Utopia Talk / Politics / Diaper-Shitting Ped0 & Totalitarians #5

Cherub Cow Member	Sun Sep 18 04:54:38 Full title: "Dementia/Parkinson’s Diaper-Shitting Ped0phile and Totalitarian Ass-Clowns and Sycophants" the thread series! :D/ Contained in this thread series is a chain of evidence of the totalitarian threat brought about by WEF acolytes such as Totalitarian Pedophile-Biden (or "Pedo Pete", as Hunter calls him), King Charles III, BlackFace Trudeau, and Smiles-At-Genocide Ardern, as well as useful idiots sworn to Marxist delusions of "Utopia", such as the progressive "Squad" and Marxist-funded organizations such as BLM, Antifa, and the DNC.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Sep 18 04:55:08 Previous Thread: http://uto...hread=90310&time=1662987565167
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Sep 18 04:55:11 The Levels of the Agenda — Macro to Micro The global Pyramid Scheme begins with trillionaire asset-managers such as Larry Fink and Bill Gates, who believe that the vision of Henry Kissinger, Klaus Schwab, and George Soros will serve their Malthusian ends. Their goals are nearly synonymous with those of the BRICS Group, which seeks to implement "Green" energy policies and Marxist thought-cancer in the West to weaken those nations and rise as the new power, maintaining their own food and energy independence, ensuring triumph in Thucydides' Trap. ⬇ This strategy is publicized through the soft powers of the WEF, which provides outlines and "Strategic Intelligence" for the Globalist movement that controls the "Fourth Industrial Revolution" to the exclusive benefit of the oligarchs — they intending to enslave the world under the A.I. serfdom of "hub" cities which can be reformatted at the will of oligarchs to serve the global totalitarian order. Thus they promote useful control metrics such as • Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) and its Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE) Marxism, • the "Genuine Progress Indicator" (GPI), • The "Build Back Better" global framework (*not* just a local/DNC slogan), • The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), • The Global Competitiveness Index, ⬇ Hard policy is enacted via • the UN, • NATO, • infiltrated governance figures of nations who enact ESG on behalf of the WEF, and • asset manager anti-competitive strategies. These hard policies ensure government funding and asset manager contributions go near exclusively to WEF-sponsored programs, allowing ESG/Marxist-adherent businesses to merge with government, shutting out independent competitors, and legitimizing the monopoly by undermining national constitutions and their law-making functions — paving the way for the Ice-Nine spread of the totalitarian order. In effect, universalizing legal frameworks under ESG allows the oligarchs to make decisions worldwide without legal opposition. ⬇ Social capture occurs as a result of the massive money-funneling apparatus. Money is filtered to the pillars of civilization: • Religion • Family • Education • Media • Law Thus, the targets of funding are • Religious establishments more likely to repeat WEF mandates and religions more vulnerable to Marxist rhetoric. • Marxist Organizations that demonize the family unit. • University endowments and K–12 education via Social-Emotional Learning (SEL), Common Core, and Critical Race Theory (CRT). Students without historical context are often completely unaware that the curricula have changed from a background in Greek and Roman studies to a background in postmodern critique of the foundations and unities of society. Postmodernism is a perfect vector because its currents undermine the infiltrated society. • Social media, captured by government intelligence, controlling the algorithm so that thoughtcrime is cloistered off and minimized while state propaganda is boosted. Within sites such as Twitter, echo chambers are designed to direct user behavior into a psychosis. People may notice that obeying the algorithm's feed directs them to particular Tweets liked by particular people, Twitter directs people back to users if they have previously interacted (directing repeat engagement to solidify brain drain), and even visiting particular content-makers directly does not necessarily reveal their comments in a linear fashion. Twitter favors hyper-immediacy to disrupt memory-making. The medium is the message. • Traditional media has been all-but-owned by the Marxists, who have long infiltrated nearly every network, including CNN, PBS, BBC, AP, Reuters, and nearly anything considered "left", with the right minimized to independent media that can be dismissed by the managerial state's elitists with memes such as "resurcher" and "conspiracy theory." • Cultural spaces: Disney, Marvel, Netflix, Hulu, and more have all repeated the Party lines because they are all taking the Party subsidies — paid and indoctrinated by the culture industry. Even the RottenTomatoes Critic Score shows ESG adherence. • Law has been infiltrated through WEF sycophants who seek to formalize ESG policies through bills such as Build Back Better ("Inflation Reduction Act") and suicidal energy policies. In the U.S., their current targets include abolishing the Electoral College, ending the filibuster, and packing the Supreme Court. Ending the Republic is favorable to the totalitarians because the mob can be controlled but electors and representatives can act as a bulwark. ⬇ The fruits of the poisoned tree. All of these policies amount to issues that are immediately identifiable even in every day life. • Nearly all captured businesses promote "sustainability" — A Marxist/Marcusean word which encompasses DIE policies and a Malthusian society where population sizes are controlled passively through propaganda, social credit scores, controlled diets, directed famines, and controlled carbon output. Where soft policies fail, hot conflict is initiated to burn off excess carbon. People will be sent to their deaths in wars meant to decrease the numbers of their disposable males. • Media and its cultural/propaganda repeaters near-unanimously support DIE strategies, selling, for instance, the "diversity" of re-cast films and works of the Western tradition. All Western heroes are executed on screen, whether Wolverine accepting his demise and waning powers in "Logan", James Bond sacrificing himself for the new and diverse leadership of Britain, "Rings of Power" revising Tolkien to promote slave morality, or "Prey" finding a way to cast near-exclusively resentful indigenous persons for an ahistorical fantasy that implicates the "problematic" colonist. All of Western canon is meant to be dismantled publicly by the Marxists. • Businesses have raised the incompetent and the DIE-hires into managerial positions to overcome the "wage gap". Thus, the unproductive are rewarded by the Marxist system — bribes for their part in the destruction of the West. • Property ownership is reduced and made nearly impossible by asset managers purchasing trillions of dollars of properties and re-releasing them as rentals while rent increases to ensure serfdom — people whose income is dedicated to monthly survival so that they cannot expend extraneous wealth on carbon-intensive pursuits such as travel. This builds a society of perpetual renters of the state's property. • Gasoline prices are raised by design, encouraging people to seek alternate means of transportation, pricing people out of the market, and limiting movement still further. • All economies are being collapsed, with the value of work undercut by massive inflation. This is all by design: a cost that the oligarchs turn onto their populations with eyes open. They believe that this is a benevolent totalitarianism. They believe that they are the Chosen Ones. • Anarcho-tyranny and the closing Overton Window: the Marxist State targets conservatives and the right while attempting to limit acceptable speech and action to only the speech and action that it itself produces and allows. These are the walls of society closing in, with "choice" reduced to the dictates of the state and individual intuition replaced with one's sense of spiritual connection to the Marxist Overmind: people believing that they are enlightened if they participate in the collectivist delusion on behalf of the totalitarians who control these movements. This is the BLM mob. This is the Antifa attack. These are government and asset-manager-funded groups given the authority and monetary power to destabilize nations while those populist movements that oppose the totalitarians are given the full angst of State Media. This is the reduction of the world. Only a deluded public can believe that such totalitarians — who overtly want to euthanize most of the world — are benevolent saviors of humanity. Thus it is that the totalitarians target especially those of slave morality: the postmodernists, the Marxists, the weak, the infirm — the nihilists who secretly crave death and are happy to sign it away to those more powerful than themselves. It is against this Totalitarian Order that individuals stand.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Sep 18 06:04:04 Old news now, but added here for posterity: UP's coverage of Biden's totalitarian speech: "So Biden is just full-on evil now " [Rugian; September 2nd, 2022] http://uto...hread=90549&time=1662203582983 "So...Bidens speech" [Habebe; September 2nd, 2022] http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=90552&time=1662246108528 Much of the subject has already been closed, but I'll add two notes: • Issue 1: Some people have pointed out that Biden called "MAGA Republicans" a "clear and present danger". Their point in mentioning this is that this is a legally enforceable phrase which gives the state power to suspend due process (much like the Patriot Act), which, given how January 6th political prosecutions have gone, would mean even *more* DoJ overreach. • Issue 1 Counterpoint: However, people need to reference the *actual* remarks: Former VP Robinette: "This time, they’re determined to succeed in thwarting the will of the people. That’s why respected conservatives, like Federal Circuit Court Judge Michael Luttig, has called Trump and the extreme MAGA Republicans, quote, a “clear and present danger” to our democracy." The slight of hand is that by *quoting* this judge, Biden was able to call "MAGA Republicans" a "clear and present danger" without it being a binding executive statement. So, he did not just declare open season — yet. By making the statement via a quotation, he was flirting with authoritarian measures and was messaging that that phrase would be the next step for the DNC–totalitarian apparatus — a warning. • Issue 2: Luckily, the right seems mostly aware that the Biden White House conducted this totalitarian-style speech in an attempt to bait unhinged lunatics into violence against Biden and the DoJ. The White House has its own aesthetic-controlling production team, so this totalitarian speech was no accident. That is, most people know that the right committing acts of violence will be weaponized by the DNC Panopticon. For instance, most of the right saw the media blackout on BLM/Antifa during the 2020 Marxist Insurrection versus the media gas-lighting on January 6th. They know that participating in a Franz Ferdinand moment will be a launch point for the totalitarians. The fear, then, is the false flag or the FBI/CIA operation: the grooming and unleashing of a Manchurian Candidate. A question, then: if Robinette were the target, would they really use him for 2022 or would they wait until 2024? Is long-term DNC presidential continuity the priority (i.e., a 2024 win) or is near-term legislation (i.e., 2022 wins)? Obviously they want both, but if they had to choose? 2022 certainly has a lot of value for the DNC, which has been so desperate for wins that its propaganda has completely buried all of its policy failures in favor of abortion, gun control, and January 6th psychosis. DNC wins in 2022 would allow them to give legal weight to Biden's totalitarian Executive Orders. They would be able to push through legislation with their uni-party control, solidifying WEF infiltration. This is quite important for them to stay on track for the 2030 Agenda. Right now, they can only pass bills such as BBB/666 by tricking petroleum titans with ESG-conversion subsidies. They would much rather abolish those businesses altogether. Lindsey Graham, a likely totalitarian supporter given his NeoCon history, seems even to be playing the part here. His abortion-ban bill would carry the weight of federal law, stopping abortion after 15 weeks, which is antithetical to the populist right's belief that Roe's overturning merely returns the issue to the states: "S.4840 - A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to protect pain-capable unborn children, and for other purposes." [Senate dot gov] http://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3065785d-86b8-4d36-986a-72aa1c8f100c/protecting-pain-capable-unborn-children-from-late-term-abortions-act-.pdf [Bill progress link] http://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/sponsored-bills "The abortion shall not be performed or attempted, if the probable gestational age ... of the unborn child is 15 weeks or greater." Graham gave this toxic talking point to the DNC right before an election, so his role is pretty clear. All the GOP had to do was not play the role of authoritarians as the DNC is doing, but Graham is giving them a moral authoritarian figure to target. The GOP did not need something like this to get numbers for November 2022, but the DNC did. However, the left-wing psychosis is strangely silent on this so far. Their current target is general character attacks against Matt Gaetz, e.g., http://imgur.com/gallery/3WFviuz http://imgur.com/gallery/mjRdSyg http://imgur.com/gallery/rG6YlWi http://imgur.com/gallery/CsLJoz1 http://imgur.com/gallery/aCivpBa http://imgur.com/gallery/3WFviuz The psychosis is acting against Gaetz because he's up for reelection in 2022, so it's important to engage the useful idiots against him. Graham, meanwhile, may not have given them a big enough target: 15 weeks may not be extreme enough, so the DNC may hurt itself by admitting that it wants to oppose that nationally. Biden may also be at the limits of Executive Order discretion. He was able to be highly destructive in the last two years, but they really need the uni-party in place to eliminate the GOP altogether. The DNC's October surprise may well be political violence and more FBI actions.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Sep 19 00:11:34 The DNC-run propaganda group "Good Info Foundation" is getting flack on Twitter for paying useful idiots about $400 to spread January 6th propaganda on TikTok and Instagram as a means of effecting DNC voter turnout in November: A thread by right-wing account "Crab Man" (@crabcrawler1): "DEMOCRATS PAYING TIKTOKERS *$400* TO DO ANTI-TRUMP JANUARY 6TH PROPAGANDA and LIE to viewers [from @trialbypreston of TikTok http://www...=pc&web_id=7137974295051929134 ]" [September 17th, 2022] http://twitter.com/crabcrawler1/status/1571178811600900096 Crab Man points out that the "Good Info Foundation" is classified a "Foreign Nonprofit Organization". These are the talking points listed in the job description: -=-=-=-=-=- • Say "criminal conspiracy", not "attempted coup," "treason" or "insurrection". • Say "Trump Republicans", not "Trump and his allies." • Say "January 6th investigation", not "hearing" or "trial" • Call this an "attack on our country" or an attack on "America" or on "Americans" and a "criminal conspiracy," "committed crime." • Talk about "MAGA Republicans" etc. • Make clear this is ongoing and unresolved, not past and done. • Show voter agency, turn the anger into defiance. Core deliverables: • 1x 16-60 second TikTok video • Repost video onto Instagram reels • Concept to be pitched to Vocal first followed by client Key Messaging (in your own words!) • Remind your followers about the images and scenes from the January 6th insurrection Example: "You probably saw this [greenscreen of Jan 6th violence] happen but what a lot of people don't know is that the violence on January 6th was actually planned and paid for by Trump Republicans." • Talk about the many aspects of their plan and the broad involvement of Trump officials, members of Congress... Example: "The Trump campaign paid literally millions of dollars to make January 6th happen." • [get your followers to] vote and ensuring the will of the people prevails! Example: "It's important to know that this..." • Remind folks that the hearings are not over, and how important it is to stay informed ahead of November. Example: "The January 6th Committee is holding hearings in September and I think you should watch" -=-=-=-=-=- Some within the psychosis may doubt the veracity of this, but this is consistent with Donny Deutsch's May 2022 propaganda imperatives as well as early January 2021 DNC initiatives, which Deutsch elucidated plainly in an MSNBC interview (covered in thread 1 comment "Sat May 28 08:20:32"). This works on several tricks to snare useful idiots: • Hyper-immediacy — I've covered this before, but useful idiots are susceptible to hyper-immediacy, which is the eternal present and the enabling of the goldfish memory. This is done, for instance, with out-of-context clips with no temporal location; they are fed clips from months or years ago, given no context, and thus expected to interpret what they see as absurdity — their lack of understanding of the issue given power and angst rather than corrected or clarified and given closure. These people are always looking for the most immediate Party clips, since Marxist rhetoric requires that they stay up-to-the-minute with the Party slogans. This connects also with 1984 revisionist propaganda; the talking points must constantly adapt to counter-points, which means that ideological consistency with their own past arguments is not important. They must only exist in the Party's present talking points. Thus, January 6th, despite being resolved and irrelevant, must be an ongoing source of DNC-voter angst, fed to the useful idiots every time an election approaches or every time the psychosis wanes and the useful idiots begin reflecting (psychosis must be boosted to stop rumination). • The rhetorical slight of hand — In the following phrase is a typical slight of hand by the DNC propagandists: "The Trump campaign paid literally millions of dollars to make January 6th happen." To the useful idiot, the message is clear: The Trump campaign, with eyes open and a clear motive, funded, condoned, and authorized rioters with a specific criminal conspiracy in mind. This is not what the statement actually means. The slight of hand is that "make January 6th happen" is an unqualified and empty statement intended to bury causality and let the useful idiots fill in the blanks with Party innuendo. That is, the conclusions of the useful idiots are artificially manipulated by wordplay. If, for instance, a parent bought a gas-station slushie, left it unattended on the kitchen counter for five minutes, and her toddler snatched and drank the entire slushie, then vomited on the floor, the DNC propagandist could say, "[This parent literally paid to make vomit happen]." This rhetorical slight of hand disguises causality, making the payment seem to be a direct cause of the vomit when the payment was separated from the chain of events and motives that caused the vomit. Useful idiots — often midwits — do not handle causality well, however, so they collapse the beginning and the ending of the narrative to create a new and fabricated meme. In the case of January 6 "funding", this claim of "The Trump campaign [paying] literally millions" comes from the Trump White House spending money on January 6th permits, paying organizational groups, and funding consultation firms ( https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2021/08/trumps-political-operation-paid-more-than-4-3-million-to-jan-6-organizers-questions-remain-about-full-involvement/ ). "Aha!" the useful idiot would say, "So it's true!" But they again miss the causality: paying for permits and logistics companies to provide buses, portable toilets, and trash removal is not the same as feeding event organizers a direct script which elucidates criminal motive. The useful idiot, however, makes that connection on behalf of the DNC. This is similar to the useful idiots presuming high-level Trump White House discussions on planned "insurrection" strategies on January 6th.... by inferring and assigning heavy innuendo to the moments that have not been revealed in the public record (a few moments of silence in the White House 'here' or a closed-room meeting 'there'). This is the narrative-building of "hidden histories" — a postmodern narrative trope that manifests ahistorical fictions where concrete records do not exist. This was, for instance, the plot of "Hidden Figures" (2016), which invents the fiction that black mathematicians were responsible for coding launch trajectories when, in reality, those employees were glorified transcribers and compilers — copying the code of other people into legible sequences. This is the TV trope of the "bottle episode" and the "tangent universe", like "Aliens vs Predator: Requiem", where the fiction only survives so long as there is no record (a town overrun by aliens must be destroyed; there can be no evidence since this would meet concrete historical record, where fiction is likewise annihilated by historical consistencies). Propaganda thrives on these "hidden histories", since they can undermine foundations (another postmodern rhetorical strategy) while pretending that the lack of a record admits the possibility of their infiltration of the record. Concrete reality has people sleep through the night, but hidden histories create sleep walkers who accomplish amazing things. • The Shifting Talking-Points — DNC thinktanks constantly test the efficacy of new talking points. The narrative of "insurrection" and "coup" has now reached the end of its efficacy. The DNC has failed to make its sensationalist claims true, instead over-charging trespassers and using D.C. jails to punish people with the process itself (See "American Gulag" https://americangulag.org/ and Nick Searcy's "Capitol Punishment" (2021) for more on the DoJ's and D.C. government's mistreatment of Capitol protest political-prisoners). Their biggest charges were "seditious conspiracy" against 11 protestors, but the DoJ has not made any sensational headlines with successes there: [Justice dot gov; All Capitol Breach Cases] http://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases?combine=conspiracy Despite the FBI's avalanche of weaponized charges and political persecution, only two people have pleaded guilty to charges related to conspiracy, and that was back in March and April — Brian Ulrich and Joshua James, who were not even newsworthy enough for a strong DNC propaganda operation or a proof-of-concept "insurrection" claim. The other nine persons charged received superseding indictments in late June 2022, and, if the DNC is changing its talking points now, it is likely that these charges will fizzle as well (i.e., the DNC received insider word from the FBI that they cannot count on those charges any longer). If true, this is unfortunate news for the DNC's October surprise. The purpose of the January 6th Show Trials was to have hot gossip to polarize useful idiots for November, but these new talking points are not as sensational as they would like. They've gone from "insurrection"/"coup" to "criminal conspiracy" — hardly as sensational as prior iterations of their propaganda. • Keeping useful idiots within the psychosis — The insistence on people watching the January 6th Show Trials is a strong imperative for the DNC propagandists. The DNC intends to start them again on September 28th, which will lead the software of the useful idiots into October and then to their November ballots. But, also admitted here is that the DNC is desperate for Show-Trial viewership. Despite their highly edited videos, the Show Trials have not garnered the audience that they were supposed to. The Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) Bots have been captive to *any* negative Trump coverage, but even this acute-psychosis group has experienced a brain drain — only its weakest minds or lowest-information adherents remain, with other people waking up and moving on. There clearly was not enough sensational information to drag this out for 2 years. Their credibility problems have also been tremendous. Again, all but the most TDS-deranged people can see through the supposed "bipartisan" claim of the Committee, with few independents believing that Kinzinger and Cheney represent impartial or even GOP interests — much less do any GOP voters believe it. Thus, the Show Trials maintain an already captured key demo rather than capturing additional demos. This is why January 6th will not be enough for 2022 wins — it is just one strategy or one head of the Hydra.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Sep 19 03:31:35 "Equal Pay Day", Marxist Equity, and Imposters Avoiding the "Syndrome" September 18th is "Equal Pay Day", which is a fake holiday created in the '70s by the "National Committee on Pay Equity" (NCPE), a Marxist organization that has remained mostly irrelevant but whose groundwork has been used by the ESG/DIE totalitarians. Many people, particularly on the right, have seen through the lies of the supposed "pay gap", recognizing that it is a myth or an irrelevant fringe-case that discriminatory practices result in different pay for different people within the same job. In reality, pay differences are most often a mere matter of job performance and, at best, a case of people being too timid to ask for recognition and raises, with the "pay gap" existing because of the differing performance proclivities of different people. In other words, for various reasons, some people do not work as hard and thus do not get paid as much. But, where the right often misses the mark is in not seeing the next chapter of this issue. That is, the pay gap is indeed a poor metric that has been discarded by simple meritocratic principles, but why, then, does it remain a major talking point on the Marxist left? Because they are acting on it. It remains because the "pay gap" is yet another part of Marxist infiltration of corporate governance. These Marxists want equal pay, and they oppose meritocracy since it is a barrier to that sheer senseless want. Naturally, wanting an end goal without wanting to earn that goal through merits means that these are people more likely to manipulate the system asymmetrically in their favor. This is a common theme in Marxism: awarding capital to people of slave morality where their character failings would otherwise deny them. The ineffective worker is still human, after all, desiring comforts and wealth independently of having a mind to achieve those things. And what is their strategy? I discussed this in thread 3 comment "Tue Jul 12 04:35:40" and gave an example directly from the ESG report of one of Biden's Offshore Wind companies (subsidized by BBB/666), but the short version is that "pay gap" advocates cannot quite rig the system such that under-performing people within a particular pay scale are paid more than their high-performing coworkers. E.g., • If a pay scale is $1 (minimum performance) to $5 (maximum performance), • If a DIE applicant rates a $1 performance, and • If a non-DIE applicant rates a $5 performance, ..then the "pay gap" will persist. The non-DIE applicant is working harder and thus earning more money. However, ESG/DIE corporations bypass this structure by having requirements for DIE applicants on their boards and in managerial roles. So, E.g., • If a pay scale is $1 – $5, and • If a non-DIE applicant rates a $5 performance, ..then the DIE applicant will be promoted to a pay scale that rates $5 to $10. In this way, the DIE applicant bypasses the competency requirements but rates a pay which balances the "pay gap". This is Marxist equity as it exists in ESG's Corporate Governance. Seriously, look at nearly any ESG report for any ESG-compliant company, and you will see them talking about this strategy for their "pay gap". They admit that they cannot increase a person's position in the pay scale (that has hard metrics attached to it, such as production numbers or profit), but they *can* artificially promote these people to fill DIE quotas. Nearly every ESG/DIE business has 2030 goals of having equal pay between DIE/non-DIE workers and a majority of DIE applicants on its board of directors. What is the social cost of this? Imposters, for one. For those unfamiliar, imposter syndrome occurs when people in high-performance jobs feel as though they do not deserve their positions. On the one hand, this can happen to nearly any newly promoted person as that person accepts the new burdens of expanded authority. Additionally, it is considered a "syndrome" when people are wrong — when they can rise to the position with confidence and personal application. In the case of ESG/DIE applicants, they are not wrong. They are indeed imposters. The ESG/DIE imposter is unable to rise to the occasion. Many in the equity movement, believing as they do in the *titles* of the managerial state, believe that the position itself is the authority, having misunderstood or resented (as "impenetrable"—to them, anyways) the formation of peer respect and natural advancement that comes from hard demonstrations of competence and authority. But, while they are imposters, they have been trained not to feel the syndrome. The "Mary Sue" of popular culture has guided them with characters such as Rey Palpatine, Miss Marvel, She-Hulk, and the "Rings of Powers" Galadriel to be over-confident and entitled to peer-praise despite themselves and their Marxism-induced character flaws. Their very status as promoted DIE applicants is a substitute for their lack of virtue — or a crutch preventing them from attaining virtue. Thus, if people recognize their flaws, those people are simply not being good Marxists; *they* are wrong for questioning a DIE imposter. Unsurprisingly, the result of this reality-denial is that others must over-support the DIE imposter from above and below, supplementing the job requirements of the DIE leader to prevent system failure, since they too depend on the organization for their survival. To the Marxist, this is an acceptable outcome. This is the workers uniting: hiding incompetent figures for the good of collective goals. This is everyone drinking the Flavor Aid together to ensure that their "revolutionary" act saves them from the "fascists" and "capitalists". Unfortunately, this collectivism has massive system flaws. A good metaphor is seen in the "Chernobyl" mini-series, where the middle management decisions of character "Anatoly Dyatlov" (Paul Ritter) combined with compartmentalized managerial knowledge caused the issuance and obedience of incompetent orders. When a thinking worker is able to defy orders in secret — accomplishing tasks correctly rather than as ordered by an incompetent Marxist — then the system functions. But, if the DIE imposter assumes the managerial role and issues flawed orders, having not increased requisite competencies, then there may not be opportunities for subordinates to exercise intelligent disobedience. Worse, still, is that managerial incompetence can result in malicious compliance, where the orders are followed to the letter despite the worker knowing that this will cascade system failure. And perhaps worst of all is that total system ownership by Marxists may result in no remaining intelligence for such disobedience to occur. The cascade failure will be initiated by an imposter, and no competent person will be present to stop the reaction — or will be denied a voice due to the managerial state not designating that person as an authority. Collectivism most often does not permit such course corrections. System flaws such as this may show that a managerial state with Marxist infiltration is in fact *designed* for system failure. Managerial roles often include special manager-training events, but again, in an infiltrated system, the trainers themselves lack the skills and experience to impart wisdom — they merely read from an ESG/DIE-approved script like a Lumon Industries employee quoting Kier Eagan control-memes. Thus, the DIE Marxist as a "hero" archetype (again, the "hero" of DIE productions by, for example, Disney and Marvel) is self taught. However, this self-instruction is not the "Renaissance Man" autodidact, since Marxism rejects these Enlightenment polymaths. The useful idiot of the Marxist collective receives instruction not from immense study of classical text but from hyper-immediate Faith in Party. This "hero" is merely sensitive and conscientious of a hyper-present need to submit to ESG/DIE Marxism's changing imperatives. Any failure is acceptable if initiated by a Marxist, as, indeed, the failure will merely be revised as a necessary slow down in production. It is at this point that the failures of the Marxist-infiltrated managerial state of the West merges with the overt strategy of the ESG/DIE totalitarians. The Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) dictates of the West's rising World Economic Forum (WEF)-endorsed totalitarians is built on the overt strategy of drawing down the world's economies for Marxist/Marcusean "sustainability". Businesses that are productive produce more carbon than unproductive businesses, hence, unproductive businesses with these "sustainable" practices are ideal beneficiaries of the Marxist state. Closing the "pay gap" and causing an intentional collapse of the managerial state's competence is merely an extension of this Marxist imperative. This relates to... • regulatory capture by the pharmaceutical industry — its installing incompetent bureaucrats in government who shorten the time from patent to market, now but not previously under the guise of emergency powers. • the intentional selection of Marxist economists to direct economic policy — policies designed to fail. • the intentional promotion of Marxist climate activists who have overt Malthusian agendas. • the selection of incompetent faces for the Politburo. • the promotion of ESG/DIE content in social media algorithms as a means to sell the public on climate policies which are designed to end the public's own lives. And all of this is on the background of an ESG/DIE West that implodes itself while the BRICS Group rejects these suicidal policies. This paints a picture of an externally provoked collapse championed by the West's useful idiots and its ideologically captured Vanguard — all on the behalf of a gleeful BRICS Group which merely has to wait for the West to weaken enough that it cannot overcome its new masters. But, to end on an optimistic note, the grand fallacy of authority that has for decades been awarded to the managerial state (i.e., the managerial state convincing the public that only designated "experts" can possibly come to the "truth", where that "truth" is merely the captured state's permissible groupthink) rhymes far too much with the age of the printing press and the rise of literacy. The Marxist left has attempted to dismiss any arguments which they intuitively recognize as not coming from the Marxist Inner Party, but this is akin to acolytes of the pre-literate medieval Church rejecting any readings of the Bible which are not read and interpreted by the Church's anointed ones. While this transition from mediated readings of sacred text by the anointed to the common person reading the primary text herself was by no means a perfect process (see for example the many Christianity-based splinter religions that had strong variations in their interpretations of the Bible), this transition broke the Church's monopoly on education. So too can the Marxist monopoly of the Western university be broken. The managerial state will likely not recover its credibility following this totalitarian infiltration, but the libraries of this state still contain the works which, when read by the newly "literate", may cause another Renaissance.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Sep 19 06:11:22 That "Crab Man" account made a WEF/ESG thread on Twitter. It hits a lot of the same points that I've hit in this thread series, but this information might be more readable in the compact form of a Twitter thread: "The ESG Scam" [July 26th, 2022] http://twitter.com/i/events/1553058786482556929
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Sep 19 22:29:31 Ol' Diaper-Pooper decided to appear on 60 Minutes, but, despite it intending to be a puff piece appearance, he could not help but be a senile old fool whose own words had to be walked back by his handlers. "President Joe Biden: The 2022 60 Minutes Interview" [60 Minutes, official YouTube; September 18th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1UC89H4Swc 10:00 — The moment that's been making the rounds: Biden says that he will use U.S. forces to stop and/or defend against a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. 60 Minutes themselves has to immediately cut away and say that the White House returned comment saying that they would *not* do this. 11:50 — Biden repeats the talking point relayed previously by Karine Jean-Pierre that he was not notified of the Mar-a-Lago raid ahead of time. This is again a semantic manipulation: Biden himself gave the FBI the go-ahead to collect the documents, so he's just pretending that he did not know about the specifics of the *Mar-a-Lago* raid ("[Hey, they were going to raid him in NYC for all I knew!]") 15:00 — Biden hilariously says that his being able to keep to a schedule is proof that he's fit for office.. apparently even downplaying that he may indeed not possess other requisites, such as "mental acuity".. but that scheduling is a good enough bar :| 19:30 — He again pitches his retarded "deer [don't wear] Kevlar vests" line, vowing to ban assault weapons if the DNC gets mid-term wins. He also uses retarded pathos arguments for why he'll use Uvalde to take rights away from law-abiding Americans. ("[Those poor kids :'( ... now... about those pesky rights.]") 21:55 — 60 Minutes apparently hires completely incompetent camera operators, because they're forced to use video of a cameraman rushing across screen to get a different angle — ruining the other camera operator's primary shot. Despite their best efforts to edit, 60 Minutes can't help but show that Biden is, in fact, a diaper-shitting invalid. Trying to humanize him with his dead family doesn't work, since he's just an old pedophile walking slowly around furniture in a million-dollar government-sponsored old folks' home. It would be hilarious to see the unedited interview where they cut around all the unusable footage of poop seeping out of his pant legs, but the White House probably didn't do that because they were expecting (and received) a puff piece. More important than Biden's typical incompetence is that this further solidifies that he is not an independent entity here; he is indeed a puppet. At best, an observer could say that differences between White House policy and Biden's stated policy is designed to create uncertainty behind any of Beijing's potential strategies, but that seems far to generous for the level of incompetence that has thrived in this administration.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Sep 20 06:23:10 This is a good lol. Not much write-up needed :D President Biden, @POTUS [September 19th, 2022] http://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1571988905624309761 "At current gas prices, a family with two cars is saving an average of $140 a month compared to if prices had stayed at their mid-June peak. That's a big deal for families like the one I grew up in." Yeah. He's comparing the current gas prices to *June*, when they were still shit because of his shit WEF policies. Not only that, but to get the $140 figure, he had to cite a family with TWO cars. And! On top of that, he's still doing this "families like the one I grew up in" bullshit. I almost wonder if the interns running his social media account are just trolling for sport XD
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Sep 20 08:42:48 Hilarious shut-down of the reparations argument that is going around today: "CNN’s @DonLemon tells royal commentator Hilary Fordwich the royal family should pay reparations — immediately regrets it" [September 20th, 2022] http://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1572145367512190978 She apparently didn't get the memo on Marxist repressive tolerance ;D
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Sep 20 19:37:59 Interesting... Scott Adams @ScottAdamsSays: [Scott Adams' Twitter; September 20th, 2022] "#Dilbert was cancelled in 77 newspapers this week ... One large chain." http://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1572327918344474627 "I don't know what drove the decision on the newspapers." http://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1572337176112959491 I brought up in previous thread comment "Tue Aug 02 01:43:04" that people have been trying to red-pill Adams on ESG. This resulted in him committing to making fun of ESG for 6 months, which would have raised the issue in the public sphere and potentially gotten people to push back against it. About two weeks ago, Adams began publishing those ESG Dilbert comics (two so far — also linked in the previous thread). That said, it's unclear *exactly* why this happened. • Some speculation is that those were *newspapers*, and that's a dying medium. But that's a flimsy reason given that the comic section of newspapers tends to be consistently popular. • The conspiracy theorists blame Operation Mockingbird. • Others suspect Adams' general right-wing proclivities. I think this is also somewhat flimsy, since Adams isn't very sensational in that respect. My suspicion is that it *was* because he began attacking ESG. This could very well be a shot in the dark, but the consistent variable here is that almost *no* newspapers or mainstream news carriers are talking about ESG in anything other than a positive light or a "[we could do even more!]" light. The ones that *do* cover it try to dismiss talks about it as conspiracy theory.. while simultaneously qualifying those "conspiracy theories" in the body of the article (past the headline's talking point), where they're forced to (quietly) quote ESG's actual functioning methods — which say the same exact thing that those "conspiracy theories" say. This issue has been largely silenced, including on Twitter where engagement is artificially limited on the subject, likely as part of the general Marxist capture of media as well as the asset managers controlling ESG being the same ones that own most media sources. The central strategy remains the same here: they intend to infiltrate Corporate Governance and lawmaking bodies as much as they can under the cover of "security through obscurity", and only when the cascade failure of "climate policy" has become irreversible will they allow public critique. On a particular timeline, this means that they're hoping to keep the issue quiet at least until after midterms, which will either solidify their strategy (midterm wins allowing more extreme "climate" (Marxist) measures) or redirect their strategy (midterm losses forcing more executive orders).
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Sep 21 01:46:20 Bill Clinton speaking on the "Clinton Global Initiative" in September 2022 (meeting took place 19–20 September), where he congratulates BlackRock CEO Larry Fink for making an economic formula that is not about profit-motive but instead about "social" programs. [Clipped by "Will Hide" (@Willhide) on Twitter; September 20th, 2022] http://twitter.com/WillHild/status/1572298473680027649 Full video (>2 hours): [Clinton Foundation dot org; Clinton Global Initiative; September 2022 Annual Meeting; September 19–20th, 2022] http://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative-september-2022-annual-meeting/ Clipped segments by guest/speaker: [Clinton Foundation dot org] http://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative-september-2022-meeting-livestreams/ Bill Clinton to BlackRock CEO Larry Fink: "I want to thank you for a lot of things... for urging people to consider the social impact of their investments and to try not just to go for a quick rate of return if it's damaging to society but instead to try to build a future we can all share." Larry Fink: "In the next seven months we're in a transition, and it's not going to be a pretty transition. Umm. We have food insecurity worldwide, which is going to be creating more elevated prices — that we have not seen all the increases that we should expect to see in food. Umm. We have imbalances in energy right now in the short term..." Yeah. *They* are causing the food insecurity. This transition to green energy is a controlled collapse of economies, so there will be *more* famines ahead, more mass-death, and we can expect Russia to use the winter to launch hot ground conflicts. Most of the population reduction will occur in the Middle East, the Indian subcontinent, and South America, with soft eugenics programs continuing in Europe and the United States. The "elevated prices" situation is also part of their intentional inflation strategy, which, by their own words, is designed to create a future of renters so that governments can seize property under the guise of these asset managers and redirect all resources into this Malthusian/Marxist "Utopia". These people are psychopaths. Their intent is mass death and a totalitarian empire. Featured participants included: [Clinton Foundation dot org; Press Page] http://www.clintonfoundation.org/press-and-news/clinton-global-initiative/president-clinton-secretary-clinton-and-chelsea-clinton-to-convene-leaders-across-government-business-and-civil-society-for-the-clinton-global-initiative-2022-meeting/ • Eric Adams, Mayor, New York City; • Noubar Afeyan, Founder and CEO, Flagship Pioneering and Co-Founder, Chairman, Moderna; • Her Majesty Queen Rania Al Abdullah of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan; • José Andrés, Founder and Chief Feeding Officer, World Central Kitchen; • Charlie Baker, Governor, Massachusetts; • Xiye Bastida, Climate Justice Activist; • Jesper Brodin, Chairman and CEO, INGKA Holding; • Matt Damon, Co-Founder, Water.org; • Thasunda Brown Duckett, President and CEO, TIAA; • Larry Fink, Chairman and CEO, BlackRock; • Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO); • Kathy Hochul, Governor, New York; • Laurene Powell Jobs, Founder and President, Emerson Collective; • Alan Jope, CEO, Unilever; • Lin-Manuel Miranda, Award-Winning Songwriter, Actor, Director; • Mia Mottley, Prime Minister, Barbados; • Vivek Murthy, U.S. Surgeon General; • Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General, World Trade Organization (WTO); • Hamdi Ulukaya, CEO and Founder, Chobani, and Founder, Tent Partnership for Refugees; • Malala Yousafzai, Activist; • Randi Weingarten, Bolshevik, Teacher's Union Marxist; In the bigger picture, this also illustrates the firm connection between the Clintons and the ESG/DIE totalitarian strategy. The Clintons connect also with the Obamas and their puppet, Biden. This is all on the same platform — the same vocabulary, the same formula. Climate activism is a viral vector for Marxist-Malthusian totalitarianism under their A.I. Panopticon.
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Sep 21 02:09:09 A user made a nice little summation video of BlackRock's Asset, Liability and Debt and Derivative Investment Network (ALADDIN) A.I. Program, which was behind 2008 acquisitions and the further totalizing of all world assets: http://twi...n27/status/1565284361339080708 Direct from the source: [BlackRock dot com; Aladdin] http://www.blackrock.com/aladdin In BlackRock's bottom menu, users can see all of Aladdin's sub-categories, including ESG: "Aladdin has a collection of ESG data and solutions that empowers ESG integration across investment workflows and helps users report on their ESG efforts. We offer clients access to 60+ ESG metrics in our Starter Pack, at no additional cost, and access to 8,000+ additional metrics based on licensing." and Marxist/Marcusean "sustainability": "Aladdin Sustainability is powering the shift to sustainable investing, enabling investors to understand and to leverage ESG and climate metrics throughout their workflows. Our goal is to give you the data and tools you need to navigate the risks and opportunities of sustainable investing." As I've pointed out before with BlackRock's hard-selling of oil tycoons (see previous thread comment "Wed Aug 03 04:17:42"), their strategy is to force everyone into their anti-competitive scheme with hard sells and threats of existential destruction (i.e., "[comply, or be destroyed]"). They are attempting an A.I. singularity by forcing everyone to conform with their own system at which point they control the entire market — not just passively observing the market but controlling it towards their Marxist/Malthusian vision. And, written into the system is their imperative to force compliance with their climate metrics. That is, they have programmed modeling which restricts economic decisions to those that will keep carbon production and world temperature below key 2030 thresholds (e.g., keeping temperature below 1.5° C increase). In other words, this is Skynet. Remember how the programming solution of Skynet at its "self-aware" moment was "[humans a thread to Skynet — Humans must be destroyed]"? BlackRock's Aladdin version of that is "[make decisions that keep people from polluting]". Do we really think that this gives a shit about how many people die in the process? No. Carbon is a variable that they intend to reduce. As a simple formula, the fewer people consuming and thus producing carbon, the less carbon. They have programmed their Marxist-Malthusian imperatives into a massive economic self-destruct sequence.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Sep 22 05:49:34 In a minor story, the low-IQ left are hyping up another legal challenge against Trump, this one filed by New York AG Letitia James, who has been well-documented for her TDS: "Supreme Court of the State of New York County of New York ... against Donald J. Trump [family and holdings]" [New York Attorney General dot gov; Official Complaint pdf; Filed September 21st, 2022] http://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/tto_complaint.pdf While the complaint hides being the pseudo-legitimacy of 222 pages, the organization of the complaint is actually very simple: They are accusing Trump of not doing with his money and assets what he says he has been doing. Simple enough, right? The psychosis left would say, "Aha! This proves it!" but their poor ability to evaluate evidence is an obligatory feature of their failures at this point. The AG's technique is that this is a way to force Trump to de-tangle all of his assets and feed the managerial state more attack vectors for their endless legal war. Trump's lawyers have to go through the complaint item-by-item and explain how he obeyed the tax code or used particular legal allowances to own or move properties and/or assets. When it comes to wealthy people, this can get complicated quickly — whether that be for Trump or some upper class rando, itemizing wealth can be incredibly time-consuming. As an example, imagine you bought a car 10 years ago. You did it legally, and you have paperwork, but now the full weight of the NY AG comes down on you and asks you to prove that you purchased the car, had it insured, filled the car's gas tank with your money, and never did anything wrong with the car. You now have to produce all of those documents, show your bank account, credit limit, monthly payment records, credit card costs from gas stations, documents from the dealership, maintenance receipts, etc. Imagine the amount of work that that one item would take on your behalf. Now imagine that the AG wants that and 100 other things. It's a classic Gish-Gallop suit. They're throwing out as many variables as they can in the evaluation of Trump's finances and hoping that they can tie him up in the courts, bleed his assets, and force him to give them more information that they can use against him in subsequent frivolous suits. It's similar to what the FBI brown shirts do when they want to destroy a political target on behalf of the totalitarian managerial state, and this NY AG move is, in fact, an extension of the FBI, because this fresh lawsuit is designed not just to divide Trump's lawyers with the NY AG's complaint but to double the effect of the FBI's current actions as well. It is the logic of Cardinal Richelieu and Kafka's "Trial": it is not that he is guilty, it is that the state has determined him to be an enemy who must meet the state's demands. Those who support these maneuvers are thus aligning themselves with the machinations of the totalitarian state. Another major part of this suit is that they want him to appear before their court publicly within 30 days, which is another show-trial maneuver. This is part of the DNC's October Surprise, which is to rally their polarized midwits around their narrative's central villain, get him fresh in their minds, then, just before November, re-drop the thought-bomb "[You've gotta vote against these MAGA Republicans! This is what's at stake! Trump, Trump, Trump!]" It is, of course, transparent propaganda. The DNC did this same polarizing/tribalizing technique in 2016 and 2020. They are simply hoping that they can polarize their psychosis-afflicted base more than this same propaganda will polarize the GOP *against* their totalitarian actions (i.e., they hope to create more "against Trump" votes than "for GOP" votes — the same repetitive control mechanism). Yet, this AG action appeals only to one key demo for their psychosis: the TDS Bots. The others demos are being enabled by, for instance, • Roe v. Wade propaganda • January 6th propaganda • Gun control / assault weapons ban propaganda • climate change propaganda These are the DNC's fallback positions since they know that their policies are part of the collapse of world economies for their totalitarian panopticon. That is, they are intentionally destroying the world with their policies, so they have to distract away from those policies in order to continue those policies. Another Trump lawsuit is bait. Still, this type of propaganda has good pull with the midwits. JoJoFromJerz, a propagandist on Twitter with 622.1k followers who is paid directly by the DNC to spread low-IQ takes for these midwits and was even awarded with a special VIP visit to the White House where she met the Diaper-Pooper in Chief last week, often spreads useful talking points for this exact kind of move, e.g., • "[They've charged him so many times that some of it must be true!]" • "[Nothing to hide, nothing to fear!]" • "[Innocent people don't use their Constitutional rights of protection!]" She has not yet commented specifically on this story, but the midwits have been primed from her former insanity. Being Marxist immoralists, the low-IQ left do not even care that this is the weaponization of the state. They truly believe — having no virtues within them — that "the ends justify the means". They want something to stick to Trump no matter what it costs them — and it costs them everything: their dwindling character, their sense of right and wrong, their conscience. This is a repeat of the Sam Harris TDS: he was so immensely overcome with the total state's propaganda that he truly believes that there was no act that the state could commit against Trump that the state would be wrong. People lacking in such principles can easily be deprived of their liberty.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Sep 22 06:14:24 A fresh clip of dementia-Joe is circulating, showing him confused on stage again: Biden's full remarks appear here: [The Union Herald; September 21st, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idF-NwJ4IWg And here: [C-Span; September 21st, 2022]: http://www.c-span.org/video/?523084-1/president-biden-global-fund-york And can be read here: [The White House dot org; September 21st, 2022] http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/09/21/remarks-by-president-biden-at-the-global-funds-seventh-replenishment-conference/ The Union Herald video cuts off before Robinette's latest dementia moment, but at 6 minutes in the C-Span video, Robinette.. • Seems to freeze-drop, likely because his handlers told him not to leave the stage. • Then seems to ask his handlers, "You want me to stay here?" • Then turns around very artificially as the speaker thanks him. • Then shifts his position and freezes again. • Stares blankly at the speaker in the distance, his arms in a strange position by his side. • Tries to walk off stage again, but apparently sees his handlers telling him to stay. • Folds his hands and waits, looking at the speaker again. • He was clearly supposed to remain at the podium, NOT in the dark next to his handlers. However, comical as this is, do not let it distract you. This same sort of distraction occurred before. Recall the "YOU take YOUR seat" meeting where Biden had overly explicit instructions for his meeting. The major focus of the story in the media was Biden needing his hand held, but the real story was that that meeting was held between Biden and Overshore Wind CEOs who were about to burn billions in U.S. taxpayer money in a "Green" energy scam (see thread 2 comment "Mon Jun 27 00:40:52" and thread 3 comment "Thu Jul 21 06:03:07"). This time, while the hilarious moment is again Biden having dementia, the real issue is this: • This was a meeting at "The Global Fund" • 14.25 Billion U.S. dollars were contributed to the fund. • Also present were Trudeau and Bill Gates. Okay, so, why is this news? Money printer always go burrrr, after all. "The Global Fund" is yet another shell for the ESG/DIE scheme to collapse the West. This $14.25 billion was not just going to magically benevolent causes such as AIDS research; this money flows directly to the UN/WEF's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — and empowers the Malthusian Gates family to this end. http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/about-the-global-fund/ By its own admission, this fund is part of the "stakeholder capitalism" model of the UN/WEF totalitarians, with its primary imperative being Marxist/Marcusean "sustainability" — the same vocabulary of Klaus Schwab and the other WEF totalitarians. Biden, today, just gave yet billions more to the annihilation of the West on behalf of the Marxist Malthusians and the totalitarian oligarchs who champion the world's next Industrial Genocide.
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Sep 23 05:46:49 (tw floated a "Whataboutism" in the "Mucho amigos arrive in Martha's Vineyard" thread ( http://uto...hread=90601&time=1663622110377 ), and, incidentally, this particular comment addresses that subject — though not written to address it.) "The Washington Post", an indy publication not unlike Vox or Vice, which specializes in the kind of tabloid stuff that people could find in "People" Magazine or "Highlights for Kids", recently published this article: "Trump’s ‘big lie’ fueled a new generation of social media influencers "Accounts that rose to prominence spreading disinformation about the 2020 election now drive other polarizing debates, a Washington Post data analysis found" • "By Elizabeth Dwoskin and Jeremy B. Merrill" • "Jake Kara and Taylor Lorenz contributed to this report" [September 20th, 2022] http://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/20/social-media-influencers-election-fraud/ The article is basically The Washington Post citing The Washington Post, saying that the people that they identified are all the big "disinformation" targets that need to be removed from social media. And they really do say this; they are disappointed that Twitter has not removed the users with whom they disagree, and they celebrate some of their wins by mentioning that they at Washington Post had a problem with them before they were removed....... yeah. Beyond that, the article is a fucking mess. Take, for instance, paragraph 8's opening line: "The list of 77 was drawn from research by disinformation experts at Stanford, Harvard and Cornell universities, as well as the University of Washington." The phrase "list of 77" is a link. Now, what do you think happens when one clicks this link? Do you.. A) Go to an article or webpage that plainly lists the 77. B) Go to an outside research institution that assembled 77 accounts identified as "disinformation" by robust sources. C) Go to another Washington Post article that further obscures any lists. ? Is the answer too obvious? Yeah. The answer is always "C", anyways ;) This is how Washington Post drives up clicks on their own articles and hides their sources. Within the linked article is this source, however: [EI Partnership dot net] http://www.eipartnership.net/2020/repeat-offenders If you go to that link, you find a list of 20 accounts. These are the ones that are not anonymous trolls: 2) Charlie Kirk 3) Tom Fitton 4) Chuck Callesto 5) Josh Caplan 6) Jim Hoft 7) Brietbart News 8) James Woods 9) Donald J. Trump 10) Breaking911 11) John Solomon 13) Sean Hannity 14) Benny Johnson 15) Eric Trump 17) Omar Navarro Notice that this comes from a dot *net* website. It's not even dressed up to look professional. It is a blog. It looks like it was created by students to be read on their cell phones. And was it? Yes. While I initially suspected that this website merely linked to Stanford and U of Washington to lend legitimacy that they did not have, it was slightly more elevated than that. The best single link return-referencing was this University of Washington article: [University of Washington dot edu; March 2021] http://www.cip.uw.edu/2021/03/02/election-integrity-partnership-final-report-long-fuse/ "The Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a nonpartisan coalition of researchers that identified, tracked and responded to voting-related mis- and disinformation during the 2020 U.S. elections, released its final report, “The Long Fuse: Misinformation and the 2020 Election” on Tuesday. The final report is the culmination of months of collaboration among approximately 120 people working across four organizations: Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public (CIP), Graphika and the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab)." "Nonpartisan" is, of course, a lie, given who funded this, who they targeted, and who defined their operating direction. Their entire methodology rested on the belief that they knew the truth already, so anyone who contradicted that was thus identified for wrongthink. This is the circularity of the managerial state's reporting. They cite each other and determine that they are right. You must be anointed to participate. You must have the blue checkmark or work in the DNC/Marxist-captured institution. Their Harvard citation is similarly biased. This comes from Principal Investigators (PIs) at another DNC thinktank based out of Harvard which posts a hit-list of the 25 people they don't like (updated January 2022) and whether or not they've been successfully removed from Twitter/YouTube/Facebook already: http://mediamanipulation.org/research/deplatforming-index-research-brief Focusing on Twitter: • Donald Trump (suspended) • Lin Wood (suspended) • Sidney Powell (suspended) • James O'Keefe (suspended) • Michael Flynn (suspended) • Charlie Kirk • Tom Fitton (restricted) • James Woods • Donald Trump Jr. • Rudy Guiliani • Ron Watkins (suspended) • Team Trump (suspended) • Rogan O'Handley (suspended) • Gateway Pundit (suspended) • Praying Medic (suspended) • Jack Posobiec • Eric Trump • Richard Grenell • Lou Dobbs • Dinesh D'Souza • Steve Bannon (suspended) • Roger Stone (suspended) • Mike Lindell (suspended) • Candace Owens • Sebastian Gorka Weird how the left has successfully removed so many "problematic" accounts... while all of the ones contributing to the left-wing psychosis are spotless (e.g., see my list in the first link of this comment, there under comment "Fri Sep 16 04:42:46"). And we see here how they are not finished. Back to the Washington Post article, they have now expanded this list to include the ones with whom they disagree. Sadly, you have to go through the article to find them... so... having done that... (not all suspended accounts say "suspended" — those are just the statuses listed in the articles): 1) Kyle Becker, Fox News Producer 2) Donald Trump (suspended) 3) Eric Trump 4) Donald Trump Jr. 5) Stephen/Steven Bannon (suspended) 6) L. Lin Wood (suspended) 7) Sidney Powell (suspended) 8) Sean Hannity 9) Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit (suspended) 10) Josh Caplan, Breitbart News. 11) Candace Owens 12) Jack Posobiec 13) Tim Pool, YouTuber 14) Tracy Diaz / Tracy Beanz (suspended) 15) @catturd2 16) @prayingmedic (suspended) 17) MajorPatriot (suspended) 18) Ron Watkins (suspended) 19) Michael Coudrey (suspended) 20) Mike Lindell (suspended) 21) Benny Johnson 22) Dinesh D’Souza 23) Libs of TikTok (a continual WaPo project for suspension — whom they doxxed) Where did the other 54 go? Some of them are mixed into the previous two groups as well as other analytics pages, but Washington Post seems not to want to make that information too easy to find (probably to drive more clicks and obscure some of their targets). But, cross lists include: 24) CodeMonkeyZ 25) James O'Keefe (suspended) 26) Michael Flynn (suspended) 27) Charlie Kirk 28) Tom Fitton 29) James Woods 30) Donald Trump Jr. 31) Rudy Guiliani 32) Team Trump (suspended) 33) Rogan O'Handley (suspended) 34) Al_Sanchino 35) Richard Grenell 36) Lou Dobbs 37) Roger Stone (suspended) 38) Sebastian Gorka 39) Chuck Callesto 40) Josh Caplan 41) Brietbart News 42) Breaking911 43) John Solomon, @jsolomonReports 44) Omar Navarro 45) DC_Draino Expanding from there, they cite 6 anonymized accounts (EI Partnership source above). They also mention "PatriotMountainMan" and some others in a linked article. It's not clear at this point who is part of their list, but to add these: 46 – 51) Anon accounts 52) PatriotMountainMan 53) TrumpWarRoom 54) William Painter @Enki74 (suspended) 55) Logan Cook @carpedonktun And here's this "nice" and totally not totalitarian message from the article: "Palen has also found that more than 100 of the original accounts that retweeted Trump in April have been suspended by Twitter. The company targeted the accounts for “bulk retweeting” and other violations. In addition, Twitter said it had already reduced the reach of 80 percent of the 200 accounts shared by The Post, meaning the accounts had less value in Twitter’s dissemination algorithms than those that behaved more authentically." That is, here, again — **yet again** — we see that Twitter does, in fact, artificially limit the reach of accounts deemed to spread "wrongthink". They start this with simple metrics such as the use of mass-ReTweets and simple amplification measures, then move to terms such as "groomer", "fraud", and.. perhaps, "WEF". This is how people such as TW and ep become so low-information. They are receiving a highly cloistered experience, counter-claims to their narratives have their reach artificially limited, and "problem" users are targeted and blocked. This is how the DNC totalitarian machine continues culling the discourse for their ESG/DIE Overton Window. This is the A.I. Panopticon.
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Sep 23 06:04:36 Noticed some repeat errors in the list. Fixed: Explicitly listed in the Washington Post article: 1) Kyle Becker, Fox News Producer @kylenabecker 2) Donald Trump (suspended) 3) Eric Trump @EricTrump 4) Donald Trump Jr. @DonaldJTrumpJr 5) Stephen/Steven Bannon (suspended) 6) L. Lin Wood (suspended) 7) Sidney Powell (suspended) 8) Sean Hannity @SeanHannity 9) Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit (suspended) 10) Josh Caplan, Breitbart News. @JoshDCaplan 11) Candace Owens @RealCandaceO 12) Jack Posobiec @JackPosobiec 13) Tim Pool, YouTuber @Timcast 14) Tracy Diaz / Tracy Beanz (suspended) 15) @catturd2 16) @prayingmedic (suspended) 17) MajorPatriot (suspended) 18) Ron Watkins (suspended) 19) Michael Coudrey (suspended) 20) Mike Lindell (suspended) 21) Benny Johnson @bennyjohnson 22) Dinesh D’Souza @DineshDSouza 23) Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok Listed in associated articles: 24) CodeMonkeyZ (suspended) 25) James O'Keefe (suspended) 26) Michael Flynn (suspended) 27) Charlie Kirk @charliekirk11 28) Tom Fitton @TomFitton 29) James Woods @RealJamesWoods 30) Rudy Guiliani @RudyGiuliani 31) Omar Navarro @RealOmarNavarro 32) Team Trump (suspended) 33) Rogan O'Handley @DC_Draino (suspended) @dcdraino 34) Chino @Al_Sanchino 35) Richard Grenell @RichardGrenell 36) Lou Dobbs @LouDobbs 37) Roger Stone (suspended) 38) Sebastian Gorka @SebGorka 39) Chuck Callesto @ChuckCallesto 40) Brietbart News @BreitbartNews 41) Breaking911 @Breaking9l1 42) John Solomon, @jsolomonReports Possible list items (unclear; some are from distantly associated Washington Post links): 43 – 48) Anon accounts 49) PatriotMountainMan (suspended) 50) TrumpWarRoom @TrumpWarRoom 51) William Painter @Enki74 (suspended) 52) Logan Cook @carpedonktun (suspended)
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Sep 24 23:50:07 A small note that is unsurprising but which further explains the ESG focus on Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity (DIE): "The Paradox of Diverse Communities It turns out the most cohesive neighborhoods are almost never the most diverse ones. But does that mean we shouldn't fight against self-segregation?" [Bloomberg, November 2013] http://www...paradox-of-diverse-communities "After 20 million-plus simulations, the authors found that the same basic answer kept coming back: The more diverse or integrated a neighborhood is, the less socially cohesive it becomes, while the more homogenous or segregated it is, the more socially cohesive." The DIE cocktail is designed to de-stabilize the West, with the Diversity component working to undermine social cohesion via mass migration, a lack of assimilation, and national self-destruction via empowering these unassimilated persons with global interests. People may notice, for instance, that the West has some of the highest immigration numbers of developed nations: http://www.macrotrends.net/countries/usa/unitedstates/immigration-statistics United States — 46,627,102.00 Germany — 12,005,690.00 United Kingdom — 8,543,120.00 UAE — 8,095,126.00 Canada — 7,835,502.00 France — 7,784,418.00 Australia — 6,763,663.00 Spain — 5,852,953.00 Italy — 5,788,875.00 While the BRICS group — China in particular — tells another story: http://www.macrotrends.net/countries/usa/unitedstates/immigration-statistics Brazil — 713,568.00 Russia — 11,643,276.00 India — 5,240,960.00 China — 978,046.00 South Africa — 3,142,511.00 Russia's high numbers are mostly flat, however, with their net migration having spiked briefly after the ESG/DIE totalitarians began formalizing in 2004 and dropping after the ESG/DIE 2008 economic warfare. http://www.macrotrends.net/countries/RUS/russia/net-migration The drops in net migration occurred also in some ESG/DIE nations in 2008, however, so it is not the cleanest metric; it only explains part of the equation. China, meanwhile, saw a sharp surge in net migration in 2008 but got it under control by 2013. http://www.macrotrends.net/countries/CHN/china/net-migration Within the BRICS Group, China always appears to be the most insulated from the ESG/DIE totalitarian plans, which lends to the ever-increasing metrics of its guilt in originating this Marxist–Malthusian strategy. Even Larry Fink, the main asset-manager oligarch behind ESG/DIE, has been critiqued for being a major investor of Chinese power, even though China is not a beneficiary of ESG/DIE investment metrics (i.e., China does not care about ESG/DIE). "New pressure campaign paints BlackRock CEO Larry Fink as China lackey" [Washington Examiner; February, 2022] http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/new-pressure-campaign-paints-blackrock-ceo-larry-fink-as-china-lackey Washington Examiner even links to a cause-based website which lists articles pointing out Fink's connections with China: http://whoislarryfink.com/ http://blackrockloveschina.com/ "He calls democracy messy, props up the Chinese Communist Party, praises Xi [Jinping] and his regime known for violent oppression, invests in Chinese military companies." • "Larry Fink has stated that China is one of the biggest opportunities for BlackRock over the long term. • "Fink has lavished praise on China as he attempts to build BlackRock’s business there, extolling the Chinese government for lifting much of its population out of poverty. • "Larry Fink helped the Chinese Communist Party during the U.S.-China trade negotiations in 2019. • "Under Larry Fink, BlackRock is investing in surveillance companies used by the Chinese military. • "During a Bloomberg TV appearance, Larry Fink once stated that “markets like actually totalitarian governments” as they bring stability and Democracy is messy. • "According to Larry Fink, he is “a globalist and I’m proud of it.”" So we again see the incentive for the Western oligarchs (e.g., Fink) to sell out the West on behalf of China and the BRICS Group: the massive infiltration of Marxist ESG/DIE allows a world totalitarian society which is completely predictable for ESG/DIE investments — all controlled and manipulated to fit into Fink's A.I. Panopticon ALADDIN software. This is why the UN/WEF totalitarians are funding these enterprises and funding the WEF sycophants in their own nations: they believe that a Chinese-led totalitarianism is a good way to funnel assets into their total world-fiefdom. They can cut the population of the world so that people like Bill Gates do not get pies thrown in their face anymore, but they in the oligarchy can become the un-elected rulers, improving their own quality of life while making slaves of everyone outside of the Inner Party.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Sep 25 00:20:18 And why might the totalitarians want to make propaganda that specifically villainizes white people under their DIE strategy? There are many reasons, such as this allowing for identity politics which divide and conquer and undermines the Western canon, resulting in postmodern nihilism and self-destruction, but there are even more explicit reasons: "Americans’ Views of Government: Low Trust, but Some Positive Performance Ratings" [PEW Research dot org; Politics; September 14th, 2020] http://www...-positive-performance-ratings/ White people in the U.S. are far more likely to support limiting the power of the government. "Bigger government providing more services" vs. "smaller government providing fewer services" White: 41% vs. 56% Black: 79% vs. 19% Hispanic: 74% vs. 24% The totalitarians likely asked this by the simple metrics: how do they gain more power, and who is likely to support their gaining of power? I.e., who is more likely to support totalitarianism? It happens that white people in the U.S. are less likely to support the large government of totalitarianism, so these people must be atomized by the totalitarian state. The atomized white person is thrown into useful nihilism and psychosis, hating his race and wanting to join the ESG/DIE totalitarians; while the non-white DIE groups are more likely to use this slave morality inversion for their benefit — i.e., they are more likely to support the totalitarians if those totalitarians are seen punishing their "enemies". The totalitarians are simply using whatever divisions are useful for the downfall of the West — the reformatting of the world into a totalitarian "Utopia". If it were not race, it would be something else — as it is indeed something else within other categories (e.g., LGB versus TQ+NAMBLA). The totalitarians, by definition, ultimately oppose anything which opposes the consolidating of their powers, be that white people in some nations, individualists in another, populists in all, or Christians in another. Their ideal population is one that insists on the total expansion of government programs and government interventions. Any demographic which supports these powers is funded and empowered under the total cloth. Ultimately, it boils down to funding those in possession slave morality, as a perpetual global slave morality keeps the serfs fighting among themselves and reducing all possessions while the totalitarian oligarchs rise.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Sep 26 22:56:32 The Ray Epps saga has been an interesting one. Today, a clip was floating around Twitter of Kentucky Representative Massie in dispute with the Bolshevik Raskin. This comes from the House Judiciary Committee hearing on September 21st, 2022, the relevant hour of which can be seen here: "Massie Confronts Dems About Ray Epps: 'Why Is There No Interest In Him?'" [Forbes Breaking News; September 23rd, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S66NWcSccwE And the complete 8-hour hearing can be seen here: [House dot gov; Judiciary Committee] http://judiciary.house.gov/newsroom/watch-live.htm >leads to their official YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw2N3cCDMu8 Massie can be seen presenting evidence at 5:45:00, with his floor time proceeding again after recess at 7:15:00. The 1-minute clip of Raskin was initially floated last week by low-IQ low-information left-wing propaganda account @Acyn, with the intended propaganda for his followers meant to be, "[Raskin is Bolshevik like us, so we should believe his narrative.]" "Raskin: You guys are trying to make this poor schmuck who showed up to your protest into something a lot bigger than he is. He’s just trying to survive and he’s on your side. You don’t have many voters left, you might want to try to hang on to them" [@Acyn; September 21st, 2022] http://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1572720808396746753 This propaganda — a DNC talking point — was subsequently repeated down the propaganda chain by usual suspects such as David Pakman ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3hAkOk5qW0 ) and Brian Tyler Cohen ( http://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1572721287822442497 ). As a quick side note, I have pointed out less formally before (e.g., thread 2 comment "Tue Jun 14 10:06:39") that the DNC's social marketing propaganda works like this: 1) DNC propaganda apparatuses such as Media Matters, Arabella Advisors (see http://www.influencewatch.org/for-profit/arabella-advisors/ ), and DNC propaganda arms such as CNN scour archives for usable talking points to remove from their context to make it meme-able. 2) DNC propaganda is then issued to its paid repeaters — sock puppets such as Acyn, Occupy Democrats, JoJoFromJerz, and BrooklynDad_Defiant (longer list in the Acyn write-up; here as image: http://i.imgur.com/E6oEo1b.png ). 3) These sock puppets then sell the appearance of "relatability" to the DNC's useful idiots; they repeat the DNC talking points nearly verbatim while pretending to be unaffiliated — despite them often taking money directly from DNC-funded social marketing groups. 4) The DNC's useful idiots believe that they're seeing normal people simply having opinions. The useful idiots thus adopt the DNC's talking points, believing that they came up with them as part of "grassroots" opinions. Even more concisely: • DNC Propaganda Think Tanks ⬇ • CNN/MSNBC, Paid social marketers / sock puppets ⬇ • Useful idiots This is how people like tw and ep end up repeating DNC talking points while being able to claim that they do not watch CNN or MSNBC; they get their information from the same DNC propaganda network while believing that they are independent researchers. This is how the total state ensures that its useful idiots all hold the same viewpoint. I have spoken also about Raskin's Bolshevik status (thread 2 comment "Mon Jun 06 08:09:01"). Raskin will say whatever he needs to say to create the appearance of "truth" for this same propaganda effect, such as when he deflected against the DNC's use of Antifa/BLM brown-shirts in the 2020 Antifa/BLM Insurrection by saying that the FBI does not list these as problem groups. The slight of hand was that there is a difference between the FBI not targeting these groups (true) and these groups being insurrectionists (avoided truth). Raskin knew that he could use a procedural barrier to float this propaganda, since he knows that the DNC controls the FBI's investigative directions. Back to Ray Epps, then: Raskin used the same procedural manipulation and projected it onto Massie. Raskin claimed that Epps' testimony has not been revealed because *no* testimony has been revealed. This is true. But what is the slight of hand? • Raskin claims that the Epps–Fed issue is "conspiracy theory" that has been "debunked", which cannot be done without revealing Epps' testimony. Thus, "debunked" is itself DNC propaganda, and it has been repeated by the New York Times and the usual DNC repeater chain. • Raskin avoids addressing Epps' calls to violence, his effect on the crowds in which he was embedded, or Epps' lack of outstanding charges. Raskin avoids addressing this Epps information that is in fact part of the public record. And what is public record? This can be pulled from Congressional record as well as a New York Times article that repeated that record, albeit with the same DNC talking points attached: • NYT, Jan 2022: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/11/us/politics/ray-epps-january-6-committee.html • NYT, May 2022: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/jan-6-ray-epps-evidence.html The timeline: • January 5th, 2021, Ray Epps is seen in footage by Live-Streamer Tim "Baked Alaska" Gionet talking to MAGA-adorned protestors, telling them that they must not only go "to" the Capitol but "*inside*" the Capitol on January 6th. The crowd accuses him of being a fed. • January 6th, 2021, Ray Epps is seen between the White House and the Capitol, directing people at Trump's speech to the Capitol, 20 minutes before the speech ended, saying that "that's where our problems are". • Epps is seen in another video telling someone, "When we go in, leave this here [pointing to something]. You don’t need to get shot" (i.e., still insisting on going "in"). • Later, Epps is seen talking into the ear of protestor Ryan Samsel just before Samsel pushes a police barricade into police at the edges of the Capitol Building's outer-lawn perimeter. • January 7th, 2021, Epps appears as #16 on the FBI's "Most Wanted List" for the January 6th event. • January 8th, 2021, Epps claims to have seen his name on the list after being informed by his wife (and she via family) and calls an FBI tip-line to explain his involvement. The call lasts 27 minutes, though this may include on-hold time. He claims to have told Samsel that the police were just doing their job. This was corroborated by Samsel in January 2022 who said the exact words were, "Dude, relax, the cops are doing their job." • January 11th, 2021, "Arizona Republic" contacted Epps, showed him video recorded of him on January 5th, and asked him what he meant by "go inside", and Epps responded, "The only thing that meant is we would go in the doors like everyone else. It was totally, totally wrong the way they went in" ( http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2021/01/11/fbi-capitol-investigation-arizona-trump-supporter/6624406002/ ). This does not exactly change his original meaning or put "Fed" accusations at ease. If anything, this would still be consistent with an FBI agent encouraging illegal activity while keeping his own hands clean. But, Epps also claims to be guarding statements because he has sought an attorney. • March 3, 2021, Epps meets in-person with the FBI at Epp's Phoenix attorney's office, claiming that he brought first aid since he was expecting a terror attack ( http://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/ray-epps-told-fbi-he-expected-a-bomb-attack-near-the-capitol-on-january-6-documents-show_4655405.html ) This seems like retroactive statements that follow from public knowledge of the pipe bombs near the Capitol. Epps would likely be unable to prove this motive with information pre-dating January 6th. • July 1st, 2021, Epps is removed from the FBI list without FBI statement. • November 2021, Epps spoke to House committee investigators, who report that Epps said that he is not an FBI asset or member. The House committee reported this interview in January 2022. (Note: while many low-IQ persons would simply say that this is the end of it, it should be noted that FBI assets and agents with undercover statuses are allowed to maintain their cover under questioning unless they are unmasked by the FBI, so this testimony is nearly meaningless.) • July 2022, Epps talks with the New York Times, saying, "I am at the center of this thing, and it’s the biggest farce that’s ever been, ... It’s just not right. The American people are being led down a path. I think it should be criminal." (This apparently in regards to the right-wing narrative being spread about him, against which he intends to pursue legal action.) Of "James Ray Epps" himself, the non-FBI theory of Epps gathered from public record is that he is a 61-year-old (as of 2022) former Marine from Queen Creek, Arizona, the former owner of "the Knotty Barn" there, a wedding and events-planning venue which now lists itself as under new management, and, in 2011, was a Chapter organizer for Arizona Oath Keepers (presumably he is not currently a member and was not at the time of January 6th). He now lives anonymously in an R.V. with his wife, and, under this good faith information, has retired to Colorado to avoid the public eye. That is pretty much the extent of the fact list, though there has been additional sensationalism attached. One issue is that Ted Cruz questioned Jill Sanborn, Executive Assistant Director for National Security Branch in the FBI, who declined to clarify Epps' status (see Forbes video of that exchange in January 2022, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePxjwXAIf2E ). However, people should note that Cruz did this performative questioning only days after he had received bad press for calling January 6th protestors "insurrectionists" and had had a bad interview on Tucker Carlson as a result. Cruz was very likely trying to redirect his bad coverage into good among the right, transferring right-wing anger at himself into anger at the FBI. Additionally, he knew that Jill Sanborn was unable or unwilling to answer any questions, and Cruz was simply using that fact to make it appear that the FBI had Epps acting as an undercover agent agitating the crowd. Similar events have played out with Massie (above), Goetz (September 22, 2022 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z6vU7NjNxA ), and Cotton (January 2022, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiDqA-X_-n4 ), where they have asked for details and met the FBI's brick wall (though their questioning was far less performative than Cruz'). Massie even spoke with AG Garland in October 2021, and Garland provided zero information (Massie official YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kPGvDKU_yI ). On the one hand, it is *partially* true that the FBI cannot comment on ongoing investigations, but, on the other hand, they do indeed have a Constitutional obligation for a baseline level of transparency at these meetings — but have not offered any. Massie suggests this at 5:49:00 in the September 21st House Committee video. Garland and the FBI is allowed to disclose depersonalized information, but they have opted not to disclose any information at all — not even information that could put "conspiracy theories" to rest. So, what is the recent misdirection here in this latest Raskin–Acyn–DNC propaganda? The DNC propagandists are focusing on "debunked" and "conspiracy theory" for something that has not been debunked and is indeed plausible. More importantly, this exchange between Raskin and Massie was during a meeting wherein Massie and others were attempting to pass House Resolution 1356 (H.Res.1356) which would force the FBI to reveal details on Epps and potential FBI operatives on January 6th — and Raskin was fervently opposing this motion. That is, Raskin does not want Epps' testimony released and does not want the FBI's fact-finding to be part of the congressional record. This is essentially a repeat of the DNC's avoidance of transparency, which is highly suspect. My long speculation on Epps is that he is just some oafish old man experiencing cognitive decline who bit off more than he could chew, but the political game has developed into something more radioactive. Cruz, in particular, took a big risk by making Epps a concern, and Massie and Gosar may fall victim to DNC propaganda if the records remain sealed. This current wave of propaganda makes the GOP figures asking about Epps appear to be unsympathetic to Epps the common man, which is a pathos argument that works on the low-IQ webs attached to figures such as Acyn. The good faith maneuver by the DNC would be simple: if Epps is indeed just a man, DNC persons such as Raskin could agree to a privacy clause for H.Res.1356 which allows the "conspiracy theorists" within the GOP to see the FBI documents in a SCIF, thus protecting Epps from public scrutiny (if innocent) while defusing the GOP obsession with Epps. The GOP and DNC could agree to Epps' innocence (if innocent) and ask the public to respect Epps' privacy. Because Massie is not RINO GOP, this would carry far more weight than say, Liz Cheney saying anything about anything. No such DNC argument was made. Instead, Raskin used his usual propagandist deflections: that the issue should be dropped and no one should look further (similar to the DNC's 2020 election propaganda). This makes the Epps issue follow the DNC's hoax pattern, which is to float a claim ("debunked") using knowledge that they do not have to expose to the public. If, indeed, there is nothing behind the Epps curtain, then the DNC could embarrass these GOP "conspiracy theorists" by allowing the discovery of these FBI documents. But, it is far more useful to them to make a claim without providing the evidence. Aside, the 8-hour video is also funny because Rep. Mondaire Jones (Bolshevik, NY), claims that Sicknick was "bludgeoned to death", and the GOP figures in the room (e.g., Rep Bishop of NC) had to explain to the low-IQ Bolsheviks that Sicknick's cause of death was due to natural causes. The GOP members also have to explain the difference between the police statements on Sicknick's death versus the medical examiner's. Jones, being an idiot, argues that Sicknick would not have died if he were not present on January 6th, and the GOP members have to explain basic causality to Jones. It's fucking hilarious that this is where the DNC is at right now. They cannot understand causality and are left googling New York Times stories in these committee meetings.
Habebe Member	Mon Sep 26 23:05:54 Sometime soon I will binge read these as I do.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Sep 27 06:44:08 Hopefully this can be a good resource :) .. Possible white-pill moment: "Britain launches review of plan to reach net zero climate target" [Reuters; September 26th, 2022] http://www...ero-climate-target-2022-09-26/ • "The review comes as Britain seeks to boost extraction of fossil fuels with plans for new oil and gas licensing rounds and after the government last week lifted a ban on onshore fracking for gas as it tries to boost energy independence following Russia's invasion of Ukraine." • ""The government remains committed to reaching our net zero emissions targets, but with Russia weaponising energy across Europe we must make sure we do so in a way that increases energy security and does not place undue burdens on businesses or consumers," said Business and Energy secretary Jacob Rees Mogg, who has previously expressed scepticism about the need to fight climate change." I've been talking about this here since thread #1: the ESG/DIE strategy makes the West vulnerable to the BRICS Group during global conflicts such as the Ukraine and Taiwan proxy wars. So, it is good that at least *some* leaders are aware that they cannot draw down the West's energy independence while simultaneously expecting to defeat the energy-independent BRICS Group. An energy-independent BRICS Group using the high energy of petrol and nuclear energy can out-produce an ESG/DIE West. Even if the ESG/DIE West brings more countries into the pyramid scheme, the ESG/DIE strategy — by design — results in lower energy output and high inter-dependence. Thus, that collective will fail if BRICS remains empowered. So, this is a potentially optimistic moment for the UK at least. To limit that optimism, this is only a resolution to review ESG/DIE strategies by the end of 2022, with only limited gas-lease restrictions removed in the short term. This is by no means a complete rejection of the totalitarian strategy, just a simple logistical wake-up call for the UK which may even be too late to turn around before Russia's winter plans. King Charles III is still a major player in WEF totalitarianism, so I don't expect a total reversal, though this may signal to other WEF collectivists that some "cheating" is allowed. The WEF briefly reported that King Charles III would be turning over some of his ESG/DIE projects now that he's king, and they applauded him in the expanded article for being one of the leading figures in green policy. [WEF Forum Intelligence] http://intelligence.weforum.org/monitor/latest-knowledge/dfa81218f38d466193d743484e238eef The WEF statement on turning over responsibilities seems based on Charles III's September 9th speech: "Full Speech: King Charles III Gives First Address After Death Of Queen Elizabeth II" [NBC News; September 9th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9EUPrd_oJw In the longer article, they speculate that Charles III may bring his policies openly into the monarchy, and his Parliament speech seemed to confirm that, with him signalling the "our democracy" talking point (a Marxist phrase when used by the WEF): "King Charles III's first speech in Parliament" [PoliticsJOE; September 12th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWvAzCRMLyI In short, the UK may simply be realizing that they have to maintain *some* functional energy policies in the short term while dealing with Russia in the winter, but this logistical reality may evaporate if Russia falls apart; they may go right back to Malthusian depopulation if Russia is defeated. This could be a splinter in the UK between the WEF adherents and Jacob Rees Mogg, who has been criticized for not being all-in on ESG (he apparently questioned whether or not climate change is a threat — that defies the Marxist dogma). So, it may simply be that they'll remove Mogg from the picture or pressure him to accept the dogma.
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Sep 28 16:12:49 The January 6th Show Trials scheduled for September 28th were cancelled due to the hurricane interfering with their potential ratings from the psychosis demographic :'( :( :'( :( Please pray for your insane friends. They are not okay today! The people in the hurricane are probably fine, though.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Sep 29 06:33:25 Not that I'm a Glenn Greenwald fan, but he had a good response to a video of Jacinda Ardern that's floating around (lots of people commenting on this one since it's so transparently evil): "This is the face of authoritarianism - even though it looks different than you were taught to expect. And it's the mindset of tyrants everywhere: This is someone so inebriated by her sense of righteousness and superiority that she views dissent as an evil too dangerous to allow:" [12:20 PM; September 28th, 2022] http://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1575188754071171072 This came from Ardern's appearance before the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in NY on September 23rd, 2022. The entire speech can be seen here: [United Nations official YouTube; September 23rd, 2022] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_4Cjki3SOM To the uninitiated, Ardern's speech might just sound like, "[We should stop malevolent actors from causing harm unrestricted online]", but that's not what she's talking about. I have covered Ardern at length in thread 2 comment "Sun Jun 05 05:41:12", but this UN speech deserves a fresh comment. Here are a few key phrases/sentence: • "This week we launched an initiative alongside companies and non-profits" Ardern is talking about the total state's management of private companies and WEF-funded "non-profits" whose central mission is enact the total state's imperatives under the guise of grassroots organizers (non-profits funded by the total state and staffed by Marxists) and "stakeholder capitalists" (business-owners prepared to destroy their own profits and annihilate world economies on behalf of the Marxist-Malthusians). • "how a person's online experiences are curated by automatic processes" Ardern is talking about the WEF's imperative of an A.I. Panopticon, managed via Marxist-indoctrinated programmers who are so politically hijacked that they consciously create algorithms which serve the total state. In simple practice, this is a matter of creating social media sites which manage people into thought-states that ultimately benefit the total state. • "mis- and dis-information online" This probably goes without saying, but she's talking not about the truth but about preserving the Party's narrative and making sure that it is supported even as it deviates from the truth — which it does as a rule. Thus, her subsequent comment on her and fellow leaders valuing "free speech ... so highly" is purely disingenuous. And, if you think that it's disingenuous to claim that she was being disingenuous, be aware that she continues to prove otherwise. • "How do you tackle climate change if people do not believe it exists?" This is an important WEF talking point. Whether or not "climate change" exists, the public *must* *believe* that it exists because the total state needs it as a perpetual emergency which justifies all of its actions — even its genocides and eugenics programs, which are not far-off projects in a dystopian future but are currently taking place via ESG policies intent on manufacturing famines and energy crises. • "How do you ensure the human rights of others are upheld when they are subjected to hateful and dangerous rhetoric and ideology?" This is where she completely buries any doubt about what she meant by "free speech". She is not talking about free speech as it was valued on the Internet as recently as the late the '90s. She is not talking about 4chan. She is not talking about Alex Jones. She is not talking about Kiwi Farms. She is not talking about conservatives. "There's a difference between 'hate speech' and speech that you hate," and, for Ardern and the WEF totalitarians, she is talking about the WEF wanting to silence any content which opposes the total state. It is under the guise of "human rights" that these WEF psychopaths intend to impose these "protections". This is because the total state means to become a protection racket. The total state must sell its psychosis propaganda to keep people in a useful fear state, and then it sells those fearful people its antidotes: "[protection and stability — but only through the state's expanded powers]". It is in this way that it closes the masses within its life-denying Overton Window. • "to cause chaos and reduce the ability of others to defend themselves" The projection here is amazing. Ardern delivers this statement from a UN General Assembly whose major agenda point for this meeting is world disarmament, including the sub-category of "Conventional arms control at the regional and subregional levels" (UN General Assembly Agenda, September–October 2022; http://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N22/595/10/pdf/N2259510.pdf ) • "to collapse the collective strength of countries who work together" Again quoting the WEF Bible, she talks about the WEF binary of populists and sovereign nations against the collectivist totalitarians. The total state demands compliance from macro to micro and micro to macro (top down through the oligarchs and bottom up through the indoctrinated Marxist useful idiots). The entire world must join the Borg. The anti-competitive strategy of ESG/DIE must be totalizing.. Except China and other members of the BRICS Group, of course — China being set to emerge as the new ruling power following this suicidal delusion of Western total-state oligarchs. ESG/DIE would cripple the West for a generation, and China would rise during the same. • "For every attempt to push the world into chaos is a collective conviction to bring us back to order. We have the means. We just need the collective will." Collectivists for a long time were unwilling to admit to being collectivists, since they are the progenitors of totalitarianism and adherents to Marxism, and many in the West were very aware of this and so rejected them in the Zeitgeist. But, the WEF totalitarians know not just that they are collectivists but that they will be followed by collectivists already seeded in governance; they know how deeply they have infiltrated, so they can now speak openly about their intention to bring total slavery upon mankind. Outside of the clip, in the full video, Ardern talks about progress in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which low-information people assure us are not actionable but just recommendations (lulz). 2:50 — "The lessons of COVID are in many ways the lessons of climate change ... Climate action will only ever be as successful as the least committed country as they pull down the ambition of the collective. Now, I'm not suggesting, though, that we rely on the good will of others to make progress. We need a dual strategy. One where we push for collective effort but where we also use multilateral tools to make progress. And that's why on pandemic preparedness we support efforts to develop a new global health legal instrument, strengthened international health regulations, and a strong and empowered World Health Organization. It's why we're such advocates of the World Trade Organization." And a key moment: 3:50 — "It's why we've worked so hard within the Paris Agreement to see the action we need on climate while also doing our bit at home, including putting a 1.5-degree warming limit INTO LAW, increasing our [Nationally Determined Contribution] (NDC) to 50% below 2005 levels by 2030 and quadrupling our climate finance commitment." I really cannot stress how important these "small" statements are. Here's a workthrough: If the world is warming — due to people or not — and there is a law saying that it is ILLEGAL for the world to increase in temperature, then a government is given near carte blanche to do any terrible thing it needs to in order to decrease that temperature. It is in this condition that total-state oligarchs put absurd caps on carbon production by citizens, eventually bringing about famine, genocide, and war to reduce the amount of people producing that carbon. And that temperature may still pass anyways. If a broken system controlled by a poorly programmed algorithm attempts to solve a problem that is not actually controllable by the metrics over which it has control, then it will crash. This is the Skynet metaphor: a system that calculates an immediate problem and can only solve it through its available abilities. • 5:16 "What country, who claims to be a liberator, threatens to annihilate the very civilians they claim to liberate. This war is based on a lie." Again, the projection is incredible. ESG/DIE will annihilate *billions*. • 6:50 — She calls for abolition of the UN's veto powers. This is again the WEF acolytes calling to remove protections on mob rule. The WEF acolytes in the U.S., for instance, call for abolishing the filibuster and the Electoral College — moves that would enable the total state. • 8:20 — Ardern does not believe that Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) is going to be a functional ideology as the ESG/DIE totalitarians consolidate powers. • 11:30 — She celebrates New Zealand as one of the first nations to recognize women's right to vote. This is like celebrating a car accident. • 13:30 — [Begins the clipped section discussed above] • 15:50 — Ardern asks for more nations to join the "Christchurch Call To Action", a total state strategy which used the Christchurch Shooting as a Trojan Horse for political suppression. Beginning and ending with indigenous language is par for the course. She has done this before, but I should mention that this is part of the "Land Acknowledgement Statement" logic of Marxist/Marcusean "sustainability". The Marxist "Utopian" believes that primitive cultures should be empowered because they lived "sustainable" lives that did not over-intrude into nature. This is, of course, delusion, and the conclusion these Marxists derive of such over-valuing of primitive cultures is a Malthusian one: that people must be depopulated in order for nature to "heal". This is not just a fringe belief but a WEF-induced propaganda strategy used by university professors signing off their emails, ESG propaganda movies such as "Prey" (2022) and "Antlers" (2021), and government policy (e.g., see my write-up of the Inflation Reduction Act, which, among other things, was an excuse to give millions to the indigenous). Ardern is a WEF Malthusian globalist through and through.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Oct 04 01:37:22 Many have now seen the video of Biden asking where the dead Rep. Jackie Walorski was during a speech on September 28th, 2022 (e.g., clipped by NBC News here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je4URLzZnFQ ). The full video is available here (34 minutes): [PBS News Hour; September 28th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beDOChoTVkQ • Biden's remarks begin at 11:00. • He begins by warning oil companies not to raise prices during the Florida storm (a continuation of an ESG talking point designed to gouge oil companies by cutting into their profits — an attempt to shame and sink these businesses while partially hiding the effects from the public) • His mention of Rep. Walorski occurs at 16:50: "I want to thank all of you HERE for— including bipartisan elected officials like Representative Gover [he apparently meant "McGovern"], Senator Braun, Senator Booker, Representative — Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? I, uh, I didn't think she, uh, was gonna be here." People *not* in the psychosis can see this as yet another example of Biden's mental invalidity — whether due to Parkinson's or dementia. People *within* the psychosis attribute it to a "stutter" or.. even more psychotically.. they believe the White House talking point of Biden simply having her on "top of [his] mind" (which does not answer the issue at all). Andrew of "Don't Walk, Run!" does a good recap: ""WHERE’S JACKIE?” (Jackie, Are You Here?)" [Don't Walk, Run! Productions; October 3rd, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cy4w6x8wwM He notices that Biden has a habit of doing off-the-cuff quips when he is about to read a name that he does not want to risk mispronouncing. Rep. Jackie Walorski has a potentially difficult last name for Biden, so he was using such a quip — while not realizing that she was dead and thus the quip was going to reveal, yet again, that the emperor is not wearing clothes. Another issue, however, is that Biden sandwiches that comment with "here", meaning that the list of people he was recognizing were presumed to be there in the audience — that is, not just by him but by the speechwriter. This would mean that the fuller story is that the speechwriter prepared these remarks before Walorski's death, did not revise them, and Biden walked directly into the trap. But! The White House has apparently resisted publishing the pre-speech draft (per September 28th's briefing https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2022/09/28/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-september-28-2022/ ): Q: "Would you be prepared to release the prepared remarks that the President had in the teleprompter just so we could understand?" Jean-Pierre: "I’m not understanding why — why that would be — would be necessary. We always share the remarks that the President had — even, you know, delivered. That’s probably going to be up on the website. Not really sure what that has to do with anything." Jean-Pierre deflected to saying that they publish the words *spoken* to evade revealing that they would not reveal the teleprompter text. These were the words they published after-the-fact: [White House dot gov; "Remarks by [Former VP] Biden at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health"] https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/09/28/remarks-by-president-biden-at-the-white-house-conference-on-hunger-nutrition-and-health/ "And I want to thank all of you here, including bipartisan elected officials like Representative McGovern, Senator Braun, Senator Booker, Representative — Jackie, are you here? Where’s Jackie? I didn’t think she was — she wasn’t going to be here — to help make this a reality. And thanks to Senator Stabenow, Representative DeLauro for their leadership." Notice the slight orthography shift between what Biden said.. "Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? I, uh, I didn't think she, uh, was gonna be here." ..versus what they wrote: "Jackie, are you here? Where’s Jackie? I didn’t think she was — she wasn’t going to be here — to help make this a reality." By placing the statement, "She wasn't going to be here," within em dashes, they make it appear to be a separate clause where Biden quietly reflected that, indeed, she is dead and was not going to be here. That's the "top of mind" lie that they're going for. Sadder still is that people have pointed out that much of the White House Press Corps (including names I've mentioned before while talking about the WHCA's total-state infiltration) was trying to *feed* Jean-Pierre better talking points. They were *actively* trying to give the White House better comments for public release, but she was too goddamned stupid to realize it. This rides on top of Biden's recent pedophile remarks at a mostly empty DNC event on September 23rd (they put a few dozen people behind him, but audio makes it clear that that's about it. Additional images reveal maybe 100 total): [NBC News; Live Coverage] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gizREAHTmAw 2:50 — "We go back a long way. She was 12, I was 30, but anyways/[at any rate]. This woman helped me get an awful lot done." It's honestly a big struggle to interpret this one to mean much other than that he took sexual notice of a 12-year-old girl when he was 30 and that what they got "done" was inappropriate sexual contact — especially given his facial expressions. And this is on top of assuming that he even recognized this particular woman. If he did not recognize her, then he was reminiscing about some other girl with whom he had been inappropriate. Still, giving another interpretation a shot: The most likely DNC-endorsed position is that he was simply trying to show that, while they "go back a long way", he's much older and thus they could not go back *that* far (also an indirect way of flattering by saying that she's "young"). His joke, then, would be that he actually met her much later but that's just how old *he* is (i.e., "[I'm so old that it's like an old person is 12!]"). But... that's not the angle that DNC propaganda mills seem to have taken. PolitiFact, for instance, rates the story "false" because.. and get this.. because he did not meet Jill Biden when she was 12. http://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/oct/03/viral-image/no-biden-didnt-say-he-met-jill-biden-when-she-was-/ In other words, their deflection is that the story is "false" because they took a random meme that was using the very real quotation in a new context as a joke.. and they debunked the joke.. and Google gave them top search result for it. :| The big detail for me would be **who was he talking to**?. Sadly, the event seems to have been heavily controlled, with few competing video angles available. The New York Post has a couple images of the crowd that Biden faced ( https://nypost.com/2022/09/23/biden-leaves-viewers-stunned-in-teachers-speech-she-was-12-i-was-30/ ), but nothing that connects the two moments for clarity. Annnnnyways, it's still impressive to me that DNC propaganda was so strong in 2020 that they were able to villainize Trump so well that it became palatable for the masses to vote for a diaper-shitting pedophile and puppet of a totalitarian order. Credit where credit is due?
Habebe Member	Tue Oct 04 01:45:23 "PolitiFact, for instance, rates the story "false" because.. and get this.. because he did not meet Jill Biden when she was 12." Fact checkers say the craziest shit. This is a common tactic. They will get some pointless side detail that is off and claim the story false even though the bulk of it they will actually confirm if you read the details.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Oct 06 06:03:14 "They will get some pointless side detail that is off and claim the story false even though the bulk of it they will actually confirm if you read the details." Exactly. And peeps like tw fall for it because they just read the headline, look at the source, confirm that it's The Party saying it, and agree. .. .. In another white-pill moment: I mentioned in previous thread comment "Tue Aug 16 15:27:35" that many U.S. states have seen the writing on the wall with ESG and have started divesting from ESG and WEF organizations such as BlackRock (>19 states including Texas, Arkansas, Utah, Florida, and West Virginia). In another continuation of that, Louisiana Treasurer John Schroder wrote a plan detailing Louisiana's intent to divest completely from BlackRock over the next few months. John Schroder gave the exclusive to Fox Business: "Louisiana divests from BlackRock over ESG policies: 'Would destroy Louisiana’s economy' ESG standards would lead to the 'crippling of our own economy,' Louisiana Treasurer John Schroder wrote" [October 5th, 2022] http://www...cies-destroy-louisiana-economy Schroder's condensed press release of the letter appears here: "Schroder protects Treasury funds from ESG by divesting $794M from BlackRock" [Treasury dot Louisiana dot gov; October 5th, 2022] http://www.treasury.la.gov/_files/ugd/a4de8b_588fa93a5a9242009b177e54f556f4ce.pdf (via their press release page https://www.treasury.la.gov/2022-2023-press-releases ) The full letter (3 pages) is linked from the press release, forwarding here: http://a4de8bd9-8c02-4b69-8f48-7792cfcaf8fd.usrfiles.com/ugd/a4de8b_38fdc8b7e3c04c9490bf332ce14f8d2f.pdf Highlights: • *Not* simply being a letter of *intent* (e.g., not like a threat to posture while awaiting election results), the press release states, "He reported that $560M has been removed to date and that a total of $794M will be removed by year’s end" — the letter states that this will be a complete divestment from BlackRock. • The letter also includes a hint at something I've talked about before (e.g., previous thread, Exxon CEO comment "Wed Aug 03 04:17:42"): Fink threatens businessmen behind-the-scenes for results: "His letter comes following a meeting with BlackRock representatives, whose statements he said directly contradicted public messaging by Fink, including letters to shareholders and other BlackRock corporate communications materials." • The statement made to investors **by Blackrock**: "[b]ehaviors are going to have to change and this is one thing we are asking companies. You have to force behaviors. And at Blackrock, we are forcing behaviors." • And it also points out that this is, in fact, illegal: "ESG investing violates Louisiana law on the fiduciary duties which require a sole focus on financial returns for the beneficiaries of state funds." • Yep: "ESG investing is more than bad business; it’s a threat to our founding principles: democracy, economic freedom, and individual liberty. It threatens our democracy, bypasses the ballot box and allows large investment firms to push political agendas. It threatens our economic freedom because these firms use their massive shareholdings to compel CEOs to put political motivations above a company’s profits and investors’ returns. Finally, it threatens our personal liberty because these firms are using our money to push their agendas contrary to the best interests of the people whose money they are using!" So this is good news. It may only be a few million here and a few million there — perhaps not much compared to the trillions that the WEF is throwing around, but the more of these ESG asset managers that are dropped, the better. This WEF anti-competitive scheme is massively corrupt and often illegal. This is part of why its mechanism includes the destabilizing and destroying of national sovereignty by infiltrating legislative bodies: like Emperor Palpatine, it has to *make* it legal — "it" being an intentional worldwide economic collapse to facilitate eugenics strategies and the rise of China (or the entire BRICS Group) at the expense of the ESG/DIE West, which self-hobbles into tourist destinations for Chinese citizens and world oligarchs. Here's a nice compilation of BlackRock's malevolence (5 Tweets): [WillHild Twitter; March 23rd, 2022] http://twitter.com/willhild/status/1506634983896752129 I've said before that Fink is simultaneously investing in China while forcing the world to invest in ESG — rewarding China despite China openly not playing by the same rules. This is a clear show of Fink's hand: he is helping China to rise in a massive parasite operation, getting the West to destroy itself while having China reap the benefits — the "capitalist" buying his own noose from China. Fink is selling out the world to become a quadrillionaire — a check that China will not let him cash. Part of Fink's larger *direct* moves in this respect (not including the general investments strategy) includes his attempt to force the SEC to adopt ESG policies. This would mean that businesses filing with the fucking *SEC* would have to disclose ESG portfolios by *Fink's* imperatives. That is, the WEF under Fink would own the U.S. business security apparatus, forcing yet more centralized compliance with ESG: "BlackRock Urges SEC to Change Climate-Risk Disclosure Plan "Firm says agency’s approach risks added costs, confusion "SEC wants companies to release details about their pollution" [Bloomberg; June 2022] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-21/blackrock-calls-on-sec-to-change-climate-risk-disclosure-plan The apparent form of the SEC's action here is to create objective metrics for an individual company's carbon production. And *why* might BlackRock want this control? They *are* in the carbon reduction business, yes? Because ESG is a suicide vest for businesses, and Fink wants to control the propaganda around it — to hide the kill switch. Fink wants to control the reporting metrics so that — even as these ESG businesses hemorrhage money into a pyramid scheme while perhaps not actually reducing overall carbon — the ESG scheme appears to be "working". It is "working" when people are forced to buy "green" energy from China's "Belt and Road Initiative", which is *not* "green" so much as it is merely China's attempt to monopolize the *appearance* of "Green" by raping the Earth where people do not see the rape happening (e.g., East Africa, its own factory zones). It can be summarized with the electric car issue: • We know that electric cars do not have a literal tailpipe while on the road, thus it appears to be clean/green energy. These are the "seen" market forces. But, • the massive lithium mines in 3rd world nations, the toxic waste from inefficient means of battery disposal, the coal power often behind them, and the massive energy cost of worldwide transport to get parts from the 3rd world to the first is the "unseen" hand — this is where China funnels the West's wealth into China's pockets. And the more you think on this model, the more the pieces come together: why would the West be encouraged *not* to be energy independent? Because if the West is energy independent, they can mine their own lithium, make their own batteries, and China loses market share. But, if the West can be convinced by ESG policies to only accept "seen" sources of "green" policies, then China gets to pollute unchecked while the West pats itself on the back for becoming pawns of a totalitarian movement. The West turns off its lights and shivers for the winter, and China prepares for the first generation where they are unopposed in the world.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Oct 06 08:03:50 Me, above: "Lindsey Graham, a likely totalitarian supporter given his NeoCon history..." Yeah. Absolutely confirmed. He wants more money for Ukraine: [Lindsey Graham Twitter; October 5th, 2022] http://twi...mSC/status/1577716698848919555 "While we’re at it, maybe the Congress should revisit the electric vehicle tax credit boondoggle. It is where the credit is now solely benefiting electric vehicle manufacturers who have increased prices equal to the tax credit!" "It could be a good way to help save money by applying those funds to assisting Ukrainians in defending their homeland!" Graham and the NeoCons who have led a direct line from the Cheney war-monger days into this ESG/DIE proxy-war profiteering need to be ousted from the GOP. The DNC has terminal cancer as far as the totalitarians go, but the GOP might be salvageable if voters recognize GOP politicians like Graham for what they are.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 09 06:48:45 You peeps can scroll this for the dank memes I made at the end: "Kanye's "WLM" Shirts Against the Zeitgeist's Enforced "BLM" Meaning Western Equality Against Marxism's Equity" [Cherub Cow Substack] http://che...-shirts-against-the-zeitgeists It also has a YouTube clip that I forgot to post in this thread, though I've mentioned it in UP in passing. It shows a Portland Bolshevik yelling, "Black Lives Matter!" to check to see if he's interacting with a Party Loyalist. Direct link to that (correct time point is set): "Live from Portland protest" [M. Tracey; July 23rd, 2020] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I54apP0Xsuc&t=2240s Remember, when someone asks you if you're a god, you say, "Yes!"
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 09 21:34:10 In entertainment news, right-wing Twitter user "Maze" (@MazeMoore) has begun compiling old Daily Show clips (with John Stewart) wherein Stewart and the current DNC Politburo members (e.g., Samantha Bee) were totally willing to make fun of how Joe Biden (then VP) is a pedophile, groper, and sexual harasser. Here's the latest one: "They scrub the videos but I find them. This is what they thought of Joe Biden before 2016." [October 9th, 2022] http://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1579261715493294080 (Samantha Bee pretending to have Biden's hand prints on her breasts) And here's one from yesterday: "Jon Stewart went from making fun of this to making fun of people who believe there are only two genders. He's so enlightened." http://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1578896678610145281 (Jon Stewart plays the montage of Biden touching people inappropriately in public appearances — where they cannot escape Biden's grasp for fear of making a public scene.) The montage includes the video of the girl who was so distressed by Biden's creepiness that she pulls away to evade a kiss while clearly feeling Joe's old-man breath on her cheek D: It also doesn't include this moment (at around 7:30) where Biden repeatedly strokes a little girls face for 15 seconds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4PLSPvJ9BY This, again, was why I believed going into 2020 (not so much by October) that Biden had no chance — that all that had to happen was for one DNC outlet to play these montages of him touching and groping and no one would vote for him. As I've said before, I did not expect that the DNC propaganda apparatus was so committed to stopping Trump that they would conceal the actions of a known pedophile and serial abuser — a compromised career politician who was beholden to the total state. Just think of that: all of these people, from Stewart, to Noah, to Samantha Bee, John Oliver, Lewis Black, Wyatt Cenac — people who are less beholden to DNC money and so should have *some* personal conscience... they all knew what Biden was.. but they were so convinced that Trump was the enemy — so convinced by a total state apparatus — that it did not matter. This is the psychosis. This is composed of people like Sam Harris who literally have **no limit** to how immoral their actions must become in order to address a "threat". This is "the ends justify the means". Is fraud beyond such people? If the ideologues of an immoralist movement are convinced that there is nothing wrong with anything that defeats Trump.. then what of the useful idiots? Is there any sophistry that is beyond them? How many within such a psychosis would be willing to discard a few ballots 'here' or shred a few inconvenient documents 'there'? How many judges — judges with even less distinction than the Supreme Court infiltrators who told COVID misinformation before dissenting on the OSHA mandate (e.g., Sotomayor, Kagan) — would be willing to overlook violations of election law in order to "preserve democracy"? The total state relies on these immoralists — these people without conscience. Even Jon Stewart's questioning of Arkansas AG Leslie Rutledge reveals a man without conscience: [The Problem With Jon Stewart; @TheProblem; October 7th, 2022] http://twitter.com/TheProblem/status/1578414849083654144 Notice how he supports the total state — the "defer to the experts" mentality. If "experts" told you to sterilize your own children, would you defer to them or to your conscience? People like Stewart would prefer the premier. A population without conscience is vulnerable to the total state's psychosis, having no boundaries and having a total willingness to concede ground to the psychological intimidation of the total state panopticon. A virtuous person cannot be talked out of her conscience under the pressures of the psychotic multitude. "In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 10 05:58:51 Yikes. Most saw this story by now: Kanye mentioned that he would maybe call out Jews on October 9th (11:55 PM October 8th: "I'm a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I'm going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE"). That Tweet was removed within 2 hours. Due to that removal, Kanye also wrote a Tweet asking who "created cancel culture?" (the comment had a pretty unanimous guess https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1578964763220271105 ). Before this, he had also complained about Zuckerberg, who is Jewish, since Kanye was banned from Instagram (probably not by Zuckerberg himself, of course). Buzzfeed was apparently able to get in touch with Twitter, and a spokesperson "told BuzzFeed News on Sunday, "The account in question has been locked due to a violation of Twitter’s policies."" (i.e., Kanye cannot login, but the account is not suspended) http://www...west-twitter-jews-antisemitism People have pointed out that "Stop Antisemitism" dot org, a U.S.-based group that, by its own words, "exposes antisemites and creates consequences for their behavior regardless of that person’s affiliations" ( https://www.stopantisemitism.org/about-us ) was behind a push to "Cancel Kanye." http://archive.ph/KX3Cb Comments point out the illogic of that: Kanye accuses Jewish people of being behind cancel culture... and the response of Jewish advocacy groups is to cancel him. :| It's certainly not a good look, but this particular Jewish advocacy group appears to be run by unhinged people (e.g., their Instagram moderator calls anyone who disagrees "Nazis" — discourse on the level of Imgur), and it may be a stretch to believe that they had a direct hand in Twitter's actions. Worse, though, is that counter-arguments take a disingenuous form, such as via one Yair Rosenberg (101.5k followers), a proud Jewish "troller" of "Nazis", who wrote of Kanye, "it’s a self-affirming conspiracy theory. The antisemite claims that Jews control everything. Then, if they're penalized for their bigotry, they point to that as proof. Heads they win, tails Jews lose." http://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/status/1579117096683720706 On the surface, this seems almost sound, and one could see the circular logic of Kanye at work: "[Aha! If I don't get punished, I get to say more antisemitic stuff, and if I *do* get banned, I get my point proven!]". But, even Rosenberg's argument is based on an immoral premise: he believes that people should be banned for antisemitism. This is the "hate speech" bypass of free speech. People should not be banned for such rhetoric. Kanye was not calling for violence. Even if "death con 3" is taken as an intentional revision of "DEFCON 3" rather than Kanye being semi-illiterate (more likely), insinuating that Kanye even mentioning Jewish people while he has so many followers could "incite" others is a false causality — the red herring of stochastic terrorism. If it were not such a red herring, Kanye's Tweet would be far more direct, but it was not. He did not even bring it up to "death con 1", and on Twitter that might only mean posting 4chan memes. Rosenberg's rhetorical manipulations continue in his Twitter thread, and he writes a longer variation for the DNC-owned "Atlantic", where he is happy to talk about Kanye's mental health history before the pay-wall: http://newsletters.theatlantic.com/deep-shtetl/63433940fb1fdd003629c72c/kanye-jews-anti-semitism-twitter/ He also makes the suggestion that it's odd that Kanye does not lash out at people such as the Amish instead: "Put another way, unwell individuals like Kanye rarely go on tirades against, say, the Amish; they tend to land on those already targeted by the broader culture, and to reflect their society's preexisting pathologies, whether anti-Semitism or racism." This is a very sad attempt at a parallel, given that the Amish objectively have no authority in the wider world. Even their apparent willingness to use *some* modern conveniences, such as car batteries and entertainment devices, does not place them in a position to manufacture world crises. Rosenberg also makes the strangely dismissive attempt to say that people such as Kanye use "euphemisms" for Jews, such as "globalists" — which almost seems like a transparent play by Rosenberg to say that critiquing globalists is to critique Jewish people. But why would that be? That would only be a problem if the Venn Diagram of "globalists" and "Jews" were an eclipse, and if it *is* an eclipse, then Rosenberg's propaganda would make sense: do not use any words that describe Jews, their ideology, or their actions. This same rhetorical device has been used by other social media Jewish people who have said that "Marxist" is a euphemism for "Jew". This is, of course, an absurdity. Marxism is adopted internationally — and not just by Jewish persons (e.g., South American Marxism). That Venn diagram ("Marxists" and "Jewish people") is assuredly *not* an eclipse. However, is this an attempt to evade another eclipse? I.e., is there one between "Jewish people" and "Jewish Marxists"? That is, what percentage of Jewish people are afflicted by Marxism? Certainly not 100%, but if Jewish people feel implicated, is the overlap larger than one giving the benefit-of-the-doubt would like to think? Rosenberg makes no attempt to admit why these "conspiracy theorists" might happen to turn their attention to Jewish people as perpetrators of a global alignment. Even elucidating the argument is counter to his efforts, which makes his propaganda even more transparent. He makes no genuine effort to address actual claims; he hopes to bury them behind the thought-terminating clichés of "antisemitism" and "conspiracy theory", but these words have no effect on people willing to use Terry Davis thinking strategies — people willing to examine the forbidden. How might a *moral* person address the "globalist"–Jew claims? For instance, I learned only a few days ago that Larry Fink — one of the largest players in the global organization of the WEF's ESG/DIE strategy — is Jewish. This was extremely disappointing to me, since I was hoping to debunk theories of a *Jewish* Great Replacement, yet here Fink is, a Jew, managing the collapse of the West. Does that mean that China is just another market to infiltrate, as opposed to Fink acting on their behalf? In Rosenberg's position, I might say that Fink's global strategy is not ideologically "Jewish". That would put me at ease. A good argument is that Fink is managing the global collapse not due to his Jewish faith but because he just happened to become king-trillionaire at the time of a rising A.I. power that he believes he can wield (ALADDIN). I might talk about how the 4chan charts that show how many Jewish people are in positions of power have omitted the scale of Jewish *absence*. For instance, a popular 4chan meme shows dozens of Jewish people in positions of power at CNN, The New York Times, NBC, CBS, NPR, and yes, even Fox News. But let's test-sample the absence theory: For the New York Times, listed as primary Jewish owners are.. • Meredith Kopit Levien — new CEO • Arthur Sulzberger Jr. (Chairman and Publisher) • Michael Golden (Vice Chairman) • Joseph Kahn (Managing Editor) Beyond that are dozens of Jewish journalists and minor editors. But is that the total leadership structure of The Times? This is their board as of May 2022: • A. G. Sulzberger, (Jewish, already listed) • Aman Bhutani, CEO of GoDaddy (Sikh, not Jewish) • Manuel Bronstein, CPO of Roblox (Hispanic-Venezuelan? Jewish last name...) • Beth Brooke, former global vice chair of public policy for Ernst & Young (not Jewish) • Rachel Glaser, CFO of Etsy (Unclear; Jewish last name) • Arthur Golden, bestselling author (Jewish) • Hays Golden, former AIG executive (Jewish) • Meredith Kopit Levien, CEO of the New York Times Company (Jewish, already listed) • Brian McAndrews, former chairman and CEO of Pandora Media (likely not Jewish) • David Perpich, former president of Wirecutter (Jewish) • John W. Rogers Jr., founder of Ariel Investments (not Jewish) • Doreen Tobin, former CFO of Verizon (probably not Jewish) • Rebecca Van Dyck, CMO of Reality Labs (possibly not Jewish) I wanted to be proven wrong more, but 7?/13 Jewish isn't *too* overt and maybe NYT was a low-hanging fruit. At any rate, the overlap of Marxism with *any* people would be the greater issue. It does not matter if Jewish people are in power, it matters what they *do* with that power. The New York Times is corrupt, but that does not need to be a Jewish issue. Repeatedly finding these connections is distressing, but the true enemy of humanity is enslavement — regardless of who attempts to make slaves. It was difficult enough to find some of the religions of these people much less to know their hearts. Plus, Jewish populists can likely identify this same issue, not just because a total state would accidentally enslave them (and perhaps it would not) but because morality should not be beyond the reach of a thinking person, and not every thinking person seeks total power. And if this total-state infiltration is indeed a BRICS strategy, antisemitism would simply be another divide and conquer conflict. That is, turning the West against its Jewish population would be another way to dismantle the West's powers. Focusing on ethnicity rather than ideology disguises this issue.
Habebe Member	Mon Oct 10 06:43:11 Kanye is clearly semi illiterate and legit a no polar mess off his medication (understandably) Jewish people are heavily over represented in media.Thats just a statement of fact. Like blacks are over represented in the NBA.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 10 07:02:13 The malevolent readings of that Jewish representation are definitely troubling. There are Jewish rabbis that promote Zionism not just as a Jewish liberation but as an intentional revising of the world to make all non-Jews into slaves of the Jewish cause. Their stated purpose is to control Christians to serve in this slavery, where corrupted Christians believe that service to Jews is their salvation. Some rabbis even interpret this into international politics, where they must destroy the West to breed their ideal slaves — promoting immigration to breed out individualism. They perhaps believe that the Chinese are already bred to be slavish. The non sequitur is between these rabbis (potentially just fringe idiots equivalent to tent preachers in the U.S. South) and conscious actors who are Jewish. We know that Marxism owns the WEF via people like Klaus Schwab, but a thread to pull would be Larry Fink's biography and beliefs. The generous version is that he has no Jewish beliefs and truly believes that he's saving the world with climate activism — accidentally adopting Marxism to do it. The cynical version is that he's consciously collapsing the West with the Marxist ESG deception to bring about this Zionist dream. Both versions create a total state with mass slavery.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 10 09:33:40 Lulz. AOC is pretending not to be antisemitic today, even though the entire progressive squad has a storied history of antisemitism: "There is absolutely no room in this country or world for antisemitism. It is important to see how harmful + dangerous Kanye’s words are - not only to our Jewish brothers, sisters, & siblings, but also to our collective society at large. We must reject this [garbage] wherever we see it." [October 9th, 2022] http://twitter.com/AOC/status/1579295827574788096 Maybe she was crying next to Nancy Pelosi while Pelosi wrote this Tweet for her, like she was crying when she had to vote to give Israel more Zion-defense money.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 10 21:04:51 The Kanye interview on Tucker Carlson is gold, btw. It can be viewed in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGKrtPOX9zY (part 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL5dnoNYGfw (part 2) But those links will likely be removed since it's copyright infringement. Rumble is less monitored (part 1 only): https://rumble.com/v1mxnl1-tucker-carlson-tonight-kanye-west-interview-full-episode-october-06-2022.html And parts can be viewed via these Fox News clips: • "Kanye West exclusive: Rapper tells Tucker Carlson story behind White Lives Matter shirt" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTCJHxv4jMA • "Ye reveals he didn't know how close ex-wife Kim Kardashian was to Clintons" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVOGB-eSvqw • "Kanye West: Media's promotion of obesity is demonic" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bj0FQjRYjM • "'Atheists love' this term: Kanye West" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvASNmTynk0 • "Ye: This is when my connection with Obama 'faded'" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTSfYDzpjqI • "Ye on being a Christian in liberal-dominated music and fashion industries" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loPhnAIAECM • "Ye: ‘God-fearing people perform for an audience of one’" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odi5zTGwdDw • "Ye talks about his spirituality" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAvEv8gTmVo The "Media's promotion of obesity" clip includes Kanye talking about how Planned Parenthood is black eugenics. He mentions Margaret Sanger, the KKK, and the connection to the DNC. Yep! Planned Parenthood is part of the DNC's eugenics strategy. If you want to talk about "systemic racism": the DNC has systematically culled black people with eugenics and cultural degradation in order to make them into a useful voting bloc. It is the same total-state strategy as the ESG/DIE totalitarians in general: they realized what kind of person was more likely to vote for government expansion, and they *created* and *encouraged* that type of person. In the case of the black community, this meant encouraging the immorality of abortion, the dysfunction of single parenthood, and the rejection of anti-deterministic self-becoming (the promotion of "cracker culture" within black communities, as Sowell calls it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT4NQ9D0M6w ). The "This is when my connection with Obama 'faded'" clip includes slight prodding of Jewish influence. Between the lines, he talks about how Jewish asset managers and CEOs essentially "buy" influential black artists as faces of their brands (e.g., Nike, Gap) in order to convince black people to behave in predictable ways. Once they have an influencer secured in this brand role, that influencer's freedom is removed by controlling their livelihood (corporate culture — the managerial state). He also talks about how black people need to completely reinvent themselves if they want the creative control to influence positively each other — without being managed by people who are merely controlling their influence. Kanye realizes that he does not have to be the face of someone else's brand, and he can "put God first" — which is antithetical to the Jewish wish that all non-Jews be hopeless atheists deprived of God. "Ye on being a Christian" is funny because he points out that the DNC's brain drain has meant that they no longer even have the best influencer to peddle their black controls (i.e., they don't have him). "Ye talks about his spirituality" includes talk about media mind control and how people are being convinced not to have healthy relationships. He sees family as a bulwark against these manipulations. Kanye is definitely aware of a lot of the manipulations afoot. He even had a Tweet saying, "George Soros and Klaus Schwab are your enemies, not China & Russia". While all four of these may be enemies, the rhetorical device is that Soros and Schwab are the greater enemies, and that is correct, since they are the foothold in Western politics that is collapsing the West — perhaps on behalf of BRICS. The BRICS Group is an issue, sure, but having infiltrators in the West is worse.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 10 22:26:47 The PayPal issue has not yet been totally clarified. Summary here, for those in the dark: "PayPal tells users it will fine them $2,500 for misinformation, then backtracks immediately" [Fortune; October 10th, 2022] http://for...formation-aup-error-confusion/ • PayPal released a new AUP draft (not then effective) which included a provision for a $2500 fine for "misinformation" (wrongthink against the Party). • The provision read that PayPal "may subject you to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 US dollars per violation, which may be debited directly from your PayPal account(s) as outlined in the User Agreement [which states that in] connection with your use of our websites, your PayPal account, the PayPal services, or in the course of your interactions with PayPal, other PayPal customers, or third parties, you must not ... provide false, inaccurate or misleading information." • They were called out on social media and revised the AUP. • PayPal claims that it was an error. • PayPal stocks semi-crashed as people mass-terminated their accounts. • PayPal seems to have given people errors when attempting to terminate their accounts, either due to volume of requests or as a way to throttle account terminations while the story dies down. The missing clarification, for me, is who drafted the AUP? PayPal has not explained the source of the "error", if it were indeed an error rather than something that people were not supposed to notice or critique. Scott Adams' theory is that it was a managerial mistake; one single lawyer just tried to throw in additional protections for PayPal and no other person noticed the language before it reached the public. While this speaks to the mundane realities of bureaucracy, it does not explain why such a specific item would be added to the AUP — and why that item aligns so readily with the ESG/DIE totalitarian imperative under which PayPal has conspicuously organized its corporate governance. People such as Glen Greenwald have pointed out that this was no accident ( https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1579612133696098305 ). PayPal has been moving this way for over a year, such as when they aligned with the Anti-Defamation League to enforce Party Doctrine: [PayPal Corp; July 26th, 2021] http://newsroom.paypal-corp.com/2021-07-26-PayPal-Partners-with-ADL-to-Fight-Extremism-and-Protect-Marginalized-Communities In other words, this "error" justification speaks more of a plausible deniability strategy than of the infinite monkey theorem producing a miracle. The words were written consciously, and PayPal has no obligation to reveal who specifically wrote them, while PayPal would definitely know that information. At any rate, the social media reaction to divest from PayPal is a correct one, since this was a clear glimpse at PayPal's corporate governance. People have pointed out that Dan Bongino's AlignPay was launched as just such a censor-proof alternative to PayPal and ESG. PayPal, meanwhile, has an excellent ESG rating ( https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PYPL/sustainability/ ), which means that this mass exodus of users and PayPal's stock tanking may only be a temporary setback. They will be subsidized by the asset managers for taking this risk, and/or the asset managers will insist on those subsidies being a reason for yet more ESG infiltration. PayPal will become more compliant with the total state, only hiding its ESG actions slightly better in the future by using more discrete legalese.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Oct 13 05:58:34 Regarding Twitter's control of wrongthink: I brought up in the previous thread (comment "Thu Aug 04 22:13:46") that Twitter was designed by progressive programmers to limit the voices of those promoting ideas and phrases with which the ESG/DIE Twitter sycophants disagree. That is, if a user posts certain phrases (e.g., Ellen Page, World Economic Forum, groomer), that user's reach is artificially limited. This happens not just at the level of some algorithm which automatically identifies bad phrases and just "happens" to target conservatives; the programmers created a reach-throttling algorithm which accepts the manual input of these "wrong" words and they intentionally input conservative phrases. In the big examples of this, those targeted find themselves shadow-banned, or, despite having followers, their Tweets are not promoted in the feeds of their followers — only in the chronological timeline. In the case of shadow-banning, banned users can write replies, but those replies appear at the very end of all other replies, and people have to un-hide those replies to see them — and most people do not bother scrolling down that far. This happens even when there is no swearing or wrongthink in a particular comment — the user has already been categorized by previous behavior (previous use of key words, previous "flags", previous news-stories re-tweeted, etc.) and their future comments will be shadow-banned until a certain threshold of "acceptable" (Party-appropriate) discourse has been used. A good example is BotSentinel: http://botsentinel.com/dashboard When I first started using Twitter again a few months ago, I started running names through bot-checkers when people would say crazy things (to see if they were a sock puppet, bot, or just crazy). One of these bot-checkers is BotSentinel, which assigns scores for how "disruptive" a user is. However, BotSentinel it is not just some passive evaluator by an impartial actor/programmer. Firstly, be warned that inputting your own Twitter name into BotSentinel to "analyze" out of curiosity results in BotSentinel changing, establishing, or re-evaluating your score — much as credit card companies may change credit scores simply because a credit-user checked the score. Your name appears in the refreshed list of recent searches and is public for any passer by. If multiple people search for your name, the account is flagged for further review (automatically and manually), and even a single search places you more "on the map" for BotSentinel. That is, multiple people checking to see if you're a bot (or checking to see how acceptable your speech is) may cause the system to assume that you *are* a bot or that your speech is unacceptable. This may result in a flag-cascade, where multiple people "checking" your name results in your name remaining closer to the top of "problem users", where more people will check your name and potentially report it, keeping your name there for even longer, giving you even more negative exposure, and giving you a more "problematic" ranking. BotSentinel also uses the same tactics as Twitter: adding "problematic" phrases to its search list as part of its wrongthink-flagging. So that's old news. BotSentinel has been on the map for this for months now. That said, user "Lowkey Rey 2.0" (@AtlRey) received trending status (currently about 4500 likes) on October 11th, 2022, for pointing out that the programmer behind BotSentinel, Christopher Bouzy (@cbouzy), was recently sponsored by Twitter itself (openly) in their planned rollout of a publicly available rating of "acceptable" speech. http://twitter.com/AtlRey/status/1579872092061069312 Twitter is apparently testing an icon that appears directly below usernames to show how "Acceptable", "disruptive", "normal", or "problematic" the user is. This appears as a percentage and a color-coded indicator — the exact format of BotSentinel. User Oceana (@OceanaRune) replies to AtlRey with more details on BotSentinel and its owner: https://twitter.com/OceanaRune/status/1570418312265306112 Oceana points out the obvious cracks in BotSentinel's claims of impartiality, such as Bouzy's own obvious left-leanings (attacks of GOP politicians), his targeting of people who were against Amber Heard, and his artificially giving people negative ratings if they've caught his personal attention. Oceans also shows Tweets by Bouzy where he has admitted to accepting money to negatively rate critics of Meghan Markle, including one woman whom he doxxed and accused of hate speech because she wrote about his public-record fraud track record. So, we now have Twitter potentially merging with another biased rating group to provide a manipulated categorization of its userbase. On the one hand, BotSentinel may correctly target obvious bots, but BotSentinel uses the same tactics as Twitter (e.g., adding "problematic" phrases for removal, silencing, targeting, or throttling which just happen to disagree with left-wing sensibilities), and BotSentinel also assigns a percentage value that Twitter would like to display as a means to further establish the logic of the managerial state — namely, the managerial state's imperative to psychologically condition people to only accept *their* "experts", so that people will only believe or accept the opinions of those whom the total state and its sycophants have approved. People really need to be on the watch for this in particular because this is the same logic of the pre-printing-press Church: the Church sought to stop unmediated readings of the Bible, wanting people to only take the word of the Church regarding its contents. The total state is again attempting the same. This is built into memes attempting to disregard arguments when they were not stated by the anointed class. This is the total state's fallacy of authority: "truth" assigned for Party Faith, not for soundness of argument. In a total state which suffers the groupthink of a managerial elite as well as institutional and regulatory capture, moves such as this represent contractions of the snake, narrowing the Overton Window until only the state's approved voice remains among A pliable mob.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 16 11:32:32 "Biden attempts a sniffing at a Baskin Robbins in Oregon today" [End Wokeness Twitter; October 15th, 2022] http://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1581441986115948544
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 16 11:53:54 Just a reminder that the Chief Pedophile was supported by BigPharma for the 2020 win (and still is supported by the BigPharma oligarchs): http://www...y-is-supporting-for-president/ "The pharma industry has put its weight behind Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, reversing a longstanding fundraising trend that has favored the GOP." The poor gullible cultists who voted for this pedophile totalitarian figured that voting for war mongers, regulatory capture, worldwide enslavement, and mass death from famine, war, and plague was a totally non-death-cult thing to do.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 17 04:59:46 One of the DNC's primary propaganda repeater accounts (accounts paid by the DNC to spread DNC talking points), @JoJoFromJerz, on October 16th, 2022, re-spread an incredibly low-information DNC hoax that really sums up how misinformed the U.S. left-wing has become: "The same bigot who five years ago called Nazis “very fine people” is threatening Jewish Americans today. When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time." http://twitter.com/JoJoFromJerz/status/1581739492247220225 Many of the DNC's useful idiots still believe that Trump called Nazis "very fine people" following the Charlottesville rally. This comes from a slightly longer but still selectively edited clip of Trump saying, "very fine people on both sides". To this day, the DNC loves to suggest that this was Trump making an equivalence between Nazis and left-wing protestors — an outright lie and willful distortion of his words. In the full video, Trump continues: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs "And you had people — and I'm not talking about the Neo-Nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned *totally* — but you had many people in that group other than Neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay, and the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group, also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group too." Trump was clearly talking about how there were people protesting the removal of a statue who had a legitimate grievance, but the ESG/DIE press lumped these legitimate-grievance people in with the Neo-Nazi groups, saying that anyone who opposed the removal was a Neo-Nazi (another lie by the press). On the current revision of the Charlottesville Wiki (Wikipedia being DNC-owned at this point), the fourth paragraph states, "This first statement and his subsequent defenses of it, in which he also referred to "very fine people on both sides", were widely criticized as implying a moral equivalence between the white supremacist protesters and the counter-protesters.[8][33][34][35][36]" Notice the deception: "Widely criticized as implying", followed by a spattering of five sources to give this claim credence. This is a managerial state propaganda tactic. The idea is to appeal to an argumentum ad populum (here: many people believe it, so it must be true) and hide behind a fallacy of authority (here: multiple sources were used, so they must be valid). In reality, "implying" is worthless and "widely criticized" is effectively meaningless here, since they were widely fucking *wrong*. And their appeal to authority is a failure since the sources are NYT, CNN, Washington Post (twice), and Politifact — all captured DNC media. To Politifact's credit, they only lightly editorialized the transcript before giving a fairly faithful representation of his entire remarks. https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/apr/26/context-trumps-very-fine-people-both-sides-remarks/ Notice, also, that the sentence on Wiki following the propaganda tactic is also propagandized: "Trump later stated (in the same statement) that "I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally–but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists".[37][38]" The Wiki editors wanted very much to say that Trump stated this "later", but, DNC-owned as Wiki is, they could not quite alter the fact that it was within the same exact statement. Even so, the ploy is to emphasize "later" to make it appear that "on both sides" had established an equivalence that Trump only "later" corrected — whereas his meaning was explicitly captured in one statement. They are hoping that the lukewarm-IQ people will be tricked by this "later" word instead of realizing that Trump said all of this within the span of one minute. The Wiki editors also accidentally reveal the bias of the managerial state "experts" in the first sentence: notice that 5 sources were used in the first sentence ("very fine people"), but only two sources for the second ("not ... the Neo-Nazis"). This is because the four sources that "widely criticized" Trump's remarks **omitted** his clarifying comments — a malicious act of state-sponsored disinformation. Only sources that dutifully carried the entire transcript were forced into the truth. That is, Wiki accidentally showed that all of those "experts" from DNC media were maliciously and intentionally lying. This is how people like tw get so totally owned by state propaganda. They only see what the Politburo shows them — not what the Politburo omits. They hear the edits, they read the snippets, but they are denied the unabridged reality by a Party whose power demands that its followers be kept ignorant and dutifully psychotic. The "very fine people" hoax is one of the DNC's most egregious hoaxes, but it is by no means their only one. TW has fallen for nearly all of them. Here is a short list of some of their lies: • Andrew Cuomo presented as the best early COVID governor • Attack on GOP at baseball game was apolitical • "Austere religious scholar" dies (WaPo headline on ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi) • Avenatti rising star in Democratic politics (DNC propaganda spread to repay favors to him) • Build Back Better (the "Inflation Reduction Act") will not cost a thing • Border agents used whips against migrants • Border kids in cages under Trump, not Obama • Bubba Wallace NASCAR noose • Charlottesville "very fine people" quotation lie • Christmas parade marchers murder by "SUV" • COVID lab leak a conspiracy theory • Covington HS kids at US Capitol • CRT is not taught below college level • "Don't Say Gay" bill • Early COVID days: civilians should not mask • Gang-rape at UVA • "Putin's price hike" • "Hands up, don't shoot" • Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation • Inflation is temporary/transitory • Ivermectin is only a horse de-wormer • Jussie Smollett / MAGA country • Just 2 (not 52) senators is anti-democratic (referring to Manchin and Sinema stepping out of line) • Katie Hill, who slept with employee, was a victim • Kavanaugh sexual assault accusers (e.g., Ford's lies) • Kyle Rittenhouse [killed black people]/["crossed state lines!"]/illegally possessed/etc. • Lock-down good for COVID, except to protest "racism" • "Mostly peaceful protests" (the DNC's insurrection) • "Muslim travel ban" • Officer Sicknick killed by January 6th mob • Palin webpix incited Gabby Giffords shooting • Pulse Nightclub shooting was homophobic • Ron DeSantis — "fully vaxxed" goalpost prediction (i.e., the total state continuously redefined "fully vaxxed") • Russia Gate • Russian bounties on US Soldiers • Tom Cotton NY Times Op-Ed • Trayvon Martin narratives (nearly all false to fuel DNC's racialist strategies) • Trump tax cuts benefited only the rich • Vaccines would end the pandemic A sad thing is that much of this is transparent to a person with the slightest functional memory, so, beyond idiots, the propaganda only "works" on low-information and low-IQ persons. People who are knowledgeable or at least a standard deviation above the norm can see the lies, but state propaganda is for them about humiliation and demoralization — they experience a chilling effect when they see the cost of truth under the state's control of discourse. These are the Party immoralists and cowards. Worse still, however, are the immoralists who knowingly spread this propaganda on behalf of a state whose intent is annihilation. They betray their very species on behalf of genocidal maniacs.
Paramount Member	Mon Oct 17 12:08:30 Joe Biden brags about how he threatened to pull $1 billion in loan guarantees from Ukraine if it didn’t fire Prosecutor General Shokin. The prosecutor, who was fired, was leading a corruption investigation into a company that employed Biden's son, Hunter http://twi...?s=61&t=Q9Tl4BkIZr_GciACOBlK0Q
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 17 21:56:03 Yep. Biden is a criminal. The Biden family's racketeering in Ukraine is directly connected with the current proxy war, with them attempting to get rich off of the UN/WEF's ESG encroachment. The people with Ukraine flags in their bios are supporting the DNC's war-profiteering and their establishment of a world totalitarian state. .. Unsurprisingly, the White House is now using Lindsay Graham's poorly timed bill to float more abortion propaganda: "Republicans want a national ban on abortion—but if we elect two more Democratic senators and keep the House, we will codify Roe v. Wade." [includes video] [@JoeBiden Twitter; October 17tt, 2022] http://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1582172358378491905 (I spoke of Graham's role as total-state controlled opposition above in comment "Sun Sep 18 06:04:04", including going into the bill he proposed.) The video is, of course, misleading. Firstly, Graham has been chastised for this move, since this deflates the argument that conservatives have been making about Roe's overturning: that it merely returned the argument to the states. So the claim that this was "Republicans" in general is a lie. Secondly, notice how they simply call it a "national ban on abortion" but avoid the actual language of the bill. This is because the bill would stop abortions after the first trimester (specifically: after "15 weeks or greater") — which tends to be a line popular with people regardless of party. That is, most people, when surveyed, think that 15 weeks is a pretty reasonable stop, since the pregnancy should have been detected at this point and the fetus has developed into something that most people recognize as human and semi-sentient. But, of course, the propaganda is less effective if the DNC says, "Some Republicans want to ban abortion after 15 weeks, with exceptions for extreme scenarios." Instead, they have to pretend that this is a total and all-encompassing ban with no exceptions. This ties further into DNC desperation for this mid-term cycle. They have totally failed on the issues since even low-information people can recognize economic calamity, so all the DNC has is the distractions of abortion, gun control, and Trump/January 6th. Even climate change is not testing well right now, and show-trial ratings were so abysmal that they can hardly be said to have made an impact. The DNC is going to have to make a *lot* of ground with their late October surprise, which, if they're committed, may be a political assassination or shocking developments in Ukraine which can convince the useful idiots that they need leadership stability. Their strategy is the same, however: • If the DNC experiences a Red Wave, they'll suddenly be aware of the economic calamity that they themselves have caused and will say that the GOP is keeping them from doing anything about it (i.e., blame the GOP for the DNC's own policy effects). • If the DNC secures mid-term wins, they'll push through ESG/DIE strategies without opposition, ending the republic and further solidifying the uni-party totalitarian state. A DNC midterm win is clearly worse, but like the Malthusians of the Matrix, there are levels of survival that they are prepared to face should they lose power for the next two years. They have an extensive propaganda package prepared for 2024, since Agenda 2030 requires that the president's veto power be suspended by total state operatives in the critical 2024–2028 window. DNC wins allow them to continue soft genocides and disguise these genocides with propaganda control, but losses of power force them to make their moves in the open via hot conflict.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Oct 18 03:35:04 This was posted in a parallel UP thread ( http://uto...hread=90753&time=1666076427073 ), but it's worth pointing out some key details that UP may have missed: "Saudi Arabia says U.S. asked it to postpone oil supply cut by a month Such a delay in the OPEC+ move could have staved off price rises at American pumps until after the midterm elections." [NBC News; October 12th, 2022] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna52037 1) Firstly, it is very likely that the Saudis are telling the truth, since this is highly consistent with the U.S. ESG strategy, so much so that this was even the major suspicion of motive before Biden's fist-bump meeting with the Saudis (i.e., that Biden would try to pull the Saudis away from BRICS). The DNC totalitarians are well aware that the ESG strategy is causing massive economic downturns worldwide. Their mission, then, is not to *stop* this downturn but to *disguise* it. I have mentioned this too many times in this thread series to even self-reference on that point — it is a major feature of the strategy: their policies cause the calamities, and they use propaganda to deflect from the known consequences. In an example, they know very well that their specific policies have caused rising gas prices, so they have propagandists such as Robert Reich, the Press Secretary, and their own cabinet (Energy and Transportation) repeating the lie that rising prices are due to oil-industry price-gouging. This is false. Those oil "profits" are often not adjusted for inflation before being reported by the Politburo, and ESG policies are directly cutting into the back end of oil profits via regulation and Kafka lease games (e.g., "[You can use the lease, but only if you kill your own business by converting to 'green' energy]"). That is, the oil industry is bearing additional government costs and is attempting to recover those costs at the pump. The government's Politburo, meanwhile, is trying to get these oil industries to not recover their losses. It's a sick game: they want the oil industries to die, and they use propaganda to force the industries to kill themselves faster. 2) Biden's request of the Saudis further reveals the Saudi's position between the ESG/DIE totalitarian West and the BRICS Group. I have spoken before about Saudi's position regarding BRICS (thread 3 comment "Mon Jul 04 07:42:58"). The version specific to this new issue is that the Saudis have to decide between two futures and are in the middle of a bidding and investment war between the two totalitarian groups: Option a) Joining the ESG/DIE West. If the Saudis join the ESG/DIE anti-competitive scheme, they would be crippling their entire economy, which is composed of greater than 60% petroleum exports. Thus, they would have to be given heavy incentives by the ESG/DIE West. A typical incentives package is to make the target nation's oligarchs insanely wealthy. This is, for instance, the package that Ardern of New Zealand took for selling out her countrymen and Canada's Trudeau for the same. This is the package the Charles III organized to consolidate powers under Elizabeth II's nose. This is also the package that Zelensky and the Bidens took. The oligarchs of Western nations are not necessarily powerful simply because they hold office during a term limit, so they must take these massive bribes from the ESG asset managers to assure their prosperity — and they do so over the corpses of the nations that they pledged to serve. The Saudis, however, are already oligarchs. The West's oil expansion in previous decades assured that Saudi princes would have all of the riches that the West's traitor oligarchs are seeking today. Thus, a bribery package by trillionaire asset managers is not going to cut it. The Saudis want a future. The ESG/DIE totalitarians have offered the Saudis "sustainable" mega-cities such as Neom and its "Line" project. These are absurd concept-cities that claim to be able to give the Saudis a future when their ability to profit from oil is ended. These cities are nothing but tourist traps that will be reclaimed by the desert in a generation, and the Saudis know this — these cities require petroleum for maintenance, so the ESG/DIE pyramid scheme would be selling them their own coffin. This leaves the ESG/DIE totalitarians with sanctions and threats of war against the Saudi customers. That is, if the Saudis do not accept the oligarch-package and these doomed "sustainable" cities, then they will be economically ruined by the collectivists — if the collectivists *win*, that is. Option b) Joining BRICS. If the Saudis join BRICS, they would be economically protected from the ESG/DIE West's further encroachments, but openly joining would mean that their customer base would be cut by official policy — i.e., the bribes to join ESG/DIE would end, and prices from BRICS could be cut by BRICS' knowledge that the Saudis are all-in. However, the Saudis could outlast the ESG/DIE West's downfall. The West's energy strategy, despite its "sustainable" claims, requires a massive genocide and depopulation, which places the West in a position of weakness. If the Saudis join BRICS and maintain their energy independence, they can let the West die and then begin selling to the West again after BRICS puppets are installed in the West (if they are not already). BRICS easily has all of the leverage for the Saudis, but, by delaying entry, the Saudis force more of these bribes from the West, who are desperate to eliminate a rival and so will stupidly pay the price while hoping to pass corporate governance frameworks in Saudi Arabia to tie their hands. Biden walked right into this, because he is not in a position to bribe other oligarchs — only the asset managers are. This fact connects back to the two types of oligarchs that I previously listed: • Uninformed, useful-idiot oligarchs — true believers in ESG/DIE, attempting to force BRICS into compliance. • Informed, traitor oligarchs — supporting ESG/DIE to enable intentionally BRICS emergence. The Bidens may be the first category — useful idiot oligarchs who stupidly think that this is their own scheme or that other nations will simply see the benevolence in the energy suicide-pact. The IQ is definitely low enough in that family, and they were likely all selected because they will say anything they can to make money — even if it means selling out the United States for totalitarians. This would explain why Biden would approach the Saudis with no market position. The Saudis do not want to talk with puppets; they want to talk with Larry Fink and the other asset managers.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Oct 18 07:35:31 Kanye went on Drink Champs on October [16th?] to talk about his hot water with the enslavement-Zionists. The 3+ hour episode was removed from YouTube and the Drink Champs' own site, but is still available from reupload sites such as Odysee. It could be the most based thing you will see this year: http://ody...Part-3)-Ye-Freedom-of-Speech:4 Highlights include: • Kanye explaining that his "White Lives Matter" shirt was ready to go, but the Jewish owner of his clothing company declined to print it, proving his point. • Kanye again correctly points out that Jewish businessmen have attempted to "own the black voice". • Kanye lists all of the Jewish-owned businesses that promote black people who tow the Zionist lines. • He points out that Jews came into their money on Wall Street from convincing Catholics to get divorced, then mediating. He references this to Kim K. now being under Jewish control. • He references (not by name) Christian restorationism, Christian Zionists, the Scofield Reference Bible, and the Zionist infiltration of Christian religions as a means to establish a Jewish state — enslaving Christians through their own belief system (note, Christian Zionism posits that Christians must bring about the messiah's second coming by building a Jewish state in Israel). • He goes into how Jewish leaders use anti-competitive strategies to remove dissenting voices, which they are now doing against him: propagandizing him, making his friends turn their backs, and pulling contracts. • Kanye points out the connection between Jews and the Chinese being on the same page for this destabilizing world slavery strategy. • Speaking of the people who abandoned him: "All you fake hard-niggas, fuck you!" Kanye also explicitly points out the Jewish usage of slave morality to support their in-group — even when that in-group is filled with immoralists. He does not know the terms "slave morality" or "repressive tolerance", but he describes them in direct terms: when a Jewish person messes up, that person is taken as fringe, but when a Jewish person succeeds, "everyone [in the Jewish community] eats [from their shared spoils]". The Jews then reverse this when dealing with out-groups: if a black person messes up, the Jews blame all black people, but when a black person succeeds, Jews insist that that black person *not* enrich his community. This correctly describes BLM profiteers and scores of black entertainers and public figures who are managed by Jewish people, including BLM's own Patrisse Cullors, who was instructed by enslavement-Zionist and Weather Underground terrorist Eric Mann. Kanye perhaps shows that the Jewish usage of slave morality is not going to work now that the black genocide at the hands of the DNC is being exposed. They can claim their "holocaust", but blacks can refer the Jew to Planned Parenthood where the black holocaust occurs. Kanye may be misguided, however, because enslavement-Zionists resist all discourses which turn power away from their own asymmetries. That is, they want to be the only ones using slave morality for *their* benefit. I pointed this out also in thread 4 (comment "Wed Sep 07 07:48:34") when talking about Palestinian groups attempting to infiltrate Jewish groups with slave morality — it doesn't work. However, Kanye's platform is far larger than what Jewish media may be used to addressing. Kanye is, in short, aware of the Satanic Synagogue. "Enslavement-Zionists", as I'll call them for convenience, are of this Synagogue. We can establish two ground rules: 1) No group member should be judged by the larger group. 2) Any group should be answerable for its actions, not receiving special-group immunity. Enslavement-Zionists of the Satanic Synagogue have insane beliefs and act on them: 1) That Jews, exclusively, are the "Chosen People" 2) That Jews are divinely due their Zion in Israel 3) That non-Jews are merely slaves whose jobs is to enable this Zionism 4) That Jewish culture should be protected by slave morality and repressive tolerance; enabling Jewish immoralists and unchecked sickness within Jewish groups. Following the ground rules, it is specifically the Satanic Synagogue which follows these beliefs — not all Jews. However, the line separating these Satanists from the total state are not as obvious as the DNC — though the DNC is very much monopolized by these Satanists. That is, Jews have infiltrated the DNC most heavily, but the GOP and conservative movements have Satanists as well. A Venn Diagram by Avi Mayer states this from another perspective: https://twitter.com/AviMayer/status/1580110006632214532 For instance, the right has its own Enslavement Zionists and Christian Zionist slaves, including: • Ben Shapiro (e.g., https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1580109893683810305 ) • Dennis Prager (e.g., "Yes, Jews Are the Chosen People" https://www.nationalreview.com/2011/05/yes-jews-are-chosen-people-dennis-prager/ ) • Dave Rubin • Rupert Murdoch Shapiro, Rubin, and Zuby, in particular, were called out during the Kanye issue for debasing themselves with the claim of "Antisemitism" — a thought-terminating cliché which echos the thought-terminating clichés of total state adherents on the left. Stating the facts of Jewish Zionism is not antisemitism, nor is pointing out the Jewish Zionist tendency to control, manage, and debase groups for their own benefit. At best, they can claim that Kanye was not explicit enough in delineating between Jews in general and Enslavement-Zionists, but Kanye established this in his meaning-making, so "antisemitism" clearly falls apart except in erroneous perceptions (i.e., the claim that "[People could take this the wrong way, Kanye!]"). At any rate, this bridges another area of examination: the connection between enslavement-Zionists and Chinese totalitarianism. Enslavement-Zionists clearly lack the morality preventing them from manipulating the world into supporting their Jewish state, going so far as to sin by usury, create debt slaves, manipulate with knowingly dishonest propaganda, cull narratives, and enable repressive tolerance in their favor. These people have no virtue and should be condemned. Their ranks include Larry Fink, George Soros, and Zelensky. However, these could merely be the sociopaths and psychopaths of the Jewish movement who have simply been attracted to power. Political positions often attract such narcissists, sociopaths, and psychopaths, so Enslavement-Zionism may be top-down imperative by a special class rather than a popular movement. Specifically, would common Jewish people truly say that it is fine to enslave the world for Zionism? Would that not make them see that such a "Chosen" status indicates not chosen by God but chosen by Satan to represent his great immorality? Chinese totalitarians have a similar lack of morality to enable their pathway to power. We see this with their willingness to cheat in the Olympics (e.g., forging birth certificates), their willingness to break international law with dangerous bio-weapons sites, and their open enslavement of their own peoples. Chinese oligarchs such as Xi Jinping seem determined to make China a world power that enslaves the West to free its own people, but would they play along with the Enslavement-Zionist game? Perhaps their goal is merely to use Enslavement-Zionists of the West as a means to an end: let the Zionists destroy the West, then worry about the Zionists themselves. The Zionists could be playing this same game with the Chinese: enable the Chinese only as a means to defeat the West. Enslavement-Zionists may believe this to be a strategy which asymmetrically favors them, since the Chinese have made the mistake of breeding slaves of their population for generations. China's rise has always been as vulnerable as its parasitic "expert" class, who are often dependent on Western culture for a vision of their own civilization.
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Oct 19 05:31:27 You can tell from this short clip why tw hates Kari Lake so much.* Tw also hates who posted this, Jack Posobiec, since Posobiec is basically mirror-Acyn — low-context bait designed to stir the pot ;D [October 18th, 2022] http://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1582490726557831168 (Kari Lake reads from a list of headlines and statements by DNC operatives who denied election results in the past) This information (DNC election-outcome deniers) is not new to most people outside of the left-wing cult, so this is a matter of platform. Left-wing trolls monitor Posobiec, so they'd be exposed to this, and left-wing trolls monitor Lake, so they'd be exposed to this. The usual left-wing cult response is that "[it's different when we do it! Trump *also* did this or *that*! And it was worse because the opposition did it and Orange Man Bad!!]" Not many of those comments appear below Posobiec, which is odd, since he usually has a lot of Astro-Turfing which pushes the hate-comments to the top. One comment repeats the argument that "The problem is when Rs don’t get the results they want, they keep going. Trump has still not conceded nor did he participate in the peaceful transfer of power". http://twitter.com/JS3200/status/1582504942279225344 This is, of course, a shitty argument, since it fails the mirror test. That is, Democrats *also* "keep going", and Democrats *also* have "still not conceded" former elections. Big examples of this are Stacey Abrams, who still has not conceded, Hillary Clinton — who still maintains that Trump was installed by Russian interference — and large swaths of DNC voters who continue to contest the 2000 Florida election results. The usual left-wing cult response is, "[Yeah, but the GOP really did cheat in Florida!]", which, as a rhetorical device, ignores that the mirror test just failed, since they admit that they do indeed still hold a grudge — after 22 years, no less. The cult cannot see beyond their repressive tolerance. They can do no wrong, and only their opposition is accountable for anything. Meanwhile, back in a land of ideological consistency, Kari Lake is right to point out that people should question their elections. She is not the first to say this, and any liberty-loving person should promote the sentiment. Should we question 2000 Florida? Yes. Should we question Stacey Abrams' loss? Yes. Should we question Trump's 2016 win? Yes. Should we question Trump's 2020 loss? Yes. Any system is vulnerable to exploitation, and it is the duty of citizens and their representatives to protect against those vulnerabilities. In a practical society, that means in-person voting, identification, and hand-counted paper ballots. It means making sure that only citizens are voting. It means questioning outcomes and having a clear evidentiary trail which can be audited publicly and transparently. For "some reason", the DNC wants none of these practical steps. The cynical reason is that they want to cheat and exploit. The slightly more forgiving reason is that they want to get as many voters as possible. In either case, their strategies in opposing the above practical steps have weakened election integrity. *They* have done that. *tw's hate for Kari Lake: http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=90676&time=1666138021749
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Oct 20 06:40:12 The totalitarian-in-chief has been getting made fun of for one of his most blatant lies: "President Biden Delivers Remarks on Additional Actions to Strengthen Energy Security and Lower Costs" [White House Official YouTube; October 19th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ligOQez0gjM After repeating his retarded take on falling gas prices (which are still at record highs), he repeats his retarded lie of the "Putin Price Hike", then announces more release from the strategic reserve, which is a self-destructive move at this point. The most hilarious moment comes at 3:00, where he claims that this "administration has not stopped or slowed U.S. oil production". This is an outright lie. His preceding sentence even revealed the lie: "We need to responsibly increase American oil production without delaying or deferring our transition to clean energy." This is their ESG strategy, yet again. I've spoken specifically about their deception regarding oil leases previously (e.g., previous thread comment "Wed Aug 03 04:17:42"). The strategy is to pretend that they're asking oil companies to increase production but that those companies are not so that those companies can drive up prices. This is false. The reality is that bills such as the "Inflation Reduction Act", the "American Rescue Plan", and EPA-empowering executive orders *penalized* oil companies for producing more oil or for working on new leases "unless" those businesses took a *loss* by converting to 'green' energy or meeting newly issued EPA caps on carbon. As an example, if Exxon wants to open a new lease to produce more oil, they must do so while reducing their overall carbon impact, otherwise, they get fined. So figure that out: more oil but less carbon. To do this, they have to invest heavily in 'green' industries, pay carbon taxes, and draw down their percentage of oil production compared to 'green' energy (e.g., for every $1 spent on new oil leases, they must pay $2 on green energy). The end result of this is obvious: it is not profitable to open new leases. The government is forcing oil businesses to destroy themselves by "playing ball". And that is indeed the stated goal of this administration: the destruction of the American oil industry. Thus, instead of playing ball, those businesses are remaining on stagnant production trajectories to weather the storm of regulation. I have also pointed out that because this is a protection racket, the government has to blame the businesses for not wanting to destroy themselves. This is why propagandists such as Robert Reich have been activated, being told to say that these companies are merely "greedy". No. They are trying to make profits, not run a government charity. The businesses "playing ball" are merely being transitioned into state-owned ESG arms, with the CEOs being paid off as a reward for demolishing their businesses. That is one of the only ways that the administration can hide its destructive policies: get the state-sabotaged businesses to take the losses instead of consumers. Another way? Propaganda and lies — like the above video. Any time that Biden or this White House talks about energy policy, you can be assured that it is a direct line to ESG and the intentional implosion of world economies.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Oct 20 07:02:48 Stacy Abrams, an election-denier who is shielded by the DNC because she denied the "correct" elections (see also "repressive tolerance"), appeared on MSNBC to see if people can recognize that Jonathan Swift's "Modest Proposal" is a mainstream DNC platform: "Stacey Abrams: Reproductive Rights Is An Economic Issue" [MSNBC Official YouTube; October 19th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzpBpu_PUJM Being part of the Malthusian coalition, it is her imperative to discourage women from having children ("Abortion is a human right!" — Malthusians), as that would better allow women to see the economic impact of the Malthusians (i.e., the ESG Malthusians are making things expensive, and you'll notice this if you take on additional expenses by having children). This plays into the cowardice of people who say, "How could you bring a child into a world like *this*?" The total state would prefer cowards unwilling to even breed. The DNC's "Modest Proposal" is thus to kill the children, allowing the City/Urban Liberal Types (the CULT) to entertain their narcissism perpetually — unencumbered by values and virtue. The spare parts of those murdered children can then be used by the state to extend the lives of the oligarchs. So sustainable! Our democracy!
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Oct 21 06:15:52 The dementia-ridden pedophile-totalitarian diaper-shitting liar who is actively selling out the United States on behalf of the ESG managerial state and for whom total state useful-idiots saw fit to vote because "orange man bad" just had another sundown moment where his brain stopped working: "Biden 'feels good' about midterm election prospects" [Associated Press, Official YouTube; October 20th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJyjpXBAyAk The official White House transcript is funny: "Remarks by President Biden in Press Gaggle" [White House dot gov; October 20th, 2022] http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/10/20/remarks-by-president-biden-in-press-gaggle-8/ • Question: "Sir, why don’t more candidates want to be seen in public with you, like Mr. Fetterman? ... • Diaper-Pooper: "They’re — they’re — what are you talking about?" • Question: "Tim Ryan in Ohio says he doesn’t want you there. Warnock said he wouldn’t say. Do you think they’re making a mistake?" • Diaper-Pooper: "No. There have been 16 that have already (inaudible), and a lot more have asked — another 20 or so. So I’m going to be doing it." In reality, his words were closer to, "No, they're by 16 there I've already gone in 48 and a lot more've [slurred] asked. Another 20 or so. I'm gonna be goin' in." This took place at restaurant "Primanti Brothers" in Pennsylvania's Moon Township, which Biden visited with John Fetterwoman, the amorphous tumor from the end of Akira who chases random black people when he's looking for criminals. The person asking the question was basically wondering why Fetterwoman is one of the few key-state candidates who is taking a risk by allowing the diaper-pooper to be seen endorsing him. This is because most candidates at this point realize that diarrhea-legs is poll-booth poison, so they want to pretend that Biden is in a completely different Democratic party than they are — like how tw avoids the strange immoral position of voting for a pedophile to "save our democracy" and thus focuses entirely on Trump instead. On this mid-term tour, Biden has made it plain that a major desperation that the DNC has for mid-terms is that the "rest of the world is looking" (Associated Press; http://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-biden-pittsburgh-business-government-and-politics-aeece9127d2ccbd737e831e002c00fce ). This is because their continued war-profiteering in Ukraine partially requires that they own the House and Senate. They know that the so-called "MAGA Republicans" (i.e., people who are not managerial state-owned psychopaths who want to start WWIII as a means of population control) are less likely than RINOs and Democrats to continue funding the proxy war / money-laundering scheme. Their ESG strategy is also contingent on this power structure, and the other WEF globalists need the United States to fall for their own nations to justify their own collapses. A major part of the propaganda strategy is that all major nations have to be able to claim, "[Well, it's happening in 'other country' too!]" (yeah, because they're all in the same pyramid scheme). At any rate, Biden's glassy-eyed stare is always a good reflection of the empty-headed logic of his voters. He is barely conscious of reality, moving along with a tide that he cannot understand — again, like his voters, who were easily pushed into voting for a totalitarian state. These people will never acknowledge that they made a mistake, because the alternative that they have made for themselves is that Trump might not be the worst person in the world — an unforgivable heresy.
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 22 05:15:51 In a nice propaganda reversal, Maze points out that Ol' Diaper-Pooper has been saying, "This is not your father's Republican Party", since at least 2005: [October 21st, 2022] http://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1583655793211379712
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 22 05:26:43 This is totally rational and not at all fucking absurd: "Sandy Hook Families Ask Judge to Max Out Alex Jones Penalty "Jury already awarded families $965 million in damages "Judge to decide damages under state deceptive trade law" http://www...ones?leadSource=uverify%20wall "Sandy Hook families said a Connecticut judge should impose “the highest possible punitive damages” for Alex Jones, suggesting by one calculation that could be as high as $2.75 trillion." The left-wing psychopaths, having allied with the totalitarians, think that this is reasonable, since they are anti-free-speech and want to punish anyone who speaks against the total state. Unfortunately for them, dollar amounts like this only reveal how much the total state is worried about people speaking against them. Their entire quadrillion-dollar world-destruction agenda cannot survive if people know what they have planned.
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 22 06:01:41 Oh, look, the propaganda accounts that tw follows all got together for *another* DNC-paid event at the White House: "If you’re wondering why Twitter is so quiet today. @JoJoFromJerz @meidasjordy @itsJeffTiedrich @caslernoel @cooltxchick @CalltoActivism @heathergtv @natsechobbyist @TexasPaul @funder @AaronParnas @NickKnudsenUS @grantstern @atrupar @ethanmwolf @TheRealHoarse 1/ @ChrisDJackson @QasimRashid @mmpadellan @JustinAHorwitz @OccupyDemocrats @mslaceedee" [@MuellerSheWrote; October 21st, 2022] http://twi...ote/status/1583506004007788558 These are some of Twitter's worst hate-spewing accounts. Pure psychosis. And the DNC rewarded them.
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 22 23:22:11 This event has been covered pretty extensively on social media at this point, but few seem to be pointing out an obvious issue here: "Hu Jintao escorted out of party congress" [Reuters video; October 22nd, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtpGkgabpcU The common angle is that Xi Jinping was making a public example on state TV that he himself was consolidating power, with the extending of his term limits and the removal of his predecessor symbolizing that he no longer relies on advisors to make his decisions — that he is top-dog and that others must share his singular Communist vision. The evidence-building for this is that everyone in the room knew that this was a live broadcast available to all of China, with a full gallery of press in attendance, so anything happening "must" be choreographed and extremely regimented — an extension of their great Politburo apparatus. However, beyond the physical removal of Hu Jintao, there does not seem to be a ceremonial presence for this within the script. For instance, these are Xi Jinping's translated remarks on October 18th, delivered before opening of the congress: "Transcript: President Xi Jinping's report to China's 2022 party congress" [Nikkei Asia; October 18th, 2022] http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/China-s-party-congress/Transcript-President-Xi-Jinping-s-report-to-China-s-2022-party-congress The speech is very repetitive, reusing their phrase of "socialism with Chinese characteristics" ("people's democracy" — people managed by propaganda), talking about their next five-year plan in a line of 117 plans, talking about their one-size-fits-all approach to collectivist governance, and making a point-by-point talk of how they have applied this approach in each governance category. There is nothing "dramatic" here about China taking decisive actions to consolidate this collectivism — this is a continuation of their generational direction leading into 2035. I.e., if you know Chinese Communism, it's not new information. And, the key detail is that the video of Hu Jintao being led away was *not* part of the most official broadcast, televised by CCTV and including gimble shots of the uniformed Party Members: "Closing Ceremony of the 20th CPC National Congress" [October 21st, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ga3X_dgOU7o This camera angle of Hu's removal came from someone in the gallery who was likely not authorized to continue filming or to release the footage, but the CCP had to allow some releasing to appear "transparent". Also, CNN themselves were censored on state media when they attempted to report on the issue: "Former Chinese leader Hu Jintao unexpectedly led out of room as Party Congress comes to a close" http://www.cnn.com/2022/10/22/china/china-party-congress-close-hu-jintao-intl-hnk/index.html "CNN was censored on air in China when reporting on Hu’s exit from the meeting Saturday." That is, the CCP did not want Hu Jintao's removal televised or talked about. This was not some kind of boss move by Xi Jinping. The escorting reveals this further. Hu Jintao has been retired since 2013 and is in clearly poor health. He looks like a mental invalid barely aware of the space he occupies. The way that Xi Jinping interacts with him appears steeped in embarrassment for the elderly man. What seems most likely here is not that this was a power play but that Hu had done something that would have been even more embarrassing (in this event) had he continued or had he been discovered. Possible options are that Hu Jintao pooped himself like Biden, or, that he was mumbling to himself. Mumbling to himself would have been an issue since Xi Jinping's microphone would have picked up this audio for the press gallery, since this production likely had a press soundboard so that everyone could hear Xi Jinping. Also, given the event's directives, a continuity of governance was far more valuable to the CCP than a public demonstration of an ousting. Hu Jintao has been a puppet of the CCP for a decade — someone who appears only to give the public a sense of governance stability (continuity propaganda for aging citizen-blocs). He is not some kind of symbolic obstacle whose removal shows Xi Jinping's ascension. In short, we are seeing an elderly man who can no longer appear in public without his dementia making him a liability. This was not a ceremonial ousting. Xi Jinping was embarrassed for the elderly man, and Hu Jintao was mentally vacant. That said, now that the bell has been rung, the CCP may *make* this appear to be intentional, since even an old man pooping himself has to be revised to allow the Party to project strength. Their propaganda thinktanks are probably working on this feverishly, since they'll need a Monday morning narrative.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 03:02:15 Oof, "Don't Walk, Run! Productions" made a 40-minute video of Biden's biggest screw-ups (so far): "The TOP 25 Bloopers, Blunders, and Gaffes" [October 22nd, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neCj_m2p4i0 Many have been discussed already in this thread series, but seeing them back-to-back really puts things in perspective ;p
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 05:27:24 Of Hu Jintao's removal, this article sort of repeats the possibilities listed above for the situation, though it seems to give more credence to it being a political stunt — if only because the article ends with that possibility: "What the Hell Just Happened to Hu Jintao? Xi Jinping’s predecessor was forcibly led away from the Party Congress." [Foreign Policy; October 22nd, 2022] http://for...inping-hu-jintao-ccp-congress/ The article has more context about opening statements by Xi, which the author interprets as having hidden references to Hu's former policies (i.e., that Xi may have been saying that more "conservative" Marxists of the Party are holding back their next chapter — this would implicate Hu). So, anyone potentially not on board with this rejection of "conservative" Marxism was on notice: vote properly on Sunday (they did, by the way: Xi's leadership team was established without opposition). One interesting thing that author James Palmer mentions is that *if* it were indeed dementia, the removal could have been provoked because someone spoke with Hu Jintao before the officials filled Beijing's Great Hall, then word spread among organizers that Hu was suffering an acute bout of dementia, in which case they may have discussed whether he would vote correctly, decided he was a liability, and removed him. There's a large amount of procedural speculation there, but it seems like a plausible explanation for the timing at least. Something that refines that speculation is.. It's strange that the person sitting to Hu's left, Li Zhanshu (Chairman of the Standing Committee), at one point passes a document to the usher who removes Hu. In many edits of the video that were handled by Chinese media, this passing of a document is removed with a hard edit (intentional obfuscation), e.g., RFA China: http://twitter.com/RFA_Chinese/status/1583709713895915525 In the unedited footage, Li Zhanshu's handling of the document and giving it to the usher are included: [AFP News] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQAxkh8-O-E Notice, also, that everyone at the table has a document in front of them — but, Li Zhanshu has two documents, and Hu Jintao has no document. The obvious solution here is that Li took Hu's documents. These documents are pre-printed, likely being the ceremonial program that everyone receives, though it's possible that this material is classified and somewhat individualized for the Inner Party. But, if it's a generic document, why take it from Hu? • The more absurd explanation is that Hu was preparing a speech, but he has no microphone, so the possibility that he was going to deliver some (lengthy) off-script message seems unlikely — he would have to physically move Xi. But, if Li Zhanshu had observed a speech by peering at Hu's documents, he may have thought that Hu intended to at least deliver a few words which would disrupt Party unity. (Again: unlikely.) • The simple and more likely explanation is that Hu's dementia manifested via his treatment of the document. Perhaps he was making noise with it, asking why the document did not make sense, or grasping it in a confusion — as he also attempted to grasp Xi's document in a confusion. People with dementia have a tendency to behave confusedly with objects when they're falling into a stupor. They lose the ability to discern objects (agnosia) but may still fixate on an impulse to discern, causing them to visibly struggle without effect. So, in short: • Hu experienced an acute bout of dementia, handling his documents in a confusion, possibly speaking his confusion while trying to make sense of the documents. • Li took Hu's document to stop Hu's confusion, then reported the acute dementia. • An effort was made to remove Hu. • Hu was so demented that he did not even realize that Li had taken the document. • Hu was vaguely aware that he needed his document, grasping at Xi's in confusion, looking for his again on the table, then trying to grasp his own directly when the usher held it in front of him for a moment. Whether or not Hu was going to vote incorrectly, he was likely behaving out of character and needed to be removed. I think that the other Party members even felt bad for him, knowing that he was not mentally there. Xi even tries to be somewhat accommodating. My only reservation is that the Wall Street Journal confirms that Xinhua News Agency (China State News) reported that Hu was not feeling well ( http://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/china-xi-jinping-communist-party-congress ). Typically, you can bet that State media is lying. It is also strange that Chinese media would remove the portion where Hu's document is transferred. Even so, even Chinese media may sometimes tell the truth, and, reading the room, I think we're just seeing a dementia-ridden man being removed. Xi was likely to consolidate power regardless, and no political spectacle was necessary.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 05:41:55 As a side note: that Wall Street Journal article indicates that Xi's plan into 2035 includes hot conflict with the West, and China is bolstering their forces to that effect. It's still somewhat difficult to merge the China+Israel pieces, but from known details, the potential strategy is that Larry Fink is working with China because he's hedging on Chinese victory as an accelerator to global totalitarianism (the ideal goal of Marxist–Jewish enslavement of the non-Jew world). Perhaps Fink made a deal with China that Israel would be given special privileges under Chinese totalitarianism. If so, Fink is a traitor to the human race. Pretty big "if", but that would be the meaning.
williamthebastard Member	Sun Oct 23 05:46:38 Quick question: has Christian Grey made his entrance yet? I tried a Ctrl + F but received "Insufficient memory. Please upgrade to 1TB"
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 07:11:02 Quick question: will you ever learn to read, or did you reject your introductory undergrad classes on close-reading and just commit to lazily scanning your way through life, coasting on accomplishments that stopped serving you years ago?
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 09:31:09 I made a summary video of Hu's removal with my thoughts/conclusions: http://twitter.com/CherubCow/status/1584188880453976065
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 09:32:47 Ah shit. The 50-cent army immediately retweeted me. This is a bummer, since China can suck a fuck.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Oct 23 10:55:02 Long live the resistance.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Oct 23 11:08:54 Shit is pretty dark right now to be honest, difficult to see how we exit this road destined for conflagration.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 23 20:11:50 (I got verbose again. TLDR at the end.) Yeah, it's sometimes difficult to not get a little black-pilled when you realize that the ESG activists *so* dominate the media space that ESG is off limits for 99.9% of discussions. This simple ban on the issue accounts for the public's immense ignorance, which means that when people hear of these issues, they assume that it's dismissible "conspiracy theory" — fooled as they are by the belief that they would have been notified by the State if this were important or real. Meanwhile, everything I've talked about here is readily available with source links and traceable connections that even Wikipedia cannot ignore. I've even seen randos claiming that the WEF's policies are just "thinktank" thoughts with no binding principles behind them — a complete ingnorance of asset-manager investment and ESG as the WEF's implementation strategy. I pointed out the structure in the third comment here. In other words, these citizens have a misplaced expectation that they will be informed by a media apparatus that is best served by their ignorance. They have been trained to choose only the fruits of this poisonous tree rather than discerning the truth via its connection to reality itself. The media does not want them to know about ESG, and, being perhaps incurious, they do not learn about it. Even so, it has been adopted by nearly every business around the world — including small businesses at this point. They trust that the midwits of the managerial state would be alerted if something were wrong, when the managerial state's groupthink is so abysmally flawed that the managerial state's midwits think the same of themselves and so do not recognize systemic errors. That is, the self-appointed "experts" (the managerial state) have guarded themselves from realizing their own errors by assuming that those who disagree must not be "experts". It is a circular logic death spiral, itself promoted by ESG, which structurally saw to it to place these unthinking midwits in positions of power so that the strategy would not be understood by anyone who could or would act against it. And we have not even reached the entryway for the Celebration Parallax on this issue. The Celebration Parallax doublethink goes, "That’s Not Happening, and It’s Good That It Is", but the media is not even at the point of "That’s Not Happening" yet. They've seeded a few "conspiracy theory" articles in case people Google key words, but overall they're performing an information blackout. TLDR: It's difficult not to be black-pilled when ESG media is controlled and infiltrated, by design intends to keep people ignorant, and yet people still trust it to keep them informed. Optimistically, I think that it's possible to break through the signal by interacting with people who are stuck in Twitter/Reddit/Imgur echo chambers — just dropping little threads for them to pull out of curiosity — but the big question is whether these ESG strategies will be revealed in the Zeitgeist *before* or *after* it's too late for the public to oppose them with their votes... considering that ESG also intends to take the power of those votes away.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Sun Oct 23 23:08:39 What drags me down is what I seems like an inevitable disruption to global food supplies next year. It comes on top of the energy situation creating the perfect shitstorm for the WEF people and their stake holder class to take advantage of. Civil wars, riots, revolutions shit hole implosions, migrations waves and those are the things you can plausibly predict, unlike something like the Pakistan floods. That country is on the brink of total collapse, a nuclear power in total anarchy. Who knows what bullshit nature has in store next year. But yes, best bet is trying to drag out one person at a time from the Matrix. Very carefully, I have had to pull back a bit explaining this stuff for people IRL, lest one sound like a maniac.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 24 00:09:07 "What drags me down is what I seems like an inevitable disruption to global food supplies next year." Yeah :/ I'm figuring that we have until December to stock up on non-perishable food items (if the November election doesn't give the DNC an excuse to kickoff Ukraine action). After that, issues with holiday supplies will wake up a lot of people to near-term issues. I don't think it will get as dismal as bread lines, but I distrust their plans enough that some basic prepper logic is in order. "Very carefully, I have had to pull back a bit explaining this stuff for people IRL, lest one sound like a maniac." Same... and I admit that I'm not that great at it. I told some IRL friends about ESG, and before I even got to anything interesting, one claimed that it was conspiratorial. Like, no. I had literally only explained that ESG exists, was given weight via a UN-backed asset manager resolution in 2004, and seeks to change world corporations with its name-stated variables of E, S, and G. That was enough, apparently. I didn't even mention my speculation about their motives (e.g., Malthusian, Marxist) — just that ESG exists in this form. That wasn't a total loss, though. I've since explained other functions to them, and they seem to know that it exists now. Little steps are okay, I think. I've also explained to several people that ESG is the reason that so many movies promote certain formulaic scripts. That's a pretty direct causality, so it's not difficult. And even on Imgur, which is very high in psychosis, I've dropped little hints about it to the anti-capitalists. This isn't necessarily incompatible with their beliefs, since, if they hate capitalists, it's easy to at least get them to take "stakeholder capitalism" at face value, at which point they can combine this with their belief that capitalism=evil. I've attempted to explain to anti-capitalists that ESG is actually Marxism, but in one case they started denying the dictionary definition of capitalism to avoid being implicated, so... not very productive. I'd always been annoyed by shows where you can get ahead of the writing, but in trying to explain these things I'm seeing why a lot of writers choose a slower pace. Anyways, I'm setting aside time for animation work in the next few weeks and am hoping to do more video edits to explain stuff on Twitter/YouTube, so #ImDoingMyPart ;D
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 24 01:09:50 The White House appears to be testing the bounds of its social messaging, deciding that less than three weeks before midterms is a good time for Biden to sit down with born-again transgender Dylan Mulvaney, among other psychosis-captured victims of total-state propaganda. "NowThis News" appears to have captured an (at least temporary) exclusive, with the White House not doubling the video for its YouTube or official dot gov transcripts yet: "Joe Biden Answers Burning Questions of Our Young People in NowThisExclusive" [October 23rd, 2022] http://nowthisnews.com/biden-forum (1-hour, highly produced video) While "NowThis News" is eerily similar to John Oliver's "And Now This" segments, being a political clone of ESG progressivism which tones down its pathos-propaganda only slightly less than OccupyDemocrats, there does not seem to be a direct funding or producer connection between the two. They are more generally connected through progressive slush funds (e.g., asset manager groups such as National Venture Capital Association, which has invested >$10 billion in ESG climate causes), being part of the larger circuit of Huffington Post, Buzzfeed, Dodo, and, mainly, CBS Broadcasting — all DNC propaganda repeaters designed to push the Overton Window towards UN/WEF 2030 social goals using programming such as.. • self-sterilization (LGBTQ2I+NAMBLA advocacy), • animal "advocacy" through animal annihilation (Dodo), • animal care as a substitute for human procreation (also Dodo), • "systemic" arguments as a means of installing Marxism, etc. Dylan Mulvaney himself has been artificially amplified by total state propaganda leading up to this interview, having amassed 8.3 million followers on TikTok in less than a year, where his extreme derangement includes videos of him "hiking" through public parks in short-shorts and high heels, explaining that he wants to "normalize" a "girl lump" (his penis being visible through a leather skirt), and him over-enthusiastically portraying his idea of a woman (or, "girl", if we identify another "MAP") — which merely shows his demented and ultimately insulting view of the sex he does not possess ( https://www.tiktok.com/@dylanmulvaney ). He has already been made fun of for this, especially following an appearance on ULTA where he and another man celebrated "women" by replacing their voices (e.g., an October 20th "Freedom Tunes" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hD4Y4SrdJM ), and he is hate-followed by people who see him as wearing womanhood as a fame-enabling skinsuit. As usual with transpersons, what is at work here is a question of "passing". He does not. This makes him "uncanny" in the Freudian sense; he is robbing behaviors for a semblance rather than possessing them innately. He also is acting in Sartre's "bad faith" — play-acting at an identity that he can never own — but perceptive people instinctively see the cracks in the disguise. For instance, his absurdly narrow hips are barely that of a man's much less of a woman's. And there is no natural state-of-being here; this is a high effort performance — the kind that breaks even high-profile celebrities in rigorous tour schedules. Already in his eyes is a kind of fame-induced panic where he knows what the next step is but is terrified that the choice is no longer his own: public castration. Just as people learn things about the Kardashians against their will through supermarket checkout line magazine-covers, so too have people learned about Mulvaney via heavy investment from ESG propaganda groups. TikTok was the perfect grooming environment for his psychosis, bringing him from a flamboyantly gay man to a performance transitioner. The Hunger Games Capitol elites want this indeed, as promoting this performative castration reduces the carbon impact of expendable bodies. Because he is targeting "boys" and "girls", he could convince young children to make irreversible decisions before they understand consequences — dooming a generation. But to close up, this propaganda has to meet certain WEF time points. 2030 is the obvious one, but there's a schedule. Even with midterms approaching, the DNC *has* to appeal to the psychosis rather than whatever may be left of their moderates. So, Biden is left in a visible disgust talking to an uncanny "woman" but must push the propaganda against his own instincts. When Biden is asked by Mulvaney his thoughts on "Gender-affirming care", Biden says that states should not be able to deny those services. This indicates 2 things: 1) Obviously, this would mean federal law protecting this "care" 2) "Affirming" is being enshrined. The second point is interesting because "affirming" is another Marxist rhetoric — a part of their scale (from Yuri Bezmenov and Marxist propagandists; see New Discourses for a summary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLgOyZ_VPwU ) 1) destigmatize (make it less of an object of scorn) 2) normalize (make it commonplace, with passive services where needed) 3) affirm (encourage it artificially) 4) celebrate (total moral reversal: celebrate the deviant as the new heroic) "Gender-affirming care" is designed to encourage state-sponsored healthcare — hospitals and BigPharma financially incentivized to sterilize as many people as they can. Better still, this connects directly to the CMS mandate's Supreme Court success, which I warned about in the vaccine litigation thread: With "gender-affirming care" tied into federal healthcare dollars and with the CMS secretary having the ability to solidify hospital imperatives in "emergencies", trans-health will be seen as a "public health emergency", with hospitals flooded with still more incentives to transition (sterilize) "vulnerable" people (people selected by DIE) with the groupthink errors that characterized COVID's management driving the over-prescribing and over-standardizing of sterilizing drug and surgery regimens. Feel weird in your body? Castration. Feel a little bored? Double mastectomy. Puberty making you break out? Hysterectomy. Is this the Moorehouse CinePlex? Kill yourself. And the best part? While the overturning of Roe temporarily unprotected the DNC's ability to hide eugenics programs such as abortion and trans-sterilization, they quickly pushed for "privacy" in DNC states so that these eugenics programs would be protected from uniform reporting. In other words, the public will not be made aware of just how many people are being selected out of the gene pool in this massive experiment. Vote DNC! ;D
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 24 03:27:08 Big fucking yikes alert D: Ol' Dementia Mc-Diaper-Pooper appeared on the MSNBC Morning show on Sunday to like... prove that he doesn't have dementia or something? D: It's bad. "Exclusive: Pres. Biden Leaves The Door Open To Second Term" [MSNBC Official YouTube; October 23rd, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cl6jjWunDek He is *again* given the easiest fucking layup by Politburo members to say something pre-prepared about how mentally strong he is and how he could totes take on Trump again... and he absolutely waffles... *again*. And....... he gets touchy D: Ol' Serial Molester is at it again. "Well, uh, I think Aunt Gloria should take a look — uh, uh, I think it's a legitimate thing to be concerned.. about anyone's age, including mine, I think that's totally legitimate, but I think the best way to make the judgment is to, uh, to, you know, watch me. You know. Am I slowing up. Am I—don't have the same pace or, you know, uh, and that old joke, you know, uh, umm, everybody talks about the, you know, the new 70s, 50s, that uh all that stuff. You know, I, uh, you know, could be th—, I–I–I'm a goo–great respecter of fate, I could get a disease tomorrow, I could drop dead tomorrow. But, I a–you know, in terms of my energy level, in terms of how much I'm able to do, I think people should look and say, 'Is he, is he still have the same.. passion for what he's doing?' and if they think I do, and I can do it, then that's fine, if they don't, then they should vote against me, not against me, should encourage me not to go. But that's not how I feel. I can't even *say* the age I'm gonna be. I can't even get it out of my mouth. I can't I, I swear to god. Nooooo. Come on, that can't be true. And I–you think I'm joking, you know I'm not joking." He keeps going. Fuck. This is a former vice president. :| He eventually says that he's physically well.. then remembers to say, "*and* mentally"... It's so sad to see Resident Biden wandering around, trying to figure things out. It's so cruel to make a totalitarian pedophile answer questions when he'd rather be napping. You can even fill in the blanks and understand what he was saying... but his mind is Swiss cheese. He cannot seem to finish a thought before drifting into another. His most conscious state is a drunken stupor.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Oct 24 03:54:44 "I've also explained to several people that ESG is the reason that so many movies promote certain formulaic scripts. That's a pretty direct causality, so it's not difficult." Can you explain this more?
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 24 07:41:33 It's actually what I'm working on right now via my SubStack, so you get a preview (not that my SubStack is exclusive, lulz) :D On SubStack I'm trying to make it as short as possible while trying to make it an explanation for people who have never heard of ESG, so summarizing the summary will be fun.. Ultra-summary that I've told a few people without issue (just this paragraph): ESG has infiltrated nearly every business. This includes the entertainment industry. As part of a business' social compliance, it has to promote ESG values, such as climate activism and Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity. In cultural works, these values manifest in extremely transparent ways, like promoting indigenous values and making heroes of the "oppressed". That's the short version, and then it breaks into detail blocks. It starts with their climate imperatives, how those translate to thematic translations, and then quickly devolves into ESG stock characters (this is under development currently; I'm expanding the items): Overarching cultural imperatives: • Slave morality again! #BrokenRecord ;D • They have to promote values that make people accept a managerial elite. • They promote an expert class, collectivism, and a belief that people have to serve a wider social good. • They have to promote people who do not breed. • Minor imperatives: open societies, A.I. as a positive, distrust of sovereignty, mockery of individualism/populism. ⬇ Thematic Imperatives: • Destruction of the ingenue; the absence of Helen of Troy — the female characters in a movie have to be non-breeders or people who do not have strong chemistry with the male leads. Most women are asexual or defensively anti-male. This prevents audiences from being invested in ideas of protecting women or fighting for their worth (as Greeks went to war with Troy over Helen). • Debasement of male power (particularly white male) — If men are strong, they have to defer to their ideological betters. There must be a passing of a torch to these ideological betters, who are likely diverse. These men cannot breed, their romantic prospects must die, and the future of their offspring must be uncertain or doomed. • Postmodern destruction of foundations and unities; the revision of the past to create a cynical ahistory — demoralize, undermine, and apply impossible standards; any time a traditionally heroic character's history is observed, it must be to debase it. Hercules and Theseus must be an archetype of white privilege, old soldiers must be liars and cowards, DIE characters must talk about how they secretly hated those virtuous people but were simply quiet about it. • Replacement and Immigration as a positive — All virtuous heroes must now be DIE heroes. Hercules must be black, Helen of Troy must be indigenous, Spider-Man must be gay, etc. The plight of the immigrant is given a pathos treatment; they deserve the lands of the sovereign. • Intersectional Bechdel Test — there must be significant dialogue between non-white and non-cis people about their own personal experiences, making a subtext of a white-cis enemy. ⬇ Stock characters: • The Mary Sue / The Imposter — Because women cannot be contaminated with the culture of classical male heroes, female heroes must not be trained by men; they must be ideologically perfect and must simply be waiting to be recognized for that perfection. Other people (e.g., the Western Hero) must simply make way for this power, as also the author must give them unlimited power (E.g., Rey Palpatine). • The Western Hero, broken by postmodernism — As above; the Western hero must be filled with shame, regretful of the past, with a broken spirit, wanting to crawl away and die so that a better world can occur (e.g., Logan, Soldier Boy). • The State Expert — DIE experts must simply know the correct path and anyone who contradicts them is automatically an enemy (e.g., Holdo, She-Hulk). • The Indigenous Hero — Indigenous persons, even in historical settings, must be immensely virtuous, possessing low-waste sustainable strategies which best the Colonial Enemy and reclaim their lands (e.g., Prey, Dexter:New Blood, Antlers, Avatar). • The Colonial Enemy — the European arriving anywhere is an enemy invader and raper of history; they must be filthy, phallic/patriarchal, unwashed, manly, and wasteful. TLDR: It's just ESG/DIE in story form ;D
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 24 07:45:59 "Yes, Critical Race Theory Is Being Taught in Schools A new survey of young Americans vindicates the fears of CRT’s critics." [October 20th, 2022] http://www...ory-is-being-taught-in-schools Firstly, this was known already to anyone paying attention. Even so, many still resist the reality, so this seems to be a fairly well conducted check. They simply identified clear components of Critical Race Theory and asked students if they were being taught those things. Most students said that they were indeed being taught those things. Pretty straight-forward stuff, but this was continuously obfuscated with the Celebration Parallax ("It's not taught, and it's good that it's taught since it's just teaching history!").
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Oct 25 02:19:17 I don't know if anyone else here is watching the Darrell Brooks trial (the left-wing psychopath who perpetrated the Waukesha Parade massacre), but it is incredibly deranged. Some highlights: • Early on, he shaved his dreadlocks, so he's basically bald right now. • He dismissed his own defense so that he could represent himself. Yeah. :| • In the first trial days, he presented himself before the jury in his jail orange, even after the judge took a *lot* of time to explain to him that he would be potentially prejudicing the jury against himself, since it would constantly remind the jury that he is being held in police custody during the trial. • He has constantly objected without understanding why. He basically just says, "Objection," every time he doesn't like something. • On one day, he was objecting, "Hearsay," for every objection, apparently having no clue what that means but knowing that it's a common TV objection. E.g., he called out, "Hearsay," when video evidence was being admitted and when a witness was saying what she herself had seen with her own eyes. • He has constantly mumbled under his breath when he doesn't like a judge's ruling. This has gotten him removed several times. • When he gets removed, they place him in a separate room where he's muted to the main court room but can still note his objections for the official record. • One of the times he was removed, he took off his shirt and was apparently talking to himself while standing and turning his back to the camera. He does this for a *while*. • Another time, he builds a box fort to hide from the camera.... yeah.. Some examples of the above: "Most Bizarre Moments in Darrell Brooks' Trial So Far" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60g2t2zCr9g Now the most fucked up stuff: • He is a clear sociopath and narcissist with rage issues to such an extent that it is amazing that he wasn't already serving a life sentence from his 20s onward (he is currently 40). • At one point, he flew into a rage when prosecutors pointed out that they could tell the jury that he is a sex offender if he were to continue down a particular defense route. His response was that the girl told him that she was 18....... :| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9uZ1gOm6vo • At another point, he tries to stare-down-intimidate the judge: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsIIoPslg9c • In preparation for closing arguments, he says that he can tell the jury whatever he wants and that he will make the argument to the jury that they should nullify. The judge explains that he cannot legally do this and that he has to stick to the legally admissible facts of the case. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TwmITSHZEs • Because he is representing himself — and keep in mind that this is a known mass murderer whose guilt is absolute — this means that he is cross-examining some of his own victims. • One of the victims was a dance team leader who had to watch footage of her dance-team girls being struck by Brooks when Brooks drove through them. Brooks constantly objects without merit while the prosecution tries to establish evidence, forcing her to re-answer emotional questions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-nAf8en3ms • Another victim is a man who saw a woman thrown onto Brooks' hood and then crushed under Brooks' wheels. The man believed at the time that he was watching his wife being murdered. Brooks attempts to undermine this man's testimony with insane questions. Of that last instance, Brooks has revealed that he does not have a consistent narrative of his defense. When questioning the above man, he asks if the man saw "brake lights", attempting to conflate "brake lights" with "tail lights" to make it seem like — whoever the driver was — the driver was attempting to slow down. So, there's two narratives there: 1) The driver was trying to slow down while plowing through people (so, it must be a nice person) 2) It was not Brooks driving. On the one hand, a defense might try to supply multiple narratives to present reasonable doubt, but both of these narrative are retarded here, since Brooks has been pictured in the vehicle in admitted evidence and Brooks continued to plow into parade-goers even after this supposed "brake lights" moment. He even questioned his former girlfriend to try to get an ally, but that produced a third narrative: that he was in a rage when he left her. That narrative does not exactly mesh well with his other narratives. He has no theory for his case, just short-sighted nonsense. His theatrics could appear to show his hope for an insanity defense... but he does not seem to realize that it's too late to present one. *This* is his defense — whatever "this" is — not "insanity". At best, he could attempt proper representation and use an insanity defense on appeal, but he has already been evaluated and found to be fit to present his own defense — having rage issues does not excuse that. So, closing arguments Tuesday, October 25th, should be hilarious. He's going to be in contempt of court by trying to go on an illegal tirade where he calls for jury nullification, the prosecution will have to object, and he may end up having to deliver his closing statement in print after it is reviewed by the judge. This judge has also gotten a lot of credit for keeping the trial moving despite Brooks repeatedly attempting to cause a mistrial. And, because Brooks is a mass murderer, it is highly unlikely that anyone will come to his defense after this trial to review his case and reopen the issue on his behalf. He probably has no friends left in the world.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Tue Oct 25 05:57:36 I see, yes I have seen this patter repeated in some recent shows I have seen. For All mankind (Apple tv) Wheel of Time (Amazon) Rings of Power (Amazon) The general theme is that the men are incompetent assholes and those that are not die. The character development goes: the women become empowered and independent and the men come to accept that the women were right all along. This is especially obvious in "For all mankind". One of the men even comes to accept that his wife cheating on him, isn't black and white. LOL :) Been watching that show, waiting for some redeeming and balancing quality, but no. All the men are morons and the women who have all those defining characteristic of being disagreeable, aggressive and masculine they are still correct in the end or redeemed in some way. The only men who have no real character flaws, dies or is a weed smoking stay at home man supporting a female test pilot/astronaut. If you have not watched it you should :) you would have a field day, it is an ESG alternate history, it's not even subtle. They even have conspiracy theory extremist drawn from a substrate of coal miners and oil industry malcontent and everything :P
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Oct 26 07:14:40 lol. You guys *seriously* are missing out on the Darrell Brooks trial :D Closing arguments: [Fox 9, Minneapolis–St.Paul; October 25th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3DgvaT5tCI They *knew* he was going to mention jury nullification right out of the gate, and, sure enough, he only walked around it for a few sentences before straight-up saying, "you have the power to nullify any law that you don't agree with" (6:40). 9:00 — He seems to indicate that there needs to be a process of "forgiveness" (i.e., they can forgive him by nullifying). 14:00 — He claims that there's no evidence that it was an "intentional act", saying that he's never heard of anyone doing that while blowing their horn, lulz. 15:30 — He lies, claiming that the model of Ford that he was driving was supposed to have been recalled, having a faulty accelerator that prevents stopping. Fucking wow. The prosecution has to object multiple times over this, since this was not evidenced in court and is not based in reality. He stands on his children here too. 20:00 — He tries to talk about how the prosecution's narrative of him flying into a rage doesn't fit, since she can't read minds. Lulz. This would be great if he hadn't lost his temper about 50 times in this trial. 24:00 — He claims that the D.A. doesn't care about the victims. This fucking psycho. In this section, he also basically admits that it was indeed him in the car, since he talks not just generally about the intent of some disembodied driver but his own intent in the car. This sinks his own attempt to pretend that no one saw him in the car. 31:00 — Wow. He claims, "No one's heart's in more pieces than mine." Umm, yeah, no. You killed six people in a rage. One was a child. They had families. 36:00 — He tries to claim that "[things are not what they appear]", like he can just magic trick his way out of this. He then tries to appeal to religion and faith. 43:00 — He claims that his daughter said, "That's not the dad I know," when she learned of what people were saying about him. I think he's hoping that this is better evidence than him plowing through a bunch of innocent parade-goers. He goes on and on with the same subject. He basically just keeps pretending that the jury doesn't have all the details so they should speculate wildly about what they don't have and infer his innocence. The prosecution presented their case before this. Both prosecution and defense can be seen unedited here: [Fox6 Milwaukee] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEMePqDie5g The prosecution's alone is here: (about 40 minutes) [Fox6 Milwaukee] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n7eFWChx6g The prosecution knew that Brooks would object during their arguments, so he was removed in advance. Notable time points from the full video: 1:09:00 — The prosecution summarizes the counts, which themselves may be why it will take the jury a bit of time to deliberate: there are 76 separate counts that the jury must itemize. The prosecution had to spend a lot of time during the trial to establish each person who was struck or injured. 1:18:00 — Prosecutor talks intent: all Brooks had to do was stop, but he did not. Brooks keeps objecting here, not understanding that the prosecution has leeway for their claims. 1:22:30 — They show the state's exhibits, showing where Brooks entered and how he behaved. 1:30:00 — They show video of Brooks before the parade, where he is in a fight with several men, pushing one before walking away to the car, calm (not worried about being attacked) but angry. While objecting here, Brooks slips in, "They need to know that they can nullify," before he's muted again. 1:33:00 — Prosecution quickly details every impact along the parade route: all the people that Brooks hit without slowing down or deviating. 1:36:00 — Video of Brooks hitting Nicole White (first victim). They do not show it, but this is the overhead video of Brooks hitting a band from behind (available in low quality on alt sites, e.g., http://odysee.com/@JoePadula:a/graphic-waukesha-christmas-parade:8 ). White was holding a drum in the rear of the band. She survived and testified in the trial. The prosecution points out that directly after this, rather than slowing down, Brooks hit a woman and her child. The father testified in the trial. Brooks questioned him. Brooks then veered right, hitting more people, who flew onto his hood, hitting more people while driving over them and accelerating. 1:38:00 — Brooks asks for a mistrial because he doesn't like that the prosecution is allowed to say bad things about him. They show the damage to his vehicle after his mass murder. 1:41:00 — They show how Brooks ditched his vehicle, jumped fences to avoid police, changed his appearance by removing articles of clothing, and hid in someone's house. They show various images of Brooks, confirming repeatedly that it was indeed him driving. They sink Brooks' absurd claim that this is mistaken identity. 1:48:00 — They show the jury a full montage of all video of every hit. It is not publicly available. People can be heard crying in the court. This is how the prosecution ends. 1:53:00 — Brooks asks if he's muted, then says, "The jury should know that they can nullify," then is muted. 3:36:00 — State's rebuttal (follows Brooks' arguments). She points out Brooks' bad pathos arguments and how it doesn't hold water against the people he killed and injured. 3:39:00 — The judge reads jury instructions, including all 76 charges and how they have to decide for each count. This goes on for a while, and Brooks reads random Bible sections. After about 30 charges, he can't pretend to be distracted anymore, when it gets into the 60s, he tries again, but then he clasps his hands to seem prayer-like. 4:28:00 — He feigns suspicion of the judge's selection of alternate jurors, likely planning to make this a point of issue in his failed appeals. 4:36:00 — Brooks tries to ask how the state can place 61 charges for injuries when those 61 persons did not testify. The judge basically has to explain that that was the state's prerogative. Brooks seems to think that he's found a weakness in the prosecution's case, which is kind of a little late and is not a weakness, since the prosecution would have their case strengthened by parading even more witnesses rather than batching them for brevity as they did. Even after the prosecution's rebuttal, Brooks is clearly sticking with his plan of questioning the system itself — not because of actual injustice but because he thinks that his ignorance of the system itself indicates injustice. He did this constantly in the trial by expecting the judge to explain her every motion — like a child asking, "Why?" without end, bringing answers to the point of absurdity. And his psychology is very much that of a child's — strangely playful when he thinks that he's currying small favor from the judge — and not because he is mentally incompetent but because he never developed himself beyond his small world. Of "injustice", I have pointed this out many times for people possessing slave morality: they cannot perceive actual evidence or actual and verifiable causality because their perceptions have been stolen by their flawed morality. We see this in typical social media reactions constantly. E.g., perhaps a police officer draws a weapon on someone who's reaching into his waistband. People with slavish perceptions do not understand that simple causality (i.e., that reaching precipitates an officer's defensive posture); they see only needless escalation. They cannot comprehend one action precipitating a response. The slave has been trained only to see the actions of the "oppressor" — never of himself. It is sad that many of these people do not learn of accountability and conscience until they have had time to read in prison. How can a person be truly human without revering her choices as her own? Despite Brooks calling for jury nullification, the jury would have to be insane to use that power for this kind of a man. It seems very probable that every single count will return "guilty" in the morning (October 26th) — hardly a difficult prediction. Brooks showed no sign of "accidental" from the first victim to the last. There was no fight that he was running from. There was no fear of being attacked by parade-goers at any point along his rampage. The state's narrative is far more concise: this is a man filled with anger who wanted a rampage. There was no remorse at any point. Maybe it will begin for him at sentencing, as so many can only see themselves truly when their prevarications are finally dissolved in crystal reality — Pablo Ibbieta before his executioners, finally human.
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Oct 26 07:18:19 "If you have not watched it you should :) you would have a field day, it is an ESG alternate history, it's not even subtle. They even have conspiracy theory extremist drawn from a substrate of coal miners and oil industry malcontent and everything :P" Lulz. I've been avoiding a lot of pop media just for these reasons, but it might be nice to treat it as research ;D Apple is actually doing well on the production side, so "For All mankind" wouldn't even be a total hate-watch either :D
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Oct 27 05:15:07 Darrel Brooks verdict came in today: VERDICT: WI v. Darrell Brooks - Waukesha Parade Defendant Trial Day 15 [Law & Crime Network; October 26th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ScQF4a-pmI It started with some hilarious back and forth about him thinking that a Reddit post was a cause for a mistrial (starts at 31:00 in above video). Someone on Reddit apparently pretended to be a juror who had Internet access. There's a story about it here: [Mashable; October 26th, 2022] http://mashable.com/article/darrell-brooks-trial-reddit-fake-juror-post Brooks, being semi-retarded, thought that it sounded like the person had "intimate" knowledge of the trial, which, in his mind, would probably mean someone who had watched a few clips of the trial. Brooks attempted to make this a reason to dismiss the jury or call a mistrial, but the judge had to explain that they cannot dismiss before investigators have even checked the details. In reality, from reading the Reddit post, it sounds like someone is making fun of the subReddit (r/Justice4Darrell) for being stupid enough to defend Brooks and his retarded attempts at sounding informed on the law. The post even mocks Brooks' shitty arguments and pretends to not have known what jury nullification is before visiting the subReddit (very obvious sarcasm). That it was referenced by the court itself shows that his obvious sarcasm was not visible to whatever Asperger's person flagged it. This joke-post was later confirmed (also in the article), when that user confirmed that yes, it was a prank. At 2:42:00 in the video, the court is filled, and the judge announces that the verdict is in and the jury will enter. Brooks tries more retarded legal questions, again doing his routine of "[You didn't explain why you made a basic ruling! Aren't you a civil *servant*?]" The judge again has to treat him like a disruptive kid in class and just move on. 1:51:00 — The verdict begins: guilty. Someone in the gallery shouts, "Burn in hell you piece of shit," after a first-degree intentional homicide guilty-verdict is read. The judge has that man removed. 3:19:00 — Charges wrap. 76 counts, all guilty. From intentional homicide all the way to bail-jumping. Every single charge. They poll the jury. All jurors confirm the verdict. The judge thanks the jury and discharges them. Brooks still seems to be making mental notes for his insane appeal. Not much of this seems to have hit him. Sentencing is on Halloween — should be extra spoopy. Video ends at 3:26:00. The prosecution makes a statement at 5:02:00 — not much of interest. So there it is! The left's narrative-attempts to salvage their terrorist fell apart. Some of the false narratives for this one: • He was escaping a knife attack. • He got confused by police waving at him; his fear of police drove him. • He accidentally entered the parade and hit someone, then wanted to escape but people were trying to attack him so he had to escape those people. • The parade wasn't marked so he didn't know what he was doing. Oops! All false! Brooks was even found guilty of the minor injuries, meaning that at no time was he simply afraid and trying to stop. At every point in the route that he took through the parade he was out to hurt people. He then attempted to flee consequences, lie his way out of trouble when questioned, lie more in trial, and lie and evade in the moments that the jury was entering the room to produce their verdict. Even after 76 counts were read, he still looked like he was ready to blame the system itself. Sentencing will be extremely harsh.
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Oct 28 04:49:31 Hell yes: Ol' Musky has begun purging the totalitarian sycophants from Twitter, and one of the highlights is Vijaya Gadde, who people may remember from a 2019 Joe Rogan Experience where she and Dorsey talked about how "benevolent" Twitter is for having an obvious Progressive moderation policy which results in the removal of conservative voices: "Joe Rogan Experience #1258 - Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde & Tim Pool" [March 5th, 2019] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZCBRHOg3PQ While an obvious counter here would be, "[Hur dur, Musk is doing the same thing but against the left!]", the better understanding is that he is removing *executives*, not *users*, and these executives are willing to ban/silence/censor opposition to effect their desired political outcome: a total state. While I do not have some kind of uncritical faith in Musk, removing totalitarian sycophants from positions of power is a good move. These people are incredibly anti-free speech, are globalists, and have openly wanted to use Twitter to social engineer useful voting blocs. A note of caution is that Musk himself has mentioned that he might continue to restrict "reach" through some artificial controls. It's possible that he would draw this line in ways which create another negative Overton Window rather than allowing 4chan anarchy to red pill the masses. Another angle is that Musk has himself expressed desires to use technology in dystopic ways (e.g., neural implants) and has flirted with WEF global-planners, which could indicate that he has totalitarian designs of his own and is simply seizing the biggest propaganda apparatus currently existent in the world (i.e., Twitter). One would have to hope that one total state is not merely being supplanted with another, but it would be consistent with the ESG/DIE versus BRICS Group situation already afoot. The managerial state has created total state pathways to power with this massive reformatting of world governance via ESG, and this means that vacuums can be filled — with people being vulnerable to whoever fills them. Musk is clearly a better option than Gadde, but the power structure itself should not exist. ESG needs to be dismantled.
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 29 06:00:47 Video was released from slightly before the scene when Hu Jintao was escorted out. It's from the same time, but I missed it previously: [CNA; October 24th] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBG2bD-TE9g I'd like to think that it *only* confirms my theory that Hu was confused, but it sort of complicates things. Li Zhanshu (on Hu's left) appears to speak to Hu for a moment, and he does indeed take Hu's program, but Hu only seems slightly confused at this point. They gesture to the *text* of the program, and Li makes a point of covering the text for Hu. This *could* be because Hu was confused by the text (not what it said but just confused), and so Li wanted to cover the information so that Hu would not behave strangely. But the complicating issue is that Xi seems to be listening to Li and Hu's conversation, and after Xi contacts the usher (the same who later removed Hu — likely security assigned to Hu), Xi gestures to his own document and directs the usher to read the document (1:00). Hu listens to the conversation that Xi has with the usher, and the usher then looks separately at Hu's program while Xi looks away — apparently to explain the issue to Hu or to check that Hu's program is correct. Li Zhanshu quickly covers the program after the usher looks at it, apparently not wanting Hu to see — it seems that the usher's digging is against protocol here, which makes sense since he is not handling the material properly. My theory for this usher interaction is that Xi was playing to the possibility that he (Xi) was being recorded by the press and — to disguise the issue — said something like, "[Hu's program is perhaps incorrect. Could you assure him that his suggestions are reflected in the official program?]", and, the usher, not taking the hint that this was "kid in the room"/"Hu has dementia" tone, went to Hu's program to see if it was correct — which it was — and accidentally confirmed that Hu was correct to be agitated. This seems to be combining the narratives: Hu probably was experiencing some dementia here, but it's possible that he was in and out of lucidity and saw something that was upsetting and confusing to him — which he is not mentally equipped for anymore. Maybe the people around him were counting on him not being aware enough to notice something that was in the program or to handle it with more dignity. China Uncensored did a good assessment of the competing narratives and offered a detail I hadn't realized: [October 26th; 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMKmzONpjIs The detail is that "Little Hu", Hu Chunhua, who has been groomed for Politburo ascension by Hu Jintao, was supposed to be named in this latest Politburo shuffle, but he was not. This means that Hu's sort of "successor" was at least temporarily ousted. Hu Jintao may have noticed Hu Chunhua's absence in the program and started questioning why this was the case — an improper thing during the ceremonial confirmation. Li may have entertained Hu Jintao at first, but if Hu was demonstrating dementia/Parkinson's, they would want him to stop talking about it — especially with the press now in the room with recording devices. TLDR: It may be that Hu Jintao's Poliburo pick(s) were not in the program, which agitated him, and his dementia kept him from concealing this agitation, causing him to be removed to avoid a scene.
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 29 07:26:40 While I try not to post random YouTube celebrities, this was a good video: "Things are not looking good...." [Lauren Southern; October 24th, 2022] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS0_uIOFHVM She basically discusses what's happening in the world in a more abstract sense: that something is wrong. In particular, she discusses that governments are very obviously lying to people, yet we're expected to believe them anyways. What's interesting for me here is that I think that many people intuitively know that there *is* something wrong, but they are not yet putting all the pieces together. This hearkens back to pre WWI: common people knew that something massive was building even before Franz Ferdinand. Southern describes the managerial state, but she maybe does not know the name for it. She describes a march towards a terrible thing, but she does not perceive that terrible thing. The managerial state is a major structure of all of this. When we see people like wtb, ep, and tw simply accept major-media narratives, this is what is afoot. They simply believe their "anointed" ones without realizing that they are recycling lies and deceptions out of cognitive convenience. We see these themes also with people who simply believed COVID narratives from Fauci, Walensky, and the WHO — not necessarily the "narratives" about what the virus itself is at a molecular level but what the world must *do* about the virus. Because the "do" *prefigured* the virus itself, "the science" very quickly became an irony: its method became "listen to the experts" rather than to face hardships in uncovering reality. For the masses, compliance with the narratives became more important than one's own conscience. The managerial state is the ultimate fallacy of authority. It is the "experts" who are to be believed against all real evidence. They are the propagandists, the un-elected bureaucrats, the web of publishers who all cite each other to manufacture "truth". These are the Party Officials, the Politburo, and the superstructure on which anointed politicians sit so as to act as the state intended with or without consent or imperatives of representation. And how did they infiltrate so deeply? They had such success because this was launched in degrees over a century. Of the last two decades in particular, the culmination is that the actual experts have been replaced with imposters and frauds — by design. With the managerial state's pseudo-empirical system in place, all they had to do was promote midwits into positions of power and feed them narratives. Key to these midwits is that they themselves will believe Party narratives even before their own knowledge of their own specialities. An immunologist may find himself doubting his own understanding of COVID after seeing a government broadcast. A doctor may close her office because a lingering fear is greater than any cure she can provide in reality. Millions of people find that they doubt their own intuition, their own understanding, their own expertise, and their own good sense simply because the Party presented itself as incontrovertible. With such a captive audience and social compliance manufactured, surely, the managerial state would not lie?
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Oct 29 20:30:52 lol Ye shared the 4chan chart of Jewish executives in various news agencies: "Kanye West doubles down on anti-Semitic claim Jews control the media by sharing SPREADSHEET 'filled with names of Jewish execs at top entertainment corporations'" [Daily Mail; October 29th, 2022] http://www...filled-names-Jewish-execs.html Hilarious note from the article: "Their names weren't visible, so it was impossible to verify West's claims." It indicates an impressive echo chamber to have missed these charts. It is indeed possible to verify Ye's claims. The chart is correct. Available here: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6DVTQ-4fhRA/Ue_KFm291FI/AAAAAAAAKms/oCKFzp8bVsE/s1600/Who+controls+your+mind+2013.jpg The most popular version lists "2013", but there are updated versions. That said, this particular chart is less popular even on 4chan not because it is false but because it has been shown even on 4chan as misleading (though that could be fedposting), since it has columns for "President", "CEO", "Founder", "Owner", "Vice President", and "Chairman"; and, as you might expect, often these positions are held by only one or two people (i.e., there are duplicate names), making the "red" cells appear more numerous. A counter-chart has been floated, though it has its own issues ( https://i.4cdn.org/pol/1667090415644375.jpg ) — namely, that it's a *recent* "debunking" of a chart from 2013 (i.e., took long enough). At any rate, while the Ye chart is not necessarily the whole picture, it does show *power* monopoly. I.e., those executive positions are indeed held by a minority viewpoint; the fact that there are duplicate names only *improves* the argument that there is a power monopoly. It is like Augustus Caesar holding multiple positions in Rome — seeing his name multiple times in such a chart only furthers the argument that he consolidated power; saying that it is not fair to Augustus to list him multiple times is nonsensical. However, an alternate chart simply lists confirmed Jewish persons within various media organizations without doubling names (low-res version https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FgQ-lT4WQAEjrlZ?format=jpg&name=medium ). I went through this chart's claims about the New York Times above, where 7 of their 13 executive positions are occupied by Jewish persons (comment "Mon Oct 10 05:58:51"). That chart is also slightly outdated (more up-to-date than 2013, however) and has its own deception: that these listed Jewish persons are the *only* employees and executives. This was not the chart's *stated* claim, but this is a consequence of its messaging: by omitting the total organizational quantity and structure, a domination is inferred by the reader. E.g., the 4 non-Jews on the NYT board were not named. So, that claim by the alternate chart is not quite accurate either. Most of the NYT's board is indeed Jewish — which I admit is curious — but that does not tell the whole story. A full chart would list the entire organizational structure — including non-Jews — in order to show percent composition. Even better, it would identify not just Judaism but whether people within the structure support Zionism and the Satanic Synagogue idea of enslaving the world on behalf of the Israeli state. At the end of this, people would simply find that they're testing for a variable that I've stated as superlative repeatedly: slave morality — the single variable directing the total state's control mechanisms. Whether or not this is a strong Venn Diagram with Jewish leaders would simply be exposed in the process of stopping a total state. Slavery is the core of the malady.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 30 08:13:31 Peeps on social media have been pointing out that Ben Shapiro is only *now* realizing that perhaps we cannot trust the massive bureaucracy around COVID shots and lockdowns — like he's never heard of a managerial state or that "experts" can be (and have been) corrupted via regulatory capture. This follows Shapiro's earlier reporting on COVID shots as obvious things where everyone should get them to accomplish herd immunity — ignoring issues around safety, liability, and efficacy that were known to anyone looking directly into the bureaucracy (e.g., see again my vaccine litigation thread http://www...hread=88805&time=1636130551282 ). This is yet another phase of ignorance-based gaslighting, with Shapiro being just another symptom. To Shapiro's (minor) credit, he was long against government-issued mandates, but he still advocated for shots, likely to appear "reasonable" to the left. But pop media — and not just on the right — is now looking at the obvious effects of lockdowns and mandates and pretending that "[this is all new info!]" — when they made overt and intentional policies to shut down anyone who presented that information previously, including full-scale social media censorship. Their best deflection is typically, "[Oh, but *our* people didn't have the full evidence of that! *Now* we do!]", but we fucking knew. A failed experimental design does not have to go through the experimental phase before its failures can be isolated. People's livelihoods were being threatened over this — did lazy bureaucrats think that people in that situation would not be motivated to research them? This follows most recently from a European Union Parliamentary hearing on October 10th, 2022, wherein Dutch Member of Parliament Rob Roos asked Janine Small of Pfizer if their "vaccination" program ever conducted studies on "stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market". The answer was a flat, "No," and her justification was their accelerated timeline: "the speed of science" required that they just shit out their shots without those tests. Again, **we fucking knew this**. Full video here: [Multimedia CentreEuropean Parliament (Official EU website)] http://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/webstreaming/covi-committee-meeting_20221010-1430-COMMITTEE-COVI The question occurs at 15:23:00. The response occurs at 15:31:40. "We had to do *everything* at risk." "At risk" is particularly telling, since in pharmaceuticals this refers to accelerating to the next phase before issues with the prior phase have been addressed. This goes from basic production all the way to research and development. In a simple explanation, when a reaction tank is cleaned in manufacturing, the tank's "clean" status must be verified with sample testing before it is used. But, to save time, a reaction may be allowed to proceed in that tank "at risk". The risk is: if the cleaning samples return contaminated, then all of the reaction tank's contents must be discarded (they too are now contaminated) — this costs a lot of time and money — both in labor hours, spent chemicals/organics, disposal, re-cleaning, re-verification, and fault-testing the cleaning failure. Now multiply the scale of that and consider the costs of a failed test. In large production environments (e.g., Pfizer, Moderna), there is a financial incentive to prep at risk and — if a lot of money is on the line — to decrease the thresholds of a "passed" phase if it means continuing to the next phase. So, if, for instance, a certain PPB of contaminants would normally result in a "fail", in accelerated testing at risk, the company may decide that that's actually a "pass" to both save time and money (either on paper or, in a work-case, off paper — i.e., not documented). That failure then compounds at each subsequent step, especially if additional failures continue through additional mismanagement along the production line. Again, we knew this. When news was breaking about issues with efficacy very early on with shot protocols, these issues were clear. Pfizer and Moderna were financially incentivized to rush past all of the failures in their production schedules, and world governments were incentivized to get shots into arms regardless of a consideration of efficacy versus net benefit versus normal health risk. This is why it did not matter if someone worked in a public-facing job with lots of human contact (i.e., high risk and thus potentially high benefit from a shot) versus someone who works alone with zero human contact (i.e., low risk and thus low benefit from a shot). This was regulatory capture. The financial component was far more valuable than the health component, and governments saw this as an opportunity to expand their own regulatory capture of the private sector via work-health regulations. The "fact-checkers" are pretending that this is not sensational, and indeed, their deflections make it sound that way (e.g., this extensive review of the issue: https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/scientific-studies-show-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-reduces-transmission-claim-rob-roos-misleading/ ). But, what these "fact-checkers" fail to account for is the result of this regulatory capture on product quality and safety. They may indeed be able to provide stats on reduced transmission, but they cannot paint a perfect picture since their results are themselves contaminated by public policy errors and the health risks of a low quality shot regimen. Their *assumption* is that the health risks were overruled by the shot benefits, but due to public policy failures, this statement is itself flawed by "one-size-fits-all" policies. More clearly: that low-risk low-benefit person is actually *harmed* by a shot — regardless of its benefit in a *high*-risk scenario, since that high-risk scenario may never occur. They steam-rolled these possibilities to social-engineer compliance. People like Scott Adams have made the error of saying that all COVID decisions were based on "fear and guessing" ( https://twitter.com/scottadamssays/status/1561710348729606146 ), which is patently absurd. The only way that is true is by making those terms meaningless. In practice, many people were motivated to make high-information decisions that went far beyond simple "fear" and well beyond and "guessing". Scott Adams, however, like Shapiro, is another foolish believer in the managerial elite: again, this fallacy of authority where people truly believe that only "experts" can possibly understand a subject. In reality, the issue was always whether or not the high-information people were given a platform or silenced by the total state for interfering with this massive capture of public health. Low-information people who complied were far more valuable to a total state, so their beliefs were promoted as appropriate — despite their constant psychosis and forfeiture of all reason.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Oct 30 08:14:53 Of Scott Adams, on the plus side, he has continued his ESG Dilbert project, which is now 9 comics: http://dilbert.com/search_results?terms=ESG
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 31 03:49:33 While immensely ignorant people such as Dukhat and tw openly say that they do not understand the right's motivations for supporting Bolsonaro over Lula (e.g., http://uto...hread=90823&time=1667195549592 and http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=90773&time=1667173375809 ), the reasoning can be easily reconciled through the ESG/DIE and BRICS Group binary: Lula was heavily supported by the total state as a means of removing Brazil's presence in the BRICS Group, which opposes ESG/DIE. Lula is, after all, a WEF acolyte ( https://www.weforum.org/people/luiz-inacio-lula-da-silva ), being heavily financed and supported by the world total-state, including his support for infiltration via union policies and DIE. Lula is also heavily corrupted and is thus willing to erode Bolsonaro's government presence (i.e., Bolsonaro's party remains in government as a barrier for Lula) through ESG executive actions, much like the president of Sri Lanka took executive action to precipitate his country's collapse. That is, Lula is far more likely to accept a bribe and sell out his country for that desired oligarch status. Bolsonaro, on the other hand, was against this total state infiltration, opting instead to attempt to give Brazil energy independence and prevent their collapse under ESG/DIE's targeted inflation and economic warfare strategies. He openly opposed ESG's DIE mechanism, which the ESG/DIE total state portrayed as "racism" and "xenophobia" as well as a barrier to their belief in a benevolent "progressivism". While doubt in election results has become a cliché to be dismissed by the left, people should understand that a world total-state is heavily invested in precipitating this economic cataclysm, so pushing Lula to 50.9% over Bolsonaro's 49.1% is well within their purview — legitimately or not (i.e., "legitimately" through massive asset-manager funding, and illegitimately via recruiting of immoralist fraudsters). In other words, people need to understand that the world total-state is on the line. Infiltrating the BRICS Group is a top priority, which is why the West is creating conflicts with Russia and China while electioneering in Brazil, India, and South Africa. The anti-competitive strategy needs loyalists, and with a few more pushes over the next 8 years, legislative bodies will cease to represent citizens and will instead represent the total state's ideology. In short, Bolsonaro's loss was a major victory for the ESG/DIE totalitarians, but, again, this merely consolidates their executive control of Brazil. Bolsonaro loyalists still exist in Brazil's governance, so there is some resistance to the dominoes all falling here. The fear is that Lula will use Brazil's corruption against these loyalists, consolidating power over the legislature. If Brazil falls in this way, the ESG/DIE totalitarians will be able to focus more resources in the East, having captured a major player in South America which enables their desired mass-migration movements into the U.S., which itself will further destabilize the U.S. It is a sad spot to be in that it is better for a draw between the ESG/DIE and BRICS totalitarians rather than to see the ESG/DIE totalitarians achieve these victories. BRICS is by no means an ally of free people, but neither is ESG/DIE. If BRICS wins in Ukraine, the ESG/DIE totalitarians may have to re-invest in energy to avoid citizen overthrows of their governments, but this itself is unlikely since the total state is putting all cards on the table with their current moves. They truly see 2030 and 2050 as hard deadlines, which means that they intend to "win" — regardless of how they can wipe out their own populations.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 31 09:55:43 Look at these fucking people: "Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty We need to forgive one another for what we did and said when we were in the dark about COVID." [The Atlantic; October 31st, 2022] http://www...d-response-forgiveness/671879/ "But the thing is: We didn’t know." "We". Fucking. Knew. YOU. Fucking. Didn't. These total state acolytes now want forgiveness? As Bully Maguire says, "If you want forgiveness, find religion." These people threatened the livelihoods of people with whom they disagreed. They called people "conspiracy theorists" and blamed those people for literally "*killing*" others for not "complying". It is fine for people to be waking up this late, and they need to do so. But pretending that these people did not treat their fellow citizens like shit for two years is the height of narcissism and absurdity. They need to do some soul-searching about how they got it *so* wrong. And they need to start by realizing that they're *still* getting it wrong. These left-wing psychosis people cannot continue living two years behind everyone else just because they stuck their heads in the sand under peer pressure. Wake. The fuck. Up.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 31 22:14:45 Say what you will about conservative podcasts and vlogs, but here is another example of BigTech using their power over social media to remove voices leading into elections: ("Louder with Crowder" suspended by YouTube over the weekend, shutting down a conservative show that gets hundreds of thousands of views per video — silencing/suspending them all the way into midterms) {available on Rumble, where viewership is typically reduced by a large amount} [October 31st, 2022] http://rum...-show-louder-with-crowder.html
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Oct 31 23:54:19 This is another of those total-state functions about which people paying attention *knew* but which is being further *confirmed*. We knew, for instance, that the White House was communicating directly with Twitter to target specific people who had become a "problem" to White House talking points — getting targets removed, limited, or suspended (See their target list above in comment "Fri Sep 23 05:46:49" or more concisely in comment "Fri Sep 23 06:04:36"). Now, however... "Truth Cops "Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation" [The Intercept; October 31st, 2022] http://the...cial-media-disinformation-dhs/ "The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms." Article highlights: • Mentions the White House's Misinformation Committee ("Disinformation Governance Board") • "There is also a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use." • "HS’s mission to fight disinformation, stemming from concerns around Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, began taking shape during the 2020 election and over efforts to shape discussions around vaccine policy during the coronavirus pandemic." • "Prior to the 2020 election, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives. According to NBC News, the meetings were part of an initiative, still ongoing, between the private sector and government to discuss how firms would handle misinformation during the election." • The deep state essentially used a Trump cyber-infrastructure bill to funnel funding into their pet projects of government censorship: "Jen Easterly, Biden’s appointed director of CISA, swiftly made it clear that she would continue to shift resources in the agency to combat the spread of dangerous forms of information on social media." • Sound familiar?: "The report called on the agency to closely monitor “social media platforms of all sizes, mainstream media, cable news, hyper partisan media, talk radio and other online resources.”" • But packing the Supreme Court is apparently not undermining the courts, right?: "with a focus on information that undermines “key democratic institutions, such as the courts, or by other sectors such as the financial system, or public health measures.”" • And I have warned many times about non-profits being ESG propaganda outfits designed to give the appearance of a grassroots movement: "Geoff Hale, the director of the Election Security Initiative at CISA, recommended the use of third-party information-sharing nonprofits as a “clearing house for information to avoid the appearance of government propaganda.”" • "other government efforts to root out disinformation have not only continued but expanded to encompass additional DHS sub-agencies like Customs and Border Protection, ... Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Science and Technology Directorate ... and the Secret Service ... FBI forming the Foreign Influence Task Force" • "revealing that officials leading the push to expand the government’s reach into disinformation also played a quiet role in shaping the decisions of social media giants around the New York Post [Hunter Biden laptop] story." • "free speech advocates ... note that the agency is attempting to make an end run around the First Amendment by exerting continual pressure on private sector social media firms." If the DNC pulls out wins, they are likely to codify these government–social-media entanglements further.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Nov 06 02:51:55 The 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC), aka the 27th Conference of the Parties (COP27), will be held from today until the 18th of November, so expect our world totalitarians to reveal more Malthusian psychopathy this month! ;)
Habebe Member	Sun Nov 06 03:05:49 Yeah, they tend to be more brazen these days.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Nov 07 18:18:37 I think it's because they know that the train is almost a runaway. They've continued suppressing ESG stories. They only need 2 more years before it's too late; they believe they can pull another "2020" in 2024, with a DNC totalitarian pulling ahead of Trump and securing the Executive office into the key leadup to 2030. The U.S. is very close to being totally owned. I've said before, but even though the GOP *really* needs to win tomorrow (and everyone should get out and refuse to vote for *any* DNC–total-state candidates — this includes anyone mentioning "climate change", "climate justice", Diversity/Inclusion/Equity, pro-"choice", etc.), the total state already has the narrative prepared to blame all of their failed policies on GOP obstruction. This further obfuscates their dealings and lets them talk openly about their plans as an alternative (despite those same plans being the cause of the world's ills). This will get the useful idiots to accept further total-state plans under the belief that they're fighting "fascists". ... In other news, Snowden linked from his Twitter to this YouTube video earlier today (November 7th): "[1983 video] CIA Officer Frank Snepp Discusses Planting Stories in Vietnam" ["Witness to War" YouTube Channel; uploaded September 30th, 2017] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwerBZG83YM Key points from the video are CIA plans that most people should know by now but which are good to hear sometimes from the horse's mouth: • The CIA chooses susceptible journalists with far-reaching influence as dissemination points for disinformation campaigns. • The CIA then tells these journalists propaganda narratives useful to the state. • These narratives cannot be fact-checked by the journalists since the information is at the level of state secrets (e.g., satellite intel, protected insiders) • The journalist must therefore simply "trust" the information. • The CIA's success rate at getting journalists to trust them — in 1983 — was "70 – 80 %". • The CIA would simultaneously seed this information to multiple outlets and government agencies, so, when the journalists spoke to each other and to their DoS and DoD sources, they would all "confirm" the information from the same poisonous tree — believing its credibility and publishing it as "truth". • Among the lies told were strategic lies, such as farcical military vulnerabilities which would cause the public to be on board with sending aid to foreign nations. We could certainly use this last point to talk about why Snowden posted this at all. Plants in the comments are already talking about how he's a Russia-shill who is merely trying to seed this story so that people associate this with the U.S. government lying about Ukraine in order to funnel money there. But, regardless of Snowden's motive, we know that this money laundering is indeed occurring, as I've discussed for months in relation to ESG money-laundering. That is, regardless of whether or not Snowden is indeed Russian-captured, he is not wrong. And, at any rate, it's worth pointing out some other reveals in the video as they relate to modern politics: • Snepp specifically mentions poisoning sources via the CIA's British and New Zealand contacts. This is a direct reference to the Five Eyes apparatus, wherein the CIA gets around legal blocks (e.g., that the CIA is not technically allowed to spy on U.S. citizens) by having friendly nations spy on their citizens *for* them. I spoke about this before with the Proud Boys, who were called "domestic terrorists" by *Canada* (also Five Eyes). Why Canada? Because this allows Canada to spy on, infiltrate, and manipulate the Proud Boys and give all operational information to the U.S. government. • The media has now graduated from simply filtering information *from* the CIA (which they still do) to actively hiring former CIA agents as pundits. This was the case with Snepp, but the media justification was that Snepp was *now* reliable because he did not agree with CIA disinformation programs in Vietnam. Whether or not that was true of Snepp (personally, I would not trust his broadcast works because, as he himself said, the government still held leverage over him), current CIA media-pundits no longer have to offer this credibility: they simply say the CIA talking points **as truth**, and CIA-media viewers accept these truths. I spoke about this in the previous thread comment "Mon Aug 15 20:50:15" in relation to the "hoax pattern" of government disinformation: NBC, in particular, is a CIA-owned apparatus. • Mass media is often state-owned at this point. The usual suspects could go without saying (e.g., MSNBC, CNN, NYT, Washington Post). But, this same ownership is partially at work with Fox News (though perhaps not totally infiltrated — e.g., Tucker Carlson has been weirdly on-point with indy populism lately) and downstream repeaters. E.g., propaganda Twitter accounts listed in thread 2 comment "Tue Jun 14 10:06:39". That is, accounts such as JoJoFromJerz, Acyn, and Ron Filipkowski repeat CIA and DNC talking points nearly verbatim (those two groups being effectively the same). They are issued these talking points and repeat them to their followers under the appearance of "grassroots" truths, convincing useful idiots that they are not actually receiving messages directly from the State. Following actions such as the Patriot Act and Biden/Obama "infrastructure" bills, this lack of a divide between government and media has only worsened. This connects to a whole host of issues, such as.. • the partial state-ownership of Twitter (e.g., suspicions are that Ol' Musky himself found out that Twitter has hush orders with state intelligence since Twitter is a state intelligence project, and this forced Musky to purchase when he wanted to back out.) • state infiltration/ownership of Facebook • state ownership of the DNC (this is so apparent that this almost seems redundant to mention) • World Total-State legislative and medical consolidation — primarily between Five Eyes nations (e.g., CPTPP, WTO, WHO, ASEAN, IPEF) In short, the total state's disinformation apparatus is extensive, with them actively trying to consolidate the last pieces of the puzzle (e.g., private social media enterprises) in order to manage people into predictable and therefore useful blocs.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Nov 07 19:58:54 People on the right are again worried that the DNC will pull something fraudulent tomorrow. The typical narrative is that the DNC is always prepared to stuff ballots within a certain margin. E.g., if the margin of victory is within, let's say, 1%, the DNC will stuff ballots on the order of 1.2%. The expectation is that this dump will happen after midnight on election day (or, technically, in the early morning of the 9th), when the last legitimate ballots have arrived. The counter-narrative (DNC narrative) to this is the "red mirage" (the DNC phrase that has been seeded top-down across DNC media to prime psychologically people for this narrative). This prefigures that many DNC states now have mail-in ballots, and DNC voters are more likely to use mail-in ballots, so there is a reasonable expectation that mailed ballots will be recorded "late", thus causing an early-morning DNC surge. The problem with this narrative is that it simultaneously reveals a systemic flaw: that — whether the DNC narrative is true or not — the DNC has positioned itself to use this narrative to justify a manipulation of the margin of victory. That is, the DNC has positioned itself to monitor the election results and then change them with ballot dumps as necessary; whether or not it really does this, it factually holds this position. The GOP lacks this position. To remedy this position, the GOP is in a bind. • Immoral method: If they try to compete directly, they would advocate for mail-in ballots, which strengthens fraudulent actors since — despite the DNC's claims — mail-in ballots have unavoidable weaknesses, such as signature forgery and door-to-door coercion in high-density areas such as apartment buildings. Stereotypical vulnerabilities are old-folks' homes and immigrant communities, where people can be told to vote in a certain way and no trail exists of such coercion — people will simply hand over their ballots, and the DNC can fallaciously claim a secure chain-of-custody of the ballots. • Passive-moral method: the GOP can advocate for in-person voting and ensure that voters follow instructions correctly, thus making sure that all GOP ballots withstand audits. This method is already used. • Active-moral method: the GOP can advocate for the stopping of mail-in ballots. This stops fraudulent pathways and places a filter on voter participation, ensuring that those actively engaged in politics are more likely to vote while those low-information persons who could be manipulated into voting by malicious solicitors will self-select out. The DNC, of course, calls this active-moral method "voter suppression", being as they are dishonest immoralists. The Inner Party knows very well that in-person voting has a more robust security framework, but they also know that their voters are more susceptible to laziness and coercion, so it is an imperative to enfranchise their fellow immoralists by reducing all barriers to voting — even advocating for automatic voting. This is a part of their lie of a benevolent mob, which, in reality, is mob rule directed by DNC propaganda (i.e., convince low-information people to passively vote). It is a degradation of Republic protections. This leaves the GOP with unstated policies: exceed the margin of victory to overcome DNC fraud. That is, GOP voters must be *so* substantial that DNC fraud attempts would be exposed by relying on **too many** dumped ballots. Without the active-moral method in place, this is the single incentive for GOP voters: do not take the "Red wave" for granted — make it happen. Black-pillers would caveat this by saying that the DNC was willing to expose their fraud in 2020 despite the margin being too big. This is true, given, for instance, that courts have now ruled that laws were indeed broken through the admitting of un-dated ballots outside of the acceptable time of receipt (i.e., untrackable ballots which broke chain-of-custody were admitted), and, given that ballots with bad signatures, no signatures, and improper and therefore legally discardable issues were admitted en masse by DNC-appointed judges (e.g., the Pennsylvania judged who ruled that discarding illegal ballots would itself "undermine election integrity"). That is, the DNC may just make their fraud apparent and rely on partisan judges to break the law again, then claim — again — that there is "no evidence" that they did what they did, despite their own rulings including this evidence (i.e., leverage propaganda). Still, the final issue is public perceptions and public polling. In 2020, the excuse was the pandemic, where people were able to justify ballot dumps via the mass psychosis of new voters who were terminally online and who used mail-in ballots as pandemic protection. This gave the DNC a useful explanation: 81 million votes must have occurred because DNC propaganda had a captive audience of polarized psychopaths. Do they have that argument this time? Arguably no: "it's the economy, stupid." While low-information DNC voters remain unaware that the DNC is instituting a totalitarian state whose effects they are feeling, they *do* feel those basic results of DNC policies: a bad economy, inflation, rising cost of living, rising crime, and job/market uncertainty. This forces massive DNC-voter apathy. Propaganda accounts such as JoJo have been desperately asking voters to stand against the DNC's fallback positions: abortion, gun control, and Trump/January 6th. These same arguments are all that's had on DNC propaganda sites such as Reddit and Imgur — the direct arguments of the DNC total state, Astro-Turfed for visibility. These issues, while further polarizing on the reliable psychotics, do not reach people who are aware that the DNC has failed them — those people have disengaged from politics and thus are not visible on these sites (but *are* visible via the lower relative activity on these sites), not caring about the "Trump" boogeyman when they see the cost of groceries and gas. DNC media has even been distracted by Elon Musk, not realizing that this undermines their messaging, since no vote on November 8th can "fix" Twitter; Musk is not an election issue. This did, however, show that Musk was successful in using the total state's tricks against itself: he seized their propaganda apparatus right when the DNC needed it in order to amplify their narratives. Without those narratives, the DNC cannot ignore its bad polling. It has only its fraud apparatus, and, even disengaged DNC voters may realize how suspicious a DNC win is following such poor policy impacts. In short, the DNC is going to have to make some on-the-fly fraud decisions tomorrow night, which are highly vulnerable to high GOP voter participation. They may ultimately have to decide between launching their 2024 "blame the GOP" narrative and exposing their fraud to the public at large. Given their loss of control of Twitter, they may have to hedge on securing propaganda centers in the next 2 years before using the fraud route again. This gives the GOP a short-term advantage which could pay off tomorrow.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Nov 08 05:23:53 On the topic of the DNC holding a late-night position, some GOP pollsters have offered another suggestion: do not report vote counts until *after* major cities report theirs: http://twitter.com/GraduatedBen/status/1589815771164987392 This forces the DNC districts to reveal their hand and commit to the call (i.e., presumably, they cannot change their hand once it's been played). Problems with this strategy include that clerks may demand GOP districts report before they demand that DNC districts report. Comments suggest that GOP districts simply drag their feet. The counter to this counter is that if the DNC is forced to call first, then DNC districts will simply report errors and the arrival of more votes to justify a "recount", allowing them to report last. A theory, then, is that the DNC's claims that election counts will exceed three days in swing states is because we'll have the DNC repeatedly trying to adjust numbers as other "players" (poll centers) reveal their hands. They'll also try to shave votes where they can, such as over-scrutinizing GOP ballots, which is difficult since GOP ballots have lower error rates, unsurprisingly. Pennsylvania Democrats are already suing to allow higher error rates on their ballots, claiming that illegal ballots (improperly dated) should be accepted because voting should be super easy (this argument again http://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/pennsylvania-undated-ballots-supreme-court-wrongly-dated-lawsuit-20221105.html ). That remedy seems unlikely to be accepted or litigated in time. But, if the DNC loses in Pennsylvania, they may find themselves in the same exact position that the GOP was in in 2020 and will have to pretend that the same arguments that the GOP made (which were condemned by the DNC) are okay for the DNC to make — namely, that laws were "changed illegally". The DNC was highly critical of this argument when the GOP made it — even after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court eventually ruled that the GOP was correct to make it — so this will be another case of "repressive tolerance" in action, especially since the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (4 DNC judges and 2 GOP judges) made this ruling rather than a solitary partisan judge. The DNC may be hoping to leverage their Pennsylvania Supreme Court majority to change the law if needed, so they're already seeing a narrative there. Ironically, their narrative confirms their strategy: that they are using minority communities to inflate ballot counts. This goes with the DNC's racialist strategy wherein they keep minority communities ignorant, immoral, and malleable in order to get the "correct" bubbles filled on ballots. Communities less likely to report criminal behavior are, naturally, not going to report DNC election meddling, and such meddling is more difficult for the DNC when they have to quickly generate ballots. Producing fake dates may result in discernible patterns in their fraud, such as via a ballot stuffer who dates an entire building on the same day or an operative who quickly fills out the required number of ballots accidentally alternating between two or three dates rather than producing a normal date distribution. The DNC opposes traceability for these sorts of reasons. This is why they do not want signatures, dates, I.D.s, or a number of other safeguards.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Nov 13 02:09:03 Anyone paying attention has known that the rising total-state has been using Ukraine to launder money, but the recent collapse of FTX has given a good glimpse behind the veil, showing at least one avenue that this was accomplished. A Gateway Pundit story can catch people up: "Tens of Billions of US Dollars Were Transferred to Ukraine and then Using FTX Crypto Currency the Funds Were Laundered Back to Democrats in US" [November 12th, 2022] http://www...y-laundered-back-democrats-us/ Short version: • Barbara Fried, a Stanford professor, wanted to launch a "grassroots" PAC for the DNC in 2018 as a way to push DNC efforts in the 2020 election and the 2022 midterms. • Shortly afterwards, her son, Sam Bankman-Fried, launches FTX, pretending to be a "people's" crypto but very transparently advertising it as a pyramid scheme which directly paralleled the ESG pyramid scheme. That is, rather than it being a way for investors to protect money against inflation as a store of value (the typical sell for crypto bros), it was transparently designed to attract lots of investors and then liquidate assets for "social" causes (total-state issues which the DNC supports), leaving investors in the lurch (this is ESG's function also). • To this effect, FTX gained capital initially through useful idiots who were not storing value but were just taking part in a transparent pyramid scheme. • Enter the DNC's Ukraine excuse, supported also by the NeoCon total-state war-mongers such as Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell. They used the stupidity of the American people to pass multi-billion-dollar Ukraine aid packages, using 9/11-style propaganda to convince people "[Don't think! We have to win! Think later!]". • With billions funneled to Ukraine, what does Ukraine do with the money? Among great "investments" such as allowing Ukraine to possess previous-gen American arsenals and allowing Ukrainian MPs to send family over the border with millions of dollars of funneled cash ( http://www.wionews.com/world/ukrainian-politicians-wife-nabbed-with-28-mn-eu13-mn-cash-stashed-in-suitcases-in-hungary-464483 ), Ukraine invested millions into FTX (billions by some estimates), as well as Kuna and Everstake. • What became of that FTX investment? FTX became a top donor of the DNC in the 2022 election, behind only Soros and Uline in the *transparent* categories by giving total-state campaigns $70 million — i.e., this is not all of the DNC donations, just the ones that were public ( http://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/top-organizations ) • Various estimates show FTX funneling "donations" to Ukraine (i.e., back to the DNC) in the amount of about $200 million, as well as funneling $1.8 billion of venture capital funds, with conservative estimates being that $1 billion of common-client funds have gone "missing" and potentially billions of U.S. aid to Ukraine were funneled away by "suspicious" transactions that will have to be "investigated" — i.e., which will be memory-holed when they lead to U.S. intelligence and government entanglements ( https://www.reuters.com/technology/further-details-emerge-ftx-bankruptcy-missing-funds-2022-11-12/ ). Meanwhile, regarding Sam Bankman-Fried, 4chan autists believe they tracked a private jet leaving Bankman-Fried's address in the Bahamas and headed to South America, with an arrival in Argentina on November 12th (possibly around mid-afternoon). This could just be memesters trolling, or it could just be a coincidental flight-path for a private jet which just happened to coincide with the FTX bankruptcy announcement. Reuters was apparently able to contact Bankman-Fried who asked if this "flight to Argentina" narrative were true. Bankman-Fried replied, "Nope", in a text: http://www.reuters.com/technology/ftx-founder-bankman-fried-says-he-is-bahamas-2022-11-12/ Super high-quality information from Reuters. :| Meanwhile, I have spoken before about Janet Yellen in regards to her being a total-state champion of "too big to fail" (e.g., the narrative for the total state's intentional 2008 collapse). The short version is that "too big to fail" is a way for government to merge with corporations in order to effect a total state — it is the government's way of making sure that its assets are subsidized by its citizens who are now enslaved to the state's debts. Of FTX, Yellen was, therefore, obnoxiously quick to suggest crypto regulation: "Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says crypto must be regulated after FTX collapse" [New York Post; November 12th, 2022] http://nypost.com/2022/11/12/janet-yellen-says-crypto-must-be-regulated-after-ftx-fiasco/ This comes after the White House put out Fact Sheet on government crypto, with formalization in September: "FACT SHEET: White House Releases First-Ever Comprehensive Framework for Responsible Development of Digital Assets" https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/09/16/fact-sheet-white-house-releases-first-ever-comprehensive-framework-for-responsible-development-of-digital-assets/ The typical narrative goes that the government has been helping to hype crypto-bros with "store of value" and "lottery" logic so that people will get involved in the obvious crypto pyramid schemes. When these unregulated cryptos inevitably create a few millionaires and billionaires on the backs of millions of destitute idiots, the government will step in to create a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) to provide "stability". Implicit in this stability is total tracking of all citizen purchases, enabling Chinese-style social-credit scores, carbon caps on consumption and productivity, and total-state control of all taxable income, meaning the formalization of a feudal system where people are kept in their economic zones via government control — extracted from poverty only by becoming Party loyalists. This is implicit in the DNC's mockery of "bootstraps" logic. It is not that people cannot lift themselves out of poverty, it is that the DNC and the world total-state do not *want* people to be able to do so. This is the Matrix "Neo" metaphor in real form: all remainders reconciled as a system of control. In short, the DNC used crypto to funnel money to itself from its own Ukrainian aid packages (as, likely, did other nations with other crypto scams), then, it acts surprised and calls to "regulate" such scams, tricking useful idiots into thinking that the DNC must not be complicit when, in reality, that regulation further empowers the total-state by forcing the creation of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). The DNC creates the problem, then sells the "solution" — consolidating further power via the enslavement of humanity.
McKobb Member	Sun Nov 13 02:23:52 damn, CC got that word count tied u0
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Nov 13 18:21:33 Ol' Musky responded to a post critical of ESG, which could potentially bring greater attention to it: "Sam Bankman-Fried’s fraudulent FTX got a higher ESG score on “Leadership & Governance” than Exxon Mobil [cry/laugh emoji] ESG ratings are all a fraud." [@WallStreetSilv; November 13th, 2022] http://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1591873139574808577 Musk: "Yup" I've explained this many times before, but the "governance" score of ESG indicates total-state infiltration. A high score is a sign that a business is "okay" for total-state investments — i.e., a business that should be propped up by the anti-competitive strategy, even against short-term losses. Businesses earn this score by publishing corporate frameworks which do things such as promote incompetence (DIE initiatives) and allot high percentages of would-be revenues to "social" causes (e.g., to total-state political campaigns). FTX rated a high score because it was indeed fulfilling this ESG charter. Its failure, then, is an intentional failure. Normally, a high governance score has "too big to fail" already woven into it (i.e., ESG is sold as an attractive investment because ESG businesses are artificially propped up even despite not having good profit motive). But, because FTX was crypto — which is supported by investments totally rather than formalized government subsidies — the idea here is to *implement* "too big to fail" logic at the *governmental* level (as opposed to mere *corporate* governance). That is, FTX' failure was encouraged to happen.. • In the short term, so that DNC candidates could launder money, • In the long term, so that governments have an excuse to draft already-prepared legislation which forces government subsidization of crypto, which will be not for FTX but Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Nov 13 18:37:13 I misspoke on a minor point that does not change the conclusions: FTX rated a 50 for leadership and governance. This is a middling score. The Tweet was pointing out that Exxon has a comparatively *lower* score than FTX, not that FTX has a *high* score, just high*er*. That's worth mentioning because FTX was *not* protected, but the design of people such as the total-state's Yellen is to prop up higher-score businesses since those higher scores indicate corporate–government mergers.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Nov 14 00:53:52 Forgot to mention this since it seemed so obvious: I have pointed out before that a major strategy between the ESG/DIE totalitarians and the BRICS totalitarians is that each total-state group is attempting to attract its own oligarchs. This attraction is usually based on energy output and is also due to stick and carrot logic being offered to them (i.e., the ESG "stick" of sanctions and the "carrot" of oligarch benefits for collapsing one's own country; the BRICS "carrot" of energy independence and a growing population and the "stick" of Beijing/Moscow-led governance). So, for instance, an oligarch in an energy-rich country may be attracted to BRICS while an oligarch in a service country may be attracted to ESG/DIE because they hope to save some of their population by offering their country as a WEF "hub" (e.g., Sri Lanka offering itself as an organic tea and garment hub). With that in mind, the inevitable dispute nations were going to be those that could not improve their ESG scores (e.g., oil/coal-dependent nations with "failing" scores of less than about 60). These nations would be caught between two total states in a bidding war. Saudi Arabia was the big one, which has been flirting with BRICS for years since its economy is oil-dependent and its current oligarchs (its princes) already have more perks than any Western-traitor oligarch (e.g., Trudeau, Biden, Ardern, Macron) would gain under the ESG pyramid scheme. But, with the 2030 genocides getting closer, more nations are aligning with the BRICS powerhouse: "The New Candidate Countries For BRICS Expansion" [Silk Road Briefing; November 9th, 2022] http://www...countries-for-brics-expansion/ • "If accepted, the new proposed BRICS members would create an entity with a GDP 30% larger than the United States, over 50% of the global population and in control of 60% of global gas reserves." • "Concerning a BRICS expansion, Lavrov stated that Algeria, Argentina, and Iran had all applied, while it is already known that Saudi Arabia, Türkiye, Egypt and Afghanistan are interested, along with Indonesia, which is expected to make a formal application to join at the upcoming G20 summit in Bali. [/] Other likely contenders for membership include Kazakhstan, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Senegal, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates. All had their Finance Ministers present at the BRICS Expansion dialogue meeting held in May." • "All of course are members of China’s Belt and Road Initiative" The article lists the GDPs at stake here, and, outside of the article, also interesting is the G-Scores of these BRICS+ hopefuls as an explanation for why these nations are flirting with BRICS: Afghanistan — 44.2 Algeria — 34.0 Argentina — 61.4 Egypt — 29.0 Indonesia — 49.9 Iran — (unlisted on WE; likely low) Kazakhstan — 38.6 Nicaragua — 24.2 Nigeria — 36.9 Saudi Arabia — 37.6 Sénégal — 56.2 Thailand — 37.8 United Arab Emirates — 53.2 http://www.worldeconomics.com/Rankings/ESG-Governance.aspx I have explained before, but a low G-Index indicates the failure of the world total-state (the UN/WEF's ESG/DIE totalitarians) to infiltrate governance. But, this is not *just* due to that country's oligarchs not being receptive to it. Some nations resist the DIE strategy due to religious beliefs, corrupt governance, strong/authoritarian governance, or the general inability to pass laws which favor the ESG/DIE totalitarians. And, of course, this sits on the overarching platform of China's *intentional* resistance as a way to insulate themselves from the West's suicide pact. So, these nations having low ESG scores and having energy to offer means that they are able to give the BRICS Group uncorrupted governance (not to say that their politicians are not corrupt but to say that ESG/DIE has not corrupted their corporate structures). Looking individually at some of these nations can be illuminating. • Sénégal, for instance, does not have that much to offer in terms of energy. Supposedly, it has discovered new oil sites (per the article), but more likely it is trying to hedge on BRICS while avoiding further ESG infiltration. At a G-Index of 56.2, it is almost irredeemably owned. It may hope to leverage its strategic position on the continent, but, honestly, China does not necessarily need it. At best, they will be captured by China simply to avoid a U.S. foothold. • Nigeria is a sad story. Their population has already been reduced heavily through total-state manipulation, seeing a -12% reduction in 2022. Thus, their attempt to join BRICS is an attempt to stop the ESG/DIE Malthusians from further killing their citizens. That is, they *need* this, being one of the canary-states most impacted by ESG. They have more to offer than Sénégal, having open trade (already owned by China) and large oil reserves, but, this also means that China does not have to offer them much at all — they will fall to China with very little resistance, bargaining for little more than minor oligarchy status for replaceable war lords. Some people are more easily bribed than others into betraying their species. Note first on population pyramids: Population pyramids show young age groups in the bottom of the chart and old age groups at the top. The understanding is that a wider base (many young people) means that a population is growing. A narrow base means that a population is collapsing or reducing. Nigeria brings up another issue that has already begun affecting ESG/DIE-infiltrated nations: the sickly population pyramid. There are a couple issues here: 1) Nations that have been heavily infiltrated by ESG/DIE have seen an unhealthy population pyramid for their sovereign citizens. 2) Population pyramids are being partially obscured in Western nations by intentional migrant crises; sovereign citizens are being replaced by migrants so that a collapsing population is not as visible without comparative analyses. A conclusion of this is that whether one accepts ESG/DIE totalitarians (indirect Chinese ownership) or BRICS totalitarianism (direct Chinese ownership), it may be that they are still being population-toppled. So, for instance, Nigeria's 2019 population pyramid looks healthy: http://www.populationpyramid.net/nigeria/2019/ But they have faced population reduction due to migration. http://www.macrotrends.net/countries/NGA/nigeria/net-migration Why? They are being used as migrant production by the Chinese to destabilize surrounding nations. They have high birth rates, but high poverty and low opportunity has meant that they are a key migrant group. Most Belt-and-Road nations fit this bill. An overall map of the world shows just how youthful Belt-and-Road nations are: http://ourworldindata.org/age-structure The West, meanwhile, is being age-collapsed. A central policy of ESG/DIE is population-reduction propaganda which convinces Westerners to self-select out of the gene pool, thus, ESG/DIE-infiltrated nations are far more likely to have inverted population pyramids when those pyramids are adjusted for European ethnicity — often, they're inverted even *before* removing migrant populations. We see this plainly with the so-called "conspiracy theory" of "White Replacement". Where it admits to the reality of it under the Celebration Parallax, we see that, indeed, European-ancestry is being systematically replaced. At any rate, this latest flirtation with the BRICS Group arrives along with the White House announcement on finalization for the ASEAN pact: [White House Fact Sheet; November 12th, 2022] http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/11/12/fact-sheet-president-biden-and-asean-leaders-launch-the-u-s-asean-comprehensive-strategic-partnership/ Why is this relevant? I have pointed out before that the ASEAN framework is Pacific-Theater ESG/DIE infiltration, spearheaded, in particular, by total-state acolyte Ardern. They spell this out further in the Fact Sheet: • "President Biden has overseen an unprecedented expansion in U.S.-ASEAN relations, marked by the launch of five new high-level dialogue processes on health, transportation, women’s empowerment, environment and climate, and energy, as well as elevated engagement in existing dialogue tracks on foreign affairs, economics, and defense" • "ACHIEVING THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS" (SDGs) • "a gender equality and social inclusion analysis, with a focus on small-scale and indigenous fishers and youth, and a regional IUU fishing risk assessment." "Women’s empowerment, environment and climate, and energy" is pure ESG. • "Women's empowerment" means total-state employees given unearned positions of power through governance "wage gap" logic. • "environment and climate, and energy" is, needless to say, the E-Index applying energy collapse in target nations. • SDGs, are, of course, ESG goals; they are nearly identical in every respect, though SDGs pretends to be the "non-binding" version. In effect, the White House is collapsing the Pacific Theater on behalf of the BRICS Group. This sets the stage for the Taiwan proxy war, wherein the ESG/DIE total state will fight the Chinese with a hand behind its back, strategically laundering money while drawing out the conflict until the West's resources are siphoned off. This leaves the United States strategically vulnerable in the Pacific, at which point they will have to concede openly to Chinese demands. On the negative side, the West will collapse and become a defunct Marxist state facing controlled depopulation. On the plus side, the total-state traitors effecting this strategy in the West will be immensely wealthy. I'm sure there's a silver lining here. Ah yes: if citizens of the West realize that their politicians have been infiltrated by Chinese Marxism, those citizens might just stop voting for ESG/DIE totalitarianism — and, hopefully, this realization will occur before election fraud has made their votes worthless.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Mon Nov 14 01:19:23 holy shizz thats wall of spam if ive ever seen one thinking one more trump loss will be the thing that finally ruins whats left of ccs mind
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Nov 14 01:52:12 Oh, is it already time for a low-IQ left-wing bot to attempt to talk about total-state propaganda subjects such as Trump? This one couldn't even use a main account. People in a psychosis are typically only able to see one variable. This allows them to be more easily manipulated, since they are inevitably confounded by more complex subjects.
williamthebastard Member	Mon Nov 14 01:57:31 ^lol, she said with Tom Cruise eyes. 50,000 words, and this is thread #5? Holy fucking hell
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Nov 14 02:01:01 Oh look, wtb outed himself as "Jesse Malcolm Barack" — and still has nothing to say.
williamthebastard Member	Mon Nov 14 02:03:11 Yes, I'm secretly Jesse Malcolm Barack. Dear me
williamthebastard Member	Mon Nov 14 02:03:22 0
	show deleted posts