Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sun Jan 29 06:15:01 PST 2023

Utopia Talk / Politics / Diaper-Shitting Ped0 & Totalitarians #6
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 28 19:13:55
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 road map which elucidates the actions of the rising totalitarian state.

This world total-state means to use binaries of populism/conservativism versus progressiveness, left versus right, and oppressor versus oppressed to effect total power, destroying the West's foundational systems in order to infiltrate their constitutions and governance to institute serfdom on the basis of a new currency: carbon, as managed by CBDCs, in a totalizing social-credit system which maintains slaves within their roles.

To achieve these ends, they feed the world's peoples Marxism and its weaponization of Nietzschean slave morality — disabling their ability to oppose the new order. The oligarchs, meanwhile, consolidate their new powers, selling out their nations for a seat at the new world council of slavers.

The true binary is totalitarians versus the people, as no one should desire his or her own enslavement.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 28 19:14:16
Thread #5:
http://uto...hread=90616&time=1668413002067
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 28 19:15:01
Kanye, Fuentes, and Milo appear on Timcast to explain their meeting with Trump, crushing the total-state narrative:
[TimcastIRL, November 28th, 2022]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufcDoegDNsk
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 28 19:32:17
Lulz.
Tim Pool floated a straw man argument that Ye was "[blaming all Jewish people]", so Ye walked out with Fuentes and Milo. Tim and Luke are left alone in the studio completely unaware of their error, thinking that Ye just didn't like being asked questions. Nope! Ye was asked a *lot* of questions when on other podcasts.

They're now just hoping that Ye calms down and returns.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 28 19:35:24
Lol. They got a car ride out, so they're likely not returning XD
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Nov 28 21:48:37
While Tim Pool screwed up his chance here, Ye&Co. at least confirmed that Trump indeed did *not* know who Fuentes was.

This is obvious to anyone with a brain not liquefied by Total State propaganda.

I would bet that most people who were suddenly told "[Nick Fuentes is antisemitic, and he met with Trump! Therefore Trump is antisemtic!]" had never even heard of Fuentes before a few days ago — in addition to "antisemitic" being a thought-terminating cliché that only works on useful idiots who can't see past their Panoptic blind spots (trapped in the state's Overton Window of acceptable search criteria). This is even confirmed by searching the histories of DNC propaganda accounts such as JoJoFromJerz: she had only mentioned Fuentes *once* before and in passing (in March 2022), but suddenly she's aware of him enough that she's made dozens of Tweets about him in the last few days? These people cannot divide between what they learned *recently* from state propaganda and what they believe they've known all along. (Incidentally, this is part of the hyper-immediacy propaganda tactic, elucidated in "1984" by the eternal present of Party propaganda).

Are people to expect that *Trump* knew about some random podcaster who has a small cult following on only the parts of the Internet reserved for the banned and deplatformed? You think Trump has time to go to Odysee and BitChute and sort through all this? Trump doesn't even know that his 2024 campaign is being re-infiltrated by establishment war-mongers with mainstream track-records, but you think he knows about *Fuentes*?

This leaves the total-state cultists with only one legitimate avenue of critique: that Trump met with people whom he had not had vetted by security and/or an inner circle. And even that is flimsy, since he probably heard "Kanye [and entourage]", as opposed to "Kanye, Milo, and Fuentes." That is, when famous figures visit famous figures, they often come with an entourage of people who remain totally unknown to the host who nevertheless get fast-tracked through security and vetting (Chinese infiltration is notorious for such entourages; you can even see their eyes darting around to memorize details). Even people with criminal records slip into such venues by this logic, so Fuentes slipping in is unremarkable to anyone who understands the basic logistics of such high-profile meetings.

This leads to Ben Shapiro's bad Tweet as the next stop in bad faith arguments:
"A good way not to accidentally dine with a vile racist and anti-Semite you don't know is not to dine with a vile racist and anti-Semite you do know."
[Ben Shapiro Twitter; November 27th, 2022]
http://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1596865494828855296

I.e., Shapiro is saying that Ye is a confirmed "vile racist and anti-Semite", so Trump could have avoided association with Fuentes by avoiding association with Ye.

But, this is the same thought-terminating cliché of "antisemitism" along with a straw man argument. Ye has clarified and re-clarified his position on Jewish power, but people such as Shapiro — and Shapiro claims to be high-information — still pretend not to understand the difference between Ye's issue with Jewish people **in power** abusing their power and Jewish people at large, Shapiro trying to obfuscate by saying that Ye "must" mean "[Jewish people at large]" (a straw man argument).



And for people not understanding the total-state's influence on this issue (i.e., tw in his psychosis thread thinking that citing "Breitbart" and their claim of "antisemitism" was some kind of own that legitimizes the argument since it appeared on "both sides" (really just one side: the total-state's) http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=90918&time=1669689419046 ):

The issue is that the claim of "antisemitism" is the total state revealing their hand. People pushing back against it as a thought-terminating cliché rather than making selective arguments are revealing that they are trying to sink particular candidates using rhetoric which easily misleads useful-idiot voters.

That is, useful-idiot voters are likely to hear "[He met with an antisemite!]", and, due to mental failings, will then employ a fallacy of association ("['met with' antisemite means he's an antisemite too!]") and believe that this particular well is now totally poisonous — never examining the "antisemitic" claim in any concrete terms.

Even more simply: they accept the claim of "antisemitic!" as "bad", make the faulty association of "Trump = bad", and look for alternatives (DeSantis). The total-state people — not just on the left but on the right as well — are trying to eliminate Trump because he is less predictable and less likely to accommodate their seizing of the total-state apparatus. *This* even *after* Trump has recognized these maneuverings and thus tried to consolidate associations with the Jewish community. They know that any infiltrator they place with Trump may be fired once he's in power.

What Trump underestimates is that the Jewish total-state actors see that DeSantis is a better pathway to their own power. Trump could offer these total-state actors *everything* that the U.S. has to offer in compensation for an endorsement, but the Jewish total-state actors with the larger amount of capital investment know that the DNC and a split-GOP is a better strategy for Israeli power. You think they'd vote for Trump because of *principles*? No; immoralists *have* no principles; they pick winners.

And why is Trump not a winner by these criteria?

Trump's 2016 victory was a direct result of the total-state attempting to poison the Trump-well which meant that they gave him excessive coverage while not realizing that that coverage *amplified* Trump's messages. Even Colbert played into this, thinking that it was harmless to platform Trump's campaign because "[he couldn't possibly win!]".

Do you think the total-state would make this mistake again?
No.
Trump's 2024 run will now be totally owned by the adjusted strategy: to give him *no* media-air and to poison any air he receives. Musk tried to bypass this by giving Trump his Twitter access back, but Trump's obligations to his own social media site has crippled him (by design, incidentally — he was tricked into this without realizing it).

That is, Trump can hold his rallies, but without MSM drooling over their belief in a controlled opposition (their 2016 strategy), they'll just quietly "fortify" the election, deprive Trump of air, and then, even *if* DeSantis runs and even *if* DeSantis wins, the total-state will be seeded behind DeSantis. The DNC does not even necessarily need to worry about a DNC loss in that respect, though they would likely prefer a DNC victory since their power rests more completely with the DNC at the moment.

One of few ways to defeat this total state is to expose its machinations to the public, expose its many duplicities, and get any would-be candidates to cut ties with any total-state advocates. If DeSantis is indeed being platformed by Jewish investments and DNC controlled-opposition funding, then perhaps DeSantis would need to be warned about his own role.

If DeSantis is already aware, it would explain why he has already adopted the total-state's "do not platform" strategy, since he has ignored Trump. DeSantis may believe that his best move is to stay governor until 2028, allowing Trump to spar with disposable GOP candidates in 2024 (i.e., let Trump diffuse himself, allowing DeSantis to stay politically "clean"). The GOP will then predictably oust Trump in favor of a lukewarm candidate, lose in 2024, and allow the DNC total-state its victory.


TLDR:
That is by the current details. So far, no candidate exists in opposition to the total state. DeSantis and Trump are both at least partly infiltrated. Trump's "loose cannon" personality makes him less owned in an executive position, but that means that he will not be platformed (save in a scenario of some massive donation by Musk or concerned private parties). Thus, effecting such donations and stopping GOP candidates from accepting total-state policies should be a priority of culture. People basically have to convince the oligarchs not to support totalitarians. That's about where we are as a society.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Nov 29 07:21:31
I made fun of Ian from Timcast, and someone tried to defend his absurd spirituality... this tirade response of mine was the result (their comment quoted in sections):

• "so we can both agree on the fact everything around us is energy, correct?"
So long as we do not make the mistake of thinking that complex molecules, cells, and organisms still follow the principles of simple photons projecting through space or that "energy" in basic physics can be used in parallel with pseudo-scientific beliefs in "life" as a vague sense of "energy", then yes.

• "Physics shows us that when something “discovers” it’s being observed a disturbance in its natural processes takes effect on some scale."
You're likely referencing Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. The mistake people often make with this principle is taking a laboratory truth and distorting it into the false causalities of misinterpreted cultural issues — something that Ian himself has done previously (e.g., the first few minutes of their June 8th, 2021, episode with Elijah Schaffer).
— That is, in the laboratory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is caused by several issues present in the limitations of the experiment. For one, the measure of small particles necessitates the measuring of incredibly delicate physical properties which are highly sensitive to interference. Secondly, the machines used to measure these small particles may have electrical/magnetic properties within them which themselves affect the measure of these small particles. This is one reason why instruments such as the Large Hadron Collider are such feats of engineering: they attempt to minimize the effects of equipment on the particles to produce better data via better controls.
— Meanwhile, when this metaphor is misapplied to culture, people make the mistake of thinking that particles themselves — such as between people — are what is causing an observed person to change behavior. This is an absurdity. In reality, the change in an observed person's behavior is due to more concrete variables than magnetic interference: it's variables such as seeing with one's own eyes another person looking at them and being aware and perceptive of another's mind based on facial expressions, social cues, and a hundred other variables which are all far more potent and immediate than vibration.

• "These changes (due to what us wack job spiritualists call ViBrATiONs) are constantly causing shifts in the energetic make-up around us and inside of us. Pop culture may refer to the phenomena as the “butterfly effect”."
That is not the butterfly effect. The butterfly effect is in relation to Chaos Theory, which uses the butterfly effect as a shortcut to explain drastic differences in the mechanics of a system following minor differences in initial conditions applied to that system — that is a separate issue from people changing "energetic make-up" when interacting with the world. To save that metaphor, you'd need to change that to say that every complex system interacting with every other complex system is going to generate an infinite number of small-particle interactions. But, again, these small-particle interactions are far less observable or are far less potent variables when compared to the main effect of those complex systems taken as a whole. E.g., the physics of two people colliding has more to do with action-reaction forces than with photons causing imperceptible changes in energy states.

• "Knowing this, Wiccans for instance work to directly tap into those energy fields in attempts to kind of bend reality to align with their wishes through methodical internal energy harvesting, varying tools or instruments, and of course ritual."
This sounds like the realm of the acausal delusion. For those working through the acausal, faulty connections are created to explain phenomena which are far more robustly explained via much more direct and present mechanisms. For instance, a person at prayer is not "channeling energy fields" but is simply relaxing muscles and the brain, which allows neural fluid to better drain from the brain, resets neurons as performed also in sleep, consolidates memories, focuses and strengthens neural connections/pathways through their persistent activation, and reduces a persons susceptibility to lower-level stimuli, such as distractions which would turn people away from these internal neural activities. All of these are far more robust explanations than synchronistic beliefs in deities and energy fields and are far more demonstrable via, for instance, MRI.

• "We see what the moons positioning does to our oceans, what’s to make a person believe that that small rock thing isn’t having an affect on us?"
Again, this is the small variable being incorrectly scaled to the larger variable. If we accept the idea of the "lunatic" for a moment (i.e., that the moon has effects on humans), the largest variable that the moon has on humans is not gravity but light. That is, the additional light that a full moon creates is going to change a person's sense of day and night, potentially interrupting circadian rhythms, causing light-migraines, and exciting epileptics. Similar and far more potent effects can be seen with too much exposure to computer monitors — regardless of moon cycles. The moon's pulls is also not limited to water, so comparing the tides to water within the human body makes the error of figuring that gravity pulls on water in particular rather than on mass and energy in general. And even with this correction (gravity, mass, and energy), the pull that the moon has on a human body is going to be nearly zero in difference at different lunar stages because the mass of the human body is so relatively small. This is demonstrable when viewing the effects of gravity on the tides (observable) versus the effects of gravity on a drawn bath (near-zero effect).

• "it’s not far fetched to believe that when we transition from our mother’s womb and snipped from her cosmic energy cycles taking on our own that the day/ time/ place we come into this world at is going to result in similarities between us and others who were birthed during similar empyrean arrangements"
This is again acausal.
One of the interesting things about horoscopes is that they try to divine personality conditions through planetary alignments rather than through far more direct realities, eventually coming to conclusions that they would have seen if they had looked directly at those realities. That is, most horoscopes worth anything rely on the specific time and location of birth (the more specific the better) because they have pooled personality traits not from galactic alignments but from common personality traits that exist within a particular generation, a particular cultural group, a particular geography, a likely diet, and a particular sub-section of each. They pretend that it is the position of the moon or stars at birth which affect one's personality when, in reality, the far more robust predictor is that being born in a particular city at a particular time may result in particular cultural upbringing which results in particular traits en masse. Add to that the likely climate or weather conditions of particular places, and observers can pool developmental factors, such as a summer birth resulting in more irritability or a winter birth causing a better temper — items that have more to do with the effects of temperature on a developing body than of stars across a galaxy.

In short, the problem with beliefs based on synchronicity is that they make faulty conclusions based on far less robust predictors of causality than those available by more direct observations. People like Ian fall into these traps because they have developed drug-induced agnosia. This agnosia disables his ability to discern small variables and small differences since his neural framework is constantly misfiring connections which do not exist in reality, creating faults in his perceptions. This is why Ian often cannot tell the difference between words and falls into semantic traps of a "general" meaning of everything — he has lost a basic grasp of discernment and causality.

Incidentally, people deprived of a primary sense of causality are more easily manipulated.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Nov 29 08:23:27
Random book-marking:

I had been trying to work out a frame to explain differences in Jewish persons. I'd addressed before that, of course, no group can be taken as some totalized hivemind — that even within a Borg collective there are *some* distinctions and people need to be perceptive of those distinctions to avoid condemning an entire people for, for instance, the deeds of their oligarchs (i.e., avoid a fallacy of association). This is especially important when it comes to cultural issues, since culture can be changed even if physical bodies cannot be changed to such an extent.

In particular, we see that many Zionists simply want a Jewish homeland, whereas other Zionists want to enable that Jewish homeland through the enslavement of mankind. Still other Jewish people want not a homeland but still want the enslavement of mankind. Jewish immoralists have no problem fighting for such imperatives by seeding themselves within multiple sides of a conflict. Other Jews are simple carted along in ignorance by movements as would any citizen.

At any rate, unsurprisingly, this very question has been litigated already, in this case by Winston Churchill in 1920:
"Zionism versus Bolshevism"
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Zionism_versus_Bolshevism

Churchill uses these categories:
• "National" Jews — these are Jews who have integrated into society and accepted Western ideals, being Westerners first and Jews second or otherwise keeping religion separate from Western politics.
• International Jews — these are the Marxist Jews: those Jews attempting to effect a world total-state by destroying civilizations that oppose them and reconfiguring the world for total enslavement under Jewish rule, feeding Communism to the enslaved masses while directing all resources to themselves.
• Terrorist Jews — these are the Bolsheviks; the atheist Jews who direct the collapse of nations from within; they effect revolutions to cause nations turmoil, likely to enable the International Jews.

There is also a question for Churchill of the "Protector of the Jews". Churchill's position is that Zion must be established as an alternative to the International Jewish imperative to enslave the world. Churchill says, "The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people." Alexander Solzhenitsyn made similar arguments in "Two Hundred Years Together", where he argued that Bolshevik Jews ascended to the levers of power in the Soviet Union and that the few Jews in the gulags were given special treatment — still, he resisted the idea that all Jews were in league, seeing distinctions occurring and recognizing conflict there.

His hope was that moral "National" Jews would come forward and oppose Bolshevism in Britain — opposing the Bolshevik-Jew strategy of collapsing Britain and other nations as a pathway to world enslavement. It seems that after 100 years, the soul of the Jewish people is leaning more towards world enslavement.

As a movement directed by Jewish oligarchs, this is unfortunate. Many Jewish people would likely prefer not to be part of such a movement, yet they have asset managers such as Larry Fink and George Soros pushing them into this chasm without their consent in the matter — perhaps without even their awareness. And, a sick aspect of these Jewish oligarchs is that they believe that causing hatred of Jewish people is prophetic to their role as a "Chosen" people (their delusion in special-elect status without the effort of good works). That is, they believe that stirring hatred of Jewish people will ultimately benefit the schemes of the International Jews — not just for the cultural benefit of slave-morality status (the perpetual victim) but as a eugenics strategy.

This same scheme was spoken about by Frank Herbert in "Dune" through his metaphor of Paul Atreides. A hidden aspect of the Bene Gesserit in creating Paul is that they are stand-ins for the eventual end-state of Jewish eugenics. That is, Jewish oligarchs are repeatedly stirring antisemitism to cause diasporas and forced conflicts in order to kill off segments of their own people — the belief being that a better Jew will emerge from the bloodshed. This is their intentional thinning of the herd — their intentional killing of their own people.

This links up all too neatly with the general ESG/DIE strategy, although I have seen people resisting the Jewish connection with China.

The short version is that China offers the Jewish oligarchs slave labor. The Chinese people have already been bred as slaves for generations, and so they are an ideal nation — a model slave-state. It is thus in the interests of the International Jews to fund China and ensure its superior position in Thucydides Trap. If the BRICS Group succeeds through the West's ESG/DIE suicide, the West can subsequently be enslaved, lacking the economic and energy means to resist.


All this said, I would not place the entire ESG/DIE strategy at the feet of Jewish Bolsheviks alone.
They are one aspect.
This strategy is being tailored across nations to entice oligarchs and Bolsheviks of all sorts. This is not merely Terrorist Jews such as Jamie Raskin (Bolshevik, MD) destroying their nations from within.
• This is also Christian Zionists who believe that their salvation is in their own enslavement under the Jewish "god".
• This is also oligarchs who see a pathway to money and power.
• This is also opportunists.
• This is also Malthusians who simply want fewer people in the world.

And I still contend that this Bolshevik movement is born of Thanatos, being a death cult, and so its remedy finds itself in opposing slave morality and advocating for life and liberty.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 05 02:07:03
The total-state Bolsheviks have been working to shut down Ye with more lies and slanders, this time pouncing on out-of-context clips of him on Alex Jones in order to convince useful idiots of the left *and* right that Ye is "[just crazy]".

Notable outlets on the right which should be recognized as liars in this respect include the Daily Wire and Breitbart. Focusing on the premier:

The Daily Wire is Ben Shapiro's outfit, priding itself on being a "conservative" outlet, but people should be warned that it is seeded with establishment money. Their largest donations come from Christian Zionists (i.e., Christians who believe in a Jewish state in Israel; e.g., Jon Voight) and the Jewish right: people who are seeded within U.S. politics to siphon money to Israel.

For those unfamiliar, the Christian Zionist strategy under Jewish Zionism is designed to convince Christians that it is a "virtue" to give money to a Jewish state because of a mistaken belief by these Christians that the building of the Jewish third temple in Israel will necessarily result in the second coming of Christ. This is, of course, a Jewish-Zionist deception.

The Jewish people are not "chosen", and enabling immoralists and parasites is not and can never be a virtue. Christian Zionists are effectively making themselves willing slaves of a Jewish order. They have been convinced by the slave-morality infiltration of Saint Paul within Catholicism to serve immoral masters rather than serving the noble morality of Christ, which recognizes virtue only through virtuous practices (i.e., virtue through good works).

Shapiro himself has revealed his Zionist imperative multiple times in the past, such as when he and Bari Weiss celebrated their Zionism out in the open in an October 2021 episode, where Weiss was being celebrated for leaving the NYT — an international-Bolshevik organization:
"Bari Weiss | The Ben Shapiro Show Sunday Special Ep. 119"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjK2I31ADNE

Breitbart is similarly infiltrated by Zionists, and Breitbart's connections also to BlazeTV can be seen plainly in Crowder's backdrop, which includes an Andrew Brietbart quotation.

That said, BlazeTV's role is more nuanced than is Daily Wire's. DW is overtly Zionist, but BlazeTV, while anti-Bolshevik, sometimes treads the line between Zionism and originalist/Enlightenment liberty principles. Its foundation by Glenn Beck solidifies this line-walking, with Beck being raised Mormon — Mormon ideology intending a Christian "Zion" apart from Israel (e.g., the State of Deseret). This puts Mormons somewhat at odds with Jewish Zionists, but the geographical separation allows coexistence, which means that Mormons are more likely to accept Jewish Zionism so long as it does not interrupt the Mormon Deseret. Where Jewish Bolshevism oversteps, this Deseret is jeopardized by the Jewish imperatives of slavery through debt, and Jewish Zionism may similarly support this imperative of separation, working against Jewish Bolsheviks alongside Mormons. (I would remind, at this point, that Jewish Zionists often overlap with Jewish Bolsheviks, so this strategy is itself often duplicitous.)

At any rate, Daily Wire and Breitbart put this allegiance on display with their Ye coverage, so it is worth looking directly at what Ye *actually* said and meant in his latest interview.

The common clip being sampled is Ye talking "positively" about Hitler. Useful idiots only see the surface words exchanged here, not realizing the metaphor that Ye was communicating. There could also be an overlap of sheer intelligence, where the less intelligent a person is, the more likely they are to think that Ye is a literal Nazi. But, this sense of "intelligence" overlaps also with one's alignment with the total state. That is, the more accepting of a totalitarian state that someone is, the more likely they are to misinterpret Ye's words in bad faith, distancing themselves from him in fear and cowardice.

The full video is available here:
"ALEX JONES [FULL] Thursday 12/1/22 • Ye West In-Studio With Alex Jones! Uncensored, Unchained, Raw"
http://rumble.com/v1yc5v6-alex-jones-full-thursday-12122-ye-west-in-studio-with-alex-jones-uncensored.html

Time points:
First 14 minutes — Ye opens by talking about how Christians need to draw from the teachings of Christ rather than being slaves of the "300" Zionists.

This concept of the "300 Zionists" comes from a story of Hungarian Jews who escaped into the West in 1944 and refused to assimilate into Western nations in order to reestablish Jewish power following WWII. This is directly connected to the Frankfurt School, which formalized plans to reestablish Jewish power and Winston Churchill's warning of "terrorist Jews" — Jews who would place themselves as parasites within nations in order to enrich the Jewish community through the labors of non-Jews and destroy those nations from within. As a more straightforward modern metaphor, these are Jewish oligarchs (asset managers, CEOs, politicians) who intend to destroy the West to establish and maintain a Jewish monopoly on political power.

So, it should be noted that West is thus making sure to specifically confine his criticism to Jewish oligarchs who do not necessarily represent the interests of their own people.

12:00 — Ye points out that the "300" Zionists try to atomize Christians to keep them from recognizing their alliances. He explicitly states, "A Christian can stand next to anyone ... because Jesus can save *everyone*."
This is a crucial detail which arrives shortly in his explanations about "loving" Hitler. His point is that a Christian who follows Christ rather than atomized "Christianity" will speak to any supposed "enemy".

13:30 — Jones does what Timcast failed to do: he clarifies at the top that their talk of Jewish Zionists does not include entire groups judged at large without respect for dissenting opinions that even exist within those groups ("There are good people from every group."). He brings up "Nazi" rhetoric and criticizes the fallacy of association that has long been used to silence dissenting opinions. He talks of his grandparents *literally* fighting Nazis and how it is a clear distortion and rhetorical manipulation to call people such as himself "Nazis".

15:00 — Ye calls out the lies that have been spread about him, mainly the lie that Ye was "[blaming 'all' Jewish people]" which he points out that he did not do, citing his appearance on Lex Fridman where Ye specifically names specific people (incidentally, Ye also named specific people on Timcast, Piers Morgan, and Drink Champs; those mentions do not make it into the propaganda clips).

15:50 — Jones re-floats the fallacy of association of "Nazi" rhetoric, prompting Ye to make his memeable statement that has been clipped for propaganda:
"I see good things about Hitler also. I love *everyone*, and Jewish people are not going to tell me, ‘you can love *us* ... but ... you can’t say out loud that this person ever did anything good ... and I’m done with the classifications; every human being has something of value that they brought to the table, especially Hitler."
Ye repeats this line again at 1:12:40, though Jones seemed aware that it will be clipped out of context. Again, Ye's point is that a true Christian can love *anyone*, and Ye is avoiding the fallacy of association the makes enemies by inept labels.

21:00 and 36:00 — Ye does a puppet show with Netanyahu (calling him "Net-in-Yahoo/Yoohoo!" by using a net and a bottle of Yoohoo chocolate drink).
Alex Jones talks about the larger transhumanism agenda, Margaret Sanger, and Israel’s draconian policies — how even Israeli leaders oppressed their own people.
Ye talks about how Jewish elites intentionally cause conditions to cause mass persecution of their own people. This is part of the Talmudic teachings of Jewish leaders wherein they believe that their status as "Chosen" people (a delusion) necessarily means that people just "happen" to hate them for no fault of the Jew's own. In reality, this is a slave-morality smokescreen to evade accountability in the public sphere while they apply eugenics to their own people through the violence of the enemies that they themselves in the oligarchy created.

26:50 — They talk about Soros confiscating property from Jews while posing as Christian.
They show the popular interview of Soros wherein Soros talks about how he had zero guilt taking away property from other Jews. Soros’ general sentiment is that being in that position of power was a matter-of-fact condition. This is consistent with Jewish delusions wherein they absolve themselves of accountability for their own personal immoralities. As part of the "Chosen" delusion, Jewish oligarchs believe that it is a mere fact of nature that a slaver ends up in power over slaves. This absolves them of choice and allows them to direct the genocides of their own people, believing that those killed Jews were simply playing their part in the cosmic dance — utter deterministic fallacies.

34:00 — Ye talks about how Jewish media ultimately puts up controllable black people such as Dave Chappelle, who is ultimately unprincipled and will not speak truth to power. Ye may not be giving Chappelle proper credit here, since Chappelle's monologue was a light red-pill for the SNL audience. It may just be that Ye recognizes that Chappelle did not put his net worth fully on the line as Ye has done.

37:00 — Jones again brings up Israel pushing vaccines onto their own population.

38:50 — Fuentes once again clarifies they he and Ye are not antisemitic and do not blame all Jewish people.

40:00 — Ye again explains that his “Death con” Tweet was a spelling error. He said this also in October on his “Drink Champs” appearance.

41:30 — Laura Loomer calls in and expresses her concerns of Milo being part of Ye’s campaign. They intend to bring her on later.

42:00 — Ye again explains his Hitler take, saying that he just loves "information" — i.e., he’s saying that he is willing to look behind the thought-terminating clichés to find the truth behind people such as Hitler. This is a reasonable argument since even Hitler literally could not have been wrong about everything. This sort of rhetorical nuance is lost to the weak-minded, but Ye is declaring that he is not going to be managed by these weak-minded mental blocks.

47:30 — Ye recites "The Armor of God" prayer.

51:30 — They talk about Balenciaga very briefly (this comes up in depth later).

56:00 — Fuentes talks about their visit to Mar-A-Lago. They once again clarify that Trump did not know who Fuentes was.
They talk about how Trump received a phone call from a joint lawyer (i.e., a lawyer that both Ye and Trump share) who warned Trump against the meeting, precipitating Trump to become defensive after the call, believing that Ye intended to sabotage Trump. Following Trump's complaint, Ye then asked Trump to be his running mate. They go through the details of the propaganda spread against the meeting.

1:05:00 — They talk about Trump’s Jewish handlers (e.g., Kushner, Netanyahu).
Ye clarifies that Trump was nevertheless working for American interests during his term rather than being owned totally by Zionists. Ye seems to recognize that despite Trump's Jewish connections, this imperative would win out for a Trump presidency.

1:07:40 — Ye talks again about Josh Kushner owning more of Ye’s company "Skims" than Ye himself, indicating that this model of Jewish power is persistent: they try to own the labors of other people. This is consistent with the slave morality model of Jewish power.

1:09:40 — They briefly discuss Kushner and whether or not he did something good with their Middle East peace deal.

1:11:00 — Ye talks about how he’s using his position to get forbidden information out to the people.

1:17:00 — Laura Loomer is brought on the show via cell, explaining her part as Jew who was cancelled. She believes that she sets herself apart as a "free speech absolutist" who does not shy away from the Jewish Question.

1:19:30 — They talk about Jewish oligarchs posing as the leaders of the Jewish people while oppressing their own people.

1:29:00 — Ye yet again clarifies who he’s talking about — i.e., not all Jewish people.

1:38:00 — Ye explains why he is wearing Balenciaga after Balenciaga’s bad press.
His explanation is that Balenciaga is being made as a distraction and an easy target for an extreme scenario at which everyone can throw stones. The point of the distraction is to stop people from seeing that Balenciaga’s pedophilia connections is the end-state of people ignoring their own immoralities, such as their viewing of pornography, their vanity projects on Instagram, and their sexual exploitation of women who were abused as children and funneled into the porn industry.
In other words, he is doing this as performance art, much like the "Falling Man" 9/11 social experiment, where the idea is to get people to wonder why Ye would wear their clothes despite Balenciaga's bad press. He wants people to think about how they themselves created these Balenciaga monstrosities. That is, people should take accountability for *creating* these monsters rather than simply throwing stones in a thoughtless Frankenstein mob once the monster is before them. Otherwise, these monsters will continue to appear from people's own vices.

Also notable is that there's an element here of Ye wondering if Balenciaga is being set up. This is *not* to dismiss the pedophilia of their photoshoots, of course. Ye's thinking seems to be that infiltrators often create these sorts of connections inorganically in order to tank competing businesses. This is the Salem witch-trial method of seizing power: create actionable accusations, destroy a competitor, and seize the market vacuum (e.g., how Salem land-owners accused other land owners of witchcraft in order to resolve property disputes). In modern markets, this means infiltrating businesses with these immoral actors (e.g., child-abusing photographers), then let the bad press destroy that business. Some comments even float fashion designers are money-laundering schemes, where such open displays are designers trying to show the world who is behind their funding.
This may or may not be true of Balenciaga. I've looked into a lot of that issue, but there are still threads to pull, such as the history of its management, who has been replaced, whether this immoral history was always in place, etc.

1:44:00 — Owen Shroyer talks about how this broadcast will be distorted to keep people from realizing that Ye is not the one selling out the nation. This was correct. Useful idiots such as wtb took this bait wholesale.

1:47:00 — Ye again reiterates that he will love everyone, whether Zionist or Hitler. Jones clarifies that Ye is getting past the weaponized labels.

1:48:00 — Ali Alexander talks about how this interview will be demonized.

1:52:00 — Ye again explains the “White Lives Matter” shirt, albeit more briefly this time. I did a longer write-up about his meaning on that shirt ( https://cherubcow.substack.com/p/kanyes-wlm-shirts-against-the-zeitgeists ).

1:56:30 — Jones and Fuentes Tweet under Ye’s account. This is part of why Musk banned Ye’s account again (i.e., Musk wanted Jones to remain banned, but this bypasses the ban). Ye was also banned following a combined swastika with a Star of David, which people point out is Ye recognizing that Jewish people are using the Hegelian dialectic openly. That is, by creating a "Nazi" enemy as "bad", Jewish people justify themselves as "good" in opposition. In reality, Jewish oligarchs need this separation to cause conflicts on their behalf.

2:04:00 — They briefly speak about DeSantis being backed by the establishment.

2:05:00 — Ye again talks about the fallacy of association regarding Nazis. This is consistent with left-wing psychosis echo chambers wherein psychotics talk about how anyone remotely "adjacent" to Nazis is by extension a "Nazi". Ye recognizes the obvious contradiction to this: even German citizens and even Nazi soldiers can be itemized to break this rhetorical fallacy (i.e., even a Nazi soldier may have helped Jews or may have done good things to oppose evil in the system). This rhetorical technique by Ye also points out that if Jews can indeed remain resistant to "all" arguments (i.e., the straw man that Ye is saying, "All" Jews), then this same logic should remain consistent with Nazis. People who resist this reality are being psychically owned by the bad faith rhetoric of slave morality and "repressive tolerance", believing (wrongly) that such credit should be extended to Jewish people but not to Nazis.

2:08:50 — They briefly talk about Candace Owens and her autonomy being interrupted by Daily Wire and Ben Shapiro.
Ye warns about how clips of this interview will be used to float the lie that Ye is crazy and needs to be drugged into compliance, as has been floated by many on the left and right — owned grifters.
Ye again explains the metaphor he is using by talking about loving “Nazis”, clarifying that he is playing with the false terms of owned media.

2:21:00 — Owen Shroyer talks about how they are culture jamming with this rhetoric — using the total state’s logic against them.

2:24:00 — Ye talks about why he walked out of Timcast: Tim is an NPC. This is accurate. Tim is always afraid to bridge topics out of his depth. Timcast is Jeopardy!-level knowledge, and it resists deeper discoveries.

2:29:00 — Ye again says he loves Hitler, questions the Holocaust numbers (the "6 million" meme), and again explains that to break the signal you have to love "all people".
"Stop the generational abuse."
"It’s our disobedience to God that got us enslaved."

2:35:00 — Post-show begins with Owen Shroyer.

3:02:00 — Jones reexplains Ye’s meaning regarding Nazis and Hitler, saying that if the totalitarians are calling Ye "Hitler", then they reveal themselves as far far worse, since it is they who hold the institutional power — not Ye.



In short, it is worth going into the details of Ye's appearance simply because it has been so fully misrepresented by media of all sort — even independent media. Daily Wire, Breitbart, Timcast, and many others failed this test of honesty and nuance, revealing that their own logic has been infiltrated by bad faith. People who fail to understand Ye's meaning are taking part in some measure of deception, whether due to their failure to understand, their trusting the false narratives mediated to them by grifters, or their intentional misrepresentation in order to degrade Ye's message.

And so this becomes a good litmus test for rationality. People who condemn Ye due to a misunderstanding of his meaning have failed the test of rationality, and people who understand him may yet see beyond the veil.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 05 03:44:27
Before I forget, this UP thread is a good example of how many people were fooled by establishment propaganda surrounding Ye on Alex Jones:
"Praise Yebus! Praise Hitler!"
["murder" thread; December 1st, 2022]
http://uto...hread=90933&time=1670227623070

Here are some key fallacies:
[murder]: "First of all you can be anti-semitic and still recognize that Hitler and the Nazis were straight up bad guys."

False. Fallacy of association. Fallacy of composition.
Murder erroneously states that bad parts create a "straight up bad" condition for an entire person. This erroneous logic is exposed through simple exercises such as, "[Hitler drank water. Person 'x' drinks water. Person 'x' is a Nazi]." In other words, demonstrably, not everything that every bad person did is inherently bad. A person can be "overall" bad, but failing to be able to itemize that badness from its goodness suspends a person's ability to track the logic that brought that "bad" person to failure. In the case of Hitler, he was correct about many things, but the thought processes which brought about his "Final Solution" are where the errors rest.

[murder]: "That's made even easier by the nazis we have now in the GOP trying to destroy this country."

This is the same fallacy of association that Ye was pointing out. "Nazi" rhetoric has become a psychosis talking-point which resists logic. Murder reveals himself yet again to be taking part in that psychosis.

[wtb link]: "Hate Speech’s Rise on Twitter Is Unprecedented, Researchers Find"

Hate speech is not a real thing. Its "rise" is therefore impossible. What this article is saying is that "wrongthink against the establishment is on the rise on Twitter", which is good.

Several comments also fall for the bait of talking about Ye's mental health.

It should be noted that being bipolar and becoming manic does not necessarily make a person *wrong*. The show "Homeland" gave a dramatic treatment to this which might simplify this concept for UP's midwits: there is a balance within manic episodes wherein the afflicted can be fruitful and intelligent versus self-destructive and unproductive.

Ye is still within the "fruitful" realm. The things he is saying are true, and he is consolidating these items into a framework. The question is whether or not listeners possess the perception to understand his meaning.

That said, I should also point out that while Ye is exposing a lot of information to the masses with these appearances, those same masses are nevertheless being trained to ignore it, so they will likely remain wholly ignorant. UP's midwits provide a good example of this. The major NPC talking points were "crazy" and "antisemitic". Market saturation of these lies has had great success.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 05 07:04:46
A quick thought on a subject I've covered before:

Of ESG Brain Drains and Managerial Midwits

I've pointed out before that the type of people that the left post-2016 has consistently attracted are insane people, easily propagandized people, low-information people, opportunists, and midwits. This can be because the left's discourse has so perilously collapsed that the only people remaining are those who accept the peer pressure of Party Doctrine. These are often people of resentment, nihilists, and people who feel the insane power of collectivist mobs.

The result, of course, is a brain drain.
This seems natural: if a person finds herself surrounded by more and more crazy people with progressively more insane perspectives, it is only a matter of time before the lowest common denominator IQ of the room dominates and so begins to alienate those who are more than a standard deviation above the mediocre. In other words, the left's psychosis is continually alienating its own intelligence away from itself. The people who see through the perpetual waves of Party Doctrine are going to keep leaving.

But, the rise into power of midwits and the managerial elite is the result. These are midwits such as Buttigieg, AOC, Hochul, Biden, and so many more.

One of the backbones of ESG is to *intentionally* cause these brain drains so that upper management in government and business is monopolized by true imposters ("true" as opposed to "imposter syndrome", as I covered before https://cherubcow.substack.com/p/equal-pay-day-marxist-equity-and ). That is, by causing brain drains in all of these positions across business and government and by hiring and promoting based on "wage gap" logic (i.e., promoting based on DEI), these organizations are being primed to collapse through the sheer weight of their top-heavy incompetence.

But that is not an accident.

If, say, a foreign power wanted to collapse the West, promoting DEI, causing brain drains, and fast-tracking Marxist Party Doctrine into positions of power is a great way to do it. These managerial midwits know how to perpetuate flawed discourse (e.g., "our democracy", LGBTQ2S+NAMBLA rhetoric, "repressive tolerance"), but they consistently fail at policy, mismanaging their organizations into oblivion (e.g., NYC, San Francisco, Chicago). If you spread this type of logic not just across academia but into energy, into food production, into land management, etc., then you're going to watch nations collapse themselves. For examples, consider a food producer catching fire because someone in management forgot to avoid spark hazards in dusty areas, or a natural gas producer turning off a valve that should have remained on, or a hospital that mis-prescribes treatments to its people during an emergency.

This brain drain and its subsequent calamities leave BRICS nations and those that otherwise reject ESG in a position of power. They maintain competence while the West puts its weakest people forward.

In a conflict, this means that BRICS nations have their top performers in power, while the West has its weak and its midwits in charge. This is the infiltration of the managerial state — itself a weakness. With only fools on the levers of power, all of those mechanisms of state which are supposed to foresee calamities and prevent them are wholly absent. The advanced warning has been suspended, and the very nature of the fallacy of authority within a managerial state (i.e., where only those anointed by the state can be trusted for council by the state) ensures that anyone who can foresee the calamities is demoted into ineffective Cassandra Complexes (e.g., the "conspiracy theorist").

We are being brought to a collapse far greater than 2008 — and by the same mechanism — and the people who could prevent it have been systematically denied access to stop it.

On the plus side, I am still hopeful that people will realize this before the DNC consolidates the totalitarian state in 2024.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 05 23:57:37
Ye has shown that he knows much more about this than UP's midwits:

""KANYE" YE INTERVIEW WITH GAVIN MCINNES (FULL DEC 2022)"
[December 5th, 2022]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T30Yn4XcjB8

(This particular video will likely get pulled quickly, since Gavin McInnes is banned from YouTube and this video is a copyright violation that McInnes may address.)

Notable moments:
• Gavin starts by explaining that this is not just Jewish people. He correctly assesses that we are talking about oligarchs of all sorts.
He gets close to a simple principle that people need to realize: the current total-state expansion means that psychopaths and sociopaths are being placed in positions of power, causing these insane political conditions. Part of this is simply that smart people find themselves in these top positions of power (not middle management's useful idiots but the primary directors and organizers), and that when this is combined with sociopathy, massive mistreatment of the public at the behest of oligarchs is the result.

For those too stupid to realize my position on this (e.g., wtb made a comment here where he again stupidly minimized my position: http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=90931&time=1669626309166 ), this is something that I have been saying:

Jewish people are tightly woven into these strategies not necessarily because they are the singular movers but because they have long used slave morality for power and slave morality is now being used against the West at large, which has pushed slave morality to the forefront. Even more simply:
- Jewish people have long used slave morality for power.
- Slave morality has now been mass-produced onto the West to enslave the West.
- Jewish people, being beneficiaries of slave morality, have had their use of slave morality exposed by people critiquing the global use of slave morality.

That said, we can clearly see that it is not simply Jewish oligarchs using slave morality but oligarchs of all sorts, whether Trudeau, Ardern, Xi, Biden, Lula, or any number of ESG/DIE totaliarians. The connection is often Christian Zionism, but this model is incomplete. So, while Jewish oligarchs are *beneficiaries* of this strategy, we cannot remove complicity from other oligarchs. Slave morality is useful to *all* would-be totalitarians.

• 8:00 — Ye contradicts his previous statements: "Yeah, but I lump them all in together. That's why the Tweet said that: 'Jewish People'."
He is clearly trolling here. He even laughs at McInnes' response. He is using heteroglossia to pose as the arguments of those who are criticizing him.

• 8:20 — McInnes: "Do you [start with a fresh slate when meeting individual Jews]?"
Ye: "Nope."
Lulz. Ye is ultra-trolling here. There are two ways to take this:
1) He is joking still, in which case, he is done trying to clarify his previous statements and is just pretending to be the enemy that people see in him (i.e., "I might as well commit the sins, as for being blamed for them.")
2) He is being sincere. Sadly, being sincere makes sense for Ye in particular, since the only Jewish people approaching Ye right now are likely going to be people trying to deceive and manipulate him — not being good ambassadors for the Jewish people.

The first case is consistent with Ye's previous statements, and the second case will be even more difficult to explain to low-IQ viewers, who will clip it and again use it as "proof" of antisemitism, since this level of nuance requires brain power that they simply do not possess.

• 10:00 — Ye points out his awareness of the oligarchs and their infiltration of governance. He explains his wearing of a mask (so he can think more clearly without worry about his image), and talks about how Ben Shapiro and the "mental health" people are taking part in a narrative-seeding which is intended to justify Ye's death, should they want to kill him as they killed Michael Jackson.

It's worth stopping for quick moment to point out that Michael Jackson was indeed likely murdered in order to break his contracts and siphon off his money. Even the narrative of Michael Jackson as a pedophile was likely manufactured, as proven by many of the narratives around him falling apart in the chronology of testimonies (e.g., people getting times wrong, people changing testimonies following lucrative deals, people being exposed as liars, people who remained un-bought maintaining Jackson's innocence). I was particularly surprised by the mountain of evidence clearing Jackson's name on this. Moving on, however..

• 14:00 — Ye talks about degradations of black culture via infusion of debilitating vices (e.g., drugs, alcohol). He talks about the "black vote" and seems aware of the DNC's racialist strategy.

• 17:00 — Ye talks again about Jewish power asymmetries (i.e., slave morality).

• 18:00 — McInnes points out that Jewish people are often victims of this as well. Yes, McInnes, but they are asymmetric beneficiaries.

• 19:00 — Ye makes strong statements about a need for a Christian leader.

• 20:00 — McInnes asks Ye's solution to the Jewish Question.
Ye says that he loves all people, but Jews should simply not be in charge.
McInnes asks how such policy would occur.
Fuentes chimes in by saying that Christian moral frameworks need to be brought back in to the management of communications (e.g., pornography bans, immoral content rules), since this is clearly a matter of unchecked left-wing propaganda.

• 26:00 — Ye talks about how he's being forced to make these points publicly after his cancellation and people's unwillingness to talk about these things.
Ye explains briefly Jewish collectivism and how it is a mass-adopted feature of the Jewish people.
They cross many subjects here without many interesting notes.

• 40:00 — McInnes asks about Ye's specific policy positions (e.g., immigration, gay marriage). Ye clearly has given no thought to any of this and simply defers to Biblical teaching. This also means that McInnes is the first person who actually got past the easy pitfalls of not understanding Ye and asked actual questions.

47:00 — McInnes' closing thoughts.
McInnes points out that Ye is not antisemitic and that this is performance art, just as I pointed out above.

Ye is trying to make a point here: stop being divided. Learn to love.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Dec 06 00:31:56
That was fast. YouTube already took down the McInnes video due to "hate speech", which is a bullshit claim. A copyright strike would be far more fitting, since it's McInnes' content and hate speech is a farce.

It's available here on Rumble, which seems to be slightly more resistant to copyright strikes and does not respond to "hate speech" lies:
http://rum...d-nick-fuentes-12-05-2022.html
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Dec 10 23:02:57
Totalitarian control of Twitter expressed in UP here:
"The Twitter files!!!!"
[Habebe; December 2nd, 2022]
http://uto...hread=90948&time=1670256520181
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Dec 10 23:03:05
And here:
"Murder:Trump is the actual president"
[Habebe; December 5th, 2022]
http://uto...hread=90958&time=1670586929348
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Dec 10 23:03:11
Michael Shellenberger continues with part 4 here:
[December 10th, 2022]
http://twi...rMD/status/1601720455005511680

One particular thing that caught my eye from Shellenberger:
"What if a user dislikes Trump *and* objects to Twitter's censorship? The tweet still gets deleted. But since the *intention* is not to deny the election result, no punishing strike is applied."

This fits for how sites such as Imgur, Reddit, and Twitter got caught in such a psychosis: nuance was *not* allowed. This is how you get useful idiots such as tw who assume that anyone contradicting him is "Defending Trump" — he's been getting that insane argument from others in a psychosis who were amplified, whereas people who saw the insanity in that were likely not even visible to him during his insane searches through the propaganda apparatuses. This allowed him undue confidence in the legitimacy of the total-state-directed psychosis. With only one narrative allowed, useful idiots are directed into believing in it, and, having no conscience or consciousness of their own, they had no bulwark against it.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Dec 10 23:10:20
Here's a good example, actually.

Joy Reid runs a propaganda program for DNC-Politburo apparatus "MSNBC", and she said this *today* in response to someone saying, "being woke means you’re pro-Marxism" (a correct statement):
"[cry-laugh emojis] Marxism is a radical theory of economic class equality. So if you apply that to race (which actually has nothing to do with Marx but ok let’s play your silly game) it means radical race equality. Tell me how that’s a bad thing. Explain it like I’m five. Fascists are silly."
http://twitter.com/JoyAnnReid/status/1601761858159267840

It's funny that she *almost* gets that, yes, Marxism can indeed be applied to race. This is the bedrock of Race Marxism, as pointed out by James Lindsey in response:
http://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1601803939539656704

I have explained this before, but Marxism works on a particular dialectical framework, using certain thought experiments to justify its enslavement of mankind through economics. Applying this framework to racial relations is a way to further enslave. The metaphor still works whether on economics or on racialist strategies. This is the structure of ESG/DIE.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 12 20:47:54
Bari Weiss continues with part 5:
[December 12th, 2022]
http://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1602373896648282112

What is interesting about this is that the DNC's total-state sycophants continue to pretend that this is a "nothingburger" (unsurprising), *and* even the liberty-minded right are "unimpressed" with the reveals. Scott Adams, who is contrarian to a fault, has had a Twitter meltdown trying to say that it's not a big deal (in particular on December 10th) — *still* incapable of recognizing the important detail here:

Twitter was a completely captured totalitarian state entity. It was the pure voice of the Bolshevik Politburo, with no mechanism in place to hold a conscience.

I think this is most potently revealed in Tweet 7 (of part 5), where a screenshot from an employee has them saying that Trump is "a threat to Democracy". These are the words of the Bolsheviks, who spoke those words to justify the indiscriminate killing and acid-burning of the entire tsar family (including Anastasia), the raping of their dead bodies, the breaking of their faces with rifle butts, and the burial of the family in a mine shaft. The Bolsheviks owned Twitter, directed by BRICS Bolshevik-psychopaths such as Gadde and the Saudis, and their goal was to break apart the liberty of the West through the propagandizing of its citizens.

Twitter was their Trojan horse.
Twitter was a totalitarian apparatus, and Musk is exposing this.

While the right is impatient here, they should keep in mind that by doing this in degrees rather than all at once, the left-citizens who were ideologically captured by the Bolshevik propaganda are faced with daily reminders of their complicity in a total-state strategy that meant to convince them of the benevolence of the total-state's impending genocides. They will have to see that their psychopathic words were carried by a useful idiot Bolshevik-class within Twitter and that conservative voices were indeed being stifled to keep them from seeing the basic truths of COVID policy, governance infiltration, election fraud, cultural degradation, and a totalitarian capture of the West.

This delayed gratification for the right will be a psychic storm upon the left, which every day must face their misdeeds.


There are cautions to apply, of course. Notably,
• Musk has had his own totalitarian proclivities, simply leveraging his own sense of moral benevolence to be a "good king" — but a king nonetheless in a world where kings should be questioned. Further, BRICS includes China and South Africa, and Musk is South African and has often worked as a beneficiary of Chinese influence. He may merely be marching to the same thoughtless drum but simply slowing the drum beat rather than stopping it. He is taking good short-term action, but he could be a long-term enemy unless his conscience is positively affected by the warnings of those he hears.
• in Part 5, Musk is also leveraging Bari Weiss, who cannot be trusted with power following her slow awakening at the New York Times. While it is good that she turned away from those Bolsheviks (at least apparently), she should be taken as a potential turn-coat or double-agent, being as she is a Zionist and thus a beneficiary of Bolshevik totalitarianism. While she, similar to Musk, is working in a short-term "good", she was given access to internal communications and is only reporting on the activities which serve Zionist interests. I.e., she is not reporting on the suppression of so-called "antisemitic" movements, since the Venn Diagram of Bolsheviks and Zionists has them both benefiting from this suppression. In other words, this is still a controlled Overton Window.

The good must be taken with the bad here. Exposing the Bolshevik infiltration is an overall good, though its intentional precipitation of conflict must be watched carefully.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 12 22:15:33
The hilarious coping mechanism of people who have accepted that "progressivism" has "won":

"Towards a Post-Progressive Political Perspective"
"Using cultural intelligence to integrate more gratitude into its grievances"
by Steve McIntosh, May 2021
http://dev...ressive-political-perspective/

Aside from adding pathetic wordy-words that speak of too frequent visits to a thesaurus (e.g., repudiation, evince, espouse, laudable, normative, ameliorating), he's basically just describing progressivism but using "post" to show that he's accepted a new "hegemony" and is just trying to give it guard rails.

That is, his thesis is basically, "[Sure, a totalitarian state has seized world power using progressive politics, but maybe we can bargain with it so that totalitarianism can work for us soy-boy beta cucks?]"

Here's a few hilarious quotations:
• "post-progressivism wants to better employ the innovative power of business to significantly reduce carbon pollution. It wants to alleviate economic inequality by removing barriers to entrepreneurship in disadvantaged communities."
— That's just ESG/DIE progressivism. It's still the same bullshit.
• "It wants to restructure America’s healthcare system to work better for everyone"
— That's just the totalitarian seizing of health care via "universal health care" so that the total state can dictate the actions of the very bodies of its citizens in the name of "public health".
• "It seeks a more compassionate immigration system that nevertheless recognizes the legitimate interests of our nation-state"
— *More* compassionate? This is the same bullshit line of "[We can improve our economy by flooding ourselves with unassimilated immigration!]"
• "though [progressivism] threatens to undermine Western civilization from within, it cannot be cancelled or otherwise destroyed."
— "[We're already being cucked, so I guess we just watch the migrants rape our families? I'm no detached from the consequences of Bolshevism! How *post*-progressive of me!]"
• "The post-progressive strategy entails carrying forward progressivism’s upsides, such as its world-centric morality and environmental priorities,"
More ESG/DIE. Great. That's the solution.
• "Modernist values include economic and scientific progress, individual liberty and the rule of law. Modernity’s pathologies lead to environmental degradation, gross inequality and nuclear proliferation."
— Yep. He's rejecting "modernist" "pathologies" of *liberty* because they lead to "Gross inequality". So, yet again more DIE — the same progressive message with no "post" accept as a façade.
• "Positive traditional values include loyalty to family and country, duty and honor and altruism. Traditionalism’s pathologies lead to racism, sexism and homophobia."
— Yep! When you're watching your family getting raped, beliefs in "family" and "honor" are much more easily disposed of if you want to be a good host! Fucking insane.
• "post-progressivism can appreciate how traditional values continue to provide the moral foundations of our society."
Oh, can it? So, once the family is raped and disposed of, and once morality is replaced by the state's authorship of all human actions, "moral foundations" are going to have air to breath? Give me a fucking break.

This "post-progressivism" bullshit can be summed as Lloyd Christmas from "Dumb and Dumber" saying, "Find a happy place," while awaiting Seabass' entry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nh_PVUiva4
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 12 22:16:59
*"I'm [s]o detached"
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 12 22:18:51
*"no "post" [except] as a façade."

Geeze. Two typos. Have I been reading too much wtb incompetence? ;D
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 12 22:34:29
Lulz. The total state has purged more wrong-thinkers by giving them the verboten titles of "conservative"!

"Twitter dissolves trust and safety council"
[Washington Post; December 12th, 2022]
http://www...musk-twitter-harass-yoel-roth/
"in recent days as part of what Musk calls the Twitter Files, a series of tweets by conservative journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss"

Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss are "conservative" as much as Liz Cheney is not a war-monger of the totalitarian state. Notice that as soon as left-wing journalists break ranks, they are "conservative" (read in the total-state language, "bad!") and are thus to be taken as a poisoned well. This is how the left-wing cult keeps its members from seeking out the forbidden information of the right: it gives them a chilling effect ("[Speak out, and you too will be called a 'right-wing' 'MAGAt' and made a pariah!]") and signalling to them what information should not be taken seriously. This ensures that the cult only gets its information from the Politburo and its downstream repeaters.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Dec 13 00:39:39
So it begins!
FTX, which had a middling ESG G-Index score (about 50) and was setting the stage for governance-infiltration of crypto, was taken over by now-CEO John J. Ray III, whose brief Wiki points out that he has a history of extracting assets following monumental failures (e.g., Enron). This is a continuation of a strategy I elucidated in the previous thread: FTX' collapse is being used to usher in further ESG infiltration of governance by creating laws which infiltrate crypto.

Ray's initial statement on FTX was filed today to the House Judiciary:
[Financial Services; House dot gov; early filing for December 13th, 2022]
http://fin...-ba00-wstate-rayj-20221213.pdf

Key selection from Ray's filing:
"Although our investigation is ongoing and detailed findings will have to await its conclusion, the FTX Group’s collapse appears to stem from the absolute concentration of control in the hands of a very small group of grossly inexperienced and unsophisticated individuals who failed to implement virtually any of the systems or controls that are necessary for a company that is entrusted with other people’s money or assets."


There are two notable things in that paragraph:
1) "grossly inexperienced and unsophisticated individuals"
2) "failed to implement virtually any of the systems or controls"

The first should be subdivided into two important categories to read between the lines:
a) FTX was "mismanaged" intentionally, and
b) ESG actually *intentionally* empowers mismanagement.

Seems contradictory, right?
That is, why would he criticize mismanagement if he intends to implement mismanagement?

This leads to point 2:
Ray's solution is to "fix" this problem by implementing ESG's corporate governance — his *own* brand of mismanagement (or, rather, the total's state's brand, which he represents) which ESG asset managers can control through compliance structures.

Problem.
Reaction.
Solution.

The problem?
FTX Collapsed!

The reaction?
Panic! All that money lost! A scam! A pyramid scheme!

The solution?
Corporate governance (via ESG) and highly regulated Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).


In effect, they are claiming that ESG's governance frameworks would *fix* mismanagement, when, in reality, ESG's "pay gap" logic is designed to place incompetent managers in charge because these incompetents are Party Loyalists who will yield to the managerial elite. That is, ESG's infiltrated governance bodies yield to the totalitarian Inner Party, these governance bodies lacking the expertise to disagree with external management. This is the ESG solution to mass conspiracy: the players are often too incompetent to know that they are part of it.

They are already setting up this narrative of "[ESG as savior]". This likely places us on the cusp of ESG going mainstream, where total-state ESG propaganda will claim that ESG is benevolent because it is "preventing" the things that it is actually causing. This is the deception.

For example:
• ESG *causes* food and energy shortages, but ESG governance will be promoted as the savior — not because it creates more food and energy but because it manages the collapse by redistributing energy supplies and getting people accustomed to poverty.
• ESG *causes* mass migration from nations that are being exploited by the belt-and-road initiative, but it pretends to be the "solution" by redirecting funds to migration policies (accepting more migration) and housing and services policies (emptying the coffers of nations to fund a new welfare class).
• ESG *causes* the collapse of managers like FTX by siphoning and laundering funds into pet "climate change" projects, but it provides the "solution" by regulating those businesses — preventing them from collapsing by endlessly subsidizing them from the coffers of nations.


ESG is *causing* worldwide calamity, but, soon enough, useful idiots such as tw will be aware of it not for what it has done (the "unseen" hand of the market) but for what it will self-promote and propagandize: its "solutions" to the problems that it causes. This is, again, why this is a massive pyramid scheme as well as a protection racket. It is collapsing nations while convincing those same nations to adopt it for their survival.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Dec 13 02:08:18
The thing that doesn’t make sense is that SBF was already onboard with all the Liberal/democratic talking points. He was already working and lobbying towards state control of crypto. SBF was a WEF partner despite doing their best to erase that trace.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Dec 13 02:09:33
http://web....weforum.org/organizations/ftx
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Dec 13 03:05:39
The information revealed by twitter whistleblower report is arguably even worse than the twitter files. It has has an FTX air about it.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Dec 13 03:07:35
http://twi...?s=46&t=BxDkSR5jAIbQNaYjAQysmw

Twitter does not have separate development, test, staging, and production environments. At least 5,000 employees had privileged access to production systems.

Twitter knowingly allowed itself to be infiltrated by, or otherwise a tool of, many governments.


It just hoes on and on.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Dec 13 07:40:34
Holy crap.
No wonder Musk mass-locked work computers and fired people without warning; any of them could have sabotaged if those security vulnerabilities had persisted into his ownership. I don't know how I missed this story, given that this was August/September.

And the section on governments using Twitter wasn't a surprise after all we've learned and after seeing how unregulated their tracking is — and especially China, India, and (potential) Russia infiltration (there's BRICS again). I've said it before, but BRICS is not just some passive mechanism: they are actively attacking the West. The Twitter propaganda apparatus was a major method; its main leadership was held by Indians and Saudi investments, which many people do not seem to realize is a direct security threat to the West — and they were let into the gates and lauded.

..
"The thing that doesn’t make sense is that SBF was already onboard with all the Liberal/democratic talking points. He was already working and lobbying towards state control of crypto. SBF was a WEF partner despite doing their best to erase that trace."

It's a best-of-both-worlds situation.
1) SBF gets to run a mini-ESG operation that launders money for ESG causes (the DNC, Ukraine, other ESG nations using his services to launder money), which effectively means that all of that investment disappears, and he gets to claim incompetence when it's not recovered.
2) His "failure" (which is intentional) then gets used as an example to justify further ESG initiatives (crypto control).

So, they successfully laundered billions and will sell a "solution" to launder billions more. This might be cliché, but I really would be surprised if he doesn't "suicide" in prison. He seems to have acted without conscience, but if his handlers think he has *any* conscience remaining or think that he would leverage his knowledge for further payment, then he is a liability.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Dec 13 08:02:06
Dam I thought it was new revelations.

SBF getting wacked isn’t a bad bet, Epstein was just a peak behind the curtains, SBF went full retard and ripped the entire curtains down when he started falling.
Pillz
Member
Tue Dec 13 14:20:26
You lost me like 2 threads ago
Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Dec 15 07:10:28
[Pillz]: "You lost me like 2 threads ago"

I did a summary at the top of the last thread for new readers ( http://uto...hread=90616&time=1668413002067 ), though I was planning to make a new outline for this thread which incorporates more details.

Short version:
• World elites (e.g., Kissinger, Charles III, Rothschilds),
• traitor oligarchs (e.g., Trudeau, Ardern, Biden, Macron, Daniel Andrews),
• Bolsheviks/Marxists (e.g., Raskin),
• malicious asset managers and billionaires (e.g., Larry Fink, Bill Gates, Soros, the Clintons, the Cheneys), and
• the BRICS Group (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa)

...are all on the same scheme of using ESG/DIE ("Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance" and its social infiltration via "Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity") to collapse the West by
• collapsing energy independence (e.g., ending oil, ending coal, ending nuclear),
• creating food scarcity (e.g., converting farms into "green" initiatives which fail to support a population's nutritional needs),
• propagandizing Western nations into population collapse (e.g., trans ideology as child sterilization, "don't have children" propaganda, abortion as eugenics),
• encouraging mass immigration,
• consolidating currency into CBDCs for total control ("carbon" being the limitation imposed on Western life),
• enabling "failing upwards" "pay gap" logic to place incompetent useful idiots into positions of power,
• siphoning and laundering money through proxy wars to speed the collapse and redirect funds more easily (e.g., Ukraine, Taiwan), and
• creating an economic catastrophe (the end-game of the bottom falling out on the ESG pyramid scheme),

..with the final goal of creating a Western world which is managed by the traitor oligarchs in a new serfdom, where the West's populations have adopted slave morality (morally broken and manageable by a totalitarian state) and is too energy-dependent to fight back against BRICS. BRICS intends to make a servant state of the West, who will be behold to China due to its success with the belt-and-road initiative — owning all the resources that the West needs to survive in its idiotic "green" energy future (i.e., owning the precious metals and resources needed to produce energy-inefficient panels, generators, and wind energy).

We are to be slaves, you see.

We will build the Third Temple for the Israelis and make China the undisputed ruler of the world. Marxism will be our religion. Cause and consequence will be indecipherable to us, with only the oligarchs and elite given the schematics of causality. Our heroes will be made ugly before us, and we will see only the virtues of our conquerors.
Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Dec 15 07:15:41
Back to the subject of Mudge and BRICS+ infiltration of Twitter:

"Former Twitter staff sentenced to over three years for spying in US for Saudi Arabia"
[Independent (UK); December 14th, 2022]
http://www...nced-three-years-b2245623.html
• "A former Twitter employee who was previously found guilty of spying in the US on behalf of the Saudi Royal family has been convicted to over three years in prison."
• "The US Justice Department noted that another Twitter employee who accessed confidential user account data, and a person allegedly with close ties to Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, was also involved."
• "Mr Abouammo was arrested in Seattle on 5 November 2019, and was charged with acting as an agent of Saudi Arabia."
• "According to an FBI agent’s testimony, a Saudi government agent started courting Abouammo in 2014, offering him gifts, following which the former Twitter employee began gathering private data on the platform’s users critical of the Saudi regime using his inside access."
• "[Mudge] said in his disclosure that India was able to place at least two suspect foreign assets within Twitter and that he was warned by the FBI that at least one Chinese agent was in the company."
Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Dec 15 07:22:31
This Twitter user made a compilation of infiltrators within Twitter:
"1. @elonmusk, Your new company @Twitter has many ex FBI/CIA agents in high ranks. Should probably do a little housecleaning."
http://twi...247/status/1600316966182715393
2. Kevin Michelena - current Twitter Sr. Corporate Security Analyst. Ex FBI Intelligence Analyst 12 years
3. Doug Hunt - current Twitter Senior Director. Ex FBI Special Agent 20 years.
4. Mark Jaroszewski - current Twitter Director Corporate Security/Risk. Ex FBI 20 years
5. Douglas Turner - current Twitter Senior Manager, Corporate and Executive Security Services. Ex FBI 14 years. Ex Secret Service 7 years.
6. Patrick G. - current Twitter Head of Corporate Security. Ex FBI Special Agent 23 years.
7. Karen Walsh - current Twitter Director - Corporate Resilience. Ex FBI Special Agent 21 years
8. Russell Handorf - current Twitter Senior Staff Technical Program Manager. Ex FBI 10 years.
9. Michael B. - current Twitter Senior Corporate Security Manager. Ex FBI 23 years.
10. Vincent Lucero - current Twitter Senior Security Manager. Ex FBI Special Agent 22 years.
11. Kevin L. - current Twitter Corporate Security Manager. Ex FBI Special Agent 25 years.
12. Matthew W. - current Twitter Senior Director of Product Trust, Revenue Policy, and Counsel Systems & Analytics. Ex FBI 15 years.
13. Claire O. - current Twitter Senior Corporate Security Analyst. Ex FBI 8 years.
14. Bruce A. - current Twitter Director, Corporate Security. Ex FBI 23 years.
15. Jeff Carlton - current Twitter Senior Manager. Ex FBI & CIA Intelligence Analyst 3 years.
16. What do all of these Twitter employees have in common? They were ALL hired since @realDonaldTrump was elected.


Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Dec 16 06:53:39
Former UK PM Gordon Brown (Bolshevik/Labour) decided to Tweet portions of the totalitarian plan (UK edition) all at once:
[December 10th]
http://twitter.com/GordonBrown/status/1601566707612815360
Some of the language is telling:
• "It’s time to replace the House of Lords with an elected second chamber."
• "A new constitution should include a guarantee of free universal healthcare, an end to poverty, the creation of a sustainable environment as well as the defence of our security."

Replacing the House of Lords is akin to the DNC plan of making the Supreme Court directly elected or abolishing the senate in that it removes a check on powers (save comments about this comparison not fitting for the specific functions of the Lords and the Supreme Court — not my point).

One of the ESG/DIE strategies to collapse the West includes the "our democracy" point because, as I have said many times before, "democracy" is their word for "mob rule" — a mob that they control via propaganda and fraud. If the totalitarians can give more governmental positions "to the people" (mobs that the totalitarians control), then that government has been defeated by the world total-state. This strategy is not limited to the U.S. and UK but is being promoted in nearly every ESG/DIE nation. Meanwhile, BRICS is consolidating leadership, such as Xi's recent presidential extension and trimming of his Politburo — preventing the governance infiltration that the West is allowing.

As for "a new constitution", Brown cannot help but mention universal health care (the direct control of UK bodies which allows them full access to government control of eugenics), "poverty" is their imperative of emptying the coffers for migrants, and "sustainable environment" is again the Marxist/Marcusean infiltration device of ESG.
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Dec 16 07:13:29
Fun fact:
The Tweet that most recently got Ye banned (the merged swastika and Star of David), comes from "Raëlism":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%ABlism
Raëlists essentially place aliens behind religion and phenomena; they believe that "Guides" must bring humanity to the stars by developing space technology and building "landing pads" for aliens. When Musk purchased Twitter, Raëlists declared Musk an honorary "Guide".
http://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/rael-awards-honorary-guide-title-124500614.html

Their USA Twitter page prominently features the symbol and jokes about Musk and Ye not knowing their symbol:
http://twitter.com/Rael_usa/status/1601663534634409984
"Kanye and Elon both need education. This is a Raelian Symbol. The Star of David represents the infinity of SPACE. The Swastika in the center represents the infinity of TIME. “Nothing is created, nothing is lost; everything is continually transformed.”"

So there's a split narrative here: one where Musk was unaware of Raëlists and another where he was.

Of the second possibility, it's interesting that Musk and the Raëlists share a great many thoughts. Musk and Raëlists, for instance, believe that A.I. will replace the servitude that is placed on people. For Musk, this takes place with his metaphors of Twitter as a collective consciousness that he can make grow into a problem-solving platform. He may well be using this on the back-end to train A.I. to do it without people.

This gets a bit absurd, though, since Musk likely had never heard of Raëlism. Raëlism and Musk probably just got most of their ideas from the X-Files.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Dec 18 01:07:52
Twitter Files #6 released today (December 17th), picking up with Matt Taibbi again:
http://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1603857534737072128
• "But a surprisingly high number [of emails between Twitter and the FBI] are requests by the FBI for Twitter to take action on election misinformation, even involving joke tweets from low-follower accounts."

The left is seizing on this to say that that "joke" (a joke about what day the election was being held) was "[super serials, guys]", ignoring the meat: that the FBI was coordinating with Twitter, which *still* has at least 16 former agents on its staff.

This is particularly revealing:
• "7. The FBI’s social media-focused task force, known as FTIF, created in the wake of the 2016 election, swelled to 80 agents and corresponded with Twitter to identify alleged foreign influence and election tampering of all kinds."

Taibbi got the acronym wrong, but it's the "Foreign Influence Task Force" (FITF). What is interesting about the FITF being created "In the fall of 2017" (as the FBI reports: http://www.fbi.gov/investigate/counterintelligence/foreign-influence ) is that this is following H.Clinton's and the total-state's insistence that Trump was an "illegitimate" president because "it was the Russians" and "he was helped a lot in unprecedented ways".

That is, the DNC effectively pressured the FBI to create this task force due to the DNC's lies. The FBI then infiltrated Twitter and sat on the sidelines while foreign actors were *promoted* into positions of power. Their role was simply to make sure that the DNC's goals would be effected; they were not actually working to manage U.S. sovereignty against foreign influence — just ensuring the "correct" influence was amplified.

• "8. Federal intelligence and law enforcement reach into Twitter included the Department of Homeland Security, which partnered with security contractors and think tanks to pressure Twitter to moderate content."

So we have DHS–FBI–DNC–SecurityContractors–ThinkTanks–BRICS merging pressures to make Twitter into an ideal propaganda apparatus for the totalitarian state. We can see how this is a combination of soft and hard powers, with ThinkTanks and "advocacy" groups doing the lifting that the FBI cannot openly do and vice versa. This is a strategy of obfuscation and multi-leveled attacks. That is, a low-IQ person cannot understand many actors simultaneously exacting the same plan from different angles, stupidly believing that it's a mere "standalone complex" and therefore acceptable. When, in reality, it is a coordinated way to totally envelope a target, with all actors working from the same ideology and often even from the same slush funds.

Yep:
• "10. The #TwitterFiles show something new: agencies like the FBI and DHS regularly sending social media content to Twitter through multiple entry points, pre-flagged for moderation."

This is the classic demo-targeting of propaganda. The same message can be received or not received depending on the classification of the dissemination agent. I.e., if someone is an MSNBC viewer, they'll believe propagandists such as Rachel Maddow but not believe propagandists such as Fox News' Judge Jeanine. Similarly, the FBI can attempt multiple entry points into Twitter to make sure that someone removes target content. If lawyers don't work, they can try direct messages to DNC–Twitter executives, and if that doesn't work, they can contact their own FBI assets within Twitter.

• "unanswered question: do agencies like FBI and DHS do in-house flagging work themselves, or farm it out? “You have to prove to me that inside the fucking government you can do any kind of massive data or AI search,” says one former intelligence officer."

This was subtle but is an interesting question. Taibbi is likely referring to the FBI's ability to leverage the NSA and even foreign actors to search and identify terms in order to funnel the FBI more "actionable" threats. And consider the consequence of that: the FBI is trusting that they are being funneled top-tier information when they may actually be looking at incomplete or doctored searches and false targets in order to waste their time chasing right-wing issues rather than far more dangerous left-wing issues. This could be as simple as having faulty search terms determined by partisan language-knowledge, such as how a left-wing user would say, "protest", (perhaps less of a red flag) whereas the actual *meaning* is likely "violent insurrection". Similarly, if "patriot" is a flagged term, the FBI would waste its time with left-wing doublespeak and not uncover left-wing plots.
This would produce major blind spots in the FBI's search criteria.

• "in which “FBI San Francisco is notifying you” it wants action on four accounts:"

This is another issue that left-wing actors will downplay. In this case, they'll say that "[Oh, the FBI is just letting Twitter know that these users are breaking Twitter's TOS. 'Nothing to hide, nothing to fear!' That is, if they're breaking TOS, there's nothing wrong with reporting them!]"
Wrong.
That is Cardinal Richelieu logic.
This shows that the FBI is *using* TOS as a means of removing the *FBI's* targets. It is part of their "multiple entry points" strategy. They want targets removed, and they find an excuse to justify it. And where most common users reporting such TOS-violations are perhaps ignored (in addition to being losers and hall monitors), the FBI gets an inside track and priority action.

Taibbi points out that Twitter was having weekly meetings with government Politburo actors:
• "24.In a letter to former Deputy General Counsel (and former top FBI lawyer) Jim Baker on Sep. 16, 2022, legal exec Stacia Cardille outlines results from her “soon to be weekly” meeting with DHS, DOJ, FBI, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence:"

Hilariously, listed in their action items is that Lincoln Project (a propaganda and misinformation spreader) complained about being flagged for "Synthetic and Manipulated Media" (SAMM). Lincoln Project was apparently given extra interaction with Twitter's "Bridget" to address their concerns. Weird that Lincoln Project was not in their "suspended" list for their constant lies and distortions.

• Also from the email:
"I explicitly asked if there were any impediments with the ability of the government to share classified information or other relevant information with industry. FBI was adamant that no impediments to information sharing exist."

There are two ways to look at this:
1) The FBI was telling the truth, in which case the FBI was directly communicating classified information to Twitter.
2) The FBI was lying, in which case Twitter exec Stacia Cardille was conned into believing that the FBI was feeding Twitter good-faith information without an ulterior motive (a stupid perception on Cardille's part).

Both options are not good. Option 1 means that the FBI was effectively extending security clearance to Twitter lawyers in order to have them acting on behalf of government intelligence (and here that means DNC political maneuvers), and option 2 means that the FBI was treating Twitter lawyers as useful idiots for government propaganda. Both implicate the FBI, whereas option 2's only saving grace is for Cardille: that her errors were due to FBI deception.

Just a good point:
• "33.The ubiquity of the 2016 Russian interference story as stated pretext for building out the censorship machine can’t be overstated. It’s analogous to how 9/11 inspired the expansion of the security state."
You'd think that people would learn from Post-9/11 power grabs, but here we are. And it's not just young adults — people who were conscious during 9/11 and saw the political maneuverings are nevertheless *still* trusting of these government–corporation mergers.

More on the "unanswered question" from above:
• "35.FBI in one case sent over so many “possible violative content” reports, Twitter personnel congratulated each other in Slack for the “monumental undertaking” of reviewing them:"
That is, Twitter's own employees were being leveraged to act on behalf of the Party. This means that Twitter was dedicating personnel and their labor hours to acting on behalf of the DNC via its FBI ownership.

Flash from the past:
• "41.Here, a video was reported by the Election Integrity Project (EIP) at Stanford, apparently on the strength of information from the Center for Internet Security (CIS):"
• "43.The EIP is one of a series of government-affiliated think tanks that mass-review content, a list that also includes the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Laboratory, and the University of Washington’s Center for Informed Policy."

I spoke about Stanford's "Election Integrity Project/Partnership" and the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public (CIP) in the previous thread (comment "Fri Sep 23 05:46:49"). They are basically a DNC-partisan project by university students and their professors who compile lists of "problematic" users on Twitter (i.e., users with whom they ideologically disagree). They were a source of the Washington Post in their "77" article, with the WP leveraging Stanford's/Washington's lists to legitimize their plan to target and attempt to suspend or remove "problematic" accounts through mass reports, social pressure, CIS-data, and insider assets within Twitter.

In short, you can see how this web of collusion works: CIS (a DHS contractor) feeds data to DNC think-tanks (often these are publicly funded universities who make DNC activists/laborers of their students), DNC think tanks isolate "problem" users and research laws that could result in the removal of these users via TOS violations, those think tanks then become the "legitimate" information for media to report on ("[Aha! Stanford said it! Accept our fallacy of authority!]"), media and tech use these think tanks to remove DNC competition and stop information harmful to the regime. The snake eats its tail.


• "44.The takeaway: what most people think of as the “deep state” is really a tangled collaboration of state agencies, private contractors, and (sometimes state-funded) NGOs. The lines become so blurred as to be meaningless."

That really is the bottom line. These entanglements are being revealed to the public at large through these drops. You have government agencies working with activists and activist organizations to fulfill DNC directives. Public money is being used to fund these labors through universities and the Total State's security apparatuses. They are actively removing the lines between public and private and private and government so that useful idiots think that it's "normal" for government to have so much power and influence. This psychological trap is in the list of how people accept a totalitarian state.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Dec 18 22:13:55
People seem to be over-speculating about Elon Musk "meeting" with Saudis and Kushner:
"Photo of Elon Musk, Jared Kushner at World Cup Draws Criticism, Speculation"
[NewsWeek; December 18th, 2022]
http://www...-criticism-speculation-1768005

Even the DNC's useful idiots such as Dash Dobrofsky (a DNC talking-point repeater account) are floating this narrative:
"Elon Musk was at the World Cup with Jared Kushner — the son-in-law of Donald Trump who received a $2 Billion investment from a Saudi Arabian fund led by Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman. Twitter’s second largest shareholder is a Saudi Arabian Prince. A lot of coincidences here."
http://twitter.com/DashDobrofsky/status/1604538015879073794


So it's worth pointing out a few things:
1) Taking this as a "meeting" where strategy was discussed is potentially a stretch. This is the same CIA strategy of "[here's a picture of these people together! Assume the worst!]" This DNC–CIA op was run against people such as Jill Stein in order to sink her name in the press when she became a DNC threat going into 2020 (January 2019; Jill Stein CNN interview by Erin Burnett; picture of Stein with Putin was used: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQKzkMkc1xI ). That is, the image is mostly meaningless, and the fact that it's being used by the DNC is a big tell.

2) Despite Dobrofsky's innuendo, those Saudi investors *preceded* Musk's time at Twitter. This is because BRICS+ had already infiltrated Twitter and were using it pre-Musk as an ESG/DIE propaganda apparatus. They did not *need* Musk; they were already in control of Twitter and were having great results with their psychosis.

3) That said, I've wondered about Musk's opposition to BRICS+ and ESG/DIE in the past. He has expressly said that he hates ESG, which dispels his South Africa connection, but I can see an argument that he was seizing Twitter as an "outsider" in order to accelerate division in the West — still acting on behalf of BRICS+. Even Tesla relies heavily on China's belt-and-road rare-earth mining, so he does indeed have a financial incentive to use ESG/DIE against the West (it corners the market into electric vehicles). But, again, he would not need to meet with the Saudis and Kushner at the World Cup if he were *already* taking part in this plan.

4) Further, the DNC would not want to spread this propaganda against Musk if this alliance already existed. The DNC would *benefit* from Musk being influenced by the Saudis, since the DNC is pure ESG/DIE. After all, the DNC was happy to leave the Saudis in place when *they* had control of Twitter. We see this also in the DNC trying to sink Tesla despite Tesla being useful for ESG/DIE.


All said, where duplicity is afoot, these terms can become convoluted. So, simplified, these are the main scenarios I see:
• Option 1, Musk as controlled opposition — in this reading, Musk was always DNC–BRICS+ aligned but was working as a double-agent of sorts (an apparent "conservative") in order to drive U.S. division. This fits with the DNC's own strategy, since the DNC supports BRICS+ supremacy via policy but simultaneously pretends to oppose Russia and the Saudis in its propaganda. This is because using Russian/Chinese conflict is an excuse to drive the Ukraine and Taiwan proxy wars, which allow the West to funnel money to BRICS+ and West-sinking policies (e.g., mass immigration, debt holes).

• Option 2, Good faith belief in Musk's principles — in this reading, Musk fell into the ESG/DIE scheme accidentally, realized what was going on and how he and Tesla were being used for it (e.g., due to his child being transed — a sacrifice that no moral parent would make intentionally, especially with so little propaganda being spread about it for it to be useful to an immoralist), and does indeed oppose ESG. This means that he has no loyalty to the BRICS+ strategy of collapsing the West.


Undermining Option 1 is that Musk's conservatism seems genuine, and it would require an awful lot of faking — not that the total-state is averse to using such fakers, but that requires more moving parts. Also, stepping aside on behalf of BRICS+ at this point would undermine a supposed double-agent's goal of creating more division. I.e., why step in, undermine the strategy, and then disappear before it succeeded? This would merely demoralize the right again, who would have no champions on social media.

Undermining Option 2 is that Musk has shown some alignment with the big picture of BRICS+ control, including his persistent belief in Neuralink and his China investments (that belt-and-road reliance for rare-earth tech). But that well is pretty low. I can see an argument for him doing this to get out just before the West's January debt crisis. The U.S. is likely to default in January, though some speculators push this back to Q3 2023. Giving Twitter back to pure ESG/DIE control would allow financial collapses to be obfuscated by DNC propaganda, which needs to seed the pyramid scheme further before the bottom falls out.


Lots to think about here. We're essentially talking about a theory of mind for Musk, where the binary is believing in his sincerity versus seeing him as a Machiavellian actor for BRICS+. Given DNC propaganda and Musk's personal costs here, I lean more towards Musk truly opposing totalitarianism, but there is a lot on the line here.

I hope that his poll on stepping down as CEO was a simple bot trap and nothing more, but it raises all of these issues again.


Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Dec 18 23:09:59
For the sake of more information, it looks like Leonidas Raisini, who claims to have "$1.420 Billion" in Twitter investments, claims that he overheard the Saudis trying to get Musk to appoint a new CEO, which would precipitate Musk's poll:
http://twitter.com/iamraisini/status/1604619857257025537

While I do not necessarily *doubt* this, Raisini's commentary is unhinged, he being very much within the psychosis of Musk hatred and DNC affiliation. Raisini appears to be a Tesla/Twitter investor as a means of empowering BRICS+, with him even seeming to take sides with the Saudis in order to have better Tesla/Twitter leadership. His investments seem to be a matter of exerting influence against the discretion of Musk and has threatened to fund the SEC against Musk, which makes him a malicious actor. I.e., why not invest in businesses that are already managed "correctly"?

In other words, Raisini has a direct conflict-of-interests here, with him directly benefiting from bad press against Musk as a means of leveraging a Saudi deal.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Dec 18 23:11:01
*"discretion of Musk[,] and [he] has"
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 19 01:01:51
If you'd like to see how hilariously owned Wikipedia is, this is a great example:

"December 15, 2022 Twitter suspensions"
"(Redirected from Thursday Night Massacre (Twitter))"
http://en....r_15,_2022_Twitter_suspensions
Opening line: "On December 15, 2022, Twitter suspended the accounts of nine journalists in an event one security researcher labeled the "Thursday Night Massacre"."


This absurd Wiki page is already highly fleshed out and organized. People on the talk page have pointed out that even the title of "Thursday Night Massacre" was invented by the affected journalists and has limited popularity, with one Twitter user with about 224 likes being an apparent source of the phrase:
http://twitter.com/alexstamos/status/1603560627565314048

That is, the "persecuted" journalists are publishing articles about their suspensions, mischaracterizing the events, and those articles are being used as valid Wikipedia sources.

See how this works?

This is how Wikipedia launders news. Their supposed "neutral point of view" was easily toppled years ago by its "reliable sources" policy, since their "reliable sources" lean heavily towards establishment press — even when that press has a direct conflict of interests in the information presented in the article. Useful idiots then go to Wikipedia and read this bias as truth. This is a way that they manufacture consensus.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 19 01:47:15
Kissinger, who has worked on behalf of the totalitarian scheme for his entire life, even being Klaus Schwab's mentor.. sees a strategy for the Russian draw-down:

"How to avoid another world war"
by Henry Kissinger
[UK Spectator; December 17th, 2022]
http://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-push-for-peace/
• "Ukraine has acquired one of the largest and most effective land armies in Europe, equipped by America and its allies. A peace process should link Ukraine to Nato, however expressed."

Funny, that. NATO wanted to flirt with Ukraine, which didn't have the requirements it needed.. and now, after NATO has flooded Ukraine with billions in aid, Ukraine has a position to join NATO. Almost like.. a self-fulfilling prophecy. Who could have predicted this?

Oh yeah, "Early Life Section"'s Gideon Rose of the Council on Foreign Relations, on "Colbert Report" in 2014:
http://www.cc.com/video/8067fc/the-colbert-report-crisis-in-ukraine-gideon-rose

• "If the pre-war dividing line between Ukraine and Russia cannot be achieved by combat or by negotiation, recourse to the principle of self-determination could be explored. Internationally supervised referendums concerning self-determination could be applied to particularly divisive territories which have changed hands repeatedly over the centuries."

This negotiation process would like include Russia gaining precious metal and food sites, allowing it to maintain independence and insulation during the West's collapse.

• "The preferred outcome for some is a Russia rendered impotent by the war. I disagree ... dangers would be compounded"

Yep. An empowered BRICS Group. "Too big to fail" logic applied to Russia. See how this works? The ESG/DIE strategy identifies entities which must be protected by the world totalitarian order. This applies to state-owned businesses (with such businesses being expanding through continual efforts to absorb more) and with nations. Russia is meant to become one of those protected entities.

• "artificial intelligence. Auto-nomous weapons already exist, capable of defining, assessing and targeting their own perceived threats and thus in a position to start their own war ... as important an issue today as climate change, and it requires leaders with a command of both technology and history."

This is the appointing of the oligarchs over A.I.
Kissinger is talking about the WEF strategy of directing human development by infiltrating A.I. to the WEF's ends. His earlier talk of the shock of violence experienced by nations during WWI's technology leaps is his threat. The argument is that A.I. will be used to wipe out millions of people if the totalitarian state (which, ironically, is the one developing this weaponized A.I.) does not preemptively control the world.

Kissinger is such a piece of shit.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 19 05:21:05
Looks like the Musk poll has now expired at
Yes: 57.5%
No: 42.5%
"Should I step down as head of Twitter? I will abide by the results of this poll."
http://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1604617643973124097

Now to find out if it was bot-bait and/or if it was him replacing himself with himself 2.0. Another option is that he'll remove the bots and then reveal the *actual* results (likely "no") as a "gotcha" to how much elections can be skewed by malicious actors.

That is, "I will abide by the results of this poll [after removing bots]."
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 19 05:59:35
Twitter Files #6 part 2 released the afternoon of December 18th:
http://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1604613292491538432

This segment focuses on an exchange with the FBI, where the FBI claims that Twitter lawyers did not properly identify foreign actors. The back-and-forth has Twitter lawyers talking with each other about how they *did* indicate foreign actors, so — between the lines — they're not sure how to respond without self-incriminating. They want to reply in good faith, but they seem worried that the FBI is fishing for prosecutions.

Comment 10 points out,
• "10.Roth suggested they “get on the phone with Elvis ASAP and try to straighten this out,” to disabuse the agencies of any notion that state propaganda is not a “thing” on Twitter."

That's a good catch; Twitter was confirming that foreign agents are indeed acting within Twitter. That's not a minor point, though Twitter treated it as one.

• "11.This exchange is odd among other things because some of the “bibliography” materials cited by the FITF are sourced to intelligence officials, who in turn cited the public sources."

There's that theme again: we saw the FBI citing open-source documents as directions and backing for their own investigations. That is, rather than having special knowledge through governmental channels, they were relying on Oxford University, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the Mercator Institute, and the Wall Street Journal.

This is worth parsing, however, since these sources are not *as* sensational as they could be. WSJ and Foreign Policy, for instance, have high reliability on the MediaBias chart ( https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ ). Mercator also seems pretty bland (very specific revenue sourcing), and it even got into hot water with China after being in the citation list for investigating China's treatment of Uyghurs. Oxford is probably the biggest weak point since the UK has been largely captured, but its articles here talk about BRICS influence on COVID details. So this particular list is less interesting than the information laundering of part 1 of this #6 drop.

It's also worth pointing out that the FBI is having this discussion with private citizens over unsecure channels who have not necessarily been read into classified information. Using open-source information is a way to have these discussions without revealing classified aspects of investigations. This can be done maliciously, of course, such as the FBI *sourcing* those studies surreptitiously and then using them as sources — citing themselves in the same format as governments seeding lies (see previous thread comment "Mon Nov 07 18:18:37" on the Frank Snepp strategy).

Part 2 wraps by responding to an FBI statement that attempted to obfuscate by saying that they merely give information about foreign actors to private businesses while letting those businesses make their own decisions. Taibbi points out that that is not topical here, with the FBI's involvement exceeding simple information providing and targeting specific non-foreign individuals.

Taibbi is correct here; in the correspondence cited in this drop, the FBI was clearly asserting legal pressure on Twitter to come up with actionable targets. The FBI even asks for Twitter's search limitations regarding "the domestic, scam, foreign state, official propaganda, and white supremacist actors" — itself an admission of the FBI's priorities and the FBI's insistence that Twitter is not using good-enough metrics in target removal.

Again, that cannot be understated. This kind of FBI pressure ties up Twitter's legal department, creates more departmental pressure for actions (i.e., dedicates the workload of Twitter employees to the FBI), justifies more moderation with a specific target list, expands the moderation team to comply with those requests, and is results-oriented. I.e., the FBI's tone here is legally worded to suggest that Twitter needs to give them results in these categories and provide thorough metrics to demonstrate compliance: "[show that you are making removals in these categories and that you're targeting *lots* of 'bad actors']".
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 19 09:13:40
lol
Twitter scammers/trolls managed to trick some semi-famous or blue-check people into clicking on a shady link and giving away their account logins. With one person falling for it, they were able to contact other semi-famous accounts with the first account and get those accounts to fall for it. One of the victims?

Propaganda account @JoJoFromJerz:
http://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/1604613651851354115

Due to falling for this, that account has currently been wiped:
http://twitter.com/JoJoFromJerz
"This account doesn’t exist"

I'm sure it's Musk's fault somehow. ;)
The people in the above comment section seem to think so, even though the message had an obvious setup, an external link, and ends with "Thanks / Regards" (double sign-off with missing punctuation and no signature).

While I do not subscribe to the sociopath logic of "stupid people get what they deserve by falling for scammers", I *do* find it entertaining that JoJo is indeed the sort of midwit who would fall for something like this. It explains her political takes and her entire identity.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Dec 19 11:32:56
I finished the article I mentioned that I was working on in the last thread:

"A Guide to the Total State's Cultural Messaging
How the WEF's ESG/DIE Plan Reveals Itself in Narrative"
http://che...e-to-the-total-states-cultural
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Dec 20 01:50:20
This may be the most rotten update so far:
"1. TWITTER FILES: PART 7"
[Shellenberger; December 19th, 2022]
http://twi...rMD/status/1604897153121366017

The short version:
The FBI was aware of the legitimacy of the laptop but sat on it for the DNC and primed/infiltrated Twitter, NBC, and media for an FBI-disinformation op (i.e., the FBI *knew* they were lying to Twitter in order to remove a favorable story — they had *zero* evidence of Russia involvement and even desperately searched for evidence to justify this narrative). When the laptop become actionable by non-DNC parties (e.g., the NY Post), the FBI knowingly misinformed Twitter (in addition to Facebook) to suppress the story, knowingly protecting a DNC–Biden–China–Ukraine treason scheme.


This was a key part:
"30. Efforts continued to influence Twitter's Yoel Roth.
In Sept 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise” on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden
The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it"
http://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1604896328453980160

The attached document details how Twitter was being shaped to behave when the "misinformation" was spread. This relates directly to how the FBI did the same with Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg's talk of "fit that pattern" was not merely, "[Oh, potential Russian disinformation; this must be it.]"

No.

Twitter, like Zuckerberg, were given specific details of a Biden-related embarrassment and given a script of how to behave when the embarrassment occurred. The FBI knew that it was real, but they lied to, misled, and managed social media and DNC media to have the information suppressed. They used legal pressure, threats, inside actors/infiltrators, and cultivated assets within Twitter and Facebook to ensure that this FBI disinformation would be acted upon in a pattern favorable to the DNC–FBI.

Especially telling from slide 30's transcript is this — and keep in mind that this was a *script* of a "potential" event which was practiced in advance of the 2020 elections but *after* the FBI was already aware that the laptop was real:
"Cesar Conde, the chairman of NBC News, announces that because of the suspicion that the BIDENCRIMES.info leaks are coming from a foreign power with a goal of undermining America's free and fair elections, no aspect of NBC News or MSNBC will report on the allegations or use the materials as the basis for reporting ... he asks all other news organizations to follow NBC's leadership."

Notice two things here:
1) Aspen Institute, a captured institution, was floating the FBI's own lie of "coming from a foreign power" — a claim without evidence which was being used as a psychological primer.
2) "follow NBC's leadership"

Why is #2 particularly interesting?

I pointed this out in previous threads, for instance:
"• DNC Propaganda Think Tanks

• CNN/MSNBC, Paid social marketers / sock puppets

• Useful idiots"

And also from thread 4 comment "Mon Aug 15 20:50:15":
"• Note well: NBC is a major route of the CIA into the Zeitgeist; they openly present former CIA officials as authorities and then adopt those talking points as reality; NBC amplifies "what if" scenarios as "reality".
• Note well: the same propagators repeatedly initiate this play
- Adam Schiff
- Kevin Delaney, an ESG/DIE activist, WEF partner, Time and WSJ columnist,
- Andrew McCabe, former FBI director"


That is, the FBI *wanted* Twitter and Facebook to first follow NBC's lead because **NBC is government-controlled propaganda**. The FBI even followed the pattern by laundering this through a DNC Propaganda Think Tank (Aspen Institute).
Cherub Cow
Member
Wed Dec 21 05:36:16
I've outlined the totalitarian strategy a number of times, and it's getting pretty close to finalized as a better-organized Sunny-in-Philly/Charlie conspiracy chart (I have some avenues I want to check into before adding them), but Dr. Neema Parvini did a presentation on his "Octopus" conceptualization of the totalitarians ("the regime"):

"Dr Neema Parvini, AKA Academic Agent on The Octopus And Elite Theory"
[Traditional Britain Group; December 9th, 2022]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC6YOTas-_Q

The video is 40 minutes, but he talks slowly, so you can easily listen to this at 2x speed. I highly recommend this for people who want an overview of the totalitarian organizational structure that we are all facing. (It might help to hear it from someone besides me?)


That said, here's a quick summary of his key points. He places it as a "rough flow of power" in this order:

"The Octopus"
• The Chest (money)

• The Network (NGOs)

• The Crown (Governments)
⬇ ⬇
• The Bench (law) ➞➞ • The Head (think tanks), • The Church (Vatican)
• The Chamber (intelligence groups) ➞ • The Mouth (media)


And here it is with more detail:

"The Octopus"
• The Chest — Investment Banks
Blackrock (ESG), Vanguard, etc.
These are the big movers; they fund the strategies.

• The Network — Foundations, Corporations, NGOs, World Orgs
This is where he puts Bill Gates, Tony Blair, World Bank, and the WEF.

• The Crown — National Governments, Lobby Groups, Policy Agenda

• The Chamber — Local government, Civil Service, Secret Services
This is deeper government control; Five Eyes would likely sit here too.

• The Bench — Judiciary, law enforcement, lawyers
A thesis of his is that "culture is downstream from law", so placing the Bench lower in the flow of power shows that culture and law are being directed by factors such as ESG and the WEF, with law subsequently informing culture via the "mouth" (media).

• The Church — The Catholic Church
He doesn't go into detail, but I've pointed out the Vatican before. The short version is that the papacy is the throne of the Anti-Christ (per Nietzsche). The Pope's job is to capture the religious with false versions of Christ's teachings, re-directing those people back into the scheme of mass debt, slave morality, and "good works" which build the total state's designs.

• The Head — Funding Bodies, think tanks, elite universities
"Paid Shills of the regime"; academics generate theory/arguments to justify the regimes actions post hoc. This is then fed to the media as their talking points (sound familiar? This *just* happened with FBI–Aspen➞NBC➞Twitter).
He speaks of Foucault for instance. I've made this point myself: "Discipline & Punish" was an instruction manual for regime power that was used, for instance, in COVID policy. He didn't directly mention the "spectacle of the scaffold", but he specifically cites how Whoopi Goldberg's "mercy" granted by the ADL was a good example of Foucault logic. Scenes like that are designed to condition people to see who is in charge.

• The Mouth — Media, Arts and Culture, Social Media
It makes sense to see this at the bottom. Most "journalists" (read, "content creators") do not have a fucking clue; they just repeat regime propaganda. This is also where the useful idiots remain. They simply listen to the media and do not follow the media upstream to the sources of power.


He also points out some key things:
• "Power *wants* to display itself"
This is key because a lot of people keep looking for secret societies at work. I don't think it's necessary to look for Masonic symbols and numerology when the WEF, Chabad groups, and Larry Fink are saying exactly what they're doing. It's not "conspiracy theory" when they're outright saying that they want Marxism and world slavery. Parvini points out that they do it openly because it's how they write the script for their desired hierarchy; people wouldn't fall in line if they didn't know who to follow. That said, I don't think most people realize *why* they're falling in line, and they likely don't understand that totalitarianism is the result of their compliance.

• The left has been "utterly contained".
That is, the left is now "cheering on" multinational corporations simply because those corporations are feeding them their own shit.
Many have pointed this out: how the left went from opposing corporations to being their mascots.

• He mentions Neo-Marxism, but he thinks the bigger issue is Neo-Liberalism.
I've heard this argument before, where a lot of conservatives are saying that "[this is the end state of classical liberalism]", but I think that largely misses the point and falls into a rhetorical trap. Ep fell into that trap similarly, thinking that a city's politics simply develop towards the DNC because they see that certain things make sense for them. That's not quite the case and is in fact a Marxist rhetorical belief in the inevitability of Marxist "history" (progression towards "Utopia").

That is, we cannot ignore that there are special interests who are motivated to destroy the West. Controlling the direction of cities is simply a part of this, since controlling cities creates more revenue for those interests who can then launch larger attacks. In other words, cowardice and decay is not a natural outcome of cities; it is an implemented and managed direction.


Lastly, Parvini mentions a good detail that I've been thinking about in another way:
He says that people should really read Fink's yearly strategy reports.

This is crucial. The ideology of this totalitarian movement's key psychopaths who drive these changes needs to be fully understood.

I've read quite a bit about Fink and his behavior towards shareholders and board members, even bringing up examples of his behavior towards Exxon (e.g., last thread comment "Thu Oct 06 06:03:14" which itself connects back to other comments). The short version is that Fink outright threatens other CEOs to get their compliance by infiltrating their boards to vote against them, bribing board members to resign so that they can *be* replaced by his stooges, destroying businesses by incentivizing boards to take payouts, and a bunch of other maneuvers that go beyond even ESG's normal anticompetitive framework. I mean, it's not just businesses icing out non-ESG businesses (though that's a big part); Fink himself is threatening these CEOs.

All of this speaks of a psychopath, but Fink is worth examining much more closely.
Cherub Cow
Member
Wed Dec 21 06:58:48
The text of the 2023 Omnibus:
[Appropriations; Senate dot gov;
http://www...ov/imo/media/doc/JRQ121922.PDF
4155 pages of government spending that amounts to about $1.7 trillion — from about 10 million on the government's DIE office to about $45 billion more for Ukraine money-laundering. Should be a fun 2023!
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Dec 25 07:53:28
Musk has now disavowed ESG *and* the WEF.
He responded to someone with previously about 40k followers (now 86.9k) who posted a Musk–WEF connection back in February, which likely indicates that Musk was browsing his own name and "WEF" keywords for the opportunity.

This account, (@Spiro_Ghost), then posted follow-up questions:
"Thanks Glad To Hear
Could It Be Argued Your Companies Are Driving WEF Agendas?
Neuralink = Transhumanism
Tesla = Green Agenda
Starlink = World Wide Internet To Incorporate Billions of Un-Banked People Into Control Grid / Digital ID
Twitter = Payments / Cashless / Digital ID?"
http://twitter.com/Spiro_Ghost/status/1606731100285460484

People are hoping that Musk will respond.
The 4chan frogs have been asking Musk these questions since Musk first began his negotiations with Twitter, so Musk is likely aware of these questions.

My thinking is that Musk did not realize that he was being used as a facilitator for this strategy, fell victim to it, and is now trying to reverse course. Should be interesting to see if he has any response.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Dec 31 05:54:45
This is fine.
Nothing to see here.

The Ukraine money-laundering scheme — which had obvious connections to the ESG/DIE plan that I've pointed out repeatedly in this thread series — basically just announced publicly that they are, indeed, owned by the ESG/DIE totalitarians:

"President [Zelensky] discussed with the CEO of BlackRock[, Larry Fink,] the coordination of efforts to rebuild Ukraine"
http://www...ektorom-blackrock-koordi-80105
• "Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Larry Fink agreed to focus in the near term on coordinating the efforts of all potential investors and participants in the reconstruction of our country, channelling investment into the most relevant and impactful sectors of the Ukrainian economy,"
• Zelensky: "Specialists of [BlackRock] are already helping Ukraine to structure the fund for the reconstruction of our state."


To spell it out:
• Larry Fink, a Jewish Bolshevik, has been championing ESG/DIE using asset manager funds accumulated via BlackRock's anti-competitive practices. These practices are designed to collapse world economies while siphoning funds into totalitarian state structures which are themselves designed to take over following these collapses.
• Zelensky, another Jewish Bolshevik and an ESG/DIE puppet, was placed in charge of Ukraine by Jewish Bolshevik billionaire-oligarch/propagandist and Chabad-funder Ihor Kolomoyskyi; Zelensky's job as puppet was to enable this scheme — encouraging the West to bankroll this massive fraud, with the West's traitor oligarchs participating for their own payoffs.
• Ukraine conflict was manufactured as a proxy war to siphon additional funds into this strategy. Now that Ukraine has amassed the wealth of useful-idiot nations (Western nations run by traitorous oligarchs such as Biden, Trudeau, and many others mentioned above), BlackRock is stepping in to seize the money through "management".


In short, BlackRock, which manages the ESG/DIE anticompetitive scheme, placed a puppet in Ukraine, encouraged the proxy war, and is now swooping in to collect the bulk of the money that was laundered in the scheme. We have a direct and transparent connection between the Chabad groups, Ukraine, ESG/DIE, and the rising totalitarian state.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jan 02 07:45:04
This Twitter user tracks down FBI assets at right-wing protests, showing their false flags in action. In this thread-unroll, he shows several FBI agents in uniform and traces them to their appearances in the front lines of some of the most well known images of Charlottesville and January 6th.
[Mememar; November 2022]
http://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1594848454626668544.html
Thread for updates:
http://twitter.com/MememarGaddafi/status/1594848454626668544

This shows a few things:
• The FBI was not merely observing; these agents were in leadership roles, particularly in Patriot Front.
• The FBI being in these prominent images shows that there was an intention to control optics here; i.e., they wanted to have their images taken to be used for propaganda. Their images were used by Rolling Stone, NYT, and other regime-run media.
• Lincoln Project was an FBI-captured propaganda operation.


Much of this was known from the way that operations such as Patriot Front operated. The "Polos and khakis" look is a feature of Quantico training; it's how FBI agents and some U.S. military are typically guided to appear as "civilians" when working out of uniform. Patriot Front has been very typical for having standardized their appearance with these rules, which indicates that their leadership was controlled opposition trained by the FBI. The appearance standards may have been both a slip by the FBI (i.e., they are not aware of how obvious this appears to viewers) and/or an easier way for the FBI to identify their own assets during operations.

And as for optics, a good example of this FBI-operation strategy occurs in relation to Ray Epps. I listed many of the details of Epps' story here in September 2022:
http://cherubcow.substack.com/p/more-of-the-ray-epps-saga

NBC, which is FBI-owned regime media, released this recent article on Epps, repeating the regime propaganda that Epps was merely a Trump supporter mistakenly targeted by his own people:
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/-trump-protester-ray-epps-told-jan-6-committee-crazy-conspiracy-theori-rcna63615
This is consistent with the narrative spun by Bolsheviks such as Raskin, who said this exact narrative when Massie questioned the lack of investigation into Epps' FBI connections; Raskin said that people should leave Epps alone because he's just a poor Trump supporter (video in my Substack article above).

This typically leaves two major narratives with Epps:
1) The FBI-endorsed regime narrative — Epps was a legitimate Trump supporter who didn't do anything wrong and should be left alone; he had no contact or encouragement from the government.
2) Epps was acting as an FBI asset to effect the DNC–FBI plan (made in advance of January 6th) to propagandize the public with the narrative of "insurrection".


The first narrative has major holes in it.
• Firstly, the Bolshevik prosecution of regime enemies via January 6th propaganda has been immense. The DNC–FBI operation has initiated waves of arrests of January 6th protestors, severely charging even those who entered the Capitol grounds (and did nothing else) and questioning and charging hundreds of people with misdemeanors and yet holding them in jail for months in DNC-controlled gulags. Many of these malicious prosecutions are listed here:
[American Gulag]
http://americangulag.org/
With this being the case, it is highly out-of-character for the DNC to *not* be heavily invested in prosecuting Epps, who was a prominent figure on January 6th — unless, of course, they had a "special" reason not to do so.

• Secondly, very little of Epps' questioning by the regime has been released, with the House transcript having heavy redaction and appearing to show House members leading Epps into their own regime narratives:
[House dot Gov; January 6th Documents; Questioning of Epps, January 2022]
http://january6th.house.gov/sites/democrats.january6th.house.gov/files/20220121_Ray%20Epps.pdf
Of particular note is that Epps was asked about a text message wherein he told a family member that he helped "orchestrate" the events of January 6th. The House Committee was extremely light on follow-up questions here, accepting a narrative of Epps which did not make sense and did not fit the fact pattern of Epps *intending* to go into the Capitol and *encouraging* others to that effect. I.e., the House Committee drew *no* connection between the "orchestrate" text and Epps telling people to go *into* the Capitol. Epps claims that he simply left before anything happened, which is a total contradiction of his urging others to trespass.

• Thirdly, Nancy Pelosi's office organized a propaganda operation for the day of January 6th, which was used in the January 6th Bolshevik show trials. In the video, she pretends to talk tough against Trump and reveals that she has "been waiting for this — for trespassing on the Capitol grounds" and "We have to finish the proceedings or else they will have a complete victory".
[ABC News; October 14th, 2022]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzbSptfNJi4
As the ABC video mentions, this propaganda video was produced by Nancy's own child, Alexandra, for a state-propaganda video for HBO called "Pelosi in the House". Extended clips can be seen here as well:
[The Independent]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-TMZcXXPrM

You can see that Pelosi was canning the false narrative of "directed by the president" very deliberately, needing to seed that propaganda explicitly. She also hopes to push through the proceedings by only allowing the GOP to talk about Arizona fraud, [since that would be controlled opposition which allows the other fraudulent states to manufacture a DNC win.] She also floats the false narrative of feces in the Capitol, which I've pointed out before was itself an over-inflated and manufactured propaganda narrative of foot-prints:
http://i.imgur.com/HZRPrCD.png
And, more crucially, CNN released more footage of the HBO documentary, which includes Pelosi's scheme successfully being carried out via Arizona deliberations (about 5 minutes).
http://www.cnn.com/2022/10/13/politics/pelosi-jan-6-capitol-riot-video/index.html
Pelosi also floats the narrative that the proceedings must not be allowed to stop or "we will have totally failed". This language shows both that she was attempting to seed the narrative that the mob was delaying proceedings while also slipping her lack of control of language, indicating that she knows that that DNC's fraud scheme would be undermined if they could not finish their Arizona-only strategy.

That is, the DNC wanted and orchestrated the maneuver, Epps provoked it on the front lines, and the distraction was intended to fast-track proceedings to stop the legal presentation of fraud. If it were a bad thing for Epps to provoke these actions, he would be charged, but the DNC narrative was that this was Trump's fault, so they could not shift blame.

• Fourthly, Epps had several calls before and on January 6th from a number that the House could not identify and which was redacted from the record (p.37–38). When questioning began on this, Epps suddenly asks for a break from the video interview. After returning, Epps has additional council and tells the House that the call was to his brother, "to let him know how things were going and what I observed that night". The House does not push on this point at all.


Alternatively, supporting the narrative that Epps was an FBI asset was that he admitted in his testimony that..
• He joined the Oath Keepers because he recognized former law enforcement in their ranks and thought that was a good thing (i.e., between the lines, the Oath Keepers had FBI infiltration). Those infiltrators tried to encourage members to go to Portland and attack Antifa members, which Epps claims was too extreme (again, inconsistent with his "inside" statements; he also contradicts this later, pretending that they only wanted to "convert" Antifa, which is not "extreme", so he was lying here and was not called on it). This "wxtreme" action was later placed on Stewart Rhodes, who was charged with seditious conspiracy for January 6th (i.e., Epps is seeding FBI narratives here).
• He claims that he attended January 6th for his son's safety. He then says that it was for sightseeing (a narrative fed to him by House members). This, again, is inconsistent with his involvement, since, if that were indeed his objective, he would not have done any of the things that he did. He would have been low-key and out of the way. This is contradicted by him saying that he intentionally placed himself at the front on January 6th, left the White House early into Trump's speech, and abandoned his son to stick with a riotous mob (p.42,46). This is also contradicted by video wherein he was directing people from Trump's speech to the Capitol where their "problems are".
• He claims that he was trying to calm down "Baked Alaska" by finding common ground. This is false. "Baked Alaska" was one of the people who recorded Epps instigating to go "inside", precipitating a crowd calling Epps a fed. Epps seems to have been following Baked to instigate his group. Epps had been doing this in D.C. for months, including an appearance in November 2020 in a Baked Alaska video ( http://twitter.com/ShawnWitzemann/status/1495139454444519430 ). The "common ground" narrative does not make sense here; claiming that out-extreming someone is "common ground" is insane left-wing logic.


Interestingly, though, is that Epps claims that he thought that the rotunda would be open for visitors on January 6th since it was a week day. His claim on pages 27–28 is that he thought they could go "inside" because he thought it would be open. This, again, contradicts previous statements (i.e., how is that common ground?), but it's interesting because this narrative of a Capitol open to visitors was one floated by people who were trying to say that there can be no trespassing into a federal building. It's not true, of course, and fits an FBI disinformation pattern. So Epps was claiming that it was okay for them to go into the Capitol when it was illegal to do on the day. He claims that this was his attempt to deescalate a riotous group.

Schiff, of all people, calls him on this, asking how it makes sense that Epps just said that it would be legal to go inside when Epps said that he could get arrested for suggesting that they go inside. However, Schiff then reveals his hand by giving Epps an out which is ludicrous, feeding Epps the narrative that Epps said that it was in the "heat of the moment" and searching for "common ground" that he suggested that he might get arrested — as separate from "going inside" getting him arrested. When pushed, he simply says that the phrase "just popped out" (p31).

This is not consistent. Epps just claimed that he wanted them to peacefully (i.e., lawfully) enter the rotunda, but in the same breath claims that it could get him arrested.. to build rapport?
What is consistent is that — were he an FBI asset and/or provocateur — it would make perfect sense for him to identify a riotous group and feed them false information about the Capitol, encouraging them to go inside on January 6th, recognizing that it was indeed illegal but necessary. It is also consistent that he had previously identified this riotous group in his previous visits to the area, even directly interacting with Baked Alaska in the past while sharing a street corner with Baked for *hours*. Epps thus lied about not knowing this group before January 2021.

Over the next few pages of questioning, they try to feed and reinforce Epps with the narrative that Epps truly thought that the rotunda would be open. Kinzinger, in particular, pushes this point and even emphasizes it for the record (p35). They are carefully grooming the narrative for Epps.

• On page 43–44, Epps is questioning about his directing the crowd to the Capitol during the beginning of and before Trump's speech and again contradicts himself. He says that it was "common knowledge" and yet he thought it was necessary to direct people. When asked why, he reveals it's because he wanted more people to be there to voice their concerns (sounds very much like he's disguising his objectives here).

• When asked why he left his son, he has no answer, but subsequently seeds the possibility that it was instinctual to be at the front due to his pre-'80s Marine Corps history (p.46).

• Important section: page 47, they identify the group that went there early and ask about their motives.
Epps says, "they looked like they were in uniform, kind of a khaki-looking uniform with an orange hat ... they've got something else going on that's not a part of this."

Thing is, those are the Proud Boys, seen here in a NYT article:
http://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2021/01/08/capitol-ticktock/assets/images/east_side-720_x2.jpg
via https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/12/us/capitol-mob-timeline.html
..and they were not present at the barricades where Epps was:
http://odysee.com/Epps-Storming-Barricades:f
The Proud Boys were farther south of Epps on a different walkway.

I.e., Epps is again trying to deflect blame to seed an FBI narrative, and his story has holes in it.

Epps then contradicts himself again (p48):
"my mindset changed when I saw the barricades. I knew we weren't going in. I mean, it just wasn't going to happen. It's not in my DNC to break the law."

He claims that when he saw the barricades, he changed his mind about going in. Meanwhile, here is a video of him *at* the barricades saying to the initial breachers — who, again, were not wearing orange hats — "When we go in, leave this here."
(broken to avoid a thread stretch)
http://odysee.com/@RevolverArchiveSaves:e/Ray-Epps---
Crime-Scene-Video-%28First-Barricade-Storm%29---When-We-
Go-In-1%282%29---Copy:e?r=HJnygNeZD5h4XTsQSgj1NjU6iog7QvCs&t=30

He claims to not remember saying that, and he doesn't know how anyone had footage of it (weird thing to say, right?). This is him *again* pretending that he just sort of said something without being conscious of it. It is a lie.

But there may be a sliver of truth to his statements. That is, he knows the group is going in, but *he* is going to insulate himself from illegal action, which, again, is consistent with an FBI asset.

At this point, they question him a little more, but he defaults to not recalling. Kinzinger then takes the opportunity to float the narrative that Trump supporters were suspicious of Antifa actors in the crowd, which is potentially a DNC deception to draw away from FBI involvement.

• 51–52, he discusses his supposed deescalation of a primary actor. I discussed this before; this person corroborated the story, but that person also faced charges, so there is an argument for unreliable or coerced testimony there. The consistent variable so far is that Epps has not been seen deescalating, and this one potential deescalation moment occurred without audio between Epps and an unreliable witness. Thus, it is far more likely that Epps was not deescalating but was continuing his strategy of provocation.

• p.57, they show a video and text message exchange that's heavily redacted, but I cannot find an external source. They have footage of Epps "deescalating", but I see no video of it anywhere. Apparently, Epps *continued* up the Capitol pathway after the video of the gates being pulled down. This, *after* he claimed that he would not go farther. And! He only turned back after getting exposed to gas. **This did not happen until much later**.

That is, Epps, even after saying that he stopped at the barriers and "knew" they could go no further, provoked people to go "inside", continued with this agitated group that he had been following for months, and only turned back when exposed to CS gas. He also said that he went "in" and looked around (p58), and his clarification when asked is "into the platform" "before you go into the building". **That is two football fields away from the barricades.**

• p.60, This is where Epps texts with his nephew, "I was in front with a few others. I also orchestrated it." That is, after going two football fields past the barriers with an agitated mob to the entrance of the Capitol, at 2:12 PM, as the Capitol is breached, Epps says that he orchestrated the NorthWest entrance breach.

In the following pages, they ask him about "orchestrate", and the best he can offer is that he had an odd relationship with his nephew and didn't know what he was taking credit for.. which.. again.. makes no sense given that he *knew* about the barricades falling, went to the Capitol Building proper, and was at the CS gas releases. His narrative that nothing bad happened until after he left is a straight fucking *lie*.

• p.64, Epps is then *fed* the narrative that what he "meant" was that he "orchestrated" the super-chill positive energy.
This is, again, absurd, since he already admitted to be present at multiple conflicts which included violence against police and CS gas releases. He cannot pretend that he only saw a benevolent aspect of this; he was ground-zero for conflict — not "deescalation", as he's claiming and as the House is feeding him. The new version that he explains as a hindsight explanation is "I helped get people there" (p.65), but, again, those people he got there were an agitated mob led to the very doors of the Capitol.

Throughout these last pages, he also points out that violence delegitimizes a protest. Yup. I almost wonder if this is an admission of intent.

• p.64, the Committee tries to blame Trump for playing a part in instigating Epps directly, which is especially shaky for Epps since Epps was directing people to the Capitol before Trump started speaking, and Epps left Trump's speech during the opening remarks.

• They then go through Epps' call logs again. This seems like a complete list, but this refers back to the supposition that the break that Epps took with his lawyer was indeed to find accurate information rather than cover up a special contact. They also direct any other texts and calls to "spam" related to his business' number being listed.

• p.79, this is Epps' talk about getting his name removed from the FBI's Most Wanted. I covered this briefly in the above Substack. The short version is that he called the FBI Tip Line in a 27-minute call on January 8h. I presumed in the Substack article that this was likely due to a long on-hold time; Epps' testimony confirms this. But, Epps preemptively claims to have not remembered anything they asked him, and he's not at all pushed on this.

• p.81–83, Epps has an in-person meeting with the FBI using his new attorney on March 3rd, 2021.

• p.88, Epps talks about how they're collecting info on people who called him an informant; sounds like he'll take legal action.

• p.90–91, Epps talks about why he hasn't gone public to explain himself. He claims that it's on the advice of council to not talk about it. This seems like a bad move.

• p.93, They place blame for the Epps narrative directly on Trump, Massie, and Revolver


-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=

In short, these are the DNC–FBI narratives we'll be hearing:
• "[Trump supporters wrongly believed that Antifa were present and instigating, when it was actually the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers!]"
• "[Epps multiple times claimed not to be working for the government so he must not have been!]"
• "[Epps repeatedly attempted to deescalate! He was nothing but kind!]"
• "[Trump, Massie, Gaetz, Greene, Cruz, and Revolver are to blame for besmirching this poor man!]"
• "[Trump supporters are being cruel to one of their own! This is what happens to a good man in the GOP! The only good GOP voter is one who converts to the DNC!]"


What you will not hear from the DNC:
• Epps escalated multiple times, including at the very barriers of the Capitol. The only times he "deescalated" are in videos and conversations not released to the public.
• Epps stuck with a particularly rowdy group, escalating them, in particular, multiple times over the course of *months*.
• Epps lied and self-contradicted multiple times in his interview.
• The Committee interviewing Epps fed him narratives to explain away inconvenient statements, and they did not push him on his obvious errors.
• Epps went to the very doors of the Capitol, only leaving after they had been breached shortly after 2 PM.
• The Committee was weirdly kind to Epps and fully trusted him, which is highly uncharacteristic given other January 6th prosecutions for far lesser offenses. This is in part explained by the informal meeting, but there were no formal follow-ups, likely because this would be radioactive to the DNC's "blame Trump 100%" narrative, since Epps' testimony reveals an element of rioters who did not care what Trump had to say and were going to take direct action independent of Trump's words.


This is a weird one.
I said before, in September, that this was an impending propaganda operation — that the DNC was sitting on this transcript to reel in any GOP figures that would take the bait and then burn these figures by releasing the full details. Here the DNC is, doing it just before another anniversary of the Ashli Babbit murder. Their leverage is a pathos argument about Epps being attacked by unhinged Trump supporters and the unexamined assumption that Epps would not lie to protect himself.

In reality, between-the-lines, it appears that Epps may have been partially managed and ultimately was trying to manipulate this particularly volatile group into taking direct action. That is, he may not have had a direct FBI manager, but his association with FBI-infiltrated groups may have primed him for this kind of logic. This leaves him standing alone with the bag, likely lying about "deescalation" in order to avoid prosecution.

On the one hand, this makes sense, since the scenario of a regular person wanting to avoid January 6th prosecution is sensible, since January 6th protestors have been very harshly treated — even for misdemeanor offenses. In this narrative, Epps lawyered up and spun the story to make himself look almost heroic.

That said, Epps' lies and distortions are pretty transparent. At the very least, he *constantly* and *publicly* misspoke his intentions, making hilariously backward errors which unintentionally *instigated* when he was trying to "deescalate" (e.g., he *repeatedly* said, "Go inside," **even at the very police-held barriers**). That would be a *high* degree of stupidity and an incredibly misguided way to earn trust. More likely, again, those were not mistakes but intentional, and he's changing the meaning to avoid prosecution.

That said, there are still missing pieces which the DNC could weaponize if they actually fit the DNC's narrative:
The transcript reveals videos and images which I could not locate.
• One is apparently a static image of Epps between the barriers and the Capitol Building doors,
• another is a video of Epps supposedly being recorded audibly deescalating, and
• the last is an extended recording with Baked Alaska which corroborates Epps "deescalating" before he was called a fed for escalation rhetoric.

The absence of these items will not stop the DNC from using the narratives listed above. Still, this leaves two options:
1) bury those videos because they do not support the narrative, or
2) delay use of those videos/images until January 6th, 2023, at which point they can better sell the "deescalation" narrative.

At any rate, the timing of this testimony was clearly designed for propaganda. They sat on this for an entire year.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jan 02 22:15:07
Big yikes.
For those somehow still doubting the connections between ESG/DIE totalitarianism and its Marxist undercurrents, here's this:

"Towards the Transformative Role of Global Citizenship Education Experiences in Higher Education: Crossing Students’ and Teachers’ Views"
[SagePub / Sage Journals; June 2022]
http://jou...full/10.1177/15413446221103190
• "Global citizenship education (GCE) aims to promote democracy and social justice, and a sense of global belonging, awareness, and action (Bourn, 2015). Over the last 60 years, GCE evolved from informative toward more transformative perspectives. Freire (1972, 1999) was decisive in this shift, proposing notions such as “conscientization,” critical social justice, or solidarity. Social and personal transformation became expected “outcomes” in policies and formal and non-formal practices."
• "The concern with a global outlook in education has been debated for decades (Bourn, 2015), yet GCE gained more visibility since the recent endorsement by UNESCO (2015). Approaches and pedagogies of GCE are diverse, depending on the education providers (e.g., schools, civil society organizations), and on the traditions to which GCE is related locally (e.g., civic education, development education)."


If you missed it from above: this is an article promoting "Global Citizenship Education" and directly citing UNESCO adoption and tracing its roots directly back to Marxist-Malthusian Paula Freire, whose works themselves directly inspired/created Social-Emotional Learning (SEL), another Marxist indoctrination device. The overarching goal is to create "global citizens" who are malleable to Marxist causes such as "openness", "sustainability", "solidarity", and "social justice" — all designed to weaken empires so that they can be conquered by anti-liberty totalitarian imperatives.

Many of these connections have been well established by people paying attention, such as "sustainability" coming directly from Marxist-Malthusian Herbert Marcuse, so what's interesting here is to see a globalist-sponsored academic work so directly putting Freire-Marxism in its opening lines as a go-to inspiration.

This also adds to a list of Marxist indoctrination methods in the West:
• Postmodernism as a vehicle for Marxist delivery — getting Humanities students who lack STEM perspective to adopt moral relativism, question foundations, and want to break any unifying frameworks that defy a global order.
• Critical Race Theory (CRT) — Using racialist strategies to enforce slave morality, causing nations to artificially promote the incompetent into positions of power and causing division within nations which makes them vulnerable to outside rule.
• Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) — making weak-willed children who defer to their ideological betters and are over-committed to being pliable and accommodating to external rule.
• Global Citizenship Education (GCE) — The global version of SEL, adopted by ESG nations while BRICS teaches its own citizens that they are meant to rule the West.


In short, GCE is part of the Marxist education package, with the simple message being that this is meant to demoralize and enslave the West under Marxist totalitarianism.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 03 05:05:25
Kristalina Georgieva of the IMF appeared on CBS to run interference for the ESG/DIE strategy's 2023 effects.

We have known for months now that the larger economic effects of the totalitarian strategy would take place in Q1–Q3 of 2023, and Georgieva is now confirming that"
"Transcript: Kristalina Georgieva on "Face the Nation," Jan. 1, 2023"
[CBS News; December 30th, 2022]
http://www...-nation-transcript-01-01-2023/

Some talking points are based on CCP propaganda, such as the economic effects of COVID in China potentially causing a slow down there, which would disrupt supply chains in the West. This is based on the assumption that video released by China showing their COVID issues is accurate rather than staged for effect.

Georgieva also works directly from the ESG/DIE playbook:
• "Yes, the way we have operated created excessive dependency in global chains. We were too focused on costs, how can we make products cheaper. And COVID and then the senseless war Russia started against Ukraine has shown that this is not enough."

Most people would overlook what she said here, but there are a few things:

1) They knew, in advance, that they were creating "excessive dependency in global chains". I've pointed this out before with the expansion of international anti-competitive dimensions of ESG/DIE in previous threads, such as my talk of New Zealand managing suicidal trade pacts in the Pacific theater. These pacts are not based on good deals — they are designed to collapse Western nations through "climate justice" by siphoning money from the West into developing nations. Georgieva even mentions this facet: "Who benefited the most? Emerging markets and developing economies"

2) "We were too focused on costs, how can we make products cheaper."
This was, again, intentional. Their focus on costs was on the store-front side, meaning that they intentionally squeezed the supply chain into self-destruction and then tried to get corporations to soak up those losses by reducing their profit margins. This was part of the Robert Reich propaganda of "record corporate profits" — a lie that ignored the corporate sabotage of ESG/DIE.

3) Her comment on COVID and Russia/Ukraine is far too predictable here, since this is part of their pretense that the Ukraine proxy war was not *designed* to manage these effects.

These things make her next line funny:
• "We have to think of the security of supplies and that means diversify the sources of products that make the economy function well, lifting up the level of cost."

I've said before, they cause problems with ESG/DIE and then sell ESG/DIE as the solution. This plan of "diversifying" is designed to force international market dependence, forcing all nations to be slaves of other nations. It is the cause of these issues, and she is selling this as a solution. And, again, she is not talking about market independence by individual nations; she is talking about establishing WEF hubs, whose mission is to deliver on supply chain roles as dedicated arms of the scheme.

• "And this is what we are arguing for, don't go in a direction in which this separation would make everybody poorer and the world less secure."
• "So you're telling Beijing and Washington, figure it out. You can't be in conflict."

And here's the China–U.S. control merger. She is advocating for further dependence on China's supply chains in order to soften the economic draw-down that they themselves caused by using ESG/DIE, which placed direct economic dependence on China's belt-and-road initiative.

• "this is going to be a tough year, tougher than the year we leave behind. Why? Because the three big economies, U.S., E.U., China, are all slowing down simultaneously. The US is most resilient. The U.S. may avoid recession. We see the labor market remaining quite strong. This is, however, mixed blessing because if the labor market is very strong, the Fed may have to keep interest rates tighter for- for longer to bring inflation down."

I again remind that the simultaneous slow-down is due to ESG/DIE being used simultaneously across world nations to cause these slowdowns. Notice, also, that they will place greater weight on the Fed's debt slavery, using interest rates to siphon more wealth from the U.S. into this scheme. This will disguise the U.S. collapse while causing U.S. citizens to have less spending power.

They then discuss which 3rd world nations are going to be most affected and therefore need the most climate justice:
• "So far the countries that are in that distress are not systemically significant to trigger a debt crisis. Let's just look at the map, which are these countries? Chad, Ethiopia, Zambia, Ghana, Lebanon, Surinam, Sri Lanka, very important for their people that we find the resolution to the debt problem, but the risk of contagion is not as high."

If you didn't notice the red flags in that list by recognizing them from my previous lists, let's look at their ESG scores (E, S, G):
— Chad (97.8, 44.1, 24.3)
— Ethiopia (95.8, 53.1, 37.8)
— Zambia (98.9, 50.6, 42.5)
— Ghana (99.1, 70.0, 61.7)
— Lebanon (99.7, 84.9, 52.1)
— Surinam (99.9, 83.3, 55.3)
— Sri Lanka (99.5, 88.3, 46.0)

Notice the pattern?
High E-Indexes, low G-Indexes.
I mentioned in July (thread 3 comment "Sun Jul 10 09:31:00") that nations with high E-Indexes but low G-Indexes were most at risk of collapsing. This is because they have high Environmental compliance (low energy independence, low carbon) but have not been infiltrated by Governance, meaning that the anti-competitive "too big to fail" logic has not protected them from their inevitable economic collapses under ESG/DIE pressures. This is the pretext that ESG/DIE is using to target these nations for compliance: these nations will be plagued with famine and trade wars until they join the scheme. Again: ESG/DIE causes the issue and sells the solution. It is a protection racket. They plunged these nations into debt and will "solve" this debt through Governance slavery. It's the Nietzschean slavery-via-debt trap used in the Christ figure: the solution to debt is further debt. As a direct effect on individual citizens, this means that nearly every Western citizen will be paying to prop up systems meant to destroy them.

Further, still, is that the African nations and Sri Lanka of that list are all Chinese control imperatives for the belt-and-road initiative. So we see another parallel at work: nations being used as slave labor for rare earth mining and hub status are being granted high E-Indexes to show that they are exploitable and desired for their resources and/or strategic value in WWIII. That is, it's not just about low carbon, it's about resource economics, which are to be backed by CBDCs in the Marxist "sustainability" system (i.e., currency based on ESG/DIE compliance).

And here is more of the Ukraine proxy war's intended benefits:
• "The [IMF] is a source of resilience and I am- I am very pleased that many of our members are coming to us. Just since the war started we got 16 countries coming for programs to the IMF, $90 billion in support for these countries."

See? These nations are being captured by the banks due to Ukraine money laundering.



In short, the IMF just confirmed our 2023 prospects:
• More money-laundering through Ukraine, forcing currency crises and forcing G-Index vulnerable nations to join the ESG/DIE anti-competitive scheme, collapse, or officially join BRICS.
• More reliance on China and its belt-and-road initiative as a pretext for avoiding market instability.
• Increased interest rates to erode currency value and buying power in the West — siphoned away to force other nations into the totalitarian scheme.

This is designed to precipitate the largest depression since the Great Depression, precipitating the desired WWIII scenario, though this is intended to stretch into 2030, so 2023 is merely an extension of this strategy.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 03 08:13:27
This video from 1996, "The Money Masters", is incredibly pertinent to the above strategy as it unfolds:
http://rumble.com/v1dl8z3-the-money-masters-1996.html

Lots of parallels to discuss, though I'll just mention a few for now:
• 2:28:00 — The Federal Reserve was used to siphon money from the U.S. into pre-WWII Nazi Germany, which had been infiltrated by the international Bolshevik scheme (a parallel to current Ukraine).

• It also slightly redeems Woodrow Wilson, who at least realized after his presidency that he had given over the nation to a totalitarian strategy by creating the Federal Reserve. That's a little late to develop a conscience, of course, but I didn't think he ever had one.

• It also goes over early U.S. attempts to get out of the international banker scheme, Lincoln's attempt to stop the internationalists from dividing the U.S. to effect greater control (another strategy of current Bolsheviks such as Michael Malice who are trying to divide the U.S. via balkanization), Jekyll Island, Fort Knox as a deception for the Fed's private investors to own all U.S. gold,

It even points out that communism and socialism are simply tools of oligarchs, which has been a persistent theme of this thread series.

• 2:45:00 — The feudalism objective is still there, as is their scheme of bribing politicians and controlling all opposition and the use of war to control debt.

It goes without saying that ESG/DIE is just the latest variation of their totalitarian strategy.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jan 09 20:22:04
A comment correctly points out, "This says all you need to know about what’s happening in Brazil.":

[Barack Obama, Official Twitter; January 9th, 2023]
http://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/1612611495560417280
"The entire world has a stake in the success of Brazil’s democracy. Together, we must reject any effort to overturn or disrupt the will of the Brazilian people and affirm the peaceful transfer of power as a cornerstone of democracy."


Of course, I'm not taking "all" too seriously, since there's a higher level of detail here, but the meaning behind this user's metaphor is correct since Obama is a total-state oligarch whose messaging is 100% on-brand for the Marxist totalitarian scheme; if it's important to Obama, it's important to the totalitarian scheme.

And Obama admitted a few key things here:
• Brazil is indeed important to the world-totalitarian strategy that Obama supports. This is true via Brazil's position in BRICS, which would need to be controlled by the totalitarian scheme at the executive level in order to infiltrate and control more completely the region. Perks of regional control by BRICS include forcing mass migration to the U.S., further infiltrating local legislation with ESG/DIE frameworks, flooding fentanyl into the U.S. to exacerbate the drug crisis (drugs as mental degradation of the U.S.), and controlling regional trade to force nations into the Belt-and-Road resource monopoly.
• Bolsonaro was more or less against the BRICS totalitarian scheme, but Lula fits the bill and is now in a position to destabilize the region on behalf of the totalitarian scheme. This instability will "have to be" (™Total State) heavily subsidized by the West, which will use Brazilian mismanagement as an excuse to launder money through South America under the "Global South" (™Total State) talking point.
• The totalitarian oligarchs feel entitled to crush populist movements in any nation. This almost goes without saying, but this is further framing of the total state's belief that no nation should be left out of the anti-competitive scheme. No nation is to be left with any sovereignty, even if that means bringing about even more fraudulent national elections.


I also did a short translation:
• "The entire world has a stake"
UN/WEF "stakeholder capitalism"
• "Brazil’s democracy"
Total-state control via Marxist oligarchy
• "the will of the Brazilian people"
The will of the total-state oligarchs
• "affirm the peaceful transfer of power"
Crush dissent


And this is all covered under the Celebration Parallax. Useful idiots would look at Obama's statement as "[that's not what he means]" and later "[yeah, he means that, but that's something we need to do; we need to be global citizens]" — completely insulating themselves from the world slavery that is intended for them by weakly declaring that their slavery is necessary for "climate justice".
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jan 09 23:15:56
And here is AOC speaking more Marxist language, being part of the same strategy as Obama:


"Nearly 2 years to the day the US Capitol was attacked by fascists, we see fascist movements abroad attempt to do the same in Brazil.
We must stand in solidarity with @LulaOficial’s democratically elected government. [Brazil Flag]
The US must cease granting refuge to Bolsonaro in Florida."
[@AOC; January 8th, 2023]
http://twitter.com/AOC/status/1612211900326215681


"Attacked by fascists" is the incendiary language of the mouth-breathing useful idiots, and AOC is adopting it openly to reignite the support of the constituents that she continues to betray by caving to Marxist oligarchs to become one herself. In reality, the U.S. Capitol was not "attacked by fascists", with the best service to that narrative coming in the form of context-free images that show some random Neo-Nazis present at the protest (i.e., guilt by association logic). That is, AOC is disingenuously casting that small group onto the whole of the protest, which is the same propaganda tactic that the DNC overtly stated that they would adopt in order to polarize voters to squeeze a few more votes from extremists.

The rhetoric of "stand in solidarity with" also comes directly from Marxism's use of slave morality. This is one of Marxism's most obvious proclamations and now is used openly, showing that captured institutions need not be afraid of their totalitarian scheme being called for what it is. "Solidarity" feeds directly into the Marx idea of collectivists standing against individualism in praxis/practice — a design used to ensnare resentful nihilists into a movement which ultimately enslaves them after using their political power against them. This was subsequently adopted by Herbert Marcuse of the Frankfurt School, whose works became the bedrock of Marxist doctrine within the United Nations and the World Economic Forum (WEF) — the same doctrine adopted into the governance formulas of ESG/DIE.

And more shortly, AOC's support of Bolsonaro is more support of the BRICS totalitarian infiltration of the "Global South" (™Total State), with AOC actively propagandizing on behalf of the totalitarian scheme. She is openly a traitor of the United States, as is Obama and a near entirety of the DNC. There is little daylight between herself and the totalitarians, with the only separation being that she is a dime-a-dozen useful idiot of this scheme rather than an Inner Party Marxist. As such, she is designed to state the same exact Party propaganda but by using more "common" language to penetrate lower-IQ and lower-information voting blocs. This popularity with low-IQ and low-information voters also means that she is most vulnerable to the designs of the Machiavellian Inner Party, who would happily sacrifice her life if it means gaining a few outrage votes and causing further political violence by paid Marxist movements.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 10 01:50:27
The World Economic Forum has its annual meeting in Davos next week (16–19 January, 2023) where they'll swap ideas on how best to genocide their own people.

This is their 2023 programme:
[World Economic Forum dot org; Annual Meeting Overview]
http://www...ng-2023/about/meeting-overview

They mirror talking points discussed above by their IMF assets and will include a guest list of the usual suspects, including, of course, Larry Fink of BlackRock. Larry Fink is on the WEF Board of Trustees — which the WEF describes as "exceptional individuals who act as guardians of its mission and values, and oversee the Forum’s work in promoting true global citizenship."

In case anyone missed it, Larry Fink, one of the largest asset managers in the world who is probably the single largest working champion of ESG/DIE totalitarianism under the A.I. Panopticon of ALADDIN, is being held in the WEF's highest esteem as a global Marxist–totalitarian acolyte. Charles III must be happy to see such minions toppling the world for the banking elite.

An early guest list circulated among the press and was "leaked" to indy journalists at "The Dossier" (I say, "leaked", in quotation marks because this list is typically published openly by the WEF as the event nears and participants confirm publicly):
http://dossier.substack.com/p/exclusive-the-dossier-acquires-confidential?utm_source=twitter&sd=pf

The list includes Belt-and-Road nations, ESG/DIE nations with high governance indexes, BRICS infiltrators, WEF CEOs, complicit oligarchs, and regime propagandists.

Here's a selection:
• Vera Daves de Sousa, Minister of Finance, Angola {Belt-and-Road; oil, diamonds, coffee, fishing, hydrocarbons}
• Australian University tech professors {owned academics}
• Azerbaijan President, Minister of Economy, and others {Belt-and-Road; oil}
• Carlos Nobre of Brazil {climate alarmist / climate propagandist}
• Kim Hallwood of HSBC Bank Canada, Head of Corporate Sustainability {Canada's ESG/DIE money}
• Many European Commission acolytes {European Marxism}
• Pekka Lundmark, Nokia CEO {Communications ownership}
• François Villeroy de Galhau, Governor of the Central Bank of France
• Sasha Vakulina of Euronews {Regime propaganda}
• Christian Sewing, CEO of Deutsche Bank
• Roland Busch, CEO OF Siemens
• Shrikant Vaidya, Chairman of Indian Oil
• Dinesh Kumar Khara, Chairman of the State Bank of India
• Lots of United Nations, WHO, and world-government figures
• Francesco Ceccato, CEO of Barclays Bank
• Amir Yaron, Governor of the Central Bank of Israel
• Sultan Bin Khaled, CEO of Saudi Industrial Development Fund
• Colin Bell, CEO of HSBC
• Viswas Raghavan, CEO of JPMorgan
• Andy Jassy, CEO of Amazon
• Jane Fraser, CEO of Citi Bank
• CNBC and CNN propagandists
• Christian Meissner, CEO of Credit Suisse
• David Solomon, CEO of Goldman Sachs
• James Gordon, CEO of Morgan Stanley
• Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer
• Douglas Peterson, CEO of S&P Global


We see near total representation of the banking groups that created ESG/DIE, who collapsed economies in 2008, and who are driving the West to its next cataclysm. This banker presence is significant because the obvious counter to the WEF has long been that it is soft policy without an implementation apparatus, but the presence of these ESG/DIE bankers *again* shows that these are all strategies with action arms.

That is, the WEF gives its progress reports and strategizes in "soft" policy, but bankers, politicians, and NGOs — all present — then "independently" set the same exact policy in hard form via ESG/DIE legislation and governance initiatives. They are all on the same page but simply apply the same strategy to their respective markets.

I have seen speculation that this year's focus will be on "Global Citizenship Education" (E.g., James Lindsay), and, as a parallel or extension of that I think their main focus will be on shifting assets to cover up 2023's projected losses while simultaneously improving their Social Indexes as an indicator of improved receptivity to propaganda. A big issue they're facing, especially after their loss of the Twitter propaganda apparatus, is that they have not successfully pushed Social-Indexes in major Western nations above about the 70–80 zone. World Economics recently re-ranked all nations, but the social numbers seem inflated at present.

For example, the U.S. is currently at an S-Index of 95.9 ( https://worldeconomics.com/Indicator-Data/ESG/Social.aspx ), which is up from last year's 77.7 (see thread 3 comment "Thu Jul 21 06:03:07"). What this essentially represents is how susceptible the voting population has become to ESG propaganda. Or, in other words, how much the media can be honest with people without the people disliking that this is all a totalitarian scheme (an end state in the Zeitgeist might be, "[Sure, it's totalitarianism, but that's a good thing!]"). This is because the S-Index includes not just markers such as "life expectancy" but Marxist indoctrination programs (education) and the population's willing adoption of DIE. So, if these numbers are correct, this would mean that the U.S. voting population is currently totally owned by Marxism and totally indoctrinated into Marxist strategies.

More simply, they know which markets are going to collapse this year (discussed above in the IMF update, comment "Tue Jan 03 05:05:25"), and their goal is to penetrate those markets with governance and/or prepare propaganda packages to convince people that those markets only failed because they weren't part of the protection racket. If the updated S-Indexes are correct, then this means that they may well start talking about ESG in mass media as "a good thing", allowing useful idiots such as tw to start defending ESG with regime talking points rather than the useful idiots simply not knowing anything about it and assuming that their ignorance means "conspiracy theory".

The adjoining E-Indexes have fallen with this S-Index rise, which may indicate that climate change propaganda will be a central talking point of 2023 (note that this suggests that these indexes are themselves manipulated for effect). They can pair this E-Index manipulation with the increased S-Indexes to get people to sign away their rights on behalf of "climate justice".

Even more simply:
• Propaganda has succeeded (S-Index), so they have highly susceptible Western populations.
• E-Indexes have been artificially dropped in "bad" nations to justify aid to high E-Index nations, so they can suggest more "climate justice" propaganda to justify the worsening economic conditions that ESG caused, boosting their G-Indexes across all nations.
• The WEF will discuss propaganda-software updates such as these, and the banking and government acolytes will apply the changes.

The big question, then, is whether they will wait until Q3 to do controlled market collapses. To again quote the IMF, initial collapses will likely happen in "Chad, Ethiopia, Zambia, Ghana, Lebanon, Surinam, Sri Lanka". Their successes in controlling these market collapses will then be scaled to larger nations.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 10 07:17:30
Oh, another name I should have highlighted in the WEF guest list:
Thomas J. Jordan of Swiss National Bank (SNB)

On the subject of asset managers moving around losses to disguise the impending and intentional collapse, SNB lost $143 billion in 2022, but that loss will be soaked up by the market — not by SNB.

"Central Bank’s $143 Billion Record Loss Costs Swiss Government Usual Payout
FX holdings drive losses five times the previous record
Payment to government skipped only second time in 116 years"
[Bloomberg; January 9th, 2023]
http://www...loss?leadSource=uverify%20wall

This monetary enslavement cannot be understated. This intentional loss by an ESG/DIE asset manager is placed directly on citizens, since the "too big to fail" logic which protects asset managers in this scheme means that they face no symmetric burden for unforced errors. Their errors instead fall to higher interest rates (which are debt slavery) and poor governmental policy which erodes citizen wealth in favor of centralized authority.

On the plus side, Thomas J. Jordan likely does not need to fly his private jet to Davos to tell his WEF friends about this $143 billion loss, since he's probably within driving distance, and the WEF expects these sorts of losses anyways. Intentionally collapsing world economies to consolidate wealth is a very prestigious line of work.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jan 10 09:55:51
This article is a bit old news for those who read this thread series, but it is pretty good summary on the DIE infestation in US higher education.

How DEI Is Supplanting Truth as the Mission of American Universities

http://www.thefp.com/p/how-dei-is-supplanting-truth-as-the
Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Jan 12 05:04:30
Nice article!
Some selections..

• "For the first time in his 40 years at UCLA, Klein told me he had to submit a statement on equity, diversity, and inclusion. UCLA had adopted this as a promotion requirement in 2019, and now demands that all faculty members express how they will advance these principles in their work, and how their mentoring and advising helps those “from underrepresented and underserved populations.”"

This is a pretty transparent Marxist allegiance play. How are you advancing the Party, comrade? Do you not want to be a Party Commissar?

• "several deans at Mount Sinai’s Icahn School of Medicine declared: “There is no priority in medical education that is more important than addressing and eliminating racism and bias.”"

I would think it far more important for a School of Medicine to prioritize excellence in medicine.

• "White Coats For Black Lives, a medical student organization that calls for the dismantling of prisons, police, capitalism, and patent law, successfully petitioned medical schools around the country to adopt similar plans,"

So weird that Marxists would benefit from DIE. I wonder why there's overlap there, lol. ;D

• "the University of Houston–Downtown sought an instructor in Early Modern British Literature, including Shakespeare, with a preferred specialization in “critical race studies.”"

This is because the past must be re-interpreted by Marxists in order to undermine it. They insist that if one looks to Shakespeare, they must do so in order to kill a Western author.

• "These imperatives often come from the top. In May, the Board of Governors for California Community Colleges (CCC), the largest system of higher education in the country, decreed that every employee—faculty, staff, and administrators—must be evaluated for their “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” competencies."

Big fucking yikes.

• "at Mount Sinai’s Icahn School of Medicine. When describing their work, the program’s creators asserted that it’s important to accept that “if we are White, we are a big part of the problem. We are part of the reason that structural racism imprisons and oppresses people of color every day, everywhere they go, and no matter what they do.”"

Oh good job, DIE activists. This couldn't possibly be the narrative of genocidal maniacs.

• "“We unconditionally accept that what they are describing really happened and needs to be explored, addressed, and resolved.”"

More slave morality. This gets people to further accept solipsist delusions by rejecting cause and consequence. It gets people to accept the absurd interpretations of DIE cultists instead of asking if they actually have greater evidence than what's best left to a psychiatrist's diagnostic notes.

• "To get a grant, scientists must describe how equity and inclusion are “an intrinsic element to advancing scientific excellence in the research project.”"

Here we go! Lysenkoism Round 2 is poppin'!

• "Finalists then were asked to describe their DEI efforts during their interviews. The initiative yielded eyebrow-raising results: The initial applicant pool was 53.7 percent white and 13.2 percent Hispanic. The shortlist was 13.6 white and 59.1 percent Hispanic."

Yep. They found a way to select white, Asian, and even "conservative" people out of positions. Now combine this with the ESG logic of the "pay gap", where they must pay DIE applicants more and they can't pay them more for less work (i.e., can't pay them within the same pay scale), so they promote them artificially into positions of power where they lack the skills and aptitude to take on the requisite responsibilities.

• "“The way that institutions collapse is that they become structurally stupid. That means people can no longer object, they have to go along with the orthodoxy.” Haidt said this isn’t an issue just in his field of psychology. “It’s about the biggest problem facing our country—the collapse of our institutions.”"

Bingo.
This is a total and intentional reordering of all of the West's institutions into a slave morality pyramid scheme — infiltrating power with incompetence. It is designed to collapse the West.

We need another House Un-American Activities Committee to purge the Marxists.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Jan 12 05:45:13
Yea, that promotion story is frankly one of the most Kafkaesque things I have heard in a while. That was a few years ago, but the more recent Jordan Peterso re-education ultimatum shows that we have not reached peak woke. On the contrary, it is ever more invasive and bolder.
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jan 16 04:38:54
I'd like to think that they're being exposed more, but the successful passage of the 2023 Omnibus makes a lot of the pushback lip service; these ESG industries just got funding on the backend, so the losses they've posted became *our* losses. Which segues to...


I've decided to start writing in terms of the Octopus strategy (see Parvini above) and also via an outline that I'll be finalizing soon which will alter the Octopus slightly to merge it with my own outline (see previous thread comment "The Levels of the Agenda — Macro to Micro" for that outline that I made before finding out about Parvini). I'll do this because while people such as Parvini are very correct about what's happening, I've noticed that a lot of these architect thinkers are not very organized. Parvini, for instance, could not set priorities in his octopus and his map devolved into obvious drawn-line connections between the octopus tentacles. This over-saturation of connections is not practical, since there is a very clear hierarchy in play which can be communicated much more easily in visual media.

So, working into a functional outline will keep the segments of the totalitarian strategy organized so that people can see which segment I'm addressing (e.g., whether I'm talking about low-level propagandists or high-level strategists). I'll release that on substack as a more organized version later which I'll continuously edit with links to articles that apply to each section. Consider this preliminary.


This is the low-resolution outline of the above Parvini Octopus with some of my modifications, which assigns thought bubbles to the major players of the totalitarian strategy:
• The [Money] Chest — Investment Banks
• The [Idea] Network — Foundations, Corporations, NGOs, World Organizations
• The [Legislative] Crown — National Governments, Lobby Groups, Policy Agenda, Legislature
• The [Local] Chamber — Local government, Civil Service, Secret Services
• The [Legal] Bench — Judiciary, law enforcement, lawyers
• The [Religious Control / Paul's Catholic] Church — I'll also call this the Synagogue
• The Head — Funding Bodies, think tanks, elite universities
• The Mouth — Media, Arts and Culture, Social Media; Zeitgeist propaganda


A sub-category of "The Crown" (legislature) and "The Mouth" (Zeitgeist propaganda) is "the Conversation", which is how propaganda directs low-information people into "The Show" of the 24-hour news cycle. This focuses citizen attention on daily drama/conversation so that they do not have cognitive energy for the bigger picture; they simply learn the talking points of the day, get closure on those limited subjects, and have a general sense of feeling involved (this relates also to the Frankfurt School's "Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception").

So "The Show" can be summarized as the latest political intrigue. "The Show" is designed to give simplistic thinkers a binary of choice, such as friend vs. enemy, GOP vs. DNC, "conservative" vs. "progressive", and "low class" vs. "middle class". This is not to say that there is no distinction between these groups (e.g., there do indeed exist enemies and choices) but instead to point out that low-information citizens can be funneled into strictly enforced binaries (this enforcement diverging from reality) in order to make the actions of these citizens more predictable. So, for instance, while the higher-resolution and more correct version of "GOP vs. DNC" is that the DNC is totally owned by the totalitarian scheme while the GOP has some political holdouts, to a low-information citizen being directed by propaganda, this same "GOP vs. DNC" message may be erroneously simplified to "[DNC bad. GOP good. Vote anyone who is GOP to get good thing]." The error should be obvious: while the DNC is "bad", most of the GOP is just DNC-lite, so simply voting straight-ticket is not in itself a helpful political action (e.g., one should also direct the GOP into correct actions).

This low-information citizen can be seen in tumbleweed, for instance, who is correct to dislike Trump but who does not understand how to correctly parse Trump's good vs. bad actions, since tw's position is "DNC good and anyone opposing the DNC is bad" rather than "totalitarianism bad" — the latter phrase-tool being far more constructive in recognizing the DNC's and Trump's shared faults and why Trump was simultaneously an enemy to DNC-totalitarianism on key issues. For instance, Trump was wrong on vaccines (he promoted them emphatically), and he supported BigPharma regulatory capture, but Trump was correct to oppose ESG. I may do a longer write-up on Trump so I can reference it when tw floats his straw man assumptions about my supposed "support" for Trump, but I've already covered Trump in part dozens of times in these threads, so it would just be a consolidation.

That said...


Latest Update on "The Show"
(DNC v. GOP distraction propaganda)

In the States, the Gaetz crew (e.g., Boebert, MTG, Bishop, Massie, Paul) talked about success with Kevin McCarthy, but there's reason to worry over the same thing that DNC voters saw with the squad: folding principles. The Squad quickly fell in line with all of Pelosi's/Schumer's votes, repeatedly lying to their constituents by saying, "[We'll convince central/legacy-DNC next time, we just have to play ball because politics are complicated.]" And their pushback was meaningless anyways, since the Squad is just the overt Marxists (low-level propagandists for less fluent Marxist voter blocs) whereas central DNC is just less obvious Marxists with the exact same political objective of totalitarianism — just with less pretext of popular appeal.

However, the DNC has no morality, so the Squad's principles folded quickly in the face of "compromise" (i.e., total submission to the Inner Party). Conversely, with the anti-ESG crowd within the GOP (the anti-McCarthy Gaetz crew), their principles are more likely to stand and their track records better support that possibility. Boebert, MTG, and Paul, in particular, have most consistently voted against anything ESG-related (e.g., Ukraine funding). Gaetz is the least trustworthy of the group, MTG may be too willing to play the game now that she knows she could find a seat at the table (we'll see), and Bishop, while principled, strikes me as someone who could justify bad votes if promised a minor bill later. This I blame on Bishop's age and establishment ties.

Such a strategy of compromise simply will not work. This is all or nothing; none of them should — under any circumstances — vote for anything ESG-related **at all**, not even if promised some mirage bill later. That mistake crippled the Squad, and it is not enough to just be a "conservative"; slowing things down while staying on the same trajectory will only make the hot conflicts worse, since hot conflicts have to make up for anything not accomplished with these initial soft manipulations. Gaets and co. need to be absolutely uncompromising and explain the gravity to the rest of the GOP in order to stop both the soft manipulations and the hot conflicts. They basically have only this year because by January 2024, due to election decisions, if any of the world strategy has *not* been exposed in the Zeitgeist, the train will have run away and it may be too late to stop the last rush to 2030 goals.


Latest Update on "The [Idea] Network"
(Total-State Think Tanks)

Speaking of the world strategy, here's a World Economic Forum update:

I do not necessarily like Avi Yemini due to his gonzo journalism style and his over-sensational narratives, so I just tune out his sensationalism and watch the truth beyond his words. That said, he was present at Davos last year and is correct this year to point out that security forces have indeed escalated presence:
"There's a heavier police presence in Davos than we expected protecting the World Economic Forum.
Officers are on edge.
Watch what we encountered today as we covered the preparations for the annual event.
Full coverage: http://WEFreports.com"
[January 15th, 2023]
http://twitter.com/OzraeliAvi/status/1614714343907786753

Davos in 2022 was already under heavy patrol, with one popularly mentioned incident being Posobiec's detainment:
http://twitter.com/jackposobiec/status/1528772493032534018
This detainment was such an overt issue that DNC propaganda apparatus "PolitiFact" outright lied about it:
http://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/may/25/donald-trump-jr/jack-posobiec-was-not-arrested-or-detained-davos/
Videos of the incident itself were also largely removed from Twitter. Clips can still be seen on Odysee:
http://odysee.com/@ACE1918:6/journalist-jack-posobiec-detained-by:d

There are several things to note about this:
• The security posture of these WEF police around Posobiec in 2022 was heightened. Viewers of the Odysee compilation should note that a "casual" (i.e., low threat) confrontation would have security agents standing in a soft echelon (i.e, spread out in a line but not threatening) with hands on the butts of their weapons (e.g., see "hang" or "safe hang" postures for military personnel or view images of troops on long shifts at security posts). This was not the WEF posture. Two of these WEF police were in the low ready and were kill-alert, with fast-twitch movements ready to raise and fire. Notice that they also set up a kill box around Posobiec. The blonde policeman by the "Migros" sign and the bearded policeman by the egress route had a converging sector of fire through Posobiec's table. This shows that these were either poorly trained police (not aware that their posture can itself create scenarios) and/or this was an intimidation stop. "And" here would be that these police had been fed bad intel so that they would have a higher-than-appropriate alert status, increasing the potential for aggression mistakes such as failing a shoot/no-shoot scenario.
• Note, however, that security at international diplomatic events is high by default. Likely, nearly every hotel in Davos has armed controlled-access set up, blocking entire floors from casual guests. This is inner security (direct counterintel for diplomats and their personal security entourages). On the streets is local security, which are typically on the alert for terrorist activity. This is true of almost any diplomatic event and therefore tempers sensationalism.
• That being so, local security can indeed be elevated year-to-year; just because diplomats have security does not mean that they always have the same posture.
• The biggest conclusion of elevated security is that "security through obscurity" does not necessarily apply to Davos anymore. That is, people now know who the oligarchs and tyrants are, and this knowledge would show up in Davos threat reports.

The more sensational claim I'll make is that this connects to the Franz Ferdinand narrative I've been suggesting for years now will be a total-state power play. The narrative goes that the total-state oligarchs are provoking tension and moving security forces around in order to precipitate the targeting by government-cultivated extremists of a WEF oligarch. That is, bolster security to make it impenetrable at certain spots but allow light security at other spots to encourage malicious actors to hit soft targets.

The most obvious targets by such extremists are Klaus Schwab and Joe Biden. This is because..
• They are not masterminds and have nearly zero personal impact on the totalitarian strategy; they are replaceable puppets of a hydra organism; it would be an entirely futile action strategy-wise but would have maximum political gain for the totalitarians.
• Both Biden and Schwab are being elevated as comical villains. Biden's totalitarian optics at his "MAGA Republicans" speech would have an easy psychological effect on the deranged, and Schwab simply looks like a Bond villain. It's honestly hilarious how bad their optics have been.

But this assumes a right-wing actor. The broader strategy is to precipitate conflicts between the psychosis movements of both the left and the right. To date, greater success has been achieved against the left, with their psychotic elements being primed for violence in a "progressive" vs. "conservative" binary akin to "revolutionaries" vs. "fascists" role-playing. The total-state has also been feeding them optics of Trump as "Hitler 2.0" (e.g., the "[Hitler also returned after losing an election]" trope), which combines near seamlessly with their narratives of "[time travel to kill Hitler]". This was even the central programming of propaganda movie "The Dead Don't Die" (2019), which used the phrase "kill the head" in montages that combined rhetoric suggestive of Trump.

In short, political violence from either side is a win for the totalitarians. They have set up a clear hierarchy of visibly un-elected oligarchs as subjects of angst for psychosis actors. This conditions useful idiots into believing that only direct action can solve total-state implementation. Narratives are being seeded by sock puppets on social media that "you can't vote your way out of this", which is designed to activate the lizard brains of useful idiots into furnishing the totalitarians with the necessary propaganda moment — whether that be a "Drag Floyd" moment (i.e., the targeting of a grooming event by the right-wing) or a high-profile action against soft targets.

Far more valuable things can be gleaned from Davos than these fool's errands. At Davos this week, the totalitarians will lay out their public-facing agenda for the year. While most will focus on Schwab, key speeches may occur via Larry Fink and IMF representatives.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jan 16 05:14:36
I watched Neema Parvini, I like/appreciate the terminology. Thanks for that :)
Cherub Cow
Member
Mon Jan 16 19:25:00
Np! :D
• Parvini definitely gets the big picture more than most I've seen. That immediately makes him a top-tier source.
• James Lindsay understands a lot, but he's incredibly disorganized. I've said before that he desperately needs an editor. People who just watch a random video by him are going to be completely in the dark.
• Auron MacIntyre also understands a lot, but he's over-dedicated to mapping everything onto "Leviathan & Its Enemies" by Samuel T. Francis (i.e., mapping everything purely onto the "managerial state"). This works a *lot*, but he's clearly trying to grow his audience rather than engage purely with the truth.

I'm thinking that aggregation is key here..
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 17 01:03:18
Update on The Mouth and The Show
(Zeitgeist propaganda and DNC/GOP Binary)

Adam Schiff (CA, Bolshevik), best known for his part in the "Hoax Pattern" wherein he's read into classified briefings and then lies about what he saw to generate disinformation propaganda such as the "Russia Collusion Hoax" (see thread 4 comment "Mon Aug 15 20:50:15"), was recently named as one of the DNC politicians to be removed from his committee positions under McCarthy's tenure as speaker.

Perhaps in an attempt to distract from his waning powers and gain "grassroots" credibility, Schiff played into the Marxist pattern of showing a context-free clip of an arrest to gin up the DNC's racialist strategy, floating this propaganda:
"We must not look away. And we must not shrink from the need for justice for Keenan Anderson.
Police must never respond with such force to a potential mental health crisis. Resources and care are the answer.
Accountability must be transparent and swift."
[Adam Schiff, Official Twitter; January 15th, 2023]
http://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1614810506707058689

What Schiff misses is that Anderson was high on cocaine, had attempted GTA, was fleeing arrest, ran into traffic, and was given an absurd amount of chances to peacefully surrender to police, who were far too kind to him because of their clear knowledge that the DNC's racialist propaganda would be used against them. Anderson died later in the hospital, likely due to the cocaine (current COD is "cardiac arrest").

The DNC is hoping for another George Floyd scenario — itself an imperfect example given Floyd's fentanyl usage — but this propaganda works far less when the DNC holds executive power, since blaming it on "the system" while they are in control of that same "system" is an admission of guilt. This means that their propaganda has to pivot to, "[If only we held the House too!]" — ignoring the last two years where they could have "solved" this with another of their signature defective bills.

Naturally, Schiff is being ripped in his comments, with comments already exceeding the "likes" by almost a couple thousand (currently 19.5k to 18k). This story has also been ignored by Imgur, which has never let truth stop it from a good narrative, so the narrative simply is not there. Schiff basically just failed on this one, and this propaganda may not rise into the Zeitgeist.
Cherub Cow
Member
Wed Jan 18 06:05:47
Right on fucking cue!


Update on The [Money] Chest, The Crown, The Synagogue, and The Mouth
(Investment Banks, Legislature, Religion, and Zeitgeist Propaganda)

"Larry Fink Says ESG Narrative Has Become Ugly, Personal
"Fink says he’s never experienced such personal attacks
"He is trying to change the narrative, address misconceptions"
http://www...ative-has-become-ugly-personal

The Bloomberg TV interview at Davos (18-minute clip of his response to ESG critique):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2023-01-17/blackrock-s-fink-on-capitalism-and-sustainability-video?srnd=all

Fink is such a psychopath that while addressing "misconceptions" about ESG, in the **same sentence** he says, "If you don't have a lens towards de-carbonization, you're not gonna win one Euro of business."

He then pretends that BlackRock is "friendly" because it's "helping" oil companies de-carbonize. Keep in mind that this is the psychopath who threatened Exxon's CEO by saying that he would replace the Exxon board with ESG stooges who would remove the CEO from his position. That is, he maliciously replaces board members and CEOs who do not comply with his strategies (I went into this more in Thread 4 comment "Wed Aug 03 04:17:42"). That's fucking "friendly"? And within a sentence he then says, "We are *hostilely* against divestiture; ... [movement] from public hands to private hands." He's speaking of energy, so he's talking about making sure that energy remains a government enterprise.

The reason? ESG has seen successful enforcement via legislative apparatuses, so if energy is kept in public hands (not the "people's" but the *government's* hands), then ESG has greater control of energy production and can command compliance — expanding its anticompetitive practices.

When asked if he's "politicizing investment" (5:00), he says, "We are doing everything we can to try to change the narrative."

See the psychopathy in this response? He *is* politicizing investment; that's what ESG *is* definitionally; it's not just "E" it's "ESG". So his deflection is to propaganda: we are going to see more and more propaganda promoting ESG as "good". All the useful idiots who have never even heard of ESG are about to suddenly be "experts" promoting it as "[that thing we all need to do]".

12:00 — After talking shop about investments, he brings up China's expected rebound. Fink has heard from other Davos members that China's offices are filling again after their recent COVID issues.
Peter Zeihan has been taking flack for his belief in the opposite after a JRE appearance. Zeihan has been expecting China's fall for 10 years and projects its fall now for 10 years in the future. He's still stuck on a kind of Scott Adams version of market understanding where he thinks that markets are run with rational global good and shareholder models in mind rather than intentional manipulation as economic warfare. China is the single nation best positioned for global dominance in 2035 due to its absolute capture of African resources and the West's suicidal outsourcing for "green" initiative materials. If Russia sees success in Ukraine via a favorable energy monopoly, BRICS as a whole will exceed the West — and the West's rulers are playing directly into this strategy by adopting ESG.

13:00 — He again confirms ESG structure rather than "correcting" worries. He specifically says that "sustainability" investment is better because it has "better coupon". This is a direct reference to the fact that ESG is *not* about shareholder investment but is about government capture to fund *bad* investment to cover ESG's losses. He even directly compares this strategy to more "income-oriented private" funds.

14:40 — Another slip of his psychopathy: "Herd mentality never works". He's talking here about the market's rational self-interest as being in opposition to ESG's forced market manipulation.

15:00 — He talks "growth", but the important thing to note here is that "growth" for ESG means more businesses trapped by the pyramid scheme.

He then has some interesting complaints about immigration as helpful for the strategy. He tries to parse this as "legal" immigration to avoid flack, but he's already dried ink on this subject.

They end by mentioning BlackRock's intent to recognize Ukraine as an "open" market. Note also that a way for ESG to infiltrate is to break economies in order to *make* them "open". This is the economic warfare being used on the above IMF list (Chad, Ethiopia, Zambia, Ghana, Lebanon, Surinam, Sri Lanka). Crushed markets are more susceptible to further Governance infiltration. Nations that have held out on their G-Indexes are being collapsed so that they have to accept Fink's "helpful" hand (protection racket).


So anyways, Fink is particularly interesting because he is a direct line through asset management to legislative control to religion and to propaganda. ESG is the central unifyer of this totalitarian strategy, so it has influence in everything. The religious connection for Fink is that his firm was notorious for Jewish nepotism, and his business processes reflect the Chabad group imperative of international Bolshevism in order to institute world slavery which benefits Israel. That said, Fink may be such a sociopath that he is unaware that that is a natural consequence of his business behavior. He seems to have such a warped sense of "good" and "bad" that these are totally fine actions.

Collapsing nations is very prestigious work.
Cherub Cow
Member
Wed Jan 18 09:02:02
Update on The Crown and the Chamber
(National Governments, Policy Agenda, Local government)

U.S. Secretary of State Blinken (Bolshevik) appeared on the State Department's official YouTube this morning:
"Remarks at the U.S. Conference of Mayors’ 91st Winter Meeting"
[January 18th, 2023]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JED_lkrACOE

His remarks were a treasure-trove of ESG/DIE propaganda, but I've covered that before — even with specific focus on Blinken's role as a propagator. What is particular about *this* appearance is his mention of "Subnational Diplomacy" as an imperative of driving the U.S. engagement in the ESG/DIE totalitarian strategy.

The short version with "Subnational Diplomacy" is that this is a way to get local governments to adopt international frameworks. A very tame version of this is "sister cities", such as how Lyon, France is a sister city of St. Louis, Missouri. Of course, in the case of sister cities, this is little more than flimsy cultural ties and a very small budgeting of promotional activities and tourism between the cities. But the more expansive objective of Subnational Diplomacy is to *expand* the power of such international frameworks with actionable bureaucracies:
(From the DoS page on Subnational Diplomacy)
"The Special Representative for Subnational Diplomacy and her team lead and coordinate the State Department’s engagement with mayors, governors and other local officials in the United States and around the world. The Special Representative aims to bring the benefits of U.S. foreign policy, such as jobs, investments, innovative solutions, and international experiences, to the local and state level. It supports U.S. national security priorities by integrating local ideas into foreign policy and fostering connections among cities, municipalities, and communities in the United States and abroad."

And I have pointed out examples of this with, for instance, Ardern (See thread 4 comment "Mon Aug 15 20:16:52"). Ardern's imperative in the Pacific Theater is to expand ESG/DIE trade policy so that Pacific nations are trapped in the anti-competitive strategy. Blinken mentions these pacts in today's speech, citing in particular
• The Global Methane Pledge (another 2030 pledge)
• the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF)
• The Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity (APEP)

These link up with..
• the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP),
• Indo-Pacific Framework, and
• Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

All of these are methods of enacting ESG imperatives on the legislative side.
Most particular to Subnational Diplomacy in the Pacific Theater are:
• Memorandum of Cooperation (MOC) between New Zealand and California,
• Memorandum of Understanding (CA–China)

In the case of Ardern, because she was waiting for success on the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), she opted instead for the sub-victory of making trade agreements between totalitarian oligarch and California Governor Gavin Newsom.


In other words, world leaders attempt to pass ESG frameworks which force the strategy upon world nations. However, if those policies and trade agreements fail to pass at the national level (e.g., the TPP), totalitarian oligarchs use Subnational Diplomacy to create agreements between regional oligarchs. For example, where Trump stopped the TPP, Ardern worked with Newsom to effect TPP-lite (getting a state on board where the full nation is not).

This strategy also occurs at the city level, and in fact that was the purpose of Blinken's speech before the Conference of Mayors. So, without full infiltration of the GOP House, the U.S. totalitarians have to bypass national law by getting U.S. governors and mayors to adopt international frameworks.


In short, where a nation's Constitution and overall governance have not been totally infiltrated and undermined, global totalitarians find small-level traitors to enact plans which undermine the sovereignty of their home nations. This is the essence of the Crown–Chamber relationship; it is designed to squeeze out sovereignty wherever it can — at whatever level is accessible and infiltrated.
Cherub Cow
Member
Thu Jan 19 02:15:09
Some potentially good news!!!

"Jacinda Ardern: New Zealand PM to step down next month"
[BBC News; January 19th, 2023]
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64327224
• "Ms Ardern choked up as she detailed how six "challenging" years in the job had taken a toll.
Labour Party MPs will vote to find her replacement on Sunday."
• "But while Ms Ardern was often seen as a political star globally, opinion polls suggest she was increasingly unpopular at home."


She was one of the primary totalitarians effecting ESG suicide, so her stepping down is a good thing in that respect. The only question about whether or not this is truly good news is the question of her successor. It is very likely that her entire party is owned by the totalitarian strategy, so this will likely be a case of "meet the new boss — same as the old boss".

Even so, part of Ardern's success was that midwits and useful idiots saw her bucktoothed smile as endearing and overlooked her totalitarian politics, so New Zealand found itself run by enslavers and the bulk of the NZ voters exposed themselves as immoral slaves. If Ardern's successor is less likeable, as was for instance Victoria P.M. of Australia Daniel Andrews, then it will be more difficult to smile through totalitarian policies.

On the other hand, New Zealand's governance is near totally owned, they having a 96.3 G-Index — only a small fall from last year's 98.0. This means that it ultimately does not matter who of Ardern's party is placed in power; the successor will be a puppet for pre-existing policies. *This* means that their puppet will likely be the most retarded and most intersectional candidate, similar to how the White House's Karine Jean-Pierre was chosen.

Of the potential pool of about 10 senior figures in New Zealand's Labour Party, this narrows down the likely pool to
• Kiri Allan,
• Nanaia Mahuta, and
• Ayesha Verrall.

Of those three, the most intersectional is Nanaia Mahuta, being of Māori descent, possessing a face tattoo for street cred, and likely being clinically retarded.

I have explained before that the Intersectional Olympics always end at indigenous people because they are most likely to be resentful and crave revenge for colonialism, so empowering them is a means of de-stabilizing nations of Western influence.

But, if the Labour Party is concerned about Mahuta's face tattoo, then Allan is also available as an indigenous candidate, she's a lesbian, and based on physiognomy is the most resentful of the three. But undermining this is that Allan was diagnosed with stage 3 cervical cancer in April 2021. Labour may prefer a more guaranteed longevity after Ardern, so Allan might have to schedule a doctor's visit before Sunday to see if she's clear.

Ayesha Verrall would be on the game board because she is likely a BRICS infiltrator, her mother being from the Maldives. This would be a big win for BRICS, and Verrall would absolutely accept external totalitarian policies on the basis of resentment. She is also a good candidate for weaponizing health care against New Zealand, given her "expertise" in "international health".

So, I'm between Verrall (BRICS infiltrator) and Allan (presentable intersectional champion) and am leaning slightly more towards Allan. If New Zealand wants to signal that they're ready for more viral warfare, they'll choose Verrall, and if they want to signal that they're completely politically owned, they'll choose Allan. If they have a sense of humor, they'll fall back to Mahuta, who, albeit retarded, is a top pick of China.
McKobb
Member
Thu Jan 19 03:46:41
Some Pig
williamthebastard
Member
Fri Jan 20 05:17:11
Fee fi fo far
I smell the shit of bovinian sephar
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Jan 21 00:37:21
That might be the most wtb has written since his P.I. asked him why his undergrads are more literate than wtb and asked if he wanted to just take the coward's way out with a Master's degree instead of a PhD, causing wtb to find the enthusiasm to shit out 2,000 words with the pathetic perception that that was somehow impressive to anyone but the unqualified hacks that had been artificially furnished into his decrepit and Faustian grad program. It must hurt his ego to know that the only reason that he got as far as he did (and that's not far) was because there just happens to be a demand for useful idiots who cannot even prove their own credentials without holding up their C.V. :D


..
Anyways, I thought this was hilarious:

"Tucker Carlson: Biden is done"
[Fox News; January 19th, 2023]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgXq8S02NJc

I don't usually post Fox clips because that's the kind of source-work troll bait we expect from tw's threads (makes it way too easy for low-IQ people like wtb and murd3r to shit their summer dresses), but there's a meta point to be made:
Tucker Carlson, who by all normal processes should be expected to say the "safe" talking points of establishment media, has been pretty actively saying the things that only niche independent journalists have been talking about (i.e., high-information statements). He even did coverage of the Kennedy assassination after recent document talk, which is a wound re-opened by the DNC's/Total-State's own complete self-exposure post-2016.

While the normie talking point would be, "[Oh wow! Even DNC media is going after Biden. It was so bad that they couldn't ignore it!]", Carlson here goes high-information and talks about how Biden is being ousted by his own party as calculated theatrics and political maneuvering. That is, the media was given the green light to remove Biden. This is consistent with things I said months ago, in particular about how establishment comedians were only finally given the green light to make fun of Biden in about June/July of 2022, showing that the Regime was laying groundwork for a directed critique. This further grew with Biden's totalitarian speech, which was controlled — by his own people — to produce incredibly negative optics.

Carlson makes a comparison to Nixon's ousting leading the way for the state-owned Ford and talks about how non-establishment people are strategically ousted (e.g., Michael Flynn). The leading point he is making is, "[With whom does the DNC plan to replace Biden?]"

The obvious answer would be Harris, being VP, but Carlson's use of the Ford parallel indicates an intent to replace both Biden *and* Harris, since Ford was not elected to the VP position but rather appointed after elected-VP Spiro Agnew's resignation following flimsy WaterGate connections, loss of popular support, and a years-old tax evasion charge that was suddenly up for prosecution.

At that time (1973), Ford was minority leader of the House. The current minority leader of the House is Hakeem Jeffries (Bolshevik, NY), who was appointed in November 2022 after Pelosi decided that she'd done enough insider trading.

In other words, Carlson's thought, which has been floated previously on indy media, is this chain of events:
1) Biden is prepared for his ousting via a manufactured scandal.
2) The scandal implicates VP Harris or includes an excuse to oust Harris. There does not even need to be a real connection — just enough information to disguise causality from casual citizen observes (see, for instance, the non sequitur of invading Iraq as retribution for 9/11).
3) VP Harris resigns.
4) Harris' replacement is appointed by Biden — most likely Hakeem Jeffries.
5) Biden resigns.
6) Hakeem Jeffries assumes the presidency.


Why Hakeem Jeffries?

Carlson makes the point that Ford was an ideal replacement because he had helped the CIA bury its complicity in the JFK Assassination by helping to manufacture the results of the Warren Commission.

Does Jeffries have such a connection?
Not really.
However, the case for Jeffries would be that he *is* totally ideologically captured. Jeffries is what an ideologically consistent DNC would call an "election-denier", believing that Trump was installed by Russia in 2016. He is also a useful idiot of slave morality, having fallen for hoaxes such as "hands up, don't shoot". Most of his career leads into him being an ESG/DIE acolyte, and his speech before giving the Speaker of the House position over to McCarthy shows that he's consciously trying to channel both MLK's Baptist speech patterns and Obama's smile/propaganda patterns, despite having a minor lisp:
[C-SPAN dot org; January 7th, 2023]
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c5050190/york-democrat-hakeem-jeffries-delivers-speech-mccarthys-election-speaker-house

Ironically, he pretended to be willing to cross the aisle but immediately followed that with his total unwillingness to compromise on dozens of progressive insanities. He even touted "maturity over Mar-a-Lago", which means that he did not get the advanced memo on the DNC's behind-the-scenes work on Biden's incoming scandal, which began November 2nd, 2022. Before the CBS Biden story was released, high-level DNC politicians were warned not to talk about Trump as much once they realized that Former VP Biden was guilty of worse.

So he could definitely be a useful idiot and/or was strategically insulated from information, and positioning him as a presidential candidate going into 2024 would be a smooth move by the DNC. Even if Jeffries does not have the obvious deep-state appeal that Ford had, he is likely totally owned by the totalitarians nonetheless — not legally via blackmail, perhaps, but ideologically surely.

Even so, it's worth looking at two other things.

1) A greater parallel to Ford would have been the appointment of January 6th Committee Show-Trial propagandists (akin to the corrupt Warren Commission), with that list including these DNC figures:
• Bennie Thompson, Chair, Mississippi
• Zoe Lofgren, California
• Adam Schiff, California
• Pete Aguilar, California
• Stephanie Murphy, Florida
• Jamie Raskin, Maryland
• Elaine Luria, Virginia

Of these, Zoe Lofgren would be the most hilarious pick, since she was a staffer who helped draft articles of impeachment against Nixon and is mildly psychotic. Raskin, Luria, and Schiff would be funny for the Bolsheviks who expect a Jewish U.S. president in this generation, but the converging factor could be the candidate with both senior DNC leadership *and* a position in the January 6th show trials — and that would be Pete Aguilar. But would they really appoint him over Jeffries? Probably not. Aguilar is kind of a doofus. I realize that that didn't stop them with Biden and Frankenstein (Fetterman), though.. so... it's certainly possible.

2) While a parallel to Nixon/Ford is interesting, would this mean that the DNC no longer intends to incite violence against Biden? Not necessarily.
Against the option is that JFK was shot when he had high approval ratings, but Biden has abysmal approval ratings, having not recovered since August 2021. *For* the option is that that would not matter after such an event, since the media would make it into their Franz Ferdinand moment regardless of all other factors. What this means is that both options are available: they remove Biden if they can via this scandal while continuing to provide poor security at events such as his Delaware bike rides.


The ultimate goal of the Nixon/Ford strategy is to replace their puppet (Biden) with another (Jeffries) while maintaining the exact same ideological direction of totalitarianism. This provides the DNC with a better demagogue who sells the same exact shit-storm but with more of the necessary narcissistic need to please large crowds with snappy speeches.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Jan 22 21:47:43
As a quick update on the above, the four key people for VP appointment following a Harris resignation are currently
1) Hakeem Jeffries (Minority Leader)
2) Katherine Clark (Minority Whip)
3) Pete Aguilar (Caucus Chairman)
4) James Clyburn (Assistant Minority Leader)

While Jeffries is in the prime spot and Aguilar could be rewarded for the January 6th Show Trials, there has been an interesting development with Katherine Clark. From her own Twitter:
"Last night, my daughter was arrested in Boston, Massachusetts. I love Riley, and this is a very difficult time in the cycle of joy and pain in parenting.
This will be evaluated by the legal system, and I am confident in that process."
[3:44 PM, January 22nd, 2023]
http://twitter.com/RepKClark/status/1617292265738702849

Why is this significant?
As politicians rise in power, it becomes increasingly useful to blackmail them into power trades. The arrest of Clark's daughter, a left-wing psychosis victim who was arrested for assaulting a police officer at a Boston Antifa event, gives the state leverage over Clark, who will want to reduce charges to save her daughter's future.

There are a few things to this:
1) There may already be blackmail in place against Clark, since she has already given unconditional support to Jeffries,
2) This new blackmail gives decent leverage but not "do anything" leverage, but it could combine with "1)"
3) This leverage could be used to assure that the Deep State has control over Clark *should* she be appointed,
4) This leverage could be used to assure that Clark will support the Deep State's actual candidate.

Of "3)" and "4)", it should be understood that the Deep State hedges bets; this is not an either/or. If Clark polls well, they'll use her, but they might simply need her to be a continual supporter for Jeffries, who would likely poll better.

And, of course, the less sensational but grounded explanation is that Clark simply has a daughter who reflects her sick values and that this was therefore inevitable — no Deep State action needed to be tailored for her. In such case, she would simply expect the State to protect her daughter from consequences for loyalties already demonstrated.

And is she a presidential option? Surely — otherwise, she would not be in her position. But would the U.S. *want* an angry authoritarian librarian wine-aunt in power? Or does it even matter what they want?
Cherub Cow
Member
Sun Jan 22 21:59:13
*"The arrest of Clark's [son, who wears women's clothing and is] a left-wing psychosis victim"
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 24 01:31:07
Oh, quick update on my New Zealand prediction:

Looks like they did *not* go for the intersectional imperative and went instead for Chris Hipkins, who was in the extended list of about 8 potential successors. While not intersectional, he *is* a Malthusian psychopath.

I really thought they would go for Allan :'(

That said, Hipkins was "minister for COVID-19 response" during New Zealand's totalitarian COVID hysteria, which puts him on track for my above guess that appointing a health official would mean that "New Zealand wants to signal that they're ready for more viral warfare". Viral-warfare management would allow New Zealand to rapidly implement final stages of their 2030 plan, since the "emergency" conditions will convince New Zealand's slaves to obey their oligarchs. New Zealanders can expect fun outcomes in the next few years, like eugenics and genocide that clear out the population so that the trillionaire asset managers who built their mansions there will not have any unexpected visitors ;)
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Tue Jan 24 02:15:18
It’s an interesting disconnect how leaders like Ardern are viewed by foreign media and their actual popularity in their own country.
Cherub Cow
Member
Tue Jan 24 07:10:35
That disconnect really illustrates the media's primary objective: propagandize on behalf of the totalitarians ... this being the opposite of holding power to account.


..
Quick update on The [Idea] Network and the Crown
(World Organizations and National Governments)

As part of pushing the ESG/DIE framework into medical governance, in November of 2022, India of the BRICS Group requested that this change be made to the governing principles of the World Health Organization (WHO):
• "Article 3 Principles
"[CHANGE THIS:] The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons"
"[TO THIS:] The implementation of these Regulations shall be based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the State parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development."

"Working Group on Amendments to the International Health Regulations"
[World Health Organization dot int]
http://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/index.html
Direct PDF link:
http://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/pdf_files/wgihr1/WGIHR_Submissions_Original_Languages.pdf

I'm honestly surprised that the WHO didn't have this already.

Still! This does at least two major things:

1) This further codifies that world health and public health can be directed along the lines of slave morality and eugenics. More specifically, nations that are more "vulnerable" (e.g., DIE nations, nations with low G-indexes, nations that want special selection for wealth transfers) get moved to the top of the list for health resources when it comes time to mobilize world supply-chains in a health crisis. So, in the next manufactured pandemic, these nations get health resources and vaccine priority while competitor nations (the West) let their people die.

2) India specifically took action to push ESG/DIE.
I've mentioned this connection before, but it's always fun to see it so transparently: the BRICS nations have a vested interest in pushing ESG/DIE propaganda upon the West, since this forces investment from Western nations into BRICS. BRICS is a *huge* beneficiary of ESG/DIE economic redistribution.


As a further example of the case "2)", India recently got media attention when it was seen that all of that oil that Europe was supposedly rejecting from Russia was simply being redirected to India, which then processed that oil and sent it to Europe:

"India Now Buying 33 Times More Russian Oil Than a Year Earlier
"Nation took 1.2 million barrels a day from Moscow last month
"Sanctions from G-7 and EU possibly led to deeper discounts"
[Bloomberg; January 16th, 2023]
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-16/india-now-buying-33-times-more-russian-oil-than-a-year-earlier

We have been seeing this strategy play out, and we will continue to see it play out until the traitor oligarchs are exposed. BRICS is the major profiteer of the West's adoption of ESG/DIE suicide.
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Jan 27 09:08:26
Today will be fun. Paul Pelosi bodycam and dash-cam footage is supposed to produce some lulz. Here's an early edition:

"Paul Pelosi's DUI body cam footage finally released. They tried to keep this hidden since May of 2022."
[Clayton Morris Twitter; January 27th, 2023]
http://twitter.com/ClaytonMorris/status/1618896432081285120
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Jan 27 21:42:30
[Seb]: "Not the way it is done at all."

False. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
I like that you even re-present what I just fucking said while pretending that we disagreed, you disingenuous piece of shit. You just list a bunch of obvious shit while pretending that it's contradictory. Are you Jewish, a life-long troll, or retarded, you Poe's-Law bot?

[Seb]: "so the idea that there is a super magic process that nobody who isn't the president would know about is speculation on your part."

No, it's not, you dumb bitch, and that's a straw man argument, you disingenuous piece of shit, since I did *not* say that "[hur hur, only the president knows]," you fucking liar. How the fuck would *I* know if only the president knows, shit-stain? This information is known by anyone who's worked in offices where classified material is actively generated — a population of millions.

And we've seen people **in this forum** (e.g., tw) make the fucking retarded error that there is only "one" way to handle classified materials, believing that that's the low-level way where classified documents always already exist and are simply managed. I've seen *dozens* of people across social media's retard-spheres (e.g., Imgur, Reddit, Twitter) make the same mistaken belief that "[hur hur, logbooks and inventories are air tight. We always had chain of custody! I would have been fired!]"

[Seb]: "declassifying the document ... is to cease controls on that document, which means that *everyone* can see the document and releases other people bound by relevant laws from viewing docs they do not have clearance for."

Not quite, dumbass. Documents can be declassified but still controlled. Do you really think that any random can walk into a declassified documents cache and just start reading? Do you really think that things get declassified at 1pm and go to the New York Times by 2pm? No, you fucking idiot. They most often get declassified and then disappear to secure locations where they may never be seen again.

[Seb]: "Claims - even from a former president who at one point had such authority and clearances - that they have declassified the document in the past hold no water if there is no record of it."

False and fucktarded. Batched documents can be given a mass-declassification while *not* physically removing their cover sheets.

Here's an example:
1) An office does its monthly deep-dive inventory.
2) They find one box which includes dozens of non-inventoried items (or rather, inventoried as a "box" rather than per-file) which were given higher-than-needed classification due to on-the-spot classification needs (e.g., daily itineraries).
3) The entire box is "declassified" verbally and sent for incineration/shredding.

Now, if you're retarded like Seb, then the person who moves the documents from the office to the incinerator/shredder is still handling classified documents. This is false and fucktarded. As a simple matter of convenience, the person doing the shredding may find it better to destroy the documents *with* the cover sheets simply so they're not destroying documents for their entire fucking life. It is up to the office whether or not the cover sheets will be maintained or destroyed (e.g., some offices are very averse to making new cover sheets as a way to limit their production of documents), and yet the documents with those cover sheets are declassified yet controlled at this point.

Similarly, the movement of documents from the White House to Mar-a-Lago can be done without an imperative to remove cover sheets simply because the task would take time that was not available. Only a retarded Vogon could think that things have not occurred if they have not been written down — yet that is the mantra of Sebbish bureaucrats whose god is paper, for paper lacks the imagination that they themselves lack as they march in formal procession from their birth certificates to their death certificates.

[Seb]: "and as you point out"

Did not point this out, you piece of shit. I don't disagree, but don't throw your rhetorical bullshit at me.

[Seb]: "there is no way to substantiate the claims of the former president that he had declassified them. There was no record of them having been declassified. Ergo, they are still classified"

False. The word of a president is sufficient.
The only exception to this is if a totalitarian state that has been infiltrated by Malthusian Marxists is attempting to use any and all means — including the creation of entirely unsupported precedents — to remove the political chances of a populist president who opposes in part the totalitarian strategy, just as the CIA has done abroad for more than 50 years to the populist leaders of other nations, including the recent Brazil electioneering. You are witnessing a deep-state coup in real time, and in your stupidity are being led by the nose by their hyper-immediate lies — not seeing that those lies contradict powers which would not have made anyone blink before the propaganda of 2016 began.


[Seb]: "Bottom line, if the document has a protective marking, and the information asset register has the document still listed with a protected marking,"

Notice how Seb slightly shifts his argument while pretending that he knew all along. This is how Seb gains ground despite having been fucking *wrong* initially. The slight change in his argument is that "if [condition A] AND [condition B]", which is correct but **not what he said before**. His argument before was "[Condition A and B are the same condition]." He is such a piece of shit. He *knows* that the hole in his argument was that documents often are *not* inventoried, so now he's pretending that he knew about that condition and is re-presenting his hypothesis-argument with the incorporated and previously unknown information.

Let's call this the "Seb Maneuver":
1) Seb says something completely fucking retarded, akin to a Cunningham's Law prompt.
2) Someone corrects Seb and calls him out for his retardation, stating the correct facts.
3) Seb says, "No, that's not correct," to make it appear that he's about to disagree.
4a) Seb proceeds to *agree* but restates your own argument back to you in his own words.
4b) Simultaneously with Step 4a, Seb, still being a fucking idiot, repeats step 1, making all-new errors.
5) Seb continually repeats this sequence, incrementally adjusting his argument until you're arguing with a deformed Brundle-fly version of your own argument.


..
[CC]: "A president can indeed declassify material"
[TDS Bot]: "yep, he sure can, [and he did by his own word]"

Awesome! Glad you agree! I'm glad that you're waking up from your psychotic delusions.
A bed-wetting diaper-shitting pedophile-supporter might have made the argument that "[hur hur, Trump is a liar, so he must not have done this]," but not you! You're above that pathetic communist propaganda because you're not an impotent little weasel who spends his day rubbing peanut butter on his Trump poster so he can lick it off while watching Acyn propaganda. :D

[TDS Bot]: "false info...
Biden docs found Nov 2, returned Nov 3, they only waited on any public acknowledgement"

False, you fucking liar. This was reported and confirmed even by the Washington Post, so even regime media knows how this went down. You fucking *know* that they sat on the info. You fucking *know* that they first contacted the White House before the DOJ. Even their useful idiot Press Secretary was in the dark until January, and even she admitted this when pressed, you piece of shit liar.

Everything bad you say about Trump is your own personal character flaw, you dumb bitch liar.

[TDS Bot]: "on the stupid belief he DID declassify, by what reasonable explanation would he never want the gov't to know it happened?"

I love how comically retarded even your examination question is — a perfect encapsulation that even your search for "truth" has corrupted you into faulty inquiries. You *presume* that he would "never want the gov't to know it happened", since, having no conscience, you are incapable of the good faith required to realize that he has **no imperative** to do these things himself.

Reconciliation and inventory is a government process, meaning that a president does not need to be hypervigilant about himself; these actions happen on his behalf to protect his interests. This normally functions without issue since the office of the president is understood by government authorities as possessing this power. The question you ought to ask is, "Why did government entities choose to disregard the president's own powers and authorities?" And the answer is that they are totalitarian Bolshevik scum attempting to remove a competitor to their strategy. If that means undermining the very powers of the government, they will do it.

Do you doubt this?
These are the same people attempting to undermine every Constitutional power that they can. These are the *same* people trying to remove parties from ballots, asking to pack the Supreme Court, abolish the Senate, make D.C. a state, abolish the Electoral College, and a hundred other Republic-ending machinations that would make slaves of United States citizens in the perpetual distraction of oppressor/oppressed in-fighting. Do you really think that they wouldn't invent a way to stop a competitor from running again? These people have the same hole of a missing morality as yourself, which means that nothing is beneath them.
Cherub Cow
Member
Fri Jan 27 21:42:57
Oops, wrong thread, lol
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Jan 28 00:08:11
Update on The Legislative Crown and The Synagogue
(World Governments and Religious Control)

After my above mention of India's conscious infiltration of Western governance with ESG/DIE policy (comment Tue Jan 24 07:10:35), I had been wondering about a potential division between Russian policy and BRICS+ policy at large, but this division may not actually exist at the level of core policy.

In the above comment, India was using "coherence" in the Marxist sense, likely referring to "Coherent Theories" by Vladislav Inozemtsev, which attempts to take the "useful" aspects of Marx and Engels (removing contradictions between them) and adapt them into a "coherent" framework which can be adopted by the world governance (totalitarian) template of a post-industrial (slave/service) society. More simply, a "coherent" Marxist plan allows all nations to adopt totalitarianism symmetrically/uniformly.

Inozemtsev does not just *hint* at this, by the way; this synthesis of Marx and Engels into post-industrial society is his overt thesis, and this "coherence" in governance is now a top priority of the ESG/DIE mechanism. I had not noticed it *previously* in ESG/DIE governance infiltration, but India's ham-handed insertion of the word — along with the usual DIE buzz-words — within their WHO-governance edit brought attention to it.

And what is the connection here to Russia and BRICS?

Inozemtsev, a Russian, has been critical of Putin's Ukraine aspirations. *If* Inozemtsev is taken as an Inner Party dogma propagator, then this is not consistent with the overall strategy.


And that overall strategy is worth re-stating:
BRICS+ is pushing the West to adopt ESG/DIE policies while insulating themselves from the negative effects of that same policy. So, BRICS+ talks about how important ESG/DIE "is" while not adopting it themselves (their G-Index remains extremely low). This allows BRICS+ to become energy powerhouses (BRICS+ expands their nuclear energy and oil production) while the West draws down its energy and becomes addicted to China's Belt-and-Road energy (the ESG/DIE West adopts "green" energy which has lower energy output and is reliant on Chinese mining).

In other words, BRICS+ talks out of both sides of their mouth, proclaiming the virtues of ESG/DIE while not drinking the Flavor Aid themselves — knowing that the West's suicide leaves BRICS+ standing in absolute power.


So, if Inozemtsev were Inner Party, he would *know* that it's important for BRICS+ to *avoid* adopting "coherence", yet he is critical of Putin for *not* doing so. Putin is correctly running the ESG/DIE vs. BRICS+ strategy by securing Ukrainian energy (ensuring Russian energy independence and provoking Western money-laundering), so, if Inozemtsev were being honest, he would support the strategy.

This means that Inozemtsev is
• ignorant of the strategy (unlikely, given his knowledge of Marxist theory) or
• duplicitous (the likely case, since a Russian outside of Russia must oppose Russia to maintain his positions)

The cost of Inozemtsev' duplicity is that it continues to meet reality. Inozemtsev has argued that Putin is essentially using the same framework as Hitler, believing that Russia has a duty to protect the sovereignty of its citizens against the growing slave morality of the world, expanding into Europe to rid Europe of this slave morality (also similar to the Russian version of Manifest Destiny). Placing Putin in such an alignment with Hitler, however, means that Putin would be targeting the central progenitors of slave morality: the Chabad groups. But Putin is *not* doing this:

"Putin Blasts 'Neo-Nazis' in Ukraine on Holocaust Remembrance Day"
[The Moscow Times; January 27th, 2023]
http://www...locaust-remembrance-day-a80065
• [Image Caption]: "Russian President Putin, Chief Rabbi of Russia Berel Lazar, and President of the Federation of Jewish Communities Alexander Boroda (L-R) meet on the eve of International Holocaust Remembrance Day"
• Putin: "This is evidenced by the crimes against civilians, ethnic cleansing and punitive actions organized by neo-Nazis in Ukraine. It is against that evil that our soldiers are bravely fighting,"
• "Supporters of Putin's military operation allege Ukraine's treatment of Russian speakers in the country is comparable with the actions of Nazi Germany."
• "One of the goals of the operation was the "de-Nazification" of Ukraine, Putin said when he announced nearly one year ago he had ordered Russian troops toward Kyiv."
• "[Putin's] claims have been contested by the Ukrainian government and the country's Jewish community."
• Of Ukraine's position to the opposite: "Russia's Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar told AFP that "for us, this is clearly a humiliation because we perfectly know and remember the role of the Red Army in the liberation of Auschwitz and in the victory over Nazism.""


Between the Russian-East and the West, this paints a picture of mudslinging along the lines of "[Onto whom can we map Hitler?]"

Both sides of this argument would point to "fascist" elements within each, between Ukraine's Azov Regiment and Russia's general expansionism under Putin's centralized power. Neither of those arguments is convincing in itself, since many leaders have seized power without being "Hitler", and Ukraine has made efforts to distance itself from the Azov Regiment's Nazi-phile history.

This illustrates a few options:
1) Putin is only giving lip-service to the Russian Chabad groups while he consolidates power outside of Chabad infiltration (proving the Western narrative of "Putin as Hitler" correct).
2) Putin is indeed aligned with the Chabad groups, with Chabad groups of both Ukraine and Russia playing both sides (showing consistency with the ESG/DIE and BRICS+ "overall strategy" mentioned above)
3) Putin is aligned only with Russian Chabad groups, with there being a splinter between Russian Chabad groups and Ukrainian/Western Chabad groups.


My thinking goes to option 2, particularly because Chabad imperatives are so consistent worldwide; but the thread to pull is whether or not there are indeed faith deviations between Russian and Ukrainian Chabad groups. If, at the core of each, exists the belief that it is Israel's destiny to rule the world, then option "2)" is shown, whereas, if Russian Chabad groups oppose Israeli supremacy, then option "3)" is in play. Option "1)" would be the most interesting option, but if Putin is being duplicitous to this degree then there would simply not be direct evidence of it until he consolidates Ukrainian energy (i.e., it would be safe to remove the mask).

Option "1)" would also result in Russian Chabad groups complaining about Russian policy. That is another thread to pull. The issue is again that it would not be safe for them to do so while Putin is in power, but smaller factions might take the risk and complain — particularly defectors who would raise alarms.
Cherub Cow
Member
Sat Jan 28 20:58:00
Another Update on The Legislative Crown and The Synagogue
(World Governments and Religious Control)


While I've said many times that the uni-party has *most* infiltrated the DNC — which is totally captured — here is another example that the GOP is *also* captured, with only a few representatives and senators seeming to oppose the uni-party on principle:

Republican Nation Committee Resolution:
"Resolution to oppose all forms of antisemitism, antisemitic statements, and any antisemitic elements that seek to infiltrate the Republican Party"
[USA Today's backup of the original document PDF; January 28th, 2023]
http://www...pose_all_forms_of_antisemitism

While this is currently just a resolution (not legally binding), this follows from Trump's 2018 parallel resolutions as well as Florida's successful passing in 2019 of the "Anti-Semitism Protections Bill CS/CS/HB 741", which codified into *law* the Department of State's definition of "Anti-Semitism":
[Florida dot gov; May 31st, 2019]
http://www.flgov.com/2019/05/31/governor-ron-desantis-signs-anti-semitism-protections-bill-cs-cs-hb-741/


To lukewarm IQ people, "antisemitism"="bad", so what's the problem? This seems obvious and "good", right?

No.

The issue here is similar to that seen in Sheila Jackson Lee's attempt to infiltrate DOJ governance with a faulty defining of "white supremacy" which effectively makes it illegal to talk about the DNC's racial eugenics (see UP thread on the subject http://utopiaforums.com/boardthread?id=politics&thread=91124&time=1673972069049 ).

The strategy is this:
1) Pass legislation making [bad thing] illegal. People don't like [bad thing], so what could go wrong?
2) Now that [bad thing] is illegal, the definition of [bad thing] is revealed as a legalese manipulation; its broad definition allows for the prosecution of political enemies and the distortion of statistics at the level of policy.
3) Prosecute political enemies, bypass First Amendment protections, empower the voice of a foreign actor.


In other words, if the GOP extends this resolution into additional state or national laws — following Florida's example — First Amendment protections will not apply when discussing a foreign entity or its policies within the United States. This follows from the Department of State's definitions, which were used in Florida's 2019 law:
[Department of State dot gov official; "Defining Antisemitism"]
http://www.state.gov/defining-antisemitism/
1) "Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
2) "Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
3) "Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
4) "Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust
5) "Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
6) "Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
7) "Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
8) "Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
9) "Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
10) "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
11) "Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel."


The first one seems reasonable, correct? Calls for violence are obviously a problem. But that's about the end of the "reasonable" section.
2) As law, it takes it as "true" that it is a "myth" that Jewish people have control over "media, economy, government or other societal institutions" — when this is not myth but simple and bland reality. Codifying this also means that — even *if* Jewish people did *not* have control — the law would give them immunity if at any point they *gained* control.
3) This section represents the fallacy of "[individuals when wrong is done, a group when right is done]". It is a "repressive tolerance" scheme which shields accountability. This would be like making it a law that one cannot point out that Islamic people have a higher tendency to resort to violence when their beliefs are called out — there is a clear connection there between belief and individual action which scales even with population surveys on this same point. Blurring this connection allows the belief system to remain unchanged by Western ideals of liberty; it is asymmetrically anti-assimilation, allowing the West to erode on behalf of foreign ideology.
4) It also prevents people from even *questioning* Holocaust evidence. Say what you will about Holocaust Denial in general (there exist plenty of comical fodder there), but not being able to examine evidence is antithetical to truth-seeking.
5) "Accusing" is the key word here. People will *indeed* exaggerate the Holocaust's importance, but under this definition it is "antisemtic" to even *accuse* someone of doing it.
6) Again, *accusing* is "antisemitic". This shields Jewish people from *actually* having asymmetric loyalty — even if they do indeed have demonstrable loyalty preferences.
7) This one is hilarious: opposing Zionism is itself "antisemitic". Pointing out that the DIE policies being used against the West via mass migration is *not* being used in Israel.. is "antisemitic". This is again "repressive tolerance"; Jewish people are allowed an ethnic state which cannot even be criticized for this ethnic imperative while the rest of the world is free game for ethnic annihilation.
8) This one is pure irony: its "repressive tolerance" cannot even be identified. If you point out Jewish double standards, it is *you* who is applying a double standard! lol
9) Again, even *claiming* that Jews killed Jesus is "antisemitic", which almost seems tailored to Mel Gibson ;) .. still, this one is less of an issue since Jesus may not have even physically existed.
10) You cannot even *compare* Jewish supremacy with Aryan supremacy. Again, this is both an issue in the present (present speech blocked) and an issue in the future, since this allows Jewish people to actually and openly conduct such policies at a future date but remain immune to the consequences of those policies. This was clearly designed to shield Israel from its Apartheid tactics.
11) This one is fair as a non-legal thought, since the entire peoples of a group should not be condemned for the actions of its oligarchs. But it is not fair or just as a law.

So we have 11 bullet points but only 2 of them are *actual* antisemitism and only *one* of them should be even *close* to legally advisable.

Even in the *best* case scenario, which would be that Jewish people are totally and blessedly wonderful and could do no wrong and thus deserve all protections, formalizing these criteria into law — as the GOP intends to do further — actually incentivizes Jewish leaders to *pursue* the negative aspects of these criteria since they would be legally shielded from accountability in their future actions. That is, Jewish leaders could indeed use Nazi tactics, distort Holocaust evidence, merge all Jewish individuals into a Borg overmind, have asymmetric loyalty to Israel, wield repressive tolerance without check, openly admit to killing or inventing Jesus, and conduct blood libel.. and face no repercussions (illegal even to talk about it!).

Ironically, even though formalizing the DoS definitions into law is a *direct* contradiction of Unites States principles of free speech and liberty, the GOP Resolution lists those very same imperatives of speech and liberty before making an insane non sequitur which says that eroding those very rights is *supported* by the resolution. This level of doublethink is tremendous, and it was signed off by GOP leadership.


In closing, while low-IQ UP members may see this post as "antisemitism" in itself, I would again remind that this is *not* about blaming random Jewish people who merely live their lives and attend their local synagogues — *that* fallacy of association *is* perhaps antisemitism, but even that should not be illegal in itself. No. Resolutions like this and their downstream laws represent something different.

As this connects to the ESG/DIE empowerment of world oligarchs, what we are seeing with Jewish oligarchs and their GOP oligarch supporters is the same policy used worldwide: an intentional asymmetry of law which takes power away from free-speaking people and places it squarely in the hands of an anointed class. And this is not limited to just some "Jewish conspiracy"; that is myopic.

Ardern, Trudeau, Macron, and Biden did not attend synagogue, as far as I'm aware, but they are using this same framework for DIE groups in general. This is the same insane imperative of passing "hate speech" laws that prevent people from saying negative things about immigrants of any number of ethnic origins. The binding factor is again that this protects people who possess slave morality, be they Jewish, Somali, Guatemalan, or Visigoth. Rome is being told that any who oppose it have a special class of laws which shield the slaves while allowing those slaves to enslave Rome. Treason against the West is itself being protected — in and *by* the West!
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share