That won't stop the media from blaming it on the collusion of Trump, Russia, and the dirty right wing extremists!
2020 US Election - Let The Games Begin!
- Thread starter露丝
- Start date
That won't stop the media from blaming it on the collusion of Trump, Russia, and the dirty right wing extremists!
Miles Mathis: "The January 6 “Attack on the Capitol” was Staged"
->http://mileswmathis.com/jan6.pdf
His conclusion:
->http://mileswmathis.com/jan6.pdf
His conclusion:
Steven Crowder's show returned at the beginning of this month, and this week published evidence of specific votes having been cast for or by people with non-existent addresses. Inthese show notes, they explain how they did it:
They ended up with a sample of 20 cases [10 in Clark County (Las Vegas), Nevada, and 10 in Wayne County (Detroit), Michigan] to go visit and physically check. The relevant segment of the show begins here:
Crowder is hoping that people watching his show will follow his lead and check vote records against actual addresses, possibly generating some kind of momentum towards opening official investigations:
Among the 20 cases they verified as fake votes, one was done on behalf of a criminal currently in prison, and another was by (or on behalf of) a Las Vegas lawyer and (former?) Clinton staffer named Christina Gupano, who wasouted by Project Veritas back in 2015for hiring polling workers and telling them, "whatever you can get away with, just do it."
She later 'went missing' after gettingcaught breaking campaign lawsand being investigated by the state of Nevada. Crowder's team found that Gupano has postal address listing her as currently being in London, while her Instagram accountplaced her in the Philippineslast Christmas... yet she 'voted' two months earlier in the 2020 election from a Las Vegas address that doesn't physically exist.
Crowder and team wanted to just keep going like this, but they're trying to 'walk the line' with social media platforms' "community guidelines" regarding what they can or cannot claim about election fraud. So their lawyer advised them to make theadditionalstep of physically visiting these 'residential addresses' to verify that they do not in fact exist.
They ended up with a sample of 20 cases [10 in Clark County (Las Vegas), Nevada, and 10 in Wayne County (Detroit), Michigan] to go visit and physically check. The relevant segment of the show begins here:
Crowder is hoping that people watching his show will follow his lead and check vote records against actual addresses, possibly generating some kind of momentum towards opening official investigations:
Twitter then briefly blocked the @scrowder account when he posted notification of that show (from Feb 23), reinstated it when they complained, but left that particular tweet 'un-interactable' so that it couldn't be shared or commented on. In Crowder's subsequent show (Feb 24), he further explained their vote-checking methods and general strategy of trying to hold the tech companies to their own 'standards'.
Among the 20 cases they verified as fake votes, one was done on behalf of a criminal currently in prison, and another was by (or on behalf of) a Las Vegas lawyer and (former?) Clinton staffer named Christina Gupano, who wasouted by Project Veritas back in 2015for hiring polling workers and telling them, "whatever you can get away with, just do it."
She later 'went missing' after gettingcaught breaking campaign lawsand being investigated by the state of Nevada. Crowder's team found that Gupano has postal address listing her as currently being in London, while her Instagram accountplaced her in the Philippineslast Christmas... yet she 'voted' two months earlier in the 2020 election from a Las Vegas address that doesn't physically exist.
Novelis
Jedi Master
Firstly, it needs to be said that while I don’t think Jordan Peterson himself thinks the 2020 election was stolen, judging by his interview with Gaad Saad, at 9 minutes 37 seconds in, where he says…
(Linked below)
_
…nevertheless, I still found his words, from the book ’12 Rules for Life’, to be particularly relevant not only to this election, but also on how the US got to this state, as well as the potential future lying ahead.
Personally, when I read the above passage, I experienced many glimpses of those “smaller (or further removed from our times, thus appearing smaller in terms of “distance” as opposed to “size”) lies” that lead us here – the Kennedy assassination, Bush’s stolen election against Gore, the London bombings, the endless smaller scale false flag operations that pepper the decades since 911, etc. – all culminating in the election fiasco we witnessed before our very eyes.
By the time I got to the end of Peterson’s passage though, these flashes of the many images of the decades since 911, and many more before then, gathered together into one horrifying possibility…
Now, I know I am speculating, but please bear with me, as I do have a point to make of all this that I thought was worth sharing with everyone, which will become clear by the end…
What if, when viewing things in light of what we know is possible from the hypothetical 4D perspective, these recent events, chiefly the whole COVID scam, working in tandem with the 2020 elections (since the 2020 elections couldn’t have turned out the way they did without the very convenient COVID scare operating as a backdrop), provides appropriate context as to why, for instance, most governments around the world stayed silent when 911 occurred?
Perhaps 911 was the attempt to get the US to swallow a smaller falsehood (in comparison with this one), as well as simultaneously acting as an impetus to goad the US citizenry into acting upon that lie, passively in the form of remaining silent, giving consent, etc., and actively by participating in that bloody war in Iraq (as well as many other wars, in many other places)?
如果现在,因为所有的相对较小的lies surrounding 911 have already been swallowed, acted upon and internalized, the fruit was ripe for the 2020 election results in the US, and more broadly, for the “Counter-COVID measures” (which remains to be seen) on the global level?
More importantly though, I wondered: since lies don’t just need to be swallowed and accepted, but have to be acted upon (Free will could not be abridged if you had not obliged), what is the impetus by which the global citizenry are being goaded into acting upon THAT lie? Then it hit me…
It’s (in part at least) the vaccination, isn’t it?
See, while perhaps appearing fairly innocuous at face value to most, and especially when viewed as disconnected from everything else going on, the vaccine is more than just an object made of its composite parts in the material sense; it is also the beginnings of a tacit agreement between the person taking the vaccine and the “body” of corrupt individuals and vested interests that make up the PTB, the very individuals who stole the election, and the people who stood to benefit from it. It is more than dodgy science, potential health hazard, an experiment, and all the rest of what has been covered on Sott and elsewhere, it is also part and parcel of the 2020 election itself; it contains a dose of the LIE that is the 2020 election within its metaphysical, etheric, or hyper-dimensional composition. It is an action that demonstrates implicit trust in the PTB and their presupposed interest in the welfare of the masses. It is also a support structure, a pillar if you will, that will prop up greater lies still.
我希望我错了,我过于偏执, or that I am being too black-and-white on this matter, so please correct me, as always, if I am mistaken or being too extreme… but judging by how people are taking their vaccines, it’s all looking pretty bleak from where I am standing right now.
Jordan B. Peterson said:
(Linked below)
_
…nevertheless, I still found his words, from the book ’12 Rules for Life’, to be particularly relevant not only to this election, but also on how the US got to this state, as well as the potential future lying ahead.
Jordan B. Peterson: 12 Rules for Life: P.160 said:
Personally, when I read the above passage, I experienced many glimpses of those “smaller (or further removed from our times, thus appearing smaller in terms of “distance” as opposed to “size”) lies” that lead us here – the Kennedy assassination, Bush’s stolen election against Gore, the London bombings, the endless smaller scale false flag operations that pepper the decades since 911, etc. – all culminating in the election fiasco we witnessed before our very eyes.
By the time I got to the end of Peterson’s passage though, these flashes of the many images of the decades since 911, and many more before then, gathered together into one horrifying possibility…
Now, I know I am speculating, but please bear with me, as I do have a point to make of all this that I thought was worth sharing with everyone, which will become clear by the end…
What if, when viewing things in light of what we know is possible from the hypothetical 4D perspective, these recent events, chiefly the whole COVID scam, working in tandem with the 2020 elections (since the 2020 elections couldn’t have turned out the way they did without the very convenient COVID scare operating as a backdrop), provides appropriate context as to why, for instance, most governments around the world stayed silent when 911 occurred?
Perhaps 911 was the attempt to get the US to swallow a smaller falsehood (in comparison with this one), as well as simultaneously acting as an impetus to goad the US citizenry into acting upon that lie, passively in the form of remaining silent, giving consent, etc., and actively by participating in that bloody war in Iraq (as well as many other wars, in many other places)?
如果现在,因为所有的相对较小的lies surrounding 911 have already been swallowed, acted upon and internalized, the fruit was ripe for the 2020 election results in the US, and more broadly, for the “Counter-COVID measures” (which remains to be seen) on the global level?
More importantly though, I wondered: since lies don’t just need to be swallowed and accepted, but have to be acted upon (Free will could not be abridged if you had not obliged), what is the impetus by which the global citizenry are being goaded into acting upon THAT lie? Then it hit me…
It’s (in part at least) the vaccination, isn’t it?
See, while perhaps appearing fairly innocuous at face value to most, and especially when viewed as disconnected from everything else going on, the vaccine is more than just an object made of its composite parts in the material sense; it is also the beginnings of a tacit agreement between the person taking the vaccine and the “body” of corrupt individuals and vested interests that make up the PTB, the very individuals who stole the election, and the people who stood to benefit from it. It is more than dodgy science, potential health hazard, an experiment, and all the rest of what has been covered on Sott and elsewhere, it is also part and parcel of the 2020 election itself; it contains a dose of the LIE that is the 2020 election within its metaphysical, etheric, or hyper-dimensional composition. It is an action that demonstrates implicit trust in the PTB and their presupposed interest in the welfare of the masses. It is also a support structure, a pillar if you will, that will prop up greater lies still.
我希望我错了,我过于偏执, or that I am being too black-and-white on this matter, so please correct me, as always, if I am mistaken or being too extreme… but judging by how people are taking their vaccines, it’s all looking pretty bleak from where I am standing right now.
Recto
Jedi
Here's my take on it, FWIW.
Each lie a person "swallow" up the stakes regarding the impact facing the truth would make on them. For instance, putting myself in the shoes of a patriot (of any country), facing the fact that my country waged illegal wars in foreign countries, that my beloved government is spying on and manipulating its citizens considering them as a potential threat, that the system is so corrupt that even "holy democracy" is merely a facade for a pathocratic empire, all of that and much, much more would be like shattering all I think I knew about my country, my past, my identity even.
From that point of view, the cost of truth for some people is seen by themselves (unconsciously, since they are in denial) as "too high". Taking the vaccine is going one step further by actively taking part in this false reality. And it will have much more dramatic consequences (health related first and foremost) for those taking this step.
But you also have people who are not entirely conviced but will get vaccinated with a bit of an "incentive", either through threats or manufactured hardships. You have also the case of the ignorant and naive people, which haven't thought through the issue and will get their free will robbed easily. The reality is probably far more complex than that, especially when taking into account the circulation of true informationon the internet about what is going on. It would be hard to quantify the impact it has on the matter (even at a subconscious level). When there's doubt, there's hope.
So far, correct me if I'm wrong, we haven't seen a real enthusiasm by the people at large for the vaccination campaigns. Even with all the fear mongering going on. So there's still hope that a critical "awakening point" may be reached before an all-out dystopian future tipping point. Let's do our best and we'll see how that goes
Heather
Dagobah Resident
Hi@moyal.
I thought I'd further the ongoing discussion (on threads like this one) about source. Miles Mathis admits in his piece he links to re: the 2020 election fraud that his sources are Zero Hedge, Natural News, and Alex Jones. So, he's on very shaky ground right there. I haven't read either of these articles in their entirely but right off the bat with the election fraud piece his analysis is far too simplistic. While I agree there are a lot of shady areas with Trump -- it's been difficult to know just how tied to the Deep State he actually is -- but to miss the fact that he represents a phenomenon around which a new populist movement has emerged makes me question Mathis' analysis skills, if not his intentions. I agree that partisan politics is problematic. I'm always stepping back from it, trying to gauge things from a wider perspective. Still, the "fight" this current populist movement is engaged in does represent pretty down to earth concerns, including constitutional rights (by the way), and so my sympathies go in that direction regardless of how I feel about knee jerk partisan politics, which is always problematic.
As always, at least for myself, it's useful to develop the ability to hold two thoughts simultaneously. While it's important to question partisan politics, and other devices being used to divide us, that shouldn't mean throwing the baby out with the bath water. If there is a worthwhile "fight" (and I'm not talking about violence, but populist forms of political action, including donating time and or money, and engaging in discussion), then the powers that be will want to disrupt that perspective as well. We see how they do this too since they do it constantly. For example, as we've seen for a long time now, the left is acting both overtly and covertly like domestic terrorists, so what do they do? They accuse Trump supporters of being that themselves. And because they do this "projection" routine so thoroughly and consistently, it really does create this twisted form of "mirroring realities." Theirs is the "fun house" version of the truth because of this incessant lying and propagandizing.
Having said that, staying with the truth is not always easy given the insidious nature of the deep state, and how it infiltrates all of our efforts. Regardless of all that, it's important not to do away with common sense, which is what a lot of these actual conspiracy theorists tend to do (including Mathis). They play on our skepticism, and destroy what should be obvious to us (always remember the "flat earth" phenomenon, and how that preyed on and perverted many people's legitimate skepticism regarding the mainstream).
Also on the issue of source: right now I've been following George Webb more closely, trying to determine what kind of source he actually represents. I'm baffled why he's allowed on Twitter. I believe he lost his account on Youtube but is now appearing on another Youtube channel with some of his associates.Unlike Mathis' take, Webb didn't think the shooting of Ashli Babbitt was fake, based on the footage.He indicated she was led to her execution, in fact, with a senate aide on her left and another operative dressed in black on her right (each taking her by the arm as she entered). Then there was the hand with the gun appearing left of screen, with specific bracelets on the wrist that helped identify the shooter as the Washington security person involved in Congressman's Scalise near murder. As I understand it, he was Scalise's body guard but didn't do his job -- it was someone else who stepped in to save Scalise.
Anyway, I haven't looked into the Ashli Babbit scenario more than that. Even though she's a vet (possibly tied to intelligence) and even if she happens to be Jewish that doesn't automatically mean she was part of the capitol operation as Mathis is saying. I'm not saying she wasn't either. I'm just questioning his automatic assumption. Also: why wouldn't Webb, who is all over such "ties," have indicated as much? So, more work would need to be done in order to come to such conclusion
On a somewhat related topic, if the "Yahweh" book by Guyenot is even half correct you'd think we'd be hearing a lot more about the Mossad's involvement in present domestic terror operations. Maybe such info. is out there, I just haven't come across it.
In so speaking, I've been thinking it might be useful to assess present domestic terror operations in light of the cited material in the "Yahweh" book, specifically Guyenot's contention that the CIA's involvement in the JFK assassination has been misrepresented -- if it's true the CIA's actual intention was a "near miss," not an actual assassination. As the story goes, this misrepresentation of the CIA's almost exclusive involvement then became the focus of virtually all of the subsequent theories surrounding JFK's death -- as opposed to Guyonot's claim (in citing a researcher whose name escapes me) that the Mossad infiltrated the CIA operation so as to succeed in carrying out an actual assassination.
In other words, in light of the research in that book -- which should also be examined closely for its own potential shortcomings -- but, in light of such research, it seems like we should always be asking the question as to whether the Mossad's role is being covered up in some way, no matter what the operation. Is Webb himself misdirecting? Is that why he's allowed his presence on Twitter and Youtube? Or is he, as he attests, in imminent danger?
Was Oliver Stone allowed to make his JFK movie because it continued the cover-up concerning the Mossad?
After I wrote the above, I saw a new tweet by Webb in which he mentions a scene from Stone's JFK film that the Mossad censored. [??] Wow, if that's true, I'd never have imagined their involvement to be so direct. So it seems Webb is at least aware of this as an issue.
Related to this: what's pretty wild about George Webb re: Oliver Stone's JFK movie is that he claims to be "updating" it based on his research. He's written a screenplay and plans to go into production; he is casting the film as we speak.
I have to say I was rather shocked to see Webb is now in the "movie" business. Having knowledge of narrative filmmaking myself, I can tell you first hand it's a far cry -- especially cost wise -- from doing a documentary. So, how is Webb able to, uh, just update Stone's (a seasoned Hollywood director) 40-60 million dollar budget production [not sure how much exactly]?
This development is something I'd like to follow closely to see what Webb is actually able to pull off even just production wise, but also in terms of its "updated" content. But, I mean, production wise, he could be in the midst of some grand "misdirected" folly! Of course, it will likely be an extremely low budget "verite" sort of endeavor. Nevertheless, it still takes some skill and experience to do that with some proficiency.
As a source, George Webb is something of a conundrum. He seems legit, and yet he isn't the easiest source to follow. He isn't good at "fleshing out" ideas. I bought a small pamphlet of his, it's hard to call it a book, titled "Why Blackberries Matter." (This refers to the encrypted blackberries Hillary Clinton, et. al., have used for their nefarious activities. Webb discovered this significant aspect of their whole operation some time ago through his rather daring, on the ground ventures in investigative reporting.) The slim book has some good nuggets in there, but Webb's writing doesn't seem to be his strong point. It's missing a lot of connective tissue, so you're left to puzzle with the pieces he presents you with. But, with that in mind, how could Webb write a convincing feature length screenplay? Or, maybe it's a short. Hard to imagine him writing a feature.
Anyway, I'm keeping an eye on Webb, following him on Twitter, and may read more of his books, which are cheap and, I assume, all rather brief.
As for his film project... should be interesting to keep track of.
Last edited:
Lyndi Lama
Jedi Master
Just a quick comment here. Great interest in what you have written, will look up that book by Guyonot. Primarily, I've been following Webb off and on for a couple of years on various platforms and have the question, why is he still alive, basically. I concluded his information and dot-connecting are highy accurate. A smart friend of mine, when I mentioned him to her, half-muttered that he 'drank a lot'. Maybe he has been dismissed, written off? A smear campaign (yes, MSM as I just found call him a conspiracy theorist)? On the other hand, another smart friend likes him a lot and never mentioned alcohol.
New York Times describes him in a 2017 article as "a prolific social media conspiracy theorist", and "With almost 17,000 followers on Twitter and nearly 40,000 subscribers on YouTube, Mr. Webb does not have the reach of prominent conspiracy theorists such asAlex Jones……”。我想我应该post the link here, since I've mentioned this NYT article. I'm not experienced on protocol here on the forum - yet, but likely I just cut and paste.How a Conspiracy Theorist’s Call About a Dirty Bomb Shut Down Part of a Port (Published 2017)
Didn't mean to get further into this, but found that George Webb's brother, David Webb, is a cybersecurity expert and author. George Webb himself is named a co-conspirator in the case of a the dirty bomb story in the NYT article above and was arrested the following day for DUI. The brother, David, wrote "The Port of Charleston Dirty Bomb Hoax and Social Media Liability"about the incident of June 14, 2017. Well! Connected to a cybersecurity expert. Also his father was the first inventor to patent the cordless phone. So between money thanks to cordless phone, perhaps, and a brother who may be a better writer (who wrote a book on cyberwarfare and has multiple credentials in that field), maybe a film is not such a stretch. Link:Port of Charleston Dirty Bomb Hoax - EverybodyWiki Bios & Wiki.
After watching it, it seems like he's hinting at running again a 3rd time in 2024. He's down and not out and is still fighting for the truth that is the election was stolen. Another highlight was that he mentioned Biden's no-fracking stance despite Biden retracting his statements after feeling the heat from the people a while back, only to again reaffirm his true stance by shutting down a major oil pipeline shortly after entering office.
There will be interesting developments in the future for sure.
After contemplating the reason why he did not go to alternative platforms after being banned from Twitter, I think a part of that decision, whether conscious or not, was to not cause further division among people. If he were to be on Parler or Gab, which to be honest lean mostly right-wing, would further increase the fissure between the left and right. And given how ravenous the media works in influencing the minds of others to the point of hatred, it seems that this would most likely be the case. The Cs speak of the importance of uniting. As long as the individual isn't fully against taking an open stance, then the potential for that individual to enter the path of true learning is not lost. As the Wave books have described, individuals who let the predator's mind take over merely have a disease, and disease can be treated.
He does not take these as sources. He thinks it's all controlled opposition.
About Kennedy I don't care to be honest. I was born 1975 in the GDR, for me that's just a name of some person from history. Like Martin Luther or Madame de Montespan. And history is lies about events that did not happen told by people that where not there.
Here is Miles Mathis about Kennedy:http://mileswmathis.com/barindex2.pdf
I don't say he is right, but I say he is interesting, because he looks at a lot of stuff from unique angles, that you find nowhere else.
Here is his page with links to all his articles:
Updates
mileswmathis.com
(the one about Charles Manson, Hitler and Abraham Lincoln are a good pick to read)
BHelmet
The Living Force
Miles Mathis can be a highly entertaining writer. His musings can be quite original and at times collinear with some of what goes on in this forum. I do check in to his site from time to time and I have read everything you mention.
However...
He can also be a bit of a broken record. "It was the Crypto-Jews from the royal peerage playing games with us in league with the boys at Langley; everybody was in on the gag and none of it really happened, just one big happy Psyop; all these photos were faked ...etc etc"
It gets old.
It is entirely possible he is also a part of the controlled opposition himself, although I still give him the benefit of the doubt.
You don't care about Kennedy. Old news. I get it. And yet you seem to care about Mathis' interpretation of history...about the same old news. Something odd about that.
What was most important about Kennedy was what he represented: A humane, hopeful, co-operative vision of the world.
After his assassination, which, in my opinion, was a coup, that vision was crushed and scattered to the wind. Today we are still reaping that same dysfunctional harvest that nobody really wants except the madmen at the top.
I think it is instructive to note the current hot topics, and personalities that Mathis seems to avoid as he favors fake serial killers and murders. I also note that his solar cycle article assiduously avoids the idea proposed by many that this cycle is just beginning to start bottoming out.
But yeah, he IS a very entertaining guy with plenty of style.
However...
He can also be a bit of a broken record. "It was the Crypto-Jews from the royal peerage playing games with us in league with the boys at Langley; everybody was in on the gag and none of it really happened, just one big happy Psyop; all these photos were faked ...etc etc"
It gets old.
It is entirely possible he is also a part of the controlled opposition himself, although I still give him the benefit of the doubt.
You don't care about Kennedy. Old news. I get it. And yet you seem to care about Mathis' interpretation of history...about the same old news. Something odd about that.
What was most important about Kennedy was what he represented: A humane, hopeful, co-operative vision of the world.
After his assassination, which, in my opinion, was a coup, that vision was crushed and scattered to the wind. Today we are still reaping that same dysfunctional harvest that nobody really wants except the madmen at the top.
I think it is instructive to note the current hot topics, and personalities that Mathis seems to avoid as he favors fake serial killers and murders. I also note that his solar cycle article assiduously avoids the idea proposed by many that this cycle is just beginning to start bottoming out.
But yeah, he IS a very entertaining guy with plenty of style.
What do you expect he should change, that it get's "new" again. Since today it is the Eskimos?
From the Kennedy paper:
Heather
Dagobah Resident
Hi@moyal. I haven't read it in its entirety yet, but if you change your mind about looking more into history, I recommend you read "JFK and the Unspeakable; Why he died and why it matters," by James W. Douglass. One speech is not enough to understand the context in which it is uttered. This book goes deeply into these matters. Not long into the book you'll come to understand the stakes involved in what was then the relatively new age of nuclear destruction; this includes Kennedy's thwarting the Joint Chiefs' proposition to drop a nuclear bomb on Russia. The Bay of Pigs operation was already in gear when it was handed over to Kennedy by Eisenhower. Kennedy SHOCKED the Joint Chiefs and the CIA when he WOULD NOT play ball, when through a secret correspondence with Khrushchev -- which itself was almost a kind of miracle given the two men had no reason to trust each other initially -- a diplomatic feat was accomplished, an equitable deal was arrived at, and de-escalation occurred with Russia removing its nuclear warheads from Cuba.
Actually, I believe it was in Guyenot's book ("From Yahweh to Zion") where we learn that Kennedy did not want LBJ as his running mate. He wanted Adlai Stevenson. On this matter, Kennedy was blackmailed by the New York Times who promised to smear him in such a way that he would never win the election UNLESS he chose Johnson (who happened to have been a serious Zionist -- which of course was Guyonet's point given the theme of his book).
Meanwhile, what you come to understand in Douglass' book is that Kennedy's learning curve during the brief time of his presidency was nearly vertical. To understand the man, you also have to understand what he was rapidly coming to terms with concerning the whole "deep state" set-up, and how he was responding to it in ways that would inevitably get him killed. Actually, this is a good example of how extreme circumstances can either destroy a person or challenge him or her to "become." In that sense, not even death destroys us, nor did it ultimately destroy Kennedy, who's thinking had entirely changed in the short time he was in office to the degree that he was not the same man by the time of his assassination. To those who believe him to have been exceptional, it's that he bravely became so through extreme adversity.
I agree that no one who gets to that level of power is an angel. Significant here is Kennedy's father who, as I understand it, was able to rig the election to win the presidency for his son. As we all know, Jack Kennedy was also a womanizer, but in those days the press felt that such matters were not only personal but beneath the journalist's more serious calling. Journalism was a far more formal affair than the "normalized" tripe we see now. (That sexism and racism didn't need to be addressed I don't deny, but that's another conversation.) Anyway, I only bring this up in that I agree that Kennedy was far from being a "saint." Having said that, and as I touched on already, there are real reasons why he is often thought of so highly, and a discerning reading of history begins to bear that out.
As for my personal take on this Mathis person, the more I read his stuff, the more convinced I am he is controlled opposition -- and a pretty obvious version of it too. I'm certainly not tempted to go any further with him. Quite the opposite in fact.
Recto
Jedi
I wonder what has been the first-hand experience of Donald Trump in that regard. He knew part of the government was corrupt but he must have been surprised the day he took office. Let's hope someday we'll get a sneak peak behind the curtain of his presidency. It should be as equally fascinating/important to read, IMO.
Heather
Dagobah Resident
Hi @LyndiLama.
我不知道他的兄弟,但我知道他s been smeared by the MSM many times. I'd have to look up the details again, but it seems they deliberately mischaracterized his accurate (too accurate, as it turned out) reporting concerning the dirty bomb, in an attempt to dirty his own reputation. The "drinking" incident they smeared him with in reality had to do with his pulling his car over to the side of the road in order to get some sleep (or maybe he used an abandoned parking lot somewhere, I don't exactly recall). Now, last time I checked, this is what you do for safety reasons if you find yourself too sleepy to drive. In fact, it's the "responsible" thing to do. But not if you're George Webb, and your reporting is too "on the money." In that case the cops take you in on a DUI charge (!)
I didn't know about his father either, and the father's cordless phone patent. That's particularly interesting given Webb's exposing the whole encrypted blackberries scenario.
Actually, it seems that initially Webb's reputation as a cutting edge (independent) investigative reporter -- well, except by the MSM, who of course call him a conspiracy theorist -- had a lot to do with the encrypted blackberries discovery, which still has relevance even now. For example, Webb recently stated that many of the current players in the new Biden administration have these encrypted blackberries, which, to those that understand what they are used for, is "smoking gun" in its implications. Seems the more you dig into the George Webb material, the more you understand the importance of these blackberries.
Funny that the Times puts down Webb not just as a conspiracy theorist, but a conspiracy theorist with not nearly the following of Alex Jones. I mean, for those of us who follow Webb, that goes to his credibility, and isn't a slight on his legitimacy at all! (Very much the opposite.)
最近,男男同性恋者曾试图威胁韦伯for what really amounts to his doing too good a job with the capitol "insurgency" operation. Webb, being the on the ground reporter that he is, had been at the capitol that day, and had been filming, as had others in his crew. Once the operation started playing out, and they got wind of what was happening, they were all over the role Antifa operatives (among others) were playing since Webb and others actually filmed them, and were later able to photo I.D. many of them. But George Webb noted right away that it was the "orange hats" (tied to Antifa) who toppled the rather low metal fence outside the capitol building, not MAGA's red hats -- although he and his crew also discovered that some of them changed their orange hats for red ones as the operation unfolded. Webb, et. al., were also there creating a time line proving that Trump supporters, who were still listening to the end of Trump's speech, were not even at the capitol building when the so called insurgency first started. In the films he and his crew took, he eventually would I.D. known Ukrainian terrorists too, and even has footage where the "insurgents" were shouting in Russian (!)
Webb also tied all the extremist groups (left and right) used in the operation to something called "4th Psych Ops" out of Fort Bragg (I believe it is) -- oh, and he discusses how the FBI is all over the operation as well. (Many here may already be aware that the leader of the Proud Boys is a known FBI informant, but that is just the tip of the iceberg where the FBI's considerable role in this is concerned.)
Anyway, the MSM responded to Webb's initial reports by saying that because Webb was the first to expose Antifa's role in the capitol "insurgency," he must be part of Antifa's operation himself (!!).
Let's rewind that a second: so, because someone is doing YOUR job (MSM); that is, because Webb is doing the on the ground investigative reporting that you, CNN, NBC, etc. should be doing, he must therefore be "involved" in the operation he is exposing. (Ha!) So, yeah, Webb has had to do a lot of fencing with the MSM maniacs who are busy manipulating every move he makes.
Actually, as usually happens when you start to focus on a particular source, the more I listen to Webb, the more bits and pieces of his personal history begin to emerge. Interesting to note, he used to be an independent reporter used by CNN, which is why he keeps tabs on them in particular since he actually knows a lot of the people who work there. It seems that at some point Webb realized he had to function entirely on his own if he wanted to do the kind of reporting he's doing now, and has been doing for some time.
You could be right, Lyndi Lama, Webb may have some family money with which to finance a feature film, although I'm sure he'll also use something akin to Patreon to raise money online. Patreon, by the way, recently kicked Webb out, and in so doing deleted many many videos and other materials he had posted there over quite some time, so... so much for Patreon.
Last edited: