I have one household chore that generally takes well over an hour, and so like to have background noise. This morning I listened to Brian Staveley in a 9/11 video hosted by AB and Fakeologist.
I am not a good liar, and in fact decided years ago that it is better in almost all cases (except when feelings are needlessly hurt) to be honest. Consequently, I have never studied the art of lying. My first wife was a highly skilled liar, part of the reason she was able to charm me into being her mate. I still marvel at how she can tell detailed lies with seeming innocence and absolute conviction. That is what it takes to be a good liar.
Intelligence operatives study the art of lying, because it is not only the lie that matters, but also the ability to persuade. My ex-wife not only tells her lies, but is persuasive. She studies her marks, fits the lie to the targeted person. All of this, and she is not very smart in a book sense. (All of this too, and she has not and will never read a blog.)
As I listened to Staveley, I first realized that the video started out with a modest lie. The whole thing is built around two people exchanging ideas, and was planned that way. But Staveley pretended to be surprised when he got a call, and said nothing thereafter when no one else called in, and the caller was on the entire show. I never did get his name.
That was the plan. I used to do televised interviews (for local access in Billings, Montana – don’t get excited), and tried one time to do a whole show without a guest. (It was never aired – I made sure of that.) Some people can pull that off, and maybe Staveley can, but much bigger game was afoot in that video. Brian and his guest were doing a hard-sell on flat earth. It is much easier to pull that off if you are having a two-way conversation.
We don’t allow discussion of flat earth on this blog, so I will monitor comments and delete any that want to go that route. Flat earth is not what this is about. I will not delete comments to be harsh on anyone, but rather only to keep the comment thread from exploding in my face and going off in unintended directions.
By that video I now judge Brian Staveley to be a spook. Here’s why: He used
45 1:09 of the video to tell us stuff we already know. We are all in agreement that the moon landings, JFK, 9/11, Sandy Hook, the Pulse, were fake. Here at this website we have added things like Tyrone’s JFKTV and my own work on Columbine, John Denver, Dennis Washington, John Brown, etc. … original work all of it.
Staveley claims to be a ground breaker. I am having my doubts. I am thinking now that he has hoovered the good work of others, claimed it as his own, and uses it as packaging for flat earth.
What I heard in the video linked above was the art of persuasion. He is claiming common ground with true researchers, and then using that common ground to take us down a side road, some of the most untenable hogwash ever spewed in the Internet age.
There is a notion among those of us who are honest in this game that we should take what is good from disinfo agents and spooks, ignoring the rest. I agree with that to a degree. But the hard sell on flat earth that we get from Staveley, and a softened version from Crrow777 (who claims not to be flat earth but says that the word planet is accurate if we drop the ‘t’), the [I don’t know what to make of it] kind of unending spew that AA Morris puts out … is an agenda.
So the importance of flat earth is not that there is a dime’s worth of truth to it, but the “Why?” Is it to discredit honest research by shrouding it in horse manure? I have busted my butt, as have other writers and commenters here, to find and expose truth. We are not always right, but we are always honest. If anyone who writes here (or anyone who reads here) goes to Fakeologist to watch to the Staveley video, and is then persuaded, then all of our work is discredited. It will have been used to sell a very big scam.
That, to me, is the only purpose of flat earth – an attack on honest research.
46 thoughts on “Outing Brian Staveley”
I keep seeing new Stavely posts from Ab and have been curious but haven’t watched or listened to anything. Can’t wait to read your article. I love to expose lies….thanks Mark!
damn, forgot about this post and wasted time listening to last evenings “live” broadcast with Ab and Stavely via youtube
I spoke with Brian several times some years ago when he was parroting a lot of Simon Shack. I pointed out a few of Simon’s mistakes that Brian was perpetuating and after a bit of convincing he removed the mistaken material.
I think he’s honest and has no hidden agenda. While I don’t believe in Flat Earth, the fact is that there is a significant body of empirical evidence that supports it. So it’s not hard to see why so many would fall for it.
Brian may be easily misled, but I’m quite sure he’s not an operative of any kind.
Fakeologist is a different story. I think I posted somewhere here how he and Jan Erik tried to convince me that Google Earth was fake because I had used it to debunk one of Simon Shack’s claims.
If Brian is so easily misled on something so obvious, then he is discredited in everything, and should not be tossed aside lightly, but rather thrown with great force. Apologies to Dorothy Parker for theft of her line.
My only point is that he’s not an agent of any kind nor is he attempting to deliberately mislead anyone.
Then my point is that he should be ignored.
There are only 3 options, geometrically; the Earth is either flat (no), concave (no) or convex (yes). No matter how people want to spin it, those are geometrical laws, you cannot go around those.
I have spent a long time with Flat Earthers online, mainly to try to see where they are coming from, what their matter is, and they have none.
Hence my name.
I am not going through a 1:45:00 video to see Brian Staveley go for Flat Earth, but what I think is this:
• I heard Staveley made a good point about 9/11 nobody else has brought up (so indeed, I take that good stuff)
• I know from experience Ab hosts and embraces Flat Earthers, though he says he is not one himself
• there is a difference between Flat Earth believers (dupes) and Flat Earth pushers (“agents”)
FE is not a theme, but as you rightly point out Mark, it might be used as a DBA strategy to compromise otherwise good observations, but it doesn’t work.
To the shallow viewer that is. Crow777, ODDReality and others have pointed out major flaws in the “Space Travel” BS that are valuable.
Using those points doesn’t make you a Flat Earther. Or, like I said way back at Cluesforum:
I have observed the same thing with the “Dinosaurs are Fake” bullshitter crowd.
That’s what I call a self-fulshilling prophecy.
My evidence may not hold up to conjecture … I have looked into the sky through massive telescopes and seen the Moon, Venus, Saturn and Jupiter. They are round, orbital and predictable. The idea that earth is an exception or that what I saw with my own eyes was some sort of optical illusion is not the stuff that even bar room debates are made of. It is nonsense. Flat earth is nonsense. Those who push it are either, as you say, dupes, or agents. In either case, why bother with them?
You say that Staveley brought new information to the surface about 9/11. I think of this as a calling card, nothing more. He is given these tidbits. It reminds me if that image of the Sgt. Pepper Drum where the words “Lonely Hearts”, when a mirror is reflected halfway up, top on bottom, reads “119 he die” … someone manufactured that, but no one would have stumbled on it. More likely, inside sources provided the information to keep the game going. So too with Staveley. I imagine his unique insights were handed to him to give him credibility on his flat earth mission.
I agree. The “answer” you get from those childish trolls is “they’re just lights in the sky”. I have had this debate for months over at Ab’s Discord and HBC’s. They are not truth seekers, they are trolls. Childish, I made the comparison with taking your kid out on a week’s camping trip and explaining to him/her all the life in the forest and at the end of the week you ask them, pointing to an oak: “what is this?” “yeah, just a plant”, and then pointing to a fern, cactus or orchid: “yeah, just a plant”.
Things have properties and “the lights in the sky” do have those, that is undeniably true for those who care to actually take a look at them.
A fair question. Why bother watching “the news” still? Why bother watching scripted sports events? I like to engage in debates with “the enemies of truth”, because I did my own research and have my own arguments and they are not prepared for them (Google doesn’t help them out because I didn’t publish them before). The same thing with the Great H Mystery. I learn from it, so if your question is “why bother”, it is because people irl, who I like to engage in discussion with about these topics will ask the same questions, “but what about…”. They are no agents, spooks, trolls or anything, they are -hopefully- genuinely interested in these topics.
So to better prepare yourself for those questions, it is good to know what questions you might expect. It is one of the first rules in debating classes.
And once you are prepared to give your own, non-scripted, non-copy-pasted, non-Googled answers, people will take you way more seriously and are more inclined to listen to your arguments than if you just rehash the same stuff that can be found out there.
That was one of the reasons for me to become your guest writer; to add to our vault of knowledge how the world is (not).
Can you give a timestamp for the FE stuff Staveley is spreading in that video? I don’t want to go over the -what I consider, others please feel free to disagree- dead horse 9/11 again for more than 100 minutes…
Will do, tomorrow. It is not a difficult task.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It all begins at 1:09 into the video. You can plainly hear that their tactic is that we must be open minded, that the difference between flat earthers and regular people is that the former have evidence, while regular rounders are steeped in belief, turning the tables. It’s all very smooth, calculated, and designed for persuasive effect. These are not fools off on a blind alley, but rather two blokes on a mission. Disingenuous to the core.
I used the word blokes … I guess that makes me British.
Strewth guv, you could be in Mary Poppins talkin’ like thartt!
When I went London, I was disappointed no one wore Bowler Hats or spoke like Terry-Thomas.
BLOKES, are a joke with no punch line. and if you take CRROW777 and drop theR you still have CROWeating Crow… humiliation by having been proven WRONG after taking a strong position. CROW ooops… I mean* CRROW is presumably foul-tasting,in the same way that being provenWRONG*might be emotionally hard to F…..G swallow.
Ha thanks, I listened to it and around 1:15 the guy “interviewing” Staveley says (about the “no forests on Flat Earth” video, watched part of it before and now again and it is total BS):
Eh, what? You just talked about 9/11, Boston, Sandy Hoax, but now suddenly truth seeking is not important anymore? And yes, nice shots of nature is cool, but not if you surround them with obvious lies and distortions with no clue about what you’re looking at.
He also says “I don’t know anything about geology, but…”. Maybe start learning something before commenting then?
Staveley admits he goes into the “baby hoaxes” and then on to Flat Earth, so indeed I think your observation that he uses those obvious points as stepping stones to lead people astray and targets to be ridiculed is valid.
I have met 1 guy irl who believed in Flat Earth. It was a bizarre night (out) with him and though we had hundreds of potential topics to talk about (he seemed quite awake on a lot of things), he kept insisting FE was true, so I ended up debating him all night having my own arguments he wasn’t used to. But he wouldn’t bend or even try to see why he was wrong.
I have never seen him again after that night.
We explore, endlessly, either inside our “Truman-Show bubble” or watching championship ping-pong through the wrong end of our binoculars. One day, perhaps, we may escape our prefabricated piece of the universe. Today, however, as volunteer captives of our own ego, marching nose-to-tail along that well-worn cow path followed by generations of goyim, we can only ponder were that journey may ultimately lead before the chemical reaction(s) in our own battery runs its course. https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/09/14/boning-up-on-eternal-recurrence-kubrick-style-2001-revisited/
Steve, nice reply!
LikeLiked by 1 person
This post is cringeworthy really. When people in the community sling sh$# with no evidence for such, labeling people as agents or gatekeepers well, then in turn those very people pointing the fingers are the ones gatekeeping whether they know it or not.
You start by acting as if its suspicious no one else called in and I didn’t mention it. Hahaha. You aren’t starting off well here. Have you even bothered to look how the call came in??? It’s called Google Voice. Its not a new invention. He wasn’t on the hangout and I didn’t give the hangout link to anyone cuz I went on air alone. I came home, the night of 9/11 and decided to just go live. EXCUSE ME if people like what I have to say and someone that has followed my research for years decided to call that night, on the anniversary of 9/11. Yea that is soooo suspicious. So if you know how to use some form of conferencing with your Google Voice , let me know!
Next time you hear me take a call on the Google line which you can even hear RING ON AIR, well try calling in while that caller is on and see if you get through. SMH
Next the doing shows along part? I’ve done tons fo shows alone back in 2010 and 2011 mostly but I could go for three hours alone no problem.
Now the idea I was handed my information to then muddy it with FE and discredit it or whatever your angle is. So If I was given my 9/11 information or any of the other events then you should be able to call and expose me on not really being well versed on those topics. Also are saying they put me up to this 8 years ago and I did 100 s of shows about 911 and other topics with just informationI was told to spread?? Or did I just get invovled as a Johnny come lately? thats odd since all my shows and blogs and whatnot are all easily available and clear to see I’ve been talking about these things for 8 years.
Love your disclaimer. “flat earth is not allowed on this blog” EXCEPT when you bash it and the people researching it. lolololol.
Here is the Google Voice number for the person who posted this nonsense. 978 435 0006
Call in next time and embarrass on my views that were handed to me.
The phone call could be either real or staged, and the means by which it came in is irrelevant. So set that aside. A limited hangout is a confidence game … this blog went a completely different direction with the realization that David McGowan, who also did a yeoman’s job on things like moon and Boston, forgot to do any real research on Laurel Canyon and accepted everything handed to him at face value, making his book Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon also a limited hangout. He was charged with covering things up while appearing to do real research. That’s how it works. McGowan is a spook. (Fake death 11/22/15). However, if McGowan was/is the real deal, then his work is trash and he should be ignored.
In the same vein, your work on 9/11 could be real and in any case appears derivative, but since you have elected to put it all in the same bin with flat earth, you have discredited it, and my judgment is that this is a deliberate tactic. I am not always right, but I stand by that call, as I know flat earth to be irredeemable nonsense.
If you read the comment policy above, you’ll find we’ve a number of topics that are not allowed, flat earth and Mandela among them, as it draws in loons and results in endless and unresolveable debate, perhaps the whole purpose behind flat earth – a side show, a distraction.
Still, it speaks well of you to stand your ground in person, but I stand mine as well, that if you are real, you need to be tossed aside with great force, as the brew you are serving is part real, and part toxic trash. It is the job of the flat earth agents to push it, and push it hard, and I interpreted the show I listened to as a hard sell, a staged encounter, using real research as the bait to pull the unsuspecting into a trap. Persuasion is the name of that game.
NASA fakery does not entail Flat Earth. Fallacy of the False Dichotomy.
Mark if you call in, post a link to that show so we can listen. Maybe he’s muddying the waters on purpose to bait people to call in, so he doesn’t have to do shows alone? Either way FE, muddying waters, 911 or whatever topic, gotta keep it in our minds.
Brian, I have listened to some of your shows and they were quite interesting, even when I am not so much interested in 9/11.
The question I have is; why covering a variety of topics in a good way and then muddy your own waters by leading people astray into the dark worlds of geometrically, physically and thus obviously impossible Flat Earth?
Is exposing 9/11 narrators “bashing”?
Is exposing the NASA fraud “bashing”?
Is exposing the Nuke Hoax “bashing”?
So why is exposing the Flat Earth Fraud then “bashing”?
dear Brian S. Staveley, the most topics all the conspiracy theorists, fakeologists, shills or what ever are discussing on all those countless blogs and forums can be discussed. Including the 911 topic, which IMO is very easy to debunk today. Yet still details can be discussed. No so the FE topics. Do you seriously believe the Earth is not a sphere? Do you believe we’re living under a dome? This is the line, you’re not supposed to cross. That’s why Mark does not allow any FE on his blog. Crossing this line destroys any credibility. Not everything is fake in this world. Not everything we’ve learned in schools is wrong. Some things we will never really understand, for instance the dilemma between creation and evolution. Some things we can consider to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Such is the fact, that we are living on a spherical planet which is constantly moving in space together with other similar objects. This other objects can be easily observed as you can fly around the Earth within a few days using conventional airplanes. Questioning this simple facts makes you either stupid or suspicious. I don’t think you’re stupid.
We were taught as kids that people in the time of Columbus thought the world as flat. That would have to be nonsense, as long before that time people had witnessed eclipses, seen the shape of the moon and noticed its regularity, and seen the shape of the sun. Why they told us kids otherwise is just presentism, nothing more, advising us that we are smarter than the people who came before us. Since we have TV, and they did not, only the opposite can be true. We have to be the dumbest manifestation of the species to date.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe Brian can do a live call when standing on the East Coast of the US and looking at the full moon in the sky in the east while his other caller is looking at that same moon from Ireland/western Europe in the sky in the west and tell him the European caller can see the backside of the spherical moon (even in FE the Sun and Moon need to be spherical, geometrically there is no other option)…
Is there a difference being a hobbit on a round surface than on a flat one?
Sure. The Eye of Sauron can’t see past the curvature into the Shire if Middle Earth is round. If it’s flat, you’re orc-chow everywhere.
Orc-chow mein on a platter.
I just googled this Brian S. Staveley entity and I’m wondering why is there a need to out? He outs himself sufficient enough. He started questioning 911 in 2010? Really? Where was he living before that? How can anyone take him seriously, just because he’s reposting some findings others made long before him? It’s so obvious. There is this video from some Stefan Molyneux which also Simon Shack (and others) is recently propagating via Cluesforum. This looks to me like a teamwork effort to generate traffic for this entities.
So I am suspicious when just one caller calls. In and ties up the line so Inoffensive an open line to anyone that wants to call and now that suspicious so I don’t have to do a show alone? You guys are a joke. I did yesterday S show alone addressing this clown show didn’t I?
You guys are fools and bring nothing to the table. Way to avoid the challenge and back up your claims about me or even exactly how I am muddying the waters by saying I am baiting you to call in cuz why? I can’t do shows alone? Lololol. No I am telling you to call in so you can’t hide behind blogs and have to have a face to face convo with me unscripted. What are u so scared of.
What a joke. Last time I reply here. Again you want to call in grow some balls and do it.
Yeah, we all like a good storm out.
You really seem determined to make people believe you are who you say you are. Why can’t you take no for an answer?
this sounds to me very much like Simon Shack’s last attempt to do some damage control, no? Simon was like “call me on skype”, Brian is like “call me on google Voice”. Same thing. That joke is as flat as the entire Flat Earth movement. I wonder how much are they paid?
LikeLiked by 1 person
who was the caller Palo Walo is likely the more interesting question to answer…
Since 2012, I’ve been reading, listening, watching, and even published a few of my own YouTube videos re: the lies, hoaxes, psyops, and control and manipulation of the masses. Currently there are maybe 10 podcasts, a few websites/blogs, barely any YouTube channels left, that discuss things of this nature. None of which appear to have large audiences (a few thousand or less). In my personal life, I’ve only influenced a handful of people into questioning why they believe everything they’re fed. Even then, like me, they’re lives don’t change: we all still work, pay bills, raise families, eat, sleep, and repeat. Clumsy psyops control the masses. And even those who don’t fall for it are caught up in the machine. When a particular researcher gets off onto a tangent which I disagree, doesn’t make sense, or I’m disinterested: I fast forward, change the channel, or eventually tune out their content. It seems highly improbable that there are so many “spooks” inhabiting this tiny, insignificant sliver of the World Wide Web.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I beg to differ. As I view it, we are in a total information control environment. No matter where you turn, from NPR to Fox to Amy Goodman to Alex Jones to every podcast that has survived, you are dealing with a spook. The analogy I like to use is a large paddock, and down the middle of the paddock is a fence, but one that can easily be jumped. However, it does not matter within the paddock which side of the internal fence you are on. The important thing is that the sheep fight among themselves, ignoring the large fact that they are all prisoners. I think Steve K has been making this point in this thread.
Well said. I think this whole “spook/shill calling” is a sign of weakness, not being able to address the arguments and research. I don’t call Brian Staveley a “spook” or “shill” either, nor do I think Miles Mathis or Simon Shack are or Dave McGowan was. I think they really believe in their theories.
The big outlets is different; the Alex Joneses, David Ickes, Jim Fetzers, etc. are clearly set-up to guide viewers in a certain direction/away from certain directions.
Still, I wonder why someone pushes an obviously flawed idea and Staveley doesn’t respond to that simple question.
What Straight and I noticed about McGowan was total lack of research. He didn’t interview anyone he wrote about, did not even go to SSDI, which was among the first things we did. Such sloppiness should not result in a book! He did not even notice (or say) that the lone photo in the book was a paste-up, not even a real photo. His DOD was a spook marker, 11/22 (=33, and is a double-whammy because it is the 326th day of the year, =11). They love that date, along with 4/20 (110th day of the year = 11). This speaks of limited hangout.
Simon Shack gives me the creeps … just instinctual, I suppose, but the coverup was so well planned that they would have hired a guy to catch the really thoughtful people and give them a place to vent, just as they hired Judy Wood to explain the absence of metals and computers and stuff and the empty building that collapsed so very fast. As I say, they thought of everything, have someone for everyone. SS’s behaviors – going to search for truth to incredibly historically rare insight into the makeup of the solar system … indicate to me that he is now taking the herd he has assembled and making sure they don’t cause real trouble.
MM, I suspect, and this is speculation, represents the split in intelligence that he himself talks about, that part that wants to take some credit for all of the amazing scams they have run versus the other part that says no disclosure now, not ever. There are other issues with the guy, perhaps some trouble with the law, house arrest, etc., as BZ speculates, so that he is being used to reveal stuff for others who choose to by anonymous. Does this make him a spook? Well, if so, not a bad spook. He is, after all, revealing things that are good to know, JFK being the most important.
The others … someone said somewhere that they must be well paid. I doubt it. I would venture that someone like Staveley would not take much green persuasion to take on the task … to regurgitate all that is known about 9/11 and then drench it in flat earth. He does not impress me as a stockbroker type, more like a laborer. AA Morris appears to be reading scripts and also throws in science nonsense to discredit it all. Others work for a pittance, trolls and the like, and perhaps a good measure of bots. I do not trust any of them save the guys here at this website … I cannot say with certainty that they are spooks, of course, but honestly, if a guy like Staveley (or Crrow or AA) cannot figure out that we live on a round planet, what use are they? Isn’t that kind of, you know, stupid?
Dave McGowan: that is the thing about books, they are static. Even if he would have noticed/got notified that his photo was a paste-up, there is little you can do. You can write a supplement/erratum but it wouldn’t change much. As far as I understood it, he went much more into the culture creation aspects of Laurel Canyon than in the “fakeology” of it. Which is a choice of angle.
His death day can be suspicious, or it can just be coincidence. It is hard to say, as a supporting point it can make a case, but it could just mean nothing too.
I have listened to Chris and John from HBC interviewing Dave a couple of months before his death and he came across as a reasonable researcher with a lot of knowledge. He covered also a bit of the ridiculous North Hollywood Shootout event, one I have taken a much deeper dive into.
Is “incompleteness” a sign for a “limited hangout”? Maybe. Or maybe not, because there are just so many hours you can spend on something and then move on to the next topic.
I enjoyed his series about Boston and his Wagging the Moondoggie is an amusing read. Yes, he rehashes earlier points, but also adds a lot, which I think is valuable, at least to me it was.
Simon Shack: I don’t think he is a “shill” or “spook” nor that he is “dragging people into his model”. If you have followed Cluesforum and other sites he actually managed to do the opposite; push people away. I was the only one who reviewed his book in so much detail and he responded to my criticism that I “was an ESA shill” (which is kind of ironic as people have suggested he himself hosted ESA staff in his house in Rome…).
Miles Mathis: similar thing. I think he is completely wrong with believing in space travel and for a guy of his intelligence level and research capabilities that is suspicious. But also there; he wrote books where he uses data acquired by space probes. So he paints himself in a corner if he comes out of the closet and say “I was wrong about space travel” as his whole “house of cards” would collapse. I don’t find his science stuff convincing and his “electrical universe” is all pure speculation as we cannot go into space to actually check things out. I am not saying he is wrong, it is simply unknowable.
What made Kevin’s research so strong is that he used the exact same methods against MM that he did; the boomerang effect. MM’s response was weak and defensive while he himself has encouraged people to do exactly that what Kevin did.
The whole “pedophilia” stuff I find far-fetched and unconvincing and a good researcher doesn’t need such silly (semi-)accusations about someone. MM has a big ego, that is what can explain a lot of things better imho than anything else.
The FE pushers: there is a difference between believers in FE (stupid, uninformed, illogical) and pushers of it. The latter category can be “shills” or just people who think they found Columbus’s Egg and try to spread that idea. I have watched hundreds of videos of FE believers about the ISS and other ridiculous “space travel” and I am not bothered by their FE angle; it is the other information I take away from it and ditch the BS.
AAMorris to my knowledge has never said he was a FE’r, though I have listened to like 25 of his podcasts so miss out on a lot. As far as I know he is a geocentrist that doesn’t believe in space (I don’t know in what medium the planets, moons, Sun, Moon, comets and all other celestial phenomena are moving in then according to him) and doesn’t think gravity is the driving force. I disagree with him on that, but don’t get the feeling of someone who actively tries to push people in a certain direction, quite the opposite actually.
I disagree with John Le Bon on so many points, but where I think he is on the ball (haha) is where he talks about this. I think this whole “the shills are after us” paranoia is showing an overestimation/self importance of what we do here.
Nobody cares about this kind of research. The Elites rely on the fact that the vast majority of people believe all the bullshit stories and peculiar plots. That they are busy with Netflix, Facebook and sugarcoated softdrinks. We are insignificant, which I think is a great position to be in.
That is not to say that what we do is not important, I think it very much is; building a vault of knowledge about stories that are fed to us that are false. Pass it on to our peers, our offspring, etc., please.
But we are no “threat to the system”. They had thousands of years of power and mind control to build a population of cattle that follow the “shepherd”, that they don’t care some of them are swimming against the stream.
Re:: MM and pedo. The case that Uncle Bob made was not about pedophilia but rather porn.
MM says plainly, I have pix of a girl. They are like the Lewis Carroll photos and until societal norms change, they cannot be published. How much plainer does he need to be?
But then his fans say, We have seen the pix and they are not nudes or erotic.
OK. So then how are they like the Carroll pix, and why could he not publish them at this time?
I think that’s a fair question, one which which the MMC has not answered.
OK, I’ll avoid point counterpoint with you. We agree to disagree except on one point, a new one you raise …
… I agree we are no threat to the system. I have long understood this and made it clear that I do the work I do for the sheer joy of it. The larger point is my point about Total Information Control – that in a closed system such as ours, there are no exits, only gatekeepers.
Why the gatekeepers, trolls, shills, bots? I am/was a CPA, and our job was to maintain control of large financial systems. To do that we have to anticipate every potential way to defraud the system. So we post people to watch other people, systems that require duplication of effort and even things like insisting that people take vacations.
In the same manner, our controllers have to maintain internal control, anticipate deviation, and control it. It is not that we threaten the system, but rather that the system self-sustains by containing all threats at all times. That is why we are surrounded by gatekeepers, trolls, shills and bots. It’s just good internal control.
I still remember how I started to question the mainstream. I grow up in the Eastern Block being skeptic to politics from the beginning. But other than that, I was convinced, that it is restricted to the Eastern Block and that behind the wall everything must be ok. It seemed so for a long time. After 911 I was just thinking, something is not right there. I went the entire way one step after another, from inside job, Alex Jones, Ace Baker, Jody Wood, etc., I stumbled upon Cluesforum once and rejected it first, I started to question more and more, I found Dave McGowan, then I came back to the Cluesforum and there I found Miles Mathis, Fakeologist, other similar forums, every time feeling smarter than before. I first did not question medicine for a long time because I don’t go to doctors myself. It was not important to me. It was just after I had my own kids and was confronted with the aggressivity doctors force you to vaccinate them that I started to research viruses and bacteria and was taken aback when I read there are scientist seriously questioning the existence of viruses. At this time I accepted that my entire perspective may be totally wrong and that I have to learn everything again from scratch questioning everything I read or hear. I never would get to where I’m now without all those steps in between. I think the purpose in all this forums and blogs may be to give the necessary platform for everybody. I think TPTB want us to become conscious. It’s just that people will defend their belief at all costs. “What if you had to tell someone the most important thing in the world, but you knew they’d never believe you? ” (a Quote from the Deja Vu movie). I think the system encourages this kind of creativity and that’s why all those blogs and forums came into existence. It’s part of the system.
I rather agree with this assessment. I think the narcissists at the top enjoy having our attention as we analyze their machinations.
What did Karl Rove say? “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
It’s the “urge to confess” that Mark has written about.
What if the limited hangouts are employed precisely in order to lay out a trail of breadcrumbs for us to follow? But only so far and no farther. They are the carnival barkers and we are the audience that gathers to appreciate the performance. If it weren’t for the McGowans and Shacks and Mathises, I wouldn’t know where to start looking for Truth. I would just have a vague sense that the world was not what it seemed. And what fun is there in putting on a show without someone to notice?
BTW, I think the first one at POM to mention the confession urge was Uncle Bob.
Indeed. It is towards the end of his essay.
“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” – Orwell
Words (and numbers) are not reality, but artful illusion created by man. Destroying the meaning of words in illusion within illusion. Deeper and deeper in unreality we descend. Anybody have a ladder?
In “Podcast Episode 221: The History & Science of Rocket Science & Zero Gravity Part 1“, AAMorris clearly states he is not a Flat Earther. It is an excellent episode anyway, where he observes the same “shill paranoia” as I mentioned and shows Crazy Dave J (Fakeologist con-tributor) to be a fool. Good ranting.
One thing he says I disagree with, because I also figured out “zero gravity” cannot exist, but he uses it to prove Newton wrong, I think Newton proves zero g wrong. Space, as is told to us how it is, is all gravity, because of the lack of other forces, so zero gravity (or steering in space) cannot exist. Things in space can only be slave to gravity, no escape from that.
Well worth the 2 hours, that episode.