We all have people who put out content that we like and we have them whom we don’t like. And our opinions about them or their content can shift over time. It also can lead to people joining hands and people walking away as they so please. This year we have already seen a lot of these schisms; the John Adams saga, the Miles Mathis drama and the Faykeopedia failure, to name just three obvious ones.
As probably a lot of readers here I also like listening to AAMorris’s podcasts “A Proper Gander at Propaganda”, that started on March 5th this year.
I want to focus on two recent episodes of that series, number 221 and the one of today, 225.
The ones in between I still have to hear, but different from his earlier work, where he repeatedly has mentioned “I don’t care about different opinions, if you like my research fine, if not also fine”, a position I wholeheartedly agree with, he now went on a “killing spree” of fellow (non)-researchers in this environment.
The problem with this proper gander series I have is that AAMorris, who has always (rightly) stressed the importance of logic and rationality in deconstructing the peculiar plots fed to us, again much to my agreement, becomes completely irrational.
It looks like the formerly rational AAMorris has “lost it”. Or at least more than he “gained it”.
He takes on some people I have engaged with this year and people who are linked here at POM as well; Crazy Dave (DaveJ or Dave Johnson), John Le Bon (JLB), John Adams, Chris Kendall (both Hoaxbusters Call – HBC) and some people I have heard about but never listened to; Markus Allen and Jay Dyer.
One point AAMorris keeps stressing in his latest episode is “I don’t debate, because debate is silly/useless”. That is a fallacy. Silly or useless debate is silly/useless, but you cannot project the part (pars) to the whole (toto). What good debate does, is sharpening your mind, as you get feedback from others who may have different points of view than you (corrective) or the same points but new information (constructive). I understand it is much safer to sit behind your computer and not engage in debate, but it makes you somewhat of a coward, unable to address counterarguments by others.
AAMorris shares this with Miles Mathis by the way.
Many of his observations about especially Crazy Dave (who indeed is a complete lunatic, embraced by Ab the Fakeologist and JLB alike), JLB (childish, small repertoire, arrogant, little idea about the real world) and Chris Kendall (who foolishly pulled a gun on screen in a useless Vegan debate he had with some kids, agreed that such behavior is unacceptable) are valid. But, he mixes that with irrational behavior:
- he keeps making the same silly childish joke ‘literally’ 100 times (I didn’t count, but around that number) in a 2 hour episode
- he calls for JLB “to take a break from the internet” because “he is living online”, but this comes from a guy who has 225 2 hour audios produced in just 200 days! A reasonable estimate for the 2 hour audio in editing is like another 2 hours, so 4, and for the vast research in the back you need between 10 and 20 hours per podcast too; which makes a 14-24 hour “work day” for more than 6 months straight. It gets a bit thick to accuse (right or wrong) others of “spending too much time online” if you have such an output
- he goes into the personal lives of the people he addresses a lot, calls people “losers” many times and even makes a hit at someone’s mental condition. Unprofessional or immature at least, for a 49 year old man
In his episode 225 he contradicts a lot of what he himself said in ep 221;
- the “shill paranoia” he registered in ep 221 has turned into he himself being paranoid about shills (and praising Unreal, whose credibility I seriously question) in ep 225
- related to this is that he says about JLB: “he calls me paranoid, I am not paranoid, JLB is the paranoid guy here” – another fallacy, Mr. Logical Morris. It is not an argument. JLB can be paranoid, but you can be too. One being paranoid does not exclude the possibility of the other being paranoid. It’s a non sequitur; the one doesn’t follow from the other.
- in ep 221 he calls journalists (which he himself was, working for Bloomberg FFS) “dupes” and in ep 225 he calls them “liars” (or something along those lines, I paraphrase from memory now) and says “journalism shouldn’t be a degree”. What is it? Are they tricked into the peculiar plots because they simply funnel down AP feeds without criticizing them (yes, most of them) or are they evil liars trying to spread propaganda (only the top ones)?
- he says “Dave J is obsessed with the death of a 6 year old girl” (JonBenét Ramsey). But AAMorris, aren’t you “obsessed” with a variety of people online by producing 10 hours of podcasts about it?
Why am I writing this post? For one I know AAMorris reads here, so he can be glad he gets feedback, as he has shut himself off of that option through no participation in Discord chats or blog participation. Secondly I think it is important to share observations, others can see much more than I do, and I want to bring it to your attention. I simply share my observations about stories, audios, videos and other content online.
I do not think he is a “shill” or a “spook” or something like that, but what I observed is a lot of military terms in his ranting. He uses the word “frame” a lot of times in just 2 hours. Most normal people don’t think in terms of framing.
And above all he literally says “I have infiltrated Fakeologist and HBC, so they like me and I bit my tongue for a while so now I can criticize”. Right there, he just admits he is an infiltraitor (no typo). One can thank him for his openness but at the same time question him about someone’s motives for doing such a thing.
Listen for yourselves and please share your comments here, in the “Iconoclasts” series, I think it fits rather well:
Podcast Episode 221: The History & Science of Rocket Science & “Zero Gravity” Part 1
Podcast Episode 225: Messing With Cyber Shills
PS: I hope at least someone spotted the tongue-in-cheek semi-fallacy in the title of this post; in my understanding of the English language a “glance” is “a quick look”. “Proper” usually means “thorough”, “detailed”, “in depth”. A “Proper Glance” therefore would be at least paradoxal and at most contradictory. But as I only review 2 podcasts out of 225, not even 1% I think “glance” certainly is justified here; so it’s a paradox; an apparent contradiction.
Piece of Mindful 
He says in Episode 222 (43:00): “I need to be scrutinized”. So here you have it, AAMorris!
LikeLike
Dear Gaia, I must complement the writing skills you have displayed in this piece. Even if I disagree with much of the substance of your work, I can still appreciate the style. And kudos to you for subjecting yourself to two more hours of AAPM’s work in order to do the requisite research for this post. That’s what I call ‘taking one for the team’.
If what you say is true, and AAPM has criticised me for spending too much time online, then as you rightly point out, we are dealing with a hypocrite of the most shameless kind. AAPM is either completely devoid of self-awareness, or he is so driven by irrational anger that he has temporarily taken leave of his senses.
For some reason, I tend to view AAPM as a likeable fellow. Nice, smooth voice; apparent passion for and commitment to what he is doing; and what I used to infer was a relatively positive disposition (but have now begun seriously questioning).
The problem is that AAPM is developing a formline of shooting from the hip and asking questions later (if ever). We saw the same behaviour from him two years ago when I first exposed the Nikola Tesla HOAX. Rather than consider and inspect the evidence I was presenting, AAPM and many other so-called ‘researchers’ decided to attack the messenger and ignore the message.
Now that the Tesla myth is an accepted and acknowledged HOAX among the broader ACT (alternative / conspiracy / truth) realm, I have yet to hear or read any apologies or retractions from those who came out swinging against me in 2016/17. I don’t expect any apologies or retractions either, because most co-called ‘researchers’ in this scene have no more honour than common thieves.
This is because they are in fact thieves. Time thieves. Attention thieves. Energy thieves. They feed off of the time, attention and energy which they are given by their audience whenever they shoot their impotent arrows at messengers like myself. This is precisely why I am constantly attacked by so-called ‘researchers’: they get more time, attention and energy by focusing on messengers, than they would by focusing on the evidence and logic underpinning the message.
So it is with the War HOAX. Much easier to attack Dave J and myself for what we are exposing about this grand deception, than to focus on the deception itself. Innocent children are ritualistically indoctrinated into War faith every year with ‘minutes of silence’ and symbolic red poppies. Anybody reading these words is likely to have been psychologically traumatised over and over again as a child, without having ever realised the depths of their trauma, or the consequences which follow from it.
Imagine a small child being instructed to remain silent, in solemn standstill, in unison with dozens or hundreds of his or her friends, to mourn the loss of millions of humans he or she has never met. Imagine the impact this ritual would have on the psyche of the child, in that moment, and for the rest of its life. Well you do not need to imagine it, because this is exactly what happens every annual ‘Remembrance Day’ (or whatever the sick ritual is called in your part of the world).
Now ask yourself, what evidence were you given to suggest that millions of people perished in the so-called ‘Wars’ of the twentieth century? Not appeals to authority or appeals to consensus, but actual evidence. Think seriously about this. Is a photo of some seemingly-dead soldiers evidence of millions of real deaths? No more than the film Pearl Harbor is evidence of millions of real deaths.
No, you were not given actual evidence of millions of deaths. You were given macabre and horrifying stories, backed by the authorities; you were ordered to remain silent for a minute, wearing a red poppy, in a group ritual with all of your friends, to mourn the deaths of millions of people you never met and could never know. You were an empathic child, full of energy, placed into a state of what you may soon realise was an overt trauma-based mind control. This was done to you by the very same authority and social conditioning system which many people on this blog claim to understand and oppose.
How different this world looks to a person who no longer sees it as a place of wanton death and murder. Like the parable of the fish who do not realise they swim in water, the typical western adult today does not have any conception of how deep the supposed mass murder of the twentieth century has been embedded in his psyche (and, I would personally suggest, his soul).
Who will be game enough to truly challenge his or her own preconceived notions about War? Who is willing to confront his or her own memories of what was done to them as an innocent child at school, year after year after year? Who is able to break free from the conditioning and challenge the AUTHORities?
And who, on the other hand, will continue to attack the messenger, and make a complete fool of himself in the process? It makes no difference to me whether or not you maintain belief in ‘War’ — but it makes a much bigger difference to you than you could ever possibly imagine, while you remain in the psychological bondage of trauma-based mind control.
LikeLiked by 2 people
John, thank you for your “complement” (sic?, shouldn’t that be compliment? As a non-native speaker I thought “complement” means “to add to” and compliment means “to praise, show support, respect”), but here you show exactly what I alluded to in my post; your repertoire is small.
You keep pushing the idea that “war is a hoax”. It’s not. There is hoaxing in wars, very much agreed, if they can pull off the Great H Mystery, they can pull off a lot of other stuff.
But, as I said in the post, you should leave the relative safety of your “attic”, your safe environment, and actually see the world. I cannot blame you for growing up in a country that is just 200 years old, I cannot blame you for thinking that that is how the world is, but what I can blame you for is propagandizing the idea that that is what it is.
I have been to and even lived in countries that are torn by war. The evidence is there, right in your face. You see destroyed buildings, you meet people, talk to them and know that war IS NOT “a hoax”. Yes, the narrative is corrupted, but that doesn’t make “war” (in a general sense, or even a specific one) “a hoax”. That is just empty slogans, as AAMorris rightly points out in his latest rants. The #NDNGH meme, it even received a hash (Afghan or not) tag to reinforce its meme status, is a joke. Actually it is not, because it’s not funny.
I have spoken to people directly and personally involved in the latest war in Syria. Is ISIS a controlled “Al Qaeda-style” organization? Yes, of course. Are narratives about babies pulled out of mother’s wombs invented? Yes. Does that mean “nothing is going on, it’s just a theater act” (a hoax), no.
What you and Crazy Dave seem to forget, in this “everything is just CGI” world, is that resources still are real, tangible things. You cannot just invent a tungsten, or cobalt deposit from behind a computer, you actually have to go and mine the stuff. That is very very real. The same for oilfields, pipelines, phosphate deposits, anything. It is that what the Elites are after, because in the locations they hail from those deposits don’t exist.
Look at South Africa, one of the few countries you actually have visited. The whole “Boer Wars” were centered around getting control of the rich diamond deposits of the Kimberley. The narrative is of course constructed, but the war in the background was real.
The same with oil in WWII, poppy fields in Afghanistan, cocaine plantations here in Latin America, phosphate mines in Mali, those things are tangible, real, non-CGI’d examples of the Purposes of War.
To deny that is denying reality. To make believe it is just one big “9/11 style CGI Hollywood show” is wrong. Even 9/11 was not a full hoax, because on 9/12/2001 there were no Twin Towers anymore. Denying that is insane.
The same with your “history is a hoax. Period” schtick. Go visit Europe and look at the castles. Were they secretly constructed just 200 years ago, nobody noticed or reported it, but they were not medieval? You had like 1000s of masons secretly constructing castles all over Europe in the last 200 years, portraying them to be much older? What is your evidence for that, a line you love so much.
Does me criticizing you for your “History is a Hoax. Period” narrative mean I am “married to” the mainstream explanation? No, it is not, it would be a false dichotomy to suggest that. I think the idea that history is 1000 years younger than reported holds value. I stay open to that possibility, especially because “the Dark Middle Ages” we don’t have any written documents to support the notion of it and it is ridiculous that after the advanced Roman Empire, mankind “suddenly lost that knowledge for 1000 years and then found it again”. But 200 years and not more? Ridiculous, misdirection, uninformed, crazy.
I am not here to throw punches at people, I am not here to start “internet wars” (are they a hoax too?). I am here to share my observations and let people decide for themselves, I give my take but that is nowhere the only possible view, something you, I fear, still have to learn.
LikeLike
-> ” There is hoaxing in wars”
Indeed. As is often the case, you agree with points being made, but somehow still want to argue about what obviously follows from the premises. Why interview a FAKE ‘eye witness’ of 9/11 (‘Harley Guy’) if there were any REAL eye-witnesses? Because there were no real witnesses because there were no planes because 9/11 was a made-for-tv movie, scripted from start to finish.
So it is with so-called ‘War’. Why produce fake boogeymen like Osama bin Laden if there are real terrorist masterminds lurking in caves? Why produce fake boogeymen like Kim Jong Un if there are real madmen threatening nuclear destruction? Why produce fake boogeymen like Adolf Hitler if there are real evil dictators creating ‘world wars’?
They produce fake boogeymen because there are no real boogeymen. Just like Goldstein in 1984, the masses are given boogeymen to fear and to hate, scapegoats for the fake wars which the ruling elite use to justify their own position at the top of the heap: defenders of the populace against sworn enemies who appear and disappear like a game of whack-a-mole.
The fact that they need to produce fakes, and that no other so-called countries call them out on it, is in and itself evidence of the ruse at play. The fact that so-called ‘researchers’ like yourself overlook the obvious is evidence of how easy the ruse is to get away with. They tell an obvious but gargantuan lie, and only the most self-driven of intellects will ever challenge it. The rest will attack those who dare speak out.
-> “you should”
You acknowledge that I have been to Africa but personally attack me for not getting out of my ‘attic’? Perhaps you have been listening to too much AAPM.
-> “I am not here to start “internet wars””
The closest that you or anybody else will get to ‘War’ is right here on the internet. The reason for this is that you control yourself, I control myself, and the same can be said for anybody who reads these words: as individuals we control ourselves and so will occasionally find ourselves in hostility with one another. The so-called ‘countries’, on the other hand, are all controlled by the SAME people, which is precisely why they have no need for real ‘War’.
Instead we are given horror movies on our TV screens and macabre death deification rituals at school. Some of us break free from the conditioning and take to time to share our fresh perspectives with others, even though we are attacked for it by so-called ‘researchers’ with axes to grind.
War is a HOAX. Period. Do people die or get hurt in so-called ‘War’? Sure. People die all the time, especially when working in labour-intensive jobs on location, which is precisely what the military actually does: lots of manual labour, construction, strategic relocation, and so forth. But this is very different to War as told by the authorities and believed by the lemming masses.
The idea that two (or more) opposing national armies are firing live weapons at one another in hostile combat, in order to kill and destroy their enemies, in fight-to-the-death conflicts? That is in fact a HOAX. As are the alleged death counts of the so-called ‘Wars’ of the twentieth century.
When you respond to this comment, try to include your BEST EVIDENCE to support the alleged death counts of the so-called World Wars. If you fail to do so, if you instead focus on the messenger rather than the message, it will reveal much about your position.
And remember, nothing that you ever say or do will change the fact that War is a HOAX. Nothing you ever say or do will change the fact that 9/11 was a HOAX. Objective reality does not care about your feelings, so leave them at the door.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is called a “belief system”, I am sure you are familiar with that term, because you use it all the time.
Real open-minded people are able to change their position, opinion, point of view, with new information coming in. Narrow-minded “religious” people do the opposite and claim “nothing you ever say or do will change the ‘fact’…”.
Hence how ironic it is you use “objective reality”. I am sure more intelligent people than yourself pick up on this.
I started the conversation about “Syria” and you ask me for “evidence”. I didn’t record both encounters I had, I leave (secret) recordings to other people, but I had 2 encounters, 3 and 1 years ago respectively:
A – our taxi driver in Jordan was hosting a Syrian refugee family. Do I have any reason to believe this guy was lying to me, to “propagate a mainstream story”? No, of course not. This was just a regular, working class man who hosted people who fled from a constructed (yes) conflict. The fact that conflict is constructed doesn’t make their fleeing fake.
B – my hairdresser in a small town in Germany explained to me in broken German that he was living in Germany for 1.5 years, that his parents were living somewhere in Turkey, that his brother was living there too in a different place and his sister somewhere in Greece. Was this working class guy lying to me, portraying a “fake war hoax” to me? No, of course not, he was just a young (early 20s) guy who wanted to make a living in a safe place. If “war is a hoax”, there would be no reason whatsoever to flee to a small town in Germany. He would have had the support of his family in the “safe” (according to the “War is a Hoax” pushers) environment back in Syria, where people speak Arabic, his mother tongue.
Things like that you only learn when traveling, meeting people, actually talking to real, common, working class people. No “agents”, “spooks” or any other crappy internet memes pushed in this toxic environment of “they are after us”.
Either you don’t understand the meaning of the word “hoax”, which is pretty sad for a native speaker, or you deliberately misdirect. Or another option you may be able to explain. The silly use of capitals, Crazy Dave-style, doesn’t impress people with a bit more intelligence than the coffee-cup-writing position (according to AAMorris) you come from.
LikeLike
So you have offered precisely ZERO evidence to support the claim that millions of people perished in the so-called ‘World Wars’.
Instead you want to offer more of your ad hominem misdirections. No surprises there.
-> Real open-minded people are able to change their position, opinion, point of view, with new information coming in.
Indeed. I used to believe in ‘War’, millions of deaths, ‘nations’ trying to murder the citizens of opposing ‘nations’, etc etc.
I no longer believe in these horror stories, having taken the time to search for actual evidence to support them.
It turns out that there isn’t any evidence to support these outlandish stories, which is precisely why you won’t provide any evidence, and why nobody else will, either.
Take a look at this video of ‘World War One’ ‘battle’ and tell me, and tell every person who reads this thread, that you believe the footage to be genuine.
Go on, then. Tell us that you believe this is real footage of real murder.
Anybody familiar with media fakery will agree that this footage is in fact fraudulent. A staged ‘battle’ to fool the lemming masses, who are spellbound by moving pictures.
War is a HOAX. Period.
LikeLiked by 1 person
JLB, I tend to believe, that the first WW was at least in parts a real one. People really killed each other. The old Prussian school generals did their best to win their battles. Things got out of control. That’s why TPTB stopped it in the middle, developed better communication technology and restarted again over 20 years later. Of course all the numbers and especially all the historically known battles are fake. The battles were fought in the country, well out of side. Everything is possible. I remember some old traumatized veterans of the first WW from my youth. Old, senile men still wearing their old military overcoats, being seen at places their memories forced them to visit. They were weirdos to us kids and we made fun of them. One of my grandfathers was taken away by the Russians at the end of WW2 and forced to work in Russia until 1946 and came home walking from there which took him over a year. But he survived and got quite old. My parents generation is convinced of the reality of wars. They witnessed violent, primitive Russians invading their villages, raping and killing many people. Those things obviously really happened. But it is not part of the official history though. Which also tells me a lot.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isn’t that video an outtake from the Battle of Saint Mihiel scene of the 1927 movie Wings? So of course it’s fake. It was filmed around San Antonio, not in France. Not sure what a movie clip proves about the reality of war ….
LikeLiked by 1 person
I did a little experiment of my own…..
Here in the UK there is a war memorial in every village, every town, every city. Everywhere. They are ubiquitous. You can not go anywhere bigger than a hamlet and not see a War Memorial.
I know from my own personal history, my grandparents lived through WW1 here in the North of England, and I can say with certainty, that “doing one’s duty” was rigorously monitored by local people. Those that did not do their “duty” were easily identified. They were often vilified and notorious locally.
So here is my central point:
The names of the dead, that are on every War Memorial in every village, were real people who never returned home. They must have died. There is no other explanation of their failure to return. Where were they if not dead? I know for sure that these names were thoroughly scrutinised by everyone locally. The family grief for those that did not return became the communities grief. There is no mistaking this, it is embedded deep within UK society, across all strata’s, rich, middle and poor. Every one in the UK from my generation [I was born in 1950] knows this truth………
So, I counted the number of names on my local War Memorial and then divided by the known local population, from the nearest official census to 1914. This gave me the percentage of local folk that must have died in WW1.
Next step was to apply that percentage to the whole UK population from the same census.
The result? A few thousand short of 900,00.
Almost 1 million perished then. This is a very near match for the official death toll.
So I can say with some confidence that WW1 was not a hoax and that hundreds of thousands of Brits died in the conflict. The WW1 generation of young men was decimated.
I could say a lot more about WW2 as well. My father went over the English Channel on D day. He landed on the Canadian beach in Normandy in the first 24 hours. He then followed the war from the beach in Normandy all the way to Luneberg Heath where they signed the Armistice on 4th May 1945.
He was a radio operator for coded signals from the top brass, and he was always about 20 miles behind the front. He lived in a tent and drove a big wagon full of radio equipment all the way to Luneberg following the fighting from a safe distance. So he saw the results of WW2 all the way from the beach to Germany.
[He visited Belsen-Bergen camp on the way. He was there within the first week after it was liberated and he could never utter a word about what he saw because it was so shocking to him. He never spoke about it for more than a few words without welling up, and the words drying up…..]
WW1 and WW2 were not a hoax. I am sure of that.
I would also be gobsmacked if the Vietnam War was a hoax, utterly gobsmacked. I watched the TV news in the 1960’s like everyone did. The death and destruction portrayed might certainly have had some Hollywood element. PoM have demonstrated that. But 100% hoax? Do me a favour, Hollywood ain’t that good…….
LikeLiked by 1 person
I had uncles who were in combat in WWII. There would be no way to convince them that what they experienced was a hoax.
I have known other men who fought in Europe and Korea. They saw what the bombs they dropped and the shells they fired did to the targets and how real the damage was.
I have a close friend who suffered from PTSD after his stint in ‘Nam. No way could you persuade him that the bullets he was ducking were fake.
I personally know refugees from Iraq and Syria. What did they flee? A movie shoot?
What could it possibly mean to say that “War is a hoax”? If all of these otherwise ordinary and honest eyewitnesses I have known are in fact just paid shills and crisis actors … Well, that belief would be one step away from solipsism.
Yes, I know that for the rest of you, my acquaintances’ testimony is hearsay. But I am unable to construct a worldview for myself in which so many decent people are actively lying so consistently about their experiences. Far easier to believe that the War-Hoax claim is a psyop. Which is consistent with other things I know about those who advance such claims.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, no response about that video being a movie clip and not footage of spurious combat on the fields of France?
LikeLike
Question #2 for JLB. What would you accept as evidence for the deaths of millions in the World Wars?
LikeLike
Let’s see what happens here. I’ve written before and it’s been blocked. My grandfather died from war wounds, years after shrapnel was pulled out of his body. Was that a fake?
LikeLike
From the safety of the basement down under, it is easy to call that “fake”, but that seems to be the whole modus operandi of these people; ridicule every personal account and not think about the consequences of such actions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Correct. He signed up. He dodged bullets in Egypt and then he went to the Kokoda Trail and lived. Shot full of bullets and died at 53.
LikeLike
Let me explain that a bit more. He was hit with shrapnel on the trail. Yes I’m an Aussie. They couldn’t get it all out and he suffered for years. I never knew him. He died a long time before I was born. My Mother grieved him for a long time.
LikeLike
And I’m pretty sure he didn’t fake his death for his kith and kin.
LikeLike
Everyone is going on by what they were told. None of us were there. Movies, books, school, memorials brainwash us on how we are supposed to understand these events. There are too many contradictions on every single story I’ve heard and read about. Your relatives were not liars, but they just didn’t perceive what was actually happening even if they thought they did. We’ve realized by now the old battles had predetermined outcomes. The generals knew how to march their teams into death. I’ve heard that our military and others loaded many soldiers on ships and they were sunk, how many people could they get rid of that way, any other ways to kill a lot of people without a battlefield and later say they died on a battlefield? I do believe The WW conflicts and other historical conflicts were mainly about population reduction and people died. I’m not seeing many white people anymore, in areas where their ancestors lived. The TPTB do have agendas.
LikeLike
When we talk about war being a hoax, isn’t it really a matter of to what degree?
For war to be a 100% hoax would require that humans have no aggressive impulse strong enough to enable them to cause the death of others, and thus do not fight others on their own, and furthermore are not manipulated into fighting each other to the point of killing each other.
That would be great but this hardly fits with my observations of people. To me it stands to reason that some military personnel are actually injured and killed by so-called “enemy” military personnel, if for no other reason than to add some realism and legitimacy to the “show”. Also, if military medical personnel never saw soldiers come in with injuries then some people might begin to think and ask questions–can’t have that now, can we?
As others have noted, I too, can see various motives for the self-anointed “Elite” to want to manipulate humans into killing each other, ranging from the obvious potential for financial gain, as well as more obscure reasons, e.g., the liquidation of delinquent creditors.
LikeLike
The world has been dealt from the bottom of the deck since the beginning of time,The game is rigged,this we all know. you’re just a bad player at the game. you think EVERYTHING is a HOAX. I’m certain you’ve been sold some sweet dreams in your time along with a few bridges and some swamp- water to run under it…you’re bitter and paranoid by delusion and irrational suspicion because you’ve been taken for a few too many rides over the rainbow…and that my friend was no HOAX !!!
LikeLike
Apparently you didn’t read my post before you commented–or at least didn’t comprehend it, else you wouldn’t have come to that conclusion.
Thanks for the non-responsive reply to something you made up, that I never said.
LikeLike
LikeLike
why do I have the feeling that you guys are pushing adds for each other here? Or for others too. Never mind. As for me, I’ve witnessed myself how easy it is to put things in minds of people so they will see what you want them to see. Imagine you live in Syria (or Lebanon, or Iraq, or wherever), you know about the outside world enough to know your life is not as good as it could be, yet still you’re afraid to leave not only because it is (or appears) difficult or dangerous. For non-nomadic folks it is always scary to leave their old place and their old life. They don’t travel as you guys do, they don’t meet other folks and if they are forced, they have difficulties to assimilate due lack of experience. It’s the world government or what we call TPTB who is (or was) moving people from certain countries to more developed places using fake wars not only to misdirect us but to misdirect this other people in the first place. That’s why you hear stories if you’ll have the rare opportunity to talk to some of the refugees. They believe in the fake wars more than the most of us do. It’s what made them move to unknown places and unknown people. This mass migration seems to be completed now. I know some such people from Iraq and Syria but they all are living in Germany for about 20 years now. They don’t know any fresh refugees themselves. I know a young couple from Iran who travels frequently to Germany and back. They don’t take their own history very seriously. I also know older people from the very same Iran who fled after the Revolution during the first Golf war. They still take it for real. They didn’t witnessed any bombing or whatever. All they know about it is from news. And they won’t talk to the younger ones. People like to stick to what they first learned and are afraid to change their perspective.
LikeLike
WWI footage is not real, it’s from some Hollywood film. ‘Dead’?/’injured’? bodies that move out of the way of the Renault FT tanks at the 55 second mark, improbabile. US Army operated Renault tanks in the war.
LikeLike
Indeed Maarten and Peter, it is a psyop and a shallow silly one too. It is repetition of soundbite slogans “NDNGH”, “War is a HOAX. Period”, they come from a first year marketing class, it seems.
The tactics:
– look at this footage, that is fake, so it means everything else is fake too – fallacy
– if you believe war is not a hoax, you believe the full media story – false dichotomy/strawman
– I am going to dismiss everything that counters my insane ideas and don’t accept anything as evidence, no matter how hard you try – immature close-minded trolling
Apart from the total nuttiness and repetition of AAMorris (I have now listened to all the episodes, but don’t recommend them if you don’t want mere repetition and the most ridiculous accusations -of coprophagy no less- to hear), he is right about the DaveJLB connection; a pathetic psyop crowd who believe they have some internet celeb status.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Off-topic, but somewhat related I think: regarding fake sports, if the NFL games, and NHL, golf, NBA, etc., games are faked and managed, are the massive athletes’ salaries that are widely publicized fake as well? I find it hard to believe that if the game outcomes are faked, why pay tens to hundreds of millions in salaries to NBA, golf and NFL players? It make no sense. These “athletes” should be happy to get $100k a year, if even that, for playing games all year long. Why are the athletes’ salaries so bloated and ridiculous (akin to the massive lottery winnings (e.g., $500 million powerball winnings, etc., which I believe are fake)? But I could be wrong, if their salaries are somehow part of the project as well.
LikeLike
I would reason the other way; the salaries are real because they take part in those scripted games, so they keep quiet about scripted outcomes, just because they get paid so well. Pay them peanuts and you get loose-lipped monkeys. Money is no issue for the ones controlling the Excel sheet that defines it, so why not paying 100s of millions of dollars for real?
That the main games are scripted, of course doesn’t make every sportsman/woman a talentless person, I think there is a lot of real talent and dedication around. With real people who want to achieve something.
Not so off-topic when you think along the “war is a hoax”/”every game is scripted”/”they all are actors” absolutist POV vs “major things are hoaxed in wars/major sports events are scripted/some major players are actors” point of view.
LikeLike
the salaries of stars being it sport or movie or music stars are vastly exaggerated to make them look more important. Only the tax office knows how much they really payed them. It’s still a lot compared to what an middle class employee earns. I estimate this in the range of maybe a few millions or less for a year. They earn this big money only for a short period of time. And they are forced to spend lots of it to keep their image up. When this time is over there’s not much left. That’s why they still have to work somehow to earn fresh money which then is much less of course. Just take a look what your favorite stars are doing when their career is over. The German Tennis star Boris Becker for instance makes a clown of himself now playing a bankrupt star, a divorced star, a star with a child on the side, a star who’s just lost his Spanish villa, etc. Lots of stuff for the news, one more absurd than the other. His last ex wife recently had to play in the German version of a show called “I’m A Celebrity – Get Me Out Of Here”, which was pathetic to say the least. Why is she doing that? They all need fresh money. Imagine you’ve made some savings, say 10 million $ after taxes. If you’re a reasonable person you can afford any luxury then and still won’t be able to spend this 10 million in your lifetime. Of course any amount of money can be wasted, but I don’t think they do this. They all have to work because they never earned the big money as we are told.
LikeLike
is what Xfiles asks over at Fakeologist.
In my understanding of the English language, a “hoaxer” is someone who hoaxes/pulls off hoaxes, just like a painter is someone who paints, a trader is someone who trades and a liar is someone who lies.
AAMorris calls John and Chris “hoaxers”. But that term was reserved for the people who pull off hoaxes, so it cannot (also) refer to those who analyze/deconstruct hoaxes, just like an art critic is not (necessarily) an artist, a movie reviewer is not a director/producer and someone who analyzes stories is not (per sé) a storyteller.
“Language is important, let’s focus on that”, again very much agreed AAMorris, but you are the first victim of your own stance, as you appear not to understand language or deliberately misrepresent it. Or something else.
“We should get rid of the word ‘hoax'”, again agreed, that’s why I called my series “Peculiar Plots”, and not “Hoaxes”. But, the one who used the words “hoax” and “hoaxers” dozens of times now is you, AAMorris. Put your money where your mouth is.
I fear it is.
LikeLike
In response to AAMorris’s coprophage accusations, this clip from the great Steve Hughes is more than appropriate:
LikeLike
we all have some reason to believe of the reality of the previous wars because of our relatives. Especially the so called World Wars, which I consider to be one war with a break in between. Our grandparents or parents told us stories, etc. All this memorial places. To understand how this worked, you can take a look at how today’s hoaxes work. For instance 2015 there was a blockupy event in Frankfurt, where some protesters tried to block banks in Frankfurt. I had to work this day so I came early, about 07:15 in the morning. I walked near a burned car, which still was smoking a little. There were a few TV teams, lots of photographers still taking pictures from all possible angles. It was maybe 100 meters at the side from my way to office and I saw everything very well. On the main street in the financial district (Mainzer Landstraße) there were already lots of police cars, bumper on bumper with only some gaps to let working people through. They let me go undisturbed. Then the entire day the news were like “Frankfurt is burning”, “Frankfurt is in chaos”, etc. with pictures of non existing smoke over Frankfurt, with pictures of this one burning car suggesting the protesters burned many cars the entire day. Nothing of it real. The weather was fine this day, very sunny, I have a very good look over the financial district from my office. I even called a friend of mine who works at the place where the most protests supposedly happened. She said, she just came back from lunch, there are lots of people, some making speeches, etc. But the restaurants are not overcrowded. Everything was fine. I then talked to some people (kids from friends) who were participating on the protests. They told me, what the news told them, even though they all were right there and could witness everything. People believe what the news tell them more then what they see. In the time of the World Wars it was no different.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You see how easy it is to spark up a WAR from a primitive state, to an advanced stage of cultural development of so-called civilized people…over opinions ? We all know those are like ASS….s and we all have one….Granted,the game is always rigged to some extent….Especially when Money is involved…And Money being the root of all evil,bringing out the best and worst in all of us…it’s rotten to the core,and if you think that didn’t start some REAL WARS,You’re all F…..G delusional.
LikeLike
The racket always makes money destroying “the old” (they don’t call it disaster capitalism for nothing), creating the need to invest (borrow from the banks) in rebuilding a “brighter future” out of the rubble created by wars of choice. War is always a choice, which coincidentally masks stalled “growth” when banking tricks can no longer support the logic of mergers and acquisition (market share) and/or price increases. War IS the capitalist business model. Goyim will always sacrifice their young when the symbols of church and state are (fake) threatened. Have we “peaked” yet? Onward Christian soldiers.
LikeLike
Power,Money and Greed….WELL,SAID.
LikeLike
wrong, trigger man, the war wasn’t sparkled but scripted. It started with the well known “…and action” command given by the directors of this production. The idea was to create chaos first and then something new out of chaos. It may be the only way to make bigger changes. How was the world before the WW? Feudalism and aristocracy was leading the civilized world, hindering any development. The masses were poor. People worked long hours either on big farms owned by very few or in big factories owned also by very few. Aristocracy (old money) was wasting much of the surplus doing nothing of value. This leading layer did not allow any changes and was not able to agree on anything. On the other side, mass production was already known, many essential improvements in the agricultural technology waited to be implemented. TPTB knew the world can be improved but the control was still in hands of others. So they took over and started to implement what we now call the New World Order. It does not men a new order for the world by the way. It means the order from the New World (USA). That’s where TPTB were hiding. The USA was created after the French Revolution to be the place from where all had to start.
LikeLike
Hmmm …. not quite. The Latin on the Great Seal of the USA reads Novus Ordo Saeclorum, which can only be translated to mean “a new order of the world” and NOT “the order of the New World.”
And if you listen to Bush Sr.’s remarks on the NWO, it is again clear that “new” modifies “world-order” and that it is not a compound of the phrase “New World” + “order.”
LikeLike
no Maarten, Novus ordo seclorum means verbally “a new order for eternity” or “an age of new order”. There is no “world” in it. There is this sentence on the “Great Seal of the United States”, (which in itself is a code. They didn’t call it “the Great Seal of the United States of America”, did they?) And there are this famous announcements like that one from G.W.Bush about New World Order. Different things but then not so different at all. They play with us, as usual. They applied “united states” worldwide now. Borders, first introduced after the French Revolution, lost any significance now.
LikeLike
NEW OLD ORDER To take the place of,by force or trickery. The rule of the jungle supplants from the meek. it’s a” world” for the taking,Where the strong take the weak
LikeLike
Wrong again, BM.
From the Latin dictionary of Lewis and Short, at the entry for saeculum:
In late (=ecclesiastical) Latin especially, the noun could be used as a plural in constructions but with a singular meaning of “world.” And of course, the folks who came up with the Great Seal would have studied late Latin for sure.
So, you see, there IS a possible reading of “world” in Novus Ordo Seclorum. And no, the word aeternitas is not in the motto, so your translation is nonsense.
Best to quit while you are behind: Taciturnitas stulto homini pro sapientia est.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well B. MU, I guess I don’t agree with you on all points after all,Not on the WORLD part anyway, I’m sort of leaning towards MAARTEN on that one…Unless of course you can prove him wrong.
LikeLike
Maarten, I had some Latin in school and don’t rely on online dictionaries. I don’t know a proper word in English for “seclorum”. In German it means “Zeitalter”, which could be translated as “age” but in Latin it also means a very long period of time, like in the meaning of eternity. Don’t you see that the world is being “ordered” out from the New World? Never mind.
LikeLike
BM, your Latin teacher should have been sent to Siberia for gross incompetence. The meaning of saeculum is not a long, long period of time like an eternity, but something more like “the maximum human lifespan.” Some of the ancients figured that to be 90 years, others 110. The meaning settled in at 100 years by the time saeculum descended into the various Romance languages with the meaning of “a century,” as for example with French siècle.
I was tempted to urge you once more to quit while you are behind in this side-debate. But to be honest, it is fascinating to watch you at work, dodging facts and twisting meanings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
B.MU, So we agree then.Everything starts with an agenda.You said it yourself,it started with the well known.Those seeds of time were sown,and watered by the deeds of those who know and who are known,and there’s always an ulterior motive, usually the motive is money and everything else is secondary. I agree with everything you said…it’s all in the script. Good or Bad,something alway’s ascends from the ash of chaos and corruption…and that’s ascendancy itself controlling influence and domination.
LikeLike
I’d say money is just a means to an end for the true controllers; it’s not the true motive for what they’ve been doing for centuries.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I agree Lex Mercatoria (nice name).
In The Purposes of War, linked above, I have listed a number of purposes, but there are more. Money is part of it, but by far not the most important and the industrialists making money in wars are relatively small (weapons, logistics, resources, etc.) compared to the rest of the economy where people are negatively affected by wars.
One of the purposes of war, and the documentation of it in his-story, is what we have been taught/told at school. What we learned is that basically “history is just a sequence or wars”, which of course is not the case. 99.99% of the time and in place, people are not at war. Life is peaceful, people just living their lives, surviving, raising children, etc. Even during wars (like WWII), large parts of Europe did not see active combat. Yes, conditions were bad, with rationing/looting in the Nazi-occupied areas, social terror and looting by the Commies and propaganda and looting by the Allies, but many people were not directly in danger.
But that is not what we were taught. The purpose of course is to propagate the idea that we “need” a “govern-mind” to “protect and serve”, and people really believe that, especially in Europe.
LikeLike
O.K…LEX, Not a true motive, yeah ,right. Let’s take money out of the equation of everything in the world ,and add that to your wishful thinking,and then subtract it from REALITY. You can rest assure the driving force isn’t the coming attainment…*of peace,love and flowers.
LikeLike
If you read my post–which would likely now be for the first time–you’ll find I did factor $$$ into my comment.
Please stop imagining things I didn’t say. Thanks.
LikeLike
yes…correct,STORY….HIS STORY…A TALE, A FABLE.
LikeLike
Hi Gaia, it looks like you just got there in time. the AAMorris website now says:
“PLEASE NOTE: THE AA MORRIS “PROPER GANDER AT PROPAGANDA” PROJECT IS OVER.
It was all just “an elaborate piece of performance art.”
This website and accompanying podcast series were designed with this end result in mind. Consider this a live acton roleplaying experience. Do not believe much of what was said or written. AA Morris the so-called “ProperGander” is not a real human being; nor is there any reason to believe in anything the “ProperGander” AA Morris put forth. This person never really existed at all. Please keep this in mind.
Never forget to believe half of what you see and none of what you hear. What we can honestly reveal is that this is the work of more than one magical “guy”.”
Well I never…… Any thoughts or reaction?
LikeLike
Hi Peter, see the link here below. At the end I come in and explain my idea about AAMorris. It’s a good listen with lots of good points and fun.
LikeLike
Thanks for that Gaia, I will have a listen
LikeLike
In a very enjoyable show hosted by talented radio producer Velocet, with other good Australian (Rollo, Exoteric64, Noiz_level) and other people (JohnnyClues and Rachel), we go over AAMorris for 4 hours: AFR Radio 30 September.
Enjoy.
LikeLike
I have had discussions with quite some people who also listened to the Proper Gander podcast series, both the 220 “sane” ones and the about 15 “insane” ones at the end. From that, and AAMorris’s own words, I basically see three options:
1 – a mental breakdown
2 – a professional shill
3 – a piece of performance art
The first was suggested by a handful of his listeners and while there are certainly signs that can be interpreted as such, I think this option is not the most likely one:
– AAMorris had a very sudden and seemingly unprovoked (I of course don’t know his personal correspondence with people) “change of heart”, going from supporting and linking to websites and individuals to attacking and slandering them
– his attacks on anyone and everyone certainly had signs of a mental crisis in them, but at the same time there always was an air of sarcasm (one of his most attacked “subjects” interpreted it like that)
– the amount of NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) in those rants (see below)
The third possibility is that this all was a “joke”, a “piece of performance art, not to be taken seriously”. That is what AAMorris himself now claims on his website. And he is almost the only one who suggests this option, from the people I have spoken with. Also this option I do not consider likely:
– he had a blog running for 2 years, registered 3 years ago, long time for “performance art”
– he put out a whopping 220 podcasts in 200 days, most of them 2 hours each, which is a substantial piece of content, more than other “performance artists” would do
– if this was “performance art”, then what is the artistic part in it? Art should make people think, and that has worked, but it then becomes senseless because of the amount of information he shared in the long run up to a 10 day rant spree
The second option deserves a bit more digging and elaboration. From what I have heard here and elsewhere, there basically exists a “spectrum” that runs from Mark’s position of “Total Information Control” on one end to the ‘Shills are a HOAX. Period’ stance of John Le Bon.
When Mark explained his position here at POM, I understand much better where he is coming from. His professional career was in accounting and he has made that comparison when talking about this. Yes, I imagine the -horrible- accounting business as a very tight and monitored piece of business. But, I also think that projecting that environment to the whole rest of the internet is not justified. A lot of other professions are far far less monitored and controlled, so if Mark would have worked as an artist or self-employed freelancer for 40 years, he could have used that experience to state the opposite of the tightly controlled and monitored accountants position.
John Le Bon’s position, as we know him, is of the opposite yet evenly absolutist character. No shills or everyone shilling, there is about 99.99% of space in between, with millions of people. JLB’s promotion of that position reeks of Catholic priests who claim “there are no pedophiles”. No, John, I am not calling you a pedophile, I count on your proper reading and interpretative skills.
My position is much more towards the JLB end of the spectrum than on Mark’s end and before the ranting episodes I thought AAMorris was not a shill. I still think the “self-fulshilling prophecy” is a strong idea; self-censorship-like in thinking people are after us. Similar to the Orwellian “the suggestion of war is even stronger than real war”. Visible in staging events in peace and in war time and with the big Nuke Hoax of course. “Why make it when you can fake it?”
In the case of AAMorris there was however much more to back-up the position that he was a shill, and probably a paid one too. I took note of some of his wordings, from the horses mouth:
The tell-tale signs
– “they think they see clues for 9/11 in Back to the Future movies”, “these people are CRAZY” – I have compassion for blind people, even for you AAMorris
– “this [people talking on Discord and blogs/forums] is more important than anything else [his own research in the 220 previous podcasts]” – indicating why he did all this
– “I have infiltrated Fakeologist and HBC, so they like me, and I bit my tongue so now I can criticize” – and again
– “I have laid out a bread crumb trail” – and yet again, the revelation of the method
– “I worked [work?] for Bloomberg” – standing by itself not so much an argument, but in the bigger picture it is important
NLP – Neuro Linguistic Programming
The repetition in his rants is overwhelming and a lot of what he says is typical mainstream speech (I use abbreviated names here to not help him spread these messages):
– “JA, that disgusting SICK, SICK… fixated with Alex Jones, fixated, fixated…”
– “CK is a joke, he is obsessed with pedophilia, he eats his own feces, he is not a researcher, he is sick, he needs help, but nobody over at [that site] seems to care because they think everything is fake, they are HOAXERS!”
– “CK is driving around the country with a GUN in his van, that guy belongs in a straightjacket, he is a DANGEROUS man in a van” – playing on the emotions of the MSM believers and the various staged events with “conspiracy theorist” target culprits
– “why would R act drunk but he is not really, he is obsessed with stalking people traveling around the world, he is radicalized by Bill Cooper”
– “I am just a regular guy” – which he said about the people he talked about too, but AAMorris called himself “normal” and not obsessed, while his subjects were “not normal” and “obsessed”
– “I don’t care about details and memory fails me, but… [then goes into details about other people, making things up, pulling things out of context and misrepresenting actual words]” – this is also NLP as the media do the same thing; they rely on the fact that most people have very little eye for the details of these peculiar plots, something we here and people elsewhere try to change.
– “anyone even tangentially connected to these sites is a role player” – lumping everyone in, like suddenly there are no disagreements anymore. Also, he went into role playing himself, by himself, in his solo rants.
– “you shouldn’t talk with people online, you don’t know, normal people don’t do that”
But: “you should talk about people online, you don’t know, for hours and hours” is “normal”, really, Mr. Morris?
His repetitions up to 100s of times and like 50-100 in just 1 episode of:
– “never forget, never forget, never forget” – 9/11 and H Mystory (Mystery+History+Story) NLP
– “always remember, always remember, always remember” – Gunpowder Plot/Guy Fawkes, 9/11, H Mystory NLP
– the abuse of the word “hoaxers”, many many times in a row. A hoaxer (active verb) is someone who pulls off a hoax, not someone analyzing them (reactive).
His personal words to me
– he said about me: “it is crazy to be obsessed with Flat Earth [admitted, he has a point there, but I learned quite lot from it], because it is a scientific fact the Earth is not flat”
Not:
– simple observations and basic trigonometry prove the Earth cannot be flat
And:
– this comes from the same guy who criticized the “scientifically established facts” of orbits, gravity, space, etc.
So if “scientific facts” are suddenly important in the FE case [and not simple observations everyone can make], you just destroyed the whole tower you built in 10s of podcasts about “gravity”, “orbits”, “the Solar System”, etc.
Defending the “enemy”
– “accusing Lenny Pozner that his son didn’t die is offensive” – typical MSM speech, parroted by dupes online and offline
– “we should stand behind the victims, the Lenny Pozners (father of Sandy Hook AND Peshawar school shooting 2 weeks later “victim”) and Sonny Meltons (Las Vegas “victim”)”
– spamming of the honr website during the rants and now on his blog
– “Hoaxers take a cowardly and malicious approach to being heard, with little regard for those they harm in the process.” – Hmm, doesn’t that remind us of someone?
My conclusion?
Rather than having an honest “mental breakdown” or “performing art”
…, he offered to Bloomberg “you let me stay at home with my kids and I set up a project to infiltrate [his own words] a community to expose their ‘craziness’, ‘loser’ status [his own words], laying a bread crumb trail [his own words], manipulate them into liking me [his own words] and then I expose them for their ‘hoaxer’ idiocy, while propagandizing for Lenny Pozner [his own words]” and got a fat promotion with content that can be used at any time in any future to “expose” those “crazy non-believers” in the peculiar plots we put out there, so we can hunt them down.
McCarthyism 2018.
LikeLike
If there are “no shills online. Period.”, then why is there a training course costing 5000 USD for that exact purpose?
Some excerpts, check out the link, it is revealing…
LikeLike
Fascinating.
Is it real, this website? Or another layer of someone’s deception? How did you find this, Gaia?
The list of students/clients is revealing, if real.
Many financial institutions. Maybe explains why Steve Kelly’s posts on money get so few bites from the commentariat: the less attention drawn to that subject, the better for the employers of the shills. Keep ‘em speculating about sports and celebrities and anything but fiat money and its implications for the average Jane or Joe.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I assume it is very real, there is no need to hide these courses and contracts in secret. In the end, they are proud of this kind of warfare, and the duped people who work in these areas I am sure really believe it is needed to “serve and protect” “freedumb and democrazy”…
There is much more links to this, for instance a purchase order from the Naval Air Warfare department (NAVAIR) here.
Of course they are located in the “Salem State” Massachusetts:
I got this information from a friend at HB who is an excellent sleuther, in that sense good this AAMorris character sparked this.
LikeLike
Note the content at that course website has been taken offline. Now you have to send an email to them to obtain the information listed above. So yes, I think we were being monitored here.
LikeLike
Hey where can I read more about ‘the John Adams saga’? That’s John Adams of HBC right? I used to really like him on HBC and thought he was a genuine guy, is that not the case?
That whole AA Morris thing is a mind-**cker of the highest order. Anywhere I can read more on that?
LikeLike
I don’t know where to read about that, and is it important? Why someone would dig in someone’s private life without any reason baffles me. I talked a lot with John and I also like him.
LikeLike
Digging into his private life? Is he not somewhat of a public figure? Doesn’t what someone publishes online become sort of a ‘public record’, and as such is worthy of scrutiny. Why would he have published anything at all if he didn’t expect people to be interested in it, and by extension interested in the man himself? I am interested in reading more because I spent many, many hours of my life listening to him and internalizing his ideas- it seemed to have been suggested that he may not have been a genuine character, similar to Aa Morris, so I am curious to know more. Does anyone really have a ‘private life’ anymore anyway?
LikeLike
How does John Adams quote written passages at length while driving a car? Or is that “pulling into the driveway” thing just a framing device?
LikeLike
I don’t know, breaks at traffic lights? A screen next to him in the car? I don’t think he was “faking” his commutes.
LikeLike
I’m not concerned with his private life or digging into anything, but simply trying to understand if I should reconsider his public output, if there is good reason to believe he is not a genuine person. Am I misunderstanding? You seemed to have compared him to AA Morris.
LikeLike