Perpetual War Seems Real To Me

I’ve been struggling to find a way to make sense of the increasingly frequent opinions/comments here at POM that propose, with little or no evidence, that America’s foreign wars are staged; essentially fake.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/07/an-eyewitness-to-the-horrors-of-the-us-forever-wars-speaks-out/

I offer one piece of evidence to refute this notion. The eyewitness account in the above link seems genuine enough to me. The author has a lifetime of first-hand knowledge and a consistent anti-war message offered to all who will listen.

So, I offer this as a challenge to the proponents of “wars are not real” to post some evidence of their own. I am open to changing my mind, but not based solely on the opinion of anyone that can’t bring a few tidbits of reality that we may all examine.

What have you got to share?

In the meantime, I will repeat my pathetically ineffective call for “No More Endless War.”

67 thoughts on “Perpetual War Seems Real To Me

  1. I obviously cannot speak for other proponents of the War as a Hoax concept, but my views:

    1 – we (should) know about all the war fakery in recent past and present, e.g. fake attacks in Syria recorded on stage!
    2 – we know about specific events that are blatantly fake; every “war” starts with a false flag event (staged); Franz Ferdinand, USS Maine, Tonkin, Gliewits incident (or what was the name, the onset for WWII), the assassinations of Abby Lincoln, Jorge Eliécer Gaitán (1948), JFK (1963), this Iranian dude (2020), and many many more.
    3 – we know all “””sides””” of a “war” are con-trolled by the same psychopaths
    4 – we should know the power of “war correspondents” and their tendency to stage news instead of reporting what is really going on, check William Citizen Kane Inventor of Fake News Randolph Hearst and his fake whorenalist William Shirer
    5 – we should know that politicians are actors and so is the military (psyops are street theater!)
    6 – we should know they fake families, genealogies and other data to support the idea of boogeymen and saviors, examples Dolfy Hitler, Osama bin Laden, Simón Bolívar, etc. etc.
    7 – we know they fake battles, see the La Plata “battle” outlined on this very blog, but much more to find in MM’s excellent Crusades, Napoleon and other papers.
    8 – we know the military operates outside of what is so nicely called “civil” law, so they can pull off whatever story the scriptwriters have written.
    9 – very important concepts to take into account are the spiritual murder and the first witness. By pushing sobbing “war” stories you commit the former and by dropping your skepticism and embrace an account as “trustworthy” you forget the importance of the former.

    More tonight, I am on a fieldtrip.

    I would falsify your position; what piece of information would change your views towards an understanding of the War as a Hoax concept?

    So it only

    Like

    1. I don’t believe in nukes or spaceships so I have to assume all governments are in cahoots. Now it doesn’t necessarily follow that gullible apes can’t be lined up to shoot at each other of course. But I’ve never had a bomb dropped on me nor do I know of anyone that has. So I don’t worry about all the drama on the world stage we’ve been taught to call the globe.

      Like

  2. A supposed eyewitness account is no better than an opinion especially from a controlled opposition rag. Id suppose someone saying some/certain wars are not real doesnt mean bombs arn’t flying that people arn’t dying but rather unseen motives and hidden hands are indeed conniving. Since I cant stomach television news admittedly out of ignorance Im not up to date about the group whose leader was killed, but is it not more plausible the group was formed from some sort of intel agency from the start then you can supposedly kill said leader of said fake front to give pretext for war. These cowards these days dont do anything unless theyre controlling both sides. These wars force the eyes of the populace outside who look to the controllers of it as saviors what a great way to keep the hierarchy intact essentially the war isnt against said enemy rather against the populace. Thats one way to look at it but in this day and age with globalism key there may be some last factional vestiges that need to be cleaned up before fully implementing the overall platform.

    Like

  3. My paternal grandfather was an artillery man throughout WW1. He saw death and destruction beyond modern comprehension.

    My father went over on D day in WW2 and followed the war front all the way to Luneberg Heath where the Armistice was signed. He was alongside plenty of “Yanks” as he called you guys all that time, and he crossed the channel with the Canadians.

    He visited Hamburg on the way, which he said was “just piles of bricks, the city had gone” and also “the smell of decaying bodies underneath all those bricks was overpowering, it made me heave”.

    He also visited Bergen Belsen and saw the piles of bodies for himself. I could not get him to tell me more about that because his composure would crack every time that he tried. He was not a soft man, he was hard as nails, but the tears welled in his eyes at the mere thought of Belsen.

    If you’d told either of them that war is fake then they’d have left you senseless on the ground. They knew better….

    Having said all that I do think that there have been plenty of fake aspects in many wars as exposed by Miles and others. Certainly it’s much easier to fake aspects now that most people think that their ubiquitous screens somehow show them reality.

    But to say that wars are fake is simply ludicrous. Every village and town and city in the UK has a war memorial. And the local community there knew the people whose names are on them, well over a million names. Where the eff did they all go if war is fake?

    Like

    1. Dear Pete, are you open to the possibility that your father was a liar?

      As for the memorials, of course they could be faked, every single name on those plaques could be entirely make believe.

      You do realise there are similar memorials for the VicSims of 9/11, do you not?

      Nuclear bombs are a hoax. Once a person realises this fact, it is only a matter of time until they unravel the entire deception.

      Some people who called me ‘crazy’ a few years ago are starting to come around to the War Hoax.

      Others will take much longer, this isn’t an easy process, we have all been heavily programmed from a young age.

      From what you have written, it sounds like you copped a heavier dose of programming than most, so I completely understand if you get mad at what I have written here.

      Like

      1. Thanks Jon for your calm civility, it is a pleasant contrast to what went before

        Yes, all kids who grew up in the 1950’s UK copped a heavy dose of programming for sure, all of us without exception, it was unavoidable. But that cannot detract from the real life experiences, from first hand accounts by people who were actually there and saw for themselves. People like my grandfather, and my father, and many of their friends. I hold this evidence in far higher regard than any theorising from a distance of many decades too. Many of my fathers generation went through similar experiences. Were they all liars? What are the odds?

        I know for certain that my father was not a liar in all other aspects of his life that I actually witnessed [40+ years post my infancy]. His deeply moral attitude to life was not based on any religion [he was atheist] it was based on his real life experience. He was not a liar in all the time that I knew him, not ever. But he could not hide his emotion from me that’s for sure. He presented a hard exterior to the world but I knew that if the tears came into his eyes when he spoke in private then it was heartfelt. To tell me that he did not go to Hamburg or Belsen because he was a liar is simply out of the question. The second world war was his university of life. He was 18 when he signed on and 24 when he came home, boy to man.

        As for the war memorials I think some more detailed explanation is in order. You guys are probably not aware that such memorials were erected by local people here in the UK. Any 9/11 memorial is an entirely different thing, chalk and cheese. The names were scrutinized by local people who actually knew the people who went off to the war and did not return. The locals gathered there to mourn their lost kinfolk, on the masonic 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month each year. But the names were scrutinized when they were inscribed. By people who knew the victims. Newer names were added with the next war. This was deeply entrenched in British society, still is to a lesser degree. Foreigners cannot possibly understand just how deeply entrenched it was. You needed to live here and see for yourself. It was a matter of honour, something that is in short supply now

        I can accept that there may be the odd false name. But even that is hard to conceive because all the local names were scrutinized by all the numerous local clubs and associations of ex military guys. These clubs, with their multitudes of committees, were every where, all over the UK. There were far, far, too many eyes on these names to make them all false. It was a massive point of honour, massive, hard to understand if you are not a Brit. Any older Brit knows this for sure, we’ve been sending men to die in wars for effin centuries. It is simply ridiculous to say that all those millions of people were fooled. That idea could only come out of the modern internet and obsessive screen culture, where such a fantasy is possible.

        Like

        1. a pleasant contrast

          Nice.

          Without contrast no colors. Sorry, colours.

          Yes, all kids who grew up in the 1950’s UK copped a heavy dose of programming for sure, all of us without exception, it was unavoidable.
          Many of my fathers generation went through similar experiences. Were they all liars [1]? What are the odds?

          I know for certain that my father was not a liar [2] in all other aspects of his life that I actually witnessed [40+ years post my infancy]. … He was not a liar [3] in all the time that I knew him, not ever.
          To tell me that he did not go to Hamburg or Belsen because he was a liar [4] is simply out of the question.

          4 times you keep this strawman alive. Who has accused your father of being a liar? I used the term “false witness”, thank you DaveJ.

          Michael Collins and Neil Armstrong were also not lying! when they answered Patrick Moore. Collins “didn’t remember seeing any”, because he WASN’T seeing any. He was safely stored in a safehouse run by NASA and the attached military-engineering complex programming his mind (“””MK-Ultra”””).

          Only that option could mean they could come across as semi-credible, at least for many people at the time.

          I managed to convince various people of various ages (ranging from 17 to 83, my father-in-law] about the absurdity of the moon landings and space travel in general.

          Those people were able to completely topple their world views, how about that. I will get them on air soon.

          Back to your dad. What about the option that HE got “MK-Ultra’ed” into believing the stories he was told. The people disappearing around him should reinforce the programming.

          But:

          A – did they really die? – this is a story propagated by the MIC (military industrial complex, or give it any name you like]
          B – what about the prime example we have of this, the myth creation psyop of the Holocaust Story

          As for the war memorials I think some more detailed explanation is in order. You guys are probably not aware that such memorials were erected by local people here in the UK.

          This was deeply entrenched in British society, still is to a lesser degree. Foreigners cannot possibly understand just how deeply entrenched it was. You needed to live here and see for yourself. It was a matter of honour, something that is in short supply now

          We have multiple nationalities here and people living in foreign countries. Do you really imagine in your Britannism that other countries do not have these same propaganda programming in their system?

          I have seen war memorials in many different countries, like Ukraine, Spain, Colombia, Mexico, and my home country the Netherlands of course. These names may be very real, why does that need to be a matter of debate?

          But are the causes of death, the circumstances and the motives or even faked deaths (Holocaust Story cough] as the MIC, a known bunch of staged event directors and storytellers, programmed into us what they were.

          That, with the 10,000+ hours we all have spent on deconstructing psyops, is illogical to say the least.

          It is simply ridiculous to say that all those millions of people were fooled.

          “Simply ridiculous”, is that a mathematical, philosophical, statistical or rather satirical statement in these times of foolery?

          Again, Holocaust Story. That proves it is easy to fool millions. Read Mark T’s (both did the work] quote of Piece of Mindful again, please.

          I will share it for you.

          It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled. – Mark T.

          Sometimes indeed.

          Like

          1. I was replying to a question by Jon le Bon:
            “Dear Pete, are you open to the possibility that your father was a liar?”
            I was replying to Jon NOT to you, that should have been very clear, my post was right below his. Perhaps in future you should actually read, and then think, before you return to your keyboard?

            I was not replying directly to you Gaia. Your bluster and aggression does not fool me either. Strawman? Pot, kettle, black

            Like

          2. I understand, you project something you don’t like about me (talking about “civility” when the topic at hand is death and mind control, hilarious).

            Always a good strategy to avoid addressing my arguments; you can keep hiding behind your dislike of me. Excellent display of another fallacy, you can find the Latin term yourself, though I have little faith in your ability to deal with a new world view.

            Satirony*, from the country that almost invented satire.

            *Satirical irony, my own Newspeak.

            Like

          3. Ahhh, poor little Gaia wants to be liked. Really? Hilarious

            You complain that I ignore your irrelevant arguments:
            Collins and Armstrong?
            MK ultra?
            Holocaust?
            10,000+ hours of deconstruction?
            Wtf have they got to do with this discussion?

            Yet you ignore all the many thousands of first person witness accounts. Were they all liars? Were they all Mkultra’d? Wasn’t MK ultra post war ffs? Were all these people fooled? They were witnesses not consumers of controlled media remember. They were witnesses, there’s a massive difference you know

            I’ve heard many first person witness accounts, not just my fathers, many others. There are more witness accounts than it is possible to read too, many tens, probably hundreds, of thousands. I will provide you with 2 more:

            My father in law, who has now passed, escaped from the fall of Singapore in a boat and made it all the way across the Indian Ocean to the island of Reunion, off Madagascar. Many of his pals died in the Japanese camps in Thailand. They certainly did not return

            My dog walking friend, who has also passed, was an officer in command of soldiers defending Singapore with machine guns from the invading Japanese army. Many of his men died. He was captured and went to those same camps; the officers had a better chance of returning, but not all of them did. He saw many of them die there too

            Or maybe they were all Mkultra’d and turned into good Japanese citizens? Whatever, they certainly did not return home like both of them did. Were all these many thousands of people fooled? Do me a favour, grow up

            You are a funny guy Gaia

            Like

          4. I am so glad you share these stories and debunk those ones in this world who may believe it is all some freakish MK Ultra Truman Show where nobody dies nobody gets hurt ever.

            Abrasion gives luster you see?

            Or the contrast you were talking about.

            Like

        2. @Pete

          Many of my fathers generation went through similar experiences. Were they all liars? What are the odds?

          To determine whether or not they were lying, I would need to know exactly what they were saying. Anybody claiming to have been shooting live fire at the enemy, and being shot at with live fire by the enemy, in skirmishes which led to real death, is in my personal opinion a liar, because these sorts of skirmishes did not take place, because such ‘war’ is in fact a hoax, it is not real, and it was never real.

          To tell me that he did not go to Hamburg or Belsen because he was a liar is simply out of the question.

          He may well have gone to Hamburg or to Belsen. Tours take place, men (and women) are sent to foreign lands under the pretense of ‘war’. The war hoax concept does not entail any denial that people are ‘sent to war’, simply that the ‘war’ itself is a ruse, it is not real.

          The names were scrutinized by local people who actually knew the people who went off to the war and did not return.

          Is there any way to verify this claim? What are you proposing: that the townspeople all gathered at the memorial and, one by one, inspected the names on the plaques, to make sure there was no tomfoolery? Is there any way for researchers or skeptics today to verify that these supposed plaque inspections took place?

          It is simply ridiculous to say that all those millions of people were fooled.

          Millions of people were fooled and remain fooled with regards to 9/11. Fake planes flying into empty buildings on the telescreen. Physical impossibilities, cartoon style, and yet the lemming masses believe every last word they hear from the guys reading the teleprompters at 5pm. People are dumb as rocks, they trust authority, and we have no reason to believe the people of the 1940s and 1950s were any different in this regard.

          Given your backstory, what you have been told by men you literally looked up to as a child, I do not expect you to find any of what I am putting forward here palatable, much less convincing. I do appreciate that you haven’t resorted to overt ad hominem or strawman in this exchange. Cheers.

          Like

          1. You’re an imbecile and each one of yr posts anywhere on the web is the proof of it. Before posting such nonsense next time, maybe ya’d want to get yr lazy butt off of the couch and take a trip to any ex-warring country. There’re plenty of those around the globe if ya’d be willing to get yr focus off of the tablet or monitor and check them up in person.

            Like

  4. He drove a signals truck on to Sword beach within the first 12 hours. He saw the death and destruction for himself and all your bluster will not alter that fact.

    It’s not propaganda either. The war memorials are real here in the UK. Everybody here knows that. Maybe you should do some reasearch?

    Your ad hominem abuse is quite pathetic and it demonstrates your lack of real knowledge about these matters. Who is the time waster here?

    Like

      1. He said his father would leave me senseless (virtual threat of violence], I have been called “shill” various times, but that is all ok I guess.

        I give AND I take. Others seem only capable of throwing punches, not receiving them, that is the difference.

        It is heart of summer here in the tropics, no ice at all. But at least a lot of free market and open minded people everywhere.

        Those on your page who should be aware of all the points I listed should know better than to parrot military propaganda. Is that so strange.

        Like

  5. It’s not propaganda either. The war memorials are real here in the UK. Everybody here knows that. Maybe you should do some reasearch?

    It’s not propaganda either. The 9/11 memorial is real here in NYC. Everybody here knows that. Maybe you should do some reasearch?

    It’s not propaganda either. The Holocaust memorial is real here in Yad Vashem. Everybody here knows that. Maybe you should do some reasearch?

    It’s not propaganda either. The MH17 memorial is real here in the Hague. Everybody here knows that. Maybe you should do some reasearch?

    Maybe it starts dawning now what character (or lack thereof) you play. The mirror may be ugly but that is probably not the mirror’s fault.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Here in Germany, every city got a rubble hill. Leipzig even got multiple. The Red Bull socker arena is even placed inside a ring of rubble from the bombed town. There are several evacuations each year, because bombs are digged out on construction sites. Serious question, are you being paid to write here?

      Like

      1. I have lived in Germany and my hometown got bombed too. Where did I say destruction and enforced migrations are NOT part of ‘war’?

        The “war” in this country is both much more complicated and much simpler too; all ‘sides’ are supported and sponsored by everyone, not the binary FARC (bad) against the military/goverment (good) as is propagated in the media.

        Same for the War For Resources and War For Drugs that are definitely real.

        On top of the greatest War of all; the War For the Human Mind.

        Jumping from “buildings are bombed” to “war is real” is an example of that. Apparently in your case you are a victim of your own programming. Get that out of your head and stick and replicate only that what you know (buildings destroyed) without falling for their narratives (motives, death count, death cause).

        Take 9/11. The only real event of that day was the controlled demolition of the towers. The rest was a movie set (Simon Shack’s September Clues) and a lot of propaganda and other fluff.

        Why is this so hard to grasp for the veteran researchers I expect here?

        Liked by 1 person

  6. On that article.

    What evidence of war do you think it presents? If you read past the emotion and hand wringing unfairness of it all, I see very little.

    There is only one bit that relates to military, and that is when the U.S. bombed that hospital. I’m happy to conceed that it was true for the sake of argument.

    But that’s a bombing of 1 hospital. That’s not proof of a war. There weren’t 2 forces attacking each other. There are economic sanctions, destruction of areas – all terrible, but those aren’t war either. Our at least, it’s only war as a metaphor.

    I suspect that in the single case that is referenced in that article, perhaps the hospital area was scheduled for destruction but didn’t get the message, or perhaps that was an error by the U.S. military. It is clear this was not engagement with troops though.

    The point I’m making is there weren’t bullets being exchanged, soldiers weren’t being shot, etc. Rather than 2 sides fighting it out, it’s seems much more like a super rapid demolition team in action. That maybe made a mistake.

    Perhaps a better article or source could be presented?

    Like

  7. My father died in 2003. The thing that he hated most of all was liars and propagandists. If you had called him that to his face then you would have regretted it for sure.

    He threw his all military medals away and refused to celebrate any war because he had seen it first hand for himself. He never went to the war memorials but he knew that they are real Gaiatesticle

    So who is the clown here? We can all judge that for ourselves

    Goodbye and happy time wasting

    Like

  8. I have a number of friends who went to Vietnam and saw plenty of carnage there…and every single one of them is suffering some form of malady either from PTSD or Agent Orange exposure. There is no way they are faking this stuff. No way.

    Like

    1. Dear Lofcaudio,

      If a person comes back from ‘Nam with PTSD or similar mental problems, does it necessarily follow that they must have been party to real war’? I say: clearly not.

      Vietnam is a crazy place at the best of times. Particularly in the south, the heat and humidity alone can drive a man mad. Add in the isolation from family, the language barrier with the locals, and excessive booze/drugs/womansing… a few short months could be enough to change a man forever — and not necessarily for the best.

      Do you get where I’m going with this?

      Liked by 1 person

  9. And out of the woodwork come the false witnesses.

    I could use my greatgrandparents and their family in the same way as you guys with parroting military narratives.

    We cannot know if and how soldiers disappeared, died or were relocated (as was the case with the Great H Mystery).

    So stop doing that. Stick to what you know, not what traumatized parents or others in their innocence spread as fear pr0n.

    Like

  10. Once again, some here confuse a rigged war with a staged war with no real victims. As well as the figures for the number of real casualties.

    “My father fought in World War I” But no one denies that kind of butchery, no joke.

    “Bergen-Belsen” No serious revisionist denies that thousands died in those camps.

    Like

    1. Why use “some”?
      Why not be specific (honest)?

      Where did I say nobody dies in wars? Do you have any idea where I live?

      Strawmen to direct the attention away from the issue at hand. You of all people should KNOW how the H Mystery was propagated; through Nazionism. The Nazis putting jews in charge of the camps… That would be like giving the command of “Guantánamo Bay”* to a bunch of muslim fundies…

      The Chinese whisper game the (((Sonderkommandos))) spread throughout the camps, infested 4 generations after like a typhus epidemic.

      That is how that story could have been pulled off; the Nazis could never lay out the H Story as them jews could.

      Not to forget the Elluls of this world with their great works, but effective propaganda is best studied in “wars”…

      *another great example of war fakery

      Like

    1. Only the dead have seen the end of war.

      The sweet irony being that Plato himself is of course a fictional character.

      Speaking of fictional ‘ancient greece’, the ‘greco-persian war’, and ‘peloponnesian war’, are great tales of conquest, death and destruction.

      And that it is all they are: tales. Just like all tales of ‘war’.

      War is and always has been a hoax, and an easy hoax to sell, because humans seem to love tales of war as much as they love stories about bushfires. Drawn to such narratives like flies to bug-zappers.

      Bzzzz.

      Like

  11. Having a real 1st person experience vs another paper written by a person living in a known ‘spook’ community. Whose information came from where & whom? How times removed? K. Speaking of ‘who’, who has been churning out all this propaganda & to whose benefit? This whole matrix is not to make a few shekels & get laid now is it?

    Like

  12. hmm, I wonder, if Mark will let me through. I’ll try anyway. I remember some WW1 veterans from my youth, when we visited our family living in a small village. This old people liked to walk in the forests where they fought in WW1 still wearing their old military coats. We children then dug there and found many shells, coins, parts of helmets, even some bayonets. That was for real. I therefore think, this old traumatized people really fought at this places and you have to know, that the battles back then were usually fought in the country not in cities. Which probably proves it was all scripted that way. To create less damage. I think TPTB had to create some reality of war to convince all the folks and in WW1 it got out of control due lack of communication technology. Then they stopped it for 25 years under a false pretext and restarted again as WW2 after there was radio and radar available. One of my grandfathers was abducted by the Russians 1945 and worked in Siberia until 1946 and had then to walk back home which took him over a year. He didn’t fought in the war. All people I talked about which participated in the WW2 had only military training, spend some time in camps and none of them actually fought in battles. I tend to think, TPTB always create some reality if locals have to be involved. It is very easy to scare people via mass media and scared people tend to see what they are told to see. The recent wars happen in empty places. I think nobody lives in Syria or Lebanon anymore. This places are simply film sets. Even the Gaza strip is such a film set and can even be visited by tourists. They pretend to find old bombs here in Germany occasionally usually deeply buried many meters under the surface. Why should that be the case? This bombs couldn’t get covered that deep by simply falling from an airplane. I think that’s a hoax to keep the idea of bombed cities alive. It is always overdone. They evacuate thousands of people, involve many companies, make it very expensive. Then nothing happens. And if they occasionally decide to “detonate” the bomb, it gets overdone too. It’s a show IMO.
    When the bombings supposedly happened there always was an alarm first, people run to bunkers where they couldn’t see anything. The reason of this staged bombings was probably to destroy the old infrastructure and let people rebuild it after the war using new technology. The reason for the World Wars was to replace the old feudal society with what we have today and what we call “democracy”.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. I’m on the record as stating that war is a hoax.

    Not only do I stand by that, but it seems to me the meta-scripting for 2020 will provide more and more evidence to support my stance. The war hoax concept will only gain in popularity as the comical nature of the ‘war’ on our telescreens becomes more obvious by the month (and possibly by the day).

    Take this recent ‘Suliemani’ ‘drone strike’ event. What an absolute farce.

    Does any person with a functioning brain truly believe that some orange man directed his army guys to fly a plane above Baghdad to fire a weapon to kill some Iranian guy because he was a mastermind terrorist? Really? Anybody?

    Anybody?

    Here is a recent presentation I put together to explain what I mean when I say that war is a hoax:

    https://www.johnlebon.com/live-shows/the-war-hoax-explained-two-hour-presentation/

    I also go into some detail about the process, the path my research took, from around 2015 to today. I didn’t wake up one morning and decide to start saying that war is a hoax. It took me years of piecing together the puzzle before I could look at it for what it is and say, that’s it: war is a hoax.

    The amazing thing is how many people in the conspiracy subculture, especially in this corner of it (MM, PoM, Fakeologist, HBC, etc), have already identified numerous pieces of the puzzle, but for some reason, either cannot or will not take a step back and see what those pieces reveal when considered in totality.

    The Apollo mission hoax, Wernher von Braun, also in charge of the V2 rockets in WW2, this was the genesis of ICBM technology. The nuke hoax. Nayirah. Wag the Dog (1997). Osama bin Laden, ‘buried at sea’. The list goes on and on. Most people here know about these hoaxes and/or clues, yet somehow it seems that many still consider the war hoax concept taboo or otherwise ‘can’t go there’ territory.

    Fascinating in so many ways.

    There’s nothing to fear. There will be no WW3. Any representation of a WW3 on the telescreen will be Baudrillard-style simulacra and simulation. Recall that Baudrillard once wrote a book called ‘The Gulf War Did Not Take Place’. Not an accident. Nukes will not fly, Trump (an obvious WWE style character) will not ‘escalate tensions’ to the point of ‘starting war’.

    Everything is going to be okay 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

      1. @Motorhead

        What is the role of Israel in this theater(s) of the past 200 years?

        I don’t know for certain what the Metascriptors have in store for any of us, much less a specific ‘nation’ such as Israel. It seems to me, based on how the narrative has played out thus far, that Israel is being set up for a big fall. It may be that Israel’s role in the meta script is to play the heel of the middle east component of the ‘geopolitical’ theatre, and this could go in perpetuity, every good drama needs a bad guy. However, I get the sense that the story arc is building towards something, and that something may well be a kind of ‘final battle’ in which Israel falls.

        Like

        1. Yes, the present occupiers of Israel are seeking annihilation of it. They also have the same goal of the Western nations of N. Europe & America. You see their finger prints & symbol’s everywhere. The Hexagram or Seal of Solomon is not the Star of David, that is a lie or the go-to term here a hoax.

          Like

    1. @JLB

      Waaaiiiit ….

      You’re claiming Baudrillard agrees with you?!?!?
      You have not read his book, have you?

      Contrary to the title, the author believes that the events and violence of the Gulf War actually took place, whereas the issue is one of interpretation: were the events that took place comparable to how they were presented, and could these events be called a war? The title is a reference to the play The Trojan War Will Not Take Place by Jean Giraudoux (in which characters attempt to prevent what the audience knows is inevitable). ….

      Baudrillard argued the Gulf War was not really a war, but rather an atrocity which masqueraded as a war. Using overwhelming airpower, the American military for the most part did not directly engage in combat with the Iraqi army, and suffered few casualties. Almost nothing was made known about Iraqi deaths. Thus, the fighting “did not really take place” from the point of view of the West. Moreover, all that spectators got to know about the war was in the form of propaganda imagery. The closely watched media presentations made it impossible to distinguish between the experience of what truly happened in the conflict, and its stylized, selective misrepresentation through simulacra.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulf_War_Did_Not_Take_Place

      Baudrillard, unlike you, does not deny that violence—terrible violence—occurred. You might not call it war, but a rose by any other name …

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Thanks, Maarten. This kind of subjective word-art is usually something (nothing really) I try to walk away from. It may be my lack of comprehension of the notion of “postmodernism.” Whatever that is.
        I could, of course, be completely wrong.
        Postmodern
        “The idea that there is no objective meaning, only subjective meaning, the meaning one brings to a thing, irrespective of the intent of the author, or of the Author, or of reality.” https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Postmodern

        I always appreciate your perspective.

        Like

  14. Only those of us who have participated or been victimized in war can safely assert to their reality. Mathis did a rather startling piece on Dresden, citing the fact that the buildings allegedly destroyed in the firebombing are still there. The claim is that they were meticulously rebuilt in the aftermath of the war. I cannot know with any certainty, but his assertion that we no longer have the craftsmen capable of such work is certainly borne out in modern design. It can be aesthetically pleasing, even stunning, but it is the result of modern materials and production techniques rather than individual masons doing painstaking work over decades.

    Where we are sorely lacking is in information. Reports from Iran and Iraq right now could be made up out of whole cloth, and would pass unnoticed as we have no system in place to audit the accuracy of news. I more or less came aware in the mid-90s, when there was a subtle propaganda campaign for those of us alienated from the system of fake news that the US and Britain were systematically starving hundreds of thousands of youth and old people in Iraq. It was led by Ramsey Clark, son of a former Supreme Court justice, and was probably fake. It was done in the same manner as Napalm Girl during Vietnam, in order to keep us divided and misinformed.

    So is war real or fake? I haven’t a clue. Never been in one.

    Like

    1. You answer your own question.

      The staging of “Napalm Girl” is war fakery in its full display (World Press Photos).

      The many stories repeated by what I see as honest people here, are however nothing more than propaganda. “My uncle died in the Towers…” that kind of perpetraiting military psyop style.

      We can only say people disppeared. Todo lo demas es mentira.

      Like

  15. I recently watched a TV-program about Germans fleeing to Argentina before the End of WW2. Not before the beginning but before the end of war. They then put up sugar cane plantations there. One would have to think, they were Nazis fleeing the lost war, but no. One of the interviewed persons went to a cemetery showing where his family was buried and all the graves had David stars on it. He also showed an old 16mm black and white movie they made there in 1945 where his father riding confidently a horse with locals is planning the plantation. I think this was a rich aristocracy family which decided to make a new start in the new world. Who else would have such a good riding skills and the need to film their first steps in their new life?

    Like

    1. You may like to read much more about the 2nd most jewish country after the US…

      And the modern Israeli military presence in South America. Luckily in the place I am now they haven’t infested as much as in Taganga…

      Plan Patagonia is one of the big conspiracies happening as we speak. The geopolitical implications (control over the Drake Passage, Magelhão Strait and the Antarctic Peninsula are not to be underestimated.

      http://fakeologist.com/fakeopedia/index.php?title=Plan_Patagonia/Nazionism

      Like

  16. Steve,

    Reading the article you linked to as well as the comments here, I wonder if the problem is a lack of consensus on the meaning of the word “war.” You point to this article’s author as someone who seems to be a genuine eyewitness, and maybe she is. But she’s not describing victims of “war” as I understand it, where countries engage in battles that might go either way. Her article describes victims in countries where the U.S. is raping and pillaging. I get no sense–from this article or from my own understanding of the world–that the U.S. fucks countries in the ass that might fuck back. 9/11 created the illusion that maybe the U.S. could be fucked in the ass by its enemies. If this were true, why would they need to create the illusion of it?

    Maybe some people look at fake mass shootings and think all violence in the news and in the history books are fake. That our leaders are liars but they’re not into killing people. If I encountered people who held such a position, I’d consider them too ignorant to argue with.

    Like

    1. In this podcast I did last year we talked a.o. about a real event in the real War For Drugs, the DAS building bombing of 1989.

      My family in law owned a business at 3 blocks from this bombing executed by tío Pablo and his even more evil business partner El Mejicano. They found ripped off hands and skull pieces in their partly destroyed business.

      The length of the wiki article and ratio of wounded vs dead makes also sense, not those 1-to-1 numbers you find in the baby hoaxes.

      Like

    2. SCOTTRC,
      I’ve been thinking the same thing after reading comments. I’ll go with 1828 Webster’s if there’s no objection.

      WAR, noun [G., to perplex, embroil, disturb. The primary sense of the root is to strive, struggle, urge, drive, or to turn, to twist.]

      A contest between nations or states, carried on by force, either for defense, or for revenging insults and redressing wrongs, for the extension of commerce or acquisition of territory, or for obtaining and establishing the superiority and dominion of one over the other. These objects are accomplished by the slaughter or capture of troops, and the capture and destruction of ships, towns and property. Among rude nations, war is often waged and carried on for plunder. As war is the contest of nations or states, it always implies that such contest is authorized by the monarch or the sovereign power of the nation. When war is commenced by attacking a nation in peace, it is called an offensive war and such attack is aggressive. When war is undertaken to repel invasion or the attacks of an enemy, it is called defensive, and a defensive war is considered as justifiable. Very few of the wars that have desolated nations and deluged the earth with blood, have been justifiable. Happy would it be for mankind, if the prevalence of Christian principles might ultimately extinguish the spirit of war and if the ambition to be great, might yield to the ambition of being good.

      Preparation for war is sometimes the best security for peace.

      In poetical language, instruments of war

      His complement of stores, and total war

      Poetically, forces; army.

      Oer the embattled ranks the waves return, and overwhelm their war

      The profession of arms; art of war; as a fierce man of war Isaiah 2:4.
      Hostility; state of opposition or contest; act of opposition.
      Enmity; disposition to contention.

      The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, but war was in his heart. Psalms 55:21.

      Man of war in naval affairs, a ship of large size, armed and equipped for attack or defense.

      Holy war a crusade; a war undertaken to deliver the Holy Land, or Judea, from infidels. These holy wars were carried on by most unholy means.

      WAR, verb intransitive

      To make war; to invade or attack a nation or state with force of arms; to carry on hostilities; or to be in a state of contest by violence.

      He teacheth my hands to war 2 Samuel 22:35.

      And they warred against eh Midianites. Numbers 31:3.

      Why should I war without the walls of Troy?

      To contend; to strive violently; to be in a state of opposition.

      Lusts which war against the soul. 1 Peter 2:11.

      WAR, verb transitive

      To make war upon; as, to war the Scot. [Not used.]

      To carry on a contest.

      That thou mightest war a good warfare. 1 Timothy 1:18.

      Like

      1. Let’s reverse the definitions, what is the opposite of war? In common understanding it would be “peace”, right?

        Two quotes about just that:

        Peace: A period of cheating between two periods of fightingAmbrose Bierce

        Peace is just a period between two warsJean Giraudoux

        My comments of 3 years ago:

        The use of these quotes suggests that the natural state of mankind is “war”. This is also what mainstream history “teaches” us by focusing attention on the wars of history, glorifying or demonizing wars and their leaders, and retelling the long period of mankind as “essentially a series of wars”.

        But is it?

        Isn’t history, or better “his-story” not a collection of dramatized tales that is indoctrinated into our minds?

        As a comparison; a soap series, pick any of them. Are our daily lives really so much filled with drama, intrigue, back-stabbing and curious events as it is told in soap series? Not really.

        Same for history. 99.99+ % of the time people are just living their normal lives, the majority of mankind that is. We are not fighting, not planning intrigues or anything like it. It’s just “boring” everyday business of survival and hard work; getting food on the table, raising our kids and socializing with other human beings.

        There is no reason to assume in the past it worked differently.

        The natural state of mankind, of the non-Crazy Apes that is, is peace. Not war. People can be fighting, but fighting is not war. If two neighbors are fighting with each other, none of them is going to occupy the other house, enslave their children and take control of a future money supply. Looting is stealing and is instantaneous, it’s not a long term plan. Not war.

        See for more The Purposes of War.

        Like

        1. Let me highlight this section of the definition of war provided above, for example.
          “…for the extension of commerce or acquisition of territory, or for obtaining and establishing the superiority and dominion of one over the other. ” Is this not war?

          Is this not also “peace” as defined by man-made law? Is peace in our current system not uninterrupted, free-flowing commerce? As you point out peace (“between wars”) is hardly different from the definition of war. Peace = war. Where have we heard that before?

          I suggest that war is constant (perpetual) against the commoner (goy), and nature (of which man is obviously a part), as a matter of law. State/corporate law is by design/definition in opposition to nature and natural law. Why else would there be any need for any other law than that which exists in nature (supreme law). The legal system itself — on a constant basis — is fundamentally at war with nature (man). The methods, strategies and tactics of the ruling elite only give the appearance of difference.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I can completely live and agree with that definition of war and I think we are aligned in that.

            Hence the importance to point out THOSE real wars and st(r)ay away from the theater show on the telescreens.

            Haven’t we learned enough?

            I see roughly 4 levels of real wars, in increasing importance:
            I – War For Drugs – includes human trafficking, the biggest business of all, and the main intended result of “””wars””” – enforced migrations, you should count the Venezuelans here, all mandatorily and free of charge vaxxed (!!!)
            II – War For Resources – everything from agriculture, water to coltan and other REEs
            III – War For Strategic Positions – Globalism – Plan Patagonia is crucial
            IV – War For the Human Mind – Transhumanism – the topic of my birthday Podcast, interested participants can mail to agenda2020@protonmail.com

            The psyop propaganda of what the mainstream calls “wars” and JLB, TNG, DaveJ, myself and others so eloquently debunk, each in their own way, is in the end part of the highest level. “MK Ultra” or whatever name you want to give to the Freudian-Bernaysian-Goebbelian-Marxist-Postmodernist-Facebookist social engineering sequence…

            Like

  17. Mark, can you please make the edit option (with a timer if needed) for us commenter available, like writers have. There are intermediate roles possible. It will increase the participation of other and necessary voices than mine.

    https://truth-zone.net/forum/gaia-s-forum-general-discussion/68905-the-purposes-of-war.html#343161

    I wanted to quote steve’s excellent definition, but that edit option is not possible for us, mere [i]bovi[/i]….

    Like

    1. Yes. There is far too much ‘its all FAKE’ and everything is fine. We as a non chosen people are doing well. The laws are just, the elect are true & virtuous. Their are only a few bad actors, the rest are just playing roles for their amusement to stave away boredom being so filthy rich & UNCHALLENGED for the the past 1000+ years. Owning the banks & printing the money. Broadcasting the fake news & rigged sports programs. Owning the planets best resources. Right.

      Like

  18. Yes War is a HOAX, It is CON-trolled Demolition and Strategic Relocation, That’s a Fact. Period. I saw a note asking above about Dresden What part of WAR is a Hoax did you miss the first time I said it? Yes your Dad(or any other) LIED to you. here is a reupload as the original has been removed several times. Beware of Work thieves that do not KNOW “history” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjewqdy7RCQ

    Like

  19. https://en.mehrnews.com/news/146570/President-Rouhani-inaugurates-IKIA-s-Salam-Terminal

    I have been trying to search who operates the control tower at IKIA. The airport expansion was plagued by delays, and French companies failing to meet contract obligations. If anyone knows who sits in that control tower, I’d be most grateful for that tidbit of info.

    SERCO, a Crown corporation, operates many U.S. control towers. https://www.airport-suppliers.com/supplier/serco-group/

    Just curious.

    Like

  20. IKEA, eh, IKIA, seriously?

    That is not-so-subtle blackbranding…
    And TRIOMF.

    How do the IKEA stocks do?

    I am not lazy, I abstain from all that poison, and now I see I made the right choice.

    Like

  21. Interesting subject. On one hand, it wouldn’t surprise me if many, and maybe all battles where inventions. One the other hand, they kill people with medicine. So why not during wars ?

    I have three testimony about that. My grand-father was a soldier during WWII (the battle of France during 1940). He told us that he was never engaged in any combat. He never saw any people dead. Ok, France lost the war in just one month, but still.

    My father had to do the war of Algeria. He told me he never fought and never saw any death.

    However, I have read a little book from a great great grandfather who have fought during the war of 1870 (against Prussia). The book talks about his adventures during this war. At one moment, he says he found himself in the middle of a fight. And he has seen some wounded people and maybe even some dead guys (not sure about this last one). So, this testimony is more in favor of the idea that at least some battles are real. But, maybe, even at this time, the elite used actors in order to have false wounded guys and give some credibility to the deception.

    Otherwise, I have been to the museum of Montormel, retracing the battle of the Falaise pocket (1944). They insist about the fact that during the last days, it was a massacre for the Germans who could pass only across a short passage of maybe 300-400m. Yet, I have only seen maybe two photos showing dead people. And each time, there were only four or five people dead on the photo. You have tons of photos with lots of wreck tanks, trucks and cars, but almost no one showing dead people. Where was the slaughter ? And, if I remember well, the four or five people dead showed no hard wounds like the ones that could have been done by machine guns or canons. So, if there are so few photos showing dead soldiers, it’s probably because there was no real battle there.

    Like

  22. I tend to think that wars are extremely exaggerated, but I don’t think it’s all staged. My father served in the 101st Airborne and arrived in Vietnam in January 1967. He frequently talks about events that happened there, and he’s almost 90 yrs old now. On Aug 25, 1967, he lost both eyes and is completely blind now. I was born in April in 1967 and he never saw me other than in a picture before he lost his eyes. It is odd that he lost his eyes due to shrapnel, but his face has no scars whatsoever. If he’s lying about it, his stories have been 100% consistent.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s