I'm wondering if we're not being tested on several levels at once. Our willingness to see and accept the nonsensical when media gloss and illustrious names are involved is well tested. But are they also testing our herding need?
Here you see a photo of something clearly impossible: one side of the earth with an oversized Australia and no other land mass. The shot is supposed to be a straightforward one, the freshly-detached lunar lander is in the shot.
No doubt there could be claims that we are looking at an impression not an actual photo, but nowhere is this indicated in any reporting on the website or the follow-up on X, where there are hundreds of rapturous comments on the "achievement". Even if it were an impression, why not show something that makes sense? There are plenty of world globe pics available. Yet nobody murmurs the slightest doubt, though the photo is so absurd it might as well include a Purple-People-Eater hanging on to one leg of the lander.
How is it possible? Are the comments and reportage simply faked? Or are masses of tech-educated people able to see only what they perceive is permissible to be seen by tech-educated people?
Test?
I hope the comments at least are faked, otherwise it's the end of science and rationality. Look at that photo and tell me it isn't so. Please.
At least the lunar lander in the photo looks like it might survive the supposed conditions of space, at least for a brief period. Musk's upholstery in space had the advantage of showroom conditions, with some pleasant shade from space trees. But what can one say of the paper, sticky tape, canvas and aluminium foil of Apollo 14?
I wonder if the radiation problem (which didn't affect cloth, paper, sticky tape etc back in '69) is a distraction from the less mentioned problem of extreme temps. Then there's the problem of vacuum annihilating anything composed of cells (like upholstery). One problem is used to distract from the other.
My biggest doubt, however, is over gravity.
If gravity is what they say it is, then I cannot believe that humans, animals and plants can survive more than the briefest time without something so fundamental and pervasive. Astronauts are claimed to fly on a permanent vomit comet and the only effect is some floatiness and funky hair. Not buying that.
So I come back to my original doubt: are they really this incompetent or are they faking badly on purpose? Just a few pallets of cash or heroin subtracted from an opium war flight to/from Afghanistan could pay for some decent fakery now.
They could build solid cars back in the 60's yet the lunar landers look like botched backyard aviaries made from materials found at a dump. Any local council would demand their removal. Why not build something solid as any motor car of the era and disturb a bit of dust underneath to indicate that a rocket had puffed there? Is that so hard?
Are we being conditioned to think that all fakery is cheesy and easily spotted? I hope my suspicions are unfounded and that our globalist masters are as incompetent and demented as they appear. Fingers crossed.
They obviously don't have to do it well. There seems to be an element of mockery. I think it also ties in to the notion of free will. It seems the views is that if we hand our souls over so easily, then we deserve everything we get.
Look up on yt what a .223 round does when it hits a watermelon. No way the wound on that kid's neck was an exit wound from a .223 round. An entrance wound can sometimes look like that, but not an exit wound. The clip of the guy from the Pulse shooting being coached is also pretty wild. I cant quite wrap my head around how they keep all of these people quiet indefinitely, but that doesnt make most of this any less compelling, imo
I am going to again link to an article on my blog, which you are free to delete, no questions asked. Anderson Cooper, son of Gloria Vanderbilt, had a brother, Carter. He jumped to his death from their Manhattan high-rise apartment in August, 1988. This was odd, to say the least, but at the time (2016) I was investigating twins, and had found more than a few, including the McCartney's, Paul and Mike and the Joplins, who alternated public roles and appearances.
I also found two Anderson Coopers, the lesser-used one whom I called Fredo, as he just did not seem as bright as Anderson. This indeed was, I gathered, Carter, whose 1988 death was faked. Jeopardy used to host "journalists" for a week of shows, and AC was one of the guest contestants. I judged that it was really Carter, the slower of the two.
Why two Anderson Coopers? Hollywood (and Intel) love twins, as they can be in two places at once, allow each other time off, giving each other a break. In the movie business, due to child labor laws, there are strict limits on how much labor child actors endure, but having two doubles the time, ala Hayley Mills. In the news business, why two? I do not know.
Anyway, judge for yourself. My piece was written in 2016, and I was wet behind the ears, but still trust the face chops that show two unique Anderson's.
By the way, the Pulse shooting event in Orlando, there I found the same photos flipped to show two victims when there was only (none) one. I won't link on that one, and few bought my assertions, though I stand by them. They not only changed eye wear and were flipped, they also changed sexes.
Francis, you realise that all the items you put forward are examples of Revelation of the Method. The smirking you refer to with Diane Downes is called duping delight and sometimes it is inferred that the inappropriate smiling of crisis actors is duping delight, however, it isn't. Duping delight is involuntary while crisis actors are scripted to speak and behave in however they speak and behave. No doubt the scripting of the inappropriate smiling originated in earlier times when crisis actors betrayed it naturally - later it became part of the script.
This is a fascinating concept. One that is revelatory yet potentially disturbing in some ways. The basic question is this:
1. Does humanity literally give its permission for controlling forces to perpetrate what they do by being told in some form what is being, or about to be done to it? Even if it’s disguised from their conscious awareness in esoteric and occult messages?
2. Or are they simply being pre-programmed to accept what is about to unfold?
Or both?
There are two main levels from which to perceive this concept. The first is that preconditioning is simply a method to get the subjects to accept the agendas being implemented. The other is, without our explicit or even implied agreeance, these things cannot take place.
While they work in concert and both beg humanity’s compliance, those dynamics are powerfully different. Both require human awareness at different levels, yet the second more esoteric notion implies a sort of restrictive code whereby without agreeance any such takeover plan apparently would not be “allowed” to succeed.
Let me just say for starters that I’m not so sure about that second one. It smacks of external reliance and everything that has distracted humanity from waking up in the first place. Just ask the innocent victims in Gaza and an entire world experiencing massive oppression and degradation. If permission was needed and there was some “galactic code of conduct”, we would have seen it from the get go.
Maybe it’s time to get real about the conditions on our planet and stop over-spiritualizing reality away. It’s time to demystify what is clearly more layers of manipulative energy extraction, rather than be dazzled by some kind of esoteric code. All of these tactics, to whatever extent they’re real and influence us, need to be kept in a conscious perspective.
I think the other counterargument to this revelation of method thing, which I only thought of after my last comment, is that whilst it seems like a reasonable hypothesis, with the usual 'internal logic', in order to actually give it some weight you need to provide evidence of the effect of this predictive programming. Otherwise it's just a hypothesis.
So, can you provide some evidence of the effect of this programming?
No, but as for Revelation of the Method in general I think this (edited) quote from Theodore Dalrymple aka Anthony Daniels is very pertinent:
"The purpose of propaganda is not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponds to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
That's a good quote, for sure. However... (go on, have a smile)
1. That's a statement of intent, not evidence.
2. The use of the word 'humiliation' there reveals a kind of self-deception - because if the subject/victim doesn't feel humiliated then it's a fake victory. If you see what I mean (trust me - as a victim of child abuse I know what I'm talking about here). Like, getting people to blindly believe what you tell them to believe, or do what you tell them, is one thing, but if they only do it blindly and they think they are doing something good (like going to war thinking it's self-defence when it's actually racist mass murder of the other) then like I say it's a kind of Pyrrhic victory.
However - to a certain extent I totally agree with you. Because there is certainly a lot of sadistic pleasure to be had in manipulating people in this way, especially to believe and do things against their better nature. So in that sense, it doesn't actually matter if the subject/victim is aware it's happening to them. (or, for example, when they vote for the controlled opposition).
This, ironically, does tie neatly into to what I was saying, about how a lot of this stuff is the cabal testing the waters to see what they can get away with, how far they can push things without provoking the final revolution - whenever they can extend these limits it would certainly make them feel powerful. And as I say, this is a very significant aspect of their pathology.
The other really interesting aside here is that what you are implying works even better for 'cognitive infiltrators' and the conspiracy theory subculture. If the agents (i.e. influencers) can get their followers to blithely believe whatever memes they push then yes, they have achieved a certain humiliation and a victory and the aforementioned sadistic pleasure (especially when people get misdirected from the important stuff/big picture, and look discredited and stupid in the eyes of the general public). The most obvious example that springs to mind is this anti-woke cult. You come across this all the time in the subculture - people just parroting the same old bigotry - and it does, indeed, turn them into nasty, vile, evil abusers. So there is definitely a victory there, because they've fundamentally changed those people's psychology.
If you look at Miri's comments section, for example, you'll quickly see that 99% of it is just sycophancy. I wonder if/when she'll get bored with that. It's another reason I like you, because you don't shy away from a good argument - obviously so long as the other person is polite, of course - but I get the impression you'd get bored pretty effing quickly if everyone just agreed with you the whole time. Like 'Oh, Petra, you are sooo right! I never thought of that before! We're not worthy! We're not worthy!"
As you can tell, I like a good argument. It's not so much devil's advocate, but I do - ironically - take a sadistic pleasure in fucking with people. If the intelligence services could persuade me that what they are doing all the time is for an ultimately benevolent reason then I'd be very happy indeed to offer my services. Unfortunately, none of what they do is for a benevolent reason. For their own social group perhaps, in the short term at least, but not for the human species or the planet or - ironically - their own souls.
So ultimately, the joke and the humiliation is going to be on them. Because there will come a day when they are staring extinction in the face. And they will know it was all their own fault.
Maybe there's a more prosaic explanation - which is that they are simply a bunch of evil psychopaths who enjoying fucking with people.
Likewise, it makes them feel powerful to get away with things so brazenly. This is, in fact, and extremely important psychological point which most people don't seem to get. The cabal are not some kind of all-powerful bunch of Alphas. They are actually Gammas at most. This creates resentment because they know they are Gammas. They also hate the fact that humans, in their natural state, are morally superior to them. And so this leads to a pathology whereby they need to feel powerful and superior - it's a form of self-deception of course. Nietzsche understood this perfectly.
So the psychological truth about this 'revelation of the method' thing is that it's got nothing to do with the 'apparent' target - i.e. humans. It's entirely to do with the perpetrators and their pathological need to feel safe and superior. Because remember they are vastly outnumbered and constantly paranoid and terrified about being found out - because if they ever get exposed to the general public, they will be exterminated through sheer overwhelming numbers (which is why cognitive infiltrators do their damnedest to divert attention from stuff like the child abuse network - this latest thing about (Asian) grooming gangs is yet another misdirection in that regard).
So the cabal need to test the waters, so to speak. 9-11 is the most prominent example of this. Like 'can we get away with something so brazen without inciting a revolution against us?' or put differently 'how safe are we?'. You will have noticed how they have increased all their brazen activities tremendously since then - because they did, indeed, get away with it without the revolution. In the same vein, when 2 million people marched on London to 'stop the war' in early 2003, but didn't storm parliament, instead just making some pretty speeches, waving some banners around then obediently going back home again, the Establishment realised and knew for sure they could push the limits a hell of a lot further without the revolution cometh.
So this has nothing to do with 'predictive programming'. It has everything to do with the pathology of a psychopath who is terrified of discovery and retribution (not 'guilty conscience' mind - they don't have consciences).
If there is a 'predictive programming' then it's specifically aimed at 'conspiracy theorists' who don't, in fact, understand the occult at all. It's to convince those people as well that the cabal are far more powerful than they actually are.
If the cabal really were as powerful as they would like people to believe, they would've long-since achieved their totalitarian dystopia. But they haven't. Why? Because they are Gammas, not Alphas. Put me in charge of their strategising for a dystopia and I'll have it done within a generation for them. No charge, either. Well, maybe a small consultancy fee would be appreciated. But the recognition for the work, and remembrance in their grand archive would be far more valuable to me.
If you've not seen the interview of the Dunblane teacher being interviewed the day after being shot through the head, may I heartily recommend it and the doctors comments at the end.
Are you trying to suggest that the Las Vegas shooting was a hoax? or only that the woman was not actually one of the victims but was put forward as one in order to support the official narrative.
And thanks to you as I'd not seen those. What's really mad is that so many will accuse us of being mad for looking at some of this and on the face of it say "I'm not buying it". Skepticism on any media narrative should be the de facto position.
I'm wondering if we're not being tested on several levels at once. Our willingness to see and accept the nonsensical when media gloss and illustrious names are involved is well tested. But are they also testing our herding need?
Here you see a photo of something clearly impossible: one side of the earth with an oversized Australia and no other land mass. The shot is supposed to be a straightforward one, the freshly-detached lunar lander is in the shot.
https://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2024/02/intuitive-machines-odysseus-featured.jpg
No doubt there could be claims that we are looking at an impression not an actual photo, but nowhere is this indicated in any reporting on the website or the follow-up on X, where there are hundreds of rapturous comments on the "achievement". Even if it were an impression, why not show something that makes sense? There are plenty of world globe pics available. Yet nobody murmurs the slightest doubt, though the photo is so absurd it might as well include a Purple-People-Eater hanging on to one leg of the lander.
How is it possible? Are the comments and reportage simply faked? Or are masses of tech-educated people able to see only what they perceive is permissible to be seen by tech-educated people?
Test?
I hope the comments at least are faked, otherwise it's the end of science and rationality. Look at that photo and tell me it isn't so. Please.
That's one hell of a photo. I feel similarly about Musk's car in space and his comment, "you can tell it's real because it looks so fake."
At least the lunar lander in the photo looks like it might survive the supposed conditions of space, at least for a brief period. Musk's upholstery in space had the advantage of showroom conditions, with some pleasant shade from space trees. But what can one say of the paper, sticky tape, canvas and aluminium foil of Apollo 14?
https://www.teslarati.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Apollo-14-Lunar-Module-LM-NASA-pano-1-crop-c.jpg
Have you seen these two articles?
https://francisoneill.substack.com/p/moon-walkers-part-1
You've covered most of the main points there.
I wonder if the radiation problem (which didn't affect cloth, paper, sticky tape etc back in '69) is a distraction from the less mentioned problem of extreme temps. Then there's the problem of vacuum annihilating anything composed of cells (like upholstery). One problem is used to distract from the other.
My biggest doubt, however, is over gravity.
If gravity is what they say it is, then I cannot believe that humans, animals and plants can survive more than the briefest time without something so fundamental and pervasive. Astronauts are claimed to fly on a permanent vomit comet and the only effect is some floatiness and funky hair. Not buying that.
So I come back to my original doubt: are they really this incompetent or are they faking badly on purpose? Just a few pallets of cash or heroin subtracted from an opium war flight to/from Afghanistan could pay for some decent fakery now.
They could build solid cars back in the 60's yet the lunar landers look like botched backyard aviaries made from materials found at a dump. Any local council would demand their removal. Why not build something solid as any motor car of the era and disturb a bit of dust underneath to indicate that a rocket had puffed there? Is that so hard?
Are we being conditioned to think that all fakery is cheesy and easily spotted? I hope my suspicions are unfounded and that our globalist masters are as incompetent and demented as they appear. Fingers crossed.
They obviously don't have to do it well. There seems to be an element of mockery. I think it also ties in to the notion of free will. It seems the views is that if we hand our souls over so easily, then we deserve everything we get.
https://francisoneill.substack.com/p/lockdown-vaccines-and-the-occult-c08
Look up on yt what a .223 round does when it hits a watermelon. No way the wound on that kid's neck was an exit wound from a .223 round. An entrance wound can sometimes look like that, but not an exit wound. The clip of the guy from the Pulse shooting being coached is also pretty wild. I cant quite wrap my head around how they keep all of these people quiet indefinitely, but that doesnt make most of this any less compelling, imo
I can't answer some of the whys and the hows but we can all see the WTFs.
Expanding on your point with Diane Downes, and "dupers delight...
The duper's delight is an emotional boost, or thrill, that some people get when they successfully cheat or deceive another person or organization.
The rush they enjoy can lead them to repeat their dishonesty, even when there's no reward other than the high itself.
Case studies of 9/11 "truther" talking heads caught out with "dupers delight".
1. Richard Gage's Duper's Delight - https://rumble.com/v5az6od-dupers-delight-a-911-truther-talking-head-case-study.html
2. Greg Jenkins' Duper's Delight - https://rumble.com/v5b3f9x-exposed-greg-jenkins-dupers-delight.html
3. Flight 93 (Shanksville) Mark Bingham's mom - https://rumble.com/v4rvzpe-flight-93-shanksville-mark-binghams-mom.html
Additional resources;
1. The molecular dissociation of the thermite & nuke theories
People are so easily led by perceived "experts".
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-controlled-demolition-of-thermite
2. Dr Greg Jenkins’ “Directed Debunking Energy” and Dr Judy Wood
Scholarly Questions and Inquiry, or Badgering, Misrepresentation and Harassment?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/dr-greg-jenkins-directed-debunking
3. 9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
From timestamp 40:45 in your interview with MiriAF she mentions David Kurten being "one of the good guys" because he doesn't get any publicity from the press. If the gentleman that updates this website is correct Mr. Kurten is a Freemason - https://truthisfree.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/kurtenmason.png?w=1024 - ; along with a lot of the other so-called Truth Seekers....https://truthisfree.uk/2022/10/04/all-in-it-together/
I am going to again link to an article on my blog, which you are free to delete, no questions asked. Anderson Cooper, son of Gloria Vanderbilt, had a brother, Carter. He jumped to his death from their Manhattan high-rise apartment in August, 1988. This was odd, to say the least, but at the time (2016) I was investigating twins, and had found more than a few, including the McCartney's, Paul and Mike and the Joplins, who alternated public roles and appearances.
I also found two Anderson Coopers, the lesser-used one whom I called Fredo, as he just did not seem as bright as Anderson. This indeed was, I gathered, Carter, whose 1988 death was faked. Jeopardy used to host "journalists" for a week of shows, and AC was one of the guest contestants. I judged that it was really Carter, the slower of the two.
Why two Anderson Coopers? Hollywood (and Intel) love twins, as they can be in two places at once, allow each other time off, giving each other a break. In the movie business, due to child labor laws, there are strict limits on how much labor child actors endure, but having two doubles the time, ala Hayley Mills. In the news business, why two? I do not know.
Anyway, judge for yourself. My piece was written in 2016, and I was wet behind the ears, but still trust the face chops that show two unique Anderson's.
https://pieceofmindful.com/2016/09/14/anderson-cooper-intrepid-reporter/
By the way, the Pulse shooting event in Orlando, there I found the same photos flipped to show two victims when there was only (none) one. I won't link on that one, and few bought my assertions, though I stand by them. They not only changed eye wear and were flipped, they also changed sexes.
Francis, you realise that all the items you put forward are examples of Revelation of the Method. The smirking you refer to with Diane Downes is called duping delight and sometimes it is inferred that the inappropriate smiling of crisis actors is duping delight, however, it isn't. Duping delight is involuntary while crisis actors are scripted to speak and behave in however they speak and behave. No doubt the scripting of the inappropriate smiling originated in earlier times when crisis actors betrayed it naturally - later it became part of the script.
https://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/revelation-method-predictive-programming-and-prime-directive
The Revelation of the Method
This is a fascinating concept. One that is revelatory yet potentially disturbing in some ways. The basic question is this:
1. Does humanity literally give its permission for controlling forces to perpetrate what they do by being told in some form what is being, or about to be done to it? Even if it’s disguised from their conscious awareness in esoteric and occult messages?
2. Or are they simply being pre-programmed to accept what is about to unfold?
Or both?
There are two main levels from which to perceive this concept. The first is that preconditioning is simply a method to get the subjects to accept the agendas being implemented. The other is, without our explicit or even implied agreeance, these things cannot take place.
While they work in concert and both beg humanity’s compliance, those dynamics are powerfully different. Both require human awareness at different levels, yet the second more esoteric notion implies a sort of restrictive code whereby without agreeance any such takeover plan apparently would not be “allowed” to succeed.
Let me just say for starters that I’m not so sure about that second one. It smacks of external reliance and everything that has distracted humanity from waking up in the first place. Just ask the innocent victims in Gaza and an entire world experiencing massive oppression and degradation. If permission was needed and there was some “galactic code of conduct”, we would have seen it from the get go.
Maybe it’s time to get real about the conditions on our planet and stop over-spiritualizing reality away. It’s time to demystify what is clearly more layers of manipulative energy extraction, rather than be dazzled by some kind of esoteric code. All of these tactics, to whatever extent they’re real and influence us, need to be kept in a conscious perspective.
I think the other counterargument to this revelation of method thing, which I only thought of after my last comment, is that whilst it seems like a reasonable hypothesis, with the usual 'internal logic', in order to actually give it some weight you need to provide evidence of the effect of this predictive programming. Otherwise it's just a hypothesis.
So, can you provide some evidence of the effect of this programming?
No, but as for Revelation of the Method in general I think this (edited) quote from Theodore Dalrymple aka Anthony Daniels is very pertinent:
"The purpose of propaganda is not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponds to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/124952-political-correctness-is-communist-propaganda-writ-small-in-my-study
That's a good quote, for sure. However... (go on, have a smile)
1. That's a statement of intent, not evidence.
2. The use of the word 'humiliation' there reveals a kind of self-deception - because if the subject/victim doesn't feel humiliated then it's a fake victory. If you see what I mean (trust me - as a victim of child abuse I know what I'm talking about here). Like, getting people to blindly believe what you tell them to believe, or do what you tell them, is one thing, but if they only do it blindly and they think they are doing something good (like going to war thinking it's self-defence when it's actually racist mass murder of the other) then like I say it's a kind of Pyrrhic victory.
However - to a certain extent I totally agree with you. Because there is certainly a lot of sadistic pleasure to be had in manipulating people in this way, especially to believe and do things against their better nature. So in that sense, it doesn't actually matter if the subject/victim is aware it's happening to them. (or, for example, when they vote for the controlled opposition).
This, ironically, does tie neatly into to what I was saying, about how a lot of this stuff is the cabal testing the waters to see what they can get away with, how far they can push things without provoking the final revolution - whenever they can extend these limits it would certainly make them feel powerful. And as I say, this is a very significant aspect of their pathology.
The other really interesting aside here is that what you are implying works even better for 'cognitive infiltrators' and the conspiracy theory subculture. If the agents (i.e. influencers) can get their followers to blithely believe whatever memes they push then yes, they have achieved a certain humiliation and a victory and the aforementioned sadistic pleasure (especially when people get misdirected from the important stuff/big picture, and look discredited and stupid in the eyes of the general public). The most obvious example that springs to mind is this anti-woke cult. You come across this all the time in the subculture - people just parroting the same old bigotry - and it does, indeed, turn them into nasty, vile, evil abusers. So there is definitely a victory there, because they've fundamentally changed those people's psychology.
If you look at Miri's comments section, for example, you'll quickly see that 99% of it is just sycophancy. I wonder if/when she'll get bored with that. It's another reason I like you, because you don't shy away from a good argument - obviously so long as the other person is polite, of course - but I get the impression you'd get bored pretty effing quickly if everyone just agreed with you the whole time. Like 'Oh, Petra, you are sooo right! I never thought of that before! We're not worthy! We're not worthy!"
As you can tell, I like a good argument. It's not so much devil's advocate, but I do - ironically - take a sadistic pleasure in fucking with people. If the intelligence services could persuade me that what they are doing all the time is for an ultimately benevolent reason then I'd be very happy indeed to offer my services. Unfortunately, none of what they do is for a benevolent reason. For their own social group perhaps, in the short term at least, but not for the human species or the planet or - ironically - their own souls.
So ultimately, the joke and the humiliation is going to be on them. Because there will come a day when they are staring extinction in the face. And they will know it was all their own fault.
And I for one take great pleasure in that vision.
Maybe there's a more prosaic explanation - which is that they are simply a bunch of evil psychopaths who enjoying fucking with people.
Likewise, it makes them feel powerful to get away with things so brazenly. This is, in fact, and extremely important psychological point which most people don't seem to get. The cabal are not some kind of all-powerful bunch of Alphas. They are actually Gammas at most. This creates resentment because they know they are Gammas. They also hate the fact that humans, in their natural state, are morally superior to them. And so this leads to a pathology whereby they need to feel powerful and superior - it's a form of self-deception of course. Nietzsche understood this perfectly.
So the psychological truth about this 'revelation of the method' thing is that it's got nothing to do with the 'apparent' target - i.e. humans. It's entirely to do with the perpetrators and their pathological need to feel safe and superior. Because remember they are vastly outnumbered and constantly paranoid and terrified about being found out - because if they ever get exposed to the general public, they will be exterminated through sheer overwhelming numbers (which is why cognitive infiltrators do their damnedest to divert attention from stuff like the child abuse network - this latest thing about (Asian) grooming gangs is yet another misdirection in that regard).
So the cabal need to test the waters, so to speak. 9-11 is the most prominent example of this. Like 'can we get away with something so brazen without inciting a revolution against us?' or put differently 'how safe are we?'. You will have noticed how they have increased all their brazen activities tremendously since then - because they did, indeed, get away with it without the revolution. In the same vein, when 2 million people marched on London to 'stop the war' in early 2003, but didn't storm parliament, instead just making some pretty speeches, waving some banners around then obediently going back home again, the Establishment realised and knew for sure they could push the limits a hell of a lot further without the revolution cometh.
So this has nothing to do with 'predictive programming'. It has everything to do with the pathology of a psychopath who is terrified of discovery and retribution (not 'guilty conscience' mind - they don't have consciences).
If there is a 'predictive programming' then it's specifically aimed at 'conspiracy theorists' who don't, in fact, understand the occult at all. It's to convince those people as well that the cabal are far more powerful than they actually are.
If the cabal really were as powerful as they would like people to believe, they would've long-since achieved their totalitarian dystopia. But they haven't. Why? Because they are Gammas, not Alphas. Put me in charge of their strategising for a dystopia and I'll have it done within a generation for them. No charge, either. Well, maybe a small consultancy fee would be appreciated. But the recognition for the work, and remembrance in their grand archive would be far more valuable to me.
Thanks Petra, I write about Revelation of the Method here:
https://francisoneill.substack.com/p/lockdowns-vaccines-and-the-occult
and duping delight here:
https://francisoneill.substack.com/p/victims-or-actors-part-3
I wonder why you didn't refer to RoM in this post, Francis.
Because I have mentioned it twice in this series, the article is already long enough and I am trying not to be a bore.
https://francisoneill.substack.com/p/victims-or-actors-part-6
Fair enough but I think it's worth a mention especially as you mention duping delight but it's not duping delight.
I've mentioned it and now you've mentioned it.
If you've not seen the interview of the Dunblane teacher being interviewed the day after being shot through the head, may I heartily recommend it and the doctors comments at the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pxJj90sIk4
I hadn’t seen that interview, absolutely incredible. The ‘doctor’ could be from a comedy sketch show.
Thanks for that. I've never looked at this event before but heard it was a psyop. A couple of comments on the video:
"Sounds like someone who is in a bit of shock from having won the lottery, bewildered by the win." LOL
"Crisis Actors were so bad back then."
In response to the second comment - no worse than they are now. The rule is to make it obvious.
This is a woman shot at Las Vegas interviewed by Dr Phil.
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=GOOMUN3W73G2
Are you trying to suggest that the Las Vegas shooting was a hoax? or only that the woman was not actually one of the victims but was put forward as one in order to support the official narrative.
Oh yes. You think real?
Here's a highly amusing video by the late Woodrow Wobbles who had an incredible database of songs to draw from to highlight the fakery.
https://youtu.be/wx7EVdX-71w?si=xuGuu-W24MwviVEX
And thanks to you as I'd not seen those. What's really mad is that so many will accuse us of being mad for looking at some of this and on the face of it say "I'm not buying it". Skepticism on any media narrative should be the de facto position.
"Skepticism on any media narrative should be the de facto position."
Precisely.