Created Nov. 14, 2015 updated Nov 25 015
Funding & Tactics of SJWs
SJWs = Social Justice Warriors
this article is incomplete at this time and in progress of being written
Sargon of Akkad Speaks
Funding Censorship & Control
Shill Tactics on the Net
Who are you? Do you care?
More Tactics Revealed New Nov 25 015
The tactics of the NWO have gotten very sophisticated in recent years. Not only in the way they fund things, but also in the way they promote concepts and propaganda and subvert the population and change attitudes. They have literally created vast networks of online agents to ages info wars on the net, where the last vestiges of freedom remain for now. so I will show how things are funded, promoted and persecuted. I will explore the new battle ground of internet warfare with shills, sock puppets, and astroturfing. and lastly, I will show how shills invaded a particular case that took place in the UK area of Hampstead London, UK involving the worst reported case of SRA I have ever come across for its world-wide implications. I pick this one because I became a participant in it as soon as videos of the 2 childrens' testimony came online. So it is the one I am most knowledgeable of and involved it. I believe I know what happened and I believe the world needs to be warned.
And when I refer to SJWs, I also include in on this, "professional" activists, braggarts, blow-hards, and know-it-alls (exempting myself, of course). I refer to many who are well known media personalities and famous web/internet personalities as well. They all were halos and pretend to be oh so wonderful. but in reality, they are all liars, promoters, snake oil salesmen, and counter-agents. They pretend to favor a cause when really, they are against it.
But people/sheeple are not used to looking at details, or daring to question someone who has appeared to be so behind a cause for so long. Shills are experts at laying in wait, and putting on a good appearance, so that when the right day and time come, they can upset the apple cart and turn on the cause they once fought.
Its a very common and very effective technique. Most people, once they have begun to trust, will never question the trusted source ever again. Those predators over us know this fact all too well. They know the tendency of people to be intellectually lazy and trusting. It rarely ever fails. It works like a charm.
Back to Top
Secret funding is how things were done in the newly arrived Industrial Revolution of the mid 19th century, the 1800s. You will hear of many rags to riches stories of men who came from humble beginnings to create huge companies and even industries. But they were not really the accomplishments of humble men as they rose to wealth and power. These men were often from humble backgrounds, but as they rose in rank, they showed some ability and were offered opportunities, if they showed a willingness to play ball with big finance and do as they were told. In return, they had their companies and/or industries grown into huge proportions.
Now there are many prominent industrials of the 19th century. JP Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, Jim Brady, Vanderbilt, and many others, too. But I want to use the case below, because it was a little more humble at its start, but since I had done the research, it offered the detail I wanted without extra search and reading.
I discovered this doing legal research regarding Nova Scotia (Canada) law. Eaton was a prominent name in Kings County Nova Scotia (NS) and in other parts of NS. I'll let the document I found explain the rest.
""Cyrus Eaton made his home in Cleveland, Ohio. He was born in Nova Scotia, a descendant of Empire Loyalists who emigrated from New York during the American Revolution – leaving behind a homestead on what is now the corner of Broadway and Wall Streets! His growing up as a farm boy and son of a small-town store-owner was a source of great pride, and the subject of many wonderful tales beginning “when I was a boy in Nova Scotia, . . .”
While still a theology student at McMaster University, he was invited to Cleveland by his uncle, Charles Aubrey Eaton, pastor of John D. Rockefeller's church. Rockefeller hired Eaton and inspired him to be an industrialist who rejoiced in hard work and strenuous play.""
>>I need to point out some stuff at this point. The Eatons were part of a network. Hailing from NY and all around the USA in time, This branch of Eatons went to Nova Scotia as Loyalists. Many people who lived on Portland Maine, then called Falmouth, went to Nova Scotia, too. All the names there are found there are found in Portland, too. So these Eatons had connections where it counted, namely Rockefeller. So though only mildly prominent in Nova Scotia, a province that never really so that much in development except for Halifax, by relatives, Cyrus Eaton found himself connected to one of the wealthiest men in the world, with all kinds of links and ties to finance and ruling the world. Are you getting the picture?
Now clearly, JD Rockefeller (JDR) knew talent and loyalty when he saw them. He must have seen this in Cyrus. So they say JDR "inspired" Cyrus. I have other words for it. But from here, Cyrus was funded and managed an empire, obviously staying close and loyal to JDR. Cyrus did well for himself and JDR had his guys in place to keep control of all business and finance. So if you think industry is made up of autonomous independent corporations, you really are naive. They are all networked and controlled.<<
An innovative businessman
Eaton built enterprises in steel, coal, iron ore, railroads, lake shipping, rubber, paint, utilities, and finance. Having lost a fortune in the Great Depression, he recovered to create a second empire afterwards.
>>He lost it all but got it all back. How? Why? Cause he had very powerful and wealthy friends who wanted their gang to stay in power, so they put Cyrus right back in style. He had to be on their good side to be treated like this. He was not threat. Its helps to have "friends."
Now as the story goes below, Eaton took an "interest" in a lot of things, that are part of a world wide agenda. You can better appreciate why he got his wealth and success back. He was participating in many varied pursuits, all aiding and helping his more power and wealthy friends and their agendas. He was a good errand boy, I would say.<<
Eaton was dedicated to the quest for international friendship, disarmament, and peace. The Pugwash Conferences, which Eaton helped found in 1957, were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995.
Eaton brought together scholars and scientists of many countries to share ideas and explore ways to co-exist peacefully;
A farmer and conservationist
Eaton bred Shorthorn beef cattle and raised waterfowl to be released into the wilderness.
An avid reader
Eaton embraced philosophy, literature, history, and science.
An outdoorsman and athlete
Eaton believed everyone should have access to trails, woodlands, and picnic places.
A Clevelander from 1906 until his death in 1979
Eaton cared about its schools, industry, culture, and growth.
The Cyrus Eaton Foundation The Heights Rockefeller Building; 2745 Lee Blvd., Suite
2B Cleveland Heights, OH 44118
>>The moral of this story is that there was a lot
of funding going on, but none of that was recorded. Instead, nice propaganda
about what a great guy he was and how much he cared. But for the real story, you
would need to follow the money. JDR, anyone?<<
The first book I will introduce lightly is:
Who Financed Hitler - The Secret Funding of Hitler's Rise
to Power 1919-1933
by James Pool Dial Press NY 1978
First off, you will note in the title, Secret Funding. Get used to it. Now this is a long book with lots of detail. It is remarkable for its detail, and yet, for all that detail, there is a lot of serious information missing. Not because the author wanted it so, but because the trail goes cold beyond a certain point. Very wealthy powerful people do not want you or I to know what they are spending their money on. For one, they often fund more than one party and that is in the book with names. Germany after WWI, had many parties competing to control a chaotic post-war Germany. The treaty of Versailles was designed to quickly lead to another World War, so it was a matter of who would be holding the reigns when the time came.
There were key people who funded Hitler and the Nazi Party. Hitler was in a precarious position. Historians would like to paint him as a mad man but Hitler was anything but. He was intelligent and He understood many of Germany's problem. He had to unite the industrial rich with the laboring poor and that was no easy feat in itself. He had to cope with warring factions, armies and political groups. As key men came along, these, one by one, would deliver money to Hitler, but it was never clear who it was coming from or where it was coming from in most cases.
We could safely say that industrialists of Germany were somehow behind it and by the social gatherings that took place, one can be pretty assured about the sources, in a broad sense. But they took great care to hide that it was any of them. Every meeting had a pretense that had nothing to do with politics or funding. Wives would be brought along as if it was social. They would meet where they might not be noticed much. They went thru a lot to conceal their true purpose in coming together.
To this day, it can not be proved for sure where the money to finance the Third Reich and Nazis came from. We could guess and likely be right in most if not all cases. Not just anyone can finance things. But certainty is left remaining. We know it happened, but how it got to key men, those connections remain out of sight.
It is not much different in the USA. The meeting that took place at Jekyll
Island by the world's biggest bankers or their representatives, was done very
low key like and discreet, so that no one would even know why they gathered or
who gathered, for the most part. But there they drew up the plans to take over
the banking system of the USA and replace it with the "Federal
Reserve" which we are now enslaved to. So I hope your getting the picture.
Its all about secrecy and hiding, putting on a show without anyone seeing the
This comes by way of Brice Taylor, aka Susan Ford, formerly Susan Eckart, a former mind control slave and presidential model who served in a number of different ways, the government. In her book, "Thanks for the Memories" she reveals on page 139:
There is a whole network of men who manipulate a lot of international business around the world, including the World Banking System. Chase Manhattan Bank was just the tip of a whole network of banks all over the world that were set with a framework to control the world economy and hide illegal funds. These illegal funds are never detected if they are distributed into the internal workings of this banking system. In the early years, I was programmed to make large deposits into banks all over the world. Many mind-controlled slaves were doing that work.
>>Mind control slaves carry on lots of banking activity since the 60s, that hid illegal funds. Its more secrecy. Are mind-controlled slaves used for campaign fund donations and transfers? They could be if those who control them wanted to! Pay careful attention to the bold face text next. In the event of an EMP attack, so feared by so many, would have much less impact than we are told to believe, because mind-controlled people with mind file systems have everything needed to keep the system running without computers. So that is why governments are not too worried about EMP attacks.<<
There are programmed people involved in global implementation all the way to the top in order to insure that by this time, through this generation, their plan will not fail. Mind control was and still is their failsafe mechanism intended to alleviate any human weakness or human interference. If the world's computer systems were to shut down, their systems, carefully created within the mind file systems of mind control victims, would continue to operate. Cryptic information passes to people in the know with the "eyes to see and the ears to hear," as I overheard them during Stock Exchange dealings cryptically refer to those involved with New World Order agenda. Those programmed are able to glean plans and agendas as well as command instruction while watching the stock trades on television or by their actual physical presence while there.
Parts of me were filled with lots of information on stocks, bonds, annuities, the Federal Reserve and these parts knew exactly how the Federal Reserve manipulated business, corporations, and large investments for their own gain. Funds were amassed through the Federal Reserve for use in anything but what the funds were publicly portrayed as being used in. By the way, nobody audits the Fed, not even the IRS. I was heavily used for both mind files and sex, but my mind file use during my teens and on into adulthood, always took priority as the Council, Henry, and others sent messages and information back and forth to each other without the risk of being publicly linked. For example, Henry would say when an international crisis would/could be created and what countries were to be involved. Then those players involved would get their monies or exchanges, step up to be in the right position
to gain monetarily and then step out. There were lots of corporate men who backed these endeavors with money from their corporations. They fronted the money in exchange for favors from the Federal Reserve or politicians.
Alan Greenspan had a lot of big business backing, thus furthering their banking deals. They laundered huge sums of money through subsidiary treasury banks so the action would be taking place off to the side in unnamed, unmonitored banks. That way the main Federal Reserve Banks, were kept freer to operate without detection. The plan covered the overall banking system so nothing could be traced. So if there were large sums of money that needed to be washed, they were put through the smaller, subsidiary banks that weren't being monitored, so no one
would know. Sometimes these subsidiary banks ended up actually handling much larger sums of money and transactions than the larger Federal Reserve Bank in the same geographic area in order to hide the money laundering schemes. The way the system is set up, all monies from an area are supposed to funnel through the Federal Reserve Bank in that area in order to monitor many different things, so they can keep control of the money in specific geographic areas. With the large, washed funds filtering through the subsidiary banks, the laundering system did well and was never detected through the main Fed, which is highly monitored by Congress. Otherwise the Reserve would come up out of balance every step of the way, since so much money was laundered in certain areas and there was no way to begin to explain the large percentage of imbalance there would have been between even neighboring cities' or state's holdings.
>>Do you understand money laundering? Its transferring money from one party to another! One party, say a drug dealer, takes in lots of money but in order to spend it, has to explain how he got it to begin with. So he gives the money to a business he owns on the side, claims he did lots of business and made lots of profit with that side business, and he can spend that as he pleases since it has taxes paid and money taken in thru what appears to be a legitimate business on paper.
Now imagine someone wants to give a politician a big wad of money for his campaign. How does he give it, if he is only allowed to give a small amount? Easy! He gets in touch with his network and they distribute his big sum to a disbursement agent who apportions out small amounts to many people to give the politician. Now he has the amount the big contributor wanted to give, but it does not appear as if the big contributor did it at all. A bunch of individuals did it. More on this later.
Notice below who "worker bees" funnel funds continually thru subsidiary banks so that nothing gets noticed. Get the picture?<<
The Federal Reserve had areas like political districts. In some areas, it was essential to have the subsidiary banks 'in place' in order to funnel the funds from covert operations. San Diego was one. Los Angeles was another and Hollywood was also. Wherever clusters of worker bees (mind control operatives) were located, money went into a subsidiary bank of the Federal Reserve to keep the funds continually channeling back to them. This was true in areas of immense illegal profit, like in Vegas, where the whole town was built on graft and everyone inside knew who got paid first so no one got hurt or stepped on. I was constantly traveling to meet with members who were tied into the subsidiary Federal Reserve Banks. Pete Wilson, who at that time was a San Diego based Senator from California, was one.
There were lots of arms and drug shipments in San Francisco and they raised and lowered the amount of money in the Federal Reserve to hide the activity in the area. They had to inflate it when there was no drug or munitions activity, so when there was, it would be even and steady and won't show the influx of the money into the area. I was taken to many large buildings, with high fences and guards.
>>See how easy it is to work around the so called checks and balances? Hiding in plain sight!<<
Some of the big deals I witnessed, involving more international figures, took place in the Hawaiian Islands, like on Maui. And the deals involving Mexico took place in Mexico, often in Mazatlan. While vacationing one year on Maui with my husband, I was taken away from him by men in suits, put on a commercial airline by two Secret Service agents and flown to a location like Jamaica or Costa Rica to deliver a message. I was given a clever disguise, dressed in a tourist costume - a fruit patterned skirt and blouse, with a big straw hat with fruit on top of it, and made to look like an overweight old lady. The place I was taken to was about an hour's drive from the airport by limo, and I was delivered through a dirty and poverty-stricken town full of dark-skinned people, to a harbor seaport, then taken down to the docks to make the deal. This way the person I was meeting on the ship could simply cut the deal and leave by ocean without ever needing to be on land.
>>Notice that Brice was dressed to look overweight and disguised. Any security cameras would not be identifying the real person.<<
There were palm trees by the ocean and the coastline area was pretty much uninhabited toward the port. It was a rocky seacoast in many areas with few sandy beaches. I was instructed to deliver the message only to the man in the white uniform who took a hold of my left hand and elbow and asked me if I was lost. A man in a white Naval uniform and hat brought me on board the large ship, momentarily, to receive the message I delivered, "Sir, the bird is flying north." Then he quickly shuffled me off the boat and the Secret Service agents took me away by limo and I was flown back to Maui. I was kept in isolation, without food or water for a day, before I was returned by my husband's side at the pool where we were vacationing at the Hyatt Regency in Maui.
Secret Rendezvous in the Pacific
During the late 70's and early 80's the Council often met out in the middle of the ocean, aboard yachts, where they could all come together anonymously. They sailed or motored around until they connected with each member. They navigated to precise areas where a yacht would be waiting. Everyone had to be expert navigators and Craig's dental friend, Jeff, was just that. He constantly read a complex nautical map with special tools and combined that information with the placement of the stars in the sky in order to deliver me to a preplanned destination. He had to navigate to different places around the Channel Islands to areas we were supposed to go to.
>>Note above who the Council met under tha greatest cover of secrecy, even more so that Jekyll Island. A note to flat earth fans. Note the navigation techniques used to find the locations desired. Its all based on spherical planets, orbits, stars, etc. Its not flat. Flat is a psyops.<<
I was usually the first to be picked up by the yacht the Council was to meet on, because I was the least important and they didn't want to waste these important men's time. The captain pulled us in close, side-by-side, and the member aboard the other yacht would leave his yacht and come aboard. Each man was picked up in this way. There were usually three or four rendezvous after they picked me up.
The men never arrived on the same yachts but used different vessels and crews so as not to ever be identified. Once every member was picked up they met in the largest room on board ship, and I was brought in to sit at the table during certain junctures when they wanted to send a message back to the President, foreign leaders, etc. This way later, I just delivered the message to whomever they directed me, usually during sex, and so everything remained anonymous.
<<<< End of Brice Taylor book quotes --------------------------------
In Our Time 2015
The World's #1 Personal Fundraising Site
Go Fund Me
Send funds thru PayPal.com
People can now ask for loans from the general collective public or even free donations. If your cause hits a nerve, you could be in business. Even Paypal can be used to donate. But I suspect this was designed for another purpose. A number of social causes have benefited in big ways from this new scheme. Sandyhook victims have made millions, I believe. Social Justice Warriors such as feminists Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn have done well by these funding methods. And these have raised my suspicions. Are these another way for the rich financiers to pay people to serve outrageous causes and change society, so they hope?
Sargon of Akkad
SJW = Social Justice Warrior
Back to Top
Sargon has his own Youtube channel. He speaks a lot about Feminism, and related issues to it, and of what he and/or others call Neo-Progressivism. I am going to address a particular video of his regarding financing causes and making money as "professional victims" and crusading for social justice issues (SJWs). These are not really social justice issues. That is the deceptive name they give them. When I say "they," I mean the real initiators and promoters of causes that will lead to banning all free speech and criticism of such causes. I am speaking of the ultimate leaders of the world I throw under the umbrella name of NWO. I list some of Sargon's statements just under his link below.
and Censorship of the Internet
"The Business model of professional victims"
model." "An Awareness
of it needed."
"Being a victim on the internet pays!" "These are fans so dedicated that . . ."
Now as we go thru his presentation, I want you to know that I do not agree with Sargon's interpretation here of how this is funded. He thinks its supporters and fans of Feminism that fund these SJWs. I say its funded, not from the bottom up, but from the top down, by the very wealthiest promoters of inversion law, where subversion of anything decent is the goal.
Sargon sees Feminism for its many dangers and sinister agenda. But he does not see who the real motivator and cause is. Maybe he does not want to see. I don't know. But I will make my case as we discuss his case. He does bring some very good things to light. He is intelligent, and has a sense of humor. He is a very interesting man, as are his many views. I respect his work, always. If one does not look at the bigger picture, one will not see what I see.
He starts off showing the funding results and how they grow at key times.
Now note that the site she deals with shows 600+ pledged to help fund her (Anita) videos in maybe 2 weeks or so time. Why is this amazing? Because her ideas are so ridiculous that even many women do not support this crap. Are there really 600 willing to shell out money, that ultimately, will lead the world into censorship and slavery and destruction of rights, particularly in the USA, where we have some in writing, though not in practice. Can't see people doing that in too many numbers.
Also note above right, that she claims harassment, etc, suffering terribly, you know, and supposedly threats of violence, death, rape, etc. I doubt most of those, if they are real, are legitimate. They get their own to post as those who threaten so that they can get sympathy. This would require help from a 3rd party who has people who will act as sock puppets (fake posters). This is hoped to create sympathy and allow governments to act and censor the net for "protecting the poor abused on the net. That is to say, its a false flag psyop to give excuse to a government or the UN to protect us all from being hurt, of course!
How many would actually be in favor of this? Really? Be serious! How many liked the TSA after 911 at airports. I worked at an airport at the time. Everyone hated it that I ever heard from.
Now below she went from 600 to 1000 in 2 weeks. Wait till you see the amounts of money.
So here is what she did in response to funding, we are told:
OK, pay close attention. above in 2012 had about 7000 supporters and raised 159,000. But in 2014, it skyrocketed to 442,000, almost 3 times as much. How did they do that? Is it because of their brilliance? Is it the sound rational logic of their arguments. Ah ha ha ha! No way! Maybe this issue resonates with some? Nope! Still wrong! Here, let me help you. Just believe, a supposed threat was received. It refers to the Montreal Massacre, which Sargon says is only known in Canada since it was a small affair.
So Sarkeesian decides to cancel the event because it is so dangerous and scary. She and all her friends are so terrified. However, according to the police in Utah (below screen save), there was no risk to students. And trust me, government would be all over this if it were a risk so they could grab our guns. This was a total fake in my opinion to make their cause look persecuted and them suffering mentally from all the threats and harassment. But do not kid yourself. It was all fake but designed to create sympathy for them and their cause. The result, regardless of legitimacy or not, was the jump in donations to 159,000 in 2012 to 442,000 in 2014. But now I ask, why did the funds get so much response for such a fake event, much like Sandyhook was. Sandyhook survivors also got lots of funding and money. Being a victim really does seem to pay. But who is really paying?
So notice the praise from earlier just above ^^^ Does Anita reallyt look that bright to you? Are her arguments that persuasive. If you answer yes, can I interest you in some bridges and other real-estate in NYC by chance? More hype below. vvv
Anita's friend Zoe also gets attention below: vvv
Does this even sound like she is serious? She sounds to me like she is just screwing around. Even if you believed in the cause, would you give her money for what she describes in this add? In the add below she gets nearly 4 times as much as just above.
Below she gets more patrons (in theory) but slightly less money.
Now in 2015, the 2 women are starting a new campaign to combat online violence. Notice how disagreement or even insult is now violence, which has always been something exclusive to the physical world. Now violence can be verbal. How about that for verbal gymnastics, eh?
Below, our 2 "heros" address the UN. The UN was fascinated and concerned with all those online bullies committing outrageous "violence" against 2 harmless, defenseless, innocent "little girls." Oh God! The humanity! Do you really think the UN would bother with things like this, generally not worth time in a small local newspaper? Not unless the UN and its owners had something to gain from it and I assure you, they do!
Above, they want to broaden a/the definition . . . for online harassment and abuse. I note how authorities are great for broadening definitions. Its called a foot in the door. Once you make something a crime, then you just widen or broaden the definition till you have something far more powerful and abusive to use on the public at large.
Above, the powers of the world want social networks to censor in behalf of the powers of nations and the world rulers of the NWO. And in this way, it can be said (but not taken seriously) that its not the UN or nation doing it, it is the social networks so that citizens can not complain about abuse of rights. You don't have to use facebook or twitter. So this is not really about online abuse as much as it is censorship. Now honestly, how many people think censorship is a good thing. Not many I suspect.
Below left: To make/force online platforms "responsible" for the actions of their users. Now why would those platforms want to do that when it is likely to affect their advertisement income adversely by driving people away? But with big finance and big business putting pressure on them, they will have no choice but to comply. Comply with what? Stopping Online Harrasers? Well, the problem is that they want to widen that definition of harrasser to anyone who disagrees with a feminist.
So in reality, the harassers are the UN and feminists who define perfectly allowable speech such as criticisms and disagreement as harassment and violence. This is known as inversion where bad becomes good, and good becomes bad. Look how far we have fallen!
Sargon also makes a plea that now needs addressed. He calls the likes of feminists like Antia and Zoe as professional victims, as they make money with their victimhood of "online violence." He says we will only make them more money by "contacting" them or conversing with them, likely in disagreement. He fears that we will lose our freedoms if we push these 2 or others like them.
I am going to disagree with Sargon on this point and show how he is wrong on several accounts. First, I want to make it known that I posted on the video above letting Sargon know how the funding was done, from the rich source to a network of people who make individual contributions, so that the rich source is hidden. Hidden because the rich source is the origin of the feminist nihilist agenda against men and the world. I had meant to screen save it, but I had to type it in and might have snapped a shot and forgot to save it. But the post was deleted.
Believe it or not, this was not a surprise to me. This happens too often in these battles tween ideologies. Neither side is being fully honest. Sargon is hiding the source of funding and pretending that it is the creation of the feminists and that their followers are legitimate ones that reach into their own pocket for these insincere leaders and their rhetoric. I don't believe those fans and followers really believe their own crap and they are not likely to spend a lot of money when they know where the support is really coming from.
Now Sargon is not the 1st time I have encountered bullshit. The MGTOW movement, sort of lead by Sandman, is also avoiding revealing who is really behind feminism as well as MGTOW. By the way, MGTOW stands for Men Going Their Own Way, which means they are not bothering with women much anymore. I propose that Sandman operates at least 4 different identities/channels, all covering MGTOW. He may be operating even more. I'll address him more later, in a follow up to this article.
As well, I have encountered very suspicious activity in the Hampstead Conspiracy to coverup Satanic cult operations which include entire schools, 6-7 in number, in Hampstead, who have all the kids attending, have sex with each other and with parents and school staff, as well as a world wide import operation to supply babies for the elite of these cults to sacrifice, eat and drink the blood.
The varied supporters trying to expose this conspiracy all exploded into fighting and splintering into chaos. Nothing that nearly anyone in whole movement did, made any sense. So yours truly is not leaving anyone out as a suspect. I will get to the bottom of it all, for the sake of passing this on to USA conspiracy people who can make use of it to demonstrate how big and serious this conspiracy really is.
Anyway, that will be another article. But I found that many administrators of facebook group forums, or WordPress Blogs were, in my mind, shills up to no good and covering for other operative shills. The majority, including the 2 most prominent ones, were New Age adherents. They all seemed to "flock" together. In fact, one WordPress blog was the cause of the biggest rift and divide of the whole affair. And she has left the most evidence behind her to possibly incriminate her.
So in all these movements, both sides seem to be manipulated and likely, I think, funded. Both sides are concerned about protecting the financiers behind them or not pointing fingers at these controlling manipulators at the top.
Funding Censorship & Control
Back to Top
I will now describe what I posted to Sargon on the article I addressed of his, above previous.
I said that big contributors were the real ones promoting feminist/nihilist agendas whose main goal is to reduce men to about 10% of the world's population, s that those numbers will not amount to enough to overthrow anything. Men make up the majority of soldiers in armies. They have the most brains and are more likely to buck those who subvert, overthrow, and vanquish. Women will be nothing more than sex slaves to the 10% of the 10% men left, amounting to 1%. These will enjoy the 1 to 9 ratio of women. So no one is going to win in this loss. God will stop this from being fully fulfilled, anyway.
But one should be aware that no movement has ever started as a grassroots ground swell of the little people who then decide their own agenda. The common folk don't have that much brains or initiative. It starts with bullying at the top and forcing all to join a group with ambitions and a willingness to sacrifice blood to get what they want. How many World Wars were fought with a strictly volunteer military force? Answer? ZERO! All had to force a draft of men. Its always done by force. ALWAYS!
Likewise, all new agendas or attempts to overthrow a previous regime, must start at the top and be skillfully managed in order to force society to accept their will and ways. This is done thru conditioning citizens and by disseminating false news propaganda and fake events promoted as real events, in order to make people believe there is a problem, when the only reason the problem exists is to bully people into accepting a solution to that problem. We now call these Psy-ops.
The goal of feminist psy-ops are to broaden definitions so much that nearly anything amounts to a very serious crime that justifies imprisonment or execution. Freedom of speech is to be eliminated. NO dissent of ideas will be allowed. How do you convince others to go along with this? You control enough news and media outlets to create a false impression that the world has changed. You pass new laws and enforce them with swiftness, certainty and severity. Those who resist will be dead or silenced in prison or concentration camps.
Anita and Zoe are hired and promoted spokespeople for the NWO overthrow agenda of the world. I said hired, didn't I? I did. But its not quite that simple. The two women do not punch in on a time clock, or go to a place of employment. They remain freelance crusaders, social justice warriors, doing what they do for the supposed good of humanity, to save us from those horrible evil rape-culture men who do nothing but beat women senseless all day long. That's us. But when they say we beat them senseless, that's only metaphorically speaking for they have decided that to disagree with them on the net is the equivalent of a good beating. I'm not making this up. I am just amplifying it slightly.
Then these female crusaders to to a "fund-me" type of website and ask for donations and low and behold, donations start coming in. Amazing! But prior to that in secret, rich powerful men hired them to be spokeswomen/crusaders/warriors and promised them lots of donations would flow in and they could do as they pleased with the money afterward. Ain't life grand? ;-) In this way, no one knows that a very rich powerful man or team of men were responsible for the whole thing, from start to finish and this is what is covered up by both fighting sides on internet battles of ideology. The rich men own both race horses.
This is what Sandman and Sargon do not want to admit and will delete any posts suggesting otherwise. Get it? The fact that Sargon delete my post is, as I see it, prima facie evidence in the court of public opinion, that what I suggested was exactly what the situation was and that is what they seek to hide. It seems to me that Sargon works for the opposition.
Now that does not mean he has nothing good to say. I still like much of his stuff. But I also question all things carefully, knowing that one day he might try to pull s fast one. But with lots of his type on the net, they are apt to create an impression of some kind of consensus existing on the net, when in fact, that might not be true at all. The NWO had been masters of creating false realities to fool us all. Only the fittest will survive the lies.
I just read this and print it here
now: American Free Press, November 9 and 16,
Follow the Money
Ever wonder why television news always seems to be on the side of Hillary Clinton even if she has committed crimes or lied to the American public? Researchers who been tracking the fund-raising efforts of the Clinton campaign recently learned that some of Mrs. Clinton's top fundraisers are also on the payroll of CNN and NBC. <<< end of quote
Do you see what I see? Clinton's top fund raisers have connections and are supported by their employers. They can serve Hilary for free if they wanted and CNN and NBC could "assign" them to work on Hilary's campaign without charging her or having her show any money donations. But labor donations that supply much more money are also contributions and substantial ones at that.
Consider that any government agent, we will say a CIA agent, goes abroad to spy, work with resistance or whatever else the CIA needs or wants. They obviously do not want the nation they are spying on, to know who their agent is. So they give the agent an identity that will not raise suspicion. Maybe he will pose as a businessman, a salesman, or set up a business in the foreign nation, or something like that. They call this a cover, or you might say, a disguise. It hides what he is really over there for and what he is really doing.
This is what banks and financiers do all the time. They have covers for what they do. Money, labor, connections, these all have value and use.
So when the NWO rulers decide on policies to promote and implement, they need to contact some agents to work for them, but not let anyone know they work for "them," the promoters and financiers of the new policy they want implemented. This is how Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn operate, says I. They get paid for promotion and for appearing like they are attacked and want to promote solutions to stop the attacks. And then they get paid by donations. Where those donations actually come from, can not be determined. It has the appearance of being individual contributors of modest means. That is the intention. But in reality, it is very wealthy sources who dish out the money thru a laundering process, whereby, individuals are appointed to contribute modest sums in large numbers of assigned people.
Now this brings up our last interesting category. Vipers laying in wait, under foot. That is to say, those who serve current causes whose interests involve trying to help people who are victims of various predatory corporate and governmental evil. For example, Trauma Based Mind Control, an operation of many governments, as well as big business and organized crime, creates many victims of the worst sexual abuse and other torture and SRA.
Governments and Non-profit entities will create people who pose as activists who want to help people, Social Justice Warriors who want to help, and other such "concerned" individuals. But it does not end there.
Under the USA Military, large divisions of personnel are formed and trained to surf the net and fight the propaganda war waged by citizens like my self who do not like what my government and the world government are doing. So the military presents false information to throw us off and spies to infiltrate our online networks of self-defense against government and business abuse against us. So if a conspiracy is suggested, the military agents will try to discredit that.
So we have lots of people whose only paid job is to make
trouble for us on the internet and in our lives as we try to escape abuse and
harm being perpetrated against us constantly.
US plans to 'fight the net' revealed
By Adam Brookes BBC Pentagon correspondent
A newly declassified document gives a fascinating glimpse into the US military's plans for "information operations" - from psychological operations, to attacks on hostile computer networks.
As the world turns networked, the Pentagon is calculating the military opportunities that computer networks, wireless technologies and the modern media offer.
From influencing public opinion through new media to designing "computer network attack" weapons, the US military is learning to fight an electronic war.
The declassified document is called "Information Operations Roadmap". It was obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University using the Freedom of Information Act.
Officials in the Pentagon wrote it in 2003. The Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, signed it.
The "roadmap" calls for a far-reaching overhaul of the military's ability to conduct information operations and electronic warfare. And, in some detail, it makes recommendations for how the US armed forces should think about this new, virtual warfare.
The document says that information is "critical to military success". Computer and telecommunications networks are of vital operational importance.
The operations described in the document include a surprising range of military activities: public affairs officers who brief journalists, psychological operations troops who try to manipulate the thoughts and beliefs of an enemy, computer network attack specialists who seek to destroy enemy networks.
All these are engaged in information operations.
Perhaps the most startling aspect of the roadmap is its acknowledgement that information put out as part of the military's psychological operations, or Psyops, is finding its way onto the computer and television screens of ordinary Americans.
"Information intended for foreign audiences, including public diplomacy and Psyops, is increasingly consumed by our domestic audience," it reads.
"Psyops messages will often be replayed by the news media for much larger audiences, including the American public," it goes on.
The document's authors acknowledge that American news media should not unwittingly broadcast military propaganda. "Specific boundaries should be established," they write. But they don't seem to explain how.
"In this day and age it is impossible to prevent stories that are fed abroad as part of psychological operations propaganda from blowing back into the United States - even though they were directed abroad," says Kristin Adair of the National Security Archive.
Public awareness of the US military's information operations is low, but it's growing - thanks to some operational clumsiness.
Late last year, it emerged that the Pentagon had paid a private company, the Lincoln Group, to plant hundreds of stories in Iraqi newspapers. The stories - all supportive of US policy - were written by military personnel and then placed in Iraqi publications.
And websites that appeared to be information sites on the politics of Africa and the Balkans were found to be run by the Pentagon.
But the true extent of the Pentagon's information operations, how they work, who they're aimed at, and at what point they turn from informing the public to influencing populations, is far from clear.
The roadmap, however, gives a flavour of what the US military is up to - and the grand scale on which it's thinking.
It reveals that Psyops personnel "support" the American government's international broadcasting. It singles out TV Marti - a station which broadcasts to Cuba - as receiving such support.
It recommends that a global website be established that supports America's strategic objectives. But no American diplomats here, thank you. The website would use content from "third parties with greater credibility to foreign audiences than US officials".
It also recommends that Psyops personnel should consider a range of technologies to disseminate propaganda in enemy territory: unmanned aerial vehicles, "miniaturized, scatterable public address systems", wireless devices, cellular phones and the internet.
'Fight the net'
When it describes plans for electronic warfare, or EW, the document takes on an extraordinary tone.
It seems to see the internet as being equivalent to an enemy weapons system.
"Strategy should be based on the premise that the Department [of Defense] will 'fight the net' as it would an enemy weapons system," it reads.
The slogan "fight the net" appears several times throughout the roadmap.
The authors warn that US networks are very vulnerable to attack by hackers, enemies seeking to disable them, or spies looking for intelligence.
"Networks are growing faster than we can defend them... Attack sophistication is increasing... Number of events is increasing."
US digital ambition
And, in a grand finale, the document recommends that the United States should seek the ability to "provide maximum control of the entire electromagnetic spectrum".
US forces should be able to "disrupt or destroy the full spectrum of globally emerging communications systems, sensors, and weapons systems dependent on the electromagnetic spectrum".
Consider that for a moment.
The US military seeks the capability to knock out every telephone, every networked computer, every radar system on the planet.
>>I have long been expecting the net to be shut down. But maybe it will be more than that. Eliminate all communication at a key time? Why not? It might be very effective from the standpoint of the devil who wants to test our own resolve, given that we had enough opportunity to become informed, which we will and have, had. Then we will have to decide on our own, without help, to see if we are self-sufficient, self-reliant, and independent in our thinking and understanding, rather than relying on others to do it for us. We are going to find out who is and who is not.<<
Are these plans the pipe dreams of self-aggrandising bureaucrats? Or are they real?
The fact that the "Information Operations Roadmap" is approved by the Secretary of Defense suggests that these plans are taken very seriously indeed in the Pentagon.
And that the scale and grandeur of the digital revolution is matched only by the US military's ambitions for it.
<<<< end of article ------------------------------------------------
Before the rise of the internet, all information was controlled. Schools, Newspapers, magazines, and books. TV, movies! They could lie to us all the time and we would not know. The Net destroyed that control. But you can bet those in power will do what they need to, to get that control back and feed us more lies as well. Deceit and trickery will be the order of the day, even as it is already.
It should be known that most countries now have their own large departments dedicated to surfing online promoting their governments' interests. Governments, being natural slave masters of their citizens, have interests in conflict with citizens' interests. So there is that constant struggle between the two sides. So you are never out there alone when you are on the net. You always got "friends" watching what your doing.
What I want to focus on are the various types of active shills, whether those of the military or those who work in apparent isolation as activists and SJWs. But lets get some terms and definitions down first.
Back to Top
Things Shills Don't Want You To Know
I recommend the above video for information on the categories below, although the info below is adequate without the video.
Shills: from Wikipedia: Shill
A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.
Shill typically refers to someone who purposely gives onlookers the impression that they are an enthusiastic independent customer of a seller (or marketer of ideas) for whom they are secretly working. The person or group who hires the shill is using crowd psychology to encourage other onlookers or audience members to purchase the goods or services (or accept the ideas being marketed). Shills are often employed by professional marketing campaigns. "Plant" and "stooge" more commonly refer to any person who is secretly in league with another person or organization while pretending to be neutral or actually a part of the organization he is planted in, such as a magician's audience, a political party, or an intelligence organization (see double agent).
Shilling is illegal in many circumstances and in many jurisdictions because of the potential for fraud and damage; however, if a shill does not place uninformed parties at a risk of loss, but merely generates "buzz," the shill's actions may be legal. For example, a person planted in an audience to laugh and applaud when desired (see claque), or to participate in on-stage activities as a "random member of the audience," is a type of legal shill.
>>Let me make the above statements more clear. Its not OK and is illegal to commit lies or fraud in order to promote and sell. On the other hand, if you must lie and no money was lost, or risk of loss, then its OK. Honesty is otherwise not important. Participation in a stage show to deceive does deprive those who paid to see it, of their money if they were expecting a legitimate show. Random participation of a party to help cover for the say, magician, is fraud.<<
Shill can also be used pejoratively to describe a critic who appears either all-too-eager to heap glowing praise upon mediocre offerings, or who acts as an apologist for glaring flaws. In this sense, such a critic would be an indirect shill for the industry at large, because said critic's income is tied to the prosperity of the industry.
>>Let me state my biggest concern. If you have 2 kids stolen by a government because they know way too much about a Satanic Cult and its world wide operations, when the kids have done nor harm, nor broken any laws and were just trying to defend themselves, Then I have major problem with that. And worse, if you got agents out there who attempt to discredit those kids and their supporters, too, or otherwise make trouble for those kids and supporters, then we not only have fraud but a large conspiracy to violate law and justice, and commit vast amounts of treason and treachery against the public welfare at large.
I have a very big problem with that. Now some may say, what is the harm in a shill? Are you kidding me? Get enough people telling lies or subtly undermining those kids or similar casues, then we are talking real monsters. But the problem is that those monsters seem harmless enough because they are not overtly suggesting anything major. In fact, you might not even notice their suggestion threatening anything in its initial form.
But they are clever. They use the well tried and developed technique of Gradualism, whereby you take one very small step after another until you end up with a totally different outcome, suggesting the kids were not abused in the first place or that the abuse was done by another and that there was not cover up and everything was done in proper order and procedure, but professionals and authorities who know their business and take it seriously. Bullshit!
It is the practice of lies and deception, screwing over
innocent kids who only want people to stop raping them. So when is a lie not
harmful? When its just small? Or just half way to the opposite. Or do they have
to make it all the way to the opposite before you get upset?
Hold that thought real good.<<
In online discussion media, satisfied consumers or "innocent" parties may express specific opinions in order to further the interests of an organization in which they have an interest, such as a commercial vendor or special interest group. In academia, this is called opinion spamming. Web sites can also be set up for the same purpose. For example, an employee of a company that produces a specific product might praise the product anonymously in a discussion forum or group in order to generate interest in that product, service, or group. In addition, some shills use "sock puppetry", where they sign on as one user soliciting recommendations for a specific product or service. They then sign on as a different user pretending to be a satisfied customer of a specific company.
In some jurisdictions and circumstances, this type of activity may be illegal. In addition, reputable organizations may prohibit their employees and other interested parties (contractors, agents, etc.) from participating in public forums or discussion groups in which a conflict of interest might arise, or will at least insist that their employees and agents refrain from participating in any way that might create a conflict of interest. For example, the plastic surgery company Lifestyle Lift ordered their employees to post fake positive reviews on websites. As a result, they were sued, and ordered to pay $300,000 in damages by the New York Attorney General's office. Said Attorney General Andrew Cuomo: "This company’s attempt to generate business by duping consumers was cynical, manipulative, and illegal. My office has [been] and will continue to be on the forefront in protecting consumers against emerging fraud and deception, including 'astroturfing,' on the Internet."
In marketing, shills are often employed to assume the air of satisfied customers and give testimonials to the merits of a given product. This type of shilling is illegal in some jurisdictions but almost impossible to detect. It may be considered a form of unjust enrichment or unfair competition, as in California's Business & Professions Code § 17200, which prohibits any "unfair or fraudulent business act or practice and unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising."
>>It is my strong conviction that anyone committing fraud or misrepresentation, or deception, or misleading, as to their identity, intentions and purposes, is really no good and up to no good. It is a serious offense in any society. To lie in court is an obvious example of corrupting justice. And though considered severe by some or many, my opinion is that dishonestly in general a serious offense, even if not punishable by law. Carrying on in a deception is never a good or decent action.
Perhaps someone will say, what if I were defending your two kids by pretending to be many other people who support the cause of the kids. NO, it is still not OK. for one, you could potentially jeopardize the credibility of the kids in having to deceive in order to make them look innocent. They do not need help in being made to "look" innocent. They already look innocent and they do not need fraudulent help in that circumstance. Truth does not need the aid of lies and deceit. Truth can do just fine on its own. I have total and complete faith in truth. Its lies I fear! Keep this in mind, too. There really is no good excuse for phony personalities.<<
Radio stations will often have shills (usually front office employees or relative) in the crowd at remote appearances and it is they who will "win" the big prizes (concert tickets, expensive jewelry) while the listeners who show up win nothing.
More specifically, there are historical cases of journalists in private media organizations being covert representatives of government and/or businesses. In these roles the journalists will present positive stories about their respective interests at key moments in order to influence public opinion. This is often achieved by claiming to have access to anonymous government or business sources. At other times, the links may actually appear overt to some, but not to the intended audience such as with Radio Free Europe, a broadcaster which targeted Eastern European audiences on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency.
An extension of these tactics is the practice of monitoring news outlets prior to or during publication. Often when a negative story is discovered attempts are made first to stop it. However, as this can, in some societies, draw attention to what could otherwise be a minor story, shills are used to put out alternative views, either to confuse the public about the legitimacy of the story or to outright convince them that it is a lie.
>>Ah! Sound familiar? A government that uses shills to oppose the views and interests of its citizens, is a wicked and dishonest government. Media that lie and deceive the public are also pure concentrated evil. To lie or mislead the public is always evil. The only thing media should be supplying readers or watchers with, is truth. If media supply lies, they are up to no good.
And if you were someone acting as a shill to defend a corrupt cause or subvert justice, you would be pure concentrated evil. I just wanted to be clear about that.<<
Shill Tactics on the Net
Back to Top
Wikipedia: A Sockpuppet: is an online identity used for purposes of deception. The term, a reference to the manipulation of a simple hand puppet made from a sock, originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an Internet community who spoke to, or about, themselves while pretending to be another person. The term now includes other misleading uses of online identities, such as those created to praise, defend or support a person or organization, or to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website. A significant difference between the use of a pseudonym and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer. Many online communities attempt to block sockpuppets.
Meatpuppet: Editors of Wikipedia use the term to label contributions of new community members if suspected of having been recruited by an existing member to support their position. Such a recruited member is considered analogous to a sockpuppet even though he/she is actually a separate individual (i.e. "meat") rather than a fictitious creation. Wired columnist Lore Sjöberg put "meat puppet" first on a satirical list of "common terms used at Wikipedia," defining the term as "a person who disagrees with you."
Nevertheless, other online sources use the term "meatpuppet" to describe sockpuppet behaviors. For example, according to one online encyclopedia, a meat puppet "publishes comments on blogs, wikis and other public venues about some phenomenon or product in order to generate public interest and buzz"—that is, he/she is engaged in behavior more widely known as "astroturfing." A 2006 article in The Chronicle of Higher Education defined a meat puppet as "a peculiar inhabitant of the digital world—a fictional character that passes for a real person online."
Astroturfing: is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message or organization (e.g., political, advertising, religious or public relations) to make it appear as though it originates from and is supported by grassroots participant(s). It is a practice intended to give the statements or organizations more credibility by withholding information about the source's financial connection. The term astroturfing is a derivation of AstroTurf, a brand of synthetic carpeting designed to look like natural grass, a play on the word "grassroots." The implication behind the use of the term is that there are no "true" or "natural" grassroots, but rather "fake" or "artificial" support, though some astroturfing operatives defend the practice (see Justification below).
>>I want to point out that this is exactly how funding takes place for paid reps or private shills. the support appears to come from grassroot participants. But in reality, those participants are part of a network that divides a sum of money up into small portions that are given to individual in the network to donate. So the recipient of those networked grassroots participants donation efforts can live well without anyone suspecting that the rich are funding these recipients/spokespeople. It is quite clever. But also very sneaky and dishonest.<<
On the Internet, astroturfers use software to mask their identity. Sometimes one individual operates over many personas to give the impression of widespread support for their client's agenda. Some studies suggest astroturfing can alter public viewpoints and create enough doubt to inhibit action.
Who Are You? Do You Care?
Back to Top
Truth1 >>> Let me re-state the obvious. Astroturfing is dishonest and uncalled for. Einstein was once quoted as saying, as regards his many detractors, "If I was wrong, it would only take one to point it out" (or something like that).
Whether right or wrong, a good solid argument only needs to be made once. In the case of say Feminists, they need crowds of their own supporters because they have no legitimate arguments so they try to intimidate and make people think that because they have good numbers, that they also have good convincing arguments. But it is precisely because of those numbers that they give themselves away. They will disrupt other women who disagree with their positions and will not let these dissenters speak or present their view. Again, the dishonesty can not be hidden. Their arguments are empty and hollow, totally in vain. So they resort to dirty tricks, a long known and tried tactic of communists, subversives, and inversives (my word invention). Or maybe you would prefer inversionist?
Astroturfing is an admission that you have otherwise failed in your mission. Astroturfing was common in the Hampstead affair/conspiracy. Cult members would haunt youtube channels with no arguments at all. Just ridiculous charges that were supported with nothing but speculation. No direct witnesses, not even one. And we were all supposed to be fooled by that, as if some magic spell were cast over us. Remarkable!
So what this amounts to, is that many who astroturf, are not realistic people with good sense and logic. They think everyone is an idiot. So lets explore that!
Are most people support a cause idiots? Are they dull in their senses. If Katie were here, I'd have her inject her opinion. But mine will have to suffice for now. Maybe I can get her to add something here later ;-) Sadly, yes, most common people who are moved by a cause such as the Hampstead Conspiracy, are not all that bright. They are fairly innocent and trusting. They are not prone to dishonesty and treachery and that is why they felt for the 2 kids/whistleblowers against the cult, and supported the 2 kids. But while they supported the kids, they were often not enough help to the kids. Why? Because they are too trusting, too innocent, too naive, maybe even too gullible. They are not familiar with the dishonest tactics of evil people, and I do not use that word loosely.
It is my strong opinion that in a world as evil as ours now is, you have to be really cynical, distrusting, suspicious, if not even paranoid. It helps to be disillusioned and bitter, too. I am being serious here. How do you live in a world of evil and not be those things? I'm curious!
If you want to be of help to the kids and their cause, you need to be a hard tough cookie who loves to fight, confront, get in peoples' faces, and even have contempt for those who readily appear as liars and deceivers. You can't be nice. They aren't very nice. They are trying to sell 2 innocent kids down the drain. We are talking pure evil if you have not noticed. In fact, you should almost feel predatory, smell blood, and react like a shark in a frenzy. The scent of evil should immediately put you on the warpath and on red alert. Alarms should be going off. I can assure you, that evil certainly has these feelings towards nice innocent people and children. Evil devours such ones. It hates niceness and decency. You can not fight it with niceness and decency. You must attack with extreme prejudice. This is a war in every aspect.
This was what was lacking so much in the Hampstead Affair. The was no eye of tiger or the thrill of the fight. It was lets all be nice and civil, and polite. Damn! Where did I put my barf bag! Most people are not up to actually fighting for children and getting mean for children. That is why children are so readily taken in the UK.
Are you a nice person? Then you are the problem. A big problem. Do the kids a favor and go the hell home and stay out of this mess. Leave it to us who have the guts and courage to give this what is deserves. You see, the tough need support, not resistance. The nice people get in the way and screw things up by not being suspicious and mistrusting. In times of war, nice people suck! They are useless. They are afraid to kill. I speak metaphorically, but my anger is real.
In a fight such as this one, where 2 children are depending upon someone to have the guts and courage it takes to help them, they need someone with balls, and intensity. Someone who will shoot first and ask questions after. Someone who loves the smell of napalm in the morning, and relishes the kill. If you ever saw the movie, Highlander, with Christopher Lambert, that was an interesting movie. I liked it. When two warriors met to fight, the winner almost seemed like he was having an orgasm after killing his foe. That's the stuff. Psychotic anger, if you will.
Let me give you a Bible example. Israel is heading toward the promise land and was coming upon Moab. So the Moabites sent out their young women to seduce the young men soldiers of Israel. It worked like charm. 23,000 men fell for the generous women and died for it. But it gets better. One young man is so bold as to bring a Moabite woman right into the camp of the Israelites and God. So Phineas, grandson of Aaron, saw this appalling sight, and grabbed his sword and while the two were going at it, he drove the sword thru both their bellies. God stopped killing the young men and ceased His rage upon the camp, and delivered the message to Moses that the zeal of Phineas (also Phinehas) had turned back His rage from upon the whole camp because he would not tolerate any rivalry.
RSV) 10 And the LORD said to Moses,
11 "Phinehas the son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the people of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I did not consume the people of Israel in my jealousy."
God is intense. Godly servants are intense. In critical times, we all need to be intense. But weak soft people do not deserve the time of day. They are not up to the task or challenge. They want to go home and cry to mommy. If ya can't take the heat, then don't go near the kitchen.
Now you remember the heading, right? Who are you? Do you care? If you're not up to a fight, then you do NOT care. You are worthless to those who might need you, like the 2 children. Go home and stay home, please. Only the tough need to bother to show up.
I am going to declare that the biggest problem that plagued the Hampstead Conspiracy was weak soft people who did not look beyond their noses. They did not care that a few might be shills or saboteurs. They did not see why we were so concerned. But as the saying goes, If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. I refer to shills. Shills depend upon there being lots of stupid weak people who have no guts, courage, or brains.
When I sense shills, people who actually want to harm kids and defend child rapists, I have no mercy or compassion for them. I will confront and I will ban and banish. Why is that so tough? Oh, the poor shills. Fuck the kids, right? Well, that is your attitude and you know it, you who were not concerned about shills and blame those of us who are concerned about them. They may not be that much danger among us, but they rule the outside world and that is why 2 kids are now imprisoned and in solitary confinement.
I plan on there being a round 2, commencing in February 2016. I plan on a campaign for the USA in earnest. And I don't want anyone clogging up the machinery and being a bunch of pussies. If you don't like rough play, then stay the hell home. I want the world to know what happened to 2 children caught in a cult in Hampstead.
So let me cool down and state plainly that shills matter and they need to be sent packing, for the sake of harmony, honesty, and diligence. The Hampstead Affair was plagued by apathy regarding shills. In fact, shills seemed to run the most prominent blogs and facebook forums. And they were all New Age types, too. New Age believers, though they may not believe it, are duped by Satan, according to Mark Passio, a high raking Satanic priest at one time, appointed by Anton Lavey himself.
Oddly, some who called themselves Christians were happy to follow New Age Satanists. This, too, was a problem. One openly admitted to having a harrowing Kundalini Awakening, which to me is indicative of experiencing demonic influence. Not very impressive. As God said to Jehoshaphat regarding Ahab, "what sharing do righteousness and lawlessness have?" Answer? Absolutely None !!! So dear supposed Christians, if you have no more regard for God than to cling to New Age demon-possessed freaks from hell, then stay home and maybe you ought to switch to another religion. God will have no use for you. Do I make myself clear?
Now one other problem that I see/hear are claims of egos being the problem. I see claims of trying to prevent infighting and trying to "protect" people and to make a "safe" place for people. These are the exact same excuses that government make and that those trying to subvert society such as feminists who want to broaden language/definitions and distort it and reinvent it. Protect is not protect and make safe is not making safe.
Let me be perfectly clear! All adults are or should be, responsible for making their own decisions and choices and they should be able to protect themselves and if they are not being respected by someone, then ignore them. Grown adults do not need protection or for someone else to create a safe place for them. Those are all lies created by slave masters such as government leaders and Cult leaders, who want control over others and obedience from others and for others to do whatever they are told by cult leaders. If someone wants to protect you, run as fast as you can to get away. Jim Jones only wanted to protect his dear flock. So he forced them all to take cyanide. Is that what you want?
Yet I oddly find that when a forum or blog leader says they want to protect people or make them safe, no one objects, except me, which is why I usually end up on the outside of a group because I always question and argue with "bosses" of blogs and forums. Bosses love control, usually because they are shills. Otherwise, "bosses" try to avoid being cult leaders who demand unquestioning and undisputing obedience.
I never cease to marvel at how willing people are to give up all their rights and protections such as the right to question and even engage in dispute with a leader. And we are only talking about a stupid blog or forum, not our job/employers, or government leaders, who have much more power over us than a blog or forum owner or manager/ADMIN.
I was once a member of Jehovah's "so called" Witnesses (JWs). You could be a highly regarded prominent member or despised and shunned, all by the word of 3 or 4 men who sit in judgement and ownership of everyone in a church, which they call Kingdom Halls. In just one day, you could go from hero to zero and out in the cold. Why? Because JWs are told not to question elders since these are appointed by God, supposedly.
Now if enough people were to read this article, I know most would say, I would never go along with JWs on that sort of thing. That's outrageous. But I laugh. I watched so many people in this Hampstead Affair/Conspiracy do exactly the same as JWs and never question anything that a blogger or Admin might say or do, as if that Admin/blogger was a god. Humans love to be dumb blind sheep. FACT. They prove it every day and throughout all human history. They never fail. They never learn. They keep on doing the very same thing over and over and over again, time after time. It is the most frustrating aspect of humanity.
This is the real reason why the Hampstead crowd disintegrated and fractured into small pieces. Because very few people bother to carefully watch those in control of them in forums, blogs, and the like.
The main motivation of most people on earth is to fit in and belong. Nothing else matters, ever! And in trying to belong, they are quite willing to stay quiet and not make waves or ask questions or look deeper into things. They are afraid of what they might turn up. So they avoid looking. This is why I say you have to be tough and belligerent.
So I am going to quote from a well known quoted movie, called Network. I will quote a couple lines. "I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore!" AND "I am a human being, God damn it, and I have rights!" Most of the Hampstead failure can not say these lines. They are too traumatic and take too much personal strength and courage to say. Its much easier just to lay down and die. Humans have little to no courage and guts. That is why the species as a whole must be allowed to wither and die, with God preserving the few that show personal courage and are willing to take a stand for something. These, God will protect and deliver because they are willing to stand up on their own 2 feet and be strong.
Do Admins and bloggers control? If they have to approve a post or comment, then yes, they control. They are gate keeper and censors. If they have the power to judge disputes and ban or block people, then yes, they have control and can promote or ruin any movement with their "influence." Many "Hampsters" do not grasp this. They say, "Shills are harmless! Why bother with them?" Answer? Because they can demoralize a movement of well meaning people and send everyone running away. This happened at a facebook forum during the London protests of Mid March 2015. This forum just got running around Feb. 15, 2015. So in one month, the place got wiped out. ONE MONTH. How short our memories are! So this is not mere speculation. It is a proven FACT. Many people left that forum over that weekend of protest. Some never returned. Some come back only briefly. Many do not trust the forum. The Primary Admin in charge has sought out new members but they are not dedicated and seldom show up. The forum is in ruins, so to speak. In fact, another facebook forum now receives many of those refugees as it has more activity going for itself. It deals with Mind Control, Social Engineering and that sort of thing. A sort of Conspiracy channel, really.
2nd case! A Word Press blog exploded around July 11, 2015, as the Jean-Clement recordings were released without the consent of Abe/Ella by the blogger. There was a manifest duplicity shown by the blogger in seeming to favor both sides that erupted and divided against each other. The blogger alienated a large number of her followers over this deal, due to a perceived treachery. But most there had no clue to all the things I saw and witnessed prior to this. I was not surprised and confess I was delighted to see the kingdom of the new age witch crumble before her eyes. Up in smoke and flames.
Was this the intended result? I think it is quite possible in both the forum and the blog. Scatter and destroy. Now some cry and say its egos that did it. I say its not caring about shills and leaving them to fester that is the problem. No one wants to be confrontational, save a rare few. Some do go too far, but that is only 1-2 people. All the rest just stand there looking stupid, waiting for someone to do something for them.
Here is an interesting quote I saw just last night (Nov 17 015) on YouTube:
Does 'maybe' mean no?
"Bullshit artists get to keep spreading their bullshit if its unchallenged."
So I have given solid historical evidence of why finding shills before they have a chance to hurt, is important, even vital, and then drive them to hell out of town, so to speak. Those who say shills are not a problem, are ignoring the past, and in fact, are the problem themselves, and they should be considered shills as well. However, what I find is that in the case of the facebook forum, the shill was a co-founding member who volunteered and "outreached" to get in on it. Shills operate as full time activists and SJWs. I'll get to the evidence in a minute in the next section or so.
The blogger said she and her husband decided in Feb. 2015 to help by starting the blog, as the story goes. Hubby volunteered to take care of the housework so she could devote full time to the blog. I say that is total BS. I have lots of evidence to suggest she has been in "the business," just like the one in the above paragraph. She controls a YouTube channel that was started in 2009, not 2015. She has lots of sock puppets that were created in 2011-2012. She is a notorious sock puppet operator as far as I am concerned. The evidence is forthcoming. Again, she was in on the ground floor just as the movement started with the sudden appearance of the videos that took off like wild fire like around Feb 6 or so, I think, so it is said by some.
These are, I would suggest, full time professional SJWs lying in wait, to serve any cause directed by whoever it is that employs them. And I do believe they are employed. Exactly by who I could not begin to tell you. Governments and "non-profits" are the most likely sources. Funding is always secret as we learned earlier. Shills are always two steps ahead of us, the public at large. That's just how it is. Shill operatives are always looking for a new crisis to deflate and infiltrate. In the case of the blog, It started in Feb 2015 as the forum did, and died in July 2015, relatively speaking. She continued with her own website after threatening to quit. She had a small handful of her previous followers. Few ever had anything so say. It was a laugh to look in on. She has quit again, but I fear a comeback yet again. Hence, I write this article.
But in the meantime, I quietly watched, being confident that this blogger would give me ample proof of her contradictory nature and history. If you give anyone enough rope, they will usually come thru for you. She did not disappoint.
So now that we understand the biggest part of the problem confronting Alisa and Gabriel, the Hampstead 2, I want to get down to some specific problems. The proverbial elephant in the living room, that no one wants to talk about. Who dunnit? !
I am doing this because I want the USA crowd, who I intend to present the Hampstead case to, to be aware of what is likely to happen and who they might avoid trusting as reliable sources. As well, I do not know how severely the USA will react to this, if it catches on. The gang of conspiracy theorists in my neck of the woods need to be prepared for anything.
More Tactics Revealed
Back to Top
As I have been surfing the net, checking in on Youtube posts, I began to notice a trend with my comments and became aware of some more government shill tactics. And let me be clear that government shill operations are the biggest problem. I will show you what I mean. the following video is about Feminists fearing male sex toys.
TL;DR - CollectiveShout Don't Understand Sex Toys &
Here was my original post:
1 week later I ended up underneath 105 senseless comments of no seriousness or importance. Was this an accident, knowing that the US Army employs legions of "soldiers" to work as internet agents (typically called shills)? Honestly, I do not think so. Look at it this way. What better way to push a comment out of sight without deleting and banning it and looking bad. Just pile 105 comments in front of it and push it so far down, no one will ever see it. It works and it works well!
With lots of sock puppets on call amongst the army shill work force, they can astroturf anything and make good comments and ideas disappear in sea of mindless crap.
As well, the first posters get the best chance of being seen and responded to. After 10 posts or so, good comments quickly fade. And shills can target specific posts and quickly render them buried out of sight. Comments are not likely to be seen if they are serious and threaten the status quo. They will be attacked.
It is my conclusion that commenting about serious subject matter is a waste of time. I also conclude that "crusader" types who care about their fellow citizens will not be allowed a voice, just as it is in the mainstream media. So we can not win that way. How can we win? But not letting shills have a voice, either!
Disable Youtube commenting. Do not let the bastards have a single word posted. Let the video speak for itself. Take the 2 Hampstead kids, Alisa and Gabriel, for instance. If their full presence, including eyes, faces and unmodified voices are left untouched, the kids speak very convincingly for themselves. And don't think the enemies don't know that. Why do you think those videos get banned and deleted all over youtube? Because they are VERY effective. They do the job all by themselves. Abraham had the good sense to record it all, often as close up as he could get. Let the faces and voices do the rest. The kids are stars. Please let them shine.
No accolade cheers in comments will add anything to the stellar testimony of 2 children wanting so much to have an end to the misery they endured in school every day. Go listen to Alisa describing the "sex" she had to endure every day after mom drove away in her car or if she walked away, in Alisa's first police interview. No need for any comments. Just sober graphic horror to digest.
Shills have made commenting pretty much worthless. By contrast, the Xendrius channel on Youtube has had over 49 million views/visits. He struck a nerve with footage existing on other channels but which channels did not recognize things in those videos that Xendrius did. His work speaks for itself, as it does with the 2 kids. Let this be a lesson going forth. Videos only and no comments.
I run my own website. No posting available. I am the only one allowed to be heard thru text and pictures or links. My site is primarily for deep study, though much of it is easily grasped. The long length of the articles often is what discourages. Most people do not like effort and I can't help that. I may try to splinter subjects into small packed units that might get more consideration. But at the same time, people must learn to develop some focus and concentration along with some perseverance. We are not used to that in our society. We have short attention spans now and that is not a good thing.
Look at it this way. Our video makes an impact. Do we let shills sabotage that? Does the Mainstream media let truthers inject their views? NO! Then shills don't deserve it either. Silence the enemy.
I also recommend avoiding "free" services like wordpress or even youtube exclusively. Put your videos on Vimeo as well. Maintain a website in addition to wordpress. When you start an account with wordpress, you are subject to their rules and those are bound to get much more severe and restrictive if recent activity of extreme feminism and racism continues to get worse.
Another problem I find on youtube and facebook is sock puppets and astroturfing. I know that some are concerned with privacy. But that can still go to far or far more than is necessary for reasonable security. Now one could say, whether under 5 names or 1, does it matter if is is always my same opinions and ideas? Well, no and yes. 5 names presenting the same thing is not a problem, but it may put one in a bad light or make others suspicious that someone is trying too hard to hide too much. 2nd, if all those ideas spread out in 5 names were joined into one common name, you now have what the advertising industry calls "branding." I think Branding is a very good thing and an honest thing as well. Truth in advertising. If your comments are good, your brand and reputation will be good. Make a jackass of yourself and your brand will suffer.
I have always sought to maintain one brand, one ID. Truth1 is my preferred ID since it points back to my site. My real name is fine on facebook. I used my email name for wordpress. Tween the three, I have a brand. People know what to expect from those. But as I see it, honesty is good policy. Using multiple IDs? That is what Mind Control programmers create. Multiple personalities in one mind/body. Each conceals secrecy and lies. Are you a fractured mind? Or whole, integrated, and honest?
To present ourselves as something other than what we are, is a lie and pretense. Note below. A company used lots of phony IDs (sock puppets) to make good reviews for their products/services. Its against the law for one. It is very dishonest and immoral. It also cost the company $350,000 in fines.
If we are defending two children and care about their cause, then we do not want to hurt the credibility of the cause by using phony IDs to create a false illusion. We don't need numbers. This is especially so for Christians, who are supposed to rely on God for victory and not numbers or politics. It is my experience on the net that usually, its dirt bags and scum that love to astroturf. The Hampstead Satanic Cult loves to astroturf with multiple accounts.
I look at it this way. I do not want to be seen behaving like my enemies. I want to stand out as different and better than my enemies. If I stoop to the same low as my enemies, then I am no better than my enemies. That is something I can not live with or accept. I want to be beyond reproach.
Now some have several IDs per service, like Youtube, and facebook. Some do not imagine they are fooling anyone and used the names more as a way to parody someone. I can't judge these and some are entertaining. It also prevents direct identification of the real person, which does have a little merit in some circumstances. But still I caution to use as few IDs as possible. It is part of conducting one's self in an upright manner that reflects on our cause well. Astroturfing is a lie at heart and the devil is the father of the lie and the devil/Satan, is the one ultimately responsible for 2 children being in prison and pretty much in solitary confinement with just each other. You don't want to be like the devil, do you? I hope not.
Anyone seeking to support Alisa and Gabriel should avoid too much concealment and deception in ID. Astroturfing is uncalled for and not needed at all. We can do better. God can furnish what we can not overcome. Don't believe in God? Well, its your choice but I warn all people, so that my own hands might be cleansed of any blood, that there are, really and truly, and not exaggerated in the least, only 2 options, ultimately. There is God, or there is the devil. If you choose God, that is fine. You can be protected by Him as you fight Satan. But if you choose any other way, by default, you choose Satan, because he is the rebel against God, who created many multiple paths and choices. But that is going to change and then Satan will demand that all choices except God, will have to all do things the exact same way.
All will have to rape children, sacrifice people, eating their flesh and drinking their blood. No, I am not kidding and Yes, I am dead serious. So with just those two choices, I'd strongly recommend God, as He respects life and children and demands love, kindness and mercy, not rape, torture, insults and sacrifices of people.
Coming up in separate articles, related to this article, are:
1. a critique of Hampstead Research, who appears to be the main cause of the most destructive effects on the entire movement of the Hampstead Conspiracy/Coverup.
2. The war against men waged by Satan and his earthly generals down here. Involved in this war are Feminists, MGTOW, MRAs, SJWs, Race, and Immigration. And shills lead the way in this one.
3. Mandatory Government Schooling for all children. The most important institution for programming kids to accept all of the above. Universities get roasted as well. Most people blame entertainment for most programming, along with TV. I am going to dispute that with fanatic passion, closely attached to facts.
This article you have just read, shows how the internet is one of the substantial ways to create a false reality and mislead by using shills employed by government militaries as well as a few "altruistic" non-profit foundations and organizations. This is the web Satan has weaved over us to fool us. It is the final frontier, so to speak.
Back to Top