this shirt was for sale 5 days ago on the same day Kylie Irving of the Cleveland Cavaliers basketball team brought it up. hmmmmm…profitting or planting a Meme?
Conspiracy theories can even run wild in the NBA. Earlier this month, Cleveland Cavaliers player Kyrie Irving outed himself as a flat Earth truther. Then, on last Wednesday, teammate Richard Jefferson appeared wearing a shirt that read “Flat World .
I just saw this from Lefty gatekeeper Bill Maher bringing up Flat Earth. This is a huge psyops, not popularity opinion to sell ads but to create conflictual natures like LBGT and #Black Lives Matter to seed conflict amongst the sheeple. Their just feeding the Flat Earth Debate or you would not hear about it on TV…just like the end of the protests at the North Dakota…it’s over and no one even reported it. they are putting the FE topic to divide and conquer, pure and simple but the cat is officially out of the bag and 2017 is the Year of the Flat Earth Awakening!
Seth MacFarlane’s family guy perfectly predicted Robin Williams “suicide” one year before the event and was pulled at the last minute from boarding the 9/11 plane out of Boston, he is also known for his animation, including “I am a Weasel”…
also note the link between Flat Earth and climate change …..again…all a set up, but hey, heads are turning and there is no such thing as bad publicity, right?
And check out the manufactured cover look about Flat Earth…talk about body language and implanted memes to the masses!!
~ Prediction: Within one year, you will also be required to be vaccinated to travel
We had already been through boarding pass checks, passport checks, scanners, and pat downs. At the gate, each passenger had already had their tickets scanned and we were all walking on the jet bridge to board. It’s at this point that most people assume that it is all done: finally we can enjoy some sense of normalcy.
This time was different. Halfway down the jetbridge, there was a new layer of security. Two US Marshals, heavily armed and dressed in dystopian-style black regalia, stood next to an upright machine with a glowing green eye. Every passenger, one by one, was told to step on a mat and look into the green scanner. It was scanning our eyes and matching that scan with the passport, which was also scanned (yet again).
Like everyone else, I complied. What was my choice? I guess I could have turned back at the point, decline to take the flight I had paid for, but it would be unclear what would then happen. After standing there for perhaps 8 seconds, the machine gave the go signal and I boarded.
I talked to a few passengers about this and others were just as shaken by the experience. They were reticent even to talk about it, as people tend to be when confronted with something like this.
I couldn’t find anyone who had ever seen something like this before. I wrote friends who travel internationally and none said they had ever seen anything like this.
I will tell you how it made me feel: like a prisoner in my own country. It’s one thing to control who comes into a country. But surveilling and permissioning American citizens as they leave their own country, even as they are about to board, is something else.
Where is the toggle switch that would have told the machine not to let me board, and who controls it? How prone is it to bureaucratic error? What happens to my scan now and who has access to it?
The scene reminded me of movies I’ve seen, like Hunger Games or 1984. It’s chilling and strange, even deeply alarming to anyone who has ever dreamed of what freedom might be like. It doesn’t look like this.
I’ve searched the web for some evidence that this new practice has been going on for a while and I just didn’t notice. I find nothing about it. I’ve looked to find some new order, maybe leftover from the Obama administration, that is just now being implemented. But I find nothing.
Update: a reader has pointed me to this page at Homeland Security:
As part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) border security mission, the agency is deploying new technologies to verify travelers’ identities – both when they arrive and when they leave the United States – by matching a traveler to the document they are presenting. CBP’s goal is to enhance national security and protect a traveler’s identity against theft through the use of biometrics.
Biometric information (such as finger, face, or iris) measures a person’s unique physical characteristics. CBP incorporated fingerprints for biometric identification and verification in 2004, and is now testing facial and iris imaging capabilities to help improve travelers’ identity protection, the integrity of our immigration system, and our national security.
I happened to be on the “one daily flight” that gets exit scanned.
Another change has to do with new rules for Homeland Security just imposed by the Trump administration. They make deportation vastly easier for the government. I have no idea if these rules are the culprit for intensified emigration checks.
What people don’t often consider is that every rule that pertains to immigration ultimately applies to emigration as well. Every rule that government has to treat immigrants a certain way also necessarily applies to citizens as well.
Chandran Kukathas is right when he says that “controlling immigration means controlling everyone.”
Regulating immigration is not just about how people arrive, but about what they do once they have entered a country. It is about controlling how long people stay, where they travel, and what they do. Most of all, it means controlling whether or not and for whom they work (paid or unpaid), what they accept in financial remuneration, and what they must do to remain in employment, for as long as that is permitted. Yet this is not possible without controlling citizens and existing residents, who must be regulated, monitored and policed to make sure that they comply with immigration laws.
To be sure, there might have been some tip off that security officials received that triggered these special measures for this flight only. Maybe they were looking for something, someone, in particular. Maybe this was a one-time thing and will not become routine.
The point is that it happened without any change in the laws or regulations. Whatever the reason, it was some decision made by security. It can happen on any flight for any reason. And who is in charge of making that decision?
On the plane, finally, my mind raced through the deeper history here. Passports as we know them are only a little over a century old. In the late 19th century, the apotheosis of the liberal age, there were no passports. You could travel anywhere in the world through whatever means you could find. Nationalism unleashed by World War I ended that.
And here we are today, with ever more controls, seeming to follow Orwell’s blueprint for how to end whatever practical freedoms we have left. And we are going this way despite the absence of any real crisis, any imminent threat? The driving force seems to be this: our own government’s desire to control every aspect of our lives.
Think of it: there might be no getting out of the country without subjecting yourself to this process. It’s a digital Berlin Wall. This is what it means to put “security” ahead of freedom: you get neither.
Last week, privacy advocate and blogger Jeffrey Tucker posted his experience before a flight from Atlanta to Mexico:
Halfway down the jetbridge, there was a new layer of security. Two US Marshals, heavily armed and dressed in dystopian-style black regalia, stood next to an upright machine with a glowing green eye. Every passenger, one by one, was told to step on a mat and look into the green scanner. It was scanning our eyes and matching that scan with the passport, which was also scanned (yet again).
Baal Ball Earth
Paradox pair of Ox
A Lie N’ aliens
Tell Lie Vision Television
Be Lie ve Belief Believe
Scripture Your Script
Egypt got gypted
Isis Sissy backwards
System sissy stem
Hores Meet Horse meat
Convergence On the Verge of a Con
Conspiracy Cons Piracy
Hospital Ho’ spit ALL
Lincoln Lie and Con
Xmas X miss
Mossad More sad
Maritime Roman Law
Judges have a Masonic hammer or gavel which they hit to declare the word of Law. The idea of law comes from the biblical ten stone commandments and so it is said that you “break” the law. Judges always sit on a three-tier high platform representing the first three blue degrees of freemasonry.
The same tritier platform is found at Congress, and the altar in most Catholic and Protestant churches is three tiers high. That’s also why you get/give someone the “third degree” related to the third degree of Masonry where the initiate is asked a series of probing questions he must answer correctly in order to become a Master Mason.
There is usually a gate around church altars just as there are gates with swinging doors in every courtroom. The congregations at church all stand up to recognize the priest, just as all rise when the judge walks in.
Then the judge takes a “recess” because he is in “court” playing a game of “ten”nis (commandments), with lawyers who play the dialectic protagonist/antagonist game, bouncing the advantage into each other’s court. In the courtroom witnesses must place their hand on the old/new “testament” before giving their “testimony,” just as a priest’s sermon is often called testimony (also notice “mon” from “moon” in testimony and sermon).
As a witness swears in, one hand is placed on the bible while the other is held up; In church, when parishioners feel the holy spirit, often during song, they will hold one or both hands up to praise the lord.
“Then when you get further into Saturn, you begin to understand that his color is black, that he was a God of one of the many different Semitic tribes, or groups, and one of his symbols was a square. Then you get into the square black mortarboard that the university or high school students wear when they graduate.
When you graduate from high school you come out processionally with a black robe, which is black for Saffron, the God of the Hebrews, requiring that you wear the square mortarboard on top of your head.
The square mortarboards are, of course, used by the Freemasons for their plaster, so that is why you wear a square mortarboard when you graduate, ultimately becoming an Alumni. It all has to do with Freemasonry; it all has to do with the control of education in this country.”
It is a square on his head, and it is usually black. The color of Saturn, one of the ancient Hebrew Gods. This is the same black used on the robe the judge wears when he is going to throw you in jail. Because the black represents Saturn. Saturn is the old Semitic God.
That is why churches and courtrooms look the same today, because when you go into churches you sit out here with the poor folks in the chairs out here in the pews, but you cannot go up onto the lifted higher elevation, you can’t go inside the gate, you can’t go inside the little doors, only the priest can go inside there and officiate for you.
You stay on the outside with the poor folks. The altar is always raised at least three tiers, because in Egypt that was the way it was always done.
The altar was always raised so the people could see the representative of God dressed in black. The priest comes out on the altar dressed in blac, and he is officiating for you, he is the mediator between you and God. That is the same thing that happens in the courtroom, you walk in and you are part of the poor folks sitting out here in the audience, and here is the fence, or gate, that separates you.
The attorneys can go inside the gate and they are your mouthpiece, to go talk to ‘God’ for you and see if they can get you off, and the lawyers will be the mediator between ‘God,’ or the ‘judge’ who judges you, and man. That is where all of this comes from in our society today.”
~ Jordan Maxwell, “Matrix of Power
In addition, when we go into court we have a “hearing” and present “oral” arguments to “plead” our case. The spoken word over the written word.
Deaf Phoenician = Definition
Imagine what this could be used for.
The technology comes out of a collaborative effort between Germany’s University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, the Max-Planck Institute for Informatics, and Stanford University in California. The incredible technology has already being tested on George W Bush, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, and Vladimir Putin.
The study, Face2Face: Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment of RGB Videos, “animates the facial expressions of the target video by a source actor and re-renders the manipulated output video in a photo-realistic fashion,” according to the researchers.
The way the technology works can be explained simply, it tracks the facial expressions of both the source and target video and addresses details like teeth by finding the mouth interior that best matches the re-targeted expression and warping it to produce the right fit.
Do you think this technology is safe to have? Given the implications of what this could be used for with the proper voice tone recreation technologies out there, couldn’t this make anyone say anything someone wanted?
This technology is decades old, as is cloning
Perhaps the greatest polo player ever, Adolfo Cambiaso is planning to compete on a pony that died nearly a decade ago—a clone of his beloved stallion Aiken Cura. With more than 25 replicas of champion horses now in existence, Haley Cohen explores how the science came to polo.
Just before the JKF, RFK, MLK looooooooooooooooooooone gunman assassinations….how convenient!
In 1967, the CIA Created the Label “Conspiracy Theorists” … to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the “Official” Narrative
Conspiracy Theorists USED TO Be Accepted As Normal
Democracy and free market capitalism were founded on conspiracy theories.
The Magna Carta, the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and other founding Western documents were based on conspiracy theories. Greek democracy and free market capitalism were also based on conspiracy theories.
But those were the bad old days …Things have now changed.
The CIA Coined the Term Conspiracy Theorist In 1967
That all changed in the 1960s.
Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories. The dispatch was marked “psych” – short for “psychological operations” or disinformation – and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.
The dispatch was produced in responses to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times in 1976.
The dispatch states:
2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.
3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by … propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:
a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider.
b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent–and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) …
c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc.
d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other.
f. As to charges that the Commission’s report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.
g. Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” can always be explained in some natural way ….
5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission’s Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.
Here are screenshots of part of the memo: