Forwarded from Ali Zeck
My account isn’t a deep dive into topics like others are that do a lot of research, but even then, it’s still quite easy to find information on Musk and his parents and lineage.
And then you just observe.
And when you take not a narrow view of him, not just the reductionist view of the guy that came to liberate Twitter, but you pan out and take a very broad one and look at his entire life, all of his holdings, his friendships, his parents, his quotes, his business developments…then you can see it all. You can see the common theme.
Or you can’t.
Either way…it’s still happening.
And then you just observe.
And when you take not a narrow view of him, not just the reductionist view of the guy that came to liberate Twitter, but you pan out and take a very broad one and look at his entire life, all of his holdings, his friendships, his parents, his quotes, his business developments…then you can see it all. You can see the common theme.
Or you can’t.
Either way…it’s still happening.
🔥34👍18❤1
Dark agendas are real. Dark people are real. But my god, some of these “truther” accounts have become absolutely ridiculous with their level of delusional, self-righteous, conjecture-based paranoia in calling virtually anyone that simply disagrees with them on one or two things controlled opposition. Taking one picture out of context, one statement out of context, one past mistake, running someone’s pet ferret’s name through an online gematria calculator, seeing “symbolism” where there clearly isn’t, asserting that someone is something based on literally no knowledge of their life. I’m convinced the most pervasive and effective elements of controlled op are those who constantly call others controlled op based on literally zero real evidence of it.
I get it— I get the paranoia. I’ve been there. There was a period in early 2021 when I didn’t wanna talk with/associate with anyone because I was so paranoid that anyone around me could be co-opted. It was honestly pretty debilitating.
My approach now? I do me. I focus on my message. I don’t need to attack the individuals I *believe* are controlled, because I can simply just attack the misunderstandings that they spew instead, helping others focus on learning the material rather than wasting energy on the one saying it. When people are attuned to the truth of a given topic, they will simply just tune out those who aren’t speaking it.
I have my thoughts on some people, but I generally keep my thoughts to myself unless there is repeated, undeniably questionable things that someone says/does that they won’t allow people to question them about, or if there is someone that I’ve personally had multiple sketchy experiences with.
If you’re certain of something (like, really certain— let’s say it’s something that really is true) and someone else is preaching something opposite of it, more often than not they simply just haven’t broken through their own conditioning. We all have it, and we’d be super fucking naive to think that we don’t. This is why I always try to approach those I disagree with to have a conversation with them, like… I don’t know… a human being trying to help a human being would do? Idk. Maybe I’m different.
Differentiating between controlled op and conditioning requires discernment. Do you have it?
Just my thoughts. Take it or leave it. Or run it through an online gematria calculator and assert your self-righteousness or something 🥴
Another addition— the ones who are constantly attacking others and calling others controlled op are usually those who are too afraid to acknowledge or look at something within themselves… and to be clear, again, I say this while acknowledging there are real elements of controlled op. Again— discernment.
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
-Matthew 7:3-5
I get it— I get the paranoia. I’ve been there. There was a period in early 2021 when I didn’t wanna talk with/associate with anyone because I was so paranoid that anyone around me could be co-opted. It was honestly pretty debilitating.
My approach now? I do me. I focus on my message. I don’t need to attack the individuals I *believe* are controlled, because I can simply just attack the misunderstandings that they spew instead, helping others focus on learning the material rather than wasting energy on the one saying it. When people are attuned to the truth of a given topic, they will simply just tune out those who aren’t speaking it.
I have my thoughts on some people, but I generally keep my thoughts to myself unless there is repeated, undeniably questionable things that someone says/does that they won’t allow people to question them about, or if there is someone that I’ve personally had multiple sketchy experiences with.
If you’re certain of something (like, really certain— let’s say it’s something that really is true) and someone else is preaching something opposite of it, more often than not they simply just haven’t broken through their own conditioning. We all have it, and we’d be super fucking naive to think that we don’t. This is why I always try to approach those I disagree with to have a conversation with them, like… I don’t know… a human being trying to help a human being would do? Idk. Maybe I’m different.
Differentiating between controlled op and conditioning requires discernment. Do you have it?
Just my thoughts. Take it or leave it. Or run it through an online gematria calculator and assert your self-righteousness or something 🥴
Another addition— the ones who are constantly attacking others and calling others controlled op are usually those who are too afraid to acknowledge or look at something within themselves… and to be clear, again, I say this while acknowledging there are real elements of controlled op. Again— discernment.
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
-Matthew 7:3-5
❤48👍22🔥14
One man I am personally very skeptical of is Elon Musk (short for Elongated Muskrat, probably).
Starlink, heavily invested in the internet of things and the internet of bodies, neuralink, faux-green movement, openly transhumanistic, openly pro-vax, WEF young global leader, to round out a few reasons why.
It’ll be interesting to see who exactly he reinstates on Twitter, but even more interesting to see who he *doesn’t* reinstate... use discernment.
Starlink, heavily invested in the internet of things and the internet of bodies, neuralink, faux-green movement, openly transhumanistic, openly pro-vax, WEF young global leader, to round out a few reasons why.
It’ll be interesting to see who exactly he reinstates on Twitter, but even more interesting to see who he *doesn’t* reinstate... use discernment.
👍56💯30
I’m open to being wrong. And that would require that you show me proof of a 🦠 that strictly adheres to the scientific method.
Not proof:
—pointing to symptoms of disease, even when experienced amongst multiple people. This is an affirming the consequent logical fallacy. You first need to show X exists to say it causes Y.
—a paper claiming “virus isolation” that doesn’t adhere to the scientific method, is riddled with assumptions, and follows an isolation protocol that is so ass backwards a kindergartener could explain why it doesn’t make sense.
—electron micrograph images post-cell culture isolation. Electron microscopy’s preparation methods negate the significance of the results, but especially so when the results are from multiple things combined on a monkey kidney cell with multiple assumptions.
—an expert opinion. Appeal to authority.
—talking about the characteristics of this supposed 🦠. That’s a reification fallacy.
—saying “where’s your proof there isn’t a 🦠?” That’s a burden of proof reversal fallacy.
Not proof:
—pointing to symptoms of disease, even when experienced amongst multiple people. This is an affirming the consequent logical fallacy. You first need to show X exists to say it causes Y.
—a paper claiming “virus isolation” that doesn’t adhere to the scientific method, is riddled with assumptions, and follows an isolation protocol that is so ass backwards a kindergartener could explain why it doesn’t make sense.
—electron micrograph images post-cell culture isolation. Electron microscopy’s preparation methods negate the significance of the results, but especially so when the results are from multiple things combined on a monkey kidney cell with multiple assumptions.
—an expert opinion. Appeal to authority.
—talking about the characteristics of this supposed 🦠. That’s a reification fallacy.
—saying “where’s your proof there isn’t a 🦠?” That’s a burden of proof reversal fallacy.
👍50🔥13👏8💯6❤5
Being a “free-thinker” doesn’t mean blindly parroting whatever the most popular alternative talking point is. It means that you’re willing to look at the spectrum of available information on any given topic and filter it through logic, your own observations, experiences, research, and intuition and form your own perspective on the topic. If your perspective happens to line up with the prevailing alternative talking points, great. If it doesn’t, great. That’s “free thinking.”
I see too many people calling themselves “free-thinkers” when they literally just spout whatever the most popular alternative pundit says, verbatim, all while failing to actually contemplate the issue for themselves.
I see too many people calling themselves “free-thinkers” when they literally just spout whatever the most popular alternative pundit says, verbatim, all while failing to actually contemplate the issue for themselves.
🔥34👍19🙏5👏1
Christine here. I’ll be hosting a voice chat again tomorrow, November 1st at 3pm Pacific, 5pm Central, 6pm Eastern or whatever time it converts to in your time zone. For those who haven’t attended one before they’re an informal chance to say hi, connect, acknowledge where we’re at and explore whatever topics or themes feels most relevant for us. The banner at the top of the channel shows the countdown to it and you can click on that banner at the time of to join. Looking forward to it.
👍6
In light of the big push for the gain of function/lab leak narrative, and because it’s important we dispel the myth of viruses altogether, I’m in the middle of building a virtual summit covering every piece of the official COVID narrative from a TERRAIN perspective.
What are some topics you’d like to see covered? What are some genuine questions you still have regarding everything that’s happened?
Let me know in the comments 👇
What are some topics you’d like to see covered? What are some genuine questions you still have regarding everything that’s happened?
Let me know in the comments 👇
👍23❤11
Christine here. The voice chat I’m hosting is starting in 5min. You can click on the banner at the top of the channel to join. For those who haven’t attended one before they’re an informal chance to say hi, connect, acknowledge where we’re at and explore whatever topics or themes feels most relevant for us today.