Setting the Stage For ULTRA MAGA Comms - The Great Awakening

▲ 3 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 3 points 2 years ago +3 / -0

u/dty6 u/lonewulf u/sleepydude

READ DECODE BLOG'S POST FIRST

https://decodingsymbols.wordpress.com/2022/06/30/mos-cia-compare-contrast/

(Very interesting post)

03/26/1979 Israel and Egypt Peace treaty in DC BEGINNING OF MASSIVE ISRAEL & Egypt FOREIGN AID

Three Mile Island = TMI = Too Much Information

Read to the bottom when he gets to decoding the new Q posts. Very interesting stuff.

Anyway, to get into the new posts note the discussion of Jane Roe, and abortions.

I decoded that in my last post as it relates to likely an ending to MK ops. Abortion symbolizing adults who have children they want to abort and then sell them to the 666 as sacrifices. Abortions is the tamest way to describe what happens there and understandable why it would be chosen as a symbol as it rolls off the tongue a lot better than child sacrifice to create murders.

No wonder we get articles like this:

https://www.yahoo.com/video/jane-roe-daughter-says-she-170307366.html

The daughter of the woman at the centre of Roe v Wade has said that she is “devastated” by the Supreme Court’s ruling which has now undone all her mother’s “hard work” and “sacrificing” that led to the legalisation of abortion in America five decades ago.

Note the air quotes around "sacrificing".

Texas was one of 13 states with a trigger law in place ready to go into place as soon as Roe was overturned.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/6/satanists-sue-for-religious-right-to-ritual-aborti/

“[On Feb. 23, 2021] The Satanic Temple [of Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston] filed a lawsuit against the State of Texas alleging certain state-mandated abortion regulations violate the religious liberty of its members … [and] violate the temple’s religious teachings. The Satanic Temple … wants its followers to be exempt from such regulations. The temple has members across the country, including in Texas.”

Mr. Greaves goes further: “The ritual goes like this: Before the abortion takes place … a member of The Satanic Temple will look at her reflection, be reminded of her personhood and responsibility to herself, take deep breaths, focus on her intent and make herself comfortable. When ready, she will say the third and fifth tenet of the temple aloud.”

Read Q post #4552

Why would [D]s block a bill that stops infanticide [allow ABORTIONs up to point of birth] and does not provide new restrictions on ABORTION itself? How is taxpayer funded [PP] allowed to donate [large sums] of taxpayer funds to select members of [D] party? Is this about a woman's right to choose OR SOMETHING ELSE?

Does an aborted child exist? Can the mother pretend the child didn't exist?

What if the child wasn't even killed (yet)? But given away and sold away. You can't sell a baby once it's born and has a birth certificate. A child born at 9 months but "aborted" never existed.

You see them passing lies and trying to claim that doctors would force women to keep "ectopic" pregnancies (which are 100% lethal to child and mother). No doctor will ever do that. It's a death sentence. The MSM spreading lies. They're in a panic.

https://www.vogue.in/culture-and-living/gallery/45-celebrities-who-have-had-abortions-and-spoken-out-about-them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_selling

The libertarian US economist Murray Rothbard (1926–1995) wrote in his book Ethics of Liberty, that parents should have the right to put a child out for adoption or sell the rights to the child in a voluntary contract. Rothbard suggested selling children as consumer goods in accordance with market forces, would benefit "everyone" involved in the market: "the natural parents, the children, and the foster parents.[32] In Rothbard's view, "the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights." Thus, parents should have the legal right to let any infant die by starvation. However, since "the purely free society will have a flourishing free market in children" he wrote, "the existence of a free baby market will bring such 'neglect' down to a minimum".[32]

Lawrence Stone reported some attempted sales of children accompanying wives sold by husbands to new husbands, one in 1815 and another discussed in 1763.[35] (Wife sale in England was illegal but believed to be lawful and widely practiced in southern England and the Midlands.

Child selling is old.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/who-buys-sells-and-uses-fetal-tissue-acquired-from-abortion-clinics/

Fetal tissue can be used only with the consent of the woman having an abortion. Some researchers receive the tissue from abortion clinics at their own institutions, or from tissue banks maintained by some universities. Many buy the tissue from companies that act as middlemen. Those companies pay small fees, usually $100 or less a specimen, to abortion providers like Planned Parenthood, who say they charge only what they need to cover their expenses. The companies then process the tissue and sell it to researchers for higher prices that reflect the processing.

It's not really regulated.

This wasn't quite the post I wanted to make. I had a different one, but I'll continue this in a separate post about that topic.

permalink save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

u/dty6 u/lonewulf u/sleepydude

JAWS symbolism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaws_(film)

Shot mostly on location on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, Jaws was the first major motion picture to be shot on the ocean, and consequently had a troubled production,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha%27s_Vineyard

Martha's Vineyard (Wampanoag: Noepe; often simply called the Vineyard)[2] is an island located south of Cape Cod in Massachusetts in the United States in North America that is known for being a popular, affluent summer colony. Martha's Vineyard includes the smaller adjacent Chappaquiddick Island, which is usually connected to the Vineyard.

The Vineyard was home to one of the earliest known deaf communities in the United States; consequently, a sign language, the Martha's Vineyard Sign Language, emerged on the island among both deaf and hearing islanders.

The island received international notoriety after the "Chappaquiddick incident" of July 18, 1969, in which Mary Jo Kopechne was killed in a car driven off the Dike Bridge by U.S. Senator Edward "Ted" Kennedy. The bridge crossed Poucha Pond on Chappaquiddick Island (a smaller island formerly connected to the Vineyard and part of Edgartown).

In 1974, Steven Spielberg filmed the movie Jaws on Martha's Vineyard, most notably in the fishing village of Menemsha and the town of Chilmark. Spielberg selected island natives Christopher Rebello as Chief Brody's oldest son, Michael Brody; Jay Mello as the younger son, Sean Brody; and Lee Fierro as Mrs. Kintner.[41] Scores of other island natives appeared in the film as extras. Later, scenes from Jaws 2 and Jaws: The Revenge were filmed on the island, as well. In June 2005 the island celebrated the 30th anniversary of Jaws with a weekend-long Jawsfest.[42]

Why do presidents like to go there?

Since the 1990s, Bill Clinton spent regular vacation time on the island during and after his presidency, along with his wife, Hillary Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea. Clinton was not the first president to visit the islands; Ulysses S. Grant visited the vacation residence of his friend, Bishop Gilbert Haven on August 24, 1874. As a coincidental footnote in history, Bishop Haven's gingerbread cottage was located in Oak Bluffs at 10 Clinton Avenue. The avenue was named in 1851 and was designated as the main promenade of the Martha's Vineyard Campmeeting Association campgrounds.[46] On August 23, 2009, Barack Obama arrived in Chilmark with his family for a week's vacation at a rental property known as Blue Heron Farm.[47] In December 2019, President Barack Obama completed the purchase of a 30-acre (12 ha) homestead on the Edgartown Great Pond.

Why do so many die there?

On July 16, 1999, a small plane crashed off the coast of Martha's Vineyard, claiming the lives of pilot John F. Kennedy Jr., his wife Carolyn Bessette and her sister Lauren Bessette. Kennedy's mother, former U.S. first lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, maintained a home in Aquinnah (formerly "Gay Head") until her death in 1994.

No one hears anything there.

Martha's Vineyard was known as an "everyone signed" community for several hundred years,[53] and many deaf people view Martha's Vineyard as a utopia.[54] A high rate of hereditary deafness was documented on Martha's Vineyard for almost two centuries. The island's deaf heritage cannot be traced to one common ancestor and is thought to have originated in the Weald, a region that overlaps the borders of the English counties of Kent and Sussex, prior to immigration. Researcher Nora Groce estimates that by the late 19th century, 1 in 155 people on the Vineyard was born deaf (0.7 percent), about 37 times the estimate for the nation at large (1 in 5,728, or 0.02 percent),[53] because of a "recessive pattern" of genetic deafness, circulated through endogamous marriage patterns

Cape cod is famous for THIS story:

Cape Cod has been the home of the indigenous Wampanoag for centuries prior to European colonization. They lived from the sea and were accomplished farmers. They understood the principles of sustainable forest management,[citation needed] and were known to light controlled fires to keep the underbrush in check. They helped the Pilgrims, who arrived in the fall of 1620, survive at their new Plymouth Colony.

Cape Cod was among the first places settled by Puritan colonists in North America.

Maybe what we've been taught about the "Puritans" is not who they really were:

In the early 17th century, thousands of English Puritans colonized North America, mainly in New England.

17th century? The 17 is often used to symbolize when the "narrative" is not the real story.

Did the Cult send out colonies?

https://listverse.com/2018/05/19/10-horrifying-ways-americas-puritans-persecuted-the-quakers/

After Fisher and Austin left, the Puritans didn’t get any nicer to the Quakers. As far as they were concerned, the Quakers who were starting to visit America were a threat to their religion. They saw them, as one Puritan put it, as “instruments for propagating the kingdom of Satan,” and they weren’t going to put up with them

Why were they so threatened?

Quaker women weren’t just beaten and imprisoned. The Puritans turned abusing Quakers into a weirdly sexual display. They would strip them naked down to the waist and parade them through the town, whipping their backs as they went.

Puritan laws only became harsher. From 1656 on, every male Quaker caught in Massachusetts was to have his right ear cut off. If they came back, they’d lose the other ear. And if they came back again, they would have their tongues bored through with a red-hot iron.

Puritans sound like sociopaths. Just like in Haiti they tried to make a place where "they wouldn't be judged for their brutality" they seemed to have tried to create other places.

They'd bring a flock of "sheep" (the malleable to do the work) and then try to practice their brutality under the name of "God".

Quakers were a threat to their practice.

The Puritans got fed up. On July 17, 1658, they dragged Holder and Copeland to prison and chopped off both men’s right ears.[4] They were kept in prison, where they were brutally and repeatedly whipped on a set schedule for nine weeks straight. Then, finally, they were forcibly sent back to England.

The greatest refuge for Quakers in the New World, though, was Rhode Island. It was the one place in America that refused to persecute them for their faith. As the Puritans chased more and more of them from their colonies, more and more Quakers found themselves hiding in the protection of Rhode Island—and that made the Puritans furious.

The Puritans of New England threatened the Colony of Rhode Island, telling them that they would cut off all communication and trade if they didn’t start torturing, exiling, and executing Quakers.

Bowne told the European court everything that was happening to the Quakers of America. The court was shocked and soon wrote the governor of New Netherlands, ordering him to put an end to the persecution of the Quakers.

Puritans weren't "normal" and nice. It sounds like the CULT tried to make a colony in the US, but it got foiled because too many normal people came. They tried to drive them out, but were foiled. However, they did set up deep roots.

Decoding blog mentions that the US colonies were originally meant to be a refuge for these sociopaths. The early colonies had laws allowing the marriage of 9 year olds. Eventually they had to go somewhere else.

I suspect these sociopaths have continuously looked for somewhere to "be themselves" and be as evil as they like without the threat of the Sheep murdering them.

Hence the symbolism of "James"

https://lets-reason.com/2018/11/22/thinking-of-the-puritans-on-thanksgiving-day/

It’s that time of the year Americans celebrate Thanksgiving Day in memory of the feast the Puritans (also known as Pilgrims) held with the local Indians in order to rejoice after their first harvest in the New World that fall of 1621.

But who were those Puritans who, along with the colonists of Jamestown in Virginia some ten years earlier, are considered the first permanent European residents of America?

Epstein Island was called "Little St. James" and "great St. James".

permalink save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– LoneWulf 2 points 2 years ago +3 / -1

"Maybe what we've been taught about the "Puritans" is not who they really were..."

Think Pilgrims Society. Perhaps this group existed way before 1902:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrims_Society

Very interesting connections with "James." Why James?

Never knew the Puritans were so tyrannical.

Lots to digest here. I think there's some hidden history embedded in here, for those that know.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 3 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 3 points 2 years ago +3 / -0

u/dty6

Spitballing, but I have a theory.

We have the Virgin Islands:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/jeffrey-epsteins-private-us-virgin-islands-locations-sale/story?id=83628644

A lot of these islands became "oasis" for the sociopaths sick depravities.

Here is the story of their name:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Why-are-the-Virgin-Islands-called-so/articleshow/1911509.cms

Virgin Islands were discover-red by Christopher Columbus. He named them after Saint Ursula and the 11,000 Virgins.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Ursula

Her legendary status comes from a medieval story[6] in which she was a princess who, at the request of her father King Dionotus of Dumnonia in south-west Britain, set sail along with 11,000 virginal handmaidens to join her future husband, the pagan governor Conan Meriadoc of Armorica. After a miraculous storm brought them over the sea in a single day to a Gaulish port, Ursula declared that before her marriage she would undertake a pan-European pilgrimage. She headed for Rome with her followers and persuaded the Pope, Cyriacus (unknown in the pontifical records, though from late 384 AD there was a Pope Siricius), and Sulpicius, bishop of Ravenna, to join them. After setting out for Cologne, which was being besieged by Huns, all the virgins were beheaded in a massacre. The Huns' leader fatally shot Ursula with an arrow in about 383 AD

Martyrs or sacrifices?

The Basilica of St. Ursula in Cologne holds the alleged relics of Ursula and her 11,000 companions.[13] It contains what has been described as a "veritable tsunami of ribs, shoulder blades, and femurs ... arranged in zigzags and swirls and even in the shapes of Latin words".[15] The Goldene Kammer (Golden Chamber), a 17th-century chapel attached to the Basilica of St. Ursula, contains sculptures of their heads and torsos, "some of the heads encased in silver, others covered with stuff of gold and caps of cloth of gold and velvet; loose bones thickly texture the upper walls".[13][15] The peculiarities of the relics themselves have thrown doubt upon the historicity of Ursula and her 11,000 maidens. When skeletons of little children ranging in age from two months to seven years were found buried with one of the sacred virgins in 1183, Saint Hermann Joseph, a Praemonstratensian canon at Steinfeld, explained that they were distant relatives of the eleven thousand.[14] A surgeon of eminence was once banished from Cologne for suggesting that, among the collection of bones which are said to pertain to the heads, there were several belonging to full-grown mastiffs.[13] The relics may have come from a forgotten burial ground.

Read between the lines. This is a lie. They tried to mask the real crimes. These young women were raped, repeatedly (hence the baby skeletons) and sacrificed in the "Golden Chamber". Over 11,000.

The cover story is that the barbaric "huns" did it.

I suspect this is what the VIRGIN Islands were really named for. They wanted to make a NEW world where they would not be troubled by the sheep. You read what they did in Haiti.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– LoneWulf 1 point 2 years ago +2 / -1

u/dty6

"These young women were raped, repeatedly (hence the baby skeletons) and sacrificed in the "Golden Chamber". Over 11,000."

Many cultures are said to have sacrificed virgins.

I was also wondering whether Ursula was looking for an excuse not to marry the pagan governor. Most marriages at that time were arranged, especially among royalty. Sounds like Ursula took advantage of the storm as an excuse to buy herself some time by running away. It's even possible she and her handmaids were pursued and murdered. She might have been running to Rome to seek sanctuary in the church.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– dty6 1 point 2 years ago +1 / -0

holy cow, that's a terrible story

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 1 point 2 years ago +1 / -0

u/dty6 u/lonewulf

LOOK

https://www.garfieldrefining.com/resources/blog/gold-and-thanksgiving/

When the first Mayflower expedition set off for the New World in 1620, travelers included wealthy pilgrims. As members of elite Puritan families in England, some pilgrims held vast estates with profitable farmland. However, settling in the new world meant foregoing their wealthy status in England and committing to a life of the bare essentials.

You were right. They were rich. Very, very rich.

It wasn’t until 2012 that historians uncovered a manuscript that listed the provisions of some of the original Mayflower settlers. Though many of the pilgrims were quite wealthy, you wouldn’t guess it from what they carried with them. The official provision list included only the necessities: food, drink, clothing, tools, and weapons.

As one historical study noted,* the pilgrims did not venture to the new world in hopes of finding wealth but rather to escape the religious persecution* that was widespread in Europe.

What kind of religion did the "Puritans" really practice? Was it Godly or something evil? What makes very affluent people run to the other side of the world and leave their estates behind?

The narrative is that they were "poor" people fleeing religious persecution. It wasn't until 2012 that it was revealed they were all quite wealthy. Why do wealthy people abandon their wealth and run? There is generally only one reason.

That's why they were so terrible at surviving. They literally had no idea how to do anything. They were spoiled rich people who couldn't figure out how a hoe worked and didn't want to invite "sheep" because the sheep would "ruin" it. Like any cult they thought they could make a utopia, but they only made a nightmare because sociopaths are ultimately useless at doing anything.

They're parasites that have to steal the resources of their host to thrive.

That's why they had to have slaves in Haiti. Someone has to have sense and do the work. They have none.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mayflower_passengers

According to the Mayflower passenger list, just over a third of the passengers were Puritan Separatists who sought to break away from the established Church of England and create a society along the lines of their religious ideals. Other passengers were hired hands, servants, or farmers recruited by London merchants, all originally destined for the Colony of Virginia. Four of this latter group of passengers were small children given into the care of Mayflower pilgrims as indentured servants. The Virginia Company began the transportation of children in 1618.[36] Until relatively recently, the children were thought to be orphans, foundlings, or involuntary child labor. At that time, children were routinely rounded up from the streets of London or taken from poor families receiving church relief to be used as laborers in the colonies. Any legal objections to the involuntary transportation of the children were overridden by the Privy Council.[37][38] For instance it has been proven that the four More children were sent to America because they were deemed illegitimate.[39] Three of the four More children died in the first winter in the New World, but Richard lived to be approximately 81, dying in Salem, probably in 1695 or 1696.[40]

This is called child trafficking. They stole the children and took them to the "NEW WORLD" to be slaves. They were helpless. They were disappeared from the streets.

Look at this:

In response, the English Privy Council granted the Virginia Company permission to do whatever necessary to force the children into the ships.

They were stolen. Untold numbers were taken as slaves to the wealthy pilgrims.

And if any of them shall be found obstinate to resist or otherwise to disobey such directions as shall be given in this behalf, we do likewise hereby authorize such as shall have the charge of this service to imprison, punish, and dispose any of those children…and, so to ship them out for Virginia with as much expedition as may stand with conveniency.

the Virginia Company was desperate for child labor and went to to great lengths to import unwilling youths; second, while it is not clear whether or not they had parents, these children certainly emigrated without them and were placed in the custody of the masters to whom they were apprenticed; and third, neither the Virginia colonialists nor the English showed any concern for the best interests of these children, nor, for that matter, for basic due process before punishment-rights guaranteed adult Englishmen, but apparently not children.

Children who came to America as indentured servants without parents were an important part of the story of the colonies’ settlement. More than half of all persons who came to the colonies south of New England were indentured servants, and, according to historian Richard B. Morris, most servants were less than nineteen years old. The average age was between fourteen and sixteen, and the youngest was six.

Child labor was essential.

Slave children, who comprised about one-fifth of all children by the end of the eighteenth century, could be sold away from their parents at any time.

It makes you understand better what "All men are created equal" was an earthquake in 1776.

The harsh manner in which colonialists treated children reflected the English tradition. Colonial family law and employment law were still firmly tied to their English origins.

The children were treated like slaves.

Courts could easily steal your children away.

Parents also lost their children if they were not able to provide economic support. All these children were quickly recycled into the labor force as apprentices in other households.

https://www.grunge.com/260308/the-messed-up-history-of-old-timey-child-labor/

In 1618, Britain started another practice: taking poor children off their streets and shipping them off to their colonies to fill labor shortages there. According to Merseyside Maritime's On Their Own, that first instance was a case of 100 children picked up in London and given to the Virginia Company, who sent them to Virginia's plantations. And it happened a lot: 200 kids were sent over to North America in 1645 to fill in where there were more labor shortages, and in the 1740s, around 500 children were kidnapped from Scotland and sent to the colonies. Their story was later documented in the 1757 book written by one of the children, Peter Williamson. Did it stop the practice? Of course not!

Now back to the Puritans:

Cape Cod was among the first places settled by Puritan colonists in North America. The Cape's fifteen towns developed slowly, aside from Barnstable (1639), Sandwich (1637), and Yarmouth (1639). The final town to be established on the Cape was Bourne in 1884, breaking off from Sandwich.[37] Provincetown was a group of huts until the 18th century. A channel from Massachusetts Bay to Buzzards Bay is shown on Southack's map of 1717. The present Cape Cod Canal was slowly developed from 1870 to 1914. The federal government purchased it in 1928.

The Great Migration of Puritans to New England was primarily an exodus of families. Between 1630 and 1640, over 13,000 men, women, and children sailed to Massachusetts. The religious and political factors behind the Great Migration influenced the demographics of the emigrants. Groups of young men seeking economic success predominated the Virginia colonies, whereas Puritan ships were laden with “ordinary” people, old and young, families as well as individuals. Just a quarter of the emigrants were in their twenties when they boarded ships in the 1630s, making young adults a minority in New England settlements. The New World Puritan population was more of a cross-section in the age of the English population than those of other colonies. This meant that the Massachusetts Bay Colony retained a relatively normal population composition. In the colony of Virginia, the ratio of colonist men to women was 4:1 in the early decades and at least 2:1.

I think there is more than meets the eye.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 3 ▼

– LoneWulf 3 points 2 years ago +4 / -1

u/dty6

I think you're right. This sounds like the DS being pursued by the villagers with pitchforks and torches, so to speak. They may not have taken their wealth because it had already been confiscated or their homes burned to the ground or they were simply "run out of Dodge."

Also, ships at that time were not all that big. Oftentimes the ships were overcrowded. You could only take the most essential items. So, you took food, water, tools, and a few personal items like clothing.

Once they got to the US and became established, it sounds like they were pretty ruthless towards other religions that didn't meet their standards. I wonder if these "Puritans" played a role in the Salem Witch Trials, too??

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– LoneWulf 1 point 2 years ago +2 / -1

This is who "Little St. James" Island was named after -- a lesser known, "in the shadows," and unsung disciple.

https://www.learnreligions.com/james-the-less-obscure-apostle-701076

Jamestown was named after James I.

https://www.britannica.com/place/Jamestown-Colony

A lot of these initial colonies struggled to survive. I wonder if that was because they were made up of elites who knew nothing of how to survive the day-to-day challenges of the common man. They seem to have made a lot of "rookie" mistakes:

After a period of searching for a settlement site, the colonists moored the ships off a peninsula (now an island) in the James River on the night of May 13 and began to unload them on May 14. The site’s marshy setting and humidity would prove to be unhealthful, but the site had several apparent advantages at the time the colony’s leaders chose it: ships could pull up close to it in deep water for easy loading and unloading, it was unoccupied, and it was joined to the mainland only by a narrow neck of land, making it simpler to defend.

The colonists had not carried out the work in the springtime needed for the long haul, such as building up the food stores and digging a freshwater well. The first mass casualties of the colony took place in August 1607, when a combination of bad water from the river, disease-bearing mosquitoes, and limited food rations created a wave of dysentery, severe fevers, and other serious health problems. Numerous colonists died, and at times as few as five able-bodied settlers were left to bury the dead.

It seems the colonists were more interested in money-making ventures than they were with day-to-day survival. They had no concept of surviving in a remote, foreign environment -- not surprising if they were of the pampered elite.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

u/dty6 u/lonewulf u/sleepydude

Do you remember the King Richard stuff we were seeing?

When you look at it historically, the DS HATED King Richard. They have continuously tried to trash him even to this day. They were furious when his remains were found under a parking lot and he was given a full funeral with 21 gun salute.

They've tried everything in their power to write how he was a "child-killer" and a monster, but lots of records show that he was actually much more popular with the regular people than they will acknowledge.

Trying to push that Trump is "King Richard" is an attempt to put an insult on him, but he takes it as a comment. Dick Cheney happens to be "Richard" Cheney so another way to use the Richard label.

Just wanted to share this with you.

permalink save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– Mr_A 1 point 2 years ago +1 / -0

How does ultra MAGA = King Richard?

permalink save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

u/lonewulf u/dty6

Ultra-Maga doesn't equal King Richard.

Ultra Maga was just one part of the message. It's the connection to the Cheneys and to MK ULTRA.

Which Stranger Things has characters like Eleven who are written as MK Ultra experiments.

https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1616646/Dr-Brenner-Stranger-Things-real-person-Netflix

So what was buried is being brought to the surface. It's now being planted in the public's mind. You see it first, then they see once the idea of it exists.

https://www.politico.eu/article/the-secret-history-of-fort-detrick-the-cias-base-for-mind-control-experiments/amp/

Gottlieb searched relentlessly for a way to blast away human minds so new ones could be implanted in their place. He tested an astonishing variety of drug combinations, often in conjunction with other torments like electro-shock or sensory deprivation. In the United States, his victims were unwitting subjects at jails and hospitals, including a federal prison in Atlanta and an addiction research center in Lexington, Kentucky.

These were the most gruesome experiments the U.S. government ever conducted on human beings. In one of the them, seven prisoners in Lexington, Kentucky, were given multiple doses of LSD for 77 straight days. In another, captured North Koreans were given depressant drugs, then dosed with potent stimulants and exposed to intense heat and electro-shock while they were in the weakened state of transition. These experiments destroyed many minds and caused an unknown number of deaths. Many of the potions, pills and aerosols administered to victims were created at Detrick.

Nonetheless Fort Detrick, as it was renamed in 1956, remained Gottlieb’s chemical base. After the end of MK-ULTRA, he used it to develop and store the CIA’s arsenal of poisons. In his freezers, he kept biological agents that could cause diseases including smallpox, tuberculosis and anthrax, and a number of organic toxins including snake venom and paralytic shellfish poison. He developed poisons intended to kill Cuban leader Fidel Castro and Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba.

Maga King is about King Richard. What's going to happen if this is pushed.

Liz Cheney and them are going to make Trump as "King Richard" (a grotesque, "child-killing" monster as DS historians write it). Trump is saying, "Do it. I'll embrace the label. He's none of that.".

What they're really afraid of is MK Ultra stuff coming out.

That's my take.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– Mr_A 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

Ah, thank you. Ultra-MAGA is bad guy comms, telling all the spooks and cabalites that Trump will reveal mk-ultra. Trump runs off with Ultra-Maga flag, saying "you better believe it." Separately the BH are also painting Trump as King Richard, which gets a similar response. Thanks for clarifying.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

Yes. They're warning him not to spill the beans about MK Ultra (which never really ended). It's coming soon.

Oil City = OWL city

Liz Cheney will come after you. Trump "Haha. Do your worst. I'm not scared."

(Their surprise witness is likely a White Hat plan that would blow up their attempts against Trump).

Trump does a rally right in Cheney country and declares it "MAGA country".

Their attempt to tar him will blow up and only make him stronger. Their warning him not to let "ULTRA" come out. He's saying "Try and stop it. You'll fail. I'll be KING RICHARD, but it won't hurt me."

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– LoneWulf 1 point 2 years ago +2 / -1

I just watched this video of a couple of protesters in London who glued themselves to a van Gogh painting. They're wearing orange shirts (orange man) that say, "Just Stop Oil."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=3rD399eR3vI&feature=emb_logo

permalink save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 1 point 2 years ago +1 / -0

Very good catch!

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– LoneWulf 1 point 2 years ago +2 / -1

I'm wondering if there aren't more comms in this. Like, why a van Gogh painting? There has to be a reason. Plus, why didn't the museum remove the people, close down the room and call the police? This is a serious offense with the possibility of ruining a masterpiece. The whole thing is sus.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– SemperSupra [S] 1 point 2 years ago +1 / -0

Check this out. It talks about "live art". Art is used for trafficking.

https://jewelyblue.com/rachel-chandler-epstein-child-trafficking

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– LoneWulf 1 point 2 years ago +2 / -1

Interesting article about Chandler. Some of it I've seen before, but some I hadn't.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– LoneWulf 1 point 2 years ago +2 / -1

Well, the two people who glued themselves to the van Gogh are definitely "live art" now.

permalink parent save report block reply