Don't you dare compare me to that Luciferian piece of filth.
Refreshing to hear from a (supposed) military asset.
Most truth seekers have come across Wilcocks work- I've personally studied his offerings since he hit the scene in late 90's and bailed several yrs ago when he (and his handlers) were exposed as Luciferians. He just never quite passed the smell test, especially him claiming to be Edgar Cayce reincarnated kek.
David is good at what he does tho... don't know if he's sincerely mislead, an MK victim, or simply a dark soul
he would be making a lot of sense and then suddenly drag spiritual matters into things in a way that was very woo-woo and clearly not dispassionate or impartial.
THEY ALL FUCKING DO THIS. Just like gay people, they cant shut up without letting someone know.
LA Marzulli pretty much accused the entire Ancient Aliens alumni of this because History Channel axed his television career due to his Christian ethos theories surrounding megaliths and other such ancient mysteries.
THIS is what is was referring to re: Luciferian (sorry, at work, no time to dish sauce)
LA Marzulli pretty much accused the entire Ancient Aliens alumni of this because History Channel axed his television career due to his Christian ethos theories surrounding megaliths and other such ancient mysteries.
I don't see David Wilcock as Luciferian--at least not intentionally. He separated from Gaia TV because he said they were spinning his appearances on Ancient Aliens to support a Luciferian perspective on history. He also purports to be a Christian (as do many who aren't, I know, but it's at least worth noting that he regularly makes reference to his Christian beliefs). What I always go back to when I'm assessing David Wilcock is his book "The Source Field Investigations." This is good, solid work. I think what throws people off about David Wilcock is that I believe he's a genuine "autist" as in he is Asperger's, i.e., on the autistic spectrum. That makes him awkward socially, but it's likely also the root of his focus.
"NowTheyAllLose" calls him a "piece of filth". Having read all but one of David's books and seen many, many of his presentations, I don't see that. David puts a lot of emphasis on The Law of One books as a philosophy and as truth. I have read the first book and a half of those and can't get past that point. They set off my spidey sense. I wouldn't go so far as to call them Luciferian, as I'm not qualified to make that assessment since I've not read all of them. But if I did get through them and came to that conclusion, it would not surprise me. I think Satan's capabilities for deception know no bounds.
So, I could be wrong, of course, because once upon a time I thought Tom Hanks was the greatest, but I don't think David Wilcock is a "piece of filth." Supporting a Luciferian viewpoint without realizing it maybe, but I think that's been true at varying levels for many people before the Great Awakening got under way. I mean, as an example, how many of us loved Tom Hanks and voted for a Bush or a Clinton or some other POS satanist?
Can you expand on this? If David Wilcock is a Luciferian I would genuinely like to know that. You mean you think he's a practicing satanist? Or he's like the people who are in the lower levels of the freemasons and have no idea what they're really a part of?
The Law of One is promoted not only by David Wilcock but also by Jason Momoa and The Rock, so these FB moms losing their collective minds about these Luciferian connections need to unbunch their panties ASAP.
This is the vibe I'm getting from your post.
P.S. Don't you dare compare me to that Luciferian piece of filth. reads far differently than NowTheyAllLose" calls him a "piece of filth".
I am not telling anybody what to think. I'm expressing my own opinion. I figure people don't need me to tell THEM what to think anymore than I need them telling ME what to think. So if you're getting that kind of vibe from my comment, then you're vibe-rater is out of calibration.
Re: Wilcock
Don't you dare compare me to that Luciferian piece of filth.
Refreshing to hear from a (supposed) military asset.
Most truth seekers have come across Wilcocks work- I've personally studied his offerings since he hit the scene in late 90's and bailed several yrs ago when he (and his handlers) were exposed as Luciferians. He just never quite passed the smell test, especially him claiming to be Edgar Cayce reincarnated kek.
David is good at what he does tho... don't know if he's sincerely mislead, an MK victim, or simply a dark soul
THEY ALL FUCKING DO THIS. Just like gay people, they cant shut up without letting someone know.
LA Marzulli pretty much accused the entire Ancient Aliens alumni of this because History Channel axed his television career due to his Christian ethos theories surrounding megaliths and other such ancient mysteries.
THIS is what is was referring to re: Luciferian (sorry, at work, no time to dish sauce)
LA Marzulli pretty much accused the entire Ancient Aliens alumni of this because History Channel axed his television career due to his Christian ethos theories surrounding megaliths and other such ancient mysteries.
I don't see David Wilcock as Luciferian--at least not intentionally. He separated from Gaia TV because he said they were spinning his appearances on Ancient Aliens to support a Luciferian perspective on history. He also purports to be a Christian (as do many who aren't, I know, but it's at least worth noting that he regularly makes reference to his Christian beliefs). What I always go back to when I'm assessing David Wilcock is his book "The Source Field Investigations." This is good, solid work. I think what throws people off about David Wilcock is that I believe he's a genuine "autist" as in he is Asperger's, i.e., on the autistic spectrum. That makes him awkward socially, but it's likely also the root of his focus.
"NowTheyAllLose" calls him a "piece of filth". Having read all but one of David's books and seen many, many of his presentations, I don't see that. David puts a lot of emphasis on The Law of One books as a philosophy and as truth. I have read the first book and a half of those and can't get past that point. They set off my spidey sense. I wouldn't go so far as to call them Luciferian, as I'm not qualified to make that assessment since I've not read all of them. But if I did get through them and came to that conclusion, it would not surprise me. I think Satan's capabilities for deception know no bounds.
So, I could be wrong, of course, because once upon a time I thought Tom Hanks was the greatest, but I don't think David Wilcock is a "piece of filth." Supporting a Luciferian viewpoint without realizing it maybe, but I think that's been true at varying levels for many people before the Great Awakening got under way. I mean, as an example, how many of us loved Tom Hanks and voted for a Bush or a Clinton or some other POS satanist?
Take it from a guy who's been through a Luciferian cult. He is.
Can you expand on this? If David Wilcock is a Luciferian I would genuinely like to know that. You mean you think he's a practicing satanist? Or he's like the people who are in the lower levels of the freemasons and have no idea what they're really a part of?
This is the vibe I'm getting from your post.
P.S. Don't you dare compare me to that Luciferian piece of filth. reads far differently than NowTheyAllLose" calls him a "piece of filth".
I am not telling anybody what to think. I'm expressing my own opinion. I figure people don't need me to tell THEM what to think anymore than I need them telling ME what to think. So if you're getting that kind of vibe from my comment, then you're vibe-rater is out of calibration.
You're quoting people out of context and defending David Wilcock.
And this is your reaction when getting called out on it.
My vibe was dead on.