I've become a BIG fan of Badlands, primarily because of the quality of DEFECTED. I also think its good to be aware, wary, and knowledgeable, and to realize that the Enemy is always trying to screw up relationships and cause disruption.
I keep being told to hate Jon and his team and hate Badlands, but when I try to follow why, it’s never very clear and gets super convoluted fast. This makes me suspicious. I also notice that the critics never seem to point out anything that was actually said by Jon on his show. I’ve listened to probably 100+ hours of Devolution and Badlands Media now and nothing has seemed shilly or divisive or controlled opposition to me. But I keep being told to hate him. Weird.
I agree with your comment. None of the accusations ever made sense. Neither did the weight attached to such accusations. Saboteurs seemingly arguing on the side of Kash Patel, it really doesn't make sense.
Maybe Badlands growth is the result of a fake theory and everyone has been wasting their time. Alternatively, maybe they are on the money. If they are on the money, the only semi-official attack against them has been the Rothschild journalist. Which did no damage except personal to Jon. If Devolution is true, and the series stands up to scrutiny, then the bad guys in question would have heard about it by now.
So if you were the bad guys, how would you try to discredit Devolution if you couldn't attack the facts?
If you truly believe in 1A there should very few reasons for moderation. The only reason on a "free speech" platform would be direct calls for violence.
Calling names and shutting down conversations is nothing more than communist tactics IMO.
How about this? A church is being run by a community. A communist enters and wants to join and be part of the leadership, and to preach to the congregation about the evils of Christianity and all religion, and to advocate for a Marxist utopia.
Is it 1 A violation to decline the communists request? If not, why not? If yes, then why?
How about a lecture being run by a university to teach mathematics, but a student stands up and wants to argue about the political atmosphere of the university and the country, and ignores the lecturer's request to be quiet or leave.
Is this a 1A violation? If not, why not?
What, for that matter, is a "free speech platform"? Is it a platform that says anyone can say whatever they want, regardless of what it is, as long as it doesn't break any laws?
If the answer is yes, then what defines it as that "free speech platform"? The purpose. Such a platform would have a PURPOSE, and the purpose would be "free speech" aka to be a place where "anyone can say whatever they want". THAT is the purpose.
GreatAwakening.win is NOT a free speech platform (neither is Patriots.win, for that matter, I suspect). Its purpose is NOT to provide a venue where anyone can say whatever they want. It's purpose is to provide a forum for discussion of Q-related content, in a productive, uplifting and constructive way, aka a way that ADDS to the Q movement or it's direction. THAT is its PURPOSE.
Discussions, commentary and activity that does NOT adhere to, align with, or serve that purpose doesn't belong here.
If you want a free speech platform, go find one. GAW has a very clear purpose, but it is not to allow anyone to say anything or whatever they want, whether it is related to uplifting, developing the Q movement or not.
That said, naturally, critical thinking is a very important part of that development. So is discussion, advocating of differing viewpoints, and analysis. But also CRITICAL THINKING can and should have a purpose. If the purpose is destructive, to undermine, divide, discourage, mock or disparage, to inflate ego or vent personal negativity, then it's NOT productive.
In the end, PURPOSE is what determines value and what determines applicability. Failure to recognize PURPOSE is a fatal flaw that often leads to completely erroneous conclusions vis-a-vis how or what something is or should be.
Calling names and shutting down conversations
Obviously, calling names is not moderation. But what is and isn't calling names might easily be open to debate. What exactly constitutes "shutting down conversations" is open to debate (and bias).
The purpose of moderation in ANY forum or discussion venue is to MAINTAIN and uphold the PURPOSE. When something contradicts or violates that purpose, moderation can and should take any required action to ensure the purpose is upheld and preserved.
If someone doesn't believe in the purpose of a particular forum, they are free to leave. And, they should. Engaging with a forum whose purpose one doesn't believe in, or whose purpose one wants to alter, is really the definition of destructive. And yes, Communists certainly practice methods intended to destroy and undermine ANY purpose that doesn't serve or align with theirs. But they pursue that by INVADING other venues and purposes to undermine them.
I have been reading over there the last few days. Man I thought it was bad on the Philadelphia Eagles blog (bleedinggreennation.com) with the cursing and f bombs, but Patriots.win takes the cake. Wow. They get into some pretty amusing “scream” curse fights over there. We are a church group comparatively 😂
a group of people falsely accused Kate Awakening of being Mossad. Its completely untrue and these people wont admit they are wrong so they attack Kate, John and anyone involved in We The Media or Badlands. it screams psyop like Simon Parks/Charlie Ward
I'm inclined to agree, but I like to always consider two dimensions at play: both the conscious and the unconscious.
Some people are consciously moved to attack, destroy, undermine. It's their chosen work, either paid or unpaid.
Others are manipulated unconsciously by spiritual forces that exploit their weakness in order to become unwitting instruments of the purpose of those spiritual forces, or to become instruments of disruption.
I assume and believe that there are A) people who are paid operatives whose purpose is to attack and destroy the Great Awakening movement as much as possible, through whatever avenue they can find.
I think B) others can be misinformed, or compromised by their own emotionally driven programming to see bad where there is good, etc.
Both of these are a problem.
So far, I have only seen good fruit from Badlands, but I don't have much time for digging into accusations that smell of either A) or B). Maybe I'm wrong, but I have to trust my own senses and judgment when deciding WHERE to invest my time and effort. And the above two categories usually don't inspire me to invest much (although I despise the disinfo opps BIG time, and for that reason, I'm a fan of Jordan Sather, btw.)
A few days or so ago, a post was made claiming that Patel Patriot might be a "Paytriot". And in typical GAW fashion, opinions were made, stones were cast, and so on.
Ah, the old Paytriot shillism. That cry has been used by more shills than not. An easy inroad for creating division.
And in typical GAW fashion, opinions were made, stones were cast, and so on.
I won't say if that is typical or not, but obviously, if there is an argument to be made it should be made using empirical data, reasoning, logic and balance. More often than not, such assertions tend to come from extremely emotionally driven places, NOT from based, balanced and reasoned arguments.
Yeah, I just checked back into this thread, and you can see what I mean lol.
Either Patel could be a grifter/paytriot, and either could be legit. Either way, I'm not spending money. I'll spend money on the one who is right in the end, if at all.
I cannot see anything wrong with choosing to use or apply your money where you want. Either way.
So I also don't see anything wrong with people who invest time, money, effort receiving support or creating ways to sustain that work or make a living, either.
I do put money to some places, but I get about 100 times more value from those places than value I put in. As a culture, we seem to have become trained in the "I deserve everything for free" mentality.
The thing is, these people (like PP) actually DO put out a lot of value without demanding (selling) it. They offer it freely, then ask, hey, if you want to support, I can use that support, and here's how to do it.
If we want to look at real grifters, we should look at places like this: this is what real grifting looks like: scam central.
Feel like elaborating on that?
I've become a BIG fan of Badlands, primarily because of the quality of DEFECTED. I also think its good to be aware, wary, and knowledgeable, and to realize that the Enemy is always trying to screw up relationships and cause disruption.
I keep being told to hate Jon and his team and hate Badlands, but when I try to follow why, it’s never very clear and gets super convoluted fast. This makes me suspicious. I also notice that the critics never seem to point out anything that was actually said by Jon on his show. I’ve listened to probably 100+ hours of Devolution and Badlands Media now and nothing has seemed shilly or divisive or controlled opposition to me. But I keep being told to hate him. Weird.
Thanks for the data leads, Baggins.
Here's Jon's side. https://patelpatriot.substack.com/p/transparency
I agree with your comment. None of the accusations ever made sense. Neither did the weight attached to such accusations. Saboteurs seemingly arguing on the side of Kash Patel, it really doesn't make sense.
Maybe Badlands growth is the result of a fake theory and everyone has been wasting their time. Alternatively, maybe they are on the money. If they are on the money, the only semi-official attack against them has been the Rothschild journalist. Which did no damage except personal to Jon. If Devolution is true, and the series stands up to scrutiny, then the bad guys in question would have heard about it by now.
So if you were the bad guys, how would you try to discredit Devolution if you couldn't attack the facts?
I have found that the truth is usually very simple and it's bullshit that is complicated. I sympathize with your failure to find a simple reason.
This place is weird 90% of the time.
Oddly enough, people are calling out Patriots.win for this same shit.
Claim people want talk, ban, remove, call out those that talk. Whether you like it or not.
Deleting of post with no clear reasoning as to why.
With half the time it simply offended the mods.
Dont' believe me, check it out? https://patriots.win/p/16ZXepeeak/house-republicans-release-their-/c/
Mods are getting too antsy banning people and pushing them out.
The forums are dying because no conversation is allowed. The ONLY THING YOU CAN DO IS AGREE
Lest you be called Doomer, Shill, Whatever word makes them feel good.
If you truly believe in 1A there should very few reasons for moderation. The only reason on a "free speech" platform would be direct calls for violence. Calling names and shutting down conversations is nothing more than communist tactics IMO.
That's a completely erroneous perspective. IMO.
How about this? A church is being run by a community. A communist enters and wants to join and be part of the leadership, and to preach to the congregation about the evils of Christianity and all religion, and to advocate for a Marxist utopia.
Is it 1 A violation to decline the communists request? If not, why not? If yes, then why?
How about a lecture being run by a university to teach mathematics, but a student stands up and wants to argue about the political atmosphere of the university and the country, and ignores the lecturer's request to be quiet or leave.
Is this a 1A violation? If not, why not?
What, for that matter, is a "free speech platform"? Is it a platform that says anyone can say whatever they want, regardless of what it is, as long as it doesn't break any laws?
If the answer is yes, then what defines it as that "free speech platform"? The purpose. Such a platform would have a PURPOSE, and the purpose would be "free speech" aka to be a place where "anyone can say whatever they want". THAT is the purpose.
GreatAwakening.win is NOT a free speech platform (neither is Patriots.win, for that matter, I suspect). Its purpose is NOT to provide a venue where anyone can say whatever they want. It's purpose is to provide a forum for discussion of Q-related content, in a productive, uplifting and constructive way, aka a way that ADDS to the Q movement or it's direction. THAT is its PURPOSE.
Discussions, commentary and activity that does NOT adhere to, align with, or serve that purpose doesn't belong here.
If you want a free speech platform, go find one. GAW has a very clear purpose, but it is not to allow anyone to say anything or whatever they want, whether it is related to uplifting, developing the Q movement or not.
That said, naturally, critical thinking is a very important part of that development. So is discussion, advocating of differing viewpoints, and analysis. But also CRITICAL THINKING can and should have a purpose. If the purpose is destructive, to undermine, divide, discourage, mock or disparage, to inflate ego or vent personal negativity, then it's NOT productive.
In the end, PURPOSE is what determines value and what determines applicability. Failure to recognize PURPOSE is a fatal flaw that often leads to completely erroneous conclusions vis-a-vis how or what something is or should be.
Obviously, calling names is not moderation. But what is and isn't calling names might easily be open to debate. What exactly constitutes "shutting down conversations" is open to debate (and bias).
The purpose of moderation in ANY forum or discussion venue is to MAINTAIN and uphold the PURPOSE. When something contradicts or violates that purpose, moderation can and should take any required action to ensure the purpose is upheld and preserved.
If someone doesn't believe in the purpose of a particular forum, they are free to leave. And, they should. Engaging with a forum whose purpose one doesn't believe in, or whose purpose one wants to alter, is really the definition of destructive. And yes, Communists certainly practice methods intended to destroy and undermine ANY purpose that doesn't serve or align with theirs. But they pursue that by INVADING other venues and purposes to undermine them.
I have been reading over there the last few days. Man I thought it was bad on the Philadelphia Eagles blog (bleedinggreennation.com) with the cursing and f bombs, but Patriots.win takes the cake. Wow. They get into some pretty amusing “scream” curse fights over there. We are a church group comparatively 😂
a group of people falsely accused Kate Awakening of being Mossad. Its completely untrue and these people wont admit they are wrong so they attack Kate, John and anyone involved in We The Media or Badlands. it screams psyop like Simon Parks/Charlie Ward
I'm inclined to agree, but I like to always consider two dimensions at play: both the conscious and the unconscious.
Some people are consciously moved to attack, destroy, undermine. It's their chosen work, either paid or unpaid.
Others are manipulated unconsciously by spiritual forces that exploit their weakness in order to become unwitting instruments of the purpose of those spiritual forces, or to become instruments of disruption.
I assume and believe that there are A) people who are paid operatives whose purpose is to attack and destroy the Great Awakening movement as much as possible, through whatever avenue they can find.
I think B) others can be misinformed, or compromised by their own emotionally driven programming to see bad where there is good, etc.
Both of these are a problem.
So far, I have only seen good fruit from Badlands, but I don't have much time for digging into accusations that smell of either A) or B). Maybe I'm wrong, but I have to trust my own senses and judgment when deciding WHERE to invest my time and effort. And the above two categories usually don't inspire me to invest much (although I despise the disinfo opps BIG time, and for that reason, I'm a fan of Jordan Sather, btw.)
A few days or so ago, a post was made claiming that Patel Patriot might be a "Paytriot". And in typical GAW fashion, opinions were made, stones were cast, and so on.
"BE CAREFUL WHO YOU FOLLOW"
Ah, the old Paytriot shillism. That cry has been used by more shills than not. An easy inroad for creating division.
And in typical GAW fashion, opinions were made, stones were cast, and so on.
I won't say if that is typical or not, but obviously, if there is an argument to be made it should be made using empirical data, reasoning, logic and balance. More often than not, such assertions tend to come from extremely emotionally driven places, NOT from based, balanced and reasoned arguments.
More often than not.
PS thanks for the response!
Yeah, I just checked back into this thread, and you can see what I mean lol.
Either Patel could be a grifter/paytriot, and either could be legit. Either way, I'm not spending money. I'll spend money on the one who is right in the end, if at all.
I cannot see anything wrong with choosing to use or apply your money where you want. Either way.
So I also don't see anything wrong with people who invest time, money, effort receiving support or creating ways to sustain that work or make a living, either.
I do put money to some places, but I get about 100 times more value from those places than value I put in. As a culture, we seem to have become trained in the "I deserve everything for free" mentality.
The thing is, these people (like PP) actually DO put out a lot of value without demanding (selling) it. They offer it freely, then ask, hey, if you want to support, I can use that support, and here's how to do it.
If we want to look at real grifters, we should look at places like this: this is what real grifting looks like: scam central.
https://amg-news.com/cia-top-secret-list-of-8-million-names-who-will-be-rounded-up-when-martial-law-is-imposed-video/