Yo Tink,

A few things.

One, I have listened to Bosi live (I mean attended several of his lectures/rallies/events) and like and appreciated many of the things he said, including his general attitude and perspective on certain core issues (like sovereignty, etc).

That said, after closely following his predictions, warnings and so forth, I decided to move on. His predictions were NOT playing out (kek, here we are 4 years later and it still not here) and perhaps more importantly, he continually spoke from a 'special inside information' posture.

Understandably, given his military background, that he's not so much into research and analysis for informing his audience, but seem very much about simply telling folks what is what, not doubt based on his own perspectives.

I personally find that this approach does not lift my understanding, or help me develop my own mental engagement. It's more like, "this is how it is, believe it".

There is nothing wrong with making predictions or theorizing and them not hitting the target, except that Bosi's approach has been "This is how it is" rather than actual theorizing or speculation that develops critical thinking engagement.

I still like his attitude and agree with many of his principles, but his methods seem significantly limited and not really what the larger awakening needs. (I did listen to the first 5 mins of the video, because it was Bosi speaking.)

Two, it took me a while, because its been so long, but at the mention of "Derek" something clicked in my brain, and then looking at the screen, seeing the person in the top left wearing the cowboy hat, I rummaged through my mental clearing house to recall the last name. "Is this that guy?"

Eventually (and I think I'm pretty sure on this), I recognize him as Derek Johnson, who I did a solid dive on about 3 (or 4?) years back. Based on some serious factual research and analysis, I concluded without much difficulty that Johnson is a serious grifter and fraud who latched himself on to the patriotic aspect of the awakening movement, other people's research, and has been trading on that ever since.

As such, this sort of doesn't surprise me, but also pretty much discredits this particular podcast group. Anyone who brings in Derek Johnson is either not paying attention or is grifting themselves.

What do I mean by grifting? There are plenty of people now who have latched on to the awakening movement, but who's primary motive is not the same as the patriots and anons who created it (including Q). Rather, they are opportunistic, see a way to make money and influence and relevance, etc, by 'latching on'. This doesn't mean that they spew pure garbage, although a lot of garbage finds its way in, because the real primary purpose is NOT to find honest, actual truth via critical thinking, but to utilize 'truth' for their own primary purpose, and if that means smudging or spinning or being loose and fast with facts, etc, to advance that purpose, then so be it.

It's an issue of integrity and purpose.

The 'grifters' (so-called) are not the same as controlled opposition, even thought the methodologies are similar. It's the objective that differs. The controlled opposition are operatives whose primary purpose is to redirect the public (or target audience) to the narratives that the controllers want, in order to manipulate (direct) them, or head them away from finding actual truth that reveals the truth about controllers.

The 'grifters' are opportunists whose primary purpose is self-benefit, whether that is $$$$, or influence, fame, relevance, attention, etc. They wear the clothes of 'patriots' or 'truth tellers' in the same way that the mega-church TV preacher wears to the clothes of a faithful Christian, using all the language, the words, the concepts that Christians find familiar and emotionally attractive, but whose real motive is ultimately self-benefit. Think the Bakers.

Because their primary motive is self-interested, they can and will utilize any information, true or partially true, to sway their audience, earn their trust, and keep them emotionally engaged because, just like charlatans who feed off the emotional and spiritual energy of their adherents, these 'grifters' feed of the emotional attention and energy, not to mention the $$$ in many cases, that their adoring audience provide to them.

I did research on Johnson. I looked at his track record, his claims (according to him, he was the top selling country star in the USA in 2020, who was swindled out of recognition by the relevant music board. He exploited photo ops with Trump in order to pain himself as "Trump friend and confidante". He latched on to Pascal Najadi, who presented himself as a certain player two years ago, but who was a poser, like Johnson himself. Jon Harold, the guy who developed and posted the devolution series, is pretty clear about how Johnson essentially took Harold's research and passed it off as his own, where convenient.

I'm guessing that you probably like and think that Johnson is pretty good, hot stuff. I'm just responding here to share my own view, one I hope that you'll consider before reaching any conclusions.

I'll link below the post I did on Najadi, after some research, outlining on what basis I drew my conclusions regarding him (also, his connection with Johnson).

https://greatawakening.win/p/17shvo09gf/the-curious-case-of-pascal-najad/

I don't think I ever compiled a post about my findings on Derek Johnson himself; but after spending time investigating, I was confident in my conclusions about his real nature. That was 3+ years ago. Perhaps he has changed? (I doubt it).

A few more points:

I do NOT think that Bosi is a grifter; I think his motives are quite sincere and extremely patriotic. I am also inclined to assume that others on that podcast you cited are not grifters, but perhaps, like Bosi, are skewed towards a particular type of perspective on the current infowar/psywar/operation.

Johnson, however, I see as a poser and opportunistic grifter, based what I researched about his behavior, actions and history (not specifically based on what he says, because, as I pointed out, such types will most certainly latch on to true or partially true information, and share it. The key point is the methodology they use and their objectives/motives.)

Secondly, since first being hoodwinked by fake news coming from <ahem> our side in 2018, during the early stages of the Q movement, I became particularly focused on or gave attention to operations from 'our side' that were spreading disinformation, or presenting themselves to be something other than what they were, or in various ways were using information to exploit or manipulate the millions and millions of people awaking from the Matrix of Globalist lies.

One of the key aspects of such destructive (imo) operations and actors is the methodology of generating emotional engagement by use of certain types of information (true, partly true, and fake) to influence and take advantage of people looking for truth, hope and vision. Just like the religious charlatans I mentioned above, the methods are often very effective, and you cannot identify simply by what they say (because the method involves saying what YOU want to hear).

The reason I made this post on DEFCON ZERO and other badlands actors is because, so far, I have found them to be crystal clear about their methods, intentions, and their own limitations, admitting quite openly when they speculate, identifying it as such, rather than attempting to convince listeners to 'trust me bro'.

In the early comments, some frogs posted other sources they find effective, helpful, etc. I'm not familiar with them, but I don't doubt their testimony. There are lots of good researchers, commentators, and analysts out there. But, there are also lots and lots and lots of fakes, opportunists, and snakes who will happily exploit any opening you give them. Yes, in the 'truth sphere'.

Anyway, for what its worth.

Yes, we're hungry for truth, and hungry for hope and vision too. The hardest thing in the awakening sphere is to be self-aware and self-critical so as to not be led astray by the snakes, and instead find the doves. That said, as difficult as that is, it should not stop us from trying.

So, I'm not saying "you are wrong about Johnson" (if I am correct in assuming you're a fan). I'm just sharing my own alternative perspective. But don't take my word for it. If you really think someone is a good source of truth, then dig. Do research. Find out more about them that simply what they say. examine their methods. because anyone can say anything these days. Heck, lots of people can parrot exactly what Trump is saying and pretend to be MAGA, while simply looking to take advantage of the current times. Right?

Either way, just hoping this response is useful or at least interesting in some way.

FI