Every post people make on this message board doesn't have to be a diatribe, full of links and other supporting evidence.

I agree, but you began your post with an ad hominem. This all by itself is hugely problematic. That should never be done, and is one of the primary tools of fuckery used by the Cabal to create false beliefs.

People believe what they believe primarily because of ad hominems, and not evidence itself. That is why all "fact checkers" begin with an ad hominem, designed to steer the conversation away from the actual evidence presented without actually addressing the evidence presented. Fact checkers later (usually) go on to address evidence, but the stage is set with the ad hominem, placing the future address of evidence into a box, falsely supporting the argument by basing it on a fallacy.

what you did was to focus on my opinion

I focused on your presentation of your opinion because it is essential that people understand the depth of the hidden fuckery in such presentations of argument. The Matrix, a completely false belief about reality, is created primarily through appeals to ethos (ad hominem and pro hominem), and by out of context (or woefully insufficient context) "debunkings," both of which you did in your original response. The discussion of the facts presented is important, and I didn't do that, but I feel it is far more important for us to all appreciate how our own rhetoric reflects that of the primary tools used by the Cabal to create false beliefs. THAT understanding is what's most important in the solution, not the particulars of any one specific event. Until we all understand how to address "the truth" through our rhetoric, even when just offering our opinion, we will continue to enchain our ability to get closer to it. Our trained rhetoric is literally designed to steer us away from the truth.

As for the rest of what you said, I will not address it directly, not because you don't make good points, you do, but because there is something I don't think you appreciate. My investigation strongly supports the assertion that the world is pretty much one big conspiracy. Read my report. The part there so far shows the creation of the singular corporation that exists (there is only one corporation in the world), and the single body of people that control it. The next part (coming out very soon I hope) will make it super clear that pretty much everything is a conspiracy. The "news," what is shown on the news, is almost never the truth. It is all contrived. Mostly, it is stuff taken out of context, but it is also actors staging events to fill a narrative (having little to nothing to do with the truth of an event), false flags, real events created by agents provocateur, etc. There are even people on tic tok, youtube, etc. that are such actors and agents provocateur, designed to feed the "independent journalist" into believing a false narrative, even when that narrative is different from the mainstream narrative. That doesn't mean that any or all such pieces of evidence are false, but they are all suspect, and should be looked at with that lens.

The Matrix is complete, with many mouths and many opinions, designed to be in opposition, all coming from a single source. In such a world, it is very difficult to be discerning. It is only through considered debate and presentation of evidence that we can get closer to the truth of anything. It is essential that we relearn our training to appeal to ethos and pathos (which are always fallacies), and learn to appreciate that even appeals to logos are not "the truth," even if they are logically true (which just means logically consistent, the axioms could be false or otherwise unstated). By working together, and relearning our rhetoric, we can get closer to the truth. That is the only way.

make responses/attacks personal

I do not think I attacked you at all. If you think I did, please point out how I did. I addressed your rhetoric for the reasons stated above. That is not a personal attack from my perspective. I do that to everyone. I am an equal opportunity offender in that regard.

Every post people make on this message board doesn't have to be a diatribe, full of links and other supporting evidence.

I agree, but you began your post with an ad hominem. This all by itself is hugely problematic. That should never be done, and is one of the primary tools of all fuckery used by the Cabal to create false beliefs.

People believe what they believe primarily because of ad hominems, and not evidence itself. That is why all "fact checkers" begin with an ad hominem, designed to steer the conversation away from the actual evidence presented without actually addressing the evidence presented. Fact checkers later (usually) go on to address evidence, but the stage is set with the ad hominem, placing the future address of evidence into a box, falsely supporting the argument by basing it on a fallacy.

what you did was to focus on my opinion

I focused on your presentation of your opinion because it is essential that people understand the depth of the hidden fuckery in such presentations of argument. The Matrix, a completely false belief about reality, is created primarily through appeals to ethos (ad hominem and pro hominem), and by out of context (or woefully insufficient context) "debunkings," both of which you did in your original response. The discussion of the facts presented is important, and I didn't do that, but I feel it is far more important for us to all appreciate how our own rhetoric reflects that of the primary tools used by the Cabal to create false beliefs. THAT understanding is what's most important in the solution, not the particulars of any one specific event. Until we all understand how to address "the truth" through our rhetoric, even when just offering our opinion, we will continue to enchain our ability to get closer to it. Our trained rhetoric is literally designed to steer us away from the truth.

As for the rest of what you said, I will not address it directly, not because you don't make good points, you do, but because there is something I don't think you appreciate. My investigation strongly supports the assertion that the world is pretty much one big conspiracy. Read my report. The part there so far shows the creation of the singular corporation that exists (there is only one corporation in the world), and the single body of people that control it. The next part (coming out very soon I hope) will make it super clear that pretty much everything is a conspiracy. The "news," what is shown on the news, is almost never the truth. It is all contrived. Mostly, it is stuff taken out of context, but it is also actors staging events to fill a narrative (having little to nothing to do with the truth of an event), false flags, real events created by agents provocateur, etc. There are even people on tic tok, youtube, etc. that are such actors and agents provocateur, designed to feed the "independent journalist" into believing a false narrative, even when that narrative is different from the mainstream narrative. That doesn't mean that any or all such pieces of evidence are false, but they are all suspect, and should be looked at with that lens.

The Matrix is complete, with many mouths and many opinions, designed to be in opposition, all coming from a single source. In such a world, it is very difficult to be discerning. It is only through considered debate and presentation of evidence that we can get closer to the truth of anything. It is essential that we relearn our training to appeal to ethos and pathos (which are always fallacies), and learn to appreciate that even appeals to logos are not "the truth," even if they are logically true (which just means logically consistent, the axioms could be false or otherwise unstated). By working together, and relearning our rhetoric, we can get closer to the truth. That is the only way.

make responses/attacks personal

I do not think I attacked you at all. If you think I did, please point out how I did. I addressed your rhetoric for the reasons stated above. That is not a personal attack from my perspective. I do that to everyone. I am an equal opportunity offender in that regard.

Every post people make on this message board doesn't have to be a diatribe, full of links and other supporting evidence.

I agree, but you began your post with an ad hominem. This all by itself is hugely problematic. That should never be done, and is one of the primary tools of all fuckery used by the Cabal to create false beliefs.

People believe what they believe primarily because of ad hominems, and not evidence itself. That is why all "fact checkers" begin with an ad hominem, designed to steer the conversation away from the actual evidence presented without actually addressing the evidence presented. Fact checkers later (usually) go on to address evidence, but the stage is set with the ad hominem, placing the future address of evidence into a box, falsely supporting the argument by basing it on a fallacy.

what you did was to focus on my opinion

I focused on your presentation of your opinion because it is essential that people understand the depth of the hidden fuckery in such presentations of argument. The Matrix, a completely false belief about reality, is created primarily through appeals to ethos (ad hominem and pro hominem), and by out of context (or woefully insufficient context) "debunkings," both of which you did in your original response. The discussion of the facts presented is important, and I didn't do that, but I feel it is far more important for us to all appreciate how our own rhetoric reflects that of the primary tools used by the Cabal to create false beliefs. THAT understanding is what's most important in the solution, not the particulars of any one specific event. Until we all understand how to address "the truth" through our rhetoric, even when just offering our opinion, we will continue to enchain our ability to get closer to it. Our trained rhetoric is literally designed to steer us away from the truth.

As for the rest of what you said, I will not address it directly, not because you don't make good points, you do, but because there is something I don't think you appreciate. My investigation strongly supports the assertion that the world is pretty much one big conspiracy. Read my report. The part there so far shows the creation of the singular corporation that exists (there is only one corporation in the world), and the single body of people that control it. The next part (coming out very soon I hope) will make it super clear that pretty much everything is a conspiracy. The "news," what is shown on the news, is almost never the truth. It is all contrived. Mostly, it is stuff taken out of context, but it is also actors staging events to fill a narrative (having little to nothing to do with the truth of an event), false flags, real events created by agents provocateur, etc. There are even people on tic tok, youtube, etc. that are such agents provocateur, designed to feed the "independent journalist" into believing a false narrative, even when that narrative is different from the mainstream narrative. That doesn't mean that any or all such pieces of evidence are false, but they are all suspect, and should be looked at with that lens.

The Matrix is complete, with many mouths and many opinions, designed to be in opposition, all coming from a single source. In such a world, it is very difficult to be discerning. It is only through considered debate and presentation of evidence that we can get closer to the truth of anything. It is essential that we relearn our training to appeal to ethos and pathos (which are always fallacies), and learn to appreciate that even appeals to logos are not "the truth," even if they are logically true (which just means logically consistent, the axioms could be false or otherwise unstated). By working together, and relearning our rhetoric, we can get closer to the truth. That is the only way.

make responses/attacks personal

I do not think I attacked you at all. If you think I did, please point out how I did. I addressed your rhetoric for the reasons stated above. That is not a personal attack from my perspective. I do that to everyone. I am an equal opportunity offender in that regard.

Every post people make on this message board doesn't have to be a diatribe, full of links and other supporting evidence.

I agree, but you began your post with an ad hominem. This all by itself is hugely problematic. That should never be done, and is one of the primary tools of all fuckery used by the Cabal to create false beliefs.

People believe what they believe primarily because of ad hominems, and not evidence itself. That is why all "fact checkers" begin with an ad hominem, designed to steer the conversation away from the actual evidence presented without actually addressing the evidence presented. Fact checkers later (usually) go on to address evidence, but the stage is set with the ad hominem, placing the future address of evidence into a box, falsely supporting the argument by basing it on a fallacy.

what you did was to focus on my opinion

I focused on your presentation of your opinion because it is essential that people understand the depth of the hidden fuckery in such presentations of argument. The Matrix, a completely false belief about reality, is created primarily through appeals to ethos (ad hominem and pro hominem), and by out of context (or woefully insufficient context) "debunkings," both of which you did in your original response. The discussion of the facts presented is important, and I didn't do that, but I feel it is far more important for us to all appreciate how our own rhetoric reflects that of the primary tools used by the Cabal to create false beliefs. THAT understanding is what's most important in the solution, not the particulars of any one specific event. Until we all understand how to address "the truth" through our rhetoric, even when just offering our opinion, we will continue to enchain our ability to get closer to it. Our trained rhetoric is literally designed to steer us away from the truth.

As for the rest of what you said, I will not address it directly, not because you don't make good points, you do, but because there is something I don't think you appreciate. My investigation strongly supports the assertion that the world is pretty much one big conspiracy. Read my report. The part there so far shows the creation of the singular corporation that exists (there is only one corporation in the world), and the single body of people that control it. The next part (coming out very soon I hope) will make it super clear that pretty much everything is a conspiracy. The "news," what is shown on the news, is almost never the truth. It is all contrived. Mostly, it is stuff taken out of context, but it is also actors staging events to fill a narrative (having little to nothing to do with the truth of an event), false flags, real events created by agents provocateur, etc. There are even people on tic tok, youtube, etc. that are such agents provocateur, designed to feed the "independent journalist" into believing a false narrative, even when that narrative is different from the mainstream narrative. That doesn't mean that any or all such pieces of evidence are false, but they are all suspect, and should be looked at with that lens.

The Matrix is complete, with many mouths and many opinions, designed to be in opposition, all coming from a single source. In such a world, it is very difficult to be discerning. It is only through considered debate and presentation of evidence that we can get closer to the truth of anything. It is essential that we relearn our training to appeal to ethos and pathos (which are always fallacies), and learn to appreciate that even appeals to logos are not "the truth," even if they are logically true (which just means logically consistent, the axioms could be false or otherwise unstated). By working together, and relearning our rhetoric, we can get closer to the truth. That is the only way.

make responses/attacks personal

I do not think I attacked you at all. If you think I did, please point out how I did. I addressed your rhetoric for the reasons stated above. That is not a personal attack from my perspective. I do that to everyone. i am an equal opportunity offender in that regard.

Every post people make on this message board doesn't have to be a diatribe, full of links and other supporting evidence.

I agree, but you began your post with an ad hominem. This all by itself is hugely problematic. That should never be done, and is one of the primary tools of all fuckery used by the Cabal to create false beliefs.

People believe what they believe primarily because of ad hominems, and not evidence itself. That is why all "fact checkers" begin with an ad hominem, designed to steer the conversation away from the actual evidence presented without actually addressing the evidence presented. Fact checkers later (usually) go on to address evidence, but the stage is set with the ad hominem, placing the future address of evidence into a box, falsely supporting the argument by basing it on a fallacy.

what you did was to focus on my opinion

I focused on your presentation of your opinion because it is essential that people understand the depth of the hidden fuckery in such presentations of argument. The Matrix, a completely false belief about reality, is created primarily through appeals to ethos (ad hominem and pro hominem), and by out of context (or woefully insufficient context) "debunkings," both of which you did in your original response. The discussion of the facts presented is important, and I didn't do that, but I feel it is far more important for us to all appreciate how our own rhetoric reflects that of the primary tools used by the Cabal to create false beliefs. THAT understanding is what's most important in the solution, not the particulars of any one specific event. Until we all understand how to address "the truth" through our rhetoric, even when just offering our opinion, we will continue to enchain our ability to get closer to it. Our trained rhetoric is literally designed to steer us away from the truth.

As for the rest of what you said, I will not address it directly, not because you don't make good points, you do, but because there is something I don't think you appreciate. My investigation strongly supports the assertion that the world is pretty much one big conspiracy. Read my report. The part there so far shows the creation of the singular corporation that exists (there is only one corporation in the world), and the single body of people that control it. The next part (coming out very soon I hope) will make it super clear that pretty much everything is a conspiracy. The "news," what is shown on the news, is almost never the truth. It is all contrived. Mostly, it is stuff taken out of context, but it is also actors staging events to fill a narrative (having little to nothing to do with the truth of an event), false flags, real events created by agents provocateur, etc. There are even people on tic tok, youtube, etc. that are such agents provocateur, designed to feed the "independent journalist" into believing a false narrative, even when that narrative is different from the mainstream narrative. That doesn't mean that any or all such pieces of evidence are false, but they are all suspect, and should be looked at with that lens.

The Matrix is complete, with many mouths and many opinions, designed to be in opposition, all coming from a single source. In such a world, it is very difficult to be discerning. It is only through considered debate and presentation of evidence that we can get closer to the truth of anything. It is essential that we relearn our training to appeal to ethos and pathos (which are always fallacies), and learn to appreciate that even appeals to logos are not "the truth," even if they are logically true (which just means logically consistent, the axioms could be false or otherwise unstated). By working together, and relearning our rhetoric, we can get closer to the truth. That is the only way.