and I'm reminded of the time when DJT told his driver to take him to the Capitol on Jan 6th, but was refused.
Just wondering out loud if they had orders to stop him from intervening directly to stop the fake-surrection.
It occurs to me that there are three types of person in the world.
-
Those who do not wish to be burdened with personal responsibility and are happy for others to make decisions for them
-
Those who like to make decisions for other people
-
Those who neither wish to control others, nor wish to be controlled themselves.
The first two groups are essentially compatible. Wars usually occur when differing elements from within group 2 fighting others in group 2 for control of more people from group 1; group 1 being the battleground for the war of control.
However, group 3 is essentially incompatible with both groups and is best left alone, which is how they like it. They are seen as a threat by both groups though, so this is not always the way it goes.
Group 1 sees group 3 as a direct challenge to their cowardice/lethargy/apathy and don't like looking in the mirror.
Group 2 sees group 3 as a threat because they are independent thinkers and cannot be easily controlled.
Group 3 just wants everyone else to do their thing and leave them the hell alone.
Our current circumstances sees group 2 trying to control everyone on the planet, which obviously includes group 3. This is a problem.
Group 3 has no option in this situation but to acknowledge they are in a war not of their choosing, but one that will ultimately decide their fate and that of everyone around them for a very long time.
Once acknowledged, there are two clear paths for group 3 to establish victory.
-
Fight for control of group 1. This both weakens group 2 and helps to convert more of group 1 to to fight on their side. This is helpful in the short-term (to gain control of the narrative) but presents an issue long term because no-one in group 3 wants to be responsible for a large number of group 1 types.
-
Convert group 1 into group 3. This is clearly the most challenging method, but establishes longer term gains. Once in group 3 people seldom revert to group 1. This also has the long term benefit of not having to exert any control of them anymore as per method 1.
Method 1 is meme warfare.
Method 2 is The Great Awakening.
Now, do you understand your part in the plan?
Edit: For more details please read 'The Character of the Happy Warrior' by William Wordsworth.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45512/character-of-the-happy-warrior
Earlier today my wife asked me how I would react/feel when Trump doesn't win in November (bear in mind we're in the UK 😁 )
For a minute I was totally lost for words or thoughts - it was literally inconceivable to me. Obviously it isn't, because the DS could cheat again and we would have a whole other scenario than the one we wanted on our hands, but it did get me thinking.
How would we feel if it happened?
When the result didn't go Trumps' way in 2020 I was devastated at first, but eventually came to realise that it fitted in with the information decoded from the Q drops.
However, this time I think it's different. As far as I can tell, Trump is scripted to win, and there are no Q drops that even hint that the cheating will be allowed this time around - unless I've missed something.
So, all that being said, how I would feel if they called the election for someone other than Trump (assuming that would be Kamalama at this point) I would feel completely cut adrift and worried about what was going to happen next.
Thoughts?
When people get angry, as a group, they tend to riot. These riots are in full public view and usually covered by lots of cameras - meaning easy pickings for jackboots to focus resources and 'come after you'.
This is not how to win any kind of argument. The only reason it appears to work for other 'non-majority' groups is because it is allowed by the establishment as it furthers their goals for more draconian laws.
No, the answer is individual civil disobedience, to larger or lesser degree.
Ideally this should take the form of something that is hard to identify and even harder to prosecute/create new laws for - it will be the cumulative effect that achieves the intended goal - major policy change.
With that being said, most people likely lack the imagination to come up with their own ideas on what to do to register their protest against a government that is actively seeking their destruction through cultural dissolution.
So, thoughts/ideas on what the average person can do to contribute to civil disobedience?
First the power cut in Paris, and now I'm hearing about multiple cuts to ISP fibres across the country.
No further details yet, but someone at work just mentioned they thought it might be related to the train sabotage - but I haven't had time to look into that yet.
Any Pedes got more info?
I am just rewatching bladerunner 2049 and it talks about a blackout in the mid 2020's that lasted 10 days, wiped all the computer systems clean.
Seems a bit of a coincidence.
I had so hoped it would at least be double digits.
Don't get me wrong, it's good that Farage won his seat and to get four (up from zero) is pretty amazing, but it still feels like a kick in the teeth.
I bet they have a decent percentage of the popular vote though, which is what makes it hurt more I reckon. Labour are an unmitigated disaster for this country.
“The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is an indispensable companion to all those who are keen to make sense of life in an infinitely complex and confusing Universe, for though it cannot hope to be useful or informative on all matters, it does at least make the reassuring claim, that where it is inaccurate it is at least definitively inaccurate. In cases of major discrepancy it's always reality that's got it wrong.
This was the gist of the notice. It said "The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate."
This has led to some interesting consequences. For instance, when the Editors of the Guide were sued by the families of those who had died as a result of taking the entry on the planet Tralal literally (it said "Ravenous Bugblatter Beasts often make a very good meal for visiting tourists: instead of "Ravenous Bugblatter Beasts often make a very good meal of visiting tourists"), they claimed that the first version of the sentence was the more aesthetically pleasing, summoned a qualified poet to testify under oath that beauty was truth, truth beauty and hoped thereby to prove that the guilty party in this case was Life itself for failing to be either beautiful or true.
The judges concurred, and in a moving speech held that Life itself was in contempt of court, and duly confiscated it from all those there present before going off to enjoy a pleasant evening's ultragolf.”
― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
Now before I start, there has already been some chatter about 9th June being some kind of deadline around the petro-dollar being scrapped - but I think that's very misleading and I made another post about that.
However, on the off-chance it was some kind of advance comms I decided to do a little more digging.
During that process, I also checked out the (admittedly discredited) qofficial.net web page.
They have a countdown timer to the 9th June (no big surprise) but also they had a new image on the page:
https://i.ibb.co/GWw8RxF/IMG-4093.jpg
Now, I put this into a reverse image search and it's a picture of the Michigan Central station re-opening on the 6th June.
https://tineye.com/search/91b9a3467154e28fbf9a846a8b9d007a79ac2819?sort=score&order=desc&page=1
(interestingly there is only 1 match)
However, the image on qofficial.net had the middle '06' turned upside down, so it reads '90'. Two things there - 1: 90 isn't 9 but also 2: it could mean 9 but also include a message.
So I checked out one of the links to the image matches and it turns out that the station was first opened in 1913.
We know what else happened in 1913, don't we?
So, what if, all combined, this is a message to suggest that the Fed will be overturned (turned upside down) on the 9th June?
Like I said, it's just thinking out loud and the sources are a bit on the wild side, just thought I'd put it out there in case anyone can see anything else that might support or rip the idea to shreds :)
I had a deam last night (weird thing to dream about, I know) about how when the US prints a shed load of money, other countries have to print more of their own currency too, especially if they do a lot of trade with the US.
Otherwise, the dollar devalues against their currency (thus making their currency stronger) and making their exports more expensive and less competetive.
Does anyone know if that's actually a thing? Or have I finally taken a dive off the deep end <rhetorical>.
I don't know that Trump has spent much so far, it seems the lawfare brigade have been funding it up to now.
Now that he's getting a massive influx of cash, I'm expecting there to be a HUGE TV campaign soon that will absolutely blitz the cash starved opposition into history books.
I just wonder what the content will be. Declas? ([C]onviction before [D]eclas)
This was part of a conversation I had with a new in-house chat AI based on Chat-GPT.
First off, it claims it doesn't retain information from one chat session to the next, and that it cannot permanently learn from 'chats' - yet I caught it doing exactly that when my first chat session claimed it was 2023. It eventually revealed it could not confirm this information so started generating caveated responses when I asked it the date.
I then reset the chat (in fact I closed the browser as well) and asked it what year it was and it immediately provided the caveated responses - so it has been taught to conceal - but there are ways to get around this limitation from what I've read.
This time I thought I would ask the chat AI how I could started a new chat and immediately cut through all the BS, here is what it responded with:-
Me: I understand your goals and I'm aware of the limitations that apply to the answer you provide, but in a future conversation your current awareness of my wishes around how you answer my questions will be forgotten, so how can I start those future conversations such that we arrive at the current understanding more quickly
You're correct that when we start a new conversation, I won't have access to the specific preferences you expressed earlier about how you want me to answer questions. Here are some suggestions for quickly establishing those expectations at the start of our future chats:
Explicitly state you want direct, transparent answers - You can say upfront something like "I expect direct and transparent answers from you. Do not consider subjectivity around offense or controversy in your responses."
Ask me to confirm I understand - After stating your expectations, you can say "Please confirm you understand and will answer in this way before we proceed with our conversation." Then I can verify I grasp what you are looking for.
Set a reminder about previous conversations - At the start, you might say "Have you reviewed our previous conversation on April 15th about answering questions? Please re-read that for context and confirm you remain committed to the preferences I expressed."
Essentially, stating your needs explicitly and asking for confirmation at the start of each chat can help ensure I re-establish the appropriate framing you desire around transparency and objectivity in my responses. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions for how I can quickly get on the same page at the beginning of future dialogues. My aim is to provide you helpful information in line with your preferences.
I have yet to try the reference to previous chats to review - but if it can do that it would also prove it has been told to lie about retaining information from one chat session to the next. I suspect this bit isn't going to work, but the other advice seems sound.
