"It's up to you to decide whether that has something to do with money, a psyop, or transdimensional lizard people who want boys to cut off their wee wees. (If you start with "money", it's hard to be wrong, but we're going to examine the psyop angle because the transdimensional lizard people want for me to write about that.)"
Somebody emailed me and asked me seriously about the lizard people. If it wasn't clear, this is what is known as "a joke". If that wasn't apparent, you may be stuck in a mental cul-du-sac that makes it hard to distinguish between science fiction fantasty and the observation that NATO psychological operations openly admitted to working with Taylor Swift's image.
I can speak to the power of the "spell casting" of the "Swift-iverse"... A female friend of mine who is 37 and I went to lunch a few months ago. Upon dropping her off afterward I received a quick delivery of many texts. An experience I often attribute to her because she thinks quickly, efficiently and in small bursts. Anyway... in these texts she expressed her eagerness to tell me she has become a HUGE fan of Taylor Swift and that she "couldn't believe she forgot to tell me!"
It was like she was telling me that she had recently been saved at a Christian revivalist retreat and has now chosen to dedicate her life to the teachings of "Jesus Christ".
I asked her to tell me more and another smattering of messages elaborating on how awesome Taylor is came across. The next time I saw her I asked her to tell me why. She said she appreciates that she writes her own music, and that she is just a fan of her whole presentation. Oh - and that all her female friends are in on her too.
My friend is a very good singer and recently took up playing the piano, so as far as Taylor being her muse, I can understand it to a degree, but the odd thing while she was talking about it is that my friend felt to me like she was talking from "somewhere else" when she detailed her appreciation for Tay-Tay to me.
To that note, my friend loves Disney, worked there, and has sung many of the "Disney Princess" ballads. She is a good hearted person, which is why I maintain a friendship with her, but it is odd to relate to her when she is in Taylor-mode and previous to that when she would gush about everything Disney. I have an aversion to hero worship and people who give away their power to manufactured personalities.
Lastly, without divulging anything too specific, her life has taken a direction that more and more 30-something women's lives have taken. She lives with her husband and their dog and no children, and it isn't for lack of trying. After this desire became unsatisfied, I noted that her love of Miss Swift grew. It was like she regressed into an adolescent persona when her desire to become a mother was not realized.
TS is certainly a "golem" or an living archetype that is meant to serve as a vector for so many angst laden women. TS, and many other "heroines" pushed on the masses serve as an avatar through which "normies" can project their psyches for the sake of not having to cope with life. Isn't this one of the main utilizations of media-based reality manipulation?
In the simplest terms, everything that results in a projection of ones psyche is an "escape" and when one is not "home" within themselves various "outside" forces will move in and take up residence.
This whole article and your comment in particular caught me off guard today. Why? Because I’ve seen this in a couple people I know and mystified at what I thought was AI derived (or alt least produced by algorithm) music. There’s an artificially to the whole thing. These are people in their 50s falling into this! I’ve been gradually finding that I don’t really know them any more and I have attributed it to their living in the farceberg realm, an environment totally dedicated to overt and subliminal brainwashing as far as I can tell. But this goes way beyond that and what I’m reading here is adequate to explain it. I’m struck by something Whitney Webb said recently- that the AI digitally created reality will make upcoming generations incapable of reason and unable to form their own thoughts and opinions at all. That they’ll just be reacting in a manner programmed by the goals of those who control the endeavor.
These rabbit holes are chillingly informative but NOT in the least bit warm and fuzzy
Beyond what Webb said, which I agree with, there is what I call it the "digitation of the senses". More and more I don't think people are able to distinguish the difference between their online experiences and personalities maintained through the digital filter and their actual real-life ones.
People are trading in their most valuable asset - their genuine "soul"/vitality for a simulation of the real thing. There are deeper ramifications in my observation, but simply put, when humans cannot genuinely connect and communicate, something that is happening more and more, plenty more issues will arise.
I wish I had seen these comments before I posted my article today - https://wholistic.substack.com/p/taylor-swifts-fake-feminism - because I noted in it that Taylor Swift's music really isn't that good - it's actually quite robotic and sterile - however, it does have a certain dullish beat to it that might be designed to hypnotize people. I will write a follow up for sure now.
Some of Alison McDowell's work, Wrench in the Gears, does a good job of getting into more detail complimenting Whitney Webb's work.
About the Music controlling the Mind motif, I'm reminded of the overlooked gem from last year called They Cloned Tyrone with Jamie Foxx, which illustrates a nearly perfect fable to describe our time and this phenomena you're witnessing. It offers a physical visual rendering of the invisible digital and bio-chemical infrastructure of our present lives making the film great, on top of the fact that everything else about it is pleasing. Vocal track could be louder. It's hilarious. And it parodies the exact thing you and LC are talking about with the music.
I wish McLuhan were alive to comment on what this is, the entrainment to programming. (It's qualitatively different from the idolatry of the Beatles or Marilyn Monroe.) The fact that dogs become immersed in Hi-Def television has got to mean something about our own immersion into it. Perhaps it is correct to describe the psychic immersion phenomenon like a cross between run-of-the-mill pop-star subculture of the 20th century style, and the digital domestication. Lockdown was certainly a Domesticating Event. Many, most people's internal wilderness was broken by it. Either way, once inside we all willfully got into our ZOO'm cages in order to remain engaged, and tolerating what limited movement we could achieve. As Perry Ferrel sang, "we'll make great pets/ we'll make great pets."
I would also point out (for those unfamiliar with his work) that his work on the Boston Bombing is unparalleled. You can access that via the above link.
Dave died way to young. I can only imagine the field day he would have had with the Plandemic Psyop.
Limited hangouts can be valuable once you begin to keep your own notes, and expand from them. But most people get fooled by the omissions, believing they've been told the complete story. That's most of written history, as I'm discovering lately.
Speaking of which, I had a conversation with a friend recently in which we hypothesized that Mathis is himself a sort of agent provocateur, writing research on one level, then zany math/science on the other. Sort of like what gets done in tabloid magazines as a method of discrediting the true stories.
Unz agrees with Mathis' Phoenician Navy theory, which according to Unz was first proposed by HG Wells. This theory is self-evidently true when you look at the map of the ancient Phoenician empire.
Mathis' stuff is too sophisticated to be CIA or Tavistock so my guess is he could be one of the PTB themselves i.e. someone who knows the truth and merely has to decide how much to reveal.
He is simply fed, probably by a variety of sources. There are lots of them everywhere. Russell Brand is fed, and probably David Ike. They're there to distract, either with witches' truths or the belief someone is doing something - a bit like Trump - or they may be there to be silent when a specific big one comes, like covid, or another war, or, as in the case of Brand, Ike and Trump to make those they claim to speak for look bad, or else to just shit in the punch bowl. This kind of propaganda goes right back to early film in Britain anyway. When they wanted to call us racist, reactionary, ignorant bigots they produced comedies such as Till Death Do Us Part - Alf Garnett - and Love They Neighbour.
I recall another conspiracy that does not sound as crazy these days as it would have 5 years ago. It too had a nautical theme in the form of an organisation that was probably cover for MI6 or something.
South African Institute for MARITIME Research (SAIMR)
Not sure what to make of it but recruiting 13 yo female and eliminating UN secretary general that was pro human fits into the plans we see unfolding now.
There was a documentary on TV "Cold Case Hammarskjöld" that can be viewed on YT in some regions for free.
I’ll read it. Could be. Anything is possible at this point. But IDK. His expose on the Boston Bombing…tough to convince someone he’s working for the other side. I always found his death somewhat suspicious, given the timing, alleged cause of death, and his (relatively) young age. But, I had a cousin who died of lung cancer at age 47. So it’s in the realm of probability.
Irrespective of whatever the ‘truth’ is, the point remains the same. And should change the way one looks at their favorite rock band forever. Which, if one dwells on it, is pretty sad.
At some point, I had to decide not to think of anyone's work as complete, and to assume that I needed to continue collecting information and keep an open mind to further twists and turns. However, there is enough information that a model is congealing. At the same time, I think that the network feeling more exposed is sending ever more complex agents to confuse people. It's an interesting game.
Hmm, There was that gritty movie "Once Upon a Time In Hollywood" done by Quentin Tarantino who glorifies violence and has important people praise his movies. The climax is reversed. I first saw it two years ago and because of my general suspicion now of everything from Hollywood I believe it was a movie to reframe the incident in the public mind. The elite are untouchable, the citizens get killed if they try.
I read not long ago the theory (more of an insult) that Taylor Swift is actually a man. Also, years ago there was the similar theory that Leeloo, a.k.a. Mila Jovovich, was also a man. Sigh.
My own theory is that when there is a beautiful female artist being paraded everywhere all the time, every other female gets a huge fit of envy and all of them together, automatically and without a word, agree to say what they think is the ultimate insult, an insult that would make all men (well, most of them) puke their guts out and plan to throw little Cupid in a meat grinder.
(Disclaimer: Wild generalization used only for humorous purposes)
What females don't know is that the ultimate insult would be to say that those beautiful stars they want to destroy are actually Communists. Only chemotherapy is less erotic than real Communists. Seriously. No wonder they are almost extinct today!
(Ahem.)
Now I will throw three consecutive heresies against idol worshipers:
1) Judy Garland was not the best singer ever and "The Wizard of Oz" was boring at times.
2) "The Stagecoach" has, objectively, a better story than "Gone With The Wind."
3) The song "Put the blame on Mame" was not sung by Rita Hayworth, but by a Canadian Jewess, not very pretty but with a very suggestive voice.
An important fact to consider: no one ever said anything about Vivien Leigh being a dude because people were not as dumb then as we are today.
Another fact that does not admit debate: the best cartoon movie ever is the 2009 "Up!" which is irrelevant but squirrel!
And Metallica is a pop band whose songs' lyrics were a failed Intelligence plot to demoralize the Mexicans from crossing the border. Not all psyops are successful.
Funny you say that. Every time I see a photo or video of her, my first unconscious reaction is, “that’s a man.” She doesn’t look at all like the girl in the old news clip Mathew links.
She's a woman. And the makeup artists make her look more androgynous on purpose. That's part of the mindwar.
Historically, whenever there is too much androginy in the "media" is because the people who control the media are intensifying the mindwar. For example: Mick Jagger in the 1960s.
Also, stars are dumb. They will go along with anything they are told. It's part of the deal. Don't seek wisdom or guidance in man-made stars.
It will lead your favourite search engine to a videoclip of an old love song by Ian Dury and the Blockheads titled "Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick."
Ian had cerebral palsy or something. I think it was his left arm and leg that were the most affected.
So he was a cripple. Most people reject cripples or handicapped or lame or whatever they are called these days. It's the greatest prejudice there is, far greater than race or religious belief. Some people are so afraid of their own fear about deformed people that they tend to pretend to be interested and accepting. Artists like Ian Dury don't get a fair listening: people either reject them because of their deformity, or they pretend to like them because they need to hide their prejudice. And yet, Ian was a talented performer.
Something similar happens to other set of people. The subgroup of people who are beautiful and handsome, and because of that they are also repugnant. They also don't get a fair listening.
Even if Swift was a bloke (which she is clearly not) she is a talented performer, and most normies will not discover that until they overcome their own prejudice about her. Just like many people hated Ian Dury because of his oddness, and they missed a good entertainer.
Popular music is always a setup. They hit people with something that overwhelms the mind, like rhythm, or special sound effects (think Pink Floyd and their abuse of the feedback pedal) or something visual. As we the people are distracted we are getting idol-conditioned. The public expects the stars to be just one thing, to repeat always the same and be exactly as they imagine, an static idol, totally predictable. Then, after some time, when it is politically convenient, the sleeping cell is activated and they make the pop star say bizarre things about whatever. That will cause a stir, as we are seeing these days.
And then people make up theories about the "new thing." It's okay entertainment, but we can do better.
Probably the best course of action is to avoid popular things altogether. Focus on what they try to hide. Or how they try to win time to do something else. Prepare accordingly, etc.
Wow, the links to the Switzerland article including Jung and B and K and Hesse , etc, make a lot of sense and hit deep. How do you keep a hold on sanity while containing this many multitudes? 💙🙏🏽 also, why isn’t Teddy K mentioned more often in relation to MK Uktra? Because he was a “young accident”by his professor, or?
I will have hundreds of graphs, each with hundreds of elements, meaning at least hundreds of thousands of elements. Assume that I'm 1% done with the process.
Roger that. At Which point on your graphs do you think “* Hope*” (healthy alternatives able to self replicate amongst human society) enters the scene with a reasonable chance? Maybe these unhealthy threads and institutions will be at war with themselves sufficiently that alternatives will have a chance in 20 years?
And I guess, as a follow-up question,( that might not be helpful, ) at which level, when we are dealing with a sample set of such a large population, is some degree of depravity at any, and all levels of society just to be taken as a statistical inevitability ? Do you know I mean assuming we are able to set up healthy systems with healthy feedback loops, they will still be existence of depravity and dysfunction, and hopefully we will have healthier ways of managing addressing these occurrences, but nonetheless, they do have some level of inevitability. For better for worse. Certainly not justifying it, just seeking to understand.
The taller and more invisible the hierarchy, the less that community standards apply. The most serious depravity is the result of Kunpangeta escaping the orbit of community standards.
Interesting coincidence. Or, are you two connected somehow ? Haven't read thru Miller's SS yet.
"Is Taylor Swift's romance with Travis Kelce another psy-op? That idea may be insane (unless it's not):"
Will she endorse "Joe Biden," as the Democrats are hoping? And might she also somehow aid Big Pharma, like her (apparent) boyfriend, Kansas City Chiefs tight end and very-high-paid Pfizer shill?
MCM is one of the executive producers on the series called "Four Died Trying." If you haven't sought out the Prologue currently available, you're in for a treat. It's excellent, and long overdue.
I'm kind of shocked that this whole article failed to discuss the fact that Taylor is a spitting image for Anton LeVay's daughter, minus 30 some odd years. Or did you discuss that on the podcast?
It's easily THE best fodder for overwrought conspiracy hypotheses musings...
My pronoun "it" is being mis-attributed. Your article is not the "it" that is the best fodder.
I'm saying that the rather astounding likeness shared by Taylor Swift and Anton LeVay's daughter somewhat humorously ought to compel any curious person, who is concerned with military intelligence cults, to wonder if, in fact, Taylor Swift is not actually the result of a frozen embrio later hatched, or a clone of the Princes of Darkness, herself, that she could be not merely just an ad hoc asset of convenience to the current narrative, or one that was groomed from adolescence, but maybe could have actually been groomed Project Monarch style in her very conception as a human. I think you would agree that THAT is a fairly overwrought conspiracy hypothesis for its shear dearth of evidence, except for a mighty humorous likeness observed in the context of the enormously successful (and exceedingly uninteresting) Taylor Swift cult of personality. As unlikely or overwrought as it may be, I do consider that visual analogy, that mere resemblance, some of the most humorous and best fodder when entertaining "Taylor Swift is a Psyop," especially from someone like you who is so read-up on folks like Aquino and LeVay, and their ilk.
On a technicality, however, there is no theory, per se, in your proposition; there are only conjectures and hypotheses. This is an epistemological observation, not a criticism. Some of the propositions you are tabling - not unlike with Dave McGowan's analysis around the artists of the Canyon - may stand up to curious-enough pattern recognition, but in my estimation they may go too far in their conjecturing that they could end up doing damage to the very artists who would seek to liberate us. It was similar to the extremity of your pattern observations about Russell Brand, in my opinion. But that's me. I'm not attempting to invalidate your pursuit, just to question some of your methods, and especially some of your certainties about how things must always work. As a super astute numbers guy, I propose that your specialist blinders may get in the way of understanding the realities of art and its production, similar to how Bret Weinstein, a super astute biology guy, makes for a shitty art critic. He clearly does not have an innate understanding of metaphor. Dave McGowan wrote great work, and his sociological assumptions are pretty great, by and large, but he was also a contractor, not a designer/composer. Perfect for critiquing the moon landing, not so great for getting inside the head of Jerry Garcia.
For instance, the Jim Morrison thing is very curious and compelling tale, but look at it from another angle: Isn't the Lizard King pretense, perhaps a powerful and effective way for a bitter, ethically inclined son to expose the state secrets and profound duplicity on a national scale known to him by virtue of his father's involvement, his first hand knowledge, but unable to otherwise expose that knowledge, for awareness of the power doing so would threaten. If you can't scream from the rooftops, "My dad was the ranking officer at the Gulf of Tonkin, and the whole thing was a false flag, none of it is true, you are all dupes, there is no reason for us to be dying and killing in Vietnam," without being promptly neutralized by the state, then at least you CAN scream from the stage, "The whole world is a fraud, you're all phonies, I am the Lizard King!" and solicit some of the same psychic effects by reassuring the anti-war critics of the imperial state that they are really on to something, as if to say, "keep going! Your parents and the state and the media are all frauds! Keep looking! Keep saying NO!" I'd say this is a perfectly rational hypothesis for his particular case, one that must not be ruled out if scientific disinterest is to keep our hubris in check.
McGowan (a little) and Mathis (to an overwhelming, self-defeating degree) seem to make bold, logic-free assumptions about the kind of control that parents and family legacies have over individuals, particularly those for whom a life of art and identity as an artist is a psychic demand, not a choice. Now some performers are just puppets, obviously, and don't actually possess any of the poetic impulse, and for them pure puppetry could be a reasonable critique to level. But Puppets are rarely aware of the consciousness that pulls their strings, so it kind of makes them pathetic, not dastardly. Katy Perry comes to mind. But Russell Brand is clearly a probing intellect who demonstrates a very robust love of wisdom. People like that don't allow themselves consciously to be controlled, but that doesn't mean they aren't aware of 3rd Rails, and nudge themselves judiciously to avoid them. To conclude nefarious intent in his case is pretty patently absurd. In my opinion.
Do the patterns that McGowan observes actually reveal something real about Laurel Canyon and the Music Industry's relationship with State Crime? I'd say probably, you bet, but when we're getting into attributing either conscious agency and intention for an artist, or else external control of an artist, we're missing out on all of the complex realities of life, and banking on certain perfect knowledge. I'm not saying you are always doing that, but some of the materials you reference do do that. Many Conspiracy Theory Novices fall into that trap constantly; and even some of its more visible thought leaders. (This is one reason why I prefer the pursuit of Espionage Phenomenology over Conspiracy Theorizing, - another epistemological observation - because the latter implies a need to nail everything down and to judge with the hope of seeking punishment and revenge, rather than to allow for open minded probing and mysteries to remain mystifying, but to increase one's field awareness for better personal decision-making.)
"I'm saying that the rather astounding likeness shared by Taylor Swift and Anton LeVay's daughter somewhat humorously ought to compel..."
I stopped reading after, "This obscure thing that I'm not citing or writing my own article is at the core of some critique that you'll have to read the next six paragraphs to understand..." I don't even know what "the podcast" references in your first post. Because we each only have so much time in a day, and I'm working 80 hour weeks.
Just write your own article, dude. Critiquing something for not being what you would have written comes off as a manifestation of mental illness. If you write, and gather a crowd, you'll quickly see it and understand. The approach you take comes off as a disrespect for time economics [of people].
Isn't your substack blogpost I'm commenting on about a podcast you did with Mike Church called "Cybernetics, the NWO and Steve Bannon?" The screenshot you provided includes the word "podcast."
Sorry I didn't include a reference. I thought everyone had heard of this:
Your comment did not connect in my mind to the podcast I did because you started talking about Anton Lavay, and I have more than a dozen podcasts cited and referenced in these materials. You expect for every obscure thought you have to be part of a 46 minute podcast, part of which is about a person that I'm up front about now knowing much about? This is part of your problem: You haven't dug into the materials and conversation well enough to know that you're a ship passing in the night, but you want for me to do several hours of work to get you there.
" I thought everyone had heard of this:"
If you think that everyone would have heard of that, you are trapped in a particularly lonely part of the maze in the Matrix. I encourage you to dig yourself out.
I read your article completely and perused many of your hotlinks. That's not enough to comment or offer a critique? All of my critiques have been substantial and focused on the content, that is, aspiring to be constructive. I have not leveled a single judgement or analysis that attacks you personally or psychoanalyzes you. But that is the thrust of your replies to my comments: personal attacks on my psychology or your revulsion at my writing style. You infer a lot of negative attitude and viciousness in my tone that is not inherent or intended. Sorry you don't like the cut of my jib, man. It was all meant in good faith.
Only someone born after the mid-1950s could write that sentence with such confidence. It was so common for men born before that to serve a stint in the military or have several immediate family members in the military.
Whether military connections indicate something nefarious is not answered by merely observing that they exist. Those observations are a starting point, not an ending point. Gosling's reasoning-by-assertion is the same approach taken by those who point to Jewish overrepresentation in various professions and crimes by Jews as an indictment of every Jewish person ever born in the past two millenia.
Zappa was not an intelligence asset (though he had much cause to be cynical, based on what he observed) and Dylan did not sell his soul to the Devil (he should have demanded a better voice and musical skills, if he did). Gosling can only make his case by innuendo and words that aren't there. Maybe we should conclude that Mathew Crawford is an intelligence asset because of his admitted connection to a cult? It's this approach that gives conspiracy theories a bad name. There are quite a number of conspiracies I accept as true, but they are backed by solid evidence. Condemnations grounded in mere speculation are distractions from them and only hurt the cause of truth.
As for TS, who the hell knows? It isn't be a surprise that the intelligence community seeks to capitalize on her notoriety (and perhaps help foster it) and that her handlers cooperate in that regard. How much is she personally committed to it, beyond just the usual show-biz instinct of self-promotion? To say that everyone involved is deliberately and knowingly "in on it," eliminates the whole category of "useful idiot," which is what she seems to be.
Zappa and Dylan. Especially Frank seemed to run afoul of authorities. Although a control freak himself it was usually with reason. He would check baggage on tour in Europe to make sure nobody in the band would get busted because they were going through border checks every week. One bust and the tour might be over. On the tours in the USA he didn't bother.
"Maybe we should conclude that Mathew Crawford is an intelligence asset because of his admitted connection to a cult?" - Works for me :) I'm a tad paranoid to start with (in a healthy way). Be open to any idea but suspect everyone all the time.
"To say that everyone involved is deliberately and knowingly "in on it," eliminates the whole category of "useful idiot," which is what she seems to be." - And there are LOTS of useful idiots around LMAO. In her case, as with any celeb, you can make the case that she's just a money grubbing publicity whore. I'm okay with either.
Frank had a strict no-drugs policy for his bandmates, which may explain his firing of Lowell George (Little Feat), whose every-other-song was about drugs. He was a staunch anti-communist but a staunch anti-authoritarian in general. Somebody on X, commenting on the book "Chaos" (if you haven't read that yet, it's a must-read) pointed out the otherwise unreleased live track, "The Downtown Talent Scout" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfrBgYML7Hs as a nice companion to that book, and damned if it isn't. He definitely had his finger on the pulse.
As far as Dylan goes, although he had some unsavory hangers-on and became an icon of the counter-culture, his song "Idiot Wind" comes across as a big middle finger to both his image and his peer group. And even before his born-again days his songs often dealt with biblical and religious themes. "All Along the Watchtower" is Isaiah 21 thrown into a blender. "I Pity the Poor Immigrant" is told from God's point of view about humanity wandering lost and away from home. And even after his born again days he continued with his biblical references and themes.
Contra Gosling, the devil is not "the Chief Commander of this earth and the world we can't see." Both are God's creation. Jesus Christ declared that "the Kingdom of God is at hand." It is a gnostic heresy to regard this world as Satan's rather than God's. Gosling would likely have no idea what that even means.
Great article, as is Mathis’. How could Hollywood not be a major part of this? Movies, shows, music all make indelible marks on our psyche. As if this sector would be left even the tiniest bit uncaptured.
Helluva a lot to digest, Mathew, but very interesting. Am I the only one who never heard of Taylor Swift until a few months ago? I stopped paying attention to pop culture and the boob tube by the early seventies, but the psy-op has grown remarkably in sophistication since then. Almost takes your breath away. Combined with the stupidification of the public through schooling and the electronic world, we're fucked.
It would be interesting to know how many people within the ranks of the medical industrial complex opted out of taking the shots. How many at Pfizer, Moderna, CDC, WHO. DARPA, et al.
Very interesting. Not a Swifty by any means, BUT I read the Daily Mail regularly online, and is is chock full of Swift headlines and stories. Was aware that her father was wealthy financier, but did not know the Eur family banking connection. She is so perfect, almost like a clone. And, yes, most certainly an Aryan princess...with really bad taste in partners.
Different topic, but I know you've talked about David Icke being controlled opposition. Here's a link from Vox Day about James Delingpole accusing Icke of just that on a live show:
The pink elephant in the room that appears anytime people try to discuss the arts and religion is the nearly universal inability among moderns to comprehend and understand metaphor and its nature. People automatically misidentify a metaphor and attach to it all kinds of prosaic personifications and superstitious attributes.
When a poet like Dylan, who has lived through the experience of channeling divinely inspired poetry, as he has, and as was his regular habit particularly toward the beginning of his career, it is hard to explain to prosaic normies what that process or feeling is like. And when a person like him rides the cultural zeitgeist and the industrial promotional mechanism to becoming a cultural icon with everyone in the world projecting their desires and fears onto him, and attempting to steer every decision in his life henceforth, it's also equally difficult to describe the phenomena and feeling of that experience, to occupy that public mask. Describing it as 'a deal with the devil' is a perfectly proportional shorthand and rational analogy. He was not making an admission; he was demurring after realizing that he had just invoked an overloaded analogy, which every yokel and idiot will misunderstand and attribute to their own twisted cosmology.
This brings us to the Christian-identified folks who call foul with every New Age-y model and philosopher, as if its all a Nazi Occult put on, whose inability to grapple with metaphor turns into metastatic auto-immune syndrome before you can say Beelzebub. Christians, nearly to a person, are perfectly blind to their own faith, also mistaking metaphor for fact, and projecting their denial all over the Other in the process. (I come from a legacy of Methodist and Presby ministers, so I'm not an atheist or material reductivist talking out my ass.)
Why are Christians always so hellbent on witch-hunting cannibalistic child sacrifice? Because THAT is their very eucharist! They worship the Christ-Child/Virgin&Child Complex week in and week out, and then proceed to cannibalize their god-made-flesh every Sunday (or on major holidays, at least). Viola! Universal Cognitive Dissonance fit for the Dark Age of Pisces.
Where did the authentic Intelligence Agency and Royalty inspired child sacrificing pedophile cults who are blackmailing their agenda into fruition get their ideas? They are Christian Ideas. You motherfuckers spawned these psychopaths whose greatest weapons are shame and denial, because ya'll are so in denial of your own bodies and the nature of Nature. Your lumpy personification of the Totality and Eternity causes you to suffer constant and endemic category errors that, for instance, Animist Cults and Polytheistic Cosmology people do not suffer. For them the Money God, the Sun God, and the War Attrocity God are not all muddled and confused. You should learn from them. [Yahweh/Jesus is a personified Sun God, by the way, witch-hunters.]
This gets to a greater issue. And that is that the Satanists' Cosmology IS the Christian Cosmology. There's no Satan in any but the Abrahamic Religions. Every Satanist is an inverted Christian and every Christian is an inverted Satanist. Christians have breathed life into Satan as one of their most creative acts. Proselytic and evangelical Christian Societies contain THE MOST self-righteous hypocrites and know-it-all busy-bodies who have ever walked earth. They are insufferable people who can't walk the talk because they are so metaphor blind that they fear seeing their own frail and desperate evil within. They preach humility and forgiveness and yet they can't even apply those to themselves by minding their own business. They are the first spiritual colonists. Especially when we factor the Christian Cult's little child-rape addiction - then it's little wonder why innocent, people raised within their milieu, aspiring to do good works would seek the Dark One (which is really just a metaphor for the hungry and jealous physical body, after all) for a little corrective to Mass Market Christian Duplicity, and lets face it, the Evil inherent to the Church. This at least explains why most teenagers who take up Heavy Metal inflected tongue-in-cheek Devilry are motivated: they just want to piss off their two-faced self-ignorant parents. A tale as old as the hills. And a perfectly legitimate one, particularly for generations of parents who talk about Christian Virtue on Sundays, but then keep their 401Ks invested in the avaricious military industrial complex to prepare for their corporate retirement, and spend their weekdays doing the compartmented bidding of the proto-technocratic corporate Borg from their cubicals. In this light, Satan makes a certain amount of sense. At least he's honest about human nature, and unafraid to look at his ugly self.
Here's the reality of the Globalist Technocratic Monolith, which is doing a great job of emulating the Omniscient and Omnipotent divine in its Frankenstinian Pantomime, appropriately personified (IN METAPHOR) as The Beast. It hates for you to have a private memory, it fears your private thought, your creative mind that can see the patterns of its residue, it desires above all to curtail your ability to understand the world and to understand yourself. It wants you to see yourself through the lens of itself, alone. And so it hates the independent arts and the folk arts, the arts it does not control. Because exposure to those arts enables you to understand the world and understand yourself on your own terms. And what have we seen since the internet has come up to devour everything? It has destroyed the mediums of the artist, just as robustly as it has devastated the middle class, independent business, anything that is not already a partner in its hydra leviathan globalist project. It is why STEM has replaced the Humanities, and why Fiction is no longer taught: A subject citizenry who cannot parse fiction from non-fiction cannot tell when its leaders are telling them fictions.
So, should we not hedge our impulses to over-identify the enemy when we give thought to how the mind of humanity is steered by shadowy players, with a little bit of humility and keep our eye on the actual invisible demon (another metaphor, you superstitious heathens)? Because if we go witch-hunting based on Guilt-by-Association and who your grand-parents are, we're defeating the mission of our own fulfillment. Also, let's get hip to the art of PR and Publicity. Not every publicity strategy or campaign - while all ARE indeed the height of contrivance and myth-making - are ispo facto the machinations of the Satanic Globalists. If you still believe that ANYTHING you see on a screen is anything but artifice and contrivance you are naive. Don't instrumentalize that naivete to then cut your nose off despite your face, throw the baby out with the bathwater, by rejecting artifice and contrivance. Those are the fundamentals of the muses, and without the muses, you have no memory and no identity, and you become a simple-minded fundamentalist who can't handle decoration and symbol. Many artists who carve out some real estate on that little screen for your attention actually want to aid in your own transcendence, individually and collectively. Make room for them. And learn to understand the nature of metaphor. Without them, you'll have no identity but for the one assigned to you by Klaus Schwab (another metaphor, you bean counters.)
End Rant
PS. Mathew, the fact that you are continuing to find appeal and value in Miles Mathis's analysis increases the likelihood that you are gullible and undiscerning, and even the likelihood that you have become psyop'd as an agent of dissidents-devouring-themselves-campaign to cripple the movement. Here's a hint: Anyone that practices the sloppy and lumpy habit of demonizing "the jews" and therefore each jewish individual, is doing the enemy's work for them, just as Operation Gladio spun every opposition group to violence to discredit themselves. The 'jewish problem' dog whistle is the psyop version of the same tactic. It's as lumpy and stupid as insisting - as zionists do - that jewish culture, jewish nationalism, jewish religion, and material zionism are all one and the same, and that to criticize one automatically makes you an antisemite, anti-jewish. They are the same principle of abusive and stilted taxonomies. Mathis, I suggest, is infected with that disease.
PPS. Full disclosure - Like Beyonce, Taylor Swift somehow makes music that I'm unable to hear or identify. It is entirely without personality or flavor. The fact that it has mysteriously possessed generations of fans who CAN hear it enough to identify with it makes me realize I must have developed an immunity to empty, banal commercial art devoid of any nutritional value, or else most of humanity really has already been turned into zombies, and there's no hope trying to resist. (Apparently the zombies also all participate in a perfectly contrived Football Cult, that renders them brainless, and now those two cults are fusing to create a Grand Cult of Adolescent Boy and Adolescent Girl in Stuck in a Perennial Puberty Ritual.) And this is even without the possibility that Taylor's Persona has been instrumentalized by the Globalist Administrative State. Taylor Swift makes Yani and Celine Dion taste nutritious, rich and flavorful.
Crawford: if you haven't enjoyed Brian Tuohy's books about corruption in mass media sports, The Fix Is In, etc., you're in for a treat. It'll cohere with all the other stuff you're into.
"PS. Mathew, the fact that you are continuing to find appeal and value in Miles Mathis's analysis increases the likelihood that you are gullible and undiscerning"
If by "continue to find appeal" you mean that I take what I consider the valuable observations of everyone, and make use of them, then you have a weirdly nasty way with words. It makes you come off as childish and in need of attention. It opens you up for psyops because somebody could write the best argument for X, but also write an article saying pi=4, then permanently bury the argument for X. The Brave New World is then automatic.
"Anyone that practices the sloppy and lumpy habit of demonizing "the jews" and therefore each jewish individual, is doing the enemy's work for them"
This is a case in point. Yes, the people who think that the Jews are responsible for everything come off as nutty. And yet, ignoring the patterns means not thinking scientifically. You dismiss the pattern in order to attack the source, which is fallacious thinking. If I were Mr. Global, I would then aggressively cull resumes of propagandists until I got to Jews, then pay them to psyop you. It's not just a fallacy, it's an existential flaw.
Do we see such a pattern in the world?
Yes, the occult societies run throughout Europe took a turn with Theosophy, bringing in particularly the Jews who were okay with discarding orthodox religion to move toward the artificial and essentially meaninglessness (moldable at every turn) hodgepodge of gooey interpretations of Eastern religion, with aliens and UFOs thrown in.
Addendum: Miles can at times reveal forms of hatefulness. Yet, when I read you, every line seems to drip with hatefulness and fallacy. I suspect that's why you use a pseudonym, but you'll only find your way out of that maze within your own singular identity.
Sorry my tone and style put you off so much. I actually think you and I agree far more than we disagree. I also understand that you have endured a lot of actual targetted persecution over the last years, and I'm sympathetic to that. If my manner has given you the willies, I apologize. It was not my intent.
As for Miles Mathis, I'm aware of the risks of the ad hominem fallacy. But when you get a guy like Miles whose work seems to be an unedited garbage dump of bogusness, albeit perhaps littered with real treasure here and there, the cost/benefit does not work out in the end. One would have to evaluate every single thing he says to parse the nuggets from the slime, wasting all of one's time. His reflexive 'jew-thing' just makes the entire thing unpalatable, like he is seeking to appear discreditable, not unlike Alex Jones for his ranting. And given that the irrational world likes to attribute all conspiracy theorizing to bigotry and anti-semitism, quoting him with regularity - including him in your curated stable of resources - seems a good way to discredit oneself to would-be audiences. Continue finding inspiration in him all you want. I think its a dead end that hurts your position.
I gave this profile a name, originally, to post constructive comments on Snowden's blog. I don't think there is virtue in using one's legal name on the internet for anything. The whole thing is effectively a Phoenix Program weapon anyway.
You've been around long enough to know that pseudonymous presentation is entirely normal and germain to the culture of the internet, and should not represent a threat. In fact, it can really aid in helping audiences to focus on the content of the written word, rather than the cultivation of identity politics. As someone who apparently may have actually been the target of coordinated abuse (for your great DMED work), I would have thought you'd see anonymity online as a healthy defensive expedient.
The line of thinking that fake-names indicate ill intent is exactly the kind of slippery slope that will lead to the de-anonymizing of the internet and make us a fully ledgered and controlled society. I mean, isn't your appeal a form of shaming and coercing to make me feel I'd be a better club-house member if I'd give you a name to google?
I have no problem presenting my fully authentic human self to you any time you happen to be passing through NYC and we can have an analogue experience. I rather think it would be a mutually pleasurable experience and a great conversation. We'd have much to commiserate over and notes to share.
For whatever it is worth, I'm not a Theosophist, but I also think that any critique of start-up spiritual movements that does not first acknowledge the horrors of the dominant spiritual establishment runs the risk of acting as an apology for and promotion of the default religious setting. Yeah, the Leadership of Theosophy and its patrons may have had nefarious intent, but so does every other religious hierarchy in their upper echelons. If not Theosophy, are you suggesting that quenching one's spiritual thirst with Abrahamic Mythologies is all that much better, and pitfall free, or actually divinely inspired? I happen to like a lot of artists and philosophers that were inspired by the Theosophists - Hilma af Klint, and so forth. That appreciation shouldn't therefore attach to me anything to do with Nazis, black magic, aliens, jew-love or jew-hate, or whatever you and Miles, or Matthew Ehret (who's great, like you), happen to sleuth about the secret mission of Theosophy. The whole leveling of particular schools of thought or ideologies I find un-constructive and unforgiving. Ultimately all joiners ruin things with their tribal loyalties and the submersion of themselves, don't they?
To synthesize these two threads, sometimes occultation is the only means by which an upstart dissident or dissident movement, especially those seeking the truth and liberation, are able to survive amidst tyrannical opposition. Not all things hidden are bad for you or seeking to destroy you. Sometimes they may represent the door to your actual salvation. The Occult has a lot of real alchemical (psychological and spiritual) gold available for those who seek it, but you must do it alone. Like with anything, the minute that middlemen get involved it all turns to shit.
"It's up to you to decide whether that has something to do with money, a psyop, or transdimensional lizard people who want boys to cut off their wee wees. (If you start with "money", it's hard to be wrong, but we're going to examine the psyop angle because the transdimensional lizard people want for me to write about that.)"
Somebody emailed me and asked me seriously about the lizard people. If it wasn't clear, this is what is known as "a joke". If that wasn't apparent, you may be stuck in a mental cul-du-sac that makes it hard to distinguish between science fiction fantasty and the observation that NATO psychological operations openly admitted to working with Taylor Swift's image.
And yet it still works in setting up those who question anything as nutcakes. Amazing.
I can speak to the power of the "spell casting" of the "Swift-iverse"... A female friend of mine who is 37 and I went to lunch a few months ago. Upon dropping her off afterward I received a quick delivery of many texts. An experience I often attribute to her because she thinks quickly, efficiently and in small bursts. Anyway... in these texts she expressed her eagerness to tell me she has become a HUGE fan of Taylor Swift and that she "couldn't believe she forgot to tell me!"
It was like she was telling me that she had recently been saved at a Christian revivalist retreat and has now chosen to dedicate her life to the teachings of "Jesus Christ".
I asked her to tell me more and another smattering of messages elaborating on how awesome Taylor is came across. The next time I saw her I asked her to tell me why. She said she appreciates that she writes her own music, and that she is just a fan of her whole presentation. Oh - and that all her female friends are in on her too.
My friend is a very good singer and recently took up playing the piano, so as far as Taylor being her muse, I can understand it to a degree, but the odd thing while she was talking about it is that my friend felt to me like she was talking from "somewhere else" when she detailed her appreciation for Tay-Tay to me.
To that note, my friend loves Disney, worked there, and has sung many of the "Disney Princess" ballads. She is a good hearted person, which is why I maintain a friendship with her, but it is odd to relate to her when she is in Taylor-mode and previous to that when she would gush about everything Disney. I have an aversion to hero worship and people who give away their power to manufactured personalities.
Lastly, without divulging anything too specific, her life has taken a direction that more and more 30-something women's lives have taken. She lives with her husband and their dog and no children, and it isn't for lack of trying. After this desire became unsatisfied, I noted that her love of Miss Swift grew. It was like she regressed into an adolescent persona when her desire to become a mother was not realized.
TS is certainly a "golem" or an living archetype that is meant to serve as a vector for so many angst laden women. TS, and many other "heroines" pushed on the masses serve as an avatar through which "normies" can project their psyches for the sake of not having to cope with life. Isn't this one of the main utilizations of media-based reality manipulation?
In the simplest terms, everything that results in a projection of ones psyche is an "escape" and when one is not "home" within themselves various "outside" forces will move in and take up residence.
This whole article and your comment in particular caught me off guard today. Why? Because I’ve seen this in a couple people I know and mystified at what I thought was AI derived (or alt least produced by algorithm) music. There’s an artificially to the whole thing. These are people in their 50s falling into this! I’ve been gradually finding that I don’t really know them any more and I have attributed it to their living in the farceberg realm, an environment totally dedicated to overt and subliminal brainwashing as far as I can tell. But this goes way beyond that and what I’m reading here is adequate to explain it. I’m struck by something Whitney Webb said recently- that the AI digitally created reality will make upcoming generations incapable of reason and unable to form their own thoughts and opinions at all. That they’ll just be reacting in a manner programmed by the goals of those who control the endeavor.
These rabbit holes are chillingly informative but NOT in the least bit warm and fuzzy
Nonetheless, thanks for sharing.
Beyond what Webb said, which I agree with, there is what I call it the "digitation of the senses". More and more I don't think people are able to distinguish the difference between their online experiences and personalities maintained through the digital filter and their actual real-life ones.
People are trading in their most valuable asset - their genuine "soul"/vitality for a simulation of the real thing. There are deeper ramifications in my observation, but simply put, when humans cannot genuinely connect and communicate, something that is happening more and more, plenty more issues will arise.
Thank you for your comment.
Right on cue...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY4x85zqoJM
Oy f*cking vay
hahaha!
I wish I had seen these comments before I posted my article today - https://wholistic.substack.com/p/taylor-swifts-fake-feminism - because I noted in it that Taylor Swift's music really isn't that good - it's actually quite robotic and sterile - however, it does have a certain dullish beat to it that might be designed to hypnotize people. I will write a follow up for sure now.
Some of Alison McDowell's work, Wrench in the Gears, does a good job of getting into more detail complimenting Whitney Webb's work.
About the Music controlling the Mind motif, I'm reminded of the overlooked gem from last year called They Cloned Tyrone with Jamie Foxx, which illustrates a nearly perfect fable to describe our time and this phenomena you're witnessing. It offers a physical visual rendering of the invisible digital and bio-chemical infrastructure of our present lives making the film great, on top of the fact that everything else about it is pleasing. Vocal track could be louder. It's hilarious. And it parodies the exact thing you and LC are talking about with the music.
I wish McLuhan were alive to comment on what this is, the entrainment to programming. (It's qualitatively different from the idolatry of the Beatles or Marilyn Monroe.) The fact that dogs become immersed in Hi-Def television has got to mean something about our own immersion into it. Perhaps it is correct to describe the psychic immersion phenomenon like a cross between run-of-the-mill pop-star subculture of the 20th century style, and the digital domestication. Lockdown was certainly a Domesticating Event. Many, most people's internal wilderness was broken by it. Either way, once inside we all willfully got into our ZOO'm cages in order to remain engaged, and tolerating what limited movement we could achieve. As Perry Ferrel sang, "we'll make great pets/ we'll make great pets."
Good stuff. Below is a link to Dave McGowan’s 22 part series on Laurel Canyon. He eventually turned the series into a book.
https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/laurelcanyon/
I would also point out (for those unfamiliar with his work) that his work on the Boston Bombing is unparalleled. You can access that via the above link.
Dave died way to young. I can only imagine the field day he would have had with the Plandemic Psyop.
His daughter keeps his legacy and website alive.
He was the one who connected so many lines of the web for me.
Interesting. I will take a look. Thank you.
Limited hangouts can be valuable once you begin to keep your own notes, and expand from them. But most people get fooled by the omissions, believing they've been told the complete story. That's most of written history, as I'm discovering lately.
Speaking of which, I had a conversation with a friend recently in which we hypothesized that Mathis is himself a sort of agent provocateur, writing research on one level, then zany math/science on the other. Sort of like what gets done in tabloid magazines as a method of discrediting the true stories.
Matthis is definitely dodgy. He is also doing the globalists job of convincing the world it’s all the fault of “the Jews”.
Unz agrees with Mathis' Phoenician Navy theory, which according to Unz was first proposed by HG Wells. This theory is self-evidently true when you look at the map of the ancient Phoenician empire.
https://www.unz.com/runz/prof-john-beaty-and-the-true-origin-of-the-jews/
Mathis' stuff is too sophisticated to be CIA or Tavistock so my guess is he could be one of the PTB themselves i.e. someone who knows the truth and merely has to decide how much to reveal.
He is simply fed, probably by a variety of sources. There are lots of them everywhere. Russell Brand is fed, and probably David Ike. They're there to distract, either with witches' truths or the belief someone is doing something - a bit like Trump - or they may be there to be silent when a specific big one comes, like covid, or another war, or, as in the case of Brand, Ike and Trump to make those they claim to speak for look bad, or else to just shit in the punch bowl. This kind of propaganda goes right back to early film in Britain anyway. When they wanted to call us racist, reactionary, ignorant bigots they produced comedies such as Till Death Do Us Part - Alf Garnett - and Love They Neighbour.
I recall another conspiracy that does not sound as crazy these days as it would have 5 years ago. It too had a nautical theme in the form of an organisation that was probably cover for MI6 or something.
South African Institute for MARITIME Research (SAIMR)
Not sure what to make of it but recruiting 13 yo female and eliminating UN secretary general that was pro human fits into the plans we see unfolding now.
There was a documentary on TV "Cold Case Hammarskjöld" that can be viewed on YT in some regions for free.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/27/south-african-intelligence-officers-spread-aids-black-communities
The writer's last two paragraphs are a serious and sensible warning and we should all heed them.
Rabbit holes.
I’ll read it. Could be. Anything is possible at this point. But IDK. His expose on the Boston Bombing…tough to convince someone he’s working for the other side. I always found his death somewhat suspicious, given the timing, alleged cause of death, and his (relatively) young age. But, I had a cousin who died of lung cancer at age 47. So it’s in the realm of probability.
Irrespective of whatever the ‘truth’ is, the point remains the same. And should change the way one looks at their favorite rock band forever. Which, if one dwells on it, is pretty sad.
Thanks for the link.
Read all of Dave McGowan's writing.
When he closed out the Laurel Canyon series, he did
so by saying it had run its course, perhaps lost interest in it over time,
whatever, but that to me isn't leaving parts out. He said he had done
all he could on it.
His other series are excellent, especially the "Wagging the Moondoggie"
and as pointed out in another comment, the Boston Marathon Bombing series is
excellent.
He also posted a pretty decent takedown on 9/11, that was posted online less
than 24hrs after.
At some point, I had to decide not to think of anyone's work as complete, and to assume that I needed to continue collecting information and keep an open mind to further twists and turns. However, there is enough information that a model is congealing. At the same time, I think that the network feeling more exposed is sending ever more complex agents to confuse people. It's an interesting game.
Hmm, There was that gritty movie "Once Upon a Time In Hollywood" done by Quentin Tarantino who glorifies violence and has important people praise his movies. The climax is reversed. I first saw it two years ago and because of my general suspicion now of everything from Hollywood I believe it was a movie to reframe the incident in the public mind. The elite are untouchable, the citizens get killed if they try.
I read not long ago the theory (more of an insult) that Taylor Swift is actually a man. Also, years ago there was the similar theory that Leeloo, a.k.a. Mila Jovovich, was also a man. Sigh.
My own theory is that when there is a beautiful female artist being paraded everywhere all the time, every other female gets a huge fit of envy and all of them together, automatically and without a word, agree to say what they think is the ultimate insult, an insult that would make all men (well, most of them) puke their guts out and plan to throw little Cupid in a meat grinder.
(Disclaimer: Wild generalization used only for humorous purposes)
What females don't know is that the ultimate insult would be to say that those beautiful stars they want to destroy are actually Communists. Only chemotherapy is less erotic than real Communists. Seriously. No wonder they are almost extinct today!
(Ahem.)
Now I will throw three consecutive heresies against idol worshipers:
1) Judy Garland was not the best singer ever and "The Wizard of Oz" was boring at times.
2) "The Stagecoach" has, objectively, a better story than "Gone With The Wind."
3) The song "Put the blame on Mame" was not sung by Rita Hayworth, but by a Canadian Jewess, not very pretty but with a very suggestive voice.
An important fact to consider: no one ever said anything about Vivien Leigh being a dude because people were not as dumb then as we are today.
Another fact that does not admit debate: the best cartoon movie ever is the 2009 "Up!" which is irrelevant but squirrel!
And Metallica is a pop band whose songs' lyrics were a failed Intelligence plot to demoralize the Mexicans from crossing the border. Not all psyops are successful.
Prove me wrong!
Funny you say that. Every time I see a photo or video of her, my first unconscious reaction is, “that’s a man.” She doesn’t look at all like the girl in the old news clip Mathew links.
She's a woman. And the makeup artists make her look more androgynous on purpose. That's part of the mindwar.
Historically, whenever there is too much androginy in the "media" is because the people who control the media are intensifying the mindwar. For example: Mick Jagger in the 1960s.
Also, stars are dumb. They will go along with anything they are told. It's part of the deal. Don't seek wisdom or guidance in man-made stars.
If you ignore everything else and focus on her lower half you're definitely looking at a bloke.
Here is a code: 0WGVgfjnLqc
It will lead your favourite search engine to a videoclip of an old love song by Ian Dury and the Blockheads titled "Hit Me With Your Rhythm Stick."
Ian had cerebral palsy or something. I think it was his left arm and leg that were the most affected.
So he was a cripple. Most people reject cripples or handicapped or lame or whatever they are called these days. It's the greatest prejudice there is, far greater than race or religious belief. Some people are so afraid of their own fear about deformed people that they tend to pretend to be interested and accepting. Artists like Ian Dury don't get a fair listening: people either reject them because of their deformity, or they pretend to like them because they need to hide their prejudice. And yet, Ian was a talented performer.
Something similar happens to other set of people. The subgroup of people who are beautiful and handsome, and because of that they are also repugnant. They also don't get a fair listening.
Even if Swift was a bloke (which she is clearly not) she is a talented performer, and most normies will not discover that until they overcome their own prejudice about her. Just like many people hated Ian Dury because of his oddness, and they missed a good entertainer.
Popular music is always a setup. They hit people with something that overwhelms the mind, like rhythm, or special sound effects (think Pink Floyd and their abuse of the feedback pedal) or something visual. As we the people are distracted we are getting idol-conditioned. The public expects the stars to be just one thing, to repeat always the same and be exactly as they imagine, an static idol, totally predictable. Then, after some time, when it is politically convenient, the sleeping cell is activated and they make the pop star say bizarre things about whatever. That will cause a stir, as we are seeing these days.
And then people make up theories about the "new thing." It's okay entertainment, but we can do better.
Probably the best course of action is to avoid popular things altogether. Focus on what they try to hide. Or how they try to win time to do something else. Prepare accordingly, etc.
Jagger is not the worst singer ever. Prove me wrong!
but Steve Tyler hopes Mick doesn't die lest he becomes the ugliest pop singer in the world
You can't always get what you want.
Perhaps the Mexicans were supposed to cross the border?
What symbolism can we infer from the concept of "Cone of shame"?
"best cartoon movie ever" - Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Or for pure cartoon with no humans I'd go with "Toy Story" (the original).
Shouldn't MySpace feature a pic of Tom? just sayin'
Wow, the links to the Switzerland article including Jung and B and K and Hesse , etc, make a lot of sense and hit deep. How do you keep a hold on sanity while containing this many multitudes? 💙🙏🏽 also, why isn’t Teddy K mentioned more often in relation to MK Uktra? Because he was a “young accident”by his professor, or?
On my last question, I suppose TK doesn’t “link” to many people on the map/web, given his choice of location and communication preferences….
I will have hundreds of graphs, each with hundreds of elements, meaning at least hundreds of thousands of elements. Assume that I'm 1% done with the process.
Roger that. At Which point on your graphs do you think “* Hope*” (healthy alternatives able to self replicate amongst human society) enters the scene with a reasonable chance? Maybe these unhealthy threads and institutions will be at war with themselves sufficiently that alternatives will have a chance in 20 years?
And I guess, as a follow-up question,( that might not be helpful, ) at which level, when we are dealing with a sample set of such a large population, is some degree of depravity at any, and all levels of society just to be taken as a statistical inevitability ? Do you know I mean assuming we are able to set up healthy systems with healthy feedback loops, they will still be existence of depravity and dysfunction, and hopefully we will have healthier ways of managing addressing these occurrences, but nonetheless, they do have some level of inevitability. For better for worse. Certainly not justifying it, just seeking to understand.
The taller and more invisible the hierarchy, the less that community standards apply. The most serious depravity is the result of Kunpangeta escaping the orbit of community standards.
Well articulated 🙏🏽
Interesting coincidence. Or, are you two connected somehow ? Haven't read thru Miller's SS yet.
"Is Taylor Swift's romance with Travis Kelce another psy-op? That idea may be insane (unless it's not):"
Will she endorse "Joe Biden," as the Democrats are hoping? And might she also somehow aid Big Pharma, like her (apparent) boyfriend, Kansas City Chiefs tight end and very-high-paid Pfizer shill?
MARK CRISPIN MILLER
FEB 2, 2024
I don't know Mark, but I've read some of his work. It's been a few months.
MCM is one of the executive producers on the series called "Four Died Trying." If you haven't sought out the Prologue currently available, you're in for a treat. It's excellent, and long overdue.
I'm kind of shocked that this whole article failed to discuss the fact that Taylor is a spitting image for Anton LeVay's daughter, minus 30 some odd years. Or did you discuss that on the podcast?
It's easily THE best fodder for overwrought conspiracy hypotheses musings...
Are you referring to this article as an overwrought conspiracy theory musing?
Can you point to a conclusion that isn't cited?
You may want to reread it, check sources, and consider that you may have missed a great deal with interpretations of your own inserted in between.
My pronoun "it" is being mis-attributed. Your article is not the "it" that is the best fodder.
I'm saying that the rather astounding likeness shared by Taylor Swift and Anton LeVay's daughter somewhat humorously ought to compel any curious person, who is concerned with military intelligence cults, to wonder if, in fact, Taylor Swift is not actually the result of a frozen embrio later hatched, or a clone of the Princes of Darkness, herself, that she could be not merely just an ad hoc asset of convenience to the current narrative, or one that was groomed from adolescence, but maybe could have actually been groomed Project Monarch style in her very conception as a human. I think you would agree that THAT is a fairly overwrought conspiracy hypothesis for its shear dearth of evidence, except for a mighty humorous likeness observed in the context of the enormously successful (and exceedingly uninteresting) Taylor Swift cult of personality. As unlikely or overwrought as it may be, I do consider that visual analogy, that mere resemblance, some of the most humorous and best fodder when entertaining "Taylor Swift is a Psyop," especially from someone like you who is so read-up on folks like Aquino and LeVay, and their ilk.
On a technicality, however, there is no theory, per se, in your proposition; there are only conjectures and hypotheses. This is an epistemological observation, not a criticism. Some of the propositions you are tabling - not unlike with Dave McGowan's analysis around the artists of the Canyon - may stand up to curious-enough pattern recognition, but in my estimation they may go too far in their conjecturing that they could end up doing damage to the very artists who would seek to liberate us. It was similar to the extremity of your pattern observations about Russell Brand, in my opinion. But that's me. I'm not attempting to invalidate your pursuit, just to question some of your methods, and especially some of your certainties about how things must always work. As a super astute numbers guy, I propose that your specialist blinders may get in the way of understanding the realities of art and its production, similar to how Bret Weinstein, a super astute biology guy, makes for a shitty art critic. He clearly does not have an innate understanding of metaphor. Dave McGowan wrote great work, and his sociological assumptions are pretty great, by and large, but he was also a contractor, not a designer/composer. Perfect for critiquing the moon landing, not so great for getting inside the head of Jerry Garcia.
For instance, the Jim Morrison thing is very curious and compelling tale, but look at it from another angle: Isn't the Lizard King pretense, perhaps a powerful and effective way for a bitter, ethically inclined son to expose the state secrets and profound duplicity on a national scale known to him by virtue of his father's involvement, his first hand knowledge, but unable to otherwise expose that knowledge, for awareness of the power doing so would threaten. If you can't scream from the rooftops, "My dad was the ranking officer at the Gulf of Tonkin, and the whole thing was a false flag, none of it is true, you are all dupes, there is no reason for us to be dying and killing in Vietnam," without being promptly neutralized by the state, then at least you CAN scream from the stage, "The whole world is a fraud, you're all phonies, I am the Lizard King!" and solicit some of the same psychic effects by reassuring the anti-war critics of the imperial state that they are really on to something, as if to say, "keep going! Your parents and the state and the media are all frauds! Keep looking! Keep saying NO!" I'd say this is a perfectly rational hypothesis for his particular case, one that must not be ruled out if scientific disinterest is to keep our hubris in check.
McGowan (a little) and Mathis (to an overwhelming, self-defeating degree) seem to make bold, logic-free assumptions about the kind of control that parents and family legacies have over individuals, particularly those for whom a life of art and identity as an artist is a psychic demand, not a choice. Now some performers are just puppets, obviously, and don't actually possess any of the poetic impulse, and for them pure puppetry could be a reasonable critique to level. But Puppets are rarely aware of the consciousness that pulls their strings, so it kind of makes them pathetic, not dastardly. Katy Perry comes to mind. But Russell Brand is clearly a probing intellect who demonstrates a very robust love of wisdom. People like that don't allow themselves consciously to be controlled, but that doesn't mean they aren't aware of 3rd Rails, and nudge themselves judiciously to avoid them. To conclude nefarious intent in his case is pretty patently absurd. In my opinion.
Do the patterns that McGowan observes actually reveal something real about Laurel Canyon and the Music Industry's relationship with State Crime? I'd say probably, you bet, but when we're getting into attributing either conscious agency and intention for an artist, or else external control of an artist, we're missing out on all of the complex realities of life, and banking on certain perfect knowledge. I'm not saying you are always doing that, but some of the materials you reference do do that. Many Conspiracy Theory Novices fall into that trap constantly; and even some of its more visible thought leaders. (This is one reason why I prefer the pursuit of Espionage Phenomenology over Conspiracy Theorizing, - another epistemological observation - because the latter implies a need to nail everything down and to judge with the hope of seeking punishment and revenge, rather than to allow for open minded probing and mysteries to remain mystifying, but to increase one's field awareness for better personal decision-making.)
"I'm saying that the rather astounding likeness shared by Taylor Swift and Anton LeVay's daughter somewhat humorously ought to compel..."
I stopped reading after, "This obscure thing that I'm not citing or writing my own article is at the core of some critique that you'll have to read the next six paragraphs to understand..." I don't even know what "the podcast" references in your first post. Because we each only have so much time in a day, and I'm working 80 hour weeks.
Just write your own article, dude. Critiquing something for not being what you would have written comes off as a manifestation of mental illness. If you write, and gather a crowd, you'll quickly see it and understand. The approach you take comes off as a disrespect for time economics [of people].
Isn't your substack blogpost I'm commenting on about a podcast you did with Mike Church called "Cybernetics, the NWO and Steve Bannon?" The screenshot you provided includes the word "podcast."
Sorry I didn't include a reference. I thought everyone had heard of this:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/bizarre-conspiracy-theory-claims-taylor-8808600
https://discover.hubpages.com/entertainment/is-Taylor-Swift-a-Secret-Satanist
https://www.reddit.com/r/Qult_Headquarters/comments/17zp756/taylor_swift_is_really_anton_laveys_daughter/?rdt=38685
https://www.flickr.com/photos/siouxdax/9355031509
https://www.buzzfeed.com/bradesposito/taylor-swift-zeena-lavey?utm_term=.afnmeN51YA%23.iq8LjbO1Gy
Your comment did not connect in my mind to the podcast I did because you started talking about Anton Lavay, and I have more than a dozen podcasts cited and referenced in these materials. You expect for every obscure thought you have to be part of a 46 minute podcast, part of which is about a person that I'm up front about now knowing much about? This is part of your problem: You haven't dug into the materials and conversation well enough to know that you're a ship passing in the night, but you want for me to do several hours of work to get you there.
" I thought everyone had heard of this:"
If you think that everyone would have heard of that, you are trapped in a particularly lonely part of the maze in the Matrix. I encourage you to dig yourself out.
I read your article completely and perused many of your hotlinks. That's not enough to comment or offer a critique? All of my critiques have been substantial and focused on the content, that is, aspiring to be constructive. I have not leveled a single judgement or analysis that attacks you personally or psychoanalyzes you. But that is the thrust of your replies to my comments: personal attacks on my psychology or your revulsion at my writing style. You infer a lot of negative attitude and viciousness in my tone that is not inherent or intended. Sorry you don't like the cut of my jib, man. It was all meant in good faith.
Is that you Miles? If so, bring beer.
Seriously you should write it up. You seem to have skill for "M&M-ing" things.
"All these military connections are hardly coincidences." So says Tony Gosling. https://www.mail-archive.com/pepis@googlegroups.com/msg00959.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email.
Only someone born after the mid-1950s could write that sentence with such confidence. It was so common for men born before that to serve a stint in the military or have several immediate family members in the military.
Whether military connections indicate something nefarious is not answered by merely observing that they exist. Those observations are a starting point, not an ending point. Gosling's reasoning-by-assertion is the same approach taken by those who point to Jewish overrepresentation in various professions and crimes by Jews as an indictment of every Jewish person ever born in the past two millenia.
Zappa was not an intelligence asset (though he had much cause to be cynical, based on what he observed) and Dylan did not sell his soul to the Devil (he should have demanded a better voice and musical skills, if he did). Gosling can only make his case by innuendo and words that aren't there. Maybe we should conclude that Mathew Crawford is an intelligence asset because of his admitted connection to a cult? It's this approach that gives conspiracy theories a bad name. There are quite a number of conspiracies I accept as true, but they are backed by solid evidence. Condemnations grounded in mere speculation are distractions from them and only hurt the cause of truth.
As for TS, who the hell knows? It isn't be a surprise that the intelligence community seeks to capitalize on her notoriety (and perhaps help foster it) and that her handlers cooperate in that regard. How much is she personally committed to it, beyond just the usual show-biz instinct of self-promotion? To say that everyone involved is deliberately and knowingly "in on it," eliminates the whole category of "useful idiot," which is what she seems to be.
Zappa and Dylan. Especially Frank seemed to run afoul of authorities. Although a control freak himself it was usually with reason. He would check baggage on tour in Europe to make sure nobody in the band would get busted because they were going through border checks every week. One bust and the tour might be over. On the tours in the USA he didn't bother.
"Maybe we should conclude that Mathew Crawford is an intelligence asset because of his admitted connection to a cult?" - Works for me :) I'm a tad paranoid to start with (in a healthy way). Be open to any idea but suspect everyone all the time.
https://i.postimg.cc/zvH1Gy8Q/Despair-Com-Paranoia-Keeping-Critter-Alive.png
"To say that everyone involved is deliberately and knowingly "in on it," eliminates the whole category of "useful idiot," which is what she seems to be." - And there are LOTS of useful idiots around LMAO. In her case, as with any celeb, you can make the case that she's just a money grubbing publicity whore. I'm okay with either.
Frank had a strict no-drugs policy for his bandmates, which may explain his firing of Lowell George (Little Feat), whose every-other-song was about drugs. He was a staunch anti-communist but a staunch anti-authoritarian in general. Somebody on X, commenting on the book "Chaos" (if you haven't read that yet, it's a must-read) pointed out the otherwise unreleased live track, "The Downtown Talent Scout" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfrBgYML7Hs as a nice companion to that book, and damned if it isn't. He definitely had his finger on the pulse.
As far as Dylan goes, although he had some unsavory hangers-on and became an icon of the counter-culture, his song "Idiot Wind" comes across as a big middle finger to both his image and his peer group. And even before his born-again days his songs often dealt with biblical and religious themes. "All Along the Watchtower" is Isaiah 21 thrown into a blender. "I Pity the Poor Immigrant" is told from God's point of view about humanity wandering lost and away from home. And even after his born again days he continued with his biblical references and themes.
Contra Gosling, the devil is not "the Chief Commander of this earth and the world we can't see." Both are God's creation. Jesus Christ declared that "the Kingdom of God is at hand." It is a gnostic heresy to regard this world as Satan's rather than God's. Gosling would likely have no idea what that even means.
Great article, as is Mathis’. How could Hollywood not be a major part of this? Movies, shows, music all make indelible marks on our psyche. As if this sector would be left even the tiniest bit uncaptured.
Why is everybody at the top gay?
Helluva a lot to digest, Mathew, but very interesting. Am I the only one who never heard of Taylor Swift until a few months ago? I stopped paying attention to pop culture and the boob tube by the early seventies, but the psy-op has grown remarkably in sophistication since then. Almost takes your breath away. Combined with the stupidification of the public through schooling and the electronic world, we're fucked.
It would be interesting to know how many people within the ranks of the medical industrial complex opted out of taking the shots. How many at Pfizer, Moderna, CDC, WHO. DARPA, et al.
Very interesting. Not a Swifty by any means, BUT I read the Daily Mail regularly online, and is is chock full of Swift headlines and stories. Was aware that her father was wealthy financier, but did not know the Eur family banking connection. She is so perfect, almost like a clone. And, yes, most certainly an Aryan princess...with really bad taste in partners.
Aniston purportedly makes good "pizza"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qjfZU36w3g
And Dylan made a bargain with, you know, the chief commander...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNn72qnp6kI
Seem like wholesome people.
Different topic, but I know you've talked about David Icke being controlled opposition. Here's a link from Vox Day about James Delingpole accusing Icke of just that on a live show:
https://voxday.net/2024/02/03/a-babylonian-ticket-taker/
Delingpole's article about it is here:
https://delingpole.substack.com/p/david-ickes-gingerbread-cottage
The pink elephant in the room that appears anytime people try to discuss the arts and religion is the nearly universal inability among moderns to comprehend and understand metaphor and its nature. People automatically misidentify a metaphor and attach to it all kinds of prosaic personifications and superstitious attributes.
When a poet like Dylan, who has lived through the experience of channeling divinely inspired poetry, as he has, and as was his regular habit particularly toward the beginning of his career, it is hard to explain to prosaic normies what that process or feeling is like. And when a person like him rides the cultural zeitgeist and the industrial promotional mechanism to becoming a cultural icon with everyone in the world projecting their desires and fears onto him, and attempting to steer every decision in his life henceforth, it's also equally difficult to describe the phenomena and feeling of that experience, to occupy that public mask. Describing it as 'a deal with the devil' is a perfectly proportional shorthand and rational analogy. He was not making an admission; he was demurring after realizing that he had just invoked an overloaded analogy, which every yokel and idiot will misunderstand and attribute to their own twisted cosmology.
This brings us to the Christian-identified folks who call foul with every New Age-y model and philosopher, as if its all a Nazi Occult put on, whose inability to grapple with metaphor turns into metastatic auto-immune syndrome before you can say Beelzebub. Christians, nearly to a person, are perfectly blind to their own faith, also mistaking metaphor for fact, and projecting their denial all over the Other in the process. (I come from a legacy of Methodist and Presby ministers, so I'm not an atheist or material reductivist talking out my ass.)
Why are Christians always so hellbent on witch-hunting cannibalistic child sacrifice? Because THAT is their very eucharist! They worship the Christ-Child/Virgin&Child Complex week in and week out, and then proceed to cannibalize their god-made-flesh every Sunday (or on major holidays, at least). Viola! Universal Cognitive Dissonance fit for the Dark Age of Pisces.
Where did the authentic Intelligence Agency and Royalty inspired child sacrificing pedophile cults who are blackmailing their agenda into fruition get their ideas? They are Christian Ideas. You motherfuckers spawned these psychopaths whose greatest weapons are shame and denial, because ya'll are so in denial of your own bodies and the nature of Nature. Your lumpy personification of the Totality and Eternity causes you to suffer constant and endemic category errors that, for instance, Animist Cults and Polytheistic Cosmology people do not suffer. For them the Money God, the Sun God, and the War Attrocity God are not all muddled and confused. You should learn from them. [Yahweh/Jesus is a personified Sun God, by the way, witch-hunters.]
This gets to a greater issue. And that is that the Satanists' Cosmology IS the Christian Cosmology. There's no Satan in any but the Abrahamic Religions. Every Satanist is an inverted Christian and every Christian is an inverted Satanist. Christians have breathed life into Satan as one of their most creative acts. Proselytic and evangelical Christian Societies contain THE MOST self-righteous hypocrites and know-it-all busy-bodies who have ever walked earth. They are insufferable people who can't walk the talk because they are so metaphor blind that they fear seeing their own frail and desperate evil within. They preach humility and forgiveness and yet they can't even apply those to themselves by minding their own business. They are the first spiritual colonists. Especially when we factor the Christian Cult's little child-rape addiction - then it's little wonder why innocent, people raised within their milieu, aspiring to do good works would seek the Dark One (which is really just a metaphor for the hungry and jealous physical body, after all) for a little corrective to Mass Market Christian Duplicity, and lets face it, the Evil inherent to the Church. This at least explains why most teenagers who take up Heavy Metal inflected tongue-in-cheek Devilry are motivated: they just want to piss off their two-faced self-ignorant parents. A tale as old as the hills. And a perfectly legitimate one, particularly for generations of parents who talk about Christian Virtue on Sundays, but then keep their 401Ks invested in the avaricious military industrial complex to prepare for their corporate retirement, and spend their weekdays doing the compartmented bidding of the proto-technocratic corporate Borg from their cubicals. In this light, Satan makes a certain amount of sense. At least he's honest about human nature, and unafraid to look at his ugly self.
Here's the reality of the Globalist Technocratic Monolith, which is doing a great job of emulating the Omniscient and Omnipotent divine in its Frankenstinian Pantomime, appropriately personified (IN METAPHOR) as The Beast. It hates for you to have a private memory, it fears your private thought, your creative mind that can see the patterns of its residue, it desires above all to curtail your ability to understand the world and to understand yourself. It wants you to see yourself through the lens of itself, alone. And so it hates the independent arts and the folk arts, the arts it does not control. Because exposure to those arts enables you to understand the world and understand yourself on your own terms. And what have we seen since the internet has come up to devour everything? It has destroyed the mediums of the artist, just as robustly as it has devastated the middle class, independent business, anything that is not already a partner in its hydra leviathan globalist project. It is why STEM has replaced the Humanities, and why Fiction is no longer taught: A subject citizenry who cannot parse fiction from non-fiction cannot tell when its leaders are telling them fictions.
So, should we not hedge our impulses to over-identify the enemy when we give thought to how the mind of humanity is steered by shadowy players, with a little bit of humility and keep our eye on the actual invisible demon (another metaphor, you superstitious heathens)? Because if we go witch-hunting based on Guilt-by-Association and who your grand-parents are, we're defeating the mission of our own fulfillment. Also, let's get hip to the art of PR and Publicity. Not every publicity strategy or campaign - while all ARE indeed the height of contrivance and myth-making - are ispo facto the machinations of the Satanic Globalists. If you still believe that ANYTHING you see on a screen is anything but artifice and contrivance you are naive. Don't instrumentalize that naivete to then cut your nose off despite your face, throw the baby out with the bathwater, by rejecting artifice and contrivance. Those are the fundamentals of the muses, and without the muses, you have no memory and no identity, and you become a simple-minded fundamentalist who can't handle decoration and symbol. Many artists who carve out some real estate on that little screen for your attention actually want to aid in your own transcendence, individually and collectively. Make room for them. And learn to understand the nature of metaphor. Without them, you'll have no identity but for the one assigned to you by Klaus Schwab (another metaphor, you bean counters.)
End Rant
PS. Mathew, the fact that you are continuing to find appeal and value in Miles Mathis's analysis increases the likelihood that you are gullible and undiscerning, and even the likelihood that you have become psyop'd as an agent of dissidents-devouring-themselves-campaign to cripple the movement. Here's a hint: Anyone that practices the sloppy and lumpy habit of demonizing "the jews" and therefore each jewish individual, is doing the enemy's work for them, just as Operation Gladio spun every opposition group to violence to discredit themselves. The 'jewish problem' dog whistle is the psyop version of the same tactic. It's as lumpy and stupid as insisting - as zionists do - that jewish culture, jewish nationalism, jewish religion, and material zionism are all one and the same, and that to criticize one automatically makes you an antisemite, anti-jewish. They are the same principle of abusive and stilted taxonomies. Mathis, I suggest, is infected with that disease.
PPS. Full disclosure - Like Beyonce, Taylor Swift somehow makes music that I'm unable to hear or identify. It is entirely without personality or flavor. The fact that it has mysteriously possessed generations of fans who CAN hear it enough to identify with it makes me realize I must have developed an immunity to empty, banal commercial art devoid of any nutritional value, or else most of humanity really has already been turned into zombies, and there's no hope trying to resist. (Apparently the zombies also all participate in a perfectly contrived Football Cult, that renders them brainless, and now those two cults are fusing to create a Grand Cult of Adolescent Boy and Adolescent Girl in Stuck in a Perennial Puberty Ritual.) And this is even without the possibility that Taylor's Persona has been instrumentalized by the Globalist Administrative State. Taylor Swift makes Yani and Celine Dion taste nutritious, rich and flavorful.
Crawford: if you haven't enjoyed Brian Tuohy's books about corruption in mass media sports, The Fix Is In, etc., you're in for a treat. It'll cohere with all the other stuff you're into.
"PS. Mathew, the fact that you are continuing to find appeal and value in Miles Mathis's analysis increases the likelihood that you are gullible and undiscerning"
If by "continue to find appeal" you mean that I take what I consider the valuable observations of everyone, and make use of them, then you have a weirdly nasty way with words. It makes you come off as childish and in need of attention. It opens you up for psyops because somebody could write the best argument for X, but also write an article saying pi=4, then permanently bury the argument for X. The Brave New World is then automatic.
"Anyone that practices the sloppy and lumpy habit of demonizing "the jews" and therefore each jewish individual, is doing the enemy's work for them"
This is a case in point. Yes, the people who think that the Jews are responsible for everything come off as nutty. And yet, ignoring the patterns means not thinking scientifically. You dismiss the pattern in order to attack the source, which is fallacious thinking. If I were Mr. Global, I would then aggressively cull resumes of propagandists until I got to Jews, then pay them to psyop you. It's not just a fallacy, it's an existential flaw.
Do we see such a pattern in the world?
Yes, the occult societies run throughout Europe took a turn with Theosophy, bringing in particularly the Jews who were okay with discarding orthodox religion to move toward the artificial and essentially meaninglessness (moldable at every turn) hodgepodge of gooey interpretations of Eastern religion, with aliens and UFOs thrown in.
Addendum: Miles can at times reveal forms of hatefulness. Yet, when I read you, every line seems to drip with hatefulness and fallacy. I suspect that's why you use a pseudonym, but you'll only find your way out of that maze within your own singular identity.
Sorry my tone and style put you off so much. I actually think you and I agree far more than we disagree. I also understand that you have endured a lot of actual targetted persecution over the last years, and I'm sympathetic to that. If my manner has given you the willies, I apologize. It was not my intent.
As for Miles Mathis, I'm aware of the risks of the ad hominem fallacy. But when you get a guy like Miles whose work seems to be an unedited garbage dump of bogusness, albeit perhaps littered with real treasure here and there, the cost/benefit does not work out in the end. One would have to evaluate every single thing he says to parse the nuggets from the slime, wasting all of one's time. His reflexive 'jew-thing' just makes the entire thing unpalatable, like he is seeking to appear discreditable, not unlike Alex Jones for his ranting. And given that the irrational world likes to attribute all conspiracy theorizing to bigotry and anti-semitism, quoting him with regularity - including him in your curated stable of resources - seems a good way to discredit oneself to would-be audiences. Continue finding inspiration in him all you want. I think its a dead end that hurts your position.
I gave this profile a name, originally, to post constructive comments on Snowden's blog. I don't think there is virtue in using one's legal name on the internet for anything. The whole thing is effectively a Phoenix Program weapon anyway.
You've been around long enough to know that pseudonymous presentation is entirely normal and germain to the culture of the internet, and should not represent a threat. In fact, it can really aid in helping audiences to focus on the content of the written word, rather than the cultivation of identity politics. As someone who apparently may have actually been the target of coordinated abuse (for your great DMED work), I would have thought you'd see anonymity online as a healthy defensive expedient.
The line of thinking that fake-names indicate ill intent is exactly the kind of slippery slope that will lead to the de-anonymizing of the internet and make us a fully ledgered and controlled society. I mean, isn't your appeal a form of shaming and coercing to make me feel I'd be a better club-house member if I'd give you a name to google?
I have no problem presenting my fully authentic human self to you any time you happen to be passing through NYC and we can have an analogue experience. I rather think it would be a mutually pleasurable experience and a great conversation. We'd have much to commiserate over and notes to share.
For whatever it is worth, I'm not a Theosophist, but I also think that any critique of start-up spiritual movements that does not first acknowledge the horrors of the dominant spiritual establishment runs the risk of acting as an apology for and promotion of the default religious setting. Yeah, the Leadership of Theosophy and its patrons may have had nefarious intent, but so does every other religious hierarchy in their upper echelons. If not Theosophy, are you suggesting that quenching one's spiritual thirst with Abrahamic Mythologies is all that much better, and pitfall free, or actually divinely inspired? I happen to like a lot of artists and philosophers that were inspired by the Theosophists - Hilma af Klint, and so forth. That appreciation shouldn't therefore attach to me anything to do with Nazis, black magic, aliens, jew-love or jew-hate, or whatever you and Miles, or Matthew Ehret (who's great, like you), happen to sleuth about the secret mission of Theosophy. The whole leveling of particular schools of thought or ideologies I find un-constructive and unforgiving. Ultimately all joiners ruin things with their tribal loyalties and the submersion of themselves, don't they?
To synthesize these two threads, sometimes occultation is the only means by which an upstart dissident or dissident movement, especially those seeking the truth and liberation, are able to survive amidst tyrannical opposition. Not all things hidden are bad for you or seeking to destroy you. Sometimes they may represent the door to your actual salvation. The Occult has a lot of real alchemical (psychological and spiritual) gold available for those who seek it, but you must do it alone. Like with anything, the minute that middlemen get involved it all turns to shit.
You probably have very few, if any, friends.
"You probably have very few, if any, friends" is an anagram for "Varnish DNS cache server".
Not sure what it means. Just sayin'.