My suggestion to people wanting to offer their takes (without waiting) is to explain them as well as possible to see if there is bias that could be toyed with. Make it a habit to hold back---particularly in parasocial circumstances.
Edit: I added the Woody Harrelson appearance with Bill Maher from five months ago in which he went fairly deep (not entirely correct, but with a lot of good or reasonable points and intuition) on pandemic medical scams. That YouTube video was viewed 775,000 times, so there were likely at least a million views. So, yes, it was well understood what Woody Harrelson thought ahead of his SNL appearance.
A simple theory of everything is Money. Consider that the average person - who has a below-average IQ due to the world now having become complex - is about 85% of everyone (every person to the left of one SD to the right of the mean). The corporate media runs on money, not truth, so they target the average person because that's where the money is. The government also targets the majority as that's who they need to control and tax.
So as long as the average person believes in something; covid, the vax, Ukraine, climate change, vegetables, mandates, or wokeness as examples, the media will push that particular narrative regardless of it being true. It makes them money and if they went against that tide they'd lose people and profit.
But when the truth of that narrative begins to falter they switch slowly, then fast. The liberal media and the alt-right media both support covid, the vax, Ukraine, and climate change because 85% believe in those narratives. They differ somewhat on vegetables vs meat, mandates, and Trump vs Biden due to their market segmentation.
No media can afford to support a truth if the People do not believe it - they'd immediately lose viewers whose confirmation biases they fail to support.
A conspiracy of interests creates false narratives of perceived truth, government policy and support make them official, and the media amplifies them for as long as the People continue to believe.
Political parties and politicians do the same. The tail always wags the dog.
What's needed to break the hold of manufactured hypnosis is replacing the alt-right media and mainstream media with independent (non-corporate) data, studies, interviews, lectures, and commentary found on independent online media. As with cult deprogramming, the first step is removing the individual from the cult leader, which in our case is the media.
Since I ignored the SNL excitement over the weekend, perhaps that disqualifies me from having any insight ... and unlike Mr Zen above, I know I get caught up in the same excitements as the general public and smoke the same Hopium as the midwit crowd- "the Orange Man is going to ride in at the last minute" or "I'm going to get rich off this exponential trend!". Thus, like millions of codependent wives, just a little bit of positive news and I'm like, "oh hallelujah, they're seeing the light!".
So I really don't want to hear the hard headed realism of Mr Sharpe, about how likely is it that the video wing of the MSM and the print wing of the MSM are suddenly at each other's throats, especially given that they're owned by the same people. No no Mr Sharpe, don't bring up those conspiracy theories! I want my simple world of butterflies and buttercups. Don't make me think! I feel threatened!
I too am always behind the curve not having a Twitter account and not heeding the 'news'. As I understand it the elites who rule us all are not one amorphous blob but a coterie of fighting families all vying for power and influence - like the Venetian merchant class in the 15th Century. There are plenty of conspiracies and conspirators and we cannon-fodder sometimes get caught in the crossfire. (I'm going for the metaphors-in-a-sentence record here).
I'm guessing that as long as some overlord (the WEF?) doesn't succeed in subjugating these warring factions we can have some hope. The butterflies and buttercups of Fluffybunnyland may yet come to be!
You have a point. The WEF is a handy bogeyman for the disaffected.
Who could disagree with statements like 'We believe that progress happens by bringing people together.'? Should we take that kind of statement at face value or observe that the WEF propaganda is riddled with anodyne pronouncements of just that sort? It does rather look like a very sweetly scented smokescreen.
If something looks too good to be true then it usually is.
With Ed Dowd's recent revelation on Tucker Carlson (that the Vax is killing people) the tide may be turning. Dowd points to a "conspiracy of interests" and mentions possible violence when the Vaxxed realize their lives have been shortened:
Instead of getting quarterly mandated boosters, people are ignoring pharma. The covid narrative is losing steam and may be tipping over. But there are other false narratives the People still believe and new ones to come. Not finding WMDs did nothing to slow the forever wars. Most people have no interest in waking up.
By the way, just because the vax did not kill you does not mean it's not taken years off your life. It may also degrade the quality of your life in the meantime.
Jon Stewart is a well-paid tool, and I have no reason to believe that his appearance with Colbert was "natural".
Dowd is a great example of what I'm trying to get at. He is smarter than average, but not by a lot, and naive enough to have no idea that he was used to fleece put buyers in 2022. He had no idea of the internal contradictions of his message (Buy puts in *these* companies, the whole market will collapse, but there will be liquid counterparties to pay off your bets?). He is exactly the guy that you want in a stable of pawns to engineer messaging in a controlled way.
No way was Jon Stewart's Colbert appearance "natural." Stewart had an enormous "Q Rating" so he was the perfect pitchman to pull out of semi-retirement to shift The Narrative from the increasingly untenable natural origins to lab leak. And of course Stewart got nowhere near intentional release.
Maybe (on Stewart and Dowd), but isn't the simplest explanation the most likely? Individuals are not easily controlled and they make mistakes. Tool or not, Dowd did a great job getting the word out on a mainstream show that may have been historically important, maybe the beginning of the end.
After no WMDs, many people began to think twice about media programming, but most did not. I'd guess that even now 25% of Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein was directly responsible for 9/11. Probably will be the same when people realize the vax is killing us.
The simplest explanation is the obduracy of people, rather than layers of complex global psyops (unless advanced Ai-enabled *) that are as likely to fail or backfire as an old BMW, even with the military-banking complex as a common denominator.
*AlphaZero is an advanced type of Ai that self-learns in a day or so enough to be creative far beyond the smartest human. If psyops are driven by an advanced Ai they'd not make mistakes as they manipulate complexity and we'd effectively become programmed bots and never know it. Note that the average person is manipulated by the media every day and has no clue. Maybe we are too.
No, the simple explanation is not that actors on TV are sincere. What the actual F?
If that is your model of the world, step back and ask if that's your model because you have or have not ever been around any of those people who are paid to create parasocial relationships.
I don't think I have a model of the world, except in my head, but in my experience simple explanations work best, whereas complexity is error-prone. If the simple explanation does not work then it's time to think deeper. I have no doubt that performers plan things out, but they also improvise. Walberg will improvise not just on a late-night show but his lines throughout a movie.
I've never had a parasocial relationship. Am I missing out? I don't understand people who ask for an autograph, I have no pictures of myself with important people, and have never taken a selfie.
Why would people be paid to develop parasocial relationships?
I was sidestepping your point. Simple versus complex only works when both are likely correct. What's important is what's most probably correct. To zero in on that we do need a good model - but it has to have efficacy.
Yes, Hollywood is indirectly part of the intelligence community, which I believe has an entertainment industry liaison stationed there. But my point is the generalization can not be applied with confidence to individual actors. DC intelligence types are very different from bad boy actors. They might try to get a "fact pattern" into a movie but it would have to fit the script.
Woody may have planned his presentation, but not to please DC - more likely to boost his Q-score. I'd say Hollywood puts ratings before everything else. Having lived twice in DC and twice in LA the cultures are as far away as the two coasts. LA intelligence-types are focused on the aerospace and tech industries and not much on Hollywood except as advisors.
You'd not want to be saddled with a Woody or a Stewart as their handler. People like Colbert are focused on ratings, any intelligence contact or request would show up in their monologue. These guys don't keep secrets. I doubt individual performances are vetted by DC.
I could be wrong, I could be naive, but it seems to me intelligence work focuses on longer term payoffs like overthrowing governments and turning foreign agents.
I'm in the UK and I don't want to be controversial here (nor do I want to come across as impossibly naive) but I have spent thousands of hours around people who are paid to create parasocial relationships. Are actors on TV sincere? Some, yes. Isn't SNL supposed to be live? In which case the producers wouldn't know what he was about to say. There was an Aaaron Sorkin series nearly 20 years ago - Studio 60 on Sunset Strip (modelled on SNL) - which opened with the host going off script (and getting fired for it) because the show had got too tame. Maybe this is a case of life imitating art. When Kenneth Tynan first said the word 'fuck' on a BBC live TV show in 1965 the producers didn't know it was coming. The BBC had to apologise and various campaigners who thought that the TV was the devil personified petitioned the Queen.
Interesting comment. Just as life eventually imitates art, art imitates life, eventually.
With a good actor, and maybe not that good since we the People are easily fooled, we'd never know which was happening, art or life? Would not knowing be a third level beyond art and life, beyond controversial and naïve?
Mathew: This will sound nutty, but the "frankness" of your comment about Dowd caused me to think about genetics and people with high vs. low MAO-A activity. https://selfhacked.com/blog/about-mao-a-and-what-to-do-if-you-have-the-warrior-gene/ "Slow" activity means higher dopamine and serotonin, higher adrenaline and noradrenaline I believe.
Can you summarize this half hour of reading in two sentences?
98% of my migraines went away 16 years ago when I stopped drinking milk and took lactaid. My primary hypothesis is that I was lactose intolerant. But I'm open to other cogent arguments.
That bruskness displayed could be suggestive of the MAO-A gene variation that also results in tyramine sensitivity. Just make a note of it. Those posts list the genes to check. I've heard you mention migraines several times, but if you're good, no problem.
The bruskness is most likely simply not wanting to suffer fools gladly, or wanting for those who take this journey with me to trust that I'm not here to make disagreements personal. I do not have the time to give people therapy with kid gloves. Take the shock pill, relax, have a good night sleep, and get ready to handle life with a new model---or else I'm not the writer you should be following...that's my general message. We don't have time for forceful naivety.
We have a local dairy farm which sells A2 milk (it's a bit yellow) from their herd of Guernsey cows. Some of the "lactose intolerant" can drink this milk with no GI distress. The dairy still has to pasteurize the milk so as not to offend the local "Health Authority" overlords.
If you had a month to run a personal study it would be interesting to see if it was the processing, the composition of the milk, or a true milk allergy or lactose intolerance which triggered your migraines. Then you might have to run a second month on unpasteurized milk to really nail the true cause.
If you listen to the whole piece, his second punchline, about his drug use, could have been enough allow the cognitively dissonant to ignore the full frontal punchline (which in itself was obviously ironic, as he plays a major role in A Scanner Darkly, which is about EXACTLY THAT!)
I'm finding it less than amazing, and my instinct is that it was produced primarily to kick off the technology that would eventually be used for deep fakes.
There is some Keanu to get through, but Downey is fantastic, and the overall story is about as Dick as it gets. Let's say my insight into the trade makes it particularly meaningful to me...
As foretold in plans written years ago: it is part of an accelerationist policy meant to destroy nation-States (hence DOD involvement as per CLADE X), by undermining our trust in institutions. Confronted with economic depression and faced with such a level of incompetence and corruption, the people will blame their leaders, Woody (an intelligence asset just like is father) is pushing the ongoing manufactured crisis, which is principally meant to subvert, foment distrust, and cause revolt; have the people destroy their own institutions, so the parasitic barbarians can swoop in and impose new ones.
I lean into this theory as well. I think it would be quite useful for Moloch to have the Mandarins destroy one another and for the average John Q Public to create havoc for which something like Marshal Law makes sense. Neither outcome of “let the plebs know or not” is desirable. They can keep folks in the dark and continue their shenanigans or they can shine light on all the corruption, have natural break down of society and still sweep in and continue their shenanigans.
Thinning the Mandarin ranks might be "necessary" if the dollar is collapsing, in the sense of keeping the winners happy. Too many nobles, too much land, too much tribute...not always affordable.
But the Mandarins can’t be this stupid to not realise it, can they? As a pleb I’m able to grok this, they certainly should be able to, being further entrenched in the system. But agreed. Too many unnecessary entitlers with not enough honey to go around.
Looks like Woody was reading from a script himself as he did the monologue, so I'm not sure this isn't a planned disclosure. And I noticed not much reaction to the metaphor of the cartel's drugs and making it sound like big pharma. So I don't think the audience members got it. Or they were too shocked by him actually saying it.
I used to be in the "off-script" camp, but no more.
Like most, we are just making educated guesses, but all he had to do was change the ending. He could be reading off the cards until the punchline and then just change that last part, that is, if he was not allowed to do this and snuck it in.
How timely for a major celeb 'influencer' to deliver his "the drugs cartel dunnit" message - just
as some of us were starting to believe evidence from Sasha Latypova, Katherine Watt, Karen Kingston and Robert F. Kennedy Jr, etc that the real villains were the Pentagon.
Thank you, Woody, for saving us from more crazy conspiracy theorists. Job done. Now crawl back into the woodwork where you belong.
The cabal running this show is free and has shown for 3 years that if they lie - oops I mean when they lie - their largess allows them to move down the road with the story line and few even notice.
If the resistance repeats bad info - they get a permanent black mark. I think this is the tactic being employed now. I looked up the Woody clip yesterday to make sure it was not out of context. What I found out in the search results was screams about conspiracy theories. To wit / from Vanity Fair ‘taking the stage to float conspiracy theories disguised as provocative humor is both intellectually dishonest and tedious.’
Check your outrage addiction at the door y’all. Before forwarding the next ‘epic truth’ to family and friends - Due Diligence! This is exhausting. Just the way they want it.
This is a very astute point. You should write an article about it. Coercion goes hand in hand with exhaustion. I think some people go the vax because they were hectored by their brainwashed co-workers and family to the point of exhaustion and submission.
I think a patte rn is emerging that Pfizer/Moderna are being thrown to the wolves by the Deep State.
The level of death and injury that is emerging out of the rubble is beginning to see blowback and I think maybe the PTB are willing to throw Pharma under the bus, either because they're immune from any prosecution, anyway, and because the FDA/NIH/CDC rubber-stamped it & would otherwise go down with BigPharm..
Maybe not. Maybe they think they can just keep censoring and finessing their lies, but I think this may be a way to pull their asses out of the fire and look like the good guys (or so they think)...
It's really hard to say what's going on, if this is really just organic waking up and smelling the coffee, or if it's a sacrifice bunt. But it does seem like they are trying to steer the rage away from the gov't and that may mean putting the target on Pfizer/Moderna's back.
Pfizer taking the fall means it will pay a giant fine and continue doing business. Unfortunately no one seems to go to jail when Big Pharma commits fraud. That will work well for the larger agenda--more vaccines, mandates, less individual freedom.
What should happen is that they pay fines large enough to bankrupt the companies and compensate the victims and the leadership face criminal prosecution. But the DOJ has already said in one case that the federal govt (that is, us) will pay any penalties or lawsuits, not the companies. They are shielding them like crazy. I think it's a big head fake. They let stuff leak showing Pharma Phraud, block prosecution based on PREP, everyone at the top in the HHS (Fauci, Collins) that wants to retire comfortably retires with billions, they keep up the gaslighting and distraction (Ukr war, gender war, new bio warfare) and business goes on as usual.
Government is not innocent as lawyers from the Department of Justice were in court defending Pfizer in the suit to release data from its clinical trials. The two, the government and the company, wanted to wait 75 years to release the data. Also, the company defends itself from accusations of crappy medical trials by responding that it did as it was told by the government.
Another reader informed me that Woody was already talking elsewhere (Bill Maher), which is to say that Woody was invited onto SNL with a message he was sharing for five full months. Hmmm...
So the monologue is still completely available off the NBC site. Now two days later. There are no “live” surprises here, plenty of time to remove anything not allowed to be seen. Also still fully available on youtube.
There are several full minutes of normalizing “the herb” and drug use prior to this clip. He then says the things here, but then wipes it all away by excusing the shots as essentially just another recreational drug that everybody just does anyway. Its all cool, just a drug like “the herb”.
I didn’t really watch him so much, but watched the musicians to see if there were any surprised reactions. I suspect though they’re well trained to not really react, just smile whatever happens. Probably already saw it a few times in rehearsal. So again, fully above board sanctioned content.
Because after all he does tons of drugs all day voluntarily. Why are these any different? Those amateur cartel people have nothing on us real cool druggies.
If we're going to presume the world is arranged, why should I even believe the media description of Woody's childhood? My problem with presuming there was design in "allowing" (whatever level that permission was given at) Woody to say these things is that it is entirely unclear what means anyone should be using to divine the truth from the lies in media.
I know I'm seeing something that is lies mixed with truth, we've established that is what media is. I know that the CIA and other intelligence agencies (from around the world) have significantly compromised much of what is put out by media (probably greater than 70% at times), we've established that. The problem then is knowing how to separate truth from lies. How can I presume to know what any particular celebrity is if I'm using that background to judge a message we think he was "allowed" to say?
This is the problem between presuming "Design" over "incompetence". I know humans are rampantly incompetent, I see it daily. It is not clear to me that design can exist in a population with so much incompetence.
My suggestion to people wanting to offer their takes (without waiting) is to explain them as well as possible to see if there is bias that could be toyed with. Make it a habit to hold back---particularly in parasocial circumstances.
Edit: I added the Woody Harrelson appearance with Bill Maher from five months ago in which he went fairly deep (not entirely correct, but with a lot of good or reasonable points and intuition) on pandemic medical scams. That YouTube video was viewed 775,000 times, so there were likely at least a million views. So, yes, it was well understood what Woody Harrelson thought ahead of his SNL appearance.
Also of relevance is the uniformity and seeming prepared response of the media e.g. https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1629746822192463873
A simple theory of everything is Money. Consider that the average person - who has a below-average IQ due to the world now having become complex - is about 85% of everyone (every person to the left of one SD to the right of the mean). The corporate media runs on money, not truth, so they target the average person because that's where the money is. The government also targets the majority as that's who they need to control and tax.
So as long as the average person believes in something; covid, the vax, Ukraine, climate change, vegetables, mandates, or wokeness as examples, the media will push that particular narrative regardless of it being true. It makes them money and if they went against that tide they'd lose people and profit.
But when the truth of that narrative begins to falter they switch slowly, then fast. The liberal media and the alt-right media both support covid, the vax, Ukraine, and climate change because 85% believe in those narratives. They differ somewhat on vegetables vs meat, mandates, and Trump vs Biden due to their market segmentation.
No media can afford to support a truth if the People do not believe it - they'd immediately lose viewers whose confirmation biases they fail to support.
A conspiracy of interests creates false narratives of perceived truth, government policy and support make them official, and the media amplifies them for as long as the People continue to believe.
Political parties and politicians do the same. The tail always wags the dog.
What's needed to break the hold of manufactured hypnosis is replacing the alt-right media and mainstream media with independent (non-corporate) data, studies, interviews, lectures, and commentary found on independent online media. As with cult deprogramming, the first step is removing the individual from the cult leader, which in our case is the media.
As well as the Musk response.
Since I ignored the SNL excitement over the weekend, perhaps that disqualifies me from having any insight ... and unlike Mr Zen above, I know I get caught up in the same excitements as the general public and smoke the same Hopium as the midwit crowd- "the Orange Man is going to ride in at the last minute" or "I'm going to get rich off this exponential trend!". Thus, like millions of codependent wives, just a little bit of positive news and I'm like, "oh hallelujah, they're seeing the light!".
So I really don't want to hear the hard headed realism of Mr Sharpe, about how likely is it that the video wing of the MSM and the print wing of the MSM are suddenly at each other's throats, especially given that they're owned by the same people. No no Mr Sharpe, don't bring up those conspiracy theories! I want my simple world of butterflies and buttercups. Don't make me think! I feel threatened!
I too am always behind the curve not having a Twitter account and not heeding the 'news'. As I understand it the elites who rule us all are not one amorphous blob but a coterie of fighting families all vying for power and influence - like the Venetian merchant class in the 15th Century. There are plenty of conspiracies and conspirators and we cannon-fodder sometimes get caught in the crossfire. (I'm going for the metaphors-in-a-sentence record here).
I'm guessing that as long as some overlord (the WEF?) doesn't succeed in subjugating these warring factions we can have some hope. The butterflies and buttercups of Fluffybunnyland may yet come to be!
ha ha, wish I weren't on the clock, as the gauntlet for the most mixed metaphors in one run-on sentence seems to have been thrown down!
I rather suspect that the WEF is actually a visible "Underlord" of the group of families you see vying for power.
Think of a lightning rod or a magician's left hand, which divert attention from the physical event taking place.
You have a point. The WEF is a handy bogeyman for the disaffected.
Who could disagree with statements like 'We believe that progress happens by bringing people together.'? Should we take that kind of statement at face value or observe that the WEF propaganda is riddled with anodyne pronouncements of just that sort? It does rather look like a very sweetly scented smokescreen.
If something looks too good to be true then it usually is.
Woody is a liberal who identifies as an anarchist, like many other liberals who've lost the faith. Apostacy, like humor, makes people uneasy.
Jon Stewart's lab-created apostacy made Steve Colbert visibly uneasy in June 2021:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfejgwbDQ8
With Ed Dowd's recent revelation on Tucker Carlson (that the Vax is killing people) the tide may be turning. Dowd points to a "conspiracy of interests" and mentions possible violence when the Vaxxed realize their lives have been shortened:
https://rumble.com/embed/v27x60y/
Instead of getting quarterly mandated boosters, people are ignoring pharma. The covid narrative is losing steam and may be tipping over. But there are other false narratives the People still believe and new ones to come. Not finding WMDs did nothing to slow the forever wars. Most people have no interest in waking up.
By the way, just because the vax did not kill you does not mean it's not taken years off your life. It may also degrade the quality of your life in the meantime.
Jon Stewart is a well-paid tool, and I have no reason to believe that his appearance with Colbert was "natural".
Dowd is a great example of what I'm trying to get at. He is smarter than average, but not by a lot, and naive enough to have no idea that he was used to fleece put buyers in 2022. He had no idea of the internal contradictions of his message (Buy puts in *these* companies, the whole market will collapse, but there will be liquid counterparties to pay off your bets?). He is exactly the guy that you want in a stable of pawns to engineer messaging in a controlled way.
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-big-short-a-warning-about-ed
Not finding WMDs was NEVER going to slow the forever wars.
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/world-war-e-levels-deep-on-psyops
No way was Jon Stewart's Colbert appearance "natural." Stewart had an enormous "Q Rating" so he was the perfect pitchman to pull out of semi-retirement to shift The Narrative from the increasingly untenable natural origins to lab leak. And of course Stewart got nowhere near intentional release.
Maybe (on Stewart and Dowd), but isn't the simplest explanation the most likely? Individuals are not easily controlled and they make mistakes. Tool or not, Dowd did a great job getting the word out on a mainstream show that may have been historically important, maybe the beginning of the end.
After no WMDs, many people began to think twice about media programming, but most did not. I'd guess that even now 25% of Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein was directly responsible for 9/11. Probably will be the same when people realize the vax is killing us.
The simplest explanation is the obduracy of people, rather than layers of complex global psyops (unless advanced Ai-enabled *) that are as likely to fail or backfire as an old BMW, even with the military-banking complex as a common denominator.
*AlphaZero is an advanced type of Ai that self-learns in a day or so enough to be creative far beyond the smartest human. If psyops are driven by an advanced Ai they'd not make mistakes as they manipulate complexity and we'd effectively become programmed bots and never know it. Note that the average person is manipulated by the media every day and has no clue. Maybe we are too.
https://www.deepmind.com/blog/alphazero-shedding-new-light-on-chess-shogi-and-go
No, the simple explanation is not that actors on TV are sincere. What the actual F?
If that is your model of the world, step back and ask if that's your model because you have or have not ever been around any of those people who are paid to create parasocial relationships.
I don't think I have a model of the world, except in my head, but in my experience simple explanations work best, whereas complexity is error-prone. If the simple explanation does not work then it's time to think deeper. I have no doubt that performers plan things out, but they also improvise. Walberg will improvise not just on a late-night show but his lines throughout a movie.
I've never had a parasocial relationship. Am I missing out? I don't understand people who ask for an autograph, I have no pictures of myself with important people, and have never taken a selfie.
Why would people be paid to develop parasocial relationships?
"but in my experience simple explanations work best"
You're missing my point. Which "model" is the simpler one? If you're not familiar with the terrain, how do you decide?
What I'm saying is that Hollywood *is* an intelligence cesspool, and if I'm right about that, the simpler model *is* that the messaging is planned.
"What I'm saying is that Hollywood *is* an intelligence cesspool," - David McGowan details the intelligence/military connections to Hollywood and the music industry in his expose series on Laurel Canyon. https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/inside-the-lc-the-strange-but-mostly-true-story-of-laurel-canyon-and-the-birth-of-the-hippie-generation-part-i/
I was sidestepping your point. Simple versus complex only works when both are likely correct. What's important is what's most probably correct. To zero in on that we do need a good model - but it has to have efficacy.
Yes, Hollywood is indirectly part of the intelligence community, which I believe has an entertainment industry liaison stationed there. But my point is the generalization can not be applied with confidence to individual actors. DC intelligence types are very different from bad boy actors. They might try to get a "fact pattern" into a movie but it would have to fit the script.
Woody may have planned his presentation, but not to please DC - more likely to boost his Q-score. I'd say Hollywood puts ratings before everything else. Having lived twice in DC and twice in LA the cultures are as far away as the two coasts. LA intelligence-types are focused on the aerospace and tech industries and not much on Hollywood except as advisors.
You'd not want to be saddled with a Woody or a Stewart as their handler. People like Colbert are focused on ratings, any intelligence contact or request would show up in their monologue. These guys don't keep secrets. I doubt individual performances are vetted by DC.
I could be wrong, I could be naive, but it seems to me intelligence work focuses on longer term payoffs like overthrowing governments and turning foreign agents.
I'm in the UK and I don't want to be controversial here (nor do I want to come across as impossibly naive) but I have spent thousands of hours around people who are paid to create parasocial relationships. Are actors on TV sincere? Some, yes. Isn't SNL supposed to be live? In which case the producers wouldn't know what he was about to say. There was an Aaaron Sorkin series nearly 20 years ago - Studio 60 on Sunset Strip (modelled on SNL) - which opened with the host going off script (and getting fired for it) because the show had got too tame. Maybe this is a case of life imitating art. When Kenneth Tynan first said the word 'fuck' on a BBC live TV show in 1965 the producers didn't know it was coming. The BBC had to apologise and various campaigners who thought that the TV was the devil personified petitioned the Queen.
Interesting comment. Just as life eventually imitates art, art imitates life, eventually.
With a good actor, and maybe not that good since we the People are easily fooled, we'd never know which was happening, art or life? Would not knowing be a third level beyond art and life, beyond controversial and naïve?
Mathew: This will sound nutty, but the "frankness" of your comment about Dowd caused me to think about genetics and people with high vs. low MAO-A activity. https://selfhacked.com/blog/about-mao-a-and-what-to-do-if-you-have-the-warrior-gene/ "Slow" activity means higher dopamine and serotonin, higher adrenaline and noradrenaline I believe.
https://www.beyondmthfr.com/mao-a-understanding-the-snp/
MAO-A is involved in breakdown of tyramine, an amine produced from the amino acid tyrosine. People with the "slow" variant might also have problems with tyramines, evidenced by migraines. https://roguescientist.co/genes-and-tyramine-intolerance-part-1-monoamine-oxidase-a/
Perhaps keep in the back of your mind as a possibility.
No offense intended, and I concur with the sentiment as to Dowd.
Can you summarize this half hour of reading in two sentences?
98% of my migraines went away 16 years ago when I stopped drinking milk and took lactaid. My primary hypothesis is that I was lactose intolerant. But I'm open to other cogent arguments.
In regards to "lactose intolerance" one may want to consider what is done to the milk usually consumed, which changes it: homogenization and pasteurization. Many report they don't have the same symptoms when consuming fresh, unprocessed milk. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030215001162 https://draxe.com/nutrition/9-myths-of-pasteurization-or-homogenization-better-options/
The simple explanation is dairy, either lactose or casein, or else an MTHFR mutation. Would be good to start up dairy again so we can narrow it down.
That bruskness displayed could be suggestive of the MAO-A gene variation that also results in tyramine sensitivity. Just make a note of it. Those posts list the genes to check. I've heard you mention migraines several times, but if you're good, no problem.
The bruskness is most likely simply not wanting to suffer fools gladly, or wanting for those who take this journey with me to trust that I'm not here to make disagreements personal. I do not have the time to give people therapy with kid gloves. Take the shock pill, relax, have a good night sleep, and get ready to handle life with a new model---or else I'm not the writer you should be following...that's my general message. We don't have time for forceful naivety.
We have a local dairy farm which sells A2 milk (it's a bit yellow) from their herd of Guernsey cows. Some of the "lactose intolerant" can drink this milk with no GI distress. The dairy still has to pasteurize the milk so as not to offend the local "Health Authority" overlords.
If you had a month to run a personal study it would be interesting to see if it was the processing, the composition of the milk, or a true milk allergy or lactose intolerance which triggered your migraines. Then you might have to run a second month on unpasteurized milk to really nail the true cause.
It was too late at that point
They prefer to pretend it never happened
If you listen to the whole piece, his second punchline, about his drug use, could have been enough allow the cognitively dissonant to ignore the full frontal punchline (which in itself was obviously ironic, as he plays a major role in A Scanner Darkly, which is about EXACTLY THAT!)
I'd never heard of that movie. I'll see if I can fit a viewing in during my note sorting.
A Philip K Dick novel originally... synopsis here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Scanner_Darkly
OMG! IT IS AMAZING!
If you have ever used drugs, it is required.
I'm finding it less than amazing, and my instinct is that it was produced primarily to kick off the technology that would eventually be used for deep fakes.
I always find it preferable to read the story before the movie. Then the movie is usually less than amazing.
There is some Keanu to get through, but Downey is fantastic, and the overall story is about as Dick as it gets. Let's say my insight into the trade makes it particularly meaningful to me...
Tried to show that movie to my eldest kid. He got stuck on watching the head thing over and over again. 🤯
Head thing?
Ohhhh, the alien head talking?
I misspoke. Was totally thinking of Scanners. 😂 when I reread your comment I was, ‘Woody wasn’t in Scanners”..,
Or perhaps he did what Chappelle did. Went off script.
Yes, it was LIVE after all!
As foretold in plans written years ago: it is part of an accelerationist policy meant to destroy nation-States (hence DOD involvement as per CLADE X), by undermining our trust in institutions. Confronted with economic depression and faced with such a level of incompetence and corruption, the people will blame their leaders, Woody (an intelligence asset just like is father) is pushing the ongoing manufactured crisis, which is principally meant to subvert, foment distrust, and cause revolt; have the people destroy their own institutions, so the parasitic barbarians can swoop in and impose new ones.
This is plausible, though you state with certainty some assumptions.
I lean into this theory as well. I think it would be quite useful for Moloch to have the Mandarins destroy one another and for the average John Q Public to create havoc for which something like Marshal Law makes sense. Neither outcome of “let the plebs know or not” is desirable. They can keep folks in the dark and continue their shenanigans or they can shine light on all the corruption, have natural break down of society and still sweep in and continue their shenanigans.
Thinning the Mandarin ranks might be "necessary" if the dollar is collapsing, in the sense of keeping the winners happy. Too many nobles, too much land, too much tribute...not always affordable.
But the Mandarins can’t be this stupid to not realise it, can they? As a pleb I’m able to grok this, they certainly should be able to, being further entrenched in the system. But agreed. Too many unnecessary entitlers with not enough honey to go around.
This is a theory that's floating around and seems logical.
do say more
Looks like Woody was reading from a script himself as he did the monologue, so I'm not sure this isn't a planned disclosure. And I noticed not much reaction to the metaphor of the cartel's drugs and making it sound like big pharma. So I don't think the audience members got it. Or they were too shocked by him actually saying it.
I used to be in the "off-script" camp, but no more.
Like most, we are just making educated guesses, but all he had to do was change the ending. He could be reading off the cards until the punchline and then just change that last part, that is, if he was not allowed to do this and snuck it in.
My intuition says the same.
I argued that actors/comedians and whatever else always have worked in some capacity for the spies. For centuries.
I remember Woody from "Wag the dog." I often say that movie features 99% of what anyone needs to know about politics.
My ol' Shoe. That's the entry-level psyop.
I like the night life!
How timely for a major celeb 'influencer' to deliver his "the drugs cartel dunnit" message - just
as some of us were starting to believe evidence from Sasha Latypova, Katherine Watt, Karen Kingston and Robert F. Kennedy Jr, etc that the real villains were the Pentagon.
Thank you, Woody, for saving us from more crazy conspiracy theorists. Job done. Now crawl back into the woodwork where you belong.
The cabal running this show is free and has shown for 3 years that if they lie - oops I mean when they lie - their largess allows them to move down the road with the story line and few even notice.
If the resistance repeats bad info - they get a permanent black mark. I think this is the tactic being employed now. I looked up the Woody clip yesterday to make sure it was not out of context. What I found out in the search results was screams about conspiracy theories. To wit / from Vanity Fair ‘taking the stage to float conspiracy theories disguised as provocative humor is both intellectually dishonest and tedious.’
Check your outrage addiction at the door y’all. Before forwarding the next ‘epic truth’ to family and friends - Due Diligence! This is exhausting. Just the way they want it.
Great analysis Mathew.
Exhaustion is one of the goals of cognitive warfare. Mental or emotional.
A good defense is to stop needing public approbation or cheer leaders.
This is a very astute point. You should write an article about it. Coercion goes hand in hand with exhaustion. I think some people go the vax because they were hectored by their brainwashed co-workers and family to the point of exhaustion and submission.
and because the path of least resistance is most people's automatic response
I think a patte rn is emerging that Pfizer/Moderna are being thrown to the wolves by the Deep State.
The level of death and injury that is emerging out of the rubble is beginning to see blowback and I think maybe the PTB are willing to throw Pharma under the bus, either because they're immune from any prosecution, anyway, and because the FDA/NIH/CDC rubber-stamped it & would otherwise go down with BigPharm..
Maybe not. Maybe they think they can just keep censoring and finessing their lies, but I think this may be a way to pull their asses out of the fire and look like the good guys (or so they think)...
It's really hard to say what's going on, if this is really just organic waking up and smelling the coffee, or if it's a sacrifice bunt. But it does seem like they are trying to steer the rage away from the gov't and that may mean putting the target on Pfizer/Moderna's back.
Pfizer taking the fall means it will pay a giant fine and continue doing business. Unfortunately no one seems to go to jail when Big Pharma commits fraud. That will work well for the larger agenda--more vaccines, mandates, less individual freedom.
What should happen is that they pay fines large enough to bankrupt the companies and compensate the victims and the leadership face criminal prosecution. But the DOJ has already said in one case that the federal govt (that is, us) will pay any penalties or lawsuits, not the companies. They are shielding them like crazy. I think it's a big head fake. They let stuff leak showing Pharma Phraud, block prosecution based on PREP, everyone at the top in the HHS (Fauci, Collins) that wants to retire comfortably retires with billions, they keep up the gaslighting and distraction (Ukr war, gender war, new bio warfare) and business goes on as usual.
Government is not innocent as lawyers from the Department of Justice were in court defending Pfizer in the suit to release data from its clinical trials. The two, the government and the company, wanted to wait 75 years to release the data. Also, the company defends itself from accusations of crappy medical trials by responding that it did as it was told by the government.
I agree—I just doubt there will be significant ramifications for any govt official.
This is the controlled opposition.
He did throw a hard red pill at this libtard audience, but this was by design.
Big Pharma knows the blow back is coming hard and fast. They want to get in front of it and control the narrative and limit their losses.
I am not sure he was "allowed" to say it. It was at the very end of his monolog, and I think he just snuck it in, too late to censor.
The complete monolog was misdirection. There was NO indication this was coming.
Another reader informed me that Woody was already talking elsewhere (Bill Maher), which is to say that Woody was invited onto SNL with a message he was sharing for five full months. Hmmm...
Start at minute 47.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=NTvKhMmiqqo
One more theory:
The whole thing is about DIVIDE AND CONQUER.
in order to do that we need fodder for both camps to keep building hatred.
Good call. I'll add this to the list later.
So the monologue is still completely available off the NBC site. Now two days later. There are no “live” surprises here, plenty of time to remove anything not allowed to be seen. Also still fully available on youtube.
There are several full minutes of normalizing “the herb” and drug use prior to this clip. He then says the things here, but then wipes it all away by excusing the shots as essentially just another recreational drug that everybody just does anyway. Its all cool, just a drug like “the herb”.
I didn’t really watch him so much, but watched the musicians to see if there were any surprised reactions. I suspect though they’re well trained to not really react, just smile whatever happens. Probably already saw it a few times in rehearsal. So again, fully above board sanctioned content.
Because after all he does tons of drugs all day voluntarily. Why are these any different? Those amateur cartel people have nothing on us real cool druggies.
Musicians aren't generally there for rehearsals, prior to a run through
If we're going to presume the world is arranged, why should I even believe the media description of Woody's childhood? My problem with presuming there was design in "allowing" (whatever level that permission was given at) Woody to say these things is that it is entirely unclear what means anyone should be using to divine the truth from the lies in media.
I know I'm seeing something that is lies mixed with truth, we've established that is what media is. I know that the CIA and other intelligence agencies (from around the world) have significantly compromised much of what is put out by media (probably greater than 70% at times), we've established that. The problem then is knowing how to separate truth from lies. How can I presume to know what any particular celebrity is if I'm using that background to judge a message we think he was "allowed" to say?
This is the problem between presuming "Design" over "incompetence". I know humans are rampantly incompetent, I see it daily. It is not clear to me that design can exist in a population with so much incompetence.