Roll Out The Sport Model!

A very special thank you goes out to our very own pgroup for alerting me – somewhat accidentally – to this “keystone” article showing that FAKE SCIENCE is gonna have a hell of a time keeping its own “woo-woo patrol” on the reservation.

Yeah. And CRAZY WOLF could not be happier! *wink*

Here was the accidental “tip”:



In case you don’t get the joke about the “sport model”, please check out this video which I must now be shilling for the millionth time, but WHAT THE HECK IT JUST GETS BETTER!

As I told pgroup, the best part of this one is that I don’t have ANYTHING PERSONAL TO ADD. Nope. The SPORT MODEL is OUT OF THE BARN.

Just as an aside, to show you how I’m thinking on this, I realize that Bob Lazar could be complete disinformation under MK, which – as we know from “Two-Door Ford” and her BFF Monica McLean, can even be used to pass polygraph tests with flying colors. However, one of the things that really impresses me here, is that Lazar’s discussion of “sport model” flight dynamics and the engineering of it MATCHES the DoD released video on flight control of the filmed craft completely and in fine detail. Watch closely – Bob’s taking note of the remarkable congruence between his testimony and the video, accompanied with an obvious sense of pure science joy, does NOT strike me as deception – more so given that the DoD would be deceiving us as well with the video release, which I find interesting but unlikely.

Nope. I think we’ve got a live one, and DoD showed us THAT CLIP very intentionally.


PS: One year ago today.

126 thoughts on “Roll Out The Sport Model!

      1. ran’s nuclear facilities have been probed by strange UFO’s back during Obama’s years. From the article : “The UAVs could jam radars and disrupt interceptors’ navigation systems. They flew “outside the atmosphere” at speeds of up to Mach 10. They could hover. Flying at night, they emitted a telltale blue light that led to their nickname: “luminous objects.” “In several cases … F-14s faced them but were unable to operate their armament systems properly,” Taghvaee wrote. One Tomcat taking off to intercept a luminous object on Jan. 26, 2012 mysteriously exploded, killing both crewmen. Taghvaee implies the alleged UAV was somehow responsible, as the F-14 in question was “one of the fittest” of the 40 or so Tomcats then in service.” Our Military personnel have said our own Nuclear Missile silos have faced similar hijacking of electronic controls. If Obama was Cabal and Iran was Cabal, it would seem unlikely this was our government. So we have a third player, more technologically advanced than the US?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Nuclear seems to “trigger” our friends and frenemies from elsewhere. I kinda get that, but it works both ways.

          I realize that they feel a bit possessive in various ways, and perhaps rightly so, in some ways, but right now I’m trusting the plan, and the bigger plan that appears to contain it. Some have earned trust. Others seemingly less so.

          I believe in respecting other people’s territories, even if none of us really own the land. Obvious where my biases lie. 😉

          Liked by 1 person

  1. The problem I have with the BBC version– and ever other version I’ve seen– of the UFO clip is that it is a clip. The entire flight data was recorded; I would like to see the entire footage, from take-off to landing. That is nowhere to be found. If they’re willing to show is this much, what else must they be hiding?

    Liked by 9 people

    1. I suspect the full recording of the flight is too much info. Casual talk about what sent them up – reference to other incidents – and worst of all, “normalcy” about it. THAT would be shocking.

      According to Corso, there is much testing of our air defenses by these things, and it’s SMART – particularly when they push in close enough or persistent enough that they have to be intercepted, which seems to be the GOAL – to “draw an interception” and test our tech. The military may thus want to be very careful there, and not spill too much into public data.

      THAT SAID – this is a short clip. There is a much longer one, I know, but I don’t remember how long.

      Liked by 8 people

            1. Maybe that is what I need to do — read three times. One down and two to go.

              Actually it took me back to my high school days when I was really interested in UFO’s but that time seemed to be long past. Guess my head has been in the sand in many way for the last 40 years!

              Liked by 4 people

  2. “Roberts had switched his vote because he feared the Court would be attacked as a partisan institution if the five Republican appointees joined to kill Obama’s Hussein’s signature legislative achievement.”


    Unbelievable, and absolutely infuriating!

    Roberts should be IMPEACHED and DISBARRED for gross legal misconduct and breach of oath of office.

    Basing decisions relating to matters of LAW on his personal FEAR about public PERCEPTION is so grotesque it should be PROSECUTABLE.

    It is NO different than saying “I know that man is innocent, but based on my own belief that I can SEE the future, and based on my own FEAR that the Court would be ‘attacked as a partisan institution’ [for WHATEVER reason], I switched my vote and declared an innocent man GUILTY.”

    If the cited quote above is accurate, then that’s EXACTLY what Roberts did.

    He made a decision that resulted in the upheaval of MILLIONS of American lives, based NOT on the merits or relevant facts of Law, but on his OWN FEAR of how the evidently CORRUPT court he led would be portrayed by the Leftists.

    What a pathetic, lawless, corrupt maggot.

    Liked by 15 people

    1. “But Roberts pays attention to media coverage.”


      In other words, he is beholden to the Left’s portrayal of him, and acts accordingly, in order to obtain their praise.


      “As chief justice, he is keenly aware of his leadership role on the court,”


      Which has clearly perverted and subverted his legal reasoning…


      “…and he also is sensitive to how the court is perceived by the public.”


      In other words, he is more vainly subject to peer pressure than a 12-year old girl, and the peer group he so desperately seeks approval from is the Leftist MSM.

      You could throw a lawn dart at the roster of the S.S. Minnow and come up with a better judge.

      Liked by 9 people

    2. Yes, and I was told yesterday that Roberts also changed his vote on Trump wanting to put back the Citizenship question on the Census……..I need to confirm this as much as possible……but he has done this before!

      Obie, on his one volition,without Courts, or even an E.O. removed that Citizenship question. It should not need any Court approval to replace it !!!!!!

      Liked by 12 people

  3. Seems like Bob Lazar is describing a paradox.

    The technology, not just the craft but everything associated with it, could not have even been intellectually grasped by people in, for example, the 1800s or earlier. The scientific understanding simply would not have allowed for enough understanding. We didn’t even have airplanes as a point of reference yet.

    So a civilization has to advance to a certain point before any meaningful ‘revelation’ of such technology ever takes place, otherwise there’s no point to it.

    But at the same time, if a civilization *is* sufficiently advanced to comprehend at least the basic concepts involved, any such civilization would necessarily *also* have a centralized power structure in which the selfish interests of the very few (greed, desire for power, militarily or economically or otherwise) would prevent the ‘revelation’ of such technology to the rest of humanity.

    Being advanced enough to recognize the potential of the shiny new toy for what it is, is likewise advanced enough to fanatically guard and keep the secret.

    And as Mr. Lazar said, when access is compartmentalized, science and discovery is stagnant, because the scientific process requires a free and open exchange of ideas in order for understanding to advance.

    This ‘paradox’ — that the advancement of a civilization to a point capable of recognizing such technology is simultaneously advanced enough to maintain secrecy in order to attempt to harness the power of the technology for the very few in positions of highest power — will always exist, because of human nature.

    So how does one ‘break’ the ‘paradox’?

    The self-interested easily convince themselves that if the public is EVER to find out, it must be gradual, small steps, over decades, otherwise people would go insane, they wouldn’t be able to ‘handle’ it, and the entire country would need to be hospitalized… or some bullshit like that, the exact same kind of thing that sets off my bullshit detector every time Q says something similar.

    Because if their FALSE and SELF-SERVING ‘concern’ was legitimate, then THEY wouldn’t be able to ‘handle’ exposure to such knowledge, EITHER.

    If THEY can ‘handle’ it, then so can we.

    They’re not special, just PRIVILEGED.

    And that privilege has naturally bred arrogance.

    And it is that pure ARROGANCE that I hear, every time Q (or anybody, for that matter) pulls the “You can’t HANDLE the truth” line from “A Few Good Men“.

    It’s a self-serving lie of convenience, to satisfy the conscience of those who already know, and give themselves a justification and rationalization for keeping it secret from everyone else.

    They pay lip-service to the concept of “Of, by and for the People”, but they don’t ACT on it, they don’t LIVE it, because they’re just garden variety hypocrites, bureaucrats in positions of power who think they’re special.

    A potential first step in breaking the ‘paradox’ is a large dose of intellectual honesty. Unfortunately, the kind of people who find themselves in positions of power or authority don’t (generally) seem to be well acquainted with concepts like intellectual honesty. Or if they are, it’s moot, because whatever intellectual honesty they have is overcome by basic greed in one form or another.

    The only credible means of breaking the ‘paradox’ that currently occurs to me is an information ‘dump’.

    A large scale ‘declassification’.

    THAT would obliterate the ‘paradox’.

    THAT would allow for human advancement, because crowd-sourcing of billions of people focusing on the new technology is going to figure out a lot more, a lot faster, than the kind of people who obsessively keep everything to themselves and compartmentalize everything.

    And until that happens, humanity is basically stuck in a holding pattern.


    Liked by 15 people

    1. China’s sports model.
      Thomas Wictor @ThomasWic

      The single Chinese carrier was designed for vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft.

      The stupid Chinese carrier-based jet can’t carry munitions.

      ANY munitions except air-to-air missiles make the jet too heavy to get off the deck, and it goes into the water.

      See? No munitions.

      The Chinese are cargo cultists. They may as well be building aircraft from wooden crates.


      Liked by 11 people

    2. Great post! Not necessarily 100% in agreement with respect to Q because there might be (probably is) some depravity or details of betrayal, knowledge of which could cause greater harm than good, and which can be addressed and eliminated (including perpetrators punished) without common knowledge of everything.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. ” Not necessarily 100% in agreement with respect to Q because there might be (probably is) some depravity or details of betrayal, knowledge of which could cause greater harm than good…”


        I understand the concept, I just have a great deal of difficulty coming up with an example that could justify keeping it secret.

        I just don’t think we’re so dainty and fragile that we need Big Brother to provide us an emotional safe space called Global Ignorance — and even if we did, do we really want Big Brother to make that decision?

        Unfortunately, I am capable of imagining some truly horrific things, but I can’t even imagine anything that would be so bad that the benefits of keeping it secret outweigh the benefits of making the truth known to all.

        I can see why the Germans and Japanese would want to cover up atrocities committed during WWII. Would it have been better to allow those atrocities to be forgotten? Or was it better to march German citizens through the concentration camps after they were liberated and Germany was defeated?

        Are we more fragile than the German People in the aftermath of WWII?

        Talk about your ‘wake up’ calls to an ugly reality…

        I can imagine LOTS of things that would be too embarrassing for the government to reveal, no shortage there.

        But when stories already ‘out there’ like Hitlery and Huma cutting faces off children and dancing around wearing the bloody child’s face like a mask, what could be too horrific?

        We know about the child sex-slavery and ritual sacrifice and combinations of both. What could be more horrific than that?

        Or maybe the supposed ‘problem’ is theological?

        Maybe the ‘truth’ exposes some great fraud perpetrated on the world — like maybe a false church?

        If a church is false — even (or especially) a big and prestigious one — isn’t that exactly the kind of thing People need to know… if you actually care about those People and their souls?

        Or maybe an even bigger horror — suppose Satan is here on earth, right now, sitting on his throne, and these really are the ‘end times’?

        Isn’t THAT the kind of thing that people should KNOW?!?

        I mean, that would be pretty terrifying for ALL the people of the WORLD, wouldn’t it? Talk about chaos and disruption… and yet, they couldn’t HIDE it forever. There are too many ‘signs’ that too many people are aware of.

        Or even the biggest potential disrupter of all — another claim by fraudscience that God isn’t real?

        Atheists have no fear of that claim… and why should Christians either? How is anyone ever going to prove a negative like THAT one?!?

        They’re NOT.

        So no fear.

        If aliens exist, how would that possibly invalidate the existence of God anyway?

        It wouldn’t.

        Not even close.

        It took all of about 3 seconds to find a link to thirty Bible verses that appear to be related to UFO’s… and I was only searching for the examples in the book of Ezekiel:

        So WHAT IS IT that could POSSIBLY be SO BAD that mankind just couldn’t handle the truth?

        Would it be better for the ruler of a kingdom to warn his People that Genghis Kahn was outside the city gates — or is the king doing his People a ‘solid’ to just let them find out after the attack begins?

        Would it be better to know if the world was going to end on Thursday… so you have time to make amends with family, friends and your Maker… or even possibly figure out a way to avoid the looming catastrophe that the government whiz kids overlooked — or just let it be a surprise?

        What could be so bad that it was better for the People NOT to know?

        I can’t think of anything.

        But the list of things that might benefit the few who know about them, and cause them to come up with all sorts of excuses to keep it to themselves?

        Oh yes… that list is practically ENDLESS…

        Liked by 4 people

    3. HI Scott. I almost always agree with you 100%, but this time we diverge a bit.

      I understand your argument about how if “they” can handle the knowledge so can we. BUT.

      If the information/knowledge about what is really “out there” is handed off to a limited number of people, then “they” can contain/manage the reactions of said people. If said knowledge were widely disseminated all at once to a population of billions, they could not.

      Some people within the tiny group of those “who know” have committed suicide, or had to be “contained” in some way, I think due to their reaction to knowledge.

      I, too, want to KNOW. But I think many people are just too dumb to handle it. The people here are engaged, thoughtful, have educated themselves about current events, and would mostly be fine, I think. But look around you at the average populace. Sudden knowledge of what we suspect is “out there” would result in mass chaos. People have a melt-down when the coffee shop is out of an ingredient for their favorite latte, for God’s sake. What are they gonna do when they find out we are up against aliens?

      Liked by 8 people

      1. Personally fed up with BS alibis to withhold information…

        – Classified. Yea, I understand valid military stuff must be classified. Valid intelligence must be classified. But the extent classified is applied, more correctly BS.

        – Sources and methods. Over used and abused.

        – Can they handle the information.

        T R A N S P A R A N C Y
        is essential…or we’ll continue to be manipulated with increasing controls over our lives.

        Liked by 9 people

      2. “If the information/knowledge about what is really “out there” is handed off to a limited number of people, then “they” can contain/manage the reactions of said people.”


        Well let’s think about that for a moment, both from the perspective of what might really be ‘out there’ and who chooses the gatekeepers (and why… i.e., who decides, and based on what criteria?).

        First, the ‘who is out there’.

        For sake of argument, suppose that small humanoid creatures from Zeta Reticuli are responsible for genetically manipulating human DNA either 63 or 65 times, to ‘evolve’ us from monkeys.

        There are so many problems with that argument it’s hard to even know where to begin, and Bob Lazar didn’t make that argument, that was just hearsay, the ‘cover story’ that he was told.

        As always, WHERE is the ‘missing link’? Where is the fossil record? It’s the same problem that exists with EVERY ‘macro-evolution’ theory. It’s the problem that exposes EVERY so-called ‘scientist’ who ‘believes’ in ‘macro evolution’ (the only kind that really matters for the ‘evolution’ argument) as a fraud.

        And by ‘fraud’ I mean that the most basic elements of his ‘belief’ are completely inconsistent with everything (i.e., evidence) besides his willful belief. That’s NOT a ‘scientist’, it’s not even close. That’s a zealot a degree handed out by other zealots, following a cult assertion with zero substantiation.

        The concept of ‘macro-evolution’ was not credible, from the fist time I was exposed to the bogus ‘Monkey to Man’ evolution ‘chart’. It’s as bogus as Piltdown Man. It’s a NARRATIVE designed by atheists (probably communists) to contradict God, probably in the ongoing effort (long game) to undermine and destroy Western civilization.

        Does that mean the vast majority of ‘scientists’ today who apparently believe in macro-evolution are malevolently complicit?

        No, it just means they’re intellectually dishonest, with THEMSELVES (you have to be, in order to never even question the obvious problems with the foundation of your entire worldview), they lack self-awareness, they live in an echo chamber, and they are willing to believe whatever pays their bills within their field of study, or afraid to believe anything which threatens their ability to pay their bills. If there’s a better explanation, I’m all ears.

        The ONE thing that is always missing in what passes for ‘science’ today is TRUTH WITHOUT A POLITICAL (always Leftist) AGENDA.

        Pick a subject. Any subject. All the so-called ‘scientific experts’ (90% plus) believe the same thing, they all hail from radical Leftist ‘universities’ (the only kind we have anymore), and they all vote Democrat. That’s not ‘science’. They have turned their fields of study into just another arm of the Democrat Party (or Leftist generally, for those ‘scientists’ in other countries). It exists to SERVE the political agenda of the Democrats, and NEVER contradicts it.

        It is no less politicized or weaponized than the DOJ, FIB, or any other agency of government, or the MSM. They all work in concert, and it’s not a coincidence that they are ALWAYS working toward the same goals and objectives, and NEVER in opposition to one another.

        But back to the “who is out there” topic.

        Who cares what the answer is, so long as there is an ANSWER?

        If the truth IS that it’s pod people from Zeta Reticuli, then let the truth RING OUT — and PROVE it.

        Whatever the TRUTH is, let the truth BE what it IS.

        What credible argument can be made to keep People in the DARK?

        People CANNOT make “good” decisions WITHOUT access to facts, without access to TRUTH.

        And if history has proven anything, has it not proven that a tiny percentage of human beings NEVER make good decisions for the other 99.99999% of humanity? People (generally) make decisions that benefit THEMSELVES. We don’t have to worry about the ‘elite’ protecting their own asses… you can be absolutely SURE they’ve got that covered.

        What we need to be concerned about — ALWAYS — is that the ‘elite’ never do ANYTHING that doesn’t serve themselves. That’s reality. There is no free lunch. And the people who HAVE power do not give it away, EVER, for any reason.

        Never have, never will.

        It’s one thing to not know things, but it’s quite another to be purposely deceived, and then told that it’s for our own good… and that’s the bull*&^% we’re being asked to swallow whenever we’re told ‘We can’t handle the truth!’.

        It’s a ‘projectile’ lie.

        By which I mean those who possess the truth, and want to prevent others from knowing, on the premise that they know best what’s good for us, are PROJECTING, and it’s a LIE.

        It is THEY who can’t handle the truth.

        THEY can’t handle the reality that they are not so special, or different at all, from everyone else. THEY can’t handle that the rest of humanity could handle the truth just as well as they do, and probably better.

        Or they just really, really enjoy being on the ‘inside’ of a big ‘secret’, and the excitement and access and power and monetary reward that brings.

        Or both. Amazing just how well those two things (feelings of superiority and secrecy/privilege/access/weatlh/power) go together.

        There’s your ‘AND’ logic for today. 😁

        Liked by 7 people

          1. Most of the time I’m just testing my ‘case’ in the public arena, hoping to provoke a challenge to it, in order to see if my ‘case’ can withstand scrutiny.

            Like a Gladiator contest of the mind… walk out to the center of the Forum, declare your case, throw down the gauntlet, and see if anyone takes it up.

            It’s a lot of fun, really… and you can do it just about anywhere that provides a ‘comments’ section… almost like the Internet was designed for this kind of thing…

            I try to think it through and preemptively counter the most obvious objections before I post, but you never know what you might have missed, until or unless it is pointed out to you 🙂

            Here it’s more like friendly sparring. We’re all on the same team, so it’s not about trying to defeat an opponent, it’s just getting a good workout.

            Other places are different… more ‘ho holds barred, and may the best man (or woman) win’, i.e., the ‘two men enter, one man leaves‘ cage-match kind of thing 😁

            Liked by 2 people

          2. And the opposite is just as much fun.

            Every time an article is posted where some Congressman or MSM talking head or Leftist lunatic, or Hussein administration crony, or globalist commie, et al., makes some self-serving false public claim in the furtherance of some bogus narrative, they are throwing down the gauntlet to us, and we are picking it up, challenging it, exposing the faulty reasoning, fact-checking them, exposing their hypocrisy, etc.

            The person who made the comment will probably never read any of our replies here that shred them into little tiny pieces.

            But lots of their Lefty supporters may see it. If not here, then other places, where people like us are doing the same thing, all over the Internet.

            It’s good for Lefties to see that their so-called ‘leaders’ can’t present a credible case for their views, even if their lives depended on it 😁

            Liked by 3 people

      3. “If the information/knowledge about what is really “out there” is handed off to a limited number of people, then “they” can contain/manage the reactions of said people.”


        By what right do the privileged few ‘contain/manage’ the ‘reactions’ of ANYBODY?!?

        Who the hell are THEY to decide for YOU or ME what we can ‘handle’?

        And HOW would they make such determinations without BIAS that always magically FAVORS themselves?

        It’s always about CONTROL. All of the lies (or convenient self-serving excuses) they tell themselves and us are in service of maintaining that CONTROL.

        It’s no more complicated than that.


        “If said knowledge were widely disseminated all at once to a population of billions, they could not. ”


        Why should ANYONE ‘contain/manage the reactions’ of People?

        What is the track record of humanity ever doing such a thing, without doing far greater damage than they told themselves they were preventing (while coincidentally benefiting enormously from their self-described altruism?).

        It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetic.

        We don’t have any ‘betters’ who are looking out for our ‘interests’.

        The people at the APEX are PREDATORS.

        They are NOT sheepdogs.

        Did our Founding Fathers not know this with total clarity?

        Is it not why they did everything possible to create a Constitution that PROTECTED us from the kinds of people who ALWAYS worm their way into positions of power and authority?

        Liked by 7 people

          1. As much as we can trust anybody, that’s for sure.

            I don’t know if that’s saying a lot, or not.

            The ONE THING that would make believers out of EVERYBODY is arrests, prosecutions and convictions.

            Until that happens, until ‘SHOW ME’ actually happens, it’s all sizzle and no steak.

            Until that happens, we are being asked to ‘trust’ our lifelong abusers.

            I don’t even know how to begin to do that, much less understand how anybody else can.

            Liked by 7 people

              1. I’ve gone through as many rounds of delay on emailgate/spygate/FISAgate as I can stomach.

                The current narrative, as of late August, is “late [September], or the middle of [October]”.

                I’ve got to see some major DECLAS by, say, Oct. 20, or I’m going to lose confidence in Barr, and in Trump’s whole strategy of making Barr the arbiter of DECLAS. And I’m going to start saying so, as loudly as I can, on the web.

                Q’s “[C]oats before [D]eclas” mantra is going to ring hollow, now that Coats is gone.

                If Horowitz’s report on the Carter Page FISA abuse is released by then, and is damning, and recommends prosecutions, and many of the previously-classified documents it depends on are released as well, in unredacted form, that may give me enough confidence to last until the next round.

                But now we are hearing conflicting reports on Horowitz’s latest. A whitewash nothing burger coming from Horowitz, with the source documents not being released by Barr, would do a lot to push me towards the Sundance camp. Plus continued non-prosecution of McCabe.

                Liked by 2 people

      4. “Some people within the tiny group of those “who know” have committed suicide, or had to be “contained” in some way, I think due to their reaction to knowledge.”


        How could we possibly know or have any credible evidence that such a claim was true?

        Would we not necessarily need to rely on the ‘word’ (hearsay) of the very same people who keep the truth from us?

        The ‘just trust me’ crowd?

        Liked by 4 people

      5. “I, too, want to KNOW.”


        And WHY shouldn’t you?

        If Bob Lazar’s account is accurate, the RUSSIANS (when they were still the Soviet Union!) were brought in to Area 51.

        The OPENLY AVOWED ENEMY of AMERICA was “in” on the ‘secrets’, but We the PEOPLE — you know, their bosses, who FUND everything they do, and their privileged lives and lifestyles — are kept in the dark?

        I’d love to see an honest judge reconcile that in some way that doesn’t include the word “TREASON”.


        “But I think many people are just too dumb to handle it.”


        And those people would self-select OUT of any harmful psychological repercussions by doing what they always do with everything else of value or importance — by TUNING OUT, and binge-watching another Kardashians marathon.

        Why should those who are willing to think for themselves be punished because of those choose not to be bothered?

        Those who are interested enough to care will investigate for themselves, and those who don’t, won’t.

        It’s a self-solving problem that conspicuously avoids the ‘one size fits all’ approach preferred by tyrants and megalomaniacs everywhere.

        And those who choose to ‘tune out’ might not be so inclined to do so, if anybody ever told them the TRUTH about ANYTHING!

        Talk about a self-fullfilling prophecy. Lie to everybody about everything important for their entire lives, and then act surprised that many people don’t care about anything or gave up on ever knowing the truth.

        Surprise, surprise, surprise. Except it’s NOT a surprise, because the people keeping the ‘secrets’ know that is EXACTLY the effect they desire.

        When everything always works in the same direction, and always redounds to the benefit of the very few, we just can’t keep fooling ourselves into thinking that’s a coincidence as opposed to design.


        “The people here are engaged, thoughtful, have educated themselves about current events, and would mostly be fine, I think. But look around you at the average populace.”


        Does that justify making important decisions about the future of mankind based on the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR?

        Based on the MOST DISENGAGED?

        Why should you or I be penalized because of those who choose not to give *&$@?

        And besides that, those who don’t seem to care might start to care, if anybody was ever HONEST with them — about anything.


        “Sudden knowledge of what we suspect is “out there” would result in mass chaos.”


        I just don’t buy that narrative, and I certainly don’t trust the people who came up with it. It serves THEIR interests completely, and serves OUR interests not at all.

        As usual always.

        It’s like the false narrative that if the DOJ actually started doing their job, upholding the rule of Law again and applying it equally to the top 1%, that it would start a civil war, LOL!

        That sure is a CONVENIENT NARRATIVE for the criminal 1%, ain’t it?!?

        There is ZERO foundation for that belief or assertion, that a civil war or organic ‘riots’ would happen all over the country.

        It’s just PURE fear mongering.

        People don’t ‘riot’ when JUSTICE is served. It’s never happened before. What actually happens when justice is served, is that the authorities have to RESTRAIN the People from JOINING IN with the serving of Justice.

        As always, the ‘narrative’ is the complete OPPOSITE of truth.


        “People have a melt-down when the coffee shop is out of an ingredient for their favorite latte, for God’s sake.”


        How did they get that way?

        It certainly wasn’t because our government has been forthright and transparent and honest and truthful with their bosses, the American People.

        So why should the same people in government who facilitated the destruction of American society be in charge of keeping secrets from us?


        “What are they gonna do when they find out we are up against aliens?”


        Umm… unite in common cause?

        Wait… that’s the LAST thing people who crave CONTROL want, isn’t it…

        I just can’t keep playing the game, when I already know it’s rigged.

        Liked by 7 people

            1. What was the year the Russians are said to have initially left (i.e. hopefully, been kicked out of) Area 51?

              Knowing who was president then could answer some questions.

              Liked by 2 people

    4. “if a civilization *is* sufficiently advanced to comprehend at least the basic concepts involved, any such civilization would necessarily *also* have a centralized power structure in which the selfish interests of the very few (greed, desire for power, militarily or economically or otherwise) would prevent the ‘revelation’ of such technology to the rest of humanity.”

      I don’t follow your generalization.

      Our scientific and technological progress was faster when we were less centralized politically.

      And, maybe, just maybe, the Great Awakening will be successful in restoring us to a more decentralized, open, pro-human society again, with a wary, fact-oriented populace demanding transparency in government.

      So while I agree with you on what DID happen in terms of political obscurantism and rule of elite “experts”, I disagree that it MUST have happened.

      (I remain agnostic on the question of visitations from extraterrestrials.)

      Liked by 3 people

      1. “I don’t follow your generalization. Our scientific and technological progress was faster when we were less centralized politically.”


        I just meant that any civilization advanced enough to understand the concepts is not going to be an agrarian society or pre-industrial society, it will be industrial or post-industrial, with a well organized government power structure, concentrating decision-making power in the hands of the few, like any “1st world” nation operates today.

        The kind of society where the government has the means (money), power (physical force / military equipment) and control (spying, eavesdropping, etc.) to make sure important secrets are kept.

        In the 1800s (for example), the “west” was still pretty wild (government only really had control when they devoted significant enough resources to a given area, and that control was lost as soon as government troops left).

        Many advancements came about due to WWI, and many more due to WWII. Advances in technology that might have taken decades or a century without the focus and resources spent on development and short testing periods that occur when time is of the essence (e.g., the race to build the first nuclear bomb, the detonation of which is supposedly what drew all the E.T.s’ attention in the first place).

        The paradox is that any society that is technologically advanced enough to understand and grasp the potential of advanced alien technology is likewise going to be a society that has power concentrated in the hands of the few (a dictator, a president, a king, etc.), and that concentrated power structure, combined with self-interest, is always going to mean keeping any such discovered alien technology ‘secret’, in order to try to exploit the value for themselves, as opposed to sharing it with the people they work for (us).

        If an alien craft crashes in the vicinity of a tribal Amazon rain forest people, they’re not going to have any idea what it is or what to do with it, or how they might begin to reverse engineer it, or understand anything about it.

        And it won’t be long before the Americans or the Russians or the Chinese show up to confiscate it, because those nations *are* advanced enough to understand the value and potential the alien craft represents, and they have the technical know-how (science and math and computer analysis, etc.) to begin figuring out how it works and how it could be replicated and used.

        And those people — whether American, Russian or Chinese — aren’t going to share it with anybody, least of all the public.

        Therein lies the paradox.

        The cargo cult in the Amazon rain forest would share the craft with everybody in their village, they just wouldn’t have any idea what to do with it. Like the obelisk at the beginning of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

        By contrast, any society advanced enough to understand and therefore benefit from having an alien craft fall into their lap, is also advanced enough to have a government power structure with a self-interest in keeping it secret.

        In other words, the only people who could actually USE it will never share it with the world.

        And since any such discovery is SO ‘secret’ that even the scientists who *are* allowed to work on it are compartmentalized and can’t engage in a free and open exchange of ideas necessary for further (or at least more rapid) discovery and understanding, the ‘machine’ or ‘craft’ or other technology languishes for decades while tiny incremental progress is made, because of the compulsion to secrecy, to power, to monetary exploitation, all of the usual human ‘traits’ that accompany a world where freedom (or at least relative levels of something approximating freedom) is always under threat from tyranny.

        That tension between ostensibly ‘free’ nations and those nations whose leadership abhor the concept of freedom (e.g., every communist government on earth, along with every dictator of every stripe), it what causes the need for secrecy, the need to exploit and gain competitive advantage.

        So it’s a Catch-22.

        The only people who could benefit from discovering an advanced technology of some kind are exactly the same people who will never share it with the rest of the world.

        The only way I see that such a paradox can be ‘broken’ is if an insider does an ‘information dump’ leak to the public, OR if we happen to have a leader with a vision great enough to see that the benefits to all of mankind right now outweigh the potential benefits that might not be realized for another hundred years at the current snail’s pace of compartmentalized incremental discovery.

        If it was made public, and suddenly nearly every scientist and engineer from around the world was focusing on the various ‘problems’ — as opposed to the handful who can’t even talk to each other due to the need for ‘secrecy’ and ‘compartmentalization’ — the rate of discovery and understanding of the technology and new applications for it would advance exponentially faster.

        Assuming such things exist at all, of course.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. “The kind of society where the government has the means (money), power (physical force / military equipment) and control (spying, eavesdropping, etc.) to make sure important secrets are kept.”

          But why would the government think that the existence of an ET civilization is an important secret to keep from its own public?

          The blueprints to the capsule’s power supply, or engine, or the headbands for direct mind-to-mind communication, or the contents of the nav computer are one thing. But the existence of aliens? (Other than Cory Booker, I mean?)

          The same government that doesn’t have a problem with Russian researchers in Area 51?


          See, I believe with Diana West and Antony Sutton that the regime in Washington was working for the benefit of the Soviets back in the middle of the previous century.

          And I believe with Trump that it was working for the benefit of China up until recently. And some dead enders in Congress, in the bureaucracy, and on K Street think it still should be run for the benefit of China.

          And I believe with Griffin and Sutton and Q that there is an international banking elite behind the scenes that controls most of this.

          And I believe with Monika Jensen-Stevenson and Q that the CIA was getting funds outside the federal budget process by running heroin trafficking operations into the US.

          And I knew that there were pedophiles in high places, including in Hollywood and among the European and British elite, not to mention the Islamic world.

          I had already discovered 90% of this over the course of a few decades, from the Yin-Yang experience of reading both standard and non-standard history books, articles, and webpages, before ever hearing of Q.

          Q just confirmed it, and put all the pieces together. I knew there were frustrating gaps in the information about what was going on. Q made it clear that the gaps exist because the industries that control information are controlled by the international banking elite.


          So our society has been captured by a hidden gang that promotes ignorance and obscurity for its own purposes. That didn’t have to happen. And, at least in principle, it can be reversed. Trump is now giving us a fighting chance, for the first time, to reverse it.


          The drive to huge wars can force the rapid development and adoption of new technologies, when the necessary scientific understanding, human infrastructure, and industrial base exist.

          In very rare cases, it may spur the adoption of a new scientific theory or theoretic paradigm that had previously been pooh-poohed by the intellectual Establishment.

          But war can’t make brand-new scientific theories or mathematical discoveries or creative, inventive, well-educated human brains spring up out of nowhere.

          To the contrary, centralizing research in a few well-funded big government labs typically leads to deliberate or unintentional “capture-and-kill” of those creative individuals, as the need to scrape by on a shoe-string budget at a small private lab, and yet remain competitive, is removed.

          And in the bureaucratic framework of the large government lab, the desire and ability to innovate are often stiffled. In the long-run, they always are, at least to some extent.

          Here are two examples:

          A.) It took American aeronautics and astronautics 66 years to go from the Kill Devil Hills to the Sea of Tranquility.

          (For those of you who believe an alien vehicle crashed in Roswell, New Mexico, that’s 44 years pre-Roswell and 22 years post-Roswell.)

          Sure, there have been important technological developments and other milestones reached in the air and space field since 1969. But can anyone say that the rate of progress in the 50 years since has been anything like that of the previous 66 years?

          B.) If we examine the 107 years from 1805 to 1912 and compare it to the 107 years from 1912 until today, the population, income level, industrial output, level of technology, manpower devoted to science and math education, money devoted to science and math education, and the total number of paid positions for scientists, mathematicians, engineers, inventors, technicians, etc. was ENORMOUSLY greater in the latter period. This is true whether you look at the US alone, at all Western civilization, or at the whole world. Yet the fundamental growth of understanding in mathematics and the physical sciences was much greater in the earlier period.

          (In biology, medicine, and maybe chemistry, the results may be more nearly even. In computation and the automated handling and storage of data, obviously the recent period takes the cake.)

          Why did I pick 1912 for the cutoff? Because of Q’s hint about the importance of the sinking of the Titanic that year.

          Before Q, I would have picked 1913 as the cutoff year. Direct election of senators (i.e.
          destruction of federalism,) creation of the Fed, and the income tax all happened that year. Q clued us in to the causative relation between 1912 and 1913.

          1913 was the banksters’ wet dream year, and made 1914 (WWI) possible, which in turn made possible:

          -1917 (Carranza’s brief imposition of Marxism on Mexico, followed by Lenin’s permanent imposition of Marxism on Russia,)

          -1929 (Great Depression,)

          -1930 (beginning of WWII in East Asia,)

          -March, 1933 (Stalin achieving supreme power in USSR, as well as the inaugurations of the two great heads of state who would serve him, Franklin Roosevelt and Adolf Hitler,)

          1939 (WWII reaches Eastern Europe,)

          1940 (WWII reaches Western Europe.)


          My point is simply that there is more than one mode for a society to operate in.

          I have seen patriots and rational people of all stripes fight the Deep Staters and their financier bankster patrons my whole life. In most cases, the good guys didn’t even realize that is what they were doing. I haven’t seen many victories for our side. The tactical advantages the bad guys accumulated for themselves are daunting.

          But I think their initial successes in this country were narrowly won, and largely due to the innocent naivete and resulting incomprehension of our recent ancestors, their prey.

          If things had worked out slightly differently, the character of the past century would have been very different. It almost was.

          And the future can be very much better than the recent past.

          Liked by 2 people

            1. “My point is simply that there is more than one mode for a society to operate in.”


              There definitely is, but…

              Will the enemy allow you (us) to operate in any other mode?

              Remember, about 99% of human history is ‘might makes right’, and human nature hasn’t changed. Our experiment with a representative Republic is just the blink of an eye compared to the thousands of years places like Egypt or China have under their belts.

              Our operating concept is basically that this world is a jungle, and given that reality, it is best to be the biggest, baddest Lion in that jungle, than to not be.

              The Chinese Communist Party and Russia’s Communist Party would very much like to be the biggest, baddest Lion in the jungle, but since WWII, they’ve been the hyenas, nipping at our flanks.

              How do we maintain “eternal vigilance” without some kind of centralized power structure that provides for the money and command & control necessary to keep the hyenas at bay?

              Liked by 3 people

          1. “But why would the government think that the existence of an ET civilization is an important secret to keep from its own public?


            Control, in all it’s many splendored guises.

            Imagine how hard it would be to control the ‘narrative’, if the government acknowledged that not only are there E.T.s, but they’re HERE.

            Not a good day to be WH Press Secretary…

            Right now, the leader of the free world (POTUS) is the top dog, the head honcho, the red rooster.

            If they admit there are more advanced civilizations ‘out there’, that all changes.

            POTUS is then just the chief ant in a galaxy full of giants.

            Nobody wants to be the chief ant. 😁

            I’m not suggesting any of their reasons would be GOOD ones, just that they would have a never ending supply of them.


            “The blueprints to the capsule’s power supply, or engine, or the headbands for direct mind-to-mind communication, or the contents of the nav computer are one thing. But the existence of aliens? (Other than Cory Booker, I mean?)”


            The best I can do is try to look at it from the president’s perspective.

            Imagine trying to run a country — the one that affects all others more than any other — and you let that horse out of the barn?

            Every conversation becomes about E.T.s. Every question from Shithole Media™ is about E.T.s. Every meeting, about everything, devolves into a discussion of E.T.s.

            The list of negatives (from a leadership perspective) is limitless, and the upside is…




            Liked by 2 people

      2. “And, maybe, just maybe, the Great Awakening will be successful in restoring us to a more decentralized, open, pro-human society again, with a wary, fact-oriented populace demanding transparency in government.”


        That would be great, I just don’t know how it can happen, so long as tyrannical governments and dictatorships (and Black Swan assembly-line manufacturers like Soros) exist on earth.

        Because as long as they do, those government structures devoted to evil are going to use the immense resources available to their government to exploit, steal or defeat those who don’t defend against it, and defense requires an exponentially greater amount of resources than offense, because defense needs to be right all the time.

        Hence the concentration of power appears to be a necessary for a ‘free’ nation, in order to prevent being invaded and overtaken by what amounts to modern-day barbarians.


    5. “A large scale ‘declassification’.

      THAT would allow for human advancement, because crowd-sourcing of billions of people focusing on the new technology is going to figure out a lot more, a lot faster, than the kind of people who obsessively keep everything to themselves and compartmentalize everything.

      And until that happens, humanity is basically stuck in a holding pattern.”

      Agree strongly.

      This whole ‘death by classification of everything’ with which our society has been inflicted is a Soviet-style reaction that occurred precisely when our government was largely under the control of the Soviets, or, later, the ChiComs.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Another hoax gets exposed
    redwhitebluedude @redwhitebluedude
    @drawandstrike @DuaneCates
    The Trayvon Martin hoax comes crashing down. A new book and film exposes how much of the legal and media case against George Zimmerman was based on a false witness.

    Another case of wrongful prosecution.

    The Trayvon Martin Hoax Comes Crashing Down

    Liked by 11 people

  5. Go here: I had a back & forth email convo. with Joel Gilbert (the researcher/author/film maker)last night. It is TRUE.

    He shows a DVD preview on his site…and that girl he shows briefly is NOT Rachel Jenteel, but is the one who signed as Tray-tray’s GF…Diamond.

    And yes, he did write a book about his research, and has both the book & DVD for sale via his site.

    Liked by 10 people

    1. Over at the OT, for those who were there during the GeorgeZimmerman – Trayvon stuff……We always knew that Rachel Jentell, who testified, (barely literate IMO) could not have been the “phone message” that Benjamin Crump(Blacktivist Ambulance Chaser) claimed was “Trayvon’s girlfriend”, and all the trashcan-tours and the probably the real start of Black Lives Matter and all the race-baiting crap.

      Liked by 10 people

  6. Hi Wolf!

    Can I be so bold as to ask a direct question?

    Is your read of the Q-post you cite, that the “they” that wants us divided is not our government, or another government, but an EBE “THEY?”

    Because where my thinking has gone, since you pointed me at all this reading and stuff ( 🙂 ), is to a belief that there are “factions” or “variations” of EBEs that are aligned with different world governments, and are engineering wars, conflicts, etc., in order to weaken us against THEM.


    There is only one kind of “them” which is dividing the world, stirring up the conflict, etc., in order to accomplish the same goal.

    I also think that the global “elite” are in on it. They may even be hybrids.

    Either way, I think Trump is awake to it, and is doing everything he can to unite the world against this threat to our existence.

    Another question/thought I have is, do you think that the great “schism” wherein God and his opposite (I’m not really sure “Satan” as a entity exists, but I believe in PURE EVIL as the opponent, whatever it is called) separated is where these beings come from? Are they the “fallen angels?”

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Don’t forget that Q has told us a number of times that the elite worship Satan. He isn’t the only one. Plenty of whistle blowers have said the same thing, including some in Hollywood. That’s pretty easy to figure out when you look at all their symbols, the pedophilia, Epstein’s temple, Satanic rituals cloaked as Super Bowl halftime shows, etc. They don’t just worship Satan, they are his minions doing his bidding.

      Liked by 6 people

        1. “I know they worship what they call Satan. But what they are really worshiping is pure evil.”


          Is Satan not just ‘a’ manifestation, but THE physical / spiritual manifestation of pure evil?

          What evil existed before Satan?

          For that matter, what ‘lie’ existed before Satan?

          Did even the concept of a lie exist before Satan?

          Or did he (literally) invent it?

          Someone had to.

          Someone had to be first.

          And the first recorded lie is by Satan, contradicting God, while conversing with Eve, through the use of a lie.

          In Genesis 2:17, God says to Adam: “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (boldface mine)

          Satan knew exactly what God said. Verbatim. Better than any scribe, student or scholar ever will. Probably better than anyone besides Jesus Himself, as demonstrated when Satan tempted Jesus in the wilderness (Matthew chapter 4, Luke chapter 4, acknowledged in Mark 1:13)

          In Genesis chapter 3, verse 1, Satan is precipitating the fall of Man: “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

          And Eve replies innocently (truthfully): “And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.” (Genesis 3:2-3, boldface mine)

          Now see what Satan says in reply to Eve, Genesis 3:4 “And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:.” (boldface mine)

          Notice what happened there. Satan did not only contradict Eve by a lie, but at the same moment, he also contradicted God.

          God said “thou shalt surely die” (Genesis 2:17, boldface mine)

          Eve said: “lest ye die” (no ‘surely’)

          Satan said: “Ye shall not surely die.”

          Eve didn’t say “surely”, God did. Eve was paraphrasing, because she learned from Adam.

          Satan knew what God said, so not only was Satan lying to Eve by inserting the singular word ‘not’, he was simultaneously and directly contradicting God specifically (inserting the word ‘surely’, an adverb which Eve did not use — but which God did, and which Satan knew).

          I realize the original text of the account, given by inspiration of God, presumably written down by Moses, was in Hebrew, and the English is a translation, but the transliteration of the Hebrew word ‘muwth’ to mean ‘surely’ occurs 69 times in the Old Testament, and the vast majority of usage is in conjunction with the word ‘die’ or ‘death’ or punishment:

          So this ‘nuance’ or observation about how Satan seems to be addressing both Eve directly — AND God specifically at the same time, indirectly, by using the specific adverb God used — does not appear to be an accident, or something which can be blamed on translation.

          Think about what this really means:

          Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” (John 8:44, KJV, boldface emphasis mine)

          A murderer from the beginning.

          He abode not in truth, because there is no truth in him (void of truth).

          He is a liar, and the father of it.

          John wrote the passage above by inspiration of God (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16, plus many others), so this is not according to John, but the declaration of God.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. * Rauses hand and asks to weigh in, Aubergine * – satan exists (an archangel expelled from Heaven) – and ‘they’ are his servants (the Fallen Angels) – they can take any shape, size, and/or form – under their master, satan, and by the power of their master, satan – ‘they’ have the ability to control all facets of human life – provided God allows it – remember they can take any shape, size, and/or form – they can be the UFOs – they can be the aliens – they can be the blue-eyed blonde haired anomalies – and the black-eyed children – so, yes –

      The want us divided – because divided – we fall – and are easily controlled – united – we stand strong against them – by the power of God that lives within all of us – we must fight this intrusion/invasion – or we will find ourselves half man/half machine – a slave of satan and his minions/fallen ones – imho

      Liked by 7 people

      1. I don’t disagree that Satan (the fallen angel) was cast out, and exists. What I am trying inelegantly to say is I think that while Satan is evil, all evil is not Satan. I think it is bigger than that.

        Liked by 5 people

        1. Oh, I see – then, what can possibly be greater than God’s archenemy, satan? Are you thinking of ‘other worldly entities’? What if I were to tell you there are three dimensions – heaven – space – and – earth – from which dimension could these ‘other worldly entities’ come – from space?

          Not attaching your theory – just trying to understand what might be bigger than satan – that’s all.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Evil is greater than Satan.

            Looking at evil as contained within a “being” is limiting to me.

            I am not a religious person. I am, however, a deep believer. The concept of God as a concrete being is not what I believe. I also then don’t believe in the opposite “side” as a concrete being. God is bigger to me than that. I can’t explain it well, I just know how I feel. God is everything good; Evil is everything bad. The two forces are in direct opposition to each other, and we choose, or are sometimes chosen. The battle when chosen by the wrong side is to resist.

            I don’t often speak of religion, outside of my family and small group of friends. My thoughts are not mainstream, and tend to get me into trouble, which I would rather avoid. However, the current threads around these issues invite this kind of discussion.

            Liked by 4 people

            1. I understand from where you are coming – there is no doubt in my mind there is a battle going on between evil and good – it is an age old battle – and no matter how you explain it – most people are aware it is happening – so I see – i do not see God as a ‘concrete’ being – He is a Spirit – as is ‘our’ (religious thinking) enemy satan – he is an ‘evil’ spirit – thus, the same thing you think occurs in religious circles – evil versus good – it is with what we all contend – is that what you mean?

              Liked by 4 people

      2. Lucifer is not a fallen archangel. The story goes the legions were from the choirs of Powers, Principalities, Thrones and Dominions (or Dominations, depending on the translation). Which one Satan comes from is not clear that I’ve seen. Archangels all have -iel or -ael on the ends of their names.

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Archangel Lucifer (whose name means ‘light bearer’) is a controversial angel who some believe is the evilest living being in the universe — Satan (the devil) — some believe is a metaphor for evil and deceit, and others believe is simply an angelic being characterized by pride and power.

          The most popular view is that Lucifer is a fallen angel (a demon) who leads other demons ib hell and works to harm human beings. Lucifer was once among the most powerful of all archangels, and as his name suggests, he shone brightly in heaven. However, Lucifer let pride and jealousy of God affect him. Lucifer decided to rebel against God because he wanted supreme power for himself. He started a war in heaven that led to his fall, as well as the fall of other angels who sided with him and became demons as a result. As the ultimate liar, Lucifer (whose name changed to Satan after his fall) twists spiritual truth with the goal of leading as many people as possible away from God.

          Many people say that the fallen angels’ work has brought only evil and destructive results in the world, so they try to protect themselves from fallen angels by fighting against their influence and casting them out of their lives. Others believe that they can gain valuable spiritual power for themselves by invoking Lucifer and the angelic beings that he leads.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Lucifer was never an archangel in the Faith tradition I follow. He was from a higher choir. Not as high as Cherubim or Seraphim, but somewhere in the middle. And the legions of demons were from the same places. They made a choice and rebelled.

            Liked by 2 people


              As he is identified as the “highest of angels”, we would normally think of him as a Seraphim before he fell, but most theologicans think that this is not possible as the Seraphim (or “Burning ones” since God is a consuming fire and they are closest to Him) are so close to God they think it improbable that he was a seraphim, and perhaps think he was a cherubim.

              Not to disagree with the esteemed doctors but we know that the angels were tested before they came into God’s presence as once anyone is His God’s presence they no longer have free will to sin (although we all retain free will), thus Satan very well could have been a Seraphim.

              The 9 Choirs of Angels: Angel, Archangel, Principalities, Powers, Virtues, Dominations, Thrones, Cherubim, Seraphim – according to your faith tradition.

              The Choir of Angels is divided into three triads with specific concerns:

              There are 7 Archangels – 3 mentioned in the Bible –

              Lucifer is NOT an archangel – he is an angel of a HIGHER ORDER – as you say – but, not somewhere in the middle – angels fell from heaven with Lucifer – that is why they are called the ‘fallen angels.’

              Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18), and in the book of the Revelation Satan is seen as “a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth”

              We are also told that one third of an “innumerable company of angels” (Hebrews 12:22) chose to rebel with him.


              Liked by 1 person

              1. “Free will”…..
                as in…..
                “WE” can do anything “we” want?
                Even change Prophesy?
                God sits in Heaven and WAITS for “us” to do something/anything?
                That would make “us” more powerful than God.
                I do NOT believe this theology.
                GOD…. PLANNED it ALL
                (Before he CREATED anything)…..
                ALL…. will be done according to HIS plans.
                ….. So that NONE can Boast!

                Just my beliefs……
                You can believe what you want.
                “Free Will” has been sold in Churches for Ages.
                (To let God “Off the hook” for our sins)


              2. Free will is a ‘choice’ – you can choose God or not – you can do anything you want but, you may not – by the power of His Spirit – God encourages you to do good – it is we who wait on God – not the other way around – God is patient as the loving Father He is – His will; not ours – God made all that is – even us – He has a purpose and a plan for each of us – our job is to find out what that is – without Faith – it is impossible to please God – Free Will is not for sale – it is a Gift from God.


              3. Do you have a scripture for that?
                (“Free Will is a gift from God”)
                Didn’t think so.
                Jesus is the AUTHOR and CREATOR of “our” “Faith”…
                We don’t get “Faith” on “our” own!
                What “Faith” we have….. HE… Gives us.

                “He has a purpose and a plan for each of us”….
                While that is true…. Can “We” change HIS “Purpose and Plan for us”?
                I think Not.

                GOD….. is in CONTROL!
                (NOT “us”)


              4. Free Will is a choice!!!

                If “free will” means that God gives humans the opportunity to make choices that genuinely affect their destiny, then yes, human beings do have a free will. The world’s current sinful state is directly linked to choices made by Adam and Eve. God created mankind in His own image, and that included the ability to choose.

                However, free will does not mean that mankind can do anything he pleases. Our choices are limited to what is in keeping with our nature. For example, a man may choose to walk across a bridge or not to walk across it; what he may not choose is to fly over the bridge—his nature prevents him from flying. In a similar way, a man cannot choose to make himself righteous—his (sin) nature prevents him from canceling his guilt (Romans 3:23). So, free will is limited by nature.

                In the New Testament, sinners are commanded over and over to “repent” and “believe” (Matthew 3:2; 4:17; Acts 3:19; 1 John 3:23). Every call to repent is a call to choose. The command to believe assumes that the hearer can choose to obey the command.


                You do not have to be combative because you do not like my ‘choice’ of words –

                We can fail to see that purpose and plan for our lives – ‘choose’ to go in a different direction – the Spirit of God is our guide – if we trust in God with all of our hearts – acknowledge Him in all of our ways – He will make our path straight – paraphrase of Proverbs 3:5-7 – Be not wise in our own eyes – fear the Lord and depart from evil…

                God does not dole out faith – we must develop it – it increases over time.


              5. “Free will” is a “choice”……
                Or… is it the ILLUSION of “choice”?

                If GOD wants “us” to “choose” HIm…. “we” WILL.
                If Not…. “we” won’t.


              6. God does not command us to choose Him; He wants us to choose Him – He does not force us to love Him – He wants us to love Him. There is no ‘illusion of choice.’


    3. “Another question/thought I have is, do you think that the great “schism” wherein God and his opposite (I’m not really sure “Satan” as a entity exists, but I believe in PURE EVIL as the opponent, whatever it is called) separated is where these beings come from? Are they the “fallen angels?” ”


      Very interesting topic!

      Humanity can know God exists simply by observing nature:

      For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” (Romans 1:20, KJV)


      But what we cannot know with any certainty is about God, except what He has chosen to reveal to us:

      The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (Deuteronomy 29:29)

      But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. [11] For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” (2 Corinthians 2:10-11)


      And what He has chosen to reveal to us (mankind) about Himself is preserved in His Word:

      “But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:25) (cf. Psalm 119:160)


      So we can know God exists by the order and design of nature.

      And in the same way that we can only truly know about another person is what they reveal about themselves (by word and deed), we can likewise only know those things about God which He chooses to reveal about Himself.

      What God has chosen to reveal about Himself was written down (by inspiration of God, cf. 2 Timothy 3:16) and preserved — by God’s providence, not man’s doing — for posterity.

      It can be entertaining to debate whether some books should be included in Scripture or not, or how certain books came to be included in the ‘canon’ or not, and who deserves credit (or not), but the entire discussion is specious in the sense that either God created everything in heaven and earth as He claims, or He didn’t.

      If He didn’t, then the entire discussion is moot.

      And if He did, then it seems silly to concede that God created the entire universe and everything in it, and maintains all of it to this very moment, but God is somehow powerless to make sure His Word is preserved as He sees fit. In other words, as a practical matter, if the Scriptures we have today are the only credible Authority we have to go by (and they are), but the Scriptures are not accurate or inclusive of all God wanted us to know — and exclusive of that which would subvert or undermine His will — then hasn’t God failed? And how does anyone reconcile the Creator of the universe (and everything in it) with ‘failure’?

      What is too difficult for God? (cf. Genesis 18:14, Jeremiah 32:17 and 32:27)


      God is the Author and Creator of all things:

      In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] The same was in the beginning with God. [3] All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. [4] In him was life; and the life was the light of men. [5] And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” (John 1:1-5)


      God revealed Satan to us, and it is Satan who told the first lie (Satan is the Father of lies, John 8:44):

      Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? [2] And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. [4] And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:” (Genesis 3:1-4)

      They did not die physically in that moment, but they were separated from God by their sin (and would ultimately experience death because sin entered the world), and removed from their relationship with God in the Garden of Eden.

      We know that Satan is the serpent referenced in Genesis:

      And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,” (Revelation 20:2, cf. Revelation 12:9)

      I have seen arguments that Satan was not created by God, but John 1:1-5 (see above) and Colossians 1:14-17 (see below) seems to indicate otherwise.

      We know that Satan fell from Heaven: “And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” (Luke 10:18)

      And Satan’s allied angels were cast out with him:

      And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” (Revelation 12:9, cf. Revelation 20:2)


      We know that like us, angels are created beings:

      Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.” (Luke 20:36)

      And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” (Hebrews 1:7)

      In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: [15] Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: [16] For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [17] And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Colossians 1:14-17)

      And we understand, as a matter of principle, that the created cannot be equal or greater than the Creator (cf. Romans 1:25).


      We know that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God:

      All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16)

      And we know that God cannot lie:

      “In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;” (Titus, 1:2)

      So the Scriptures are given by inspiration of God, who cannot lie, and God’s Word mentions Satan specifically by name 56 times in 49 verses, not including references to the Devil (or the Serpent).

      So if God exists, and God not only cannot lie but refers to Satan 56 times specifically by name — then Satan must exist also.

      However, thinking of Satan as the ‘opposite’ of God implies an equality of some kind, but if the created cannot be equal to or greater than the Creator, then Satan cannot be equal to or greater than God.

      And God threw Satan out of heaven, which would not have been possible, if God was not far greater than Satan.

      Liked by 3 people

  7. “Roberts had switched his vote because he feared the court would be attacked as a partisan institution . . . “

    This sounds like an excuse offered for acceptance by whoever, to cover for something more nefarious. It’s not Roberts’ job to make decisions based on how he feels the public will perceive either the decision, himself or the entire court.

    If this statement is true, he should, if it were possible, be removed from his office by whatever means may be legal.

    Liked by 8 people

  8. Not to distract from the presented material in the post, but Wolf, I found this published today that may be of interest to you. Curious that it gets published now in Politico of all publications. Getting ahead of the bad news and trying to control the narrative ahead of time?

    The Secret History of Fort Detrick, the CIA’s Base for Mind Control Experiments
    Today, it’s a cutting-edge lab. In the 1950s and 1960s, it was the center of the U.S. government’s darkest experiments.

    By STEPHEN KINZER September 15, 2019
    Continue to article content

    Suburban sprawl has engulfed Fort Detrick, an Army base 50 miles from Washington in the Maryland town of Frederick. Seventy-six years ago, however, when the Army selected Detrick as the place to develop its super-secret plans to wage germ warfare, the area around the base looked much different. In fact, it was chosen for its isolation. That’s because Detrick, still thriving today as the Army’s principal base for biological research and now encompassing nearly 600 buildings on 13,000 acres, was for years the nerve center of the CIA’s hidden chemical and mind control empire.

    Detrick is today one of the world’s cutting-edge laboratories for research into toxins and antitoxins, the place where defenses are developed against every plague, from crop fungus to Ebola. Its leading role in the field is widely recognized. For decades, though, much of what went on at the base was a closely held secret. Directors of the CIA mind control program MK-ULTRA, which used Detrick as a key base, destroyed most of their records in 1973. Some of its secrets have been revealed in declassified documents, through interviews and as a result of congressional investigations. Together, those sources reveal Detrick’s central role in MK-ULTRA and in the manufacture of poisons intended to kill foreign leaders.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. From the article:

      In 1951, Dulles hired a chemist to design and oversee a systematic search for the key to mind control. The man he chose, Sidney Gottlieb, was not part of the silver-spoon aristocracy from which most officers of the early CIA were recruited, but a 33-year-old Jew from an immigrant family who limped and stuttered. He also meditated, lived in a remote cabin without running water and rose before dawn to milk his goats.

      Gottlieb wanted to use Detrick’s assets to propel his mind control project to new heights. He asked Dulles to negotiate an accord that would formalize the connection between the military and the CIA in this pursuit. Under the arrangement’s provisions, according to a later report, “CIA acquired the knowledge, skill, and facilities of the Army to develop biological weapons suited for CIA use.”

      Taking advantage of this arrangement, Gottlieb created a hidden CIA enclave inside Camp Detrick. His handful of CIA chemists worked so closely with their comrades in the Special Operations Division that they became a single unit.

      Some scientists outside the tight-knit group suspected what was happening. “Do you know what a ‘self-contained, off-the-shelf operation’ means?” one of them asked years later. “The CIA was running one in my lab. They were testing psychochemicals and running experiments in my labs and weren’t telling me.”

      Gottlieb searched relentlessly for a way to blast away human minds so new ones could be implanted in their place. He tested an astonishing variety of drug combinations, often in conjunction with other torments like electroshock or sensory deprivation. In the United States, his victims were unwitting subjects at jails and hospitals, including a federal prison in Atlanta and an addiction research center in Lexington, Kentucky.

      In Europe and East Asia, Gottlieb’s victims were prisoners in secret detention centers. One of those centers, built in the basement of a former villa in the German town of Kronberg, might have been the first secret CIA prison. While CIA scientists and their former Nazi comrades sat before a stone fireplace discussing the techniques of mind control, prisoners in basement cells were being prepared as subjects in brutal and sometimes fatal experiments.

      Liked by 5 people

    2. My read on all this is that a “new MKULTRA failure scapegoat level” is needed. They have to create a new boundary between what is lost to “the common public knowledge swim lane” and what cannot be allowed into public knowledge.

      Patching up the leaky boat and letting a new compartment flood.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. Maybe a little bit too far over the line, but thought you’d appreciate the gender reference Wolf…

    Liked by 4 people

          1. As a Turing fanatic, I’m a software supremacist on most things, but I’m a hardware chauvinist on sex and gender. I realize that I have enough CPU to run Girl on Wolf if I wanted, but Penis points to the drivers and says “You ain’t beatin’ this stuff, bro. Girl is better experienced over the network. Trust the plan.” Yup. I’m trustin’ the plan. 😉

            Sometimes listening to my friend Dick is stupid. Sometimes it’s REAL SMART. 😀

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I must have COMPLETELY misplaced my decoder ring, lol!

              Your post, to my eyes, basically looks like this:

              a;sdklfja; lsdfja;lsdkfja’ sdlkmfja’l sdfas’ldmn
              a;dfnjalsd kfja; lsdfja;lsdf kjalskmn agdslgfa
              ;aldfasdkl fasdlekfq ans’dlfkm nas’dlfkmjas’dfmj
              ad;lfna dksfjad klsfja;lsdk fjalsdkfja; lsdfkjasdf.

              I have no idea what you were talking about!


  10. scott467
    says: ”… Not necessarily 100% in agreement with respect to Q because there might be (probably is) some depravity or details of betrayal, knowledge of which could cause greater harm than good…”

    When Q says that I do not think he is talking about alien spacecraft. I think he is talking about eating babies for breakfast. Keeping kids as blood donors so the elite can stay young. Using LIVING Younsters as organ donors…

    This goes along with the panic to get an ANTI-LYNCHING LAW PASSED. Do you really think they are talking about ‘White Supremists’ lynching Blacks??? Give me a F..cking Break. NO, they are worried about getting dragged out of THEIR mansions and strung up a la French Revolution style. Keeping alien space craft secret ain’t going to spark that sort of reaction.

    Re_read drops re: Haiti.
    At some point it will not be safe for them to walk down the street.

    Fake News?
    The World is WATCHING.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I think there are MANY disclosure problems – several big ones. I trust the plan, and will not diss or question Q group for whatever road they choose. They know far more than I do, even certain things about me, and things that happened to me.

      The more one sees the scale and scope of disclosure problems, and how they arose, the more understanding of the problem, and the more forgiveness is possible.

      Nevertheless, note my comment on forgiveness to Pat Frederick (on the Lind thread). Forgiveness is a complicated thing, and does not mean we don’t deal with things as they should be dealt with.

      IMO, the most important part of forgiveness is seeing things from the other person’s viewpoint, carefully. One sees the problems more fully from multiple viewpoints. Nevertheless, one must be careful not to be drawn into the seductive reasonings of satanic error.

      Some of the things Q is talking about cannot be rationalized from any position which remains in the light. We can only sympathize that these people were so lost, but to contemplate their actions by direct sympathy – to rationalize them – is (IMO) extremely dangerous. “Sympathy for the Devil”, so to speak.

      Trust God. PERIOD.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. “Some of the things Q is talking about cannot be rationalized from any position which remains in the light.”


        And shouldn’t be rationalized.

        What the Nazis did in the concentration camps of WWII, no one should ever even attempt to rationalize, because it is impossible to do so without dehumanizing the victims and giving aid and comfort (and excuse) to evil.

        And I only use the Nazi concentration camps because they are the best known. We could talk about (and should talk about) similar camps today that are just as bad, in places like China, North Korea, and no doubt many other places where incomprehensible evil holds sway.


        “We can only sympathize that these people were so lost, but to contemplate their actions by direct sympathy – to rationalize them – is (IMO) extremely dangerous. “Sympathy for the Devil”, so to speak.”


        Very much agreed.

        But to cover them up, to keep them secret from the world, is even worse than rationalizing the horror, because it allows the horror to remain hidden, out of sight and out of mind. It provides cover for that very same evil, making it even easier for it to happen again.

        Drag that filthy putrid bastard kicking and screaming into the BRIGHT LIGHT OF DAY, and rub the world’s NOSE in it.

        And declare that THIS INDELIBLE STAIN ON OUR SPECIES is what we will NEVER allow to happen again.

        Judgment must be rendered, and the People of the World must be empowered to MAKE that judgment, especially in a world that screams at everyone 24/7/365 that you shouldn’t judge anybody for anything. If you don’t give most People ‘permission’ to JUDGE this evil and CONDEMN it utterly, then they simply won’t.

        And the abuse will be allowed to continue, just in some other dark hole of the world.


        “Trust God. PERIOD.”



        Liked by 1 person

    2. Hi Gail, I just found your reply to me by accident, I think I miss a fair number of replies because the only way I know to CHECK for replies is if someone hit the ‘like’ button, and if I remember correctly, you can’t do that due to something about the way you login to post here.

      When Q says that I do not think he is talking about alien spacecraft. I think he is talking about eating babies for breakfast. Keeping kids as blood donors so the elite can stay young. Using LIVING Younsters as organ donors…


      But if THAT is the kind of thing Q is actually referring to, then Q needs an ass-whoopin’.

      That’s like saying you’re going to help hide the abuse your neighbor does to his kid, because it would reflect poorly on the community.

      If these kids have ANY chance at all, either NOW or in the future, the TRUTH about what these monsters have done MUST come out.

      If it remains ‘hidden’, if it never becomes “acceptable” to TALK about it, then it will keep right on happening, and the culture of SILENCE will remain completely INTACT.

      If it’s anything like that, that Q is saying would be too much for us to handle, then shame on Q.

      I could understand why people, being people, would (very wrongly) cover up some of the other things I mentioned as possibilities that should NOT be covered up.

      But to cover up the horrific abuses of children — which would only allow those VERY SAME abuses to CONTINUE in darkness — it’s nearly as bad as the atrocities being committing against children itself.

      Imagine if TPTB had deemed it “too dark and horrifying” to tell the world about the concentration camps after WWII. Imagine if they just kept that their own little secret, telling themselves it was the ‘right thing to do’ for ‘the world’.

      It sickens me that people in positions of power are incapable of learning that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and they just absolutely WILL NOT EMBRACE TRUTH.

      Like I said, it is THEY who can’t handle the truth.

      Then they hide things from US, and comfort themselves that they’re doing good, because “we” couldn’t handle the truth.

      We can handle it.

      THEY CAN’T.

      And if that’s Q, then I’ve got a BIG ASS PROBLEM with Q.


    3. I think I stumbled onto a string that might lead to the center of the ball of yarn that surrounds the core of this sickly misguided effort to HIDE ‘truth’ from We the People because ‘we’ couldn’t handle it.

      The following excerpt is from a link I found here earlier today. I think the actual WQTH link was to a Brian Cates article, and the link to the article below was within the Cates article, but I’m not sure exactly how I stumbled onto it.

      But it contains an observation about a trend in psychology TODAY that jumped right out at me:

      My Story of Child Abuse
      By Joyce Bowen

      “I was lucky. I chose a course of action that helps me understand the effects of trauma. I studied psychology. I’ve been crawling around in my brain for years. I’ve succeeded in alleviating some of the effects. The current trend in psychotherapy is to keep evaluative thoughts a secret from the patient, much like medicine years ago. In other words:

      Many of you probably don’t know or remember a time when a dying or deathly ill person would go to a medical facility or doctor, and they simply would not give you the information about your condition. I remember when my grandfather went into the hospital to die of colon cancer. He asked if he was dying and they told him no. I remember him groaning on a stark white pillow; gaunt- and sallow-faced; head lying in the brief sunlight of evening as cancer ate him up inside. Now it’s nearly impossible. If you are dying, they have to tell you. Not so in psychology. Ssssshhhhhh… It’s a secret. The patient can’t handle it. There is no collaboration or discussion. Changes need to be made.”

      If this is the kind of misguided group-think that is being exhibited by Q, and parroted by others because this is “in the national bloodstream of approved approaches to traumatic events” or some similar BULLSHIT, then this has to be nipped in the bud PRONTO, Trapper John.


      The sickness is just EVERYWHERE…

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s