The full story never gets told. Not in one go, anyway. Life has become episodic. All info therefore, apparently, must be episodic.
Let me first make a bald statement... if we all went downtown, made a people's arrest of all politicians, bureaucrats, doctors, editors and journalists who are responnsible for the lies, deaths and injuries, and you know what I mean, then this would have been over two years ago when the jab mandates were first announced.
But we have cringed and whined about treason, democide, genocide, infanticide, and generally done nothing else, except to occasionally do this on a group basis. I refer, of course, to protests and rallies.
For no reason justified by actual evidence, other then what Hollywood told us about King and Gandhi and "Peaceful non-violent protest", we have gone like lambs to the slaughter.
I was assured by some earnest forty year old maid at a Darwin rally, that this also worked for the Vietnam War. What? I was there. I was one of the organisers. The protests were not peaceful, not non-violent. Who is making up this guff. That war stalled under the impact of Kent State Massacre, the self-immolation of a Buddhist Monk in Saigon Square, the Democratic Convention, tens of thousands of boys brought home to their folks in a box; and I myself witnessed much blood and broken glass in the streets, with raging battles with police in 1967 and 1968 especially. Police tried to push our bus over a cliff. Protest doesn't much more violent. But it did the trick.
Yes, there were some idiot university students who had peaceful protests but the media ignored them. Violence sells. Violence is sensational. That is why the violence was not avoided because the antiwar message reached people in the media, especially front pages and TV screens. That is what ended the Vietnam War. Brought to you by untrammelled unmitigated, unapologetic, violence on your TV screen
Gandhi was a City of London creation. Many Africans called him out as a phoney and in fact they are still doing this today. Our media does not cover such events. The FBI kept King alive, saving him from being beaten, shot, and lynched. You can bet the orchestration came from the CIA, onshore or not.
Both men were assassinated to make them martyrs and then both men had epic movies made of them by Hollywood. We were indoctrinated, folks, propagandised, brainwashed, and "peaceful non-violent protest" has now become an article of faith. Absolutely without a shred of evidence.
Why? Because the NWO architects know how to play us for suckers. This is why Schwarb, Gates, and Fauci smirk. They know we are cooked meat. They know we will not resist.
If there is anyone left to write it, history will record that we were the first piece of humanity that marched and sang triumphantly to the death house. Every other generation berrated by tyranny lit their torches, held their hay forks aloft, marched on the tyrants and hurled them from their battlements to be dashed on the rocks below.
And two entire generations will never know I said this because Tik Tok and Facebook are more real.
I fully endorse your call to action. In-fact, I was considering, ironically, an article asking the question of why the public chooses not to act. We are in the throes of the same problems that faced the populace of Nazi Germany, or that of the populace that faced the gulags in Soviet Russia.
One evident piece of chilling speech is the fact calls to... 'action', shall we say, are censored heavily on the internet. Even places like Gab.com, that have some of the most toxic views imaginable, prohibits calls to 'action' because it is illegal to do so.
No tyrant has ever made a call to 'action' legal, why would they? Why would anyone wait for it to be legalised? Why would anybody comply with this?
The UK's closest call to 'action' are the ULEZ Blade Runners. And that's about it.
An article on such a topic is extremely problematic, especially on Substack, for a multitude of reasons:
2) The article would be heavily opinionated/speculative: I don't know what causes people to not act. If I did know, I'd be offering remedies. Many people hate speculative, opinionated articles, and I am not sure what I could contribute.
3) Even if people saw the article as a 'proverbial' call to arms, what could I tell them to do? None of us (I presume, anyway) are seasoned military field commanders. None of us know what a viable strategy looks like.
[Yes, yes, there's the usual calls of 'hang Albert Bourla' or such, but that's an end goal, an objective, it isn't a strategy. For example, historically the IRA's strategy would be to bomb public places *and* make hoax bomb threat calls to achieve their separation from the British State, which was the end goal. Republic of Ireland are now a puppet state of the EU, so did it really work?]
4) There's also the paradox of morality. The people who find murder to be horrific, in a proverbial, hypothetical overthrow scenario, would be obliged to murder. The murderers in power don't have that compunction.
I genuinely do not understand the paralysis of the public in the face of such concerted murder campaigns. I do not believe it is ignorance. I believe it is reluctance, or uncertainty in how to act.
I can answer both questions. The City of London created Mohandas Gandhi and Wall St (Rockefeller) brought us ML King. They were covertly nurtured, cultivated, and protected until they served their purpose, which was to promote the incantational 'power ethic' of "peaceful non-violent protest", along with engineered success and, to validate the performance, assassination... psychologically, martyrdom. They were canonised by Hollywood with epic movies. The most literate part of the population, graduates, received more ethical polish and reinforcement. Meanwhile, business and corporate graduates were imbued with the right of "executive decision-making", a classy name for unilateralism, ergo dictatorship, as the norm.
The second question-answer is the long-proven application of a cell movement. Using a secure medium such as Protonmail.com, we discuss the key targets in principle, which by the way, are media managers. Resistance members are introduced to the strategic goal and various objectives, and are provided with tasks commensurate with their world-hardenedness. New members can discreetly identify locations of these and the frontline can capture or eliminate the targets at the right strategic moment. This is a well-understood strategy (ie WWII resistance movements}. As you acknowledged, military assistance is critical. That will be the hardest hurdle. The success depends upon the realisation as to who is actually orchestrating the scamdemic/digitisation/media coordination/WEF/WHO-UN programmes. Since March 2017, it has been Rupert Murdoch, but everybody sees him as peripheral and sycophantic. He is beyond smart. Yet he was anointed for this role by David Rockefeller in 1973, while everybody was focussed elsewhere. Long aware of this, I wrote a novel that contains the proof of his Australian criminality, which can be used to bring him down.
Google (if it’ll let you) “NPAFP India” - where NPAFP stands for Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis.
Polio has been decreed to have been eradicated, whereas thousands of Indian children annually are instead diagnosed with NPAFP. Furthermore, the number thus diagnosed has risen exponentially since they started pushing the oral polio vaccine in India in earnest in the 1990s. Now I’m not saying that NPAFP is rebranded polio - it may have an entirely different origin and the timing might be entirely coincidental - but the “NP” does look a bit paranoid, like maybe they doth protest a tad too much.
They have been at it for a long time now. I am surprised at how many shots you get when entering the military. Kind of confuses me now as to who the real enemy is.
No doubt many alt media outlets have reported as such.
The Times came extremely close to fingering WIV as being a vaccine research outlet that unleashed SARS-CoV-2... but then that part of the story rapidly disappeared!
The full story never gets told. Not in one go, anyway. Life has become episodic. All info therefore, apparently, must be episodic.
Let me first make a bald statement... if we all went downtown, made a people's arrest of all politicians, bureaucrats, doctors, editors and journalists who are responnsible for the lies, deaths and injuries, and you know what I mean, then this would have been over two years ago when the jab mandates were first announced.
But we have cringed and whined about treason, democide, genocide, infanticide, and generally done nothing else, except to occasionally do this on a group basis. I refer, of course, to protests and rallies.
For no reason justified by actual evidence, other then what Hollywood told us about King and Gandhi and "Peaceful non-violent protest", we have gone like lambs to the slaughter.
I was assured by some earnest forty year old maid at a Darwin rally, that this also worked for the Vietnam War. What? I was there. I was one of the organisers. The protests were not peaceful, not non-violent. Who is making up this guff. That war stalled under the impact of Kent State Massacre, the self-immolation of a Buddhist Monk in Saigon Square, the Democratic Convention, tens of thousands of boys brought home to their folks in a box; and I myself witnessed much blood and broken glass in the streets, with raging battles with police in 1967 and 1968 especially. Police tried to push our bus over a cliff. Protest doesn't much more violent. But it did the trick.
Yes, there were some idiot university students who had peaceful protests but the media ignored them. Violence sells. Violence is sensational. That is why the violence was not avoided because the antiwar message reached people in the media, especially front pages and TV screens. That is what ended the Vietnam War. Brought to you by untrammelled unmitigated, unapologetic, violence on your TV screen
Gandhi was a City of London creation. Many Africans called him out as a phoney and in fact they are still doing this today. Our media does not cover such events. The FBI kept King alive, saving him from being beaten, shot, and lynched. You can bet the orchestration came from the CIA, onshore or not.
Both men were assassinated to make them martyrs and then both men had epic movies made of them by Hollywood. We were indoctrinated, folks, propagandised, brainwashed, and "peaceful non-violent protest" has now become an article of faith. Absolutely without a shred of evidence.
Why? Because the NWO architects know how to play us for suckers. This is why Schwarb, Gates, and Fauci smirk. They know we are cooked meat. They know we will not resist.
If there is anyone left to write it, history will record that we were the first piece of humanity that marched and sang triumphantly to the death house. Every other generation berrated by tyranny lit their torches, held their hay forks aloft, marched on the tyrants and hurled them from their battlements to be dashed on the rocks below.
And two entire generations will never know I said this because Tik Tok and Facebook are more real.
I fully endorse your call to action. In-fact, I was considering, ironically, an article asking the question of why the public chooses not to act. We are in the throes of the same problems that faced the populace of Nazi Germany, or that of the populace that faced the gulags in Soviet Russia.
One evident piece of chilling speech is the fact calls to... 'action', shall we say, are censored heavily on the internet. Even places like Gab.com, that have some of the most toxic views imaginable, prohibits calls to 'action' because it is illegal to do so.
No tyrant has ever made a call to 'action' legal, why would they? Why would anyone wait for it to be legalised? Why would anybody comply with this?
The UK's closest call to 'action' are the ULEZ Blade Runners. And that's about it.
An article on such a topic is extremely problematic, especially on Substack, for a multitude of reasons:
1) Substack ToS prohibits discussions on the calls to 'action' of which you speak. The closest The Daily Beagle could come to it is this: https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/the-plan-to-take-back-america
2) The article would be heavily opinionated/speculative: I don't know what causes people to not act. If I did know, I'd be offering remedies. Many people hate speculative, opinionated articles, and I am not sure what I could contribute.
3) Even if people saw the article as a 'proverbial' call to arms, what could I tell them to do? None of us (I presume, anyway) are seasoned military field commanders. None of us know what a viable strategy looks like.
[Yes, yes, there's the usual calls of 'hang Albert Bourla' or such, but that's an end goal, an objective, it isn't a strategy. For example, historically the IRA's strategy would be to bomb public places *and* make hoax bomb threat calls to achieve their separation from the British State, which was the end goal. Republic of Ireland are now a puppet state of the EU, so did it really work?]
4) There's also the paradox of morality. The people who find murder to be horrific, in a proverbial, hypothetical overthrow scenario, would be obliged to murder. The murderers in power don't have that compunction.
I genuinely do not understand the paralysis of the public in the face of such concerted murder campaigns. I do not believe it is ignorance. I believe it is reluctance, or uncertainty in how to act.
I can answer both questions. The City of London created Mohandas Gandhi and Wall St (Rockefeller) brought us ML King. They were covertly nurtured, cultivated, and protected until they served their purpose, which was to promote the incantational 'power ethic' of "peaceful non-violent protest", along with engineered success and, to validate the performance, assassination... psychologically, martyrdom. They were canonised by Hollywood with epic movies. The most literate part of the population, graduates, received more ethical polish and reinforcement. Meanwhile, business and corporate graduates were imbued with the right of "executive decision-making", a classy name for unilateralism, ergo dictatorship, as the norm.
The second question-answer is the long-proven application of a cell movement. Using a secure medium such as Protonmail.com, we discuss the key targets in principle, which by the way, are media managers. Resistance members are introduced to the strategic goal and various objectives, and are provided with tasks commensurate with their world-hardenedness. New members can discreetly identify locations of these and the frontline can capture or eliminate the targets at the right strategic moment. This is a well-understood strategy (ie WWII resistance movements}. As you acknowledged, military assistance is critical. That will be the hardest hurdle. The success depends upon the realisation as to who is actually orchestrating the scamdemic/digitisation/media coordination/WEF/WHO-UN programmes. Since March 2017, it has been Rupert Murdoch, but everybody sees him as peripheral and sycophantic. He is beyond smart. Yet he was anointed for this role by David Rockefeller in 1973, while everybody was focussed elsewhere. Long aware of this, I wrote a novel that contains the proof of his Australian criminality, which can be used to bring him down.
Seems like they are having a tough time picking the disease for the next pandemic...eenie meenie miney mo..
Google (if it’ll let you) “NPAFP India” - where NPAFP stands for Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis.
Polio has been decreed to have been eradicated, whereas thousands of Indian children annually are instead diagnosed with NPAFP. Furthermore, the number thus diagnosed has risen exponentially since they started pushing the oral polio vaccine in India in earnest in the 1990s. Now I’m not saying that NPAFP is rebranded polio - it may have an entirely different origin and the timing might be entirely coincidental - but the “NP” does look a bit paranoid, like maybe they doth protest a tad too much.
Oh, rebranding diseases is another trick they use. They can 'eradicate' the cases... by reclassifying them!
Of course, the question then becomes, if it's 'not polio', what's causing the paralysis? Hey look over there, a Gates vaccine! I mean 'not polio'!
Just like polio was eradicated by changing its name to acute flaccid myelitis.
They have been at it for a long time now. I am surprised at how many shots you get when entering the military. Kind of confuses me now as to who the real enemy is.
Eradication ≠ elimination.
The word elimination is not used in the article.
The word eradication is verbatim used by the 'official' sources.
By news, of course, mainstream media are meant.
No doubt many alt media outlets have reported as such.
The Times came extremely close to fingering WIV as being a vaccine research outlet that unleashed SARS-CoV-2... but then that part of the story rapidly disappeared!