I've known many attorneys who have sued major corporations for fraud. I share what I've learned from them, and size up the facts and reasoning of the former head of the Corona Investigative Committee.
I know very little about history and politics, the only thing I really understand in that big arena is the fundamentals of psyops and what gets me is why other people don't. I've turned into a complete bore who simply repeats herself over and over and over again with the same old same old basics - why don't those interested in the area get the basics of psyops because when you do you know immediately what to expect when a psyop is rolled out.
These are the basics:
1. They do what they want for real and fake the rest - they much prefer using smoke'n'mirrors to get us to believe their nonsense than simulate reality as closely as possible or include reality even if they can - reality plays a minimal role ... except where wanted. It's all PROPAGANDA including a great deal of misdirection and distraction.
2. They give you the signs, including deliberately sloppy fakery, aka "hidden in plain sight" and "revelation of the method"
We knew immediately that the alleged pandemic was a psyop because they showed us against-reality images of people falling flat on their faces and laid out on the ground and on hospital floors and told us nonsenses such as a Chinese research team finding two species of snake to be "reservoirs" of the virus - later debunked. Pushing out obvious nonsense then debunking it is a classic technique.
3. With big psyops we will get masses of controlled opposition.
For 9/11 they pushed out the fake Commission and made a big song and dance about how invalid it was ... and then they pushed out the Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry as if this organisation was in contrast to the Commission. Nope. It's just Russian Dolls. What has the Lawyers' Committee achieved? Where's their website? They're supposedly defending loved ones of those killed but who exactly are they defending? Are they defending plane passenger loved ones because if so we know right off the bat they're fake because the planes were very obviously fake. In fact, the evidence shows that ALL death and injury was staged - they TELL us loud and clear (see Basic 1) with ludicrous miracle survivor stories, images of alleged injured that fit "drill-injured" perfectly and don't fit genuinely injured, reporters obviously scripted to allude to controlled demolition (massive reliance on the Emperor's New Clothes effect) and on and on and on and on. But how the 9/11 True Disbelievers simply cannot cope with the change of thought direction to acknowledge that 9/11 was really a massive Anti-Terror Exercise where a number of big buildings were destroyed.
The most common argument I get against it is, "They wouldn't care about killing the people." Who said anything about that? They're killing and maiming people in such an unconscionable manner now I have to say I find it hard to believe but they didn't not kill people on 9/11 because they cared - obviously - they didn't kill them because they didn't want to kill them (they must surely want to kill people now) and they didn't need to kill them to have us believe in their deaths ... and most importantly health professionals can be propagandised to inject thousands upon thousands of people with toxic jabs because of decades of fraudulent virology and vaccinology but how do you propagandise demolition professionals to semi-evacuate buildings?
They didn't want to kill people, they didn't need to kill people and it would have been highly problematic to orchestrate. People very mistakenly think it would be difficult to avoid killing people but actually it would have been much easier to completely evacuate the whole of the WTC (while probably keeping many people out to start with) than kill some people and not others.
We are in a very different situation now.
Because of my relatively complete understanding of the psyop that is 9/11 I predicted immediately with covid:
1. There was no virus (they obviously didn't want a virus they only wanted us to believe in one and if we accept the conventional wisdom on viruses we know that they cannot be controlled so a "conventionally-understood" virus wouldn't work for their highly-controlled narrative - they couldn't get a "conventionally-understood" virus to infect those in Wuhan, jump onto ships, swing over to Bergamo, etc)
2. There would be multiple streams of propaganda to bamboozle and fragment the opposition hence biolab and "Yes there's a virus but it's not as bad as they say and response inappropriate". So very, very, very much propaganda on those two streams.
3. Legal teams, groups fighting for justice likely to be controlled opposition. I think that while a lot of people genuinely believe there's a virus but don't want vaccine mandates the "freedom" and "no vaccine mandates" are heavily curated by the controlled opposition.
That's a very good question, Eric, and you raise some important issues. I have personally found it very hard to take Reiner seriously, given his numerous incoherent, nonsensical and contradictory statements about the fake virus. According to Reiner, SARS-COV-2 was only "isolated" on a computer and the tests are useless... but he knows it exists and he knows its mortality rate! LOL.
🚂 Hi there, Eric! Thanks so much for participating in the Terrain Train! I’m writing to encourage everyone involved to share this information on and off Substack as much as possible throughout the month of October. Tremendous gratitude for all that you're doing to raise awareness in the health truth movement! https://solluckman.substack.com/p/calling-all-those-questioning-germ
Yes, your comment is entirely warranted. If anything, Füllmich has fumbled the question on the reality of the virus. He gets the PCR canard only part way. When Kaufman and Lanka were on it was a disaster, and that was a show of pure incompetence. I was not aware that Wodarg had ever said anything to question the reality of germ theory in general or SARS CoV-2 in particular.
I know very little about history and politics, the only thing I really understand in that big arena is the fundamentals of psyops and what gets me is why other people don't. I've turned into a complete bore who simply repeats herself over and over and over again with the same old same old basics - why don't those interested in the area get the basics of psyops because when you do you know immediately what to expect when a psyop is rolled out.
These are the basics:
1. They do what they want for real and fake the rest - they much prefer using smoke'n'mirrors to get us to believe their nonsense than simulate reality as closely as possible or include reality even if they can - reality plays a minimal role ... except where wanted. It's all PROPAGANDA including a great deal of misdirection and distraction.
2. They give you the signs, including deliberately sloppy fakery, aka "hidden in plain sight" and "revelation of the method"
We knew immediately that the alleged pandemic was a psyop because they showed us against-reality images of people falling flat on their faces and laid out on the ground and on hospital floors and told us nonsenses such as a Chinese research team finding two species of snake to be "reservoirs" of the virus - later debunked. Pushing out obvious nonsense then debunking it is a classic technique.
3. With big psyops we will get masses of controlled opposition.
For 9/11 they pushed out the fake Commission and made a big song and dance about how invalid it was ... and then they pushed out the Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry as if this organisation was in contrast to the Commission. Nope. It's just Russian Dolls. What has the Lawyers' Committee achieved? Where's their website? They're supposedly defending loved ones of those killed but who exactly are they defending? Are they defending plane passenger loved ones because if so we know right off the bat they're fake because the planes were very obviously fake. In fact, the evidence shows that ALL death and injury was staged - they TELL us loud and clear (see Basic 1) with ludicrous miracle survivor stories, images of alleged injured that fit "drill-injured" perfectly and don't fit genuinely injured, reporters obviously scripted to allude to controlled demolition (massive reliance on the Emperor's New Clothes effect) and on and on and on and on. But how the 9/11 True Disbelievers simply cannot cope with the change of thought direction to acknowledge that 9/11 was really a massive Anti-Terror Exercise where a number of big buildings were destroyed.
The most common argument I get against it is, "They wouldn't care about killing the people." Who said anything about that? They're killing and maiming people in such an unconscionable manner now I have to say I find it hard to believe but they didn't not kill people on 9/11 because they cared - obviously - they didn't kill them because they didn't want to kill them (they must surely want to kill people now) and they didn't need to kill them to have us believe in their deaths ... and most importantly health professionals can be propagandised to inject thousands upon thousands of people with toxic jabs because of decades of fraudulent virology and vaccinology but how do you propagandise demolition professionals to semi-evacuate buildings?
They didn't want to kill people, they didn't need to kill people and it would have been highly problematic to orchestrate. People very mistakenly think it would be difficult to avoid killing people but actually it would have been much easier to completely evacuate the whole of the WTC (while probably keeping many people out to start with) than kill some people and not others.
We are in a very different situation now.
Because of my relatively complete understanding of the psyop that is 9/11 I predicted immediately with covid:
1. There was no virus (they obviously didn't want a virus they only wanted us to believe in one and if we accept the conventional wisdom on viruses we know that they cannot be controlled so a "conventionally-understood" virus wouldn't work for their highly-controlled narrative - they couldn't get a "conventionally-understood" virus to infect those in Wuhan, jump onto ships, swing over to Bergamo, etc)
2. There would be multiple streams of propaganda to bamboozle and fragment the opposition hence biolab and "Yes there's a virus but it's not as bad as they say and response inappropriate". So very, very, very much propaganda on those two streams.
3. Legal teams, groups fighting for justice likely to be controlled opposition. I think that while a lot of people genuinely believe there's a virus but don't want vaccine mandates the "freedom" and "no vaccine mandates" are heavily curated by the controlled opposition.
There are always 2 sides to a story, Fischer and Wodarg done their part too why he left the "corona investigative comitee".
That's a very good question, Eric, and you raise some important issues. I have personally found it very hard to take Reiner seriously, given his numerous incoherent, nonsensical and contradictory statements about the fake virus. According to Reiner, SARS-COV-2 was only "isolated" on a computer and the tests are useless... but he knows it exists and he knows its mortality rate! LOL.
Is RF really an NPC?
🚂 Hi there, Eric! Thanks so much for participating in the Terrain Train! I’m writing to encourage everyone involved to share this information on and off Substack as much as possible throughout the month of October. Tremendous gratitude for all that you're doing to raise awareness in the health truth movement! https://solluckman.substack.com/p/calling-all-those-questioning-germ
Yes, your comment is entirely warranted. If anything, Füllmich has fumbled the question on the reality of the virus. He gets the PCR canard only part way. When Kaufman and Lanka were on it was a disaster, and that was a show of pure incompetence. I was not aware that Wodarg had ever said anything to question the reality of germ theory in general or SARS CoV-2 in particular.