While all the anomalies in Brigitte Macron's story do strongly suggest that she was born male I'm utterly mystified by the claim that Michelle Obama was. There are photos of her as a child and she looks like a girl. The notion that she is walking around with a penis bulge is simply ludicrous and to me this is simply a "conspiracy theory" - just like the moon landing hoax - pushed out to undermine people when they call out the real lies. Clothes can bulge in funny ways. This is not to say that she and her husband aren't totally involved in all kinds of shit - so many fake terror events happened under his presidency, including, of course, the notorious Sandy Hook.
It's always good to keep in mind that 1.7% of the population is born intersex (various forms) so someone can be born intersex without definitively being the sex opposite to what they seem. I've heard from numerous sources that Nicole Kidman was born intersex and, in fact, a girl in my class was born intersex (which I only found out later) as is someone I knew who was told by his doctor that he would never father a child - two years after a casual affair, a woman informed him that he was the father of her child so even though born intersex of some kind he still managed to father a child.
In Nicole Kidman's case, her being intersex is far less remarkable than the fact that her father, psychologist and academic, Antony Kidman, was part of a VIP satanic paedophile network and the main abuser of Fiona Barnett, from Engadine, Sydney who was hired out by her step-grandfather.
Hey Petra, thanks for those images of Michelle Obama. I am absolutely NO expert, but they look genuine. I must admit to being suckered in to the Micheal Obama twist. Even if they are genuine, i still think there some wierd stuff going on with the kids. They look very much like they should be the kids of their close friends. Can't remember thier name now. But the familial likeness to the freinds is blinding, whereas i dont see much, if any between the kids and Bazza and Michelle. I generally have a very good eye for family likeness spotting.
But that could be a windup. They like to encourage the disbelievers to make wild conspiracy claims to undermine themselves when they call out the real lies.
Bottom line: Michelle Obama looks like a girl in her childhood photos. She could be intersex (1.7% of the population is after all) but that's not the same thing. Anyway, as Tom, says, it's just a distraction.
If Michelle were intersex (or if they have fertility problems for whatever reason) then sure the kids might not be theirs and maybe her being intersex is where this "born a man" thing came from. I guess it would be better to admit the kids aren't theirs if they aren't.
I continue to argue that at this point whether or not Big Michelle Obama was born a man doesn't even matter anymore. The fact the question has become an Schrödinger's First Lady and will forevermore be held as such in the public consciousness is victory enough for the conspiracy theorists. Focusing on it while they're moving forward on plans to kill us all may prove counterproductive and may already have. Thank you for your comment!
A while back, maybe on your first post about Kate Middleton I asked if anyone thought perhaps they had cloned her, and it’s taking a while for the programming to kick in, or they botched it.
No matter where I commented on cloning has anyone responded. I do believe many politicians are clones. So, I appreciate all your investigations, but will we ever know? Lol. I doubt it. Thanks for your hard work .
Thanks for your comment. I think they are likely TRYING to clone people, but all available evidence would suggest that even if they are, it's not going well. The few public animal clones we've learned about don't last long, they break down physically fast. I'm also not sure how they would "age up" a clone of, say, Avril Lavigne or Britney Spears (or Kate Middleton), in such a short period of time.
I'm far more on board with these bizarre personality changes being due to demonic possession or other spiritual influences. You make a deal with the devil for fame and/or fortune and you take some heavy baggage upon your soul. IMHO, it is the influence of the immaterial world upon our material one where people should be investigating, not the "science," which has been revealed as largely a massive malevolent manipulative misleading Narrative in recent years.
Thank you for your comment, however! Discussion of cloning is worth having, because it's obviously happening with animals (you can buy a clone of your fave pet, for example) out in the open, which means it's surely happening to humans in secret. Have you seen Jordan Peele's excellent thriller US? You might find some Occult Auteur "tells" right there.
Thank you for your comment! To me, this is another shady bit of coverage with misleading photos that once again raises more questions than answers.
Photos and video are from last year. All the witnesses/sources in the story are anonymous. According to The Daily Mail, there are no photographs of the outing, "adhering to their request for privacy as Kate recovers..." but the unnamed witnesses assure the public (or at least the press) that the Princess "looked happy, relaxed and healthy."
Dig past the plethora of photos, and you'll reach the part of the Daily Mail coverage that admits: "While no pictures were taken of the couple - adhering to their request for privacy as Kate recovers - their reported appearance is an encouraging sign that she is taking her first steps towards a return to official royal engagements."
thanks for the details, when I saw it, I wondered if it was old footage or a body double. Also interesting that NO ONE seemed to notice them, do they really go out in public without body guards? Also, with this scandal and all these questions you would think people would have at least been captured LOOKING at them.
The plot thickens, Tom. I didn't even consider the possibility of Thomas Kingston's death being a fake - really slipping there - but your article got me thinking. Maybe it was although I wouldn't say the anomalies are thick on the ground which they usually are and some things that seem to be anomalies may not be.
--- "A spokesman for Gloucester Ambulance Service said they had attended a private residence in the Cirencester area."
Googlemaps tells us Gloucestershire Ambulance Service NHS Trust (note Gloucestershire not Gloucester) is "permanently closed" - http://alturl.com/nuaaj. Also, Cirencester has an ambulance station so why wouldn't the ambulance come from there?
--- A consultant histopathologist did the post mortem. This seems a little strange as histopathology is connected to disease. Wouldn't you expect more just a general forensic pathologist?
--- "Paramedics were called to the large, detached home at about 6pm." Why would "detached" be specified? They've already mentioned "country mansion" and "outbuilding" and where is the relevance? (This irrelevant and inappropriate piece of information is a very typical sign of a psyop I have to say.)
--- It seems redundant and inappropriate to report what the Coroner opened the inquest with, namely that Rule 23 of the Coroner's Inquest rules has been complied with. This rule relates to the acceptance of written evidence in the absence of people's attendance and one asks why the relevant people cannot attend and why the inquest is proceeding purely on the basis of written evidence as seems suggested. One might also wonder why there is an inquest at all - isn't it a straightforward suicide by gunshot? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1616/made
We haven't been told what kind of gun, suggested reasons as to where the gun came from, how many shots, no suggestions AT ALL for why he suicided. Nada. That's the information we'd be expecting, not confirmation from the Coroner that an inquest rule has been complied with.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more ridiculous it seems.
As has been said about all the weirdness and dead ends in the JFK hit, but also 9/11 and other mass trauma events, an operation of that size and maybe this size will "flood the zone" with red herrings. "All hands on deck," some of them empty gloves. So it's quite possible there are a multitude of compelling narratives that are actually just dead-ends. Thank you for your comment!
Whatever it is, there are typical signs of a psyop. Just thought of something else. Did he use a silencer? How come his mother didn't hear the gunshot out in the quiet countryside. Also, they would know the exact time the paramedics were called to the house so why do they say "about 6pm" - that's a deal-breaker really when it comes to psyops. They ALWAYS do that kind of thing in a psyop.
Just to say I've revised my opinion about it being a psyop - even though there are items we can interpret as typical signs there's just too few to make a proper case. While there's simply no such entity, officially, as the Gloucester Ambulance Service in Gloucestershire there are a couple of references to such an outfit outside this case so it could just be genuinely sloppy reporting and if it really is a suicide as reported perhaps we wouldn't expect the same details as if it were murder, eg, the details on the gun and the shooting. So despite the fact that I really think there are things that seem to be signs I just don't see enough of them. There's usually an abundance that makes it very clear such as for covid, 9/11 and JFK.
I think they are punking us, yes! But, hahhahhaa, Tom, I just had to take a break reading your article to say that this sentence of yours just had me spellbound in a chuckle-y sort of way: "right before the wicked Wurlitzer cranks up some new tune for the two-legged sheeple to herk and jerk and twerk their never-ending zombie dance." What an image! Love your wordsmithing.
I'd bet that your natal Mercury is either conjunct your Sun or making a sweet aspect to Uranus, the planet of originality and one's individual connection to genius :) Expect the Unexpected is Uranus' call! Mars might be in aspect to your Mercury, too. Hmm...
The picture is very weird. Without having known quite what some of the details were, the picture was off-putting in some manner. Maybe part of it is the children's mouths being wide open, especially the younger appearing boy. And the mom's arm-span seems a bit too big too. I know, she's tall and they're kids. Maybe they really are deliriously happy enough to have their mouths gaping open and maybe her wingspan is as long as her legs. Don't know, but looks odd.
Not sure if it was coincidence but your article sent my substack weird for a while, I was getting a 504 code?! Good read though.
Total change of subject:
I know you’re not completely sold on the moon rabbit hole but I happened across the Omega Psi Phi fraternity while searching up some space dudes. Insane initiations involving beating wannabe members with paddles. Bill Cosby was a member. Worthy of some further digging.
All of this space stuff seems to start around 1911-1918 with naval aviators and then develops again around 1955. Buzz Aldrin’s father was an aviator and he married Miss Moon 👀. This is when the Omega sci-fi fraternity kicks off too. And the federal reserve. And big pharma.
The thing is they wanted to go to the moon ... so they did. The Challenger disaster was the most brazen psyop in history with all the supposed dead people just carrying along with their same names (https://fakeotube.com/video/3665/nasa-challenger-crew-alive) so we know NASA will lie its head off but they WANTED to go to the moon ... and while it was indeed an astonishing feat, a major help in getting there is that you don't need fuel to get through a vacuum.
In psyops, as pointed out by Tom, they feel obliged to give us the signs known as Revelation of the Method (RoM) or Hidden in Plain Sight (https://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/revelation-method-predictive-programming-and-prime-directive) so we can always know if an event is a psyop or not - zero theory about it - but in the case of the moon landings there's no RoM and there is masses of evidence that completely accords with the alien lunar conditions. For the entire Apollo program there's probably more than a thousand hours of audio recordings between the astronauts and mission control, etc. You cannot fake that kind of conversation. Moreover, faking over a thousand hours would be completely alien to their RoM method. My sister, a disbeliever, says, "Oh, they didn't do it RoM style because it wasn't a typical kind of psyop." No! They ALWAYS use RoM, always no matter what kind of event.
Where we do see clear signs of psyop RoM in relation to the moon landings is in the people who came out afterwards and said we didn't go - in fact, even before we see it in the 1968 British half-hour drama, The News Benders, (really worth a watch) where "moon rockets" are referred to derisively, among a list of things - some real, some not - they always like to mix it up.
This is a debunking of the first two parts of the 14-part Wagging the Moondoggie by Dave McGowan and what it clearly shows is that McGowan is propagandising, he's not mistaken in his analysis, he's deliberately lying. There are many people who genuinely believe we didn't go to the moon but Dave McGowan wasn't one of them.
I have 'em. Give me a few days to process. As I've said before, it's usually smart during the first 24-48 hours of a Mediagasm to stand back and see what falls out of the Narrative.
Thank you very much for your comment and query. I'm flattered you asked!
Another take I heard on the over the top doctored weird photo was to establish a pattern & they can claim photos are being doctored via AI when Epstein’s prince andrews pics come out. They couldn’t have been this stupid with the pic - their actions are always intentional & we’re always playing catch up. Btw - was macrons teacher documented as a woman at the age of 39? About what age would the switch have occurred?
If we do FINALLY get Epstein photos just in time for them to be dismissible as possible A.I., when they've been out there since at least the day he got busted and could've been dropped at any time, then we KNOW this whole thing is scripted.
The general feeling on when Brigitte Macron would have changed genders is somewhere between 30-33. Thank you for your comment!
I still don't believe he's dead. I think he's in Witness Protection. When do they ever show you the face of a dead person as they're being wheeled out? When they want some people to believe he's dead, and when they want the people who have a vested interest in his death to see it isn't really him... and it wasn't. The ears and nose are different.
I worked at a newspaper in Georgia where our photo guy got a telescopic shot of them wheeling out a dead guy. Ultimately our editor didn't let the paper run the head shot, we got him from the feet up. It was a small town, Cherokee County, so maybe that doesn't reflect what happens in big cities. Tough to say.
Ears and nose do look different, but he's dead. We don't know what happened to that face after he was dead.
He could be living it in So. America...or Israel...I suppose. To me, it shakes out like this:
They cover you with a sheet or you're in a body bag in a situation like that. There was no reason to show his face except to get someone wondering, 'Is that really him? That nose has a bump that wasn't there and those are completely different ears." Ears don't change except get bigger in some cases, but the inner shape of his ears are not Jeff Epstein's.
When Kate appears after Easter, it will be easy for the demons and pedophiles to tell the normies, “Look how the truthers and the patriots make crazy things up! Here’s Kate now! Therefore you can’t believe them telling you we are demons and murderers and child rapists! They are crazy liars!”
Why did they pick Kate for the latest psy-op? She’s so visible. So well known. A good choice, by all accounts!
As for people who say the globalists are getting rid of the royals? Nah. They don’t eat their own.
For all we know, King Chuck is perfectly fine, too. We’re in the middle of deep, deep psy-ops, with deep, deep brainwashing and subterfuge. There is absolutely no way to tell what is real or not.
As a general rule, we should ignore their games. When Kate went missing, we should have all yawned and maybe spent more time worrying about important things, like our genocidal governments. Instead, on cue, we went right into acting like the imbeciles that we are and spend entire days chanting, “Where’s Kate?” rather than working diligently to prevent the demise of our families. See how this works?
There are days I wonder if we’re worth saving.
As for Candice—like many Patriots or truthers, she was good once. So was Oprah, so were many others. But somehow, the cabal gets to them. Yes, there’s blackmail, and big checks being written, but it’s more than that. There must be some kind of a documentary or document they are shown that feels indisputable and is so convincing, perfectly good humans turn. Entire bodies of Congress turn. Powerful people everywhere turn, and in sweeping numbers. Even those we once held in high esteem.
Is it some sort of a documentary showing an earth being blown to bits by an asteroid, or aliens.. and if humans don’t get it together…then this is your fate? But whatever it is, it works. Suddenly, a woman like Candice begins saying things that don’t gel any longer. Or a spiritual woman like Oprah becomes a billionaire suddenly and joins the cabal.
Something convinces good people to turn. They’re called to a meeting somewhere and shown “the truth” and suddenly they’re okay with genocide or pandemics or false flags or Hawaiian fires. However they’re being convinced, it must be extremely powerful.
From what I know of Oprah's brief time in Baltimore, she was never a "good" person. Hugely ambitious and sometimes that required appearing to be "good," but she herself was never actually "good." Likewise, Candace Owens-Farmer has blown with the ideological winds, and allegedly worse.
I personally don't think anybody gets shown some documentary or other allegedly "indisputable" fact. More like all these people are connected to secret societies and participate in occult rituals that require vows that invite entities and saddle their soul with demonic beings. The longer you play that game, the more dark weight you take upon yourself, until there is nothing left but a meat husk; you're a puppet and a pawn for forces far beyond your control. Just my opinion, and thank you for your comment.
Perhaps you are right. But Oprah was brought up poor, I believe, or at least not by people who belonged to the skull and bones club in college.
At some point, the cabal takes interest in certain people. Many have admitted visits, letters or phone calls from them. How do they get good people to sign on the dotted line?
Some people sell out pretty damn cheap, actually. And every man has his price. Mine just hasn't been met and probably won't be. But they know what it is.
Wow lots of info about the strange antics amiss among elites.
Of course its all actually very serious business.
And none of it a shock if you study the satanic “family” occult practices.
As you seem to know, it is asserted by insiders/survivors that all people on the world stage ($50 Million Klub) are multi-generational Luciferian elites.
Maybe you’ve read details of their religious practices…how sxl perversion plays a huge part.. how they’re strongly encouraged to sxly “vampirize” (pan-sxlz, fetishize, anything-goes) their children by age 10, as kult religious foundation.
Apparently the kids learn very early to enjoy pegging since thats a particular ritual priority to them. They believe this activity of assaulting the spinal base, is sacred, awakening kundalini demons to slither up the spine, infilling all chakras, to the brain and overtake the pineal gland, ie. demonic possession.
It traumatizes the children, causing “helpful” DID as part of trauma programming & total kontrol.
They believe this is spiritual empowerment & imperative for fulfilling their goals. They beg Lucifer for ever-increasing demonic possession, much the way born-again believers in Jesus ask YHWH God for the empowering indwelling of the sweet Holy Spirit, of course without the perversion.
From my reading about the “family” activities including royals, I suspect gossip about royal men pegged by strapped-on women is a beard game deflecting their actual practice of keeping several young male lovers… a common practice throughout antiquity.
Great article, as ever. On the D-notice / super-injunction part, speaking as someone who used to work in the newsroom of a British broadsheet, there were essentially four ways a story gets killed (I'm a few years out of date, but doubt things have changed much):
1. Super-injunctions: here one of the parties has to go to court, disclose the particulars and ask for the injunction to be issued usually on privacy grounds. It's almost never done for business of state because a DSMA notice is more direct and has no disclosure requirement. Very unlikely these would be used for royal business. The footballer Ryan Giggs is one of the better known examples after his name was raised in Parliament. It's a device for those who are rich but outside the protection of the system.
2. DSMA Notices: still very much part of the furniture, these are technically voluntary but in practice are always complied with. It's possible these may be used for royal business but they are supposed to be for national security related stories and any editor who thought the system was being abused would be in his rights to go around it.
3. Sexual assault laws: there is a lifelong right to anonymity for any victim of sexual assault. This has allegedly been abused in the past so that embarrassing acts by public figures are shielded for life, even when no charges were ever pressed (a statement by one of the parties to the police that the act was an assault is sufficient). It is a criminal offence to breach one of these - so the strongest possible deterrent, editors simply would not go around it. To my knowledge this device been employed by the families of senior political figures in the relatively recent past, who can tell with what degree of sincerity.
4. Gentleman's agreement: there are plenty of stories which are covered by a general omertà in the hope of access later on, or because it's felt somehow ungallant to dredge up a person's private life without public interest. There's a degree of 'play fair' here - so a cheating politician relying on this cannot pose in public with his family, as that then makes this fair game.
If I had to bet what was going on here, it would be 4, but neither 2 or 3 would surprise me. FWIW I don't get the impression that the newsrooms have any real idea of what's going on.
All that said, when any of these constraints are in place, the legacy press will often release apparently random stories without any obvious news value about the subject of the injunction / restraint / ban as a way of signalling to one another that they're in the know. I thought of that when seeing this the other day:
Maybe Royals have to marry men disguised as women, or at least infertile women, for some reason. Christopher Haden-Guest, 5th Baron Haden-Guest married Jamie Lee Curtis, who has been rumored to be a hermaphodite for decades. Ever since hearing this, I've always noticed how masculine her features are. Whenever I hear someone say how hot she was in X-movie, I always tell them about this.
I've been hearing JLC is a hermaphodite since I was a film critic in college! That's a longstanding rumor. No idea if it's true.
There was an amazing Twitter thread, back when it was still Twitter, of all the female royals, wives of nations' leaders and wives of some heavy corporate hitters who it claimed were all trans, and boy did they look masculine. Even Martha Washington, when you think about it...she and George had no children. It's all very strange!
Could it be that Thomas isn't dead and he and Kate have eloped somewhere?
Just to say that Candace is making that Masonic M sign (two middle fingers together, index and pinky splayed away) aka Triad Claw hand which dates back to at least the Renaissance
As you note, they give us the signs known as Revelation of the Method so the notion of "conspiracy theory" is ludicrous. They TELL us so there's no trouble at all knowing that 9/11 was an inside job. But what we can also know - but far fewer do - is that the death and injury were staged. Those in power have profiled us into two main groups: ~90% believers of their nonsense stories, ~10% disbelievers so with big psyops they often use this - really not too complicated - propaganda strategy.
Story A for the 90%: The terrrrorrrists / lone nut / virus did it
Story B for the 10%: The cabal did it
When the reality C is that Yes the cabal was responsible but what actually happened is not what we're told. It's not just the WHO that's different it's also the WHAT.
Just as they told us that they were responsible for 9/11 with their nonsense story that defies reality both physically and in terms of normal reality - catastrophic failure of the US multi-trillion dollar intelligence and military infrastructure at the hands of 19 ragtag terrrorrrists armed with boxcutters four times in one morning - they also told us very loud and clear that they didn't kill or injure people, for example, they had Cynthia McFadden outside the Bellevue Hospital and later the trauma centre specially set up for the event tell us, "No injured, no one being brought in, empty wheelchairs and gurneys!" The miracle survivor stories are ludicrous (typical feature of psyops). They bend over backwards to tell us it was simply a fancy drill. It's not that they won't kill people, of course, but generally when they tell us they're killing people they're not and when they tell us they're saving them ... they're killing them.
Thank you for your comment. That would be wild if Kate and Thomas Kingston ran off together, but it seems highly unlikely. Where would they go? Did they take the kids? What about his kids?
As for 9/11, if nobody died, then there are a lot of grieving widows whose husbands abandoned them. I used to live in Summit, NJ, which had a direct train line into Manhattan, and the night of 9/11, the parking lot was still had a couple dozen cars that lingered there for days. I was also involved somewhat with the 9/11 widows and met with them a couple times when they were struggling to get the 9/11 Commission going. They were mourning, for sure.
That day certainly killed the firemen who got buried in the WTC collapse, because I know a woman whose father-in-law was killed there. I've seen those alleged sunset photos through the WTC in summer 2001 where the building appears largely empty, and I know that they were hurting for tenants. There's a lot of mystery around what happened on 9/11, and it's possible some of it is beyond our perception of "reality." But I'm not at all on board with the "nobody/few died on 9/11" theories.
That said, I appreciate your perspective — "Trust No One!" — and thank you again for your comment.
Reply 2: Forgot to address the children issue with Kate and Thomas. No answer for that, however, there was an event in Sydney, the "Sydney Siege", which has abundantly clear signs of a psyop in which barrister and seemingly devoted mother of three, Katrina Dawson, from an illustrious legal family, was allegedly killed. I cannot reconcile what happened to her as I cannot see she how would have left her children behind - her husband and children couldn't have simply "disappeared" with her because he remarried so it's not like some situations where someone allegedly dies but you can see how the whole family takes off together somewhere. I also tend to think Princess Diana wasn't killed either but cannot explain the children factor in her situation either.
Just to say, Tom, I'd never want to say people didn't die if they did and, of course, I don't say that no one died or was injured, it certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility that there were a few deliberate targets or accidental deaths or injuries ... in fact, more than possible, quite probable. However, the perps are scrupulous in their psyops in that they don't just employ Revelation of the Method (RoM) clues, they also NEVER put forward evidence that that clearly contradicts the actual reality so there is simply not one piece of purported evidence I am aware of that says of the combined total of 9,000 people anyone really was killed or injured.
Firstly, I'm quite sure that certain people wished to escape their families and fake their own deaths which happens in normal life anyway. Intelligence agents (of whom there are so many not just those officially employed) would be keeping their ear close to the ground for those people and anyone who wanted to fake their own death would be used in this event. So when you say you knew mourning widows it is perfectly possible that they genuinely believe their husband died when he didn't although I think it is more likely they were simply actors - what makes you believe that they were genuinely mourning?
Let's just summarise the hard evidence and reasons for not killing and injuring people for real:
1. 9/11 was a psyop and expectations in a psyop are that what is wanted is done for real while what is not wanted is faked. Psyops are all about mind control using magician-style smoke'n'mirrors fakery not doing things for real or even simulating things as realistically as possible ... unless wanted ... hence RoM - the greater the degree of dupery the better the psyop! They didn't want to kill and injure people for real they only wanted us to believe in their deaths. It took me quite awhile to come round to the faked death and injury once the idea was made known to me and part of the delay was due to propaganda indicating that people were indeed targeted - this video is a brilliant work of propaganda indicating targeting of people (or perhaps I was just gullible:)) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk.
2. 9/11 was essentially the biggest demolition job of all time and in demolition jobs the buildings are completely evacuated before destruction, not partially evacuated. Professionals needed to be employed in this massive job - how would they be persuaded to ditch their professional standards and ethos simply for a terror story where we know right off the bat they faked deaths in the faked plane crashes?
3. There is clear evidence of fakery of a number of the people who allegedly died - see https://cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=18. Obviously, there were real people among those who allegedly died too.
4. The NY Times allegedly recorded 118 testimonies of the firefighters at the WTC on 9/11. However:
a. Where's the audio? (they managed hundreds of hours of audio from the moon landings 30 years before but no audio in 2001 for the firefighters only "transcripts"?).
b. Why is there no allusion whatsoever to any of the 343 firefighters who allegedly died in any of these 118 testimonies?
c. Why are the testimonies full of nonsensicality that completely speaks against their authenticity?
5. All the images of the alleged injured perfectly fit "drill" injured while not one is consistent with the kind of severe injury / maiming we'd expect from the destruction of 110-storey towers.
6. Hospital reporting is highly anomalous in various ways
7. The miracle survivor stories are all beyond ludicrous
People are so swayed by knowing people. I know people who know people who allegedly died in psyops in Australia (a police shooting in Queensland and bus accident in the Hunter Valley) and I know someone whose classmate was allegedly killed in Barcelona in a van rampage - that doesn't make them real. In my case, the people I know I'm sure were not in on the psyops but some people will be.
I thought I was the most ardent conspiracy theorist out there, but your theory is just not viable. I worked at Ground Zero feeding fireman and even got to go inside the boundaries of Ground Zero to have a look one day. Real, real, real.
Real people died. Real people were found and not found.
A young woman from my town in WNY was killed on one of the planes. I assure you she was from a small town, everyone knew and loved her, not an actress, went to high school with people we know, etc. etc. She’s dead. We know her family. She’s dead.
And the people who believe otherwise do a great disservice and are disrespectful to the dead.
Those in power massively weaponise against us the taboos around death. Your words "great disservice and are disrespectful to the dead" I'm afraid fall on completely deaf ears. If you're interested in the truth you need to abandon taboos around death - or any taboo or whatever it is at all that those in power weaponise against us. If I'm wrong so be it, I'm willing to risk offending people if someone died. What offends me is the willful gullibility of people that allows our world to increasingly it seems run on lie upon lie upon lie upon lie.
I 100% reject the label "conspiracy theorist", a term I loathe and despise. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a psyop analyst and I'm 100% evidence-based. What you need to distinguish is evidence that clearly favours real over fake and, a priori, knowing someone who allegedly died does not favour real in any shape or form. We fully expect people to know people for both hypotheses. In the case of the staged hypothesis what is expected is that real people have participated in something akin to a Witness Protection Program.
The young woman you know may have wished to "escape" for some reason into a completely new life in the way we know happens. People pretend to be killed or to suicide and start a new life elsewhere. We KNOW this happens so the fact that someone is allegedly killed doesn't mean anything. When I say "actor" I don't necessarily mean a professional actor I just mean people playing roles such as being "loved ones". Alternatively, her family knows what happened to her and simply keeps mum.
We know there is no evidence whatsoever that favours the reality of any of the alleged airliner crashes so the young woman you know didn't die in a plane crash, plain and simple.
So you went to Ground Zero? So what?
Did you see any dead bodies?
It's abundantly obvious from numerous angles that 9/11 was the biggest demolition job of all time in the guise of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terror Exercise in the further guise of a real terror attack.
What you need is clear evidence that it wasn't. Knowing people is meaningless. I know people who know people who allegedly died in certain events, including 9/11, it simply doesn't mean anything.
I have been awake since 1997–a very long time. I awoke because I was a reporter for many years and saw immediately when the cabal demanded we write and present the news differently. Next, I cut my teeth studying pedophilia, extra terrestrials—nothing was off limits. Even then, I tried telling people what was happening.
You think it’s hard telling people today? Try 1997!
When 911 happened and then Obama came out of nowhere, I was already wide, wide awake.
I tell you this because I’ve been around for a while now and I have a good sense of the patterns and the playlist of the cabal.
I think it’s silly to pretend 3000 people faked their deaths on 911.
Oh dear me, 3,000 people didn't fake their deaths. Many of the people were completely made up and then a reasonable number seemed to be agents. There used to be a site, Let's Roll Forums, that's disappeared that spoke about how Cantor Fitzgerald sacked a large number of employees not long before 9/11 on the basis of economic downturn, hired new employees (the ones that allegedly died) and then post-9/11 re-hired the old ones. I have no evidence that this is true, however, we can see how that that is one way to make up a portion of the 3,000.
There are so many angles from which to see that staging the death and injury is actually the only thing that makes any sense ... and, in any case, the evidence is 100% consistent with this hypothesis. None of the jumpers look particularly convincing, not a single image of the alleged injured is consistent with the severe injury or maiming we'd expect from the destruction of 110-storey buildings but is all perfectly consistent with "drill" injured, the 118 firefighter testimonials are completely nonsensical, etc.
Dear God, tell me how many people you think needed to be involved and how would they all be persuaded to participate in killing the people for real when there was simply no need? It was all so easy to fake. Yes, they can propagandise and coerce thousands upon thousands of health professionals to inject toxic jabs but they have centuries of scientific fraud as their basis to do that. There is no basis to say, "Hey people involved in this exercise, we're just going to leave people in the buildings, OK? It's only a terror story but we're going to do the death and injury for real." And how do you think they're going to enlist more people in future events if they kill them for real?
This a website on the vicsims - the simulated victims - all made up.
I just knew you had a write another part to the crazy Kate deal. I didn't even notice all of the crazy stuff that has happened since you wrote about it, and now the picture...what is the deal?
While all the anomalies in Brigitte Macron's story do strongly suggest that she was born male I'm utterly mystified by the claim that Michelle Obama was. There are photos of her as a child and she looks like a girl. The notion that she is walking around with a penis bulge is simply ludicrous and to me this is simply a "conspiracy theory" - just like the moon landing hoax - pushed out to undermine people when they call out the real lies. Clothes can bulge in funny ways. This is not to say that she and her husband aren't totally involved in all kinds of shit - so many fake terror events happened under his presidency, including, of course, the notorious Sandy Hook.
https://people.com/politics/michelle-obama-throwback-photos/
It's always good to keep in mind that 1.7% of the population is born intersex (various forms) so someone can be born intersex without definitively being the sex opposite to what they seem. I've heard from numerous sources that Nicole Kidman was born intersex and, in fact, a girl in my class was born intersex (which I only found out later) as is someone I knew who was told by his doctor that he would never father a child - two years after a casual affair, a woman informed him that he was the father of her child so even though born intersex of some kind he still managed to father a child.
In Nicole Kidman's case, her being intersex is far less remarkable than the fact that her father, psychologist and academic, Antony Kidman, was part of a VIP satanic paedophile network and the main abuser of Fiona Barnett, from Engadine, Sydney who was hired out by her step-grandfather.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT3NkHaNfMY
Hey Petra, thanks for those images of Michelle Obama. I am absolutely NO expert, but they look genuine. I must admit to being suckered in to the Micheal Obama twist. Even if they are genuine, i still think there some wierd stuff going on with the kids. They look very much like they should be the kids of their close friends. Can't remember thier name now. But the familial likeness to the freinds is blinding, whereas i dont see much, if any between the kids and Bazza and Michelle. I generally have a very good eye for family likeness spotting.
Even Obama has slipped up, referring to Michelle as Michael in speeches. Video is out there. But now that anything can be faked why pay attention 🤷♀️
But that could be a windup. They like to encourage the disbelievers to make wild conspiracy claims to undermine themselves when they call out the real lies.
Bottom line: Michelle Obama looks like a girl in her childhood photos. She could be intersex (1.7% of the population is after all) but that's not the same thing. Anyway, as Tom, says, it's just a distraction.
If Michelle were intersex (or if they have fertility problems for whatever reason) then sure the kids might not be theirs and maybe her being intersex is where this "born a man" thing came from. I guess it would be better to admit the kids aren't theirs if they aren't.
I continue to argue that at this point whether or not Big Michelle Obama was born a man doesn't even matter anymore. The fact the question has become an Schrödinger's First Lady and will forevermore be held as such in the public consciousness is victory enough for the conspiracy theorists. Focusing on it while they're moving forward on plans to kill us all may prove counterproductive and may already have. Thank you for your comment!
You make a fair point there Tom. All just another distraction of our long planned demise.
A while back, maybe on your first post about Kate Middleton I asked if anyone thought perhaps they had cloned her, and it’s taking a while for the programming to kick in, or they botched it.
No matter where I commented on cloning has anyone responded. I do believe many politicians are clones. So, I appreciate all your investigations, but will we ever know? Lol. I doubt it. Thanks for your hard work .
Thanks for your comment. I think they are likely TRYING to clone people, but all available evidence would suggest that even if they are, it's not going well. The few public animal clones we've learned about don't last long, they break down physically fast. I'm also not sure how they would "age up" a clone of, say, Avril Lavigne or Britney Spears (or Kate Middleton), in such a short period of time.
I'm far more on board with these bizarre personality changes being due to demonic possession or other spiritual influences. You make a deal with the devil for fame and/or fortune and you take some heavy baggage upon your soul. IMHO, it is the influence of the immaterial world upon our material one where people should be investigating, not the "science," which has been revealed as largely a massive malevolent manipulative misleading Narrative in recent years.
Thank you for your comment, however! Discussion of cloning is worth having, because it's obviously happening with animals (you can buy a clone of your fave pet, for example) out in the open, which means it's surely happening to humans in secret. Have you seen Jordan Peele's excellent thriller US? You might find some Occult Auteur "tells" right there.
Yes distraction.. aka manipulation ..of hearts, minds, souls. thats serious business.
World leadership has been doing this to unwashed masses repeatedly since the beginning of time. People forget. 🙏
just saw this today. supposedly it's Kate walking around at a farm shop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN5y_0tCOoI
Thank you for your comment! To me, this is another shady bit of coverage with misleading photos that once again raises more questions than answers.
Photos and video are from last year. All the witnesses/sources in the story are anonymous. According to The Daily Mail, there are no photographs of the outing, "adhering to their request for privacy as Kate recovers..." but the unnamed witnesses assure the public (or at least the press) that the Princess "looked happy, relaxed and healthy."
Dig past the plethora of photos, and you'll reach the part of the Daily Mail coverage that admits: "While no pictures were taken of the couple - adhering to their request for privacy as Kate recovers - their reported appearance is an encouraging sign that she is taking her first steps towards a return to official royal engagements."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13208003/Kate-Middleton-spotted-William-visit-favourite-Windsor-farm-shop-looking-happy-relaxed-healthy-Princess-Wales-takes-steps-return-official-engagements-abdominal-surgery.html
thanks for the details, when I saw it, I wondered if it was old footage or a body double. Also interesting that NO ONE seemed to notice them, do they really go out in public without body guards? Also, with this scandal and all these questions you would think people would have at least been captured LOOKING at them.
All good (and obvious!) questions! Thank you for your comment.
Old footage. Commenters note the Christmas decorations on the huts.
Really? Where? I don't see anything like that:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/royals/26766840/princess-kate-middleton-shopping-trip-video-william/
Please LMK if I'm whiffing on this and you've seen something I've missed. Thank you for your commet!
The plot thickens, Tom. I didn't even consider the possibility of Thomas Kingston's death being a fake - really slipping there - but your article got me thinking. Maybe it was although I wouldn't say the anomalies are thick on the ground which they usually are and some things that seem to be anomalies may not be.
I worked out the Kingston mansion is on Church Rd, Kemble, Cirencester (25m from Gloucester) although I can't quite locate it on googlemaps. (https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1089287)
Seeming anomalies:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/thomas-kingston-cause-death-everything-32226346
--- "A spokesman for Gloucester Ambulance Service said they had attended a private residence in the Cirencester area."
Googlemaps tells us Gloucestershire Ambulance Service NHS Trust (note Gloucestershire not Gloucester) is "permanently closed" - http://alturl.com/nuaaj. Also, Cirencester has an ambulance station so why wouldn't the ambulance come from there?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13145415/Thomas-Kingston-lady-Gabriella-Windsor-husband-shot-himself.html
--- A consultant histopathologist did the post mortem. This seems a little strange as histopathology is connected to disease. Wouldn't you expect more just a general forensic pathologist?
--- "Paramedics were called to the large, detached home at about 6pm." Why would "detached" be specified? They've already mentioned "country mansion" and "outbuilding" and where is the relevance? (This irrelevant and inappropriate piece of information is a very typical sign of a psyop I have to say.)
--- It seems redundant and inappropriate to report what the Coroner opened the inquest with, namely that Rule 23 of the Coroner's Inquest rules has been complied with. This rule relates to the acceptance of written evidence in the absence of people's attendance and one asks why the relevant people cannot attend and why the inquest is proceeding purely on the basis of written evidence as seems suggested. One might also wonder why there is an inquest at all - isn't it a straightforward suicide by gunshot? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1616/made
We haven't been told what kind of gun, suggested reasons as to where the gun came from, how many shots, no suggestions AT ALL for why he suicided. Nada. That's the information we'd be expecting, not confirmation from the Coroner that an inquest rule has been complied with.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more ridiculous it seems.
As has been said about all the weirdness and dead ends in the JFK hit, but also 9/11 and other mass trauma events, an operation of that size and maybe this size will "flood the zone" with red herrings. "All hands on deck," some of them empty gloves. So it's quite possible there are a multitude of compelling narratives that are actually just dead-ends. Thank you for your comment!
Whatever it is, there are typical signs of a psyop. Just thought of something else. Did he use a silencer? How come his mother didn't hear the gunshot out in the quiet countryside. Also, they would know the exact time the paramedics were called to the house so why do they say "about 6pm" - that's a deal-breaker really when it comes to psyops. They ALWAYS do that kind of thing in a psyop.
So you think his mum would have heard the shot? Besides if a silencer were used it should have been mentioned.
Just to say I've revised my opinion about it being a psyop - even though there are items we can interpret as typical signs there's just too few to make a proper case. While there's simply no such entity, officially, as the Gloucester Ambulance Service in Gloucestershire there are a couple of references to such an outfit outside this case so it could just be genuinely sloppy reporting and if it really is a suicide as reported perhaps we wouldn't expect the same details as if it were murder, eg, the details on the gun and the shooting. So despite the fact that I really think there are things that seem to be signs I just don't see enough of them. There's usually an abundance that makes it very clear such as for covid, 9/11 and JFK.
I think they are punking us, yes! But, hahhahhaa, Tom, I just had to take a break reading your article to say that this sentence of yours just had me spellbound in a chuckle-y sort of way: "right before the wicked Wurlitzer cranks up some new tune for the two-legged sheeple to herk and jerk and twerk their never-ending zombie dance." What an image! Love your wordsmithing.
Ahahahaha! Thank you so much! No idea where that comes from.
I'd bet that your natal Mercury is either conjunct your Sun or making a sweet aspect to Uranus, the planet of originality and one's individual connection to genius :) Expect the Unexpected is Uranus' call! Mars might be in aspect to your Mercury, too. Hmm...
The picture is very weird. Without having known quite what some of the details were, the picture was off-putting in some manner. Maybe part of it is the children's mouths being wide open, especially the younger appearing boy. And the mom's arm-span seems a bit too big too. I know, she's tall and they're kids. Maybe they really are deliriously happy enough to have their mouths gaping open and maybe her wingspan is as long as her legs. Don't know, but looks odd.
Not sure if it was coincidence but your article sent my substack weird for a while, I was getting a 504 code?! Good read though.
Total change of subject:
I know you’re not completely sold on the moon rabbit hole but I happened across the Omega Psi Phi fraternity while searching up some space dudes. Insane initiations involving beating wannabe members with paddles. Bill Cosby was a member. Worthy of some further digging.
All of this space stuff seems to start around 1911-1918 with naval aviators and then develops again around 1955. Buzz Aldrin’s father was an aviator and he married Miss Moon 👀. This is when the Omega sci-fi fraternity kicks off too. And the federal reserve. And big pharma.
Weird world we live in.
The thing is they wanted to go to the moon ... so they did. The Challenger disaster was the most brazen psyop in history with all the supposed dead people just carrying along with their same names (https://fakeotube.com/video/3665/nasa-challenger-crew-alive) so we know NASA will lie its head off but they WANTED to go to the moon ... and while it was indeed an astonishing feat, a major help in getting there is that you don't need fuel to get through a vacuum.
In psyops, as pointed out by Tom, they feel obliged to give us the signs known as Revelation of the Method (RoM) or Hidden in Plain Sight (https://soundofheart.org/galacticfreepress/content/revelation-method-predictive-programming-and-prime-directive) so we can always know if an event is a psyop or not - zero theory about it - but in the case of the moon landings there's no RoM and there is masses of evidence that completely accords with the alien lunar conditions. For the entire Apollo program there's probably more than a thousand hours of audio recordings between the astronauts and mission control, etc. You cannot fake that kind of conversation. Moreover, faking over a thousand hours would be completely alien to their RoM method. My sister, a disbeliever, says, "Oh, they didn't do it RoM style because it wasn't a typical kind of psyop." No! They ALWAYS use RoM, always no matter what kind of event.
https://archive.org/details/Apollo11Audio
https://archive.org/stream/Apollo11Audio/AS11_PAO_djvu.txt
Where we do see clear signs of psyop RoM in relation to the moon landings is in the people who came out afterwards and said we didn't go - in fact, even before we see it in the 1968 British half-hour drama, The News Benders, (really worth a watch) where "moon rockets" are referred to derisively, among a list of things - some real, some not - they always like to mix it up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYAke_z3RVU
This is a debunking of the first two parts of the 14-part Wagging the Moondoggie by Dave McGowan and what it clearly shows is that McGowan is propagandising, he's not mistaken in his analysis, he's deliberately lying. There are many people who genuinely believe we didn't go to the moon but Dave McGowan wasn't one of them.
https://waggingthemoondoggiedebunked.blogspot.com/2018/08/wagging-moondoggie-part-1-debunked.html
https://waggingthemoondoggiedebunked.blogspot.com/2018/08/wagging-moondoggie-part-2-debunked.html
The princess has stated she has cancer so she will not be seen indefinitely, anyone who is suspicious will be labeled as cruel. Thoughts?
"Thoughts?"
I have 'em. Give me a few days to process. As I've said before, it's usually smart during the first 24-48 hours of a Mediagasm to stand back and see what falls out of the Narrative.
Thank you very much for your comment and query. I'm flattered you asked!
Enjoyed your article very much! My suspicion…well…I wouldn’t be surprised if…you know…2023 was her last Christmas.
Another take I heard on the over the top doctored weird photo was to establish a pattern & they can claim photos are being doctored via AI when Epstein’s prince andrews pics come out. They couldn’t have been this stupid with the pic - their actions are always intentional & we’re always playing catch up. Btw - was macrons teacher documented as a woman at the age of 39? About what age would the switch have occurred?
If we do FINALLY get Epstein photos just in time for them to be dismissible as possible A.I., when they've been out there since at least the day he got busted and could've been dropped at any time, then we KNOW this whole thing is scripted.
The general feeling on when Brigitte Macron would have changed genders is somewhere between 30-33. Thank you for your comment!
I still don't believe he's dead. I think he's in Witness Protection. When do they ever show you the face of a dead person as they're being wheeled out? When they want some people to believe he's dead, and when they want the people who have a vested interest in his death to see it isn't really him... and it wasn't. The ears and nose are different.
I worked at a newspaper in Georgia where our photo guy got a telescopic shot of them wheeling out a dead guy. Ultimately our editor didn't let the paper run the head shot, we got him from the feet up. It was a small town, Cherokee County, so maybe that doesn't reflect what happens in big cities. Tough to say.
Ears and nose do look different, but he's dead. We don't know what happened to that face after he was dead.
He could be living it in So. America...or Israel...I suppose. To me, it shakes out like this:
Murdered: 75% chance
Secreted Away: 25% chance
Killed Himself: 0% chance
They cover you with a sheet or you're in a body bag in a situation like that. There was no reason to show his face except to get someone wondering, 'Is that really him? That nose has a bump that wasn't there and those are completely different ears." Ears don't change except get bigger in some cases, but the inner shape of his ears are not Jeff Epstein's.
Great point about the doctored weird photo and AI, that really makes sense.
When Kate appears after Easter, it will be easy for the demons and pedophiles to tell the normies, “Look how the truthers and the patriots make crazy things up! Here’s Kate now! Therefore you can’t believe them telling you we are demons and murderers and child rapists! They are crazy liars!”
Why did they pick Kate for the latest psy-op? She’s so visible. So well known. A good choice, by all accounts!
As for people who say the globalists are getting rid of the royals? Nah. They don’t eat their own.
For all we know, King Chuck is perfectly fine, too. We’re in the middle of deep, deep psy-ops, with deep, deep brainwashing and subterfuge. There is absolutely no way to tell what is real or not.
As a general rule, we should ignore their games. When Kate went missing, we should have all yawned and maybe spent more time worrying about important things, like our genocidal governments. Instead, on cue, we went right into acting like the imbeciles that we are and spend entire days chanting, “Where’s Kate?” rather than working diligently to prevent the demise of our families. See how this works?
There are days I wonder if we’re worth saving.
As for Candice—like many Patriots or truthers, she was good once. So was Oprah, so were many others. But somehow, the cabal gets to them. Yes, there’s blackmail, and big checks being written, but it’s more than that. There must be some kind of a documentary or document they are shown that feels indisputable and is so convincing, perfectly good humans turn. Entire bodies of Congress turn. Powerful people everywhere turn, and in sweeping numbers. Even those we once held in high esteem.
Is it some sort of a documentary showing an earth being blown to bits by an asteroid, or aliens.. and if humans don’t get it together…then this is your fate? But whatever it is, it works. Suddenly, a woman like Candice begins saying things that don’t gel any longer. Or a spiritual woman like Oprah becomes a billionaire suddenly and joins the cabal.
Something convinces good people to turn. They’re called to a meeting somewhere and shown “the truth” and suddenly they’re okay with genocide or pandemics or false flags or Hawaiian fires. However they’re being convinced, it must be extremely powerful.
From what I know of Oprah's brief time in Baltimore, she was never a "good" person. Hugely ambitious and sometimes that required appearing to be "good," but she herself was never actually "good." Likewise, Candace Owens-Farmer has blown with the ideological winds, and allegedly worse.
I personally don't think anybody gets shown some documentary or other allegedly "indisputable" fact. More like all these people are connected to secret societies and participate in occult rituals that require vows that invite entities and saddle their soul with demonic beings. The longer you play that game, the more dark weight you take upon yourself, until there is nothing left but a meat husk; you're a puppet and a pawn for forces far beyond your control. Just my opinion, and thank you for your comment.
Perhaps you are right. But Oprah was brought up poor, I believe, or at least not by people who belonged to the skull and bones club in college.
At some point, the cabal takes interest in certain people. Many have admitted visits, letters or phone calls from them. How do they get good people to sign on the dotted line?
Some people sell out pretty damn cheap, actually. And every man has his price. Mine just hasn't been met and probably won't be. But they know what it is.
Wow lots of info about the strange antics amiss among elites.
Of course its all actually very serious business.
And none of it a shock if you study the satanic “family” occult practices.
As you seem to know, it is asserted by insiders/survivors that all people on the world stage ($50 Million Klub) are multi-generational Luciferian elites.
Maybe you’ve read details of their religious practices…how sxl perversion plays a huge part.. how they’re strongly encouraged to sxly “vampirize” (pan-sxlz, fetishize, anything-goes) their children by age 10, as kult religious foundation.
Apparently the kids learn very early to enjoy pegging since thats a particular ritual priority to them. They believe this activity of assaulting the spinal base, is sacred, awakening kundalini demons to slither up the spine, infilling all chakras, to the brain and overtake the pineal gland, ie. demonic possession.
It traumatizes the children, causing “helpful” DID as part of trauma programming & total kontrol.
They believe this is spiritual empowerment & imperative for fulfilling their goals. They beg Lucifer for ever-increasing demonic possession, much the way born-again believers in Jesus ask YHWH God for the empowering indwelling of the sweet Holy Spirit, of course without the perversion.
From my reading about the “family” activities including royals, I suspect gossip about royal men pegged by strapped-on women is a beard game deflecting their actual practice of keeping several young male lovers… a common practice throughout antiquity.
🙏
Great article, as ever. On the D-notice / super-injunction part, speaking as someone who used to work in the newsroom of a British broadsheet, there were essentially four ways a story gets killed (I'm a few years out of date, but doubt things have changed much):
1. Super-injunctions: here one of the parties has to go to court, disclose the particulars and ask for the injunction to be issued usually on privacy grounds. It's almost never done for business of state because a DSMA notice is more direct and has no disclosure requirement. Very unlikely these would be used for royal business. The footballer Ryan Giggs is one of the better known examples after his name was raised in Parliament. It's a device for those who are rich but outside the protection of the system.
2. DSMA Notices: still very much part of the furniture, these are technically voluntary but in practice are always complied with. It's possible these may be used for royal business but they are supposed to be for national security related stories and any editor who thought the system was being abused would be in his rights to go around it.
3. Sexual assault laws: there is a lifelong right to anonymity for any victim of sexual assault. This has allegedly been abused in the past so that embarrassing acts by public figures are shielded for life, even when no charges were ever pressed (a statement by one of the parties to the police that the act was an assault is sufficient). It is a criminal offence to breach one of these - so the strongest possible deterrent, editors simply would not go around it. To my knowledge this device been employed by the families of senior political figures in the relatively recent past, who can tell with what degree of sincerity.
4. Gentleman's agreement: there are plenty of stories which are covered by a general omertà in the hope of access later on, or because it's felt somehow ungallant to dredge up a person's private life without public interest. There's a degree of 'play fair' here - so a cheating politician relying on this cannot pose in public with his family, as that then makes this fair game.
If I had to bet what was going on here, it would be 4, but neither 2 or 3 would surprise me. FWIW I don't get the impression that the newsrooms have any real idea of what's going on.
All that said, when any of these constraints are in place, the legacy press will often release apparently random stories without any obvious news value about the subject of the injunction / restraint / ban as a way of signalling to one another that they're in the know. I thought of that when seeing this the other day:
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/sarah-rose-hanbury-duchess-cholmondeley-william-kate-b2510472.html
Maybe Royals have to marry men disguised as women, or at least infertile women, for some reason. Christopher Haden-Guest, 5th Baron Haden-Guest married Jamie Lee Curtis, who has been rumored to be a hermaphodite for decades. Ever since hearing this, I've always noticed how masculine her features are. Whenever I hear someone say how hot she was in X-movie, I always tell them about this.
I've been hearing JLC is a hermaphodite since I was a film critic in college! That's a longstanding rumor. No idea if it's true.
There was an amazing Twitter thread, back when it was still Twitter, of all the female royals, wives of nations' leaders and wives of some heavy corporate hitters who it claimed were all trans, and boy did they look masculine. Even Martha Washington, when you think about it...she and George had no children. It's all very strange!
Barbara Bush was the spitting image of her mother's (Pauline Pierce) lover, Aleister Crowley.
I met JLC once at a Bike Shop I worked at in Santa Monica, where she's (he's?) from. I did not like her vibe. I sensed she has NPD.
Fantastic article, Tom!
Could it be that Thomas isn't dead and he and Kate have eloped somewhere?
Just to say that Candace is making that Masonic M sign (two middle fingers together, index and pinky splayed away) aka Triad Claw hand which dates back to at least the Renaissance
Renaissance paintings - https://europepmc.org/article/med/31910180
Modern day including Oprah - https://twitter.com/CoMembe9/status/1726959916836122645
As you note, they give us the signs known as Revelation of the Method so the notion of "conspiracy theory" is ludicrous. They TELL us so there's no trouble at all knowing that 9/11 was an inside job. But what we can also know - but far fewer do - is that the death and injury were staged. Those in power have profiled us into two main groups: ~90% believers of their nonsense stories, ~10% disbelievers so with big psyops they often use this - really not too complicated - propaganda strategy.
Story A for the 90%: The terrrrorrrists / lone nut / virus did it
Story B for the 10%: The cabal did it
When the reality C is that Yes the cabal was responsible but what actually happened is not what we're told. It's not just the WHO that's different it's also the WHAT.
Just as they told us that they were responsible for 9/11 with their nonsense story that defies reality both physically and in terms of normal reality - catastrophic failure of the US multi-trillion dollar intelligence and military infrastructure at the hands of 19 ragtag terrrorrrists armed with boxcutters four times in one morning - they also told us very loud and clear that they didn't kill or injure people, for example, they had Cynthia McFadden outside the Bellevue Hospital and later the trauma centre specially set up for the event tell us, "No injured, no one being brought in, empty wheelchairs and gurneys!" The miracle survivor stories are ludicrous (typical feature of psyops). They bend over backwards to tell us it was simply a fancy drill. It's not that they won't kill people, of course, but generally when they tell us they're killing people they're not and when they tell us they're saving them ... they're killing them.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/911-the-false-dilemma-propaganda
Thank you for your comment. That would be wild if Kate and Thomas Kingston ran off together, but it seems highly unlikely. Where would they go? Did they take the kids? What about his kids?
As for 9/11, if nobody died, then there are a lot of grieving widows whose husbands abandoned them. I used to live in Summit, NJ, which had a direct train line into Manhattan, and the night of 9/11, the parking lot was still had a couple dozen cars that lingered there for days. I was also involved somewhat with the 9/11 widows and met with them a couple times when they were struggling to get the 9/11 Commission going. They were mourning, for sure.
That day certainly killed the firemen who got buried in the WTC collapse, because I know a woman whose father-in-law was killed there. I've seen those alleged sunset photos through the WTC in summer 2001 where the building appears largely empty, and I know that they were hurting for tenants. There's a lot of mystery around what happened on 9/11, and it's possible some of it is beyond our perception of "reality." But I'm not at all on board with the "nobody/few died on 9/11" theories.
That said, I appreciate your perspective — "Trust No One!" — and thank you again for your comment.
Reply 2: Forgot to address the children issue with Kate and Thomas. No answer for that, however, there was an event in Sydney, the "Sydney Siege", which has abundantly clear signs of a psyop in which barrister and seemingly devoted mother of three, Katrina Dawson, from an illustrious legal family, was allegedly killed. I cannot reconcile what happened to her as I cannot see she how would have left her children behind - her husband and children couldn't have simply "disappeared" with her because he remarried so it's not like some situations where someone allegedly dies but you can see how the whole family takes off together somewhere. I also tend to think Princess Diana wasn't killed either but cannot explain the children factor in her situation either.
https://crimesofempire.com/2014/12/17/multiple-smoking-guns-expose-sydney-siege-as-a-big-lie/
Just to say, Tom, I'd never want to say people didn't die if they did and, of course, I don't say that no one died or was injured, it certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility that there were a few deliberate targets or accidental deaths or injuries ... in fact, more than possible, quite probable. However, the perps are scrupulous in their psyops in that they don't just employ Revelation of the Method (RoM) clues, they also NEVER put forward evidence that that clearly contradicts the actual reality so there is simply not one piece of purported evidence I am aware of that says of the combined total of 9,000 people anyone really was killed or injured.
Firstly, I'm quite sure that certain people wished to escape their families and fake their own deaths which happens in normal life anyway. Intelligence agents (of whom there are so many not just those officially employed) would be keeping their ear close to the ground for those people and anyone who wanted to fake their own death would be used in this event. So when you say you knew mourning widows it is perfectly possible that they genuinely believe their husband died when he didn't although I think it is more likely they were simply actors - what makes you believe that they were genuinely mourning?
Let's just summarise the hard evidence and reasons for not killing and injuring people for real:
1. 9/11 was a psyop and expectations in a psyop are that what is wanted is done for real while what is not wanted is faked. Psyops are all about mind control using magician-style smoke'n'mirrors fakery not doing things for real or even simulating things as realistically as possible ... unless wanted ... hence RoM - the greater the degree of dupery the better the psyop! They didn't want to kill and injure people for real they only wanted us to believe in their deaths. It took me quite awhile to come round to the faked death and injury once the idea was made known to me and part of the delay was due to propaganda indicating that people were indeed targeted - this video is a brilliant work of propaganda indicating targeting of people (or perhaps I was just gullible:)) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk.
2. 9/11 was essentially the biggest demolition job of all time and in demolition jobs the buildings are completely evacuated before destruction, not partially evacuated. Professionals needed to be employed in this massive job - how would they be persuaded to ditch their professional standards and ethos simply for a terror story where we know right off the bat they faked deaths in the faked plane crashes?
3. There is clear evidence of fakery of a number of the people who allegedly died - see https://cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=18. Obviously, there were real people among those who allegedly died too.
4. The NY Times allegedly recorded 118 testimonies of the firefighters at the WTC on 9/11. However:
a. Where's the audio? (they managed hundreds of hours of audio from the moon landings 30 years before but no audio in 2001 for the firefighters only "transcripts"?).
b. Why is there no allusion whatsoever to any of the 343 firefighters who allegedly died in any of these 118 testimonies?
c. Why are the testimonies full of nonsensicality that completely speaks against their authenticity?
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/nonsensicalities-in-the-911-firefighter
5. All the images of the alleged injured perfectly fit "drill" injured while not one is consistent with the kind of severe injury / maiming we'd expect from the destruction of 110-storey towers.
6. Hospital reporting is highly anomalous in various ways
7. The miracle survivor stories are all beyond ludicrous
People are so swayed by knowing people. I know people who know people who allegedly died in psyops in Australia (a police shooting in Queensland and bus accident in the Hunter Valley) and I know someone whose classmate was allegedly killed in Barcelona in a van rampage - that doesn't make them real. In my case, the people I know I'm sure were not in on the psyops but some people will be.
I thought I was the most ardent conspiracy theorist out there, but your theory is just not viable. I worked at Ground Zero feeding fireman and even got to go inside the boundaries of Ground Zero to have a look one day. Real, real, real.
Real people died. Real people were found and not found.
A young woman from my town in WNY was killed on one of the planes. I assure you she was from a small town, everyone knew and loved her, not an actress, went to high school with people we know, etc. etc. She’s dead. We know her family. She’s dead.
And the people who believe otherwise do a great disservice and are disrespectful to the dead.
Those in power massively weaponise against us the taboos around death. Your words "great disservice and are disrespectful to the dead" I'm afraid fall on completely deaf ears. If you're interested in the truth you need to abandon taboos around death - or any taboo or whatever it is at all that those in power weaponise against us. If I'm wrong so be it, I'm willing to risk offending people if someone died. What offends me is the willful gullibility of people that allows our world to increasingly it seems run on lie upon lie upon lie upon lie.
I 100% reject the label "conspiracy theorist", a term I loathe and despise. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a psyop analyst and I'm 100% evidence-based. What you need to distinguish is evidence that clearly favours real over fake and, a priori, knowing someone who allegedly died does not favour real in any shape or form. We fully expect people to know people for both hypotheses. In the case of the staged hypothesis what is expected is that real people have participated in something akin to a Witness Protection Program.
The young woman you know may have wished to "escape" for some reason into a completely new life in the way we know happens. People pretend to be killed or to suicide and start a new life elsewhere. We KNOW this happens so the fact that someone is allegedly killed doesn't mean anything. When I say "actor" I don't necessarily mean a professional actor I just mean people playing roles such as being "loved ones". Alternatively, her family knows what happened to her and simply keeps mum.
We know there is no evidence whatsoever that favours the reality of any of the alleged airliner crashes so the young woman you know didn't die in a plane crash, plain and simple.
So you went to Ground Zero? So what?
Did you see any dead bodies?
It's abundantly obvious from numerous angles that 9/11 was the biggest demolition job of all time in the guise of a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terror Exercise in the further guise of a real terror attack.
What you need is clear evidence that it wasn't. Knowing people is meaningless. I know people who know people who allegedly died in certain events, including 9/11, it simply doesn't mean anything.
I have been awake since 1997–a very long time. I awoke because I was a reporter for many years and saw immediately when the cabal demanded we write and present the news differently. Next, I cut my teeth studying pedophilia, extra terrestrials—nothing was off limits. Even then, I tried telling people what was happening.
You think it’s hard telling people today? Try 1997!
When 911 happened and then Obama came out of nowhere, I was already wide, wide awake.
I tell you this because I’ve been around for a while now and I have a good sense of the patterns and the playlist of the cabal.
I think it’s silly to pretend 3000 people faked their deaths on 911.
But I respect your right to think differently.
Oh dear me, 3,000 people didn't fake their deaths. Many of the people were completely made up and then a reasonable number seemed to be agents. There used to be a site, Let's Roll Forums, that's disappeared that spoke about how Cantor Fitzgerald sacked a large number of employees not long before 9/11 on the basis of economic downturn, hired new employees (the ones that allegedly died) and then post-9/11 re-hired the old ones. I have no evidence that this is true, however, we can see how that that is one way to make up a portion of the 3,000.
There are so many angles from which to see that staging the death and injury is actually the only thing that makes any sense ... and, in any case, the evidence is 100% consistent with this hypothesis. None of the jumpers look particularly convincing, not a single image of the alleged injured is consistent with the severe injury or maiming we'd expect from the destruction of 110-storey buildings but is all perfectly consistent with "drill" injured, the 118 firefighter testimonials are completely nonsensical, etc.
Dear God, tell me how many people you think needed to be involved and how would they all be persuaded to participate in killing the people for real when there was simply no need? It was all so easy to fake. Yes, they can propagandise and coerce thousands upon thousands of health professionals to inject toxic jabs but they have centuries of scientific fraud as their basis to do that. There is no basis to say, "Hey people involved in this exercise, we're just going to leave people in the buildings, OK? It's only a terror story but we're going to do the death and injury for real." And how do you think they're going to enlist more people in future events if they kill them for real?
This a website on the vicsims - the simulated victims - all made up.
https://www.cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=18&sid=a7a760598ba64b3a68d055c959b12f39
I also have a page that you might find useful
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/911
I just knew you had a write another part to the crazy Kate deal. I didn't even notice all of the crazy stuff that has happened since you wrote about it, and now the picture...what is the deal?