relevance: we follow these 'truth leaders' and don't wanna be mislead in our investigations.
good evening. let me say up front that I don't care if you call me a shill. you might accuse me of trying to cause division, but these are legitimate and serious viewpoints held by respected voices within the truth movement. i'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing the case as it's out there if you wanna see, so I only ask that you look at the evidence. and without further adieu...
(if you want extra reading—not necessary for the point of this post)
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/06/18/snowden-cia-shill/
(also not essential. here's a funny one for AJ, starting at 5:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPHfdUnC_Ng&t=5m
basically, the idea is controlled opposition. they give you truths, gain your trust, and then keep you chasing your tail. evidence for AJ include never naming the Zionists, only calling them 'globalists,' working for time warner, his lawyer being one of the elite, bad acting, disrupting peaceful protests and inciting violence, etc. etc. etc. lot's of evidence out there and on youtube.
with snowden, he's suspected of being a 'limited hangout.' evidence includes not leaking anything we didn't already know, receiving MSM coverage (huge red flag), becoming a media darling, easy escape/lifestyle, talks like Obama, nothing the leaks contained changed corruption, the leaks were harmful to America's enemies, announcing 'leak dates' like it is some news press release, etc. same goes for Assange. oh, and Assange says 9/11 conspiracy is fake.
you can do your own research and come to your own conclusion. i'm not going to try to persuade you in this thread. the idea I want to entertain is: if it's true that they're all CIA ops, then that lends even more credence to pizzagate. think about it.. if everything that has been 'leaked' so far has been a distraction, nothing new, and 'safe,' for them to do so... then it explains how they didn't expect some 4chan super autists to spot only handfuls of code words in what were otherwise thousands of mundane e-mails with a few containing dirt on Hillary. it would mean they messed up. it was unintentional. they had to improvise. I know we are all desperate for our heroes, but it's even more crucial to teach ourselves to keep hope and not be depressed in the absence of such. me, personally—i'm hoping for a gigantic natural disaster that sets them back a few hundred years.
oh, and trump looks shady at best too.
what do you all think?
view the rest of the comments →
paulf ago
Sure, we should listen to everyone but blindly follow no-one. But you've made a lot of blanket statements in here which don't really hold up to close scrutiny.
Nonsense. The Snowden revelations were an absolute bombshell and deeply embarrassed the NSA. The real problem is only a few thousand documents have been released out of a promised hundreds of thousands.
Not really a red flag at all. Detailed leaks on how the NSA spies on the world's communications was newsworthy.
Easy escape? It was a famously difficult escape. Talks like Obama? What does that even mean?
I'm not sure if you've noticed but Assange has been holed up in a foreign embassy in London for six years because of Wikileaks. Wikileaks has a 100% accuracy record in over ten years of leaking, something no other media organisation on the planet can claim. Indeed, Pizzagate would not EXIST without Wikileaks and none of us would be here.
Source please.
The initial work was done on reddit. I was there.
One of the most powerful and corrupt people in the world for fifty years now - Henry Kissinger - says, and I quote, 'Trump has no baggage.' The Big Three agencies - the CIA, the Mossad and GHCQ - have been trying for 18 months to find any dirt on him. All they have managed is some obvious fan fiction from 4chan (Pissgate) and some locker room banter from 11 years ago. If they had one single thing on Trump they would have leaked it by now and he would have lost the election.
It is very very difficult to really know what's going on behind the scenes in a situation like this. Personally, I think it's quite likely that Snowden was a pawn used by the CIA to discredit the NSA in the inter-agency wars that have been going on for some time now. I also know that I'm unlikely to agree with anyone on absolutely everything: maybe the other party is more informed than I, maybe I'm the one with more information and the valid theory.
GiantMillipino ago
also, you don't need to say 'and I quote;' this isn't oral communication—we can all see the quotation marks in your text.