Play Cards Against This, And...

You will lose.

Of course, many governments, many of these so-called 'elites' are playing cards; that's exactly what they are doing.

Anyway, humans are humans, right? They'll just all go on doing what they always ever have done.

Oh, what is this?

The thing that occupies the discussions among astro-physicists and cosmologists when it comes to 'the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Life' - apart from clever things that the Kepler Space Telescope (a craft) could do like record the periodic diminishing levels of light from nearby stars which indicated that 'Earth-like' planets were crossing the visual field in front of the particular star... ...the thing they talk about is the fact that super advanced Extraterrestrial civilizations would need to have found a way to send data back in time. And this is because that is the only mechanism our scientists can see - or maybe the best mechanism they can see - that provides some kind of bridge to faster-than-light travel. Information - or 'data' - if you look at it in terms of the pulse function ('wave function') of light, may be able to recruit energy and subsequently mass and also organize it. I mean, we are talking seriously huge numbers and quanta here, it's beyond my state-of-mind even to bother trying to actually 'think' about. Jesus, if you want to look at gravity as having some kind of Doppler properties then you are talking about a medium that goes right through and all the way round and round and round the whole entire Universe all at once.

Ouch, my head hurts.

Anyway, we don't need to think about that stuff!

Dunno... Double Delta?
Two heat sources
coming together?

Of course, almost all of the genius-level physicists' discussions all end with the 'we haven't found any indication of anyone having sent any data back in time...'

So. You only need to have found one of those...

Because if you find one, as in really do find one that is not able to be dismissed in any way at all, and is in fact able to be tested positively, then it's not a 'singularity,' it's the breach that alters the 'skeptic hypothesis' for everything (which is our present 'genius-level' human approach) - and starts to afford itself the opportunity to take the 'political hypothesis' approach instead.

If all of us here just all admit that we are maybe not that important in the vast scheme of things - that we, us, are maybe not entitled to engage anyone from some hugely advanced futuristic alien civilization and get them to expend however much huge sums of whatever they need to recruit to the task, to 'make space-ships appear' or send two or three interplanetary visitors over materially just to hold our hands and go 'there, there...'

Nevertheless, the easiest, cheapest (in terms of whatever protocols and energy spend is involved - which must be simply huge) way to get things to us, is to send data.

Now I'm only 'taking a step back' from absolute disclosure because I don't know what plans people have that have plans, and also who have the power; I don't know what they want to do. What I do know, is - going back to the - exo-biologists/cosmologists - that they have a 'parallel stepping' hypothesis. This says that as we, we humans, progress with our own technology and science understandings by ourselves, then equivalently, other civilizations may engage at the equivalent technology level and not much beyond it.

It really is only the 'back sending' of data that is our big hurdle at the moment and it may be that CERN has gone at least enough of the way, that 'help' could be rendered more meaningfully in that 'parallel stepping' protocol. Except, let's at least be somewhat modest and say, not to us individually particularly. Right?

Right?! Because that's the 'stance' we take. 

If anybody asks you, you just say 'no no no, not me, IDK. I'm just guessing and I just heard rumors.'

On the other hand, if someone comes to you with a 'sign' then you know - well, at least you'll know how to read the sign.

There's all kind of 'static' - all kinds of nonsense and socially irresponsible stuff that goes on with any large social groupings and the instigators of things inside there. For instance, green colored shawls 'could' be an indication of someone who takes, trades, or wants marijuana. That's pretty straightforward.

And I guess those guys would not realize that the Office of National Drug Control Policy has had people inside of festivals and concerts at least for the last seven months now - so let's not alert them either, okay.

A big tip for those of you here who haven't already decided to stick their fingers in their ears now, is to 'right click' on any pic and 'Google search for image' and then just see what is associated with those pics.

Naturally, because you have been raised and effectively completely brainwashed in the 'skeptical hypothesis' approach and not the political hypothesis approach, you won't - you still won't believe what you are seeing.

However there are, at this moment a good half a dozen people who emailed privately and by now if any of them wanted to dispute what they were shown, I'm sure they would have comment-posted by now.

I love this phrase, that seems to be something from our modern era of 'phoneglish' and post-Millennial speak:

It is what it is.

It is what it is. 

Here's that song 'Arrowhead' again.

The Modern 'Business' Of 'News'

Sometimes it isn't that you - 'we' - don't already know a certain thing, it's just that we haven't confronted it clearly and succinctly, or that consciously yet, so we don't think about its consequences.

How do you suppose CNN, for example, functions? How does it make money...?

Well, their in-house accountants have worked the 'per unit' cost of the type of news 'product' they broadcast, and they consider their style of production part of their brand. They further distinguish different types of story, even down to the nature of the content, and place a kind of a 'viewer appeal' metric onto it. Thus, whatever was in their 'in-house generated' schedule of news appearances has a specific unit cost.

This hard-shell case is what they carry cash in

So then, for example, accredited news reporters produce a story, maybe it is an 'exclusive' which was subject to some kind of agreement between the subject of the story and that reporter, and these items go into a syndicated agents' 'selling sheet.' This will include items that are released through very large agencies such as AP or Reuters. Unless these are already part of the brand agenda and schedule structure, they will never appear in broadcasts and those that do get a bulk or commodity news rate fee paid to whatever large agency had specific 'royalty rights' and these kinds of rights are not genuinely 'royalties' as is meant in the Tax Act or Artists' and Writers' Code or Legislation, but merely 'agreed' royalties already standardized by habitual practice between the large agency providers and various Networks.

And then there comes along some independent reporter who covered something which was 'actual news' as such: he or she found out, for example, that the person detained in Russia under suspicion of being an active foreign spy held literally four separate legal citizen-ships. So now this is not going to be run in any of the Networks because it was not 'their' news.

But if you paid them, to shift their unit costed news blocks out of the way, to be substituted by this 'externally-costed' item, then they would run it, paid for... ...by someone.

And there is a pecking order, an ascending premium rate structure so that the higher 'up' the news item is to be 'placed' the more it is going to cost to get it 'placed' there.

This is the 'Institute for Statecraft' at Number 2 Temple Place in London.
Russia's 'Sputnik News Agency' uncovered this place,
and they are running the pics and story now,
but we have already shown you various places that NO ONE else has ever talked about.

All current news Networks and major Broadcasters - including the BBC, for one good instance - operate this way. With the BBC, there is a government policy agenda filter on all news; so much so, in fact, that it took a recent anonymous hacker to uncover - and then finally the Parliament admitted it was so - that the government has at least one and probably many, organizations that are heavily funded to the tune of millions of pound per year, to produce 'placed' news items.

Ostensibly these previously clandestine organizations are there to provide formally guaranteed factually-based and truthful news, and so the one that was recently named in the UK Parliament, carries the title of 'The Integrity Initiative.' However, this organization is a two-way street between the seemingly privately-funded group known as 'Bellingcat' which produces completely fabricated propaganda disguised as 'independent work and internet research.' Bellingcat was responsible for all of the supportive 'stories' that seemed to underpin what was in the Christopher Steele 'dodgy dossier' which was then 'paid for' at a premium by various US political interest groups.  

So whether it is 'Hakluyt,' or 'Bellingcat,' or 'the Integrity Institute' someone ends up paying for actual items placed and run in whatever magazine, or television program, or newspaper ends up covering the items.

Sometimes, it is the taxpayer that pays, but he doesn't know that the stories are politically-spun or who gets to control the 'spin.'

The bottom-line for you, is this - whatever story you see in any mainstream outlet, has been paid for by someone who believes it is in their financial interest to have that story or narrative told to you. It is not 'news.' And it has never been 'news' maybe for at least since the time of John Major as so cloying a lie as it has now become.