ArchiveCategory Archives for "Players"
Relevant players. (We’re all being played.)
Relevant players. (We’re all being played.)
Those at the top (a.k.a. the globalist elite, the new world order, the shadow government, and the deep state) are not omnipotent. They are just psychopaths hiding in the shadows. They are just players who have been slowly and secretly consolidating power for decades, and perhaps for centuries.
Their plays only work because we are asleep, but as each of us awakens to the truth and becomes immune to their plays, they lose power. Just as deception provides what the truth denies, the truth denies what deception provides.
America is the goose that laid the golden egg. It is their power base, and so, inside America, they had preferred the more peaceful route to global domination, which was Hillary, but we wouldn’t just give it to them. Using the truth, we made Hillary too much of a liability and thereby forced them to go with Trump, who was their plan B. From their perspective, we will get what we deserve because those who make peaceful enslavement impossible, make violent enslavement inevitable.
They are currently desperate, and thus at maximum danger.
On March 2nd, 2016, the most likely plan by the globalists (to those lacking inside information) was: Trump is a Ringer. Hillary is Trump’s Bitch. It was within Trump’s power from the beginning to guarantee a Clinton Victory – like Ross Perot did for Bill Clinton. In exchange, one must assume that Trump would have owned Hillary. Of course, there was nothing Trump could do to guarantee his own victory given how the globalists control government, the media, voting machines, and the Internet gatekeepers. Such cheating could deliver about 25% of the total votes to a candidate – like it did for Obama. Therefore, those who said they knew Trump would win because of his true appeal to voters or because of his persuasive skills were not accounting for how the world really works.
In other words, an anti-establishment candidate would have to be worthy of a 25% margin of victory in a fair system just to get 50% of the vote in our rigged system. Given a fair system, in Trump’s case, he would have only won with a 10% spread instead of 25%. Just for comparison, Ronald Reagan would have won with a 30% spread. It may seem like Trump would have won with a bigger spread given a fair system, but the unfairness of the system and the bias and violence of Hillary voters was a large part of Trump’s appeal. Of course, given a fair system, Trump and Hillary would never have been candidates in the first place.
Trump barely won the electoral vote and lost the popular vote. He would have lost if any one of the things in his favor had not happened. Trump would have lost without Hillary’s health, Project Veritas, Wikileaks, Dinesh D’Souza, Weinergate, or without any one of many other factors that no one predicted. Even what little damage was done to Hillary by James Comey was enough to give Trump his slim margin of victory. Trump would have lost if several hard core delusional leftists in the media, such as Chris Matthews and Michael Moore, had not inexplicably begun helping him the week before the election. Trump would have lost if several popular libertarians and anarchists, such as Alex Jones and Stefan Molyneux, had not unexplicably begun promoting him hard. Trump would have lost if the media and the government had decided to make the allegations against him stick – at least through the election. He would have lost if anyone had released another candid audio clip, of which several must certainly have been available.
Given Hillary’s bad health, and given how the globalists let Brexit happen, and given the highly improbable help one or two weeks before the election, it appeared plausible, though not likely, that the globalists had decided near election time that they wanted Trump to win; and with Trump’s victory, and with his immediate backpedaling, we now know that is what happened – but why?
I think the globalists had decided that if Hillary had won, then government, academia, the media, and crony corporations would have lost too much credibility and would rightly have been seen as the enemy by too many people. If that had happened, then the globalists would have faced far more resistance going forward. They would even have been at risk of losing everything; whereas, now, they can claim that the system worked and that it was fair. For their agenda to succeed, the people must believe they are free and in control. Harriet Tubman said, “I freed a thousand slaves, and I could have freed a thousand more, if only they had known they were slaves.”
Another benefit from Hillary’s loss is the ease with which globalists can provoke violence from the losers, and consider that all conflict can be used by the globalists as a pretext for more of a police state. Of course, they could have provoked as much conflict if Trump had lost, but now they can get two-for-one if they have the electoral college elect Hillary. This seems unlikely, but it is the kind of thing they can do when they are ready to incite insurrection.
It is more likely that they will not risk their credibility by using the electoral college to elect Hillary because they can simply wait 4 years and get the electoral collage repealed by a Constitutional amendment proposed by the next globalist President and his globalist Congress. It would be expensve to get ratification by 38 of the 50 states, but it would be worth it to them, and they could certainly fudge a few states.
Perhaps the main benefit of a Hillary loss for the globalists is how they can claim that bad voters elected bad people, and then, at any time, the globalists can trigger the collapse they have had primed for years, and their media will blame it on nationalists, conservatives, capitalists, racists, patriots, and anti-establishment types. For the problems caused by the globalists, their front men will propose solutions that will indirectly and eventually advance their agenda, which is: one world currency, one world government, one world religion, total dependence on government, total control by government, and total powerlessness of individuals.
Trump will feign reluctance when he gives in to globalist solutions for the crash they themselves caused. Consider that Trump not only was a Demoocrat, but that in 2013 he proposed the globalist solution to the crash of 2008 when he said, “We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability.”
These are volatile times, and thus there are other possibilities, but a last minute switch to Trump by the globalists seems the most probable. It is almost as likley that they wanted Trump all along and were playing both us and most of their own front men and all of their useful idiots the whole time in order to give Trump street cred as the anti-globalist candidate. There is perhaps a 1% chance that Trump is backpedaling to deceive the globalists so they don’t do anything extreme to stop him before the electoral college votes and before he takes office. There is even a 1% chance that if we block too many of their moves by outing them ahead of time, then they will trump us by inciting insurrection and blaming it on us, which in the short term could be done through an electoral college surprise or a recount surprise.
Where I think they have miscalculated is that I don’t think they will be able to blame their opponents to the extent they need. In fact, we can derail their plans for years if we wake up enough people so that their attempted misdirection becomes too risky for them. Consider that we derailed their plans for Hillary by making her too much of a liability for them. We thereby forced them to go with their plan B.
The crash will have to come in January 2018 at the earliest to ensure that it is blamed on anti-establishment types and not on Obama. It is possible (30%) that this could be the big one … where the globalists perpetrate a 3 – 12 month collpase, declare martial law, trade bread for guns at FEMA camps, implant RFID chips, force vaccinations, bring in foreign troops, ban cash, collapse the US dollar, and execute a “night of the long knives” to take out likely resistance leaders. Such an extreme move would be pretty risky for them, so I think a lesser crisis is more likely, and if we wake up enough people before then, I suspect their plan B will be a crash more like 2008 with a modest move towards global currency.
A useful word to begin using is collaborator. Top progressives and neocons (Republican progressives) are collaborators.
Consider how Germans began to talk about loyalty in the 1920’s and 30’s. I don’t think this is coincidence. I think the US is being herded into the position of Germany in WWI and WWII.
The globalists see the armed American people as the last thing standing between them and global domination. This includes that minority of the US military still more loyal to the US people than to the government. Therefore, they must take down the American people as soon as they think they can succeed without looking like the bad guys.
Napoleon said …
Every soldier carries a Field Marshal’s baton in his pack.
The opportunity was there.
Anyone could rise from the bottom to the top.
That used to be America.
But America is a corrupt cronyist system.
That’s why America is circling the drain.
Who can rise to the top of a cronyist system?
Only cronies …
Government, corporations, the media …
The top are corrupt cronies.
I know this because I was at the top.
Now I’ve been kicked out of the club.
They’re all on the same side.
Democrats, Republicans …
Bushes, Clintons, Obamas …
They work for the same people.
And they will do anything to maintain their power.
What do they want?
What do they want for you?
They want you powerless and dependent.
Look at what they have done to the black community.
Harriet Tubman said …
I freed a thousand slaves,
and I could have free a thousand more …
If only they had known they were slaves.
I could stop here …
but their propaganda machine won’t let me.
If we’re going to make America great again,
we have to fight back.
We know they’re liars.
They know they’re liars.
They can manufacture many new accusers each day …
if that’s what they think they need.
Which gets us back to how slaves didn’t know they were slaves.
Today … we have elections.
That’s how the people know they’re free. <smirk>
But how can an election be fair …
If the media are all on one side?
If they are playing, good cop – bad cop?
If the media fabricate and censor?
If the corporations fabricate and censor?
Whether you believe we were created …
or the product of evolution …
The leftist, feminist, politically correct agenda …
Goes against our genes.
Such denial …
That’s why violence and racism are worse.
That’s why no one is happy.
That’s why America is cirling the drain.
Women want to get married and have kids.
Men want to get married and have kids.
So, why do the media ridicule what 96% want?
Why do they ridicule what works?
Why do they promote every other arrangement?
But there is also tension.
Men want to impregnate as many women as possible,
And women want to be impregnated with the best genes,
Which are those men who can impregnate the most women.
It should come as no surprise then, what happens …
In the world of politicians, Hollywood, and the rich.
Addiction is rampant …
Because opportunity is rampant.
If you find women irresistable, you can have women.
That may not be a fashionable arrangement anymore,
But that is the least of their crimes …
In a culture addicted to drugs …
In a culture that flies to Pedophile Island …
Lookup the Franklin Scandal.
Many at the top, around the world, are pedophiles.
They think you just don’t understand.
She defended a man she believed had raped a 12 year old girl.
She called the girl a liar.
She laughed about the whole thing.
You can listen to the audio yourself.
But that’s not how she knows so much about it.
She’s married to Bill Clinton.
She not only said his rape victims were liars …
She destroyed them.
Like Bill Clinton …
Like Socrates …
I find women irresistable.
It’s how they look. It’s how they act.
Women were irresistable to me …
when I was younger.
On TV how you look …
How you act …
It’s part of the job description.
It is the job description.
I’m a tall, famous, rich, and powerful alpha male.
That’s the genes women are looking for.
I am irresistable to many women …
especially in that world.
My locker room talk was not fabrication,
but it was exaggeration.
and unlike Bill Clinton …
If women didn’t reciprocate …
I let them be.
You can vote for the kown perpetrator and/or promoter of rape …
Negligence, deceit …
Corruption, cronyism …
Racism, poverty …
Murder, conspiracy …
Dictators, pedophiles …
Terrorism, treason …
War, and genocide …
The perpetrator … to be …
Of a draft …
and of a civil war inducing gun decision from her Supreme Court
You can vote for the Kissing Bandito.
If you want to see the future of the denial that runs America,
Just look at Sweden.
This country of 10 million has one million Muslim immigrants –
Mostly young men – not real refugees.
Sweden also has a 1500% increase in rape,
But if you say it’s the Muslims,
Or if you say they’re not real refugees,
You will go to jail.
America has a choice.
If Americans continue to live in denial …
America will continue to circle the drain.
If Americans are ready to think for themselves,
If Americans are ready to grow up,
we can make America great again.
I, a libertarian, voluntaryist, anarchist, anarcho capitalist, agorist, etc. would vote for Trump if he gave this speech because he might be a significant net gain for freedom, reality, and quality of life; whereas, Hillary, Jill Stein, and Gary Johnson would all be a definite net loss.
Ordinarily I would have voted for the Libertarian Party candidate, Gary Johnson, but he has so clearly sold out that he would simply be a net loss for freedom, reality, and quality of life – one way or another. That’s the whole point of selling out.
Also, the other candidates all seem to be terrified of what people might say about them, which makes it nearly impossible for them to fight effectively; whereas, Trump …
Nevertheless … I would not give money or time to Trump because he only – might – be a net gain. I would only give money or time to a candidate who was a highly probable net gain. For example, I gave money to Gary Johnson in 2012.
Also, I’m not persuaded by the “Don’t Vote“ Psyop. If you are awake, they don’t want you to vote. So, if you don’t vote, then you have been played.
This is a message to those thinking about voting for Hillary.
Under a President Hillary Clinton, two specific inevitabilities will hit everyone hard:
1) Young men will be drafted for a war. Do you know any young men or boys? How will you explain your vote for Hillary to them?
2) Any Hillary appointee who fills the Supreme Court seat left empty by the very suspicious death of Scalia will be the fifth vote to disarm the people, and will thus flip the former 5-4 majority against civil war to a 5-4 majority for civil war. Anywhere from 10,000 to 10,000,000 will die. Then how will you explain your vote for Hillary?
It may not be personal to most Americans, but hundreds of thousands of innocent people will die in other countries – as happened under Bush and as happened under Obama.
These are not certainties under other candidates.
Some general Hillary induced malaise will be:
How will you live with yourself if you voted for Hillary?
There has been increasing talk of how the Nobel committee should revoke Obama’s 2009 peace prize. After all, he has done eveything Bush did and more. Critics feel that surely the Nobel committee must now see their mistake, but consider that none of their reasons have changed, and thus they see no mistake. Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize for the same reason he was given everything else in his life – because he was a half-black gay socialist – not all black – that would be too black, and of course, Obama is still a half-black gay socialist, so they see no mistake.
Although everyone acknowledged that Obama had not actually done anything yet to earn the Nobel Peace Prize, the Nobel committee was given the necessary cover they needed for such an implausible move because the media had already given the world “The Myth of Obama”. Or more accurately, the media had already given Obama the Myth of Obama – for the same reason Obama has been given everything else.
Although Obama appears to be no smarter than Bush. He does have some additional attributes that help to explain why everything has been given to him. In a nutshell, he is an excellent front man.
For example, Obama is tall and has a good voice. Also, Obama is photogenic – not as photogenic as people think – but photogenic enough, with the help of make up and Photoshop applied by the media. That’s just part of the Myth of Obama – the media’s gift to Obama.
Obama is also a good enough actor. He just has to be a blank canvas onto which the media paint the Myth of Obama. For example, he just has to read the teleprompter and never step out of character and never say what he really thinks about white people, America, or anything else; which brings us to his final qualities that explain why everything has been given to him – he is anti-white and anti-American.
Therefore, since 2009 nothing has changed. In fact, just a few days ago Obama’s CDC expanded his police state further. Nevertheless, the war protesters and human rights activists on the left, who disappeared as soon as Obama took office, haven’t come back because their reasons for disappearing have not changed – Obama is still a half-black gay socialist.
Socialists (and other progressives) have all the information they need to know that Obama has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, that he has ruined the lives of millions, and that he has worsened the lives of billions … but they don’t care so much about that … what they really care about is whether Obama is an anti-white anti-American half-black gay socialist.
Penn Jillette came out as a shill in an interview published August 2nd, 2016 on ReasonTV.
Penn now says that we should focus on likeability in a candidate, but that is the same as asking us to not use our brains and to just focus on the image the media creates for each candidate.
Instead of using our brains to investigate and go where the facts take us, the media, and their masters, would love for us to focus on the image they create for each candidate. For example, the media created the Myth of Obama based on … nothing. Obama just has to not step out of character, and the media will do all of the attacking and defending for him – for free. They even fabricate dirt on those they don’t like while covering up the dirt on Obama, thus leaving Obama looking like a really nice, cool, smart guy … at least to those who would rather conform than think for themselves; whereas, the media thus force any candidates they don’t like to spend a lot of their resources to directly defend themselves and to attack the media, Obama, and other bad guys. Then the media spin such necessary and legitimate self-defense and attacks as petty, mean, racist, and ignorant.
Any smart well-informed libertarian like Penn Jillette knows that likeability is a media fabrication, and yet, he now says we should focus on likeability in a candidate. Penn also adds that Obama is a nice likeable guy, even though he knows that Obama is a creation of the media, and that Obama has killed or ruined the lives of tens of millions, and worsened the lives of hundreds of millions. He also knows that Obama claims the authority to kill or indefinitely detain any American without due process, and that he has already exercised these powers. Penn knows that Obama used the IRS to neutralize grassroots efforts that would have cost him reelection. He has also audited and/or jailed those who embarrass him.
Penn now says that Obama is smarter than pretty much anyone, including Bill Clinton! As an example, he says you will learn something new every 15 minutes in conversation with Obama.
If Obama is so smart, then why does he use a teleprompter more than any previous president, and why did he recently sound like a moron when his teleprompter went out; whereas, when Bill Clinton’s teleprompter went out, he went ahead and gave the speech. Without his teleprompter, Obama thought Austrians speak Austrian, that there were 57 states (then corrected himself and said there were 60 states), and that good solutions to our energy problems were overinflating our tires and clean coal. He even tried to enter the Whitehouse thorough a window that he thought was a door – just like George Bush did. If you read the parts of his books that were not ghost wrutten, you can see what a mediocre mind he has. He was given a Nobel prize for nothing, a degree from Columbia having never attended class, and editorship of the Harvard Law Review having never written anything for it – then or later.
You will learn something new in conversation with Obama every 15 minutes? That sounds pretty unimpressive. Consider that you will learn something new from an average libertarians every 5 minutes.
I have never heard a single intelligent or impressive statement from Obama, except this statement he made in 2006:
Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘‘the buck stops here.’’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.
I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.
However, after Obama became President, he said he had been wrong, and he recanted his one intelligent statement.
Under Obama, there has been no economic recovery, the lost jobs are still gone, the stock market is just inflation, food stamps are at an all time high, and healthcare has gotten worse.
Given how everything Obama has was given to him, and how he is told by everyone among the seemingly diverse crowd around him how he is The One, and how he seems unaware of smart people and smart ideas outside the mainstream, and how he never has to think about attacking others or defending himself … because his fans, such as the media, do it for him … he would naturally always be in a very positive mood and frequently repeating cool stuff that actual smart people in his crowd told him … unless he had an amazing gift for introspection and independent thought; whereas, he seems to have no introspection or independent thought at all. Obama is thus understandably delusional. Hence I stand by my article from 3/21/2010 Pity Obama.
If Penn knows some reason why Obama is so smart, then why didn’t he tell us? Why was his reasoning so laughable? Also, why would he give up all of his credibility with smart, honest, well-informed, independent thinkers in order to infinitesimally enhance Obama’s credibility with mediocre, low-information, conformists? Why would he help such a bad and powerful man at all – let alone at the cost of his own reputation?
After squandering his whole reputation on Obama, Penn then goes on to say that to be healthy, we should eat nothing from animals, which is the same as saying we should eat like a serf. In addition to recommending that we eat like a serf, he is simply wrong. To be healthy, we should eat lots of animal products. For health advice, go to Dr. Mercola’s site.
Penn Jillette is the fourth famous libertarian/voluntaryist whom I have observed to have recently, and suddenly, made such shocking statements that I watched them go from being a libertarian hero to being worse than most other shills. (I recently covered Gary Johnson’s fall.) For example, they started praising some of the worst individuals alive today (i.e. Hillary and Obama), and they started misdirecting us. In a nutshell, they are trying to neutralize us. They are thus worse than most in the mainstream media and politics because they definitely know better; whereas, many “journalists” and politicians are mostly just stupid and ignorant conformists.
Unfortunately, I have no choice but to assume Penn is some kind of shill if he is telling such huge lies to persuade us to live like a serf, to look up to Obama, to have faith in the system, and most importantly, to look away from what is actually happening – like a magician.
The only thing necessary for the people to win is to shine a light on what is really happening, but given that they are neutralizing any honest leaders, like Penn, we can no longer rely on anyone else to educate us.
In order for the people to win, you don’t have to do much. Just think for yourself, and then educate others. You will then just be one of millions. They would have to do a Stalin-like purge to neutralize most such grassroots efforts, but then they would automatically lose the argument for 100 years – so they won’t do that. You’re safe as long as you think for yourself and educate others.
I have been a libertarian since at least 1993, and in 2012, I contributed to the Johnson campaign, and thus, I never would have believed that he could lose my vote, but he just did.
First, consider that, although there are some naïve people in the Libertarian Party, any serious, honest, independent-minded, longtime libertarian knows that under Obama, America is circling the drain, and that Hillary and Obama are evil people who are front men for other evil people, and that Democrats and Republicans both work for the same evil people, who some refer to by one of their main agendas – the New World Order. Their differences are mostly theatre. No well informed libertarian has anything good to say about Hillary or Obama – or either Bush.
Now one can understand how shocked I was by the recent CNN town hall, where the host would say a name and Johnson and Weld would give a concise opinion. When the host said “Barack Obama,” Johnson said, “Good guy,” and Weld said, “Statesmanlike.” … WTF?! … Then, when the host said, “Hillary Clinton”, Johnson said, “A wonderful public servant,” and Johnson said, “Old friend. Nice kid. Knew her in her 20’s. We shared an office in the Nixon impeachment. Real bond. Lifelong.” … WTF?!!! … I instantly new that Weld would have to know that Hillary stood out among the lawyers and politicians on the Nixon impeachment for her unethical behavior.
I thought … “Maybe this is just some tragically misguided attempt at being positive,” but then, when the host said, ” Donald Trump,” Johnson said that when he was in the Republican party early in the 2012 campaign season, if Trump had become the Republican nominee, then he would not have supported Trump. Weld simply said, “Huckster.” … sooo … nope … They weren’t being positive.
Then, Johnson and weld were interviewed by Reason TV, and to summarize, Medicaid needs to GIVE poor people the same healthcare policy that Johnson got as a state governor. He expects the rest of us to pay for that, and he also expects us to repay the bankers who printed 20 trillion out of thin air and gave it to the federal government. He also says that life in America is better than EVER because we get along better, kids are smarter, law enforcement is better, and business is better – all of which is false!
In a later interview, Johnson said he supports the TPP, but we don’t even need to know any such specifics to say Never Johnson because he has so clearly sold out, which means that no matter what he would do as President, the net effect would be unhealthy for the voters – because that is the whole point of selling out.
Regardless of what these guys have said and done before, they are clearly NWO shills now … as if their lives depended on it …
Trump could easily run as an independent and cause the Republican to lose, or if he won the nomination, then he could easily throw the election so that Hillary would win. After all, he has been friends with the Clintons for years, and it wouldn’t be the first time a billionaire ran as an independent to ensure a Clinton victory. Why would Trump want to be conservative or libertarian now when he was always more of a Democrat before?
As an independent candidate, Trump could plausibly claim he was simply mad at the Republicans for not treating him fairly. As the Republican candidate, he could plausibly lose by frequently rehashing only 1% of Hillary’s vulnerabilities – just like how every Republican before him has done.
We know we are being played, but we don’t know exactly how yet, and I have been saying from the beginning that the most likely scenario of the many possibilities is that Trump is in the race to ensure a Hillary victory.
A few months ago, Trump’s advisor, Roger Stone, went on a tour for his devastating and popular new book, “The Clinton’s War on Women.” No one who reads it could vote for Hillary, but is that Trump trying to win, or is that Trump playing Hillary because she would then know she could only win on Trump’s terms.
Perhaps the most incriminating evidence of all is that Trump wouldn’t like doing the job of the President; whereas, Hillary would LOVE doing the job, and thus Trump could be doing what he likes most while knowing the President of the United states was his bitch.
I missed the previous opportunity for such a prediction. Two days before Scalia’s murder, I was thinking I should write about how if it looked like the next President might not be a Democrat or Neocon (Republican Progressive), then they would try to murder one of the conservative judges before Obama leaves, and how that would most likely be Scalia. Ironically, Scalia’s murder is thus the only evidence that Trump may not be in it to ensure a Hillary victory, although it is more likely they were just too impatient to wait for Scalia to die naturally.
On the other hand, the establishment media are not trying nearly as hard as they could to knock Trump out, so maybe Trump is actually the most favored torch carrier for the establishment. He has certainly been a crony of government – by his own admission – for a long time.
Like I said, we know we are being played, but we just don’t know exactly how – yet.
PCR, who once worked for Ronald Reagan, writes much truth that is rare or unreported in the establishment media. He sounds like a knowledgeable and experienced former insider who is blowing the whistle on the NWO conspirators in charge. He sounds like a kind of conservative libertarian expert on politics and economics. He sounds like the voice of reason (to the well informed). That is 98% of each of his articles. That is the hook – to gain your confidence, but he never really gets to the bottom of the real causes and solutions – while he subtly slips you his real message.
His most recent work is The US Economy Has Not Recovered And Will Not Recover. In it he says:
“The US economy died when … the financial system was deregulated.”
“… neoconservative hegemony now threaten Social Security and the entirety of the social safety net.”
What?! Is PCR actually Bernie Sanders?!
Doesn’t PCR know that both parties work for the same people?
Doesn’t he know that neocons are Republican progressives?
Doesn’t he know that progressives have been in charge since at least 1913?
Why does he want us to believe that the soluton to government is … more government? Isn’t that what the NWO also wants us to believe?
Much of what PCR says is truth rarely spoken by the MSM. That is the hook he uses to slip us the poison pill of progressivism.
Paul Craig Roberts is a Psyop.
The mainstream narrative about Abraham Lincoln is almost entirely myth. Lincoln is portrayed as all good and as one of the greatest men who ever lived. However, the reality is very different from the mainstream narrative.
Let’s first look at the handful of positive things we can say about Lincoln:
In spite of the few positive things we can say about Lincoln, the facts prove that Lincoln was a reckless racist fascist democidal psychopath. For example, Lincoln:
Although governments, and especially US administrations, have a long history of perpetrating false flags, I have not verified the claims that the Union itself fired on Fort Sumter to get the war started. However, even if the South fired first, it is self-evident that the Union, under Lincoln’s orders, started the Civil War because placing one’s troops in a foreign country is an act of war.
For months after the Confederacy had seceded, it kept asking Lincoln to get his army out of Confederate territory and told Lincoln that if he sent more troops into Confederate territory, then they would be fired upon. Now, Lincoln knew the Confederacy was mobilized for war and was not bluffing, and he knew that Washington DC was undefended because he had been negligent, but he still sent troops to Fort Sumter, and thus it is self-evident that Lincoln started the Civil War.
When evaluating American history in relation to slavery and the Civil War, it is important to note several additional facts:
In the following letter from George Washington at the Library of Congress, he expresses his certainty about the Illuminati conspiracy that was infiltrating America and the Free Masons.
The Writings of George Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799. John C. Fitzpatrick, Editor.
Mount Vernon, October 24, 1798.
Revd Sir: I have your favor of the 17th. instant before me; and my only motive to trouble you with the receipt of this letter, is to explain, and correct a mistake which I perceive the hurry in which I am obliged, often, to write letters, have led you into.
It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.
The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation). That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a seperation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.
My occupations are such, that but little leisure is allowed me to read News Papers, or Books of any kind; the reading of letters, and preparing answers, absorb much of my time. With respect, etc.
The letter starts at the bottom of the first image: