I had a long period of doubting everyone and everything, and then I read a few takes by Eugyppius. At first I didn't buy any of it. But after a while, and as my own fears finally came under some kind of control because I was sick of being enslaved by them, I started to see that maybe not everything was as intricately woven a web as I'd thought. So on this point, I tend to agree.
RFK, Jr, is not going to be the one to break the cabal, but he has his own areas of focus.
Just like we have each one of us our own areas of focus. At this point, I tend more to think that people fall into two general groups: those succumbing and pushing the fear, the narrative, the lies, and those trying to find the truth and fight against the former.
So difficult now to know whom to believe in and whom to disregard. I heard RFK answer a question about his reluctance to talk about vaccines; he said something like he'd prefer to concentrate on issues of ineffective governance that are more immediate and more relevant to his run for office. I'm paraphrasing, of course, but that was the gist of his answer. You can draw your own conclusions about his sincerity on that point.
I like Russel Brand, and I will try to listen to the interview; thanks for the warnings, though.
Hiya, I watched on Rumble and Russell cut him off what he got to the pandemic responses and he didn't seem to talk about vaccines at all - so he's not even coming up with the goods to justify support from the medical freedomers. Just another bloke saying he'll take on the establishment, from within the establishment.
I've had this on my TBWatched tabs for a week now, so at least I can substitute yours and watch it here (I probably have to, since Russell is who I started my YT channel to respond to.)
I don't dispute any of your points pre-watch, except that someone who saw my YT on Kennedy and Malone contacted someone in Kennedy's campaign who was higher up. That person said that Kirsch has never followed through on his SuperPAC promise. But I have my own reservations about Kennedy, as you know.
Hiya, yes I only have hearsay for the funding, no evidence, thank you for clarifying. I linked to the youtube video as it comes up with a pic but watched the whole thing, until I lost the will to live, on Rumble.
Interesting that you started on YT because of Rusty Rockets!
Kirsch definitely said he was starting a SuperPAC for Kennedy, coincidentally when the Pfizer-Veritas 'expose' came out and Malone was about to go on Tucker. Something smells fishy with the whole thing but I haven't fully identified where that smell's coming from.
Yes, I don't have it on Substack but here's my very first video called Why Russell Brand? https://youtu.be/V3JpDatCydM.
Thank you, yaya, someone else told me about Miri AF and I know I bookmarked something of hers for a future episode (maybe it was RFK?). Now I forget the topic but I was very impressed by her.
She stitches up the nonsense between Andrew Brigden, now joining a well known actor in his new 'Reclaim' party, and Matt Hancock (to switch the conversation from US to UK politics) very well. Brigden (who previously voted for lockdowns) spoke out in parliament about jab harms and efficacy to a nearly empty house, is suing Hancock for defamation. I guess it's our own version of Malone vs Breggin. Any money raised for his campaign will probably end up with Hancock. Distraction, smoke and mirrors and political insiders claiming to reform the establishment from inside the establishment.
I am a relatively recent follower of yours, Tereza. I very much like your content but I may be biased as I was having many of the same questions and line of thinking as you.
Ah the best kind of bias and conspiracy! I was just thinking how much easier things would be if we could just get a half-dozen journalists to agree on what the questions are. I think that's much more important than the answers!
I had a really great lecturer in my History course yesterday talking about reliability, bias and primary and secondary sources. I am new to the study of history. She was saying that a biased source can be very reliable and strong depending on the question we ask of it. To show us historical prejudices and attitudes and help reveal our own biases, the question is crucial!
That's a great point! In my book I quote from some primary sources on white colonial slavery. My secondary source for them, Derrick Jensen, makes the comment that even though the people writing it were biased, they have reliable data that can't be found anywhere else because the bias against the history of white slavery has obliterated it. But the overall point of his book, The Culture of Make-Believe, is that slavery was based on economics, not racial bias, which came later as a way of justifying it.
You wrote ‘RKF’ instead of ‘RFK’ twice. Is that a play on words I’m somehow missing or a typo?
I don’t know Jo, not certain of anyone thing these days, but I appreciate you bringing up questions not brought up by many. Our bodies, our fellow creatures, and our environment are miraculous all by themselves. I treat them with reverence. We can all start there. Progress doesn’t always move forward. All our advances could be the thing that leads us to our end. Perhaps we could use some simplicity over complication and give fundamental questions another look.
Hiya VA, really sorry they were typos, corrected now thank you. Is RKF something else of significance I wonder?
Like you say all these things are what they are and are beautiful. I only speak from my understanding of watching the saga from when SK first said he wanted RFK to run and what a lengthy, involved, mind numbing answer was given about the virus and Wuhan. There's been lots of discussion with Kennedy's advisor JJ Couey, who is finding it difficult to provide any evidence for a virus at all. So for me it just screamed platform for narrative pushing.
I really liked RFK's white shirt and tie with rolled up sleeves- very nice forearms for an older dude- such a contrast to Russell's tattoos, plunging neckline and beads.
The contrast spans a vast appeal between hippies and professionals. Perhaps that was the point. :)
I follow and resonate with JJs information as well. Perhaps RFK is surrounding himself with all the perspectives and weighing out the evidence. Or he is leading us to slaughter. Who knows.
I don’t know the significance of a ‘RKF’. I thought I was missing a play on words there. But we can make one up!
Robert Kennedy Fraud? 😂 I really hope not. I want one of these 800lbs gorillas to turn out to be a good guy. Not a hero. Just decent.
I've heard that Kennedy has Charles Eisenstein as a campaign advisor. JJ has a paid position, I don't think it's advisor but managing something? I know that JJ has said that he can't go anywhere near critiquing someone like Meryl Nass because she could kick him off the payroll in a heartbeat. JJ credits Kennedy with enabling him to feed his family after he got fired from the U of Pittsburg for stating his views. So I think he's beholden to Kennedy.
And Jo, I agree. I thought RB was looking particularly scruffy and provocative in that interview. I do wish he'd tone it down along with the frenetic pace of his conversation. Pandemic Russell was much easier to listen to.
Yes, the Kennedy entourage of Malone and Nass...a snake and a friend of Abigail Rockefeller, that's what I heard anyway! It's a spectacular soap opera.
Our lovely RB is getting more and more excited. I was on a Zoom call with him during the pandemic before he got really big in the US. He asked me if I had anything to say, though I didn't! I enjoyed listening to him talking to some of the people he's supporting in recovery.
Now he's appearing on US tele and has a Kennedy on his show; I agree he's getting very excited and intense. I know he looks after himself, but making a show a day at this level is unsustainable I would think.
Oh that's so funny, that's what started me on RB. I was on one of his zooms where he didn't call on me but as he was signing off said, "and Tereza Coraggio, you look magnificent!" As you know, he throws around those compliments to everyone, but it still gave bragging rights to my friends. Then the next time he did call on me, with some warning that he was taking another question first, so I had time to find the David Graeber quote he was looking for from my book and read it. When he said I should put where to get my book in the chat, I said that was my question--do I put it on Amazon and dance with the devil? He answered, "Dance with the devil but don't go home with him." So I did.
But you know that from my first video. That's exciting that you were on those calls too!
Thank you my dear. I'm delighted to be getting away with that at 66.
And what I want to tell purists who won't buy my book because it's on Amazon is 'If you think depriving Bezos of a few pennies will do more to bring down the empire than my research and system, you probably shouldn't read it.'
Here is one scenario that could play out. As a matter of fact I think it might. Sooner or later everyone realizes we were played. When it turns it will be a tsunami. The proverbial frog in boiling water. Only middle class society will realize it is the frog. A scapegoat will be offered by the rulers. Because, well golly gee, you can’t blame them they were following the science. They were lied to also. The scapegoat, Daszak, Baric, Fauci, Walensky etc will have to bring out their irrefutable defense. ‘There never was a virus’. Their defense against life in prison is an easy one. ‘Show the court the virus.’ If we accuse them of facilitating murder their defense will be they never found a virus ever. No one died from COVID as it doesn’t exist. And if it does then bring it to court and prove it. Which no one will be able to do. That will change everything.
Yes, bringing it to court, and it being easily defended, but by having to admit to no virus would be interesting. I don't think they'll allow it come to court.
Whether RFK knows it or not (i suspect he knows it) he's allowed to run because he still pushed the virus lie, and, just, or more importantly he pushes the anthropohenic climate change lie. It amazing how one can appear so alternative to the normie crowd and yet so normie to the true alternative crowd. Life is full of such paradoxes.
A major goal of propaganda is to get the people so passionate about it that they promote it (true believers). Your approach of moving everyone out of the true believers bucket and into the propagandist bucket is a massive mistake.
I had a long period of doubting everyone and everything, and then I read a few takes by Eugyppius. At first I didn't buy any of it. But after a while, and as my own fears finally came under some kind of control because I was sick of being enslaved by them, I started to see that maybe not everything was as intricately woven a web as I'd thought. So on this point, I tend to agree.
RFK, Jr, is not going to be the one to break the cabal, but he has his own areas of focus.
Just like we have each one of us our own areas of focus. At this point, I tend more to think that people fall into two general groups: those succumbing and pushing the fear, the narrative, the lies, and those trying to find the truth and fight against the former.
No one is going to be spotless.
So difficult now to know whom to believe in and whom to disregard. I heard RFK answer a question about his reluctance to talk about vaccines; he said something like he'd prefer to concentrate on issues of ineffective governance that are more immediate and more relevant to his run for office. I'm paraphrasing, of course, but that was the gist of his answer. You can draw your own conclusions about his sincerity on that point.
I like Russel Brand, and I will try to listen to the interview; thanks for the warnings, though.
Hiya, I watched on Rumble and Russell cut him off what he got to the pandemic responses and he didn't seem to talk about vaccines at all - so he's not even coming up with the goods to justify support from the medical freedomers. Just another bloke saying he'll take on the establishment, from within the establishment.
I've had this on my TBWatched tabs for a week now, so at least I can substitute yours and watch it here (I probably have to, since Russell is who I started my YT channel to respond to.)
I don't dispute any of your points pre-watch, except that someone who saw my YT on Kennedy and Malone contacted someone in Kennedy's campaign who was higher up. That person said that Kirsch has never followed through on his SuperPAC promise. But I have my own reservations about Kennedy, as you know.
Hiya, yes I only have hearsay for the funding, no evidence, thank you for clarifying. I linked to the youtube video as it comes up with a pic but watched the whole thing, until I lost the will to live, on Rumble.
Interesting that you started on YT because of Rusty Rockets!
Kirsch definitely said he was starting a SuperPAC for Kennedy, coincidentally when the Pfizer-Veritas 'expose' came out and Malone was about to go on Tucker. Something smells fishy with the whole thing but I haven't fully identified where that smell's coming from.
Yes, I don't have it on Substack but here's my very first video called Why Russell Brand? https://youtu.be/V3JpDatCydM.
Love it, thank you xxx
Here is another powerful woman with fantastic insights.
She's written about RFK too.
https://miriaf.co.uk/
Thank you, yaya, someone else told me about Miri AF and I know I bookmarked something of hers for a future episode (maybe it was RFK?). Now I forget the topic but I was very impressed by her.
She stitches up the nonsense between Andrew Brigden, now joining a well known actor in his new 'Reclaim' party, and Matt Hancock (to switch the conversation from US to UK politics) very well. Brigden (who previously voted for lockdowns) spoke out in parliament about jab harms and efficacy to a nearly empty house, is suing Hancock for defamation. I guess it's our own version of Malone vs Breggin. Any money raised for his campaign will probably end up with Hancock. Distraction, smoke and mirrors and political insiders claiming to reform the establishment from inside the establishment.
Excellent essay!
I am a relatively recent follower of yours, Tereza. I very much like your content but I may be biased as I was having many of the same questions and line of thinking as you.
Thank you for putting all this out!
Ah the best kind of bias and conspiracy! I was just thinking how much easier things would be if we could just get a half-dozen journalists to agree on what the questions are. I think that's much more important than the answers!
I had a really great lecturer in my History course yesterday talking about reliability, bias and primary and secondary sources. I am new to the study of history. She was saying that a biased source can be very reliable and strong depending on the question we ask of it. To show us historical prejudices and attitudes and help reveal our own biases, the question is crucial!
That's a great point! In my book I quote from some primary sources on white colonial slavery. My secondary source for them, Derrick Jensen, makes the comment that even though the people writing it were biased, they have reliable data that can't be found anywhere else because the bias against the history of white slavery has obliterated it. But the overall point of his book, The Culture of Make-Believe, is that slavery was based on economics, not racial bias, which came later as a way of justifying it.
You wrote ‘RKF’ instead of ‘RFK’ twice. Is that a play on words I’m somehow missing or a typo?
I don’t know Jo, not certain of anyone thing these days, but I appreciate you bringing up questions not brought up by many. Our bodies, our fellow creatures, and our environment are miraculous all by themselves. I treat them with reverence. We can all start there. Progress doesn’t always move forward. All our advances could be the thing that leads us to our end. Perhaps we could use some simplicity over complication and give fundamental questions another look.
Hiya VA, really sorry they were typos, corrected now thank you. Is RKF something else of significance I wonder?
Like you say all these things are what they are and are beautiful. I only speak from my understanding of watching the saga from when SK first said he wanted RFK to run and what a lengthy, involved, mind numbing answer was given about the virus and Wuhan. There's been lots of discussion with Kennedy's advisor JJ Couey, who is finding it difficult to provide any evidence for a virus at all. So for me it just screamed platform for narrative pushing.
I really liked RFK's white shirt and tie with rolled up sleeves- very nice forearms for an older dude- such a contrast to Russell's tattoos, plunging neckline and beads.
🥰🌸🐍
The contrast spans a vast appeal between hippies and professionals. Perhaps that was the point. :)
I follow and resonate with JJs information as well. Perhaps RFK is surrounding himself with all the perspectives and weighing out the evidence. Or he is leading us to slaughter. Who knows.
I don’t know the significance of a ‘RKF’. I thought I was missing a play on words there. But we can make one up!
Robert Kennedy Fraud? 😂 I really hope not. I want one of these 800lbs gorillas to turn out to be a good guy. Not a hero. Just decent.
I've heard that Kennedy has Charles Eisenstein as a campaign advisor. JJ has a paid position, I don't think it's advisor but managing something? I know that JJ has said that he can't go anywhere near critiquing someone like Meryl Nass because she could kick him off the payroll in a heartbeat. JJ credits Kennedy with enabling him to feed his family after he got fired from the U of Pittsburg for stating his views. So I think he's beholden to Kennedy.
And Jo, I agree. I thought RB was looking particularly scruffy and provocative in that interview. I do wish he'd tone it down along with the frenetic pace of his conversation. Pandemic Russell was much easier to listen to.
Yes, the Kennedy entourage of Malone and Nass...a snake and a friend of Abigail Rockefeller, that's what I heard anyway! It's a spectacular soap opera.
Our lovely RB is getting more and more excited. I was on a Zoom call with him during the pandemic before he got really big in the US. He asked me if I had anything to say, though I didn't! I enjoyed listening to him talking to some of the people he's supporting in recovery.
Now he's appearing on US tele and has a Kennedy on his show; I agree he's getting very excited and intense. I know he looks after himself, but making a show a day at this level is unsustainable I would think.
xxx
Oh that's so funny, that's what started me on RB. I was on one of his zooms where he didn't call on me but as he was signing off said, "and Tereza Coraggio, you look magnificent!" As you know, he throws around those compliments to everyone, but it still gave bragging rights to my friends. Then the next time he did call on me, with some warning that he was taking another question first, so I had time to find the David Graeber quote he was looking for from my book and read it. When he said I should put where to get my book in the chat, I said that was my question--do I put it on Amazon and dance with the devil? He answered, "Dance with the devil but don't go home with him." So I did.
But you know that from my first video. That's exciting that you were on those calls too!
That's so amazing, maybe we were there together. And you do look magnificent. Or maybe beautiful would be a word I'd be more likely to use.
Teehee yes Amazon is a bit a thorny one. I do still buy from there but would love an alternative.
xxx
Thank you my dear. I'm delighted to be getting away with that at 66.
And what I want to tell purists who won't buy my book because it's on Amazon is 'If you think depriving Bezos of a few pennies will do more to bring down the empire than my research and system, you probably shouldn't read it.'
Here is one scenario that could play out. As a matter of fact I think it might. Sooner or later everyone realizes we were played. When it turns it will be a tsunami. The proverbial frog in boiling water. Only middle class society will realize it is the frog. A scapegoat will be offered by the rulers. Because, well golly gee, you can’t blame them they were following the science. They were lied to also. The scapegoat, Daszak, Baric, Fauci, Walensky etc will have to bring out their irrefutable defense. ‘There never was a virus’. Their defense against life in prison is an easy one. ‘Show the court the virus.’ If we accuse them of facilitating murder their defense will be they never found a virus ever. No one died from COVID as it doesn’t exist. And if it does then bring it to court and prove it. Which no one will be able to do. That will change everything.
Yes, bringing it to court, and it being easily defended, but by having to admit to no virus would be interesting. I don't think they'll allow it come to court.
Whether RFK knows it or not (i suspect he knows it) he's allowed to run because he still pushed the virus lie, and, just, or more importantly he pushes the anthropohenic climate change lie. It amazing how one can appear so alternative to the normie crowd and yet so normie to the true alternative crowd. Life is full of such paradoxes.
RFK is a 60s hippy. He is right on vaccines. But wrong on everything else. He is about 6” to the right of Bernie.
This seems MUCH less likely than the simple version.
The simple version being believing what we're told at face value?
A major goal of propaganda is to get the people so passionate about it that they promote it (true believers). Your approach of moving everyone out of the true believers bucket and into the propagandist bucket is a massive mistake.
Russell Brand is an actor paid to muddy the waters, not to be trusted.