The winner for guessing correctly on this post is... Amaterasu!!!
She wins because of the correct analysis of Manson in the Photo and the only commenter who wrote it all out for us. I couldn’t put it so clearly in #6 as that would have ruined the game. She did miss that #3 was also correct because of the evidence that Sharon became Patti, the made-up sister a few years later. She says:
“I give highest probability to the whole thing being a CIA psyop. Prisons do not allow beards, and Manson sported one every time They brought Him out on stage. This suggests that the actor was not actually in prison. I also do not think there were any actual murders - Tate was seen in Rome with Polanski years after the "event." From what I could glean, the CIA was working on how to stop the love building in the 60's, and threw that party to cast a ghastly light on "hippies" and the like.”
2. Marta, Staszak who said #6 and #3. This is really the best simple answer.
3. Fizzygurl, who said #6 (but missed #3).
So what was the Manson-Tate event all about? It was 1969 and the anti-war movement was boiling over. This was mainly led by fervent hippies, some were even shot at by crowd controllers like the Kent State incident and they had to be discredited. Manson & Co. did the trick, but other music legends also had to go-probably just underground (Morrison, Joplin, Hendrix). Morrison's dad was commander of United States naval forces during the fake Gulf of Tonkin Incident-hey all in the family. War is big business.
It was also another episode of Intel agencies using movie sets to mind-bend us into a narrative and reaction. The photo shows Manson was never really in prison, he just visited for these follow-up shows. The Manson Family girls were all from affluent families and were all involved in stage and acting. They didn’t really look like hippies nor have the history of such and they neither were really in prison. Tate was another faked death like JFK and many others.
THINK & INVESTIGATE do not just BELIEVE & OBEY. Question everything and don't make any rash decisions if you don’t have the time or resources to investigate!
In future, I will take your questions seriously, PM. Just to let you know that I read Miles Mathis' post (also had a look at Kevin's link) and now have no doubt the murders were faked. When I saw the rationale that Miles gave as you have here then it was much easier to make sense of. I have a friend whose first question any time I say something is faked is, "What's the motive?" which I find very annoying because I may have no clue what the motive is but the fakery is clearly there regardless and even if I could think of one, motive doesn't prove anything anyway but having no clue for the rationale for faking the Tate murders felt like a stumbling block so to see a reason made it easier to accept as fake ... although the evidence is really overwhelming. So many of these grisly multiple-murder scenarios whether all-at-once or serial seem to be faked. It just goes on and on. A famous grisly murder series in Australia is the Ivan Milat hitchhiker murders. I may have vaguely heard they were fake but not sure and haven't really looked.
Well, I give highest probability to the whole thing being a CIA psyop. Prisons do not allow beards, and Manson sported one every time They brought Him out on stage. This suggests that the actor was not actually in prison. I also do not think there were any actual murders - Tate was seen in Rome with Polanski years after the "event."
From what I could glean, the CIA was working on how to stop the love building in the 60's, and threw that party to cast a ghastly light on "hippies" and the like.
#6 comes closest, but I think still misses the mark...
Sorry a little off-topic, PM, but I think this could be important although I have to say I can't quite believe my eyes. So I wasn't even really looking and I came across this image, the last one taken before Sharon Tate's alleged death. She's lying on the floor surrounded by baby clothes and her right leg is slightly bent - I cannot but be reminded of the Hanged Man tarot pose (like the 9/11 Falling Man in Time magazine). I'm very, very confused, I must say. Really, WTF?
Before I forget, just to answer this, it's a pre-death photo that after the "death" will emphasize all the baby paraphernalia to impress how sad it is that she and her baby are now dead-and more importantly how ruthless these hippie killers are.
Okaaay, so I see that the photographer, Terry O'Neill, had the rights to that photo and he was married to Faye Dunaway who was in the Polanski film, Chinatown. I guess everything's connected, isn't it?
Thanks PM I look forward to it as I'm mystified. Truth be told I did see a few little red flags in what I looked at prior to this image but cognitive dissonance wasn't allowing them to register. Actually I just looked at my page that puts forward the parallels between covid and 9/11 where I have an image of the Falling Man juxtaposed against the Hanged Man tarot and I notice the Hanged Man has his arms in the same position as Sharon so even though the image doesn't show her upside down there's no mistaking the connection.
It's weird to see someone thinking the way I do. In my experience, Mathis is sometimes overdoing it, but his pieces are always challenging, entertaining, and informative. He is making me question many things I thought I knew, so it will take me time to digest his materials. His analysis of Harry Potter (about a page somewhere in the middle of the article) and Lincoln (rings true enough) are ingenious, and his observations on Dresden also made me think.
I have been reading the works of Miles for years! He opened up my eyes to the OJ show, which had me spiralling down a rabbit hole of truth. From Rodney King to the George Floyd fake events to way back to the fake Titanic and now the plannedemic and money laundering, crime syndicate wars.
Every news story has a hidden hand and has been planned, sometimes for years, by the Phoenicians. It’s pretty freeing when you understand that media is mental and most, if not all stories are psychological operations.
That’s why my wifi is turned off most times; devices are turned off and the majority of my hours are spent in the woods, or barefoot on the grass or Oceanside in the sand, cold salt water swimming and taking in nature’s healing powers to ground myself.
The main stream media and social media platforms can kiss my behind! Manson was definitely an actor and that psyop was/is pretty obvious.
Lucky you; even if I go to our garden the GMO mosquitoes and the chiggers eat me up alive. The woods are a lot worse. No grounding here in rural KY. No seawater, either. :)
For me, most of the false flags were a no-brainer most of the time, but it took me time to recognize limited hangouts and red herrings. It still does.
Most of the mass shootings were false flags. The exceptions were exercises in remote control and/in mind control:
Truly entertaining and enlightening. Those assembled here have nailed it. The occult underlies all of the trickery. That which is occulted is more to the truth, due to that bent in the nature of those behind it. The show put on upfront is of their own choosing. That the truth can be discerned is thanks to the research and knowledge of minds that are awake. Such as yours. Bravo!
After reading Miles Mathis’ take, it’s #6 for me. That room does not like looks like the inside of a beautiful mansion...such crappy furniture. Tate’s father was military intelligence.
Very very good Kevin. There is something about Miles though I love his posts. I'll just give you some: writes and investigates more than one could expect of a single even Harvard graduate. He is a poly math, poly art, poly history, and poly science genius. Sure these people exist, but getting info like he does from original sources takes A LOT of time, ergo he seems like more than one person. I can give you David Martin, 2nd Smartest Guy, James Corbett-all operatives. Also, did you notice Miles leads us to beautiful detail to the fakery of events and the agencies and persons directly related, but does he ever go to who really runs things, you know the kernel (not colonel)? Those descendants of Romans etc. Blood lines going back mostly to mid 1800s and sometimes to the 1700s are great "they're all related", but he stops there, yeah Geni and Ancestry stops there, but, it's a vacuum that is seeming like that's as far as they want us to go like there's nothing before that. I don't buy that.
If I had an afternoon where I was not busy and not researching all this crap, his would be the readings I choose. The genealogy stuff is secondary to the main story but all very fascinating!
Agreed. I just got tired of his obsessive looking for Jewish-ish names. We seemed to clear this up below: "anyone can change their name and esp the elite do that all the time". Some lists of top families seem to be filled with Italian-ish names. I don't know what to make of that, I wouldn't be obsessed with finding them, wouldn't know if that was their original name (Rothchilds was a different name), certainly have many Italian friends none who are elite or even know any of this, same with Jewish people I know. Most everyone thinks I'm nuts to think the world is controlled by elites to begin with...Miles is my man though my rough comment above I guess is just because I got dizzy reading his genealogy madness. It does have some meaning, like how all the POTUS and Celebs seem to be related, but finding a specific ethnicity in their names can be faked, it's a distraction to me. Apologies.
He often refers to the Phoenician Navy. These planet runners could be descendants of the Nephelim or giants, but who knows… they might be trapped here and are wreaking havoc on humanity.
Mathis is often accused of fronting a writing committee, but, for a variety of reasons including my many direct interactions with him over the years, I’m still “mostly" certain he is the real deal. His overarching theme that everything emanating from the mainstream is fake pretty much holds water - it’s all about pattern recognition, you know. As far as who really runs things, well, Mathis’ research all begins and ends with the Phoenicians, which of course takes us back over 4000 years. For more context on this, I recommend Gerry’s site in general and his MM introduction in particular: http://ancient-spooks.de/meta-infos/introduction-miles-mathis.html.
I see Gerry rightly calls them fake Jews and rule by deception, I fully agree with that. the "Jews in charge fraud" is just one of their diversions away from the real people in charge.
When Mathis refers to “the Jews” he isn't painting with a broad brush. To paraphrase Gerry, those in charge are secular humanists (my words) who use “the Jews" as cover, as their middle managers, as the administrative class to implement their plans (primarily via their intelligence agencies, as you probably understand). Religious Jews and the majority of the secular members of their tribe are as much victims of the syndicate as is their fellow Gentiles.
Also, Miles’ research does not stop at Jews, Hollywood, CIA, etc. Again, his research lays a trail all the way back to ancient Phoenicia (and in Gerry’s opinion, it continues even further back).
And finally, if you want some specific names, think “Stanley”, “Stewart/Stuart”, “Cohen” :)
Ok thanks Kevin, leaving the fronting aside, he is obsessed with finding the "Jews" in everyone's blood line, instead of the distraction that is providing knowing the real power structure always stays in the shadows, being so open about being Jews means that's a psyop, and unfortunately people fall for it. It's the Black Nobility: Rome to Venice to London. (Knights of Templar to Jesuits to Free Masons). The Comm of 300 (I wont throw out the family names here), the RIIA, Tavistosk, CFR, etc etc. I've only seem him stop at Jews, CIA, Hollywood.
This also has some limitations, but on the power structure, it is much deeper than Miles.
the eyebrows and eyes of sharon and patti are very similar, as are the noses….BUT the teeth are very different and I doubt someone with hollywood teeth would go and have dental work to partly mangle them.
everyone always forgets the teeth. our teeth are like finger prints which is why they are used for forensic identification.
Look at the part that talks about the ear in the post, from Miles Mathis. Anyway, you never know the extents these folks are forced to take by their controllers, especially MKers and Monarchers. Patti has a clear nose job, and does not look 36, she looks late 40's or 50+ trying to force herself into 30s. Even sis Debbie looks oookay for 80+.
I still find it difficult to get my head around this one even though it makes the most perfect sense in many ways. What I wonder about though is if Polanski was in on it why did that thing happen to him in Switzerland not to mention at the time? Could it be that he wasn't in on it? and even though he made the movie with Faye Dunaway, partner of Terry O'Neill, who surely WAS in on it, he wasn't?
This is unrelated but I'm just asking your opinion: do you think Abu Ghraib may have been faked just like Collateral Murder and Operation Northwoods? It seems suss at the outset that the person who "went down" for it was Janis Karpinski who was a Colonel in the US Army Reserve??? in 2001, promoted to Brigadier-General by 2003 and then "demoted" to colonel again in 2005. Revelation of the Method signs will tell if it was faked or not if nothing else does but I just haven't come to grips with it yet and just wondering if you have any thoughts, PM.
I read that Polanski was in the blood line (was it on Mathis?) and he was made a director at very early age with little work history (sounds familiar). I don't know about AG but in general there was a push to distract from the fact we didn't need to be in that war and to paint the muslims as terrorists to keep the fear going. Op Northwoods may have been declassified when they knew they needed a cover for not using planes in 9.11 so that one of the distractions was changing planes, meaning planes would still seem to be used. Sorry don't have more info.
If Polanski is in the blood line or whatever I'm still confused about the seeming humiliation and exile he has been subjected to ... which isn't to say it's not all a perfectly normal part of it that outsiders just don't understand ... or else sometimes other forces are at work which foil those in power.
I think ON was faked from the start with 9/11 in mind - it seems 9/11 was planned as far back as the 40s (great collection of predictive programming - https://youtu.be/_AUclXzapJo?si=W9FWF5BfPUS_TeFJ&t=28) - and clearly the document bundle doesn't add up but nor does the Pretexts document alone - why would they even posit the possibility of sinking "a boatload of Cubans" for real rather than simulating it - it makes no sense ... except of course as propaganda directed to the disbelievers of the 9/11 story. To do it for real either:
1. They'd lure Cubans onto a boat and then sink it.
2. They'd wait for a boatload to appear and then sink it - definitely not psyop MO.
And then how would the "friendly Cubans" utilised in the other actions feel about either option?
Psyops only have things done for real that are wanted for real and that makes perfect sense - it's all about dupery not doing something for real unless wanted.
David Hinkley Jr. Fully released June 2022. Apparently sane now? He was found not guilty due to insanity.
Mark David Chapman, thought the be a CIA patsy, denied parole in 2020. Still in Attica, in solitary confinement, for his own protection. (No beard in photos).
With the first 2 it seemed the CIA was cleaning out it's closet while releasing more, but not all JFK files.
Lets wait & see if Chapman gets out after his next parole hearing.
Very amusing, PM, however, I cannot see fakery in those murders. I really don't get it. What I really resent is having to scour gruesome images to check if they're fake or not. Drives me nuts. In this article we see an image of Sharon that looks to me to be a genuine image of a pregnant woman who's dead. I see no fakery of the body or photoshopping of the image. Also, I think the interview with Susan Atkins seems genuine.
I understand your feeling and suggest you avoid posts that might upset you, the photo in the post is not gruesome and advised only to see Manson's Wiki which also has no gruesome photos. My post is about the photo in the post, I will make an explanation statement in a few days. I use satire, not amusement, but the underlying stories are quite serious, I don't mean this murder. My purpose is to get points across in a 1-2 page interesting post rather than make people read dozens of pages of text taking a few hours-which is what I did to prepare this post.
Oh I didn't mean to imply you were asking anyone to look at gruesome photos. I take it upon myself to do it. It's not so much that it upsets me as we are obliged to do it to work out if events are real or staged and I resent the fact that to determine the truth we're obliged to look at gruesome photos. Of course no one HAS to but if you want to determine the truth sometimes you do. You don't have to look at any gruesome photos to determine that JFK's assassination was faked because the evidence is so clear elsewhere but because I don't see clear evidence of the Manson murders being faked I wanted to look at the photos to see if they seemed faked ... I don't think they are.
Its only about this one photo to get the point of the post, not necessarily to prove every moving part was fake or real-or another point unrelated to real or fake. Let me get more responses, we have your opinion which is fine and appreciated and part of the plan of this post to gather up.
Well said PM, and I do hear Petra's concerns. I commented below that I had heard about this topic from Crow (Crrow777 radio). They have talked about this topic a few times, most recently episode 482. The first hour of the 2 hour episodes are free to all. Here is a link (with the search criteria of "Manson"), if anyone is interested.
About beard in prison...yes they were and sometimes are allowed depending. In California long hair and beards were allowed. Do prisoners have beards?
§ 551.2 Mustaches and beards.
An inmate may wear a mustache or beard or both. The Warden shall require an inmate with a beard to wear a beard covering when working in food service or where a beard could result in increased likelihood of work injury.
What makes you think I am not calm? What kind of tactic are you using, telling me to stay calm? Before you write something for the world to read based on assumption you should do at least some perfunctory investigation. This was not hard to find. https://psmag.com/magazine/objects-that-matter-the-prison-uniform/
You can be polite and still get your points across, now here from your link I dont see them allowing the cloths, neck scarf that can be used to strangle, and 2 rings that can punch hard, in the Vanity Fair photo at the top of my post. In addition, I am making the conclusion from the entirety of the Manson murders that were clearly faked.
"But the tough-on-crime laws of the ’80s and ’90s ushered in a new era of strict prison dress. In the early 2000s, California institutions banned non-prison-issued denim. Prisoners could no longer purchase Levi’s, which had been a prized possession behind bars. The preferred denim pants were replaced with thin, blue polyester material."
I do not see where I am being anything but polite. I asked you what tactic you were using by accusing me of not being calm since there is not way of knowing a person's emotional state by the words they type. I do not think that was out of line. Yes, by the 90s only prison-issued cheaper denim pants were allowed. Now, it has come to light that Manson was involved in Co-intelpro through his parole officer in San Francisco, whose office was based at the SF free clinic. Tom O'Neill actually spent 20 years investigating Manson, the case and CIA involvement before publishing any evidence. But your evidence of Manson murder fakery is based on assumption using images and your own imagination as evidence. If memory serves you also claimed in the past that the three women in the case were actually male actors. I was simply reminding you that a bit of due diligence on your part would help to dispel some of your wilder ideas.
The winner for guessing correctly on this post is... Amaterasu!!!
She wins because of the correct analysis of Manson in the Photo and the only commenter who wrote it all out for us. I couldn’t put it so clearly in #6 as that would have ruined the game. She did miss that #3 was also correct because of the evidence that Sharon became Patti, the made-up sister a few years later. She says:
“I give highest probability to the whole thing being a CIA psyop. Prisons do not allow beards, and Manson sported one every time They brought Him out on stage. This suggests that the actor was not actually in prison. I also do not think there were any actual murders - Tate was seen in Rome with Polanski years after the "event." From what I could glean, the CIA was working on how to stop the love building in the 60's, and threw that party to cast a ghastly light on "hippies" and the like.”
Runners-up:
1. Kevin Johnson who gave us this that explains all: https://www.bitchute.com/video/Pex6GX9QOnu1/
2. Marta, Staszak who said #6 and #3. This is really the best simple answer.
3. Fizzygurl, who said #6 (but missed #3).
So what was the Manson-Tate event all about? It was 1969 and the anti-war movement was boiling over. This was mainly led by fervent hippies, some were even shot at by crowd controllers like the Kent State incident and they had to be discredited. Manson & Co. did the trick, but other music legends also had to go-probably just underground (Morrison, Joplin, Hendrix). Morrison's dad was commander of United States naval forces during the fake Gulf of Tonkin Incident-hey all in the family. War is big business.
It was also another episode of Intel agencies using movie sets to mind-bend us into a narrative and reaction. The photo shows Manson was never really in prison, he just visited for these follow-up shows. The Manson Family girls were all from affluent families and were all involved in stage and acting. They didn’t really look like hippies nor have the history of such and they neither were really in prison. Tate was another faked death like JFK and many others.
THINK & INVESTIGATE do not just BELIEVE & OBEY. Question everything and don't make any rash decisions if you don’t have the time or resources to investigate!
I thought my 6 6 6 answer was pretty good.
Oh, I get it now, thanks!
hehe
Congratulations to the winner and runners-up!
In future, I will take your questions seriously, PM. Just to let you know that I read Miles Mathis' post (also had a look at Kevin's link) and now have no doubt the murders were faked. When I saw the rationale that Miles gave as you have here then it was much easier to make sense of. I have a friend whose first question any time I say something is faked is, "What's the motive?" which I find very annoying because I may have no clue what the motive is but the fakery is clearly there regardless and even if I could think of one, motive doesn't prove anything anyway but having no clue for the rationale for faking the Tate murders felt like a stumbling block so to see a reason made it easier to accept as fake ... although the evidence is really overwhelming. So many of these grisly multiple-murder scenarios whether all-at-once or serial seem to be faked. It just goes on and on. A famous grisly murder series in Australia is the Ivan Milat hitchhiker murders. I may have vaguely heard they were fake but not sure and haven't really looked.
Well, I give highest probability to the whole thing being a CIA psyop. Prisons do not allow beards, and Manson sported one every time They brought Him out on stage. This suggests that the actor was not actually in prison. I also do not think there were any actual murders - Tate was seen in Rome with Polanski years after the "event."
From what I could glean, the CIA was working on how to stop the love building in the 60's, and threw that party to cast a ghastly light on "hippies" and the like.
#6 comes closest, but I think still misses the mark...
I think photos like that are done and marketed to train people into cognitive disonance.
Sorry a little off-topic, PM, but I think this could be important although I have to say I can't quite believe my eyes. So I wasn't even really looking and I came across this image, the last one taken before Sharon Tate's alleged death. She's lying on the floor surrounded by baby clothes and her right leg is slightly bent - I cannot but be reminded of the Hanged Man tarot pose (like the 9/11 Falling Man in Time magazine). I'm very, very confused, I must say. Really, WTF?
https://themansonfamily-mtts.medium.com/she-found-sharon-tates-body-be0e757ec3b5
Thanks, I think this photo has a "purpose" smell to it, I will explain all in a few days. Take care.
Before I forget, just to answer this, it's a pre-death photo that after the "death" will emphasize all the baby paraphernalia to impress how sad it is that she and her baby are now dead-and more importantly how ruthless these hippie killers are.
Okaaay, so I see that the photographer, Terry O'Neill, had the rights to that photo and he was married to Faye Dunaway who was in the Polanski film, Chinatown. I guess everything's connected, isn't it?
Thanks PM I look forward to it as I'm mystified. Truth be told I did see a few little red flags in what I looked at prior to this image but cognitive dissonance wasn't allowing them to register. Actually I just looked at my page that puts forward the parallels between covid and 9/11 where I have an image of the Falling Man juxtaposed against the Hanged Man tarot and I notice the Hanged Man has his arms in the same position as Sharon so even though the image doesn't show her upside down there's no mistaking the connection.
https://occamsrazorterrorevents.weebly.com/911--covid-19-the-parallels.html
For me #3 and 6 most likely in my mind.
You forgot the Beatles "Helter Skelter".
I spent most of the day yesterday reading Mathis:
http://mileswmathis.com/bestfake.html
It's weird to see someone thinking the way I do. In my experience, Mathis is sometimes overdoing it, but his pieces are always challenging, entertaining, and informative. He is making me question many things I thought I knew, so it will take me time to digest his materials. His analysis of Harry Potter (about a page somewhere in the middle of the article) and Lincoln (rings true enough) are ingenious, and his observations on Dresden also made me think.
🎯
I have been reading the works of Miles for years! He opened up my eyes to the OJ show, which had me spiralling down a rabbit hole of truth. From Rodney King to the George Floyd fake events to way back to the fake Titanic and now the plannedemic and money laundering, crime syndicate wars.
Every news story has a hidden hand and has been planned, sometimes for years, by the Phoenicians. It’s pretty freeing when you understand that media is mental and most, if not all stories are psychological operations.
That’s why my wifi is turned off most times; devices are turned off and the majority of my hours are spent in the woods, or barefoot on the grass or Oceanside in the sand, cold salt water swimming and taking in nature’s healing powers to ground myself.
The main stream media and social media platforms can kiss my behind! Manson was definitely an actor and that psyop was/is pretty obvious.
Santa Klaus is planning to make alternative media platforms illegal - as posted on the WEF’s website. Let’s watch how this one plays out! Here’s a link to the story: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/10/news-media-literacy-trust-ai/
Lucky you; even if I go to our garden the GMO mosquitoes and the chiggers eat me up alive. The woods are a lot worse. No grounding here in rural KY. No seawater, either. :)
For me, most of the false flags were a no-brainer most of the time, but it took me time to recognize limited hangouts and red herrings. It still does.
Most of the mass shootings were false flags. The exceptions were exercises in remote control and/in mind control:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/mass-shootings
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/from-mind-control-to-selective-killings
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/psychotronic-and-electromagnetic
In general, I stay away from esoteric explanations.
Truly entertaining and enlightening. Those assembled here have nailed it. The occult underlies all of the trickery. That which is occulted is more to the truth, due to that bent in the nature of those behind it. The show put on upfront is of their own choosing. That the truth can be discerned is thanks to the research and knowledge of minds that are awake. Such as yours. Bravo!
After reading Miles Mathis’ take, it’s #6 for me. That room does not like looks like the inside of a beautiful mansion...such crappy furniture. Tate’s father was military intelligence.
Shhhhh.....💕
Gave me a laugh
I discovered MM via this video: https://www.bitchute.com/video/Pex6GX9QOnu1/
Very very good Kevin. There is something about Miles though I love his posts. I'll just give you some: writes and investigates more than one could expect of a single even Harvard graduate. He is a poly math, poly art, poly history, and poly science genius. Sure these people exist, but getting info like he does from original sources takes A LOT of time, ergo he seems like more than one person. I can give you David Martin, 2nd Smartest Guy, James Corbett-all operatives. Also, did you notice Miles leads us to beautiful detail to the fakery of events and the agencies and persons directly related, but does he ever go to who really runs things, you know the kernel (not colonel)? Those descendants of Romans etc. Blood lines going back mostly to mid 1800s and sometimes to the 1700s are great "they're all related", but he stops there, yeah Geni and Ancestry stops there, but, it's a vacuum that is seeming like that's as far as they want us to go like there's nothing before that. I don't buy that.
If I had an afternoon where I was not busy and not researching all this crap, his would be the readings I choose. The genealogy stuff is secondary to the main story but all very fascinating!
Agreed. I just got tired of his obsessive looking for Jewish-ish names. We seemed to clear this up below: "anyone can change their name and esp the elite do that all the time". Some lists of top families seem to be filled with Italian-ish names. I don't know what to make of that, I wouldn't be obsessed with finding them, wouldn't know if that was their original name (Rothchilds was a different name), certainly have many Italian friends none who are elite or even know any of this, same with Jewish people I know. Most everyone thinks I'm nuts to think the world is controlled by elites to begin with...Miles is my man though my rough comment above I guess is just because I got dizzy reading his genealogy madness. It does have some meaning, like how all the POTUS and Celebs seem to be related, but finding a specific ethnicity in their names can be faked, it's a distraction to me. Apologies.
He often refers to the Phoenician Navy. These planet runners could be descendants of the Nephelim or giants, but who knows… they might be trapped here and are wreaking havoc on humanity.
What is an operative? Is that like CIA?
Working for a group or cause, usually unstated, but can be seen with a little digging.
Mathis is often accused of fronting a writing committee, but, for a variety of reasons including my many direct interactions with him over the years, I’m still “mostly" certain he is the real deal. His overarching theme that everything emanating from the mainstream is fake pretty much holds water - it’s all about pattern recognition, you know. As far as who really runs things, well, Mathis’ research all begins and ends with the Phoenicians, which of course takes us back over 4000 years. For more context on this, I recommend Gerry’s site in general and his MM introduction in particular: http://ancient-spooks.de/meta-infos/introduction-miles-mathis.html.
I see Gerry rightly calls them fake Jews and rule by deception, I fully agree with that. the "Jews in charge fraud" is just one of their diversions away from the real people in charge.
When Mathis refers to “the Jews” he isn't painting with a broad brush. To paraphrase Gerry, those in charge are secular humanists (my words) who use “the Jews" as cover, as their middle managers, as the administrative class to implement their plans (primarily via their intelligence agencies, as you probably understand). Religious Jews and the majority of the secular members of their tribe are as much victims of the syndicate as is their fellow Gentiles.
Also, Miles’ research does not stop at Jews, Hollywood, CIA, etc. Again, his research lays a trail all the way back to ancient Phoenicia (and in Gerry’s opinion, it continues even further back).
And finally, if you want some specific names, think “Stanley”, “Stewart/Stuart”, “Cohen” :)
Ok thanks Kevin, leaving the fronting aside, he is obsessed with finding the "Jews" in everyone's blood line, instead of the distraction that is providing knowing the real power structure always stays in the shadows, being so open about being Jews means that's a psyop, and unfortunately people fall for it. It's the Black Nobility: Rome to Venice to London. (Knights of Templar to Jesuits to Free Masons). The Comm of 300 (I wont throw out the family names here), the RIIA, Tavistosk, CFR, etc etc. I've only seem him stop at Jews, CIA, Hollywood.
This also has some limitations, but on the power structure, it is much deeper than Miles.
https://www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-compound/4A/4A92FD2FB4DAE3F773DB0B7742CF0F65_Coleman.-.CONSPIRATORS.HIERARCHY.-.THE.STORY.OF.THE.COMMITTEE.OF.300.R.pdf
Still of course I highly value the info he gives up to the level he goes, and I neither know everything about the rabbit hole.
the eyebrows and eyes of sharon and patti are very similar, as are the noses….BUT the teeth are very different and I doubt someone with hollywood teeth would go and have dental work to partly mangle them.
everyone always forgets the teeth. our teeth are like finger prints which is why they are used for forensic identification.
Look at the part that talks about the ear in the post, from Miles Mathis. Anyway, you never know the extents these folks are forced to take by their controllers, especially MKers and Monarchers. Patti has a clear nose job, and does not look 36, she looks late 40's or 50+ trying to force herself into 30s. Even sis Debbie looks oookay for 80+.
i will agree she doesn’t look her age (in a bad way)
I still find it difficult to get my head around this one even though it makes the most perfect sense in many ways. What I wonder about though is if Polanski was in on it why did that thing happen to him in Switzerland not to mention at the time? Could it be that he wasn't in on it? and even though he made the movie with Faye Dunaway, partner of Terry O'Neill, who surely WAS in on it, he wasn't?
This is unrelated but I'm just asking your opinion: do you think Abu Ghraib may have been faked just like Collateral Murder and Operation Northwoods? It seems suss at the outset that the person who "went down" for it was Janis Karpinski who was a Colonel in the US Army Reserve??? in 2001, promoted to Brigadier-General by 2003 and then "demoted" to colonel again in 2005. Revelation of the Method signs will tell if it was faked or not if nothing else does but I just haven't come to grips with it yet and just wondering if you have any thoughts, PM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janis_Karpinski
I read that Polanski was in the blood line (was it on Mathis?) and he was made a director at very early age with little work history (sounds familiar). I don't know about AG but in general there was a push to distract from the fact we didn't need to be in that war and to paint the muslims as terrorists to keep the fear going. Op Northwoods may have been declassified when they knew they needed a cover for not using planes in 9.11 so that one of the distractions was changing planes, meaning planes would still seem to be used. Sorry don't have more info.
If Polanski is in the blood line or whatever I'm still confused about the seeming humiliation and exile he has been subjected to ... which isn't to say it's not all a perfectly normal part of it that outsiders just don't understand ... or else sometimes other forces are at work which foil those in power.
I think ON was faked from the start with 9/11 in mind - it seems 9/11 was planned as far back as the 40s (great collection of predictive programming - https://youtu.be/_AUclXzapJo?si=W9FWF5BfPUS_TeFJ&t=28) - and clearly the document bundle doesn't add up but nor does the Pretexts document alone - why would they even posit the possibility of sinking "a boatload of Cubans" for real rather than simulating it - it makes no sense ... except of course as propaganda directed to the disbelievers of the 9/11 story. To do it for real either:
1. They'd lure Cubans onto a boat and then sink it.
2. They'd wait for a boatload to appear and then sink it - definitely not psyop MO.
And then how would the "friendly Cubans" utilised in the other actions feel about either option?
Psyops only have things done for real that are wanted for real and that makes perfect sense - it's all about dupery not doing something for real unless wanted.
Your q are better than my a, and the YT is great thanks!
Leslie Van Houten, paroled July 2023
David Hinkley Jr. Fully released June 2022. Apparently sane now? He was found not guilty due to insanity.
Mark David Chapman, thought the be a CIA patsy, denied parole in 2020. Still in Attica, in solitary confinement, for his own protection. (No beard in photos).
With the first 2 it seemed the CIA was cleaning out it's closet while releasing more, but not all JFK files.
Lets wait & see if Chapman gets out after his next parole hearing.
The lip is zipped this time. 🤫
Very amusing, PM, however, I cannot see fakery in those murders. I really don't get it. What I really resent is having to scour gruesome images to check if they're fake or not. Drives me nuts. In this article we see an image of Sharon that looks to me to be a genuine image of a pregnant woman who's dead. I see no fakery of the body or photoshopping of the image. Also, I think the interview with Susan Atkins seems genuine.
https://listverse.com/2019/12/07/10-gruesome-and-shocking-facts-about-the-tate-murders/
I understand your feeling and suggest you avoid posts that might upset you, the photo in the post is not gruesome and advised only to see Manson's Wiki which also has no gruesome photos. My post is about the photo in the post, I will make an explanation statement in a few days. I use satire, not amusement, but the underlying stories are quite serious, I don't mean this murder. My purpose is to get points across in a 1-2 page interesting post rather than make people read dozens of pages of text taking a few hours-which is what I did to prepare this post.
Oh I didn't mean to imply you were asking anyone to look at gruesome photos. I take it upon myself to do it. It's not so much that it upsets me as we are obliged to do it to work out if events are real or staged and I resent the fact that to determine the truth we're obliged to look at gruesome photos. Of course no one HAS to but if you want to determine the truth sometimes you do. You don't have to look at any gruesome photos to determine that JFK's assassination was faked because the evidence is so clear elsewhere but because I don't see clear evidence of the Manson murders being faked I wanted to look at the photos to see if they seemed faked ... I don't think they are.
Its only about this one photo to get the point of the post, not necessarily to prove every moving part was fake or real-or another point unrelated to real or fake. Let me get more responses, we have your opinion which is fine and appreciated and part of the plan of this post to gather up.
Well said PM, and I do hear Petra's concerns. I commented below that I had heard about this topic from Crow (Crrow777 radio). They have talked about this topic a few times, most recently episode 482. The first hour of the 2 hour episodes are free to all. Here is a link (with the search criteria of "Manson"), if anyone is interested.
https://www.crrow777radio.com/free-episodes/?searchfree=manson&searchguest=&searchtag=
6
6
6
About beard in prison...yes they were and sometimes are allowed depending. In California long hair and beards were allowed. Do prisoners have beards?
§ 551.2 Mustaches and beards.
An inmate may wear a mustache or beard or both. The Warden shall require an inmate with a beard to wear a beard covering when working in food service or where a beard could result in increased likelihood of work injury.
Thanks, would that be allowed for a mass murderer like Manson? how about rings and non prisoner clothes?
Why don't you do your homework about prisons in the 1970s in California instead of assuming you know?
I'm asking you not telling you. Stay calm Wendy I am not against you. Manson was shown in the prison in the 90s and beyond.
What makes you think I am not calm? What kind of tactic are you using, telling me to stay calm? Before you write something for the world to read based on assumption you should do at least some perfunctory investigation. This was not hard to find. https://psmag.com/magazine/objects-that-matter-the-prison-uniform/
You can be polite and still get your points across, now here from your link I dont see them allowing the cloths, neck scarf that can be used to strangle, and 2 rings that can punch hard, in the Vanity Fair photo at the top of my post. In addition, I am making the conclusion from the entirety of the Manson murders that were clearly faked.
"But the tough-on-crime laws of the ’80s and ’90s ushered in a new era of strict prison dress. In the early 2000s, California institutions banned non-prison-issued denim. Prisoners could no longer purchase Levi’s, which had been a prized possession behind bars. The preferred denim pants were replaced with thin, blue polyester material."
I do not see where I am being anything but polite. I asked you what tactic you were using by accusing me of not being calm since there is not way of knowing a person's emotional state by the words they type. I do not think that was out of line. Yes, by the 90s only prison-issued cheaper denim pants were allowed. Now, it has come to light that Manson was involved in Co-intelpro through his parole officer in San Francisco, whose office was based at the SF free clinic. Tom O'Neill actually spent 20 years investigating Manson, the case and CIA involvement before publishing any evidence. But your evidence of Manson murder fakery is based on assumption using images and your own imagination as evidence. If memory serves you also claimed in the past that the three women in the case were actually male actors. I was simply reminding you that a bit of due diligence on your part would help to dispel some of your wilder ideas.
Do not make the mistake virologists make. They make claims and then adjust findings to fit their hypothesis.