PDA

View Full Version : Is Russell Brand a Rothschild shill?



wishinshow
25th November 2014, 14:36
Okay. I've had enough of Russell Brand.

He's calling for a revolution. He's promoting every Rothschild agenda there is. Fabian socialism. Revolutionary socialism. Communism. Anthropogenic climate change.

He can't even bring himself to say 911 was an inside job.

He shouts about the Royal Windsor family (illuminate financiers) and never once mentions their Rothschild opposition.

His girlfriend's brothers are married to Rothschilds and they all- including Russell Brand - work for the Rothschild rag, called New Statesman.


I think he is one of the most dangerous people we have in the UK.

Perhaps he is playing a game with the Rothschilds to give himself a platform for actual truth at some point in the future.

EDIT 28/11/2014 EDIT 28/11/2014

The following is a Russell Brand impression by Maunagarjana!



"You lot seem very supportive of Socialism, from what I've read, which is odd, because you're like the antithesis of the proletariat, you're one of the wealthiest families in the world and major stake holders in lots of the massive mega-corporations out there. So, why would you support something like Socialist revolution unless you somehow have figured a way to exploit any attempt at achieving such in order to further consolidate more wealth and power into your already squid-like world-encompassing empire?" That there was my Russell Brand impression, ;)

This is beautiful. It was a very very good impression. I do hope RB reads it and feels that he once said it. And that he further ommitted to say - out loud - the part about them being squids! Maybe he was just eating some squid with the squids. Maybe we can change their red shield to a red squid, in a few years.

END OF EDIT 28/11/2014

Even if this is the case, Russell Brands words/actions are indefensible due to the obvious fact that he is well aware of the falsehoods and dangerous notions of revolution that he is currently promoting.

TargeT
25th November 2014, 15:22
I couldn't agree more, just another flavor of COINTELPRO there to "gum up" those that might be questioning things by carefully guiding them down dead end alleys or right back onto the desired path with the addition of blinders and rose colored glasses.

Beware the overly charismatic, they are often Socio/Psycopaths...

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 15:27
@TargeT It's just so hard to believe of Russell Brand. I used to love this guy. He's so funny. I find it very hard to swallow the obvious fact that he has been, "got to". I really really hope he blows the lid on his relationship with them and tells people some truths that are beyond the mundane.

jerry
25th November 2014, 16:24
@TargeT It's just so hard to believe of Russell Brand. I used to love this guy. He's so funny. I find it very hard to swallow the obvious fact that he has been, "got to". I really really hope he blows the lid on his relationship with them and tells people some truth. I hope he hasn't delved into their magic. I hope. this really is the genius of their mind control as targe says were easily led down endless dead end paths by these people so taking everything in with a grain of salt would be my advice as well

Akasha
25th November 2014, 16:41
His silence and misdirection over the voter fraud in the Scottish independence referendum did it for me. I mean that was so blatant. How could he not comment on it given his self declared status as voice of the people?

edit: Forgot to mention, we kept putting links to the various videos covering the fraud in the comments section of his Trews channel with requests for him to comment on it the day it all broke and they we're removed as fast as we could put them up. Nuff said!

21g
25th November 2014, 16:53
I disagree with your conclusions, op.

The Rothschild girlfriend is no more. The MSM are desperate to quieten the loose canon.

He is waking people up in their droves. Granted, i would nt look to him for the finer details of what
change should look like, but the trickster energy that he embodies is a catalytic force that the elite cannot handle
or control.

At numerous marches in London, he was trying to calm the `mob` and taking some serious stick in the process.
I feel he is sincere but, all we can do is go with our own gut feeling.

pathaka
25th November 2014, 17:13
Silly stuff.

Typical "first we raise them up, then we drag them to drug."

He's just a guy, who happens to speak fairly freely and due to his previous mainstream media appearances, before going really open, he just gets more coverage.

Shill?

He's not talking: eugenics, microchipping, culling down the population, transhumanism, one-world government or one-world currency or corporate fascism.

And if socialism means taking care of those unfortunate, I guess that makes me a socialist too. It's just a tag to put down people, when one disagrees. No content in it. Just an easy label.

Listen to the message, think for yourself. Ignore the carrier.

Akasha
25th November 2014, 17:14
.....At numerous marches in London, he was trying to calm the `mob` and taking some serious stick in the process....

Not surprising. I'm sure he regretted his school-boy revolutionary rhetoric once he saw boots on the ground.

21g
25th November 2014, 17:28
Brand is an advocate of non violence, so trying to tell a pissed off bunch of protesters to be nice,
is pretty brave in my view.

I think he knows the message is diluted when rioting kicks off. The MSM love that.

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 17:35
He keeps saying that there cannot be ANY ill intent behind the anthropogenic climate change fraud. He knows fine well that Tesla had over unity power supply in operation. He knows about the carbon tax scam. Therefore he is a shill. QED.

@pathaka ...who exactly DOES talk eugenics or microchipping. Does Bill Gates drop those words at his TED talks? Because I haven't heard him. Can you tell be somebody outside of the sci-fi or transhumanism circles, who actually uses those words?

Nasu
25th November 2014, 17:41
Silly stuff.

Typical "first we raise them up, then we drag them to drug."

He's just a guy, who happens to speak fairly freely and due to his previous mainstream media appearances, before going really open, he just gets more coverage.

Shill?

He's not talking: eugenics, microchipping, culling down the population, transhumanism, one-world government or one-world currency or corporate fascism.

And if socialism means taking care of those unfortunate, I guess that makes me a socialist too. It's just a tag to put down people, when one disagrees. No content in it. Just an easy label.

Listen to the message, think for yourself. Ignore the carrier.

I hope your right. I like him, I like his diatribes and breathless rants! If it is all just as it is painted to seem, then I support him, however, it is not out of the bounds of reason that he could be a shill, his success, given his rebellious topics of interest, must be questioned, IMHO.

Not saying it is, but this could be one of the oldest tactics, I know it as "burning the grass" but there could well be other names for the same idea. Kings, queens, emperors and governments have used it to great effect. The idea is simple, take a well spoken critic of the status quo on the edges of polite society and promote them, not directly, it is important that the shill not know of the subterfuge. Let them run wild, let them shout their voice of desent and revolution from the rooftops. Meanwhile, we observe who comes out to play, so to speak, who agrees with the message? Then we round up the followers, trouble makers, rebels, etc, with ease...

Like I say, I hope your right, he seems like a funny chap. It is strange that he has continually dodged the 911 truth, whatever that means. It's also odd that he would cover the Scottish vote so extensively but omit the calls for a re vote, based on evidence of tampering? Seems strange, don't you think?... N

DeDukshyn
25th November 2014, 17:42
Is this the gossip channel? No sources, no research, no evidence at all, but nice editorial ... A good place to vent pent up programming and frustrations perhaps though - maybe we could use that energy to make the world a better place? Too much work I guess. ;) It's way easier to change the world by pointing fingers and judging from behind a keyboard.

Wind
25th November 2014, 17:43
Rubbish. :)

white wizard
25th November 2014, 17:48
I would like to see some proof behind those assumptions that he is a shill. I have

seen him wake up quite a few people. The global elite factions all rely on people

being asleep. Him waking people up would be counter productive.

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 17:54
@dedukshyn errr? Are you not pointing fingers and judging us/me from behind your keyboard in the posting above?

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 18:00
Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky, "wake people up", in much the same way that Russell Brand does. The global elite have obviously felt for a while, that if people are "waking up" and "opening their eyes" to the madness, then they might as well attempt to put blinkers on them.

(Horses have blinkers so that they cannot see to the sides)

21g
25th November 2014, 18:11
Devils advocate here,

Their are many climate change believers, myself included, who are breathless at the rampant destruction of natural
resources and environs. Arguing for another 50 years over whether our behaviour spikes natural trends or not is precisely
what Elites would like. Keeps the show rolling. Gaia is taking a hammering, the debate over how much we are complicit via
greenhouse gases, new to nature chemicals etc is a moot point. It all needs to reduce way beyond what politicians are
considering anyway. Do we take a broom or a dustpan and brush to clean up the aftermath of an earthquake, or do we get serious !?

He may know about Teslas work but most people dont. Maybe better to approach joe public with issues they can relate to ?
Look what David Icke has been through, taken 20+ years to be heard above the MSM spin machine. Hopefully Brand would learn from that.

Nasu
25th November 2014, 18:12
...... Him waking people up would be counter productive.

Counter productive to what?

Formulating an extensive cross examinable list of Royalty / government haters? Out and out Rebellion? Total collapse and systemic takeover of all resources? War?

Like I said, I like him, he has woken a lot of people up, it's the purpose behind that premise, that I question.. I hope he is not a shill, either conscious or unconsciously. I hope he is all that is being claimed and none of the negative dark puppetry that I have alluded to... N

etheric underground
25th November 2014, 18:21
If you weigh up whether a person is doing more good than bad...it is what it is.
Personally I believe his hearts in the right place...I have always had pretty good intuition
on people...and I get more good than bad...keep it up RUSS!

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 18:22
@21g I am also a climate change believer. It changes all the time! I don't believe CO2 is in any measure a driving force behind it. I believe that the sun's magnetosphere interacts with the earth's magnetosphere to alter cloud cover on this planet and to thus increase or decrease temp. And we're probably headed for the beginning of a mini ice age! Mr Brand knows these ideas because all he has done is read these kinds of ideas, for five years!

Akasha
25th November 2014, 18:27
Is this the gossip channel? No sources, no research, no evidence at all, but nice editorial ... A good place to vent pent up programming and frustrations perhaps though - maybe we could use that energy to make the world a better place? Too much work I guess. ;) It's way easier to change the world by pointing fingers and judging from behind a keyboard.

So I shouldn't have reported my experience of trying to get him to comment on the Scottish vote rigging (post 5)?

There was a source for that story: Me!

naste.de.lumina
25th November 2014, 18:27
I think we are entering a 'financial' phase of the globalist plan in which they need many people on both sides of the counter.

They need a lot of people thinking they are 'aware' to support the BRICS side, as world saviors in contrast to the dark 'noble' European / Western banking cartel.

On the paul topic posted below is possible to understand in general terms how this process is occurring in the economic / financial perspective.

Global Currency Reset (SDR's and the New Bretton Woods; by JC Collins) (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76591-Global-Currency-Reset--SDR-s-and-the-New-Bretton-Woods-by-JC-Collins-&p=900946&viewfull=1#post900946)

Controlled opposition is an old tactic as already mentioned in the posts above.

It is a risky tactic.

As the old and popular saying: who leaves in the rain is to wet.

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 18:28
@etheric_underground

When I was ten, I felt that I had pretty good intuition when it came to the nature of people. I used to think Jimmy Saville's heart was, "in the right place". He was mostly doing good.

Wind
25th November 2014, 18:34
@21g I am also a climate change believer. It changes all the time! I don't believe CO2 is in any measure a driving force behind it. I believe that the sun's magnetosphere interacts with the earth's magnetosphere to alter cloud cover on this planet and to thus increase or decrease temp. And we're probably headed for the beginning of a mini ice age!

I think he can be forgiven that. Many people have bought the guilt lies (us sinful humans!) spread by the msm and politicians hook, line and sinker. Not everyone has researched and understood the correlation between the Sun and our weather here. Everyone is just screaming CO2 or HAARP without actually bothering to connect the dots. Our whole solar system is changing.

When it comes to Russell, I think that it's hilarious that people think him as a shill. No wonder that were not getting anywhere, meaning this endless blame game. Watch this video and tell me his a shill. Hell, in that case I too would qualify as a shill!

_bKQXmvdr8o

Nasu
25th November 2014, 18:35
@etheric_underground

When I was ten, I felt that I had pretty good intuition when it came to the nature of people. I used to think Jimmy Saville's heart was, "in the right place". He was mostly doing good.

Yup. Experience is the hardest master, as she gives the lesson after the test... As for Russell, time will tell either way... N

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 18:41
I think we are entering a 'financial' phase of the globalist plan in which they need many people on both sides of the counter.

They need a lot of people thinking they are 'aware' to support the side BRICS, as world saviors in contrast to the dark 'noble' European / Western banking cartel.



It's very hard to tell what the plan is here. There's this new info from the thrive guy that there are some Chinese "elders" with a lot more gold than the Rothschilds who want to keep the status quo, in effect.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

This is the third time in ten days that I have seen 666 as the number of postings a person has made.

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 18:48
@wind The point here is that Russell Brand HAS done the research. All he has done for five years is research this material. And he must know that anthropo CO2 climate change, is hogwash! So he is, by inference, A BIG FAT SCREAMING ELEPHANT OF A SHILL

...or he is biding his time to pounce on 911truth, climate change fraud, aliens, reptiles, Scottish election fraud and the fact that my grandmother shaved her moustache.

naste.de.lumina
25th November 2014, 18:51
I think we are entering a 'financial' phase of the globalist plan in which they need many people on both sides of the counter.

They need a lot of people thinking they are 'aware' to support the side BRICS, as world saviors in contrast to the dark 'noble' European / Western banking cartel.



It's very hard to tell what the plan is here. There's this new info from the thrive guy that there are some Chinese "elders" with a lot more gold than the Rothschilds who want to keep the status quo, in effect.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

This is the third time in ten days that I have seen 666 as the number of postings a person has made.

The content of this book is the cleaned part of the plan that is materializing around us and the Chinese perspective to this new world is also very clear in the book. They are in bed together.

http://redefininggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/prospectforamerica.jpg

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB66/01.jpg

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB66/03.jpg

David Rockefeller visits China to start working out implementation details for what is to come.
Here he is meeting with Premier Chou En-Lai…
http://redefininggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/rockchina.jpg

http://redefininggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/kissingerxi.jpg

http://redefininggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/kissputie.jpg

The Rockefeller Plan for the BRICS New World Order, in their own words… (Update 1 – Putin and Kissinger’s friendship) (http://redefininggod.com/2014/11/the-rockefeller-plan-for-the-brics-new-world-order-in-their-own-words/)

China’s complicity in building the Rockefeller New World Order, in their own words… (http://redefininggod.com/2014/11/chinas-complicity-in-building-the-rockefeller-new-world-order-in-their-own-words/)

The Globalists are accelerating the rollout of their new financial system (Update 3 – An audit is coming for the Fed) (http://redefininggod.com/2014/11/the-globalists-are-accelerating-the-rollout-of-their-new-financial-system/)

MorningFox
25th November 2014, 19:01
Of course he's a shill. He is given huge amounts of airtime on the BBC and other mainstream outlets. He is massively in the public eye in all forms of MSM. That says it all.

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 19:08
I'm interested in the agreements and pacts between Chinese/Russian/American/Iranian/reptile/mantid/grey/Pliedian etc NOW; not what the pacts were 50 years ago when Rockefeller put Mao in.

In fact, in recent days, I'm
becoming less interested because it looks like the amount of power these forces wield is absolutely nothing in comparison to what lies above them in the form of alternate galactic artificial intelligence. (The most recent avalon interview)

viking
25th November 2014, 19:13
No imo he's not a shill..

The awakening has many faces, and yes he is not advocating mass demonstrations to fall into the trap of the ptw.

He is changing the way the masses think thus the consciousness change to enable reality to change course. That's all.

Was Jesus doing the same thing.? Critics will always find an angle! Manipulation of thoughts hey!! A whole new topic...ahhh which road to take?

Viking

naste.de.lumina
25th November 2014, 19:20
I'm interested in the agreements and pacts between Chinese/Russian/American/Iranian/reptile/mantid/grey/Pliedian etc NOW; not what the pacts were 50 years ago when Rockefeller put Mao in.

In fact, I'm less and less interested because it looks like the amount of power these forces wield is absolutely nothing in comparison to what lies above them in the form of alternate galactic artificial intelligence. (The most recent avalon interview)

My friend.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but I must say that the plans are made 50 years ago or more of rockefeller / mao / kinssinger / etc, which are materializing around us now.

Like it or not, is another question.

Dennis Leahy
25th November 2014, 19:38
I couldn't disagree more (with the opening post.)

THIS is a Rothschild shill?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqsFp0J22Hc


...and the words "communism" and "socialism" have effectively been destroyed in an Orwellian doublespeak onslaught. In reality, at one end of the spectrum, there is the Rothschild Empire mindset: pyramidal-capitalism, unfathomable greed, privatization and (their) ownership of everything, and of consolidation of power (into their hands.) At the other end of the spectrum is sharing everything, which is what theoretical communism is. (There has NEVER been a communist society, just some totalitarian regimes that used the word in yet another twist of the lexicon to mask their greed and hunger for power.)

Real socialism includes some private ownership and a lot of group ownership (of infrastructure and resources.)

The ultra-rich of the world (of course including the Rothschild Empire) attacked "communism" in the 1950's by using the word "communism" rather than attacking a totalitarian regime mindset as was foisted on the Russian people. Russia wasn't communist or socialist, the ultra-rich Global Financial Empires knew it, and the opportunity to plant an anti-sharing meme that they called "anti-communism" was not wasted. And so, rather than the US regime opposing the totalitarian Russian regime, it was framed as freedom opposing communism (and communism was cleverly but falsely equated with a lack of freedom.) Gloogle "Red Scare", think about Edward Bernays and his work, and realize that the ultra-rich fooled everyone into opposing sharing! Well, of course they would - sharing is the opposite of greed.

Real socialism (I rarely even bother to use the word, with its trail of false-meme baggage) is group ownership of infrastructure and resources. Business within a real socialist model would be conducted by individuals and by businesses that are "worker-owned", and would involve the exchange of goods and services for bartered goods and services or much more frequently, using some sort of agreed-upon system of exchange (money.) So, "socialism" isn't the end of "capitalism" (nor is it the opposite of capitalism.)

The opposite of socialism is privatization and ownership of everything. Surprise! Guess who owns it all? The day each of us was born on this planet, the vast majority (maybe all) of everything was claimed by someone as their own. So, the whole notion of Empires owning everything doesn't work out too well for 99.9% of humanity.

Oh wait, what about anarchism? Well, as far as I know, it is purely theoretical and there has never been a major society that operated under anarchy. I do wish Larken Rose or someone else would create Larkenville and a few thousand anarchists move there and give it a fair try. Everyone could watch and see if it can be done in reality or only in theory. I have to admit, though I would watch carefully, I would not want to live downstream or downwind of a society that allowed people to do anything they want - as long as it wasn't a direct harm to other humans. Of the people I have met in my life (like my neighbors that saturate their lawns with herbicides and pesticides and are clueless about what happens downstream, and don't care who has to breathe it in downwind), they are not knowledgeable enough about their connection to everything and that their actions affect everyone. Could we hand-pick a thousand people who could live in harmonious anarchy?* I believe we could. But when you include EVERYONE, representing the entire spectrum of personal growth, I don't believe it would work for 2 weeks (when the 5% of people who always volunteer get tired of the other 95% who never volunteer - and when Larken actually had to drop everything in his life and actually go build a road.)

*(I think we could also hand-pick a thousand people who could live harmoniously in communism. The trick is picking dedicated people that already have what it takes to make that specific system work.)

Sorry for the rant, but we need to invent new words to discuss some of this. We need to stop having knee-jerk reactions to these words that have been successfully twisted by Global Rulers. For example, when speaking of legislation that has been passed by the US Congress, I ask people to examine whether the legislation is "citizen-centric", or "corporate-centric."

Dennis

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 19:38
I'm interested in the agreements and pacts between Chinese/Russian/American/Iranian/reptile/mantid/grey/Pliedian etc NOW; not what the pacts were 50 years ago when Rockefeller put Mao in.

In fact, I'm less and less interested because it looks like the amount of power these forces wield is absolutely nothing in comparison to what lies above them in the form of alternate galactic artificial intelligence. (The most recent avalon interview)

My friend.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but I must say that the plans are made 50 years ago or more of rockefeller / mao / kinssinger / etc, which are materializing around us now.

Like it or not, is another question.

Yes. And the plans made now are what will materialise in ten years. Because the game is speeding up. I want to know where we're going; not where we are!

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 19:45
@Dennis

Fire in the minds of men - James Billington (revolution as a - reptile - religion for the 20th century)

Tragedy and Hope - Quigley

The Rothschilds used the Schiffs and Rockefellers to fund the Bolsheviks, and to run Lennin from New York.

1984 was written about the Fabian Socialist Society's agenda (established in 1884)

As far as I understand, the Pleiedians offer a fairly good manifestation of space faring anarchy.

Shezbeth
25th November 2014, 20:30
Lets look at the possibilities. On the one hand, his refusal to tackle certain issues could be an adherence to the concept of:

Choose Your Battles - For one, 911 and other issues have plenty of advocates, and over-applying himself to too many issues could diminish his efficacy in the eyes of his target audience, the people. Additionally - as referenced - he has had the opportunity to observe the likes of David Icke (who I also like but don't trust entirely,... whoops I gave away the surprise ending!). He could have a comparable agenda but attempting a different strategy,....

AND/OR

He could be choosing his battles in the interest of duping the public, as has been suggested. By 'championing' certain issues that both awaken and enliven the masses, he could be a trojan horse of sorts as Akasha has pointed out with the Scottish referendum shenanigens.

Personally, it seems readily apparent that he has a fairly grounded understanding of metaphysics (I.e he has at least been partially illuminated), and I have thought ever since his "Messiah Complex" show that he is deliberately conforming to the archetype of 'The Savior'. Don't get me wrong, I love his comedy, his wit, and the topics he covers, and I am a regular viewer of the Trews.

Don't think for a moment I trust the cheeky bastard tho! As for whether he's a shill or not, consider this.

If he's not 'powerful' enough to take on the Rothschilds, and is therefore avoiding that element for the time being, does that make him a shill, or does that make him a careful strategist who recognizes an insurmountable (ATM) opponent?

Russel is one who's material I will keep close to. Whether he's a 'friend' or an 'enemy', the procedure is the same is it not? ^_~


I want to know where we're going; not where we are!

To get where one wants to go (or even CAN go) one MUST start from where one is.

Sammy
25th November 2014, 20:38
Beware the overly charismatic, they are often Socio/Psycopaths...

Wow (says Sam as he gazes into the mirror...) as I often emulate overly charismatic behavior.

Your poster name, Target, is no coincidence. More than once has a post of your jolted me in this way... thanks.

wishinshow
25th November 2014, 20:58
@shezbeth To get where one wants to go (or even CAN go) one MUST start from where one is.

Very true on the level of the law of attraction and a mirrored existence to our soul progression. Perhaps not so true when there are powerful entities attempting to corrupt the universal law of attraction, wherever possible!

I ask, where I am being taken(?), so that I might find out where I am now and where one might choose to otherwise be and go.

DeDukshyn
25th November 2014, 22:02
Is this the gossip channel? No sources, no research, no evidence at all, but nice editorial ... A good place to vent pent up programming and frustrations perhaps though - maybe we could use that energy to make the world a better place? Too much work I guess. ;) It's way easier to change the world by pointing fingers and judging from behind a keyboard.

So I shouldn't have reported my experience of trying to get him to comment on the Scottish vote rigging (post 5)?

There was a source for that story: Me!

All right ... I'll grant you an exception ;)

DeDukshyn
25th November 2014, 22:14
@dedukshyn errr? Are you not pointing fingers and judging us/me from behind your keyboard in the posting above?

Had I started a thread called "wishinshow is Rothschild shill" and proceeded to make negative comments about you without any evidence or sources or even good explanations of exactly why I felt the way I did, then yeah I guess I would be doing the same ... but I didn't really do that. I am not trashing anyone, just pointing out what seems somewhat obvious to me.

KaiLee
25th November 2014, 22:54
There's definitely something about Brand. But what?

The whole marriage thing to Perry was just weird. Sometimes he is cuttingly funny, other times he is so obviously self inflated. Sometimes, his humour is sheer arrogance and manipulation of people who think they think. One can't deny he says the right things, sometimes. But for what purpose? Popular thought equals dollar signs for this sort.

I'm wary of Brand, but unable to form a conclusion on his behaviour. Watch and learn I guess.

loc333
25th November 2014, 23:33
if he is ..let him go he is wakeing up people who wouldnt have a clue.they can do the math and figure the rest out for themselves.

TargeT
25th November 2014, 23:50
if he is ..let him go he is wakeing up people who wouldnt have a clue.they can do the math and figure the rest out for themselves.

This is the fall back cointelpro defense... if he IS a "schill" don't you think it was taken into account him "waking up" people? these plans span thousands of years, I doubt we would be able to glean much in the 1-2 years he's been "doing" this strange act.

He is saying the EXACT things that make us distrust the current splintered "country based" governments.

Don't we also know that a "new world order" is desired? a Global governance and currency (even religion)? To achieve this wouldn't you have to demonize the system you currently have in place to allow the transition?

sure seems like that's what he's doing, guiding us right down the desired path.

Paul
26th November 2014, 00:13
He is saying the EXACT things that make us distrust the current splintered "country based" governments.

Don't we also know that a "new world order" is desired? a Global governance and currency (even religion)? To achieve this wouldn't you have to demonize the system you currently have in place to allow the transition?

sure seems like that's what he's doing, guiding us right down the desired path.
"Ken", of RedefiningGod.com (http://redefininggod.com/) has an excellent post, expounding on this very point:
The Multilateral/Multipolar New World Order will seem like heaven… at first (http://redefininggod.com/2014/11/the-multilateralmultipolar-new-world-order-will-seem-like-heaven-at-first/")

jerry
26th November 2014, 00:29
Silly stuff.

Typical "first we raise them up, then we drag them to drug."

He's just a guy, who happens to speak fairly freely and due to his previous mainstream media appearances, before going really open, he just gets more coverage.

Shill?

He's not talking: eugenics, microchipping, culling down the population, transhumanism, one-world government or one-world currency or corporate fascism.

And if socialism means taking care of those unfortunate, I guess that makes me a socialist too. It's just a tag to put down people, when one disagrees. No content in it. Just an easy label.

Listen to the message, think for yourself. Ignore the carrier.
To take care of the poor socialism is not required at all ...just one years expenditures of the US military budget alone including black opps is enough to fund every social program for 30 years on some accounts up to a hundred years.

Cardillac
26th November 2014, 00:40
all one has to do is look at Russell Brand's absolutely hideous/freaky "smile"- I never had a good feeling about this man (reportedly Katy Perry's handler but don't know if that's totally true)- talk is cheap but body language is worth its weight in gold- body language never lies and if one is versed in it (I am- I work in theater) it reveals a helluva lot-

and I've noticed David Icke has discontinued sourcing Russell Brand

mahalall
26th November 2014, 00:41
he aint no shill,
cos if ee were
hed be talking about this in his home town.
qIHajwS_NYc
in it!!

TargeT
26th November 2014, 00:44
He is saying the EXACT things that make us distrust the current splintered "country based" governments.

Don't we also know that a "new world order" is desired? a Global governance and currency (even religion)? To achieve this wouldn't you have to demonize the system you currently have in place to allow the transition?

sure seems like that's what he's doing, guiding us right down the desired path.
"Ken", of RedefiningGod.com (http://redefininggod.com/) has an excellent post, expounding on this very point:
The Multilateral/Multipolar New World Order will seem like heaven… at first (http://redefininggod.com/2014/11/the-multilateralmultipolar-new-world-order-will-seem-like-heaven-at-first/")

His adopting of the "savior" archetype fits very well with this too; almost puzzle perfect.

Edit:

That was a great article, shows how "our hopes and dreams" may not have originated with us, and just be another Hegelian outcome.

Dennis Leahy
26th November 2014, 02:28
The level of cognitive dissonance necessary to discount and ignore 98% of what Russell Brand IS ACTUALLY SAYING is astounding to me. Let's tie him to a stone, throw him in the water, and see if he floats! If he floats, he a witch! er, I mean he's a Rothschild Illuminati master manipulating bastard. Burn him! Stone him! Off with his head!

Who's next, me?

Dennis

Tesseract
26th November 2014, 02:45
Of course he's a shill. He is given huge amounts of airtime on the BBC and other mainstream outlets. He is massively in the public eye in all forms of MSM. That says it all.

So is George Galloway, is he a shill too?

AnamCara
26th November 2014, 03:10
Perhaps no matter how much or little that we 'know' about someone's intent, our own intuition is the deciding factor. It seems to me there has always been in a thread of honesty in Russell's rants, woven in with the laughs and the desire to shock/wake up the audience. Jim Carrey has a similar appeal and he also is on a mission to 'wake up' the audience. I have great respect for Jim Carrey and also intuit his honesty.

Maunagarjana
26th November 2014, 05:37
Russell Brand just has a different perspective, than you. Just because he's got some blind spots in certain areas doesn't make him a shill. I've known many people who think just like him, and they are people who I respect, think are good people, that their heart is in the right place. He's missing some important pieces of the puzzle, sure, but I think he's got a lot of good pieces too. To claim to know what it is that he knows is ridiculous. Like all of us, he is a work in progress, and down the line he may be singing a different tune once he figures out some things. Also, as it has been pointed out, Brand split up with Jemima Khan. http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/russell-brand-jemima-khan-split-4297376

Shezbeth
26th November 2014, 08:51
There's a story that stuck with me I would like to share. It originates from a Star Wars novel (can't remember which one, sorry!) so please bear with.

The story is about a particularly (arguably the most) beautiful butterfly. When the butterfly is in its cocoon, it experiences a period of extreme encapsulation, suffocation, and terror. This feeling is particularly 'loud' to those force-sensitive. The butterfly literally cries out through the force to be saved. A particular jedi apprentice once heard that cry, and set out to alleviate the butterfly's feelings, and freed the butterfly from the cocoon.

While the sentiment was sincere and benevolent, the doing so (freeing) was premature, and the butterfly's wings never fully developed, never reached their full size and never developed its characteristic beauty and color. The butterfly could not fly, and died shortly thereafter.

The experience of terror, of imprisonment and suffocation was a necessary part of the butterfly's development. By being freed too soon the butterfly was dependent on outside forces for its survival, which was very short-lived. What was intended to be a gesture and an act of charity resulted in tragedy.

My point is, Brand may be alerting people to some of the ill things going on in the world, but is he really awakening people? Are not all the things he says things that have already been said elsewhere, better, and more comprehensively? Do his words really lead others to a higher understanding, or is he 'awakening (freeing) the butterfly before it is fully developed'? Food for thought.

Flowerpunkchip
26th November 2014, 09:08
oh for f*** sake, concentrate on the bigger picture than accusing Brand of being a shill.

And I totally understand if he doesn't want to touch 9/11. You all know what happens if you question 9/11 in the media. He'll be shooting himself in the foot. It's bad enough when I mention that I have certain unanswered questions about 9/11 to friends, you are treated like a moron. The media in Britain (and most other places) are savage and if I was famous, I wouldn't even talk about 9/11 to my family.

I think the same goes for George Galloway regarding 9/11, I am sure he respects the 9/11 movement but he will stay clear of it.

Anchor
26th November 2014, 09:10
Then we round up the followers, trouble makers, rebels, etc, with ease...

Ooops, that's me buggered then....

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 09:36
Russell Brand is moving the UK towards a socialist revolution on the streets of London. What could be better if you were a Rothschild who wanted to steal everything from the middle classes and wanted to steal everything from the reigning royal family?

Hasn't that been done before by the Rothschilds? The French Revolution? The. Bolshevik revolution? Hasn't it been copied by every other tin pot dictator with a Rothschild rule book?

This is about Fabian socialism meets revolutionary socialism. Both of these ideologies fomented with Rothschild money. (Please see Fire in the Minds of Men - James Billington.)

I just can't understand why the majority on a forum of this pedigree and grooming isn't au fait with the understanding that the Rothschilds used their minions to fund every socialist/communist movement in history.

bluestflame
26th November 2014, 09:48
i have seen memes circulating depicting brand as a " pied piper" , i couldn't get past it , not sure what it brought forth in me but beyond all the surface appearances i don't trust him

Akasha
26th November 2014, 10:10
oh for f*** sake, concentrate on the bigger picture than accusing Brand of being a shill.

And I totally understand if he doesn't want to touch 9/11. You all know what happens if you question 9/11 in the media. He'll be shooting himself in the foot. It's bad enough when I mention that I have certain unanswered questions about 9/11 to friends, you are treated like a moron. The media in Britain (and most other places) are savage and if I was famous, I wouldn't even talk about 9/11 to my family.

I think the same goes for George Galloway regarding 9/11, I am sure he respects the 9/11 movement but he will stay clear of it.

Exactly the meme that ensures perpetuated high (and low) profile adherence to the script. Once a critical mass of celeb's (and nobodies) get over the fear of pariahship they/we will be collectively redefined as reality analysts.

David Icke has consistently advocated the "growing a pair" method and he's gone from strength to strength as a result. The climate is far more ripe for folk like Brand to successfully tackle the really hot potatoes than it was back in the early 90's when Icke's truth quest started.

Baby Steps
26th November 2014, 11:02
Like Jessie Ventura, someone in the public eye, who wants to take a section of their followers a certain number of steps down the rabbit hole, in the cause of awakening them, has to draw a line somewhere, in order to avoid alienating them. There will be a numerical relationship between how deep one goes and how many one takes along. Done in the spirit of service, there is definitely a place for people who 'only go so far' because more will go that far and eventually go further. RB is great (but he might be a sexual vampire). For many people this will have been the first time that they hear that our society is dominated by corporate corruption, and this is key.
In the case of Jessie's interview with David Icke where he demanded 'show me a reptile', I suspect it was a set up with Alex Jones in order to differentiate JV from DI, and thereby retain his mass support, and perhaps not threaten certain groups. Again that is a legitimate ploy to retain mass support.

Anchor
26th November 2014, 11:34
My point is, Brand may be alerting people to some of the ill things going on in the world, but is he really awakening people? Are not all the things he says things that have already been said elsewhere, better, and more comprehensively? Do his words really lead others to a higher understanding, or is he 'awakening (freeing) the butterfly before it is fully developed'? Food for thought.

You could level that accusation at any teacher who is teaching outside of a specialized teacher/guru-devotee/disciple/chela relationship (call it what you want) who encourages people to do things, since the teacher is constantly providing grist to the mill for awakening for those who decide to explore it.

The fail safe for each is freewill and the freedom to discern for oneself how one should act.

If I act to free a butterfly prematurely, then I have abridged the butterfly's freewill.

If I present thoughtful information, which may or may not be super-good-stuff, but you ignore it, then I am not infringing on your freewill - I just might irritate you a while until you reach the threshold of deciding to ignore me.

If I impose my will (however that can be, unlikely in your case, but assume someone less aware) and act with intent to attempt to undermine your discernment (by perhaps using cunning techniques not known to the majority) then I infringe your freewill and karma adheres to me.

If I were a service-to-self oriented loveless-psychopath type with no active green ray, or heart centre, it would not matter, since were I on that path I would not care about your freewill, just how many followers I could accrue. The weaker and more prematurely damaged the better - just so long as you have enough in you left to enrich my powerbase - muwahahaha!

Russel Brand certainly seems to irritate a lot of people.

The acid test passes for me, which is that he is, at will, ignorable, you can take or leave what he has to say.

Shezbeth
26th November 2014, 12:00
You could level that accusation at any teacher who is teaching outside of a specialized teacher/guru-devotee/disciple/chela relationship (call it what you want) who encourages people to do things, since the teacher is constantly providing grist to the mill for awakening for those who decide to explore it.

... and perhaps I will, in their respective thread. Meanwhile,....

Personally I think that he is smart enough to know he's being allowed to have his effect, but I also expect he knows he can only go so far which may (hopefully) inspire further inquiry but is also aware of the celebrity dominance his work inspires. However, I also recognize the possibility that he's a brilliant manipulator and is in cahoots, and that's just one of the many other possibilities.

All I am doing is agreeing with the sentiment of "don't trust him" and providing counter-point to the assertion that he's waking people up, because there are likewise people going to sleep "cuz Russel will tell them what to think". Whether that is deliberate and/or calculated is indeterminable IMO, in the meantime I do find him entertaining,....

:p

Karma? Really? Not everyone finds karma a credible concept,....

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 12:10
Jesse Ventura calls 911 as it is and he also calls the anthropo-climate-change-scam, as it is.

I ask the forum: do you think that we could go so far as to say that the litmus test for a Terran hominid being awake,or not, could be found in their response to these two subjects?

Or would an arbitrary panel assigned to an individual's level of consciousness need to include Atlantis, aliens and the individuals view of the metaphysical?

Personally, I believe I was totally asleep, comotose, almost flat-lining when I subscribed to the 911official and the idea that CO2 was going to heat the planet up. Since waking up to 911/climate change, I feel that, year upon year, my eyes have gradually opened wider.

MorningFox
26th November 2014, 12:13
Of course he's a shill. He is given huge amounts of airtime on the BBC and other mainstream outlets. He is massively in the public eye in all forms of MSM. That says it all.

So is George Galloway, is he a shill too?


Likely. Certainly he is beneficial to their agenda willingly or not... otherwise he simply wouldn't get the coverage.

Is anyone naive enough to actually believe that *anyone* threatening their agenda in any way would get continued mainstream media coverage? Come on now.

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 12:17
Of course he's a shill. He is given huge amounts of airtime on the BBC and other mainstream outlets. He is massively in the public eye in all forms of MSM. That says it all.

So is George Galloway, is he a shill too?


Likely. Certainly he is beneficial to their agenda willingly or not... otherwise he simply wouldn't get the coverage.

I think that there are people within the framework of the BBC who are working for higher interests who are interested in disclosure about 911 etc. There just aren't many.

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 12:22
You could level that accusation at any teacher who is teaching outside of a specialized teacher/guru-devotee/disciple/chela relationship (call it what you want) who encourages people to do things, since the teacher is constantly providing grist to the mill for awakening for those who decide to explore it.

... and perhaps I will, in their respective thread. Meanwhile,....

Personally I think that he is smart enough to know he's being allowed to have his effect, but I also expect he knows he can only go so far which may (hopefully) inspire further inquiry but is also aware of the celebrity dominance his work inspires. However, I also recognize the possibility that he's a brilliant manipulator and is in cahoots, and that's just one of the many other possibilities.

All I am doing is agreeing with the sentiment of "don't trust him" and providing counter-point to the assertion that he's waking people up, because there are likewise people going to sleep "cuz Russel will tell them what to think". Whether that is deliberate and/or calculated is indeterminable IMO, in the meantime I do find him entertaining,....

:p

Karma? Really? Not everyone finds karma a credible concept,....

I defer from my original hard line view point to be more in line with what you have written above. Very wise words.

The only concern I have with joining you on the sidelines is the fact that he (Russell Brand) is continually promoting anthropogenic climate change. I'm surprised he isn't teaming up with David Meyer de Rothschild, yet. They would look good as a couple.

Shezbeth
26th November 2014, 12:35
I will also add that his message (which I admit I haven't heard all of) seems noticeably lacking in its advocacy of personal emergence and refinement, which is a concept I know he knows and which I find (and he should as a metaphysician) to be more important to a therefore emergent society, which would also be a potential indicator for 'manipulator',....

Sidelines nothing, I'm watching him from the fence!

jackovesk
26th November 2014, 13:59
Question: "Is Russell Brand a Rothschild shill?"

Answer: ((NO, he is NOT))...:nono:

Question: But, why are you so sure jackovesk...???

Answer: Just am, is all...:noidea:

:crazy_pilot: :neo:

PS - Having said that, I would most certainly be concerned if he was a friend of...

http://freecoolaid.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/dderoth.jpg

:mad2:

ulli
26th November 2014, 14:04
Question: "Is Russell Brand a Rothschild shill?"

Answer: ((NO, he is NOT))...:nono:

Question: But, why are you so sure jackovesk...???

Answer: Just am, is all...:noidea:

:crazy_pilot: :neo:

I'm with you, Jacko.
Let's not give them bastards too much power.

donk
26th November 2014, 15:42
The level of cognitive dissonance necessary to discount and ignore 98% of what Russell Brand IS ACTUALLY SAYING is astounding to me. Let's tie him to a stone, throw him in the water, and see if he floats! If he floats, he a witch! er, I mean he's a Rothschild Illuminati master manipulating bastard. Burn him! Stone him! Off with his head!

Who's next, me?

Dennis

I do not mean to hurt your feelings, but I personally think that your time and energy and work and the direction you take it empowers and validates the system you want so badly to fix more than any shill ever could....that's not to say I want to stone you or Russell or anyone, it's just the way I see it...I think the cognitive dissonance required to do what you do is absolutely astounding....I guess we are mirrors peering into each other. I allow for the possibility I may be wrong, do you?

And to another who I have great respect for, Wind: I find it hilarious that people learn any of the positive lessons he has to teach from HIM. The blame game needed to start LONG before Dubya popularized and derided the concept. There are individuals making decisions that directly effect all of us, and until the blame game gets started in a direction in humanity's favor, we will continue to rail against abstract concepts, magical constructs, tulpas of someone else's creation....like the economy, religion, and politics--all of which we are all giving power to...while someone (or something) hides behind them and laughs at us.

As a card-carrying member of the "controlled opposition" (as I oppose ANY who desire and actively work for CONTROL), I think it's more important to look at the account Akasha brings up, or notice the fact that Icke backed off him like someone else noticed...or I could be wrong...and we can use the new age accounting system to judge him: he is WAY more in the black than the red...so he is above criticism and can't possibly going down an anti-human path or even being used as tool, nothing to see here, just worship his goodness...

Akasha
26th November 2014, 17:21
I would most certainly be concerned if he was a friend of...

http://freecoolaid.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/dderoth.jpg

:mad2:

So Russell's very recent ex', Jemima Khan (nee Goldsmith)'s brother Zac is married to Alice Rothschild and her other brother Ben was, until 2013, married to Kate Rothschild. David de Rothschild's great great grandfather, Lionel De Rothschild, is Ben, Zac and Jemimas' great great great grandfather.

That's several less degrees of separation than most of us mere mortals.

Are they friends? Who knows?

Cause for concern? You tell me.....

.....but given Russell's attempts to win over the alternative community and given the alternative community's overwhelming opinion of DdR and given the Rothschilds' ownership of Reuters/AP, if they were friends, wouldn't we be the last to know?

Rothschild Genealogy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogy_of_the_Rothschild_family)

lauraheath123
26th November 2014, 17:47
I hope russell hasnt been got too but there is a few signs he has been, take this interview, he looks like he is being woke from hypnosis just before he speaks, never mind the subliminal hand signals :(

3YR4CseY9pk

Dennis Leahy
26th November 2014, 18:21
The level of cognitive dissonance necessary to discount and ignore 98% of what Russell Brand IS ACTUALLY SAYING is astounding to me. Let's tie him to a stone, throw him in the water, and see if he floats! If he floats, he a witch! er, I mean he's a Rothschild Illuminati master manipulating bastard. Burn him! Stone him! Off with his head!

Who's next, me?

Dennis

I do not mean to hurt your feelings, but I personally think that your time and energy and work and the direction you take it empowers and validates the system you want so badly to fix more than any shill ever could....that's not to say I want to stone you or Russell or anyone, it's just the way I see it...I think the cognitive dissonance required to do what you do is absolutely astounding....I guess we are mirrors peering into each other. I allow for the possibility I may be wrong, do you?

So, how do you define yourself? I'm guessing anarchist. If yes, then ponder the possibility of a transformation of US society from rule by the current fascist-corporatist-militarist US government to a/an _(anarchist? socialist?)__ society:

A.) with the status quo just the way it is: rule by the Ruling Elite
or
b.) with citizens in control of our own governance, first

Many anarchists, and socialists, and a couple of communists I know all believe that the US government can be transformed in one single step into their desired FORM of government. Whoosh! {waving the magic wand} And, would rather stubbornly live their entire life as a slave and die as a slave rather that try to think like a chessmaster and figure out how to DISEMPOWER the Elite/oligarchs first.

Are you wise enough to see The Reset Button as a steppingstone, and not as an ultimate goal?

Do you have any idea how few anarchists there are in the US? Or how few socialists? Most US citizens view those terms like they view "Nazi" or "godless commie" - they have absolutely no idea what those terms actually mean and have NEVER thought about changing the FORM of government in the US (though they wish they had a better government) to one of THOSE things they have been taught to believe are horrible. How could they - they have been brainwashed into believing that the US government, though "slightly imperfect", is not only the best in the world but the best in world history. Get out more, talk to more people - you'll be astounded how locked-in they are.

The vast percentage of the US population needs to be spoken to in terms they understand, and may be able to support some concrete, systemic change that complies with the current US Constitution - but are utterly incapable of taking the visionary leap to an entirely different social structure. Congratulate yourself on your ability to envision a drastically different future - but good luck trying to get 300 million people that have no such mental functionality to leap with you.

If someone wants to live and die a slave, here's the recipe:
Stay stubborn, think like a toddler, don't try to unify a large mass of people based on one thing they can all agree on, and don't strategize like a tactician. Oh, another one is to demonize or at least discount anyone who who doesn't think exactly the same as them (or has money, or fame, or a cute ex-wife, or less than 6 degrees of separation from a known bad guy.)

donk
26th November 2014, 18:41
I define myself as human being, who has found not everything is as exactly as I thought I was. One who took responsibility for the fact that I constantly lie to myself, like most everyone else in this reality of lies where we find ourselves.

I strive to see things differently than I have been programmed, I work hard at changing my emotional attachments I have to my most sacred held beliefs. I recognize that I really know nothing. I choose to do my best to live my life as free as I possibly can, despite all these human created control structures we find ourselves immersed in.

To me the ideal is not defined by any -ology...it is the complete non-participation in any of these anti-human/anti-life institutions. I hold no illusions my grandchildrens' grandchildren can be free of it, but I live in hope that even WE--in our lifetime--just might. To do that, I am trying to find ways to convince as many around me as I can something to the effect of "what if there was a war, and no one showed up?"...or even better: what if our national and religious and cultural and every other category of VALUES were based on a solid foundation of TRUTH and PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY?

I am not wise enough to see the "Reset Button" as anything other than what I've always associated that idea with: the thing that momentarily utterly terminates the machine's program, so that the identical program can start over again at the beginning in hopes that it works better this time. I used to be super-immersed in the economic and political and social realities as they are presented to me in my reality...I personally find it exhausting, sorry but I just can't invest my energy on anything based on the mindset that allows any validation to "civilization". I honestly believe it is not the only way, is not even a "human" way...and am constantly looking for something different--I'll let ya know if I come up with anything good.

Call it "thinking like a toddler"...maybe that's not such a bad thing? I personally think we can learn a lot more from them, than any HIS-STORY we are taught. All I am doing is offering perspective, which I see as a balance. What some find astounding and hilarious, others may find the exact opposite...which doesn't mean we want to destroy that opposite thought. We just want you to see that maybe others see it differently.

Dennis Leahy
26th November 2014, 19:01
Jesse Ventura calls 911 as it is and he also calls the anthropo-climate-change-scam, as it is.

I ask the forum: do you think that we could go so far as to say that the litmus test for a Terran hominid being awake,or not, could be found in their response to these two subjects?


Well, you busted me. Though I'm 100% certain that 9/11 was an inside job, I do see information forcing me to believe that humans really are changing the climate of the world with deforestation, ocean acidification - killing plankton that supply the most oxygen - and fossil fuel burning. I see it regardless that the Elite scum see this (like everything) as an opportunity to make money, and have enacted disingenuous carbon tax that of course wouldn't solve anything. And, I see it regardless if the Earth is ALSO being heated by factors that (some scientist says) are heating all the planets in the solar system.

I have to say, I'm impressed that we humans have not only developed the ability to measure the temperature of other planets, but that we can measure them so accurately and that we have enough historical data that we can positively conclude that other planets are heating up at the same rate as Earth. That is some Nobel Prize worthy astrogeophysics right there! The fact that THAT particular scientist (or scientists) gets his data placed on the "I believe him!" altar and other scientists data gets stored in the trashcan is somewhat baffling to me. Maybe we all just pick and choose which data to believe based on our preconceived notions. I admit it's true for me. I see removing 80% of the Earth's forests and burning billions (trillions?) of tons of hydrocarbons as pretty damn likely to have a deleterious effect on the planet. So yeah, I'm guessing we had a hand in both the 6th mass extinction and climate change. Anyone that wants to believe that humans can virtually do anything and yet have no effect on the climate are free to do so... and if they want to declare that as a criteria for being awake, well, I guess that means that I'm asleep.

Dennis

Skyhaven
26th November 2014, 19:30
Goooooooooooooooo Russel!

These conspiracies are going nowhere. :loco:

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 19:31
@dennis. I agree with you. We all planted the bombs in those two skyscrapers. I'm not being sarcastic. I really do believe that we all planted those bombs. Collective consciousness. And maybe the sun knows we killed 80% of the trees and is giving us a roasting for it. I'm open to that, too. In fact, my head is so damn open, my brain fell out yesterday.

However, I was not talking on that level of abstraction or spiritual dialectic. I was talking about the bricks and mortar of 911 and the CO2 debate. I think you understand that.

So I ask you. Do we pretty much agree?

dianna
26th November 2014, 19:42
In fact, my head is so damn open, my brain fell out yesterday.



:rofl: Best line on the forum today! :rofl:

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 19:44
Russell could be programmed biological entity without soul that they keep in a vat of ACME green glug between intervals of wheeling him out for a Trews session and a quick shag. We just don't know. And maybe I'll stop asking soon. I bloody hope I can stop asking, soon.

If any moderators would like me to withdraw the statement above, I am most happy to do so and would subsequently wish to put on record that I heard about the green glug from a local bag lady who was Brand's lover in a past life. I would also add that this is intended to add humour to a long in the tooth thread where I feel we are offering the man too much attention. Perhaps some of his BRAND of humour is a nice way to close the discussion off.

Guys! Shall we knock this thread on the head?

(PS I know I'm not as funny as Brand and I have never once called him a pedophile. In fact he's the only person from the establishment who I am sure is not a pedophile! Well... Nah... He's not)

TargeT
26th November 2014, 19:52
t we can measure them so accurately and that we have enough historical data that we can positively conclude that other planets are heating up at the same rate as Earth

except, earth isn't heating up?

http://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/styles/inline_all/public/YearlySurfaceTempAnom1880-2010.jpg?itok=tCps1K4T
http://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/why-did-earth%E2%80%99s-surface-temperature-stop-rising-past-decade

and anthropomorphic climate change is more of a guilt trip than anything based on science. Lots of negative ego and fear involved in "global warming".

But of course this is just based in logic and data (which shows we go through cycles, warm, then cool and have been forever...)

Now, this doesn't make it untrue that humanity has an effect on the environment, but almost all studies along those lines are based on the logical fallacy "Correlation does not imply causation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation)" which we are trained societaly to accept (especially when leveraged by another popular fallacy Appeal to Authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)).

Anyway, I like your thought line; but I think you picked a poor example (an example that is a part of the wide spread divide and conquer techniques that seem to be popping up everywhere).

donk
26th November 2014, 20:01
The thing is, you yourself are defeating the only productive thing about having threads like these….by doing the EXACT thing that makes them repulsive to most. Putting emotional attachments and snarky mocking of a personality, creating conspiracies, haha all fun and games til everyone misses the point: there CAN be value here. Including and not limited to:
-first hand personal experiences of the personality acting other than how most see him as…or how he tries to present himself to be
-intuitive feelings of the more sensitive…to take or to leave, and be expressed in a tasteful (and not hurtful or slanderous) way
-examining trends, patterns, or anomalies in what is being presented to the intended audicence
-analyzing aforementioned audience, as well as the “media” itself , and especially the message and it’s true intent
-presenting other observable phenomon such as the “judgement accounting” where some good deeds cause others to fall into behavioral patterns such as defensivenss and cognitive dissonance


…and that’s just off of the top of my head, I could probably come up with a few more if I put any thought into it. Some here did…and completely sh!tbagging the whole thing poops on all of that. I personally don’t care, I mean, I’ll probably just wait for the next one…but it is marathon, not a sprint. And one day we may even be able to have discussions where the meaningful information is the highlight rather than fireworks peoples’ feelings for the messenger? You can say that I’m a dreamer….

Billy
26th November 2014, 21:23
I can only share my personal thoughts as everyone else has.

One important piece of the puzzle, is to remember that you are ALL important pieces of the puzzle that creates the bigger picture. The picture is continuous work in progress. Russell has his individual personal vision of how he sees the bigger picture as do many other alternative thinkers, David Icke, D,W. to many to mention, whether they are influenced by the controllers vision of the picture or not, to me is not important, it only becomes important when other folks influence is fed energy and allowed to become a distraction that steers the individual away from personal and collective conscious vision from the changes you want to see in our world.

As i say there are many with visions, they are all sign posts, pointing this way and that way. But if you find yourself at a junction standing still, pointing to one sign post saying "this sign post is pointing in the wrong direction". You become distracted from moving forward and are not going anywhere. We all have the choices whether to stand still pointing fingers or move forwards.

Peace.

P.S. Russell helped to awaken my daughter. I thank him for that. Now she tries to move on from anger and frustration. All part of the journey.

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 21:55
@donk an artificial intelligence might approach the discussion in the manner outlined in your bullet points. I'm a flawed human who, at times, values gossip and humour. I also like to dance, sing, play the guitar and do yoga. I haven't yet found a way to compute the reason why! And until Russell starts inviting forum members over for a cup of tea or a quick shag; we'll need to stick to mindless gossip about the inner workings of a cult celebrity's life.

avid
26th November 2014, 22:00
So - what's the outcome of Russell Brand being a sort-of shill? Married to illuminati Katy Perry, indoctrinated into vile atrocities, shocked into revulsion of 'said' experiences, and possibly having some sort of 'mind-control' as his 'get-out clause' to release him from the 'Katy Perry' vilification. He's trying to make it right? The high and mighty in the media today are all singing from the same Satanic "Hymn-sheet" - otherwise - they would never be there. Please listen to those who are desperately trying to escape, there are many, and we should listen.

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 22:04
I'm a bit scared to post it. And i would love to see a vote on the issue!!!

Edit: or maybe after Billy's kind words, I view a vote on the direction of the branded sign post, as irrelevant. After all, and as Yazz said, if we don't want to go in the direction of a socialist revolution, the only way is up! Baby

21g
26th November 2014, 22:16
@ wishinshow - Brand does Yoga;) Be afraid !

Just pulling your leg.

I really appreciate humour aswell. Keeps the mind open.
Thanks for the good thread.

G.

Dennis Leahy
26th November 2014, 22:20
@dennis. I agree with you. We all planted the bombs in those two skyscrapers, as well. I'm not being sarcastic. I really do believe that we all planted those bombs. Collective consciousness. And maybe the sun knows we killed 80% of the trees and is giving us a roasting for it. I'm open to that, too. In fact, my head is so damn open, my brain fell out yesterday.

However, I was not talking on that level of abstraction or spiritual dialectic. I was talking about the bricks and mortar of 911 and the CO2 debate. I think you understand that.

So I ask you. Do we pretty much agree?

Um, you've taken a turn I can't follow. I'm not going to go into the "we are all one"/metaphysical aspect (which is true, but not relevant to the topic, to me), and twist that to blame humanity for what a few Bad Guys have done. The Universe/God/One didn't plant the bombs in the tower, and I didn't either. I'm pretty sure you didn't either (unless you're making a confession.) There were real people who did, real black-ops people who were following orders, or (and this has been postulated by others as well) maybe some service personnel delivered bomb-rigged vending machines or water coolers or fire extinguishers - without knowing what they were really delivering. But yeah, the whole freaking WTC complex was brought to rubble by bombs. The shutdown of NORAD and the cover-up of everything are absolute indicators that the US government HAD to be in on it, so, yeah, Inside Job (probably with help of the Mossad.) So, I agree with your earlier statements about 9/11, and don't know why you're now taking this "we all planted those bombs" bizarre twist - which I don't agree with.

As for global climate change...
Is the Earth heating up, or not. Let's say it's not. (We'll discard the fact that over 95% of "scientists" in "climate science" fields say we are.) Now let's get a guillotine and remove the heads of the globalist oligarchs and their minions that foisted a carbon tax on us. Alright, where are we now? Unless the global empires of the Energy Mafia were destroyed by removing a few of those heads, then they still exist - and together with the bankers (who are way too smart to get their heads chopped off) still rule planet Earth. To me, we live on a Blue Gem, filled with a stunning array of biological diversity relatively in balance, and relatively in flux (evolution, climate cycles, weather patterns, succession.) To the Global Rulers, the Earth is a treasure chest to plunder, most life forms are inconsequential (unless they taste good with ketchup), and humans - better known as "human resources" - are slaves. I sometimes like to call these psychopathic global rulers, "the Bad Guys."

So, The Universe/God/One didn't clearcut 80% of the planet's forests, dig up a billion tons of coal, pump up a billion barrels of oil, the Bad Guys did. (Now we could get metaphysical here, and as a part of Oneness or even a complicit member of humanity, accept part of the blame for what the Bad Guys ordered done. I'm not buying it. I've never clear-cut a forest, or allowed toxic tailings from my mine to run into the streams, or drilled oil and frac-drilled gas wells, or ordered coal-fired power plants to be built, or dumped the toxic sludge from my factory into the aquifer... but the Bad Guys have.)

Let's also take into consideration that these same Bad Guys have been obscuring/reflecting as much sunlight from hitting the Earth, with their aluminum/barium chemtrails, as they possibly could - for DECADES. Any clue why they might be doing that, since global warming is just a carbon tax-based hoax?

As I mentioned, I'm open to the idea that there are solar and/or galactic forces at play with Earth weather, but to pretend that humans are not negatively affecting the climate and causing the 6th mass extinction is just... well, pretending.

Russell Brand actually mentions these same Bad Guys, and he doesn't appear to me to be cheering for them. The Bad Guys don't need Russell Brand (or me, thanks "Donk", first time I've ever been called a shill) shilling for them. They have done a pretty damn good job of taking over planet Earth (while we who believe we are "awake" try to keep them from taking over planet Earth. Oops, too late.)

Dennis

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 22:39
@dennis. Thank you so much for the most eloquent post that this thread has, IMHO, seen so far. I have to sleep now and will reply tomorrow. One thing, though. They are spraying metals in the atmosphere to "light up" the cloaked UFOs that they cannot see without the metal.

Jenya
26th November 2014, 23:03
So bored of this "so and so is a shill" debate. The guy is incredibly high profile and has put out some incontravertably positive content - there's no doubt at all that this will have made him a target for manipulation and corruption. However, that's true of pretty much anyone with any sort of standing in the movement. Doesn't mean anybody should be outright rejecting the work he is doing. We live in a world where nothing is entirely trustworthy - all you can do is take the positive where you can find it and accept that it's going to be mixed in with some amount of bull****.

Sorry, not very eloquent first contribution to the forum but yegods I am tired.

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 23:08
it only becomes important when other folks influence is fed energy and allowed to become a distraction that steers the individual away from personal and collective conscious vision from the changes you want to see in our world.

We all have the choices whether to stand still pointing fingers or move forwards.



Would I be correct in thinking that this forum is there to help us work out which signs are pointing in the correct direction and which are not? Is this not what Bill Ryan has helped us all with? This thread was intended by me to allow people a forum to discuss whether or not the Russell Brand road sign is currently pointing us all, in the correct direction, or not. We have only stood still long enough in front of this road sign, to make that very decision (currently less than 24 hours with breaks for cups of tea and a cookie).

I hope many others will read this thread and move onwards and/or upwards, past it.

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 23:14
@jenya not everybody is calling for a revolution. Russell brand IS calling for a revolution. I think that most people on this forum would prefer evolution. It's a lot less bloody and I get to keep my silver candle sticks that my grandmother gave me.

Jenya
26th November 2014, 23:21
Revolution has a few possible definitions. One is the violent overthrow of government, of which yes, I admit would not be helpful (the violent element specifically), the other, which I think is what he is actually pushing for, is simply "a dramatic and wide-reaching change in conditions, attitudes, or operation".

wishinshow
26th November 2014, 23:49
And this dramatic change, has - historically - benefited the few over the many. Fire in the Minds of Men - James Billington.

Jenya
27th November 2014, 06:22
Violent revolutionary overthrow has historically benefited the few over the many, yes. But as I wrote in my last post, that's not the definition of the word 'revolution' that he's advocating. He is advocating for "a dramatic and wide-reaching change in conditions, attitudes, or operation" - and he's pretty clear that it should be non-violent.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/russell-brand-calls-for-peaceful-effortless-joyful-revolution-again-9554651.html

And isn't that what we all want? I don't see how you can argue that this is an inherently dangerous thing to promote, unless you're happy with the status quo?

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 06:51
@Dennis

I feel I have patronised you in my first reply to your original post in this thread and I feel sorry for having done that.

I want to say this. I believe that damage to the environment (in the form of pollution) is not in any way equated with the idea that CO2 is causing an increase in the heat which our planet's greenhouse effect is able to retain. I believe that pollution and the destruction of our natural habitat is terrible. I would like to see us manufacture and employ giant Tesla machines that can purify the oceans of contaminants like mercury. I want to see Tesla power generators that would make wind turbines an irrelevance. If the aliens can manufacture saturn's rings, then we can use the same level of technology to clean up this planet. I would further say that I would like to see a ten times increase in the levels of CO2 in our atmosphere because ALL plants thrive in a high CO2 environment and the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has such a microscopic impact on the greenhouse effect, that one might as well completely factor it out.

I used to be a climate change activist. I used to think that "Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulphur enhancement" was a great idea. Then 911, and David Icke/Alex Jones woke me up using Lord Monckton and Piers Corbyn.

I repeat myself. Chemtrails are being sprayed to "light up" cloaked UFOs on radar and they get the added benefit of ten more programmes to attack us with morgellons and viruses and a general malaise of the human immune system.

jackovesk
27th November 2014, 07:38
t we can measure them so accurately and that we have enough historical data that we can positively conclude that other planets are heating up at the same rate as Earth

except, earth isn't heating up?

http://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/styles/inline_all/public/YearlySurfaceTempAnom1880-2010.jpg?itok=tCps1K4T
http://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/why-did-earth%E2%80%99s-surface-temperature-stop-rising-past-decade

and anthropomorphic climate change is more of a guilt trip than anything based on science. Lots of negative ego and fear involved in "global warming".

But of course this is just based in logic and data (which shows we go through cycles, warm, then cool and have been forever...)

Now, this doesn't make it untrue that humanity has an effect on the environment, but almost all studies along those lines are based on the logical fallacy "Correlation does not imply causation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation)" which we are trained societaly to accept (especially when leveraged by another popular fallacy Appeal to Authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)).

Anyway, I like your thought line; but I think you picked a poor example (an example that is a part of the wide spread divide and conquer techniques that seem to be popping up everywhere).

Agreed TargeT...:thumb:

All ((Global Warming Fearmongering)) simply comes down to this in a ((Nutshell))...



The ((Elite's)) way of (($$$ Controlling)) the Energy-Supply...:yes4:

That's ((ALL)) you need to know...:wizard:

:focus:

jackovesk
27th November 2014, 07:48
FK, I really feel sorry for all those ((Whistleblowers - Good Samaritan's) these days, seems they just can't win no matter what they do...:faint:

...and to be brutally honest

Opinionated 'Threads' like this without any ((research/footnotes)) at all, talk about being stuck on a fully-fledged ((Merry-Go-Round)) with no exit point...:faint:

Just thought I'd state the 'Obvious' before you begin your next thread "wishinshow"...:noidea:

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 09:08
Thanks for the input, Jackovesk. Peoples opinions are fun. They offer a difference of perspective. Is that not what god is looking for?

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 09:22
@jenya Did the non violent industrial revolution benefit us? Did the non violent computer revolution benefit us? Did the green revolution benefit us? The genetics revolution? The genetic modification of our genome by dracos revolution that started all the other revolutions? Or were they all just ways to quickly confuse the majority as the few grabbed more power and gradually weakened Terran hominid's capacities to feel good in the third dimension? Revolution is not a valued word in my vocabulary. People who call for it, are never wise. Don't get me wrong; I'm all for the technology and the wonder that is a society; I just don't want somebody or the majority, pushing it or a new version of it, on me. Henrik Ibsen pointed out - and as we all know on this forum - the majority is always wrong. At least, always wrong, when they live in a reptile prison full to the brim with deceit and falsehood.

My contention is that Brand is either part of this deceit or that he panders to it. I will not pander to their lies, deceit and revolution.

Would I take part in a revolution? Of course I would. Because once the boulder is pushed; it will drag everybody - including me - down the hill with it.

Jenya
27th November 2014, 09:50
You're really reaching now, dude. Pretty desperate to protect your negative view, not opening your mind at all. I give up. Enjoy your anger :-S

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 09:54
@jenya I understand. Thank you for partaking in the discussion with me. Have a good day.

MorningFox
27th November 2014, 10:26
His call for people not to vote is only ever going to influence the left, liberal types which potentially leaves it open for the right to win a clear victory.

He is a dangerous man and not working for the good of the people.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 10:45
This is absolutely ridiculous. Here's a man who advocates against war (violence), religion, the propaganda of the media, shallow values in fashion and commerce, the top of the pyramid where ruling elites control the resources, and we are concerned with the phantoms of conspiracies that might or might not have some influence on this man?? Really? Come on people, why not just value what this man is speaking about and wake up from your paranoid mindsets.

Wind
27th November 2014, 10:47
Skyhaven, stop talking sense there! It's just way too much fun to be paranoid!

Daozen
27th November 2014, 10:47
It's getting harder and harder for me to give Brand the benefit of the doubt.

"The Millionaire Marxist"

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 10:56
@skyhaven I can understand why you would say this, I really can. And I empathise with the sentiment. However, there is always another layer to the knowledge. That there is "always another layer" is not paranoia; this is a universal fact. And very often when somebody presents a big fat sack of the finest oats; somebody else has put a spoonful of rat poison in there to mess up our stomachs. My contention is that everything that Russell says, is great; except for the anthropogenic climate change and the need for a revolution. He also stands accused of omitting many details of the conspiracy story that I/we believe he is well aware of. This omission may be political expedience on his part. I/we have not made a final judgement on this issue. Only time will tell.

MorningFox
27th November 2014, 10:59
This is absolutely ridiculous. Here's a man who advocates against war (violence), religion, the propaganda of the media, shallow values in fashion and commerce, the top of the pyramid where ruling elites control the resources, and we are concerned with the phantoms of conspiracies that might or might not have some influence on this man?? Really? Come on people, why not just value what this man is speaking about and wake up from your paranoid mindsets.

It's not ridiculous, it's intelligent to be weary. Ridiculous is taking everything at face value, especially when it's pushed so readily by mainstream media.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 12:11
Skyhaven, stop talking sense there! It's just way too much fun to be paranoid!

Don't you guys think that chemtrails, GMO, pesticides, taxation, federal reserve fiat currency, eugenics vaccines, cell phone radiation, HAARP, secret space program, reptiles, mantids and Walt Disney give us all reason to err on the cautious to paranoid side?

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 12:37
@skyhaven I can understand why you would say this, I really can. And I empathise with the sentiment. However, there is always another layer to the knowledge. That there is "always another layer" is not paranoia; this is a universal fact. And very often when somebody presents a big fat sack of the finest oats; somebody else has put a spoonful of rat poison in there to mess up our stomachs. My contention is that everything that Russell says, is great; except for the anthropogenic climate change and the need for a revolution. He also stands accused of omitting many details of the conspiracy story that I/we believe he is well aware of. This omission may be political expedience on his part. I/we have not made a final judgement on this issue. Only time will tell.

So you want to spend your time on a presumably negative charged "layer" you know very little about? Of all the topics you could think of you could create, you had to shoot the messenger? Its sad, really.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 12:52
This is absolutely ridiculous. Here's a man who advocates against war (violence), religion, the propaganda of the media, shallow values in fashion and commerce, the top of the pyramid where ruling elites control the resources, and we are concerned with the phantoms of conspiracies that might or might not have some influence on this man?? Really? Come on people, why not just value what this man is speaking about and wake up from your paranoid mindsets.

It's not ridiculous, it's intelligent to be weary. Ridiculous is taking everything at face value, especially when it's pushed so readily by mainstream media.

Your mind wants to think everything through, fill topics with bloated reason, and then it tells itself its intelligent, but in the mean time your a slave to this process.

I follow my intuition on these matters, I know Russel is a good guy just by watching/listening to him. Its that simple, no need to think everything through.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 12:59
I don't understand the question, @skyhaven.

I want people to question aspects of Russell Brand's message and to question his agenda.

I ask you all. Would you give Bill Ryan as hard a time as you are giving me/us, if he was questioning whether or not a witness/whistleblower was adding lies to his testimony? is it any different when the "witness" is a funny celebrity?

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 13:03
I've said this before. Many people thought Jimmy Saville was a "good guy". Many people think that a number of pedophiles which are currently in positions of power are "good guys". It's about questioning.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 13:15
I don't understand the question, @skyhaven.

I want people to question aspects of Russell Brand's message and to question his agenda.

I ask you all. Would you give Bill Ryan as hard a time as you are giving me/us, if he was questioning whether or not a witness/whistleblower was adding lies to his testimony? is it any different when the "witness" is a funny celebrity?


I am open for any type of questioning, but your opening post offers no proof, nor any references to any proof, but instead you've chosen your topic title in a way an ordinary gossip tabloid would, just to draw people in.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 13:21
I've said this before. Many people thought Jimmy Saville was a "good guy". Many people think that a number of pedophiles which are currently in positions of power are "good guys". It's about questioning.


If you want to live in a default state of distrust towards other people, then that's your choice, but remember what goes around comes around, so you will be distrusted too.

fractal being
27th November 2014, 14:12
Well this thread has become surprisingly long given it's pretty straight forward title. I guess the fact that several different topics are unfairly merged into one thread has a big contribution to it. Nevertheless thank you wishinshow for starting it, I'll try to address each one separately:

Russel Brand: A pretty short answer to the thread title would be "who cares"?

But for the benefit of the conversation, let's say that he is. Then he is a puppet. Would you waste your energy on targeting him out of a system where the likes of david cameron, nigel farage, the queen and plenty of other banker sociopaths reside?

There's an excellent thread on avalon that might help you ponder on that:
Where Attention goes focus goes (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?75091-Where-Attention-goes-focus-goes---&highlight=attention)

Now let's say that he's not a shill. then why would he not speak openly about 911? The real question is, having the same amount of media exposure as him, would you? It's easy to do the talk, but you might find it difficult yourself to do the walk. I don't think anybody would be that ignorant to not realize that it could be the perfect opportunity for those wishing to start a which-hunt. It's very easy to state opinions when you're in the spotlight, but when it involves commenting on the loss of thousand of lives to their relatives in another country, you'd pretty much have to have UNAMBIGUOUS, ABSOLUTE PROOF backing such claims and I don't think any single person is able to provide that. Jesse Ventura is talking about an issue regarding his own country and thus he can claim that he has first hand experience on the matter. And honestly I fail to see how not stating certain facts can remove any merit from whatever else you say.

Revolution: Maybe it's outside your Scandinavian* experience but the majority of our human fellows are STARVING and suffering from abuse and exploitation today and we have the resources and technology to fix that tomorrow. Yes it will take a revolution to achieve that. Unfortunately praying and meditating can't change that alone. Heck knows how hard I've tried. In the past revolutions have been violent. Although I would be willing to argue whether the fight of a slave for freedom is an act of violence or an act of liberation, it's never too late to correct that and I truly believe that we have higher chances of achieving it this time around. It's really up to me and you, isn't it?

Global warming. Well Dennis covered that very eloquently and he pretty much nailed it on whats the difference between a NWO promoted global warming agenda and the evident environmental destruction. It is true that our fellow plants have demonstrated a remarkably higher than anticipated efficiency in absorbing CO2, but it is also true that we are removing more and more plants from that equation. Not to mention that any average Beijing citizen would have a very different perspective on CO2 levels from yours.

Now as you say the NWO global warming agenda is an agenda and as such it involves the promotion of certain ideas like fracking, expensive and inefficient power generating alternatives, sustainable development, carbon taxes etc. I would love it if you could pinpoint to me, at which speech RB promotes any part of that agenda. I hope you do realize that not everybody is equally educated on environmental matters and it's easy for a common fellow to mix up those two notions.

Advocating the shift towards more environmentally friendly methods like wind turbines are cosidered to be could also mean that somebody is not educated enough to know that wind turbines are neither an efficient power source nor an environmentally friendly method, it doesn't necessarily mean that they promote the same agenda as the NWO guys. After all nobody knows everything at their full extent. Maybe as a more educated person on the matter you should focus your energy on filling those gaps rather than accusing him or anybody else for not doing it for you.

As a final point regarding your Fabian socialism fears: I agree that that kind of socialism is not perfect, but it is still way better than any other existent applied model of human societies. Believe me I would consider it a huge improvement if more nations would use their energy resources to fund the healthcare, education and pension schemes for all their citizens as Norway does instead of gifting them TAX FREE to private corporations as most other nations do. Any given day...

* I do know that DK is not Scandinavian, I'm just referring to similar standards of living.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 14:28
I've said this before. Many people thought Jimmy Saville was a "good guy". Many people think that a number of pedophiles which are currently in positions of power are "good guys". It's about questioning.


If you want to live in a default state of distrust towards other people, then that's your choice, but remember what goes around comes around, so you will be distrusted too.

I don't live in a default state of distrust towards, "people". I live in a constant state of distrust towards government and the higher echelons of our society. Why wouldn't I?

donk
27th November 2014, 14:33
B

I've said this before. Many people thought Jimmy Saville was a "good guy". Many people think that a number of pedophiles which are currently in positions of power are "good guys". It's about questioning.


If you want to live in a default state of distrust towards other people, then that's your choice, but remember what goes around comes around, so you will be distrusted too.

Why does everyone assume us "negative nellies" that like to look at things from different angles (that seem so negative and scary to the "positive police") assume just because we can't dismiss the information we choose not to ignore and the feelings we get beyond those that lead yall to worship and defend your favorite gurus that it means we want to destroy them or be mean and hurtful or lower your vibration or whatever you put on us when we dare suggest anything not all "love & lighty" or point out inconsistencies in people you see doing some positive?

I didn't used to have the discernment skills you all seem to have and project on the rest of the world. I worshipped many folks who were positive & helpful...spreading the word about these great great people cuz they transmitted a few of my favorite beliefs. I ate up everything they said....and got all upset when anyone dare say anything counter to what I wanted to believe about them.

Reading "negative" information is what woke me up. It was crushing to find my favorite person was not exactly who I thought he was, but ultimately stopping the lies to myself and the actual truth set me free...and set me off for massive growth. Thinking differently changed my life...and I feel trying to help others do the same is a service--not a bringing down of any vibration or whatever you want to project on to it.

I don't contribute to these types of threads because I like to trash people or feel cool or rankle feathers or whatever you keep projecting on to others. I usually don't give a ratsass about the messenger...I particiapte to watch this phenomonon. If the positive police are going to come attack us negative nellies anytime critical thought is applied to a celeb or pet belief, I'll be here for to help try to balance it.

Yeah outrageous statements to get attention are silly. It can be said once, even though it should be as obvious as everything you all like to repeat. Then maybe after we're don't chastising everyone who we don't like the way they speak or throw their poo around, maybe we can get real information or first hand accounts (like akasha's that none of the RB lovers seem to want to touch)?

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 14:47
Thank you for your in depth post, @fractalbeing.

Is it possible that we are subject to an ideological difference which is very extreme? Would you trust a post revolutionary socialist or otherwise government to administer health care, education, technology etc to her subjects? If yes, then we are at odds.

I would never trust any government in this current reality (this 3D planet). I believe that we the people have outgrown money, we have outgrown government and that we have outgrown religions.

There has been a trojan horse in every political/economical/technological/religious "advance" since time immemorial and I will have no more of any system where it is possible that the health system could degenerate into a system which gives everybody cancer, the economic system could make everybody poor and the political system could promote pedophiles and satanists to the highest office. It's finished. We need to move past government and transcend our 3D existence.

The emblem of the Fabian socialists is a wolf in sheeps' clothing. The society was founded 100 years (1884) before George Orwell wrote about this very society that he was a part of! I invite you to investigate this AND to research the eugenics movement which socialism was designed for.

FYI I am Scottish. And I do live in a part of Scandinavia called Denmark. Denmark like the rest of Scandinavia is a Fabian socialist Rothschild subsidised (or non Rothschild raped!) narcissistic alienating country where I have a great time doing yoga and meeting the most genetically amazing (individualistic Pleiedian dolphin) people that it is possible to meet. Scandinavia is being used to showcase totalitarian control as cuddly and sweet.

I want 50 times more CO2 in the atmosphere because plants like it and I like plants.



(Where does the apostrophe in "a wolf in sheep's' clothing", go?)

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 14:52
@donk. That was an amazing post and I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Lochinvar
27th November 2014, 14:56
Jesse Ventura calls 911 as it is and he also calls the anthropo-climate-change-scam, as it is.

I ask the forum: do you think that we could go so far as to say that the litmus test for a Terran hominid being awake,or not, could be found in their response to these two subjects?


Yes indeed. Perfect examples of modern day shibboleth.

Lochinvar
27th November 2014, 15:10
His call for people not to vote is only ever going to influence the left, liberal types which potentially leaves it open for the right to win a clear victory.

He is a dangerous man and not working for the good of the people.

Voting changes nothing though. Turning our backs on voting (which is a distraction) is needed. Energy flows where the attention goes afterall. Deprive it of energy and it fades away.

Camilo
27th November 2014, 15:14
He plays on both sides, and takes advantage of what each has to offer.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 15:17
I don't understand the question, @skyhaven.

I want people to question aspects of Russell Brand's message and to question his agenda.

I ask you all. Would you give Bill Ryan as hard a time as you are giving me/us, if he was questioning whether or not a witness/whistleblower was adding lies to his testimony? is it any different when the "witness" is a funny celebrity?


I am open for any type of questioning, but your opening post offers no proof, nor any references to any proof, but instead you've chosen your topic title in a way an ordinary gossip tabloid would, just to draw people in.

When there is a murder; we look for evidence. When somebody who says that they are helping has enough Rothschild connections to be possible heir to the federal reserve: we ask questions.

And I really cannot top the post which @donk has recently made. Well done @donk.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 15:25
B

I've said this before. Many people thought Jimmy Saville was a "good guy". Many people think that a number of pedophiles which are currently in positions of power are "good guys". It's about questioning.


If you want to live in a default state of distrust towards other people, then that's your choice, but remember what goes around comes around, so you will be distrusted too.

Why does everyone assume us "negative nellies" that like to look at things from different angles (that seem so negative and scary to the "positive police") assume just because we can't dismiss the information we choose not to ignore and the feelings we get beyond those that lead yall to worship and defend your favorite gurus that it means we want to destroy them or be mean and hurtful or lower your vibration or whatever you put on us when we dare suggest anything not all "love & lighty" or point out inconsistencies in people you see doing some positive?

I didn't used to have the discernment skills you all seem to have and project on the rest of the world. I worshipped many folks who were positive & helpful...spreading the word about these great great people cuz they transmitted a few of my favorite beliefs. I ate up everything they said....and got all upset when anyone dare say anything counter to what I wanted to believe about them.

Reading "negative" information is what woke me up. It was crushing to find my favorite person was not exactly who I thought he was, but ultimately stopping the lies to myself and the actual truth set me free...and set me off for massive growth. Thinking differently changed my life...and I feel trying to help others do the same is a service--not a bringing down of any vibration or whatever you want to project on to it.

I don't contribute to these types of threads because I like to trash people or feel cool or rankle feathers or whatever you keep projecting on to others. I usually don't give a ratsass about the messenger...I particiapte to watch this phenomonon. If the positive police are going to come attack us negative nellies anytime critical thought is applied to a celeb or pet belief, I'll be here for to help try to balance it.

Yeah outrageous statements to get attention are silly. It can be said once, even though it should be as obvious as everything you all like to repeat. Then maybe after we're don't chastising everyone who we don't like the way they speak or throw their poo around, maybe we can get real information or first hand accounts (like akasha's that none of the RB lovers seem to want to touch)?

I embrace negativity just as much as positivity, if it is based in what I think is true. If I didn't embrace negativity I wouldn't have responded in the negative way I did, would I? But since the openings post is filled with suggestive, unproven gossip, it isn't that strange that this dissonance is going to resonate steadily through the entire topic now, is it? You might have engaged in critical thinking yourself, but the foundation of this thread remains flawed with false suggestions. So to me it seems obvious that a constructive conversation with critical thinking with such a foundation isn't going to be smooth sailing.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 15:39
@skyhaven Can you tell me why it is gossip to say that RB's girlfriend's brothers are both married to Rothschilds? Can you tell me why it is gossip to say that RB doesn't address Scottish election fraud and removes posts from his youtube channel that say this? Can you tell me why it is gossip to call RB out on his adherence to a climate change Rothschild carbon tax scam?

To say that the above is "gossip", is completely ludicrous. What it is, is circumstantial evidence and evidence for him having an agenda other than or even opposed to that which he says his agenda is. He's a 25 million dollar cultural Marxist. I mean, I know that the Rothschilds are 25 trillion dollar cultural Marxists but you gotta' start somewhere.

donk
27th November 2014, 15:52
B

I've said this before. Many people thought Jimmy Saville was a "good guy". Many people think that a number of pedophiles which are currently in positions of power are "good guys". It's about questioning.


If you want to live in a default state of distrust towards other people, then that's your choice, but remember what goes around comes around, so you will be distrusted too.

Why does everyone assume us "negative nellies" that like to look at things from different angles (that seem so negative and scary to the "positive police") assume just because we can't dismiss the information we choose not to ignore and the feelings we get beyond those that lead yall to worship and defend your favorite gurus that it means we want to destroy them or be mean and hurtful or lower your vibration or whatever you put on us when we dare suggest anything not all "love & lighty" or point out inconsistencies in people you see doing some positive?

I didn't used to have the discernment skills you all seem to have and project on the rest of the world. I worshipped many folks who were positive & helpful...spreading the word about these great great people cuz they transmitted a few of my favorite beliefs. I ate up everything they said....and got all upset when anyone dare say anything counter to what I wanted to believe about them.

Reading "negative" information is what woke me up. It was crushing to find my favorite person was not exactly who I thought he was, but ultimately stopping the lies to myself and the actual truth set me free...and set me off for massive growth. Thinking differently changed my life...and I feel trying to help others do the same is a service--not a bringing down of any vibration or whatever you want to project on to it.

I don't contribute to these types of threads because I like to trash people or feel cool or rankle feathers or whatever you keep projecting on to others. I usually don't give a ratsass about the messenger...I particiapte to watch this phenomonon. If the positive police are going to come attack us negative nellies anytime critical thought is applied to a celeb or pet belief, I'll be here for to help try to balance it.

Yeah outrageous statements to get attention are silly. It can be said once, even though it should be as obvious as everything you all like to repeat. Then maybe after we're don't chastising everyone who we don't like the way they speak or throw their poo around, maybe we can get real information or first hand accounts (like akasha's that none of the RB lovers seem to want to touch)?

I embrace negativity just as much as positivity, if it is based in what I think is true. If I didn't embrace negativity I wouldn't have responded in the negative way I did, would I? But since the openings post is filled with suggestive, unproven gossip, it isn't that strange that this dissonance is going to resonate steadily through the entire topic now, is it? You might have engaged in critical thinking yourself, but the foundation of this thread remains flawed with false suggestions. So to me it seems obvious that a constructive conversation with critical thinking with such a foundation isn't going to be smooth sailing.

It's not strange, from that perspective. But perhaps you can get past the op? You may think of the thread as some sort of cohesive unit...but some of us--like me, ignore the emotional outbursts and baseless opinions and actually find nuggets of information.

And even the stuff I dismiss is useful to me, it tells me a lot about the posters (and those that react to them)

MorningFox
27th November 2014, 15:52
It's not ridiculous, it's intelligent to be weary. Ridiculous is taking everything at face value, especially when it's pushed so readily by mainstream media.


Your mind wants to think everything through, fill topics with bloated reason, and then it tells itself its intelligent, but in the mean time your a slave to this process.

I follow my intuition on these matters, I know Russel is a good guy just by watching/listening to him. Its that simple, no need to think everything through.

Haha. How pompous and ignorant of you to assume you know how my mind works. How arrogant and foolish of you to be manipulated by Brand's adept allure and charm and then claim that your intuition is law simply because he has won you over with his charade. How ridiculous to call out other's reasonable assertions and observations as gossip simply because it clashes with your opinion. An opinion based on no more than Brand's rather eloquent act.

The mind really does boggle at some people.

donk
27th November 2014, 15:54
And even the talk about the talk is enlightening to me, in its own way...perhaps those always commenting on how others comment can be more forthcoming in why they feel the need to interject in conversations they could easily choose to not post in--or imagine this: even choose to not read?

I personally prefer reading outrageous emotional outburst or far out opinions to "I'm so tired of reading these posts". It's just silly. Maybe even a form of "gatekeeping"?

Maybe you don't believe trashing people adds value...and I tend to agree, but it is enlightening, on certain levels. As is the phenomonon of people needing to "correct" those people. i recognize I am engaging in it myself...i recognize I'm directing my energy that way...do you?

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 16:12
It's not ridiculous, it's intelligent to be weary. Ridiculous is taking everything at face value, especially when it's pushed so readily by mainstream media.


Your mind wants to think everything through, fill topics with bloated reason, and then it tells itself its intelligent, but in the mean time your a slave to this process.

I follow my intuition on these matters, I know Russel is a good guy just by watching/listening to him. Its that simple, no need to think everything through.

haha, how pompous and ignorant of you to assume you know how my mind works. How arrogant and foolish of you to be manipulated by Brand's adept allure and charm and then claim that your intuition is law over other's reasonable assertions and observations, simply because he has won you over with his charade.

The mind really does boggle at some people.

and does it work for you? the mind I mean? :p Hey I didn't claim my intuition is law over your mind. I am just saying that intuition knows better than "the" mind.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 16:34
And even the talk about the talk is enlightening to me, in its own way...perhaps those always commenting on how others comment can be more forthcoming in why they feel the need to interject in conversations they could easily choose to not post in--or imagine this: even choose to not read?

I personally prefer reading outrageous emotional outburst or far out opinions to "I'm so tired of reading these posts". It's just silly. Maybe even a form of "gatekeeping"?

Maybe you don't believe trashing people adds value...and I tend to agree, but it is enlightening, on certain levels. As is the phenomonon of people needing to "correct" those people. i recognize I am engaging in it myself...i recognize I'm directing my energy that way...do you?

In my opinion there's no right and wrong in this. I'm just giving my opinion. I usually don't give my opinion on these matters, because I don't want to. Of course I could choose not to respond, but today I wanted to. So there are no hard feelings here for me, I am not offended, nor am I defending RB. I'm just pointing out to the gossip-like nature of this thread: I mean people are even calling RB 'dangerous', this is so off with my own perception that I felt I needed to jump in, that's it.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 16:39
I think that the subconscious projections here are that - if RB is a shill - if he has been got to - then perhaps we are all corruptable. I know I am. I'm sure if the shadow government went through my internet history and dialled me up for a visit, they could push enough buttons to put me on a ticket to the moon with the vampires. Maybe not. But maybe. The more I know; the less likely it becomes that I would flake and cave to the pressure. I think that this RB thread is about that.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

I called him dangerous in the op. And I stand by it. Dangerous.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 16:42
And this is a great thread and I'm proud to have posted the op. This is what existence and perspective is all about. The good, the bad, the ugly the brave, the weak, the love, the fear, the knowledge, the truth, the wisdom. And I have another 46 trillion years to go. Wow. It's beautiful. Come on guys. It's beautiful that we sit here and discuss. So let's just say a big thank you to each other.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 16:59
@skyhaven Can you tell me why it is gossip to say that RB's girlfriend's brothers are both married to Rothschilds? Can you tell me why it is gossip to say that RB doesn't address Scottish election fraud and removes posts from his youtube channel that say this? Can you tell me why it is gossip to call RB out on his adherence to a climate change Rothschild carbon tax scam?

To say that the above is "gossip", is completely ludicrous. What it is, is circumstantial evidence and evidence for him having an agenda other than or even opposed to that which he says his agenda is. He's a 25 million dollar cultural Marxist. I mean, I know that the Rothschilds are 25 trillion dollar cultural Marxists but you gotta' start somewhere.


Even if I was the son of a 'bad' Rothschild would that automatically mean that I have the values of my father? You can't just say the guy has the same name so he belongs to the bad guys. Everyone is different and you can't just judge everyone for his/her appearance or name. Maybe the son came in to teach the father he's off track? Who is to judge?

fractal being
27th November 2014, 17:00
Thank you for your in depth post, @fractalbeing.

Is it possible that we are subject to an ideological difference which is very extreme?

I would find that unlikely since I don't consider myself a victim of ideologies or any form of dogmatism. I'm open to all constructive criticism.


I want 50 times more CO2 in the atmosphere because plants like it and I like plants.
I'm not sure whether I should respond seriously to this. You do realize that CO2 does not come alone, but in a mixture with other dangerous chemicals and heavy metals that are toxic for plants and animals alike. Any increase in CO2 content equals to a proportional increase of all the other hazards. And frankly how much more bluntly to put it other than WE ARE KILLING PLANTS THROUGH, DEFORESTATION, GRAZING, DESERTIFICATION, CONTAMINATION OF WATER RESERVOIRS. The beautiful island of Crete in the Mediterranean used to be covered 95% with plantation just 350 years ago, now it's a poor 30%. x


Thank you for your in depth post, @fractalbeing.

Would you trust a post revolutionary socialist or otherwise government to administer health care, education, technology etc to her subjects? If yes, then we are at odds.

I would never trust any government in this current reality (this 3D planet). I believe that we the people have outgrown money, we have outgrown government and that we have outgrown religions.

The emblem of the Fabian socialists is a wolf in sheeps clothing. The society was founded 100 years (1884) before George Orwell wrote about this very society that he was a part of! I invite you to investigate this AND to research the eugenics movement which socialism was designed for.

Of course I wouldn't blindly trust any government at any dimensional reality. However the fact that a certain group is pushing an agenda towards a perverted form of socialism, doesn't mean that ANY form of socialism works in favor of that agenda. That kind of mindset leads to inactivity. If you are so negatively conditioned towards the word socialism, we might call it something else if you wish, let's say "blue chair", as soon as we agree on the core values. The fact is that the tools we have at hand to administrate the needs of millions of people are limited in this 3D reality and therefore we have to work with what we have.

From that perspective the push towards a transitory "blue chair" establishment that offers access to basic needs for all human beings, transparency in policy making, scrutiny of military and scientific developments and unrestricted input in decision making for all seems like an inevitable step to me, before we collectively evolve into our higher selves.

Do you think that it's not possible to achieve all these even without fully acknowledging our current technological potential? If the government was not elected but chosen randomly through lotteries among all citizens with the sole purpose of fulfilling the above requirements, do you think it would degenerate in the same corrupted way as a government coming from the current electoral pharso-comedy? If yes then what's there to hope?


(Where does the apostrophe in "a wolf in sheep's' clothing", go?)

In this context sheep is singular, so it goes before the 's :)



I get the feeling that you are not being honest when you add a question mark on the title. It seems to me that you are already convinced that he is a shill and just looking for confirmation, so from that POW my apologies for raining on your parade.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 17:42
@fractalbeing the title of the op wa changed by Billy to be a question. Prior to this it was an out and out statement. So you did well to point this out. I want a tesla machine to make only CO2 and perhaps 50x is too much but we'd have a lot better crops at 5x. I'm sorry I can't reply in better detail now: I'm making dinner! Have a lovely evening. I'm not so sure that sheep is singular, here. A wolf in A sheep's clothing. A wolf in sheeps' clothing. I don't know.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

@skyhaven I'm sure that there are many Rothchilds with a positive helpful to Terran hominid perspective and with desires that are in line with that. Perhaps RB is in with them. Perhaps he's not. What about the other questions I asked you?

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 18:06
@fractalbeing the title of the op wa changed by Billy to be a question. Prior to this it was an out and out statement. So you did well to point this out. I want a tesla machine to make only CO2 and perhaps 50x is too much but we'd have a lot better crops at 5x. I'm sorry I can't reply in better detail now: I'm making dinner! Have a lovely evening. I'm not so sure that sheep is singular, here. A wolf in A sheep's clothing. A wolf in sheeps' clothing. I don't know.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

@skyhaven I'm sure that there are many Rothchilds with a positive helpful to Terran hominid perspective and with desires that are in line with that. Perhaps RB is in with them. Perhaps he's not. What about the other questions I asked you?


Can you tell me why it is gossip to say that RB doesn't address Scottish election fraud and removes posts from his youtube channel that say this?

The things he doesn't address say nothing factual about his opinions towards them. He just didn't address them, if you think there's a reason behind it, then you must assume there is a reason behind all the things he doesn't address. This reasoning leads you nowhere.


Can you tell me why it is gossip to call RB out on his adherence to a climate change Rothschild carbon tax scam?

I haven't heard him say literally he supports the Rothschild carbon tax scam. He's recognizes human-created climate change, but half of the western world does. You just can't simply make the jump to assume that he therefore shares a Rothschild agenda.


You can't tie all of these assumptions together and think you're are going to end up with some truthful perspective. That's what I mean with the gossip-like nature of this thread, you'll need something more solid than that.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 18:11
@skyhaven I agree. These are good points. The accusation is that he deleted the posts about election fraud while not deleting posts about other subjects. Hopefully somebody can offer the proof we need in this thread. Or perhaps Russell himself can chime in. Let's hope so: he's ever so attractive and charming.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 18:26
Actually I find it more dangerous that people here find him dangerous than him actually being dangerous. But then again he clearly wants to identify himself along the lines of jesus christ and gandhi, so maybe he himself is ok with the prospect of going down as a martyr.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 18:57
And maybe he didn't address the Scottish election fraud because as he had said on many occasions he is against the current political system. He himself therefore doesn't vote at all.

wishinshow
27th November 2014, 19:32
There are some people who have compared themselves to Jesus, who have, indeed, been very dangerous for those around them!

Looks like this thread has finally petered out. Thank you to all.

Skyhaven
27th November 2014, 19:52
There are some people who have compared themselves to Jesus, who have, indeed, been very dangerous for those around them!

Looks like this thread has finally petered out. Thank you to all.


I have always seen the crucifixion of Jesus as a metaphor for the crucifixion of the Ego-self, and I must say he is building up quite an ego...

Akasha
27th November 2014, 20:53
. The beautiful island of Crete in the Mediterranean used to be covered 95% with plantation just 350 years ago, now it's a poor 30%. x

I'm ploughing through Wade Frazier's epic "Energy & the Human Journey (http://www.ahealedplanet.net/humanity.htm)" essay at the moment (which I would highly recommend and encourage everyone to take the time to read) and according to his research:


.....by 1500 BCE, the use of wood in palaces declined precipitously, and when Mycenaean Greece annexed Crete, the forests were gone and the Greeks used Crete for pasturing their sheep.....

Not that that in anyway undermines your argument, FB which I agree with. We have royally f****d up our environment and, as Dennis pointed out, responsibility for the 6th (and possibly the most devastating) mass extinction falls squarely at our collective feet.

Back to the topic of "our Russ". Have those that give more rather than less benefit of the doubt to him considered why he chose to make absolutely no mention of the Scottish vote fraud allegations, and I'm not talking about the impersonation (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11108039/Electoral-fraud-alleged-in-Glasgow-as-referendum-votes-counted.html) allegations reported in the MSM to, as I see it, misdirect away from the real fraud which took place?

zQbGgT3391w

The above video and several more like it, as most here will remember, set the alt' media on fire when they were uploaded. How could Russell avoid such a topic, not to mention removing mine and a friend's (as well as many others) requests for him to comment on the phenomenon on his Trews channel?

Answers on a postcard to the usual address, please :cool:

Akasha
27th November 2014, 20:57
And maybe he didn't address the Scottish election fraud because as he had said on many occasions he is against the current political system. He himself therefore doesn't vote at all.

Choosing not to comment is one thing. Deleting posts highlighting the fraud, quite another.

Shezbeth
27th November 2014, 21:57
Those who are quick to label this thread as negative and their opposition as positive could REALLY stand to look those words up for their (socially agreed) definitions.

Positive means that which posits, or tending to express/present a position; posit-ive, posit-ion, etc.

Negative means that which negates, or tending to engage in negation (usually of a position); negat(e)-itve, negat(e)-ion, etc.

Having thoroughly read (and enjoyed!) this thread, I can state with a degree of personal authority that no one (for the salient part) has attempted to negate Brand's position on issues, they have attempted to critically analyze his position including possible conflicts of interest, hidden motives/agendas, etc. including the (largely circumstantial) indicators that would suggest ulterior motive.

Sorry, if he is a shill, it seems Brand is smart enough to not wear a t-shirt saying "I'm a Shill" with a bullet-point list of why and how. :rolleyes:

If this thread is to pan out, I would have that - in the aftermath - readers realize the degree of cognitive dissonance that is evident in many of the posts and expressions.

(parahprased) "Yeah, he's friends with (some of) the Rothschilds,... but maybe they're the NICE Rothschilds!" - That one was my favorite.
:pound:

Anchor
27th November 2014, 22:31
I like how its "proof" that RB is a shill on account of the fact that he wont be manipulated into getting drawn into someone else's agenda (re: Scotland Voting Fraud) and chooses to remove requests to do so.

Shill or not RB is smart enough to know that he needs the media to work with his agenda and he plays that media well.

donk
27th November 2014, 22:56
Nevermind....

Innocent Warrior
27th November 2014, 23:42
There are people with skeleton keys to the internet. The source of this information is me. Take it or leave it but if you pay close attention you can see for yourself.

Shezbeth
27th November 2014, 23:50
Side-note:


I ask you all. Would you give Bill Ryan as hard a time as you are giving me/us, if he was questioning whether or not a witness/whistleblower was adding lies to his testimony? is it any different when the "witness" is a funny celebrity?

I seem to recall Gordon Duff of Veterans Today got much the same treatment (shill analysis),.... Why is Brand exempt?

KaiLee
27th November 2014, 23:59
Side-note:


I ask you all. Would you give Bill Ryan as hard a time as you are giving me/us, if he was questioning whether or not a witness/whistleblower was adding lies to his testimony? is it any different when the "witness" is a funny celebrity?

I seem to recall Gordon Duff of Veterans Today got much the same treatment (shill analysis),.... Why is Brand exempt?

Why would anyone be exempt? And yes, that includes Bill Ryan. Although, good manners would prevent one from speculating on the the persons own website. (...and no, I don't have a need to do so elsewhere either)
The point being; we all should use judgement on everyone. Isnt that the mantra of the alt. community? Do your own research, don't just believe.

Tesseract
28th November 2014, 02:16
Does anyone have the connections to invite Russel Brand to the forum? I think his input would be most valuable on a lot of topics.

Shezbeth
28th November 2014, 03:11
Oh that's just what this forum needs, the potential for another Charles debacle. :rolleyes:

For the record, by debacle I mean "Star-struck worship of a perceived celebrity by the overwhelming majority of members", particularly one as bombastic as Brand; I don't mean that he would deliberately try and wreck shop.

See, that was negative.

I suggest that Brand has quite enough platforms,... but if he can pass the application process, who am I?

Afterthought: Part of healthy discernment is the recognition that one's discernment can be incorrect IMO,....

Tesseract
28th November 2014, 04:03
But who on here worships Russell Brand? I can't think of anyone off the top of my head. It's not that he needs another platform, it just might be possible to have some very interesting discussions..

Dennis Leahy
28th November 2014, 04:20
Does anyone have the connections to invite Russel Brand to the forum? I think his input would be most valuable on a lot of topics.

It's actually a great idea, though with his own life and "Trews", he probably wouldn't have time. It would be great if he were a member because as a member, he wouldn't have to put up with attacks on his character and integrity - because Avalon's rules prohibit treating other members with such utter disregard for their feelings - and character assassination witch hunts based on baseless accusations, trivia, jealousy, being intellectually intimidated, and innuendo. But, I'm feeling kinda snarky so I'll include the following:

Well, since I've been declared a shill, and Russell has been declared a shill, I'll just call him up and ask him to join. I'm sure he'll be delighted to come here into a nest of paranoid people who have declared him as a Rothschild agent. Maybe he will describe the thrilling exhilaration of holding an Illuminati music industry slave in his arms (and maybe even tell us the nasty nasty intimate details that the gossip columnists want to hear about!) Maybe he will tell us about how his sister's brother's uncle's mother's daughter's brother gives him a direct line of communication with the Big Cheese himself, his pal and confidant, "Rothy" de Rothschild!

The OP mentioned a "litmus test" to determine "awake" status. Let's devise a litmus test for shills!

Exactly how much money does someone need to have before they are automatically inserted into the "he's a shill!" club?

How many degrees of separation from "The Bad Guys" does someone need to be, to definitely be a shill?

Regardless how much truth a potential shill club member speaks, how many times does the potential shill have to say something you don't understand, disagree with, or you are unsatisfied with the answer, to make it into the "Shill Hall Of Fame?"

If someone calls for a "massive redistribution of wealth" (something that makes Grandpa Rothschild vomit in his mouth a little bit, I'd suppose), is he simply "anti-right-libertarian-capitalist", or is he ALSO a lying shill?

If someone calls for "revolution" (do see Jenya's eloquent and succinct explanation (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77375-Is-Russell-Brand-a-Rothschild-shill&p=906026&viewfull=1#post906026) of the term in modern usage), does that automatically make them a shill? Or how about the reverse, where someone basically says, "Calm down everyone! Relax. No drastic change is necessary. Purchase some products. Enjoy some distractions. Everything is OK You are the problem, and you need to meditate and fix yourself - you are co-creating the Bad Guys." - would that person be a shill too? (or an anti-shill?)

How many times does a baseless accusations of being a shill does it take before the false accusations become true? And, at what point do we start looking at the people screaming "SHILL!" at people with good hearts that are trying their best to rally humanity to do something to stop the enslavement of humanity - before we start to actually question the motives of those people? Is it even possible that {gasp!}, the finger-pointers are THEMSELVES shills? (Or certainly aiding and abetting in the divide-and-conquer strategy of the Global Rulers - perhaps inadvertently acting as shills, doing the work of shills.)

My final note in this thread is that this is a moronic witch hunt, tearing down a man (you know, a flawed human being just as we are all flawed human beings) that is trying to help stir people from complacency and hopelessness. Not one piece of "evidence" has been presented, just a bunch of innuendo. More evidence was entered into the record here about how aliens created the rings of Saturn and that chemtrails are a UFO anti-cloaking strategy than was entered to substantiate the claim in the thread's title. If the people posting against Russell Brand's character and integrity in this thread are an indication of a cross section of us all, then the Global Rulers can raise a glass and toast you all for neutralizing yet another person who stuck his neck out and tried to unite ordinary people against the Global Rulers. If that was your aim, job well done. Your COINTELPRO tactics worked reliably, once again.

Shezbeth
28th November 2014, 04:42
Wow. Way to miss the point entirely, and then make a spectacle of the fact.

I've seen less petulance in children.

Stating, with suggestions and largely (but not entirely) circumstantial evidence that he COULD be a shill (lets be real, it is WELL within the threshold of possibility) and advising/exercising caution is a whole different beast than lighting torches and preparing the guillotine (re: 'witch-hunt').

Moreover, it would seem that the reader is being advised to throw caution to the wind, which would be a point toward the writer BEING a shill (not saying that's a case, but with outbursts like that it gravitates more toward being a possibility). Invoking COINTELPRO for purpose of minimizing and disregarding critical analysis,... wow. :clap2:

'People with good hearts doing their best to rally humanity...' ? You state this like it is the sole and exclusive possibility, which seems naive in the least and ignorant in the extreme.

Show of hands please; Who in their entire lifetime has NOT been fooled (read: seduced, misdirected, followed the red herring, etc.) by the 'apparent' interests of another person? Anyone?

Being associated with - arguably - the most Machiavellian family in history doesn't mean one is up to no good,... but I hope you will understand if that is seen as something worth considering.

But, apparently we can all sleep soundly and put away our critical faculties because Dennis is convinced that we're being silly.

I'll say it again; part of healthy discernment is the recognition that one's discernment can be incorrect IMO,.... For good measure, I'll say this again too (paraphrased); I have every hope that Brand is sincere and authentic, but I recognize the extant possibility that he isn't.

IMO, those who are convinced that he is are as foolish as those convinced that he isn't.

<Prepares for the inevitable misconstrue-ance of his suggestions,....>

wishinshow
28th November 2014, 08:21
I would like to throw a REALLY crazy thing out there. I am open to the possibility that Rothy de Rothschild (@dennis ' words)(marquis de libeaux?) is, himself, "positive" (whatever that means) to the development of Terran hominid. If a man like this (not Rothy or the Marquis because I don't want to be sued by a moderator) is indeed a black cap satanist and he is indeed into sacraficing infants, then, perhaps he might have a future plan to use the powers gained from said sacrifices to undermine the (his) deity to which he is sacraficing those infants.

I kinda' think Russell is deciding on whether or not to break ranks with his Rothschild influence and that this thread may be of influence, if he ever reads it. Or maybe he knows that the satanists are in fact doing a good job and Tony Blair (convicted, moderators?) has a long term strategy for good!

I dont judge the satanists or the luciferianists. I think it likely that the dark beings that they worship have been useful in rebellions against even worse things: such as AI from an alternate existence

Maunagarjana
28th November 2014, 08:41
Just a thought....rather than assume the worst of Russell Brand with his tenuous connections to Rothschilds, why not consider the possibility that he may have used Jemima Khan to find out for himself what their world is like, assuming of course that he actually actually met them or got to know any of them beyond perhaps sharing some meals. Surely, he's aware of their reputation. I know I would at least think about doing something like that if I had the opportunity. I'd be curious to know what they are like on a personal level, and what they talk about in private. It would be an interesting window into a world that most people have no access to whatsoever.

If I was someone like Brand, I would go in fully expecting they would probably try to charm me and assess my usefulness for their machinations. But maybe he is naive in that regard. But I wouldn't presume to know such a thing. Personally, I can't see how in the course of conversing with any of them that he wouldn't ask them something like, "You lot seem very supportive of Socialism, from what I've read, which is odd, because you're like the antithesis of the proletariat, you're one of the wealthiest families in the world and major stake holders in lots of the massive mega-corporations out there. So, why would you support something like Socialist revolution unless you somehow have figured a way to exploit any attempt at achieving such in order to further consolidate more wealth and power into your already squid-like world-encompassing empire?" That there was my Russell Brand impression, ;)

wishinshow
28th November 2014, 08:55
@maunagarjana IMHO, this is only second to @donk's posting, in its value, here. I wish I had written your postulation as the op and I think that it is perhaps the most likely reality. I could even hear Brand speaking the words that you wrote. So if we don't want our children to be served up on dinner plates (and I'm not saying that that is "bad") then let's hope you are correct in your appraisal of the situation, wise @maunagarjana

wishinshow
28th November 2014, 09:11
"You lot seem very supportive of Socialism, from what I've read, which is odd, because you're like the antithesis of the proletariat, you're one of the wealthiest families in the world and major stake holders in lots of the massive mega-corporations out there. So, why would you support something like Socialist revolution unless you somehow have figured a way to exploit any attempt at achieving such in order to further consolidate more wealth and power into your already squid-like world-encompassing empire?" That there was my Russell Brand impression, ;)

This is beautiful. It was a very very good impression. I do hope RB reads it and feels that he once said it. And that he further ommitted to say - out loud - the part about them being squids! Maybe he was just eating some squid with the squids. Maybe we can change their red shield to a red squid, in a few years.

wishinshow
28th November 2014, 09:33
I invite everybody (esp @maunagarjana)to see the original post. If anybody has a problem with the changes that I have made then I am happy to discuss the changes and am open to changing the post back to its original form in order to protect the integrity if the many posts which people have made in reference to the op.

Wind
28th November 2014, 09:52
Does anyone have the connections to invite Russel Brand to the forum? I think his input would be most valuable on a lot of topics.

Indeed it would be interesting see him defending himself here. Then again, since he is a celebrity, this thread would be inundated with questions and participants. It would be another circus show. I would like to think that he reads this thread while laughing. :p

Personally, the way I see is that many people just see Russell as annoying (and he has money, that bastard!) and that's why they want to believe that he has some sinister agenda. I mean, since he is a celebrity he just must have some weird agenda? Surely there are no shades of grey, everything is only black and white.

I am very skeptical when it comes to people (especially celebrities or big names), but I use both discerment and intuition and I can see through people. My spider senses just aren't tingling with Russell and that just can't be said of many other persons... Sure he could have better ideas and he is not any messiah, just a man with an inspiring message. He is using his celebrity status and fame to promote the peaceful ideas and probably that's why he won't be getting any more film roles, at least not any significant ones I think.

Why aren't more celebrities doing that, they can't be all brainless now can they? Of course I do believe in the inner (r)evolution, the change comes from within and then the outer world will change. Though right now we would a need a miracle to change the current system...

wishinshow
28th November 2014, 09:58
@wind thank you

Skyhaven
28th November 2014, 10:08
I think he'll will even do a trews on this thread. ;) Most of the evidence and accusations are just as shallow/black and white as the reasoning of Fox news (O' Reilly, Hannity). So I 'll bet he'll get a good laugh out of it.

wishinshow
28th November 2014, 10:15
There has consistently been 8 to 10 members and 5 to 8 guests on the RB thread. NONE of the "Hot threads This Week" except for the one at the top have had anywhere near this number with many struggling to retain a single user except me when I am in there looking.

I have started a thread which attempts to address this concern. I might further ask the question: are we being positively policed?

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77466-Why-is-the-Russell-Brand-thread-not-a-Hot-Thread-This-Week&p=906552&viewfull=1#post906552

Skyhaven
28th November 2014, 10:28
I can already hear him referring to the slogan "Where science and spirituality meet" while reading some of the posts on this thread. ;)

Akasha
28th November 2014, 11:59
I think he'll will even do a trews on this thread. ;) Most of the evidence and accusations are just as shallow/black and white as the reasoning of Fox news (O' Reilly, Hannity). So I 'll bet he'll get a good laugh out of it.

I don't know if you are including me in your "shallow" labeling and I haven't made any accusations. I have merely shared my personal experience and some facts about his proximity to the Rothschild dynasty.

Would you (or Dennis) have preferred me to have kept that to myself?

Billy
28th November 2014, 12:32
wishinshow, Yes it would be good if Russell had the opportunity to defend himself in here, I doubt that would be possible though. Bill Ryan said about a year ago that Russell would be someone he would love to interview.
Here are some links where you may find the answer to your accusation that Russel is a Rothschild Shill. If you manage a response, please let us know if your personal accusations are merely playground gossip or have any merit.

Rothschilds.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/David-Mayer-De-Rothschilds-Supporters-Fans/345946112829

https://www.facebook.com/peter.rothschild.1?fref=ts
Peter Rothschild is very open and approachable.

https://www.facebook.com/james.rothschild.10?fref=ts

https://www.facebook.com/balbir.rothschild?fref=ts

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rothschild-family/107500505945880

Russell.

https://www.facebook.com/RussellBrand?rf=108684622495172

http://www.russellbrand.com/

https://twitter.com/rustyrockets

Contact details:

John Noel Management
Block B
Imperial Works
Perren Street
London, NW5 3ED
UK
Phone: +44(0) 20 7428 8400
Fax: +44(0) 20 7428 8401

Good luck with your research in searching for the truth that could bring forth factual evidence that would confirm your personal perception.

Lochinvar
28th November 2014, 12:34
FK, I really feel sorry for all those ((Whistleblowers - Good Samaritan's) these days, seems they just can't win no matter what they do...:faint:

...and to be brutally honest

Opinionated 'Threads' like this without any ((research/footnotes)) at all, talk about being stuck on a fully-fledged ((Merry-Go-Round)) with no exit point...:faint:

Just thought I'd state the 'Obvious' before you begin your next thread "wishinshow"...:noidea:

What process do you use to identify whistlblowers who are out to decieve and disinform and do you have any examples that you've identified?

Skyhaven
28th November 2014, 12:42
I think he'll will even do a trews on this thread. ;) Most of the evidence and accusations are just as shallow/black and white as the reasoning of Fox news (O' Reilly, Hannity). So I 'll bet he'll get a good laugh out of it.

I don't know if you are including me in your "shallow" labeling and I haven't made any accusations. I have merely shared my personal experience and some facts about his proximity to the Rothschild dynasty.

Would you (or Dennis) have preferred me to have kept that to myself?

By all means no, you say what you have to say. I see you just tried to prove he supports some Rothschild agenda by offering your input. I wouldn't have contributed to prove this bold statement unless I was very sure I could prove it. You're talking about human beings here, you can't just try to badmouth a person with a few loosely tying theories. That's just mean, its gossip.

Akasha
28th November 2014, 14:19
I think he'll will even do a trews on this thread. ;) Most of the evidence and accusations are just as shallow/black and white as the reasoning of Fox news (O' Reilly, Hannity). So I 'll bet he'll get a good laugh out of it.

I don't know if you are including me in your "shallow" labeling and I haven't made any accusations. I have merely shared my personal experience and some facts about his proximity to the Rothschild dynasty.

Would you (or Dennis) have preferred me to have kept that to myself?

By all means no, you say what you have to say. I see you just tried to prove he supports some Rothschild agenda by offering your input. I wouldn't have contributed to prove this bold statement unless I was very sure I could prove it. You're talking about human beings here, you can't just try to badmouth a person with a few loosely tying theories. That's just mean, its gossip.

I could understand ignoring posts which sought to draw attention to the Scottish vote fraud on his Trews channel, but deleting them?

Seeing the censorship take place before my eyes really shocked me, as if the veil had, for a split second, been lifted.

Maybe those that overwhelmingly support him will do me the honor of trying to put themselves in my shoes at that moment, rather than accusing me of being a mean, badmouthing gossip for sharing my experience.

ulli
28th November 2014, 15:56
After reading this thread I was reminded of this video below,

which explains the dynamics behind the divide and conquer agenda.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_oS-JEeQMM#t=254

Skyhaven
28th November 2014, 16:29
I think he'll will even do a trews on this thread. ;) Most of the evidence and accusations are just as shallow/black and white as the reasoning of Fox news (O' Reilly, Hannity). So I 'll bet he'll get a good laugh out of it.

I don't know if you are including me in your "shallow" labeling and I haven't made any accusations. I have merely shared my personal experience and some facts about his proximity to the Rothschild dynasty.

Would you (or Dennis) have preferred me to have kept that to myself?

By all means no, you say what you have to say. I see you just tried to prove he supports some Rothschild agenda by offering your input. I wouldn't have contributed to prove this bold statement unless I was very sure I could prove it. You're talking about human beings here, you can't just try to badmouth a person with a few loosely tying theories. That's just mean, its gossip.

I could understand ignoring posts which sought to draw attention to the Scottish vote fraud on his Trews channel, but deleting them?

Seeing the censorship take place before my eyes really shocked me, as if the veil had, for a split second, been lifted.

Maybe those that overwhelmingly support him will do me the honor of trying to put themselves in my shoes at that moment, rather than accusing me of being a mean, badmouthing gossip for sharing my experience.

So does that mean he is operating under some evil Rothschild agenda? If so then it's gossip because it's based on nothing that proves the aforementioned statement. If not then why would you contribute to this thread? Just because it says 'Russel Brand' somewhere in the title?

Skyhaven
28th November 2014, 16:36
After reading this thread I was reminded of this video below,

which explains the dynamics behind the divide and conquer agenda.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_oS-JEeQMM#t=254

Thanks Ulli I needed that, and this is my last post here.

Akasha
28th November 2014, 16:46
....Remember the truth is always good no matter how bad the news....

- End quote from the video Ulli just posted.

I've shared the truth of my personal experience on the subject. I appreciate that it could be construed as bad news to those who admire Russell, as I did while I was making that request to him on his Youtube channel.

ulli
28th November 2014, 17:23
If we can discover why we are passionate about what we are passionate about then we can discover hidden aspects of ourselves.
And when we have turned over the last leaf:
In waddles enlightenment!!!
And it will really blow you away, replacing 'you-fake' with 'YOU-REAL'.
It's worth giving it a shot.
Because this is ultimately not about Russell Brand, unless you are Russell Brand, and reading this.
This is about the self discovery of each one of us.

Sure there are still quite a few people out there whom I don't trust,
but before I point my finger at them I check first of all what it might be inside me that gets triggered by them.

Cidersomerset
28th November 2014, 17:44
I don't know if Russell is a Rothchild 'Shill' ? I don't think he is , I know as I
have said on several posts/threads that Russell has a very dodgy past and took
the corporate HollyWood dollar and still will if given the chance. But as with
other celebrity activists he has done a lot in the past few years on drug
rehabilitation and other causes. All we can do is see what he does and
if he is as genuine as he is portraying great. If not we will find out,
he is not the 'messiah' and is a product of the media generation and
ls an extrovert and likes playing to the crowd. But at least he is doing
something whether some of us like it or not. Some of his comments
are silly but that's his obsessive personality, but on the whole he has
highlighted his views and had a go at the 'hand' that feeds him the
corporate media. You may think he is talking 'b-----'s and is a agent
of the 'elites'....I don't think so.

Mayor Of NYC Condemns Westbrook - WILL BORIS? Russell Brand The Trews (E200)

mW57hoCkTjE

Published on 28 Nov 2014


Russell Brand The Trews (E200).
Mayor Of New York, Bill De Blasio joins the New Era estate campaign against US developer Westbrook.
The Democrat Mayor condemned the rogue "lawbreaking" firm for their plan to evict tenants of the East
London Estate while talking exclusively to The Trews.The condemnation comes before Monday's New
Era march from Westbrook's Berkley Square offices to Downing St to deliver a petition of over 300,000
signatures of support.

Subscribe Here Now: http://tinyurl.com/opragcg and send links to video news items of topical stories that you'd like me to analyse.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I put several recent interviews on this thread and they are all pretty good in
various ways imo.....

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77482-Russell-Brand-on-revolution-democracy-and-Vivienne-Westwood-Guardian-Live&p=906780#post906780

Shezbeth
28th November 2014, 21:25
Despite my cautionary statement earlier (which was geared toward addressing the susceptibility of Avalon members to charismatic individuals) I would be absolutely tickled if he were to become a member!

However, let's be real; if (hypothetically) he were a shill, is it assumed that upon joining he would turn over a new leaf and give up his agenda, or would that just give him another venue to maintain illusions? While I would relish the opportunity to individually address him and be individually addressed (publicly or privately) I am not so naive to assume that he would be willing to suspend all agendas because "I asked him nicely". Again pertaining to the hypothesis that "he is a shill", he would still be a shill in or out of the forum, and only those who are party to his agenda would see the 'masks come off'.

In the meantime, I will be enjoying his interviews in the latest thread, because (and I can't over-emphasize this enough in spite of my cautionary position) I really like him, and his material!

Liking and trusting do not have to go hand in hand though.

I like some of my co-workers for example,.... ^_~

Shezbeth
30th November 2014, 04:51
Having thoroughly perused the aforementioned thread - special thanks to Cidersomerset and others for providing a wealth of less popular (in the 'mind' of Youtube) videos/interviews - I find that my position of caution and possibility has not changed. He is a highly charismatic individual who could be tailoring his message for the 'less/not awake' audience, but I am still unconvinced of his sincerity. Tailoring his message is one thing, but glaring omissions are quite another.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77482-Russell-Brand-on-revolution-democracy-and-Vivienne-Westwood-Guardian-Live

Additionally, he has a tendency to distract and deflect the questions before he answers, often by upsetting (charmingly) the individual(s) who are asking questions with rapid-fire interjections and interruptions. Again, his intentions could be 'sound', but they could not be as well. Whichever the case, he likes to 'disarm' and/or 'lower the other person's defenses' before he addresses their inquiry, which is a manipulative tactic.

Moreover, the reference in one of the latest posts to his history with Katy Perry correlates that - if only by osmosis - he will be somewhat familiar with metaphysics and occultism, which goes entirely unmentioned in any of his presentations, and likewise the concept of personal emergence. Collectivism is fine, but a collection of sheep are still sheep.

Additionally, his ideas of collectivism are not entirely viable in the sense that he suggests. Were his suggestions taken en masse, there would be a series of groups all vying for public attention, crying out for this, that, and the other. Organization requires leadership to some degree (strategically), else it is a disjointed group of voices all clamoring together. Not to mention that certain issues are more pressing than others,....

Shezbeth
3rd December 2014, 04:50
Yet,... (oh what, you thought I was done? Ha!)

... having watched the recent video(s) posted here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77596-Russell-Brand-defends-New-Era-Estate-residents-on-rent-row-Channel-4-News-spat-....&p=908159#post908159 I am a little more in the 'not shill' corner. Still on the fence, but leaning. The reason being how he responds when agitated/upset. One can clearly see the signs of frustration and agitation on his face when the reporter persists in pushing the presumed issue of his housing and finance level, and the manner in which he deflects the (veiled) criticism is most noteworthy, and very encouraging IMO.

The finger pointing in particular; people don't tend to do that unless its scripted (the dialogue is WAY too rapid fire and off the cuff to find that credible) or he legitimately agrees with the position he is making and is resolute on expressing it.

It may be that there are certain areas/topics he has been expressly told/suggested to avoid, and that would be understandable, but he seems quite amped about those he (assuming) hasn't been directed away from. I still don't trust the guy - nor would advocate toward trusting him - but he's earned a bit of respect with that last bit.

Besides, my personal view on 'trust' is best summarized with the phrase: "I don't trust anyone except that guy there in the mirror,... but I've got my eye on him,...."

Cidersomerset
3rd December 2014, 07:38
Russell puts the news reporter in his place commenting on his support
for the tenants at the New Era Estate , in the usual sound bite interview
the reporter tries to insinuate the like of Russell were the problem,

In the greater scheme of things this may be down the ladder , but to those
involved its very important and part of the greater wealth divide particularly
in and around London. I think the reporter dug himself in a hole as Channel
4 are usually more sympathetic, maybe it was the fact that it was so short,
that a piece that should be highlighting the plight of the poorer residents
of the capital turned into a silly debate on how much Russells rented house
was worth. I posted this as many are split as to whether Russell is a 'shill/pawn'
or genuine reformed activist who is using his celeb status to help the community.
This will probably not sway either camp on its own but worth showing imo.....


lmlZWYvXMUo



Longer version aired version with edits from above vid.....

Russell Brand on the New Era Estate rent row | Channel 4 News

wP95ySg268M

Published on 1 Dec 2014


Comedian Russell Brand tells Channel 4 News why he is supporting tenants at the New Era Estate who fear their rent could be increased after a takeover by a US property company.

Read more on the New Era Estate protests - http://bit.ly/1pHJPaz

Sign up for Snowmail, your daily preview of what is on Channel 4 News, sent straight to your inbox, here: http://mailing.channel4.com/public/sn...

Missed Channel 4 News? Catch up on the last seven days here: http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-up/

Channel 4 News weather forecast, with Liam Dutton: http://www.channel4.com/weather/

All the latest blog posts from the Channel 4 News on-screen talent: http://blogs.channel4.com/news/

Cidersomerset
3rd December 2014, 19:48
High-profile support: Russell Brand joins London anti-eviction march

yaMZqiuUvHo

Published on 1 Dec 2014


Comedian and activist Russell Brand joins protesters in central London to
demonstrate against a US investment firm that plans to evict almost 100
families from their homes. Some 400 campaigners subsequently marched
to hand a petition to PM David Cameron.

COURTESY: RT's RUPTLY video agency, NO RE-UPLOAD, NO REUSE - FOR LICENSING, PLEASE, CONTACT http://ruptly.tv

RT LIVE http://rt.com/on-air

Subscribe to RT! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_c...

Akasha
3rd December 2014, 23:01
Surprised nobody has mentioned his book, published just over a month ago, titled Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_%28book%29):


The book is divided into 33 chapters, with a prologue and an epilogue. In the first chapter Brand writes that the book was conceived after his interview with Jeremy Paxman on BBC 2's Newsnight. The author advocates a social revolution wherein, "corporate tyranny, ecological irresponsibility and economic inequality" come to an end. It proposes the eradication of the "nation state", the demise of multinational corporations and the injection of spiritual thought into the structure of society. The book also proposes a "global revolution involving radical wealth redistribution and spiritualism."

Anyone know if he broaches the free energy hot potato within its pages?

IMO that's the only way his vision will be realized.

wishinshow
7th December 2014, 12:43
@Billy I feel hurt that you consider my input and indeed the input of many others on this thread to be little more than, "playground gossip". I/we am/are considered beings who take(s) pride in my/our discernment. Prior to 1917, there was probably little more than, "playground gossip" available to the general masses as they wrangled with revolution and Lenin. We now know more about the Rothschild/Schiff funding of Lenin. Perhaps if people had "gossiped" a little more prior to 1917 and the internet has existed to facilitate more "playground gossip", the atrocities which followed might have been averted. I am open to the idea that Russell Brand is a Starseed who will help lead Terran Hominid to a brighter more integrated future. I am also open to, what you term, "playground gossip" concerning different ideas about RB.

Russell Brand's promotion of the Anthropogenic Clinate Change scam is my stumbling block. (Sorry that I repeat myself)

On another note. Two days after my previous posting, I received a telephone call. The caller said nothing for a period of two minutes, before hanging up. I then received about seven calls one after the other from different individuals who thought they were connected to a gas fitting company's customer service line. I assume that this company's phone number had been attached to my cell phone for a period of about 45 minutes. Nothing like this has ever happened to me before. Is it perhaps connected to my postings on this thread?

Shezbeth
7th December 2014, 18:18
Its possible, but not the only possibility. Some idiot had advertised my phone number as his business' number for a period of about six months. I got calls from customers, bill collectors, even an IRS representative (which worried me, 'cuz I don't pay my taxes,... luckily they were going after that guy). I won't mention the first name, but the last name was Singh,... and I'm a caucasian of european descent. Those bill collectors sure were cross until I told them what was what! Jackasses,....

But back to the topic, as you excellently put it wishinshow, the world could do with a little less credulity. As I've said, we're not talking torches and pitchforks, and calling it 'gossip' is an observably churlish way of thinking about it,... but hey whatever floats one's boat right?

I float my boat by observing trends, thinking critically, analyzing strategy, and assessing as many possibilities as I can, and I find this to be a most relevant thread/topic, especially given Brand's mass-appeal. There is a difference between waking people up and accruing followers. Perhaps there are consciousnesses that are bubbling toward the surface, but I assert that he is holding back significantly, while enspelling as many as will follow (and boy will they follow!). Maybe its out of consideration, pragmatism, or whatever, but having processed for a few days (and its funny to me that it takes a few days to process the situation,... that alone raises a red flag or two) I am still on the fence, but leaning toward 'controlled opposition'. That his body language and speech patterns are sincere and genuine is easy to setup. He may quite sincerely be on the side of those tenants, but it's not as cut and dry as "He's a good guy" or "He's a bad guy". Many 'bad guys' start by doing 'good things' to condition the audience.

I don't contest what he's doing in London with the housing situation, but lets look at what might happen as a result.

Let's say people get to keep their homes,... who will be credited for making that happen? Are the people, the protesters going to get anything more than lip-service, or is it going to be chalked up to good 'ol Russel Brand? Moreover, just because he has chosen to take a stand with the people against an evil American corporation, they're operating on a false pretense. Frequently it is argued "What business is it for an American company to buy properties in the UK?". I know that one, its called 'investing'!

And though I don't diminish the apprehension the tenants may be feeling, and it is an issue, but we're talking a few hundred people on a very minor issue when one considers the many things that could be championed. In a strategic sense, I would guess that 'Westbrook will cave and Russel Brand will get to go on tour, selling his book and proclaiming "Victory" on every major evening program that will have him' (which is pretty much all of them all things considered). Bully for him, but I smell a red herring, esp. with the buzz-worthiness of this movement.

Now that last bit was pure speculation, and maybe I got some of the details wrong, but lets see how it pans out shall we? In the meantime, I'm still in the camp of "Don't sell your soul to him just yet".

In power, the trick is to give something to a person before taking something,... it makes the subject more complicit and less resistant. When the subject is the subjects, give a few people their homes back (so really, nothing has changed) right before going after the,....

wishinshow
8th December 2014, 13:41
@shezbeth it's an honour to communicate with you and so many others on this thread who are abound with open minded critical thinking and the eloquence to disseminate said.

If a multinational, multi-billion dollar company pays zero in tax while on this planet or while on planet zeeblebot; i say, "good'on'em". The companies are not the problem; the governments are the problem and the money is the problem.

And if many of the Pieidians ARE multidimensional anarchists, i say godspeed to them all. (I say this with reference to my own PERSONAL opinion about Plieidians which is borne of having spent a lot of time with their hyper-controlled sisters and brothers in Scandinavia. I do not consider myself well read on the subject)

Shezbeth
9th December 2014, 02:12
Sorry, but you lost me with that last bit. Pleidians? :faint:

Billy
10th December 2014, 12:38
@Billy I feel hurt that you consider my input and indeed the input of many others on this thread to be little more than, "playground gossip". I/we am/are considered beings who take(s) pride in my/our discernment.

(Mod hat off)

Hi wishinshow and good to see you again. It was never and never will be my intention to hurt anyone at anytime. I am sorry you choose to feel that way.
I have found that pride can sometimes cloud our discernment.
Thank you for the 2nd video your shared with the mods/admin where you put your pride to one side and retracted your accusations/discernment against other souls in the public media.

I think i expressed my thoughts better in my earlier post in this thread concerning pointing fingers. http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77375-Is-Russell-Brand-a-Rothschild-shill&p=905979&viewfull=1#post905979

You sent many many questions by Email and PM's. I tried my best to reply to them all.

Remembering that Avalon is monitored and everything read.
What i personally would like to ask you is what is your visions on solutions to the problems in our world that you raised and question?

For example: What would you recommend that Russel Brand do for you to be reassured that he has the betterment of humanity at heart and he is not a shill?

You also mentioned Hollie Gregg. How do you see justice happening for Hollie? What do we do to awaken the masses to realize we have psychopaths in seats of power who believe they are above the law. Police chiefs, Judges, Council workers. Sheriff's and yes politicians who are warned off from protecting our children.

If as you say you feel you communicate better through video rather than the written word, We enjoyed your video's, Please feel free to share your video's with members here. Just a suggestion.

Be well.




On another note. Two days after my previous posting, I received a telephone call. The caller said nothing for a period of two minutes, before hanging up. I then received about seven calls one after the other from different individuals who thought they were connected to a gas fitting company's customer service line. I assume that this company's phone number had been attached to my cell phone for a period of about 45 minutes. Nothing like this has ever happened to me before. Is it perhaps connected to my postings on this thread?

I doubt it has to do with your postings. This happens to me and many others. As i said above, just be aware that nothing is hidden from the bastards who believe they are in power :spy:or the good guys, if there are any good guys out there. I say we are better to educate them ALL with solutions. Then just maybe there will be changes for the betterment of all. :grouphug:

(Mod hat back on) :hat:

Natalia
10th December 2014, 14:37
Ok, I'm finally going to say something..I don't usually comment on if I think people are shills or Illuminati or whatever...but, I'm kind of in the mood today, just one more...

I don't believe that Russel Brand is a shill, to me he is for real, a man who genuinely cares and wants to make a difference. I don't care about his ego (we all have one), I care mostly about his heart and his message.

There is the possibility that he is a shill,
but it's not something that I feel...

The other day, my friend posted this on Face Book (as a public post, with the following picture)

"Good old Russell.. treading a fine line in avoiding the media ridiculed label of 'Conspiracy Theorist' whilst trying to wake the masses with humour.. Go Russell!

To those that kno about the truth and that don't trust him i say understand his position.. understand why he has to renounce 'Conspiracy Theorists' etc. In order to bridge that gap he can't let on too heavy with the truth but he can use his popularity to get people questioning and then they will make the last connections themselves.. this is his art and he needs our support" ~ Julian Haynes

http://9buz.com/content/uploads/images/August2014/when_i_was_poor_and_i_complained_about_inequality_ they_said_i_was_bitter_2014-07-23.jpg

In reply, I posted this:

And you get some people who go on about their ego's perception of his ego (or what they think is his ego)...what has that got to do with his/the important message?

(btw, I have not read most of this thread).

peterpam
10th December 2014, 15:00
Russel Brand is animated, he has a sparkle in his eye. He seems to have dedication. Actually, I find his childlike enthusiasm refreshing. I'd like to see someone make up a list of people that fit that description on this planet. I think he will do more to get the masses questioning than anyone has in years.Who else will grab the attention of those that are under the spell of pop culture? And as Amethyst said, once you start questioning you can begin to see on your own. I don't have to agree with him 100%. I wonder if he evokes envy in some?

MorningFox
10th December 2014, 15:07
I would LOVE to think he was not a shill. I really would. It's possible he is being used by them for their agenda without his knowledge... because the problem is... how do you explain how much mainstream media attention, focus and airtime this guy gets?

He HAS to be helping their agenda, whether willingly or not. He has to be, otherwise he wouldn't get the coverage. It's as simple as that, as far as I'm concerned.

peterpam
10th December 2014, 15:37
I would LOVE to think he was not a shill. I really would. It's possible he is being used by them for their agenda without his knowledge... because the problem is... how do you explain how much mainstream media attention, focus and airtime this guy gets?

He HAS to be helping their agenda, whether willingly or not. He has to be, otherwise he wouldn't get the coverage. It's as simple as that, as far as I'm concerned.



MorningFox, I wonder if the answer is more simple than the one you are suggesting. Could it be that he is getting a lot of coverage because of the following reasons:

He was married to a pop star
He has made some movies
He is a comedian
He is good looking

Also he makes good fodder for the press because he is a sort of freak, being socially conscious and out spoken. I think he is invited on shows as a sort of joke, like what was done to David Icke ,although,I think they have more of a good humored laugh at him rather than the more vicious nature that Icke was exposed to. This attitude is also a way of discrediting him, as a charming but nutty guy.

Although admittedly the press is controlled and censored, they do have to maintain interest by providing what sells and I believe Russell sells.

MorningFox
10th December 2014, 16:13
Are you honestly naive enough to think that they'd allow someone serious airtime if they posed any kind of threat to their agenda?

He was married to one of the biggest illuminati popstars on the planet, and has been in hollywood... yes. Those are alarm bells if ever I heard them.

Shezbeth
12th December 2014, 03:32
If as you say you feel you communicate better through video rather than the written word, We enjoyed your video's, Please feel free to share your video's with members here. Just a suggestion.

Actually, that's a brilliant idea! There are several members who make a practice of posting links to videos, blogs, etc. It is an accepted practice (seemingly) and one that allows one the liberty to speak more 'off the cuff'. Further, there's that micro-expression, body language thing I've been on about off and on for some time.

Moreover, I find that there might be a surprising degree of assent to the views posted in the video aforementioned (not universal of course, but 'ey' right?). I would post the link now if I knew it wouldn't be taken offensively (not that I expect it would be, but AFAIK it is something of a 'private' affair and I wouldn't want to jump the gun).

peterpam
12th December 2014, 15:49
Are you honestly naive enough to think that they'd allow someone serious airtime if they posed any kind of threat to their agenda?

He was married to one of the biggest illuminati popstars on the planet, and has been in hollywood... yes. Those are alarm bells if ever I heard them.





MorningFox,I believe that everything and everybody is corrupt to varying degrees. It is part and parcel to living on this planet. Not everything is black and white. Are you naive enough to believe that all movies out of Hollywood are totally under the control of the Illuminati? There are no absolutes, everything is relative to something else. Maybe there is some truth to both of our positions.

With love and respect, Pam

Billy
12th December 2014, 17:16
If as you say you feel you communicate better through video rather than the written word, We enjoyed your video's, Please feel free to share your video's with members here. Just a suggestion.

Actually, that's a brilliant idea! There are several members who make a practice of posting links to videos, blogs, etc. It is an accepted practice (seemingly) and one that allows one the liberty to speak more 'off the cuff'. Further, there's that micro-expression, body language thing I've been on about off and on for some time.

Moreover, I find that there might be a surprising degree of assent to the views posted in the video aforementioned (not universal of course, but 'ey' right?). I would post the link now if I knew it wouldn't be taken offensively (not that I expect it would be, but AFAIK it is something of a 'private' affair and I wouldn't want to jump the gun).

Thank you Shezbeth. Yes i think it would be up to wishinshow to decide, but i was actually thinking that if he felt inclined he could produce a new video to express himself if he so wished. It was just a passing thought.

Cidersomerset
12th December 2014, 17:32
Russell was on Question time the premier UK TV political forum.
Usually mainstream and relatively predictable. This episode had
Nigel Farage on the panel so there was bound to be disagreement
from opposing social idiologies and both are flamboyant characters
in their own way and this led to some heated exchanges. I just
finished watching it on I player.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04v85qt/question-time-11122014

Q2RSKJC-ugk



--------------------------------------------------------------------

David Icke makes a good point on his web site that the establishement
are not worried about celebs like Russell going on TV , because he
is easily discredited if he should become to popular. Unless the people
really do 'revolt' and force change , but we are along way from that
yet imo. But events can change quickly if the 'grass roots start to sprout' .....

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Russell Brand and the Mainstream Political Media

Friday 12th December 2014 at 06:26 By David Icke


http://www.davidicke.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/get-attachment-114-587x390.jpg


From the David Icke Facebook page …

‘Those that are really exposing ‘The System’ for what it REALLY is – and
there are many now – don’t get within a hundred miles of Question Time,
Newsnight, Channel Four News, etc. etc. Think about it.

I am just pointing out here one simple fact – that which threatens The
System is not promoted by The System. That’s all. I am not saying that
Russell is of The System, only that he is clearly not seen as a threat by it.’

http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/

wishinshow
13th December 2014, 17:49
Hello again, all. @Billy I plan to act on your suggestion and record a short video of myself and post it on this thread. Thank you for that invitation.

Just a quick note. I see the possibility that Russell is a "good guy" and is simply taking advantage of a situation which currently translates to: if i (RB) do "toe" the msm/Rothschild line, then I (RB) will gain more market share, BEFORE I (RB) begin to disseminate information that is more in line with Parkes/Icke/Jones/Ryan.

In order for me to believe that this is his strategy, i would need to see him completely drop his promotion of the anthropogenic climate change scam wherein stands his contention/assertion that there is NOBODY who stands to gain from said scam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-b4-bkKr9E (5:23 minutes)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3BlotUe4G8 (47 seconds in)

Are we really expected to believe that RB has never heard Alex Jones/David Icke/Piers Corbyn/Lord Monckton expressing their grave concerns over exactly what DOES stand to be gained by the promotion of the anthropo-climate-change-scam vs carbon taxation as a means to legitimate funding for (and a purpose behind) a one world socialist government? Oh, i forgot, this global government would require a revolution, too. Maybe RB could brand it.

21g
14th December 2014, 10:18
Wishingshow - Hope your not still doing that Yoga ? :)

I take your point about Brand and the Carbon money machine, BUT, i would look carefully at what
he has to say about it. In all his references to it, it is clear ( to me, anyway ) that he does not understand
that environmental initiatives have been co- opted by the elite.

He has a visceral response to environmental destruction but little real world knowledge of the problems and
machinations involved. He is an urban dude through and through. Its just not his forte.

I have kept a close eye on Russell Brand for many years, and he is subversive to the bone.
What i find so compelling about the man is he will be difficult for the msm to discredit. I believe they are
currently giving him plenty of rope - but as long as he remains true to his heart, his soul power will keep
manifesting Indian rope tricks. Fascinating to watch.

wishinshow
14th December 2014, 11:59
@21g I really do hope that you are correct. He is subversive. And he is also has addictive tendencies. It is easier to break the will of people who exhibit addictive tendency.

@Billy I want to offer some comment on your idea that taking "pride" in one's discernment can cloud one's judgement. When I was younger I lived in Canada. My father told me that the American notion that there exist "winners" and "losers" was anathema to our socialist sensibilities. I believed him and developed many ideas in respect to this. I have since performed reverse cart wheels. I see nothing wrong with taking pride in one's aptitudes. I see nothing wrong in further denouncing those who might detract from one's aptitudes. There exists a particularly Scottish trait that derides those who choose to rise above the general malaise. I do hope that this is not part and parcel of your comment on pride. A comment which I do feel sympathy with owing to my anti-satanic point of perspective. However, if more of us took more pride in our Terrahom traits/aptitudes, there might exist a lot less anger in the world. Perhaps it depends upon whether or not one's pride in discernment, or other, is borne of righteousness or self righteousness.

I might further proffer that all self defeating ideas take one away from an individual and collective ability to manifest the reality one might wish for one's self and others. And that altruism must surely be a misnomer if we are all "one". Is selflessness and a desire to undermine our own aptitudes not just a way to detract from the collective wonder of building structure through love, as enthalpy - taurus upon taurus - within the polarity of this universe and perhaps others?

Positive Vibe Merchant
15th December 2014, 00:31
Hmm... this is quite interesting... Are we here all agreeing that the NWO, as an organisation, or some sort of structured entity or other large corporation have disenfranchised employees? Could it be concievable that these employees, are in positions of power that could put forward a candidate such as RB, to subvert the system from the inside... a white hat perhaps, pulling a couple strings here and there?

Not everything withing any organised structure is rotten to the core, and we have to have some belief in that to have some belief in any hope that things can change for the better.

RB is a pretty intelligent guy, and I think he is trying to put things in the plainest terms possible, so that the layman can see what is going on..

I mean, who is to say it wasn't RB's plan all along... Whats to say, he didn't get in cozy with Katy Perry to use her for a platform and subvert in the way he though he could?

Its all speculation, but I would hazard to say the more people that have any understanding about how things work the better.
PVM

Tyy1907
17th December 2014, 04:35
Him with this obey thing in his hand seems strange to me.

Cidersomerset
17th December 2014, 12:16
This is the area Russell is an expert and knows well, this is also one of the
reasons if he became political rather than campaigner ( there is a difference).
The mainstream politicians and press after initial novelty and sympathy,
would be on his back with every move he made. He does not want to run for
parliament and should not imo unless the ground roots support or system
changes to allow alternate views to be listened to seriously.

A good insight into the depth and despair that addiction causes, Russell main
point is that these are health problems not a criminal merry go round at the
street level. Its not a crime its a illness usually an escape from depressive
tendencies .


It is on the BBC I player ,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04v2zrg/russell-brand-end-the-drugs-war


Russell Brand "End The War On Drugs" Full Episode BBC Documentary

uGLy7_UnK_0

Published on 16 Dec 2014


Russell Brand "End The War On Drugs" Full Episode BBC Documentary, End The World
On Drugs "BBC & Russell Brand Documentary" today, BBC, BBC Documentary,
Documentary, War on Drugs, Documentary "End The War On Drugs" Russell Brand with
BBC, Russell Brand, Drugs Inc, Drugged, National Geographic Documentary drugs,

Russell Brand challenges the point of view that the government's 'war on drugs' policy is
working by finding out how other countries are tackling their problems of drug abuse.