New leaders and old results

[WhiteLove]

For instance Trump has now been president for a number of months and no disclosure has come out of it so far. They won't let the truth out to the people will they.

I believe there are a lot of more advanced civilizations out there that are more advanced simply because their relationship to the truth is more advanced.

What will the price be...

[Magnus]

I regard Trump as a savior i many ways, but to what degree is he really in power?

When i saw the thread about "Mysterious Metal Structures Are Popping Up In NYC", I couldn't help myself but questioning the loyalty vs degree of power in relation to Trumps fellow citizens. Those metal structures suggest that the power behind Obama and Hillary are still in power, despite the shift of official leader.

No doubt Trump has bitten off more than he can chew, anybody would have.

What I would wish for, is a detailed explanation for those mysterious metal structures that are popping up in NYC, possibly in a tweet, from the official prime leader of USA, if at all possible for him to achieve, still I consider it his duty.

I'm a swedish citizen and my concern wouldn't be of much importance if I wasn't convinced that Sweden is an american colony largely administrated by the same powers that is behind Obama and Hillary.

[DeDukshyn]

Country "leaders" (somewhat country dependent) have far less power than we ever believe; why we don't ever wake up and see this, I have no idea ...

Clinton too said he would bring disclosure, Obama said he would stop the unilateral wars against muslim countries - both were powerless to do a thing on these fronts.

[Magnus]

Obama also failed on his electoral promise to close Guantanamo bay. Not even an official valid excuse to why he failed, an owned dirtbag if you ask me.

[Magnus]

When it comes to disclosure, my focus is 90% on Linda Moulton Howe. She is as good as it will ever going to get.

[Nasu]

Obama had the excuse of not controlling the house of representatives and the senate, so he had a pass when he failed to do things that he said he wanted to do. Trump on the other hand controls both houses and yet can't even build a wall, let alone anything else..

It shows he is not in command of much, other than his untamed ego and twitter feed. As for what the price will be for disclosure, I can only say imo it will be high. Any member of this forum knows that disclosure has dripped out since the late forties, seventy years of compounded secrecy, compounded power, so why change the status quo now? Real disclosure will only happen when it benefits those who have kept it secret for so long, as such, it represents a very dangerous play in this big game we call history. Que Bono - who gains?

Until it benefits those that we despise the most, it will not happen, that fact scares me more than any aftermath to disclosure... N

[Magnus]

Disclosure is happening right now, it works its way and acceptance into peoples minds while the status quo simultaneously are perpetuating the old powergrip over human logistics, The question is which edge will finally put those demons to rest.

Obama has misused executive orders for many unholy deeds, why not use it for Guantanamo bay, too benevolent for his/their taste?

[Rawhide68]

Magnus, did you visit the UFO sverige convention this past summer?, I was ther with Clas Svahn

[Magnus]

Magnus, did you visit the UFO sverige convention last summer?, I was ther with Clas Svahn

Thanks for asking. No I did not, Clas Svahn doesn't exactly meet my preferred criterias for being a serious investigator.

[DeDukshyn]

Obama also failed on his electoral promise to close Guantanamo bay. Not even an official excuse to why he failed, an owned dirtbag if you ask me.

But keep in mind as the subtopic of this thread covers -- that was very most likely not even in his power to change. I am fairly certain that until one becomes president, the exact limitations of the role are not known.

This sums it up nicely:
B8IvKx0c19w

[neutronstar]

Obama had the excuse of not controlling the house of representatives and the senate, so he had a pass when he failed to do things that he said he wanted to do. Trump on the other hand controls both houses and yet can't even build a wall, let alone anything else..


The only people who controls the senate and house are the powers that be. They control them by compromising them through pedophilia or some other sex scandals. Until that is brought to light and and fixed nothing will ever happen for the good, and I am losing faith that that will ever happen.

[Magnus]

Obama also failed on his electoral promise to close Guantanamo bay. Not even an official excuse to why he failed, an owned dirtbag if you ask me.

But keep in mid as the subtopic of this thread covers -- that was very most likely not even in his power to change. I am fairly certain that until one becomes president, the exact limitations of the role are not known.

This sums it up nicely:
B8IvKx0c19w

Great fun, hahaha.

[Rawhide68]

If put out a feeling of mine, without thinking, or even if thinking, I learned it the hard way

[Bob]

When it comes to disclosure, my focus is 90% on Linda Moulton Howe. She is as good as it will ever going get.

Anyone ever ask, who funds Linda Moulton Howe to give us a specific train of thought? Robert Bigelow? - how can subscriptions and 4 books fund all that "research" for disclosure? Anyone ever ask what cost her house in New Mexico costs on a monthly by month basis? How much does it cost to fund a film crew to go on site? Who pays those bills?

What exactly are we buying with Linda as our spokesperson giving us the things to think about? Just asking some thoughts that keep niggling at me.. Follow the money .. Who is the MONEY behind Linda (and the others we have seen in the "industry" of disclosure?)

[Bluegreen]

People who don't read (most of the population) have this little film reel in their head: The President (no one else will do) goes on national TV (interrupting their favorite show) and says, "I have an announcement ..." This is the ONE AND ONLY SCENARIO they will accept. Again - they don't read. Again - they have this little film reel in their head, implanted by the PTB.

*snap**snap*
Disclosure has happened already. Its a slam-dunk. It is information assimilated, digested, and moved on from.

[WhiteLove]

Do you want to see a future with massive border walls all around the world, within which you are trapped? What is going on right now are some early ideas, some prototypes, some seeds, some blindness being established in the eye of the public through news media, where it together with its leaders blindly and foolishly aims to have serious discussions about something that the world has never seen before, something that to me most closely resembles discussions about early plans for what a hell hole on earth could look like, to some degree it is a vision of hell, whether that is directly or indirectly the case.

Wake up people, be aware of the deception out there.

Today there is a total disconnect between making money and making real value on a global scale. When nations invest, peace may or may not be degraded - there are no mechanisms in place that ensure the force of law, money and information automatically moves the entire civilization towards peace.

So it is not a population growth issue, it is not the lack of resources on the planet and so on, it is simply just a car and a driver driving in the wrong direction...

[WhiteLove]

When it comes to disclosure, my focus is 90% on Linda Moulton Howe. She is as good as it will ever going get.

Anyone ever ask, who funds Linda Moulton Howe to give us a specific train of thought? Robert Bigelow? - how can subscriptions and 4 books fund all that "research" for disclosure? Anyone ever ask what cost her house in New Mexico costs on a monthly by month basis? How much does it cost to fund a film crew to go on site? Who pays those bills?

What exactly are we buying with Linda as our spokesperson giving us the things to think about? Just asking some thoughts that keep niggling at me.. Follow the money .. Who is the MONEY behind Linda (and the others we have seen in the "industry" of disclosure?)

I think it is a bit more simple, lets put it this way, business women at this intelligence level and age know a thing or two about being in business. So I do not think there is much of a conspiracy behind it, she probably just has some pretty solid cash flow supporting her, maybe combined with some inhereted wealth, pension, maybe won some court case in the past and stuff like this, combined with a not so high cost of living.

[The Moss Trooper]

WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGE, MAY CAUSE OFFENCE








Hmmmmmm.......

Re: Linda Moulton-Howe:- Her dismissal of Human Mutilation as 'Agent Orange' damage is a small sign, in my opinion, of the forces at play here. Perhaps that avenue has been 'closed' to further investigation, as the implications may not sit well within the disclosure meme.



Of course, there is always the supposition that Humans' are responsible for the mutilation phenomena. The fact that bovine haemoglobin is used in the IVF process (growing Human embryo's in a test-tube) has always been telling, to me.















Rest In Peace: Lisandra Hartz-Benedict

[Mod-edit: extremely graphic picture removed, Hervé]

[neutronstar]

When it comes to disclosure, my focus is 90% on Linda Moulton Howe. She is as good as it will ever going get.

Anyone ever ask, who funds Linda Moulton Howe to give us a specific train of thought? Robert Bigelow? - how can subscriptions and 4 books fund all that "research" for disclosure? Anyone ever ask what cost her house in New Mexico costs on a monthly by month basis? How much does it cost to fund a film crew to go on site? Who pays those bills?

What exactly are we buying with Linda as our spokesperson giving us the things to think about? Just asking some thoughts that keep niggling at me.. Follow the money .. Who is the MONEY behind Linda (and the others we have seen in the "industry" of disclosure?)

I think it is a bit more simple, lets put it this way, business women at this intelligence level and age know a thing or two about being in business. So I do not think there is much of a conspiracy behind it, she probably just has some pretty solid cash flow supporting her, maybe combined with some inhereted wealth, pension, maybe won some court case in the past and stuff like this, combined with a not so high cost of living.


It's not the money angle that makes me question everything she says, after all she is married and her husband could be the bread winner, but there is a lot to question.

First of all I like Linda and I think she is sincere, but there are all sorts of red flags with her. She was sat down in a room by the deep state and shown the most classified information the deep state has? First of all that is illegal, she doesn't have a top secret clearance, but I can look past that beings they make there own laws, but what is their angle, why are they telling her this? Surly it is not out of the goodness of their own hearts. You have to ? their motives and the information.

John B Wells was fired from C2C because of the things he was talking about. It is interesting to hear his take of what happened when he was working there. At times he would have guests on that were talking about certain subjects and suddenly the broadcast in certain areas of the country would drop the show, most notably NYC and Washington DC. It would start up again as soon as they changed the subject.
Linda has a monthly time slot that no one else has. They don't seem to care about what she is talking about.

I think the deep state uses Linda and obviously she has no idea. The best disinformation agent is someone who doesn't know that they are. People think way too much with their emotions and it is the best way to fool people. People get emotionally attached to people in this field and stop thinking objectively, just my opinion.

I have said this before on this forum and I will say it again. I think we would all be surprised to find out who is spreading truth and who is spreading lies in this community. I think it is next to impossible to figure out what is really going on.

[RunningDeer]

It's not the money angle that makes me question everything she says, after all she is married and her husband could be the bread winner...
With respect to this one point: I’d say Linda Moulton Howe is her OWN breadwinner. Married once and it ended 31 years ago. She’s from the generation where many, many women did it all: family, advance degrees, career.

Personal life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Moulton_Howe#Personal_life) - She has a daughter, Laura Kathleen Howe, from her marriage (1968–1986) to Larry W. Howe.




Howe received her 1965 B.A. cum laude in English Literature from the University of Colorado. In 1966, Howe was awarded the Stanley Baubaire Scholarship for her Master's Degree work at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. She received her master's degree in Communication from Stanford University in 1968, where she produced a documentary film for the Stanford Medical Center and her Master's Thesis, "A Picture Calculus," at the Stanford Linear Accelerator.

[neutronstar]

It's not the money angle that makes me question everything she says, after all she is married and her husband could be the bread winner...
With respect to this one point: I’d say Linda Moulton Howe is her OWN breadwinner. Married once and it ended 31 years ago. She’s from the generation where many, many women did it all: family, advance degrees, career.

Personal life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Moulton_Howe#Personal_life) - She has a daughter, Laura Kathleen Howe, from her marriage (1968–1986) to Larry W. Howe.




Howe received her 1965 B.A. cum laude in English Literature from the University of Colorado. In 1966, Howe was awarded the Stanley Baubaire Scholarship for her Master's Degree work at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. She received her master's degree in Communication from Stanford University in 1968, where she produced a documentary film for the Stanford Medical Center and her Master's Thesis, "A Picture Calculus," at the Stanford Linear Accelerator.

I thought she was married. My bad. I don't question the money angle anyway. Thanks for the clarification.