Linda Moulton Howe - Truth Hunter series (GAIA production)

[Szymon]

Hi Friends,

Here is an interesting GAIA series by Linda Moulton Howe - Truth Hunter.

It looks like an excellent series to watch.

https://vk.com/video/@r.bushev?z=vid...Fpl_2701539_37

Start with the first episode. You may have to find it on the right-hand side.



PS. Just in case, make sure you have good virus protection and your popup blockers fully enabled. Sometimes free content comes with eye-opening visual images.

Cheers,
Szymon

[ExomatrixTV]

• Truth Hunter with Linda Moulton Howe - Season 1 (2017):

The truth really is out there, for those daring enough to seek it. It will take a bold investigative reporter to penetrate through all of the lies to expose what the governments of the world know about the alien presence on Earth. Linda Moulton Howe has spent her life hunting the truth about alien activity and government cover-ups. And now in her new series, Truth Hunter, she brings to light details you may have never heard about prominent UFO cases and extraterrestrial contacts. Discover revelations about our universe, the solar system and the planet we live on.

S01E01 - Revelations from Alien Encounters.mp4 494.21 MB
S01E02 - Whistleblowers Expose the Alien Agenda for Earth.mp4 268.81 MB
S01E03 - Insiders Reveal the Alien Struggle for Humanity’s Future.mp4 259.06 MB
S01E04 - Rendlesham Forest - Three Strange Nights.mp4 286.46 MB
S01E05 - Rendlesham Forest - Contact Is Made.mp4 266.50 MB
S01E06 - The Unheard Truth Behind Roswell's UFOs.mp4 277.87 MB
S01E07 - Rendlesham Forest - Binary Messages Decoded.mp4 250.30 MB
S01E08 - Introduction to an Alien Taxonomy.mp4 285.77 MB
S01E09 - Proof of Presidential Briefings on the Alien Presence.mp4 275.77 MB
S01E10 - U.K. Cover-Ups - From UFOs to UAPs.mp4 369.50 MB
S01E11 - Detailing the Government's Alien Taxonomy.mp4 399.66 MB

• torrent

[Parsi-X]

Ive got season one .. but no where to find season 2 with a german whistleblower aka Tim Tactics.. anyone here have any rips of the second season ..would be most grateful!

[7alon]

Posted by Szymon (here)
Hi Friends,

Here is an interesting GAIA series by Linda Moulton Howe - Truth Hunter.

It looks like an excellent series to watch.

https://vk.com/video/@r.bushev?z=vid...Fpl_2701539_37

Start with the first episode. You may have to find it on the right-hand side.

Attachment 50983

PS. Just in case, make sure you have good virus protection and your popup blockers fully enabled. Sometimes free content comes with eye-opening visual images.

Cheers,
Szymon

I'll pass, since she was recently exposed as a shill.

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by 7alon (here)

Posted by Szymon (here)
Hi Friends,

Here is an interesting GAIA series by Linda Moulton Howe - Truth Hunter.

It looks like an excellent series to watch.

https://vk.com/video/@r.bushev?z=vid...Fpl_2701539_37

Start with the first episode. You may have to find it on the right-hand side.

Attachment 50983

PS. Just in case, make sure you have good virus protection and your popup blockers fully enabled. Sometimes free content comes with eye-opening visual images.

Cheers,
Szymon

I'll pass, since she was recently exposed as a shill.

If so, why not show the alleged evidence of your accusatory claim @7alon so that we can make up our own mind without having to go on hearsay alone.
Accusatory claims of anything without (credible trusted) sources are just that ... "claims" .... nothing more.

If you study my past (last 33 years) of me being proactive in the Alternative Media world, I have a strong track-record providing source material of my claims by default ....

Unless it is (they are) just my:

• 01. opinion(s) or
• 02. speculation(s) or
• 03. my "best guesses" or
• 04. pondering different options or
• 05. consideration(s) or
• 06. having certain assumptions without real evidence etc. etc.

If that happens I mostly use keywords & key-phrases like: "it may" ... "it could be that" ... "maybe" .... "my estimate/estimation is" ... "if I am right, then ..." ... "it seems that" ... "having beliefs" connected to "gut-feelings" which I explained many times I rather avoid having "beliefs", because in most cases it does not really help me to have them, it only feeds to a tunnel vision confirmation bias loop >>> especially when you are obsessed with a belief-system.

• Overall, it is mostly perfectly clear when I am guessing/speculating or having real proof/solid evidence.

Some are happy to believe their memories of "seeing the evidence" without checking their claims of the alleged "evidence" because it seems: "convincing enough" then when asked what it is based upon they do not like to admit it was just a "memory" without really checking without providing source links ... without allowing others to question/examine the source links claims ... because it was "convincing enough" is "key" to spread the "hear say method" can go viral.

• And even if anyone makes mistakes, you bet there are people making it much bigger and love to exaggerate with countless misrepresentations, especially when there is an ideology or dogmatic belief-system behind their motives.

Bill Ryan or myself, could also be "exposed" if we made a human error or trusted the wrong people in the past etc. etc. and that could be the bases of a "hit-peace article" having countless unfounded assumptions ... When such accusatory claims source links are not shared so that others can check it out for themselves, you are left with someone "memory" of accusatory claims made by others.

That is why I hope/expect people add source links of accusatory claims ... and allow it to be checked, questioned & examined ... How much of it is true and what part is exaggerated and/or misrepresented? ... Parts that are true could be forgiven IF you know the whole background story behind it ... but that is often the problem in a world of (shallow) soundbites & slanderous memes.


For the record: Not all memes are bad ... the best memes are those who provide correct source links that are actually based upon real solid research!

Many memes that are half-truths are more than often targeted by: "fact-checkers" sites used by big video- & social media-platforms to: censor, shadow-ban, de-list from search engines, deplatform, bury comments, ban critical thinkers etc. etc. And there is a very big chance many "half-truth" memes are not even made by conspiracy researchers, but by people who pose as "conspiracy researchers" so that anyone copying it sharing it re-uploading it is PART of the problem on purpose! (by design!).



cheers,
John Kuhles aka 'ExomatrixTV'
June 2nd, 2023 🦜🦋🌳

[panpsych]

I'll pass, since she was recently exposed as a shill.

I'm not responding to lend credence to the idea that LMH is a "shill", as I have absolutely no evidence to support that view, nor any reason to think that she is.

But I always internally debate whether listening to the testimony of compromised individuals can be valuable when couched in the context that they are indeed compromised.

I often wonder whether it's better to take them off the table of critical scrutiny altogether, or to keep a tab on them in order to get a better sense of how the broader game is being played, and to keep one eye on the range of the move-sets of all players.

If we stop listening to everyone we believe to have said or done disagreeable/compromised things, do we run the risk of being the boxer who shuts their eyes and can't see where their opponent's shots are coming from?

The flip side to this coin is that, no matter what evidence we've followed and place credence in, there is always a probability that we might be wrong. I once worked with a man who developed an immensely intricate damning exegetical indictment of a colleague's work, with all manner of grains of truth peppered in. It was completely one-sided, but convincing to anyone who started with negative assumptions about this person's work.

The main problem was that, by filtering the evidence (either by natural bias or tampering), believers of the critique tended to find only the conclusion they were looking for at the start.

[7alon]

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)

Posted by 7alon (here)

Posted by Szymon (here)
Hi Friends,

Here is an interesting GAIA series by Linda Moulton Howe - Truth Hunter.

It looks like an excellent series to watch.

https://vk.com/video/@r.bushev?z=vid...Fpl_2701539_37

Start with the first episode. You may have to find it on the right-hand side.

Attachment 50983

PS. Just in case, make sure you have good virus protection and your popup blockers fully enabled. Sometimes free content comes with eye-opening visual images.

Cheers,
Szymon

I'll pass, since she was recently exposed as a shill.

If so, why not show the alleged evidence of your accusatory claim @7alon so that we can make up our own mind without having to go on hearsay alone.
Accusatory claims of anything without (credible trusted) sources are just that ... "claims" .... nothing more.

If you study my past (last 33 years) of me being proactive in the Alternative Media world, I have a strong track-record providing source material of my claims by default ....

Unless it is (they are) just my:

• 01. opinion(s) or
• 02. speculation(s) or
• 03. my "best guesses" or
• 04. pondering different options or
• 05. consideration(s) or
• 06. having certain assumptions without real evidence etc. etc.

If that happens I mostly use keywords & key-phrases like: "it may" ... "it could be that" ... "maybe" .... "my estimate/estimation is" ... "if I am right, then ..." ... "it seems that" ... "having beliefs" connected to "gut-feelings" which I explained many times I rather avoid having "beliefs", because in most cases it does not really help me to have them, it only feeds to a tunnel vision confirmation bias loop >>> especially when you are obsessed with a belief-system.

• Overall, it is mostly perfectly clear when I am guessing/speculating or having real proof/solid evidence.

Some are happy to believe their memories of "seeing the evidence" without checking their claims of the alleged "evidence" because it seems: "convincing enough" then when asked what it is based upon they do not like to admit it was just a "memory" without really checking without providing source links ... without allowing others to question/examine the source links claims ... because it was "convincing enough" is "key" to spread the "hear say method" can go viral.

• And even if anyone makes mistakes, you bet there are people making it much bigger and love to exaggerate with countless misrepresentations, especially when there is an ideology or dogmatic belief-system behind their motives.

Bill Ryan or myself, could also be "exposed" if we made a human error or trusted the wrong people in the past etc. etc. and that could be the bases of a "hit-peace article" having countless unfounded assumptions ... When such accusatory claims source links are not shared so that others can check it out for themselves, you are left with someone "memory" of accusatory claims made by others.

That is why I hope/expect people add source links of accusatory claims ... and allow it to be checked, questioned & examined ... How much of it is true and what part is exaggerated and/or misrepresented? ... Parts that are true could be forgiven IF you know the whole background story behind it ... but that is often the problem in a world of (shallow) soundbites & slanderous memes.


For the record: Not all memes are bad ... the best memes are those who provide correct source links that are actually based upon real solid research!

Many memes that are half-truths are more than often targeted by: "fact-checkers" sites used by big video- & social media-platforms to: censor, shadow-ban, de-list from search engines, deplatform, bury comments, ban critical thinkers etc. etc. And there is a very big chance many "half-truth" memes are not even made by conspiracy researchers, but by people who pose as "conspiracy researchers" so that anyone copying it sharing it re-uploading it is PART of the problem on purpose! (by design!).



cheers,
John Kuhles aka 'ExomatrixTV'
June 2nd, 2023 🦜🦋🌳

Go and watch Steve Cambian's channel. You ramble too much, all you had to do was ask for a source, no need to go on a tirade of drivel, attempting to insult my intelligence LOL. It makes you look defensive.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SWb3Udysy8E

Here.. even a search for you of all the videos Steve has done.

https://www.youtube.com/@Truthseeker...moulton%20howe

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by 7alon (here)

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)

Posted by 7alon (here)

Posted by Szymon (here)
Hi Friends,

Here is an interesting GAIA series by Linda Moulton Howe - Truth Hunter.

It looks like an excellent series to watch.

https://vk.com/video/@r.bushev?z=vid...Fpl_2701539_37

Start with the first episode. You may have to find it on the right-hand side.

Attachment 50983

PS. Just in case, make sure you have good virus protection and your popup blockers fully enabled. Sometimes free content comes with eye-opening visual images.

Cheers,
Szymon

I'll pass, since she was recently exposed as a shill.

If so, why not show the alleged evidence of your accusatory claim @7alon so that we can make up our own mind without having to go on hearsay alone.
Accusatory claims of anything without (credible trusted) sources are just that ... "claims" .... nothing more.

If you study my past (last 33 years) of me being proactive in the Alternative Media world, I have a strong track-record providing source material of my claims by default ....

Unless it is (they are) just my:

• 01. opinion(s) or
• 02. speculation(s) or
• 03. my "best guesses" or
• 04. pondering different options or
• 05. consideration(s) or
• 06. having certain assumptions without real evidence etc. etc.

If that happens I mostly use keywords & key-phrases like: "it may" ... "it could be that" ... "maybe" .... "my estimate/estimation is" ... "if I am right, then ..." ... "it seems that" ... "having beliefs" connected to "gut-feelings" which I explained many times I rather avoid having "beliefs", because in most cases it does not really help me to have them, it only feeds to a tunnel vision confirmation bias loop >>> especially when you are obsessed with a belief-system.

• Overall, it is mostly perfectly clear when I am guessing/speculating or having real proof/solid evidence.

Some are happy to believe their memories of "seeing the evidence" without checking their claims of the alleged "evidence" because it seems: "convincing enough" then when asked what it is based upon they do not like to admit it was just a "memory" without really checking without providing source links ... without allowing others to question/examine the source links claims ... because it was "convincing enough" is "key" to spread the "hear say method" can go viral.

• And even if anyone makes mistakes, you bet there are people making it much bigger and love to exaggerate with countless misrepresentations, especially when there is an ideology or dogmatic belief-system behind their motives.

Bill Ryan or myself, could also be "exposed" if we made a human error or trusted the wrong people in the past etc. etc. and that could be the bases of a "hit-peace article" having countless unfounded assumptions ... When such accusatory claims source links are not shared so that others can check it out for themselves, you are left with someone "memory" of accusatory claims made by others.

That is why I hope/expect people add source links of accusatory claims ... and allow it to be checked, questioned & examined ... How much of it is true and what part is exaggerated and/or misrepresented? ... Parts that are true could be forgiven IF you know the whole background story behind it ... but that is often the problem in a world of (shallow) soundbites & slanderous memes.


For the record: Not all memes are bad ... the best memes are those who provide correct source links that are actually based upon real solid research!

Many memes that are half-truths are more than often targeted by: "fact-checkers" sites used by big video- & social media-platforms to: censor, shadow-ban, de-list from search engines, deplatform, bury comments, ban critical thinkers etc. etc. And there is a very big chance many "half-truth" memes are not even made by conspiracy researchers, but by people who pose as "conspiracy researchers" so that anyone copying it sharing it re-uploading it is PART of the problem on purpose! (by design!).



cheers,
John Kuhles aka 'ExomatrixTV'
June 2nd, 2023 🦜🦋🌳

Go and watch Steve Cambian's channel. You ramble too much, all you had to do was ask for a source, no need to go on a tirade of drivel, attempting to insult my intelligence LOL. It makes you look defensive.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SWb3Udysy8E

Here.. even a search for you of all the videos Steve has done.

https://www.youtube.com/@Truthseeker...moulton%20howe

thanks will look it to it

[Le Chat]

Posted by 7alon (here)
You ramble too much, all you had to do was ask for a source, no need to go on a tirade of drivel, attempting to insult my intelligence LOL. It makes you look defensive.

..........

Ouch

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by Le Chat (here)

Posted by 7alon (here)
You ramble too much, all you had to do was ask for a source, no need to go on a tirade of drivel, attempting to insult my intelligence LOL. It makes you look defensive.

..........

Ouch

I was mostly talking in general, if anyone takes that too personally when I am generalizing that's on them, him, her etc.

[7alon]

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)

Posted by Le Chat (here)

Posted by 7alon (here)
You ramble too much, all you had to do was ask for a source, no need to go on a tirade of drivel, attempting to insult my intelligence LOL. It makes you look defensive.

..........

Ouch

I was mostly talking in general, if anyone takes that too personally when I am generalizing that's on them, him, her etc.

No, it is also on you. Use your words better, sometimes less is more/better communication. Do not attempt to gaslight because you know you were called out. I have even thanked you for your post/thanks button. No attempt to apologise.. "I'm sorry if" etc. Anyway, this is the last response I will give you because we have already derailed this thread, which wasn't my intention.

[ExomatrixTV]

Posted by 7alon (here)

Posted by ExomatrixTV (here)

Posted by Le Chat (here)

Posted by 7alon (here)
You ramble too much, all you had to do was ask for a source, no need to go on a tirade of drivel, attempting to insult my intelligence LOL. It makes you look defensive.

..........

Ouch

I was mostly talking in general, if anyone takes that too personally when I am generalizing that's on them, him, her etc.

No, it is also on you. Use your words better, sometimes less is more/better communication. Do not attempt to gaslight because you know you were called out. I have even thanked you for your post/thanks button. No attempt to apologise.. "I'm sorry if" etc. Anyway, this is the last response I will give you because we have already derailed this thread, which wasn't my intention.

I stand with all I said! (read again) yes part was personal but with a question-mark awaiting possible evidence yet to be examined, most was not >>> as there are many more people not giving source links when using accusatory claims.

• Better was/is for me to be more clear why I made such a rant and why it applies to 1000s of conspiracy researchers world-wide, especially in a world of "soundbites and memes".

So if I was not able to separate the two points of view more clearly, I apologize because OF COURSE I am 100% interested to study your evidence if it stands out to scrutiny from the rest of us!

Sincerely,
John 🦜🦋🌳