JLB Member Discord #00 | Dave J & The War Hoax (2-Sep-2018)

If war is a ‘hoax’, then why do some veterans come home injured, and others not come home at all? How could so many people be in on such a grand deception and somehow keep it a secret? What was it that led Dave to first start questioning things like the Giza Pyramids and the Sphinx? Why did Dave quit the ‘truth’ scene in 2016, and why did he recently return?

Special guest and world-famous ‘conspiracy theorist’ Dave J joined us to answer these questions and so many more from an eclectic panel of interlocutors. After three hours we still had countless more questions to ask, and if the feedback from this call is positive, I’m sure Dave will be happy to return for a followup call.

As icing on the cake, this podcast was produced by Velocet, who I cannot thank enough for his efforts.

Perhaps I’m biased but I think we’re onto something special with these Member Discord calls, folks.

Participants (cumulative appearances on Member Skype/Discord calls including this one)

Dante (six)

fuhng (nineteen)

Hando (two)

Mezzie (twenty-seven)

Audio

Dave’s new channel

See here.

Other links

Warmup thread for this call – here.

News article about Dave J cited in the call – here.

My previous chat with Dave J – here.

Background information on my past interactions with Dave J – here.


Production notes: Recorded 2-Sep-2018. Edited/produced by Velocet 2-Sep-2018. Released to Full Members 3-Sep-2018. Released to Part Members 17-Sep-2018 in line with JLB1870. Released to Freeloader Members on 12-Oct-2018 in line with JLB1888. Released to public on 23-Nov-2019 in line with JLB19041.


 

25 thoughts on “JLB Member Discord #00 | Dave J & The War Hoax (2-Sep-2018)

  • 04-September-2018 at 2:10 pm
    Permalink

    I saw the youtube clip today, the one with audio from this chat, that was great. It was so good I downloaded the video off youtube. That Dave J fella seems to have a good understanding of things, I regret not showing up for the call.

    Yes, these skype/discord calls are great. Even if 90% of each call was “idle chat”, the remaining 10% is loaded with gold nuggets the size of your head!

    “Idle chat” isnt all that bad. I had these visions before where it was like I was laying on my death bed, and I was looking back on my life and at all the business I was ever engaged in, all the running around I did for this or that goal, and I saw that all of it added up to nothing in the end. It was as if I had spent my whole life being distracted by thing after thing, moving from one hypnotists watch to another, and never did I look around and appreciate what was truly important. Lol, it seemed to me the only thing that truly mattered was the people around me, and the idle chats I had with them, and more importantly the looks I exchanged with them(Talking sort of distracts and complicates things, so really the looks I exchanged with people seemed to be the most important part of my life, lol) Idk, it was weird each time I had that vision, it was very sentimental. It felt like I was dying, and everything was being taken away from me, and the very last things I let slip from my grip were a few idle chats, and some looks I had exchanged with other people. Everything else was an enchanting waste of time.

    • 07-September-2018 at 8:32 am
      Permalink

      Thank you very much for your kind words about that video.

      I spoke with Velocet about my plan to make a promo video for the call, and before I even told him which part of the call I planned to use as the basis for a promo video, he had suggested the very same section I had in mind.

      There is something about the way Dave explained his War Hoax perspective in those few minutes that stands out. It is truly outstanding. Very effective rhetoric.

      When I say ‘rhetoric’, I am talking about the delivery/expression of information/ideas. In this sense, the ideal process of thinking and communication can be thought of as:

      Grammar -> Logic -> Rhetoric

      or

      Input -> Process -> Output

      Dave J’s rhetoric/output on the War Hoax topic is simply sensational. Much more effective, at least for the broader audience, than my, ‘what is the evidence’ and/or ‘here is how we were programmed’ angle.

      Dave J cuts right to the heart of the matter: War is a hoax. The idea that two sides are facing each other and shooting each other? That never happened. And anybody who tells you that they did that, that they faced off against an enemy an fired bullets at men who were firing bullets back at them, that person is a liar. Period.

      I used to hold back on this kind of thing. I suppose a part of me was afraid that maybe, just maybe, I was wrong about the War Hoax. Maybe, just maybe, people really had fought wars, and I didn’t want to stick my neck out and offend somebody who had been involved in war.

      Now I say: if I am wrong, show me I am wrong. Put your own name and face out there and tell your story of war. Let’s see who wants to tell the world that war is real. I have documented my own reasons for doubting war, which I have every right (and reason) to do. If I am shown to be wrong, I will own up to it. But who will own up to claiming that war is real? Who will own up to claiming to have been involved in real war?

      I disagree with Dave J on a few things, but truly I appreciate his willingness to put his cards on the table. If War is indeed a Hoax, it is no surprise to me that so few people have pointed it out, despite the ubiquity of technology and social media. We are all so heavily programmed. It took an eccentric man named Dave J to break the mold and point out that the emperor wears no clothes.

      This helped to inspire myself to state the War is a Hoax on THC which has an audience of thousands, and over the past few days I have received comments and emails from people suggesting that they, too, have recently woken up to the War Hoax.

      Of course this understanding cannot and will not ever go ‘mainstream’. That is not how the world works, and it is not my intention (or even my desire) to awaken the masses to any hoax, let alone the War Hoax. But I am pretty happy about the fact that people within the ACT realm are now more open to questioning ‘War’, and Dave J deserves credit for his part in that.

      • 07-September-2018 at 10:33 am
        Permalink

        Rhetoric, thats the word I was looking for. I complimented his war hoax speech in another comment, and I used the word “dialogue”, but “rhetoric” is better.

        I thought it was great, almost hard to believe that his talk was just improvised during a conversation. He’s got the gift of gab.

      • 15-September-2018 at 6:15 am
        Permalink

        I used to hold back on this kind of thing. I suppose a part of me was afraid that maybe, just maybe, I was wrong about the War Hoax. Maybe, just maybe, people really had fought wars, and I didn’t want to stick my neck out and offend somebody who had been involved in war.

        I have no idea what goes on when people go overseas and ‘invade’ other countries.
        Whatever/however we want to label it, I suspect that some ‘not so great’ stuff happens to some people.
        I know two people who seem extremely tramatized by whatever they experienced in Iraq.

        We can say, “Sure, but that’s not ‘war'”, in the sense that most poeple think of it, and I’d agree with that.
        However, I’d suggest that you still may “offend somebody who had been involved in war”, since, to them, what they experienced was war, and trying to convince them that their definition doesn’t align with yours, probably won’t be particularly convincing to them.

        • 18-September-2018 at 3:17 am
          Permalink

          War is said to be two forces facing off with bombs and guns and even bayonets. This is not what I’ve been told by people who have “fought” in war, is. They seem to do a lot of training and a lot of building. I assume they get injured at times, but who knows. Very few people are saying they shot at people, all the footage I’ve seen seems to be shooting nothing.

  • 05-September-2018 at 9:14 am
    Permalink

    This was a great chat, very enjoyable. Particularly the first two hours. The YouTube clip was also excellent and I’ve shared it with a few like-minded friends.

    The first time I heard Dave J was on a Fakeologist call where JLB set up Gaia to call him “crazy Dave”. While amusing, at that time I couldn’t see the appeal in Dave’s ranting about “spiritual murder” and so on. The war hoax seemed utterly implausible, Dave seemed unhinged… crazy even! JLB didn’t help matters. If I recall he more or less dug his heels in at “war is a hoax. What more is there to it than that?”.

    I really couldn’t tell who was winding up whom at the time. It’s funny how things change when an idea is given time, space and the proper consideration.

    I’m now on board with the war hoax as yet another elaborate form of performance art, a rigged end to end production line capturing labour and turning it into power and control, to shape the world as the people running the show so desire.

    I would like to check out more of Dave’s work so if anyone can suggest particular highlights I’d be grateful. In particular, I’m curious about how he arrived at the 1-11 number theory.

    • 05-September-2018 at 12:54 pm
      Permalink

      This is fantastic feedback. Thank you, dbuser.

      I remember the ‘crazy Dave’ gag well. Was it on two different calls where I got both Gaia and Rollo with the exact same joke? I seem to recall that this is how it played out.

      Either way, it was very funny to me at the time, and just as funny to me now on reflection. For those who haven’t heard it yet, basically I told Rollo/Gaia that Dave likes to be called ‘Crazy Dave’ when Dave was not around, and then they began addressing Dave as ‘Crazy Dave’ live on the air when Dave was in our company. Naturally, Dave was not impressed, and Rollo/Gaia were caught off-guard by his response. This was a few months ago, when Dave first returned to the scene, and had begun taking part on the Fakeologist Discord server.

      Was I a deceiver? Yes. It was a practical joke which had deception at its core. Without the deception, there could have been no joke. And it was very funny to me. And I would argue that it was entirely harmless. Anybody who got the joke would have been laughing along as they listened. Even Rollo thought it was funny once he realised that he had been stooged. Had the roles been reversed, I would like to think that I would have gotten the humour and laughed along. I’m sure I do not need to expand upon the broader significance of the point I am making here.

      The Rollo and Dave J call: https://www.johnlebon.com/podcasts/jlb-chats-w-dave-j-rollo-12-apr-2018/

      -> I converted the Fakeologist call into a JLB Chats episode.

      The ‘War is a Hoax’ argumentative call (with Gaia): http://fakeologist.com/blog/2018/02/24/fac433/

      -> I have not converted this one into a JLB Chats episode (yet, anyway).

      The second call listed abive may be the one in which I trolled Gaia with the Crazy Dave thing. I’ll have to listen back.

      In any event, it was latter-listed call in which several people came out of the woodwork specifically to argue with me about War, live on the air, even though their responses to my points revealed that they in fact agreed with the fundamental claims I was making. You have to listen to it for yourself to see how absurd the whole thing was. A complete clown-show. A fascinating insight into the meta aspects of the ACT realm I have been trying to elucidate for some time.

      And this is not the only time this has happened on the Fakeologist Discord server. You would be amazed at how enthusiastic some people are to argue with me, even when they admit that they actually agree with my central point. I seem to have that effect on people. This is partly my own fault, of course, due to what some people describe as my ‘abrasive’ demeanour. I don’t see myself this way but I accept that a significant proportion of the wider audience does see me this way.

      I do believe that am getting better at ‘reading the room’, and it has been a long time since I wasted my energy in a room full of argumentative people.

      My shtick is massively triggering to a certain type of person, and I can understand why this is the case. I have been called ‘unemotional’, ‘too logical’, ‘solipsistic’, etc etc. What these epithets are aimed at doing is criticising my focus on logic and evidence over emotions and group consensus. The modern human has been trained to more or less do the exact opposite of what I do when I am exploring the logic and the evidence. This manifests itself whenever I am outnumbered by normies (or conspiratards) as I was in that call. One-on-one they are usually cool to talk to, but as soon as they detect numerical superiority, they turn into rabid pack animals.

      Nowhere is this fact demonstrated with more profound absurdity than a group Discord chat in which people will agree with the central point I am making but then pat each other on the back for disagreeing with me at the exact same time. Simultaneously agreeing and arguing with me, because it is me — apparently oblivious to their own behaviour as individuals or as a group. It is truly phenomenal to observe in real time, once you understand what you are witnessing.

      They lack a certain self-awareness, as do most of us when we roll off the Epsilon conveyor belt. I know I sure did, back in the day. I would like to think that we can remediate (or at least mitigate) this fault within us once we have acknowledged its existence. Of course it much more likely that in most cases, an individual will simply blame their own behaviour on the other i.e. ‘it is JLB’s fault that we argue with him’.

      Anyhow, dbuser, getting back to the main point of your comment, you are not the first person to share this kind of reflection with me. And I am truly thankful that you (and others) have done so, that you have taken the time to explain how you first felt about what I was saying, and how this opinion has changed over time. You are demonstrating that (some) people can disagree with me on a topic, and even think that I may be ‘crazy’ or ‘trolling’ with my opinions on matters such as War, but still allow yourself time to further reflect on what I am presenting, and eventually see that I am neither crazy nor trolling. You are adding anecdotal evidence which supports the idea that we can, if we choose to, maintain focus on the message rather than the messenger.

      There is something to this.

      I still find it amazing that people can think I am crazy/trolling about topics like the Missile Hoax or the War Hoax and not take the time to contact me personally to explain how I am wrong, but I just have to accept that this is how it is. If I am wrong about something, it is simply the case that people who can see that I am wrong, will not try to show me how I am wrong. They will remain in silence and let me be wrong and make a complete fool of myself in public. And if I am wrong about missiles being a hoax (for example) then I am indeed making a fool of myself with each and every passing day, leaving my work on that topic up on the internet for all to see.

      Well, this is how it is. Just as each of you are ultimately on your own, I am also on my own. None of you can rely on anybody else to arrive at good conclusions for you, and I cannot rely on others to arrive at good conclusions for me. I have to be sure of my own evidence and logic, because if it is at fault, then even my own supporters may not feel inclined to assist me to see it. An absence of constructive criticism is not evidence that no such constructive criticism is possible. All the more reason for me to take my time with the ongoing research, to give my own mind plenty of time to debunk myself, before releasing things to a wider audience.

      And as you have quite rightly pointed out, time is a big factor in this. Giving yourself and your brain the time and space it needs to think things through.

      After all, we are dealing with twenty, thirty, forty, fifty (!) years of conditioning, programming, socialisation, and everything which follows. It may be fairly easy to uninstall a program on a computer, but the mind does not seem to function so swiftly. At 30 frames per second, even a single war film has imprinted thousands upon thousands of images of war in our heads. Now multiply that by the dozens of war films the average person has seen by the time they hit adulthood. Good luck bypassing that in the space of a single podcast or YouTube video.

      Thank you once again for this comment, dbuser. It is encouraging and insightful at the same time. And now that you see through the War Hoax, I am willing to bet that you feel a weight off your shoulders! How much nicer does the world seem when one’s mind is not weighed down by a persistent sense that war is waging around the world? Or that the different countries are ‘enemies’? I remember how weighed down I was back when I used to believe in crap like ‘World War I’. All of that programming and conditioning about death floating around in my subconscious. Buried so deep in my psyche that I did not even realise that so much darkness was there within my soul.

      Just think about school. The ‘minute of silence’, the ‘red poppies’. Powerful stuff. Embedding horrific stories in my mind — and, I would argue, in my body.

      All gone now. I feel a lot better. I would be interested to get your take on this element of it, dbuser (and others). Thanks again!

      • 05-September-2018 at 4:16 pm
        Permalink

        Thanks for another very thoughtful reply JLB.

        In the space of a couple of days, and thanks to Dave J, yourself and the other JLB.com members on Discord taking the time to express yourselves I feel like my own fog has lifted on a few matters.

        Firstly, Dave J’s explanation of what spiritual murder means. He described it using the example of a news story about a dead child, and the effect that has on everyone who hears it: it brings everyone down, it both lowers and aligns the mental state of the room on a lowest common denominator of sadness and pity for a child who may never have existed at all.

        I’ve heard this phenomenon described by people even more on the fringe than myself using terms like “collective consciousness” or “vibration level” and I had until recently dismissed it as unscientific woo, but I think I get it now. I’ve experienced spiritual murder many times and the underlying premise ties in neatly with something you said above.

        What these epithets are aimed at doing is criticising my focus on logic and evidence over emotions and group consensus. The modern human has been trained to more or less do the exact opposite of what I do when I am exploring the logic and the evidence. This manifests itself whenever I am outnumbered by normies (or conspiratards)

        We’ve probably all experienced this phenomenon with family or friends while chatting away. I know I have. Someone will bring up a news story and I, being the nominated “ultra-skeptic” of the group, will be goaded into commenting about why it’s not real, and then gently (or not so gently) mocked for thinking that way.

        I could never quite pinpoint why I engaged with such obvious provocations, but now I think I know. I want to avoid the conversation and the spirit of the group being dragged down by a fabricated news story, just so my friends can bathe in artificial emotional consensus via warm, fuzzy feelings of social belonging. The whole group is worse off from mentally handicapping itself by self-censoring the discussion.

        In these circumstances I get painted as having a cynical, negative outlook, because my thoughts run counter to the groupthink, because of course there’s no way group consensus could possibly be anything other than correct.

        It’s quite strange, but I understand why it happens. The programming runs deep; any discussion that introduces foreign concepts is attacked by a collective hive mind like an immune response (assuming those are real, of course!)

        I will try to reply again later to cover the other parts of your reply – at work now. Cheers.

        • 07-September-2018 at 7:37 am
          Permalink

          ‘just so my friends can bathe in artificial emotional consensus via warm, fuzzy feelings of social belonging.’

          amen!

          i try hard not to initiate anymore, but still don’t have the maturity to deflect or decline invitations to give my opinion, despite knowing nobody is interested in changing theirs or being open minded to a ‘fakery / deception’ angle beyond maybe a thin veneer of govt / media obfuscation.

          there is a silver lining though, even after being on the wrong end of gratuitously smug gestures, tones, and chuckles. because you may be fodder for their frail collective ego(s) … but knowing they know not what they think they know … can be satisfying to the soul : )

          exuding confidence in their ignorance can also serve as a powerful shield, warding off future attacks from overzealous normies.

          as for Dave’s take on the spirit in the room..that quote from OW seems apropos:

          “Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go” – Oscar Wilde

  • 07-September-2018 at 4:49 am
    Permalink

    DaveJ never disappoints. This was a great chat. Next time, deeper immersion into his visually metaphored numbers theory would be fascinating. Especially as it connects to the concept of Zion (Psy-on) as mind and the fact that Zionist Jews and their freemason lackeys control the central banking usury-&-legalized-counterfeiting systems of most so-called territories called countries (go and count the trees and the threes, go and plant a conned-tree or if you want to get into vulgar slang terms even a “cunt tree,” a territory for producing a race of “cunts” from actual cunts, lol).

    As far as “No one died, nobody got hurt,” is concerned, my modification to this is that no one is PHYSICALLY hurt during the PsyOp, whereas millions are lobotomized and brainwashed as a result, hence it’s not just a great trade-off but a very easily achieved media-faked trade-off without having to deal with any messy clean-up of blood-&-guts and the emotional baggage of families and loved-ones in deep grief.

    As far as the whole “war is a hoax” theory goes, on one level it’s nothing new. Most of the truth movement knows that most countries are controlled by the same people. They just don’t say that ALL countries are controlled at all times and always have been. Just like some individuals do not conform and cannot be bought for any price, some leaders of individuals must theoretically exist that cannot be bought at any price or who have, at least, a very high price, and that stubbornness ends up benefiting the side of “freedom” for their followers rather than the side of force and farce and con artistry. These would be people that the “elites” really hate (or at least pretend to hate) such as: Andrew Jackson, Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, who never kow-towed to the Jew bankers and the freemasons the way that someone like Donald Trump does. People who would never have holohoax-denial laws in their country the way that Victor Orban and Putin do. Were they all one big act to convince the cattle en-mass that no matter what they do and what their leaders do, they have no chance to win?

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-T8uDtlWgMS4/W49jbogQyNI/AAAAAAADIZY/WXBtKNgNux8O9WhR2p2pp-75VtIzD5_YACLcBGAs/s640/EUROPE%2B%25289%2529.jpg

    One-on-one fights obviously exist where usually at least one and often both parties get “hurt” (get heart; only when you get hurt, do you get heart; hence the common expression: he’s not as good a fighter as his opponent but he has more heart or former hurt that he can mine with grace).

    Boxing, martial arts, football games and whatnot where both sides beat the crap out of each other to instill physical sado-masochism and the ability to take pain and give pain, also obviously exist for a reason: to let out the physical aggressions that formerly were released through violent confrontations, before non-violent ways of solving these conflicts were discovered.

    Group-brawls and gang-fights also obviously exist between competitors for different territories and also just for determining which group’s big ego or claims of big penis dimensions will remain valid through the rule of force, “bragging rights” as the saying goes. People on both sides get hurt and sometimes even killed.

    Street gangs are not “PsyOping” people on TV. They’re just letting their natural aggression out, solving their problems with violence. What’s the old saying? “A child becomes a man when he learns to walk around a mud puddle rather than through it.” Well, people who solve problems with brute force are still children pretending to be adults, still stuck in win-lose dialectic of the jungle rather than the win-win of civilization.

    Primitive people’s in villages also have their own territorial gang-fights where they rape and pillage each other.

    And what is “war” and its warriors (worriers) except a larger gang-fight with more fearful and anxiety-ridden participants? Sure, the leaders might all be friends and pretending to be enemies, but the goal is still “land grab,” “commodity grab” and most importantly “herd management.”

    Therefore, if killing and maiming a few thousand people in a large gang-fight so that they can then bullshit and say tens-of-thousands and even “millions” were killed in a long campaign of warfare in order to shoot up the fear-&-anxiety levels of hundreds-of-millions of people at once, they’ll do it. When you own the media, when there is no independent media but only your own very highly paid agents reporting all the “important news” everywhere in the world, maintaining this mass-media saturation itself and therefore gaining MASSIVE emotional leverage to control millions of humans at once with only a few declarations from “official sources” becomes paramount.

    Therefore, within the long established “dramatic/traumatic” scenario of modern gang-fighting, “crisis acting” wouldn’t work and killing and maiming enough soldiers to provide a good front becomes necessary. To say that ALL of these people were killed and maimed during friendly fire exercises is silly. What would be the purpose? Why not just let a few hundred people who have been brainwashed on both sides have a gang-fight party and shoot and kill each other. Then you can show these people to MILLIONS of others and tell them that a whole 10 year campaign has been going on where that scenario has been repeated a hundred times.

    I have come to really hate the dramatic/traumatic form itself. I literally can’t even force myself to watch any standard “movie” anymore. They are all such boring cliches of deliberate mind-control programming and have been for such a long time. Regardless of content, it is the DRAMATIC FORM itself that provides the TRAUMATIC programming for all. Setting them up for every future PsyOp and collective manipulation to come.

    The “dramatic-traumatic” narrative paradigm is the endlessly repeated false prism through which most people interpret their lives and judge it to be a “success” or “failure.” Mimicking of endless conflict is what the dramatic form makes possible, creating entirely unnecessary drama, trauma and tension in people’s lives in order to make sure they remain unstable and weak and unsure of themselves and therefore much easier to control. The “dramatic” form is only ONE way of interpreting reality and not a very good one at that. It is only one of the tools in the shed. It’s long overdue that we find other tools and let Hollywood bury itself while we laugh in its greedy, evil face.

    https://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/rvd448udj5/art_explains_entertainment_exploits_youngblood_gene_trauma_and_drama.jpg

    https://k003.kiwi6.com/hotlink/djeojbngw1/media_hoaxed_shootings_are_nuthin_to_be_a_fred_flinstoned_of.jpg

    • 07-September-2018 at 8:50 am
      Permalink

      Regardless of content, it is the DRAMATIC FORM itself that provides the TRAUMATIC programming for all. Setting them up for every future PsyOp and collective manipulation to come.

      The “dramatic-traumatic” narrative paradigm is the endlessly repeated false prism through which most people interpret their lives and judge it to be a “success” or “failure.” Mimicking of endless conflict is what the dramatic form makes possible, creating entirely unnecessary drama, trauma and tension in people’s lives in order to make sure they remain unstable and weak and unsure of themselves and therefore much easier to control.

      Great stuff, spot on. This is the best reason to wean oneself off TV and film “programming” altogether.

      • 07-September-2018 at 9:28 am
        Permalink

        Can I ask both dbuser and Negentropic, what are your thoughts on the use of film to explore esoteric or philosophical ideas?

        The reason I ask is that I do sometimes wonder if any promotion of TV/film whatsoever, even if for the purpose of serious analysis via Member Calls, may be inadvertent/unintentional promotion of a certain kind of negative energy. That is, if all programming is prima facie negative for one’s mind/soul, then merely by promoting films for analysis, I may be promoting something which entails negative consequences for those who engage in the material I am promoting.

        At the same time, I have found film analysis to be a terrific way to reconsider my own thoughts, and also to convey my ideas to others.

        A pertinent example of this is my use of The Thirteenth Floor to convey to the audience of THC my notion that History is a Hoax. Dig through the sources for characters like Herodotus and you soon find a wireframe mesh. There is nothing out there. A trip to Tucson ends in a wide-eyed stare into emptiness. It is all a sham!

        But just when I should’ve been getting closer to the city. Something wasn’t right. There was no movement, no life. Everything was still and quiet. And then I got out of the car. And what I saw scared me to the depths of my miserable soul. It was true. It was all a sham. It ain’t real.

        Clearly this resonated with Greg (as he included ‘Wireframe Mesh’ in the title of the published call) and I suspect it was very effective at communicating my experience to the listeners.

        So I am open to the idea that film/TV ought to be eschewed entirely, and I am also open to the idea that TV/film — when used with self-awareness — can be a terrific way to share our inner thoughts with fellow humans.

        Looking forward to your responses.

        • 07-September-2018 at 3:08 pm
          Permalink

          As an academic exercise—if I may use that term to mean honest research—then I have no problem with TV, film or any other kind of media.

          I personally enjoy reviewing older movies and TV shows with a retrospective historical context for events that later transpired. There are interesting patterns to be found, like the many Back to the Future / 9-11 synchronicities documented on this site*

          Basically, if you have a reason to be watching, and that reason is itself honest and has been personally well considered then fill yer boots 🙂

          * still very much looking forward to part IV onwards of the 9/11 sync series JLB

    • 07-September-2018 at 9:20 am
      Permalink

      DaveJ never disappoints. This was a great chat.

      Very well said and I wholeheartedly agree.

      It has been fascinating to watch on as the Fakeologist crowd have slowly warmed to Dave J. Yes, his rhetoric can be too much for people at times, and his willingness to call people out for their own self-deception will always rub people the wrong way. But if you give him a chance to explain himself, he will usually have something interesting, or at the very least entertaining, to say.

      Next time, deeper immersion into his visually metaphored numbers theory would be fascinating.

      This is the cool thing about having several other people on the calls, and the custom of asking one another questions. It was Mezzie who asked about Dave’s number/tone ideas. I would not have asked those questions because it is not something I am particularly interested in, at least compared with topics like the War Hoax, the History Hoax, the ACT realm and Dave’s experience with it, making the news headlines around the world, peacefulness/contentedness with life, etc etc. But other people are interested in Dave’s tone/number ideas, so Mezzie’s questions (and Dave’s answers) helped to make the call more enjoyable for more people.

      Ditto Dante/Hando, whose questions about War led to Dave’s responses which ultimately led to the short video I made to promote the call. And fuhng’s questions about Dave’s experiences in the Philipines led to anecdotes which no doubt made Dave J more personable, and easier to relate to as a human, for the listener. At least this was the case for me, listening back to the call.

      And so the open panel format has proven itself to be the best part of these calls. People will give me credit as the host of the show, and that’s fine, I’ll take the credit, but in fact if somebody were to pay close attention, they would notice that the real gems from this call came about due to the open panel nature. The format is the brilliance. And after several years of working on what would eventually become johnlebon.com, it is clear that I have attracted some of the brightest minds in the entire ACT realm to participate in what we are doing here.

      It is a thing of beauty.

      And I am happy to state that categorically: some of the brightest minds in the entire ACT realm are right here on this very website.

      People can call me ‘biased’ or ‘arrogant’ for saying so, that’s fine. But if I am WRONG then tell me where else to find a larger collection of brighter minds. Nobody can because no such place exists. Period.

      As far as “No one died, nobody got hurt,” is concerned, my modification to this is that no one is PHYSICALLY hurt during the PsyOp, whereas millions are lobotomized and brainwashed as a result, hence it’s not just a great trade-off but a very easily achieved media-faked trade-off without having to deal with any messy clean-up of blood-&-guts and the emotional baggage of families and loved-ones in deep grief.

      I think this is a very fair point, and it is what Dante seemed to be getting at with one or two of his questions i.e. are the people who produced/broadcast ‘9/11’ spiritual murderers?

      My own position on this is that TV is fake from the outset. People play roles on screen. Including me. Am I a spiritual murderer for pretending that people died or got hurt at the Ariana Grande bombing hoax? No. I was acting. It was all an act for dramatic effect. I made my act clear for those with eyes to see. As did the perpetrators of 9/11: they used cartoon planes, an OUTLANDISH story of hijackings and madmen suicide pilots, and buildings collapsing into their own footprint due to fires! Seriously, how ridiculous do they have to make it, before they qualify for the same exception as JLB does for his Ariana Grande video?

      If anything, they made their ruse way more absurd than I made mine. 9/11 is pure deadpan comedy from start to finish. An obvious and blatant made-for-TV movie, replete with clowns and jokers like our friend Harley Guy.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxQ2-DcZuR4

      As for the likes of Hitler and so forth, you are well within your right to maintain belief that these guys were not the same type of puppets/actors we see today (e.g. Putin, Trump, etc). It is cool to me that you can disagree with myself and others on this site about this topic, without making it the basis of figure-eight arguments, and needless animosity.

      Just yesterday I discovered that one of the trouble-makers in the comment section of my YouTube channel is, after all, motivated by his resentment towards my opinions on Hitler and WWII. For days he has been posting diatribes against me, even though he agrees with just about everything I am saying. Finally after some questioning, he revealed why: because I am not on his side when it comes to ‘Hitler was a good guy’.

      So we have a situation in which he and I agree about the Holohoax (a complete and utter joke of a death-myth if ever you have heard one) and rather than support me for having the guts to put my face out there while exposing the Holohoax, he sits from the sidelines like a coward and throws poo at me. I cannot tell you how many times I have witnessed this. People who do less than myself to expose the lies and Hoaxes, attacking me for ‘not doing enough’. Complete and utter hypocrites who would want to desperately hope that there is no judgement at the end of all of this.

      So thank you once again, Negentropic, for all of your support over the years. We don’t agree about everything and we don’t have to. So long as we can see eye to eye on enough things to respect one another’s path.

      As Irene Zisblatt likes to say: you’ve got to find the diamonds in the poo. Or something like that.

      • 07-September-2018 at 3:26 pm
        Permalink

        But other people are interested in Dave’s tone/number ideas, so Mezzie’s questions (and Dave’s answers) helped to make the call more enjoyable for more people.

        For me, the idea itself is less interesting than the journey that was taken to get there. In Dave’s case I would love to know how and why he arrived at his number code.

        This holds true for your content too, JLB. Your conclusions are certainly interesting, and attempting to reverse engineer them has led me down fairly untrodden paths.

        These are great benefits.

        All of that takes large amounts of time I can’t justify to my family though.

        When the reasoning accompanies the conclusion it is a powerful hook to begin exploring what can otherwise seem a daunting and/or overwhelmingly niche subject.

      • 15-September-2018 at 6:25 am
        Permalink

        I think this is a very fair point, and it is what Dante seemed to be getting at with one or two of his questions i.e. are the people who produced/broadcast ‘9/11’ spiritual murderers?

        I may be wrong in this impression, but it seems as if Dave J is not asking this question, but saying it. I’d be curious to know if he thinks that you, JLB, are indeed, a spiritual murderer.

        My own position on this is that TV is fake from the outset. People play roles on screen. Including me. Am I a spiritual murderer for pretending that people died or got hurt at the Ariana Grande bombing hoax? No. I was acting. It was all an act for dramatic effect. I made my act clear for those with eyes to see.

        It seems to me, that the crux of the difference between those that believe TPWRTS are ‘evil’, vs those who believe they are ‘good’ or ‘neutral’, is the final sentence above.
        “Clear with eyes to see.”
        Should those ‘with eyes to see’ care about what happens to those who don’t have eyes to see?
        Do those “in the know” have a responsibility to not physcologically or emotionally harm those who aren’t in the know and aren’t capable of being in the know?

  • 07-September-2018 at 5:10 am
    Permalink

    Correction and slight revision: “Therefore, if killing and maiming a few thousand people in a large gang-fight IS NECESSARY so that they can then CONVINCINGLY bullshit and say tens-of-thousands and even “millions” were killed in a long campaign of warfare AND shoot up the fear-&-anxiety levels of hundreds-of-millions of people at once, they’ll do it.”

  • 08-September-2018 at 3:48 am
    Permalink

    Why can’t good ole “war” be just a football game with a hundred people on each team in a field much larger than a hundred yards, maybe even in a dense forest or mountain range for guerrilla action using live amo? I mean what’s the big deal? Are you saying people can’t be made stupid enough to shoot at each other? That’s a very high estimate of human beings! You guys must be romantics.

    Also, when John uses his old “the elites just might be doing good for us” mantra in every last pod he does (just to annoy his critics, no doubt, lol), what he’s doing is basically using the same psychology as “battered woman syndrome.” He’s able to do this by using the fallacy that only physical wounds qualify as “battering” and not psychological wounds that actually often take much longer to heal and sometimes never heal. He’s saying, Monsieur JLB that is, you battered troofers and other average dufuses who LOVE your deceptions, go back to your deceptor and psychological tormentor and BE ON THE SIDE OF THE WINNER, the husband that will at least take care of you while still beating your ass in on occasion.

    We’ll make a new term for this and call it “battered troofer syndrome” aka learn to love your psychological torture and be on the side of the ‘winners’ folks.

  • 16-September-2018 at 6:26 pm
    Permalink

    What a great talk , as to Dave J ‘s experience in the villages of the people of the Philippines I can resonate with his experiences having spent a year immersed in a similar way in Northern Thailand . The family/culture and closeness to the nature of this world is something we have lost. Interestingly I had a step grandfather who was conscripted into the RFC in England because he was riding a horse (they assumed he was gentry) I remember as a child listening to him and looking at a photo of him next to his wooden propeller on his Sopwith Pup he had been using a navy colt pistol during flight training and had taken huge chunks out of it.. apparently he said the training was where most met their fate from fire to just bad luck. Even lost a few to live exercise with 4 second hand grenades where they took themselves out by not getting away in time.

    Never spoke about actual conflict… never occurred to me as to why. Makes so much sense. Thanks for the shake up

  • 24-September-2018 at 1:11 pm
    Permalink

    Dear John
    If war (which has to include WW2) is just a hoax and nobody died as a consequence, does that mean that all the film footage of the Renagade Tribune video; “Hellstorm” had been produced/faked since CGI was invented?

    • 24-September-2018 at 2:30 pm
      Permalink

      It is important to remember that nobody dies on War because War is a HOAX.

      Did people die in Germany between 1939-1945? Of course.

      Were some of these deaths due to operations which were described as ‘War’ but were in fact merely strategic demolition and relocation? Yes, that would be my inference.

      Kyle and Sinead seem to truly believe in what they are doing and I personally infer that they believe everything they said in Hellstorm.

      Even intelligent, well-meaning people can get caught up in the War Hoax. I know that I did at first.

      Watch Hellstorm with a critical eye and ask yourself if any of the footage presented would lead you to the conclusion that War is real.

      Perhaps I have not communicated effectively enough this important distinction: I am not saying that nobody died in what is called ‘War’, I am saying that the fundamental notion of War (armies opposed to one another and trying to murder one another with live fire) is in fact a lie.

      Even if we take the footage presented in Hellstorm on face value, all it shows is death and destruction. It does not show opposing armies fighting one another. Death destruction can be achieved without the need for any real combat i.e. War.

      And that is if we take the archival footage on face value, which I for one do not.

      Take a look at this footage from World War One and see what you notice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhu_77VU4tA

  • 24-September-2018 at 1:28 pm
    Permalink

    I live in a city that was once completely inhabited German people, but they all disappeared after the end of WW2.
    Where did they go to? Did any of them die or get raped as they left?

    War is just a hoax isn’t it???

    • 24-September-2018 at 2:32 pm
      Permalink

      I live in a city that was once completely inhabited German people, but they all disappeared after the end of WW2.

      Out of curiosity, which city are you in?

      • 24-September-2018 at 8:48 pm
        Permalink

        I’d rather not say but its in west Poland and belonged to Germany until they were defeated in 1945.
        The spelling of the name of the city is completely different to the polish pronunciation which happens to sound very similar to the original German name.

Leave a Reply