Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Mind Control

  1. #1

    Mind Control

    Society is mind controlled by the jew controlled media. Here is a short video on so called "white privilege." The media has warped the minds of whites & non whites alike, to the point that they believe everything they read or hear. It's not that they didn't before, but they really do now. The ladies in the video below, explain a few things.

    Warning: Partial nudity. It's used to make a point.

    Last edited by EricK; 04-21-2017 at 10:05 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member frey#89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,350
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Mind Control

    I really liked the selfishness of the ladies who presented the video. Highly literate as well. Lots of white folks equate black lifes matter against the cops and endless world war 2 hatred of Germans as simply going along with politics or getting what you want by joining the crowd. In my belief there is no doubt that the joo control the masses by the treat of physical and mental fear tactics to achieve racial genocide on the white race.
    For example take the Federal reserve using paper money many believe is real money or a small army can control millions by the illusion of representing everybody. Long explanations of subjects of right and wrong to drown out the narrative.
    The books of Yahweh reads the ways of man are not the ways of Yahweh. May Yahweh provide the resources to Jacob Israel survive in the days we live.

  3. #3

    Re: Mind Control

    Quote Originally Posted by frey#89 View Post
    I really liked the selfishness of the ladies who presented the video. Highly literate as well. Lots of white folks equate black lifes matter against the cops and endless world war 2 hatred of Germans as simply going along with politics or getting what you want by joining the crowd. In my belief there is no doubt that the joo control the masses by the treat of physical and mental fear tactics to achieve racial genocide on the white race.
    For example take the Federal reserve using paper money many believe is real money or a small army can control millions by the illusion of representing everybody. Long explanations of subjects of right and wrong to drown out the narrative.
    The books of Yahweh reads the ways of man are not the ways of Yahweh. May Yahweh provide the resources to Jacob Israel survive in the days we live.
    This is true. The odd thing about the paper money, is that it only costs paper and ink. The treasury can print any denomination of bills, and the cost stays the same. Of course to us, we pay the amount of money printed, and with interest. Talk about insult to injury.

    The media has society walking around in a daze, in regards to the truth on anything. Anyone with eyes to see, can see what they're doing. They try too hard. It brings up another issue. If the jews are considered the chosen people, then why do they hate white people so much? Is it because they know, that conscious whites are the last obstacle to the new age/new world order that they want to come to fruition? Or is it because they know that Jesus/Yahshua was an aryan, and that WE are the chosen of Yahweh.

  4. #4
    Senior Member frey#89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,350
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Mind Control

    My prays go out to ladies of Yahweh. I understand the frustration and hopelessness of the situation. Very respectable response and post EricK.

  5. #5

    Re: Mind Control

    I remember this video from a while back it's a good one. On a side note, for those that don't know Sinead and her Renegade Broadcasting crew are very anti-Christ. Also, I believe Lana from Red Ice and Sinead have parted ways. Seen Renegade attacks them, but Red Ice is known for interviewing jews from time to time. Unfortunately, our people have a hard time coming together with so many different views.

  6. #6
    Senior Member frey#89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,350
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Mind Control

    Great to have a comment so respectable to me Erik. I have a theory about why our people have a hard time coming together or having so many different views. Once a man is publicity exposed and frustrated a lot. Irrational ideas are applied in life. Our people are under sooo much hassle from the children of Satan that a rational plan to come together to solve our miseries do not happen.

  7. #7
    Soldier of Yahweh Beorn Aldwyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Deep in the Last Days
    Posts
    48

    Re: Mind Control

    Yes I agree. In fact that when. Men must stand up for themselves. When weak. Then strength thru numbers frustrated in peace must come soon for clarity. Publicity are life frustrations formed by irrational ideas. In theory. Yet it is. The hassle from the children of Satan cause mans miseries and that's why there's so many different views. Wonderful point and well put. Babylon be damned.

  8. #8

    Re: Mind Control

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn Aldwyn View Post
    Yes I agree. In fact that when. Men must stand up for themselves. When weak. Then strength thru numbers frustrated in peace must come soon for clarity. Publicity are life frustrations formed by irrational ideas. In theory. Yet it is. The hassle from the children of Satan cause mans miseries and that's why there's so many different views. Wonderful point and well put. Babylon be damned.



    Lets try and be a bit more respectable to Senior Forum Members, Beorn.

    Thanks,



    https://covenantpeoplesministry.org/...ful-Wonderland
    Last edited by Zaapiel; 06-29-2017 at 04:46 AM. Reason: see link
    Your Tithes & Support Is Very Much Needed
    Please Make Your Free Will Offering to CPM Via
    Patreon or PayPal

  9. #9
    Senior Member frey#89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,350
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Mind Control

    Thankful to Jesus for having my opinion reinforced in the CPM forum. Lets all do something with what we know and learn to live better Christian lives for ourselves and others not as strong as us.. Stand tall racial brothers and sisters who are not in rebellion with Jesus Christ.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    "Beyond the rivers of Ethiopia."
    Posts
    861

    Re: Mind Control

    How many scientific papers just aren’t true?

    Enough that basing government policy on ‘peer-reviewed studies’ isn’t all it’s cracked up to be

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/...st-arent-true/

    Donna
    Laframboise

    29 October 2016
    9:00 AM

    Twitter

    Facebook

    LinkedIn

    Whatsapp


    We’re continually assured that government policies are grounded in evidence, whether it’s an anti-bullying programme in Finland, an alcohol awareness initiative in Texas or climate change responses around the globe. Science itself, we’re told, is guiding our footsteps.

    There’s just one problem: science is in deep trouble. Last year, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, admitted that “much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.” In his words, “science has taken a turn toward darkness.”

    Medical research, psychology, and economics are all in the grip of a ‘reproducibility crisis.’ A pharmaceutical company attempting to confirm the findings of 53 landmark cancer studies was successful in only six instances, a failure rate of 89pc. In 2012, a psychology journal devoted an entire issue to reliability problems in that discipline, with one essay titled “Why science is not necessarily self-correcting.” Likewise, a 2015 report prepared for the Board of Governors of the US Federal Reserve concluded that “economics research is usually not replicable.” Its authors were able to verify the findings of only one third of 67 papers published in reputable economics journals. After enlisting the help of the original researchers, the success rate rose to a still dismal 49pc.

    Government policies can’t be considered evidence-based if the evidence on which they depend hasn’t been independently verified, yet the vast majority of academic research is never put to this test. Instead, something called peer review takes place. When a research paper is submitted, journals invite a couple of people to evaluate it. Known as referees, these individuals recommend that the paper be published, modified, or rejected.

    If one gets what one pays for, it’s worth observing that referees typically work for free. They lack both the time and the resources to perform anything other than a cursory overview. Nothing like an audit occurs. No one examines the raw data for accuracy or the computer code for errors. Peer review doesn’t guarantee that proper statistical analyses were employed, or that lab equipment was used properly.

    Referees at the most prestigious of journals have given the green light to research that was later found to be wholly fraudulent. Conversely, they’ve scoffed at work that went on to win Nobel Prizes. Richard Smith, a former editor of the British Medical Journal, describes peer review as a roulette wheel, a lottery, and a black box. He points out that an extensive body of research finds scant evidence that this vetting process accomplishes much at all. On the other hand, a mountain of scholarship has identified profound deficiencies.

    Peer review’s random and arbitrary nature was demonstrated as early as 1982. Twelve already published papers were assigned fictitious author and institution names before being resubmitted to the same journal 18-32 months later. The duplication was noticed in three instances, but the remaining nine papers underwent review by two referees each. Only one paper was deemed worthy of seeing the light of day the second time it was examined by the same journal that had already published it. Lack of originality wasn’t among the concerns raised by the second wave of referees.

    Anyone can start a scholarly journal and define peer review however they wish. No minimum standards apply and no enforcement mechanisms ensure that a journal’s publicly described policies are actually followed. Some editors admit to writing up fake reviews under the cover of anonymity rather than going to the trouble of recruiting bona fide referees. In 2014, a news story reported that 120 papers containing computer-generated gibberish had nevertheless survived the peer review process of reputable publishers.

    Politicians and journalists have long found it convenient to regard peer-reviewed research as de facto sound science. If that were the case, Nature would hardly have subtitled a February 2016 article: “Mistakes in peer-reviewed papers are easy to find but hard to fix.” Over a period of 18 months, a team of researchers attempted to correct dozens of substantial errors in nutrition and obesity research. Among these was the claim that the height change in a group of adults averaged nearly three inches (7 cm) over eight weeks. The team reported that editors “seemed unprepared or ill-equipped to investigate, take action or even respond.” In Kafkaesque fashion, after months of effort culminated in acknowledgement of a gaffe, journals then demanded that the team pay $1,700 in one instance and $2,100 in another before a letter calling attention to other people’s mistakes could be published.

    Which brings us back to the matter of public policy. We’ve long been assured that reports produced by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are authoritative because they rely entirely on peer-reviewed, scientific literature. A 2010 InterAcademy Council investigation found this claim to be false, but that’s another story. Even if all IPCC source material did meet this threshold, the fact that one out of an estimated 25,000 academic journals conducted an unspecified and unregulated peer review ritual is no warranty that a paper isn’t total nonsense.

    If half of the scientific literature “may simply be untrue,” then half of the climate research cited by the IPCC may also be untrue. This appalling unreliability extends to work on dietary cholesterol, domestic violence, air pollution – in short, to all research currently being generated by the academy.

    The US National Science Foundation recently reminded us that a scientific finding “cannot be regarded as an empirical fact” unless it has been “independently verified.” Peer review does not perform that function. Until governments begin authenticating research prior to using it as the foundation for new laws and huge expenditures, don’t fall for the claim that policy X is evidence-based.


    Donna Laframboise is the author of Peer Review: Why Scepticism is Essential, a report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. This replaces an earlier version of this article that had been published in error.

    SEE ALSO

    Climate change

    Government

    peer review

    Research

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-10-2017, 01:58 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-19-2016, 02:49 PM
  3. The Mind-Blowing Blessings in II Baruch!
    By Obadiah 1:18 in forum Apocrypha & Lost Books
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-05-2012, 05:19 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •