Tuesday, February 28, 2017

613 and Human Trafficking

Introduction: Isaiah 61:3 - God Will Replace Joy For Misery

“To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness: that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that He might be glorified.”

As many of you know, I've been seeing the number 613 repeatedly for more than two years now, since approximately December 2014. Today, after many months of soul-searching and much time spent researching the problem of human trafficking, I believe I understand what God is trying to tell me with this number. Essentially, it is a promise and a warning.
  • There are 613 commandments in the Torah. When we bind ourselves to them, and do our best to keep them, God saves us. When we abandon the Torah, and God's teaching, then we see (God forbid) the reverse happening in the world.
  • The number 316, the obverse, is associated with the rebellion against God: When we rebel, God punishes us by letting evil proliferate. Those who traffic in children believe they can attain power in this world while denying God Himself. And when the world follows them and denies the existence of God, human slaves suffer the untold horrors of such animals.
The reversal of 316 to 613 -- this is the transformation of evil to good -- human trafficking to freeing the slaves. As humanity is waking up to the need to cleanse the planet of this evil,  He is reversing 316 to its opposite -- 613, a state of Godliness.
Here is some evidence to substantiate my theory about 613 and human trafficking.
316 - Human Trafficking BEFORE It Is Resolved

Suffering of Victims

Involvement of Law Enforcement

Legal Prohibitions

Outreach to Prevent and Recognize

Academic Research to Help Stop The Problem

316 is the page number of many articles about human trafficking - either starting or ending:
613 - Human Trafficking AFTER It Is Resolved




Permission is granted to redistribute this article freely - it is public domain.


All opinions my own.

A Listening Session With Federal Communicators

On February 15, 2017 the Federal Communicators Network (FCN) Professional Standards Working Group held a discussion of issues related to federal communication standards. These notes are public domain; what follows is an edited version that highlights key issues.

The Importance of Standards
  • Cost Savings: When asked if agencies had a lot of independent efforts underway without clear standards and lack of coordination, many hands were raised – “money goes one way and efficiency goes another way” 
  • Quality: The issue is quality of our work. If you're going to do a communication plan, the ideal one has these components. Budgets not expected to go up. Many have contractors, but no standards. 
What Standards Are & Are Not
  • Standards are not just nice things 
  • Standards are not “thou shalts” 
  • Standards are common starting points to tell you where you are starting from, and then you fill in the blanks 
What Happens Without Standards (2016 FCN Survey)
  • Vast majority don't have anything consistent going on from agency to agency. 
  • Most said they don't know what their career path is. 
  • Most said metrics, we don't use that. 
  • Most said they don't have tools and standards that would help them do better job. 
Without Standards, Communication Is Not A Well-Managed Function
  • One of the hallmarks of effective communications is a “seat at the table” - part of decision making and sharing responsibility for results. Right now communicators in the civil service do not have a seat at the table. 
  • There are a huge variety of people charged with doing communications – federal employees (full- and part-time), term employees, contractors (onsite and offsite). 
  • The function is usually decentralized across agencies. 
Government vs. Private-Sector Communication: Much More Complex
  • More power struggles 
  • More pressure to respond to publics 
  • More legal constraints 
  • More media coverage 
Typical Problems Government Communicators Face
  • Expertise dismissed; being told by leaders that they aren't going to “dictate how I do my job” 
  • Poor enforcement of existing standards within an agency 
  • Unclear standards from agency to agency 
  • Absent a code of conduct, subject to arbitrary orders from senior leadership and the threat of being called “insubordinate” if they refuse to do something unethical 
  • Backlash over bad news; e.g. news clips that are deemed “offensive” 
  • Communicators not seen as urgently needed as versus other professionals (e.g. lawyers) 
  • Internal audiences don't take seriously the need to know your audience through fact-based analysis rather than by personal impressions, gut instinct, etc. 
  • Substituting a newsletter for real communication strategy 
  • Professional development path as a government communicator unclear 
  • Trust issues stemming from politics (e.g. having the TV channels changed from CNN to FOX and back; put the agency TV on C-SPAN instead) 
Standards or No Standards, These Approaches Work
  • Neutral, fact-based information distribution 
  • Communication vehicles that target users, not leadership talking to themselves 
  • Hiring dedicated communicators 
  • Centralizing the communications function – not allowing individual offices to “do their own thing” 
  • Communication standards placed in individual performance plans 
Communication Mechanisms Currently Known To Be Effective
  • Email delivery services for reaching a like-minded audience 
  • Social media for audience engagement 
  • Crowdsourcing and collaboration platforms 
  • Simple messages, broadcast widely with a link to more information (e.g. plasma TV monitors by the elevator with a link to fuller articles on the intranet) 
All opinions my own.

Monday, February 27, 2017

The Antithesis Of "Spin Doctors"

The fact that government communications is ripe for abuse has undoubtedly contributed to trust levels in government that are at their lowest ever. While it is true that political corruption is chiefly responsible for public disillusionment (e.g. "Vietnam: The Loss Of American Innocence?") it is also true that outsized spending on federal public relations contracts, as well as propagandistic agency communications play a role. Though the Government Accountability Office has long recognized that appropriately used communication is one of the government's top five internal controls, the way in which federal communications has been abused is not just wrong, but has also turned its dedicated practitioners into a public joke.

At this time, fortunately, there are a number of efforts underway to remedy this situation. In the U.S. military, the nature and scope of the public affairs function has been codified. In the U.K., civil service communicators now have clear guidance as well. In the U.S., federal agencies and employees, including the Federal Communicators Network of which I am a part, are working to update and implement proper standards and prevent manipulation of statutory requirements that prohibit self-promotion and propaganda.

To give just one example, the General Services Administration has developed a short list of questions to be considered before requirements are written for advertising and marketing contracts. (Considering that we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars, this is not a small advance.) These questions force the person writing the requirements to consider not only whether the proposed contract will violate the law, but also this crucial question: “Is the statement of work so broadly written that it could be interpreted to condone or encourage any of the activities described above? If the answer is yes, the statement of work/Request for Quotations is not yet ready for issuance.”

It is easy to be pessimistic about government; as citizens we are regularly cautioned not to trust it. As former British ambassador Craig Murray, who lost his job for speaking out about human rights abuses, once put it: "As a rule of thumb, if the government wants you to know it, it probably isn't true."

You can argue, as well, that a healthy distrust of government is not just good, but patriotic; with that I tend to agree.

But it is also true that we should not rest our laurels on the inevitability of alienation.

The fact of the matter is that we do have a country, a country needs a government, and as civil servants in particular we have a responsibility to help see to it that the government functions well.


All opinions my own.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

5 Ways Government Branding Is Harder

  1. Brand architecture: This is the discipline of assembling names and logos into a coherent framework. In the private sector it's easier because your end game is basically profit. (The challenge there is to balance long-term investment in reputation with short-term gains in revenue.) In government it is extraordinarily difficult to pursue any sort of brand architecture strategy without involving many stakeholders with competing interests, and without invoking many levels of law, regulation, policy, and so on. Without a clear identity strategy that puts you in a context of related identities, the communication you provide is far less likely to be impactful. 
  2. Brand leadership: In the private sector it is generally more or less clear who is responsible for the development and the articulation of the brand. In government, the lines are frequently muddied as most initiatives are cooperative in nature. 
  3. Brand metrics: The private sector has relatively reliable formulas with which to measure the strength of a brand; fundamentally, you can examine the performance of one product as versus its competitors. Yet the government does not have competition, and its outcomes (e.g. a drop in crime rates) are difficult to correlate with brand success. The closest one can come is an attitudinal measure, such as perceptions related to trustworthiness, but again it is difficult to determine with certainty how those perceptions concretely add to or subtract from performance. 
  4. Brand confusion: In government the term "branding" is frequently confused with "logo and tagline development," and this activity is distinguished from "advertising," "marketing," and so on. In the private sector there is a far greater understanding that all activities connected with image are connected, and so even seemingly humdrum materials like an employee orientation manual are seized up on as an opportunity to develop equity. 
  5. Brand boredom: For all its glamorous associations, branding is usually a very ordinary and even boring activity because it fundamentally requires consistency: doing the same thing over and over again. In the government, when a new program is launched, there is frequency a desire to show it off -- thus the trademark image of "ribbon-cutting" that can be seen in so many official publications. Instead of muddying the water with shiny new pennies every now and then, there is a strong need for government to get used to the idea that great brand work is about as humdrum as can be. 

All opinions my own.

Monday, February 20, 2017

Open Letter to a Broken Website

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am writing to inform you that I hate your website.

Maybe you think that nobody actually uses websites nowadays -- what with Facebook and all -- but I use yours, and it totally sucks.

Why do I feel strongly enough to write you a letter?

Well, for the one thing, I had a problem with my bill the other day. And I had to navigate my way through approximately 50,000 pages of content just to submit you an email.

(If you count the multi-factor security page that total would be 50,001.)

Believe me I tried not to bother you. I did. I went to the Community Forum-slash-Knowledgebase to see if there were some answers there.

But nope, nada, nothing.

I tried to use your Chat function but it seems the Chat hours are only 9-4.

It said that you have telephone-based customer service too. But you know how telephone customer service is, right? Usually totally frustrating.

In case you wanted to know what I thought of the "Splash Page" on Page One of your website: Love it!

Really, I do.

I wanted to know that you have at least four or five new and interesting projects going on right now, and that they take up almost half the page they're so important.

It's also great that your overall design is so incredibly spare.

So spare, in fact, and so much white space -- I almost didn't see the "Help" link.

But it's a good thing you had it at the bottom of the page -- way down, maybe, way below where I would have thought to look for it in the first place -- but fortunately, there it was.

It would have been nice to access your webpage from my mobile device, but that totally didn't work.

And I didn't really feel like searching for an app with your name on it.

Sorry if this hurts your feelings, Company, but there is more to selling a shiny high-tech service than the snazzy service itself.

Much more, in fact.

What I wanted from your website was a way to tell somebody, quickly, that I needed some help to fix an error -- not my error, mind you, but yours.

So please fix your website.

Right now you're limping, and I didn't sign up to spend all that money every month to pay for your broken leg.




All opinions my own.

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

"Building Bridges" Between Civil Servants & The Incoming Trump Administration


The following are my notes on "Building Trust with New Leadership," an event cosponsored by the Partnership for Public Service and the Federal Communicators Network that focused on helping civil servants work effectively with the new Administration. The event is availabl free for viewing on Vimeo

As always, in attending such events and sharing information and opinions on social media, I am independent, meaning that I do not represent my agency or the federal government as a whole. These notes are public domain and may be freely reproduced and distributed. 


Executive Coach Michelle Woodward

Theme 1: Teamwork

Based On "The Five Behaviors Of A Cohesive Team" [TM] by Wiley Workplace Solutions & Patrick Lencioni

  • Results: 
    • "If you can do trust-based conflict, then we can get to commitment to the same goal. Then we can hold each other accountable without people being attacked. Once you have all that, that's when you get to results."
  • Disagreement:  
    • Myers-Briggs personality type influences how we approach one another: Thinkers need justice, feelers need harmony. 
    • Aim to "build bridges, not burn bridges." 
    • "Appreciate the opportunity to learn where the other person is coming from." 
    • "Appreciate the opportunity to learn what you could have done better
  • Trust: 
    • "Stick to the issue at hand."
    • "Offer and accept apologies without hesitation." 
    • "Own an apology." 
    • "Be genuine." 
    • "Be consistent." 
    • "Be present in this moment not the last Administration." 
    • "Accept questions." 
    • "Give others the benefit of the doubt." 
  • Office Gossip/Office Politics:
    • "Sometimes gossip is 'important information' but 'if I wouldn't say it to you, I wouldn't say it about you'" - differentiate between information and words that are "hurtful or mean"; mean words don't build trust.
    • "You can either get enmeshed in that or step back from it."
    • Keep your ears open but don't get engaged in all that hoopla."
    • If there's a meeting that you should have been in - "give the benefit of the doubt" - "small corrections" - say "Hey X, that meeting is in my programmatic area, I believe I should be included in those meetings" and "9 times out of 10, X will say 'Thank you.'"
  • Coping:
    • First understand reality - "good to know" - then try to change reality (paraphrase); "when you see this is the lay of the land, step back, say 'good to know, they're showing me exactly who they are, who can be my ally'?"
  • Understanding Others:
    • “Find out - what motivates people? 
      • "Quality time" 
      • "Words of affirmation" 
      • "Take something off their plate" 
      • "Gift" (comment from DB: obviously “gift” here means something small and thoughtful, e.g. the speaker mentioned chocolate chip cookies; not an illegal or unethical one.)

Theme 2: Self-Management 

Based On The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz

"This is really on you - these four agreements are agreements you make with yourself that can help you." Paraphrased:
  • Keep your word; don’t use words to say back things about yourself or gossip.
  • Remember that others act because of their own perceptions and motivations, not because of you – it’s not personal.
  • Don’t assume anything – ask first, communicate so that you can avoid unnecessary “misunderstandings, sadness and drama.”
  • For your purposes, doing your best is the equivalent of excellence; there is no abstract high mark you always have to meet (because that is humanly impossible).

Theme 3: Managing Stress

  • "Units of energy" - if you're spending 60% spun up about office politics or office gossip, can't get things done. Keep a time log.
  • Breathe - breathe in the feeling you want (e.g. happiness) and out the feeling you don't want (e.g. sadness)

Audience Q&A

  • Fear of the New Administration:
    • Question: “I work for an agency that was in love with the last administration and is very scared and worried about the new one. How to handle?” 
    • Answer: “Stages of grief. You may be orbiting anger for a while, but hopefully you get to acceptance. I wouldn't rush anybody through the stages, because it's a profound change. Also don't make assumptions about who these people are or worry about what could possibly happen. Focus on right now, what's the reality, what do we know so far? If you want to be active, think about how can you effectively talk to allies about supporting the work of the office?
  • Opposition/Disagreement (Related To Above Question; Coping With Negative Emotions/Reactions To Or Disagreements With The New Administration)
    • "Be an activist within the rules of your organization. Overall think about how can I greet these people, see them for who they are, build trust, because wouldn't it be awesome if you could turn them around into allies.” 
    • "All of us need to understand what is our breaking point. What is the point at which we're not going to provide tax returns of enemies. I would recommend each of us search our own heart, and our own values and say - (what are the things about which) I can't compromise." 
    • "I do think you can be people of conscience and do your work well."
  • Battling Perceptions:
    • Question: “How do you counter the (perception that all feds are obstructionist because of the) "alt' or the "resistance,” e.g. the Twitter accounts that have been stood up, this is not like anything else we’ve seen in the past. 
    • Answer: “You don't want to be ‘tarnished’ that you’re ‘subverting or obstructing,’ say ‘don’t tar me with the same brush.’” But “we are in uncharted waters, this is unusual.”
  • Chain of Command:
    • Question: What do you do when “political appointees came in and asked for ideas” (but) “other people in the office are going to say you should've come to me first; how do you handle not violating the trust of your own people in your organization by expressing your ideas to them?” (e.g. the chain of command). 
    • Answer: “My thought would be, rather than going around your direct supervisor, saying to your supervisor can we go in together." Separate comment from the audience: “Not always does your leadership want these ideas to go forward.” Presenter comment: “It always comes back to you. Dn't gossip."
  • Getting "Shot Down":
    • Question: “What do you do when your good idea is automatically shot down?”
    • Answer: “Find out what motivates them (fear, or need information) and respond directly to that.” “Say - "I've got your back" (not going to do anything to hurt you).” Audience answer: “Focus on what problem you're solving rather than how you're feeling about it.”
  • Hitting A "Brick Wall":
    • Question: What if you’re not getting anywhere? 
    • Answer: "If you feel like you're hitting a brick wall, go back to trust" and "If they're just a closed person, just say 'good to know.'"
  • Dealing With People Who Just Want To Win:
    • Question: What if "all they care about is 'victory?'" 
    • Answer: “Again, (say to yourself) ‘good to know’ then ‘what do I want’; also ask ‘How am I getting engaged here’ or ‘affected’ (by what’s going on) - you may need to ‘call a break’; if you have trust you can say, ‘is this about winning or about finding the solution?’”
  • Exclusion: 
    • Question: “Please talk to ‘practices of exclusion’ that can ‘mess with trust’ and ‘dissemination of information’ - where ‘other groups of people know information before other groups know it.’
    • Answer (from fellow audience member): “(You have) so many opportunities to advocate internally" - "they (leadership) don't know that information they share to senior management does not cascade down."

Audience Comments

  • Conscience: 
    • “Marion Wright Edelman once said, ‘Be a flea on the big guy.’ Whenever there's a need to say the truth, do it."
  • Trust: 
    • “Last administration the "trifecta of evil went behind closed doors and started this culture of fear" saying they were ‘evaluating projects’ - nobody wanted to reveal anything." 
    • "They were ‘egotistical micromanagers who ‘all had a different perception of what the agency should be doing or where we were going’ and ‘used the workforce against each other’ for ‘four years.’" 
    • "(Then) ‘new leadership, completely empowering’ and there was ‘hesitancy about being able to trust’ because ‘in the past the light at the end of the tunnel was an oncoming train.’ ‘Just wanted to point it out because this trust issue is really really critical." 
    • "Sometimes we're beating our heads against really a solid wall. (But on a) positive note - it will change. People will cycle out, it will change."
  • Buy-In: 
    • "Convince them it was their idea and then give them credit" (semi-humorous)
  • Service: 
    • "Use a debrief from prior Administration - what was helpful to them?" (Generally they want "more involvement" from the civil service)

All opinions my own. These notes are public domain and may be freely reproduced and distributed.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Digital Engagement As Customer Service

Exciting is what big brands do. But for the government, digital engagement needs to be about one thing and one thing only: providing outstanding customer service.
  • You aren't trying to grow "brand awareness."
  • You aren't trying to capture market share.
  • You aren't trying to build a brand premium.
No, what you ought to be doing is carrying out the mission, and digital engagement (a.k.a. "social media," although this term really covers everything to do with the online experience) is actually part of that -- not separate from it.

Within the government, for a lot of reasons, I sense that digital engagement has significantly shifted and that the focus is now far more on customer service than it is on content-sharing. As follows:
  1. Operational Focus, Not Branding Focus: For a long time, branding was a "hot topic" for agencies, principally because they felt like their "image" was "disjointed." At this point, after having worked for the government for more than a dozen years I think we have established that the image thing is not going to come together, and that the time and effort spent worrying about how you look is far less worthwhile than time and effort spent actually getting the job done well.
  2. Partnership Focus, Not Standalone Focus: Because the government is funded as a series of individual entities -- programs, offices, agencies, Departments -- because people want to keep their span of control -- and because executives are distinguished by the types of initiatives they can claim, the tendency has always been to stand up "your" program, fund it and grow it. However, in recent years there has been a massive shift towards partnership efforts, partly because money is tight but also because agencies have recognized that there is an additive effect (one might say "co-branding") when two or more agencies work on an effort together, or when there is public-private-academic investment in a worthy and profitable social goal. When it comes to digital engagement, the axiom is that you want people talking everywhere about information they got from a single source. So the fewer jumps and clicks to get authoritative data, the better: Partnership portals are an excellent opportunity to reduce the burden on the customer.
  3. Interoperability: For a lot of reasons, the government is moving towards the standardization of data such that multiple information repositories can be made to speak with one another. This is important because from a customer service point of view, the citizen often wants to find information that is in the government's possession, and they don't want to have to search in a million places to get to it. The focus should be on making it easy for people to find what they're looking for by ensuring that the data they seek can be "mashed up" from a variety of sources into a single searchable space.  
  4. Stamp of Authenticity: In a  virtual world, people look for information where they look for it, or where the search engine takes them. And it is therefore important to provide them with assurance that the data they are seeing is valid. Offering a code stamp that can be affixed to genuine government data is another kind of customer service that is inextricably bound with digital engagement.
  5. Video Demonstrations of Customer Service Scenarios: People nowadays do not read. They do however watch, they scan, they go to videos, and they absorb instructions well through instructional modules. If you have a form that you want people to fill out, or if you expect them to undergo a certain type of government process (e.g., and interview) having videos readily available online cuts down on the customer's confusion and anxiety and helps them comply with what's required.
  6. Instant Access To Customer Support: The concept of offering instant help through chat, artificial intelligence, and customer support is a given in private industry, but still challenging for agencies. These forums make it possible for the busy and impatient taxpayer to get the help they need without a hassle and are also a necessary ingredient in the totality of a digital engagement strategy, both when it comes to employees and when it comes to outside inquiries.
  7. Customer Feedback: It goes without saying that people should be able to rate the quality of their experience with the government in a public, transparent way. This incentivizes agencies to offer better service and builds up trust and accountability with the public -- a "win-win" on both sides. While some may worry that people will take the opportunity to "trash" the agency, it is more likely that such "trolls" will only annoy other users, and given the opportunity such users can "upvote" or "downvote" others' feedback, as well as comment on it; official answers can also be marked with a star or similar icon.
The roles associated with the new digital engagement environment are similar to the traditional one: high-level sponsor, executive (leader/strategist), digital lead (oversight and team manager), contracting and project managers, web and social media experts, writers and designers, and administrative support. Ideally, also one would have an individual on staff fluent in taking both qualitative and quantitative metrics from customers so that progress towards clearly articulated goals can be assessed.


All opinions my own.

Wednesday, February 1, 2017

We Must Be Willing To Ask The "Crazy" Questions

  • He first became widely known during the election, for being fired from the Huffington Post as a contributor when he wrote an article about Hillary Clinton's health.
  • He has been in the forefront of researching the widely controversial scandal known as “Pizzagate.”
  • He is also an advocate for investing in bitcoin and gold currency to avoid the potentially disastrous consequences of what he believes may be a forthcoming currency crash.
Below are my notes on his video from today, February 1, 2017. It is his most important video to date, because he ties together a variety of threads that have so far mystified me and I presume many other people. I am therefore sharing my notes on it with you – most of which is directly quoted.

Please note the following as you read:
  • Seaman states repeatedly that these are not his personal views, but rather that he is sharing with the viewer what he has learned.
  • He also notes that he has endured repeated character attacks and harassment for sharing this research.
  • He believes this only lends further credibility to fact that there is something here, something that might go much deeper than initially expected.

Here are the basic themes Seaman covers in today's video, which he states can freely be mirrored by others, re-uploaded, and so on. He notes that he is not doing this research for the money.

  1. Anthony Weiner
    • On January 31, the Wall Street Journal and others reported that federal authorities are considering child porn charges against Anthony Weiner.
    • His laptop reportedly has 650,000 emails that are critical in unraveling the pedophile ring outed by Pizzagate revelations.
  1. Hillary Clinton network occult references – leaked emails.
    • Hillary Clinton Wikileaks emails – reference to sacrifice to Moloch – pagan god. People used to make sacrifices to Moloch to appease this pagan entity.
    • John Podesta emails – hundreds of references to pizza – unusual that he is receiving invitation to attend spirit cooking hosted by Marina Abramovic, whom many consider to be a Satanist.
  1. Illuminati - “Worship The Light” - Satan/Lucifer
    • Traces lineage back to before Biblical times. Consider themselves pre-Adamite race. Pre-Biblical race.
    • Believe they came from another planet. That they're a rival race known as homo capensis, not human beings, significantly higher intelligence.
    • Over time, their bloodline, through breeding with human beings has been diluted.
    • No special properties or powers. Hillary Clinton just a human being.
    • They do not worship the Judeo Christian or Muslim God. They worship Lucifer. Attempts to link it to Judaism or Islam are misinformation to keep people off the scent of what they actually believe.
    • They consider the Biblical tale of Noah's ark to be a tale of their extermination. They believe that God was summoned to wipe out their race, which has DNA which is non-terrestrial. They consider the Noah's ark story to be an act of genocide against their species by the Judeo Christian God. That's why they hate Christians, Jews and Muslims because they don't like anyone who worships God. It's one of the things they hate most.
    • They have a very different view of the stories in the Bible because they believe Satan has enlightened and protected them throughout time. They see God as something which tried to exterminate them and failed. So this is why they are anti Judaism, anti Christianity, and anti Muslim. This is why they want to see innocent Muslims and Christians suffering, because they hate the belief in God.
  1. Pizzagate
    • Researchers puzzled by photos. Not just fetishizing children, but also cheeky, seemingly mocking the rest of us, ha ha ha, so funny, we're victimizing you, we're preying on you and you don't even realize it.
    • Although it's kind of a tangent, some looked into accounts of young Hollywood celebrities and found unusual level of interest in pizza iconography.
    • So what is really going on here? What is all this stuff? Pizza is code language for children, child sacrifice, child abuse. Use it as signal that they're in on the joke. Different species, enlightened, that Satan protects and awards them riches and financial and political success.
    • They believe human beings are inferior species that needs to be depopulated. Pushing GMO foods, high level of corn (contains pesticide), not something humanb eings should be consuming, have us all on high fructose corn syrup, soft drinks, candy – want us consuming junk food because they want a weaker population.
    • They want war and strife because they do want to depopulate the planet before we use up its resources. They want to turn it into an illuminati paradise, apparently, where there are far less human beings alive, but the human beings around are slaves and indebted servants to the Illuminati master race.
  1. Antarctica
    • Understands that later on this year, members of this cult, members of this cabal, will use their contacts within the mainstream media to push one of the biggest false flags of all time. They are going to push for the notion that we have attained disclosure, that aliens exist.
    • They are going to push for something like that to drive the public crazy and hopefully distract the public from these pizzagate concerns. They think that the revelation of other species will be enough to distract the American people. Tend to disagree, but what I've heard is that they're going to focus on Antarctica.
    • There's been some weird discoveries over there, possibly some architecture that changes our understanding of human history.
    • If you wonder why some top U.S. politicos have been going down to Antarctica recently, the official explanation is that they're checking out the ice sheet (that it's melting). You can do that by checking out photos or through their aides. It's definitely not the most exciting place for Newt Gingrich or for some of these senators to be visiting. There aren't exactly great steakhouses and great cigar rooms down in Antarctica, so why are these DC politicos going down there. There will be a focus on some incredible discovery, something found in Antarctica.
    • Not saying the claim is necessarily bogus, but it's going to be a distraction from this Illuminati, this cult, this cartel of politicos and bankers which has existed continuously for at least 400 years and arguably much longer than that.
  1. Why They Harm and Kill Children
    • It's not purely sexual. They harm and kill children because they believe Lucifer and other demonic entities actually assist them when they make a sacrifice and that certain kinds of abuse unlock psychic energy.
    • So for example before passing a new big law or starting a war they will make a sacrifice.
    • But this stuff is apparently real, we don't know how far down the rabbit hole goes.
    • I suspect significant collusion with the media to make this sound like a joke for the past 30 years when it's rife in Hollywood, and it's rife in DC.
    • There was a story on Russian state television the other day (RT) about how this is starting to come out in Germany, weird and occult and sadistic practices at some of their military locations. Something closely tied to governments, people who believe in this crazy stuff and who consider themselves Illuminati, a rival race and who consider human beings inferior and a blight on the planet, want us in debt, powerless servants.
    • He thanks God for Wikileaks that we now know some of this stuff.
  1. Justice
    • There is a group that contains some top US government officials and officials from other Western governments that formed when they learned the full extent of this stuff. Basically they are pushing for immediate public disclosure, tribunals like they had at Nuremberg. They want these people hunted down and brought to justice.
    • This group includes top U.S. Government and top EU and UK officials.
    • Once they found out that there was something here, they decided that this will go on for no longer, this will no longer be a part of Western society, we're going to shine a bright light on it and we're going to bring justice to it.

In my opinion, you don't have to believe one word of this video at all. But it does help to put things that I personally am seeing into a framework that begins to make sense:

  • First, it is clear that there are those who actively seek to foment global unrest, civil war, racial divisions, and other kinds of strife. At every opportunity to make peace, they only seem to want...more fighting.
  • Second, it is clear that ordinary people are very well able to get along with each other regardless of their race, their religion, and their gender. And they want to do this. They want to live in peace, make a decent living, love their partners and children and grow old together. Nobody normal desires to go to war, and yet “somehow” there are always instigators whipping up tension between Christians, Jews, and Muslims.
  • Third, it is clear that our economy is shredding itself from the inside. Unemployment, underemployment, debt, homelessness, food insecurity, teenagers prostituting themselves for food (and pimping out their friends), rising levels of human trafficking, meager savings account, a fragile dollar and a manufacturing sector that has dramatically declined as versus other Nations all point to a crisis in the making.
  • Fourth, somehow, despite all the law enforcement resources that have been brought to bear against human trafficking, it still persists. Even the government has been lax in stopping its own workers from viewing child pornography on work computers. Given that most people have a strong negative aversion to such behavior, this does not make sense even on the level of instinct.
  • Fifth, it seems that no matter how hard one tries to search for the hidden truths that seem to underpin our society, it is impossible to get a straight answer. If the truth is obscured, then someone in power wants it obscured, and this much is supported by the many people who have died under suspicious circumstances while researching matters that threaten those in power.

On a broader level, when you understand “Pizzagate” in the “big picture” it seems this scandal is not at all about crazy conspiracy theorists with nothing better to do than obsess about pizza shops. Rather it is about the growing awareness that our planet is indeed in great danger.

It is also a hopeful story in that there are at least some people committed to the search for not just truth, but justice.

The only way out of any mess, I believe, is to commit ourselves to a rigorous process of inquiry that leaves no stone unturned and no theories off the table. Particularly today, we have a great deal at stake. I do believe that we must save ourselves from the few bad people who seek to control, dominate, enslave and deceive the innocent masses who trust them.

Thank you to the selfless researchers who risk their very lives in the quest to save the rest of us.

All opinions my own.

Search This Blog

Copyright 2016 by Dannielle Blumenthal, Ph.D. All opinions are the author's own. Powered by Blogger.