Saturday's post a day early

On the face of it, Andrew Torba has it right at Gab when he says:

Call their bluff. Make them fire millions of us. Make them kick millions of us out of college. Make them fine your business for not complying and don’t pay it. Flood the zone with lawsuits. Their house of cards economy will collapse and things will get very interesting then.

Trouble is, 'on the face of it' was factored in well before the push even started.  

Go back to William Jenner, Woodrow Wilson, Brzezinski, Clinton's mentor and what do you have?  All are agreed the thing is highly organised, with all loopholes and response behaviours from us to the provocation factored in well ahead of time.  

We see it with Cv since Event 201.  The vocabulary is organised, the slow filling of key roles organised - just look at Dick and others - Common Purpose is no figment, it exists, Call Me Dave was facilitating it, ask Lord Stoddart of Swindon or Brian Gerrish - ignoring such things, the WEF for example, is simply wilful ostrich head burying.

And yet even good friends of mine flatly refuse to countenance malice aforeplanning.  Look at this quote a fellow blogger posted - I may have misinterpreted this, if so - sorry:

Who gave these orders? Who decided that his or her opinion, expertise, and conflicts should be in charge? It was not a single person, not a crazy general or a despicable politician or a dictator, even if political interference in science did happen—massively so. It was all of us ...

The notion that it's some sort of spontaneous combustion, some sort of big bang, is only a model a rationalist-in-denial would come up with, someone who believes in natural rises and falls according to the graphs.  And while the plan certainly uses natural rises and falls, it also creates them.  Look at Peabody Economics again.

Has no one heard of Agenda 21, has nobody looked into the Club of Rome?  Why would Heath conduct his meetings in hiding?  Why would the Jeckyl Island plotters in 1910?  Did the gunpowder under parliament get there by itself?  Was it meant to lie there until some MP carelessly threw a still lit match onto it?

It's this constant denial in the brains of otherwise intelligent people that no one would ever do such dastardly things, that it's beyond reason - it misses the entire point.  

And that point is that we are not dealing with rational people here.  We are dealing with instigators, fanatics, who organise, appoint, brainwash and so create half a nation of apparatchiks who are each promised a high position in the New Society.  

N or M [1941] was all about it, The Thirty-Nine Steps was all about it too.

I keep saying to examine Geoff Mulgan, also people running Media Matters - do your ferreting and see with whom we are dealing, the calibre of people.  There is no big bang here except that planned ahead of time.

But why would they?  Sigh - it's in the words Build Back Better, The Great Reset, it's the Great Work of Ages.  Now, as one who's all for non-cooperation, work to rule, 'failing to do' as a tactic, I do say here it's factored in that that's what most will do once they fully realise.  Not street protesters.  And where do people like us go?  The gulags, right?  The Nightingale Camps.

It's further advanced in Oz - the powers allow the Branch Covidian plod to go into people's homes and take them away if unpoisoned [we've posted on it].  Anyone see Gilliam's Brazil?  Where did the idea come from?  The black midnight moriahs in the former USSR.  Aided and abetted by Branch Covidian Karens who'd sell their neighbour out if they thought it would help The Cause.  Or for 30 pieces of silver.

This thing is, I'm afraid, diabolically well organised.  Andrew is right as to tactics, I'm just saying be aware where it leads us.  There ain't no safety, folks - we run high risks doing the right thing ... or we cower away and run our risk that way until ratted on.

Sorry.

The remainder of this post is OoL specific and relates why I stopped a comment getting through yesterday.  How did such a state of affairs come about?  

Short answer is that erstwhile we live-and-let-live fellow travellers along the western path became increasingly estranged along two quite distinct ideological lines - the hegemony became the coercive Woke everything, in all key roles in society ... and the other is the beleagured and deplatformed us.

It never occurs to the Wokerati that we might not be totally enamoured of losing jobs, being called names, being hunted down by the NHS, being shut down on a daily basis, society losing the entire middle class, losing our very country - all my Woke friends can do is wonder why such simmering anger in us, why such 'hatred' from us.  Must have been Trump, eh?  Maybe the Russians?

The whole notion of Wokery is to control the Narrative, to control us and to troll, to worm into non-Woke fora and simply gainsay, allow us no space to speak as we wish on the lies ... and that's what certain people were trying on here.  

The  idea of who can speak and who cannot is quite fluid with the Wokeratist

Turns out that when it's him slandering us, it's free speech, innit?  However, when it's us deplatforming him, that's crossed a line, has it not?  That's censorship on our part, innit, fascism.

And my reply to the troll who is only there to gainsay ... with the greatest respect ... eff off.