— illuminatibot (@iluminatibot) July 14, 2023
šØšØ What is agenda 2030 ?!š³
Watch this š very nice explanation pic.twitter.com/S0ZT8aus89
— Kevin – WE THE PEOPLEā¤ļø – DADš¦ š š„ – (@bambkb) April 11, 2023
The secrets of Agenda 21/2030
*this is not a conspiracy theory. pic.twitter.com/pyJRoj1Bct
— ŠÆĪD įILL LĪD š (@Red_Pill_Led) April 19, 2022
By G. September 16, 2021
From Junior Ganymede
https://www.jrganymede.com/2021/09/16/rolling-acres-of-urban-pasture/
There was a farmer with land that had been in the family for years and generations. Every day he walked the land with his boys. He checked on the pasture. He watched each one of his cattle. He knew them by name. He checked the brightness of their coat and the brightness of their eye, so he could tell if they were less than at their peak. He repaired fences. He drained wet spots and pulled noxious weeds. He tried slow and careful experiments here and there, introducing a new clover in one field, growing chestnuts in another with grazing in the understory.
by Uncola via TheBurningPlatform.com
Headlines were made last week when the results of an experiment by two New York University professors went viral.Ā The study was designed to demonstrate gender bias by reenacting the 2016 presidential debates between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, except the gender for each was reversed. Ā In other words, a woman recited the statements of Trump and a male reenacted Hillary Clintonās original comments made during the debates.
The goal of the āHer Opponentā project was to prove that people would not have accepted Trumpās aggressive behavior had it come from a woman, and that Hillaryās debate style would be much more likable if she were a man.
Ironically, the exact opposite happened.
The professors and audiences of the mock debates, however, were āunsettledā to discover that the opposite was true –Ā Trump became more likable as a woman and Hillary became even less likable as a man.
At last. Although it took a scientific observation to remove the prejudice against Trumpās gender, these people could FINALLY see what the tolerant, open-minded āDeplorableā voters saw all along.
by Uncola
The French philosopher Voltaire once said: āEach player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game.ā The American author and newspaperman, Finley Peter Dunne, once advised: āTrust everybody, but cut the cards.ā The country singer, Kenny Rogers said we should: āKnow when to hold them and know when to fold them; and the musical pop princess, Lady Gaga, sings of how: āHe can’t read my poker faceā.
This is what comes to mind when reading about the Two Faces of Hillary Clinton in the New York Times. I must admit, when reading articles like this one, I am forced to pinch myself just to make sure I am still living in the here and now instead of having just awakened like Rip Van Winkle in a dismally Dantean, dystopian world of the future. In response to recent Wikileaks revelations, the article explains why it is necessary for the Harpy to have one face in public and another in her private political dealings. In this fine example of Orwellian Newspeak, the author of the piece, Jonathan Rauch, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, writes in his best poker face in order to deplorably deal out this despicable diamond:
āIn politics, hypocrisy and doublespeak are tools.ā