Unbelievable-Truth

The article then goes back to giving true fact after true fact after true fact.

Ickes theory is that, because the article has backed up all the vast majority of their facts, the reader won’t notice the hidden unproven allegation and apparent lie, hidden amongst them, and so will automatically accept these as truths without thinking about them.

It is always worth paying attention to when news story’s use quotes to state alleged facts, rather than just stating the alleged fact. If this story, for example, had stated that Alefantis’s business did not have a basement, people like myself could have reported the BBC to the press complaints authority for lying. However, by quoting Alefantis, the BBC still get the point across to the reader, yet cannot be criticised as they are not directly lying.

Before I move on to explaining the unbelievable truth, I would like to make a few other observations about the BBC article.

Firstly, you will vary rarely see the MSM or any politician accusing other politicians of paedophilia. Because it is so ingrained into the system within all parties, it is not in any of their interests to accuse each other of it. If the truth came out their whole system would come tumbling down.

The archons representatives did not plan for the pizzagate story to break. The reason that it did break was that, grassroot members of the Republican party started researching it. The research went viral online and within the party before the gatekeepers higher up could use the mainstream media to shut the story down.

Secondly, I have found that people are very tribal when it comes to politics. Their party is more important than the truth. A Democrat reading this discussion would dismiss it immediately, whereas if I kept the article the same but switched the parties so that it was about a Republican paedophile ring, he would, likely, have no problem reading it.

This goes even further that I have noticed that when people read an article that they generally disagree with, they will stop reading when they feel that the author gets something wrong. However, if they were reading and article which they generally agree with, even if they notice the author getting something wrong, they will often carry on reading.

With this attitude, I put to you, do you know anyone on this planet who gets everything right? I’m guessing not, so does that mean you should dismiss everything, everyone says as wrong, because no-one is perfect?

Also, to grow as a person, reading only articles which you agree with is pointless, it is the articles which you disagree with which are going to challenge you more and help you grow.

Thirdly, after reading the BBC article back in 2016, I spent about a week researching all the Republicans allegations about pizzagate, I followed each allegation to its source and whilst, after the week, I was pretty sure that there was a lot of truth in the allegations, it is only fair to say that I found no concrete evidence as most of the evidence was either circumstantial or it’s trail led to quotes from “an anonymous source at the F.B.I.” or similar. I also found no concrete evidence that the Republicans allegations were wrong.

It was, however, a very interesting journey, leading to all sorts of dark places such as the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and in my view, there was definitely enough circumstantial evidence to warrant an investigation into John Podesta, his brother and the Pizza shop owner amongst others. Don’t wait up for an investigation however. If the allegations are true then John Podesta would have had F.B.I. bodyguards with him whilst committing the crimes, so the authorities would have known all about it anyway and chose to do nothing.

Finally, we saw, in the BBC article, how by quoting someone rather than stating facts, news stories are able to put lies out as the truth. You should always be very wary of any article that quotes another publication.

If you read in the Guardian for example “The Sunday Times is reporting that …”, ask yourself the question why are they not stating it as a fact but instead reporting that another paper is saying it? Do they know it to be a lie but they are covering their asses?

I have even seen circular ass covering, where Source A reports “Source B is reporting that {lie}”.

Then when I go to Source B to see how they substantiate the lie,  to find that source B reports “Source C is reporting that {lie}”.

I then follow the chain to source C, it reports that “Source A is reporting that {lie}”

None of the three sources are actually substantiating the lie and you will go around in an infinite loop, from A to B to C and back to A again if you try and find the root of the lie.

It would be very difficult for the press complaints authority to punish any of these three sources for lying as none of them actually are, they are all reporting a true fact that another source has said whatever the lie is.

There are, of course, other reasons for one news source referring to another. Maybe they want to show why they think the article which they are linking to is wrong, maybe it adds credibility to their story, for example a local paper quoting a national news outlet, maybe it is only one part of the argument which they are putting forward and they don’t have space to include all the reasoning for that one point or maybe it’s just a lazy journalist who is following the current trend of quoting other news sources rather than showing the true source of the ‘facts’.

So, now that I have laid the groundwork, let us move on with the main point of this article; the unbelievable-truth.

One of the archons favourite ways of tricking us, is to blatantly tell us the truth about what they are doing but in a way such as we don’t believe them.

They bypasses the second law of the Universe, as once they have told us the truth about what they are doing, if we go along with it and do not do anything to stop them, they can then claim that we have accepted as our will, whatever it is they are doing to us.

It makes no difference to the universe that we did not believe the archon when they told us of their plans.

I will call this trick the unbelievable-truth.

It is best described by example and given that there are many, many variations of the unbelievable-truth and I will describe a few of the most popular over the next few articles and gradually you will understand what it is that I am talking about.

Earlier in this discussion I showed how, especially in the press, the archon trick us into believing a lie by surrounding it with true facts. In a variation of this observation what would happen if they inverted this technique and told us a truth hidden between lies.

Anyone would read the article with lie after lie, so when they finally got to the truth, they would just count that truth as a lie as well, without even thinking.

Hey presto, they have told us the truth about what they are doing and because we don’t believe them, they have fulfilled the requirement for the unbelievable-truth.

Now, obviously, in an article full of blatant lies, most people would stop reading it very quickly and so this technique would not be very effective, however, what if they kept, over time, giving the same sort of articles that never came true and finally when one day the article was true then no one would believe it.

Let me explain. Many children, when they, for the first time, see doomsday articles about nuclear war / world war III being imminent, get quite scared and have nightmares about it, but as we grow older and see more and more of these articles in the press not coming to fruition they have less and less effect on us. If the archon decided that they wanted world war III, they could now tell us about it in the press and most adults would be, “heard it all before many times” and not believe it. However, if on this occasion the archon had been telling the truth they would have fulfilled the requirement for the unbelievable-truth and would be able to commence with world war III. They would claim that it is our will that this massacre goes ahead, as they have told us all about their plans for it and we haven’t done anything to stop them.

Another way that they implement the unbelievable-truth is through religion. By setting up so many, obviously false religions, they have created a situation where people who see through the religions, when they finally hear the truth, disbelieve it as their (correct) experience is that all religions are false. Also, people who do follow any of the religions, dismiss the truth as it contradicts their religious beliefs.

I spent many months in my twenties researching as many different religions as I could, to try and find if any fitted me. In the end I had to give up as they were all, well, sorry if I offend anyone, contradictory tripe.  However, many ‘unreligious’ people reading my truths which I have written on this website, will falsely label them as ‘religious’. Given their previous experience of the crap that all religions spout, they will immediately dismiss my writings as contradictory tripe, without having given them any serious consideration. The archon have, therefore, fulfilled the requirement for the unbelievable-truth. They could say, for example, Disco Mike told them that we are going to turn them into cyborgs and they chose not to stop us, therefore it must be their will that we turn them into cyborgs.

Don’t worry if you don’t yet, quite understand, the unbelievable-truth trick, as we will be discussing it in various different scenarios over the next few articles. It will soon become second nature for you to notice it each time you stumble across it in your day to day lives.