Sensitive content
This media may contain sensitive content.
Video yükleniyor...
Video Yüklenemedi
How did GayTantra instruct 185 to open his virgin anus? See the full tutorial at 處男穴開發教學 ft. 185籃球體育生Joseph
197,173 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)
0 Yorum
Yorum bulunmuyor
Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek
![🛸 "He accidentally activated [the craft] and it levitated. And he couldn't figure out how to turn it off." ~Davis 🛸 (This is what Davis says he was told by Mary Elizabeth Elliot. Bring her in and have her tell the WORLD her story. You saw this craft levitating with your own eyes? Were you inside of it? How do you think it operated? Telepathy/psi?) Dr. Eric Davis: "I just know that one aerospace company (TRW) that ran their program at Wright Patterson, circa the 1990s, from not long after the birth of this company to the end of the 80s...they had an intact craft. They didn't know how to activate it. They could get inside, they didn't know how to activate it. "But one scientist, one of their engineers or scientists working on it...so I think he was inside the craft. So it's not manual, human-style control systems, it's a completely different type of control system. Definitely not anthropocentric, anthropomorphic, or anything. "He was, desperately, touching things to try to get something to work, and he accidentally activated it and it levitated. And he couldn't figure out how to turn it off (laughs). So, my source at TRW for that (Mary Elizabeth Elliot) said that that craft was just left levitating in the hangar - in a secured, classified hangar - and that's how they had to leave it because nobody could figure out how to reverse the controls to shut it down (laughs)." (Note: Davis has never said her name but if you've followed the Wilson/Davis-notes story, you know who he's talking about. And if you think he's full of it, fine. Bring her in and let's hear it from her mouth and see if anybody else who worked in that alleged UFO program (the scientist?) is willing to come forward, too. If they're Trump voters/supporters, that might help.) ~~~More on MEE from the Davis interview with The Good Trouble Show with Matt Ford ~~~ (OmniTalk Radio and I obsessed over MEE for years so it's nice to see some details finally coming out. I REALLY hope we get to hear from her so we can judge her credibility. She has the potential to blow this whole thing wide open. So did Jim Ryder, the now-deceased vice president of Lockheed who, according to Davis, said he worked on the C/R program right out of graduate school, along with a friend of his (Ryder's). His loss was a horrible set-back but that can be overcome if we get to hear from MEE and others who say they worked in/on the program.) ~ Davis to Matt: "I was given leaked classified information by someone (This is Mary Elizabeth Elliot) who was an executive administrative assistant and field security officer for one of the Legacy aerospace companies (TRW ~Joe) that no longer exists. It got absorbed by one of the other Legacy aerospace companies after 2000 or about that period of time." (TRW was acquired by Northrop Grumman in December of 2002.) Davis: "And that individual (MEE) revealed that Wright Patterson Air Force Base, where they had a facility at - her company that employed her - and they had intact craft there that they were trying to reverse engineer." "And so, that I knew about, that was illegal information she shouldn't have told me, but I didn't have security clearances with the need-to-know to get that. That was leaked, and that was kept very quiet until the leak of the Wilson notes, in which elements of her story, of that woman (MEE) - that's a woman - that individual's story were included as context to provide context to the Wilson notes. It was just kind of glommed on to the Wilson transcript to provide context to the crash retrieval's absurd security measures to keep it hidden." I included the MEE parts of the Wilson notes, here:](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2079668220030865613/amplify_video_thumb/2079661885864157184/img/ZcrigB7pRHzn-IXC.jpg)
![HOW THE U.N. FOOLED THE WORLD ABOUT CHINA Westerners took over control of a United Nations body to claim the Chinese locked up a million or millions of people—but they had no evidence. The “MILLIONS” number was extrapolated from interviews with just 40 people, and they were not randomly selected, said Australian lawyer and researcher Jaq James from Geolaw Narratives. These clearly untrustworthy findings were then amplified by mainstream media reports quoting people from US groups paid to demonize China—with their membership and funding hidden from readers, our own research shows. The result is a massive scam on the world’s public. Four points: . 1. THEY HIDE THE NEED FOR DERADICALIZATION Point one: In mainstream reports about terrorist deradicalization efforts after the 9/11 attack, the 9/11 act of terrorism is mentioned. Same with the deradicalization efforts after the 7/7 terrorism act in London. But there were more than 130 brutal, acts of terror in China—that’s correct, more than 130 murderous acts in which large numbers of innocent people were killed by Uyghur separatists. But these are simply not mentioned in typical reports. Only the response is mentioned. By deliberately removing the huge number of acts of terror to which the Chinese are responding, western journalists make the Chinese look like they are taking arbitrary actions against the Uyghurs. Yet the truth is that they were doing what westerners also did, responding to terrorist acts. [Image shows clip of “French re-education camps” headline] You can see how unfair that is. . 2. ORIGIN OF ‘MILLION LOCKED UP’ CLAIMS Point two: The first claim that China had arbitrarily locked up a million people was exposed by independent journalists at The Grayzone, as coming from an extrapolation from just eight people. More damning still, that extrapolation came from CHRD, a notorious US-based demonization-of-China outfit funded by the US government. The second claim that million people had been locked up came from the UNOHCR, the UN's human rights office. They took interviews from just 40 people and extrapolated what they heard to claim one million people had been unfairly locked up, as Jaq James’ research shows. Ms James points out that the UN should have interviewed randomly selected individuals to get a fair picture. But by interviewing politically networked ones, they are guaranteed to get a biased image. Again, fundamentally unfair. . 3. JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS Point three: This UN department had a leader, Michelle Bachelet, known for her appetite for justice and fairness. This meant she struggled with her staff—westerners who really controlled the operation. She insisted that their report be released alongside a response from China. Here we can see two reports – one from the UN group’s staff, and the response from China. The staff report was just 48 pages long. China’s reply was 120 pages long. How many western mainstream media outlets quoted the Chinese report, or even acknowledged its existence? Zero. Not one. Not. A. Single. One. . 4. IN WHICH WE DESTROY THE FINANCIAL TIMES Point four: The mainstream media write-ups about this subject hid the truth from readers in a shockingly deceitful way. Let’s take a look at a Financial Times article, which is fairly typical. It reinforces the UN group’s dubious findings with evidence which comes from “human rights experts and activists” – in other words, people paid by the US government to demonize China. The writers do NOT provide their names, just calling them “experts”. As Kyle Feranna said in his 2024 book: “Western NGOs, ostensibly concerned with human rights, disproportion¬ately focused on alleged violations in China despite much worse abuses occurring elsewhere in the world.” In other words, they weaponize human rights as tool to use against the Chinese. . GUANTANAMO BAY Then we get a quote from “Rushan Abbas of the Campaign for Uyghurs”. The Financial Times hides from its readers the fact that Ms Abbas was at the notorious Guantanamo Bay – not as a Muslim victim, but on the US side there. And the paper hides the fact that the Campaign for Uyghurs is financed by the NED, the CIA’s regime change spin off. These are absolutely key facts which change the whole tenor of the piece – and the FT is cheerfully deceiving its paying readers by omitting them. Abbas is quoted as saying, of the UN group’s western office staff, “without them, it would not have been released”. This reinforces many reports which say that Commissioner Michelle Bachelet did not want to release such an unfair report, but her staff, mostly westerners, pushed the unfair report out on her last day. . ANONYMOUS SOURCES Then the FT feature article quotes yet another person described as “an activist” and declines to provide his or her name. Then we go to yet another unnamed “human rights” officer. And then yes, a further unnamed “human rights” officer. And then we get a quote from an unnamed “person with knowledge”. And here we have another anonymous quote – a senior European diplomat. No name. I mean, there are so many unnamed sources in this piece, it would have been rejected at any decent journalism school. . OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY Now the FT piece breezily passes over a reference to the other side of the story by quote “China and 68 other countries”. This is hilarious. So if you are a demonizer, paid by the US State Department, you can get as many column inches in the FT as you like, with your name and funding hidden. But if you are 69 actual named countries defending China, giving the other side of the story—well, they’ll just mention it in passing. . THE REAL STORY Now, right at the bottom of the article we actually have a named person – and he actually tells the real story. “Bachelet was never really in full control of her office,” said Marc Limon. Now any journalist worth their salt would realize that that is the key quote in the whole article – and they would ask – okay, if she was not in charge of that UN group, WHO WAS? But the FT writers choose not to ask that awkward question. They don’t want to know. And they definitely don’t want their readers to know. . CLOSING LINE The FT writers close the article with a line from a quote “Uyghur journalist” who actually is named. She is Nuriman Abdureshid. So the reader is left thinking – oh, so they actually did manage to discuss this with someone in Xinjiang, someone with a name and a job. But what the FT "journalists" omit to tell the paper's long-suffering readers is that Ms Nuriman Abdureshid is associated with a group called Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, a Washington DC group which demonizes China to such an extreme extent that even other anti-China groups avoid them out of sheer embarrassment. Do I have proof that Victims of Communism is backed by the government? Well, the AI which has taken over Google tells us that Victims of Communism has received funding from the US State Department to deal with human rights issues. Here’s what happens when we look up their funding to check the details. [CLICKS LINK] “SORRY YOU HAVE BEEN BLOCKED’. Ah yes, the famous US “free speech”. . A QUESTION I’m going to close with a question. Why is the political and media class in the west working so hard to fool the world about the Chinese? Why work so hard to demonize a country that is working hard to lift itself out of starvation level poverty? What don’t they want the world to know? Could it be that China is actually doing something right? Think about that – and we may all, one day, be on the road to peace. .](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2070014240581431742/amplify_video_thumb/2070012930083758080/img/U1NzaDJxmLJBcpd4.jpg)
