Do you remember back in 2018 when Buzzfeed introduced the world to the concept of the “deepfake” in the most dramatic way possible?
Jordan Peele’s mouth on Barack Obama’s face? The “FakeApp” software? The pat reassurance that “all it takes [to spot a deepfake] is a bit of patience and skepticism”? In retrospect, everything about Buzzfeed’s deepfake warning seems quaint.
Silly as it may have been, however—it took 56 hours of video processing and the oversight of a video effects professional to put together that rather unconvincing video, we were told—the warning itself was an apt one. As it turns out, Buzzfeed was correct to alert us to the fact that convincing deepfake videos “will get easier, cheaper, and more ubiquitous faster than you would expect” and that “an age of ubiquitous deepfakes could help usher in an ‘infocalypse.'”
Still not worried? You should be. I’m willing to bet that you’ve already been fooled by a deepfake video at some point, and the future is likely to be one in which no digital image, video or audio file can be taken at face value.
Don’t believe me? Then I invite you to take the following test . . .
Bigger question “how did you find the video of Virginia?” it only had 107 views and 0 comments.
#1 Did not look ahead I say Ibrahim a Deeo Fake; issue in background but certain words an accent revealed while he sounded Western Ivy leaguer most. #2 I call real of Virginia #3 I say a deep fake.. He’s going to talk like that at the WEF? And live?
Welcome to the post truth world, a wet dream for many among us.
BTW, I do believe alphabet soup agencies have been using this technology for some time now. I.e. planes leaving roadrunner silouettes on steel reinforced concrete buildings.
“BTW, I do believe alphabet soup agencies have been using this technology for some time now. I.e. planes leaving roadrunner silouettes on steel reinforced concrete buildings.”
You mean the planes that threw its parts, including an engine, onto the streets of Manhattan with witnesses seeing it in real time and running for their lives to avoid being hit by them?
mkey, you should sit down with all the available evidence for a few months and analyze it carefully.
The ‘no planes’ theory was debunked decades ago.
Yes, those very same parts that do not belong to those very planes that purportedly left roadrunner marks on the eponymous twins.
Well what is your theory for how all of the plane parts flew out of the buildings and landed on the ground?
Some striking and injuring people?
Did someone/something shoot the parts out with a cannon as Ace Baker suggested? LOL!
Did someone plant those parts? How did they get the planted parts to hit an injure people?
I never said anything about which planes hit the buildings.
The parts that were sprayed out from the towers did not belong to flights 11 and 175.
I mentioned this before to you but it’s worth repeating.
Buildings hit by CGI graphics do not sway.
Think long and hard about that.
Buildings hit by missiles likely will.
mkey in the decade or so after 9/11 conspiracy theorists were having a field day.
There were all kinds of crazy conspiracy theories posited as we all know.
Believe it or not for a short period I too was a “no planer”. I was also a “missiles did it” theorist. I was also an Ace Baker disciple as well as a (gasp) Dr. Judy Wood follower.
I came this close to buying her book!
There isn’t a single 9/11 name player I didn’t check out (I won’t drop all the names).
But I wasn’t fooled. After I did my own careful research most of these theorists and their theories were discarded.
We have more than 30 videos of the WTC2 plane crash, most from amateurs.
And here’s the thing.
The flight path of the plane is identical in each of their videos.
You should have bought the book!
This is a reply to Wobud.
It’s strange that I wasn’t offered a Reply button to his post!
“You should have bought the book!”
I made attempts to buy it for a while but couldn’t.
Then years later I noticed I could download it online for free as a .pdf and that’s what I did.
After I browsed through it I was glad I didn’t buy it. 🙂
Early reports were of a missiles hitting the building. The reporters from the street reported seeibg missiles. Some reporters themselves reported seeing a missile hitting the first building.
Then CIA people hit the streets and the news rooms. There was a delay between the two hits and they had ample time to prepare.
Then studio talking heads started correcting street reporters, because people in the studio knew better about what was happening than the people on the street. The studios served as a sync point and served people bite sized prebaked truths. Everyone was desperate to know what happened and they told them.
Planes can not fly impossible speeds on impossible altitudes. Missiles can fly at those speeds at those altitudes. Missiles can be made to look like and some in fact do look like planes.
The only exemplary thing about the editing performed was the speed of it. 17 seconds was the delay between the actual events and the picture hitting the broadcast network. Maybe they prebaked the scenes, maybe they used “AI”, I do not know nor can I ever know.
Footage of planes with disappearing wings pulling impossible stunts, that’s where I pretty much stop believing my eyes. But that’s just me.
The brunt of the epic, never before seen in the recorded history psyop event started at the end of those 17 seconds.
BTW I didn’t say no planes were used. I am saying they did not use planes they said they used. Maybe they indeed used planes, I just find it likelier they used missiles.
You are doing the common thing of putting people in the boxes, so that it’s easier to dismiss the arguments via the common logical fallacy of association.
You tacked on that later, just like studio people started tacking on stuff at a later date. Building their absolutely impossible propaganda. Nothing is too low for these people, but there is such a thing as a too low flight trajectory.
Physics meets bullshit and physics wins every damn time.
I do not build upon Judy Wood’s work, I do not use no planer theories, I do not use missile theories. I go by early reports, personal experience, common sense adn knowledge and reject the “they wouldn’t do it” and “too many people involved” dogma.
I am putting in a request now to James to fix this limitation of replying to posts.
I don’t know the current limit, but once it’s reached no ‘Reply’ button is offered.
I hope his site maintenance people can fix it.
It’s likely that people in the conversation aren’t notified of a response to their post
if a ‘Reply’ isn’t made.
“Planes can not fly impossible speeds on impossible altitudes. Missiles can fly at those speeds at those altitudes. Missiles can be made to look like and some in fact do look like planes.”
Yes, Flights 11 and 175 can not fly at the speeds given at the low altitude. Yes missiles can fly at those altitudes. So can military jets.
“Footage of planes with disappearing wings pulling impossible stunts, that’s where I pretty much stop believing my eyes. But that’s just me.”
Military jets would have to have been used to replace the scheduled flights.
“BTW I didn’t say no planes were used. I am saying they did not use planes they said they used. Maybe they indeed used planes, I just find it likelier they used missiles.”
We agree that they did not use the planes they said they used. That’s the key.
I find it likelier they used planes. You know why? 30+ videos of planes are more convincing than zero videos of missiles. People talk of “cloaked missiles” that look like planes.
Show me a cloaked missile that looks like a plane, can fly like a plane and can punch holes in buildings with the silhouette of a plane please.
Surely there must be a video available somewhere on this earth?
“You are doing the common thing of putting people in the boxes, so that it’s easier to dismiss the arguments via the common logical fallacy of association.”
Could you please flesh this one out? What box?
“Physics meets bullshit and physics wins every damn time.”
I agree. What part of physics do you think was violated?
“I do not build upon Judy Wood’s work, I do not use no planer theories, I do not use missile theories. I go by early reports, personal experience, common sense adn knowledge and reject the “they wouldn’t do it” and “too many people involved” dogma.”
OK fair enough. You are going by early reports. But you have yet to reconcile:
-All the planes parts flying onto and landing on the ground/people.
-The plane silouettes in the towers.
-The 30+ videos of planes flying into WTC2.
> Military jets would have to have been used to replace the scheduled flights.
We can at least agree to disagree. Certainty about this point seems self deluding at best. In no way does it logically follow they military jets just had to be used.
> I find it likelier they used planes.
Wings do not penetrate steel reinforced concrete.
> Show me a cloaked missile that looks like a plane, can fly like a plane
I have never mentioned “cloaked missiles” so feel free to look for those yourself. I am also not a military technology expert, but there are cruising missiles with something that looks like wings. These could maybe be mistaken for planes and account for some of the witnesses claiming to have seen a plane. Here’s a very basic search for the same.
https://www.google.com/search?q=guided+cruise+missile&udm=2
> and can punch holes in buildings with the silhouette of a plane please.
The explosive punches the holes. That’s generally how missiles operate, they go boom. Unless they are duds.
> Surely there must be a video available somewhere on this earth?
Surely.
> Could you please flesh this one out? What box?
Here’s your previous quote.
> Believe it or not for a short period I too was a “no planer”. I was also a “missiles did it” theorist.
You have here implied that I am a “no planer”. “no planer” is a box in your mind that has the “no planer” sticker on it. You group people who look like “no planers” in that box. I am not a “no planer” and I’m not a “missiles did it” theorist.
Whatever phases of thought you were going through are perfectly fine, but that’s square on you and has nothing to do with me.
This is how people tend to think, they do it with everything. I’m just pointing it out as it’s easy to miss since it’s deeply ingrained in our minds.
> I agree. What part of physics do you think was violated?
Wings do not penetrate steel reinforced buildings.
> -All the planes parts flying onto and landing on the ground/people.
I have not seen any videos showing this. I’ve seen videos of people running around while explosions are sounding off in the background.
> -The plane silouettes in the towers.
Wings do not penetrate steel reinforced buildings.
> -The 30+ videos of planes flying into WTC2.
The count of such videos is irrelevant. Many of the videos have been demonstrated as fake (edited to skew the presented viewpoint, assets from one video used in other videos, etc.) and usually follow a completely crazy story line. Like the supposed accidental recording of the plane hitting building #1. Only the delusional can believe such story lines.
September Clues have gone in great detail on this point, even though they tend to draw conclusions with which I do not agree. But their foundation appears to be solid.
Much of the video editing has likely been performed live. Any “found footage” type of recordings that have shown up at a later date I would not trust even as far as I can chuck them in the recycling bin.
In regards to the posting depth limit, there simply has to be a limit. The page layout for level 6 is already strained as it is. We need to be reasonable here.
We were in post truth world for a while. Certainly MOST people have consumed a created world thru mass media for at least a hundred years.
You could make an argument that the rise of the internet let people have a window where they could easily see the raw footage as if they were there and this is just a reversion to “normal”.
It is very sad to see though
I am pretty sure that the economic wealth bubble of the last 70 years is the anomaly too. Most people in history were just poor, and we had a bubble where they felt rich.
Also sad ti see
@mkey
Very relevant segment in James’ Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes @1:27
“In regards to the posting depth limit, there simply has to be a limit. The page layout for level 6 is already strained as it is. We need to be reasonable here.”
Due to the quirky nature of the comment section at this site, necessity
becomes the mother of invention. 🙂
I recall using this method before. I am responding to your post mkey from
below.
I am also providing a link to the post that I am continuing from, for your reference.
In this way we can break the 6-level limitation. 🙂
This post is in reply to mkey’s post here:
https://corbettreport.com/media-challenge-spot-the-deepfake/#comment-179757
I understand you don’t like to be placed inside a box. No one does.
But I’ve heard the arguments you are making hundreds of times.
And so I simply placed you inside the same box as the hundreds of other
people making the same arguments.
The arguments are simple to refute.
“We can at least agree to disagree. Certainty about this point seems self deluding at best. In no way does it logically follow they military jets just had to be used.”
I came to this conclusion using logic.
First of all, planes had to have made the cut-outs in the buildings.
The tapering of the wing cut outs, the size, the shape, the length all match a jet’s wing shape. No missiles or other object could have accomplished that.
And they had to have been military planes for several reasons.
We already discussed the main reason; the scheduled planes could not have flown at the speeds and altitudes we saw without breaking up in the air.
“Wings do not penetrate steel reinforced concrete.”
You repeat this several times in your reply and so you seem to be very sure of yourself.
Again I have heard this argument hundreds of times. I’ve also heard variations of it, such as
“Wings can’t cut through steel” etc. etc.
This is a fallacy that is simple to correct.
The steel columns would always win in a battle of strength against the wings.
They are simply stronger.
And believe it or not, they did win in the battle against the wings on 9/11 !!!
…
@FT
Not trying to interrupt or butt in, just wanted to make sure you’d seen the latest episode
https://corbettreport.com/the-9-11-timeline-solutionswatch/
because it seems like that would be fruitful grounds for constructive discussion.
Carry on
Thanks MR, I did start to watch it an hour or so ago.
I may make a comment or two about it but it isn’t really relevant to the discussion I am having with mkey.
Imagine for a moment that it was possible to fix a plane and its wings in place so they couldn’t move. Then imagine a set of steel columns (sized and spaced the same as the WTC columns) racing towards the plane and its wings.
Racing at the same speed that the planes were flying, 500+ mph.
What do you think would happen? Yes, because the steel columns are stronger they would have sliced through the plane’s wings. No contest.
Well it doesn’t matter if you have steel columns racing towards a fixed plane wing or
plane wings racing towards fixed steel columns, the result will be the same.
The steel columns will always slice through the plane wings.
And that’s exactly what happened on 9/11, as I said above.
The wings did not slice the steel!
The opposite happened. The steel columns sliced the wings into pieces.
The wings momentum kept them moving forward. So each piece of each wing continued
moving through the windows of the building.
If you look carefully at all the photos and videos of the crash you will not see a single column that was cut!
The force of the plane hitting the building caused the construction of the steel perimeter column/spandrel assemblies to fail at their weakest point, which were the screws holding them together. Once the screws gave the column/spandrel assemblies were simply pushed inside the building.
Again, none of the steel columns were cut by the plane. The opposite occurred. The columns shredded the wings.
“but there are cruising missiles with something that looks like wings. “
Cruising missiles that look something like planes have to be ruled out immediately for a number of reasons.
1. They wouldn’t be able to cut the holes we saw in the towers. Jet plane shaped holes.
2. Cruising missiles have a unique noise footprint which is totally different from a
jet plane’s noise footprint. Numerous 9/11 videos of the planes that hit the towers have accompanying soundtracks and all reveal the unique sound of jet engines.
3. We did not find missile parts on the ground surrounding the towers. We did however find lots of plane parts.
“The explosive punches the holes. That’s generally how missiles operate, they go boom. Unless they are duds.”
Huh??? So you are saying one or a bunch of missiles were fired into the towers, went boom, and just by coincidence happened to create the silhouette of jet airplanes? 🙂
@FT
To put part of that dynamic into words:
Steel outer vertical columns remained in place, but the glass and everything else was pushed inside the building, leaving a rather unambiguous jet-like imprint in the structure.
I know that’s implied, just making it explicit.
> And that’s exactly what happened on 9/11, as I said above.
You keep saying, yes. To me, steel and concrete looks cut. The outer hull, so to speak, of the building were prefabbed slabs of steel reinforced concrete.
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/291481_AP010911112430.jpg
Videos clearly show the plane penetrating the building. Wings at least should have crumbled and dropped to the sides, but no, they go in balls deep. You say, they do so through windows, fine.
> So each piece of each wing continued moving through the windows of the building.
Yes, because flimsy aluminum just goes through glass and everything else in its path (but steel) as if it were butter.
> They wouldn’t be able to cut the holes we saw in the towers. Jet plane shaped holes.
I’m no expert, but shaped charges are a thing. You probably know better, so I have to bow down to your wisdom. You say not possible, so obviously not possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge
> Cruising missiles have a unique noise footprint which is totally different from a jet plane’s noise footprint. Numerous 9/11 videos of the planes that hit the towers haveaccompanying soundtracks and all reveal the unique sound of jet engines.
Yes, many of those videos show complete lack of reaction from nearby people to plane’s flight, they don’t even move until there is an explosion. And they have a plane flying at high speed a few hundred meters over their head.
> We did not find missile parts on the ground surrounding the towers. We did however find lots of plane parts.
I don’t know what you found over there, I didn’t find anything, I wasn’t even there. Missiles do kind of explode, I don’t what kind of missile parts you’d expect to find in the rubble.
Again, and lastly and in conclusion, there are plenty of early reports by witnesses and reporters even who said they have seen a missile being fired at the building.
I don’t care either way, I’m completely disinterested in continuing this “discussion”. Be well.
“I don’t care either way, I’m completely disinterested in continuing this “discussion”. Be well.”
I’m not surprised by your response.
You don’t have any strong arguments nor patience to continue.
I studied 9/11 painstakingly, full-time, for more than four years.
How much time did you put into it?
” To me, steel and concrete looks cut.
https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/291481_AP010911112430.jpg”
I’ve seen that photo hundreds of times and studied it with a fine-tooth comb.
Your citing it as an example that shows steel and concrete being cut demonstrates your lack of understanding of what you are seeing.
You need to study the construction of the building in fine detail first.
Know all the components.
A novice might say they see steel has been cut.
Someone with research experience can point out the mistakes being made.
I have to wonder, does it get breezy on that high horse? I guess you are the expert here, ine that is having the issue with their word not being accepted as fact. Keep trying, though.
Have you seen the WTC construction photos showing how the “cladding” was put together? Even in the MSM they were making the argument that a part of the construction bearing capacity was in the outer hull. Of course, they tried to justify the demolition in any way possible.
Anyway, you leave an impression of someone who won’t let irrefutable evidence get in the way of good research. Good luck with that.
You should gave gone into the field of virology, that kind of mindset would be a snug fit. /sarc
The best thing about this is that I really don’t care, one way or the other. Whenever I comment on the extremely likely fact those videos were doctored, you just can’t keep away and have to swoop in with your research. Just let it go, how difficult can it be? People will disagree.
I can understand that some (many) people will stare at obvious graphical artifacts, standing as proof of crude editing (likely intentional just to cause even more splintering), and won’t bat an eye lid. I get it.
Now you need to understand that your word won’t be accepted as fact by many. That’s just how that goes.
Such is life.
P. S: this “discussion” makes me that much more appreciative of James’ COMPLETE LACK OF INTEREST in the details of how the buildings were torn down. Apsolutely masterful ability in avoiding the red herrings. Refreshing.
> The arguments are simple to refute.
The main problem here is that you insist on presenting opinion as fact. And then refer to said fact to defend your opinion. And then you claim it was simple to refute. Quite ridiculous and fairly time consuming.
> I understand you don’t like to be placed inside a box.
First you insist on not understanding what boxes I’m talking about and now you assume a patronizing stance and go “good cop/bad” cop on me. You are being absolutely ridiculous.
> And they had to have been military planes for several reasons.
You repeat this several times in your reply and so you seem to be very sure of yourself.
Again I have heard this argument hundreds of times. I’ve also heard variations of it, such as
“the swapped the planes” etc. etc.
This is a fallacy that is simple to correct.
Well it’s too bad that you are so inflexible.
That’s OK we are all different.
My replies were for you and also meant to engage anyone else here on the site who might be interested in the topic.
Hopefully someone else benefited from what I had to say.
Yes, that’s me. Inflexible. I do not accept opinion as fact. I’m just no good.
All three videos are fake!
The first two are fake, the third one is not.
I agree Kalle, I did not have to watch much of any of them so unless # 3 goes deep fake half wat through I believe it is genuine.
Ok, I am guessing that 1 and 3 are the deepfakes. I am guessing this based on the mouth in the first one, and the bottom of the eyeglasses in the third one.
I hate an ai that changes the visual of the video to match the language of the listener. Dangerous indeed. What benefit does it provide? Subtitles over native , please. Wtf
Karl
Years ago I watched a Star Trek lore video in the YT and it asked why the Old Series and the Next Gen were so massively different culturally….a bit tongue in cheek but the idea was that the Universal Translator was using HOW it translated what people said to SHAPE the way people thought.
By picking certain words it shaped peoples thinking and over time mind shaped the Federation population…..I thought it was funny at the time but TBH it can see it happening- certainly we see rather crude attempts at that by language policing already.
If they can control the words we use they can shape the thoughts we can think….
I also prefer subtitles over having a voice over, even when done by a human. IIRC a the Brits were the ones who started that back when they banned media playing the voices of IRA types and so you ended up with actors voicing the footage. The biggest laugh was when they remade the entire movie “girl wiyh the dragon tattoo” in English for people too lazy to read subtitles.
The first one of Traore speaking in a perfect American accent I deemed definitely fake. The presenter on the second video produced “Click Bait”material without any sources available, so who knows. The third I guessed to be genuine.
I think 1 & 3 are real, 2 is fake.
Well I was wrong. Guess I need to change those batteries lol
I knew the 1st was fake because of the general fuzziness of the image, his face movements and his voice. For the second honestly I’d like to believe it is real so I may be biased. Third? It might well be true unfortunately.
Hmm. Well. Well, well, well. Well, because it’s simply a recorded voice coupled with a still photo and it seemed a plausible possibility, believing it to be genuine I went ahead and shared Virginia Giuffre’s Deadman’s Switch with several friends. Boo me, if indeed I was too gullible … Nevertheless, I am going to stick with my first impression and say that both it (#2) and the Argentina president’s wef speech (#3) are the real deals.
I wanted the first video to be real, but it clearly wasn’t. For the second one, I don’t know what Virginia’s voice sounded like, so I couldn’t judge. Seemed like any female with a similar voice could have made that recording. The third one sounded like the kind of thing Milei would say at the WEF, which isn’t for collectivism or socialism after all — the old neoliberalism. The WEF is for Stakeholder Capitalism.
But, let me say this about how we won’t know, if we get the Epstein tapes, if what we are seeing is real or not. Before the advent of photography, we had means of determining whether or not someone had committed a crime. We didn’t need to see a digital image of the act. And if there is plausible deniability for any video that surfaces of a politician doing unspeakable things, then it won’t be so easy for the Mossad to blackmail our politicians. After all, we should be judging our leaders by the war crimes they do out in the open, not whatever they might have done drugged or hypnotized in a hotel room.
Pick the fake one?
I Don’t think anybody can get this one wrong. They’re all fake, you’re not going to get that kind of Truth at World economic forums. The African video also, way too much truth. You don’t get truthers truth from an African figurehead spoken in such a manner. Maybe I’m just too skeptical.
Back in the bushes
The last one had me fooled….the 2nd one was something i would have heard about from people I “trust” online so I considered it probably fake- esp when it mentioned Tom hanks who is some kind of pizza meme for those discussions. The first I am pretty sure saw elsewhere so knew it was fake.
All of them COULD have fooled me if I was just listening or not paying attention……but even more worrying to me the careful crafted fakes are YT tech videos I happened across that I am pretty sure are AI slop.
This happened over the last couple of weeks on stuff the algorithm fed.
I tend to listen while working and the voices
A)had that AI twang I learned to hear off SUNO music
B) talked on a very stable register- they put …..random pauses…in…whukle they spoke. The speed change didnt match what I’d expect from people reading or thinking about what ti say.
C)Weird pronouncatuon…..for example Linus (torvolds) is said to”Lie nus” but this fk’er kept saying “Lin us” like linen.
D) had odd ways of phrasing or using words (but kids growing up on slop will soon use those words in the AI way)
I’ve seen this a few times , disturbing me since I had to stop work to look at it, but it’s an extension of human made slop (see video) just with even less work
Plagiarism and you(tube)
Hbombomberguy YT
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yDp3cB5fHXQ
But the amount of slop YT wants to Feed me is alarming…and in a year or two the deepfake video movies will fool almost anyone.
The internet is honestly dying, and everyone ought to consider how to amputate it from your life when it starts to look green……gather uour Ebooks and store them because they can now be rewritten, store any media off line because it’s now probably cheep enough to AI alter it, and remember unless I see your face irl you are an AI generated fake 😉
But seriously GET MEDIA OFFLINE because you know your going to get bored and go watch brain rot slop if you don’t have something to listen to.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ8ijmy3qPo
This dude (above)will show you how to make your own media store of Hollywood slop and if you type “media” into his YT home he will tell you how to serve it all around your house.
I think they’re all fake. The 2 videos have some weird visual artifacts, and the audio one makes me suspicious, mostly because it’s available and I wasn’t aware of much media noise.
This episode is on deepfake (AI-generated video and speech) used to fool the public.
To be honest, I am much more concerned about real video and real speech used to fool the public. Like the real video and real speech used during the scamdemic that fooled billions of people around the world.
As far as these three videos are concerned,
I take a disciplined approach when viewing/listening to media items.
Among other things I look at the post date and number of views.
I listen to the voice, its characteristics etc.
Video #1, the man should have a French accent. He does not. It is not Traore’s voice.
Video #2, there is no way that a genuine explosive video would have received 872 views in the past 11 days! The video would have gone viral.
Video #3, the link has 1K views in 1 year.
Enough said.
All of them?
(reading on to find out if I guess right now)
Yup, the next few years will be where generational amnesia and shifting baseline syndrome meets the Matrix, Minority Report and Elysium.
Entire generations born onto the earth with their baseline perception of what is meaningful and beautiful distorted and contorted by these technologies.
People in cities plugged into devices 24/7, fed an endless stream of artificially generated fake images and other slop, stuck in intentionally managed echo-chambers that leave them dumber, more agreeable, less intuitive and more obedient to “authorities”.
The quantity of people enthralled by these current forms of this content is significant and it is increasing.. people like the sensationalized depictions of nature, click bait content and humorous voice overs and they become normalized while experiences with the real world and nature become outliers in their lives.
Like a slow motion plugging into the Matrix, they are being induced into a sort of willing complacency as those tubes are plugged into their minds.
I was hopeful that James would expose this as a deep fake or perhaps a practical joke:
https://odysee.com/@corbettreport:0/nwnw595:6?r=AYpfdBKo9xYSvtaWEfVTnCDwR36nruaS&t=1054
But apparently he actually does support, and encourages his audience to support, this Rothbardian nightmare where instead of having only one FDA, he wants there to be many private sector ‘FDA-esque’ groups operating simultaneously.
Do I need to remind everyone here just how big a deal James made about the Replicon jab in Japan? Because it SPREADS AND ‘VACCINATES’ EVERYONE ELSE?!?!
Yet now, he’s suggesting that rather than just have one legacy agency that gives the “rubber-stamp-green-light” to what are apparently SELF SPREADING GMO deathjabs, he hears that Farmer Bill and his cronies want to set up shop and get a “rubber-stamp-green-light” kit of their own, so that they, and whatever group that comes along, can go completely rogue, completely haywire, and be able to create as many of these deadly and contagious GMO bioweapons, and whatever else they would like to unleash in the next phase of the human mutation project.
But, no….
Instead of a video saying,
“Just kidding! Fooled you, didn’t I?!?”
Instead of that, he churns out a fan favorite, asking for fan feedback and fan participation in a cute little game (aka fluff).
Wondering if this was on file for just such an occasion….
I’ve never been one to throw mud on a media figure for saying something I disagree with. I disagree with most people, most of the time. That’s part of the education process.
I’m not accusing James of anything. I’ve been watching James since he used to work with Jan Irving, Richard Grove and that crew. Nobody knew who James was back then, he was “brand new” on the scene, not a very large following.
No, I know the value in picking one’s battles, metaphorically speaking.
But this….
This must be addressed.
The takeaway message for me was that people should make their own minds in regards to what they want to put into their bodies.
Whether it is better to have multiple agencies instead of having one issuing these “recommendations”, I doubt that’s the case, but also I realize that every message has its target audience.
For the addled masses, anything that helps plant a seed of doubt in “institutions” is likely a net positive. Even if it’s not exactly true or the most optimal cause of action.
@mkey
“people should make their own minds in regards to what they want to put into their bodies.”
I 100% agree.
Which is PRECISELY why I posted Corbett’s own work on these SELF SPREADING nightmare cocktails.
What one person “chooses” to put into his or her body DOES NOT STAY in that person’s body – IT’S DESIGNED TO SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE POPULATION.
And it’s preferable to have MORE FDA-like bodies just “approving” whatever they like, and circulating more of these cocktails among the population, knowing that they only need to convince a few dumbasses to take their product in order to achieve population wide ‘coverage’?
That’s the issue.
Wrapping it in “libertarian” labels doesn’t change what it IS.
IT’S SUICIDAL. IT’S MURDEROUS.
One FDA is more than we can deal with already.
I’d rather see ALL synthetic drugs completely banned, rather than set up dozens or hundreds of more pathways for poisoning.
There comes a point when the ‘Third Party’ eclipses the red and blue in idiocy.
This is what that looks like.
In my view, that “self spreading” nonsense is a bunch of bullshit.
I see your point, but I don’t see the issue.
You are likely to lose more specators with antiFDA talk than with getting somewhat along with MAGA nonsense. And that’s the crowd he was speaking to, the MAGA crowd.
Not that James is promoting any of that claptrap.
So, either James has been promoting
“that “self spreading” nonsense… bunch of bullshit.”
for years, and was either fooled by it, or just lied about his concern.
Either that, or he was actually on to something real, and has now decided that, despite the danger, let’s just “deregulate” this process altogether by saying that any corporate entity with a permission slip from a government can just start “approving” its own poison.
Either way, there are major issues which need to be discussed openly.
Nobody who is learning and growing and evolving can remain 100% consistent in their views over time. Hopefully each of us holds different views now than a decade ago.
But this is not that.
This is like saying,
“All these years of reporting on the mad scientists and their pharmaceutical poisons has led me to the conclusion that we need so many more of these being released simultaneously that nobody could ever hope to keep up. AND THAT’S A GOOD THING!”
Please don’t misunderstand – I realize that there are both ‘officially approved’ as well as rogue, off the books programs happening right now, and it’s already very difficult to keep up with who is doing what.
As a holistic healer, I don’t want anyone other than my conscience and my client to have any say in how we proceed, what substances are used in that process.
THESE BASTARDS AREN’T IN THE HEALING ARENA. They’re using some of the most dangerous compounds, not herbs, food and minerals.
We’re not describing two ends of the same paradigm.
One works with nature.
One works against nature.
We’re not talking about a magic wand of healing, not with these ‘additional private FDAs.’
We’re talking about a criminal enterprise.
They DO NOT need free reign to poison the rest of us.
**What is amyloid? What causes amyloid as a process? Looking at the statistics of amyloid-specific conditions over time, and the secondary role of amyloid in other degenerative or dis-ease processes, especially Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and similar forms of memory loss and dementia? Why are there so many autoimmune disorders, even in young people? Why are there constantly new “syndromes” being described, but not fully understood?
Why are the bodies of billions of people having trouble doing one of their most basic biological functions – folding proteins?
From 2016 (amyloid, brain, memory):
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028390816304749
From 2021 (amyloid, brain, memory):
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8558977/
From 1989 (amyloid, kidneys, rheumatoid arthritis):
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2915815/
From 2006 (amyloid, kidneys)
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00535-006-1792-3
++++++++++
DNA folding:
https://www.nki.nl/news-events/news/understanding-the-mechanism-of-dna-folding/
Protein folding:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9843/#:~:text=Translation%20completes%20the%20flow%20of,production%20of%20a%20functional%20protein.
Amyloid:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amyloid
Amyloid in dis-ease processes:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/amyloidosis/symptoms-causes/syc-20353178
++++++++++++
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion
Part two, tying a few things together…
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0940960225002894
“2.4. Spike protein: neurodegenerative damage
*(SP = “Spike protein”)*
Neurodegenerative and neuroinflammatory processes often go hand in hand… Misfolded proteins are a hallmark of neurodegenerative diseases… Pathological protein misfolding can be exacerbated by external factors, such as viral infections.
SP can trigger neurodegenerative damage in the CNS via various mechanisms. SP has been shown to bind to amyloidogenic proteins such as amyloid-beta (Aβ), alpha-synuclein (α-syn), tau, prion and TDP-43, accelerating their aggregation and misfolding and leading to neurodegeneration . Aβ1–42 in particular has a high affinity for S1 of SP. Aβ1–42 increases the binding and thus the effect of S1 on ACE2. In the presence of S1, there is also a reduced clearance of Aβ1–42. These aspects suggest that SP tends to act as a functional amyloid and form toxic aggregates.
SP has also been shown to have prion-like properties. It contains sequences that are characteristic of prion-like proteins and facilitates the accumulation of toxic, prion-like fibrils in neurons, contributing to neurodegenerative changes in the CNS. In 2022, Tetz and Tetz identified the presence of prion-like domains in the SARS-CoV-2 SP. Interestingly, SP from other coronaviruses do not show such prion-like properties of their RBD. In the context of prion similarity, S1 also shows a “glycine zipper” motif, which is associated with susceptibility to misfolding and thus prion formation. SP can also induce the expression of prion protein (PrP) in the brain via hyperinflammation. The increase in prion glycoproteins (PrPC) can lead to misfolding of the prion conformation and generate prions and prion-related diseases. In addition, SP activates signalling pathways such as mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK), which are involved in neurotoxicity and prion-like disease processes. And it affects the transmembrane glycoprotein CD147, which can also promote neurodegenerative processes.
Furthermore, in vitro cell culture experiments have shown that SP is involved in the increased expression of α-Syn, a protein that tends to aggregate, which is thought to be responsible for a number of neurodegenerative diseases. In addition, the inhibitory effect of SP on the α7-nAChR of the cholinergic system has been demonstrated. In the human nervous system (HNS), α7-nAChRs are highly expressed, especially in the hippocampus, cortex and limbic regions, and are involved in cognition, sensory information processing, attention, working memory and reward pathways. The inhibitory interaction of SP with CNS α7-nAChRs can also be considered pro-neurodegenerative, as the important role of α7-nAChRs in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (reduction of α7-nAChRs in the brain, especially in the hippocampus) has long been known.”
3/3
https://cardiab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12933-021-01359-7
“We show that plasma samples from Long COVID/PASC still contain large anomalous (amyloid) deposits (microclots). We also show that these microclots in both acute COVID-19 and Long COVID/PASC plasma samples are resistant to fibrinolysis (compared to plasma from controls and T2DM), even after trypsinisation. After a second trypsinization, the persistent pellet deposits (microclots) were solubilized. We detected various inflammatory molecules that are substantially increased in both the supernatant and trapped in the solubilized pellet deposits of acute COVID-19 and Long COVID/PASC, versus the equivalent volume of fully digested fluid of the control samples and T2DM. Of particular interest was a substantial increase in α(2)-antiplasmin (α2AP), various fibrinogen chains, as well as Serum Amyloid A (SAA) that were trapped in the solubilized fibrinolytic-resistant pellet deposits.”
So… The “covid” thing, whatever it really was, if it was anything other than propaganda, is said to contain “spike protein” as an integral part of its makeup and function. It was this same “spike protein” that the mRNA platform genetic therapy injections were said to program the cells of the human body to produce for an undefined and indefinite period of time. This was said to be the mechanism of “protection” from the symptoms of (alleged) infection by the (alleged) organism associated with the syndrome known as covid-19.
The “spike protein,” both from the bodies of “long covid” patients as well as MAGAjab™ recipients, has been repeatedly, and from various different approaches, involved with a wide range of physiological processes, shown to mimic many of the most fundamental functions of prions. Prions are not a bacteria, virus or fungus. Not “living” entities. They’re proteins. Certain types of prion proteins, when introduced to other proteins, can trigger a cascade of “misfolding” throughout the surrounding tissue, and beyond. This misfolding process creates amyloid. Amyloid becomes plaque. Plaque causes Alzheimer’s, neurodegenerative disorders of all sorts, kidney and liver disease, blood disorders, DNA damage, cardiovascular inflammation, or even sudden death.
Sound familiar?
Prion disease is also transmissible to others. But it’s not an ‘infection.”
It’s almost as if there’s a change in the morphic (resonance) field, for those familiar with Rupert Sheldrake. It’s like an external signal is overriding the proper instructions that lead to normal, healthy protein folds.
These “mRNA” (prion) platform injections were spread throughout the global population not only by direct injection, but covertly, without informed consent, as if it were a living pathological microbe.
So. You want more of that?
My post is in reply to this post.
“Whenever I comment on the extremely likely fact those videos were doctored,…”
I love that combination of words mkey. A true wordsmith. 🙂
I use my approach so as not to spoon-feed people. I give them information to research and let them take it up if they are interested. If not, so be it.
“Have you seen the WTC construction photos showing how the “cladding” was put together? Even in the MSM they were making the argument that a part of the construction bearing capacity was in the outer hull.”
Your terminology shows me that you haven’t taken the time to research the construction of the towers in detail. The perimeter columns were the “outer hull”. The “cladding” was a part of the perimeter columns.
The cladding is what hangs up most people. They see cuts in the cladding and say “There, can’t you see, the columns have been sliced through by the wings!”
They don’t know how the perimeter column/spandrel assemblies were designed and assembled.
If you examine the photo you provided carefully you will see that not a single perimeter column has been cut. Many column/spandrel assemblies have been pushed inside the building (center), but no single column has been cut.
mkey there’s an old saying that goes something like this:
“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.”
In this case:
“You can lead someone to the truth, but you can’t make them believe it.”
You are a stubborn guy. You have formed your opinions about this years ago and you refuse to take the time to revisit them with an open mind. Your responses here show me that you are intransigent and will never change.
You brought up James. James understands that planes hit the buildings. How is that possible mkey?
How can someone of his intellect have come to that conclusion?
Surely he must have read your posts and should know better?
I think Corbett is coming at it from a Voluntaryist view. “No rulers.” No goverment outside of common law.
Having small groups of people with verifiable expertise in specific arenas that can put a stamp of approval on something, kind of replaces the federal regulating agencies that exist in most countries.
Then you can make an informed decision based on the group of individuals recommending / approving a product or service.
That can be a mark of quality or a warning, depending on who is putting the stamp of approval on something.
@iafiam
No shit.
It’s Murray Rothbard’s wet dream.
But we’re not living in 1975.
This is 2025.
They’re producing SELF SPREADING nightmare cocktails, calling them ‘vaccines’ and a host of other BS labels.
What one person “chooses” to put into his or her body DOES NOT STAY in that person’s body – IT’S DESIGNED TO SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE POPULATION.
And it’s preferable to have MORE FDA-like bodies just “approving” whatever they like, and circulating more of these cocktails among the population, knowing that they only need to convince a few dumbasses to take their product in order to achieve population wide ‘coverage’?
That’s the issue.
Wrapping it in “libertarian” labels doesn’t change what it IS.
IT’S SUICIDAL. IT’S MURDEROUS.
One FDA is more than we can deal with already.
I’d rather see ALL synthetic drugs completely banned, rather than set up dozens or hundreds of more pathways for poisoning.
There comes a point when the ‘Third Party’ eclipses the red and blue in idiocy.
This is what that looks like.
What would it take to deep fake a Corbett or TLAV or TCRN report or an IMA panel? For all we know, James has been sucked into the mainframe and his digital doppelganger is putting out reports! How could you prove me wrong or me prove you wrong?
It is most disconcerting to me that even Brave browser is spitting out AI answers at the top of any search query now. A short time ago, one had the option of using AI to respond to search queries; now AI is the de facto standard to all searches.
Questioning our own sanity has become “the new norm.” I hate it. How about we go back to snail mail publications? But then again, how would we know that a real person was writing and sending the thing?
That’s a SOLUTION we truly need now, en masse… how to know what is real… Then again, as Socrates so rightly supposedly said: “I know that I know nothing.” (Source: AI generated!)
Can We Teach our Moms to Spot Fake Ai Videos? –
by Corridor Crew (team who work with movie experts of special effects)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4TXO4kQwSQ
I highly recommend anyone here with kids to actually read jonathan’s book The Anxious Generation.
My guess is that they’re all fake.
One thing I have yet to hear anyone talk about amid the mass of AI slop is what effect AI music has on the Brain?
I am pretty sure watching “Elsa gate” type stuff as a little kid can mess up your brain, and there will be LOTS of AI equivalent s, but music is something we don’t even notice anymore as it’s blasted everywhere almost all the time.
Music alters the brain, activates parts and changes the emotions, so I really wonder what will happen when most of the music we hear is AI generated? Will it affect mood and concentration?
A good number of people will be smart enough to avoid video slop, but escaping the sound track of modern life is a lot harder
I don’t care. I don’t believe anything politicians say, I look at what they do. Traore is doing good work in Burkina Faso, Milei is doing good work in Argentina en Virginia was molested and most got away with it. AI isn’t going to change any of it.
How convenient that this technology began rushing into the public realm right when there appeared to be panic about where the Epstein blackmail videos ended up and whether or not they’d appear on the Internet.
What better way to free yourself of your blackmail videos than to obliterate the credibility of video in the pubic eye, and possibly the courtroom as well.
Not sure if you’re actually challenging us or joking, but these are all fakes and not good ones. The Milei one might have been able to avoid detection for a couple minutes if I had never heard him talk before and was watching from a distance so that his lips couldn’t be seen well.
The Obama deep fake warning is almost as bad as the Queen’s deep fake warning which was so bad I had to ponder if is was a 3D-chess move to make us think that even the best deep fakes are easily spotted (to help keep us off guard when watching their more advanced deep fakes).
The Trump clip of him saying the fword has got to be fake. Everything about that video seems off. Especially the way he sounds and is talking.
June 29th statement from Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy6zWWBodiM
Beautiful! Hope it’s genuine though🤪
We in Dutchie land have our own Reiner Fuellmich now since June 11:
Arno van Kessel. Lawyer. Lawsuit against Gates, Rutte, Bourla etc.
Arrested for possibly being part of a criminal network,
possibly danger of violence,
possibly part of the sovereign movement, and
possibly (here it comes:)
anti-institutional ideology!
“ Anti-institutional ideology refers to a movement of people who oppose governments and other institutions, often out of a sense of distrust and injustice. These people avoid contact with institutions and can even be hostile to democratic processes and authorities. Sometimes this ideology is referred to as anti-institutional extremism, in which the movement can be directed against the government, judiciary, media, science and other institutions”.
And so much more to be able to create Guantanamo Bays…
And what a coincidence:
His lawsuit against Gates, Rutte, Bourla etc. takes place on July 9.
But his prison time is extended with 90 days..
I requested his partner lawyer to Zoom Van Kessel in at July 9.
I hope his partner will not get accidented.
And oh yeah, in the meantime, a lawyer chief is working on suspension procedure Van Kessel. He’s not even convicted! So it’s pretty sick, to say at the least..
Is this systematic in other countries as well?
I imagine that not to long in the future, when AI has advanced alongside robotics, I won’t even know if my Uber driver is real or not.
How would attempts to regulate this kind of thing through the American legal system be impacted by the 10-year freeze on AI regulation being pushed through? Is it technically a different category if it’s protecting people’s privacy and/or rights to their image and likeness? If anyone has a better grasp of this than me I’d really appreciate any insight
Well James, that’s exactly the reason why I watch as little as possible about “the news”.
And for the quiz, no thank you🤪
(Fake?) images of Gaza? Is it all a script and a Hollywood production like Wag the Dog?
Martin Vrijland woke me up in this sense with his short brilliant article and very clarifying short video examples.
https://www.martinvrijland.nl/en/news-analyses/must-see-beelden-israel-versus-hamas/
A must read & see,
especially because it deepens this subject.
He’s a very interesting source to follow, different languages.
@gf
If you’re not familiar with Jason Breshears at
https://archaix.com/
I think you might enjoy his site.
His voice and demeanor turn off a lot of folks, and I’ll admit that did keep me from digging in to his YouTube presentations until fairly recently. He’s far from polished and refined, but the man has dedicated far more time to this pursuit than I have, and I have to give credit where it’s due. He knows his stuff.
He’s a simulation theory proponent, but that’s not my interest in his work.
He’s a chronologist, someone who plots timelines of historical events. He uses comparative mythology, catastrophism, and mathematics to construct his chronology.
And his bibliography is unparalleled, outside of places like the Vatican or similar such empire strongholds and private collections. His library makes mine look pretty shabby in comparison, and that’s reason enough for me to find value there. Hope others do as well.
@gf
Breshears’ breakdown of earth’s chronology from prehistoric times, from a simulation theory perspective.
That particular narrative starts at 1:03:45
Archaix
Anunna Files 4: Homo Anunna…Original Arcanum that Became Anunnaki
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wBDS–m4Rg
The yt alternative I use won’t let me timestamp, or I would.
Enjoy
👍
Just For Fun:
So It Begins…Is This A Real Band Or AI?
Rick Beato
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nlb-m_vKYM
Has anyone here seen what Matt Guertin has talked about with Max Igan?:
https://odysee.com/@AbeScott:b/This-is-how-Israel-Faked-the-Oct-7th-Attack-using-AI!-Max-Igan—Matt-Guertin!:0
Matt Guertin shares his analysis of the NBC footage of the October 7th attacks. He very compellingly shows that all the footage (including “breaching of fence” and iconic “running away of ravers”) was created uisng AI.
Check it out! Very interesting.
Not at all surprising, is it?
@kalle
Thanks for sharing that, I haven’t watched a Max Igan video in years.
If the footage was actually exactly as Izrul sold it, the critique was very successful in showing that the parts in question were AI generated.
It’s Mr Guertin’s claims about what AI can, cannot, and will never be able to do – that needs to be addressed.
To claim that AI will never be able to produce video without those specific grid artifacts is very misleading. If people in the “alternative” crowd internalize such a statement as dogma, they’ll be ripe for the picking.
If I were a multi generational occult network on a centuries long quest to enslave and on occasion eat the masses, with access to the fiat printing press, I might think ahead a bit, and profit from otherwise failed attempts. ROI baby.
Suppose the actual current state of AI capabilities had been hidden from the masses (I know, hard to fathom), and the stuff we have access to now [chatrpg, Bor(gRock), etc] is what DARPA threw in the dumpster many decades ago. It’s a matter of national security, you know.
So Izrul releases a video using this (to them) ancient and outdated AI program with the knowledge that eventually it will be outed and they’ll yell “Antisemite!” and that will be that. The “revelation” leads to a feeling of “empowerment” among the techy truthers, who now “know” the signs to look for. And they “know” that AI can never outgrow its current limitations…
Meanwhile, 35 years ago, DARPA already knew that all they had to do was train an editing model. The “generative” model stitches together the basics (what we saw in the video). When that looks passable, it’s fed through at least one editing model, which has been trained to remove the artifacts we saw Mr Guertin expose. It’s not “creating” the footage or the frames, so it’s not bound by the same limitations. Add a human in the mix where needed, and you get an AI generated video without the artifacts that people have been trained to look for. All it takes is an editing model.
But surely Izrul was just scrambling to put something together because of all that international pressure from governments and corporations all over the world, so they were short on time (and lack the proper tech anyway) and this was the best they could do. Oh well, can’t win ’em all, right?
And it’s an established law of physics that no AI model can ever transcend its (for the masses) current inlimitations in video production and editing models. The world would break in half before such a thing could possibly happen.
I don’t mean to sound snarky to you, @kalle I’m speaking to anyone who reads this in the hopes that some will step back away from the screen and the headlines of the day to contemplate, look at things in context, and even try to think like your adversaries for a more realistic perspective on the news and the artifacts that are left behind for us to find. And they are most certainly left behind for us to find.