Claims being made: Operation Matthew 4:19

  1. Billionaires met in November 2013

  2. one month later announced in December 2013 that they were going to troll the entire world (over gender)

  3. AFTER the start of New Year 2014, AFTER the November 2013 meetings and December 2013 trolling operation announcement: to wage war against Ukraine

  4. The Matthew 4:19 trolling operation planned in 2013 would not end, as was published in 2014 “The underlying aim, Surkov says, is not to win the war, but to use the conflict to create a constant state of destabilized perception, in order to manage and control.”

 

Operation Matthew 4:19 was initiated in March 2013 even before November 2013 meeting.

  1. Some even claim that the World Wide Web trolling operation by billionaires against everyday people was initiated via Twitter in November 2012, a year before the billionaires met in November 2013 - the first claim, #1 on list above

  2. The World Wide social media trolling operation was launched on the Web in early 2013 but not reported in Western news sources until middle of year 2014

 

“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” ― Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, 1995

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    Your entire reply is only “English literacy”, I said you have “media ecology literacy”. these are two very different things.

    You have literally said I have media literally problems in general. Don’t try it when I got your message history right here.

    “Media Ecology” literacy is not “English prose literacy”

    Well, it most certainly is when you fail to parse an English sentence and you blame your misunderstanding on me. 😂

    The whole context of the posting is the repeat emphasis on timing.

    Yeah, and the whole context of my comment was about your inclusion of gender in the title and the body of the post. What is your reasoning? Why is that so hard to answer? Where is your 3rd or 4th alternative explanation for this? Why are you explaining something I did not ask about? Why are you talking to me about media ecology at all instead of answering the question? Sus af.