Hello, friends!

As we bake under the weather control machinations of the WEF'ers, I note with some mix of amusement and satisfaction, that I am not the only contributor to RMN that finds Michael Baxter's musings less than plausible. As others have said before me, and I will gladly echo them. "No one is calling for censorship."

More effective, I think would be a thorough examination of the facts that can be discerned to surround this controversy, and the establishment of some basic truths that the majority can agree is at least most likely. After all, this is RMN, we pride ourselves on being truth speakers and truth seekers, why should we not police our own beliefs--not with a view to punishing or silencing those we disagree with--but with an unemotional, logical examination of the evidence in an honest attempt to establish the veracity of known facts. (Big words meaning let's get at the truth)

Now that I have spent the last paragraph slinging arrows at the dubiously titled Real Raw News, Some of the good Mr. Baxter's true believers may feel--somewhat justifiably--maligned. Allow me to take a moment and assure them that they are only the tip of the iceberg (IMHO).

I find myself agreeing with Clif High's assessment of: Kerry Cassidy, Benjamin Fulford, Sean David Morton, Jordan Sather, Charlie Ward, and Simon Parks as some of the worst offenders. It is my firm belief that they are all grifters. Some, of course, are slicker than others, one in particular has shown herself to be foolishly inept in her understanding of AI, or even programing in general. And while you can admire their snake oil charms from afar, as soon as you realize they are liars and enemies of the truth, they begin to appear as they really are: Pathetic. They are indeed at cross purposes with truth seekers.

Any site such as RMN is subject to abuse by grifters and shills. It should surprise no one here that more than one 'Member' has more than one account, and (apparently) they enjoy posting as different people. A good deal can be learned from a highly detailed examination over time of one's use--or misuse-- of grammar, punctuation, and spelling. Add in one's penchant for using familiar terms and themes, and it is almost childishly simple to spot a writer's personality emerging from their accumulated missives, regardless of what name they sign, or how they may attempt to disguise themselves. By the way, typing your messages in all caps, and eschewing all but the most basic punctuation, does not hide anything, quite the opposite actually.

What is the purpose behind this humble communication? Simply to open a perhaps difficult, perhaps uncomfortable conversation on what we believe, and who we believe. There have always been shills and multiple accounts used by a variety of folks, they aren’t going anywhere anytime soon, and it’s quite frankly silly to try and do any more than identify them for who they are.

Some of you are saying, “Hey, wait a sec. We do not know you any more than we know that Baxter fool! Why should we listen to you?”

The above statement is an example of critical thinking skills in action. We need a lot more of that and discernment too, but thinking will do for a start. For those who feel taken aback by the tone of this note, I can only offer the somewhat insipid disclaimer that I think it will only really offend the shills.

Be seeing you …

God Bless,

[~76~]