2) Think about it, wasn't al-Issa's making the rounds to get leading organizations to agree to "defamation of religions" enforcement, which is actually the enforcement of Shariah speech laws, culminating in the global IM/Marxist handshake at the UN in June, a "tell" that the game was on for street violence in the Western countries? (Yes!)

3) And didn't al-Issa deliver the prize, just in time for all the "Palestinian" coded "Day of Rage" declaring action on the street this past March? (Yes!)
aa.com.tr/en/world/biden…

Read 5 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Mar 2

I should get the quotes form both Lenin and Mao putting ideologues to the wall - threatening to machine gun them - when they pushed for ideological purity when operations were in full execution mode along controlled pathways.

Second to REFUSING TO RECOGNIZE that Marxism is dialectical when seeking to understand Marxism, is that it is taught along Marxists educational lines that keeps it (pseudo)intellectual, vague, and focused on Das Kapital when in fact it should be understood primarily as an execution matrix that supports DSTs (decision support templates) from which flows the philosophical slush.

2) I decided to pull those quotes from both Mao and Lenin. Among the key takeaways, PLEASE note as if it was CRITICAL INFORMATION - PIR that constitutes CCIR - the expressly dialectical form of both their comments. In deliberate decision making, PIR that constitutes CCIR that is not accounted for leads to mission failure. First Mao -

@realDianaWest 3) And now Lenin, Part 1 -

Read 7 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Feb 7

@realDianaWest 1) Well, Trotsky said he learned his tactics from Free Masons, which has generally been understood to mean that Jacobin radicals who operated out of French Lodges.

2) And, I tend to think that maybe once a Red Diaper Baby, always a Red Diaper Baby - and even if I get talked off that perch, still always a dialectical player that keeps the entire narrative inside the circle. And, after all, wasn't Diana ruthlessly attacked by former (and maybe not so former) Red Diaper Babies claiming conservative status?

@realDianaWest 3) This could explain why Trotsky's красный террор "
Red Terror" bore a close resentence to the French Revolution's "Reign of Terror" - but that could be a coincidence (to which, incidentally, Trotsky would have responded by saying: "Comrade, there are no coincidences."

Read 5 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Jan 21

More on Doha. If this is true, it means a former US Intelligence operator agreed to engage in espionage against elected members of the United States Government. Am I the only one who thinks this is a grave crime?

Reminds me of the quote from Philip II cited earlier and ponder if this is an epidemic that rises to the level of a clear and present danger. (Yes it is/yes it does - and it's permitted)

2) I remember the events relating to Sens Cruz and Cotton being stopped. Before it was ever announced that the Senate would stand down its efforts to declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, a campaign promise by Trump, an associate in the Middle East sent me an Arabic language article about how the MB in the Middle East was celebrating that the legislation had been stopped. It spilled the beans on the successful deployment of what Qatar calls its "aircraft carriers." In three parts -

Read 4 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Jan 20

"An attack on Hamas is an attack on Qatar. An attack on the Muslim Brotherhood is an attack on Qatar,' document states"

And yet the people who briefed this were purged from the USG. When you think of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, especially its HAMAS element, think CAIR.

Qatar got their money' worth. The professional CT and Intell staff who got it right, and still do, got purged and remain blacklisted.

foxnews.com/world/exclusiv…

2) How bad is it, going back to the beginning, Qatar invested in their aircraft carriers. They're still afloat and still engaged in deep active measure (information) operations. Not the ones that influence the application, but rather the operating system.
web.archive.org/web/2014103114…

3) How deep the fake? Where do dems go when their party is out of power?
brookings.edu/centers/brooki…

Read 10 tweets

Stephen Coughlin

@S_Coughlin_DC

Jan 15

1) We live in a world where, in order to stay comfortably nested within the boundaries of the narratives they live in, they prefer to be lied to.

It's pretty easy to do. Just take the work of a graduate student and associate professor (a tell in itself) groundbreaking research that the East Coast is sinking at a rate of a half inch (or so) a year.
aol.com/impacts-real-s…

2) All "they" have to do is create pseudo-scientific sounding narratives written at a level they already know you will think you understand (but don't), wrap it around "the earth as we know it will cease to exist if the government doesn't take full control now" in conjunction with "we don't have time to wait for science to prove our theory, we must act now" talking points aligned with bad Netflix dramas and a few "docu-dramas" to generate predictive responses (just like covid), and a mass line is formed.

But isn't this a repeat of the same articles from the mid-90s? But ask yourself, if true, wouldn't NYC already be underwater?

3) So, as "scientists" respond by saying "it's more complicated than that" blah, blah, blah, wrt to the picture below, the question to ask is whether you're so far gone that you're insensitive to facts and will believe "them" over your lying eyes.

At some point, you have to want to believe these narratives either because -

1) you find it entertaining as if you were participating in your own "extinction-level event" (because in the movies that's a real scientific profession) or,

2) that this state-sponsored theology that posits the state with godlike powers (a la Hegel) has become so ingrained in your belief system that to believe otherwise would be an act of blasphemy (such that you become entitled, nay, empowered to treat blasphemers accordingly [complete w extra-legal state-sponsored sanctioning]).

But just remember, these narratives support larger mass line enforcement narratives.

So, wrt to the below graphic, which says it all, and, yes, it's just that simple, who are you going to believe, your lying eyes, of the next Netflix movie or "graduate student" level research on the end of the world?

Read 6 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Stephen Coughlin

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @S_Coughlin_DC

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Stephen Coughlin

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!