Olivia
Online
Mosheh Yeroozedek
@yeroozedek
Teacher, Writer, & Member of the Post-Anthropocene Age
United States
Joined November 2022
102 Following
83 Followers
1.1K Posts
Pinned Tweet
I am a student of the earth, philosophy, literature, human expression, and metaphysics.
My work combines all these elements and associate them with a keen and pragmatic eye for studying insights that can be gained from observing the happenings of the geopolitical spectrum, societal trends, challenges, and innovative solutions.
Most of all, I am fascinated by natural law and the rudiments of the spirit that are identifiable, measurable, replicable throughout reality, and most worthy of cultivation towards the highest marks of virtue.
I want to further my understanding of all these things through travel, intellectual curiosity, immersion in culture, and vibrant conduits of brilliant, creative, and forward thinking members of the post-anthropocene age.
Where humanity will finally see the Earth as a holistic ecosystem and expression of itself in spirit while also maintaining the virtues of science, virtuous governance, and technology responsibly.
May Peace Be Upon the Worthy.
Mosheh A.Y.
@paleochristcon The chances are higher that the government had a hand in the assassination and TPUSA is complicit in some way.
It’s a very convenient push to reinforce the status quo for the credibility of the state after the damage they further incurred on their reputation with Covid-19. Innocence until proven guilty dialog supports the right to maximally investigate. You don’t even have to like Kirk.
But when you are penalised for speculating, there is some sort of agenda in play.
@RyLiberty When you don’t understand historical or geopolitical context it probably is.
@RealCandaceO He doesn’t even understand the context of the sequence of events his team is feeding him.
https://t.co/tCycHrtfM4
Andrew is poorly revealing his lack of knowledge about the context of the situation’s timeline. That’s what has caused most of your problems. TPUSA had already lied many times by this point, and she as well as many others were highly speculative that TPUSA was a dangerous place to go physically at that time. With the possible problems involving the state and its corruption, it was wholly acceptable to avoid situations where they had too much leverage over the conditions.
With that French threat being reported and a series of other uncertainties (many of which she shared at times after the threats had already been made. Some of TPUSA’s donors also have substantial leverage in the military and intelligence communities.
Also, you don’t need positive evidence for an investigation. There are investigative journalists and YouTubers all across the world that research unsubstantiated claims without positive evidence.
No, you don’t have to cower to an institution just because they are big. Your worldview allows you to bend over, but that is not a standard clause of morality. It’s just Wilson vibes and feelings. I don’t bend to institutions like that, and many others don’t as well.
Beyond that, you are projecting engaging in the very same thing you are accusing Candace of by presenting an incomplete image of the contextual environment of events that occurred during this time. I am 1/3 in now, and you are actually just saying how you would do it. That doesn’t matter; you don’t have the same connections, you haven’t testified before Congress, had valid and actionable death threats and targets on your back from multinational billion-dollar corporations and entities.
You are equating two different experiences that have no overlap. That is badly flawed the contextual environment of your criticism. Not having a humble approach driven by the full narrative of the interactions between her and the institution will always bring you to a conclusion based in a false reality of history.
Hearing your thoughts on this show just how badly you don’t understand what has happened so far. You are looking back in retrospect, and your framing is Wilson-coded.
Just like you are criticizing her, to fully understand the questions you have: “Why do people believe her?”
Go watch all of her lives since Charlie was killed or at least get an AI to summarize every single transcript.
You just made a debate claim with Owen Shroyer that Iranians should suffer Western annihilation because they are “pedophiles,” which is frankly stupid. But you’re okay with Erica’s weird history of homosexuality and alleged child grooming with “positive evidence”.
You all keep up this farce like there is no substance in her respect for her friends.
I didn’t particularly like Kirk, but I respected him enough to debate him one day. Candace is operating from a reality-based conception of history and covert intelligence operations. You are operating from a naive foundational worldview that actually posits that this is just another political normie state-driven narrative.
The point is that even if Robinson pulled the trigger or was on the team that did it, there is no evidence saying he operated alone or that there is not a possibility that TPUSA was involved given the amount of lies they have told and the shady sponsors they have.
23:02
You just said what this is really all about.
Those white people just have sense; you are offering up your soul as a political stooge.
You are acting as if the government would not do this or doesn’t have the tools to easily set this guy up, even if they blackmailed him. We just had that grocery store shooting in Buffalo, NY, a few years back that involved dark discords with government groomers in the chat. Investigation completely shut down. Candace is aware of the MKULTRA history and its culpability with Patsies. You don’t acknowledge it as part of your formulaic acumen for speculation of the evidence presented.
It’s also funny how you all never mention what she discovered about the meeting Trump had with Miriam Adelson where Trump reportedly told Charlie he was going to do s*** she said with the money she donated before that bullet hit his ear. At that point I think Trump was actually considering the weight of his morality and American Nationalism, but he took the oath of do whatever they say and at the same time enrich his family, “it’s all f*****, capitalize on a system that will never change. The exorbitance of the present corruption is too blatant and ambitious.”
It’s wholly reasonable that his corruption spans far beyond that point, but that is explicitly a point where pre and post 2025 Trump defer from one another.
But you don’t see political corruption as a problem even when it directly refutes your self-proclaimed “Christian” worldview which in the most foundational of terms says “Do not lie.”
28:09
Because she is investigating without prosecutorial power. They are infinitely stronger and have absolute influence judicially Andrew. It’s not that hard to understand.
What this comes down to is uninsightful normies that believe most of what they see on television and the news versus people who allow political and historical realism to inform their worldview. You all keep complaining about it, but that doesn’t mean you can “debate” an open investigation. You can debate the epistemological reasoning behind your opposing worldviews: 1. The government would never do this without leaving positive evidence that would make them culpable. Because there is evidence that could be fabricated, and there is enough suspicion to raise that conclusion, that doesn’t mean you should explore alternative theories! Especially when you were a close friend of the individual that was assassinated. Vs. 2. The government executing a plot like this is completely reasonable given the geopolitical stakes in play. It is possible that they had that intention to leave no positive evidence but they made some mistakes along the way.
You are somewhere in the middle but you haven’t been very explicit on your position because you want to appease both sides. Your unwavering bias for partisanship is outweighing your moral standards.
https://t.co/tCycHrtfM4
Andrew is poorly revealing his lack of knowledge about the context of the situation’s timeline. That’s what has caused most of your problems. TPUSA had already lied many times by this point, and she as well as many others were highly speculative that TPUSA was a dangerous place to go physically at that time. With the possible problems involving the state and its corruption, it was wholly acceptable to avoid situations where they had too much leverage over the conditions.
With that French threat being reported and a series of other uncertainties (many of which she shared at times after the threats had already been made. Some of TPUSA’s donors also have substantial leverage in the military and intelligence communities.
Also, you don’t need positive evidence for an investigation. There are investigative journalists and YouTubers all across the world that research unsubstantiated claims without positive evidence.
No, you don’t have to cower to an institution just because they are big. Your worldview allows you to bend over, but that is not a standard clause of morality. It’s just Wilson vibes and feelings. I don’t bend to institutions like that, and many others don’t as well.
Beyond that, you are projecting engaging in the very same thing you are accusing Candace of by presenting an incomplete image of the contextual environment of events that occurred during this time. I am 1/3 in now, and you are actually just saying how you would do it. That doesn’t matter; you don’t have the same connections, you haven’t testified before Congress, had valid and actionable death threats and targets on your back from multinational billion-dollar corporations and entities.
You are equating two different experiences that have no overlap. That is badly flawed the contextual environment of your criticism. Not having a humble approach driven by the full narrative of the interactions between her and the institution will always bring you to a conclusion based in a false reality of history.
Hearing your thoughts on this show just how badly you don’t understand what has happened so far. You are looking back in retrospect, and your framing is Wilson-coded.
Just like you are criticizing her, to fully understand the questions you have: “Why do people believe her?”
Go watch all of her lives since Charlie was killed or at least get an AI to summarize every single transcript.
You just made a debate claim with Owen Shroyer that Iranians should suffer Western annihilation because they are “pedophiles,” which is frankly stupid. But you’re okay with Erica’s weird history of homosexuality and alleged child grooming with “positive evidence”.
You all keep up this farce like there is no substance in her respect for her friends.
I didn’t particularly like Kirk, but I respected him enough to debate him one day. Candace is operating from a reality-based conception of history and covert intelligence operations. You are operating from a naive foundational worldview that actually posits that this is just another political normie state-driven narrative.
The point is that even if Robinson pulled the trigger or was on the team that did it, there is no evidence saying he operated alone or that there is not a possibility that TPUSA was involved given the amount of lies they have told and the shady sponsors they have.
23:02
You just said what this is really all about.
Those white people just have sense; you are offering up your soul as a political stooge.
You are acting as if the government would not do this or doesn’t have the tools to easily set this guy up, even if they blackmailed him. We just had that grocery store shooting in Buffalo, NY, a few years back that involved dark discords with government groomers in the chat. Investigation completely shut down. Candace is aware of the MKULTRA history and its culpability with Patsies. You don’t acknowledge it as part of your formulaic acumen for speculation of the evidence presented.
A throwback for you all today. Here is where it all began
https://t.co/i81kFL7Iv4
The holes in your present state provided evidence are enough to warrant further investigation and “questions”. The formal acknowledgement of inconsistencies in the investigation with statements from top government officials, world-famous American veterans, and several thousand members of law enforcement. It reminds me of when that corp of 1500+ engineers who said that 9/11 was structurally impossible aired on C-Span. What has the government done 20+ years later with tons of holes in their “positive evidence” for 9/11? Not a damn thing.
You are not on the right side of history holding the government accountable; you are teaching your followers to be obedient sheep.
Many of the people listening to Candace just suffered the incivilities of the lying government that killed millions/allowed millions to die from a drug they lied and said they didn’t create when they funded its research from beginning to end and provisionally gave a harmful inoculation to millions after the fact. Many of those people loved Kirk. They are not willing to let the government get away with anything else even if they end up losing. They are fed up, and care more about global domination of the world by degenerates that will enslave everyone versus some corrupt political apparatus that you want to grift some more dollars from the inauthentic civilities and plantations thereof. Her viewers aren’t thinking about protecting bearded white “bros” egos because it’s a Black woman launching a full assault against the apparatus.
They care that someone with a proven deep spiritual connection to Kirk is not letting up and searching this out to the end. Your audience has a general lack of respect for Black people because they have brainwashed themselves on ghetto social media content. But that crap has nothing to do with mature Black families outside those economically deprecated areas. I would bet millions that the low-iq beard bros in your audience refuting that woman is purely due to the fact that she is Black. A sad and weak-sounding argument that is actually true. That is also how you fumbled the ball, you don’t do enough research to understand or rather remember that there are intelligent Black people outside of your constricted echo chamber that is consistently fed the opinions of Black Degenerates or Coons like Tatum, Bongino, or Myron.
25:58
It’s not about private organisations. The entire conception of Candace is that TPUSA and the Federal government have many ties and financial interests and political interests that are tightly bound to one another. You should explore them and more context. What Rob and TPUSA are providing to you as her “theory” are completely out of context within the full narrative of her investigation. Next, within the larger geopolitical context of the Iran War, Israel’s many war fronts, and Kirk’s defiance of those strategic goals in addition to his philosophical evolution on Israel: Kirk was too powerful to hold views that were adverse to the Trump movement, another byproduct of this investigation that the Far-Right demagogue doesn’t want to face the reality of.: this administration and its agencies could be involved- not far from historical reality, and given the last 8 months of war in the exact region Charlie opposed, has given even more reasonable speculation to investigate beyond the state’s claims.
Kirk was on tap to be an undefeated presidential candidate in the next 10 years that would dwarf the influence of the most perfect neoconservative that could be fabricated in a think tank. He was a threat to the corruption you are now seeing within the full political spectrum with his defiance of the donors.
@TheSeanMitchell @paleochristcon Sounds like you really thought that out buddy. Not good enough, but you don’t have much else going for your discourse but a vocabulary of about 46 words - not including “retarded”. But hey, I guess that counts for something.
No.
It says that people who say “there is no left right paradigm” already have or are on the path to having a geopolitical, philosophical, and historical awareness based in realism. They understand that the agenda setting mechanisms in modern societies flourish in inauthentic political structures where both sides of the institution participate in continuous policy theatrics.
The institution you are seeking to become a discursive martyr for acts like it is at variance with the “left” in public while aggregating power and wealth behind the cloak of globally pervading systems of hegemonic control they have established in every form of discourse.
While you sit back cushioning reasonable suspicion and criticism aimed at the state and other nefarious and at the least unaccountable institutions, a dynamic virtual, economic, and infrastructural prison is being built around you with no points of contest.
You scream and shout about partisan optics for hours per week, but I have yet to see a considerable degree of content confronting the challenges that will enslave everyone regardless of their religion.
However, whether or not you are acting in good faith will depend largely on your own discretion and willingness to allow the universality of the morality (you claim to appreciate within the confines of principles you consider historically “Christian Ethics”) to supersede your loyalist political ideology.
As it stands, your political affiliation has become an idol within your theoretical worldview that you hold in higher regard than the Hebraic Morality which Christianity based the entirety of its epistemological foundations upon.
As I probed earlier, you are intrinsically failing to understand my original message:
Andrew has inserted himself into a narrative framework that he doesn’t understand the full contextual basis of because it is too extensive for his understanding in such a limited time.
He only has cursory knowledge of the faults and anomalies people are pragmatically finding with this case considering the state’s narrative.
I have seen his commentary on and off for over 60+ hours of content before he lost his humility earlier this year.
He jumped in way too fast to blindly defend an organization just because it is majorly white and posits itself as Christian conservative-friendly.
Anyone who is familiar with Andrew Wilson and his authentic outlook knows that he is a loyalist. He will defend someone to the final drop of blood if he likes them or finds their rhetoric sympathetic to his N1SB platform.
“Stopping the Left at any cost” (implied: whether moral or immoral).
The problem is: there is a clear boundary when the chivalry of loyalists becomes simple corruption.
He is at that precipice and very few of his non-cult moderate viewers can cut through the blind support of his cultic herd-mentality fanatics who constantly feed him positive affirmations even in the face of objective clear loses.
Rather than binding themselves to truth and moral principles, they have a strict subjective allegiance to the shared history and glory of successful debates he has had in the past.
As I probed earlier, you are intrinsically failing to understand my original message:
Andrew has inserted himself into a narrative framework that he doesn’t understand the full contextual basis of because it is too extensive for his understanding in such a limited time.
He only has cursory knowledge of the faults and anomalies people are pragmatically finding with this case considering the state’s narrative.
I have seen his commentary on and off for over 60+ hours of content before he lost his humility earlier this year.
He jumped in way too fast to blindly defend an organization just because it is majorly white and posits itself as Christian conservative-friendly.
Anyone who is familiar with Andrew Wilson and his authentic outlook knows that he is a loyalist. He will defend someone to the final drop of blood if he likes them or finds their rhetoric sympathetic to his N1SB platform.
“Stopping the Left at any cost” (implied: whether moral or immoral).
The problem is: there is a clear boundary when the chivalry of loyalists becomes simple corruption.
He is at that precipice and very few of his non-cult moderate viewers can cut through the blind support of his cultic herd-mentality fanatics who constantly feed him positive affirmations even in the face of objective clear loses.
Rather than binding themselves to truth and moral principles, they have a strict subjective allegiance to the shared history and glory of successful debates he has had in the past.
@PhilipSelf4 @lastmanlanding @paleochristcon I think you are assuming and missing the point at the same time. Just retire this line of inquiry. There has been no substance presented in contest of what I believe because you don’t know what I believe.
@PhilipSelf4 @lastmanlanding @paleochristcon It may also be the case that you don’t have to know, like, or even respect Charlie Kirk. However, there is definitely reasonable articulable suspicion that more questions should be asked, not less.
@S_A_H_C_Network @paleochristcon That sounds real based Matt. I can’t wait to hear more about what I am thinking.
@GOY_BEAM_9K @paleochristcon Translation: “I am super uncomfortable with the insecurities I have around my lack of comprehension”.
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.5M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.1M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
113.6M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.2M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.5M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.4M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.7M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
89.5M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
83.4M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
74.9M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
72.6M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.7M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
65.5M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
64.8M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
62.5M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.3M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.8M followers