Reading these comments must be, for Elizabeth, what it was like for me reading comments at my first appearance on The Higherside Chats (I didn't go back to read them for my second appearance!) Different audience bases have different expectations, standards, levels of discernment, etc. I haven't listened back yet (too busy prepping for Lent) but I invited EN on because of her background experience as an insider & was curious to hear more about it
I think my listeners have come to expect a degree of ease and chemistry between myself and guests because I tend to choose people based on a feeling of affinity more than anything; recently, I wanted to branch out and cast the net a bit wider, even if it means inviting a bit of friction into the mix....
I'm a bit confused by some of the comments on this discussion. I didn't get any impression that either contributor was unduly defensive or avoidant of subject matter.
If an interviewee is asked "do you think there is anything significant/suspicious about X" and they don't think there is, their responsibility is to answer honestly to this effect - they don't have a duty to manufacture some content for us all to feast on, or disingenuously conjure up avenues down which we can find fulfillment in speculatively wandering.
Other than that, EN shared a fair bit of personal/family history that might be considered private, or even painful. How many of us are willing to effectively talk about that kind of thing to a horde of unseen, anonymous strangers? Likewise, most people one might speak to amongst the masses would struggle to acknowledge the reality of child sacrifice, for instance, or even evil as a general force.
As for myself, I found the discussion worthwhile, and thought EN's summation of the need to address the 'darker stuff' and then walk away from it, mindful of the potential 'taint' of such energies, particularly well put.
@elizabethnickson Thank you for sharing a portion of your life. There were some very insightful moments that enriched my own. Your life story comes across as genuine, painful & beautiful & I’m interested Ito read your books.
The show seemed to end on an awkward note, leaving a suspicion of more recent questionable alignments; whether well/ill intentioned or informed. CAF outlines how the Trump-Elon actions are heading us faster into the “control grid” prison of technocratic dictatorship: https://solarireport.substack.com/p/trump-administration-digital-control
Again, support of Trump-Elon May be well/ill intentioned or informed. Despite some great instances of transparency, many are questioning their true intentions, given Musk-Thiel ties to technocracy & AI governance…
And ultimate loss of Humanity as a slave system to an oligarch elite. Long in-depth article outlines this argument:
I got the impression she wasn't too happy, whether that was with the interview per se or something else going on with her, who knows; hard to judge having not heard/read anything of her's before..
To me she seemed a bit defensive at times, which meant little was achieved in terms of synthesis between you; more thesis Vs antitheses as opposed to something more productive. This could potentially be due to how you both showed up energetically on the day, the subtleties around and aside what was actually said..
Seemed to be alot of wisdom in there though, for e.g. the neutrality piece in regards to (non)reacting to "evil" - opposition, disgust, horror, recoil, all just keeps the pendulum swinging. Yet, when she again brought neutrality to the nature of the elites tech (MRNA) - towards the end of the interview - she lost me; as if it were designed without an intent, hmmmm..
Re your podcasting in general, there seemed to be a disconnect here which was a little jarring and unfamiliar, yet something in the transmission kept me listening to the end..
Her interview came across like she didn't want to be interviewed. I understand she's a reporter and has a pedigree. But, even some knucklehead like me knows that are scholarly, well documented accounts of Trauma based mind control and ritualized abuse. Start with "A Nation Betrayed" by Carol Rutz. I can list many more. But, I don't want to be redundant. I would offer to her, "If you don't want to talk about certain things, don't talk about them" that's not the responsibility of the interviewer.
Wow. All the smartest people I know merely pride themselves on not being dumb. So when Elizabeth referred to herself as "very, very, very fucking smart," I got excited at the prospect of an hour and a half of truth bombs. Instead, all she delivered were rhetorical evasions. Her juvenile responses to the comments are further evidence of her intellectual depth, or lack thereof. I'm sure this overestimation of her own intellectual abilities, coupled with her pedigree, is what qualified her for a job at Time.
Elizabeth is awesome. Her two part pod with Kunstler is worth listening to. Eco-Fascists is ahead of its time. Her other work looks fascinating and insightful. Jasun is one of the best conversationalists. This is one of the few podcasts I still regularly listen to and why I subscribe. The chemistry seemed to fizzle out around the issue of condemnation. Elizabeth may have a point.
JHK seems to be in same hopium bubble she is in, that new ager are going to change the world and make it all better. He began not allowing comments, or at least certain ones, which is why I unsubbed from his stack. It may be their age, that lends itself to wishful thinking in a broken system? I’m trying not to pay attn to the theatrics for sanity purposes, while accepting that I see “heroes” and “scapegoat(s)” being unfolded in real time. The reveals she mentions were anticipated 100+ yrs ago, by the theosophists so also trying not to fall under that spell. I did check out her blog and it is great, full of common sense and perspective. I’m not sure if it was condemnation and/or criticism of new regime, but she did doublespeak at end about mRNA, which many of DT’s faithful tend to do, and explain away. If it turns out they are “good guys” I will gladly eat my words, though for now, he seems no different or possibly worse than Hitler and Stalin, in lives lost, at least.
The difference of opinion seemed natural and the authenticity of the interview benefited as a result. Jasun asked most questions that came to mind. Elizabeth sharing her mother’s experience at the hands of Cameron seemed yet more evidence of MK culture, but I do wonder about the silence re all the other doctors etc involved. The demonising narratives focusing on Cameron, Dulles and the Nazi’s feels a bit controlled op; especially as MK is so built-in to the superculture. I was surprised at the end to hear Elizabeth talk so positively about high-level CO Robert Kennedy (maybe I misheard?). He’s all for ‘safer’ vaccines isn’t he? Which means ‘safer’ Mr.NA???? The scientists Elizabeth talks of don’t do hardly ANY research on natural health. A few mixed-messages at the end, especially on ‘ biomedical science’ that jarred with her previous comments on MRNA.
Re the non condemnation thing, frankly I can see why that would put anyone's back up.
Christ very much did condemn, see Mathew 18:16 and - "for those that offend little one who believe in me, in would be better to have a milestone placed around their necks and cast out to sea".
Also on the synagogue of satan, he is condemning the "Jews" of Smyrna.
So I don't see why this has to become an intellectual/ spiritual sticking point.
If nothing else, weren't you (reasonably imho) condemning the Spanish NPCs in the wake of Kittengate?
I wrote about it, as well as in a series of posts on scapegoating; there's nothing in the NT that is sufficiently explicit to counter this: "He who is without sin cast the first stone."
I'd still feel more than comfortable condemning people that sacrifice or abuse kids. In all honesty I'd feel comfortable dispatching such people. Let God be my judge, and Christ forgive them.
Sacrifice? No, and I dont buy-in to 99% of references to it from wider conspriacy sources tbh. Certainly not in the 'ceremonial' contexts that often get bandied around.
That said, I could see how criminal organisations use crimes such as child murder as a way to corrupt and bond people together via mutual collusion, but even then this is probably only in exceptionally rare instances.
But paedophillia is as old as the hills, & for some depraved cases child murder becomes part of that.
Either way, the point being that condemning such crimes is absolutely correct, including from a Christian perspective IMHO.
Re paedos - thankfully no, certainly that i'm aware, but i've known of many. For the most part this is local revelations of dodgy teachers, sports leaders and such forth. They'd get caught, sent down and then released.
I can't imagine how many literal convicted nonces are in any town of 100k, but would imagine it's quite a disturbing number. And that's before unconvicted.
At a certain point i dont think these people can be treated. Repeat offenders would be better treated in the manner of a mad dog quite frankly, which to some extent is what they are to a community.
Again, this is entriely in keeping with Christ's teachings (Mathew 18:6)
Condemning the crime isn't the same as condemning the criminal. If you don't know any pedos personally, then it is all an exercise in imagination.
Neither of us is in any position for dictating policies and if we were, then we would probably be involved in covering up the crimes, if not perpetrating them.
There are no social policy-recommendations that I can think of in the NT, besides "Render unto Caesar", inc Mathew 18:6.
I wish you did go back and read the comments after your 2nd THC interview because you would have read maybe a third that were in support of you and your courageous honesty. In my comment, I mentioned that I was grateful to hear you question the truthfulness of some supposed 'truther' players; I had niggling doubts for a while about some aspects of conspiracy interview shows like THC but had never heard anyone call it out as you did. 'Truth against the World', (as the Nazarene proved) can cause those who do not have ears to hear quite a bit of discomfort and they can only rebuff by attacking the messenger.
I'm in awe of the ruling classes. They're all very, very, fucking smart, and multi-talented, and beautiful, and legitimately heroic. We really do live in a meritocracy after all.
Absolutely 2nd Matrix. Coupled with with a high handed, 'don't you know who I am vibe', found this one a tough listen. She talks a lot about USAID, but won't mention the likes of Peter Thiel and his TheilBucks flooding into the wider "Dissident" narrative.
No, just presenting the likes of Kash Patel, Trump Vance and co as some sort of good actors...
Maybe so, but some of it she seems genuine and to really believe. Everyone is on different stages of this journey, though with her background I’d think she would be more suspicious of them also? There wasn’t much new, wasn’t familiar with her before but her blog seems well-written and common sense.
Reading these comments must be, for Elizabeth, what it was like for me reading comments at my first appearance on The Higherside Chats (I didn't go back to read them for my second appearance!) Different audience bases have different expectations, standards, levels of discernment, etc. I haven't listened back yet (too busy prepping for Lent) but I invited EN on because of her background experience as an insider & was curious to hear more about it
I think my listeners have come to expect a degree of ease and chemistry between myself and guests because I tend to choose people based on a feeling of affinity more than anything; recently, I wanted to branch out and cast the net a bit wider, even if it means inviting a bit of friction into the mix....
I'm a bit confused by some of the comments on this discussion. I didn't get any impression that either contributor was unduly defensive or avoidant of subject matter.
If an interviewee is asked "do you think there is anything significant/suspicious about X" and they don't think there is, their responsibility is to answer honestly to this effect - they don't have a duty to manufacture some content for us all to feast on, or disingenuously conjure up avenues down which we can find fulfillment in speculatively wandering.
Other than that, EN shared a fair bit of personal/family history that might be considered private, or even painful. How many of us are willing to effectively talk about that kind of thing to a horde of unseen, anonymous strangers? Likewise, most people one might speak to amongst the masses would struggle to acknowledge the reality of child sacrifice, for instance, or even evil as a general force.
As for myself, I found the discussion worthwhile, and thought EN's summation of the need to address the 'darker stuff' and then walk away from it, mindful of the potential 'taint' of such energies, particularly well put.
@elizabethnickson Thank you for sharing a portion of your life. There were some very insightful moments that enriched my own. Your life story comes across as genuine, painful & beautiful & I’m interested Ito read your books.
The show seemed to end on an awkward note, leaving a suspicion of more recent questionable alignments; whether well/ill intentioned or informed. CAF outlines how the Trump-Elon actions are heading us faster into the “control grid” prison of technocratic dictatorship: https://solarireport.substack.com/p/trump-administration-digital-control
Again, support of Trump-Elon May be well/ill intentioned or informed. Despite some great instances of transparency, many are questioning their true intentions, given Musk-Thiel ties to technocracy & AI governance…
And ultimate loss of Humanity as a slave system to an oligarch elite. Long in-depth article outlines this argument:
https://cynthiachung.substack.com/p/the-realpolitik-of-transhumanism
(tip: Substack app article audio)
I got the impression she wasn't too happy, whether that was with the interview per se or something else going on with her, who knows; hard to judge having not heard/read anything of her's before..
To me she seemed a bit defensive at times, which meant little was achieved in terms of synthesis between you; more thesis Vs antitheses as opposed to something more productive. This could potentially be due to how you both showed up energetically on the day, the subtleties around and aside what was actually said..
Seemed to be alot of wisdom in there though, for e.g. the neutrality piece in regards to (non)reacting to "evil" - opposition, disgust, horror, recoil, all just keeps the pendulum swinging. Yet, when she again brought neutrality to the nature of the elites tech (MRNA) - towards the end of the interview - she lost me; as if it were designed without an intent, hmmmm..
Re your podcasting in general, there seemed to be a disconnect here which was a little jarring and unfamiliar, yet something in the transmission kept me listening to the end..
Be interesting to get her take on that interview
Her interview came across like she didn't want to be interviewed. I understand she's a reporter and has a pedigree. But, even some knucklehead like me knows that are scholarly, well documented accounts of Trauma based mind control and ritualized abuse. Start with "A Nation Betrayed" by Carol Rutz. I can list many more. But, I don't want to be redundant. I would offer to her, "If you don't want to talk about certain things, don't talk about them" that's not the responsibility of the interviewer.
Prickly, defensive, and unwilling to open up about anything. Why on earth did she consent to an interview if she didn't want to talk? Psycho vibes.
That's the question I had. I'm not sure about psycho vibes. But, I was puzzled as to why she wanted to engage with these issues.
Wow. All the smartest people I know merely pride themselves on not being dumb. So when Elizabeth referred to herself as "very, very, very fucking smart," I got excited at the prospect of an hour and a half of truth bombs. Instead, all she delivered were rhetorical evasions. Her juvenile responses to the comments are further evidence of her intellectual depth, or lack thereof. I'm sure this overestimation of her own intellectual abilities, coupled with her pedigree, is what qualified her for a job at Time.
Elizabeth is awesome. Her two part pod with Kunstler is worth listening to. Eco-Fascists is ahead of its time. Her other work looks fascinating and insightful. Jasun is one of the best conversationalists. This is one of the few podcasts I still regularly listen to and why I subscribe. The chemistry seemed to fizzle out around the issue of condemnation. Elizabeth may have a point.
JHK seems to be in same hopium bubble she is in, that new ager are going to change the world and make it all better. He began not allowing comments, or at least certain ones, which is why I unsubbed from his stack. It may be their age, that lends itself to wishful thinking in a broken system? I’m trying not to pay attn to the theatrics for sanity purposes, while accepting that I see “heroes” and “scapegoat(s)” being unfolded in real time. The reveals she mentions were anticipated 100+ yrs ago, by the theosophists so also trying not to fall under that spell. I did check out her blog and it is great, full of common sense and perspective. I’m not sure if it was condemnation and/or criticism of new regime, but she did doublespeak at end about mRNA, which many of DT’s faithful tend to do, and explain away. If it turns out they are “good guys” I will gladly eat my words, though for now, he seems no different or possibly worse than Hitler and Stalin, in lives lost, at least.
Boring interview. SRA probably has a huge amount of operatives pretending to be "victims", grifters, liars etc.. Hard pass
The difference of opinion seemed natural and the authenticity of the interview benefited as a result. Jasun asked most questions that came to mind. Elizabeth sharing her mother’s experience at the hands of Cameron seemed yet more evidence of MK culture, but I do wonder about the silence re all the other doctors etc involved. The demonising narratives focusing on Cameron, Dulles and the Nazi’s feels a bit controlled op; especially as MK is so built-in to the superculture. I was surprised at the end to hear Elizabeth talk so positively about high-level CO Robert Kennedy (maybe I misheard?). He’s all for ‘safer’ vaccines isn’t he? Which means ‘safer’ Mr.NA???? The scientists Elizabeth talks of don’t do hardly ANY research on natural health. A few mixed-messages at the end, especially on ‘ biomedical science’ that jarred with her previous comments on MRNA.
Re the non condemnation thing, frankly I can see why that would put anyone's back up.
Christ very much did condemn, see Mathew 18:16 and - "for those that offend little one who believe in me, in would be better to have a milestone placed around their necks and cast out to sea".
Also on the synagogue of satan, he is condemning the "Jews" of Smyrna.
So I don't see why this has to become an intellectual/ spiritual sticking point.
If nothing else, weren't you (reasonably imho) condemning the Spanish NPCs in the wake of Kittengate?
I wrote about it, as well as in a series of posts on scapegoating; there's nothing in the NT that is sufficiently explicit to counter this: "He who is without sin cast the first stone."
It's Christianity 101.
I'd still feel more than comfortable condemning people that sacrifice or abuse kids. In all honesty I'd feel comfortable dispatching such people. Let God be my judge, and Christ forgive them.
The question is, do you know any? And if not, how does it pertain to anything besides imagination?
Sacrifice? No, and I dont buy-in to 99% of references to it from wider conspriacy sources tbh. Certainly not in the 'ceremonial' contexts that often get bandied around.
That said, I could see how criminal organisations use crimes such as child murder as a way to corrupt and bond people together via mutual collusion, but even then this is probably only in exceptionally rare instances.
But paedophillia is as old as the hills, & for some depraved cases child murder becomes part of that.
Either way, the point being that condemning such crimes is absolutely correct, including from a Christian perspective IMHO.
Re paedos - thankfully no, certainly that i'm aware, but i've known of many. For the most part this is local revelations of dodgy teachers, sports leaders and such forth. They'd get caught, sent down and then released.
I can't imagine how many literal convicted nonces are in any town of 100k, but would imagine it's quite a disturbing number. And that's before unconvicted.
At a certain point i dont think these people can be treated. Repeat offenders would be better treated in the manner of a mad dog quite frankly, which to some extent is what they are to a community.
Again, this is entriely in keeping with Christ's teachings (Mathew 18:6)
Condemning the crime isn't the same as condemning the criminal. If you don't know any pedos personally, then it is all an exercise in imagination.
Neither of us is in any position for dictating policies and if we were, then we would probably be involved in covering up the crimes, if not perpetrating them.
There are no social policy-recommendations that I can think of in the NT, besides "Render unto Caesar", inc Mathew 18:6.
Romans 12:19
I wish you did go back and read the comments after your 2nd THC interview because you would have read maybe a third that were in support of you and your courageous honesty. In my comment, I mentioned that I was grateful to hear you question the truthfulness of some supposed 'truther' players; I had niggling doubts for a while about some aspects of conspiracy interview shows like THC but had never heard anyone call it out as you did. 'Truth against the World', (as the Nazarene proved) can cause those who do not have ears to hear quite a bit of discomfort and they can only rebuff by attacking the messenger.
I'm in awe of the ruling classes. They're all very, very, fucking smart, and multi-talented, and beautiful, and legitimately heroic. We really do live in a meritocracy after all.
Wow US aid for the Nosferatu class!
So she did agree to the co-author tag? Anyway, she definitely was triggered by something and bolted for the door at the end.
More bored and busy pal
Could exit with more grace in that case. And maybe manage your time better if you're that run off your feet.
Cordially GFY
Absolutely 2nd Matrix. Coupled with with a high handed, 'don't you know who I am vibe', found this one a tough listen. She talks a lot about USAID, but won't mention the likes of Peter Thiel and his TheilBucks flooding into the wider "Dissident" narrative.
No, just presenting the likes of Kash Patel, Trump Vance and co as some sort of good actors...
One to avoid frankly.
Maybe so, but some of it she seems genuine and to really believe. Everyone is on different stages of this journey, though with her background I’d think she would be more suspicious of them also? There wasn’t much new, wasn’t familiar with her before but her blog seems well-written and common sense.