Just seen your talk with Aisling, you were fantastic, unbiased and methodical in your assessment of things, what a true journalist should be. I felt Aisling was slightly influenced by her emotions in her judgement. Nonetheless a very good discussion with some very interesting points and I agree with you, everything should be scrutinized and no one should be offended by that.
I enjoyed this conversation and kudos to both of you for keeping it extremely civil and listening to each other’s points of view, even when you strongly disagree on some important issues.
For me it was interesting to observe the stark differences between; someone who can calmly and logically outline an argument and, someone who has been completely blindsided by their emotions. It’s astonishing to me how Aisling is not able to comprehend the sheer flimsiness and logical fallacy-riddled content of her position which includes such highlights as; ‘their injuries prove there was a bomb’, ‘if you can’t prove they are lying they must be telling the truth and, my personal favourite; ‘it’s true/false because I say it is’!!
Nevertheless my gut is telling me that she is not doing this deliberately and this could be a case of the ‘brain mush’ phase I think we inevitably go through when moving from mainstream normie life into a world where there appears to be an almost infinite number of rabbit holes to investigate.
One thing where I do agree with her is that healthy debate is important, so more of this please.
Thank you, Lynne, and I agree on both points - Aisling is (in my view) wrong on many things, but I do certainly believe she is sincere in her beliefs, and I also credit her for being so open to debate. I thought she handled this very well, politely, and respectfully. As you say, we need more of this!
Accusation in the UK is not always 'innocent until proven guilty'. This applies especially to anything to do with abuse of children, for example, even though UK law is indeed based on 'innocent until proven guilty'.
Normally there is a body of evidence to accompany the accusation.
I think Social Meedjaah has encouraged emotional reactions, which if big enough, results in political reaction. This is a very dangerous mechanism - and no, Social Meedjaah censorship is not the answer. This is the only safety valve with a deeply discredited MSM.
You handled yourself with aplomb. Glad to see it didn’t descend into a squabble. Perhaps you even gave her some food for thought. I’m interested to know your thoughts on Richard D Hall’s coverage of the Jo Cox murder. Have you covered this at all in any of your articles?
Hall: as an asset for the last decade.? Or Hall: being exposed by the ‘dark forces’; for hiding like a perv in the bushes, outside a 16 year olds house ( the house belongs to her?? ); being exposed like a creepy crawly underneath a loose brick, on an old wall. Either. Or. Job done, I think, by bought out lamestream, captured courts, and an extremely sick and twisted ‘establishment’.!! No.!??
Now then… what about ‘jihad’ O’Loughlin. Quite a personality, huge ego, and worked in ‘the mainstream’ for six years. Well, she has to be believed , surely. Because if she doesn’t ‘believe’ something occurred: then it simply isn’t true. That’s all the factual evidence we need. If someone’s in a wheelchair, or has lost a finger, then that’s your exclusive proof, that there was a bomb - that went off in Manchester all those years ago: and surgeons have been picking nuts and bolts out of maimed, and dead bodies, ever since. !!
A new benchmark of understanding has been achieved, thanks to the lovely Aisling. ( lots of followers on antisocial media, too, perhaps, that means so much). And must be careful not to trigger anyone with notions of Jihad, being part of a colour revolution. Or MK ultra type deal. No false flags there, guys, okay.!?
Nor is it the Jewish people on the street, (Another old shibboleth, perpetuated by the Warburgs, the Loebs, the Morgans, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers et al, well over a hundred years ago,) who’re causing all the trouble at t’Mill. I wonder if that may have more to do with the Catholic Church, maintaining our abject misery, hell no.!!
Scottish Presbyterians, German Lutherans, Roman Catholics, English Anglicans, (aristocracy too), Christian Zionists, Japanese Buddhists ( swore their allegiance to Hirohito, (during the Second World War), Abrahamic religions, in general. All designed to wind us up, to the max, on a regular basis. It’s poetic.!!
We’re all in the same boat: believing what we’re told; and believing half of what we see, when it suits us. And frankly, I personally, can’t understand taking a perfectly good water tight conspiracy theory to your newspaper editor, to see if it would ‘“wash “‘.?? But apparently, with the lovely ‘Ailing’ O’Loughlin, that would seem to be one of the litmus tests, required to make it ‘believable’ - because ‘the newsroom isn’t the entertainment room” ?? — or something to that effect… ( I’m paraphrasing, here, you get the drift though!?).
And, Miri, you think Aisling should write a book, hmm.? But, who would buy it…??
.. Fawning sycophants. I. Believe.
You both need to seriously up your games. As soon as,really.!!
You have the patience of a saint Miri! I totally admire the way you take the emotion out of discussing these extremely difficult topics & I am trying hard to do the same when am doing so
As for Aisling, I was a big fan but this RDH / Manchester thing has unveiled her either as a stubbornly fallacious person with crap discernment (which she weirdly didn’t seem to be before) or something more nefarious. My gut tells me the latter option & this discussion only cemented that gut feeling. Bringing up jihad was an interesting one when most if not all of the big supposed jihadi attacks were false flags! You did well on the Jewish swerve ball she served you which was also suspicious to me
Hopefully, your softly, softly approach will have some impact, Miri. I do admire how you keep everything on both a kind of minimalist pushing of argument and civil keel.
I wrote this comment on Aisling's post of your podcast.
Aisling, really like what you say about compromise at the end of your discussion with Miri. You mention "the media make it look weird". Yes, when they stage events they are obliged to do that, that is why people who just sit in front of a computer can work them out and the fact that RDH went bothering people is such a clear sign he's an operative - no investigation beyond examining the media material needs to be done. They always TELL you the truth underneath the propaganda. It's called Revelation of the Method (RoM) and it's why I became a "psyop detective" - although I only learnt of RoM two years into my study I can see in hindsight the fact that RoM is an essential part of their MO is what drew me to them because they make the truth so obvious and it's only the magic of propaganda that blinds people to that truth - so much about politics is opaque to me, I'm clueless, but because psyops have such a clear MO I'm drawn to them. If I had to do proper investigative work I wouldn't do it - it suits my lazy nature as they lay it all out before you.
"But it runs even deeper than predictive programming. Some call this Revelation of the Method.
According to Michael Hoffman: first they suppress the counterargument, and when the most opportune time arrives, they reveal aspects of what's really happened, but in a limited hangout sort of way.
We were told the vaccines were harmless, until Pfizer debased their own safety claims, but not before the entire world had been vaccinated.
Lockdown Apologists across the corporate media are now almost unanimous that lockdowns do more harm than good. This is no arbitrary volte-face, but rather a carefully planned sequence of disclosures when the time is ripe.
Michael Hoffman suggests that the ruling elite are giving notice of their supremacy. Declaring themselves virtuoso criminal masterminds, above the law and beyond reproach. But most of all, they are telling you, in no uncertain terms, that you are without recourse, these events are beyond your control, as is your own destiny for that matter. Eventually a sense of apathy and abulia engulfs humanity, demoralizing us to the point of conceding defeat to a system we are powerless to change.
Not that you would ever have restitution. The house is not designed to do its own housekeeping.
Buried deep within their rule of law, is a hidden constitution that states: nothing happens without your consent. In this version of contract law, once the truth is hidden in plain sight, you have agreed to it. There exists someplace an unsigned contract with your unsworn oath on it.
In the end, we're all victims of the same masterstroke, whether keyboard evangelist or state-apologist, everyone is being royally screwed, and it's not so much that they're laughing at you, it's that you're laughing at yourself."
Aisling ‘what about the dead people’ O’Loughlin. No thanks! I’d rather gouge out my eyeballs than listen to her bury logic with emotions again. Her conversation with Iain Davis on Manchester was painful to watch. She just ignored him and just repeatedly said ‘nuts and bolts bomb’ and ‘what about the dead people’. Well … what about all the ‘dead people’ killed by Covid - it must have been a killer virus !
Just seen your talk with Aisling, you were fantastic, unbiased and methodical in your assessment of things, what a true journalist should be. I felt Aisling was slightly influenced by her emotions in her judgement. Nonetheless a very good discussion with some very interesting points and I agree with you, everything should be scrutinized and no one should be offended by that.
Thank you, acki! Much appreciated.
I enjoyed this conversation and kudos to both of you for keeping it extremely civil and listening to each other’s points of view, even when you strongly disagree on some important issues.
For me it was interesting to observe the stark differences between; someone who can calmly and logically outline an argument and, someone who has been completely blindsided by their emotions. It’s astonishing to me how Aisling is not able to comprehend the sheer flimsiness and logical fallacy-riddled content of her position which includes such highlights as; ‘their injuries prove there was a bomb’, ‘if you can’t prove they are lying they must be telling the truth and, my personal favourite; ‘it’s true/false because I say it is’!!
Nevertheless my gut is telling me that she is not doing this deliberately and this could be a case of the ‘brain mush’ phase I think we inevitably go through when moving from mainstream normie life into a world where there appears to be an almost infinite number of rabbit holes to investigate.
One thing where I do agree with her is that healthy debate is important, so more of this please.
Thank you, Lynne, and I agree on both points - Aisling is (in my view) wrong on many things, but I do certainly believe she is sincere in her beliefs, and I also credit her for being so open to debate. I thought she handled this very well, politely, and respectfully. As you say, we need more of this!
Loved your chat and respect both sides. That will do for now.
Thanks Robert :)
A point to consider.
Accusation in the UK is not always 'innocent until proven guilty'. This applies especially to anything to do with abuse of children, for example, even though UK law is indeed based on 'innocent until proven guilty'.
Normally there is a body of evidence to accompany the accusation.
I think Social Meedjaah has encouraged emotional reactions, which if big enough, results in political reaction. This is a very dangerous mechanism - and no, Social Meedjaah censorship is not the answer. This is the only safety valve with a deeply discredited MSM.
You handled yourself with aplomb. Glad to see it didn’t descend into a squabble. Perhaps you even gave her some food for thought. I’m interested to know your thoughts on Richard D Hall’s coverage of the Jo Cox murder. Have you covered this at all in any of your articles?
Thank you, Martin! I think RDH's coverage on Jo Cox is similar to other things, mostly true but then undermined with misdirection. Here's my take on her "murder".... https://miriaf.co.uk/spooks-sell-state-sponsored-suicide/
Hall: as an asset for the last decade.? Or Hall: being exposed by the ‘dark forces’; for hiding like a perv in the bushes, outside a 16 year olds house ( the house belongs to her?? ); being exposed like a creepy crawly underneath a loose brick, on an old wall. Either. Or. Job done, I think, by bought out lamestream, captured courts, and an extremely sick and twisted ‘establishment’.!! No.!??
Now then… what about ‘jihad’ O’Loughlin. Quite a personality, huge ego, and worked in ‘the mainstream’ for six years. Well, she has to be believed , surely. Because if she doesn’t ‘believe’ something occurred: then it simply isn’t true. That’s all the factual evidence we need. If someone’s in a wheelchair, or has lost a finger, then that’s your exclusive proof, that there was a bomb - that went off in Manchester all those years ago: and surgeons have been picking nuts and bolts out of maimed, and dead bodies, ever since. !!
A new benchmark of understanding has been achieved, thanks to the lovely Aisling. ( lots of followers on antisocial media, too, perhaps, that means so much). And must be careful not to trigger anyone with notions of Jihad, being part of a colour revolution. Or MK ultra type deal. No false flags there, guys, okay.!?
Nor is it the Jewish people on the street, (Another old shibboleth, perpetuated by the Warburgs, the Loebs, the Morgans, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers et al, well over a hundred years ago,) who’re causing all the trouble at t’Mill. I wonder if that may have more to do with the Catholic Church, maintaining our abject misery, hell no.!!
Scottish Presbyterians, German Lutherans, Roman Catholics, English Anglicans, (aristocracy too), Christian Zionists, Japanese Buddhists ( swore their allegiance to Hirohito, (during the Second World War), Abrahamic religions, in general. All designed to wind us up, to the max, on a regular basis. It’s poetic.!!
We’re all in the same boat: believing what we’re told; and believing half of what we see, when it suits us. And frankly, I personally, can’t understand taking a perfectly good water tight conspiracy theory to your newspaper editor, to see if it would ‘“wash “‘.?? But apparently, with the lovely ‘Ailing’ O’Loughlin, that would seem to be one of the litmus tests, required to make it ‘believable’ - because ‘the newsroom isn’t the entertainment room” ?? — or something to that effect… ( I’m paraphrasing, here, you get the drift though!?).
And, Miri, you think Aisling should write a book, hmm.? But, who would buy it…??
.. Fawning sycophants. I. Believe.
You both need to seriously up your games. As soon as,really.!!
By suggesting Aisling write a book, I think Miri was taking the piss. I also think Miri's game is generally 'up'.
You have the patience of a saint Miri! I totally admire the way you take the emotion out of discussing these extremely difficult topics & I am trying hard to do the same when am doing so
As for Aisling, I was a big fan but this RDH / Manchester thing has unveiled her either as a stubbornly fallacious person with crap discernment (which she weirdly didn’t seem to be before) or something more nefarious. My gut tells me the latter option & this discussion only cemented that gut feeling. Bringing up jihad was an interesting one when most if not all of the big supposed jihadi attacks were false flags! You did well on the Jewish swerve ball she served you which was also suspicious to me
Hopefully, your softly, softly approach will have some impact, Miri. I do admire how you keep everything on both a kind of minimalist pushing of argument and civil keel.
I wrote this comment on Aisling's post of your podcast.
Aisling, really like what you say about compromise at the end of your discussion with Miri. You mention "the media make it look weird". Yes, when they stage events they are obliged to do that, that is why people who just sit in front of a computer can work them out and the fact that RDH went bothering people is such a clear sign he's an operative - no investigation beyond examining the media material needs to be done. They always TELL you the truth underneath the propaganda. It's called Revelation of the Method (RoM) and it's why I became a "psyop detective" - although I only learnt of RoM two years into my study I can see in hindsight the fact that RoM is an essential part of their MO is what drew me to them because they make the truth so obvious and it's only the magic of propaganda that blinds people to that truth - so much about politics is opaque to me, I'm clueless, but because psyops have such a clear MO I'm drawn to them. If I had to do proper investigative work I wouldn't do it - it suits my lazy nature as they lay it all out before you.
https://www.henrymakow.com/2022/06/revelation-of-the-method.html
"But it runs even deeper than predictive programming. Some call this Revelation of the Method.
According to Michael Hoffman: first they suppress the counterargument, and when the most opportune time arrives, they reveal aspects of what's really happened, but in a limited hangout sort of way.
We were told the vaccines were harmless, until Pfizer debased their own safety claims, but not before the entire world had been vaccinated.
Lockdown Apologists across the corporate media are now almost unanimous that lockdowns do more harm than good. This is no arbitrary volte-face, but rather a carefully planned sequence of disclosures when the time is ripe.
Michael Hoffman suggests that the ruling elite are giving notice of their supremacy. Declaring themselves virtuoso criminal masterminds, above the law and beyond reproach. But most of all, they are telling you, in no uncertain terms, that you are without recourse, these events are beyond your control, as is your own destiny for that matter. Eventually a sense of apathy and abulia engulfs humanity, demoralizing us to the point of conceding defeat to a system we are powerless to change.
Not that you would ever have restitution. The house is not designed to do its own housekeeping.
Buried deep within their rule of law, is a hidden constitution that states: nothing happens without your consent. In this version of contract law, once the truth is hidden in plain sight, you have agreed to it. There exists someplace an unsigned contract with your unsworn oath on it.
In the end, we're all victims of the same masterstroke, whether keyboard evangelist or state-apologist, everyone is being royally screwed, and it's not so much that they're laughing at you, it's that you're laughing at yourself."
Aisling ‘what about the dead people’ O’Loughlin. No thanks! I’d rather gouge out my eyeballs than listen to her bury logic with emotions again. Her conversation with Iain Davis on Manchester was painful to watch. She just ignored him and just repeatedly said ‘nuts and bolts bomb’ and ‘what about the dead people’. Well … what about all the ‘dead people’ killed by Covid - it must have been a killer virus !
Really good interview Miri.