You got a loicense for that Christianity moite?
Is he the dude in the reflection when Assange was arrested?
Not sure. Looks pretty similar though.
At the time a few were saying Bill Barr which seems kinda far fetched.
Think it's likely more some eurofag in the area.
See something, say something anyway, just putting it out there.
Fair call. Missed quite a few breads care of work and family stuff so didn't see much of a resolution to who it may have been. Still in catch up mode.
This whole Notre Dame thing is pretty fucked up and seems to have filled breads quickly.
CDAN Blind Items Revealed #38 hasn't sat well for me since seeing it.
Wonder how shilly CDAN is seeing as a lot of what's come out from them has been pretty accurate.
Seems some of the recent construction work left it very vulnerable to this happening.
Not like it was the first church in France struck, but it was the hardest felt thus far.
It's either trying to erase the legacy that once stood to "renew" as such, or just to wipe the slate and cover up all the nasty shit that may be exposed after Assange being out in the open.
Did you read that blind though?
It made way too much sense honestly and gave me a sick feeling that there may be truth to it.
I've been an advocate of Assange and what he/wikileaks do and have been doing. But now I question if there has been severe bias due to a long standing financial relationship.
It shits me to say because it makes me question what I believe.
" May 22, 2018
I really wanted to call this one full circle, but think I have used that name before.This involves three women and a few men, but it is the way this all came to be which is the most interesting thing. The first woman we will call A. You all know her and she ended up with the job. She was not the first or even the second choice, but in the long run, she has worked out well and looking back, probably the best choice.
A (former A- list mostly television actress) was chosen by a guy named M. M is one of those guys who has a ton of money and throws enough in the air until women close their eyes and shut out all thought until the sexual act is over. A always seems to need money and has openly admitted in the past to exchanging sex for money. Meanwhile M has kind of collection of one type of woman he wants to sleep with and keeps a running total of them. He has told friends he is up to almost 100. It is a special kind of celebrity.
Anyway, the first choice was kind of unusual. The first choice was B. The reason they wanted B is because she spends a great deal of time in the country where she was needed and famous enough, but not too famous where it would work. Finally, she too is known to accept money for arrangements, but here was the sticking point. Usually, even though she is a permanent A list singer in that country, she is the one bearding for lesser known people and never actually has sex with them. They pay to be seen with her and she will live with them, but there is no sex. According to the demands of the ultimate employer, he wanted to be able to have sex with the woman chosen.
The second choice was an interesting choice. We will call her C. She is an interesting choice. She lives in the country where she was needed. C also fit the bill of famous, but not too famous. She was perfectly willing to have sex when needed and had done that frequently to land many of her reality jobs/singing gigs. What ultimately disqualified her was N. Apparently N had been instructed by his employers that C was being claimed, yes that was the word used, by someone who she had yachted with in the past and he wanted her available to him when needed. N and M are best buddies.
So, in the end, A was chosen and has been doing it for several years at this point. She has made over $1M for her work. Will she end up going to jail? I think it is more likely she will end up killed rather than jailed.
A: Pamela Anderson
B: Kylie Minogue
C: Nicole Scherzinger
M: George Soros
N: Julian Assange"
The M and N connection is really spoopy, but ultimately reinforced by the A connection.
Makes you wonder how much wikileaks doesn't publish if true.
It has of course.
But being bedfellows with somebody like Soros is never going to end well and the payoff of being a double agent in that scenario is nowhere near the risk. The thing that sits terribly with me and kind of reinforces the fact is the Pamela connection. She would also have to then be a double agent if you were you go with that rhetoric.
I don't want to get into too much mental gymnastics to justify defending Assange being the best guy possible because I want him to be, I just want to take in the what's out there and see where it all lands.
So I'm not trying to hide from some of the stuff out there or sensor it to fit a narrative. I want to know as much as I can and hopefully the puzzle ends up complete at some stage.
Same reason I'm conflicted.
I thought I had a good idea of what was going on until I saw that blind. And it's the ONLY thing that has me wondering WTF. Or what more to this whole story is missing.
I think there are other key pieces to this puzzle and it's put everything into a very grey area for now.
I don't think I can trust a lot of what happens with Assange (and wikileaks has already been accused of being comped for a while).
I just hope the truth makes it to the light of day and all of this shadowy bullshit can disappear forever.