Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
555soul

Carl Sagan Murder | Assassination

27 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Was Carl Sagan murdered? Perhaps an exotic biotoxin? Assassination?

The man who warned you that we live in an age based on science and technology and people don't understand it.

Less than 50% of all Americans understand the earth revolves around the sun and about 25% of Americans recieve a passing grade in basic science.

His final interview before death.

If people don't understand science, who is shaping our lives if no one is qualified to understand the science and ask questions?

This is somewhat conspiracy and somewhat alternative history. The man was diagnosed with a rare blood disease and then died 2 years later. He was asking, who is running the science and technology in a democracy where no one is asking the questions.

He warned us to be skeptical of those in authority and to ask questions of them and the science they presented, and he also spoke from a perspective of the Constitution and founding fathers.

What would he have said as a celebrity in response to the Global Warming movement? And how influential could he have been in that movement and its skepticism? He was skeptical of UFO's being of alien origin. As am I, based on history, esotericism and natural science.

I am studied in natural science and I apply it daily: physics, quantum mechanics, atomic dynamics, unified biology, linear algebra, cryptography, unified field theory, astral physics, astro physics and astronomy, acoustic dynamics, electronics and more. There is a wealth of free information democraticly available.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He died of cancer. I think that was well documented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Why do I think of the AGW scare when I see this? All the public "evidence" seems to just be accepted and amplified by glossy "documentaries" and commercial ads. There is scientific dissent which is being ignored, that the regular folks aren't being informed about.

edit to add...I do have to agree that the state of education for kids in the US is deplorable. Despite massive increases in funding, the system graduates incompetents, totally dependent on the "system". It's very disconcerting to see first hand.

Edited by mrbusdriver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was Carl Sagan murdered? Perhaps an exotic biotoxin? Assassination?

Less than 50% of all Americans understand the earth revolves around the sun and about 25% of Americans recieve a passing grade in basic science.

God I hope youre kidding about that. Could I get a source for your statistics? Im homeschooling my son and Id like to show him the importance of learning and understanding science.

As for Sagan being murdered, it wouldnt suprise me, but it being 100% natural wouldnt suprise me any either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is scientific dissent which is being ignored, that the regular folks aren't being informed about.

Wow! You are right!

There's a whole 2.6% of climatologists who don't agree!

:lol:

The best part about this "conspiracy" is the OP doesn't even try to come up with a real motive, or any real evidence. It's just a "maybe it happened" kind of thing.

If people don't understand science, who is shaping our lives if no one is qualified to understand the science and ask questions?

Ehh, let me think. Oh yeah, that's right, those who do understand basic science!

What would he have said as a celebrity in response to the Global Warming movement?

Oh wait, what's this?

Carl Sagan was an early supporter of Global Warming

Carl Sagan on Global Warming

Oohh, ouch. Looks like we made some dead wrong assumptions about Sagan without doing even some basic research, eh?

Next time, start formulating a little more and start doing a little research.

Cheers,

SQLserver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

God I hope youre kidding about that. Could I get a source for your statistics? Im homeschooling my son and Id like to show him the importance of learning and understanding science.

As for Sagan being murdered, it wouldnt suprise me, but it being 100% natural wouldnt suprise me any either.

Charlie Rose interview, linked in the OP. I believe that was in '94 or '96.

I am of the same mind on the murder conspiracy. Considering the interview, I feel his death to be natural from his perspective. Considering the realities of the world and the nature of the beast, I would not be surprised.

Saving space on replies -

As for the cancer up top - cancer can be manufactured, and a person can be poisoned with cancer. Natural occurence or an unnatural occurence. Having said that, when it comes to nature, is cancer even at all that natural. Research the Castro cancer plot, and watch the film JFK. The cancer research alluded to in the Garrison research had to do with a covert CIA team manufacturing cancer to poison Castro with. It has since been well documented, and whether hyou chose to invest in those documents are of course left in your hands.

That's why there was rats in cages in JFK by Oliver Stone. It was hinted to, but not put in the spotlight.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
God I hope youre kidding about that. Could I get a source for your statistics? Im homeschooling my son and Id like to show him the importance of learning and understanding science.

It was something Dr. Sagan's interviewer quoted during the interview, MI.

If you're homeschooling your child...I can tell you you stand a good chance of doing a hell of alot better than our public school system does.

Bravo to you! That's a labor of love if ever there was one.

As for Sagan being murdered, it wouldnt suprise me, but it being 100% natural wouldnt suprise me any either

Well...

It is well known that Dr. Sagan contracted a rare form of cancer, and his treatments took their toll, as they generally do.

One way or another, it's not natural...but the idea of his murder is almost ludicrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The best part about this "conspiracy" is the OP doesn't even try to come up with a real motive, or any real evidence. It's just a "maybe it happened" kind of thing.

It is there in plain English, you simply missed it.

It's best to do one's own gift wrapping of information. I wouldn't invest 100% into any information that has been gift wrapped, polished and handed to me. That's what got so many people into trouble in the first place - leasing one's thinking to third parties.

Changing gears -

I find it interesting that he's towing the line in the global warming debate and the nuclear debate with Ted Turner on CNN in a Ted Turnder led interview, one-on-one. When is the last time you saw Ted Turner interview anyone on CNN?

He towed the line in its entirety within that interview, making all of the right political moves as a scientist, and then in later interviews after he had been diagnosed, he did a 180 degree turnaround and was advocating free thinking from a sciences perspective and began or continued warning people in that interview. Shortly after, the cancer ran its course and he was dead.

Shortly after he was dead, global warming hysteria began making headway. Sagan was a pop figure scientist, a celebrity physicist - go find his humor filled television show clips. We don't see that on television in gift wrapped form nowadays. If a guy such as that, with great influence got in the way of the global warming pseudo science and reality terraforming, it could have caused a lot of Industrial political trouble.

As a good scientist and scientific mind, maybe ask yourself if its possible to manufacture bone marrow based cancer. I've been asking myself that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't smoking gun conspiracy. It's a novel idea I had.

Ideally Industrial assassination is done quietly and appears as accidental. The best assassinations you never suspect or even hear of.

When it's a clear political figure, that is where the assassination is mostly public - although start researching where assumed 'natural' deaths occur after an Industrial altercation that involved government. Government isn't the enemy, it is Industry. Goverment is the intermediary between Industry and the Citizenry.

Biologists and physicists are highly accident prone and suicidal, especially when working for certain corporations and Industry. A few even have heart attacks and aneurysms - I'll leave you to your 14th century historical reading on that front. It's a very old game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He towed the line in its entirety within that interview, making all of the right political moves as a scientist, and then in later interviews after he had been diagnosed, he did a 180 degree turnaround and was advocating free thinking from a sciences perspective and began or continued warning people in that interview.

Ehhh, no. Sagan died accepting that global warming is a challenge humanity has to face.

You may be confused: He advocated skeptical inquiry until he died, that is true. However, a skeptical inquiry of man made global warming led Sagan to conclude that global warming is a real threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ehhh, no. Sagan died accepting that global warming is a challenge humanity has to face.

You may be confused: He advocated skeptical inquiry until he died, that is true. However, a skeptical inquiry of man made global warming led Sagan to conclude that global warming is a real threat.

Global warming is a challenge. A challenge doesn't corellate to a cause and effect relationship. Global warming is a threat. That threat doesn't translate to man made threat.

Today we have an imaginary line based on politics drawn between weather, science and geopolitics - similar to what he was in tune with during his political participation on the nuclear debate, as a pop political philosopher.

He towed a pop packaged version of Global Warming and Nuclear debate in his interview with Ted Turner. His spirit in later years after being diagnosed with cancer was outspoken towards the packaged science he was advocating earlier.

Whether or not that was his unique message doesn't matter. That voice supported the political agenda of the day and it made him by default a member of a political agenda or popular sales pitch, because he was a popular figure. If he wasn't on board with the agenda, he wouldn't have been interviewed on the topic.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here he is pimping politics with Ted Turner.

So we were destroying the ozone layer with our deoderant? The Sagan towards the end was not the Sagan during this interview, he had grown - and in that growth he wasn't being used to pimp politics, it was his final note and his goodbye.

No more career to build, no more agenda to pimp for celebrity or tv deals or grants or book deals - the big finish, the big nothing.

Ted Turner isn't here to help you or save the planet, he's here for Ted Turner. This is a politics package for a network that was about to delve heavily into government and Industry based mass communications. He was showing he could pimp political agenda with his clout - the man himself, in the trenches.

Pseudo Science

The interview itself IS pseudo science. It is using a popular science figure or personality and their perspective to coral the public into a political agenda. This interview is PERFECT as far as what he warned against.

Sagan was at Ground Zero for the pseudo science war being launched on America and elsewhere. He warned that science is the new religion.

The Ted Turner piece is a pilot for what was to come in terms of Science, Generals of Military, and all the other pseudo talking heads of the political agenda Hydra.

Turner is flexing and showing his audience of power what he can do with his new concept. Most of us are the recievers of that concept, daily.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i'm certain you realise, it is impossable to establish a direct causal relationship between CO2 and temperature, however all recorded evidence going back many thousands of years indicates that the two track each other exactly. This is the basis of the Global Warming theory. Since we have increased the atmospheric CO2 by a half it is very reasonable to extrapolate that temperatures are rising and will continue doing so.

There is a strong will to believe that man has nothing to do with it, and this is part of a psychological unwillingness to accept that we can be to blame for what will inevitably cause the demise of a signifcant proportion of life on earth. The last great extinction is happening now and it is manmade.

For me 555soul you sound paranoid.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He died of cancer. I think that was well documented.

Actually, Dr. Sagan died of pneumonia (more probably, respiratory failure due to pneumonia due to a severely depressed immune system due to treatment of whatever the rare blood / marrow cancer he had was).

This is likely similar to the large majority of the thousands and thousands of people who "die of cancer" every year.

That fact may change the whole basis for this particular CT! Maybe it was just that they administred to him some pneumonia...somehow...utilizing the fact that that chemical destruction of his immune sytem was in place!

God...

Or maybe it was a typical tragic death due to modern medical treatments for degenerative disease.

Why would anyone murder Dr. Sagan?

What did he do?

He merely produced some of the greatest scientific educational material of the day, inspired by his perception of the abject lack in scientific understanding produced by a failing educational system. He was merely one of the first and certainly most outspoken advocates of fixing something that was obviously in the degenerative throws of breakage, and he was right.

That situation still exists, and is absolutely no secret today. So, why kill him?

Personally, the idea is ludicrous, as there's certainly nothing to indicate such a thing, and everything to indicate that he died from typical resultants of modern medical treatment concerning diseases like that which he had.

As to his ideas back then?

Well, he changed his tune on nuclear winter in his later years, and I have the strangest suspicion that he'd have changed his tune regarding man-made global warming as well. He was all for changing his mind when the evidence suggested that he might be in error, or when new and better information came up...but we'll never know, of course, since we lost him.

And God knows I hope this doesn't turn into another MMGW thread.

I have the sneaking suspicion that it is, and that this will be a place to go and have a laugh a couple decades from now when the present cooling trend has been present for many years, and people realize that they hysteria was nonsense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Why would anyone murder Dr. Sagan?

What did he do?

He merely produced some of the greatest scientific educational material of the day, inspired by his perception of the abject lack in scientific understanding produced by a failing educational system. He was merely one of the first and certainly most outspoken advocates of fixing something that was obviously in the degenerative throws of breakage, and he was right.

That situation still exists, and is absolutely no secret today. So, why kill him?

You asked and answered your own question, and provided the motive. The motive is within your own answer. The resulting benefit is also in your answer. All answers are within.

There is a power vacuum that surrounds the status quo. Those who maintain the quo maintain the power. You said yourself he was the first and most outspoken advocates of altering that power structure.

Perhaps the system is in hte degenerative throws of breakage because people desire it to be in the degenerative throws of breakage?

It is true from your perspective that the situation still exists and he is dead. Your last question was answered by yourself in the preceding line. To preserve that situation.

To preserve that power structure and what it hoped to deliver in the coming years. Those coming years are here today.

The older a man gets, the more power and authority he is percieved to have. If that power and authority fits the quo of the power state, it is permissable.

If that wisdom falls into line with independent free thought, it threatens the power structure, therefore it must be removed and assassinated.

Carl Sagan would have been a powerful source of independent thought in an age where the desire is to allow the science to be handed down unquestioned by the scientific power state and the science soothsayers. Those are valid reasons I see on the table.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

For me 555soul you sound paranoid.

Br Cornelius

You are in a conspiracy theory forum. Not a conspiracy no-theory forum. This is a place to construct conspiracy theory.

If paranoid translates to hyper-awareness of the world that abounds ones self, and not waiting for the television to tell me what I am thinking, feeling, seeing and experiencing. Yes.

In that regard you would be correct, I am very paranoid. That paranoia is measured against a society that has been made to be docile of mind, therefore in using my mind to construct theory rather than waiting for plausible scenarios to be delivered to me via cable television and newspaper, yes - I am hyper aware.

It has less to do with hyper awareness than it does to do with the manufactured docility of man.

In this forum I hope to disregard conspiracy no-theory, suggest conspiracy theory and arrive at conspiracy fact - through facts, foundations and research based upon natural science.

That very mode of thinking is that which might have had Dr. Sagan killed. He advocated it, he had a familiar and likeable face and towards the end of his life he wasn't afraid to get up onto the tube and tell you how he felt.

He warned you of the New Age techno profits of the scientific power state and then he died. A little reminiscent of Howard Beale, with a little less fire than before, because his fire had been replaced by cancer and the fires of chemotherapy.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think the likelyhood of Carl Sagan been killed for speaking out is vanishingly small. The likelyhood that he died of old age via cancer is very high. Therefore I see very little chance of a conspiracy, and see your interpretation as been paranoid.

Carl Sagan saw the decline of rational precise thinking and warned of the consequences. Like any rational person he believed the only way to make informed choices was to understand the factors effecting those choices - without that you have to relie on a self appointed elite to make those choices for you. His warning was about the consequences of allowing yourself to be stupid and that is what he saw the population becoming. There is nothing radical about his message - just plain common sense.

I loved Carl Sagan and his series "Cosmos" was what got me into science. However he was also a deeply conservative thinker and would have been disgusted to be associated with any fringe CT thinking. He is not ours to claim for our cause, he had his own trail to blaze.

I am a fully signed up member of the CT oddsquad, but I really think this is a leap to far.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You asked and answered your own question, and provided the motive. The motive is within your own answer. The resulting benefit is also in your answer. All answers are within.

There is a power vacuum that surrounds the status quo. Those who maintain the quo maintain the power. You said yourself he was the first and most outspoken advocates of altering that power structure.

Perhaps the system is in hte degenerative throws of breakage because people desire it to be in the degenerative throws of breakage?

It is true from your perspective that the situation still exists and he is dead. Your last question was answered by yourself in the preceding line. To preserve that situation.

To preserve that power structure and what it hoped to deliver in the coming years. Those coming years are here today.

The older a man gets, the more power and authority he is percieved to have. If that power and authority fits the quo of the power state, it is permissable.

If that wisdom falls into line with independent free thought, it threatens the power structure, therefore it must be removed and assassinated.

Carl Sagan would have been a powerful source of independent thought in an age where the desire is to allow the science to be handed down unquestioned by the scientific power state and the science soothsayers. Those are valid reasons I see on the table.

You know, this has become an interesting discussion!

I think there's a sparring match between you and Br. Cornelius, and the oddity is that I can see some valid argument between the both of you.

As to you comments above, I certainly understand what you're saying...

However, I find a certain curiousity in the idea that someone might want to kill Dr. Sagan for being an outspoken critic against that which was obviously broken back then, still is, and to which many, many others of acedemic astuteness have commented upon since...they being alive.

One would think that if "they" wanted to make a point, they'd have made their point in more obvious fashion that to craftily cancer him to death and make it look like it was just another death by degenerative disease.

If you want to make a point, you make a point. As it was, no one noticed! And many more academics have been boldly stating what he first began stating all those years ago. Not a very effective deterrent, I should think.

If there's a power vacuum that surrounds the status quo, why hasn't that power vacuum silenced the rest of us?

You said...

Carl Sagan would have been a powerful source of independent thought in an age where the desire is to allow the science to be handed down unquestioned by the scientific power state and the science soothsayers. Those are valid reasons I see on the table.

You see, Dr. Sagan WAS a powerful source of independent thought in an age where the desire was to allow science to be handed down unquestioned (his own shifts in position as years went on was a testimony to his paradigm).

He still is such a voice. And many have adopted his thinking. I certainly agreed with him then, and I, nor any of the many many who do so today, are dead...killed, murdered, or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the likelyhood of Carl Sagan been killed for speaking out is vanishingly small.

Amazingly, I am agreeing with a self-avowed member of the CT oddsquad!

The likelyhood that he died of old age via cancer is very high.

Actually, I would contend that his death was not of old age, as I know no one, save maybe a kid, who considers 62 "old".

I also mentioned that he succumbed to pneumonia...which was very likely cancer treatment related, but not cancer caused.

Therefore I see very little chance of a conspiracy...

I don't think that there's much chance of conspiracy here myself, for reasons previously mentioned.

Carl Sagan saw the decline of rational precise thinking and warned of the consequences. Like any rational person he believed the only way to make informed choices was to understand the factors effecting those choices - without that you have to relie on a self appointed elite to make those choices for you. His warning was about the consequences of allowing yourself to be stupid and that is what he saw the population becoming. There is nothing radical about his message - just plain common sense.

Absolutely agreed.

I loved Carl Sagan and his series "Cosmos" was what got me into science. However he was also a deeply conservative thinker and would have been disgusted to be associated with any fringe CT thinking.

Also absolutely agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

LOL. Oh dear... my husband and I knew Carl Sagan vaguely when my husband taught at Cornell. He had a special secretary-- who I knew much better-- who was in charge of deflecting UFO reports to the physics department.

He would have gotten a big kick out of someone's theorizing that he died so melodramatically. But he died of some sort of blood cancer (leukemia-related). His last months were spent out in Seattle, surrounded by his family (he had 5 kids and it was a nice family). He was very well liked so there were regular updates on his health circulated among his friends while he was ill and people visited him a lot over the course of bone marrow transplants, etc. There was nothing suspicious about his death. Too bad he couldn't have lived longer though-- I think he was in his 60's when he passed on.

For the record... he was very kind to the people who worked for him. When my friend, his UFO secretary, lost her dad he took an afternoon off to go to the funeral to offer his respects. Decent guy as well as a scientist and spokesman for astronomy..

Edited by Siara

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are in a conspiracy theory forum. Not a conspiracy no-theory forum. This is a place to construct conspiracy theory.

This is somewhat telling...

This may be the place to construct a conspiracy theory (Lord knows that's true enough), however, it is also the place to dissect them and debunk them...

In this forum I hope to disregard conspiracy no-theory, suggest conspiracy theory and arrive at conspiracy fact - through facts, foundations and research based upon natural science.

And that is decidedly non-scientific.

Disregarding conspiracy no-therory is tantamount to saying your mind is closed to the opposite view, which abjectly disregards something that is probably correct.

You want to arrive at conspiracy fact after proposing a conspiracy hypothesis?

Actually what you should want to do is test the hypothesis and accept what comes from that.

The first thing you want to do is to propose an hypothesis, which you have.

Advancing that to theory will require what you advocate above...discovering facts, and foundations through research and experimentation so as to provide data which suppoorts the hypothesis, can be verified and repeated if applicable, and then you advance your hypothesis to the theory state.

Advancing that to the fact state...incontrovertible is a long step from the theoretical state.

CTs have a propensity to be highly non-scientific as they are...but your premise as stated above seems highly biased toward disregarding the opposing point of view, and facts to the contrary of the hypothetical.

You have an idea about a CT in the case of Carl Sagan's death.

That's all right.

I think the idea is somewhat valid...but proving that is going to be a matter of a long process of deriving some substantiation for the idea that Dr. Sagan was murdered rather than the established facts which show he had contracted a rare form of marrow-based cancer and died from pneumonia in a hospital in Seattle, Washington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL. Oh dear... my husband and I knew Carl Sagan vaguely when my husband taught at Cornell. He had a special secretary-- who I knew much better-- who was in charge of deflecting UFO reports to the physics department.

He would have gotten a big kick out of someone's theorizing that he died so melodramatically. But he died of some sort of blood cancer (leukemia-related). His last months were spent out in Seattle, surrounded by his family (he had 5 kids and it was a nice family). He was very well liked so there were regular updates on his health circulated among his friends while he was ill and people visited him a lot over the course of bone marrow transplants, etc. There was nothing suspicious about his death. Too bad he couldn't have lived longer though-- I think he was in his 60's when he passed on.

For the record... he was very kind to the people who worked for him. When my friend, his UFO secretary, lost her dad he took an afternoon off to go to the funeral to offer his respects. Decent guy as well as a scientist and spokesman for astronomy..

I have no doubts about all you say, Siara.

And you're right. He would've very likely gotten a big kick out of the melodrama associated with a CT surrounding his death...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Carl Sagan but be the first to say 'where's the evidence that I was murdered'

followed by 'and How can I say that, where's the evidence ghosts exist?'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Disregarding conspiracy no-therory is tantamount to saying your mind is closed to the opposite view, which abjectly disregards something that is probably correct.

If the opposing view is that there was no conspiracy, I can flip a switch on the television. The status quo. The status quo and the state sponsored version is no-theory.

Why waste time with ditto heads?

It isn't tantamount to being closed to no-theory. I've heard no-theory. I accept that's the popular view. Now I want the other possibilities.

You want to arrive at conspiracy fact after proposing a conspiracy hypothesis?

Actually what you should want to do is test the hypothesis and accept what comes from that.

If by test the hypothesis and accept what comes from that intends to say I should state a theory and see how everyone feels? No thanks.

I don't do group think, I don't do group consensus.

I do ideas. The bigger, the better. The more unbelievable but possible, the better.

If by test the hypothesis you intend to say: What are natural biotoxins that produce cancer? Has cancer ever been produced in a lab setting? What was the position change on environmental sciences Sagan had? What grants did Sagan recieve and then stop recieving? What people was Sagan involved with shortly before his death. What were the mechanics of the Castro cancer plot. What are ways of inducing lukemia and pneumonia? What would be the mechanics of inducing that lukemia or pneumonia?

The best murder would involve the person never understanding they had been murdered. The ultimate result would be, that they were dead. No questions. No suspicions.

Most people will be all to ready to state, Mr. Sagan died of natural causes - I saw it on the television and read it in the newspaper and that is the sum total. That is most people.

Because of most people, I am here at Unexplained Mysteries asking questions that most people wouldn't be able to tolerate hearing because it clashes with the comfort of their reality. Most people live in a fragile world of fragile reality, afraid to ask questions.

If anyone would like to do conspiracy theory, tell me how we could have killed Carl Sagan and have it appear as accidental or natural. It's a simple challenge and I am certain an assassin is capable of doing it, and a corporate interest or global interest is capable of financing it. It's only a matter of time before anyone can do anything once enough energy is directed towards it.

Most minds won't even allow themselves to imagine such things. I'm here for the minds that will imagine such things.

If there is one thing I've learned from conspiracy, it's this. Be willing to do what the next guy won't. Be willing to do something so outrageous that it's unbelievable, and no matter who anyone in on it tells, no one will believe it. Do something so unbelievable right in front of everyone, no one will believe what they are seeing, because their belief systems and senses of reality are so fragile, it becomes unimaginable to them.

Do that, and you can get away with practicallly anything. The only person who can stop you is something who thinks like you do.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Learn about the Castro cancer plot.

Then understand if a cancer plot was launched, a lukemia plot, a pneumonia plot and any other natural death plot can be engineered by a mechanic.

You'll likely need to see the Castro plot as produced by the Discovery Channel to have a sense of belief in terms of what's possible. I don't need that documentary for my mind to operate, but it certainly was helpful in bringing me up to speed on the possibilities already attempted. When it comes to wealth and power, I consider all possibilities possible, and I'm hoping to connect with similar minds.

Edited by 555soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.