Wikipedia Sarch Link

Search results

Tuesday, January 1, 2013

WHAT FACTORS ARE NEEDED FOR ATTEMPTING TO PROVE THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL CAN EXIST IN TWO PRINCIPAL RESIDENCES SIMULTANEOUSLY?

To even attempt to carry out such a mission, there are certain essential factors that have to be in place, such as: first factor is the availability for influencing the political process for the highest elected office in the land, the second factor, be sure that there is the ready 215% percent support of a certain Mogul known for his own “brand” of standards (see the post WHEN DISTRESSED CONDTIONS ARE ALLOWED TO OCCUR, AMENDED), and who is known for publicly voicing total support for and confidence in the methodology of a “critical” lieutenant (of MidAmerican Energy) even after being caught in the midst of unethical conduct and later had to resign), third rely on the thinking that advertising is a viable avenue to be relied on for achieving ANY desired outcome whether ethical or unethical, fourth be sure that if any collateral damage results (such as an individual whose identity is being decimated) either have such “collateral damage” “neutralized” (or contained) as well as rendered defenseless and fifth ensure that a cover-up mindset is established in the environment of choice. With these factors critical to the success of such a venture firmly in place the task at hand can be pursued because implementation is the most difficult part in this venture since obtaining the needed ingredients is not difficult once a target is selected.
Assuming all the necessary “boring” details such as identity switching/replacement in various locations, layoffs of those familiar with the “real” history, making quid pro deals, removing/replacing critical individuals are established etc., the main act can be carried out to convince the public of the new “truth”.
If you are in an environment that even considered pursuing such a challenge, public opinion is key to this bold undertaking in a type of reverse “Robin Hood” gamble of sorts and anything that even remotely threatens to convey a different picture of “Utopia” than otherwise portrayed must be carefully managed. For example, if the headline story in a certain popular daily/weekend Business Publication from July 18, 2012 focuses on the CEO from this State who embezzled approximately $215 million of his clients funds and is reported to have stated that famous line or sorts from a sitcom of years gone by in effect “the regulators made me do it”; ensure that in that same edition a story is carried, in a remote section (D) showing that a Professor from your State maintains a lifestyle that involves residences in two different states simultaneously in an article about gardening (with the other being a summer house in the “coincidental” state of Connecticut, but who cares about “facts” checking of such accounts), the thought has been “planted”. From this carefully “planted” and “thinly” veiled account, the “leap” is supposed to be made that “an individual can live in two principal residences, carry on two different lives (in different identities) achieve two different outcomes and that this is all a common occurrence. These are the lengths “Society’s” types have to go to in the name of easily obtained everything and have to be constantly “padding” their stories to account for the missing gaps that repeatedly occur, (but that is why the 215% support back-up is available), to plug all the “gaps” that routinely occur in their publicly advertised stories in order to keep up this “brand” of altered events. IT WOULD APPEAR IN HINDSIGHT THAT INSTANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS AREN’T AS EASILY OBTAINED AS AT FIRST APPEARED AFTER ALL, (see the post WHAT’S NEXT FOR AN INSTANT SOCIETY? ).

No comments: