A teachings that is a Christian teaching is that what you 'think' is the same as if you do it.
This refers to consciousness - a consciousness that might be accepting "rebellion alternatives" which sound 'spiritual' but are against the actual 'Law' - which we have explianed means the conciousness of the God Worlds.
If your consciousness accepts "rebellion values" then you ARE 'marked' negative. That is what is rather stressed in the scriptures, gospels etc on this. So we are looking at 'Values'.
We are going to use current topics to explore 'Values'.
 The World of 'False Values" Over 'True Values'.
"I tell u one thing.. those who are not very moral. It takes a massive toll on true intimacy. Psychologically u pay a price later on. It never leaves u."
Make no mistake we are right now in the thick of the world creation of those who "rebelled against" the 'True law'. Not necessarily enough space to go into big explanations on that title, but leave it at the understanding that once this world was a beautiful and happy place because everyone followed the "Law". The world of today has a sickness and that sickness manifests because it is now following the "values" of those who "rebelled against the Law'.
The world as it is, comes to an end when the planet reaches its 'Polarity Switch'. It changes to the positive polarity and all that is part of the negative has to leave the stage. We don't know if that happens gradually or is very instant at the time the planet switches polarity.
Right now there is a problem with many females being like this stinking character covered in a video by Daniel. "Something smells fishy". This absolutely foul, dead eyed thing, will end up where she has chosen at the time of the Polarity Switch.. The main point is that there are so many of these 'the living dead' things ruling the universe at the moment. So let's hear Daniel's take on this!
 Watch Its not clear if Bonnie is much developed above animal level.
She also has to watch the clock because she is a bit haggard looking - which you can see for yourself. That is one bordering on ugly face, while the body so far is slim and seems youthful. She is getting away with this at the moment but it won't be for long. (Apparently she is still in her 20's that was a surprise.) She is also absolutely missing the point. But she does describe herself as very matter of fact and doesn't really have any feelings about anything. She isn't really very human. She thinks she is a nice down to earth sort of person because there is very little else that exists beyond sex and as Daniel says, maybe anger. More like a vindictive rabbit!
She has a very limited range of abilty for feeling, and it is feeling which makes those of us who are human, human. She did however, have enough feeling or human awareness to be upset when her granddad died, but beyond that there does not seem to be any depth of feeling. Its just having sex and being so smart in the brains department to make money out of it. It is the physical feeling of sex, and making money. Nothing in bwteen , and we agree, there are a lot of women who function as that. So, yes, that's the answer, all women could be that smart too!
Ah, Bonnie Bunny is 'living her own truth'. She couldn't care less if she hurts your wife, She enjoys what she is doing and that is all that matters - because she has very little ability for the awareness of feeling how others may feel. No empathy. Her world is the world when people have no empathy. The positive world will be for those who do have empathy.
But the problem is that this piece of old dead fish is what the majority of females are like in the "West' at this time.
Internet Comments. "It's funny to me how she thinks everyone is just jealous of her. No...they're disgusted."
"How ironic... She also relies on men for money to pay her bills."
"She’s like “I’m so nice,” but also “your wife is irrelevant and I don’t care if I hurt her.” Wow, so nice of you to say that."
'She looks like a middle age woman — I refuse to believe she’s only in her 20s." "Dead eyes."
"Bonnie: “I'm such a nice person, people are shocked by how nice I am” Also Bonnie: “women are jealous of me, women are dumb, I don’t have emotions” This one is headed for a serious nervous breakdown."
"She's got really dead eyes. There's absolutely nothing there, no emotion."
"Wikipedia says she's 26. That must be typical wikipedia not having the right facts. She looks at LEAST 40, more like mid to late 40's."
"I was going to call someone a dog until I saw your producer, and it would be so wrong. Your producer looks very civilised."
More on 'Values'.
There is another video I began to watch with an overweight, fairly acceptable looking black female and Candace Owens making the point that this girl's value decreases with sleeping with so many men. We are with Candace on this point. Of course the girl is all 'forward thinking ' I'm free and empowered' type of thing. because that is a VALUE that is taught.
What we would like to see is how this girl is in about 10 years time when, going by her current looks - which are okay enough for a man to bang if there's nothing better around - that level has gone. That is when the wisdom of her perceived empowerment may no longer be empowering. Its a very fair bet that her current ability to be 'empowered' will not be providing the 'empowerment'. So it is a fair observation that her 'value' would indeed have decreased.
We make it perfectly clear that anyone is free to choose how they feel about this.
But we are highlighting what is soon to happen on this planet,
so we also make it clear, that this is NOT part of the actual 'Law' and after the planet changes, the 'Law' will be returned to this planet.
The world under the "Law" does not mean everyone returns to the earth and lives like a farmer in a basic type of no frills homestead/community. We would expect high levels of art and culture, excellent manners and diplomacy, and far less selfishness and nastiness.
Owens Views the Macrons' Lawsuit as a PR Stunt to Try to Stop the Story.
Owens is after the Pulitzer Prize for this story.
Internet Comments "The Spectator is interviewing Candace bc she has a high moral standing, and is brave. A modern day Joan of Arc. All you dormant Catholics - wake up!"
A. She absolutely is NOT doing that at all. She is presenting her talks as if that is what she is doing. She is not doing anything that is anything other people have not already spoken out about and covered. They just have not done it in such an offensive and accusationary way. The issues of corruption, elites and satanism are already being dealt with, and that has been happening at least since 2020.
It is always other people's work but she is loudmouthing it as if she is some kind of Joan of Arc pioneering the way. This is one of the issues people have about it. It isn't her work. The WW2 stuff was done by David Irving for example.
"Owens cannot actually KNOW that what she says is true. Brigitte, Emmanuel, and the brother Jean Michel actually KNOW.
The point is Owens is being SUED for this. It is beyond stupidity to be out doing what she is doing, even if she does 'really believe it'. She doesn't think she is wrong, but she does not KNOW that yet. Has she done enough research herself to back up what she is saying? It doesn't look like it. (See below). . It is that she would be stupid enough to continue like this, that is fascinating."
As mentioned, a French journalist went round to Jean Michel's house, knocked on the door and met Jean Michel. He was annoyed and asked the journalist to leave, but maybe information like this should be presented too..
Internet Comment : "Where's a photo of Brigitte and her brother TOGETHER .....? or why can't he come out and stand with her bro ?"
 This Brigitte with her brother Jean Michel.
The French journalist did meet Jean Michel and he is the person in this photograph alongside Brigitte.
He is also the person that the journalist mentions in the same frame of the photograph in 2017 (on the linked page, Candy Comments.)
It is important to note that Owens does say other French journalists looked into this story, and this is one of them. But she says they didn't pursue it because there were implications of threats from the French state or 'elite' or 'power base'.
In other words threats to their livelihood or perhaps lives.
This is not true.
This seems to be another example of creating a narrative that works for her, because clearly they found the evidence about Jean Michel which led to dropping the story.
Dropping the story because they found there was nothing there is very different from telling her own audience that they backed off because of threats. This is typical of the kind of thing that Owens does. Lies or presents half truths.
We are looking at a story that now has worldwide attention. If it is to do good in the world, it will hopefully highight the many people who Bible bash or in other ways hound others to the 'death' because of what they believe to be true. We go through the videos so you don;t have to, but are noting the times where Owens says things she knows are not true. *We add the Lindy Chamberlain case below this as a case where public opinion did destroy a once happy family.
Much of the information Owens demands of the Macrons is already available and it her duty as a journalist to do the research, not ask them to send what is already availabl.
Having someone with the "personality" that Owens has; makes this a worrisome issue. It would give the go ahead to all kinds of fundamentalist and hateful views, to be doing what she is doing. If it was someone else presenting the story maybe it would be less worrisome. Even the French author Proussard was measured in his presentation. In the video we are reporting on Owens does want a Pulitzer Prize for her 'journalism' here.
In our opinion the world would be taken to a very dangerous place if we had more from Candace Owens and those types, and if it was the case that the Macrons were indeed not telling the truth.
This article is on the page 'Values'. This page has home movies of Brigitte's family. Below is the list of plaintiffs who sued the French psychic and blogger for defamation.
 You can make this bigger or go to the Candy Comments page where it is full size.
We are looking at a story that now has worldwide attention. If it is to do good in the world, it will hopefully highight the many people who Bible bash or in other ways hound others to the 'death' because of what they believe to be true. We go through the videos so you don;t have to, but are noting the times where Owens says things she knows are not true. *We add the Lindy Chamberlain case below this as a case where public opinion did destroy a once happy family.
As mentioned, a French journalist went round to Jean Michel's house, knocked on the door and met Jean Michel. He was annoyed and asked the journalist to leave, but maybe information like this should be presented too..
In our opinion the world would be taken to a very dangerous place if we had more from Candace Owens and those types, and if it was the case that the Macrons were indeed not telling the truth.
'Hateful' meaning actual hateful views as happened in the Lindy Chamberlain case we are giving as an example further down.
She believes that the Macrons issued the lawsuit as a 'Public Relations' strategy.
It has not occured to her that they did it to stop her promoting fake information that was defamatory to them. Not PR, but going for the damages payout on this.
These accusations cover a private citizen who is the brother of Brigitte, and the damages may be awarded for damages done to this person. he hasns't filed for damages, but possibly the Macrons would give what they receive to him. This is a private citizen not a public figure, yet Owens is dragging this person fully into this. She is doing it for her ambitions with this being her 'career making' expose, perhaps as one of the 'greatest journalists' who ever lived.
She comes across to many as a very aggressive, insistent person who is furious with those who do not accept her views.
Owens appears to be a study in some kind of sociopathy. She has been presented with a lawsuit accusing her of defamation and the plaintiffs are going to damages. She has been asked to stop making these allegations and accusations. Instead she is continuing.
She now has a youtube interview with the Spectator (good interview, professional) and is making the story an even greater worldwide issue.. It is unlikely a President with access to the best lawyers would think a lawsuit would stop the story. That would appear to be quite low IQ but possibly a way Owens would be expected to interpret it. It seems likely that with Owens continuing with this she is making her case worse, possibly each time she continues the amount requested in damages also increases. Now she has made this a worldwide level of damage.
The interviewer does point out to her that bringing this lawsuit would not be an effective way to 'stop the story'. her answer is that the Macrons have not been very good at PR. Indicating she still thinks this legal issue is about PR. She believes the Macrons along with their American lawyers, do not understand the nuances in American law. The American lawyers however, and all legal opinion from other American lawyers appear to there is a very string case for "disregard of the truth'. If Brigitte is woman, and was born a woman, which the Macrons and the lawyers probably already jow he answer to, then Owens is disregarding the truth. That is, so long as the Macrons provided enough information to show that.
So, this is a very fascinating story because quite frankly Owens is demonstrating a very strong and dangerous personality disorder of the kind that insists you must accept her opinion and she is outraged if you don't.
You can see how angry she gets in the 3 mins. clip we have that she made after finding out she being sued. She was furious. But not deranged enough that her lawyers could get her off the hook for a damages payout.
It gives the impression to us, that she very possibly sees this as a 'calling from God' to expose to the world the 'satanic corruption'
in the manner of how a Bible bashing, off the charts evangelical style, fundamentalist might see it. The correct procedure here is to let this go to trial and allow the courts to decide. She is taking it upon herself to ignore all of that and use this as a platform to continue her allegations and make herself world famous. Btw way, if you watch any video and press the pause button randomly, there is a likelihood you will freeze a consistently appearing type of expression in her face and eyes.
It is now possible that this may not be limited to a damages payout alone, but also now include a jail sentence probably in a facility which provides for 'mental illness'.
Have to add a bit more. She continues to say that Macrons are not very intelligent in her opinion. Also that with the incident on the plane they lied about it and disappeared the story the next day. The story is not disappeared even now. The reality is that it wasn't some kind of fight, it is exactly what a woman would do playfully to her husband. If you look at it, it isn't much. But it is Owens who is again lying, misrepresenting the truth, because they did not disappear the story. She again knowingly repeats that at the play where they met Emmanuel was 14. One issue is that Owens does mirsrepresent and omit known facts.
The play was performed in May 1993 and he was 15 (born in 1977). The school itself gives those dates for the play. Rehearsals do not take overly long, but they certainly did not begin at Christmas time the year before, Macron was 15. Owens does think they are 'powerful elites' who 'abuse' their 'elite' power and that is what they are trying to do with her. She is not seeing that they want her to stop this defamation of them. She continues to reference only the worst of the school photos of Brigitte who in the better photos looks very pretty and youthful - and incidentally at 72 she is still very attractive, and she does look a little bit like Brigitte Bardot or a later Claudia Schiffer. Owens claims she looks homely and like a man transitioning into a woman. This is not true.
She mentions that she read Andre Gide's book at university. This seems unlikely that she would read this French book (obviously n English) but it is an odd thing to read. Even so, 'when she was at university' is misleading because she dropped out of a college during the first year.
Latest update with home movie film and a photo clearly showing Brigitte's hands are not big, and 'man's hands' which is a recent accusation by Owens. Please continue article. + more. The family film is the kids when young, but this film has been available since (we believe) 2022 and the onus is on Owens to do the research to find it.
There is a very strong chance that the legal teams and the French presidency are very aware of the 'personality traits' of Owens.
This work has commented that there even seems that some of the information given out has been ambiguous, and a few rumours set in motion, that to us, give the impression that Owens has been 'invited to jump in', and do exactly what she is doing (true to 'type') and to completely prove the point of what a danger she is.
We think she has been 'allowed' to do what she is doing as it proves the lawsuit is correct. Please continue to article. + more.
There was Once a case 'A Dingo's Taken My Baby'
In Australia around the early 80's a couple who were 7th Day Adventists took their young family on holiday to the outback camping. Two young sons and their new baby Azaria. The mother Lindy, left the baby in a tent to sleep, and when she returned the baby had gone and there was evidence that a dingo wild dog, had taken the little girl.
This was a young mother whose daughter was in fact taken by a dingo and eaten by the thing. The people in Australia decided they didn't like how Lindy described it. The courst cases went on and the fmily was put throuh hell. Evenutally by public opinion, Lindy was sent to prison for murdering her baby in some kind of wird religios ceremony. The 7th Day Aventists don't have any weird ceremonies.
Many years later it was discovered they were wrong. The baby had been taken by a dingo. This ended the couple's marriage. It destroyed the lives of this family, and Lindy eventually married an American and moved away from Australia.
This was exactly the same kind of witch hunt as we are seeing led by Candace Owens. It is most likely that everyone on the Macron's side know that Brigitte is a woman, born female. They probably know that. That is the most likely reality here. There could be a possibility that it was the Macrons lying and involved in pedophilia, incest, murder, lying, lack of intelligence, and abusing the power of the 'elites'. However, it is good to keep in mind what something like this did to Lindy Chamberlain and her entire family.
So what else is this person now ranting about? What unbelievable stuff is she trying now?
In the video we are now watching covering Owens (watching so you don't have to)
she is accusing the French President of saying "f...k you to the American people because he is suing an American podcaster' She continues that they are doing it 'to impoverish an American podcaster'.
What planet does she live on? Of course they are Candace. What else can they do to stop you doing this? She has accused the Macrons of incest, murder, identity theft, and is herself riddled in anger against satanism and evil, which she is also accusing them of. Of course they are suing her! Even in the recommended to view 3 minute clip (to spare you having to go through an entire video of this) even in that, she is in disbelief that she is being sued because of this.
In this video which is someone else commenting on a recent video, it seems she thinks that Trump should be stepping in to help her out in this. She thinks this is about a state leader, president of another country trying to stop an American's right to the 1st Amendment. Oh dear. The American courts do have laws against defamation. It is difficult to prove defamation easily, but the 1st Amendment does not mean anyone can earn a living from destroying someone else's reputation even if they are in and from a different country. So, apparently in this video she is saying that Trump should step in to defend her rights. She believes Trump should say that it is unacceptable that a foreign leader should "threaten the rights of the 1st Amendment'.
To which we would say that the 1st Amendment applies to how Ameirca is, not other countries. .America has no rights over other countries. It doesn't mean Americans have rights over other countries. If you defame anyone from anywhere, they have a right to sue you, and indeed impoverish you for what you have done. She thinks she needs the federal government to step in on an issue as 'important as this'. She is calling Emmanuel Macron a 'foreign invader'
You know, if the federal government did something like that, it is possible there would be a lawsuit issued against the government for doing that. Everyone, anywhere, has a right to defend themselves. Especially against vicious, ambitious opportunists who change the facts around (lie) to suit their narrative of the story they are presenting. It is probably stuff like this that is eventually going to show even her most diehard fans, what they really have here.
At this point the person covering this diatribe is saying "well I'll ask a question here then. Why are you asking the President to intervene when you say you know you will win? You said you would stake your career on this story."
Really, the audacity of this woman is through the roof. She really thinks she is important enough that the President would intervene for her because she is slandering the leaders of another country and they have relaliated.
And still she goes on. She is considering that the evidence will be faked so the Macrons win the case, and she is also accusing the courts of being corrupt (which she has done before). From this video, it is telling us the Macrons are suing for an amount that will impoverish Owens.
This is only a short video so why not take a look at her ravings? And you may see it differently from ravings, which is fine by us.
This is just 12 mins, with a black guy covering this, and we're with this guy on this.. Watch
Internet Comments : "She told them to sue her, in fact Candace said that she will help them file the lawsuit and pay for it. She requested it and the Macons said ok, I will sue."
"Defamation is not protected free speech"
"But Candace is also forgetting the fact that by law, the Macrons have the right to sue her. So, if we want to be a free country, as we say, the law has to prevail. If Trump were to intervene and prevent the law from running its course, that wouldn't be a free country."
"Apparently, Candace thinks that the whole world should cater to her whims."
"Most people don't realize on Candace's website, she sells a t-shirt with Brigette's face on it as if it were 'Time' magazine. The slogan is 'Man of the Year'. That will work against her in court!!!"
"I don't understand this whole thing. Why does it matter to anyone what sex Brigitte Macron is? Is she hurting anyone? I don't get it. I have a life to run and it's complicated. Am I expected to care about Macron's private life. What Candace is doing seems cruel and unnecessary."
Internet answers to that. "It got her followers, money and lots of publicity."
Also the accusations were incest, pedophilia and grooming, identity theft, threats against journalists looking into this, and association with murders.
"Dave Chappelle had Candace down perfectly. He called her the world’s most articulate idiot."
"Doing business and making money from someone's private affair....who did she share the money with....and now calling on Trump to do what???? Not after bragging that Trump called her personally on this same issue. Is she going CRAZY. Pride comes before a fall the scripture says."
"She is a PODCASTER! So narcissistic that she thinks the President of the United States should intervene on HER BEHALF? She is flat out bonkers."
And someone said this :
"Candace knows exactly what she’s doing. I would back her every time."
|