The Russel Brand PSYOP
Real or Ritualistic Psychodrama?
I think it's baffling he has a reputation as speaking some kind of "truth" to power.
Brand is the epitome of a fake populist. Tucker Carlson is slightly more convincing. He's a "red-pill" dispensing mind-war terrorist, pushing nightmare narratives to recruit more dreaming blue-pillers into the red-pill alt-right alt-reality.
This can be said for any that don’t call out the world-stage as such. The star players in this global Truman Show don’t talk about the stage as separate from reality.
What I am stating here is that if you are filtering your worldview through any of the lenses it provides—elite media or populist and independent—you cannot arrive at the Truth. Only a full accounting of the available facts with a full understanding of how Fakeable the media-manufactured reality is can do so.
The Troofers think anyone talking tough to "big pharma" is a legitimate truth teller and a threat to the system. My conclusion stands--anti-vax and provax was a controlled dialectic to deepen the schism in society between Left/ Right politics. Brand is playing sides here, which is important to keep in mind when looking at these dilectical mindwar games.
I evaluate this Russel Brand drama from the MSM-minus frame of reference. I'm trying to falsify the mainstream version, not assuming it to be true at face value. The mainstream, or MSM version is that Russel is guilty of all accusations.
The MSM + perspective, the counter-narrative, sides with Russel Brand by default. They assume there is more to the story. Again, MSM minus (MSM-) subtracts assumptions; MSM plus (MSM+) adds assumptions. The MSM+ counter-narrative assumes there is more to the story, likely a conspiracy to silence Brand.
From My Perspective (MSM -):
Attempting to falsify the story is not easy if we are only fed information from above. The MSM is telling us the story. However, analyzing this as a story seems to shed a little light, leading me to lean toward it all being a scripted psychodrama:
a) Among other things, it fits a pattern of celebrity icons elevated and then torn down. My theory is this: the MSM is a Narcissist. ALL Narcissists elevate their "Golden Child" who can do no wrong, who is enabled to act like a narcissist on their own but later, they devalue them. They pull them from the pedestal where they have unconditional love and reject them utterly.
This has the effect of
1) solidifying the Narcissist’s power--its main weapon being the power to reject.
2) Second, this sends a warning to all the other "Golden Children" to toe the line.
For the "MEDIA" to expel, devalue, and reject him is the ultimate expression of its power. Now every person in that circle with skeletons shaking in fear. Brand is a Self-described Narcissist. He was "enabled" by the Media that now "devalues" and "rejects" him.
b) There are some notable occult/ritualistic elements here. The kidnapping of Persephone, the spring maiden taken to Hades at the Equinox is a theme we have followed here every September since Gabby Patito was kidnapped and found on the equinox.
Russel Brand’s accuser is known only as "Alice,” as in Alice in Wonderland. The name has many mind-control victim associations. Moreover, this fits a pattern with similar celebrity scandals. Notably, Marilyn Manson’s accusers and he was working on a project called Alice in Wonderland. The “Mad Hatter” role has been associated with both of them.
Brand’s accuser was allegedly told to real Lolita. Epstein’s plane was called the “Lolita Express.” Interestingly, Manson’s accuser played a role in a music video based on Kubrick’s Lolita. So both accused have accusers associated with Alice and Lolita and both have been associated with the Mad Hatter archetype. This is the Hades/ Persephone dynamic.
I think another part of it could be something about entrenched patriarchy within media, entertainment, and politics being "exposed”; a further takedown of "toxic masculinity." This especially makes sense in the wake of Barbie feminism
c) There is too much collaboration with the media to simultaneously trash him by the weight of the accusations. If he was a target of real complaints, his rights would still be respected; the presumption of innocence would be upheld in case those accusers were lying. Otherwise, the media would be wide open to libel claims.
d) The BBC Car and his BBC pimps, the open secret of his predations suggests complicity in the commission of his crimes. Why would they expose him if he was one of their own unless this is some sick drama?
The prevailing wisdom of the counter-narrative chorus is that he’s being targeted by the Cabal Deep State Matrix for telling Infowars-level Trooferisms. This is laughable. He’s either guilty and complicit in his own takedown for iconoclastic-propagandistic reasons, or he’s not guilty and is merely playing the role of a guilty man. There is no room in this scenario for him to be an actual rogue and become targeted for what he says.
The presence of a pre-existing ritual script attached to it leads me to think there’s more to the story in the subtext so I cannot rule out fakery and fabrication. One final point: most are still judging Brand’s guilt based on their political persuasions. This reveals something about the bifurcated nature of the world stage and how it will never be reconciled because it is designed to have a crack in the middle.
Tim Ozman.
IPR Host