This came out of a conversation, the personal has been left out, the ideas kept in and rephrased in places. It could be on the topic of Archie, it could be any topic at all. There are a few personal observations of one’s ability to reason or not.
This sums up the idea put to me by a correspondent:
True learning as I understand, results in the application of learned knowledge or skill to other situations in which the skill, or newfangled knowledge might, or could, or should be used.
But sometimes, to be honest and therefore fully exposed, I just cannot for the life of me understand certain thinking and behaviour. It defies my apparent haphazard logic. Everyone thinks their way of thinking is correct, I understand that – just how can it be that both seemingly plausible sides are correct?
Brilliant question in my eyes. My correspondent went on:
There is a faction of people who mostly believe in the things that help society run as well as it can possibly be run, albeit by fallible people. That faction is getting smaller because either the people are dying off, more people in society really do espouse beliefs of the opposite side or people are scared and afraid to speak.
It is understandable they would be scared or might be afraid because the rules of argument and discussion do not apply to both sides. The other side, in my opinion, has little memorised chants and comebacks and attacks … learned very well I must say and they sling and hurl them with fervour at their opposition.
Don’t we know it – the kool aid, the responses-learned, handed down from the literature they are given or directed to, to gobble up and spew forth later at an unbeliever.
In some cases, smiling assassins, now on board with the Narrative, think in a Narrative way about anything in life, putting seemingly plausible cases, sometimes not acting from malice but simply from misplaced belief [see Reagan’s quote again].
As for those out there we’re all currently observing, from Pelosi to the abortion-mongers – these really are the evil muvvers:
They know they can get away with such infantile, absurd behaviour, unbecoming any creature, and our side is not protected in the least. Never is there any dialogue allowed, no real dialogue.
Oh how true, how true. Just look at Cortez’s current backtracking and mocking of anyone who took her seriously.
Our side is the middle, largely interested in family and self, unschooled in these games of intrigue and oneupmanship, incapable of really understanding how bestial Them are – at least today we’re beginning to see it, I’ve known since around 911.
My initial reply was [in khaki below] to the correspondent’s opening topic about curiosity, it was setting out my own stall:
My first motivation, as you know from the blog, is curiosity. In school, I was the one always asking why, about anything. Some teachers thought it was insubordinate, that I should know my place but I was just curious, many times innocently asking but no one would credit my innocence because I was frisky, cheeky faced, they thought I was being cleverly rude and tried to work out how. But no, I was really just asking. I’ve always seemed overweeningly arrogant.
I see some people I know that way too – sometimes capable of the barb-disguised but then they go all innocent. At other times, they really are all innocent, it surprises. We don’t always know with people. Supposed friend can be foe, foe can be friend.
The correspondent then got down to it:
My question is – what would be the motivation of Harry and Sparkle to fake a pregnancy? How would that advance their, hmmmm, what would it be named … their ’cause’, their ‘status’, their ‘something I am absolutely and totally missing’ thing? Is it their idea to have a pretend baby if in deed it is pretend, or has it been ordained by someone else to fake? How will little Archie advance and grow if he is a real pretend doll?
Yep, and there was something more specific waiting:
I heard Harry mention something about Baby Master Archy having ‘ hair’ on his body and Harry stressed it … I eventually looked at a close up of the baby and he does have that downy baby hair that some babies have at birth on the face.
Why on earth did the new father ramble on about hair … not hair on his head, why was he alluding to other places? Real or pretend Archie notwithstanding, that was a very pointed and concerted thing to bring to our attention. Not the sort of thing generally released to the public.
Yes, interesting, there were some very strange responses and the hair is either a brilliant doll … or …
My next response:
Uber might be right on this – let’s not comment on politics in general but her knowledge of things like that faux baby is often right, she’s always been quite savvy on those sorts of things.
I just don’t know why the Sussexes are doing this, playing it this way – at least there are a few competing, plausible explanations.
First thought is that the press only have certain snippets which have been allowed out, so they have to construct a reality around those.
Second thought is that someone wants all of us curious, wondering. Yes, this someone hates us, mocks us and maliciously sends us off on wild goose chases but it’s also to distract us from something else going down which we’re too busy to look at.
If she did not have that baby, then every player in the game is complicit, from the Queen to Wills and Kate, palace staff, all know the Lie and play up to it. Kate is quite capable of that.
Then there is that Megs is the game player in this. There is a thrill to fooling an entire nation – May gets her kicks from it, from that feeling of wrecking power, that mockery of the sheeple. It puts them on an adrenaline high, they are arch-narcissists.
Another is the Manchurian explanation – they did something inhuman to her once she was inside the net and as we know from MK Ultra, they are quite capable of pitiless trauma-infliction over hours, days, weeks, months, breaking down the person, messing up the brain. There is so much literature on this – see Marilyn Monroe for a start.
Another is that there are two Megs, also two babies. Why not? Ultra security – most world leaders of that stature or those who are about to have that stature have doubles. I used the idea in the long book.
Another is that there is some warfare going on in the Elysian areas up there which we know not of and their very security is having to keep that baby alive. No threat from mortals but from someone up in that constant Elysian areas warfare. Someone needs to get at that baby and so she has quite valid reasons to try to protect him.
That’s about as much as I can think it out with my meds-addled brain these days. As for readers, who knows?