At first let me start by saying that EVERY single question or doubt you are having you should have had the instant you finished watching the first interview. Every question/doubt you raise within this article was topic of the first interview.
So I wonder why exactly you applied to work for Mr. Bernard / his bank project? Shouldn't you have attempted to get answers to your questions BEFORE doing that?
"But what would be his mission?"
And I wonder what is YOUR mission? Trying to shoot down Mr. Bernard via various anti-campaigns and whatnot seems to be all the rage these days and sadly falls on a lot of open ears (or so it seems - oftentimes the anti-campaigners just collaborate happily with each other via the comment sections of each others' blogs/facebook pages) - so why not jump aboard that train while it is still going, huh? Is it possible that you are attempting to get a "foot in the door" of the alternative media scene with this article (and whatever articles may follow)?
Ah well, I digress.
Back to topic.
"But when I saw the video getting translated into so many languages soon after the release and how many english speaking youtube channels were sharing this content I got suspicious about it."
Most of the re-uploads of the interview (in whatever language) are on private channels - what's suspicious about supporters sharing the interview via their own channel?
"[...] and if I would give you my real name you could check it out and find evidence to this claim."
So why don't you do that so we can check?
"[...] there is no way to delete my first life from the internet. You could find out easily."
And let me take a wild guess that your first life wasn't in the 80s to 90s as Mr. Bernard's when internet wasn't a thing yet, right?
[...] he never registered a fashion company under his name and his name is in no way connected to any kind of fashion label whatsoever. Same thing goes for selling cars, in&export and his work in the textile field.
May I ask where and how exactly you inquired about this? because -
"I can't find any registered firm to his name."
So, you didn't even find out about the "United People Foundation" which IS registered to his name? And ironically another anti-campaigner found that.
But as I don't feel like linking to her blog I leave that to you to find that yourself. After all, you are so skilled in figuring out stuff, aren't you...
Normally I could stop right here but for the sake of completeness...
"- next he asks how bad we want him to paint himself as a mad man. Where is this idea coming from? We know he did bad things. He told us so. But WHAT did he do?"
How much attention DID you actually pay to that first interview? He gave many examples of what he had done in his first life. Italian Lira ring any bell for example?
"Why wouldn't youtube ban those videos like they do with so many content right now? Why does noone stop Bernard while he reaches so many people? If he would be a real threat because his informations were so dangerous he wouldn't be able to have this platform, would he?"
Because deleting all those videos (especially because the re-uploads are in the thousands now) would give almost instant credibility to everything he was talking about and I take a wild guess that's something people in certain circles wouldn't want to happen.
Attaking him and trying to debunk him, etc. is far more effective and you are doing your share with your articles. Playing right into the hands of the elite. Great job...
Well done for raising this. I've been incredulous from the start as I just don't trust anyone who has the freedom and reach to say such audacious things and remain unscathed. If he had wound up dead a few days after the video was released or went missing, I'd be inclined to think he was legit. If however he is legit and TPTB have just chosen to let him be, it's likely he is either talking rubbish or is no threat to their status quo. Also this new bank venture he's launching makes me even more dubious tbh...
Do you know about Cathy O'Brien? A person is easier to kill if the whole world does not know what they went through.
" If he had wound up dead a few days after the video was released or went missing, I'd be inclined to think he was legit." - And, TPTB know this, so they ignore him.
I agree this absence of attention strategy may be the best way in not drawing attention but if what he says really is true, I'd have thought they'd want to gag him before he could make any personal revelations and implicate others involved. Fair points though.
Yes, that's why I said I'd be inclined to think he was legit if he was snuffed or went MIA but as this hasn't yet happened, I'm not convinced of his sincerity.
So far, he is not a threat because his story is so unbelievable.
Do you know about the McMartin Preschool Case? The people doing the abusing would dress up in costumes in case the children told on them. Who is going to believe a child that says they were molested by Santa Claus?
This is where you should start:
http://www.whale.to/b/stickel.html
I can tell you personally, McMartin was the most covered criminal case in the US in my lifetime until the OJ Simpson trial. But eventually, after some questionable 'debunking,' people wanted to put the victims and parents in jail. For decades afterwards, people in the US were conditioned to disbelieve child victims of ritual sexual abuse. Even today it is brought up as an example of false allegations. But as you can see, it's far from clear the allegations were false. McMartin was the beginning of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation - started by accused pedophiles and CIA mind control researchers from MKULTRA.
So, someone claims to have worked for Ronald Bernard. Must be true then... The rest of the article is just the old blah can't find anything about his past so he must be lying blah youtube won't delete the interviews so he must be controlled opposition blah blah... The same bullshit over and over and over again.
I wish I could downvote this but I don't have enough points to do that yet.
Alright, I did not want to out myself but I wrote this article and I can proove that I worked for him. And there is much more to it. I am still invastigating.
why are you so aggressive, dude? What's your point? We're all trying to find out the truth, aren't we? Stop dividing us, please. And stop fighting me. If you have a question, just go ahead and ask. I don't see the point in this comversation. I'll tell you anything you want to know.
Ronald Bernard probably changed his name when he quit the scene, but I wonder if anyone anyone who was unethical to get involved in the first place can ever come fully clean, kind of like a drug addict even after they stop using, you really can't ever trust them completely, they are just so comfortable lying and out for themselves is their baseline its easy for them to relapse in other ways.
But what does RB stands to gain? customers for this new bank, is that going to be just a fraud? I would hope not, is it even happening?
Mostly agree, think you're being very harsh on drug addicts there, though.
I've met many who have paid their dues and who are fully trustworthy on the flip-side of hell. There's a distinction worth making, between addicts and junkies, a junky being a morally devoid fiend, though, not always beyond 'redemption'
life experience: trust sparingly and you will help good people stuck in a world of hurt. But, otherwise, yes... if you trust any ol' junky, expect to lose more than you put in.
▼ purpleabyss
Ok, now for some proper reply to that article.
At first let me start by saying that EVERY single question or doubt you are having you should have had the instant you finished watching the first interview. Every question/doubt you raise within this article was topic of the first interview.
So I wonder why exactly you applied to work for Mr. Bernard / his bank project? Shouldn't you have attempted to get answers to your questions BEFORE doing that?
"But what would be his mission?"
And I wonder what is YOUR mission? Trying to shoot down Mr. Bernard via various anti-campaigns and whatnot seems to be all the rage these days and sadly falls on a lot of open ears (or so it seems - oftentimes the anti-campaigners just collaborate happily with each other via the comment sections of each others' blogs/facebook pages) - so why not jump aboard that train while it is still going, huh? Is it possible that you are attempting to get a "foot in the door" of the alternative media scene with this article (and whatever articles may follow)?
Ah well, I digress.
Back to topic.
"But when I saw the video getting translated into so many languages soon after the release and how many english speaking youtube channels were sharing this content I got suspicious about it."
Most of the re-uploads of the interview (in whatever language) are on private channels - what's suspicious about supporters sharing the interview via their own channel?
"[...] and if I would give you my real name you could check it out and find evidence to this claim."
So why don't you do that so we can check?
"[...] there is no way to delete my first life from the internet. You could find out easily."
And let me take a wild guess that your first life wasn't in the 80s to 90s as Mr. Bernard's when internet wasn't a thing yet, right?
[...] he never registered a fashion company under his name and his name is in no way connected to any kind of fashion label whatsoever. Same thing goes for selling cars, in&export and his work in the textile field.
May I ask where and how exactly you inquired about this? because -
"I can't find any registered firm to his name."
So, you didn't even find out about the "United People Foundation" which IS registered to his name? And ironically another anti-campaigner found that.
But as I don't feel like linking to her blog I leave that to you to find that yourself. After all, you are so skilled in figuring out stuff, aren't you...
Normally I could stop right here but for the sake of completeness...
"- next he asks how bad we want him to paint himself as a mad man. Where is this idea coming from? We know he did bad things. He told us so. But WHAT did he do?"
How much attention DID you actually pay to that first interview? He gave many examples of what he had done in his first life. Italian Lira ring any bell for example?
"Why wouldn't youtube ban those videos like they do with so many content right now? Why does noone stop Bernard while he reaches so many people? If he would be a real threat because his informations were so dangerous he wouldn't be able to have this platform, would he?"
Because deleting all those videos (especially because the re-uploads are in the thousands now) would give almost instant credibility to everything he was talking about and I take a wild guess that's something people in certain circles wouldn't want to happen.
Attaking him and trying to debunk him, etc. is far more effective and you are doing your share with your articles. Playing right into the hands of the elite. Great job...
▼ neverobey
Here's part 2
▼ Amino69
Well done for raising this. I've been incredulous from the start as I just don't trust anyone who has the freedom and reach to say such audacious things and remain unscathed. If he had wound up dead a few days after the video was released or went missing, I'd be inclined to think he was legit. If however he is legit and TPTB have just chosen to let him be, it's likely he is either talking rubbish or is no threat to their status quo. Also this new bank venture he's launching makes me even more dubious tbh...
▼ pby1000
Do you know about Cathy O'Brien? A person is easier to kill if the whole world does not know what they went through.
" If he had wound up dead a few days after the video was released or went missing, I'd be inclined to think he was legit." - And, TPTB know this, so they ignore him.
▼ Amino69
I agree this absence of attention strategy may be the best way in not drawing attention but if what he says really is true, I'd have thought they'd want to gag him before he could make any personal revelations and implicate others involved. Fair points though.
▼ argosciv
Killing him only makes what he says more believable, no?
▼ Amino69
Yes, that's why I said I'd be inclined to think he was legit if he was snuffed or went MIA but as this hasn't yet happened, I'm not convinced of his sincerity.
▼ neverobey
You don't need to kill him but why would youtube support his videos that much while they burry other videos due to infringement of any policies
▼ pby1000
So far, he is not a threat because his story is so unbelievable.
Do you know about the McMartin Preschool Case? The people doing the abusing would dress up in costumes in case the children told on them. Who is going to believe a child that says they were molested by Santa Claus?
▼ Amino69
No I haven't looked into this case but will do.
▼ B_dog
This is where you should start: http://www.whale.to/b/stickel.html I can tell you personally, McMartin was the most covered criminal case in the US in my lifetime until the OJ Simpson trial. But eventually, after some questionable 'debunking,' people wanted to put the victims and parents in jail. For decades afterwards, people in the US were conditioned to disbelieve child victims of ritual sexual abuse. Even today it is brought up as an example of false allegations. But as you can see, it's far from clear the allegations were false. McMartin was the beginning of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation - started by accused pedophiles and CIA mind control researchers from MKULTRA.
▼ Amino69
Appreciated. When I found out about the FMSF I was aghast but ultimately not surprised.
▼ purpleabyss
So, someone claims to have worked for Ronald Bernard. Must be true then... The rest of the article is just the old blah can't find anything about his past so he must be lying blah youtube won't delete the interviews so he must be controlled opposition blah blah... The same bullshit over and over and over again.
I wish I could downvote this but I don't have enough points to do that yet.
▼ neverobey
part 2
▼ neverobey
Alright, I did not want to out myself but I wrote this article and I can proove that I worked for him. And there is much more to it. I am still invastigating.
▼ purpleabyss
Oooh... so why didn't you share that "proof" in your actual article, hm? Can't wait for the outcome of your "investigation".
▼ neverobey
why are you so aggressive, dude? What's your point? We're all trying to find out the truth, aren't we? Stop dividing us, please. And stop fighting me. If you have a question, just go ahead and ask. I don't see the point in this comversation. I'll tell you anything you want to know.
▼ neverobey
oh, what happened to voat? Downvoting for what exactly?
▼ purpleabyss
Downvoting for content I dislike. Guess that's the point of downvoting.
▼ neverobey
I was talking about my comment that only stated that I am the one who wrote the article. Anyways, pleas let's stop arguing. Makes no sense at all
▼ Dig4Dutroux-Holland
That's harsh bro. Also, not helping. Also, damaging your credibility, slightly ranting.. doe es meedenken.
▼ argosciv
Honestly, the entire premise of calling him up for a job interview, sounds more larpish than anything 'Ronald' has allegedly put out in the open.
▼ 2impendingdoom
Ronald Bernard probably changed his name when he quit the scene, but I wonder if anyone anyone who was unethical to get involved in the first place can ever come fully clean, kind of like a drug addict even after they stop using, you really can't ever trust them completely, they are just so comfortable lying and out for themselves is their baseline its easy for them to relapse in other ways.
But what does RB stands to gain? customers for this new bank, is that going to be just a fraud? I would hope not, is it even happening?
▼ argosciv
Mostly agree, think you're being very harsh on drug addicts there, though.
I've met many who have paid their dues and who are fully trustworthy on the flip-side of hell. There's a distinction worth making, between addicts and junkies, a junky being a morally devoid fiend, though, not always beyond 'redemption'
▼ 2impendingdoom
life experience, trust one and you will be punished.
▼ argosciv
life experience: trust sparingly and you will help good people stuck in a world of hurt. But, otherwise, yes... if you trust any ol' junky, expect to lose more than you put in.
▼ 2impendingdoom
I'm not saying don't help anyone, I'm saying that addicts can't be trusted. They hurt themselves as much as everyone around them.
▼ argosciv
Oh I hear ya, my experiences get a bit dicey too. Just saying that not everyone is a lost cause in that department :)
Hell, if others had given up on me, I'd have been doomed years ago.
▼ Dig4Dutroux-Holland
Amen to that brother.oh wait, not religious.. Word up!