It's Increasingly Looking Like The Snowden Drama Might Be A Limited Hangout PsyOp

For anyone who is confused by the title of this post, here are some notes:

The Snowden drama refers to the NSA contractor (or so we were originally told) , Edward Snowden, who, upon discovering the extent to which the NSA spies on every citizen in the United States, copied close to two million documents to thumb drives, and left the country to be able to blow the proverbial whistle without getting arrested for stealing and exposing state secrets.

A “psyop” means, psychological operation. The government is constantly pulling psyops on the public. For instance, 911. Even for those who still aren't allowing themselves to deal with the evidence indicating the inside job nature of the events of that day, there is still no denying that the government committed psyops in reaction to 911.

A great example is how they gave every day a color to indicate the supposed level of terror threat. There was never any rhyme or reason behind it. It was classic fear manipulation – which always creates massive political capital, like getting people to give up liberties in exchange for perceived security – and when critics exposed it as a national psychological operation (psyop), the government was basically forced to do away with it. (Initially, they probably thought it would be a permanent fixture of their never ending war on terror.)

A “limited hangout” has nothing to do with a sparsely attended session of a live Google video streaming service known as Hangouts. A limited hangout is a method of hiding information by making people believe you are telling all your juicy secrets, when, in fact, you are really limiting the amount of information that you are putting out.

This propaganda technique has a lot in common with a magician's sleight of hand. There is a lot of misdirection involved. Done correctly, you can pretend to be telling explosive truths, but in reality, you can be reinforcing lies that had previously started to unravel.

Almost from the beginning, a number of people have been saying the entire Snowden affair is a giant limited hangout . They cited two main suspicions that led them to such a conclusion, one much stronger than the other.

The first was that when he was in Hong Kong and first identified himself as the source of the story published by the reporters he had chosen to wok with, there was more reaction and support of him there in Hong Kong, than from citizens in the US, the actual country where the privacy of the citizens were being violated.

It could be argued that the people of Hong Kong are just more politically astute and active than the citizens of the United States. There is no doubt that the American public has been dumbed down by the powers that be, through a multiple tier process that includes fluoridation of the water, chemicals in the food, a purposely pitiful public school system, and various mind control psyops done through TV, video games and more.1)

To this day, you could probably ask most US citizens what they think of Snowden, and you'd be likely to hear replies along the lines of, “Well, as long as I had food and cable TV, I wouldn't mind being snowed in for a few days, yo.”

The lack of reaction from the public in the US isn't so much the point here. The question is, how realistic is it to think that a large throng of Hong Kong residents, armed with signs in both English and Chinese, including some with large posters of Snowden's face, is going to organically appear, the very day after the United States charged him with espionage crimes?

If you know anything about the powers that be – who, by and large, run the world – you are aware that most of the things you see on national TV news are staged events, to some degree or another. For people in Hong Kong to have a rally the day after files were charged, complete with posters, pictures and banners in both languages, does seem suspect, to put it mildly.

More important though, the early Snowden detractors have said from the start that not only is he not really publicizing anything we don't know about, he was silent on the big secrets,like 911.

The evidence regarding 911 is overwhelming to anyone who is looking with an open mind. It really is the litmus test when attempting to discern whether a federal whistle blower is worth his or her salt.

Snowden's data basically revealed that all our phones and computers are tapped. There is no real privacy. Those of us in the know, knew that was the case many years before Snowden.2)

In fact, we were aware that the powers that be can look through our computers & TVs, and that high altitude spy blimps, in conjunction with ground penetrating radar can see through our walls – (and that, even if we have have no phones, we can still be the victims of eavesdropping through the electric wiring in our homes.)3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

Snowden's data hasn't even told us all of what we already knew. It has helped to confirm things we understood to be true. For instance, we could tell that there are paid trolls online who support official events of narratives, and who wreak havoc on discussion forums, calling everyone who questions mainstream media, as conspiracy theorists.8)

Yes, it's interesting to see some of the actual training that the trolls study, and nice to have such information confirmed, but Snowden had not given us anything regarding 911. There have been previous NSA whistle blowers like Wayne Madsen9) who gave us juicier stuff than Snowden has meted out.

And that's another issue. He releases a tiny percentage of what he has. At the rate he's going, it seems like it would take a century to reveal all the files.10) So really, it's incumbent to ask, What's up with that, Edward?

You may be thinking that if the government is just putting on a show, pretending to want to extradite and arrest Snowden for espionage, then why would Obama go to all the trouble of basically forcing down the plane of the president of Bolivia en route from Russia, so that it could be searched to see if Snowden was aboard.

After all, if Obama is willing to take such an extraordinary measure against a standing, president of a sovereign nation, an ally, no less, doesn't that prove that Obama really is hellbent on finding Snowden and getting him back to the States to stand trial? The short answer is, no.

As a general rule, you'll make more money betting against the sincerity of a high level politician than you will betting on it. You can bet your last federal reserve note that Obama absolutely would go through the histrionics of wheeling and dealing with allies to get them to deny Bolivia's president the right to fly over their countries, so he would have no choice but to land and have his plane boarded and searched.

That would simply be a matter of selling it to the world… helping to enforce the “reality” of it all. Yet there is another possibility. Obama might be out of the loop. You don't actually believe that politicians are in charge; do you?

The globalist cabal that runs the show does everything big via compartmentalization. People are provided data on a need to know basis. The president is not that high on the list of needing to know.

That's the way it has been for a long time, possibly even in the days of President Washington; certainly in the days of President Lincoln. He tried to be in charge, but got himself assassinated as a direct result, just like JFK, a century later.

His vice president, who become president upon his death, clearly wasn't in charge. He was impeached. During the hearings, the White House janitor testified that a man who was Johnson's superior in the Freemason lodge would often come to the White House and yell at him, giving him orders. Johnson, according to the janitor, clearly was the one taking orders.

So it is extremely possible that the Snowden drama isn't what it seems at all. He could be an agent merely playing the pre scripted role of an IT contractor who steals information and leaks it and flees from prosecution – all without the knowledge of the POTUS11) or other political figureheads. In other words, it could be above Obama's pay grade.

Why would the powers that be do such a thing in the first place? It's a good question. We don't necessarily know for sure that that is what this is, but as time goes on, it's looking that way. Possible reasons might have to do with the fact that the alternative media is transitioning into the real media, and mainstream media is losing credibility and audience size.

The globalist criminals who, to a large degree, have hijacked most of the governments of the world, may be seeing the writing on the wall, as they say, and decided to bring the surveillance information to the light of day in this way, because they knew that it would only be a matter of time before the public learned about the hideous, contemptuous invasion of privacy anyway.

Doing it in this manner, provides a lot of theater and sleight of hand. Instead of us debating how sickening it is for the government to have this much hidden power and lack of decency – and to consider each and every citizen as a terrorist suspect – we are debating whether Snowden is a traitor or a hero.

Moreover, if Snowden, in the process of supposedly having the backs of the people, can reinforce the official narrative of 911, then it could possibly slow down the rate at which people are making the transition from 911 was an inside job denial, to 911 was an inside job reality.

With each passing year, more and more people keep making that transition. In 2001 it was a relative handful of people (percentage wise) that understood that criminal elements in the government were responsible for 911. Today, more than half of the country believes we have been lied to by the government and the media about 911.

Snowden recently sat down for a four hour interview with NBC's Brian Williams. One hour made it to air. In both, footage that was aired and footage that didn't make it, Snowden spoke of 911 as if he believes the official story.

It beggars belief that someone with this man's level of awareness of so many of the improprieties of the US intelligence agencies could take the official government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 at face value. This is especially true when you consider the fact that more than half of the 911 Commission members and one of the co chairs are on record stating sentiments like the commission was not allowed to get the full story, and was set up to fail.12)

If this is really what's it's starting to look like, the script was written well in terms of back-dooring the Snowden comments on 911. If they had been wedged in, early on, it would have provoked more suspicion. To wait this long, and to not make a big deal of it – (they cut more 911 comments out than they allowed to air) – makes it seem more organic. It's definitely more effective.

That's not to say it's going to prove to be effective in the long term, in keeping people from coming to grips with the reality of 911, but it may temporarily slow down the process. Don't expect anyone who previously understood that 911 is an inside job, to change her mind based on Snowden's comments.

Generally speaking, that doesn't happen. There will never be a trend in the polls where opinions start flowing in the opposite direction, and people who believed 911 could not have possibly happened as the result of 19 hijackers with razor blade knifes, will suddenly start changing their minds and buying into the official narrative. Nothing about the Snowden affair will make that happen.


Some of the other technology in the dumbing down process includes; deployment of psychotronics as the pulsed beam microwaves of cell phone towers, Wi-Fi, new top secret designed street lights, aircraft sprayed chemtrails which dispense smart-dust which is comprised of magnetized nano particles which are breathed in, and eventually cross the blood-brain barrier after which they can be flashed and activated to entrain desired brain patterns. This data can be found in #24 at
My hyperbole wasn't far off. Someone had the numbers and was thus able to do the math. At the rate things were going when the calculation was done, it was on par for 42 years.
president of the United States
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton said, “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, [I believe] that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue.“

QR Code
QR Code it_s_increasingly_looking_like_the_snowden_drama_might_be_a_limited_hangout_psyop (generated for current page)