Anneke Lucas Interview

[Voyageur]

believe that there is a problem with Laurent Guyénot.

Somehow, I see a good guy definitely willing to enforce some heavy doors, sacred cows, etc.

Have read a few of his books and articles, and some of the above takes things in a different direction, without being able to comment upon it at this time. Curiously, speaking of commentary, for those following Owens and the Macron/Bridgett story as originally told by Poussard, Guyénot does not seem to like his thesis and makes comment on it here.

https://www.unz.com/article/brigittology-for-dummies/

Poussard is simultaneously convinced that he is working for the truth and that he is working for Trump, Putin & Co, and these two convictions tend to get mixed up in his mind. He has lost touch with reality. He lives in another world, an imaginary world in which he is writing history.

He doesn’t understand that if his thesis is picked up by pro-Putin media or pro-Trump commentators, it simply proves that he has given them a good joke to ridicule Macron and, through him, France.

He says much more. However, was a little disappointed in his approach of what can be seen, and the treads pulled upon are threads he seems to want to dismiss out of hand.

Going with the C's:

(L) Was Brigitte Macron born a biological male?

A: Yes

The C's have simply stated it, which meshes with what can be evaluated thus far (convoluted as it is), but not for Guyénot, who is close to being definitive with his dismissal of the Poussard's thesis, although perhaps it's just too fantastical a reality for him to consider?

- this is really applicable to the Candace thread, and yet it is on Guyénot so left it here.

 

[palestine]

Thank you @Voyageur

The C's have simply stated it, which meshes with what can be evaluated thus far (convoluted as it is), but not for Guyénot, who is close to being definitive with his dismissal of the Poussard's thesis, although perhaps it's just too fantastical a reality for him to consider?

Yes that's a good question: why wouldn't the balance push "in favour"? Instead, he discredits it.