Lesta Nediam LNC2016-06-09 1605 +F Zentura

Lesta Nediam LNC2016-06-09 1605 +F Zentura
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ/posts/Csh2dbrYzkZ
https://pastebin.com/NyxU6MLQ
__


+F Zentura __ Nicely presented video. (And here's a bit of a ramble as a result of watching it!)

In a nutshell I can see it working *something* like this. A "news story/article" is typically text and some images about a recent/current "newsworthy" event. In an honest system it would be about a real event as reported to us by a real journalist who is only interested in informing us. In an honest system - everything is wonderful.

However - in a lie system this is *too good of an opportunity* to waste. There is no way a lie system would *NOT* make an effort to transfer "ideas/thoughts/concepts" to us in sly and sneaky ways via news articles.

Since Google *knows* what we're interested in [what "terms/concepts" catch our attention] it can then feed us the articles it estimates will catch our attention (or "unconscious attention"). We may not always click and read an article but Google knows we've glanced at the title!

But there's more to it. *In a lie system there is no requirement to report about anything that actually happened*. Reporting about genuine events is rather limiting! In a lie system the "news stories" themselves can be automatically generated based on things that (statistically) will catch the attention of the intended audience (since people click/read different types news articles - there can be something tailored for everyone).

Thus everyone is clicking different [generated] articles because they are "attracted" to them in some way.

As you point out in your video: *These articles themselves can then be filled with the names, places, locations, "events" which impress suggestions upon us*. Not only is a news article likely BS - it is "written" in such a way that it can influence us. Whether it works by anagrams or by bringing up "cultural concepts" (as +Terran Downvale has been focusing on) or some mixture of many things - it can all be thrown into the article. (We may not know why for weeks or months or years. We may never - and just find that over time we "feel differently" about things - never really being able to pinpoint it.)

I've often wondered how it can be that news articles contain so many spelling and grammar mistakes. Some would think it's because they're being written or edited by foreigners - *but could those errors be intentional to make us suspect it's a human and not computer generated* (or based on templates)?

In a sense these "news articles" are a kind of "spell" which transfer/impress upon us suggestions/ideas/images that "they" want us to have in our minds.

One [artificial] "news article" isn't going to change/affect us - but habitually reading them probably will. The suggestions they contain are free to swirl around in our heads influencing us.

And if a person reading the news article *believes* it's about a real event then the suggestions/impressions are going to be so much stronger. Their reactions will not be as subdued as they would be watching television - e.g., watching a murder on television will barely phase a person but reading about a murder in their local community will likely caused fear, outrage, etc.

You posted your video in 2014. _It can only be getting worse!_


__________________________________________
Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's posts, comments, videos and discussions:
https://pastebin.com/Bfr5RMSg

Here is Lesta Nediam's Google Plus posts (i.e., blog) - this is where Lesta is most active:
https://plus.google.com/+LestaNediamHQ

Here is an annotated text file with links to all of Lesta Nediam's video uploads:
https://pastebin.com/WV42jUb1

Here is Lesta Nediam's YouTube channel - for videos about the lie system:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3DalBOEZ6RqSyHk8_mGV7w