1 “Amazing Juan O'Savin Video: America's New Day Dawning, the Rebirth of America" 12.21

When Senator Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated on June 6, 1968, Jacqueline Kennedy cried out, “If they’re killing Kennedys, then my children are targets. I want to get out of this country.”

2. Mrs. Kennedy had a heartbreaking reason and a compelling reason to say that.

President Kennedy’s family are either incredibly accident prone or possibly, and this is just my supposition, there was an underlying plot by the de*ep state to remove every Kennedy that they...
3. ... believed posed a threat to their envisaged defeat.

How can I make that claim?

Because both the de*ep state and the Alliance are in possession of Looking Glass technology. This advanced off-world tech enables one to see into everything: Akashic records, future, past,...
4. ... present, timelines, dimensions, 2020 U.S. elections, anything.

Gene Decode reported that POTUS was in a SCIF Election Night watching the Election fraud take place on Quantum Computers and that this was the second time the Alliance had watched the fraud. They’d already...
5. ... seen Election Night 2020 before Trump even became POTUS thanks to Looking Glass.

This technology could also explain why Q’s posts are so eerily accurate.

It is my theory that, perhaps, when the ca_bal looked into future timelines they could see that an essential...
6. ... player in their inevitable downfall was a Kennedy.

What are the facts?

John F. Kennedy Jr.’s uncle, Joseph P. Kennedy Jr., died in a plane crash in 1944.

John’s aunt, Kathleen “Kick” Cavendish, died in a plane crash in 1948.

The parents of John’s aunt Ethel, George...
7. ... and Ann Skakel, died in a plane crash in 1955.

Johns’ father, President John F. Kennedy, was assassinated in 1963.

John’s uncle, Senator Edward Kennedy, narrowly escaped death in a 1964 plane crash.

John’s uncle, Senator Robert Kennedy, was assassinated in 1968.
8. If in fact John F. Kennedy Jr. staged his own passing in a plane crash in 1999, there is poetic Kennedy symmetry to his method of an exit.

I can understand one plane crash occurring in a family. Maybe even two. But five plane crashes in one family defies belief. It...
9. ... suggests to me a deliberate plot to remove Kennedys and any possibility of threat to the certain de*ep state annihilation.

What does this have to do with Juan O’Savin?

Many believe Juan is JFK.

As I’ve written many times now, Colleen and Charlie Freak are convinced...
10. ... of it because Juan O’Savin = 1-0-7 = 1-7 in Gematria = 17 = Q and they believe that Q is JFK.

I’m willing to believe JFK staged his own death, especially if he’d been a de*ep state target his whole life. A dramatic exit off the world stage would have been a brilliant...
11. ... and safeguarding ruse. But whether or not Juan is John I do not know.

Having listened to a number Juan O’Savin interviews I am convinced of one thing: He sounds more and more like Q, or certainly one of the Q’s.

Juan O’Savin has an exceptional gift for being able...
12. ... to clearly relate global Military and Geopolitical history to current events in this war with the de*ep state whom he calls “globalists.” He delivers his information in a measured tempo and (I believe) he carefully edits as he speaks. I assume he’s revealing maybe 10%...
13. ... of what he actually knows.

As well, Robert Steele attests that Juan has uncommon knowledge when it comes to Numerology, Astrology & Spirituality, all areas in which Q particularly communicates in coded drops.

I don’t know Juan’s true identity, but it’s fun to speculate.
14. We’ll learn soon enough, when the Alliance deems it safe for him and for us to know.

Meanwhile, in a 12-20-20 Podcast interview, President Trump said, “Merry Christmas. We’re getting closer and closer and I hope you let everybody know—we’re actually very close.”
15. Then Juan Tweeted out these two posts on 12-20-20:

Very exciting.

Some highlights in this interview to follow in next tweet...

More from 🇺🇸I Support Our Military & Law Enforcement🇺🇸

More from Politics

All the challenges to Leader Pelosi are coming from her right, in an apparent effort to make the party even more conservative and bent toward corporate interests.

Hard pass. So long as Leader Pelosi remains the most progressive candidate for Speaker, she can count on my support.

I agree that our party should, and must, evolve our leadership.

But changed leadership should reflect an actual, evolved mission; namely, an increased commitment to the middle + working class electorate that put us here.

Otherwise it’s a just new figure with the same problems.

I hope that we can move swiftly to conclude this discussion about party positions, so that we can spend more time discussing party priorities: voting rights, healthcare, wages, climate change, housing, cannabis legalization, good jobs, etc.
How the CIA gets the media to lie to you




War on democracy - installing US-puppet dictators in Latin America in order to control their economies
#Guatemala #Arbenz #RedScare

Propaganda, "harmless bombing" and a CIA terror campaign

CIA war on Nicaragua

You May Also Like

"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."

We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".

The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?