In light of recent events, it is worth going back and carefully listening to this interview, because many of the patterns of recent events that Ole and Greg explore during this conversation from seven months ago are shockingly similar to patterns we have seen over the past seven days.
The interview explores the abundant evidence which suggests that fear-inducing events may be deliberately employed in order to shock the emotions of a large number of people, in order to enable the pursuit of policies that the majority of the people would strongly oppose or vigorously protest had it not been for the emotionally-manipulative event that was staged in order to overcome that resistance (and in fact to change the popular opinion towards demanding an action that they would have otherwise opposed).
Such deliberately provoked or artificially manufactured events, designed to arouse the populace to clamor for actions that they would previously have opposed, are often referred to as "false flags," a term from the days in which sailing ships flew their colors to show their nation of origin: if a ship falsely displayed the flag of an enemy, and then committed some kind of atrocity in order to blame that act on the enemy and arouse the anger of the population so that they would demand revenge or other violent action as a response, then that incident could be termed a "false flag" event.
Beginning at about 0:06:10 in the interview as time-stamped in the YouTube version embedded above (and linked here), the conversation between Greg -- who is an excellent interviewer and prepares pages of questions before an interview -- and Ole proceeds as follows:
GREG: That is tragic and strange enough, but let's get into some of these shootings, these -- quite possibly staged events, I mean: we've seen several here in the United States, but now it seems like they're on a world tour -- just going all over the place. Just in the past six or seven months we have events in Paris [referring to the Charlie Hebdo shootings of January 2015, since this interview was published in April 2015], Copenhagen, Sydney and Ottawa and a couple of others -- and they all seem to fit a pretty predictable pattern, which is one of the first clues someone can look at to see if these events really are random, or if they're part of a larger agenda, but -- you know -- you've been looking into these pretty heavily: what are you finding, man?
OLE: I've spent some thirty years of my life looking into these things, and learning how they think, and how very strict they are: they are not very flexible, I would say, they haven't got a lot of imagination either when they carry these things out. They are all based on the old Roman tactic: Problem -- Reaction -- Solution.
I know we've talked about that before -- I'm just going to repeat it because it's so essential to understand what's going on. The people in power -- in so-called "power" -- they secretly create a problem. The reason for that is to get the reaction, from the population: we're talking globally, now. The reaction is always fear-based, like: "Oh my GOD! Something needs to be done!" Where, it's an emotional reaction they're looking for, so we do not use our skills of observation or good-thinking -- we just freak out, and say "Oh my GOD! We are under attack -- something needs to be done!" and then we turn towards these people, that we are not aware of secretly created the problem, that will then serve us the solution -- and we will welcome it; we will even see them as heroes, you know.
And the solution is every single time something we would never ever have accepted, had it not been for the problem: Problem -- Reaction -- Solution. And every single time as well, you will see the solution -- if it's a "false flag" or if they are the ones behind it -- the solution is the same, every single time: "You have to pay." You have to give up your civil rights, your human rights, you have to accept more and more militarized police, robo-cops, military vehicles in the streets, martial law -- give up the rights for privacy, for your computers, for the surveillance cameras, for scanners, for you-name-it [. . .]
So this is the signs to look out for. When you see them, before you even start looking into the details of what's going on: see what happens straight after these things [. . .]
Much later in the interview -- actually during the "Plus" part of the show which is for subscribers to Greg's THC+ program (which enables Greg to pursue this valuable radio-podcast format without any commercials and thus without having to worry about leverage or pressure being applied on him to change his show by those paying for the commercials) -- Ole and Greg explore the possible significance of dates upon which suspicious events (which may have been false flag events designed to arouse the anger of the populace) have taken place, and the locations where they happen:
OLE (beginning at around 1:18:00 of the "Plus" version of the interview): [. . .] OK, so, we look at the date -- and if you remember right it [. . .] was also Valentine's Day, which they use that for Satanic rituals as well -- and the name of the place was Khoten, which in Danish means "the Gunpowder Keg," and if you look at one of the most famous false flags ever, it was the Guy Fawkes thing, the "Gunpowder Plot," you know when he was about to blow up the Parliament and so on. I'm just pointing these out -- I'm not saying it is totally sure -- I'm just pointing them out, OK?
And the second part of this happened on the 15th of February. And many of these false flags happen on the same dates but different years. And the 15th of February was when they -- another false flag -- when they blew up the USS Maine in the harbor of Havana, on Cuba, in 1898 I think. This was -- it's been proven now to have been an inside job, either an accident or an inside job. But, Spain was blamed for it -- that they had blown up this American ship -- and it gave the US an excuse to start a war with Spain, and the result was that Spain had to give up the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam. I mean, those were stolen, and that was the first part of the American Empire, that was started on a false flag, and that was exactly on the 15th. [. . .]
The fact that the explosion on the Maine (the masts of which I'm told have been claimed to serve as the flagpoles at two different military service academies in the US -- West Point and Annapolis -- as well as at Arlington national cemetery, which is ironic because the ship itself only had two masts) was used as justification to launch a war when in fact the ship was not destroyed by enemy action would appear to indicate that the Spanish-American War was thus an illegal war of aggression launched under false pretenses, either deliberately or mistakenly.
The same can be said for the infamous Gulf of Tonkin incident from the 1960s which led to a massive buildup of troops and combat action in Vietnam, which would probably have been much more strongly opposed had the extremely suspicious supposed attacks in the Gulf of Tonkin (which turned out not to have been attacks at all) not been exploited in much the same manner as the USS Maine incident had been exploited nearly seven decades earlier.
These historical precedents, in which an incident which in hindsight can now be seen to have been presented to the people in a completely misleading manner in order to effect a profound change in popular opinion, and in fact to start wars under false pretenses, should be examined very carefully today, in light of the events of the past week and in light of the evidence which Ole Dammegard presented in his April interview based on the patterns he has found in studying possible false flag events from the recent past.
Most concerning is the pattern he points out regarding the importance of looking closely at what happens after the event in question. In the case of the horrible events in Paris last week, we are told that the crime was solved in an amazingly short amount of time, so quickly that the movements of all the perpetrators and their origins could be definitively determined, and then large-scale military actions could be planned and actually carried out, less than forty-eight hours after the Paris event took place.
So, given the patterns described by Ole and Greg in their interview from April of this year, and based upon details which can be seen surfacing again and again in suspicious "public-opinion altering events" going back all the way to the USS Maine, are there any significant patterns present in the date and location of the horrendous public-opinion altering event that took place in Paris last week?
In fact, it is possible to find some extremely significant correspondences.
The attacks took place on Friday, November 13th (just as the financial markets in the US were closing, which amazingly is yet another pattern that Ole brings up in his interview with Greg from April of this year, in which Ole points out how many suspicious, shocking, public-opinion altering events take place late on a Friday, as the markets in the US are closing).
November 13 happens to be a date of tremendous significance in the tremendously important myth of Isis and Osiris, as related by the ancient philosopher (and initiated priest of the ancient mysteries, including possibly those of Isis) Plutarch or Plutarchus (AD 46 - AD 120).
In his very important account of the Isis and Osiris myth, entitled De Iside et Osiride in Latin, Plutarch writes that the murder of Osiris (the husband of Isis) by his treacherous brother Set (or Typhon, as Plutarch calls Set, based on Greek mythology) took place at a big party amidst much revelry -- and Plutarch relates:
They say also that the date on which this deed was done was the seventeenth day of Athyr, when the sun passes through the Scorpion [. . .].
This is significant, because according to the footnote in the Loeb classical edition of 1936,
the seventeenth day of Athyr on which Osiris was said to have been slain corresponds to November the 13th.
If you want to look that up for yourself, see footnote number 72 (a very significant number, oddly enough, and one that corresponds to the number of henchmen who helped Set kill his brother Osiris, according to Plutarch's account) in the web page linked above containing a translation of Plutarch's text.
So much for the significance of the date.
The significance of the place is fairly obvious -- many authors and analysts down through the years including the insightful Robert Taylor (one of the pioneers of what today is sometimes called "aztrotheology") have opined that Paris is the city especially dedicated to the goddess Isis
(Par-Isis). And indeed, the fact that the city's most famous cathedral is dedicated to Notre Dame -- our Lady, the Queen of Heaven -- who can be shown to correspond to the goddess Isis in the celestial system underlying all the world's mythology (including the stories in the New Testament) seems to be evidence supporting such an identification of Paris and the goddess Isis.
It is also significant that the initial bombing by the US of the terrorist group which the western media chooses to refer to as "ISIS" commenced on September 22, 2014 -- a date of tremendous significance on the zodiac calendar, associated with the fall equinox, and presided over by the zodiac sign of Virgo the Virgin, who can be shown to relate to both the goddess Isis and the Virgin Mary (see for instance the analysis presented in this video).
The accusation that a nation or entity is using a false flag event in order to deliberately inflame the people to clamor for military action that they would otherwise not support is very serious, and it is of course too soon to draw any conclusions about the very recent events of November 13, 2015.
However, the shocking number of significant points of correspondence with the patterns that Ole Dammegard has found in his examination of serious and suspicious events from the past, and which he described in an interview with Greg Carlwood which aired back in April of this year, should cause everyone to pay very close attention to what Ole and Greg are talking about in that interview, and also to think very carefully about the implications of events such as the sinking of the USS Maine in 1898 and the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964.
Those incidents caused massive changes of public opinion in support of wars which in hindsight may well have been illegal in nature, not wars of self-defense but something else altogether.
I would even go so far as to suggest that every single human being has a responsibility to consider these matters very carefully -- and to peacefully but vigorously oppose the escalation of military force, physical violence, and the massive violations of human rights which are predicated upon the wide-spread fear-based responses to events whose full significance and origin are still not completely clear.
image: Wikimedia commons (link).