>>Regarding red-pilling, one of his favorite lines is, “The lies are different at every level.” It sounds as if he could be a demon, but what he’s saying with that is actually, “To get to the truth, which in your terms is so outlandish I’m forced to sugar-coat it in ways you’ll find acceptable just to hear it and for us to continue the conversation. When you’ve acclimated to that understanding, we’ll be ready for the next layer of truth if you’re willing to consider it.”
I find that to be the case when I am red-pilling a new person.
There are many things that are not freely posted on our Q threads. And some that are approached obliquely, with warnings that they are not for the squeamish. Those things go far beyond the avoidance of vulgarity and curse words.
So, yes, “sugar coating” is necessary. That can be total avoidance of certain disturbing topics. It can be links with warnings. It can be euphemisms like “human trafficking” which conceal the full horror of the full truth.
When speaking to a large and diverse audience, I believe that Juan, Q, and most of us here take precautions.
Whether or not Juan is “real” is an entirely different issue. I’m inclined to believe he is a true patriot. But regardless, his statements stand on their own merits. We each need to evaluate whether they are true or false or unknown. So far, I can’t recall anything he’s said that I would put into the false category. So IMO true statements, and those that remain to be tested.
I will admit I am tired of fanboi clubs promoting this insider, that insider, etcetc. Why not just post link or whatever and leave it at that. “Sugar coating” is not the same thing as “not telling everything in one blow”.
When someone is red-pilling an individual or a like-minded small group, an objective observer might be able to comment coherently on the efficiency or dare I say "correctness" of the words being shared.
When the audience is a larger, more diverse cross-section of bigger groups, one quickly is dealing with so many variables that perhaps a less granular (as in a nose-count of individuals that "get it") and more of a "volume of good" (or not-so) would be a useful way to look at whatever is shared.
The globalists have for centuries been writing the textbooks and painting our historical backdrops that often give rise to skewed understandings of our world. Juan's "different lies at every level" have come out in other's vernacular as, for example, "cold, hard truth" or the "whole truth" among others. What do they mean? It often grasps toward things 3- or more dimensional. You've put your finger on a few things there. Most are just not ready for the whole truth of human trafficking, the wanton sex, the ritual killing, the lust for blood.
I dropped the word "hybristophilliac" for an HRC bed-buddy. There's some horrific truth packed into that that HRC so quickly would replace in drones' thoughts using the tried-and-true words "conspiracy theories." People that throw around that term often love its efficacy to cover horrific truths.
Juan and I believe similarly that we must give these situations over to God. Not only will He "sort it out," He works as disclosed in Romans 8:28, "to the glory of those who believe in Him and who are called according to His purpose." Though we can plow, plant seeds and cultivate, it is God that provides the increase.
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places." --Eph. 6:12
If we--through faith and prayer--labor according to His purpose, the spirits of saints being subjected to Him have lofty opportunities for effective work that could never be available to our (way down here), purely human ways.