If you’ve read the comments from my last post you know we have two versions of Ike’s speech. This could mean that we ‘caught it early’ enough that all the changes have not yet ‘kicked in.’ Apparently, whatever is going on, it doesn’t happen ‘all at once,’ which is in itself interesting, and may be an important clue to the nature of the phenomenon.
Addendum: This happened one other time that I am aware of. It was the bodybuilder Franco Columbo (now ‘Columbu’) and I recall it so well because when I was a kid I knew him with the ‘o’ and even got his autograph with that spelling (lost to time but I know what it was). There are plenty of ‘residues’ around with the ‘old’ spelling, if you look. (I can’t find any of my archived versions of either, which is odd since I recall doing screenshots.) 
I’m going to spend most of today archiving clips and I hope some of you do the same when you have time. Write everything down (including the date) or include it all in the screen grab! Later, other people will tend to doubt you; you may end up doubting yourself. Meticulous record keeping is vital.
On the other hand, though, folks that currently don’t believe something very weird is going on (the ‘human memory’ fallacy), will not change their minds about this, no matter the evidence. That much is obvious from past posts. (It’s not a question of ‘having’ the ME, it’s a question of ‘seeing’ it, which some people are not prepared to do, no matter the strength or sheer amount of the evidence. Yes, it has to be taken on a case-by-case basis, but the very number of striking ‘anomalies’ indicates something very strange is going on.) I suspect that people who will not look into this with an open mind would also yell ‘conspiracy theory!’ regarding events like 9/11. Remember this video (on Sex in/and the City? All those claiming they were actually saying ‘and the City’?
Addendum: Those who don’t ‘want to’ believe anything strange is going on will say it’s all caused by faulty human memory, then will vaguely cite ‘memory’ studies to prove their point. Problem is that the relevant studies actually prove the opposite, i.e., that when multiple people testify to a data point, the consensus is almost always correct. This is well documented in ‘eye witness’ studies. One person’s memory is very fallible, but when many agree on any given point, the percentage of errors plummets.
Also, there are some cases wherein a… discrepancy is inarguable, based on now-existing evidence. This may be one of those cases. It depends on if ‘editing/copying’ is a reasonable explanation for the two versions. Some research is needed on this point, but I’ve checked the ‘Official Eisenhower Library’ (a government site) and the version there is ‘new’, i.e., with the stutter. (I’d like to be in touch with documentary filmmakers who have used the clip and ask them where they got it.)
Me, I mainly care about myself. I want to be able to say (to myself), one way or the other, without any doubt, whether I’ve witnessed a change that cannot be explained by ‘normal’ cause and effect. At least not ‘in the current reality.’ As I say, I saw the clip sans stutter two or three days ago; I’m not sure exactly when and what the source was. I will have to check my browsing records on this but it doesn’t really matter since you guys have opened the floodgates of clips without the stutter.
Try to find anyone who remembers him singing ‘this neighborhood’…
Addendum: I stopped writing here and spent a couple hours archiving the two versions. More on this below.
Let’s list the possible… non-‘supernatural’ explanations…
1) Everyone is remembering wrong. As I say, studies on human memory show that as the number of witnesses to something goes up, the chances that they are all wrong plummets. This is vital in understanding the ME.
2) I believe the speech was done live (I’ll check) so multiple takes can’t be the answer.
3) It’s a psyop. The spooks are going around changing the speech to fuck with us. We’ve been through this possibility before with other MEs; it seems highly unlikely, if not flat impossible. (For example, the idea put out by Miles Mathis is that they broke into your house to remove Dolly’s braces in Moonraker.)
It’s not just one or two but the amount of ‘residues’ like this one.
4) Later editing. In other words, at some point after the speech someone took out the stutter with whatever version of editing equipment/software was available at that time. After that, some versions were copied with the stutter and some without. A defense against this is our memories. In my case, I know I had never seen the stutter until yesterday. I mean I heard it in the background and the surprise nearly knocked me down. This is why I ask for feedback.
If say, 90% say they had never heard the stutter, we can probably eliminate the 10% doubters as being in simple denial (unless they heard the stutter very recently). What I’d like to hear is someone who does understand that something weird is going on (it’s not just ‘faulty memory’), but who also says the stutter has always been there. That would mean something (assuming I could trust the witness).
Point being, if the above is the explanation, then there should be a certain percentage of ‘old’ versions as opposed to ‘new’ versions on the various media. As of right now, I’ve checked a total of 28 Youtube sources and it came up 10 without the stutter (the ‘old’ version that I knew well) and 17 with the stutter (which until yesterday I had never heard/seen). I could kick myself, but I didn’t frame all the screen grabs so they included the date the video was posted; but the way it looks is the older a clip the more likely it will be without the stutter. I could be wrong on this; I will go back and get the specific dates. For me, though, what this means is — with a higher number of ‘stuttering’ versions (the ‘new’ one) around — I should have seen it many times. I didn’t. (This is a personal conclusion, based on what I know about my ability to notice things. I’m fucking good at noticing things, as some of my blog posts attest.)
You might notice that there is one missing. My count is 27 total out of 28. Well, one appears to be ‘in between’ a stutter and a non-stutter. There is a frame or maybe two missing – although I’m not sure how the speech was recorded (back in 1961), so ‘frame’ may be the wrong word. If anyone is familiar with the history of videography editing, please chime in below.
Meanwhile I’ve put all the archived clips on one YT video, for study now, and to see if something changes (I put up a new video on 1/01/20, somewhat different from the original).
It also occurs to me that this is one example of a change in this speech, but there may be others (changes). It would be interesting to go over different versions to see what else might have been futzed with, but that’s for some other time. Mainly, I want to archive both versions to see if anything changes. And I also want to hear from people who are very familiar with the speech, meaning this section of it. This is the sort of change — coming where it does, the word and thought he stutters on, and so forth — that is significant in that it appears to be purposeful, rather than a random event. It’s as if ‘they’ are saying that our ‘guard’ (against the military/Industrial Complex) is weakening, or is down.
But the bible (now) says they were written on ‘Tables of Stone.’ TABLES. How do you figure? Do you remember ‘Tables’ or ‘Tablets’?
There are many changes in the Bible that are like this, i.e., have portentous or ‘satanic’ implications.
All this goes to evidence of ‘Simulation Theory’ and other aspects of ‘reality.’ Are we being tested or just fucked with by a ‘higher power’? I’ll not go into this now; I want to get this stuff out and made public right away. Time to blab/philosophize later.
As always, I’m looking forward to your comments.
allan
I suspect that some folks will say that some point in the past the speech was edited to take out the stutter, and that’s that. Period. This is possible, yes. But why go to that trouble and not take out the other stuttering that Ike does in the speech? For this and other reasons — like what I can see in comparing the two — I don’t think this explains the different versions. (By far the strongest evidence for ME is that I have never seen the stutter before.)
Google trends is a good way of seeing what people were ‘thinking’ over the years.
One last point: All the top YT versions (most hits and at the top of the list) are of the ‘new’ version (with the stutter), so people grabbing the speech for other videos should have ended up using this one. Which again begs the question Why haven’t I seen it before? Ever?
I’m too young to have seen the original speech, and as non-American, didn’t watch this speech all the way through with full attention.
But let my say this: Youtube belongs to Google, and Google is founded and groomed with CIA money.