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?
Regarding “Sex and/in the City”. My personal understanding/explanation of alleged Mandela Effect in this case is that name “Sex and the City” doesn’t make sence because ‘sex’ has no (direct) connection to ‘city’. Name “Sex in the City” is also stupid as the whole TV series, but maybe sounds to brain as much more probable variant.
Check record in Czech-Slovakia movie database: https://www.csfd.cz/film/69730-sex-ve-meste/prehled/ You can see Czech translation is “Sex ve meste” which directly translates as “Sex in city”.
Poster in Russian language has name “Секс в большом городe” which means “Sex in big city” see https://img.csfd.cz/files/images/film/posters/160/762/160762900_64aa67.jpg?h180. But there is _always_ “Sex and the City” on english posters!
I think that whole mystery ME is that TV series authors choose illogical, incomprehensible name “Sex and the City” and people somehow intuitively choose/prefer to say “Sex in the City”. Human spell check auto correction in work?
When brain read text it doesn’t analyse every letter in words. It check 1st letter, last letter and the length of the word. Than it usually try to guess/predict what word it is regarding sentence/article context. The reason is to save time, increase speed and lower brain load. You can easily read text in which every word has inner letters in completely random order. It is commonly know fact.
The similar process can be observer with sight. Someone without glasses has problem in unknown place but is comfortable in well known environment because brain fills missing informations from memory. From the other side, if you see clearly, than you easily overlook something in well known place, like new road sign.
Another example: We used to have a dog called “Rex”. Now we have a tomcat called “Felix”. When my sister called “Felix”, I distinctly heard “Rex” in the beginning. My brain heard “Felix” but used to heard “Rex” when she called the animal, so auto correction in my brain decided to deliver much more probable “Rex” instead of “Felix” to my conscious mind.
Therefore if somebody read or even HEAR (!!!) “Sex and the City”… I hope everybody got my point.
Allan, ‘Eisenhower’s farewell address’ ME solved. The stutter is simply edited out in one version (the one you remember), and left in another version (original in ‘Official Eisenhower Library’).
1/ The video analysis (mpv video player)
Open your composite video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYn9u6LA1gQ
Go to time 1:33. Play it frame by frame. Eisenhover’s body moves a little between every frame. Than suddenly black point appears on the right side of his suit on tip of its collar. The black point is half tranparent (gray) on the next frame and disappear on the next frame. Go to frame with black point. Than go 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 frames backwards. 5. and 6. frames are the same (no movement of the body). The video is edited exactly where the stutter was.
2/ The sound analysis (Audacity audio software)
Open audio track of your composite video. Compare sound patterns. Versions without stutter “we must guard” against versions with stutter “we must khar guard”. The stutter “khar” is simply edited out.
Thanks for the work, although I don’t quite see your point. What I do realize is that altho I am not ‘an expert,’ I am a film editor, and can do what you did, i.e., put them side by side and compare sound and image. I will do that today.
Thing is, though, even if it is ‘film editing’ as opposed to ‘something else’, it still doesn’t explain why I (and everyone else, it seems) had never heard the stutter until a couple days ago. I’m waiting for more feedback but so far on the videos (comments) only one out of maybe 20 said he had heard it before (and who knows who that guy is).
But I’ll get back to you on the editing, with a post. If you feel like explaining why you think this settles the matter, please do.
Excellent catch Allan. Could be evidence of a staged “live” broadcast with the laterday circulation of a stutter cut as suggested above or another example of the mandala effect. Either way it reveals much. Does anyone have any insight into the presidential speech broadcasting from that era? was It really live or was there a memorex delay to enable “live” editing?
The stutter does make his insightful speech seem amateurish and in doing so discredits his warnings to a certain extent.
“The stutter does make his insightful speech seem amateurish and in doing so discredits his warnings to a certain extent.”
I totally disagree here, a stutter means NOTHING, to suggest amateurism, or to discredit anything in the real world.
Just wasn’t a finely polished TV presentation….which is what is wrong with the world today.
The people sheeple need those hair-sprayed puppets, not missing a beat, on the 6 o’clock news to take on board anything, – along with all the lies.
…..Which reminds me, there have been some shockingly bad at speaking Presidents, needing cue screens to put 2 words together.
Trump is a fantastic speaker today, he is incredible at speaking off the cuff constantly without cue card B.S, was the same in the apprentice. Anyone agree? 🙂
Have listened to this speech plenty of times over the last 20 years; this stutter is all new to me. What is going on!?!
It’s definitely been altered
The only explanation i have is that it was
Pre-recorded then edited and the edit
Version was played ‘not-live’.
Then someone used the original (non-edited) to air later.
If it was live, we’ve been mucked with.
Copying many times over with old tech recorders
Definitely could have altered audio/video timing.
Adding a word stutter is weird. PTB? Set up?
Or the dark is getting sloppy…
Ironically we do need to ‘guard’ and check keenly
To expose the truth… I’m forwarding your site…
Thanks Allan,
Cat
Allan, I remember the speech, don’t remember the stutter… or not … I just watched a version that one of the commenters put a link to and even now can’t say if it was one with or without the stutter … What I can say is after listening to the entire speech, is exactly how prophetic his two points to watch out for were … sounds like predictive programming because it seems like that’s exactly where we are … Militarily and technologically … where is the angst about that? Sometimes I think it’s all just a distraction, magic at it’s best. Love your work, look forward to every post. All the best to you and fellow readers in the times ahead.
Oops sorry, there it is
Hi Allan,
I don’t understand why my comments disappear
Bizarre. I’m not overly familiar with the speech so I can’t comment further. I did post this with a large group and will share any noteworthy feedback with you.
Great. This is what I was hoping for: Do you remember? And share this. Thank you.
Hi Allan,
I’m old enough to have seen this broadcast address a number of times over the years and I’m certain I never heard Eisenhower stumble at that point.
Although I presumed it to have been a live broadcast it’s possible that multiple takes were filmed and an alternate take has been introduced into the public domain.
Alternatively, some entity or group has the ability to alter elements of reality by accessing the past in some fashion (Project Looking Glass anyone?) possibly to ‘gaslight’ those who are really paying attention also thus consigning them to the outer limits of perceived sanity by majority public opinion along with anyone else who might hold with ‘conspiracy’ theorists. These then can be dubbed ‘deniers’ and ‘haters’ and open season can be declared upon them by all ‘right thinking citizens’.
Just a thought (or two)
Cheers and happy new year!
Yes. Your first possibility is unlikely because everyone seems to agree (it’s early yet on the tally) that they had not seen the stutter before. This is key. Yet there appear to be almost twice as many stutter-versions on YT. It will always come back to this, until we find that one or more of my archived non-stutter clips has turned into a stutter-clip. This is one reason why I put up the videos. (I put up two versions, one with the two clips separated, one with them alternating.)
Nice phrasing in your second possibility. There are others possibilities, including Simulation Theory. I’ll do another post today.
I have heard this speech literally dozens of times and I have never heard a stutter.
I watched this live in 1961, and I do not recall a stutter at “We must guard against”. I do recall thinking it odd that the President would be warning us little people about something that he said we as a nation were forced to create to survive, or something to that effect. Later in High School American History class, we were shown this speech again by the Audio ? Visual people. It was still film projector tech. This was in 1968 or 69, so the speech was something that someone wanted in the education system. I have no clue as to what this stutter in the speech is all about.
Thanks. Another vote for a ‘new’ version.
How old were you when this speech was made? And your memory of it is from that year seeing it live? How reliable is that?
I was sure you are a plant mole here to annoy me but this one is too dumb for a bot or a puppet. Sorry I thought you were dirty, Mary.
Mnemosyne (memory) was the mother of the nine Muses…the Gods simply play with the past state of the art. Destiny cannot be modify only the past can be change in the cultute in our collectiv memory…Happy 2020
So it must be my faulty memory? Okay. I guess this means you do not recall the speech or the stutter at all, one way or the other, right? I did ask for feedback on this.
Nope…never even begin to think that…what i want to say is something we dont understand play with history, change some tiny detail, a bit like in 1984 when they wipe some fact or people
So you’re still not going to tell us whether you remember it or not? Even after several reminders that I was asking for this feedback.
I remind just the version without stutters
It’s 8:30 and I see Maggie’s comment was posted at 2 PM today, or about 5 !/2 hours in the future.
I will not promise you my timeline was in the right realm. I live in the Ozarks between St. Louis and Branson, somewhere. When we have no modem and there’s heavy cloud cover it is hard to tell what day it is!
By the way, drud? I made a postimage link for this Pegasus in the Desert. You were right… it is amazing that a puff of smoke appears at 1:47 and by this frame, a perfect Pegasus has formed.
https://i.postimg.cc/ncNX0VS6/Screenshot-2020-01-01-137-Nevada-atomic-test-1955-You-Tube.png
Absolute truth is absolutely precise. To suggest an outside force is interfering, is to give the PTB an excuse for what they’re are doing. Whether Eisenhower flubbed and said card or guard is not an experience in Mandela Effect. It’s a trick.
In order to do what they do, reality is sacrificed in order to keep the populace confused.Nothing on the internet should be considered as truth.
The Pegasus thing has now corrected itself and has now ‘proved me wrong’. F*km.
My plans to revise and re-post an earlier post here got derailed by modem failure. You are an amazing researcher, Allan… if I ask you about a term tossed at me very recently which led me to the world of dark elves, I think, would you answer me or shrug like atlas?
Esoteric Hitlerism… the term that was tossed my way, as if I would know what it meant.
Someone “welcomed” me to an education on Esoteric Hitlerism, which I discovered, is kind of a “real thing.” There is library online under a plethora of white id titles. That’s my query from you or other of your readers who might help me grasp why my comment to a “beaner” friend who calls me hillbilly in return elicited such a reply.
…now, as to your fine reply…
Are we witnessing the Mandella Effect right before our very eyes?
My son was here for the “main event” but escaped when our modem failed. With a wave to us “prehistoric cornshucking losers” he drove back to cyberworld in Kansas City.
He is a software engineer, helping skynet weave all our medical records into the network for easy access worldwide. He assures me “skynet” has no sinister motives and will handle the treatment algorithms much more efficiently than human doctors.
When I asked how the “network” determines treatment priority in a limited supply situation, he told me he believes that is the crux of the singularity.
I don’t speak his lingo now, but from the tone and context, I think he is saying that artificial intelligence is really, ultimately, not artificial. Unless our own intellect is designed as well.
Is that an aspect of The Singularity? (My best guess… intended only to inspire better minds than my own.)
I downloaded it earlier today so I could watch it later. I have a freeze frame at 1:47 with the first puff of smoke then this Pegasus.
https://i.postimg.cc/ncNX0VS6/Screenshot-2020-01-01-137-Nevada-atomic-test-1955-You-Tube.png
By 1:49… a big cloud…
Okay. And all the rest of them – like in my Sex in the city video — are all a psyop too. this is what you’re saying, right? I did ask for feedback on this. I don’t know what Pegasus means, btw.
Pegasus was the flying horse that took inspired Icarus to fly to the sun and he lost his ability to fly.
So, the weird thing is that the initial blast formed this perfect image of the flying horse before making a big misshapen smoke cloud. Is it revised or is it just a coincidence?
Or did the air currents in the Nevada desert create a perfect image of Pegasus in the blast?
https://i.postimg.cc/ncNX0VS6/Screenshot-2020-01-01-137-Nevada-atomic-test-1955-You-Tube.png
By your first paragraph I can see you are really not thinking about this, are you, drud?
As for the Bible, – yes, everyone knows it as TABLETS of stone…even people who haven’t read it all, and don’t want/need to read it.
Open a bible: It’s Tables of Stone.
I first opened it (starting at) at about 6 years old – 55 years ago, and that printing said tablets…and I won’t be opening another one anytime soon sorry.
But I will take your word Tables and be quite happy.
You’re quite happy that your Bible has somehow changed since the last time you opened it? Not curious about how that might happen?
I am very interested to know what you think about everything Allan!.
And yes, I am curious to find out why the writer or editor of your Bible copy is using TABLES (I don’t & wont keep a copy).
When I type ‘stone TABLES bible’ into google, it says > “Did you mean: stone tablets bible” ?…..and there are 78million “hits” for TABLETS, and hardly any TABLES to be seen.
If I was Bible crazy, I would contact the editor, and ask why tablets had been changed to TABLES.
I did try to find the answer, but have failed so far – it’s hidden in the net somewhere I am sure. I will be honest, that book does my head in.
Anyway, loving all your post subjects & writings – much respect to you Allan.
The thing with Ikes speech is, he is a great speaker overall I think, but when you look at the various clips, his lips are out of time with what he is saying, and/or – his lips aren’t making the right shapes for many of the words.
I.e, it would be pretty much impossible for a lip reader to decipher most of what he is saying.
Much weirdness is noticed by me, and it certainly seems that someone or some group is trying to play mind games with this greatest of great speeches, – trying to dash all hope of thoughts of a peaceful, prosperous, healthy, and FREE! future.
I take it you don’t remember one way or the other either, right? I did ask for feedback on this.
Allan, I most certainly gave you my feedback back on 31st December, but it seems to be not visible to you, and stuck in cyber “limbo”.
I wrote >
Hi Allan! – Brett here on holiday in the sticks on borrowed computer, – Nope he never used to stutter on Guard, and from what I have seen today, that is the film ‘stuttering’!.
And god knows why.
I wouldn’t worry about it Allan, you are one of the few straight and clear minds in the world!.
Wishing you and the true blog friends All the Best for 2020.
Thanks. I didn’t see that. Strange.
Happy New Year! I will post soon regarding and just have to sleep and wake up in the net decade! TY Allan for all your fine posts and also to the comments most of them from really good people!
In regards to technology i think it is far more advanced than we think, i was so sure that the first binary computer was built by a Mr Alan Turing, you know the one that broke the enigma code and was the birthplace of digital computing but we were using fully functional digital(binary) well before the war, can’t remember what ship it was but it was running in WW2 with onboard targeting capabilities for the big guns and maybe the bofors, so this must be at least a twenty year old tech in 1940!
Damn this ME is a proper mindfuck, cos as you say it must be tech related or they are creeping peeps houses to replace VHS tapes!
I can’t tell whether you remember the speech or not. I did ask for feedback on this.
I do remember the speech and that it says guard not card and no stutter however i was to young to hear it live as i was not brought here till 76!
Most of the above vids look so bad today, i mean in terms of quality, also there are obvious edits.
I can see that his lips are way out of sync, his body jumps back a couple of frames.
Slow the vid down on youtube to .25 speed and you can see the edit and frame skip just after card is said.
Good points/ideas. But when I slow it down it doesn’t really look like an edit. I’d love to get an expert’s opinion. Yes, a lip reader!