The Owen Benjamin Thread

[911]

Love Owen. He is helping me on my journey through his guidance towards God, anti-pornography stance, and pro-family life.

But I really dislike it when he makes such an issue over the moon landing stuff. He seems to react very strongly to it while feigning or deflecting emotional attachment. Instead he accuses the moon landing believers of being overzealous. But what is even the point of making a huge deal out of that? Dont get it, i tend to skip those parts of his podcasts. I genuinely dont care if its real or not. I personally think it is real but if it turned out to be fake i would just feel very duped by the special effects people, and move on with my life. Its not like that really affected my life in one way or the other, unlike other direct threats to me such as pornography, drugs, debt etc.

Also seeing a penis in everything is ridiculous. No, an obelisk is absolutely not guaranteed to be a penis symbol. Its possible certainly as a theory, it could represent that while representing other things. But he claims it as fact which is just pure ignorance on his part. I think its also just a way for very ancient people to make a relatively tall structure very efficiently without moving the entire earth ie making a pyramid. Rockets are the same thing, they are design within the parameters of the end goal of efficiency in mind.

He really does better when he talks to Roosh because Roosh tends to stick to actionable reasonable advice, and faith focused talk.

I've researched the moon missions and came to the conclusion that we didn't go to the moon. Owen is right on this one. He is pretty good at fleshing out the "human wizardry" aspects of the project, while I got to my conclusion based more on the science and engineering aspects, including the fact that some of the footage was clearly shot on earth. And actually, it does affect your life, quite a bit so, because it is a gigantic lie that shows the kind of spell we're really under. Lies like the covid story are built on top of the Apollo lie, it's like the ground floor and mezzanine upon which greater, more impactful lies are being built on, one story at a time.

And obelisks absolutely are representations of a phallus, more precisely Osiris' missing part, in Egyptian mythology. Egyptian religion is largely a fertility/sex cult. This is not even hidden, it was widely understood back then. However, this real meaning of obelisks that dominate urban landscapes in places like DC or Paris is hidden from common knowledge, it reflects the pagan-masonic theology of the ruling class from the last couple of centuries. Like the moon landing myth, it is there in plain view to see, but its real nature is hidden from the public, as large symbols of the alchemy and wizardry that underpins our modern luciferian culture.

 

[Leonard D Neubache]

Owen is a larger than life character and people are going to have a tendency to love him or hate him, but I think he ought to drop the whole "pathetic manlet" schtick. He can't seem to go more than 30 minutes without expressing his opinion that everyone under 6'4" who isn't rocking an Afghan-counter-insurgency level beard is some kind of human detritus fit for nothing but extermination.

I'm only 6 foot tall and about 220 pounds (good BMI) with a pretty anemic level of facial hair owing to weapons-grade acne in my early teens, but according to Owen I'm for the camps, because I'm a horrible manlet who's presumably obsessed with Owen's giant penis.

Not only does it make it difficult to listen to his streams, it really calls into question the pathetic and grovelling nature of his following. I highly doubt his viewer base consists of 6'8" mountain men sporting full dwarven beards, ergo these "manlets" keep coming back to be told by Owen what miserable pieces of genetic shit they are.

As someone who has some self respect, I really don't see the appeal.

 

[Rob Banks]

What's with Benjamin referring to his followers as "bears" and himself as "big bear" (and using other code words like "squirt")? I can't seem to find what these mean or where they come from.

It causes him to give off a sort of cult leader vibe.

Also, he won't shut up about how he is "not a prophet and people should not see him as a prophet." It reminds me of Hillary Clinton in a 2008 debate against Barack Obama saying "Obama is not a Muslim. No way is he a Muslim. I repeat: Barack Hussein Obama is NOT a Muslim."

 

[asdf]

Youve done the research? Are you a disciple of alex jones? The notion that youre so sure of your own conclusions can simply mean youre being disingenuous and you must have some complex of your own importance that you figured out something that nobody knows by google searches. The moon hoax is flat earth before it was cool.

 

[911]

...
Also seeing a penis in everything is ridiculous. No, an obelisk is absolutely not guaranteed to be a penis symbol. Its possible certainly as a theory, it could represent that while representing other things. But he claims it as fact which is just pure ignorance on his part...

I can understand you not being convinced about the moon landing, it's a big red pill to swallow, but if you don't even understand the most basic level of ancient Egyptian symbology, then you will have a much harder time unpacking more elaborate narratives like the moon landings. You might want to start with the thread about it on the board.

Youve done the research? Are you a disciple of alex jones? The notion that youre so sure of your own conclusions can simply mean youre being disingenuous and you must have some complex of your own importance that you figured out something that nobody knows by google searches. The moon hoax is flat earth before it was cool.

You're engaging in the fundamental attribution error here, or the tendency to ascribe personality flaws to objective facts and thought processes. This is a hardcore bluepill heuristic shortcut, the notion that people who believe "conspiracy theories" (to use the deep state lingo) are driven by ego flaws rather than a research of the facts themselves.

 

[asdf]

Im just curious how you "know" based on your "research". What would you say to someone who did their own research on the moon landing and came to the conclusion that it was very real and true? If you really take your language as literally as possible, it boils down to " Im right you're wrong" which is extremely childish nonsense.

You cant simply acknowledge that you dont have proof of anything. Yet many level headed posters here can say that there is a gap between the theory of things and the proof of things which is up to debate and opinion with no ill will.

 

[Troller]

When I first heard about denial of moon landing my first thought was it should be in th humour section. But as you go more and more into it. It seems 2000kms is maximum we can go low orbit

 

[bucky]

When I first heard about denial of moon landing my first thought was it should be in th humour section. But as you go more and more into it. It seems 2000kms is maximum we can go low orbit

My official position as a midwit who doesn't have time to research this deeply is that I'm 90% sure the moon landing happened more-or-less like they claim it did. I don't think it's crazy to doubt it though. Nukes don't exist and flat earth though? Those ideas seem a bit nuttier, but I'll concede that I "know" Hiroshima got hit by a nuke and not firebombed and that the earth is round because I've been told, not because I've seen evidence with my own eyes.

 

[Troller]

But why didn’t they build the international space station on the moon? Why have a space ship?
Losing technology? Deleting moon landing by accident? It doesn’t make much sense.

 

[bucky]

But why didn’t they build the international space station on the moon? Why have a space ship?
Losing technology? Deleting moon landing by accident? It doesn’t make much sense.

Never heard the idea that the space station would have been built on the moon if it weren't all a lie. I imagine it wasn't built there because of the danger of attack from the secret Nazi base that's been on the dark side since late WW2. I jest. I believe the official explanation would be that the moon is vastly farther away than low earth orbit and that constantly landing and taking off from the lunar surface would add a massive level of complexity and expense.

"Losing technology" can be easily explained by diversity quotas and a few decades of participation trophies. Or by those smart black ladies who really got us to the moon last time retiring. Pick whichever you like best.

I'll concede that "accidentally" deleting the videos is pretty sketchy.

I don't understand the "why have a space ship" question. Again, I'm just a midwit trying to get by. Not claiming I'm right about any of this. Except the Nazi moon base. That's probably real.

 

[911]

"Losing technology" is plain dumb. There is no aspect of the moon mission that hasn't been vastly perfected over the last decades. Manned and unmanned space missions are still being carried, with vastly improved technology at all levels: solid state electronics, computer science, composite materials, improved rocket propulsion technology, communication systems etc. "Losing technology" is a normie, midbrow explanation for the absence of a moon program.

This being said, Owen and others are falling for the Cass Sunstein cognitive infiltration wizardry here, which in a judo-like cognitive move uses their own momentum of institutional incredulity to take them well past the truth and create "false negative" narratives like nukes aren't real, space isn't real, dinosaurs aren't real, and most of all, the Flat Earth Psyop.

These falsehoods which lowbrow/midbrow truthers with weak science backgrounds are meant as poison pills for the midbrow and highbrow normies, they will reject wholesale anything or anyone associated with flat earth instead of taking the time and the consciousness leap necessary for them to establish that they have been lied to about the moon landings, JFK, 9/11 etc.

Cass Sunstein was Obama's "Information Czar", he's a smart technocrat/manipulator of the masses in the same mold as an Edward Bernays, and wrote about how the masses can be manipulated through technology in his book "Nudge", applying some of the principles laid out by Bernays, Le Bon and others to the age of social media and big data. Back in the late 00s, there was a growth in the number of skeptics about 9/11 due to the rise of high-speed internet and uncensored, independent media skillfully challenging the established narratives. through solid research. In order to counter this, Sunstein advocated "cognitive infiltration" in the form of producing content to disrupt that organic growth in the truth movement.

That was the time when a lot of flat earth videos and channels first appeared, with very slick video productions. Some of these channels had first established their credibility by doing very solid, scientific debunking of the moon landing (like that Australian channel whose name escapes me, starts with "Jerra"), then they took the loyal audience they had built and pivoted onto flat earth. Others provided other content, often new agey crap aimed at women, or lowbrow biblical literalist material aimed at gullible Christians. The cognitive judo throughout was that if NASA lied about the moon landing, then they must also lie about flat earth!

Unfortunately, it was a fairly effective psyop, guys like Owen have fallen for that. As long as he's in their psyop orbit, he's partially neutered as a dissident voice.

 

[kel]

"Losing technology" is just not the right term, but bucky's description of the problem using that term is accurate. We have the technology (and then some) still, what we don't have is the will or the organization. You could sink a trillion dollars into NASA today and in the end all you'd get is a new logo and maybe a children's book talking about how there's no transphobia on Mars.

 

[bucky]

"Losing technology" is just not the right term, but bucky's description of the problem using that term is accurate. We have the technology (and then some) still, what we don't have is the will or the organization. You could sink a trillion dollars into NASA today and in the end all you'd get is a new logo and maybe a children's book talking about how there's no transphobia on Mars.

I'm currently struggling to breathe because I'm laughing so hard at "No Transphobia on Mars." Or maybe it's COVID-19, I don't know. Thanks, man. Funniest thing I've read in quite a while, mostly because I wouldn't be that surprised if we literally see a children's book with that title sometime soon. Actually, no, scratch that, now that I'm thinking about it I'm predicting we probably will.

 

[911]

"Losing technology" is just not the right term, but bucky's description of the problem using that term is accurate. We have the technology (and then some) still, what we don't have is the will or the organization. You could sink a trillion dollars into NASA today and in the end all you'd get is a new logo and maybe a children's book talking about how there's no transphobia on Mars.

That's part of the mythology of the Apollo project and the version that could work on redpilled manosphere types like us, the notion that we can't go to the moon again because of PC.

You could send a modern humanoid robot on a one-way trip to the moon for it to film, walk around and perform other tricks for less than 1/100th of the Apollo mission budget, you'd see a very different kind of footage than the ones from the 1960s-70s which were filmed in studios.

 

[Blade Runner]

I've always wondered why it matters so much if "We faked the moon landing" or "The Earth is flat" or "Hitler was still alive and lived in Argentina". Whenever someone brings those up (just to argue) I ask, "So? What's your point?"

It's pretty effective since we see much smaller, measurable and obviously degenerate or decrepit examples of government policy, yearly - all of which pretty directly affect us. I guess what I'm saying is, why go for the grand slam when you can easily show people that the government is full of shit with all these singles and doubles that are provable and right in front of our face?

 

[Hermetic Seal]

I'm in the same camp @Blade Runner . I just don't care that much about the moon stuff. No emotional impact on me if it never happened - I lost my faith in America The Idea a long time ago, so I have no particular attachment to it. Some of the Moon Hoax stuff is persuasive, but it just strains credibility to me that some of the hundreds (or thousands) or people in on this project never came forth over the years and spilled the beans on it.

Although plenty of the other things Owen rants about, like dinosaurs and Flat Earth, just strike me as the dumb ramblings of a guy who likes to work a crowd. It makes it hard for me to take him seriously.

 

[bucky]

I've always wondered why it matters so much if "We faked the moon landing" or "The Earth is flat" or "Hitler was still alive and lived in Argentina". Whenever someone brings those up (just to argue) I ask, "So? What's your point?"

It's pretty effective since we see much smaller, measurable and obviously degenerate or decrepit examples of government policy, yearly - all of which pretty directly affect us. I guess what I'm saying is, why go for the grand slam when you can easily show people that the government is full of shit with all these singles and doubles that are provable and right in front of our face?

Great point, although I find even those singles or doubles are pretty hard to prove to most goodwhites. Witness how most of them are still cowering in fear of a virus they've never seen affect anything or really believe that the cops are killing massive numbers of black people. Not only that, but they get very angry if you suggest any of thos cherished beliefs might be less than accurate.

 

[jeffinjapan]

I liked and followed Owen for a while but never gayed out and had myself verified as a "bear". He does make great points at times and I do respect him taking the stance that he did regarding the transgender movement. But....man, he just gets on these rants about things or people that are just to much to bear. (Did you catch that?)

 

[bucky]

I liked and followed Owen for a while but never gayed out and had myself verified as a "bear". He does make great points at times and I do respect him taking the stance that he did regarding the transgender movement. But....man, he just gets on these rants about things or people that are just to much to bear. (Did you catch that?)

I started listening to Owen maybe two years ago, when he was less...let's say...eccentric. He was a good influence then. For one thing, he talked a lot about how you should be able to give 10% of your income to a good cause. This was a big influence in my starting to pay a full tithe, which has been difficult but overall a great blessing to my family. Then he moved on to space isn't real, nuclear weapons are a hoax, and the feud with Nick Fuentes. The latter was especially off-putting, particularly how he just couldn't handle Nick's not agreeing with him 100% on everything and how he'd focus on bizarre sexual innuendos about Nick and his mom. I was still occasionally checking in at that point because in spite of it all he was still interesting, but then he got completely kicked off of YouTube. By then I'd moved on to mostly listening to Revenge of the Cis instead and didn't feel motivated enough to seek out Owen anymore.

 

[NoMoreTO]

Owen Benjamin asked a bunch of his bears to donate 2M in 3 days, he gets $50,000.

The goal was to buy "Beartaria" out in North Dakota, his plan was to buy it in his name and the bears to visit him during bad times.

Either he is being a grifter, which I don't think because he says he is sending the money back. I struggle to believe guys send sums like this, but we've heard the onlyfans stories. I am thinking that it is a good idea, with absolutely no plan. He just sees a property and starts asking for money so that he can buy it in his name and invite guys to come. Beartaria would need more planning than that.


Terrible Hat