I just quit working for dutch whistleblower Ronald Bernard – here's why
When I saw the testimony of Ronald Bernard this spring I was very moved. Like millions of people around the world. I immidiately sent an application to work for his foundation. Ronald himself answered and forwarded me to the man who would become my supervisor after a short job interview via skype. It was the best job interview I ever had. We briefly talked about my skills and what I could offer. After that we talked about conspiracy theories for around an hour. I got on board quickly and started working on a video for the foundation.
I had watched the original dutch video. But when I saw the video getting translated into so many languages soon after the release and how many english speaking youtube channels were sharing this content I got suspicious about it. So I started investigating a few things.
Ronald Bernard and his so called first life
Bernard claims he worked as an entrepreneur in what he calls his first life. I never called it that but I am living something like a second life as well so I have some kind of idea what someone means who says so. I have been working as a journalist and if I would give you my real name you could check it out and find evidence to this claim. Just because I found out some terrible facts about msm and "ended" my life as their supporter, there is no way to delete my first life from the internet. You could find out easily. However, when you search the internet for Bernards name before 2013, you won't find anything. He says he had his own fashion line. Seems like this was some kind of secret brand because Bernard has never been to any fashion exposition or show, he never registered a fashion company under his name and his name is in no way connected to any kind of fashion label whatsoever. Same thing goes for selling cars, in&export and his work in the textile field.
He called himself one of the big players. But there has never been any mention anywhere. I can't find any registered firm to his name. Like I said before I have been working as a journalist but I never failed so hard in finding out anything about a person. Either he wasn't as successful as he claims or he just lies.
"You can ask me anything"
I wrote a mail to my supervisor about my concerns. It took him over two weeks to answer my questions get back to me. He told me that this video would answer all of my questions.
Unfortunatelly this video didn't even help a bit because his answer was evasive.
– First he says, he has no CV because he was an entrepreneur. Maybe he never needed one but he could just produce one. It's not very hard to write down one's jobs.
– Further he says he couldn't claim names for his safety and the safety of other people. Noone ever asked for names. People like me (who even supported him) just want to know the positions in which he worked for which projects and some kind of references for his work. Everyone can do that without naming anybody.
– next he asks how bad we want him to paint himself as a mad man. Where is this idea coming from? We know he did bad things. He told us so. But WHAT did he do?
– at last he confuses two groups of people and asserts that those who wanted to see evidence about his working place wouldn't believe in his horrific claims about the powers in place.
Well, I don't only believe in ritual abuse, I know that it's true. Because I investigated and tried to write about it, but noone would let me. And you can be certain about one thing: No article holds more truth than the one that noone wants to publish. I am not one of his critics. I applied for a job, I offered my help, I trusted.
Already a pop phenomenon?
Next problem: We know there are ways to oppress informations. I think that's what we know best, right?! It is always suspicious when someone gets that popular. The search term "Ronald Bernard" on youtube spits out almost 15,000 hits. This happened in the last 5 months …Why wouldn't youtube ban those videos like they do with so many content right now? Why does noone stop Bernard while he reaches so many people? If he would be a real threat because his informations were so dangerous he wouldn't be able to have this platform, would he? And who were those who helped out giving him such a great audience? As far as I could find out this was the channel that published the video in the U.S. at first (17th of April 2017):
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLro-P_9rzq4UJk9cvDrpBuYqliBqFrDZp
Smash 240. This channel doesn't exist anymore and I can't find anything else about smash240. As if he would have only existed for this purpose. Every reference I find online is just about him sharing the video with Ronald Bernard.
Although this channel had no career whatsoever (just a handful af subscribers that you would think come from exactly this video) the video got shared from there. All you can find is another channel called Smash240 on vidme. If it is the same guy he is definitely disinfo because all that he shares is just that: Disinfo.
One of the most famous first multiplicators was Robert David Steel's Public Intelligence Blog. Mind the odd wording. Steel is former (?) CIA and definitely disinfo. He works with people like Alex Jones and George Webb. Robert David Steele can't be trusted and the first one who shared the info can't be trusted either. Getting famous like that in such a short time and even supported by those who work for Intelligence operations, … that's odd.
Ronald Bernard wasn't asked to name names. He was asked to give ANY references about his work. It's possible to do that without harming anyone. And I should be able to find something about his first life, because I just never failed in researching anybody. I can't trust him anymore because I do trust in my own abilities a lot.
Body Language: Dutch Whistleblower
So bombard got it wron?
Which of the following names do you know: George Webb, Nathan Stolpman, fu**in Freddy, Defango …?
Because they are all involved in a story that paints bombard language in a very bad way. Do you know anything about it? In short: I think she can't be trusted as well. :D
Ah interesting. But what is the purpose of promoting a fake story? Bernard and bombard don't sell a book.
that's the big question. I only have theories at this point. For example: People were exposing ritual abuse and the topic got some kind of famous. So "they" needed to install a controlled opposition. People tend to follow guys like him and stop researching. It's like he "ended" the dynamic. Maybe. But mayb ;) totally different. I just finished part two btw: https://steemit.com/conspiracy/@mayb/more-curiosities-about-whistleblower-ronald-bernard-and-the-bank-he-is-founding
I think it is a lot like the massive operation which is the Harvey Weinstein scandal. They are cutting their losses and putting Weinstein out front to keep the public away from the real story which is - drumroll - sexual ritual abuse. Luciferians at the heights of power. You can be a Luciferian if you want to but you cannot keep taking the children. The strategy is Alinksy mixed with Crowley. If you have spent time investigating SRA then you know that packs of well-paid disinfo agents lurk on the internet, waiting to get something in their fishing nets. Sometimes it's a journo, sometimes a clever housewife, quite often an SRA victim survivor. They really like when they get victims in their nets because they keep track of them online and in real life to monitor whether or not they are spilling the beans. A lot of the victims are memory repressed and also are victims of MK Ultra mind control so they are can be easy to trigger online and to manipulate. That gets into your garden-variety gangstalking which is an entirely different post. It sounds like all of your research has led you to all the right people and places. Good job.
hey @sunnyofoz! Thanks for all your nice and productive comments. Had to follow you immidiately! :)
Hy mayb, I thank you very much for this post. As yourself, the first time I discovered on YouTube Ronald bernard, I was very interested and waiting for the second one, and listening further on I thought "here we are, somebody is talking". But thinking also that some pieces were missing and curious. Then started the bank video serie and it was all over for me. I searched and hoped to find clear minded who had understood that all this was just a cunning production in which R.Bernard would have played a part, role. And I saw the ITNJ video and heard his last production. And after some more research, finally your very concise article. Thank you so much.
No, Bombard did not get it wrong. The writer of the above article got it wrong. Can't get over how stupid her reasoning is!
How on earth is this article not being found? It's important.
Great work! Thank you for bringing this information to light!
Hey Figgy! So nice to meet you over here! I'll upvote everything you share from now on.
Thank you @mayb I am still trying to find my way around here and learning slowly. I'm appreciating reading all your great work on here.
I didn't know who this man was before your article, and I will surely look him up, but thank you for a very good write-up of your experience with him. Also, on exposing this guy.
thank you.
If you have never heard if before, it will come over you as a shock. If he is disinformation, then he does a good job to shock you out of asking more questions. It's kind of a brilliant disinfo strategy. It definitely smells like their "style". As the author goes further into the research, he/she will see that they have a way of doing things which is very noticeable after a while. If it walks like a duck...
You absolutely rock lady! :) I'm so glad I found you. This is an interesting article. I have upvoted and resteemed it. I hope that helps! Maybe we could work on something together sometime. I have an idea for a project to do for journalism here on Steemit!
yes, it seems we're some kind of a match. :) I like your content, too. Let's defintely stay in contact! awww, I am glad we met. :)
Cheers... we should check out steemitchat if I can figure out how that works. Talk with you soon.
steemit lags so hard. Are you on any discord server?
I'd like to weigh in here. I am involved in the B of Joy, to be more specifically I spoke to "May B", the person she is referring to.
Let me discuss several points brought by you:
"After that we talked about conspiracy theories for around an hour. I got on board quickly and started working on a video for the foundation."
We did not talk an hour about conspiracy theories. We talked about the B of Joy, the financial system, the problems, the effects for our future, our children, the atrocities against our children and yes of course we spoke about the people/group(s) of people who are doing this. This is not conspiracy theory. This is simple facts, except for the latter which is hypothesizing based on the little true information there is.
"I had watched the original dutch video. But when I saw the video getting translated into so many languages soon after the release and how many english speaking youtube channels were sharing this content I got suspicious about it."
Why did you get suspicious about it? You don't explain why. There are numerous whistleblower videos who went virally. Going after Ronald in particular is strange.
"Ronald Bernard and his so called first life
Bernard claims he worked as an entrepreneur in what he calls his first life. I never called it that but I am living something like a second life as well so I have some kind of idea what someone means who says so. I have been working as a journalist and if I would give you my real name you could check it out and find evidence to this claim. Just because I found out some terrible facts about msm and "ended" my life as their supporter, there is no way to delete my first life from the internet. You could find out easily. However, when you search the internet for Bernards name before 2013, you won't find anything. He says he had his own fashion line. Seems like this was some kind of secret brand because Bernard has never been to any fashion exposition or show, he never registered a fashion company under his name and his name is in no way connected to any kind of fashion label whatsoever. Same thing goes for selling cars, in&export and his work in the textile field."
In the third inverview he mentioned that his financial career was from '82 till '94. So meaning before '82 he was in the textile and so forth. The internet did not exist then mainstream. So that is not possible. Why people are hammering on this, I don't know.
"He called himself one of the big players. But there has never been any mention anywhere. I can't find any registered firm to his name. Like I said before I have been working as a journalist but I never failed so hard in finding out anything about a person. Either he wasn't as successful as he claims or he just lies."
I don't understand this logic. The more towards the top, the less information we have on the entities. What do we really know about the BIS etc.. not much. What do we really know about the bloodlines that are said to define our reality? Nothing...
"You can ask me anything"
I wrote a mail to my supervisor about my concerns. It took him over two weeks to answer my questions get back to me. He told me that this video would answer all of my questions."
I was on vacation, hence I could not reply faster than I did.
"– First he says, he has no CV because he was an entrepreneur. Maybe he never needed one but he could just produce one. It's not very hard to write down one's jobs."
Why? I was entrepreneur myself and noway I am going to pen down everything I did. I don't understand. He also mentioned in the interview, before he went into the financial system, he was not a very nice guy, hence he got the seat on the stock exchange.
"– next he asks how bad we want him to paint himself as a mad man. Where is this idea coming from? We know he did bad things. He told us so. But WHAT did he do?"
The sensationalist mind. Everyone is asking this. This is pure sensation, people want to be triggered by more and more extreme stuff.
"Next problem: We know there are ways to oppress informations. I think that's what we know best, right?! It is always suspicious when someone gets that popular. The search term "Ronald Bernard" on youtube spits out almost 15,000 hits. This happened in the last 5 months …"
Why is it a problem? Because our minds are so controlled that we believe that the powers that be are so powerful that nobody can truly come clean, or truly be honest? As I have mentioned elsewhere, we are part of the problem, we give "them" so much power, we render ourselves useless, which of course is what they want.
"Smash 240. This channel doesn't exist anymore and I can't find anything else about smash240. As if he would have only existed for this purpose. Every reference I find online is just about him sharing the video with Ronald Bernard."
So here again, the mind makes it owns conclusions because it cannot stand uncertainty. We have nothing to do with smash240. If it is a way to make it appear like that, fine. It won't be the first and last trick what is pulled.
"One of the most famous first multiplicators was Robert David Steel's Public Intelligence Blog. Mind the odd wording. Steel is former (?) CIA and definitely disinfo. He works with people like Alex Jones and George Webb. Robert David Steele can't be trusted and the first one who shared the info can't be trusted either. "
See above, again, our mind is lineair and dualistic. We can't escape the notion that people can change. The human spirit within each one of us is awakening. Can it undo past actions? NO. But it can change future actions. This also counts for your allegation of being a fraud because there is a person of the Maltan order in the B of Joy. Changing behavior and consciousness is not exclusively to the people that are not part of any order. The alternative media is part accountable for this negative thinking, and giving "them" way too much power, that they are so majestically and perfect in conning society.
"Ronald Bernard wasn't asked to name names. He was asked to give ANY references about his work. It's possible to do that without harming anyone. "
That is not his view and experience. Why are people telling him to do what he has to do? He won't.
Why are we not focussing on changing the financial system through tooling that the B of Joy offers? No, we show self destructive behavior by destroying the few things that are good. Based on assumptions, insecurity of the brain and instilled patterns of behavior. Ronald offered many years of his free time to create holistic solutions for a better alternative. I bet that that are more real efforts than anyone of us (including me) here combined have done to change this world.
We are not focussing on what should happen by attacking Ronald Bernard, i.e. a different financial system, as all depends on it. Fix the financial system and we'll see that wars will end, hunger will end and what more. Research it.
Also research what the B of Joy offers in terms of solutions. Research in relation to current economic and financial mechanisms, and you'll see this is a good alternative. That is what matters. It is not called the Ronald Bernard Bank. It's a foundation and citizen-led, meaning that more people are behind the B of Joy to launch these solutions, he's not earning money with it, nothing. To be repetitive, that is a much bigger investment in a better future than many of us. We could also applaud that.... ?
Kind regards
I think you should read part 2. And I beg you to keep your comments a bit shorter. https://steemit.com/conspiracy/@mayb/more-curiosities-about-whistleblower-ronald-bernard-and-the-bank-he-is-founding
gcuccureddu Thank you for your decent and reply to this rather silly woman. Unlike her reasoning, your reply is intelligent. Maybe she is very young still?
I agree with the above comment.
This 1046 words "article" by May B....is certainly weak, as it lacks in objectivity. To some of her relevant questions, she provides shabby answers and inconclusive conclusions...Its a missed opportunity, as it would have been interesting to know more about her doubt related to Bernard...
Her article (?) does not depict rigour and coherence. It seems to reflect insecurities more than anything else. Unless, she lacked the time or/and energy to do a solid research job, this article reflects a certain kind of laziness
The fact that she ranks number 1 on google...does not relate to the quality, coherence and rigour of the "article" as much as googles algorithm that puts "stuff" like hers at the highest rank if it fits with Google's DNA ...in this case : CONTROL...
I viewed Bernard interviews and really, he does not sound like a phony...
...sorry Ms May B, if you are real...well, go and do your homework....you did not on this one...
Oh, and by the way, you should not mention that you were a journalist....they currently do an horrific job in covering objectively the Covid 19 scamdemia...
Ok, you seem a "little" evasive on voat, so let's try this again here (would have done this earlier but my account wasn't approved yet) ... This is the same I also posted on voat so how about some answers now?
At first let me start by saying that EVERY single question or doubt you are having you should have had the instant you finished watching the first interview. Every question/doubt you raise within this article was topic of the first interview.
So I wonder why exactly you applied to work for Mr. Bernard / his bank project? Shouldn't you have attempted to get answers to your questions BEFORE doing that?
"But what would be his mission?" (as you asked on voat)
And I wonder what is YOUR mission? Trying to shoot down Mr. Bernard via various anti-campaigns and whatnot seems to be all the rage these days and sadly falls on a lot of open ears (or so it seems - oftentimes the anti-campaigners just collaborate happily with each other via the comment sections of each others' blogs/facebook pages) - so why not jump aboard that train while it is still going, huh? Is it possible that you are attempting to get a "foot in the door" of the alternative media scene with this article (and whatever articles may follow)?
Ah well, I digress.
Back to topic.
"But when I saw the video getting translated into so many languages soon after the release and how many english speaking youtube channels were sharing this content I got suspicious about it."
Most of the re-uploads of the interview (in whatever language) are on private channels - what's suspicious about supporters sharing the interview via their own channel?
"[...] and if I would give you my real name you could check it out and find evidence to this claim."
So why don't you do that so we can check?
"[...] there is no way to delete my first life from the internet. You could find out easily."
And let me take a wild guess that your first life wasn't in the 80s to 90s as Mr. Bernard's when internet wasn't a thing yet, right?
[...] he never registered a fashion company under his name and his name is in no way connected to any kind of fashion label whatsoever. Same thing goes for selling cars, in&export and his work in the textile field.
May I ask where and how exactly you inquired about this? because -
"I can't find any registered firm to his name."
So, you didn't even find out about the "United People Foundation" which IS registered to his name? And ironically another anti-campaigner found that.
But as I don't feel like linking to her blog I leave that to you to find that yourself. After all, you are so skilled in figuring out stuff, aren't you...
Normally I could stop right here but for the sake of completeness...
"- next he asks how bad we want him to paint himself as a mad man. Where is this idea coming from? We know he did bad things. He told us so. But WHAT did he do?"
How much attention DID you actually pay to that first interview? He gave many examples of what he had done in his first life. Italian Lira ring any bell for example?
"Why wouldn't youtube ban those videos like they do with so many content right now? Why does noone stop Bernard while he reaches so many people? If he would be a real threat because his informations were so dangerous he wouldn't be able to have this platform, would he?"
Because deleting all those videos (especially because the re-uploads are in the thousands now) would give almost instant credibility to everything he was talking about and I take a wild guess that's something people in certain circles wouldn't want to happen.
Attaking him and trying to debunk him, etc. is far more effective and you are doing your share with your articles. Playing right into the hands of the elite. Great job...
you keep ignoring all the infos I provided. This will be my last answer to you. I am sorry. I've got other things to do. You can make out of it whatever you like. That's your decission. I don't know you and I don't know why you want me so badly to argue or agree or whatever with you. I don't understand you approach. You're a complete stranger to me. I don't know why you have to defend a particular person that much who you really don't seem to know anything about …
And now, please. I don't have a personal problem with you. I just don't understand why a stranger would lock his jaws into a stranger. Out of everything you can find out, why do you care so much about MY RESEARCH?
Please. You are free to disagree. I wish you all the best.
"you keep ignoring all the infos I provided."
What infos besides the articles themselves? On voat you didn't say much beside "keep dividing us" (now who is dividing here?) "I pray for you", etc. - but you keep ignoring my particular questions, why? Besides, why do you feel personally attacked when I just want a discussion and don't agree with what you are writing?
"I don't know you"
Let me take a wild guess that you don't know most of the people you are discussing with (here, on voat or elsewhere) either. Didn't know it's mandatory to know someone to have a discussion online... But hey - you wrote articles that qualify as attempted character assassination - and now you complain that someone has the "audacity" to question your articles? Awesome. Don't play with fire if you can't take the heat.
"[...] and I don't know why you want me so badly to argue or agree [...]
I don't want you to agree, I want to discuss and I would like my questions answered. That wall of text you posted now doesn't answer them.
"I don't know why you have to defend a particular person that much who you really don't seem to know anything about …"
But you do, right? Let me take a wild guess that you didn't have any or very little pesonal contact with him and talked to your supervisor mostly. You know, I had my questions and I approached Mr. Bernard with them and he answered all my questions in a personal email to my full satisfaction. That happened soon after the first interview was released. Or in other words - I didn't form my opinion on him by hearsay only as you seem to be insinuating.
Please let me know why you seem to have made it your short-term "mission" to attack him and his bank project. You worked for him, now you don't anymore - Just carry on with your life, problem solved...? But no, now you have to publish articles - who read like a "Best of" Martin Vrijland, Nelleke Baker, "ldbroersma", and Pepijn van Erp - to shoot him down. There is almost no original research/content in your articles. What's your goal here? You don't need to support him, others don't need to support him but why do some people feel the particular need to attack him? I don't get this. Anyone who buys an EMC from the B of Joy or gets involved otherwise does that from his/her own free will. Why do some people feel the need to interfere with this decision process?
"he protects himself and others FROM CHARGES because he's a criminal if he tells the truth. The only thing he should do is reporting himself and others to authorities."
That's ludicrous and you know it. But it seems like you didn't really pay much attention to the interviews at all (or at least hope that people who read your articles didn't). Besides, you really think that those people he worked for would actually face any punishment? Lol, wake up...seriously. And why do you want him to be punished so badly? Is there a personal angle to your little campaign here?
"it seems you're American and don't know anything about the debate over here in Europe. "
Um, no. I'm German. Deswegen kannste dieses "ignoranter, unwissender Ami" Argument echt mal stecken lassen. Und ich wohne sehr viel näher an den Niederlanden als du - falls du in dem anderen Artikel die Wahrheit gesagt hast, und tatsächlich aus Berlin bist.
"The so called truther scene over here has another opinion about him. Just read the discussion under part 3 on voat."
Yeah, that discussion.... where 75% isn't even about Mr. Bernard or the B of Joy.
"another former journalist from the Netherlands worked for him as well."
Sanne Ten Hoove? I'm familiar with that story. Yeah well, he didn't actually work for him, did he? In hindsight, what he did looks more like an infiltration attempt.
"You can see the development on the page where they show who's working for them."
Yet from the people who once worked for the B of Joy only you seem to have made it a mission to try to shoot him down now. While you just could have stopped working there and carry on with your life. But you don't and I still wonder WHY?
"I just don't understand why a stranger would lock his jaws into a stranger."
You don't seem to have problems with strangers applauding you for your articles, though, do you...?
Ronald Bernard was a fixture on Dutch financial television (much like CNBC, Fox Business News, etc.) for many years, and was interviewed very frequently. Did you ask Mr. Bernard the name of the fashion clothing line he founded? Or did you depend solely upon your google searching capabilities? Flesh out your story more. Thx.
It's helpful if you have watched Ronald's other interviews (to DVM-TV) before this one as he gives additional insights to what he has talked about in them.
Like the BIS, the 8000 - 8500 who run everything behind the scenes, how we are all just slaves and cattle for the elites... How the Masonics are following the Bible literally, how they have always worked through political movements, how they are trying to create the third temple in Jerusalem, how they want to keep us non-aware and in dualism - divide and conquer and all that... How they arrange blood sacrifices (including children) to feed off the negative energies...
Apart from that Ronald also shares a bit more about his personal experiences, his religious/metaphysical views and his near-death experience, how Cryptocurrencies were created by secret services and more.
It sucks this article is first page on google, idk if you’re a researcher or what not but sounds like a dumped girl looking to dig up shit. Fuck this article.
And people do become famous overnight, that happens,. Thats the annoying thing “famous people” say they hear ( that they got famous over night ) but they worked forever and got to that point and all people see is the media later, common story of entrepreneurs, artists, whatever. All i wanted to say was fuck this shit :)
Oh so agree with you! ...nasty, stupid, vindictive little article.