>>43226
There's a lot of information to unpack in this post. What's 'bunny training'? Did they work for Playboy or something? Are you suggesting that Blondie was used by the CIA to support a certain narrative and shape the popular culture a certain way? My first thought was 'why would the CIA do that?' but then I realised that maybe the CIA itself is being used by some other even more secretive organisation, like a proxy.
>Most of what he writes checks out, but maybe he leaves out some critical data or doesn't mention certain people, deliberately.
That's what most occultists have always done though, regardless of whether they're involved with the secret services. Usually the reasoning is that they don't want critical information to fall in the wrong hands, and the truly wise will be able to fill in the missing information by themselves. Sometimes they claim that there are things that just can't be learned from a book, but need to be experienced first-hand, and the best (or only) way is through an established occult order (Evola did this for example). I'm just saying, being jealous of your knowledge is to be expected from an occultist.