Ken Shows That Cabal Hackers are Manipulating blog reaction boxes

Cabal trolls caught red-handed manipulating blog reaction boxes

Last December, I wrote this entry about how cybertrolls attempt to influence our perceptions of truth through subtle manipulations of blog reaction boxes and read counters. I had noticed this occurring when I'd periodically revisit my entries on a popular blog to check for comments I might wish to answer. When I went back, I'd often see that the numbers in the positive reaction boxes had gone down, while the negative reaction boxes continued to go up.

Since I knew the trolls would be up to their old tricks when my entry on Vladimir Putin and David Wilcock was posted on that blog, I decided to conduct a little experiment: I went back to the entry a number of times and took screenshots of the reaction counters in hopes that I would catch them in the act. And I did!

I took 12 samples over about two days, and the last three samples caught their manipulation (you can email me for the original files if you want proof of when the screenshots were taken):

Sample 10, captured at 6:58 PM on April 2...

Sample 11, captured at 4:50 PM on April 3...

Sample 12, captured at 8:12 PM on April 3...

If you look at the yellow and red boxes, you'll note that as these counters approached 10, they were both knocked down. I suspect the trolls didn't want these positive reactions to reach double-digits. And if you look at the blue and purple boxes, you'll note that when the love to hate ratio reached 3 to 1, the hate reaction got pumped up to 3 and then the love reaction got a point shaved off. I suspect they wanted the reactions to show that more people hated the article than loved it.


When the December entry on this subject got posted on the blog site, the trolls gave me hell for it in both the comment board and the chat box. Beyond telling me that I was making it up, they suggested that people went back to the article and changed their reaction (how often does that happen?) or that there was some little glitch in the blogger software that occasionally stepped back the counters. But if either of these arguments is true, why are only the positive reactions being affected?...

...This table shows the data from all 12 samples I took. And as you can see, none of the negative reactions went backwards, but three of the positive ones did. I also suspect that the shills assigned to the blog were the providers of many of the negative votes. Oftentimes, I'll notice that the negative reactions get off to a big early lead, and it's probably because the first troll to notice the article messages the others in his CDP (Cyber-Douche Posse) to go to the article and vote it down.

Seeing this manipulation begs the question of why they're doing it. And the answer is a simple one: as soon as someone sees or reads the article, they want them to see the reaction counters and think...

"Most people don't agree with this guy."

"Most people hate this article and the information it contains."

"Some people find this interesting, but not too many."

...It is an attempt to influence one's perception of truth through a subtle form of peer pressure.

The fact that they manipulated the Putin/Wilcock article also speaks to the fact that they want to suppress such perspectives...

They want people to believe that Putin is fighting the "Western" banksters...


...that the Jesuit Pope is a good guy who is cleaning up the Vatican...


...and that the Anunnaki demons are "ascended masters," "archangels," and "ET commanders"...

Sorry, but NO. When the hidden hierarchy is finally brought out into full public view, people will not see them as saviors and benefactors, but as what they really are: predatory parasites who need to be segregated from the human experience.

And so it is....

Permalink: blog.redefininggod.com/2014/04/04/test.aspx