Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Wake Up Kiwi
    The New Zealand Government: A United States SEC Registered Corporation  |  Who Owns New Zealand's Banks - And Australia's Banks - Anyone's Banks?
 
Wake Up Kiwi
 
Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

· Home / Introduction

CURRENT AFFAIRS

· Current Events & Breaking News

· Cabal / Illuminati / NWO Watch

· Mainstream Media Manipulation

· Banking Crimes & Criminals

· Political Crimes & Criminals

· Feature Articles

· Positive Developments

ILLUMINATI / NWO

· NWO Globalist Agenda

· Secret Societies & The Illuminati

· Conspiracy To Rule The World

· What / Who Is "The Crown"?

· Agenda 21 In New Zealand

· Surveillance Society/Police State

· 'Terrorism' & Engineered Wars

· Eugenics / Depopulation Agenda

· Religion As A Tool For Control

· Common Law Vs Statute Law

SCIENCE / TECHNOLOGY

· The Climate Change Scam

· Chemtrails & Geoengineering

· Suppressed Science

· Positive New Technologies

· Cures, Health & Wellbeing

· Dangerous & Dirty Technology

· Spiritual Aspects & Metaphysics

· The Extra-Terrestrial Presence

HISTORY

· Suppressed / Hidden History

· Real New Zealand History

· The Opal File: NZ / AUS History

· 150+ NWO Globalist Quotes

MISCELLANEOUS

· Political Commentary

· Positive Resources

· Resistance, Resources & Links

· Contact


Newsletter archive - click here

Site Search:









 

Wake Up Kiwi
Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi


Keeping Watch on the Cabal / Illuminati / New World Order / Khazarian / Zionists

Reading about the history of the Cabal / Illuminati / New World Order / Khazarian Zionists and their various factions is one thing. This section is a collection concerning the more recent exploits and implementations of various types of schemes in their 'great work'.

This might seem a bit dark and depressing at times but keep in mind that their plans will not come to fruition and are failing in real time. Articles within this section are not just about watching the opposition, there are also articles showing how the people are pushing back and taking the dark ones down.



Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Walking Your Children Home From School And Driving While Caffeinated Are Now Felony Crimes In Police State America
April 5 2017 | From: NaturalNews

In Magnolia, Texas, it is now a felony crime to walk your own children home from school. Er, I mean the “government indoctrination center.”



Seriously, parents can now be charged with serious crimes for merely meeting their children at the school and walking them home.

Related: Top 10 stupidest new laws in California for 2017


“The principal has decided that no matter how close the student lives to the school, the student must either take the bus, or the parent must wait in a long car pickup line,”
reports Fox 26 in Houston.

“Try to walk your student off the campus and you could face criminal charges… Fox26 knows of 2 other parents who were just threatened with arrest.”

This is yet more evidence that even in Texas, the government thinks it owns your children. Parental rights are being obliterated across the country at a breathtaking pace, including in California where the state can now mandate government injections of your children with aluminum, mercury and other toxic substances that cause autism and neurological disorders.

The same government that has mandated these “immunizations” has also granted blanket legal immunity to the vaccine industry, so if a mandated vaccine harms your child, it’s now your problem to deal with and you can’t sue the manufacturer for its defective, harmful product.



In effect, the government can force you to harm your child, then deny you due process in seeking compensation for damage to your child.


Man Charged with DUI for Driving Under the Influence of Caffeine

Meanwhile in California, a man was arrested and charged with a DUI for driving while under the influence of caffeine.


“38-year-old Joseph Schwab has been fighting a DUI for over a year, despite the fact that he was not under the influence of any illegal drugs at the time, he did, however, test positive for caffeine,” reports The Free Thought Project.

“[The officer] arrested him and took him to jail so his blood could be drawn for other drugs. His blood tests came back negative for all illegal drugs. But he did test positive for caffeine. For some reason, this was enough to charge Schwab with a DUI.”


In doing this, California’s incredibly stupid police state bureaucrats are setting a precedent that could get you charged with a felony crime for drinking Starbucks or Pepsi while behind the wheel.

Indeed, California can now raise all sorts of money to fund its illegal alien benefits programs by arresting and charging coffee drinkers with DUIs, generating huge cash flow revenues for the insane police state known better as “Collapsifornia.” (Much of the “justice system” in California is really just revenue generation.)


Solano County DA Morons Finally Drop DUI Charges After 16 Months, Admitting Zero Evidence

Now, after 16 months of threatening this 36-year-old driver with felony charges, the libtardocrats of Solano County have admitted they have no evidence of anything and must therefore drop the charges.

In their own twisted words, they still imply the driver was on some sort of drugs, but claim they couldn’t find them even after administering a forced blood test:


“After further consideration, without a confirmatory test of the specific drug in the defendant’s system that impaired his ability to drive, we do not believe we can prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt,” says the county press release.

District Attorney Krishna Abrams typifies the kind of tyrannical bureaucrats you find throughout the California “injustice” system. They don’t care whether there’s any evidence at all. You’re “guilty” just because they want to get you (and the state has granted them exceptional powers to destroy the lives of innocent people).

I’ve seen other California DAs ruin the lives of completely innocent people, in Ventura County and LA County in particular.

There’s no question that California has the most corrupt bunch of DAs in the entire country, and they all act like salivating tyrants who seethe with anger toward anyone who refuses to bow to their power. They are far more interested in prosecuting independent-minded people than criminal-minded people, it turns out.


“What this case illustrates is the arbitrary nature of the state to use any reason possible to find a person guilty,”
writes John Vibes at TFTP. “The police state has claimed a right to search your most private property - your own blood. And, whatever they find inside it - can and will be used against you in a court of law.”

Remarkably, that’s true even if they find nothing at all. Which leads me to ask the obvious question: What’s the point of blood tests when California bureaucrats have already decided you’re guilty even before the test results come back?

Ultimately, this gets back to the core falsehoods of liberalism, the new “religion” of Collapsifornia: Evidence is not necessary when they BELIEVE they are right. This same sort of lunatic, anti-science nonsense is what underlies the entire “climate change” hoax, too.

See my article The top 10 most outrageous science hoaxes of 2016 to learn more.


Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
What Is Globalism And Where Is It Going?
April 4 2017 | From: JonRappoport

“Above all, the Globalist elite considers the human being is nothing more than a biological machine - a machine that is badly programmed, desperately in need of a complete overhaul and restructuring at the level of mind.” - The Underground, Jon Rappoport



Over the years, I have written much about Globalism. During the 2016 US presidential election, Donald Trump spoke of it often, and in derogatory terms.

Related:
Governments: The Enemy Of Freedom & Globalists Interviewed: They Admitted They Controlled The Government

He brought back, for the public, the concept, which had receded from press coverage. You could say he let the cat out of the bag.

So here I thought I would publish, in a series, some of the important material I’ve written on the subject. People need to be aware of the elite movement called Globalism and its aims and strategies.

1. “Over the weekend, thousands of protesters across multiple countries condemned impending [Globalist] trade deals promoted by governments and their corporate partners.

Though the protests received little coverage from mainstream media, they stretched from Paris to Warsaw.” (Carey Wedler, Blacklisted News, 10/19/16)

Now that the election is over, it’s important to review a few facts about Globalism. It was a centerpiece of controversy during the run-up to the vote.

Globalism isn’t just an abstract word or idea. It gives survival to some, and tries to take it away from others. It lights on populations like a storm of locusts. It undermines jobs and work. It steals. It is designed to make chaos.

Globalism is based on the elite conviction that “the best people” should rule over everyone else for the greater good. “We’re not trying to do harm. We’re spreading the wealth.”

We can find the seeds of Globalism in Plato and his ancient dialogue called The Republic. Plato made his final philosophic stand on that work. Step by step, he establishes that The Good, which is highest concept in the universe, which exists in a realm of “pure ideas” apart from the daily round of existence, must be accessed and understood, if society is to meet up with its best destiny.

But, naturally, not all people are able to fathom The Good or translate it into action here in this human realm. Only the few can grasp it - and they must rise to the top and rule.

So, in the end, there is a fascist paradise. It rebuffs all attempts at dilution.

This is how Plato, the humane philosopher, the champion of the individual and freedom and independent thought, painted himself into a terrible corner. But never mind. Down through the centuries, “the wisest of men” have taken their cue from him and built nations and civilizations based on their (self-serving) version of The Good.

And in the process, they have used propagandists to convince populations that rule from above is only carried out as altruistic service…

When a system has been devised, planned, launched, and maintained by criminals to undermine a nation, they are naturally going to defend it by saying:


"It’s good for everyone AND THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO MANAGE HUMAN AFFAIRS. BESIDES, WE CAN’T STOP IT NOW. THAT WOULD CAUSE WIDESPREAD CHAOS.”

In exactly the same way, a massive prison housing nothing but innocent people would superficially look like “chaos,” if the airtight security system were turned off.

The truth about the Globalist prison is simple. The underlying operation takes jobs away from America, in this instance, and sends them to Third World hell holes, where the same products are manufactured by the same companies, for pennies, using slave workers who labor in toxic environmental conditions that destroy their health.

Isn’t that easy to understand?

The American companies in those hell holes then sell the products back to Americans without paying taxes, tariffs, or penalties of any kind. The defenders of Globalism claim selling back the products cheaply is good for the American consumer. This is a lie, because many of those consumers no longer have jobs. Or they work at much lower wages than they used to, because the companies they worked for left America and went to the hell holes.

All in all, this arrangement is obviously designed to torpedo the national economy. It’s not an accident. It’s not an unintended consequence. The Globalists may be criminals, but they aren’t stupid criminals.

But what about the US companies who left America and set up shop overseas? Can’t they read the handwriting on the wall? Can’t they realize their base of consumers in the US is shrinking?

The companies are, in fact, stupid. They’re betting on short-term success vs. long-term collapse, and they’re going to lose. They plunge ahead with their eyes closed - because they can’t bring themselves to believe that the system they’re part of could have been fashioned with ultimate failure in mind.

The anti-Globalism movement is MUCH bigger than Trump, so no matter what you think of him, whether you believe in his honesty or not, the ideas he is bringing forward are having an immense impact on the populace - because the populace has figured out the Globalist game. They see and feel the destruction. They see and feel what is happening to jobs. Their jobs. They see the brutal reality, and they want no part of it.

They want America to endure. They want America to prosper. They want a free market. They don’t want their country reduced to Third World status.

All the politically correct humanitarian lingo in the universe is not going to change these basic realities. Globalism - the export of jobs, the rapid expansion of the Welfare State, the launching of senseless wars to pave the way for corporate plunder, the immigrant-flood through open borders - is a nation killer. It’s built to be a killer.

Decimating nations is an intentional precursor to ruling the planet from above by the Globalists-in-charge. “What we destroy we will resurrect on our own terms.”

No nation on Earth has a pure and clean history. But no nation deserves to be leveled and destroyed. The founding ideas of the original American Republic were and are the best ideas about government ever forwarded in human history. They imply:

Severely limited federal power. Free individuals. Independent individuals. Individuals who choose their own dreams and destinies. Individuals who work to achieve those dreams.

The so-called liberal press, and the academic institutions of America, have sold out completely. They are on board with what they can see of the Globalist agenda. The press will never challenge that agenda. They are grotesque cowards of the first order.

I have met some of them during my 30-plus years of working as a reporter. Behind their perfumed fronts, they give off a stench.

America is America. For the most part, its people are decent. Their leaders have betrayed them time and time again, without a second thought, without a shred of remorse.

The so-called populist movement which is growing by leaps and bounds, which got its legs under it with Ron Paul, must not come to a halt, no matter who sits in the White House, not matter what he does.

The future is now.


2. Globalist corporations are blind in the face of doom.

People don’t fully appreciate the capacity of mega-corporations. The 300 largest companies account for roughly 25% of all international trade.

And, even more startling, these behemoths are operating their production lines at half-strength. Why? Because only 1.5 billion people in the world have enough money to rate as true consumers.

So these corporations, which are the leading lights of the Globalist agenda, are looking and hoping for many more customers.

Meanwhile, Rockefeller Globalists are hyping the pseudoscience of manmade warming, in order to convince nations to cut their energy production. That plan, of course, would further erode the ability of mega-corporations to find new consumers. Indeed, Globalists are all for wrecking economies and deepening poverty - aims which infect the lifeblood of corporations.

We are looking at a huge crack - a contradiction - in the very foundation of the Globalism.

And if you want to take this farther, the notion of radical depopulation across the planet would do even graver harm to corporate dreams and ambitions. Far fewer consumers.

There are wild and woolly solutions. For example, provide a basic income to every human on Earth; or make governments the sole payer to corporations for their products, which are then dispensed to the population in a mad universal welfare scheme. In either case, you would have a new currency system.

Governments would openly and blandly create money out of thin air, as needed, to fund these harebrained schemes. Governments already invent money, but this would be occurring on a far larger scale, and without any pretense of legitimacy.

Given the propensity of governments to run their programs according to dizzyingly incompetent guidelines, I see no way the mega-corporations would welcome these “innovations.”

In short, the corporations are buying a pie-in-the-sky con. They insist on believing the favors and concocted advantages the Globalists are offering them in the marketplace are wonderful; but in fact, the long-term situation is a no-win. It’s a narrowing road, and a crack-up is coming.

Globalists are shrinking the worldwide consumer base. They want a chaos-ridden dystopia, which they will control with an iron hand. In that scenario, the mega-corporations will also shrink to shadows of their former selves. Their usefulness will rapidly decay.

Memo to CEOs: why don’t you try waking up? Your whole elite movement is a walking contradiction, and you’re on the downside.

Why don’t these CEOs awaken? Because their short-term greed exceeds their long-term vision. For them, it’s an easier way to live. Take the money and run.

3. "Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” David Rockefeller, Memoirs, 2003

The man who wrote those words represents a family that has dominated banking, oil, modern medicine, behind-the-scenes politics, and powerhouses of Globalism (e.g., the Council on Foreign Relations) for a century.

Globalism asserts that no nation can be independent from “the family” of other nations, as if it were a matter of fact beyond dispute. A nation claiming its sovereignty thus becomes a lunatic traitor to the natural order of things.

What really binds nations to one another is propaganda, and treaties which are based on the same propaganda, resulting in (temporary) engorged super-profits for mega-corporations.

Globalism is a secular piece of messianic hype. A Disneyesque altruism is the prow of the ship. Spend 10 minutes educating any street hustler on Globalist principles, and he would recognize it as a standard con.

Obama’s warning to the Brits, that their withdrawing from the Globalist European Union would put them at the back of the line in negotiating a separate trade treaty with the United States, was sheer fiction.

Britain, or any nation, that has goods to sell and a desire to buy will find trade partners. An agreement could be scratched out on a napkin over dinner.

Impending trade deals like the TPP and TTIP are thousands of pages and take so long to negotiate, because the heavy hitters at the table are looking for new ingenious ways to cut and paste the world into larger profits for themselves.

Globalism, hiding behind thousands of academic analyses, picks up jobs from one nation, where wages are reasonable and working conditions are tolerable, and dumps them in hell holes where wages are nearly invisible and conditions are poisonous. It’s that simple, and any moron could see how the industrial nations like the US would suffer…if by nations we meant people.

Instead of criminal corporations and criminal investors. But all this is layered over with “share and care” sop.

The United States government could repeal the NAFTA, CAFTA, and GATT trade treaties tomorrow, and throw current TPP and TTIP negotiating documents out the window…and all would be well. Better. Much better.

For instance, without NAFTA, US producers wouldn’t have been able to flood Mexico with cheap corn, throwing 1.5 million Mexican corn farmers into bankruptcy, leading many of them to cross the border and come to the US to find work.

No US President since Nixon has disturbed the march of Globalist “free trade.” All Presidents since then have been on board with the Rockefeller plan. And the US economy - which is to say, jobs - has thus faltered.

The 2008 financial crash was only one factor in the decline. The promise of cheap imports for sale in the US - the justification for free trade - doesn’t work when people here have no jobs and no purchasing power.

Major media, fronting for free-trade, have panicked over Donald Trump’s claim that he’ll reject Globalism.

They would have panicked over Bernie Sander’s similar promise, if they thought he had any chance of defeating Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. The media have their orders from on high - the deck is stacked, the cards were dealt long ago.

Hillary Clinton’s pathetic promises about creating jobs reveal nothing of substance. Small tax breaks for small businesses that “share profits with employees,” the “removal of government red tape,” “funding breakthroughs in scientific and medical research,” “expanding job training opportunities”- the truth is, her basic method for stimulating the economy has always been: find a war, any war, and fight it.


4. From GlobalisationGuide.org: “What does globalization mean to Australia?”


“Australian corporations participate in the oppression of workers and peasants in poor countries in Asia. Australian mining and forestry companies are involved in extracting wealth from countries such as Papua New Guinea, Irian Jaya and Indonesia, sometimes relying on military support to suppress local opposition.”

“The Australian support for trade liberalisation, particularly in agriculture, has been used to open up markets in poor countries where Australia’s commodity exports put local subsistence farmers out of work.”

“Australia has opened its own markets to goods made in countries that allow child labour, or forbid the formation of free trade unions.”

“The Australian government has opposed efforts to include environmental and labour protection clauses in World Trade Organisation agreements.”

“Australia should support reform of the WTO to make it more equitable for poor nations of the world.”

“Australia places few restrictions on the operations of transnational organisations, which take wealth from…[our] country, and are not managed in the interests of Australia.”


5. This is a bombshell. It’s a crucial piece of history that has been ignored by mass media.

I’ve published this interview before. Here I want to make new comments.

First of all, David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission was born in 1973, in part because the Globalist plan to ensure “free trade” (no tariffs paid by predatory mega-corporations) had run into a glitch.

That glitch was President Richard Nixon. He began laying tariffs on certain goods imported into the US, in order to level the playing field and protect American companies. Nixon, a substantial crook in other respects, went off-script in this case and actually started a movement to reject the Globalist vision.

After Nixon’s ouster from the White House, Gerald Ford became president, and he chose David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller as his vice-president. It was a sign Globalism and free trade were back on track.

But David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, wanted more. They wanted a man in the White House whom they’d created from scratch. That man was a peanut farmer no one had ever heard of: Jimmy Carter.

Through their media connections, David and Brzezinski vaulted Carter into the spotlight. He won the Democratic nomination (1976), spread a syrupy message of love and coming together after the Watergate debacle, and soon he was ensconced in the Oval Office.

Flash forward to 1978, the second year of Carter’s presidency. An interview took place.

It’s a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment. It’s a through-the-looking-glass secret - in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper.

The interview concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating and controlling US economic and political policy.

The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”

NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?


COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.

NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?

KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.

COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations [!], and they would resent such coordination [of policy].

NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?

COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.

NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.

COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.

KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.

SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.

Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already out in the open, it wasn’t.

Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.

US economic and political policy run by a Globalist committee of the Trilateral Commission - the Commission had been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.

Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We have lost. And I will quit.”

Lost - because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.


Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.

Flash forward again, to the Obama administration.

In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the Globalist co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

Four years before birthing the Commission with his boss of bosses, David Rockefeller, Brzezinski wrote:


“[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Goodbye, separate nations. Hello, global government.

Any doubt on the question of Trialteral goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington and Technocracy Rising, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America.

Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration. For example:

Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;

James Jones, National Security Advisor;

Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;

Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.


Here is the payoff. The US Trade Representative (appointed by Obama in 2013), who was responsible for negotiating the Globalist TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) treaty with 11 other nations, was Michael Froman, a former member of the Trilateral Commission.



Don’t let the word “former” fool you. Commission members resign when they take positions in the Executive Branch of government. And when they serve in vital positions, such as US Trade Representative, they aren’t there by accident. They’re operatives with a specific agenda.

Flash forward one more time. Trump, who squashed the Globalist TPP treaty as soon as he was inaugurated, has been busy making staff appointments. Patrick Wood writes (2/6/17):


“According to a White House press release, the first member of the Trilateral Commission has entered the Trump administration as the Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, where he will sit on the National Security Council:

Kenneth I. Juster will serve as Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs. He will coordinate the Administration’s international economic policy and integrate it with national security and foreign policy. He will also be the President’s representative and lead U.S. negotiator (“Sherpa”) for the annual G-7, G-20, and APEC Summits.”

Juster’s duties will take him into the heart of high-level negotiations with foreign governments on economic policy.

Keep your eye on Mr. Juster. Will he take actions in line with Trump’s avowed anti-Globalist stance? Or will Juster work as one more Globalist Trilateral operative in the center of American decision-making?

If the answer is “operative,” does Trump know this? Does he condone what Mr. Juster will do? Or is this a case of secret infiltration, on behalf of the most powerful Globalist group in the world, the Trilateral Commission?

6. Globalized media. It’s nice plan. Let’s examine it.

The new technocratic media is based on profiling users. There is no impactful news unless each member of the audience is surveilled and analyzed on the basis of what he already likes and wants.

Shocking? It’s to be expected. How else would technocrats parlay the untold hours they’ve spent sizing up their consumers/users? Several years ago, I wrote:


“Tech blather has already begun, since Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, bought the Washington Post at a fire sale. Jeff Genius will invent new ways to transmit the news to ‘people on the go’ and make the Post a smashing success. Mobile devices. Multiple platforms. Digital taking over from print. Ads customized to fit readers’ interests (profiling). News stories customized to fit readers’ interests (more profiling).”

In other words, non-news. If you thought media were irrelevant and deceptive before, you haven’t seen anything. The “new news” will create millions of virtual bubbles in which profiled users can float contentedly, under the cozy cottage roofs of their favorite little separate paradigms.

The tech giant Apple has waded into this territory with an app that will deliver news to users.

Yahoo:


“Apple News, part of the upcoming iOS 9 operating system, aims to be the primary news source for users of the iPhone and iPad… Apple says its news app ‘follows over a million topics and pulls relevant stories based on your specific interests’…

Joshua Benton of the Nieman Journalism Lab said the app will be important because ‘through the awesome power of default, Apple distribution puts it in an entirely other league. This [news] app will be on hundreds of millions of devices within 24 hours of its debut’.”

Translation: Profiling their users down to their toenails, Apple will present them with virtual bubbles of news they want to see and read.

Not just one overall presentation for all; no, different “news outlets” for Apple’s audiences.

This introduces a whole new layer of mind control.

“You’re an Obama fan? Here are stories confirming your belief in the Prophet.”

“You want neo-con on the rocks with a conservative Republican twist? Here’s some war footage that’ll warm your heart.”

“Do you believe ‘government gridlock’ is our biggest concern? Congress can’t get anything done? We’ve got headlines for that from here to the moon.”

“Tuned into celeb gossip? Here’s your world in three minutes.”

The idea: convince users, one day at a time, that what they already believe is important IS the news of the day.

It’s Decentralized Centralization. One media giant carving its global audience up into little pieces and delivering them a whole host of different algorithmically appropriate lies and fluff and no-context psyops.

And for “fringe users?” “You’re doubtful about GMOs? Well, look at what Whole Foods is planning for their healthier produce section. Cheer up.”



Nothing about Maui voters declaring a temporary ban on devastatingly toxic Monsanto/Dow experiments or the dangers of Roundup. “You’re anti-vaccine? Sorry, you don’t count. You’re not a recognized demographic. But here’s a piece about a little unvaccinated boy who was involved in car crash on the I5.”

Does this sound like science fiction? It isn’t. It’s the mainstream look of the near-future (if they could get away with it). Search engines are already “personalizing” your inquiries. US ABC national news is climbing in the ratings because it’s giving viewers “lighter stories,” and spending less time on thorny issues like the Middle East.

The mainstream news business is desperately looking for audience; and treating every “user” as a profiled social-construct-bundle of superficial preferences is their answer.

“Mr. X, we’ve studied the little virtual bubble you live in, and now we can sell you your own special brand of truth.”

“Hello, audience. We’re going to pitch you on becoming full-fledged obsessed consumers, as if there is no other worthy goal in life - and then we’re going to profile you from top to bottom, to find out exactly what kind of obsessed consumer you are, so we can hit you and trigger you with information that uniquely stimulates your adrenal glands…”

The one-two punch.

Any actual event occurring in the world would be pre-digested by robot media editors and profilers, and then split up into variously programmed bits of information for different audiences.

Who cares what really happened? In the new world, there is no ‘what really happened’. That’s a gross misnomer. A faulty idea. A metaphysical error. No, there is only a multi-forked media tongue that simultaneously spits out a dozen or a hundred variations of the same event…because different viewers want and expect different realities.

In 1984, Orwell’s Big Brother was issuing a single voice into the homes of the population. That was old-school. That was primitive technology. That was achieving unity by hammering unity into people’s skulls. This, now, is the frontier of unity through diversity.


“We want to make all of you into androids, through basic PR and propaganda and a pathetic excuse for education. However, we recognize you’ll become different varieties of androids, and we’ll serve that outcome with technological sophistication. Trust us. We care about what you prefer.”


User A: “Wow, did you see the coverage of the border war in Chula Vista?”

User B: “War? They had a fantastic exhibit of drones down there. At least a hundred different types. And then I watched an old WW2 movie about aerial combat.”

User C: “Chula Vista? They had a great food show. This woman made a lemon pie. I could practically taste it.”

User D: “That wasn’t a border war. It was a drill. And then afterwards, these cops gave a demonstration of all their gear. Vests, shields, communication devices, flash-bangs, auto rifles with silencers, batons. I watch drills all over the country. Love them.”

User E: “Chula Vista? The only thing I saw on the news was ‘sunny and mild’ this week. I watch all the weather channels. I love them.”

BUT when a Big One comes along, like the 2016 national election in the US, the separate tunes come together and ring as one. Then the overriding need to extend Globalism’s goals (in the person of Hillary Clinton) blot out every other priority. Then the major media twist whatever they need to twist. Then it’s the same bubble for everyone.

One problem, though. Major media have been lanced thousands of times by alt news sites, and by Wikileaks and Project Veritas. This attack has exposed the truth and the Clinton crimes.

And alt news reflects the growing interest of the public in what’s actually happening on many fronts.

The technocratic plan for the news is failing. It was a nice plan, but…It’s turning out to be a dud.

Alt media are forcing public awareness of one giant scandal after another: Hillary/Obama support for ISIS; pro-vaccine liars; the collapse of Obamacare; the GMO hustle; pesticide damage…on and on and on.

The result? Major media are being backed into a corner, where they must defend lies and build the same monolithic lies for EVERYONE all the time. The idea of creating separate news for each profiled user is ALREADY collapsing.

Major media are playing defense against the rest of the world.

It’s quite a party. And it has no expiration date.

A final note: Trump, Wikileaks, Project Veritas, Drudge, and many alt news sites created a perfect storm in 2016, raining down on major media. It was and is unprecedented. The mainstream press has been exposed down to its roots, as never before.

The lying, the collusion, the arrogant sense of entitlement, the desperation, the corruption - it’s all there to see, for anyone who has eyes and a few working brain cells. Expect more to come, regardless of the outcome of the election. The train has really left the station…


7. Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote, four years before birthing the TC with his godfather, David Rockefeller:


“[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”

Several other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney; Al Gore. The first three men helped sink the US further into debt by fomenting wars abroad; and Gore’s cap and trade blueprint would destroy industrial economies, while vastly increasing the numbers of people in Third World countries who have no access to modern sources of energy.

Does all this offer a clue as to why the US economy has failed to recover from the Wall Street debacle of 2008, why the federal bailout was a handout to super-rich criminals, and why Obama took actions which prevented a recovery?

A closer look at Tim Geithner’s circle of economic advisers reveals the chilling Trilateral effect: Paul Volker; Alan Greenspan; E. Gerald Corrigan (director, Goldman Sachs); and Peter G Peterson (former CEO, Lehman Brothers, former chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations). These men are all Trilateral members.

How many foxes in the hen house do we need, before we realize their Globalist Trilateral agenda is controlling the direction of our economy?

The TC has no interest in building up the American economy. They want to torpedo it, as part of the end-game of creating a new international currency, ushering in a de facto Globalist management system for the whole planet.


8. Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.

From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force. A central engine of that force is the Trilateral Commission.

How does a shadowy group like the TC accomplish its goal? One basic strategy is: destabilize nations; ruin their economies; ratify trade treaties that effectively send millions and millions of manufacturing jobs off to places where virtual slave labor does the work; adding insult to injury, export the cheap products of those slave-factories back to the nations who lost the jobs and undercut their domestic manufacturers, forcing them to close their doors and fire still more employees.

And then solve that economic chaos by bringing order. What kind of order?

Eventually, one planet, with national borders erased, under one management system, with a planned global economy, “to restore stability,” “for the good of all, for lasting harmony.”

The top Trilateral players, in 2008, had their man in the White House, another formerly obscure individual like Jimmy Carter: Barack Obama. They had new trade treaties on the planning table.

Obama was tasked with doing whatever was necessary to bring those treaties, like the TPP, home. To get them passed. To get them ratified. No excuses.

That’s why, over a year ago, when anti-TPP criticism and rhetoric were reaching a crescendo, when Obama was seeking Congressional fast-track authority for the treaty, he was in a sweat and a panic. He and his cabinet were on the phones night and day, scrambling and scraping for votes in Congress. This was the Big One. This was why he was the President. To make this happen.

His Trilateral bosses were watching. These men run US policy, when and where it counts. They don’t like failure.

This is also why, after Obama was inaugurated for his first term, he shocked and astonished his own advisors, who expected him, as the first order of business, to address the unemployment issue in America. He shocked them by ignoring the number-one concern of Americans, and instead decided to opt for his disastrous national health insurance policy - Obamacare.

Obama never had any intention of trying to dig America out of the crash of 2008. That wasn’t why he was put in the Oval Office.

He could, and would, pretend to bring back the economy, with fudged numbers and distorted standards. But really and truly, create good-paying jobs for many, many Americans? Not on the TC agenda. Not in the cards.

It was counter-productive to the TC plan: torpedo the economy further.

Obama is on the move. He’s traveling to far-flung places, trying to shore up global consensus on the TPP treaty. His people are working around the clock to round up the necessary votes for TPP ratification in Congress. Obama plans to sneak through the treaty during Congress’ lame-duck session after the November election, before newly elected Congressional members take office.

Pushing through Globalist trade treaties: this is why he was put in the White House. This is his appointed task. This is his real job. His bosses are watching.

“I pledge allegiance to the Trilateral Commission, and to the domination for which it stands, one planet, indivisible, with tyranny and poverty and top-down order for all…”

[Update: the TPP was dead on arrival, after Trump was elected].


9. "Technocratic human beings are spiritually dead. They are capable of anything, no matter how heinous, because they do not reflect upon or question the ultimate goal.” - Chris Hedges


“River and ocean turbines for electricity; hydrogen power; urban farms; massive water desalination—these are just a few of the means for making an abundant non-technocratic future. By any rational standard, technocratic idiocy is already obsolete.”

- The Underground, Jon Rappoport

Again, thanks to Patrick Wood and his book, Technocracy Rising, for expanding my insight into these areas.

Consider the term “scientific humanism.” The Oxford Dictionary offers this definition:


“A form of humanist theory and practice that is based on the principles and methods of science; specifically the doctrine that human beings should employ scientific methods in studying human life and behaviour, in order to direct the welfare and future of mankind in a rational and beneficial manner…Origin mid-19th century.”

That definition gives you a good general meaning for “technocracy.”

Understanding the mindset of Globalist technocrats is necessary; they believe that since they can plan the shape of society, they should plan the shape of society.

Politicians are outmoded along this new evolutionary path. They will fade into extinction. Instead, engineers will take their place.

Human beings (all eight billion) will be accounted for. They will receive energy quotas. Because a master map exists for the amount of global energy available at any moment, every human will be permitted to consume just so much energy during a defined time period.

This is the technocratic “big picture.”

Wherever you see the Surveillance State, you see technocracy. The claim that surveillance is being utilized to prevent terror attacks is a cover story. In fact, there can be no all-embracing technocracy without real-time tracking of every citizen’s energy consumption.

But technocracy goes much farther than this. Humans are viewed as mis-programmed biological machines in need of basic corrections. Their tendency to engage in conflict needs to be curbed. Whatever they do, say, or think that runs counter to the tight organizing of “peaceful and harmonious” society from above is, a priori, irrational and must be eradicated at the level of Mind.

The necessary reprogramming would be achieved through genetic, electronic, and chemical means. Though never admitting it publicly, dyed in the wool technocrats see no reason to maintain the human population at its current level. Elimination of large numbers of “biological machines” would make their job easier.

Heraldic fairy tales about “transhuman” transformation are used to put a wondrous face on technocracy. For example, we’re told that soon it will be possible to connect a human brain with a super-computer and download “spiritual wisdom, knowledge, and talents” directly to the human.

Technocratic premise: society itself is a game board, and someone has to be in charge; who better than engineers with an overall plan?

So-called “advances” in human life will begin by stating the basic “rights” people are entitled to. For example, “an optimum state of social existence.” What this really means is “pegs in holes.” People will be fitted into slots that yield up the “largest amount of possible collective happiness.”



Click on the image above to open a larger versioon in a new window

It’s all about The Plan. Freedom? Freedom to choose? Never heard of it. Instead, what the individual is given from above is satisfactory to him because he has been engineered to believe it is. That’s the plan.

Smart-grid, sustainable development, green economy, land use, community planning, climate change, education in values, and other campaigns are signals and steps toward the far shore of technocracy. They all point to putting “pegs in holes.” They all ultimately involve quotas for energy consumption.

They all involve the assumption that, since there is only so much to go around, a higher authority must decide who gets what. Food, water, shelter, jobs, luxuries, energy…

Clue: scientists and engineers can arbitrarily say what science is, and therefore they can say The Plan is “scientific.”

If you say, “Well, look, there are genuine ways to vastly increase the amount of available water and energy and clean food,” you would be running against the technocratic blueprint.

Opting for abundance is not welcomed. Abundance cuts the chords of The Plan. Scarcity must rule and it must be promoted. The lack of all essentials must be cited as the reason for imposing technocratic answers. There is no way around it.

The irony is, when you talk to really hard-core environmentalists about the means for achieving abundance through alternative technologies, they balk and grow angry.

They don’t want technological solutions - and yet, the powers behind them, where the big money is, are, in fact, all about technology - technology of a certain kind, which is based on planning out a society in which permanent and growing scarcity is MAINTAINED AND PROMOTED as the immutable reality.

It’s quite mad, quite insane. But when has that ever stopped the men who are quite sure they should sit on thrones?

Vast abundance is more than a vision. It is a reachable possibility. The history of actual science and technology confirms that both essential materials and available human innovation were always downplayed as shortages - until some individual came along and demonstrated that a new way of doing things would break through the shortage.

Corporations, governments, think-thanks, and universities try to limit, curb, and bury inventions that open up the future to abundance. Technocrats are in a race to “plan society” before those inventions leak out into the public and make them, the technocrats, obsolete.

But they are obsolete. They just haven’t figured it out yet.

But we can figure it out.


10. Elites who invent reality need an unimpeachable operation, headed up by people who are relentlessly promoted as the sanest, most intelligent, competent, and caring representatives of the human race. Guess who that would be?” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)

In 1976, the great critic of 20th-century society, Ivan Illich, wrote:


“Modern medicine is a negation of health. It isn’t organized to serve human health, but only itself, an institution. It makes more people sick than it heals.”

The medical cartel is the answer to the question: what do you with the population of Earth once they are living under a Globalist oligarchy?

It’s all about managing lives, from womb to grave, and no institution serves that management better than Medicine.

First of all, you have a system that dispenses toxic drugs in an endless stream, killing in the US alone, by conservative estimate, 100,000 people per year. On top of that, medical drugs cause anywhere from two to four millions severe adverse effects annually.

Beyond this straight-out destruction, there is the turmoil, suffering, grieving, and confusion that extends in ripples, from each one of the deaths and injuries, to families, friends, and co-workers. The overall effect? Demoralization and the inability to see and think past the emotional pain - which is exactly what you want if you are a psychopath running a planet.

The medical cartel (drug companies, public health agencies, medical schools, doctors) wants to assure cradle-to-grave treatment of every person.

This means 30 or 40 diagnoses of illnesses and mental disorders during a lifetime, and treatment with toxic drugs. It also means medical issues are at the forefront of every person’s mind as he/she wends through life, believing that Disease is the most important aspect of living.

People become proud, yes, proud of their diagnoses and treatment. They wear the diagnoses like badges of honor, and every social communication is an occasion for displaying badges and discussing treatments and comparing notes.


“You know, at first my doctor thought it was ADHD, but then he did one of those new brain scans, and realized it was Bipolar with a trace of genetically inherited Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Once he had the ODD under control with a major tranquilizer, he could go after the Bipolar. But then I developed tremors. So he implanted a chip…”

It’s not only a sick society, it’s a society about sickness.

Medical care is free, if by free one means: paid for by extraordinary levels of taxation.

The basic collectivist slogan, “We’re all in this together,” achieves its most fervent support from the axiom that Disease is our primary opportunity to help each other by accepting awesome tax burdens.

Of course, huge segments of the world population won’t be able to participate in modern, up-to-date, cutting-edge “care.” For them, there are several solutions.

The first is vaccines seeded with chemicals and genes that reduce fertility and potency. As birth rates gradually decline, cover stories are invented to explain the phenomenon: stress; rising employment rates; the social effects of urbanization; the dissolution of the nuclear family.

The second solution is epidemics that purportedly kill off large numbers of people. These epidemics are routine frauds, based on concocted science.

In the poverty-stricken Third World, announced epidemics are nothing more than cover stories; people aren’t dying because of germs; they’re dying because their water is contaminated, because of overcrowding, lack of basic sanitation, generation-to-generation starvation.



They’re dying because their fertile growing lands have been stolen. While medical experts crow about attacking the germ of the moment with (toxic) drugs and vaccines, these actual causes of death can be ignored and even enhanced.

Meanwhile, in industrialized technological sectors of the planet, psychiatry ascends to new heights of control over the educated classes. Although no so-called mental disorder has ever been diagnosed by a real laboratory test, the experts who dominate the field continue to invent new disorders at the drop of a hat.

Psychiatric patients believe they have brain conditions that must be treated with (highly toxic) drugs. The patients also believe their own aspirations are limited by their disorders, and so they acquiesce to a psychiatric model that circumscribes their lives.

At the top-end of society, new medical inventions are applied to the wealthy. Genetic enhancement is the most highly touted of these. Despite the fact that, as yet, there are no genetic treatments for any disease that work across the board, experiments will be done to extend life, to seed the unborn with special talents, to cure a wide variety of illnesses.

There will be efforts to substitute technological components for biological nature. Limbs, organs, whole body systems, brains.

The workability of high-tech pieces is not really the issue. The aim is simply to involve the rich in the entire grand experiment, thereby swallowing them up as well in a medical paradigm of existence.

At the front door of medical cartel operations, a person will be enrolled in the system while in utero, and a path will be laid out that extends all the way to the grave. Once he is on record with a medical ID package, he will be tracked and treated and tweaked without let-up.

Finally, the inevitable proposal and program will come into view. Why risk natural birth, which is already considered a medical event? Why not create birth in a laboratory?

And if, at any point in life, a person experiences doubts and regrets about his membership in the universal medical control apparatus, he can obtain a prescription for drugs that target “pleasure centers,” and then check out of his worries and anxieties.

Huxley’s Brave New World would move in like a wave on a beach.

At every way-stop toward that day, sophistication, elegance, assurance, and concern will be the watchwords of the practicing doctor, the secular priest in this drama of human dismantling.

And yet, for those who remember, who know what the Individual is, who know what freedom is, who know what imagination and creative power are, the rigging and distorting and flattening and collectivizing will look like nothing more than a horrible cartoon.

And these people who remember will lead a revolution like no revolution ever seen before.

Or we can defect from, and withdraw our consent to, this mad matrix now.


Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Africa: The Role Of Oxfam, Unicef, Live Aid In The Systematic Destabilization Of African Nations
April 3 2017 | From: 21stCenturyWire

“One thing that keeps me puzzled, despite having studied finance and economics at the world’s best universities, the following question remains unanswered. Why is it that 5,000 units of our currency is worth one unit of your currency where we are the ones with the actual gold reserves? It’s quite evident that the aid is in fact not coming from the West to Africa but from Africa to the Western world.”



The following in an excerpt from a lecture given by Mallence Bart Williams in 2015 (TEDxBerlin). 

Related:
Key’s ‘Great’ Legacy - UNICEF Ranks NZ Third Highest In The Developed World For Child Poverty

Mallence Bart-Williams was born in Cologne, Germany. She is a Sierra Leonean writer and filmmaker and a German fashion designer. She pursued her studies in economics and finance in Paris, Singapore, and Great Britain.

She is the founder and creative director of the Freetown-based creative collective FOLORUNSHO, a ‘SHARITY’ (with no financial donations or aide) that she initiated with street kids in Sierra Leone.




The Western world depends on Africa in every possible way since alternative resources are scarce out here. So how does the West ensure that the free aid keeps coming? By systematically destabilizing the wealthiest African nations and their systems, and all that backed by huge PR campaigns - leaving the entire world under the impression that Africa is poor and dying and merely surviving on the mercy of the West.

Well done Oxfam, UNICEF, Red Cross, Live Aid, and all the other organizations that continuously run multi-million-dollar advertisement campaigns depicting charity porn to sustain that image of Africa globally. Ad campaigns paid for by innocent people under the impression to help, with their donations.

While one hand gives under the flashing lights of cameras, the other takes in the shadows. We all know the dollar is worthless, while the Euro is merely charged with German intellect and technology and maybe some Italian pasta. How can one expect donations from nations that have so little?


How super sweet of you to come with your colored paper in exchange for our gold and diamonds. But instead you should come empty-handed, filled with integrity and honor. I want to share with you our wealth and invite you to share with us."




"The perception is that a healthy and striving Africa would not disperse its resources as freely and cheaply, which is logical. Of course, it would instead sell its resources at world market prices, which in turn would destabilize and weaken Western economies established on the post-colonial free-meal system.


Last year the IMF reports that six out of 10 of the world’s fastest-growing economies are in Africa, measured by their GDP growth. The French Treasury, for example, is receiving about 500 billion dollars year in year out, in foreign exchange reserves from African countries based on Colonial Debt they force them to pay.

Former French President Jacques Chirac stated in an interview recently that we have to be honest and acknowledge that a big part of the money in our banks comes precisely from the exploitation of the African continent. In 2008 he stated that without Africa, France will slide down in the rank of a third-world power.

This is what happens in the human world. The world we have created.

Have you ever wondered how things work in nature? One would assume that in evolution, the fittest survives. However in nature any species that is overhunting, over-exploiting the resources they depend on as nourishment, natural selection would sooner or later take the predator out, because it upsets the balance.”

Watch the full talk here: 



Thank you to www.wrongkindofgreen.org for the original transcript.


Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Punk Icon Johnny Rotten Cheers Brexit, Calls Trump A “Political Sex Pistol” + Brexit Bill Becomes Law As UK Queen Elizabeth II Gives Royal Assent
April 2017 | From: Infowars/ Sputnik

Rocker embraces anti-globalism as the new counter-culture.



Appearing on Good Morning Britain, counter-culture icon and godfather of punk rock, Johnny Rotten, expressed his admiration for Nigel Farage, praised Brexit, and asserted that President Donald Trump could be considered a “political Sex Pistol.”

Related: Trump Foiled Soros’ Master Plan To Impose New World Order + Theresa May: Brexit Britain And Donald Trump Can Lead The World Together

“Where do I stand on Brexit?” began Rotten. “Well, here goes: The working class have spoke, and I’m one of them, and I’m with them, and there it is.”





Rotten, who became a naturalized American citizen in 2013, was asked about his feelings on Trump.


“Here’s a complicated fellow,”
he replied. “As one journalist once said to me, ‘Is he the political Sex Pistol?'”

“In a way [he is],” interjected host Piers Morgan.

“In a way,” Rotten agreed. “What I dislike is the left-wing media trying to smear the bloke as a racist, and that’s completely not true.”

“There’s many, many problems with him as a human being, but he’s not that – and there just might be a chance that something good will come out of that situation, because he terrifies politicians, and this is joy to behold to me.”

“He is the absolutely archetypal anti-establishment character in politics,” said Morgan.

“He is,” said Rotten. “And dare I say – a possible friend?”

The longtime Sex Pistols frontman took the couch alongside Morgan and co-host Susanna Reid just moments after a heated showdown between Brexit architect, Nigel Farage, and Alastair Campbell, former Director of Communications and Strategy for ex-PM Tony Blair, in which Reid reportedly feared the men might come to blows.

Rotten wasted no time expressing his glowing support of Farage and Brexit, saying it had been “fantastic” to meet Nigel, and that he had been waiting to “shake his hand” since an incident in 2016 that unfolded on the River Thames, in which Farage and a large flotilla of pro-Brexit boaters and fishermen, were attacked by elitist-globalist music producer, Bob Geldof, who was also sailing the Thames in hopes of a confrontation.




Rotten’s comments reflect a possible change of heart from those he made last year in an interview with Metro, in which he called Brexit “suicidal” and an “act of cowardice.”

His opinion of Trump at the time was equally negative, of whom he said, “It’s a minority at best that support him, and it’s so hateful and ignorant. I agree with the basic principle that we’re all fed up with politicians, but you can’t replace them with businessmen, which is surely the more corrupt form.”


Conservatism is the NEW Counter-Culture






Brexit Bill Becomes Law As UK Queen Elizabeth II Gives Royal Assent

Queen Elizabeth II has given her royal assent making Brexit bill a law.



"Her Majesty has signified her royal assent to the following acts… European Union Notification of Withdrawal Act, 2017," House of Commons Speaker John Bercow said.

The UK monarch's formal approval allows Prime Minister Theresa May to trigger Article 50 of the EU Lisbon Treaty, as she has pledged to do by end of March. Once the treaty's exit clause is invoked, a two-year period begins during which the UK is expected to discuss plans for its post-Brexit ties with the EU.

Brexit in Motion: Could Article 50 Leave UK Economy in Shambles? Earlier on Monday, the UK Parliament signed off on The European Union Notification of Withdrawal Bill, a legislation that will now allow the UK to formally exit the European Union.

At the same time, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon announced Monday that she will ask London to give Edinburgh legal powers to hold a new referendum on Scotland's independence since Theresa May's government has failed to consider Edinburgh's interests when devising the Brexit strategy.

On June 23, 2016 about 52 percent of UK voters cast ballots to for the island nation to leave the EU. The full terms of the UK's exit have yet to be negotiated, but much hinges at stake.

Particularly, UK citizens and outside observers wonder whether Britain will keep some economic ties with the EU in the form of tariff-free trade, or whether the UK will trade with the EU like any non-EU country under rules stipulated by the World Trade Organization. Another issue is how migrants entering and leaving the UK will be treated.


Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Australian Government Ramps Up $18.5M Citizen Surveillance With “The Capability” And “iOmniscient” Technology
April 2 2017 | From: AnonHQ

Although surveillance has dominated society for years now, the Australian Federal Government has decided to catch up, now implementing the latest facial recognition technology to assist with thwarting terrorist attacks while recording every citizen's face and move.




Has Big Brother reached Australia? Concerned citizens of Queensland, Australia’s northern state, seem to think so. Privacy advocates are fearing the latest development in a facial recognition technology trial has overstepped the government boundaries.

Related: The Dark Intelligence State and the Judiciary

According to a latest ABC report “The Toowoomba Regional Council has begun trialling the software called iOmniscient on behalf of the Brisbane, Gold Coast and other councils.



“iOmniscient works by analysing images recorded by existing CCTV cameras.”

The Australian Federal Government is in support of the new technology, introducing similar rollouts in the Northern Territory to assist police, and also with the passport processing in Australia, reports the ABC News in Australia.

A law lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology, Dr Monique Mann, has said the decision is alarming on many levels.

According to Dr Mann, the introduction of facial recognition technology at a federal level will lead to privacy issues.


“It can be integrated with existing surveillance systems as we’re seeing with CCTV-enabled tracking through public faces,”
she said.

“And it can also be integrated with other big data that’s used for law enforcement and security purposes - so for example images that can be taken from social media websites.”

Paul Antonio, Mayor of the Toowoomba Council since 2012, has rushed to defend the new software, saying it isn’t an invasion of privacy.


“It is attached to a data system that will tell us the number of people coming and going to the library, and the number of times they have actually come and gone in a given day,”
he said.

“What it actually does is it analyses the existing CCTV footage that we’ve had here in this region for quite some time.”

Antonio further said this is specific to “improving service delivery” to the library, where the trial was nominated to take place, and is an “experiment.”

This comes at a time when increasing surveillance devices have been implemented not just in the state of Queensland but across the nation. Last month the Australian government announced a massive $18.5 million budget for facial recognition technology.

The Capability is another program to assist security agencies in scanning through up to 100 million facial images already on Australian databases. The images come from an array of databases including shopping centres, passport photos and drivers’ licenses.

Proponents for the use of The Capability include Justice Minister Michael Keenan, who says this new technology will assist in combating terrorism and organised crime. It keeps Australians safe by protecting their identity and it allows our law enforcement authorities to accurately and efficiently to identify someone who might take their interest,” he said.

Cyber Security analyst Patrick Gray spoke to the ABC in February, highlighting concerns. “This is a whole other league of creepy, this is a whole other league of invasive and the fact that there’s been no discussion around this is really weird.”

Deakin University criminology expert Adam Molnar also raised concerns for a “potential error rate of the technology.” Molnar raised the issue of “false positives” impacting on a person’s life.


"The FBI accepts a 20 per cent inaccuracy so that’s one in five images that could be false identification of an individual,” Molnar said.


Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Windows 10 Keeps Spying Even When All Privacy Options Are Turned Off & Did The Government Spy On Trump? Of Course. It Spies On All Of Us!
April 1 2017 | From: Geopolitics/ Infowars

In addition to the vulnerability of Apple’s expensive gadgetry, iPhones and iMac, to CIA hacking, Bill Gates’ Windows 10 is surveilling its users by default, i.e. no need for the CIA to hack it anymore.



What this means is: your PC’s camera, microphone, and keystrokes are being recorded and stored in their cloud-based databases, for future reference.

Related: “There Is no American Deep State… It Just Looks Like There Is”

Simply put, Microsoft Windows 10 and all its previous versions are the Deep State’s window to their users’ private lives.

We should not expect otherwise in the first place.


Windows 10 Will Keep Spying on You No Matter How Hard You Try to Stop It


When you boot up Windows 10 for the very first time, you have the option to customize several settings related to the collection of data from Microsoft’s servers.

You can stop your machine from sending contact and calendar details, typing and speech data, location data and even error and diagnostic reports. Unfortunately, no matter how many boxes you uncheck, Microsoft is still going to collect information from your computer, whether you know it or not.



Related: Details on NSA Backdoor in INTEL Chips

In a Voat thread last week, a user by the name of CheesusCrust published his findings after running a network traffic analysis relating to the telemetry and surveillance features of Windows 10. The results were troubling, to say the least.

While setting up a fresh copy of Windows 10 Enterprise Edition on VirtualBox, the user went through and disabled all three pages of tracking options, one by one. He then left the computer running for eight hours overnight, and returned to find that Windows 10 had attempted to contact 51 Microsoft IP addresses 5,508 times.

After 30 hours, over 112 IP addresses had been contacted.




Lou Dobbs: Chris Farrell on Deep State and Obama Wire-Tapping of Trump - the Soft Coup Continues








The user attempted the same experiment once again with a fresh install of Windows 10 as well as a third party tool called DisableWinTracking. He discovered that the name of the tool is slightly misleading, as Windows 10 had contacted 30 IP addresses 2,758 times in the same 30 hour time frame.

As Gordon Kelly explains over at Forbes, the end user license agreement (EULA) you sign to when you install Windows 10 gives Microsoft the legal right to collect this data. That’s all well and good, but Microsoft refuses to explain why it needs this data or how it improves Windows 10 in any meaningful way.

The most damning aspect of the entire investigation is the fact that Microsoft is lying to us when it gives us the ability to turn certain tracking features off. No matter what you do, or which settings you disable, Microsoft isn’t going anywhere.



Related: Windows 10 will keep spying on you no matter how hard you try to stop it

To make matters worse, US senators just voted to allow your ISP to sell your browsing history without your prior permission.


ISP's Can Now Sell Your Browsing History Without Permission, Thanks to the Senate

The US Senate has voted to overturn consumer privacy laws enacted last year by the FCC. The rules, which forced internet service providers to actually get permission before selling your data, were overturned using the little-used Congressional Review Act (CRA).

Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal said before the vote that:


"This resolution is a direct attack on consumer rights, on privacy, on rules that afford basic protection against intrusive and illegal interference with consumers’ use of social media sites and websites that often they talk for granted.”

Hope you enjoyed it while it lasted.

Assuming that this resolution passes through the House, which seems likely at this point, your broadband and wireless internet service provider will have free reign to collect and sell personal data along to third parties.

That information may include (but is not limited to!) location, financial, healthcare and browsing data scraped from customers. As a result of the ruling, you can expect ISPs to begin collecting this data by default. Some ISPs may choose to include an opt-out from data collection in account settings.



Related: ISPs can now sell your browsing history without permission, thanks to the Senate

Still think that your representative truly represents you? The Corporate Deep State has been hacking the government and monarchies alike for centuries, all for the glory of the Vatican Empire.


Related Articles:

Smart Dildos Caught Spying On Owners

Google, Soros Behind “Fake News” on “Internet Privacy”



Did the Government Spy On Trump? Of Course. It Spies On All Of Us!

President Trump should use Obama admin's surveillance as a teaching moment.

There was high drama last week when Rep. Devin Nunes announced at the White House that he had seen evidence that the communications of the Donald Trump campaign people, and perhaps even Trump himself, had been “incidentally collected” by the US government.

If true, this means that someone authorized the monitoring of Trump campaign communications using Section 702 of the FISA Act. Could it have been then-President Obama? We don’t know. Could it have been other political enemies looking for something to harm the Trump campaign or presidency? It is possible.

There is much we do not yet know about what happened and there is probably quite a bit we will never know. But we do know several very important things about the government spying on Americans.

First there is Section 702 itself. The provision was passed in 2008 as part of a package of amendments to the 1978 FISA bill. As with the PATRIOT Act, we were told that we had to give the government more power to spy on us so that it could catch terrorists.



Related: They Can See a ‘Stick of Butter from Space’ - The Billion Dollar Spy Agency You’ve Never Heard Of

We had to give up some of our liberty for promises of more security, we were told. We were also told that the government would only spy on the bad guys, and that if we had nothing to hide we should have nothing to fear.

We found out five years later from Edward Snowden that the US government viewed Section 702 as a green light for the mass surveillance of Americans. Through programs he revealed, like PRISM, the NSA is able to collect and store our Internet search history, the content of our emails, what files we have shared, who we have chatted with electronically, and more.

That’s why people like NSA whistleblower William Binney said that we know the NSA was spying on Trump because it spies on all of us!

Ironically, FISA itself was passed after the Church Committee Hearings revealed the abuses, criminality, and violations of our privacy that the CIA and other intelligence agencies had been committing for years. FISA was supposed to rein in the intelligence community but, as is often the case in Washington, it did the opposite: it ended up giving the government even more power to spy on us.




Sean Spicer Calls Out April Ryan for Acting Like Petulant Teen at Daily Briefing: ‘Stop Shaking Your Head Again’









So President Trump might have been “wiretapped” by Obama, as he claimed, but unfortunately he will not draw the right conclusions from the violation. He will not see runaway spying on Americans as a grotesque attack on American values. That is unfortunate, because this could have provided a great teaching moment for the president.

Seeing how all of us are vulnerable to this kind of government abuse, President Trump could have changed his tune on the PATRIOT Act and all government attacks on our privacy. He could have stood up for liberty, which is really what makes America great.

Section 702 of the FISA Act was renewed in 2012, just before we learned from Snowden how it is abused. It is set to expire this December unless Congress extends it again.

Knowing what we now know about this anti-American legislation we must work hard to prevent its renewal. They will try to scare us into supporting the provision, but the loss of our liberty is what should scare us the most!



Former NSA Chief: Obama Illegally Surveilled Trump




Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Literary Agents Rethinking The Legacy Of Writers Who Worked With The CIA + Interview With Douglas Valentine: The CIA As Organized Crime
April 1 2017 | From: NewRepublic / Sott

Czeslaw Milosz, the Polish poet who defected to the West in 1951, was struck by the ostentatiousness of American cultural programs: “You could smell big money from a mile away.” The era’s finest little magazines, titles like Partisan Review and The Paris Review, published enduring fiction, poetry, and essays.



The writings of Clement Greenberg and Lionel Trilling set the high-water mark for art and literary criticism.

Related: Albert Einstein, as described by CIA psychics

Richard Wright wrote the mournful poem that would provide the title for Ta-Nehisi Coates’s 2015 best-seller, Between the World and Me. The artists who waged the radical political battles of the 1930s emerged in the 1950s as cultural institutions, achieving a prominence - even a celebrity - that has eluded subsequent generations.

Plenty of observers, however, suspected that the free market of ideas had been corrupted. World tours, fancy conferences, prestigious bylines and book contracts were bestowed on artists who hewed to political positions favored by the establishment, rather than on the most talented.

In 1966, The New York Times confirmed suspicions that the CIA was pumping money into “civil society” organizations: unions, international organizations of students and women, groups of artists and intellectuals. The agency had produced the popular cartoon version of George Orwell’s anticommunist classic Animal Farm in 1954.

It flew the Boston Symphony Orchestra on a European tour in 1952, to counter prejudices of the United States as uncultured and unsophisticated. It promoted the work of abstract expressionist painters like Jackson Pollock because their artistic style would have been considered degenerate in both Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union.

The propriety of such largesse, both for the CIA and its beneficiaries, has been hotly debated ever since. Jason Epstein, the celebrated book editor, was quick to point out that CIA involvement undermined the very conditions for free thought, in which “doubts about established orthodoxies” were supposed to be “taken to be the beginning of all inquiry.”

But Gloria Steinem, who worked with the CIA in the 1950s and ’60s, “was happy to find some liberals in government in those days,” arguing that the agency was “nonviolent and honorable.”

Milosz, too, agreed that the “liberal conspiracy,” as he called it, “was necessary and justified.” It was, he allowed, “the sole counterweight to the propaganda on which the Soviets expended astronomical sums.”

Today’s intellectuals approach their labors in a very different set of circumstances. The struggle for academic patronage and the strained conditions of nearly all media properties have led to fewer jobs and fewer venues for substantial writing; the possibility of leading a public-facing life of the mind now seems vanishingly small, which only heightens nostalgia for the golden age of the 1950s.

Yet the shadow of the CIA lurks behind the achievements of that time. The free play of ideas - the very thing that was supposed to distinguish the United States from the Soviet Union in the first place - turned out to be, at least in part, a carefully constructed illusion.



Related: New CIA Docs Reveal Black Budget “Project Star Gate” to Study “Supernatural” Abilities

What if the prominence of midcentury intellectuals, the sense that they were engaged in important political and artistic projects, is inseparable from the fact that they were useful to America’s Cold War empire?

Joel Whitney’s Finks: How the CIA Tricked the World’s Best Writers insists that past glory and present disappointment are inextricably linked. He wants to show that the distinction some make between a “good,” literary CIA and a “bad” one that toppled leftists and subverted democracy around the globe is an artificial one.

Whitney argues that the government “weaponized” culture and helped create a compromised media that still serves, “in part, to encourage support for our interventions.” The term he uses in the title - “finks” - implies that the book’s subjects are disreputable actors, complicit in the crimes of the agency that supported their work.

The CIA still stonewalls efforts to understand its history, but journalists and scholars have been able to stitch together interviews and papers of the people and organizations that the agency supported to generate a picture of its activities. In this sense, Whitney picks up the investigative gauntlet thrown by the British journalist Frances Stonor Saunders with the publication of her book Who Paid the Piper?in 1999.



Related:
UFOs, telekinesis & spies: 12 million pages of CIA secrets online for 1st time

As Saunders demonstrated, the CIA didn’t simply hand out money - it actively managed the organizations it supported. What’s more, she showed, many people who feigned ignorance were aware of the connection.

Saunders’s stance reflected the cultural mood of the late 1990s: With the breakup of the Soviet Union, it became easier both to acknowledge the dark side of American power and to see the Cold War as a pretext for U.S. actions rather than the cause of those actions.

Later historians, such as Hugh Wilford in The Mighty Wurlitzer: How the CIA Played America, have examined the varied reasons why groups and individuals agreed to work with CIA fronts. While Finks is more global than Saunders’s book, devoting more attention to the CIA’s influence from India to Latin America, it represents a return to her mode of exposing hypocritical alliances rather than explaining their historical motivations.



Related: Exclusive: Democratic Plan To Overthrow Trump Revealed

Whitney, like many of his subjects, is co-founder of a literary magazine (Guernica), and he’s the author of an intricate essay, published in Salon in 2012, on how the renowned Paris Review was implicated in the CIA’s program of cultural manipulation.

The novelist Peter Matthiessen started the magazine in 1953 with Harold “Doc” Humes, a writer who grew paranoid after overdosing on LSD that Timothy Leary gave him in 1965. In 1977, The New York Times revealed that Matthiessen had been working for the CIA when The Paris Review was founded, and that the magazine had served as part of his cover.

He later explained that when he was recruited, “the CIA was brand new, and they were not yet into political assassinations or the other ugly stuff that came later.” But he still insisted that he’d broken his CIA ties after a few years, and that The Paris Review had no further connection to the U.S. government.

Whitney’s investigations in The Paris Review’s archives, however, tell a different story. The magazine remains the great white whale of Finks: Whitney is ever chasing it, searching for its traces in the twilight depths of Cold War espionage. To achieve this, Whitney attempts to link The Paris Review to the central cog in the CIA’s Cold War propaganda machine: the Congress for Cultural Freedom.

The CCF was founded in 1950 as a home for anticommunist intellectuals who wanted to combat the influence of European communists, fellow travelers, and neutralists. CIA dollars and personnel made it possible, even as the CCF quickly expanded into a global organization that operated magazines, conferences, and art galleries from Asia to South America.



Related: State Secrets: Sibel Edmonds Uncovers ‘The Untouchables’

At its height in the ’50s and ’60s, the CCF sponsored sophisticated, cosmopolitan magazines such as Preuves in France, Hiwar in Egypt, Quest in India, Mundo Nuevo in Spain and Latin America, and Encounter in London.

Mundo Nuevo
was especially influential, publishing leftist writers of the generation of the “boom” in Latin American letters (like Carlos Fuentes and Gabriel García Márquez) alongside international authors like Susan Sontag and Harold Pinter. Still, the CIA felt free to nix articles and exercise prior review. “Brand America’s sales team,” writes Whitney, “thought little of fostering cultural freedom through routine acts of censorship.”

The Paris Review, however, was not part of the CCF. Unlike the CCF magazines, which were generally both political and literary, The Paris Review remained theoretically “apolitical.” But Whitney shows that the CIA’s cultural Cold War helped to shape its content just the same.

One of The Paris Review’s editors, Nelson Aldrich Jr., discovered that a government agency had purchased 460 copies of one issue and taken out ten subscriptions.


"As far as possible, this information should remain secret,” he cautioned his colleagues. The CCF effectively subsidized many little magazines simply by being a large and regular purchaser.

But its influence didn’t end there. The Paris Review is famous for its in-depth interviews with authors; the CCF paid to syndicate those interviews in its own suite of magazines. This it would only do, of course, if the interview subject was prominent and didn’t conflict with Cold War imperatives.

The CCF, Whitney shows, paid higher fees for pieces with elements of anti-Soviet propaganda, like the magazine’s interview with the Russian novelist Boris Pasternak. The CCF also steered The Paris Review toward interview subjects it wanted for its own magazines.



George Plimpton, editor of The Paris Review for more than 50 years, revealed in private letters that he knew about the CCF’s connections to the CIA before they were made public. This fits with reporting by Richard Cummings in The American Conservative that Plimpton was an “agent of influence” for the CIA.

Through such relationships, the CIA wielded undue influence on the literary landscape. Whitney makes a compelling case, for instance, that the CIA reinforced the literary prestige of white men in American letters. If other nations believed that race relations in America were poor, the agency feared, it would damage our ability to lead the “free” world.

So the CIA sponsored African American voices only if their critique of U.S. society wasn’t too sweeping. And even writers it did support, like Richard Wright, found that the CIA was spying on them at the same time.


"I lift my hand to fight communism,” Wright wrote, “and I find that the hand of the Western world is sticking knives into my back.”

Ex-Communist Ralph Ellison, author of Invisible Man, attended some CCF events; he was the only black writer featured in The Paris Review’s “Art of Fiction” series until the 1980s.

The evidence that investigative journalists like Whitney and Saunders have amassed should leave no doubt that the so-called “free market of ideas,” which the CIA claimed to be protecting, was distorted and undermined by the agency’s own activities.

The CIA’s cultural apparatus gave intellectuals a way to advance professionally, as long as they rejected radicalism and embraced the necessity of U.S. power in the Cold War. The CIA did not create those opinions, but it amplified them and helped give its warriors the sense of being engaged in a world-historic struggle.

Still, Whitney and other critics of the CIA too often aim to portray the agency and those who worked with it as a single entity acting with a unified purpose. The reality was much messier. Even the term “finks” has an unexpected history.

Whitney picks up the word “finks” from a letter from the novelist and editor Keith Botsford to the sociologist Daniel Bell, both associates of the CCF. For years, Botsford had been trying to convince the CCF to retire Cuadernos, an anti­communist magazine it ran in Latin America.




Related: Reaction to Trump Inauguration: “That Was Some Weird Sh*t”

“It was a fink magazine,” he wrote to Bell, meaning that it drew from reactionary thinkers and produced poor quality work. (Jorge Ibargüengoitia, the Mexican satirist, once joked that Cuadernos was so bad that it must have been invented by communists to discredit their own opposition.)

Michael Josselson, the CIA’s principal agent for the CCF, fought Botsford’s plan to spike the magazine. But Josselson’s deputy - who swore to Botsford that he wasn’t CIA, when of course he was - backed Botsford. Botsford thought that he’d been played by the CIA’s “finks,” embodied by Josselson. But the “CIA” was on both sides of the debate.

Weaponizing culture, it turned out, was a tricky business. Even Cuadernos criticized the U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic. The magazine the CCF founded after Cuadernos’s demise in 1965, Mundo Nuevo, criticized the war in Vietnam.

Though the magazines still had strategic purposes, the straightforward defense of U.S. intervention was not among them. It is difficult, in fact, to say just who the “finks” are in all of this. If the test of finkdom is collaboration with state spies, then the CIA’s Communist opponents were finks, too.




Did Obama’s Defense Deputy Just Admit Spying on Trump?








Whitney sounds a powerful warning about the dangerous interaction between the national security state and the work of writers and journalists. But the precise experience of the cultural Cold War is unlikely to be repeated. A global ideological conflict, cast in civilizational terms, made the work of intellectuals worth subsidizing.

Today’s intellectuals are no longer needed as chits in a great power conflict, and our nostalgia for the Cold War generation’s prestige seems increasingly misplaced: An era of heroic thinkers now looks instead like a grubby assortment of operatives, writers who appeared to challenge the establishment without actually being dangerous to it. Jason Epstein was right.

The CIA created conditions that subverted the essential task of an intellectual: to cast a critical eye on orthodoxy and received wisdom.

Today the state maintains its capacity to influence political thinking, but the frontiers have shifted. Freedom is now defended less in little magazines than on social media. In 2014, the U.S. Agency for International Development was caught nurturing a Cuban version of Twitter - a logical extension of the CIA’s work in the ’50s and ’60s.

And as Edward Snowden’s revelations demonstrate, the promotion of freedom through open communications remains uncomfortably intertwined with the potential for surveillance.

What’s more, the vehicles we employ for personal speech are not only subject to electronic censorship and propagandistic manipulation by governments: They are also corporate properties.



While social media can facilitate the circulation of ideas and the defense of free thought, they also depend on profit-chasing and maximizing saleable engagement. In such a highly mediated and monitored system, the line between participation and unwitting collaboration can be difficult to discern.

Cold War intellectuals didn’t always realize the function they performed as “finks,” as accessories to power in systems they would have preferred not to validate.

Today the specific configuration of state interference may have changed, but we remain subject to forces that shape our opinions and the boundaries of our thinking in ways we cannot see clearly. How will we recognize it in ourselves if we, too, are finks?




Interview With Douglas Valentine: The CIA As Organized Crime

Douglas Valentine, author of the definitive book on the CIA's terror operations in Vietnam (The Phoenix Program), and the recently released title: THE CIA AS ORGANIZED CRIME: How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World.

Douglas had unprecedented access to CIA officers while writing his book on Phoenix, and since then, he has been one of their most vocal critics. He names names, and doesn't pull any punches when it comes to exposing the criminal network otherwise known as the Central Intelligence Agency.




Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Microsoft Study: Human Attention Span Now Less Than Goldfish
March 30 2017 | From: IBTimes

A new Microsoft study has highlighted the deteriorating attention span of humans. Comment: There's quite a sense of irony in that this has come from Microsoft.



In a bid to determine the impact of electronic gadgets on our ability to concentrate, Microsoft monitored the brain activity of some people using electroencephalograms (EEGs).

Related: The Binge Breaker: Silicon Valley Is Addicting Us To Our Phones

While the research revealed that we are able to multitask better now, humans were found to have worse attention spans than goldfish. The average human attention span was found to have fallen to eight seconds from 12 in 2000, putting humans below goldfish, which are is believed to have an attention span of nine seconds. Canadians with more digital lifestyles struggle to focus in environments where prolonged attention is needed.


"Canadians [who were tested] with more digital lifestyles struggle to focus in environments where prolonged attention is needed," the study found, reported The Independent.

"Early adopters and heavy social media users front load their attention and have more intermittent bursts of high attention. They're better at identifying what they want/don't want to engage with and need less to process and commit things to memory."

The fall in concentration could also be blamed on our constant need to check our smartphones and browse through social media newslists and whatsapp messages.

While critics of electronic gadgets and social media have another reason to justify their alarm, some believe it's just a natural way of humans trying to consume it all.

Bruce Morton, a researcher with the University of Western Ontario's Brain and Mind Institute said: "When we first invented the car, it was so novel. The thought of having an entertainment device in the car was ridiculous because the car itself was the entertainment.


“After a while, travelling for eight hours at a time, you'd had enough of it. The brain is bored. You put radios in the car and video displays. Why? Because after the first 10 minutes of the drive I've had enough already. I understand this.

Just because we may be allocating our attention differently as a function of the technologies we may be using, it doesn't mean that the way our attention actually can function has changed."



Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Keeping Watch on the Cabal / Illuminati / New World Order / Khazarian / Zionists



Part 1: Click here

Part 2: Click here

Part 3: Click here

Part 4: Click here


Part 5: Click here

Part 6: Click here

Part 7: Click here

Part 8: Click here


Part 9: Click here

Part 10: Click here

Part 11: Click here

Part 12: Click here


Part 13: Click here

Part 14: Click here

Part 15: Click here

Part 16: Click here


Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

This website is optimised for viewing in Mozilla Firefox

Fair Dealing Notice

These pages / videos may contain copyrighted (©) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. With reference to The New Zealand Copyright Act 1994 such material is made available for critical, review, educational purposes and the reporting of current events. In accordance with The New Zealand Copyright Act 1994, this material is distributed without profit to those with a general interest in such information for research and education.

Fair Use Notice

These pages / videos may contain copyrighted (©) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those with a general interest in such information for research and education.

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi

Wake Up Kiwi
 
Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi
Wake Up Kiwi
Wake Up Kiwi
Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi Wake Up Kiwi