‘Humanitarian’ Concerns Increase Wars, Benefit Only Arms-Producers
September 14 2024 | From: Geopolitics / Various Unlike a regular corporation, the corporations that manufacture and sell weapons to their government are virtually 100% dependent upon their government and its military allies, for their own success; their markets are only those governments, not individuals (such as is the case for normal corporations).
Consequently, either their government will control them, and those firms won’t have any effective control over their own markets, or else those firms will, themselves, control their government, and thereby effectively control their markets, via the government’s foreign policies - not only via expanding its military alliances (those firms’ foreign markets), but via its designating ‘enemy’ nations that it and its ‘allies’ (those arms-producers’ foreign markets) can then use those weapons against.
In countries such as the United States, arms-producers are benefiting and controlled by the country’s billionaires, instead of (as in Russia, for example) benefiting and controlled by the government.
Only in nations where arms-producers are privately instead of publicly controlled are the government’s foreign polices predominantly controlled by the country’s arms-producers. That’s the way it is in America.
"The US has been the world’s leading exporter in weapons since 1990 and the biggest customer is Saudi Arabia. The US sold a total of $55.6 billion of weapons worldwide, and in 2017, cleared $18 billion dollars with Saudi Arabia alone.”
Yet, Trump talks up his ‘humanitarian’ concerns for the people of Venezuela as ‘justification’ for his possibly invading Venezuela, and America’s military is preparing to do that.
Additional:Read about the Alliance that
has
been working behind
the scenes for decades to take down the 'Cabal' within the work of David Wilcock.
Some of those reading this may be confused because the cabal-controlled mainstream media is doing
everything within it's
power to denigrate Trump - as he is part of the effort to take the
Illuminati down once and for
all.
And the Alliance effort operates beyond the bounds of countries - out of neccessity; as that is how the Luciferian Cabal
does.
Do you think you can trust the mainstream media? Look at whom they target. One must wonder why 'they' also do not like Putin?
The main and central ‘enemy’ of the US is Russia’s government; and all of the other ‘enemies’ of America (the spokes of America’s ‘enemy’ wheel) are led by people - such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Viktor Yanukovych, Bashar al-Assad, Salvador Allende, Jacobo Arbenz, and Nicolas Maduro - who are friendly toward Russia.
The objective here is to force other nations to join America’s anti-Russia alliances or else to face the consequences of a likely invasion or coup by America to overthrow and replace those leaders.
Therefore, America targets all nations that are/were friendly toward Russia, such as pre-2003 Iraq, and such as pre-2011 Libya, and such as Syria, and such as pre-1973 Chile, and such as post-1979 Iran - all of America’s various target-nations, which are the authorized targets for America and its ‘allies’ to invade or otherwise regime-change (change from being a target, to becoming instead a new market).
In order for privately controlled arms-producers to thrive, there is just as much of a need for ‘allies’ as for ’targets’, because without targets, there can be no authorized markets, since every weapon is useless if it has no authorized target against which it may be used.
There consequently needs to be at least one ‘enemy’ for any country whose arms-production is privately instead of publicly controlled. Both ‘allies’ and ‘enemies’ are needed, in order for America’s arms-makers to continue flourishing.
By contrast, in Russia, where each of the arms-producers is majority-controlled by the government instead of by private investors, each arms-producer exists only in order to defend the nation, there is no need for any ‘enemy’ nations, and the best situation for such a government is to the contrary: to have as many allies, or buyers of its country’s weapons, as possible (so that it will be as safe as possible), and as few nations as possible that are enemies. For such a country, there’s no benefit in having any enemies.
Whereas the billionaires who control America’s arms-makers profit from this military competition against Russia, the controlling interest in all of Russia’s arms-makers is Russia’s government, which simply suffers the expense of that competition and would greatly prefer to end that competition.
The profit-motive isn’t driving the arms-producers in countries that control their own arms-makers. The government leads the nation there, basically because the nation’s billionaires - even if they are minority stockholders of the armaments-firms - don’t. And the reason the billionaires don’t is that the arms-producers in Russia are controlled by the government, not by any private investors.
Consequently, in countries that socialize arms-production, ‘humanitarian’ excuses don’t need to be invented in order to create new ‘enemies’.
Instead, the goal is for the number of enemies to be reduced, so that the nation itself will be safer. Their arms-producers don’t need constantly to generate (by lobbying, media-propaganda, etc.) authorized targets (‘enemies’ such as Iraq, Syria, etc.), because such a nation, as this, has designed its system to be driven for protecting the public’s safety, and not for any investors’ profits.
If an armaments-firm, in such a nation, goes out-of-business, that’s entirely okay, so long as that nation’s safety isn’t being reduced by ending the firm.
The international policy of such a country is totally different from that of a country in which arms-makers’ profits, and not the entire nation’s welfare, is in the driver’s seat regarding all foreign policies.
If arms-makers are being driven for profits, then target-nations are needed in order to expand profits so as to serve their investors. Such a country is run actually for its investors, not for its public. But if the arms-makers are being driven to serve the government instead of to serve private investors, the government is controlling the armament-firms.
The nation’s safety is the objective in such a land, because increasing profits for private investors in its weapons-firms is not the company’s objective. Any profits to such investors, are then irrelevant to the government. It’s truly sink-or-swim, for each of such a nation’s arms-makers - not socialism-for-the-rich, and capitalism (actually fascism) for the poor, such as is the case in the United States.
In a nation such as the United States, the constant need for new wars is being constantly driven by investors’ needs for expanding both markets and targets. [Albeit that this game is not going to be able to go on much longer.]
And - since in the arms-making business, all of the markets are one’s own government, plus all of its allied governments (no significant consumer-business whatsoever, which is why such firms are fundamentally different from the firms in all other types of fields) - the government needs to serve its armaments-firms, because those firms are totally dependent upon the government, and upon its international diplomacy (to increase the sales of its armaments, and thereby to serve the billionaires who control the armaments-firms).
So: the government there naturally becomes an extension of its major “contractors” or armaments-firms. The politicians know this, though they don’t want to talk publicly about it, because they don’t want the voters to know who is actually in the driver’s seat. They know whom they are actually serving, which is the billionaires who control the armaments-firms.
So: those politicians, whatever they might say in public (“America shouldn’t be the policeman for the world,” etc.), always actuallyvote to invade (Iraq, Syria, etc.), and to approve the first stage of any war, which is economic sanctions (such as against Russia itself, or Iran, or Iraq, or Syria, or Venezuela, etc.), and it’s always allegedly being done “to serve God, mother and country” at home, and “to expand freedom and protect human rights in that dictatorially ruled country” abroad.
This is basically the marketing campaign for the owners of the armaments firms.
The winning politicians in such countries are the ones that those billionaires support. In such a country, it’s almost impossible for any politician who is competing for a national office to succeed who isn’t being funded by those billionaires. And, the billionaires’ ‘news’-media support only such candidates.
That’s why there’s almost no possibility for an honest person to be elected (or appointed) to any national public office in the United States.
[Until recently: See above.]
If a nation’s sole reason for producing weapons is in order to protect the public - a public purpose - then there is no reason for the government to lie so as to demonize foreign leaders such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, Salvador Allende, Viktor Yanukovych, and Nicolas Maduro. And this has nothing whatsoever to do with how bad (or good) the demonized leader actually is.
Why does the US government demonize those people, while simultaneously serving (if not actually installing) barbaric dictators such as King Saud, Augusto Pinochet, Castillo Armas, and the Shah? The publicly stated reasons are always ‘humanitarian’ (when not ‘national defense’ - and often, as in 2003 Iraq - both at once).
The alleged purpose is to ‘bring democracy to the people there’, and to ‘protect human rights, which are being violated’ by ‘the dictator’ - but it’s actuallyin order to make suckers out of their country’s own population, so as to serve the billionaires whose income can’t be boosted in any other way than to turn ‘enemies’ (targets) into ‘allies’ (markets) — to conquer those ‘enemies’.
This is just a marketing campaign, and the voters are not the consumers of these products, but they are instead merely the gulls who have to be fooled in order for those profits to keep rolling in, to the (usually) offshore accounts of those billionaires.
This is not the type of socialism in which the government controls the economy, but instead the type of economy in which the economy - actually the billionaires who control the armaments-firms - control the government. This is why it’s “socialism for the rich and capitalism for everybody else.” (The term “fascism” can be used for that.)
This is the New America. And here is the New America Foundation, which is one of the many ‘non-profit’ PR arms of this new America. (That one represents mainly Democratic Party billionaires. Here is one that instead represents mainly Republican Party billionaires.)
These are taxpayer-subsidized public relations agencies for their businesses.
These individuals are exceptionally gifted businesspeople, because they deeply understand how to fool the public, and they understand that the public never learns and so history just keeps repeating itself, such as in 1953 Iran, and then in 1954 Guatemala, and 1973 Chile, and 2003 Iraq, and 2019 Venezuela, and so many others, ad nauseum.
And it goes on and on, for decades if not forever.
Maybe not. Apparently, constant lying by the government and by its (i.e., by its billionaires’) media - and by all of its successful national politicians - is required in any such country.
This seems to be the only effective way to control the public in such a country; and, if the public there aren’t deceived, then the arms-firms’ control over the government won’t even be possible. So, regarding foreign policies, the lying in such a country is constant - especially about foreign affairs.
The system is actually set up to operate that way. And the system’s owners (and their media) call this ‘democracy’, and are peddling that ‘democracy’ to the rest of the world.
This is a very successful trick, because - at least until now - the public never learns. (Of course, the system itself is set up so that they won’t.) The public never learns that the actual enemy is the domestic aristocracy itself.
But one major American magazine recently made fun of this by headlining “In Billionaires Is the Preservation of the World” praising them as “nature’s own life-preserver” and closing by “With life itself depending on it, how do we determine which billionaires to kiss up to?”
The enemy is within, but it’s no joke, and (as Trump makes so clear) ‘aliens’ get the blame, while the domestic aristocracy just get the money.
This type of racket has worked that way for thousands of years, and yet it has always remained “Top Secret,” or (at least) “Confidential” or etc.; but, anyway, very private - and not acknowledged in their ‘news’-media, but instead publicly denied (though, occasionally, also joked-about).
A more-serious phrase for this is “the Deep State.”
The Zuckerberg Dossier: Facebook Insider Confesses All - Mark Zuckerberg Is A Fraud Used By The CIA
September 13 2024 | From: PatriotsForTruth / Various
The following anonymous document claims to be written by a Facebook insider who was Mark Zuckerberg’s lover from their freshman year at Harvard. Mark’s continuing indiscretions with his ongoing government contract keep getting him in trouble to this day.
Mark was supposed to simply be the fake “boy genius” of Larry Summers’ (Harvard’s president) social media project funded by DARPA/In-Q-Tel (CIA)/IBM and the secretive international “public-private” group called The Highlands Group organized with the DoD Office of Net Assessment.
It was Summers and a group of government officials who fabricated, produced and directed Mark throughout the entire fraudulent creation of the Facebook propaganda story at Harvard.
These claims are explosive and allege that the entire fraudulent social media network called Facebook was always controlled by the government through the people who were at Harvard directing Mark.
Comment:If this is true - and we believe a great deal of it is true - then this would partially explain why President Donald Trump has been so ineffective against FAANG and #GoogleGestapo censorship - they are “protected” by the CIA, DARPA, and other elements that front for the Deep State.
This should however, absent legal discovery, be read in the same spirit as the fictional stories about police atrocities published in the 1960’s when rogue elements sought to forment civil discontent.
Our bottom line is simple: we need to create Web 3.0 and route around these evil doers.
The anonymous author of the letter below, who we will call “John”, also points out why Facebook was created, how Mark was controlled by Eric Schmidt, James Beyer, Larry Summers, Sheryl Sandberg and the evil intellectual property thief Professor James Chandler.
Admittedly, this Zuckerberg “Dossier” has enough information in it to put Mark Zuckerberg behind bars, and therefore would not be touched by the Main Stream Media – according to the person who hand-delivered this letter to a member of the Anonymous Patriot’s Conclave recently.
American Intelligence Media has been able to quickly verify that many of the claims insinuated in this “Zuckerberg Dossier” are true and this leads us to conclude that the document is authentic and exactly what it appears to be.
The true authorship of this Zuckerberg Dossier is evident to members of the Conclave, but that supposition is speculation and the Conclave does not deal in speculation.
Though, if one were to listen carefully to the admission of guilt by Sean Parker (a long-time executive of Facebook) which he made repeatedly before the press, you will hear that Sean knew all about the true creation of the social media giant and its evil intents and fingers the culprits.
Therefore, it is not hard at all to figure out who may have written this expose on Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook evil.
You can even see the true motivation for writing this “tell all” about Zuckerberg at this time in history, just as Facebook is facing all kinds of charges, including anti-trust violations.
Hmmm…do you own any Facebook stock? Might be cash-out time!
Any person well-educated on the continuing scandals surrounding the creation of Facebook might have been able to piece together the many divergent claimants to the authorship of the source programming code used to make social media “scalable” – which was the universal problem of all of the major tech companies at the time, including the NSA’s “LifeLog” project.
Somehow, genius Mark Zuckerberg “solved” the problem that no one else in the world could. Oh yes, and Mark did it “between a week and two weeks or so” while studying for finals and hosting a beer “kegger” for his friends.
Click on the image above to view a larger viersion in a new window
The author of this expose offers a quite different story and for the first time tells of the involvement of high-level government players who made a fortune off of the sky-rocketing overnight growth of Facebook stock on NASDAQ.
The players mentioned by “John” (anonymous author) check out to be the people who made enormous amounts of money from Facebook stock. These insider traders then took their Facebook winnings and started other social media companies that, coincidentally, sky-rocketed beyond most companies in history.
American Intelligence Media does not claim that the Zuckerberg Dossier is 100% correct, but we can state with absolute confidence that the source is real.
We also believe that their may be other installments of what we are calling the Zuckerberg Dossier and will probably not be the last time we hear from this source as the trouble that Mark is having in the news keeps mounting.
The most convincing aspect of this “scorned lover tell-all” is found in what the author outlines as Mark’s true nature and what he believes is happening to Facebook right now in America.
It was shocking to read these remarks and we found them to be, after much reflection, probably true and certainly not what we might have imagined to be the reality with the U. S. government’s threat to act against Facebook.
Also, interesting is the major British intervention in Facebook through the former Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Sir Nick Clegg, taking over the “face” of Facebook which Baron Richard Allen (another UK agent) had failed to do properly.
Mark, Nick, and Sheryl Sandberg hanging out, probably planning ultimate censorship of patriots and conservatives
At this point, Facebook seems to be “dead in the water” unless the British Crown Agents, Clegg and Allen, can save Mark from his horrible mis-management.
Again, we do not claim that this anonymous “confession” and “indictment” is true in all its parts.
But certainly, any intelligent reader will acknowledge that this version of Mark Zuckerberg’s rise to fame and fortune is much more likely that the nonsense stories we have been told by Mark since the early 2000’s when he first popped up Larry Summers’ Harvard.
Please circulate this wide and far. We need to turn the weapon that Zuckerberg is aiming at us – social media … back on him.
Mark’s diary was also provided to us where he proclaims “let the hacking begin” and is available in the link below as a PDF. We did not convert it to a Word file for obvious reasons.
Also note that we formatted the author’s letter below in a way that you can easily read it, instead of its how it was sent with tiny font and packed paragraphs. We did not correct grammar or spelling.
Mark Zuckerberg, and all of us who were there from the beginning, are lying to you and using your personal life as a government-controlled experiment in brain-washing and mind-control – basically a weaponized system of the military (CIA especially) that got out of control.
At this point, Mark Zuckerberg has lost control of a company that he never really owned or operated. Truly, anyone who has ever worked with Mark knows that his mind is a blank and that he is nothing more than a parrot for the government handlers who created him.
Mark is incapable of running a McDonald’s, let alone one of the most powerful companies in the world.
Not even his name is real and his identity has always been covered up. Mark was chosen as child for a CIA training program because his relatives were some of the people creating the program.
I am not making excuses for Mark, but his choices have not been his own.
Yes, he has become an evil sociopath who once believed in his heart-of-heart that if he decided he wanted to be president, all he had to do is say he wanted the job and “Facebook” would deliver the election to him. This is the level of brain-washing Mark is at – he is not in contact with reality.
You might think that a madman who could think he could become president – because he “said so” – would be discovered and accused as a fraud. Well, that has happened repeatedly with the other three teams that were working at Harvard, under Harvard president Larry Summers, to create what DARPA and In-Q-Tel wanted the most – a cyber-weapon that could control the minds of anyone that could be lured into it.
Facebook was always a military weapon – just like Eric Schmidt’s Google which was incubated in the same fashion that Facebook was. Mark was a patsy, but a ruthless, heartless, cold-blooded non-human patsy.
He became this way through the brain-washing he received in his High School years by a DARPA program called TIA that needed a “boy-genius” to be the front man.
This scam would make Mark into a global model of the young, cool, irreverent computer geniuses that “rule the world” and lead everyone to a cyber-god of artificial intelligence. Mark was just an unwitting puppet at first – I felt sorry for him.
I remember when I first became room-mates with Mark in our sophomore year at Harvard. We were in Kirkland House, on JFK Street and had to endure Dustin and Andrew.
Mark hated them because they prevented us from sleeping together, even though we were in the same room.
It was frustrating and kept our relationship secret. Little did I know that the thing that drew me to Mark, a certain openness for listening to anyone, also made him extremely promiscuous with both sexes.
Mark had no morals, conscience, or shame. He also chased women on Craig’s List and would sometimes just disappear to rendezvous with them.
He was like a blank slate that simply echoes whatever was happening in his environment. I loved and hated this aspect of his personality but later found out that he, and his brother and cousin, were all the same way due to the brain-washing programs they were subjected to during high school.
If certain people spoke to Mark in person or on the phone, he would drop everything and do whatever they told him to do. Certain people had more power and effect over him.
I eventually found out, from Mark breaking down and crying, that the brain-washing was permanent and was all part of the “position” these people had promised to create for Mark. He didn’t even know what this “position” was or entailed.
But one thing Mark was sure of, he was only “placed” at Harvard “for a while” until his “position” became available to him. Mark was certain that this promise of a position included a great deal of money and power - aphrodisiacs to an incurable narcissist.
I must admit that I came under the power of Mark’s surety that he didn’t need Harvard, a degree, or good grades. Mark eventually dropped out of Harvard at the end of our sophomore year and did become filthy rich and more powerful than he could have imagined.
I also admit that I road on Mark’s success to become quite wealthy myself. All four of the members of the club Mark eventually named – “The Fellowship” – became wealthy by no means of our own – we simply knew Mark’s secrets.
You see, Mark could never be faithful to anyone but he loved men more than women. He actually used to hate all women. So, Mark cheated and would want to bring the new “boy” home to me to join in.
I was never into that like Mark was. He was abusive but would never admit it, especially to young boys. Eventually, there were three of us that remained lovers with Mark.
Mark always had panic attacks and would break down frequently due to the brain-washing – according to Mark. He would cry about his mother and the “torture” she let “them” do to him.
At those times, Mark’s mouth ran on open and he would tell his bed-partners about all the pain and horrible plans these “evil people” did to him.
Early on, his doubts and fears almost consumed him at night and he could hardly sleep due to nightmares. Once Mark became filthy rich, he simply used drugs to mask these fears.
But if you get him upset by asking about the creation of Facebook, Mark will freak out and have a panic attack because he always messes up the story and looks like an idiot.
He can’t stand questions about “how he made Facebook” – because he didn’t. I had to laugh as one of his stupid answers: “I saw that Harvard didn’t have a Facebook, so I made one”, or something close to that.
The journalist let him get away with that lie, like they always have.
Mark Greenberg (Zuckerberg) did not write one single line of programming source code for Facebook. Those are lies and propaganda generated by his government, military handlers.
Everyone knows that the Winkelvoss twins (Aaron and Cameron) won a $65 million dollar lawsuit settlement against Mark because they knew that their little HarvardConnection (HC) piece was just adjunct code attached to the original stolen source code – which was given to Mark by Professor James Chandler and IBM.
That $65 million bit of dirty knowledge was pretty profitable for a couple of cute Harvard Crew rower jocks with no interest in me.
Mark simply had others adjust the code into what was a government-sponsored military weaponization of a cyber-warfare project directed by the President of Harvard, Larry Summers.
Even Summer’s himself had his own budding student and staff directory being developed by the Harvard computer staff called “Facebook.” Mark didn’t even create the name!
The Winkelvoss twins had developed their own version in the competition for the government contract, HC, that they changed to ConnectU.
Aaron Greenspan was developing HOUSE System, and Paul Ceglia was working with Mark to modify his StreetFax software into a Facebook too.
Mark developed nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Even the famous “hacking” of the Harvard systems was not done by Mark himself. Mark was the middleman for those who were the overseers of the “big project”, as it was called.
From the president of Harvard, to the “PayPal Mafia”, National Venture Capital Association, In-Q-Tel, DARPA, NSA, CIA, DIA, to the worst patent thieves in America: James Chandler, Hillary Clinton, David Kappos, Robert Mueller and the rest of the Big-Tech group.
Mark is just like the other fake front-men chosen to represent the numerous other social media companies.
Eric Schmidt was the poster child for the Silicon Valley geniuses who ran corporations that are basically exempt from prosecution as the facade for military-weaponized companies that are always funded by the same evil bankers - Fidelity Investment, Vanguard, T. Rowe Price, BlackRock, JPMorgan, HSBC, Accel Partners, Kleiner Perkins and the rest of the Silicon Valley venture capitalist who always make a killing from companies who get no-bid government contracts.
These companies, like Facebook, are just an excuse for black-ops experiments to control the enemy – and Mark doesn’t know who the enemy is. Mark’s lack of a moral compass made him the perfect patsy for the new “military experiments on U. S. citizens.”
I believe now, since Mark was well-aware of the evil intentions of the government, that he has committed crimes of many types with the clear, pre-meditated intention of harming every user of Facebook.
That is why Mark let Facebook be used to manipulate elections, he has no moral core. I personally saw the “template” that Hillary ordered that uses Facebook to manipulate voters to win elections for her.
Given the amount of election interference by Big-Tech in 2016, I became a reluctant believer in miracles.
I have seen the truth concerning the supposed “Russian Interference” and can tell you that it was all made up and, in fact, was the exact opposite of what the media reported.
I have seen so many illegal actions of Facebook that I am indeed complicit with the crimes. That is one of the reasons I must remain anonymous.
But I assure you, if I testified, Mark and I would be locked up along with the other members of the Fellowship as well as many, many other Facebook employees.
It is due to the truth that is currently coming out in the media that I feel I can reveal what I witnessed so that Mark and the “U. S. and British military controlled” Facebook can be charged with criminal activity instead of simply being hit with anti-trust charges that will only split Facebook into many subsidiaries – which would simply make Mark even more rich.
Then, the poor suckers who believed in Facebook will be left holding the bag – an empty bag of a gutted Facebook worth little or nothing. Mark will simply rebrand and go on with multiple companies that will be just as big as Facebook.
He will escape unscathed, protected again by his military handlers who, by the way, were insider traders from the beginning of Facebook and will be allowed to buy into the new companies from the beginning also.
Once again, the use of taxpayer dollars goes to private corporations run by stooges and controlled by non-Americans. Yes, I just called Mark a stooge because he actually has no clue what he is doing – at all. Just ask him to write a simple program in any code he would like – he can’t, he is a fraud and always was.
Though I will not tell you who the members of Mark Zuckerberg’s “Fellowship” group were, I can point out that all of the original members of Facebook knew from the beginning that it was a military project for cyber warfare mind-control.
Everything done from the beginning was an experiment to see just how far a social media platform could go to “conquer the enemy” through behavioral manipulation with electronic warfare.
The idea that Mark wanted to connect all college students in America was a novel idea that was far from the true intention of mind-control of every user in the world.
Free platforms like Google, Gmail, Facebook, and the rest were confidence tricks to get users to experiment on. My old buddy, Sean Parker, an early member of Facebook has “confessed all” to the media and specifically told the truth that Facebook was meant as a cyber-drug to create and control addicts – digital addicts.
As Sean said, we knew from the beginning it was harming every user and that is why we never let our friends or our children use these systems – it harms them tremendously and was the original intent of the media.
Mark and I were told by representatives of DARPA that that was the intent of Facebook from its inception.
The U. S. Patriot Act allows the military to consider every American a possible terrorist or enemy warfighter until proven otherwise.
Every person on the Internet, which was also created by DARPA, is considered a cyber-terrorist and the military sees it as their job to create systems to surveil, target, disarm, and aggressively remote control the user.
I hated the idea from the first time I heard of it. Personally, I have never used Facebook and don’t let anyone I love use it.
Mark would use patriot arguments, like the ones mentioned above, to justify his participation in this black-ops CIA operation to the Fellowship.
We argued with him, but to no avail. Mark basically believed anything his “controllers” told him. We would sometimes convince him that the project was “dead wrong”, but all it took was one phone call from “above” and Mark went back to his scheming.
It was truly pathetic to see that Mark had no freedom but was told what to do. He was also so poorly organized and such a muddled thinker that he couldn’t get anything done: homework, schoolwork, project work, nothing.
So, there was always clean up to be done after Mark, especially when the company got big.
Clean-up would include stupid stuff like paying others millions for “stealing” their code, making stupid statements every time he opened his mouth, or the lack of attention he gave to the running of the company.
Mark was always a mess and the Fellowship, as well as Larry Summers’ squeeze Sheryl Sandberg - those soul-less megalomaniacs deserve each other - helped the handlers control Mark, were always picking up the broken pieces and trying to glue them back together. But this time, Facebook and Mark cannot be fixed.
Many of the original Facebook players and the Fellowship have been paid off in huge bribes to keep us quiet. CIA secrecy agreements grow on every plant at Facebook, but the Facebook insiders are turning against Mark anyway for many good reasons.
The board of directors wants him fired. Mark’s British controllers sent Baron Richard Allen to rein Mark in, but he failed miserably. Even Sir Nick Clegg, x-deputy prime minister of Britain was sent to shut Mark up, but to no avail.
Even the second-in-charge of Britain couldn’t stop Mark and his non-stop stupidity.
Mark opens his mouth, it cost the company billions. Mark testifies, and everyone finds out that he doesn’t know a single thing about “his” company.
Mark knows nothing because he doesn’t do anything and hasn’t really shown up for work since the beginning. Mark seems to be allergic to work and can’t stand meetings unless he is “announcing” something.
He is the worst manager in history, and everyone will tell you the same if asked. We all “play” like Mark runs the company, but that is not true.
Mark can’t run himself effectively, let alone Facebook. That is why he was failing at Harvard and was going to be kicked out for bad grades, even after I did much of his work for him.
I can honestly say that, at this point, there are no “insiders” who have any faith in Mark to run the company, or to even speak in public.
We believe that even after Larry Summers, the father of Facebook, who planted Sheryl Sandberg at Facebook to shut Mark up and stop revealing that Facebook is the tool of the Democrat agenda for globalism, cannot fix the company.
This is one of the points I am most angry about.
Mark has become, over the years, no friend of America. In fact, he hates America and rants on about how proud he is to avoid U. S. taxes and to cheat the American people – whom he considers to be animals.
Mark believes he is a higher being – above human beings. He now believes it was all his work that made Facebook. He is completely deluded by his own propaganda, which is nothing but lies.
It is because Mark is now a danger to himself and the world that I must tell the true story of how Facebook and social media have become the enemies of Americans and the world.
Mark was shocked when he received an acceptance letter from Harvard, before he had applied. No test scores, interviews, or pre-requisites were required.
His government “programming” had made his acceptance a given. Harvard wanted Mark, and Mark did what he was told. So, when the president of Harvard, Larry Summers, called Mark into his office early in his freshman year, Mark was not so surprised.
He knew he would have to pay the piper. Summers asked Mark to start a group to work on the social media project – a supposed competition among teachers and students to win a government contract.
The ostensible goal was to create a social directory and Harvard where people could share in small groups.
The real intent was to create a social network to manipulate the world. Mark liked the idea but was too lazy to do anything about it.
He stuck his nose into the others’ camps to see what they were doing, but he himself just talked about it with good programmers and made them promises - thus, numerous lawsuits ensued from those promises.
Larry Summers continued to call Mark into his office for updates, so Mark just lied. Occasionally, others would be in the office with Larry Summers, but one person stood out and showed up at many more meetings in the future.
This man was obviously the person in charge of this project. His name was a former Harvard Law Professor James Chandler.
He boasted that he was one of the top idea people for DARPA and that he had actually developed lower level programming languages for the Army.
He pretended to be interested in me, but I could tell that was a political act. Guys like me can just sense these things.
Over time, it came out that Summers and Chandler had much bigger plans for the social media project and had some outside sources of help to complete the project.
Mark found it odd that Summers, Chandler, and eventually Sheryl Sandberg did not put much pressure on Mark to produce but were interested in everything Mark was learning from spying on the other groups for almost two years.
One day, Mark was called to Summers office in Massachusetts Hall to meet a most unusual man. His name was Andrew Marshall and he was the head of the Naval Intelligence Net Assessment Office.
Mark was terrified of Marshall from the beginning. Marshall had Mark sign a government secrecy agreement, and other security agreements before he told Mark the ultimate military nature of what the Harvard Facebook project entailed.
Mark, and Harvard, were simply being used as incubation think tanks as a cover for a military project that needed a corporate face.
Professor Chandler said he had discovered the source code that would accomplish the seemingly impossible task of making a social directory “scalable” to billions of people.
Chandler droned on as Harvard professors like to do about how Harvard academic elites were the best choices to do the early testing because of their superior intellects.
He explained that this scalability dilemma was not being solved by the military’s usual Microsoft, IBM and Oracle go-to military intelligence suppliers for reasons that were over my head.
He said they had found a company who had solved the problem but was not willing to be used by the military as a black-ops project against Americans and the rest of the world.
Chandler and Summers had selected Mark as their front-man to lie and claim that he had written the source code for scalability.
Chandler explained that the government had seized the source code from an inventor and his company for use in the DARPA Harvard Facebook project.
He explained in very flowery intellectual property theft language that Mark may get sued by the inventor, but that DARPA would shield him. Mark told them he was willing to take that chance.
Mark knew full-well that the people who had brain-washed him had a big plan and his part was simply to do as they told him to do.
But now, Mark was getting scared because James Chandler was a member of the president’s National Security Team, a top national security and patent lawyer, and a truly mean, ugly and frightening black man who could easily turn on you like a pit bull.
Larry Summers had those same elitist bully traits, and was the president of Harvard and an economic world leader. Mark felt he was being groomed and protected by some very powerful people.
But it was Andrew Marshall, the one they called “Yoda”, who scared the pants off Mark.
After Mark had been “read into” the plan by Summers and Chandler, their boss wanted to meet Mark to make sure that he could be trusted to be part of this overarching evil plan to manipulate all of cyber space as if it were a war arena.
Andrew Marshall did not like Mark at all. I witnessed it myself when I was asked to attend one of Andrew Marshall’s Highland Group forums as a major executive for Facebook, along with Mark. Every time Mark opened his mouth, Marshall would stare at him until Mark would shut up.
Marshall indicated in this meeting that Mark himself was the biggest problem with the Facebook operation. Mark was so happy when Andrew Marshall died not long ago.
Mark now takes his orders from Marshall understudies Dick O’Neil and James Baker who run Highlands Group.
Chandler also worked for Highlands Group and directed numerous operations working directly with Andrew Marshall and James Baker.
The Facebook operation also coordinated their activities with Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas, and the group that gathered around Hillary Clinton’s patent thefts.
Every Facebook insider, who was there from the beginning, knew these things to be true but would never speak of it for fear of retaliation and possible death.
We are speaking about a theft of literally many trillions of dollars in intellectual property, trade secrets, patents, designs and stolen programming source code.
Mark bragged for two years about being able to write the source code for the Facebook platform, but he did not produce a single line of code. For two years, all the Fellowship heard were promises of a break-through at any moment.
We heard one excuse right after the other. We learned later it was because the inventor had run into some R&D roadblocks that needed to be sorted out first.
Mark continued to spy on the other groups working on the Harvard Facebook student and staff directories, made many promises to everyone involved, but did not follow through.
Mark kept promising he was going to just “sit down and write the code”, as if it was no big deal.
His meetings with Summers, Chandler, Marshall and others continued and Mark always came back encouraged. Then, one day Mark got terribly excited about hacking a fellow student at Harvard because he had some part of the Facebook program.
The particular student was an upper classman named Max McKibben who lived next door in Winthrop House, literally 100 feet from our Kirkland House front door.
Mark got the best hacker to come to our room and use a special “school” computer to hack into McKibben’s personal Harvard email account to steal several white papers on an invention just like the one Chandler had described.
This white paper described EXACTLY what Mark had been talking about for two years and now a Harvard student had a full description of a program that could do the same thing.
It was on October 28, 2003 that Mark returned from Summers’ office and announced: “Let the hacking begin.” That hacking stole the white paper that had been sent to the son of Michael McKibben, the owner of Leader Technologies and the real inventor of scalable social media.
Michael had sent his son Max the white papers written to describe the new invention. When Mark learned that Chandler was Michael’s patent attorney, the theft finally put a name to the target Chandler had talked about in vague terms.
Chandler had requested that Michael write up a detailed explanation of the system and how it worked.
Once Mark showed the stolen white papers to Chandler, Chandler confessed that he already had a complete evaluation copy of the source code as Michael’s patent attorney, that he was using a spy tactic called “strategic deception” in pretending to help Michael and Leader Technologies file patents, while he was secretly providing Michael’s invention code to DARPA’s IBM Eclipse Foundation cyber-warfare partners.
Chandler told Mark that IBM Eclipse was preparing Michael’s program, as they spoke, to give to Mark for the Facebook launch at EclipseCON ’04 in San Fancisco right after the Harvard January Reading Period.
He said the plan was to transfer all of the NSA’s LifeLog data as soon as possible to the Facebook platform as well. He also told Mark that he would be moving to Silicon Valley after the term was over, and that the next phase of the plan for him would happen in California.
Dustin and I went with him that summer, but I decided to return to Boston and graduate. That was a sad separation, but I was happy he got rid of his Craig’s List girls. The few that I actually saw looked like sad street urchins.
Chandler had not seen Michael’s white papers yet and was eager to have them.
Mark sent him the hacked copies. Chandler said with the inventor’s first-ever public write-up, and the source code, the Highlands Group and the IBM Eclipse Foundation now had what they needed to prepare the platform for Mark to launch thefacebook, later shortened to Facebook, at EclipseCON ‘04 in February.
I now realize that Chandler took the stolen source code from Michael McKibben and Leader Technologies and gave it to the IBM Eclipse Foundation who turned around gave it out as “open source”, the most lucrative intellectual property in history, to all of the social media giants as open source code without charging a penny.
What I am telling you now is a composite understanding of what I knew early on in the Fellowship group of Mark Zuckerberg and what I have learned up to this time as a core insider of Facebook to this very day.
It is not only Mark who needs to pay for his crimes, but many others also. IBM Eclipse Foundation plays like they are moral, honest, and philanthropically gave away intellectual property to other companies who essentially became monopolies with the stolen programming source code.
This is laughable and I told Mark when he was being told this information by his handlers that the plan would never work because anyone can see through such stupidity.
But to this day, beside Facebook insiders and the Fellowship group, no one has ever told me that they suspected the IBM Eclipse Foundation or the Highlands Forum are corrupt.
The bigger the lie, the easier it is to get people to believe it.
Mark Greenberg (Zuckerberg) did not create Facebook. Facebook is a governmental monopoly doing the most advanced virtual behavioral modification on the planet with stolen and modified patents, intellectual property (IP), and trade secrets from inventors who were not remunerated for their inventions.
I personally knew this, even when it was happening. I felt sick about the whole thing and this led to many, many arguments between Mark and me.
The other members of the Fellowship felt the same way I did. Eventually, Mark had to buy all of us off with large sums of money over the years.
We have not spoken up before now, but I personally cannot hold my silence any longer.
I must speak out openly about the criminal surveillance Mark does through Facebook because it gets worse every day.
Mark’s handlers tell him to allow more surveillance even though security breaches, selling customer data, allowing for spying by CIA, NSA, DIA, GCHQ, MI6, Five Eyes, lying to Congress, meddling in elections, allowing everyone access to Facebook data, censoring conservatives, being a platform for the Democrat party, and many other charges have been brought against Facebook in other countries and America. Mark will not listen to me or anyone else about stopping the insanity.
I believe he is unstable and not fit to run Facebook.
When I saw the $1.5 billion from George Soros and the Atlantic Council bring in the AI system (some built by the Cambridge Digital Forensic Research Laboratory) used in Europe to stop free speech, I had had enough. It was then that I knew Mark was truly being used by evil forces and that even he couldn’t stop it.
He seemed to have a death wish to destroy Facebook and reveal some of its evil intent. This was ruining the company I was trying to help run.
There were no other avenues that I could take the company down that would deter Mark from the total destruction of Facebook.
Mark had been told to win the country for Hillary, or kill the company trying. He was making astounding mistakes that showed the truth of the evil foundations of Facebook.
Our secrets were gushing out like blood from a slaughtered pig. I kept talking to Mark, trying to change his mind, but he became more insane and impossible to talk to.
Mark gave up control of the company to a crowd stumbling over themselves to take personal credit for Facebook’s “turnaround”, including Highlands Group, DHS, DoD, Naval Intelligence, SERCO, Crown Agents, IBM Eclipse Foundation, Clinton Foundation, Open Society Foundation, Google, Alphabet, Schmidt, Sandberg, Thiel, Hoffman, Breyer, Louie, Ketterson, Goldman Sachs, Blankfein, Dimon, Microsoft, Gates, Allen, Thompson, Balmer, Ozzi, Nadella, Milner, Obama, Pritzker, Hillary, Kutcher, Bono, Soros, Lamont, the Queen’s men Richard Allan and Nick Clegg, and the rest of the gang who are eager to clean up Mark’s messes.
I could see that Facebook was on its last leg but I couldn’t understand why Mark would kill the company.
Then, one day I realized what Mark was doing with the obvious crash-landing of Facebook. He was being told that he would get a “deal” with the government charges against the company and would not have to pay billions in fines.
The deal would be like the government’s deal with Standard Oil when they were charged with anti-trust, monopoly issues. They were made to break up into seven different companies – all of which became as big or bigger than Standard Oil itself. Splitting up the monopoly made the owners seven times richer.
That is what Mark is doing. He wants Facebook to be broken up instead of answer to the crimes it has willingly committed.
Corporations can simply go bankrupt, dissolve, crash and burn, or do what Google did when it created a new company called Alphabet who is now called the Mother of Google and is worth even more.
How a child becomes the parent is a new one for me.
Eric Schmidt showed Mark exactly what to do and please remember that Eric Schmidt was also Mark’s mentor and the first person to invest hundreds of millions in Facebook before it went public.
Eric Schmidt made billions off of his insider trader knowledge from the Highlands Forum investment in Facebook.
Britain’s offshore banks feed them all with endless money laundering and “deal flow” as long as the Queen gets her cut.
All us insiders know this global money game is totally rigged to perpetuate this evil power.
I don’t want to go to my grave knowing that I didn’t do something to atone for my sins in perpetuating these lies.
I believe that Mark is doing everything in his power to get President Donald Trump deposed, just as he did everything he could to try to help get Hillary elected.
If Trump continues, the globalist lose.
Mark is a true globalist; he is not an American anymore. Mark essentially does not have a plan for Facebook, he simply does what he is told and always has. Mark has made no decisions on his own – not one.
This current decision to destroy Facebook from the inside out is nothing more than Mark’s handlers using Mark in their last hours of power.
Trump will win 2020 and Facebook will die. The only question left is whether Trump will charge Mark Fakerberg with the crimes he committed.
I, for one, want Mark in jail along with his handlers. I have personally been threatened and intimidated by these Big-Tech monsters since I met Mark Zuckerberg (Greenberg) – a person who truly does not even know his own name or who he is and yet is one of the richest people on earth.
Mark did not earn nor deserve a single penny he has been given. Mark is a card-board cut-out who has lost his way and is completely delusional at this point.
As a Facebook insider I demand Mark be fired and all assets taken from him due to his non-stop lying to stockholders and Facebook users.
The Board of Directors, underwriters and institutional investors all know about the secret government contracts that have been propping up the company since the beginning, but most average shareholders do not.
It is a government-owned and operated military psy-ops weapon that has gotten out of control and been used for treasonous purposes and for seditious actions against the American people.
After she got sick of the lies, Mark’s former speech writer Katherine Losse described in her 2004 book The Boy Kings that Facebook has stolen personal data and sold it, created a “dark” profile on every user and sold it to everyone who would pay the price, created secret files of compromising photos, allowed all government agencies to access all user data, breached every user agreement, lied continuously to all users, built in back-doors and zero-day programs for the military, and many other unethical, immoral and illegal activities.
Did Mark Zuckerberg (Greenberg) willing and with intent allow these criminal activities to go on unchecked on Facebook?
– You bet he did.
And he is still doing it and getting worse every day.
Like other Facebook insiders, I want no part of this squelching of free speech or illegal surveillance activities or the purposeful experimentation on users to develop new and better means to electronically control, manipulate, and imprison people.
I have stood against Mark’s immoral and evil actions since our freshman year at Harvard.
Nothing has changed, except that Mark has gotten worse and his handlers have become so demanding that they are condemning Facebook to the trash heap and creating the circumstances for Mark to become even richer and more insane.
His next projects include a system much like what Eric Schmidt has created for China, a social credit system that controls the freedom of every American.
When Facebook is broken up, the new companies will have the Eric Schmidt “Dragonfly” social credit system built in. Mark wants to be like Eric and control the world from a digital Ivory Tower and oversee the depopulation of the earth.
These maniacs believe they are “above the human race” and are actually higher beings sent to the earth to control the masses. From my experience, these attitudes are extremely prevalent with Silicon Valley tech giants - and they make me sick.
The time has come to simply end the fake social media experiments and call them governmental black-ops projects.
I personally know most of these cyber tech-lords and I can testify that they do not possess the tech skills they claim founded their companies.
They are simply tech thieves, like Mark Zuckerberg, who need to pay back those they stole from and be put in jail for their crimes.
I personally am willing to testify without immunity and suffer whatever consequences I deserve for knowing these things and never bringing them forth until now.
I know that the corruption is so great in Washington D. C. that I would not stand a chance of bringing forth this information without being squelched, killed, or silenced like I have seen done to others.
I suggest that the new Attorney General simply read this letter, investigate and then ask Mark Greensberg to program a single line of coherent code. When he cannot, lock him up.
World’s Elite Try To Wipe Out All Knowledge And Use Of Natural Cures, While They Privately Use Them For Their Own Longevity September 12 2024 | From: NaturalNews / Various
The dark side of Western medicine has been erased from U.S. history books and from Google search results, along with any trace of truth about the success of natural cures and homeopathic medicine.
Any doctors or scientists who attempt to “peer review” natural remedies are stripped of their medical license or research funding by the corrupt American Medical Association (AMA) and Big Pharma.
In fact, at least half of all clinical “trials” have never been reported, because when natural cures are proven to work, the results are removed or skewed in favor of chemical medicine.
The American healthcare system is set up to profit from illness, and those in charge are making sure that never changes.
How did Rockefeller accomplish this? He funded bogus research by a man named Andrew Flexner, who then authored the infamous Flexner Report of 1910.
Flexner used the money to visit every U.S. medical school, and with the backing of the AMA, reduced the number of physicians while limiting “authorization” of any new medical school licenses to doctors who supported only chemical medicine.
The Rockefeller family waged war on natural cures and holistic healing, while privately using them for his own health.
Today’s mainstream medicine is nothing but sick care management, where chemical pills are dished out to quell symptoms of deep-rooted illnesses, and surgery, radiation and chemotherapy are used to only temporarily stave off organ failure, heart attacks, and cancer.
Most of the richest Americans know better than to eat GMOs, drink tap water, get flu shots, or ever even consider chemotherapy for cancer.
These elitists eat organic food daily, they take organic supplements, and they visit naturopathic physicians when they get sick. The only time they visit hospitals is for emergencies when they incur a deep cut or broken bones.
John Davison Rockefeller, Sr. was America’s first billionaire. He lived to be 97 years old, thanks to a strict food and medicine regime that did not involve eating the chemicals he found in his petroleum, coal, gasoline, and oil industries.
Today, artificial food coloring comes from petroleum, and many processed oils contain hexane, a vapor constituent of gasoline. Today, tap water and vaccines contain chemicals you would never consume, if you only knew.
Rockefeller led a double life as the ultimate hypocrite. He was a business bully who cheated on his wife and tried to bury natural cures (while he used them himself), but ironically he suffered from anxiety and died of pneumonia.
Rockefeller Jr. became the Post WWII industrial “emperor” of chemical agriculture and chemical medicine.
After the U.S. helped Great Britain defeat the Nazis, U.S. politicians and business magnates built a chemical “empire” of their own in America. Hitler had used his own “Big Pharma” (I.G. Pharben) to create chemicals for warfare and the gas chambers.
Now, America would use many of those same chemists and chemicals to manufacture U.S. food and medicine, all part of a huge scheme (invented and funded by the Rockefellers) to make a fortune off the sickened masses, who would never believe their amazing country was turned so evil by monopolists.
Most people these days who get cancer think it’s hereditary. They think it’s genetic. That’s how bad the system has them fooled.
They believe every word that comes out of their doctor’s mouth – the same doctor who would never take chemo himself, and who graduated from a school sponsored, funded, and controlled by Big Pharma and the Rockefellers.
Today, nearly all conventional food is covered and smothered in chemical pesticides. Today, nearly all conventional food contains genetically engineered pesticides that continue spreading in the human gut, fueling immune disorders and cancer cell development.
Today, nearly all conventional medicine contains deadly chemicals that cause the body to remain acidic, breeding more disease and disorder. It’s a wicked formula that the elitists know and avoid at all costs.
Tune into NaturalCures.news for more information on superfoods that have not been banned by the likes of Rockefeller and Big Pharma, so you can not only survive, but thrive.
The Connection Between 9/11, JFK And The Global Collateral Accounts September 11 2024 | From: TheMindUnleashed / Various
The purpose of this article is to shed light on some topics that have garnered considerable attention over the years and to identify the underlying thread, that surprisingly connects them all.
With the facts that will be presented, we can move forward with hope and optimism that there are indeed great things happening in our world and that there are those out there continuing to ensure the truth is known. Great times for us are at hand.
Related: The Broken Presidential Destiny Of JFK, Jr.
On November 22nd, 1963, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, one of the most beloved and famous US president’s was assassinated in Dallas, Texas.
Though there are many theories as to who killed him, to get closer to the truth we must ask why he was killed. In any murder investigation, the victim’s enemies are often looked at first. In this respect, it was well known that Kennedy strongly opposed the military-industrial complex, which included The Federal Reserve and the C.I.A.
Related: JFK To 911: Everything Is A Rich Man's Trick
In a speech on April 27th, 1961 before the American Newspaper Publishers Association in New York City, Mr. Kennedy openly stated opposition to“secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings.”
He stated further opposition to a“ruthless conspiracy…a highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.”
Creating considerable dissent with the status quo and more specifically with The Federal Reserve and C.I.A., Kennedy signed Executive Order 11110 into law on June 4th, 1963, which gave the president the right to issue gold-backed currency, and completely without permission from The Federal Reserve.
But where was Kennedy going to receive such large amounts of gold to back a new Treasury note?
A Little History
In the 1930's, royal Asian families had seen that some of their gold and silver holdings in Southeast Asia were being plundered by the Japanese and needed to do something about it.
In 1938, the Chinese Kuomintang government sent 7 warships loaded with gold and silver to the US Federal Reserve for safekeeping.
In return, the Chinese were given 60 year gold bonds–a subject we will return to further down. A few years later in 1944, the infamous Bretton Woods Conference took place in which the US, France and Britain were given a 50 year mandate to modernize and transform the world for the better.
Backing this new global financial system that had just been set up was a now estimated 2 million metric tons of gold, held by this group of royal Asian families, which is also known as the Dragon Family.
By August 17th, 1945, President Soekarno of Indonesia had been elected "M1" or Monetary Controller of this large cache of assets, granted under United Nations Resolution MISA 81704, Operation Heavy Freedom.
These assets are better known as the Global Collateral Accounts and were originally intended to be used for the modernization of the world through several humanitarian projects. The Dragon Family are the legitimate Depositors of these accounts.
By 1955, it was shown that the International Monetary Fund, which was also created at Bretton Woods, was not living up to its word and was instead serving only the interest of the banking and political elite.
It was at this time that a growing alliance began to see that these funds were being used to fuel the Cold War tension and decided to strongly oppose the shady banking cabal.
By 1963, this alliance pooled their financial resources together to create the Green Hilton Memorial Agreement, which was signed by John F. Kennedy and President Skoearno and was finished on November 14, 1963.
This agreement was to utilize the Global Collateral Accounts for global development and humanitarian projects (along with a new US Treasury Note, a new supernational / international note backed by gold and would bring an end to The Federal Reserve system and the CIA).
Just 8 days later, JFK was assassinated.
The above pictures show The Green Hilton Memorial Agreement and signatures of President Soekarno and President John F. Kennedy along with several others with listed amounts of gold-backed certificates.
A short time following Kennedy’s passing, President Soekarno was driven from power by way of a coup.
By 1968, the Bush, Kissinger, Rockefeller and other influential families created a fake heir to the rights of the Global Collateral Accounts.
Up until the writing of this article in November of 2015, these accounts have been illegally and fraudulently used by the central banking system.
The 9/11 Connection
In 1998, 60 years after the Federal Reserve Board and the Chinese swapped gold for gold bonds, the Chinese requested their gold back.
After refusal from the Fed, the Chinese Kuomintang government followed with a lawsuit.
The International Court of Justice ruled that the Fed needed to return the gold, which was later agreed upon by the Fed. The first payment was scheduled to be delivered September 12th, 2001.
Interestingly, on September 10th, 2001, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced that 2.3 trillion dollars went missing from the Pentagon defense budget.
Even more conspicuous, Cantor Fitzgerald Securities, the company that was handling the paper work for the gold to be delivered back to the Chinese, was inside One World Trade Center on floors 101-105.
All 658 of their employees were murdered on that day as the towers fell and the gold was not returned to the Chinese.
The Monaco Accords, The Trillion Dollar Lawsuit and the BRICS
In August of 2011, representatives from 57 nations (none were invited from the West) came together off the coast of Monaco to create an alliance designed to legally take down the central banking cabal and create a new global financial system using the Global Collateral Accounts for many development and humanitarian projects.
Neil Keenan (right) with Count Albert of the Dragon Family
Reports from Neil Keenan, who helped arrange this historic meeting and has been entrusted with protecting and restoring the legal rights back to the Dragon Family and settling the Global Collateral Accounts for the benefit of humanity, has stated that this Monaco meeting alliance has now swelled to 182 countries and is being spearheaded by the BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).
Neil also filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York on November 23, 2011 to the tune of over a trillion dollars against the United Nations, the Office of International Treasury Control, Silvio Berlusconi, Ban Ki-Moon, the World Economic Forum and several others.
For those that want proof of this lawsuit, here is a screenshot of the filed case. This comes from pacer.gov, which is used to look up filed cases. Take a look at the plaintiff and defendants.
Since that time, Neil has withdrawn the suit (Obama’s economic advisor’s brother became the judge and he previously had never been a judge before) to refile in an even more effective jurisdiction and plans to do this in the very near future.
This new lawsuit will be bigger and will expose the EU, the Federal Reserve and all the parties mentioned above, plus much more.
Neil Keenan has also filed liens and a Cease and Desist order against all twelve central banks in the U.S. and a Cease and Desist order on behalf of the Dragon Family against names like Queen Elizabeth II, Hilary Clinton, George Herbert Walker Bush, George W. Bush, David Rockefeller and several other well known names.
Above is the official Cease and Desist order. To download this pdf file, click here
Is Our World to Be Set Free?
Is this massive alliance about to make it’s move on the banking and political cabal?
Is Neil Keenan and his team about to finish what JFK, President Sukarno and many others were trying to accomplish?
Will the 9/11 connection to the Global Collateral Accounts finally come to light? To these questions, Neil Keenan has a statement for the world:
“JFK, Soekarno, 9-11 and everything surrounding it all boils down to one and the same groups or organizations etc., that being what is known as the Cabal or NWO.
Look no further than Rothschild’s, Rockefeller’s, and on a lesser scale Bush’s, Netanyahu’s …etc.
We must always remember that according to these people we the “goyim” are the enemy and furthermore we must understand not only are they Khazarians (read Khazars and their empire) but Satanists and clearly want us all dead.
They want the world, this planet and everything they touch. They taint everything they make, put together, manufacture, and one way or another are taking precious seconds and minutes away from our lives.
They go so far as to poison baby food (Johnson and Johnson most recently caught, simply stated we are sorry and will take the toxins out of the baby food) but when caught they simply walk away leaving a path of utter destruction for many families.
It is time we defend our families, our planet, our friends and those who will soon be life long friends. It is time to bring our planet together as one, to fight these evil criminals disguising themselves as politicians. It is time to fight them as they fight us and stop talking about it.
The road to the collateral accounts was initially filled with litter. From OITC (Ray Dam), OPPT (Heather Tucci), Swiss Indo (Sino), Karen Hudes (who never did understand the collateral accounts and had never heard of the Dragon Family when she requested my help), Red Dragon Family, World Economic Forum (Davos and Giancarlo Bruno), the UN, and many others I have never mentioned all decided at one time or another they owned or managed the accounts when in fact not a one ever had any of the DEPOSITORS permissions to represent said accounts.
We took them all down and we laid them to rest but similar to a film script they often return to life and take a second shot at things after taking a deep breath but… they are all just fiction.
We are on the road to the accounts. The litter has been tossed into the garbage where it belongs and upon completing this road the accounts will be open.
The big question, even one from the Dragon Family is… will I be able to move the notes and the answer is YES!
We will be able to complete this impossible task and release the funds as initially planned for humanitarian purposes.
I need a little more time to get to where we must be but we will be there and when so, the Cabal is finished...
Academic Warns: Young People’s Ignorance Of Socialism Risks “Absolute Catastrophe” & Goodbye Free Internet, Government Is Already Here September 10 2024 | From: SummitNews / StrategicCulture / Various “They were never taught about it.”
Canadian academic Jordan Peterson warns that socialism is so appealing to young people because they are “unbelievably ignorant” about the history of the 20th century.
During an event hosted by The Heritage Foundation this week, the clinical psychologist and best-selling author said that millennials are embracing far-left ideology because they weren’t taught about its disastrous outcomes at school.
“People are unbelievably ignorant of history,” said Peterson.
“What young people know about 20th-century history is nonexistent, especially about the history of the radical left. How would you know? They are never taught about it so why would they be concerned about it?”
He also explained that the simplistic socialist notion of caring for as many people as possible was very alluring for people who had an emotional view of humanity.
Young people are “emotionally drawn to the ideals of socialism, say, or the left, because it draws its fundamental motivational source from a kind of primary compassion, and that is always there in human beings,” said Peterson.
Peterson also blamed the “unholy marriage of the postmodern nihilism with this Marxist utopian notion” for the breakdown in social and family unity, a process which has produced an “absolute catastrophe”.
A major poll last year found that the majority of US millennials would prefer to live under socialism than capitalism.
Goodbye To The Internet: Interference By Governments Is Already Here
There is a saying attributed to the French banker Nathan Rothschild that "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes its laws."
Conservative opinion in the United States has long suspected that Rothschild was right and there have been frequent calls to audit the Federal Reserve Bank based on the presumption that it has not always acted in support of the actual interests of the American people.
That such an assessment is almost certainly correct might be presumed based on the 2008 economic crash in which the government bailed out the banks, which had through their malfeasance caused the disaster, and left individuals who had lost everything to face the consequences.
Be that as it may, if there were a modern version of the Rothschild comment it might go something like this: “Give me control of the internet and no one will ever more know what is true.”
The internet, which was originally conceived of as a platform for the free interchange of information and opinions, is instead inexorably becoming a managed medium that is increasingly controlled by corporate and government interests.
Those interests are in no way answerable to the vast majority of the consumers who actually use the sites in a reasonable and non-threatening fashion to communicate and share different points of view.
The United States Congress started the regulation ball rolling when it summoned the chief executives of the leading social media sites in the wake of the 2016 election.
It sought explanations regarding why and how the Russians had allegedly been able to interfere in the election through the use of fraudulent accounts to spread information that might have influenced some voters.
In spite of the sound and fury, however, all Congress succeeded in doing was demonstrating that the case against Moscow was flimsy at best while at the same creating a rationale for an increased role in censoring the internet backed by the threat of government regulation.
Given that background, the recent shootings at a synagogue in Pittsburgh and at mosques in Christchurch New Zealand have inevitably produced strident demands that something must be done about the internet, with the presumption that the media both encouraged and enabled the attacks by the gunmen, demented individuals who were immediately labeled as “white supremacists.”
“Let’s be clear, social media is the lifeblood of the far-right. The fact that a terror attack was livestreamed should tell us that this is a unique form for violence made for the digital era.
The infrastructure of social media giants is not merely ancillary to the operations of terrorists - it is central to it [and] social media giants assume a huge responsibility to prevent and stop hate speech proliferating on the internet.
It’s clear the internet giants cannot manage this alone; we urgently need a renewed conversation on internet regulation… It is time for counter-terrorism specialists to move into the offices of social media giants.”
It's the wrong thing to do, in part because intelligence and police services already spend a great deal of time monitoring chat on the internet. And the premise that most terrorists who use the social media can be characterized as the enemy du jour “white supremacists” is also patently untrue.
Using the national security argument to place knuckle dragging “counter-terrorism specialists” in private sector offices would be the last thing that anyone would reasonably want to do.
If one were to turn the internet into a government regulated service it would mean that what comes out at the other end would be something like propaganda intended to make the public think in ways that do not challenge the authority of the bureaucrats and politicians.
In the US, it might amount to nothing less than exposure to commentary approved by Mike Pompeo and John Bolton if one wished to learn what is going on in the world.
Currently I and many other internet users appreciate and rely on the alternative media to provide viewpoints that are either suppressed by government or corporate interests or even contrary to prevailing fraudulent news accounts.
And the fact is that the internet is already subject to heavy handed censorship by the service providers, which one friend has described as “Soviet era” in its intensity, who are themselves implementing their increasingly disruptive actions to find false personas and to ban as “hate speech” anything that is objected to by influential constituencies.
Blocking information is also already implemented by various countries through a cooperative arrangement whereby governments can ask search engines to remove material.
Google actually documents the practice in an annual Transparency Report which reveals that government requests to remove information have increased from less than 1,000 per year in 2010 to nearly 30,000 per year currently.
Not surprisingly, Israel and the United States lead the pack when it comes to requests for deletions. Since 2009 the US has asked for 7,964 deletions totaling 109,936 items while Israel has sought 1,436 deletions totally 10,648 items. Roughly two thirds of Israeli and US requests were granted.
And there is more happening behind the scenes. Since 2016, Facebook representatives have also been regularly meeting with the Israeli government to delete Facebook accounts of Palestinians that the Israelis claim constitute “incitement.”
Israel had threatened Facebook that non-compliance with Israeli deletion orders would “result in the enactment of laws requiring Facebook to do so, upon pain of being severely fined or even blocked in the country.”
Facebook chose compliance and, since that time, Israeli officials have been “publicly boasting about how obedient Facebook is when it comes to Israeli censorship orders.” It should be noted that Facebook postings calling for the murder of Palestinians have not been censored.
And censorship also operates as well at other levels unseen, to include deletion of millions of old postings and videos to change the historical record and rewrite the past.
To alter the current narrative, Microsoft, Google, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook all have been pressured to cooperate with pro-Israel private groups in the United States, to include the powerful Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
The ADL is working with social media“to engineer new solutions to stop cyberhate” by blocking “hate language,” which includes any criticism of Israel that might be construed as anti-Semitism by the new expanded definition that is being widely promoted by the US Congress and the Trump Administration.
Censorship of information also increasingly operates in the publishing world. With the demise of actual bookstores, most readers buy their books from media online giant Amazon, which had a policy of offering every book in print.
Government regulation combined with corporate social media self-censorship means that the user of the service will not know what he or she is missing because it will not be there.
And once the freedom to share information without restraint is gone it will never return.
On balance, free speech is intrinsically far more important than any satisfaction that might come from government intrusion to make the internet less an enabler of violence.
If history teaches us anything, it is that the diminishment of one basic right will rapidly lead to the loss of others and there is no freedom more fundamental than the ability to say or write whatever one chooses, wherever and whenever one seeks to do so.
U.S. Department Of Health And Human Services Agency Report Confirms Glyphosate Cancer Risks September 9 2024 | From: NRDC / Various EPA Official Once Tried to Kill It, But the Nearly-Dead ATSDR Report Returns to Haunt Monsanto and Bayer.
Last week a public health agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), released the long-awaited Draft Toxicological Profile for Glyphosate. And, it supports and strengthens the 2015 cancer assessment of another health agency, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
For many years, glyphosate - more widely known under its trade name, Roundup - has been the world’s most widely used herbicide.
GMO products from Monsanto - now owned by Bayer - like Roundup-Ready corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton are specifically designed to be grown using glyphosate-based herbicides, which has driven its use and sales to about 300 million pounds annually in the US, with about 90% of that on farm fields, and about 10% on non-agriculture uses like lawns, gardens, golf courses, and parks and playgrounds.
The EPA Pesticide Office had succeeded in holding this report back for several years while it promoted its “no cancer risk” position.
In April 2015, now-retired EPA Pesticide Office official, Jess Rowland, tried to bury the ATSDR study, reportedly on Monsanto’s behalf.
Rowland told Monsanto’s Dan Jenkins, “If I can kill this I should get a medal”, according to internal Monsanto emails that have now been made public.
Jenkins subsequently emailed his Monsanto colleagues:
“I doubt EPA and Jess can kill this; but it’s good to know they are going to actually make the effort now to coordinate due to our pressing and their shared concern that ATSDR is consistent in its conclusions w EPA.”
Unfortunately, ATSDR did temporarily back-burner its work on glyphosate, agreeing instead to pay close attention to the EPA’s 2015 cancer assessment, according to court documents (see US RTK Monsanto Papers).
Now, almost exactly two years later, the ATSDR’s Draft Toxicological Profile for Glyphosate has risen from the near-dead and is out for public comment.
At an impressive 257 pages, the fully-referenced report comprehensively covers both the cancer and non-cancer health effects linked to glyphosate exposure, the latter including adverse effects on reproduction and child development, and organ toxicity.
Bravo, ATSDR!
A pattern is emerging: non-industry experts (Zhang et al 2019) and health agencies IARC and ATSDR are finding a link with glyphosate and cancer; whereas, regulatory agencies are lining up with Monsanto and Bayer that it does not cause cancer, even when reviewing the same scientific evidence (see ATSDR Fig 2-13).
The most important thing to realize about the ATSDR report is how clearly it lays out the vast array of scientific evidence linking both pure glyphosate (rodent studies) as well as formulated glyphosate-containing products (in human epidemiologic studies) like Roundup as they are sold on the shelf to cancer.
Here are the major takeaway points:
The association with non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) cancer risk is stronger when the study is adjusted for more days of glyphosate use, longer study latency period (time since exposure for cancer to develop), which strengthens the confidence in the results;
All three meta-analyses (evaluation of many studies together) show a statistically significant link with NHL cancer (positive confidence intervals), with narrow confidence intervals which strengthens our confidence in the link with cancer. This is true even of the Monsanto-sponsored analysis (Chang and Delzell, 2016), which is almost exactly the same result as the conclusions of the World Health Organization’s global cancer experts (IARC 2016).
Most studies are strongly positive for cancer (non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma), even if they are not statistically significant at a 95% confidence level. All would likely show a statistically significant link with cancer at a 90% confidence level.
Since the ATSDR analysis, a more recent meta-analysis that includes the most recent update of the Agricultural Health Study (AHS) along with five case-control studies reported a statistically significant 45% (95% CI: 1.11–1.91) increase in risk of NHL cancers people most highly exposed to glyphosate-based herbicide products (Zhang et al 2019). (See image below, ATSDR Fig 2-4)
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
For Multiple Myeloma, ATSDR reports similar findings across available studies (See ATSDR, Fig 2-5, p 87).
Given ATSDR’s lucid and comprehensive review of the available epidemiology information, which evaluates the glyphosate-based products that people are exposed to under real-world conditions, it seems to me that anyone not affiliated with the chemical industry or defending the chemical industry would reasonably conclude that these products are linked to cancer.
One could argue how strong the link is, under what exposure conditions, or other aspects, but anyone should be able to see that there is a link.
Yet, regulatory agencies in the US and worldwide all seem to have adopted Monsanto’s position that there is no link, largely by dismissing studies that don’t meet the 95% confidence standard - a threshold that is not required by law and is rejected by experts:
"It is ludicrous to conclude that the statistically non-significant results showed ‘no association’, when the interval estimate included serious risk increases" (See recent article by over 800 signatories published in Nature 2019).
In fact, the only two government agencies that seem to be able to provide an accurate scientific assessment of Monsanto’s carcinogenic products are the non-regulatory health agencies, ATSDR and IARC.
In response to the ATSDR report, a recently-retired EPA official from the Pesticide Office, Tina Levine, was quoted as saying,
“There does seem to be an effect. It’s not a large risk [of NHL] but it’s there based on what ATSDR has found… That said, consumer exposures are likely to be very different from professional applicators”.
Her comments are consistent with the conclusions of the EPA expert Scientific Advisory Panel that rejected EPA’s “not likely to be carcinogenic” classification, with some Panelists favoring the stronger classification of “suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential” (see SAP report, p. 22).
So, how come the EPA Pesticide Office had all the same studies as IARC and ATSDR, but couldn’t find the cancer risk?
My previous blog details the split among EPA experts - with the Science Office finding cancer risk, and the Pesticide Office finding none.
In addition to many other failings, EPA and other regulatory agencies state that they are only focused on exposures to the general population from food, and specifically are not accounting for routine occupational exposures to pesticide applicators and others (despite the fact that the EPA Pesticide Office is charged with protecting everyone, including farmworkers and pesticide applicators).
Non-Cancer Effects of Glyphosate and Formulated Products
ATSDR identifies scientific evidence in rodent studies and some human epidemiologic studies linking glyphosate with developmental delays, gastrointestinal effects including nausea and vomiting, kidney and liver toxicity, and eye irritation (ATSDR summary data p. 3-5).
Long-term ongoing health studies conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute of over 20 thousand pesticide applicators report that human exposures to glyphosate-containing products is linked to an elevated risk of wheezing, chronic bronchitis, and allergic asthma (ATSDR, Table 2-5, p. 36; Ag Health Study)
Developmental risks reported in studies of farm families identify a link between parental use of glyphosate and an increased risk of neural tube defects, miscarriage, preterm delivery, and small for gestational age (ATSDR Table 2-5, p. 40-41).
Although many of these are not statistically significant at a 95% confidence level, they are significant at a 90% confidence level, which should be confident enough to generate regulatory action to protect families wishing to conceive.
ATSDR summarizes a number of animal studies of early-life exposure to glyphosate-based products that report developmental effects including testicular lesions, decreased sperm production, elevated abnormal sperm, decreased testosterone, and skeletal malformations (ATSDR, p. 14).
ATSDR set a Minimum Risk Level (MRL) of 1 mg/kg-day based on a second-hand report from EPA of a Monsanto-sponsored rabbit study that reported gastrointestinal effects following exposure to pure glyphosate.
ATSDR used a standard 100-fold uncertainty factor to extrapolate from an animal study to humans, and to account for inter-human variability (for details, see ATSDR Appendix A).
Despite a mountain of good work, the ATSDR report will almost surely underestimate health risks for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
Raw data and original studies not provided to ATSDR - Importantly, ATSDR didn’t have access to the animal studies (ATSDR, p. 12).
Instead, it unfortunately had to rely on EPA Pesticide Office summaries (called Data Evaluation Records or Reports, DERs) of Monsanto-sponsored studies.
That’s two steps removed from having access to the raw data, and two layers of unreliability in my opinion. It is also a reason why the epidemiology data is so important to take seriously.
Formulated Products More Toxic than Pure Glyphosate - Ongoing cell-based toxicity tests of the U.S. National Toxicology Program show that the glyphosate-based formulated products including lawn and garden products are more harmful than pure glyphosate, some by over 100-fold (NTP 2018).
Studies in young rodents conducted by the Ramazzini Institute reported that early-life exposure to both pure glyphosate and formulated Roundup mixtures resulted in modifying the gut microbiome in ways that may impair gastrointestinal health or have other long-term adverse health impacts (Mao et al 2018).
However, most of the rodent studies evaluated by ATSDR were on the pure glyphosate, which ignores all the chemicals in the formulated products like Roundup that people are exposed to in the real world, and that are likely to be more toxic.
Again, a good reason to take the epidemiology studies more seriously, since they are real-world exposures.
It’s Time To Tell The Truth About The Global War On Christianity (And The Rise Of Satanism) September 8 2024 | From: NaturalNews / Various
In case you haven’t heard, Christian churches are being bombed all over the world today by radical Islamic terrorists.
This is just days after the burning down of Notre Dame in France, a fire that the media has gone to desperate lengths to report was not set on purpose by Islamic terrorists. (They are now blaming a computer glitch, if you can believe that.)
They are killed, tortured and run out of their own homes and countries. Even in places like the Philippines, Islamic terrorists have seized entire islands and targeted Christians for slaughter. As stated by The Gatestone Institute International Policy Council:
"The new terrorism in the Philippines is not merely inspired by political or territorial grievances, real or imagined, but rather is imbued with intrinsic hate for the “other” - for the “infidel.”
In May 2017, in the city of Marawi, a civilian bus was stopped by jihadis; when 9 passengers were discovered to be Christian - apparently because they were not able to quote the Koran - they were tied together and shot dead, execution style.
The jihadis who took over Marawi during the uprising forced women into sex-slavery and ordered Christian men embrace Islam or be used as human shields against the Philippine Army.”
In the United States, Christians are being systematically de-platformed off all social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, all of which are now dominated by Satanists who despise Christianity.
At the same time, every single Democrat running for president in 2020 has a record of attacking Christianity and either directly or indirectly supporting the silencing of Christians and Christian principles.
Christianity is under attack like never before, all across our world. Yet the left-wing media pretends it isn’t happening.
Instead, they claim it is gays, minorities or Muslims who are under attack, and that same media now essentially equates belief in God with “white supremacist” beliefs.
There is a Global War on Christianity, and Those Who are Waging it are Quite Literally the Minions of Satan
Satanism is endemic in Hollywood and the music industry, and Netflix has even been overtaken by Satanism as is now abundantly clear with its hiring of Satanists as “consultants” for its popular “Sabrina” show that features a “teenage witch” who worships the devil to gain power in modern society.
"In [the Netflix show], the Sabrina character is called to sign her name in the Book of the Beast. There are demons. Evil spells. Orgies.
The show is so satanic in its feel that the Satanic Temple itself is talking about taking legal action against the program for allegedly appropriating the copyrighted monument design of its goat deity Baphomet.
Family Research Council senior fellow Peter Sprigg agrees.“The dark, occult-ish elements in ‘Chilling Adventures of Sabrina’ provide reason enough for parents to keep their children, including teens, far away from this show,” Sprigg told Fox News.
“The show has gone over the top in depicting an actual orgy on screen, and if they think having the teen participants keep their underwear on makes it all right, the writers and producers need to think again.
This content is not appropriate for anyone, but especially not for the teen audience it targets.”
Beyond just Netflix, all the big tech giants are run by Satanists, too. Wikipedia, for example, relentlessly attacks Christianity (and natural medicine, by the way) while allowing pro-Satanism content to dominate its pages.
Those banned from Twitter include people who quote Mother Theresa or Bible scripture. Jack Dorsey personally oversees many of these bans, carrying out literal orders from Satan to silence those who share the word of God.
"Amazon is happily selling books that promote Satanism, including a book titled, “Satanism: A Beginner’s Guide to the Religious Worship of Satan and Demons Volume I: Philosophy,” published by “Devil’s Mark Publishing.” You can see the book at this Amazon.com link.”
Google is also pro-Islam and anti-Christian, as is abundantly clear by Google’s celebration of Islamic holidays and its suppression of Christian websites, videos and content.
The people who work at Google hate the very idea of God, with many of them (like Rey Kurzweil) believing that machines are God and hoping to one day merge with those machines by claiming to be able to upload their souls to computer chips (transhumanism).
According to all the dominant tech giants today, even the word “Christmas” is “hate speech.”
All the tech giants use the Southern Poverty Law Center - an anti-Christian, left-wing hate group - as the arbiter of “hate.” And the SPLC hates God, Christianity and America.
Planned Parenthood, Satanism and the Abortion Industry
The entire abortion industry functions largely as a child sacrifice temple, allowing worshipers of Satanism to carry out demonic rituals under the cover of “women’s health.” Many Planned Parenthood workers are practicing Satanists, and they pray to Satan as part of their child murder rituals.
One Planned Parenthood director recently admitted to running “a Satanic pedophile ring.” As Newspunch.com reports:
"A former Planned Parenthood director has admitted that the organization is really a front for a Satanic pedophile ring in which abortions are seen as ‘demonic rituals.’
In an interview with the Daily Caller News Foundation, Ramona Trevino revealed that staff members have quotas for abortions so that they can use the aborted fetuses for sick Satanic rituals..”
The desire to murder babies in the name of Satan is so prevalent among Leftists / Democrats that the Governor of North Carolina just vetoed a bill that would require health care for babies born alive after failed abortions.
You can almost hear Gov. Roy Cooper screaming, “Let them DIE!” as he licks his lips to lap up the blood of children murdered in the name of Satan.
Modern medicine, which feeds on baby parts while pushing vaccines that contain aborted human fetal tissue (turning every vaccine into a cannibalism blood ritual).
The LGBTQ activist community, which pushes pedophilia and the destruction of the Church because the Church teaches that homosexuality is unclean. (But don’t you dare mention the epidemic of anal cancer that’s spreading across the LGBT community like wildfire.)
The institution of “science,” which has become fanatical in its push to vaccine children with the blood of other children. (Vaccines contain WI-38 and MRC-5 cell lines, which are derived from aborted human babies, as is admitted by this CDC official document).
The open borders advocates who need the borders to stay open so they can continue to traffic human children who are used as sex slaves and child sacrifice rituals by wealthy Democrat donors (and other sickos, like tech elitists and science “skeptics” who push medical child abuse).
What You Can Do to Stay Informed and Defend the Word of God
Too many churches in America are teaching watered-down scripture that’s afraid to teach the real word of God. If you want to hear a Christian pastor who isn’t afraid to discuss Revelation, the End Times and the attacks on Christianity, connect with Discover Ministries out of Australia, run by pastor Steve Cioccolanti.
There are also many courageous Christian video channels on Brighteon.com, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
Make no mistake: Modern human civilization has been overtaken by demonic forces who are at war with God and humanity.
At least half the population has now been overtaken by demonic influence (probably much more) and are actively working to destroy human life (babies, etc.), individual liberty, national sovereignty, all white people, all Christians, etc.
Every person who promotes infanticide and post-birth abortion, for example, is an actual demon in human form. They are quite literally no longer human. They are demons pretending to be human.
Watch my all-important Counterthink episode to learn the full truth about “demons in human form.”
Be prepared, both physically and spiritually. According to some, we have already entered “End Times” scenarios, and we are watching the rise of the demonic Left and soon, the Antichrist.
This Antichrist will pretend to be a global messiah who promises to heal the world and end war and conflict. In truth, he is the embodiment of Lucifer, and he will deceive billions into following him as he leads humanity toward destruction.
Even most Christians will be fooled and will surrender their souls to his influence. Watch for more signs of the emerging Mark of the Beast, the global persecution of Christians and the rise of global government. These are all signs that the end game is approaching.
Dancing On The Crumbling Precipice: Jim Quinn Explains Why The Deep State Is The True Enemy Of Human Civilization September 7 2024 | From: NaturalNews / Various
If you’re not yet familiar with the writing of Jim Quinn from The Burning Platform, he’s an author you may want to consider adding to your “must-read” list. Quinn’s articles are insightful and daring, and his grasp of history is spot-on.
The title is apparently borrowed from a song called “The Violence” by a band known as “Rise Against,” whose lead singer believes that humanity will ultimately destroy itself with violence. (He’s not wrong on that point, by the way.)
In this article, Quinn convincingly argues that humanity must declare war on the deep state and destroy it in order to survive. If we do not destroy the deep state, it will destroy the world, Quinn explains.
Here’s Quinn’s article, with extraneous quotes removed:
Dancing on a Crumbling Precipice
This recent song by Rise Against, inspired by the turmoil since the 2016 election of Donald Trump, captures the feeling of angst and uncertainty engulfing the world today.
This Fourth Turning is entering its most violent stage, where blood will be spilled in vast quantities as an epic conflict between good and evil plays out across the globe.
Eighty years ago, the bloodiest conflict in human history began, as the social mood turned dark and compromise was no longer a viable option.
It wasn’t a coincidence World War II began exactly eighty years after the onset of the American Civil War, which began as compromisers died off and hearts hardened on both sides.
We are now eighty years gone since the outset of World War II and a global mood of impending doom overshadows our daily lives.
The inevitability of conflict, domestically and internationally, eclipses all efforts to bridge the ideological differences of competing interests around the world.
The cycles of history will not be denied and this Fourth Turning will play out as those before, with clear victors and clear losers.
Tim McIlrath, the lead singer of Rise Against, observing the violent conflict raging in our country in the press, social media, in the streets, and on battlefields across the Middle East wondered whether violence is an inevitability of the human condition, or whether we can make a choice to reject it. In an interview with Kerrang!, McIlrath stated:
“As we were watching the news and seeing all the different things [unfold] around the planet, I realized that violence has such a role in a lot of what we see when the world is falling apart.
The violence is a reflection of whether our [aggression] is in our nature, our DNA, or whether we have a choice to be part of it.
And it is a choice that we make – a conscious one – to use violence as a means to an end. Aren’t we better than this? Aren’t we the apex of the animal kingdom?
Aren’t we the only ones on the planet that have the capacity for compassion? Aren’t we good enough or brave enough to not sink to violence?”
I hate to break the bad news to Tim, but human nature never changes.
We aren’t better or worse than the billions of people who have proceeded us on this earth. We are all susceptible to the vices which have plagued mankind for eternity: pride, greed, anger, envy, lust, gluttony and laziness.
We are also capable of elevating our society through exercising displays of courage, applying justice fairly, prudently managing our affairs, treating others with respect, and acting charitably towards mankind.
As Solzhenitsyn noted in his masterpiece, Gulag Archipelago, “the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being”. The violence in our nature is ingrained in our makeup as human beings. The Bible details our violent nature in the Garden of Eden, with the murder of Abel by Cain, his brother.
The ability to use violence against others is most certainly in everyone’s nature, but average hard-working folks trying to survive in this dog eat dog world are not prone to violence or conflict.
They are too busy working, living, raising kids, buying shit they don’t need, paying the credit card bills for shit they don’t need, being entertained by modern day techno bread and circuses, and being propagandized by their government and their mouthpieces in the corporate media.
The overwhelming amount of gun violence occurs in the Democrat run urban ghettos with the strongest gun laws. The violence is not a function of being poor.
Poor folks in rural communities (aka flyover country) own firearms, but are not killing each other in large numbers, if at all. Extreme levels of violence are a function of morality, culture, and lack of family and community cohesiveness.
The legally armed “deplorables” are family oriented and law abiding. They will only resort to violence when pushed too far.
The extremist left wing politicians bloviating on a daily basis, inciting their sycophant followers towards aggression have lit the fuse for the coming civil war.
“There’s never been a true war that wasn’t fought between two sets of people who were certain they were in the right. The really dangerous people believe they are doing whatever they are doing solely and only because it is without question the right thing to do. And that is what makes them dangerous.” ?
- Neil Gaiman, American Gods
The violence in our inner cities is insignificant when compared to the violence exported across the globe by the sociopaths at the highest levels of our government and their co-conspirators in the military industrial complex.
It is naïve to think the violence engulfing the world is primarily the result of the average person’s nature.
It’s the result of dangerous men inflicting their warped worldview, blood lust ambition, thirst for power, and hubristic arrogance upon the unsuspecting dupes inhabiting their countries.
Sociopaths like Bolton and Pompeo have risen to positions of immense power, believing global disorder and war are beneficial to a bankrupt declining empire flailing about trying to preserve its superpower stature.
The Deep State elevates power hungry conscienceless men into positions where they can promote the agendas of the Deep State with no remorse or restraint.
The export of military hardware to Middle East countries that hate us is a prime example of how a flailing empire will do anything for a buck, while its corrupt politicians are fellated by the corporate war industry.
Pro-longed warfare has never benefited a nation over the long-term. The American empire had a national debt of $5.7 trillion, with the annual budget virtually balanced in 2000 when our leaders began a pro-longed period of non-stop warfare.
We’ve added $16.3 trillion of debt and are running $1.2 trillion annual deficits as our out of control war mongering has put the country on a path to destruction. Both feckless political parties vote for more war spending, more arms sales to Middle Eastern countries, and continued provocation of nuclear powers – Russia and China.
As trillions are wasted on the violent overthrow of countries who refuse to buckle to American power, our basic infrastructure crumbles, our government-controlled healthcare system is an expensive joke, our educational system is a disaster, and the rich get richer while the poor die fighting for empire.
Dwight D. Eisenhower, a military man through and through, warned the nation what would happen if we allowed the unholy alliance of government and the military industrial complex to dominate our society.
We didn’t heed his warning and allowed our country [The West] to be taken over by evil Deep State oligarchs who realized war is good for their bottom line.
They use faux displays of patriotism, create enemies when there are none, lure easily manipulated young men as cannon fodder, spread the war machine factories across congressional districts to ensure votes for more war spending, and compensate the corporate media to support war and spread propaganda.
Whenever the government and media are in lockstep regarding an issue, like Russia throwing our elections or Julian Assange being a traitor, you know it’s a false narrative designed to misinform the public.
War is a racket designed to enrich the Deep State and their pliable acolytes. It’s only the average person who suffers.
The question Tim McIlrath wants answered is whether we as a people can end the violence and war. The truth is the only way to put an end to the never-ending global war is through a violent overthrow of the Deep State who firmly control the levers of power over our government, financial systems, corporations, and media.
Ironically, violence initiated by the good law-abiding people of this country against the corrupt, powerful, rich, deceitful oligarchs is the only chance for reversing the downward moral spiral we currently face.
Believing change will be achieved through the ballot box is a fool’s errand. Just observe the extremists, imbeciles, and craven narcissists we are currently stuck with in Washington D.C. by falsely believing change can be achieved through the ballot box.
We are being manipulated and managed, just as Edward Bernays taught his disciples, and how Ray Bradbury described in his dystopian novel about the future.
“If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none. Let him forget there is such a thing as war.
If the government is inefficient, top-heavy, and tax-mad, better it be all those than that people worry over it. Peace, Montag.
Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information.
Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change.”
Our overlords have been successful in creating generations of non-thinking automatons who have been socially engineered through government education and TV programming to feel (not think critically) and be easily manipulated through their techno-gadgets, the boob tube, and now social media.
We are drowning in trivialities, mindless entertainment, gossip, and propaganda, unable to decipher truth from falsehood. The “truth” is whatever suits the purposes of those in power. Observe how the Deep State promotes their war machine through sporting events and the local news.
You have Air Force flyovers at every football game. The military uses your tax dollars to pay the professional sports leagues for those “touching” tributes to military personnel during every sporting event.
Those “heart-warming” stories of military personnel surprising their kids at school are nothing but propaganda narrative fed to the public to support never ending war. How many millions of your tax dollars are used on those flashy recruiting commercials promoting the lie our military is protecting us by blowing up brown people in distant countries.
Hemingway recognized the truth about the war machine, decades ago.
“They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one’s country. But in modern war, there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason.”
- Ernest Hemingway
As this Fourth Turning has reached its midway point, it has become evident to those awoken to the truth of a world run and controlled by a relatively small cadre of powerful men and their paid off disciples, a reckoning is at hand, with violence and bloodshed an inevitable outcome.
The election of Donald Trump has functioned as the catalyst, forcing those in the shadows to reveal their true purpose and nature.
The Deep State attempted coup of a sitting president based upon a false Russian narrative has blown up in their faces, but they will not admit defeat, because to do so would mean loss of their power, wealth and control.
They will be willing to risk world war with nuclear powers or create the atmosphere for a civil war rather than cease their sociopathic thirst for controlling the world. With the arrest of Julian Assange on bogus charges, they push the country ever closer to civil chaos. Truth is treason in an empire of lies.
It appears the oligarchs are losing control of the narrative and are reacting in a desperate manner to retain their ill-gotten riches and unconstitutional control over the levers of government power.
We have entered an era of extremism which will surely lead to more violence. We have elected politicians pushing extreme positions like open borders, socialism for all, infanticide, going to war with Russia and China, prosecuting patriots who revealed misdeeds by our government, cheering for terrorists, and supporting a surveillance state coup of a sitting president.
We have a president promoting a stock market bubble, vilifying the money printers at the Federal Reserve for being too tight when they have kept real interest rates at zero or negative for the last ten years, encouraging coups in other countries while fighting off a coup against himself, and running deficits of $1.2 trillion after campaigning on balancing the budget.
Additional:Read about the Alliance that
has
been working behind
the scenes for decades to take down the 'Cabal' within the work of David Wilcock.
Some of those reading this may be confused because the cabal-controlled mainstream media is doing
everything within it's
power to denigrate Trump - as he is part of the effort to take the
Illuminati down once and for
all.
And the Alliance effort operates beyond the bounds of countries - out of neccessity; as that is how the Luciferian Cabal
does.
Do you think you can trust the mainstream media? Look at whom they target. One must wonder why 'they' also do not like Putin?
The magnitude of extreme positions, policies, proposals, and politicians is off the charts, making me feel like I’m living in a new country called Extreme-istan.
Our daily existence is nothing more than a frustrating crusade through a blizzard of lies, in search of the truth. Extremism dominates our financial markets, our foreign policy, our politics, our media, and interaction on social media platforms.
Extreme positions are not met with calls for moderation, but contrary extreme positions. This is how it rolls during Fourth Turnings. There will be no compromise solutions domestically or internationally. As the extreme positions solidify and become entrenched, violent conflict becomes the only form of resolution, with clear victors and losers.
When the extreme multiple financial bubbles burst simultaneously and create the global financial crisis to end all financial crises, the anger and vengeance likely to be doled out against those identified as being responsible for the trillions in losses and collapse of debt laden corporations and governments will be blood curdling.
With desperate politicians trying to pacify their angry constituents, they will go to their old standby – start a war and try to appeal to the patriotism of an ignorant populace who they have successfully manipulated in the past.
This is when the “deplorables” are likely to push back. This is when the true enemies will be identified and those firearms they have been trying to confiscate will be put to use.
Joseph Heller understood generals and politicians supposedly on our side could be the enemy. The Deep State is our enemy. Until they are violently defeated, they will continue to treat us as nothing more than cattle and cannon fodder.
Steinbeck thought war was a failure of thinking men; while Hemingway thought all war was a crime; Voltaire thought war was murder and those declaring war were the murderers; and Smedley Butler thought war was a racket.
They were all right. Rich old men send young poor men to their deaths to feed the coffers of corporate arms dealers. War is a means for arrogant hubristic men to wield power in a violent display of egotistical criminality, using innocent citizens as cannon fodder in their vain endeavor at historical glory.
Tim McIlrath’s final lyrics capture the essence of human history. We are a book without an end because human history is cyclical and we start at chapter 1 every eighty years or so.
He calls for something new, but he doesn’t grasp that the existing social order is always overturned during a Fourth Turning and something new arises.
Whether that is good or bad is up to the victors. But, sadly, the elimination of violence is not in the cards and is likely to be ratcheted up to new highs during the next ten years.
Violence is in our nature, but good men and women only resort to it when pushed to their breaking point. That point is rapidly approaching.
The hubris of the ruling class has led them to brazenly reveal their true purpose in pillaging the wealth of the nation, while impoverishing the middle class, creating global disorder, promoting civic decay and ensuring global financial chaos through creating trillions of unpayable debt.
The attempted coup of Trump, the arrest of Assange, rigging of financial markets and the continued provocation of Russia have pushed the country to the brink.
The two captured political parties are bereft of courageous patriots, while being infested with corrupt extremist imbeciles. Sworn enemies, domestically and internationally, are standing waist deep in gasoline striking matches.
Anyone not realizing the direness of our situation is either dependent upon the Deep State for their sustenance, a lackey for the establishment, choosing to be willfully ignorant, or is too dumbed down and distracted by their techno-gadgets to care.
The war has begun and the storm gathers, but nobody knows when the conflagration will erupt. The Deep State is already at war with average Americans, but they haven’t acknowledged that fact.
When they do, things will get interesting. Get ready.
“The war had begun and nobody saw it. The storm was lowering and nobody knew it.”
Already in January three leading US digital outlets - BuzzFeed, the Huffington Post, and Vice announced layoffs that have left many accomplished journalists unemployed.
Consolidation of journalism looks set to continue unabated as larger media conglomerates swallow up smaller players globally. We also appear to be witnessing the death throes of the concept of ‘objective’ truth in journalism.
However, perhaps that is not at all as bad as it sounds, and we are just finally waking up to the reality that it never really existed in the first place.
Also, on the positive side, smaller independent players with innovative digital models and a more open approach like our ScoopPro service look likely to be more relevant than ever to their reader communities in this increasingly fractured and homogenised media environment.
When an industry is bleeding, it tends to bring out the sharks - now, it seems even the sharks are being attacked by other sharks. Take the Gannett newspaper chain: one of the largest players in a shrunken industry, it owns dozens of leading papers across the US, including flagships such as USA Today and the Detroit Free Press.
Some see it as a perfect candidate to snap up some of the other players in the market. However, unfortunately for Gannett, competitor Digital First Media has thrown a large wrench into the works, by quietly acquiring 7.5 percent of the chain's stock as a prelude to launching a takeover bid of Gannett.
The Drum notes that since Gannett owns Newsquest, a major UK newspaper publisher, any move to acquire Gannett could set off a consolidation spree in Great Britain as well.
Also in the UK, an independent, government-commissioned report on the state of the media industry warns that closure of local newspapers threatens democracy.
The Cairncross review concluded that many local newspapers are owned by debt-laden publishers which have cut investment and sacked hundreds of journalists in an effort to maintain profit margins.
Here in New Zealand, in 2018, Australian Nine Entertainment took over Stuff’s parent company Fairfax Media. The impact of this merger on the future ownership of Stuff and its New Zealand media holdings remain unknown, but speculation abounds that it will be sold off.
Likely buyers could be Mediaworks or NZME or even TVNZ, in each case, leading to further consolidation (and potentially more commerce commission complications).
Stuff's earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation shrank 27 per cent to $40.5m in the year ended June 2018.
Revenue fell 7.5 per cent to $301.4m. The NZ print newspaper market also shrunk considerably last year after Stuff closed more than 35% of its print newspapers and announced additional cuts in community papers.
In November 2018, MediaWorks also announced that it had signed a conditional merger agreement with Australian outdoor advertising company QMS.
If the deal goes through, QMS will have a substantial shareholding in MediaWorks, however, current owner Oaktree Capital Management will maintain the majority shareholding in the merged entity.
Stuff's news clout and large digital assets would add another appealing layer to the MediaWorks offering. However, such a deal seems unlikely to get past the Commerce Commission, which has already shown a strong tendency to protect media plurality.
Is all of this talk of mergers and acquisitions and positive outlooks just reshuffling deckchairs on the Titanic? Probably. Both Herald and Stuff, NZ’s biggest digital players, are now essentially making nothing after tax and amortisation etc, and both have now stopped paying dividends.
It appears that they are persisting in fudging their revenue statistics to make things seem rosier than the reality. Why? Because they are denial about how bad things are in the online Media industry.
They are afraid that talking about this will have a further negative impact on their dwindling advertising revenues.
One of the most positive aspects of the ScoopPro revenue model is that we are no longer reliant on these advertising revenues to stay alive, making us more resilient than most.
Looking around the NZ online media, not many other organisations can say this right now. With a few exceptions like NBR and ODT (Paywall) and Newsroom (NewsroomPro although still reliant on sponsorship) and Stuff (Various associated offerings like Fibre and streaming services), the majority of newsrooms seem to be reliant on either advertising revenue or sponsorship market.
In 2018, NZME (the NZ Herald) announced the introduction of digital subscriptions for its premium content, but the exact launch time has not been announced.
Many other publishers will probably follow suit in 2019, however, exactly how much revenue this approach will bring them is yet to be seen.
The End of Objectivity?
The fingers of blame for all these takeovers and layoffs of journalists are of course quick to point at the great bogeymen of our media age - Facebook and Google. Many have rightly warned about the threat to democracy posed by this trend.
Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for example, has highlighted tech monopolies and concentrated media ownership as the biggest threats to democracy.
There is certainly a lot of truth in that critique, however maybe that is not the end of the story. Antonio García Mar postulates that perhaps American journalism isn’t dying, it’s just returning to its opinionated roots.
Instead, he says, what is dying is that flavor of ‘objective’ journalism that purports (usually without basis) to record an unbiased account of world events:
“We take journalistic objectivity to be as natural and immutable as the stars, but it’s a relatively short-lived artifact of 20th-century America.”
" ‘Objectivity’ is an atavism from the days of studiously inoffensive and circulation-expanding reportage lavishly supported by unquestioning advertiser budgets.
That’s all gone now. And it’s not clear that this studious “objectivity” more closely approximates the truth. Iraq and the WMDs? Madame President?
Those were headlines produced under rigorously “objective” (and wrong) coverage, while those who got it right * and there were some - spoke from less regimented perches.”
More support for this viewpoint comes from The View from Somewhere, a new podcast by Lewis Raven Wallace exploring the fraught history of journalistic objectivity.
“A lot of great journalism in the United States and all over the world has been journalism that stood for something,” says Wallace, who was fired by American Public Media’s Marketplace in 2017 after he refused to delete a blog post questioning the value of traditional objectivity.
“Standing up to power requires standing for something.”
As the US political commentator Michael Parenti once observed: 'Bias in favor of the orthodox is frequently mistaken for "objectivity". Departures from this ideological orthodoxy are themselves dismissed as ideological.'
Looking at the purportedly ‘objective’ mainstream media coverage of the current Venezuela crisis, which is incredibly similar to the ‘consent manufacturing’ narratives of the Iraq and Libya invasions, I am inclined to agree with this view.
The general approach of the supposedly ‘objective’ mainstream media to Venezuela (including the anti-trump self-described ‘resistance’ media) has almost unilaterally fallen in unquestioningly behind the Trump administration’s party line in support for military intervention whilst ignoring the facts, such as the effects of illegal US sanctions and ongoing covert activities to destabilise the country.
If the idea of the mainstream liberal media as the dispenser of ‘objective’ truth is behind such manipulation of the population into support for such abominations, then I want no part in it, and will certainly not shed a tear for its demise.
The highly negative side of this Balkanisation of the US media is of course the increased success of highly partisan journalism such as Fox News and other rabidly neocon news outlets.
Winners in this polarised environment on the left seem to be The Times and the Washington Post, both highly critical of Trump.
It seems that in a polarised society, people are seeking out the news that confirms their existing bias leading to opposing echo chambers and ‘filter bubbles’ and very little compromise or real dialogue.
However, arguably an ‘objective’ journalism environment is exactly what has allowed such ‘news’ providers to have any credibility at all as something other than the opinion of a selection of (mostly white, male and wealthy) editors and shareholders.
Perhaps the time has come more a more nuanced and mature approach to the understanding of ‘truth’ and ‘objectivity’ that is fit for today’s online media environment.
However, a more positive aspect of the movement away from this ‘objective’ journalism is the rise of a particular hybrid of robust investigation and opinion oriented journalism.
The independent and member funded ‘engaged journalism’ approach has been pioneered by De Correspondent in the Netherlands and has been studied extensively by Jay Rosen and team at the Membership Puzzle Project in the USA.
This ‘engaged’ journalism approach “seeks to build a newsroom optimized for trust” and taking into account the needs and views of the community of readers by harnessing the depth of knowledge of the wider community of readers and subject experts.
Call it what you like; ‘engaged journalism’, ‘community centred journalism’ or ‘collaborative journalism’, this approach seems to be resonating with audiences.
Last month, The Correspondent, the English-language expansion of the Dutch news site, smashed through the US$2.5 million target for its launch crowdfunding campaign by more than $100,000 with over 40,000 members joining.
This De Correspondent approach does not censor or force its journalists to pretend to be objective.
Rather De Correspondent allows its journalists scope to form an opinion and take a transparency, usually ‘solutions-focused’, approach to investigations in collaboration with the input of readers.
De Correspondent journalists are expected to offer their readers transparency via access to their train of thought leading up to the definitive story and can be open about any problems they have with truth verification and challenges to interpret what they learn, observe, or experience.
Founder Rob Wijnberg believes this conception of journalism should not be equated with partisan reporting or with the “journalism of assertion” for that matter.
Although subjectivity and personality is embraced, independent truth verification remains at the heart of De Correspondent’s journalism practice.
Yet, by acknowledging the participatory culture and collective intelligence they tone down the universalistic connotation of “the truth” a notch.
This approach recognises our current culture as “an era in which truth is no longer set in stone, but can be constantly updated and subsequently contested in thousands of responses below the article.
Another interesting approach pioneered by Cathrine Gyldensted in Denmark is called ‘constructive journalism’.
Much like ‘solutions journalism,’ this approach focuses on reporting news in a more engaging, constructive way. A central component of such an approach is the “wellbeing model of the world”, in which journalists challenge their default setting of seeing people as victims to also see them as people with strengths and resilience – and report on that too.
Such an approach could attempt to encourage collaboration between politicians or opposing sides of a debate, thus helping to break down silos and promote more understanding and dialogue in online discourse.
It is said that they are the driving force behind the Knights Templar, and documents show that former leaders include names such as Leonardo da Vinci, Robert Fludd, Sir Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo, and the artist Jean Cocteau. This group was not known to the public until the mid-twentieth century.
The mystery surrounding the Priory of Sion takes place around the abbey of Rennes-le-Chateau in the Languedoc in southern France, where the Cathars were established in the 10th century.
They were the ancestors of the Scottish Carbonari, who had a lot of influence on the illuminati.
The Cathar Society was a humanitarian order who believed that their religious views were purer than those of the Catholic Church. They were followers of the former Gnostics, who devoted themselves more to spiritual matters than to material wealth.
Catharians and Catharism
The name Cathar means ‘the pure’. They were bloodily slaughtered between 1208 and 1244 at the religious command of Pope Innocent III by his papal army. Tens of thousands of men were sent by the Vatican to the province of Languedoc in France.
Rennes-le-Chateau became, many years later, the home of the Templars who from their early years had maintained warm relations with the Catharians.
They were more Cathar than Catholic. The Catharians, many of whom were wealthy, had a considerable secret cache of gold and silver and important writings. Researchers report that these treasures were smuggled away three months before their slaughter, after which this hoard was lost forever.
The Mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau
Caught up in the mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau in 1885, was a Catholic priest by the name of François Berenger Saunière. He took the initiative of restoring the city church that in 1059 was dedicated to Mary Magdalene and stood on West Gothic ruins, dating back to the sixth century.
While he was at work in the church in 1891, he removed an altar stone and discovered that one of the supports was hollow and contained four parchment papers; two pieces with pedigrees from 1244 and 1644 and two missives written between 1780 and 1790 by a former parish priest, the abbot Antoine Bigou.
The texts were unusual and seemed to have been written in code, some of which were incredibly complex. Saunière was referred to Paris by his superior and met the director general of the seminar, Saint Sulpice. Later it became known that this seminary was probably a cover for the Priory of Sion.
What the documents contained is still a secret to this day, but it was a big turning point in the life of Saunière. His visit to Paris not only earned him new friends in high circles, but also great wealth.
Before his sudden death in 1917, he spent many millions on new constructions and renovations in his town.
Shortly before his death, he discovered a small crypt underneath the church, which allegedly contained skeletons. He also discovered that the treasure he found belonged to King Dagobert II and to Sion, where he ultimately died.
Conspiracies
This dark mixture of conspiracies clearly points to a level of reality that does not come to light in the MSM.
Researchers have found irrefutable evidence of involvement of an organised and coherent framework active behind the scenes, sometimes facilitated by using other organisations as a façade, aiming at the involvement of the Priory of Sion in the ‘dark underworld of European issues’ – where the mafia partially mergers with secret societies and intelligence services.
The big business world plays cosy hand clapping with the Vatican, where huge amounts of money are used for clandestine purposes, where the dividing lines between politics, religion, espionage, the banking world and organised crime fade and become negligible.
It is a turbid sphere of influence where European Christian Democratic parties, and various societies are committed to the European unity. It is a realm in which those in royal circles, neo-knight orders, masonic sects, the CIA, Mossad, the Maltese Knights and the Vatican are driven together, to temporarily join forces for a common purpose.
However, as far as is known, no researcher has been able to get a firm grip on the Priory of Sion and its surrounding secret societies and groups. All is faded away and obfuscated by false documents, contradictory statements and smokescreens.
Moreover, yet other researchers are of the opinion that the Priory of Sion represents the summit of the current power pyramid and that the Priory of Sion recruits freemasons for its society through the Rosicrucians.
The European Union now seems to be a meticulous copy of the united Europe as envisaged by the leaders of the New World Order and the Priory of Sion.
It is believed that secret societies are inter connected with the CIA, Mossad, the CFR, Bilderbergers, Round tables and Freemasonry, and even further back in history to the Illuminati, the Templars, the Maltese Knights and the Priory of Sion.
With their continuing agenda to discredit both national and ecclesiastical authorities in their attempt to first forge a united Europe and to then unite the rest of the world, i.e. to realise the NWO.
Instead of taking part in ecumenical studies to determine which traditions are most accurate, the Roman Church has attempted to eradicate everything that defied their authority with particularly violent and murderous means.
One of the most prominent and powerful threats of ecclesiastical dogma came from the Templars. This order, originally a small secret group of knights, was formed to protect pilgrims after the first crusade was successfully completed, after having conquered the city of Jerusalem.
The Knights Templar really did not spend much time patrolling the roads. Instead, this group of knights, who had good connections with the most powerful European families, made excavations deep below where once Solomon’s Temple had stood in Jerusalem.
Whatever they found there, was all taken to Europe and was apparently hidden in the south of France in the village of Rennes-le-Chateau.
While nobody seems to know anything with absolute certainty about the particularities of these treasures of the Knights Templar, most researchers have come to the conclusion that in addition to a literal treasure of gold and silver, they most probably found old documents and works of art that could have been used to challenge and ultimately destroy ecclesiastical traditions.
A group whose beliefs were possibly strengthened by the Templars’ discovery, was the Catharians, who were mainly based in the Languedoc region.
Merovingian Dynasty
The authorities of the Roman church felt threatened by the power of the Merovingian bloodline and they arranged the murder of King Dagobert II, through their influence over his stewards, after which they organised their own principality.
When the peace-loving Catharians condemned such abuse of power by the Church in 1209, Pope Innocent III began to take military steps against them too.
It is the strong suspicion that the treasures found in Jerusalem by the Knights Templar confirmed the Catharians’ faith. In fact, many Cathars were kept out of the hands of the papal army through the support of the Templars.
The Templars
Meanwhile the Knights Templar succeeded in intimidating the Roman Catholic Church so that the Church grantedspecial rights and favours to their order, through which they became one of the most powerful multinational organisations in the world.
Nonetheless, in 1307 the Templars themselves became victims of the wrath of the Vatican. In that year, all Templars in France were arrested and tortured by King Philip IV of France, who was commissioned by the Pope and the Vatican to perpetrate this slaughter.
Philip IV had previously been dismissed as a member of the Templars because of his great debts to them. Most of Templars fled the country with a large fleet of boats that was stationed in La Rochelle on the Atlantic coast. It is assumed that they took the treasures with them.
Abroad, the Templars simply continued in various countries, albeit under different secret societies and orders, such as the Knights of Christ, Hospital Knights, and the Knights of the Teutonic Order.
In this way, their unorthodox ideas were spread throughout Europe and converged in the Masonic lodge of the Strict Observation where the “illuminated” Freemasonry arose.
It is assumed that among the hidden treasures, were genealogical documents that made the connections of the descendants of Jesus through the Merovingian royal family to individuals of our time.
Possibly, these repressed royals may have had their hand in the movement for the creation of a united Europe, in order to restore the old Holy Roman Empire.
Research into the movement for the unification of Europe and the Priory of Sion reveals connections between many of the modern secret societies, including freemasonry, intelligence services and the Vatican.
This underworld of intrigues was briefly in the news when in the eighties of the last century, the scandal of the P2 lodge in Italy erupted.
The hidden knowledge of the past contains secrets from our very distant history that have provided the basis for the theologies of secret societies.
These secrets garner the attention of high-ranking members of secret societies and even secret services. It was precisely these secrets that formed the link between modern conspiratorial societies and ancient mysteries.
We Have Been Criminalized By An Overabundance Of Laws September 4 2024 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / Various “Order may be nothing more than evidence of tyranny. Order may be nothing more than the prohibitions on freedom, the elimination of rights and the suppression of liberty. You are just as unsafe when things are too orderly as when they are disorderly.” - Jerry Day
Governments have learned that laws can be used as revenue and control measures by criminalizing more and more of human activity.
Indeed, in many instances the term “criminal” is now meaningless as law enforcement has become a greater threat to ordinary people than actual criminals.
At an accelerating rate, western governments are criminalizing victimless trivialities for profit and control of the masses.
In Denmark, the laws governing unemployment benefits are more than 36,000 pages and grow by almost seven pages daily on average.
A massive 20,000 laws have been formulated to control ownership and use of guns in the US. The taxfoundation.org has shown that in order to understand and comply with US tax laws one must go through about 80,000 pages.
Civil libertarians protest that prosecutors can charge any American with several crimes every day of the year because there are so many laws and regulations.
As it is impossible for a person to peruse all the required pages in order to comply with the laws, we are all probable criminals. Thus, the word “criminal” has effectively lost its meaning.
Governments not only criminalize behavior for revenue purposes and in order to create a slave prison population to be exploited by private industries.
Governments also legalize crimes, such as gambling for which government prosecuted private interests, and turn them into government sponsored lotteries. There is also evidence that the US government is actively involved in illegal drug trade.
San Jose Mercury investigative reporter Gary Webb found evidence of the CIA’s involvement in the drug trade.
The Mercury published it. The CIA then used its media assets, such as the Washington Post, to carry on a campaign against Webb to discredit him.
Investigative reporters got the message and have not looked into the CIA’s presence in the Afghan opium drug trade despite the massive growth under US occupation of Afghanistan’s opium share of the world market.
The Taliban had suppressed the opium trade, but under US occupation the percentage of the world market supplied by Afghanistan rose from 6% in 2001 to 93% in 2007.
An explosion in drug laws and incarcerations saw the light of the day after President Nixon launched the US War on Drugs in 1971. After 50 years of stable incarceration rates, the number of US prisoners went from 161 per 100,000 population in 1972 to 767 per 100,000 in 2007, almost a fivefold increase.
In 2007, federal and state prisons and local jails held nearly 2.3 million inmates (over 20% of the world’s prisoners), but if parolees and probationers are included, the total US correctional population exceeded 7 million.
Prisoners have become integrated into the corporate world as privately owned prisons and forced labor have become big businesses. Corporations who owe their low labor cost to prison labor have a vested interest in harsh sentences and expansion of the already seemingly infinite number of laws.
Prohibition of drugs does not deter people from using them. If harsh drug laws deterred people from drugs, not many offenders would be found in correctional facilities with a drug offense on their rap sheet.
If we consider the 2015 statistics for people on probation and parole, 25% and 31% respectively had a drug charge as their most serious offense, a total of 1,217,305 people. In 2016, 47% and 15% respectively of federal and state prisoners were in prison for drug violations, their most serious offense.
In 2017, federal agents and state police made 1,632,921 arrests for drugs violations of which 85.4% of these arrests were for possession.
These numbers clearly show that harsher sentences do not deter people from drugs. This was also echoed in a study by the Pew Research Center which showed that drug use, drug arrest, and overdose death had no statistically significant relationship with drug imprisonment.
That is, higher incarceration rates did not deter people from drugs. Drug laws also result in the murders of many people by police in violation of due process.
As police are seldom held accountable for their crimes, the legal and constitutional protections of citizens are being lost.
Moreover, prohibition leads to secondary crimes as indicated by a study that showed “17% of state and 18% of federal prisoners committed their crimes to obtain money for drugs.”
If cigarettes, alcohol and chocolate were outlawed tomorrow, prices would rise, vicious syndicates would appear and people would commit real crimes, including robbery and theft in order to get their preferred stimulant. Prohibition of alcohol in the US and elsewhere produced a new class of criminal activity.
It should come as no surprise that a study by Coyne et al concluded that:
"Prohibition is not only ineffective, but counterproductive, at achieving the goals of policymakers both domestically and abroad … the domestic War on Drugs has contributed to an increase in drug overdoses and fostered and sustained the creation of powerful drug cartels.”
Getting access to drug war expenditures is notoriously difficult, but a 2010 estimate showed that one trillion dollars in tax revenue have been spent on the War on Drugs since 1971.
Nevertheless a multiyear study, published in the British Medical Journal by Werb et al, concluded that “expanding efforts at controlling the global illegal drug market through law enforcement are failing.”
It appears that the US War on Drugs has been a disaster for the average American, but has enriched certain powerful organizations.
Some governments not only participate in the illegal drug trade, but also approve the production and sale of addictive drugs by private businesses.
Many of the drugs that can be purchased on the street from your average drug dealer have been approved by the FDA, including amphetamines, MDMA, opioids, psilocybin and methamphetamine.
One of these drugs is called Adzenys which is a formulation of amphetamine (yes, it is the same drug sold by street dealers), has been approved by the FDA for children.
This amphetamine drug comes in “great-tasting” fruit and candy flavors for children who do not like taking pills. Possible side effects include addiction, heart attack, and death.
Large pharmaceutical corporations which have deep financial ties to policymakers produce and distribute these drugs on a grand scale. The US government cashes in on the drugs via taxation and through campaign contributions from these multibillion dollar industries.
Transparency International concludes:
"Pharmaceutical companies can unduly influence national political systems through their large spending power. Pharmaceutical companies often fund candidates that support their position on key issues.
Outside of elections, the pharmaceutical industry spends vast sums of money lobbying.”
Professor Peter Gøtzsche, former director of the independent Nordic Cochrane Centre, shows in his book, Lethal Medicine and Organized Crime, that legalized drugs kill at least 200,000 Americans and also 200,000 Europeans every year.
Half of those people take their drugs as prescribed, the other half die because of contraindications and accidental overdoses.
Data from the CDC show that in 2017, heroin and cocaine killed 15,482 and 13,942 Americans respectively. However, 88,000 died from alcohol related causes, over 480,000 from tobacco, but zero died from a cannabis overdose.
There are innumerable examples of how laws turn citizens into criminals. On June 1, 2012, in Denmark, anyone without a permit could purchase an air gun with a caliber in excess of 4.5 millimeters.
However, on June 2 such possession brought a prison sentence. Every day governments define the word “criminal” more and more broadly. Eventually, by existence alone we will all be criminals.
Climate Story Is A Good Way Of Expanding Government Power & Climate Deception September 3 2024 | From: Centrist / NZCPR / Various
Professor Ross McKitrick says there may be both financial and political incentives behind the interests that are driving the talk of a climate catastrophe.
While there is a lot of talk about renewables being cheap, Ross McKitrick, professor of economics at the University of Guelph in Canada, gives a simple example of why this is not true.
He draws a parallel with the building of railways. Suppose, for example, that a country wants to build a railroad from one end of the country to the other, and puts out a tender.
Two bids are received, one of which is significantly cheaper than the other. However, the company that submitted the cheaper bid says that after every 10 miles, there is a 3 mile gap in the track.
If such a condition is acceptable, the price is really cheap.
"Well, obviously, the fact that it's cheaper doesn't help, because it's now useless as a railroad.
And electricity systems that are running on wind are useless for the same purpose.
You can't have an electricity system that when the wind dies down, there's no electricity,” he says..
The same kind of problems are true for solar power as well.
To make the power system work, i.e. to have electricity available all the time with renewables, you need either energy storage capacity or some kind of parallel system of its generation.
As far as storage is concerned, there are no good solutions at the moment, says McKitrick. One option, he notes, would be to try to create a lake in the sky and pump enough water up there while the weather is windy to use it as a hydro resource in the absence of wind.
However, this is not a realistic solution. Another option would be batteries. “No one can even conceive today of how you'd have batteries large enough to run an entire country for anything more than 30 seconds or so," he says.
And the third option? In order to have a sufficient and continuous supply of electricity, we would need another more reliable source than wind and solar – gas-fired power plants, for example.
In other words, you will need to add this cost and essentially build duplicate electricity systems that run at the same time. McKitrick says this is inefficient, silly, and comes with a high cost.
“Anything that people talk about is so incredibly expensive that suddenly the cost comparison goes back to where it always was, which is fossil fuel-based systems are inexpensive and 100 percent reliable,” he says.
Nuclear, he adds, is expensive by comparison, but once it is built, the costs of running it are low and it lasts long.
Hydropower is also good and reliable, but it can only be used where natural conditions are right. “We've used them because they're the ones that work. And when you factor in the reliability, they're also the least expensive overall. Wind and solar, they will never be competitive because of the intermittency,” says McKitrick.
Reliability in the electricity system is an important factor in why wind and solar power are not up to the task
Since renewables are uncompetitive, governments subsidise them, or in other words, taxpayers pay for them, everywhere. McKitrick gives the example of his home province of Ontario, Canada.
Around the mid-2000s, Ontario decided to start heavily subsidising wind farm development.
“What they sold to the public was Ontario is now going to be a world leader in manufacturing wind turbines and everybody is going to be lining up to buy wind turbines from us. So there will be a great economic benefit.”
McKitrick recalls this but adds that nothing of the sort happened.
“No, we didn't have any comparative advantage in building wind turbines. We don't have a wind turbine industry in Ontario. We ended up importing all the parts. The turbines went up and the government changed and the subsidies disappeared. The whole industry disappeared,” McKitrick explains.
According to him, this is what always happens when an industry comes into existence not because private investors have an interest in developing it, but because the government is handing out taxpayer money to it.
“It's gone as soon as the subsidies are gone. And as long as the subsidies are in place, it's a drain on your society. It is destroying your national wealth, not building it,” he says.
The energy transition and the deployment of renewable energy is only one part of the climate debate, however. The transition to a decarbonised economy should be preceded by the question of why we are doing it in the first place.
Allegedly, it is because human-emitted CO2 has caused global warming and if we do not stop it, if we continue to emit CO2, we will end up with a climate catastrophe, full of hellfire and extreme weather events.
But in reality, we should be asking, are these claims really accurate?
McKitrick is one of the many scientists trying to allay people's climate anxiety a little and asked the same questions decades ago.
His interest in environmental issues began during his studies at the University of British Columbia in the early 1990s. General interest in environmental issues was on the rise, but there weren't many economists studying the subject or considering the impact of environmental policies on the economy.
“I decided to focus on climate change because Canada was beginning to think about whether a carbon tax would make sense. And the economics was interesting and the data was there to work on it,” he says.
Professor Ross McKitrick focused on environmental and climate topics and their relation to the economy in the early 1990s. Here he is in 2007
In 1997, the Kyoto Protocol was agreed between countries, which set a target for greenhouse gas reductions.
In general, McKitrick says, the discussions at the time were about climate scientists talking about climate-related issues and problems, but they also wanted economists to come in and talk about the economic impact of the policies that were planned.
“There weren't many people working on the topic, so I would often get invited to these kinds of meetings and I'd see the standard science presentation. I didn't really have any opinion on it one way or the other. I just took it all in,” he says.
A Faulty Hockey Stick Graph
But at around the turn of the millennium, at those meetings, weather data collected by the satellites was presented.
"It was, to me, quite an unusual thing, because I'd seen lots of presentations of the surface thermometer data and the description of the global warming problem.
Then somebody said there's also this satellite data that's measuring the layers of the atmosphere where all this is supposed to be happening and it doesn't show any warming. Which is unusual,” he says, adding that for some reason it was not considered important.
“I thought, wait a second, that's an important point. We should understand this before we go rushing into some of these expensive policies. We need to ask how solid the science here is,” McKitrick says.
He then became interested in climate science itself, beyond the economic impacts of any climate policy in particular, and looked at the data provided by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example.
“Immediately I was struck by the fact that the statistical analysis wasn't very impressive. That they were doing really rudimentary analyses and it was clear that they didn't have as much training in statistics as an economist would,”he says.
In 2003, he was contacted by Stephen McIntyre, a mathematician who was working in the mining sector and was interested in replicating paleoclimate studies.
He would later start the popular website ClimateAudit.org, which critically assessed the statistical analysis behind climate science claims.
McIntyre explained that he had been trying to understand the data on which University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann et al created their famous hockey stick graph showing a steep rise in temperatures on Earth in the second half of the 20th century.
Together with McKitrick they then analysed the underlying data that climate scientists had obtained primarily by studying tree rings offering proxy data of the planet's climate history.
McKitrick and McIntyre discovered a significant number of errors in the work of Mann et al. “These are long paleoclimate series, mostly tree rings, things like that, and just graphing them up they didn't look like hockey sticks. And most of the data series just had no trend at all. And a lot of them even go down in the 20th century,” he says.
Sometimes it is said, with irony, that the climate crisis is ‘Mann made’. University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael E. Mann
They were able to reconstruct the steps that Mann and his co-authors had taken in analysing the data, and they saw that, in essence, Mann et al had only used the data that showed warming.
That is, McKitrick says, Mann and his colleagues extracted 20 out of 400 data series – the ones from which it could be deduced that the rise in temperatures in the second half of the 20th century resembled the image of a hockey stick when plotted on a graph.
Understandably, presenting data in this selective way is in itself a bad enough way to conduct research, but McKitrick adds that the selected data itself was also problematic in the Mann et al work.
“The additional problem is those 20 series used are the bristlecone pines, which are known in the field not to be good temperature proxies,” he explains, adding that, ultimately, a graph of any shape could be produced on climate history in this way.
The same problems apply to similar hockey stick graphs produced later.
"You have no way statistically to say that a hockey stick shape is the preferred outcome versus some completely different shape”McKitrick says.
Mann Versus Steyn: The Flawed Hockey Stick Still Lives On
McKitrick and McIntyre published their first paper on the hockey stick in 2003 and the work of Mann et al has been criticised many times since by others, but that doesn't mean that this graph of temperature rise isn't presented as truth time and time again.
A good example of this is a recent court case in Washington DC, USA, in which McKitrick was involved as a witness. It is a well-known case in which the same climate scientist, Michael Mann, sued Canadian author Mark Steyn, accusing him of defamation.
The case concerned an article by Steyn in The National Review in 2012. In addition to Steyn, Mann sued another author, Rand Simberg, whose earlier article had been commented on by Steyn in his own. Simberg had written of Mann as 'the Jerry Sandusky of climate science'.
Sandusky was a coach at the University of Pennsylvania – the same university where Mann works – who was convicted in June 2012 of child molestation.
A subsequent independent report into the university's actions revealed that the university's administration had treated the matter with abject disregard, and rather wanted to cover it up for fear of discrediting the school in the public eye.
But why did Simberg draw a parallel with this case? Mann was one of the main actors in the 2009 Climategate email scandal when a whistleblower or hacker leaked emails stored at the computer server of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit.
These emails contained 15 years of communications between the most prominent climate scientists in the world with Mann being one of them. And they were embarrassing. The emails provided insight into the practices that ranged from bad professionalism to fraudulent science. Bias, data manipulation, dodging freedom of information requests, and trying to subvert the peer-review process were uncovered.
However, the reason for drawing parallels with Sandusky's ugly affair was that the university had also launched an investigation into Mann, but found no misuse of data.
“Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except for instead molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science that could have dire economic consequences for the nation and planet,” Simberg wrote on the blog of a libertarian think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Steyn quoted Simberg in his article but added that while he himself would not have compared Mann to a child molester in this way, there is a point to what Simberg is saying
"Michael Mann was the man behind the fraudulent climate-change 'hockey-stick' graph, the very ringmaster of the tree-ring circus,”he wrote.
More than 10 years after the publication of the articles, Mann and his lawyers finally succeeded in taking the case to a jury in Washington, DC, and the court concluded that Mann had been libeled.
Simberg and Steyn were found to have made false statements and were ordered to pay Mann $1 each to compensate them.
However, as the comments were also found to have been written with 'maliciousness, spite, ill will, vengeance or deliberate intent to harm', punitive damages were awarded – Simberg had to pay $1,000 and Steyn $1 million. Steyn vowed to appeal the decision.
Author Mark Steyn was found to have made false statements about Michael Mann, although it seems as if the decision was more of a political nature and was less related to facts
McKitrick comments that, in his view, both the defence lawyers and the experts involved, including himself, did a good job, but that the court is simply a terribly bad place to debate climate science.
And in the end, the court was not deciding whether the hockey stick graph was flawed or not, it was clearly a political issue. “In a town like Washington DC, which leans very heavily Democrat, the plaintiff's lawyer, Michael Mann's lawyer, made it clear that the defendants were just evil right-wing Republican types, probably Trump supporters, and that's all the jury heard in the end,” he comments.
Reasonable Views on Climate Do Not Reach the Mass Media
The critique of the hockey stick graph is, of course, not the only work McKitrick and colleagues have done and published on temperatures.
For example, as early as 2004, he and climatologist Patrick Michaels examined temperature records from the late 20th century and found that they were significantly biased, i.e. they did not remove the warming effect of human activity and urbanisation on temperatures.
In addition, McKitrick has been a reviewer and provided formal commentary on the reports of the IPCC. While these kinds of comments point out shortcomings that could be corrected by the report's authors, McKitrick says that the recent trend has been to disregard them altogether, with many scientists not seeing a point to send their comments in at all.
On the other hand, it is important to understand what these IPCC reports actually say.
If the UN Secretary-General claims that we are on the fast track to a climate hell, can the IPCC confirm this?
McKitrick says no. For example, there is a lot of talk in the media about heat waves, major storms, and other extreme weather events, and that climate change will make them more frequent and worse.
But McKitrick says not to take it too seriously what the press says. “Most of what you hear, at least most of what I hear in the media, is ridiculous."
The normal, sensible, scientifically sound work never makes the papers. What makes the papers is the far out, outrageous, speculative stuff about the worst case scenarios.
So don't go by what you're seeing in the papers,” he says, adding that the IPCC reports do not confirm an increase in extreme weather events.
"There is some evidence that heat waves have gotten worse, although not in the United States. The 1930s was far worse than anything we've had since. But the major forms of extreme weather, they're not really trends and we don't really expect there to be as a result of CO2 emissions,”McKitrick says.
He notes that the IPCC reports also do not use terms such as climate crisis or climate catastrophe. This is the message being given by Guterres and other political figures.
What Role Does C02 Play?
As presented by political figures and portrayed as the scientific consensus in the media, one of the main reasons for climate change is human emissions of CO2. But the question actually is if CO2 is even capable of doing anything to change the climate. According to McKitrick, we have known of the warming effect of this gas for 150 years.
But can it really have a big effect on the climate? “How will that affect our weather systems and life on Earth? That's where all the uncertainties are. And most of those uncertainties are still quite large.
There's been very little progress in answering that question. Is it a large effect or a small effect?
"There's very good evidence for a small effect,” he argues while adding that current developments in Asia, particularly in China and India, where CO2 emissions are increasing, particularly because of coal-fired power generation, which is growing rapidly, could still be a likely cause for concern exactly because it is happening so quickly.
On the other hand, McKitrick says, fossil fuel use is essential for these societies to increase their prosperity.
"Wealth and income around the world have gone up a lot and in the process, they've made people much less vulnerable to environmental catastrophes and problems of all kinds.
So as the CO2 level is going up in the air, so are the incomes or the resources to deal with whatever challenges we encounter in the natural world, and weather vulnerability and things like that.
So there's another side even to that part,” McKitrick says.
He adds
that in the context where Asia is rapidly increasing its CO2 emissions, zeroing out CO2 emissions in the West would not have much effect, even if we really think that reducing CO2 would help prevent climate change. Reduction by us is offset by the increase in Asia.
McKitrick points out that more CO2 has positive effects as well that are not being talked about.
“It's improved agricultural productivity and it's turning deserts into green spaces. And so this aspect of it, again, doesn't make the headlines, doesn't get discussed in the news, but it's a very real phenomenon,” he says.
Professor Ross McKitrick recently gave an interview to Freedom Research
In particular, McKitrick says, it is worth pointing out that the role of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is also the basis of the climate models that are used to predict our climate future and that are also used by the IPCC in its assessments.
There are dozens of these models, and they vary in their predictions of global warming, but McKitrick says that in broad terms they all have one thing in common: They all expect too much warming.
These models have been run for decades and today, in black and white, it is possible to see that they are not consistent with reality.
McKitrick asks, for example, would we take a stock market analyst who consistently misses the mark in a serious manner? And how long – until bankruptcy? Yet somehow, similarly faulty climate models are still going ahead.
Too Little Climate Debate and Too Much Politics
All in all, in McKitrick’s view, the whole climate debate today is driven by various interests which are both financial and political. And it is these interests that are driving the talk of a catastrophe and of a solution in the rapid development of renewable energy with taxpayers' money.
On the government side, however, this also looks like a good way of expanding power. “Climate is a great story for doing that, because it means every single aspect of life.
You now need to have regulatory supervision and government oversight on every single thing that people are doing,” he notes. So clearly the climate debate has also become a political issue.
And that includes universities and science as a whole. McKitrick says that Western universities today have become very left-wing, and this is also affecting scientists and their research.
“I think a lot of them do secretly think that I would like it if the papers that I publish are beneficial to politicians on the left, and I resent it if the work I publish is beneficial to politicians on the right. So I might even shape my publication and research work with that in mind,” he says.
Scientific journals also make it difficult to publish work critical of 'accepted' climate science, while reputable scientific journals accept poor-quality work based on the basic tenets of climate alarmism – for example, McKitrick says, work that argues that climate change could cause frog extinction.
Any sensible work on the same subject, arguing, for example, that frogs actually benefit from a warmer climate, will probably be published in a smaller journal. Perhaps rather than restricting freedom of expression, he says, this is more about 'the freedom of reach' or limiting the reach of messages that are deemed
'unacceptable'. “For people who question the consensus, it's harder for them to get a message out,” he says, adding that it's even more difficult in the mainstream media, where climate crisis activists attack anyone who disagrees with their vision of a catastrophe and the mainstream press is usually on their side.
“So hopefully, at a certain point, people who follow this issue realize that, yes, there's a filter,” McKitrick says. He adds that the filter is not complete and that it is still possible for anyone who is interested to find factual information to actually read. This is something he recommends for everyone to do.
This month the Coalition Government has released two new reports on Climate Change – a strategy paper Here and an emissions reduction discussion document Here (submissions close on August 12).
On the surface, apart from some differences around the treatment of agriculture, there is little to distinguish them from something a Labour Government could have produced.
Their alarmist narrative implies man-made global warming causes adverse weather events, and they remain committed to the economically destructive goal of net zero by 2050.
All of this provides yet more ammunition to those who believe that National is Labour light!
A contest of ideas is fundamental to the proper functioning of our Westminster democratic system. Yet, we have a Parliament that has no counter view on the key public policy issue of climate change.
It appears virtually everyone in Parliament has been captured by this extremist ideology, with little tolerance for dissent. That was evident during the last Parliament when National’s Maureen Pugh was forced to back-peddle for challenging then Climate Minister James Shaw to provide evidence for his claim that humans had caused Cyclone Gabrielle.
This faith-based acceptance of man-made global warming is despite two fundamental facts that confront such extremism.
The first is that with 97 percent of carbon dioxide produced from natural sources including oceans, rocks, and volcanoes, how can human be responsible for dangerous global warming when only three percent is produced by mankind?
And second relates to the fact that since the warming effect of our main greenhouse gases is logarithmic – which means that as their concentration in the atmosphere increases, their warming effect diminishes significantly – how is catastrophic warming even possible?
As Geologist Gregory Wrightstone, an Expert Reviewer for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change explains, “Climate scientists have determined that the warming effect of each molecule of CO2 decreases significantly (logarithmically) as its concentration increases.
This is one reason why there was no runaway greenhouse warming when the concentration of CO2 was approaching 20 times that of today. This inconvenient fact, important though it is, is kept very well hidden and is rarely mentioned, for it undermines the theory of future catastrophic climate change.”
It’s the same story for methane – the warming effect diminishes logarithmically as concentration increases, making it impossible to produce dangerous warming.
Given these inconvenient facts, why are we in a situation where New Zealanders who believe climate extremism has gone too far and that Labour’s Zero Carbon Act is such a danger to families, businesses, and the economy that it should be scrapped, have no voice in Parliament?
A US report published by the Rasmussen polling company in January, may shed some light on the reasons.
Their survey highlighted a significant difference in attitudes to global warming between the ‘Elites’ who influence the political agenda and run the country, and everyday Americans:
"The people who run America, or at least think they do, live in a bubble of their own construction. They’ve isolated themselves to such a degree their views about what should be happening in this country differ widely from the average American’s”
Asked if they would favour “rationing of gas, meat, and electricity” to fight climate change, 77 percent of the ‘Elites’ said yes, compared with 28 percent of regular people.
Asked whether they would personally pay $500 more in taxes and higher costs to fight climate change, 70 percent of the Elites said yes, versus 28 percent of everyone else.
And when it comes to banning modern conveniences such as gas stoves, air conditioning, SUVs, and non-essential air travel, between half and two-thirds of the Elites favour such bans compared to fewer than one in four ordinary Americans: “The Elites are wildly out of touch with the American people. To fight climate change, the Elites strongly support banning things that are part of the fabric of life in America.”
Does New Zealand have a similar problem? Does our ruling ‘Elite’ operate in a ‘bubble’ far removed from the views of ordinary people?
Or is our situation more akin to the views expressed by British historian Sir Niall Ferguson, a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute, who claims the climate change phenomenon is “A bogus ideology that hardly anyone really believes in, but everyone has to parrot unless they want to be labelled dissidents – sorry, I mean deplorables?”
Is fear of being labelled “climate deniers” – to be pilloried by the press and scoffed at by opponents – the real reason New Zealand Parliamentarians are too scared to challenge this ideology?
It used to be a similar story with the race debate, of course. Few Parliamentarians were prepared to speak out against the attempted takeover by the tribal elite under the Ardern administration, for fear of being labelled “racists”.
But once He Puapua was revealed and the public understood the threat to democracy, the mood changed, and opposition Parliamentarians finally found their voice, and their spine.
The legacy media must accept some responsibility for the current state of affairs. When climate change first emerged as a public concern, the media acted as the ‘Fourth Estate’, publishing both sides of an argument and leaving the public to make up their own mind.
But once Labour became government, Stuff took the lead through their “Save the Planet” project and stopped publishing alternative views: “We’ll feature a wide range of views as part of this project, but we won’t include climate change ‘scepticism’. Including denialism wouldn’t be ‘balanced’; it’d be a dangerous waste of time.”
Sir Niall Ferguson is bucking the trend by speaking out: “As for climate change, the world is now awash in Chinese electric vehicles, batteries, and solar cells, all mass-produced with the help of state subsidies and coal-burning power stations.
Our policy elite’s preoccupation with climate change has resulted in utter strategic incoherence by comparison.
The fact is that China has been responsible for three-quarters of the 34 percent increase in carbon dioxide emissions since Greta Thunberg’s birth (2003), and two-thirds of the 48 percent increase in coal consumption.”
Sir Niall is right. The public are faced with utter policy incoherence.
Why would New Zealand, a tiny country that is already one of the cleanest and greenest in the world need to do much more? We already produce 80 percent of our electricity from renewable energy sources.
We have the most efficient farmers in the world. The country is awash with trees. And we are so ‘green’ that urban development and roading covers less than one percent of our land area.
And the answer is that we wouldn’t need to do much more – if the Coalition Government corrected two fundamental errors in their climate modelling that are making New Zealand’s situation appear worse than it really is.
It’s a simple problem. The Labour Government’s Zero Carbon agenda uses two key metrics in their policy work that are wrong.
The first is their continued use of the IPCC’s ‘worst case’ emissions scenario called Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which predicts such extreme sea level rise and flooding that it’s been discredited for policy-making.
As planning consultant and former Massey University lecturer, Katharine Moody, explains: “For years, I have observed a small group of local experts pushing the worst-case emission scenario, RCP-8.5 on businesses and home owners across New Zealand.
And yes, councils have already been taken to court on this matter; and yes, the use of these extreme scenarios have already been found to lack scientific rigour on merit review.
RCP-8.5 is the climate scenario that… nobody really believes in ̶ except for, it seems, a small cohort of experts who have secured undue influence on the Ministry for the Environment.
These ‘high end’ scenarios should have no place in legally-binding, regulatory decision-making, such as district planning, or in the assessment of building and resource consents.
To my mind, there is no remedy aside from expunging all reference to RCP-8.5 from local government guidance and hence, from current planning practice. The cost to individuals, business entities and communities of ratepayers has been more than enormous already.”
Canterbury University Professor and lead IPCC author Dave Frame is also highly critical of RCP-8.5:
"If developers are required to build to standards that anticipate more frequent, more severe flooding and fires and other events, then they will have to spend more. And that cost will be passed on to the purchasers and tenants of new homes and businesses.
“If they build in a safety margin that’s actually contingent on a scenario that nobody really believes, then it’s bad policy practice. And I also think it opens the door to legal challenge."
While the Parliamentary Under-Secretary Simon Court is well aware of the problem, warning Councils that picking extreme climate scenarios “risks lawsuits by requiring developers to design and build to overly stringent climate warming models”, to date his Government has failed to ensure that RCP-8.5 is removed from all government guidance.
And, as a result of NIWA’s discredited RCP-8.5 predictions of excessive sea level rise and flooding being incorporated into local authority plans throughout the country, the insurance industry is having a field day increasing premiums for property owners.
This is not only leaving some homeowners extremely vulnerable – unable to afford to insure their homes – but this escalation in insurance premiums has outstripped general inflation and is adding significant cost pressure to the economy that’s keeping interest rates higher for longer and penalising all New Zealanders.
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, energy expert Bryan Leyland, calls on the Government to do the right thing:
"Look at the emissions scenario RCP-8.5 which is used as a key input into the computer models that postulate bigger floods, major sea level rises and the like.
The United Nations has said that the RCP-8.5 scenario is obsolete and extreme and should not be used for policy-making. In spite of that it is used by most organisations in New Zealand when setting policies associated with climate change.
If, instead, the scenarios RCP-2.0 or RCP-4.5 that are currently advocated by the UN, International Energy Agency and others were used, the models would project a modest level of warming that can be handled by adapting to whatever a changing climate visits upon us.”
The second major flaw in the Government’s policy framework is their claim that methane is twenty-eight times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. The UN has accepted that 28 overstates the effect of methane on global surface temperature and has corrected it to a factor of seven. Yet our Government continues to use 28 in their projections.
Since methane, which is released when cows and sheep chew their cuds as part of an ancient natural cycle that can be traced back to the dinosaurs, makes up roughly half of New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions profile, if the correct value of seven was used, instead of 28, our total emissions would fall to a level close to our 2050 target.
This would allow money earmarked for climate initiatives to be deployed into measures that would improve community resilience to extreme weather – such as rebuilding flood-damaged infrastructure, reinforcing stop banks and seawalls, ensuring rivers and harbours are well dredged, and properly addressing the problem created by forestry slash.
However, using the incorrect methane value, the Coalition intends pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into silly ideas like carbon capture, methane vaccines, carbon forestry, and 10,000 electric car charging stations for an industry that’s in decline.
Common sense tells us that faulty assumptions lead to faulty outcomes. Unfortunately, the magnitude of the errors is significant – and the consequences, so horrendously expensive and far reaching, that they will impact on the lives of all New Zealanders.
I will leave the last word to the influential American economist Thomas Sowell:
“Would you bet your paycheck on a weather forecast for tomorrow? If not then why should this country bet billions on global warming predictions that have even less foundation?”
Why Anti-Authoritarians Are Diagnosed As Mentally Ill September 2 2024 | From: MadInAmerica
In my career as a psychologist, I have talked with hundreds of people previously diagnosed by other professionals with oppositional defiant disorder, attention deficit hyperactive disorder, anxiety disorder and other psychiatric illnesses, and I am struck by (1) how many of those diagnosed are essentially anti-authoritarians, and (2) how those professionals who have diagnosed them are not.
Anti-authoritarians question whether an authority is a legitimate one before taking that authority seriously.
Evaluating the legitimacy of authorities includes assessing whether or not authorities actually know what they are talking about, are honest, and care about those people who are respecting their authority.
And when anti-authoritarians assess an authority to be illegitimate, they challenge and resist that authority - sometimes aggressively and sometimes passive-aggressively, sometimes wisely and sometimes not.
Some activists lament how few anti-authoritarians there appear to be in the United States. One reason could be that many natural anti-authoritarians are now psychopathologized and medicated before they achieve political consciousness of society’s most oppressive authorities.
Why Mental Health Professionals Diagnose Anti-Authoritarians with Mental Illness
Gaining acceptance into graduate school or medical school and achieving a PhD or MD and becoming a psychologist or psychiatrist means jumping through many hoops, all of which require much behavioral and attentional compliance to authorities, even to those authorities that one lacks respect for.
The selection and socialization of mental health professionals tends to breed out many anti-authoritarians. Having steered the higher-education terrain for a decade of my life, I know that degrees and credentials are primarily badges of compliance.
Those with extended schooling have lived for many years in a world where one routinely conforms to the demands of authorities. Thus for many MDs and PhDs, people different from them who reject this attentional and behavioral compliance appear to be from another world - a diagnosable one.
I have found that most psychologists, psychiatrists, and other mental health professionals are not only extraordinarily compliant with authorities but also unaware of the magnitude of their obedience.
And it also has become clear to me that the anti-authoritarianism of their patients creates enormous anxiety for these professionals, and their anxiety fuels diagnoses and treatments.
In graduate school, I discovered that all it took to be labeled as having “issues with authority” was to not kiss up to a director of clinical training whose personality was a combination of Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich, and Howard Cosell.
When I was told by some faculty that I had “issues with authority,” I had mixed feelings about being so labeled. On the one hand, I found it quite amusing, because among the working-class kids whom I had grown up with, I was considered relatively compliant with authorities.
After all, I had done my homework, studied, and received good grades. However, while my new “issues with authority” label made me grin because I was now being seen as a “bad boy,” it also very much concerned me about just what kind of a profession that I had entered.
Specifically, if somebody such as myself was being labeled with “issues with authority,” what were they calling the kids I grew up with who paid attention to many things that they cared about but didn’t care enough about school to comply there? Well, the answer soon became clear.
Mental Illness Diagnoses for Anti-Authoritarians
A 2009 Psychiatric Times article titled “ADHD & ODD: Confronting the Challenges of Disruptive Behavior” reports that “disruptive disorders,” which include attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and opposition defiant disorder (ODD), are the most common mental health problem of children and teenagers.
ADHD is defined by poor attention and distractibility, poor self-control and impulsivity, and hyperactivity. ODD is defined as a “a pattern of negativistic, hostile, and defiant behavior without the more serious violations of the basic rights of others that are seen in conduct disorder”; and ODD symptoms include “often actively defies or refuses to comply with adult requests or rules” and “often argues with adults.”
Psychologist Russell Barkley, one of mainstream mental health’s leading authorities on ADHD, says that those afflicted with ADHD have deficits in what he calls “rule-governed behavior,” as they are less responsive to rules of established authorities and less sensitive to positive or negative consequences.
ODD young people, according to mainstream mental health authorities, also have these so-called deficits in rule-governed behavior, and so it is extremely common for young people to have a “duel diagnosis” of AHDH and ODD.
Do we really want to diagnose and medicate everyone with “deficits in rule-governed behavior”?
Albert Einstein, as a youth, would have likely received an ADHD diagnosis, and maybe an ODD one as well. Albert didn’t pay attention to his teachers, failed his college entrance examinations twice, and had difficulty holding jobs.
However, Einstein biographer Ronald Clark (Einstein: The Life and Times) asserts that Albert’s problems did not stem from attention deficits but rather from his hatred of authoritarian, Prussian discipline in his schools.
Einstein said, “The teachers in the elementary school appeared to me like sergeants and in the Gymnasium the teachers were like lieutenants.”
At age 13, Einstein read Kant’s difficult Critique of Pure Reason - because Albert was interested in it. Clark also tells us Einstein refused to prepare himself for his college admissions as a rebellion against his father’s “unbearable” path of a “practical profession.”
After he did enter college, one professor told Einstein, “You have one fault; one can’t tell you anything.” The very characteristics of Einstein that upset authorities so much were exactly the ones that allowed him to excel.
By today’s standards, Saul Alinsky, the legendary organizer and author of Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals, would have certainly been diagnosed with one or more disruptive disorders.
Recalling his childhood, Alinsky said, “I never thought of walking on the grass until I saw a sign saying ‘Keep off the grass.’ Then I would stomp all over it.” Alinsky also recalls a time when he was ten or eleven and his rabbi was tutoring him in Hebrew:
"One particular day I read three pages in a row without any errors in pronunciation, and suddenly a penny fell onto the Bible . . .
Then the next day the rabbi turned up and he told me to start reading. And I wouldn’t; I just sat there in silence, refusing to read. He asked me why I was so quiet, and I said, “This time it’s a nickel or nothing.”
He threw back his arm and slammed me across the room."
Many people with severe anxiety and/or depression are also anti-authoritarians.
Often a major pain of their lives that fuels their anxiety and/or depression is fear that their contempt for illegitimate authorities will cause them to be financially and socially marginalized; but they fear that compliance with such illegitimate authorities will cause them existential death.
I have also spent a great deal of time with people who had at one time in their lives had thoughts and behavior that were so bizarre that they were extremely frightening for their families and even themselves; they were diagnosed with schizophrenia and other psychoses, but have fully recovered and have been, for many years, leading productive lives.
Among this population, I have not met one person whom I would not consider a major anti-authoritarian. Once recovered, they have learned to channel their anti-authoritarianism into more constructive political ends, including reforming mental health treatment.
Many anti-authoritarians who earlier in their lives were diagnosed with mental illness tell me that once they were labeled with a psychiatric diagnosis, they got caught in a dilemma.
Authoritarians, by definition, demand unquestioning obedience, and so any resistance to their diagnosis and treatment created enormous anxiety for authoritarian mental health professionals; and professionals, feeling out of control, labeled them “noncompliant with treatment,” increased the severity of their diagnosis, and jacked up their medications.
This was enraging for these anti-authoritarians, sometimes so much so that they reacted in ways that made them appear even more frightening to their families.
There are anti-authoritarians who use psychiatric drugs to help them function, but they often reject psychiatric authorities’ explanations for why they have difficulty functioning.
So, for example, they may take Adderall (an amphetamine prescribed for ADHD), but they know that their attentional problem is not a result of a biochemical brain imbalance but rather caused by a boring job.
And similarly, many anti-authoritarians in highly stressful environments will occasionally take prescribed benzodiazepines such as Xanax even though they believe it would be safer to occasionally use marijuana but can’t because of drug testing on their job
It has been my experience that many anti-authoritarians labeled with psychiatric diagnoses usually don’t reject all authorities, simply those they’ve assessed to be illegitimate ones, which just happens to be a great deal of society’s authorities.
Maintaining the Societal Status Quo
Americans [Westerners] have been increasingly socialized to equate inattention, anger, anxiety, and immobilizing despair with a medical condition, and to seek medical treatment rather than political remedies.
What better way to maintain the status quo than to view inattention, anger, anxiety, and depression as biochemical problems of those who are mentally ill rather than normal reactions to an increasingly authoritarian society.
The reality is that depression is highly associated with societal and financial pains. One is much more likely to be depressed if one is unemployed, underemployed, on public assistance, or in debt (for documentation, see “400% Rise in Anti-Depressant Pill Use”).
And ADHD labeled kids do pay attention when they are getting paid, or when an activity is novel, interests them, or is chosen by them (documented in my book Commonsense Rebellion).
In an earlier dark age, authoritarian monarchies partnered with authoritarian religious institutions. When the world exited from this dark age and entered the Enlightenment, there was a burst of energy.
Much of this revitalization had to do with risking skepticism about authoritarian and corrupt institutions and regaining confidence in one’s own mind.
We are now in another dark age, only the institutions have changed. Americans [Westerners] desperately need anti-authoritarians to question, challenge, and resist new illegitimate authorities and regain confidence in their own common sense.
In every generation there will be authoritarians and anti-authoritarians. While it is unusual in American history for anti-authoritarians to take the kind of effective action that inspires others to successfully revolt, every once in a while a Tom Paine, Crazy Horse, or Malcolm X come along.
So authoritarians financially marginalize those who buck the system, they criminalize anti-authoritarianism, they psychopathologize anti-authoritarians, and they market drugs for their “cure.”
In contrast, the rapid expansion of railway transport systems across Eurasia has significantly changed the tribal mindset of the population there, so much so that they are now looking up to how and what products they could sell the global market with, rather than be forever stuck in the limited potential of their own domestic patrons.
The free access to information, and the free flowing conversation in social networks, have brought down the exceptionalist narrative that “white is good and colored is bad.”
Now, the Western population is beginning to appreciate the different cultures in Asia and realize how much they all share the same aspirations and dreams for a better world.
Those same aspirations that run counter to their own governments’ foreign and domestic policies.
“No One Trusts the US Government, Not Even the American People
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts | Global Research, February 24, 2019
Atlantic Bridge, a German front organization set up by Washington to propagandize Germans to serve Washington, has failed in the job.
The latest survey conducted by the front group shows that 85% of Germans are alienated from the US. The front group’s chairman acknowledged “the great lost of trust in the United States.”
By a margin of two to one, Germans see China as a more reliable partner for Germany than the US.
Americans have come to the same conclusion about the US government as have Germans. The latest Gallup Poll reveals that Americans regard America’s top problem to be the US government.
Twice as many respondents regard the US government to be the top problem than regard immigration, and Americans see Washington to be six times the problem that health care is.
As many have concluded, the United States is not a democracy. It is an oligarchy ruled by monied private interest groups. (See this)
There has clearly been a revolution in America. An aristocracy has overthrown the people. Democracy is dead. We live in the Oligarchy United Against the People.”
The deteriorating influence of Western diplomacy is not being observed only in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and other countries in the Middle East that were all recipients of the “War of Terror,” but also in India and Pakistan, two neighbors that are being pushed to war once again by the merchants of death solely for profit in arms sales and subsequent exploitation of their natural resources, because 50 tons of Syrian gold is simply not enough.
“Russia Officially Returns to South Asia by Offering to Host Indo-Pak Peace Talks
Russia’s 21st-century grand strategy of becoming the supreme “balancing” force in Afro-Eurasia is one major step closer to fruition after Foreign Minister Lavrov offered to host peace talks between India and Pakistan, proving that Russia’s refusal to take sides between its decades-long and newfound partners is part and parcel of President Putin’s pragmatic approach to regional affairs.
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov sent shockwaves through South Asia on Thursday by announcing his country’s intent to host peace talks between India and Pakistan if they wish for it to do so, thereby heralding Russia’s return to the region and putting it one major step closer towards fulfilling its 21st-century grand strategy of becoming the supreme “balancing” force in Afro-Eurasia…
All told, it’s nothing short of a game-changing geopolitical development that Russia would offer to host peace talks between India and Pakistan because it proves just how wildly successful President Putin’s “balancing” strategy has been thus far, considering how confident Moscow is that it can constructively apply this model to the two nuclear-armed Great Powers in South Asia.
Russia has truly returned to the region and is poised to play an even larger role in it over the coming years, which will enable Moscow to more assertively counter the US’ plans to destabilize South Asia and therefore ensure the success of the emerging Multipolar World Order."
This article was originally published on Eurasia Future.
Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare.
It’s no wonder that the Foreign Minister of Venezuela, Jorge Arreaza has been using the UN platform to voice the truth on the ground and destroy the black propaganda coming from the Western media.
The UN General Assembly itself is now headed by a reformist.
Hailed as the “best Prime Minister for 30 years” by his own people, Portuguese UN Sec. Gen. Antonio Guterres made it a point early on to “Let us resolve to put peace first,” in 2017.
Guterres was elected to the position at “the first time candidates for Secretary-General had to present their platform in public hearings in the UN General Assembly, a process during which Guterres emerged as a much stronger candidate than had been initially expected, given that he fit the bill on neither the gender nor the geographic scores.”
The prevailing pragmatic mindset in the US leadership is working positively for Venezuela…
“Venezuela’s Foreign Minister Arreaza Holds UN Marathon for Peace: Usurper Guaido Urges Military Intervention and War
In a herculean effort to prevent war, and protect the integrity of his country, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza held a breathtaking schedule of events at the United Nations, including a meeting with the Secretary-General, consultations with the envoys of 60 member states supporting Venezuela’s sovereignty, a press conference the evening of February 22, speaking at a Security Council meeting February 26, and presenting an address at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on February 27.
Arreaza’s encyclopedic knowledge of history is one of his powerful assets, as he patiently clarified to reporters, at last Friday’s press conference, the reality of US instigated economic warfare underlying Venezuela’s current crisis.
At one bizarre moment, a European reporter, asked, Mussolini-style, about a report that Venezuelan armed forces shot an unarmed indigenous person, and compared the incident to “what happened in China.” Arreaza asked whether the reporter had seen the incident, and, evading Arreaza’s question the reporter continued:
“Is your government giving specific orders to shoot unarmed people, and what will happen to those who refuse to comply with these orders?”
The stupefying question, less a query, and more unsubstantiated innuendo, was asked with such arrogance and grandiosity that Arreaza, fully aware of the insinuation intended, replied:
“Your question is full of venom and very poisonous. The army of Bolivar has never had orders to fire on the civilian population, and you should be the first to assess the reliability of false ‘reports,’ and false flag operations. It is your responsibility as a reporter to be smart, astute, and delve into the truth, and recognize propaganda.”
What was unmistakable, throughout last week, and at yesterday’s Security Council meeting, is Arreaza’s passionate effort to prevent the bloodbath of military confrontation, reiterating the historic context of the Venezuelan crisis to reporters and diplomats who may have a stunted recognition of the barbarous – but often ingenious – methods used by Washington to impose domination and de facto slavery on nations in Latin America.
Theirs is virtually a scientific formula – economic destabilization, a relentless media disinformation campaign, and if the current target – in this case Venezuela – does not submit to domination, ultimately military force will be decisive in inflicting regime change, installing a docile, subservient puppet. The horrific example of the overthrow of Allende in Chile is merely one example.
… The Wall Street Journal on February 25, 2019 headlined: “Maduro’s Opposition Urges Military Force in Venezuela,” making inescapable that the Venezuelan opposition is either lobotomized, or heedless of the bloodbath military action will culminate in. The New York Times on February 25, page 4, has a large photograph of “innocent, unarmed” protesters preparing Molotov cocktails on Sunday along the Venezuela-Colombia border.
The Security Council meeting Monday, February 25, was preceded by an asinine lineup of eight members of the European Union, demanding that Venezuela immediately call elections.
Evidently ignorant of the fact that former U.S. President Jimmy Carter characterized the Venezuelan electoral process as “one of the best in the world,” and the US electoral process as “one of the worst,” these European proxies were better suited to comic parody in a Mozart opera than to intervention in matters of war and peace.
And, of course, who is to determine that, even if new elections are called, they will be either free or fair. Obviously, the result will be as Washington directs its European colonies to approve.
It would not be possible to avoid reference to Marco Rubio’s gruesome tweet, threatening Maduro, and not incidentally Kim Jong Un, with hideous death by torture, including sodomization with bayonets before his murder.
These horrific actions were committed by those “vulnerable, peaceful Libyans” for whom the UN Security Council, enacting Resolution 1973 and “Responsibity to Protect,” in the unforgettable words of Indian Ambassador Puri, were authorized to “bomb the hell out of Libya.”
It is very likely that the Venezuelan opposition, especially those thugs, photographed by The New York Times on February 23 preparing Molotov cocktails, are the same breed as those Libyan monsters who, among other tortures, sodomized President Khadaffi with a bayonet before murdering him.
No doubt Kim Jong Un will duly note this threat, and perhaps Maduro will ponder Khadafi’s mistake in surrendering his nuclear program.
Today’s Security Council meeting, with the failure of both the US and Russian drafts, included Elliot Abrams regurgitating the same dangerous and deadly platitudes as always. The double veto of the US draft, by both China and Russia, saved the Security Council from endorsing another catastrophic military intervention."
Carla Stea is Global Research’s correspondent at United Nations Headquarters, New York, N.Y.
All of the above are reasons to be hopeful about our shared future.
This planet is not losing all its Good Men yet. But we have to do our part to appreciate what they’ve done so far, and to continue exposing the Deep State high crimes everywhere, so we can proactively prevent new ones from occurring.
Journalism Has A Problem - It’s Called Capitalism! + Media Serve The Governors, Not The Governed[Historical But Relevant] August 31 2024 | From: Scoop / ConsortiumNews / Various
Much has been written of late about the ‘problems’ of the Journalism industry and in particular the impacts of consolidation and layoffs on local news coverage.
However, I would propose that to the extent that Journalism does in fact have a problem, that problem is simply an extension of the market failures of Capitalism.
And to the extent that solutions exist, they must be solutions that allow journalism to move outside of the broken system that has caused this situation.
For this reason, a resurgence in more engaged and community focused local journalism offers hope for a way out of this situation.
Nobody with any sense really wants to go back to the ‘golden age’ of corporate ‘objective’ journalism which simply made a few magnates and shareholders wealthy while promoting a status quo editorial line. The future opportunity is rather to build something new and exciting outside of this paradigm, as we are trying to do with the Scoop 3.0 plan.
“Democracy will last as long as journalism does, not the other way around. And if we don’t figure out a way to pay for journalism, journalism, especially local journalism, will die.” ...
“I’d like to be as optimistic as Elizabeth: People want journalism, so journalism will persist… Someone has to pay for it, to make it sustainable.
Right now, journalism has a problem. And journalism’s problem is democracy’s problem.”
I would personally go even further and say that journalism’s problem IS capitalism. Focusing on finding out a way to pay for journalism is not really the solution.
We already have that - it’s called a paywall - and for a number of reasons it is neither ethical, feasible or a systemic solution to the problem to make readers pay for information that furthers democratic participation.
Furthermore, making journalism even more profitable will just attract more and bigger sharks without a way to stop them from preying on the weaker players such as local news providers.
This is already happening as seen in the countless closures, acquisitions and mergers gobbling up of niche and local papers and digital players in NZ and globally.
How Bad is the Outlook?
Bad. As Jane Elizabeth points out: The model is broken. Yes, there are rapacious, short-sighted corporations to blame. And yes, the industry was too comfortable in the fat profit margins of the advertising era and too slow to adapt to changes in information consumption.
However, as Billman points out there’s also a more fundamental problem:
“We’ve tried to supplement declining print advertising with increased digital advertising and, for many dailies, paywalls.
And because the remaining digital ad revenue is dependent on page views, media chains are cheapening their own products, churning out loads of aggregation to hit click quotas.”
In response to this situation, the Corporate Media has undergone a frenzy of consolidation. 2018 saw the further consolidation of news and media companies in the US across all traditional distribution channels: television, radio and print.
IHeartMedia, owner of the largest radio network in the US, filed for bankruptcy with $20B in debt. Its next largest rival, Cumulus filed for bankruptcy a few months earlier. Disney and Comcast have been in a bidding war to buy the entertainment division of 21st Century Fox since the summer of 2018.
Discovery Communications completed a merger with the Scripps Networks and Time Magazine was acquired by Meredith Corporation for $2.8 billion only to be put up for sale again four months later.
NBCUniversal has continued to make equity investments in Buzzfeed and Snapchat to grow its digital portfolio. Niche digital outlets with substantial audiences have also been forced to close. Media darlings like Buzzfeed and Vice both missed 2018 revenue targets by over $60 million and now have laid off staff in 2019.
In an increasingly globalised media environment, the NZ media sector is not immune to the buyouts, mergers and acquisitions. Broadcasting minister Kris Faafoi told Mediawatch in December that he had taken sounding from local media bosses who told him global online media rivals could put them out of business.
This is not as far fetched as it seems. Already Stuff’s owner has merged and announced it will be breaking up and selling off the spare parts of New Zealand’s largest online publisher.
Nor are NZ publishers immune to the ongoing decline in the profitability of print and digital media. In a sobering survey recently, Stuff reporter Tom Pullar-Strecker reckoned the three biggest private media companies today - Stuff, NZME and MediaWorks - are worth only about one-tenth of their market value in 2000 - or all together, roughly the same as that of Hallensteins and Glassons clothing chain.
Paul MacBeth reports for BusinessDesk that NZME, publisher of the NZ Herald newspaper also reported a 44 percent slide in annual profit for 2018.
The company claims this was due to its increased investment in new revenue streams it hopes will replace a structural decline in its traditional print business. NZME also invested $6.1 million (a sum NZME pointed to in explaining its big fall in earnings) in its new digital classifieds businesses, which the company sees as drivers of long-term growth.
The company apparently has high hopes for OneRoof real estate site taking on TradeMe, however the other two sites, Driven and Yudu, an employment site, seem to have failed to live up to expectations.
In the understatement of the year, NZME CEO Michael Boggs told Newsroom that the media market was “tough“ in 2018, with falls in business confidence affecting returns. He somewhat wishfully also pronounced NZME’s financial result “not a bad outcome”.
Meanwhile, NZME also announced recently it will be charging online audiences to access what it is calling "premium journalism” from June 2019.
Newsroom reports NZME hopes to attract up to 10,000 subscribers to the paywalled product by June 2020, raising a “modest” amount of money but outlaying $1.2 million in extra costs.
A paywall could be profitable in its second year and will feature paid content from international publishers such as the Washington Post who are providing the software tools.
Stuffed or Starved?
New Zealand’s biggest digital publisher, Stuff's Australian owner Fairfax was taken over by Nine Entertainment Co in 2018. Nine doesn't want to keep the Kiwi business and is preparing it for sale.
BusinessDesk reported that Stuff's 2019 first-half earnings fell at an even steeper pace than its already shrinking revenue. In its first reporting period as a subsidiary of Nine, the New Zealand business reported earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation of A$14.5 million in the six months ended Dec. 31, compared to A$18.9 million a year earlier.
Stuff downsized last year, selling or closing a third of its mastheads - largely unprofitable community and regional publications. Stuff also adopted a digital-first mentality as it grappled with the declining trajectory of print advertising and accelerated efforts to transfer more of that business online, despite about half its revenue coming from just five of its mastheads.
Stuff still describes the core of what it does as producing quality journalism. However, it no longer views itself as a media company, having branched out into other products, including internet service provider Stuff Fibre, hyperlocal website Neighbourly, and electricity retailer energclubnz. Stuff has reportedly not ruled out bringing in a Paywall although are not actively pursuing it at this time.
The major Corporate Media players in New Zealand have also changed their marketing focus, launching new campaigns in 2019.
The newly launched Herald advertising tells us that they are providing comprehensive and local ‘community focused’ coverage, as if saying this loud enough will make it true.
However, they forgot to add, “... if you can afford to pay for it” as their paywalled ‘Premium’ content will e available only to those privileged enough to be able to afford to pay for it.
Real Solutions or Just Shuffling Deckchairs?
All this marketing and apparent change from NZ’s big players may sound innovative and fresh to the uninformed observer, but how different is it really to the “business as usual” approach?
Both Stuff and NZME appear to be following the standard corporate journalism solutions of cutting costs by centralising and layoffs, limiting the diversity of their coverage and considering imposing an unequal user pays model.
They are also heavily investing in new verticals that have absolutely nothing to do with providing a quality journalism service in an attempt to provide greater profits to shareholders and sustain lossmaking journalism.
Is this really an approach that is likely to deliver better outcomes for democracy or keep New Zealanders better informed?
Not really, NZME’s ‘Freemium model’ essentially comodifies information and makes it so that wealthy people who can afford to pay for information get access to a more comprehensive service than those who cannot. This inequal information availability based on socio-economic groups is already pronounced in NZ society and this will simply make it moreso.
News Deserts and Democracy
In the USA, Digital First Media, which despite its name owns several print community newspapers throughout the country, has been crushing its local papers with redundancies and layoffs and cutting hundreds of reporters. Amy Westervelt writes:
“That’s not because those papers haven’t been profitable, but because they haven’t been delivering high enough returns to the global hedge fund that owns a majority stake in Digital First.”
Similarly, with Stuff and NZME, it is not that rural, niche and community papers are not profitable or have a good following. In fact, RNZ reported at the time of Stuff closing NZ Farmer and 15 other rural titles, that most farmers still to prefer news on paper to online.
The reality is that it is simply easier and cheaper to cut costs by centralising operations and providing a one size fits all, cookie cutter media coverage with little locally focused content and few on-the-ground journalists.
However, it is clearly not increasing the quality or diversity of coverage provided to the reader and is in fact resulting in ‘news deserts’, towns or areas of cities with no local news coverage.
The Columbia Journalism Review has reported extensively on the rise of news deserts in the US. Even more concerning for democracy, Politico has reported on the clear correlation between lack of local news outlets and Trump supporters in the 2016 presidential elections. Newsrooms are relying more and more on wire services like the AP and Reuters as they cut staff under budget pressures.
The NZME approach of tapping into paid content from a number of overseas sources for its ‘premium content’ is simply following this international trend towards consolidation and decreasing diversity.
The paywall approach is also likely to contribute to the creation of news deserts in impoverished and rural parts of New Zealand as news becomes a commodity. Stuff’s approach of closing rural and niche titles is similarly concerning in this regard.
The impact of all this is very serious and goes beyond the fortunes of the leading US or NZ media companies. We should all be highly worried about what is happening to local news and how it impacts our democracy.
For these reasons, Scoop has developed an ‘ethical paywall’ approach which underpins the ScoopPro service and our Scoop 3.0 plan
This attempts to create a fairer solution through charging for professional use only and maintaining comprehensive free access for the public. ScoopPro is now on sale with 25% off annual rates until 31 March.
One other positive note for New Zealand is that this environment of retreating local news appears to be playing into the hands of our publicly owned broadcasters TVNZ and also RNZ. TVNZ also launched an ad campaign this year, this one rightly highlights their network of reporters in the field.
This network of real reporters is something that looks to give both TVNZ and RNZ an edge over rivals such as Stuff and NZME as they shed titles and journalists. As TVNZ looks to move further into the digital world they will find themselves competing with the Herald directly and according to reports, may well even look to acquire Stuff when it is sold off this year.
The core of the problem in the media is that the structure of most media companies as privately traded enterprises makes them susceptible to acquisition and takeovers and provide perverse incentives to reduce quality and diversity of coverage.
For instance, CEO salaries in these media companies remain high despite all the cost cutting and layoffs and is clearly not tied in any way to the quality of their companies’ performance of the valuable societal role of public interest journalism.
Like any corporate enterprise, Media shareholders want to see profits and not much else. If that means cutting local news coverage, laying off experienced journalists and replacing them with robots, then the dictates of the Corporate system mean that is what must happen.
The corporate journalism model simply does not question whether this Corporate Media model is an appropriate way to manage the provision of a vital democratic service such as providing news coverage.
Why would it? CEOs continue to get paid massive salaries and receive bonuses while cutting local news services and public service content and laying off staff. In 2017, US media conglomerate McClatchy’s CEO Craig Forman took home $2.4 million in salary, stock awards, and a $900,000 bonus.
According to the Columbia Journalism Review, his newest contract has a $1 million base salary, a $1 million bonus and a $35,000-a-month housing stipend. As a local example, TVNZ chief executive Kevin Kenrick took home a bonus of $460,054 in 2018 - part of his total remuneration of $1.43m.
“It’s not gonna be Gannett and Gatehouse going back into these communities and hiring.
Even if they find a magic revenue bullet tomorrow that money is going to go to their shareholders…communities have to take responsibility for their own local news needs, and so you’re seeing grassroots solutions emerging and communities supporting them, in a variety of models that include both for-profit and nonprofit, and niche and general interest, and public media.”
In other words, if we want to change this broken system, more of the same is certainly not the way to do so. Rather, what we need is resilient solutions that sit outside of the corporate financial system entirely.
If the root of this problem is capitalism, then the only robust answer is for local journalism to adopt a different business model to the Corporate Media ‘business as usual’ model. What is needed is rather a new and more distributed governance model for the companies that produce journalism that protects them from the vagaries of the capitalist market.
Public Media like RNZ and TVNZ are certainly a part of the mix in New Zealand, however we also need decentralised local journalism experiments owned locally and in resilient non-profit or cooperative models outside of the Corporate system.
Thankfully, such models already do exist - a number of non-profit, reader owned and member funded and operated online newsrooms are having great success globally and Scoop is one of them.
Trust owned newsrooms such as Scoop (owned by the Scoop Foundation) and The Guardian or ProPublica are good examples of this. Cooperative newsrooms like The Colorado Sun or Bristol Cable are another great example of resilient media structures.
These newsrooms are not susceptible to acquisition or hostile takeovers or shareholder inspired interference as corporate journalism organisations are. Engaged journalism is another model having success by optimizing for trust, with transparency and engagement with the local community.
The Scoop 3.0 plan aims to incorporate elements of a few of these different models to ensure that Scoop is a resilient, diverse, public interest focused media company long into the future. We will also combine this approach with Scoop’s unique ScoopPro commercial membership revenue model to offer something a little different to the world of progressive online journalism.
To help us ensure that this happens, we are seeking another 50 organisational members to join the ScoopPro ‘Founding 300’ organisations.
These companies (including the 250 existing members) will receive special benefits and will be a core part of this new membership community as we progressively add new membership features and services. They will also have VIP access to the Scoop 3.0 equity crowdfunding offering later this year.
Since 2006 WikiLeaks has been censuring governments with governments’ own words. It has been doing the job the U.S. constitution intended the press to do, says Joe Lauria.
In his 1971 opinion in the Pentagon Papers case, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black wrote: “In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy.
The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government.”
That’s what WikiLeaks and Julian Assange have been doing since 2006: censuring governments with governments’ own words pried from secrecy by WikiLeak’s sources - whistleblowers. In other words, WikiLeaks has been doing the job the U.S. constitution intended the press to do.
One can hardly imagine anyone sitting on today’s U.S. Supreme Court writing such an opinion. Even more troubling is the news media having turned its back on its mission. Today they almost always serve the governors - not the governed.
The question is why.
Consolidation of media ownership has increased obedience of desperate journalists; entertainment divisions have taken over news departments; and careerist reporters live vicariously through the power of those they cover, rejecting the press’ unique power to hold those officials to account.
It comes down ultimately to lifestyles. Men go to war to protect and further their lifestyles. The press cheers them on for residual material betterment and increase in status.
It used to be accepted in television that news departments would lose money and would be supported by the entertainment division. That’s because news was considered a public service.
TV newsmen - they were almost all men in those days - were former wire service and newspaper reporters. But greed has put the presenters’ personalities before public service, as entertainment masquerades as news. Newspapers have sacrificed investigative units to maximize profit.
Government is the winner.
The abdication of the mainstream media of their constitutional responsibility to serve the governed and not the governors has left a void filled for more than a decade by WikiLeaks.
No longer do today’s Daniel Ellsbergs need to take their chances with editors at The New York Times or The Washington Post, or with their reporters spinning the damning information they risk their freedom to get to the public - no matter how disinterested and distracted the public may be.
Now the traditional media can be bypassed. WikiLeaks deals in the raw material - that when revealed - governments hang themselves with. That’s why they want Assange’s head.
They lust for revenge and to stop further leaks that threaten their grip on power. That the corporate media has turned on Assange and WikiLeaks reveals their service to the state and how much they prioritize their style of life - disregarding the carnage they help bring about.
In that Pentagon Papers’ decision, the majority of the court ruled that the First Amendment prohibited the government from exercising prior restraint - or censorship - on the media before publication of classified information. But the majority of the court also said the government could prosecute journalists after publication.
Joe Lauria and John Pilger at Assange rally
Indeed the U.S. Espionage Act, which has withstood First Amendment challenges, criminalizes a publisher’s or journalist’s mere possession, as well as dissemination, of classified material.
A 1961 amendment to the Act extended U.S. jurisdiction across the world. Assange is threatened by it.
U.S. administrations have been reluctant to take the step of post-publication prosecution, however.
Nixon did not prosecute Sen. Mike Gravel, who was constitutionally protected when he read the Papers, given to him by Ellsberg, into the Congressional record.
But Gravel could have been prosecuted for publishing the Papers as a book. Barack Obama decided to back off Assange when it was plain The New York Times and other corporate media would be as liable as Assange and WikiLeaks for publishing classified information.
The virulently anti-media Trump administration, however, may take that step if Assange is arrested.
From their point of view it’s easy to understand why the U.S. wants to crush Assange. But what is Australia’s excuse? Why is it fighting America’s battles?
Why has the Australian mainstream media also turned against Assange after an election held in the U.S., not here? What has happened to Australia’s sovereignty?
That’s a question that can be answered by Australians coming into the streets, like today - and staying there until their compatriot is at last free to leave that damned embassy. Free to continue to do the job the media refuses to do.
“Negative Hallucination” Hypnosis Experiment Demonstration Video
& The Weaponisation Of History And Journalism August 30 2024 | From: NaturalNews / PaulCraigRoberts
In this mind-boggling short video, you can experiment firsthand how the mainstream media puts America under the SPELL of mass hypnosis, using a psychological phenomenon known as “negative hallucination.”
I covered this in great detail in this Natural News article that provides visual examples of both positive and negative hallucinations now in full effect across the American masses.
Watch the video and follow the instructions. In mere seconds, your mind will be controlled via “negative hallucination,” and you won’t believe how easily you have been manipulated.
This video is based on the psychology research of Daniel J. Simons, whose YouTube channel is found at this link. Once you become familiar with this research and how it works, you will begin to see through the lies of the mainstream media while understanding exactly how your perceptions, thoughts and beliefs are being expertly manipulated - even “engineered” - by the media narrative puppet masters.
Watch the video yourself and prepare to be amazed:
The Weaponisation Of History And Journalism
In the West, facts, an important element of truth, are not important. They are not important in the media, politics, universities, historical explanations, or the courtroom.
Non-factual explanations of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings are served up as the official explanation. Facts have been politicized, emotionalized, weaponized and simply ignored.
As David Irving has shown, Anglo-American histories of World War 2 are, for the most part, feel-good histories, as are “civil war” histories as Thomas DiLorenzo and others have demonstrated. Of course, they are feel good only for the victors. Their emotional purpose means that inconvenient facts are unpalatable and ignored.
Writing the truth is no way to succeed as an author. Only a small percentage of readers are interested in the truth. Most want their biases or brainwashing vindicated. They want to read what they already believe. It is comforting, reassuring. When their ignorance is confronted, they become angry.
The way to be successful as a writer is to pick a group and give them what they want. There is always a market for romance novels and for histories that uphold a country’s myths.
On the Internet successful sites are those that play to one ideology or another, to one emotion or the other, or to one interest group or another.
The single rule for success is to confine truth to what the readership group you serve believes.
Today we have a large variety of truths: truths for feminists, truths for blacks, Muslims, Hispanics, homosexuals, transgendered, truths for the foreign policy community that serves the military/security complex, truths for the neocons, truths for the One Percent that control the economy and the economists who serve them, truths for “white supremacists,” itself a truth term for their opponents.
You can add to the list. The “truth” in these “truths” is that they are self-serving of the group that expresses them. Their actual relation to truth is of no consequence to those espousing the “truths.”
Woe to you if you don’t go along with someone’s or some group’s truth. Not even famous film-maker Oliver Stone is immune. Recently, Stone expressed his frustration with the “False Flag War Against Russia.”
Little doubt that Stone is frustrated with taunts and accusations from completely ignorant media talking heads in response to his documentary, Putin, based on many hours of interviews over two years. Stone came under fire, because instead of demonizing Putin and Russia, thus confirming the official story, he showed us glimpses of the truth.
The organization, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, published a report that completely destroyed the false accusations about Trump/Russian hacking of the US presidential election.
The Nation published an objective article about the report and was assaulted by writers, contributors, and readers for publishing information that weakens the case, which the liberal/progressive/left in conjunction with the military/security complex, is orchestrating against Trump.
The magazine’s audience felt that the magazine had an obligation not to truth but to getting Trump out of office. Reportedly, the editor is considering whether to recall the article.
So here we have left-leaning Oliver Stone and leftwing magazine, The Nation, under fire for making information available that is out of step with the self-serving “truth” to which the liberal/progressive/left and their ally, the military/security complex, are committed.
When a country has a population among whom there are no truths except group-specific truths, the country is so divided as to be over and done with. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” The white liberal/progressive/left leaders of divisive Identity Politics have little, if any, comprehension of where the movement they think they lead is headed.
At the moment the hate is focused on the “alt-right,” which has become “white nationalists,” which has become “white supremacists.” These “white supremacists” have become epitomized by statues of Confederate soldiers and generals.
All over the South, if local governments are not removing the statues, violent crazed thugs consumed by hate attempt to destroy them. In New Orleans someone with money bused in thugs from outside flying banners that apparently are derived from a communist flag to confront locals protesting the departure of their history down the Orwellian Memory Hole.
What happens when all the monuments are gone? Where does the hate turn next? Once non-whites are taught to hate whites, not even self-hating whites are safe. How do those taught hate tell a good white from a bad white? They can’t and they won’t.
By definition by Identity Politics, whites, for now white heterosexual males, are the victimizers and everyone else is their victim. The absurdity of this concept is apparent, yet the concept is unshaken by its absurdity. White heterosexual males are the only ones without the privilege of quotas.
They and only they can be put at the back of the bus for university admissions, employment, promotion, and only their speech is regulated. They, and only they, can be fired for using “gender specific terms,” for using race specific terms, for unknowingly offending some preferred group member by using a word that is no longer permissible.
They can be called every name in the book, beginning with racist, misogynist, and escalating, and no one is punished for the offense.
Recently, a professor in the business school of a major university told me that he used the word, girls, in a marketing discussion. A young womyn was offended. The result was he received a dressing down from the dean. Another professor told me that at his university there was a growing list of blacklisted words.
It wasn’t clear whether the list was official or unofficial, simply professors trying to stay up with Identity Politics and avoid words that could lead to their dismissal. Power, they tell me, is elsewhere than in the white male, the true victimized class.
For years commentators have recognized the shrinking arena of free speech in the United States. Any speech that offends anyone but a white male can be curtailed by punishment. Recently, John Whitehead, constitutional attorney who heads the Rutherford Institute, wrote that it is now dangerous just to defend free speech.
Reference to the First Amendment suffices to bring denunciation and threats of violence. Ron Unz notes that any website that can be demonized as “controversial” can find itself disappeared by Internet companies and PayPal. They simply terminate free speech by cutting off service.
It must be difficult to teach some subjects, such as the “civil war” for example. How would it be possible to describe the actual facts? For example, for decades prior to the Union’s invasion of the Confederacy North/South political conflict was over tariffs, not over slavery.
The fight over which new states created from former “Indian” territories would be “slave” and which “free” was a fight over keeping the protectionist (North) vs. free trade (South) balance in Congress equal so that the budding industrial north could not impose a tariff regime.
Two days before Lincoln’s inaugural address, a stiff tariff was signed into law. That same day in an effort to have the South accept the tariff and remain in or return to the Union - some southern states had seceded, some had not - Congress passed the Corwin amendment that provided constitutional protection to slavery. The amendment prohibited the federal government from abolishing slavery.
Two days later in his inaugural address, which seems to be aimed at the South, Lincoln said:
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”
Lincoln’s beef with the South was not over slavery or the Fugitive Slave Act. Lincoln did not accept the secessions and still intended to collect the tariff that now was law. Under the Constitution slavery was up to the states, but the Constitution gave the federal government to right to levy a tariff.
Lincoln said that “there needs to be no bloodshed or violence” over collecting the tariff. Lincoln said he will use the government’s power only “to collect the duties and imposts,” and that “there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.”
Here is Lincoln, “the Great Emancipator,” telling the South that they can have slavery if they will pay the duties and imposts on imports. How many black students and whites brainwashed by Identity Politics are going to sit there and listen to such a tale and not strongly protest the racist professor justifying white supremacy and slavery?
So what happens to history when you can’t tell it as it is, but instead have to refashion it to fit the preconceived beliefs formed by Identity Politics? The so-called “civil war,” of course, is far from the only example.
In its document of secession, South Carolina made a case that the Constitutional contract had been broken by some of the northern states breaking faith with Article IV of the Constitution.
This is true. However, it is also true that the Southern states had no inclination to abide by Section 8 of Article I, which says that “Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises.” So, also the South by not accepting the tariff was not constitutionally pure.
Before history became politicized, historians understood that the North intended for the South to bear costs of the North’s development of industry and manufacturing. The agricultural South preferred the lower priced goods from England.
The South understood that a tariff on British goods would push import prices above the high northern prices and lower the South’s living standards in the interest of raising living standards in the North.
The conflict was entirely economic and had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery, which also had existed in the North. Indeed, some northern states had “exclusion ordinances” and anti-immigration provisions in their state constitutions that prohibited the immigration of blacks into northern states.
If freeing slaves were important to the North and avoiding tariffs was important to the South, one can imagine some possible compromises. For example, the North could have committed to building factories in the South.
As the South became industrialized, new centers of wealth would arise independently from the agricultural plantations that produced cotton exports. The labor force would adjust with the economy, and slavery would have evolved into free labor.
Unfortunately, there were too many hot heads. And so, too, today.
In America there is nothing on the horizon but hate. Everywhere you look in America you see nothing but hate.
Putin is hated. Russia is hated. Muslims are hated. Venezuela is hated. Assad is hated. Iran is hated. Julian Assange is hated. Edward Snowden is hated. White heterosexual males are hated. Confederate monuments are hated. Truth-tellers are hated. “Conspiracy theorists” are hated. No one escapes being hated.
Hate groups are proliferating, especially on the liberal/progressive/left. For example, RootsAction has discovered a statue of Robert E. Lee in the U.S. Capitol and urges all good people to demand its removal. Whether the level of ignorance that RootsAction personifies is real or just a fund-raising ploy, I do not know.
Robert Edward Lee was an American general known for commanding the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia in the American Civil War from 1862 until his surrender in 1865
But clearly RootsAction is relying on public ignorance in order to get the response that they want. In former times when the US had an educated population, everyone understood that there was a great effort to reconcile the North and South and that reconciliation would not come from the kind of hate-mongering that now infects RootsAction and most of the action groups and websites of the liberal/progressive/left.
Today our country is far more divided that it was in 1860. Identity Politics has taught Americans to hate each other, but, nevertheless, the zionist neoconservatives assure us that we are “the indispensable, exceptional people.”
We, a totally divided people, are said to have the right to rule the world and to bomb every country that doesn’t accept our will into the stone age.
In turn the world hates America. Washington has told too many lies about other countries and used those lies to destroy them. Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia, and large chunks of Syria and Pakistan are in ruins. Washington intends yet more ruin with Venezuela in the cross hairs.
Years ago Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez resonated with many peoples when he said in his UN speech:
“Yesterday at this very podium stood Satan himself [Bush], speaking as if he owned the world; you can still smell the sulphur.”
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that [cabal-run] America is a font for hatred both at home and abroad.
The Disintegration Of Western Society August 29 2024 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / Various
Radical feminists are now being banned by Twitter not because they hate men, which is perfectly OK as far as Twitter is concerned, but because they object to “transwomen.”
What is a “transwoman?” As far as I can understand, a “transwoman” is a male with a penis who declares himself to be a women and demands his right to use women’s toilette facilities anong with the women who are using them.
There you have it. Yesterday it was feminists who were exercising their special society-bestowed privileges to censor.
Today it is the feminists who are being censored.
As this insanity of “Western Civilization” continues, tomorrow it will be the transwomen who are censored and banned.
What precisely is afoot?
My readers, who have partially and some wholely escaped from The Matrix, understand that this is the further fragmentation of American [Western] society.
Identiy Politics has set men, women, blacks, Jews, Asians, Hispanics, and white people against one another. Identity Politics is the essence of the Democratic Party and the American liberal / progressive / left.
Now, with the creation of “new” but otherwise nonexistent “genders,” although they are honored as real by the controlled whores who masquerade as a “Western media,” we witness radical feminists being silenced by men pretending to be women.
I sympathize with Meghan Murphy, but she brought this on herself and on the rest of us by accepting Identity Politics. Identity Politics gave Meghan a justification for hating men even, as she failed to realize, it provided the basis for moving her into the exploitative class that must be censored.
Where does this end?
It has already gone far enough that the American population is so divided and mutually hostile that there is no restraint by “the American people” on government and the elite oligarchs that rule. “The American people” are no longer a reality but a mythical creature like the unicorn.
The film, The Matrix, is the greatest film of our lifetime.
Why? Because it shows that there are two realities. A real one of which only a few people are aware, and a virtual one in which eveyone else lives.
In the United States today, and throughout “Western Brainwashed Civilization,” only a handful of people exist who are capable of differentiating the real from the created reality in which all explanations are controlled and kept as far away from the truth as possible.
Everything that every Western government and “news” organization says is a lie to control the explanations that we are fed in order to keep us locked in The Matrix.
The construction of a make-believe reality guarantees the US military/security complex’s annual budget of $1,000 billion dollars of taxpayers’ money even as Congress debates cutting Social Security in order to divert more largess to the pockets of the corrupt military/security complex.
Readers ask me what they can do about it. Nothing, except revolt and cleanse the system, precisely as Founding Father Thomas Jefferson said.
Is Thomas Jefferson Alive and Well In Paris?
If this report is correct, pray the revolt spreads to the US.
1080 Was Added To Water Supplies By Germany In WW2 As A Chemical Weapon Says A US Manufacturer – But The New Zealand Authorities Are Dropping It Aerially Into Our Waterways
August 28 2024 | From: EnviroWatchRangitikei / Various
This statement is made within correspondence in 1994 by an Eltham resident (NZ) to a US manufacturer of 1080 (details supplied in the document at the end of the article).
The person was trying to ascertain the level of risk to environment and health regarding an imminent drop of 1080 poison into a Taranaki National Park.
It is interesting to note that the replies to all the risks the person raises in their questions are risks that are now deemed quite safe & have become normalized (to the authorities at least that is – many people are now very concerned, witness the recent hikoi & continual NZ wide protests going on).
Here are the questions and answers enlarged for reading:
Nowadays we are told that 1080 targets pests and we are given the impression that little if any other form of wildlife is affected. In fact nothing could be further from the truth.
A person told me recently in the Manawatu that she was told no birds would die in the bush nearby when it was 1080'ed however to her surprise she found a dead bird after the area was treated.
Of course we now know that this is a common occurrence by the testimony of many people who find multiple dead birds after drops, photograph them & post them online.
And of course we have the various documentations that we’ve published here of multiple finds, with latterly the estimate by a Landcare scientist of 10,000 birds in a South Island drop.
Just search ‘birds, 1080’ in our search box to find more.
We are regularly told that 1080 breaks down to harmlessness in water. A scientist told me the other day it is so diluted it isn’t a problem, repeating the cup of tea mantra we hear so regularly.
We also learned recently it was added to water to poison ships rats and we heard from the former Greens co-leader that there are question marks over the official testing on 1080 concentrations in water.
This is very enlightening. No wonder the data sheets tell us not to allow it into waterways.
However NZ it seems makes up their own rules on that one. No research to prove their point, they just tweaked the rules.
Here is a link to the information regarding the development of 1080 by Germany for use as a chemical weapon in water supplies.
Not approved in the US! “Very very restricted & controlled areas” only. And here it is chucked around like a veritable lolly scramble.
The baits aren’t picked up off public walkways and neither are the poisoned animals collected & disposed off, frequently left to rot in the water where eels and other meat eaters can feed off them (Watch Poisoning Paradise on that one).
Remember the Hunua Ranges drop recently? A Court injunction to stop that one failed & during the proceedings DoC lawyers asked (and were granted) that the opposing lawyers not be allowed to question the DoC scientist.
Now doesn’t that say something? Let’s not forget Bill Benfield’s revelation either that a drop in the Hunuas in the ’90s left the water filters packed with 1080 pellets. Good one DoC. And none of the public ever got to hear about it.
Previously I’ve noted the frequent discovery of pellets on tracks, drops going on around tourists, pellets dumped near people fishing, on it goes. The veritable lolly scramble again.
The Incredible Impact Of Kindness On Humanity
August 27 2024 | From: UpliftConnect / Various
Love in Action: Every day somewhere in the world, an innocent child dies from starvation, a family is threatened by war or disaster and flees their home with their pets and children to find refuge, a mother becomes ill from polluted water, a small boy shelters under a bridge in the snow, and a grandma in the remote mountains dies from lack of medical expertise.
In fact, every second, one person somewhere on the planet, dies from starvation. It is estimated that one in every six people don’t get enough food to eat and this year 36 million people and children will die from hunger.
The UNHCR, the United Nations Refugee Agency says there are 68.5 million people displaced worldwide. Of these 25.5 million are refugees. And each day, 44,400 people flee their homes due to conflict and persecution.
While these figures are breathtaking in their enormity, these are the lives of ordinary people, just like you and I. People who want to live a peaceful, happy life with their families.
We all want the same things, to love, be loved, to care for our families, to work and to play. Yet, every day an unbelievable amount of people die from a lack of the most basic human needs so many of us take absolutely for granted.
On the 70th celebration of Human Rights Day, we can reflect on how we can each dig deeper into our hearts and stand up to make a bigger difference in the world. It is a day to recommit ourselves to protecting the safety and fundamental human rights of all people.
Instead of becoming hopeless and depressed about the sheer enormity of the plight of so many, we must instead focus on what we can do.
Because in fact we can do so much and even helping one family or one child is a fantastic difference. If 7.2 billion people all did something to help each other, that adds up to something extraordinary.
“If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito".
Each one of us has the capacity and power to make a change. And when we are fuelled by kindness and a heartfelt desire to help our brothers and sisters, anything is possible.
Most people, given the chance, want to help and do good in the world. They just don’t know how to go about it. Yet, kindness can underline our parenting, our relationships, our work, and our daily interactions.
Every day we can align with our hearts, and take a small step to support world peace, by reaching out into our community, sharing ourselves and our skills or resources and helping just one person.
This simple act of kindness will grow and ripple out further than we can imagine.
The Ripple Effect of Kindness
All over the world, people are answering the call of kindness. You can too.
Ordinary people are setting up amazing charities, like backpacker Maggie Doyne, the then 19-year-old who was moved to save one street urchin in Nepal.
She used her life savings to buy land so she could build an orphanage which now houses over 50 children. Ten years later, she has made an enormous impact on the lives of so many children, altering their future forever.
Or yoga teacher Atira Tan, who found a passion within her to save the thousands of children and women who are victims of the sex trade in Nepal.
Her choice to make a difference has saved and rehabilitated hundreds of women, who she now trains and employs as part of her charity Art 2 Healing to be able to support other women and children who have been enslaved by sex traffickers.
Each one of us can do something, even if it’s the simple act of sponsoring a child or donating regularly to a charity.
Many hands coming together change the world. Spiritual teacher Andrew Harvey implores us in his incredible book, The Hope, to respond to global challenges with the transforming power of love and compassion.
Even the smallest of gestures can have a profound impact and a knock-on effect
“Strengthened by prayer, practice and inspiration, turn now to your life and the people in it. Everyone, especially in a time like ours, has friends who are in grief, or ill, or looking for a job, or are in real financial difficulty.
Commit now to ringing one of them up, and ask him or her what you could do to make their burden easier. Do this soon and be happy that you can.
When we fill our hearts with the gratitude for the gifts in our own life, we have the fuel to support others. Andrew Harvey shares the importance of a commitment to spiritual practice in keeping our hearts inspired with love and wisdom and aligned with the ‘”pure deep love” that is longing to use us as its instrument in the world.
“Make a commitment today, even if you are in financial difficulties, to tithe between five and ten percent of what you earn to a cause of your choice.
I recommend choosing one particular cause that deeply moves you and sticking to your commitment, whatever happens; over time, tithing like this will give you a great and healing sense of being of use and the cause you are helping will become more and more precious and personal to you, and you will want, naturally and simply, to do more.
Standing Up for Human Rights
This year’s Human Rights Day advocates for everyone to stand up for their rights and those of others–civil, economic, political and cultural rights.
Additionally, the day aims to enlighten us about how our rights are a foundation of sustainable development and peaceful societies. The 2018 commemoration of Human Rights Day marks the beginning of a year-long celebration of 70 years since the international community adopted the declaration. We celebrate all our inalienable rights and freedoms, including a right to education, a decent living, health care and a right to live free from any form of discrimination among others.
Let’s build a beautiful world for all, where all children feel safe, everyone has enough to eat and communities are strong and united.
What You Pay Attention To Ends Up Controlling Your Life August 26 2024 | From: Sott / Various
One of the best insights on what true productivity means in the 21st century dates back to 1890. In his book The Principles of Psychology, Vol.1, William James wrote a simple statement that's packed with meaning: "My experience is what I agree to attend to."
Your attention determines the experiences you have, and the experiences you have determine the life you live.
Or said another way: you must control your attention to control your life. Today, in a world where so many experiences are blended together - where we can work from home (or a train or a plane or a beach), watch our kids on a nanny-cam from work, and distraction is always just a thumb-swipe away - has that ever been more true?
Attention Management
To be consistently productive and manage stress better, we must strengthen our skill in attention management.
Attention management is the practice of controlling distractions, being present in the moment, finding flow, and maximizing focus, so that you can unleash your genius.
It's about being intentional instead of reactive. It is the ability to recognize when your attention is being stolen (or has the potential to be stolen) and to instead keep it focused on the activities you choose.
Rather than allowing distractions to derail you, you choose where you direct your attention at any given moment, based on an understanding of your priorities and goals.
Better attention management leads to improved productivity, but it's about much more than checking things off a to-do list. The ultimate result is the ability to create a life of choice, around things that are important to you. It's more than just exercising focus. It's about taking back control over your time and your priorities.
Aspirations vs. Experiences
The leaders I work with tell me, "I believe in the power of mentoring and coaching my team members. The most important thing I can do as a leader is support them and encourage their growth. This is how I make a difference, and it's what gives me satisfaction at work."
But later in our conversation, I hear how their days actually go: "I spend a big chunk of my time on email and putting out fires.
I started the year with a coaching plan for my team, but it's fallen by the wayside amid everything else that is going on. My one-on-ones with team members don't happen as often as I would like, and the content is too much 'trees' and not enough 'forest.'"
Even if you see yourself as a passionate advocate for coaching and mentoring, you won't have the impact you'd like if your actions and experiences don't reflect these values.
As James said, your experience is what you attend to. And your experiences become your life.
So if your attention continues getting diverted, and email, meetings, and "firefighting" consume your days, pretty soon weeks or months will have gone by and your life becomes full of the "experiences" you never really intended to have.
So why don't we just have the experiences we want to have, and create the lives we most want to lead? Why does this painful gulf exist between the selves we aspire to and how we spend our time?
The fact that James was thinking about this topic in the 19th century shows that we've long wrestled with the conflict between our goals and values and the lure of distractions.
But, of course, we live in a world with many more distractions than existed in the 1890s. When he published The Principles of Psychology, the telephone was brand-new.
Today, we have internet-connected phones and other devices that are always with us, delivering a volume of information and communication James couldn't have imagined. There's a lot more competition for our attention.
Let's go back to our mentoring and coaching example. You could start each day intending to focus on developing your team. But those intentions can quickly get swept away in the rush of demands that characterize our workdays.
In this frenzied work environment, accomplishing the things that are most meaningful to you doesn't just happen. You can't leave it to chance. Your busy environment presents choice after choice every day about what you will attend to - and what your experiences will be.
Deliberately Choosing What You Attend To
This is where attention management offers a solution. It's a deliberate approach that puts you back in control.
Practicing attention management means fighting back against the distractions and creating opportunities throughout your day to support your priorities.
First, control external factors:
Control your technology: Remember, it's there to serve you, not the other way around! Decide to take control by turning off email and "push" notifications which are specifically designed to steal your attention. This will allow you to engage in more stretches of focused work on tasks and activities that you choose. As often as possible and especially when you're working, keep your phone silent and out of sight.
Control your environment: Set boundaries with others, especially in an open-office setting. For example, use headphones or put up a "do not disturb" sign when you need to focus. If that doesn't work, try going to a different part of your office, or even another floor of your building. If things are really bad, you can try teaming up with colleagues to designate a certain time of day, or day of the week, a "no distractions" day for everyone to do heads-down work.
But here's an overlooked truth: Our productivity suffers not just because we are distracted by outside interruptions, but also because our own brains, frazzled by today's frantic workplaces, become a source of distraction in and of themselves.
For example, the problem isn't just that an email interrupts your work. It's also the fact that being tethered to your email inbox conditions you to expect an interruption every few minutes, which chips away at your attention span.
You then become so afraid of forgetting to do some small task - like sending an email or forwarding a document - that you start to do everything as soon as you've thought of it; but then you end up getting sucked into your overflowing inbox before you know it.
Moreover, knowing that you have a catalog of all the world's knowledge at your fingertips - in terms of the internet on your smartphone -- makes it difficult to be comfortable in a state of "I don't know," and hard to avoid the distracting temptation to "find out now."
So you must also learn to control internal factors:
Control your behavior: Use those times when your technology is tamed and your do-not-disturb sign is up to get used to single-tasking: open only one window on your computer screen, and give your full attention to one task until it's complete, or until a designated stopping point. Take breaks throughout the day where you step away from your computer. Try to "unplug" completely (no technology) for at least an hour or more, as often as you can. Try it for 15-20 minutes at first; then build up to an hour, or even 90 minutes.
Control your thoughts: For many of us, this is the hardest nut to crack, which is why I've left it to last. Minds are made to wander. Practice noticing when your mind is veering off in its own direction, and gently guide your focus back to where you want it. If you think of some important small task while you are doing focused work, jot it down on a notepad and come back to it later. Do the same with information you want to look up online.
Practicing attention management will not eliminate distractions from your day.
But as you start to recognize when you become distracted, and build your "attention muscle" through habits like those above, you'll start to reclaim your life and devote more of yourself to what's really important to you.
Don't allow distraction to derail your aspirations and intentions. Instead, control your attention to control your life.
The Big Plan That Has Taken A Totally Different Turn August 25 2024 | From: OperationDisclosure / Various
The 'Elite' had a plan that is being actively defied. The outcome of which will soon be the opposite of all that 'they' had worked towards. [Historical but Relevant]
Through the intervention of the Alliance (positive forces against the Cabal) their nefarious plan is being 100% reversed for the sake of ending said Cabal and their debt-slavery system, just for starters.
The silent coup committed in 1913 on December 23rd by private bankers by founding the FED (Federal Reserve Agency) was a contract of 99 years.
Before 1913, as far as I know, no trading in birth certificates as we know them today had taken place. The contract of the FED expired in 2012, so they were no longer able to 'legitimately' print money out of thin air.
Without the world's population knowing this, man as a commercial product for those in power would have been deprived of his status as man, and would have been placed in a company, the TRUST.
That is the reason why we have been relegated from person to person, within their commercial structure is that a person cannot exist as a living being.
The system has been designed in such a way that we as a legal person have to register everything that is nothing else than renouncing our rights and possible possessions, and labour efforts, for the benefit of the Cabal Elite, the Vatican, Spiritual Centre, City of London Financial Centre and Washington DC as military power.
President John F Kennedy wanted to reintroduce money creation under his own legislation and was murdered for that purpose by George Herbert Walker Bush, then head of the CIA.
The CIA, which originated from the former OSS US secret service and the German GESTAPO. The CIA and FBI have been found to be agencies of the Bankers and Military Industrial Complex.
John F Kennedy and President of Indonesia Sukarno had agreed to introduce the new money system again independent of the Rothschild and JP Morgan Bankers, whereby the money with gold covered at the value of their joint gold stock would introduce.
As we know, it did not stop with this murder, but has followed the Kennedy family in generations.
President Sukarno was put out of order by the FED owners and replaced by Suharto on 2 October 1965 by a coup by the CIA.
In the spring of 1966 Sukarno had to hand over power to general Suharto and in 1967 he formally lost all power.
Since Indonesia was a former colony of the Netherlands, many people came from there to the Netherlands as ex Knil Militair.
The non-legal Royal Family of the Netherlands is connected to the ' New World Order' Cabal, and has treated the people who fought for them as second class people, who saw their loyalty rewarded with betrayal and contempt of the Dutch government and Royal Family.
However, these people are completely intrigued in our society and hearts, and have their right to exist in the Netherlands more than they deserve, I believe that this may also be mentioned once.
When the Dutch troops withdrew from Indonesia, several warships from the Netherlands were sunk, with a cargo of stolen gold.
It is a fixed pattern that the Cabal first conquered the gold as if they were the pirates of the country they were at war with. In 2015 the Dutch Fake Royal family visited Indonesia during a tour through several Asian countries, with the intention to recover the sunken Dutch ships and to claim the contents of gold.
Unfortunately for the Royal Cabal members, the ships were no longer to be found, so already recovered, and the gold returned to its rightful owner.
All the gold of the island groups of Indonesia would have had to function as collateral to give the current money system a gold coverage again, after the contract of the FED in 2012, had expired on December 22nd.
Sukarno's grandson Sino managed this gold until another manager was appointed, Neil Keenan, a businessman who had almost been destroyed by the Cabal, but who has now strengthened the hope of a fair money system, including the gold of Indonesia.
The Cabal 'Elite', together with the Committee of 300 industrialists, had worked out the plan to replace the current money system with a gold-covered system.
However, since the Cabal's plans were hijacked by the Alliance, the Cabal and the FED were given time to put their own house in order.
Comment:Read about the Alliance that has been working behind
the scenes for decades to take down the 'Cabal' within the work of David Wilcock.
Some of those reading this may be confused because the cabal-controlled mainstream media is doing everything within it's
power to denigrate Trump - as he is part of the effort to take the Illuminati down once and for all.
In 2016, Donald J Trump became President of the US, after the army was faced with the choice of either making a coup or asking the independent patriot Donald J Trump to join the presidency.
Through the unelected corrupt EU, the NWO is still trying to push through with their Climate Fraud.
It is therefore logical that the Cabal should be completely removed from its dominant position in order to be able to start the RV and announcement of GESARA.
I have now only mentioned Indonesia's gold, which is only the smallest fund.
Africa's mineral resources are a multiple of this, so now it will also become clear why the EU wants to commit itself to Africa, and a mass of imports of Africans should be imported according to Cabal Frans Timmermans of the EU and Globalist Macron, Rutte and Merkel.
The Alliance of US, Russia, Africa, China and BRICS countries have therefore built a new financial infrastructure with the AIIB Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
It houses all the value of the whole world, the stolen wealth of the world's population, and all the world's resources in gold, diamonds Oil, ores and birth certificates of the entire world's population.
If the information I have read is correct, this would represent an amount of 1 with 58 zeros which will be managed by the quantum financial system QFS in a CIPS protocol instead of the FED bankers.
The arrest of more than 70,887 Cabal members is a prerequisite for the transition.
That is why the military tribunals that started in Guantánamo (GITMO) in Cuba from 2 January 2019 are one of the conditions that must be met.
It will be clear that almost all Western governments will fall by this transition.
Let the tribunals do their job, and not be tempted by personal revenge against these inhumane Cabal members, not to lower us to their level.
The control and power comes back to the population, the deliberate poisoning of the World population will stop, so Chemtrails will soon be a thing of the past.
Suppressed inventions will be released to thrive as humanity in happiness and peace.
GMO food will be banned, we will live in harmony with nature, air and water will be clean again.
The deliberate manipulation of Weather and jet stream by HAARP will disappear, so that the water household of the earth will get its natural course again.
Deserts are going to become oases with a nice climate to live in, all Migrants have their own paradise on earth and can return to their own country to make their dream come true, with the help of the whole world community.
Every culture will experience its own form of transition, in which peace will be guaranteed, earlier indoctrination will be broken with all the revelations that lie ahead.
We have all suffered under the old system, the desire for peace will guide us to the future in peace and happiness.
It was an honour for me to be part of this with my personal commitment and longing for this freedom, to come out of the suffocating oppression of the Cabal. Think it's time for a party like Trump has announced that many people will be happy at the beginning of January 2019.
The battle is not over yet, but it is placed far in the right direction.
It is entirely my understanding of what I have written here, where everyone can have his own interpretation of his experience, as long as I do not have to discuss it, with people who have a limited information source.
Where also I don't have to be completely right in my story, I can make mistakes, which makes that I can learn from my mistakes, I’m human.
Science Explains Why Highly Intelligent People Prefer To Be Alone August 24 2024 | From: IdeaPod / Various
Scientists have a great idea about what is that is making people happy. It’s known that exercising can reduce the anxiety and help you relax.
Reducing the social media usage is going to improve your emotional wellbeing. Being in nature will bring us joy.
In addition, for numerous people, being around friends is making us feel happy and content. Friends are going to make you happier, unless you are highly intelligent.
This surprising claim is backed up by a research. In a paper that was published in the British Journal of Psychology, Satoshi Kanazawa and Norman Li explain why the very intelligent people are experiencing lower life satisfaction when they more frequently socialize with their close friends.
The scientists based their findings in evolutionary psychology, and they suggest that the intelligence evolved as a quality for solving the unique challenges. The more intelligent members of the group were more able to solve some issues on their own and they didn’t need help from their friends.
People are happier when they are with friends because we evolved on this way, but the more intelligent people are happier when they are alone.
Here’s the reason.
How Intelligence, Population Density, and Friendship Affect the Modern Happiness
The specialists reached their decision in the wake of breaking down study reactions from 15,197 individuals between the ages of 18 and 28. They got their information as a major aspect of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a study which measures life fulfillment, intelligence and health.
One of their key discoveries was accounted for by Inverse:
"Examination of this information uncovered that being around dense crowds of individuals ordinarily prompts unhappiness, while associating with companions regularly prompts joy – that is, unless the individual being referred to is exceptionally intelligent.”
The truth is out: associating with friends brings about expanding levels of joy unless you’re a truly smart individual.
The authors explain the findings they came across by raising the “savanna theory of happiness”, based on the idea that the life satisfaction of people is based not only on what’s happening in the present, but also by how the ancestors of ours may have reacted in the present moment.
The hypothesis originates from evolutionary psychology, and contends that the human brain was to a great extent planned by and adjusted to the states of the environment before we made a rural based society.
In this manner, the scientists contend, our brains are not appropriate to understanding and reacting to the one of a kind states of advanced society.
They analyzed two key factors that are unique to the modern era:
Population density
How frequently people socialize with their friends
According to the researchers, nowadays numerous people live in places of a higher population density than people before us would have lived in, and they spend less time with friends than people used to spend earlier.
Therefore, most people are going to become happier by living according to what is natural to them: spend more time with friends, and be around less people.
However, as the researchers stated, this doesn’t apply to highly intelligent persons.
"In general, more intelligent persons are more likely to have ‘unnatural’ preferences and values that the people before us did not have,” Kanazawa says.
“It is very natural for species such as humans to seek and desire friendships and, that’s why, more intelligent persons are likely to seek them less.”
They also found that the very intelligent people feel that they don’t benefit a lot from friendships, and yet they socialize more often than the less intelligent individuals.
Explaining the Research Finding That the Very Intelligent Individuals Want to be Alone
The most important question for the researchers is the reason why humans have adapted the quality of intelligence.
The evolutionary psychologists believe that the intelligence evolved as a psychological trait with the intention to solve new problems. For our ancestors, common contact with friends has been a necessity which has helped them to ensure their survival.
To be highly intelligent, however, meant that a person was uniquely able to solve challenges without needing the assistance of another person. This diminished the importance of friendships to these people.
In this way, an indication of somebody being exceedingly intelligent is extraordinarily having the capacity to comprehend challenges without the assistance of the gathering.
Historically, people have lived in groups of around 150: the typical Neolithic village was about this size. Thickly populated urban communities, then again, are accepted to bring out isolation and depression since they make it hard to encourage close relationships.
However, a busy and alienating place has to a lesser extent a contrary effect on more intelligent individuals. That may clarify why highly ambitious individuals float from rustic ranges to the urban areas.
"When all is said in done, urbanites have higher normal insight than ruralites do, conceivably in light of the fact that more intelligent people are better ready to live in ‘unnatural’ settings of high populace thickness,” says Kanazawa.
This Doesn’t Mean That if You Like to be Around Your Close Friends You Are Not Highly Intelligent
It’s also important to note that correlation in the research findings doesn’t mean causation.
In other words, the research findings don’t mean that if you enjoy to be surrounded by your friends that you are not highly intelligent.
While the highly intelligent persons may have adapted to be more comfortable in areas of high population density, the highly intelligent might also be “chameleons” – persons who are comfortable in various situations.
"What’s more important, the main associations of life satisfaction with the population density and socialization with our friends significantly interact with our intelligence, and the main association is reversed among the extremely intelligent people.
More intelligent persons experience lower life satisfaction with the more frequent socialization with friends.”
One of the key takeaways from this research could be to apply this to the introverts in your life.
Just because some person likes to be alone, doesn’t mean that they are lonely. They might just be highly intelligent and they are able to solve challenges on their own.
A Deeper Understanding Of Technocracy & Seven Things I Would Do If I Wanted To Keep Poor People Poor August 23 2024 | From: JonRappoport / BreakingViewsNZ
Technocracy is the basic agenda and plan for ruling global society from above, so we need to understand it from several angles.
Consider a group of enthusiastic forward-looking engineers in the early 20th century. They work for a company that has a contract to manufacture a locomotive.
On one level, workers are required to make the components to spec. Then they must put them all together. These tasks are formidable.
On another level, various departments of the company must coordinate their efforts. This is also viewed as a technological job. Organizing is considered a technology.
When the locomotive is finished and delivered, and when it runs on its tracks and pulls a train, a great and inspiring victory is won.
And then…the engineers begin to think about the implications.
Suppose the locomotive was society itself? Suppose society was the finished product? Couldn’t society be put together in a coordinated fashion? And couldn’t the “technology of organizing things” be utilized for the job?
Why bother with endlessly arguing and lying politicians? Why should they be in charge? Isn’t that an obvious losing proposition? Of course it is.
But engineers could lay out and build a future society that would benefit all people. Hunger, disease, and poverty could be wiped out. Eliminating them would be part of the uncompromising blueprint.
This “insight” hit engineers and technicians like a ton of bricks. Of course! All societies had been failures for the same reason: the wrong people were in charge.
Armed with this new understanding, engineers of every stripe began to see what was needed. A revolution in thinking about societal organization. Science was the new king. And science would rule.
Of course, for an engineered world to work, certain decisions would have to be made about the role of the individual. Every individual. You couldn’t have an air-tight plan if every human were free to pursue his own objectives.
Too many variables. Too much confusion. Too much conflict. Well, that problem could be solved. The individual’s actions would be tailored to fit the coordinated operations of the planned society.
The individual would be inserted into a pre-ordained slot. He would be “one of the components of the locomotive.” His life would be connected to other lives to produce an exemplary shape.
Yes, this could imply a few problems, but those problems could be worked out. They would have to be worked out, because the overriding goal was the forming of a world organization.
What would you do if one bolt (an individual human) in one wheel of a locomotive was the wrong size? You would go back and correct the error. You would re-make the bolt.
Among sincere technocrats, the overall vision superseded the glaring problems.
But…other people entered the game.
High-echelon Globalists saw technocracy as a system they could use to control the population. Control was their goal. Period. What happened to the individual in the process was of no concern to them.
The individual had freedom or he didn’t have freedom, and the Globalists overtly intended to wipe out that freedom.
Erasing hunger, poverty, illness? Nonsense. For the Globalists, those realities would be exacerbated. Sick, weak, and debilitated people were easier to rule and control and manage.
Essentially, a vastly misguided vision of a future technocratic utopia was hijacked. Something bad was made much worse.
In a nutshell, this is the history of technocracy.
A locomotive is a society? No. That was the first fatally flawed idea. Everything that followed was increasingly psychotic.
Unfortunately, many people in our world believe in Globalism, if you could call a partial vague view a legitimate belief.
They dreamily float on all the propaganda cover stories - greatest good for the greatest number of people; no more poverty; equality of sharing; reducing the carbon footprint; a green economy; “sustainable development”; international cooperation; engineering production and consumption of goods and services for the betterment of everyone; and all of this delivered from a central platform of altruistic guides.
If you track down the specifics that sit under these pronouncements, you discover you discover a warped system of planning that delivers misery and de facto slavery to the global population.
Waking up is hard to do? Breaking up is hard to do? They must be done.
A workable technological fix is a very nice achievement when the project is a machine. But transferring that glow of victory to the whole of society is an illusion. Anything that calls itself education would tackle the illusion as the first order of business.
For starters, I would advocate for a robust and ever-expanding welfare state - programs like Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment insurance, etc.
I would recognize that an effective recipe for keeping poor people poor is to create incentives that push them into decisions that prevent them from climbing out of poverty.
Rather than help individuals, the perverse economic incentives created by the “social safety net” trap aid recipients on welfare.
Specifically, the study concluded that in the case of a single mother with two children ages 1 and 4 earning $29,000 a year through work would be eligible for government benefits (such as Medicaid, housing vouchers, and subsidized daycare) equivalent to roughly an additional $28,000.
Such a scenario puts this woman in a bind. If she finds a better job paying more, or picks up more hours, she risks losing substantial amounts of benefits.
She would make her family financially worse off even though her paycheck would be bigger.
Just to come out even, once taxes are factored in, she would need to find work paying about $69,000 a year to compensate for the lost welfare benefits. Not many low-skilled workers can make such a leap.
It is a vicious, self-reinforcing cycle that keeps people poor and dependent on the state.
This scenario is commonly referred to as the welfare cliff. Confronted with this situation, many individuals understandably opt to continue receiving the government benefits.
Rather than help individuals, the perverse economic incentives created by the “social safety net” trap aid recipients on welfare.
And the longer they remain out of the workforce, or at lower levels of employment, the less employable they become. It is a vicious, self-reinforcing cycle that keeps people poor and dependent on the state.
Moreover, there is the impact the welfare state has on the family unit. Welfare programs break up families by replacing a father’s paycheck with a government check and benefits.
In my home state of North Carolina, families are roughly five times as likely to be in poverty when there is no father in the home.
2. Progressive Taxation Policy
High marginal taxes on profitable companies and small businesses alike discourage capital investment.
If I wanted to keep poor people poor, I also would finance the welfare state poverty trap through punitive taxes on the job and wealth creators of society.
The key ingredient to economic growth, and thus a higher standard of living for society’s poor, is through productivity gains made possible by capital investment.
High marginal taxes on profitable companies and small businesses alike discourage capital investment.
As businesses decide to either not expand or take their businesses to more investment-friendly countries, job opportunities dry up.
3. Increase the Minimum Wage
If I wanted to keep poor people poor, I would advocate for higher government-enforced minimum wages.
The law of supply and demand tells us that the higher the price of a good or service, the less of it will be demanded (other things held equal, of course).
The demand for low-skilled labor is no exception. Minimum wage laws are an effective tool to cut off the bottom rung of the career ladder.
Higher minimum wages will price more and more low-skilled people out of the labor market.
Meanwhile, the higher wages will attract more job seekers willing to supply their labor at the higher price. Employers will be able to be more selective in their hiring, and as such the lower-skilled job seekers will be crowded out of these opportunities by higher-skilled, less-needy candidates.
Minimum wage laws are an effective tool to cut off the bottom rung of the career ladder for those most in need of establishing work experience.
4. Support Restrictive “Green Energy” Policies
If I wanted to keep poor people poor, I would support government “green energy” initiatives that make energy more expensive.
State and federal initiatives that mandate more expensive “renewable” energy mean that - in the words of President Obama - utility bills “necessarily skyrocket.”
If I wanted to keep poor people poor, I would see to it that government imposes many costly regulations on businesses.
Such tight restrictions discourage businesses from starting or expanding,
Such tight restrictions discourage businesses from starting or expanding, meaning fewer job openings for those most in need of opportunity.
And mountains of red tape force business to expend scarce resources on compliance costs rather than investing in their businesses and creating jobs.
Higher-skilled compliance officer jobs will consume payroll that could have potentially gone toward opportunities for lower-skilled job seekers.
6. Inflate the Money Supply
If I wanted to keep poor people poor, I would support “quantitative easing” policies. Under such programs, the Federal Reserve [Central Banking / Reserve Banking] creates money out of thin air.
The inflated money supply then erodes the value of the dollars sitting in your wallet or bank account.
The poor are hit hardest by this inflation because their limited skill set makes it far more difficult for their incomes to keep up with the rising cost of living.
The price increases passed along to consumers disproportionately harm low-income households.
If I wanted to keep poor people poor, I would impose heavy tariffs on foreign goods in order to limit imports. Sure, the domestic industries protected from competition by these tariffs would prosper, but at what cost?
Furthermore, the price increases passed along to consumers disproportionately harm low-income households. The combination of fewer job opportunities and a higher cost of living certainly makes it harder for the poor to climb out of poverty.
Six Activities That Will Enrich Your Soul + The Benefits Of Mindfulness August 22 2024 | From: USHealthCorps / AustralianNationalReview
Our busy lives often leave us with a giant list of things we must do and seemingly no time for things we actually want to do.
While it’s important to take care of our responsibilities, it’s also crucial to our overall well-being to take care of our spirits.
Here are a few activities that will enrich your soul and help you find inner peace amid the chaos of life.
Teach Someone Something New or Learn a New Skill
Teaching someone something new can be an incredibly rewarding experience, giving you the pleasure of not only enhancing another person’s knowledge or skill set but leaving a legacy that will remain long after you’re gone.
Whether you know how to knit or crochet, paint, play the piano, or something as simple as snapping your fingers, sharing your expertise is a soul-nourishing experience. If there’s something you’d love to learn, ask an expert to tutor or mentor you and devote some time to making a better you.
Spend Some Quality Time with Four-legged Friends
If you have a friendly pet, you can enrich the lives of others while enriching your own soul by taking your furry friend to spend quality time with nursing home or assisted living residents or even hospital patients.
Of course, you should check with the facility to be sure that your pet has the required certifications. You might even consider getting your pet certified as a therapy animal so that you can spread the joy in more places.
If you don’t have a dog of your own, consider dog walking or dog boarding. It will allow you to get the mental and physical health boosts that come with spending time with animals, while also making a little extra money on the side.
Get Organized
A cluttered environment can add stress to your life, so give your home an organization overhaul. Clean out your closets and donate gently used items to charity, organize your home office, or invest in some storage baskets or cute containers to give your home an updated look while freeing up valuable space.
The sense of accomplishment you’ll get from taking care of these kinds of tasks (which, if you’re like many people, you’ve probably been procrastinating on for far too long) will result in less worry and anxiety, reduced stress, and greater peace.
Catch Up With Lost Connections
Our busy lives can often lead us to lose touch with faraway friends and family members. There’s no time like the present to fix that! Re-open the lines of communication with a phone call, an email, or even a handwritten letter.
Don’t be afraid to reach out – chances are, they’ve been thinking of you too and would love to hear from you. Whether it’s been weeks, months, or even years, reconnecting with a loved one will not only forgo feelings of loneliness, it’ll give you a chance to take a walk down memory lane and fill you with warm and fuzzies.
Curl Up with a Good Book
The busy pace of day-to-day life leaves most people with little time for recreational reading. Yet reading is one of the best ways to keep your mind sharp. You don’t have to read the Encyclopedia Britannica for your brain to benefit from reading; pick up that novel you’ve been itching to start since last year and cuddle up with a cup of tea. Whether you read a true account of a historical event or a fictional work, reading allows you to escape reality and visit faraway places from the comfort of your couch.
Create a Personal Growth Plan
We all have goals in life, both professional and personal, so start creating a plan to achieve them. Make a vision board, write down your goals, and develop a strategy for becoming the person you want to be. Creating a personal growth plan is a beneficial way to look toward the future and develop an optimistic mindset about what life has in store for you.
Our giant to-do lists may try to tell us otherwise, but there’s always time for a little soul therapy. Find an activity (or two, or three!) that makes you feel happy and incorporate it into your routine. You’d be surprised at the number of benefits you’ll see in all aspects of your life when you give yourself time for joy.
Eric Johnson’s own struggles with arthritis are what inspired him to volunteer to write for USHealthCorps.org. He hopes his work on the site can help others live healthy, happy lives despite their chronic illnesses.
The Benefits Of Mindfulness
Distractions are abounding and it affects the way we work - at home and at the office. A large number of people have trouble concentrating and this is where mindfulness comes in.
A form of meditation, mindfulness helps you develop stronger concentration powers. Large corporate companies such as Apple, Google and Starbucks amongst others offer training in mindfulness for their employees.
Forbes talks about this notion and shares how it can help boost your life and your career.
So What is Mindfulness?
A simple yet effective form of meditation, mindfulness makes you more focused, helping you to gain control over unruly thoughts. It is therefore a great way to reduce daily stress as it gives you control over your thoughts and prevents pondering on negative ones.
It makes you calm and allows you to go through the day in a productive manner. Ellen Langer, a psychologist at the Harvard University says;
“Mindfulness is the process of actively noticing new things. When you do that, it puts you in the present. It makes you more sensitive to context and perspective. It’s the essence of engagement.”
She adds that the "“mindless negative evaluations” that people make and the presumptions about problems they won’t be able to solve is what makes their day stressful."
Mindfulness and its Importance
Though there are many benefits of mindfulness, the main reason so many companies are banking on it is its ability to directly improve performance. The many studies which Langer has conducted in this regard have been accurate. Here are five other reasons why companies are focussed on mindfulness:
1. It relieves stress
Stress not only affects your performance but also your personality. Forbes explains “…it’s a people killer”. According to a research conducted by Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, 75% of healthcare expense is due to stress and two-thirds of hospital visits are for the same reason. Stress can increase your blood pressure, lead to cancer, insomnia, heart disease, anxiety, depression, autoimmune diseases and so on. Mindfulness makes you calm and takes you out of the stress mode.
2. It helps you concentrate
Mindfulness teaches you to focus on one thing at a time and this impacts everything you do. It teaches you to avoid distractions and complete one task at a time. Though we have all been subjected to multitasking, it is in fact a productivity killing practice and mindfulness lets you overcome this.
3. It makes you more creative
Creativity will depend on your mental state. Thus, when you are rid of negative thoughts and can focus, you are more likely to be creative. You can defeat the thoughts which cover up your creative skills. You can think creatively and freely because mindfulness lets you concentrate on the present.
4. It helps improve EQ
Something which cannot be perceived easily, emotional intelligence or EQ affects the way we behave, our social bonds, interactions and the decisions we make. It is your ability to understand emotions and use this knowledge to deal with relationships. Years of research have revealed that EQ is what sets star performers apart from mediocre ones. Forbes conducted studies at its workplace and found that the top performers were also high on EQ.
5. It makes you a better person
A study by the Harvard University revealed that there was in fact a link between ‘mindfulness and prosaical behaviour’. Those who practice meditation are 50% more likely to be compassionate towards others as compared to those who don’t.
Harvard Scientific Paper Details Entire Geo-Engineering Program Using Jet Aircraft August 21 2024 | From: NaturalNews / Various
Geoengineering is a controversial subject, to say the least, with so many different theories about its origins and implementation.
Geoengineering using aircraft has a long history and many different forms from cloud seeding in the 1960s over Vietnam in Project Pop-Eye to ski resorts using commercial weather modification companies to create snow to this day.
Far from a conspiracy theory, Geoengineering is being openly bragged about by China and Russia, both using jet aircraft to spray chemicals to disperse clouds for national holiday parades.
China has a huge Geoengineering program to create rain for its agricultural regions and publicly admits it. Using jet aircraft and mountain top dispersal units to inject chemicals into the atmosphere to make rain for crops.
Yet when the subject comes up in the Western zeitgeist, it is automatically a far out conspiracy theory which is to be ridiculed, that such a thing could even exist.
Many observers content a secret program already exists in Western countries to control the weather using jet aircraft.
Dispersing long plumes of chemicals in the sky to alter the climate in various ways, exactly as is being done elsewhere by other governments.
It only adds to speculation when the summation of all the U.S. funded government research on future Geoengineering describe a program that is a mirror image of what curious observers are seeing now.
Using jets to disperse chemical aerosols at high altitude to reduce solar radiation. The U.S. government claims Geoengineering is definitely not going on right now but probably will be in the future.
“After surveying an exhaustive list of potential deployment techniques, we settle upon an aircraft-based delivery system.”
- Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner
A recently published IOP Science paper by Harvard scientists Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner titled “Stratospheric Aerosol Injection Tactics and Costs in the First Fifteen Years of Deployment” is a collation of all the public research on Geoengineering and prescribes a program using high altitude aircraft to disperse chemicals in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and curb global warming.
Going into all the details that would constitute a Geoengineering program. This paper gives a rare insight into how such a thing would operate, how much it would cost and how many planes would be needed.
Lending clues to those that want to estimate the size and scope of any possible ongoing Geoengineering that may be occurring over Western countries but is being kept classified.
The paper even bemoans the fact that such a program would be very difficult to keep secret.
Harvard scientists Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner state that such a program would be hard to keep classified since jet aircraft would be leaving long plumes of chemicals behind them that span the entire sky blocking the sun in a soupy haze.
Keen observers would surely notice the changes and criss-crossing patterns of aircraft trails littering the sky from horizon to horizon.
Sounds very familiar to what is being seen by so many now, in the skies over many N.A.T.O. countries, that deny such programs exist.
“We conclude by arguing that, while cheap, such an aircraft-based program would unlikely be a secret, given the need for thousands of flights annually by airliner-sized aircraft operating from an international array of bases.
- Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner
These white papers are thinly veiled, making things sound rosy. Who would admit to such a thing? Read between the lines to get a gauge of what may be going on now.
Using the paper to get a guesstimate on how big and costly a current Geoengineering program may be.
The paper states the cost of Geoengineering for Solar Radiation Management by way of jet aircraft at 2.25 billion a year, possibly up to 5 billion a year.
That’s for the whole globe but this does not include the ill health effects on the population of the world.
“We calculate early-year costs of ~$1500 ton−1 of material deployed, resulting in average costs of ~$2.25 billion yr−1 over the first 15 years of deployment. We further calculate the number of flights at ~4000 in year one, linearly increasing by ~4000 yr−1."
- Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner
The paper also calls for a new type of stratospheric tanker plane for future operations. Eventually building up to a fleet of 95 new aircraft that fly higher and carry more aerosol by 2047.
At its peak conducting 60,109 flights per year.
There must be 100's of available modified aircraft being used for any current operations since it states today’s modified dispersion jets don’t go high enough or carry as much aerosol as desired.
A conservative estimate would be a hundred and fifty thousand flights, or more would be needed for this type of operation using today’s modified dispersal aircraft at possibly twice the cost.
“However, we also conclude that developing a new, purpose-built high-altitude tanker with substantial payload capabilities would neither be technologically difficult nor prohibitively expensive.
- Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner
The U.S. and other N.A.T.O. countries deny ongoing programs exist but say they would like to do Geoengineering with jet aircraft in the future.
The exact same thing that western observers are seeing now and that other less technologically advanced counties are already doing openly.
“Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) would require lofting hundreds of thousands to millions of tons of material each year to altitudes up to ~20 km.
Here we seek answers to three questions: if SAI deployment were to commence within the foreseeable future with the tools and technologies at our disposal, how would such deployment be physically achieved, how much would it cost, and could it be done in secret?
- Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner
It’s as if a gang of robbers was on the loose and everyone can see the smashed windows all over town if they look up from their smartphones.
A group of professional robbers then publishes a series of detailed articles in the local newspaper about how to rob homes by smashing windows “if they ever wanted to do it” in the future.
All the major details of the plan fit exactly what is being seen by witnesses, but the robbers say everyone is crazy, that its not happening and how could any sane person possibly believe it.
At the same time stating they would really like to rob homes by way of smashing windows, if given a chance, at some point in the future and are currently experimenting with it.
Spirit Led Activism - The True Power Of The People + Rites Of Passage - Encountering Spiritual “Initiations” On The Path August 20 2024 | From: WakingTimes / WakeUpWorld
As the world is driven into a state of chaos by a combination of top down despotism and bottom up politically correct pacifism, seekers of ‘the path’ sit in the lotus position contemplating their navels or drifting into the ether of another world.
Seeking to participate in inner spiritual disciplines can quite easily be used as an excuse for doing nothing. Nothing about anything that actually matters.
Nothing that would constitute making a stand against the destruction going on all around us.
I say “can be quite easily used” because many aspirants who fill spiritual seminars, workshops, conferences and retreats all over the planet, have adopted the popular view that they shouldn’t be involved in confronting anything – except possibly, themselves.
The claim they make is that trying to prevent something bad from happening goes against ‘inner spiritual work.’ It is ‘confrontational’ and therefore encourages a negative vibration, when what is called for is “peace, love and tolerance”.
This is an evasion of the simple human responsibility (response-ability) to act when faced by stark cases of injustice and cruelty.
It is not a spiritual reaction at all; it is rather the opposite, a simple act of cowardice which hides behind metaphysical teachings that say one must go ‘inward’ only, rather than outward, if one wants to do any good in the world.
Such a convenient mantra for those who wish to avoid feeling or taking any responsibility for the shocking levels of cruelty and destruction which they themselves freely admit to witnessing, and indirectly supporting, on a daily level.
“No” such people say, “we will make a better world only by meditating and changing the vibrational level from carbon to crystalline.
It is not for us to do battle with the forces of evil that control this world. If they succeed in their ambitions – and trash our planet in the process – it is because evil is still more prevalent than good, so we must keep meditating in order to become more spiritual and avoid being caught up in any form of conflict!”
Now the irony of this situation is really quite profound. Because what these spirit seekers are saying and doing – assuming that at least some are really ‘doing’ their spirit work and are not on a purely escapist trip – is not out-and-out wrong.
But, without an equal and complementary commitment to cease supporting that which they know to be insupportable – plus a commitment to give active service to humanity and pressing planetary needs, it is essentially meaningless and should be recognized as a form of deception.
Only half of something whole – taken as if it was whole – is a dangerous delusion. A half truth, when taken to be whole truth, is indeed a grand deception and one particularly popular with the political class.
Spiritual self-improvement must always be coupled to tangible actions in support of humanity, otherwise it becomes regressive.
At the other end of the spectrum, there are those who join protest movements and direct action groups, who won’t hear of anything to do with ‘the spiritual’ getting in their way.
People who are often brave and indeed courageous souls, and whose struggle to protect the Creator’s kingdom against wanton acts of destruction is considerably closer to the true essence of spirituality than is the cosseted world in which many of the so-called spiritual aspirants reside.
Bravery is an important quality, but many of those heading out to block attempts to drive a new motorway through a pristine forest would be a hundred times more effective if they added the power of a conscious spiritual intent to their struggle.
Why, oh why, do people have to identify with one or other of these approaches? Why cannot we all settle for declaring ourselves ‘spiritual activists’ and get on with the job?
This is the quality that really has the power to make/bring change for the better.
Nothing can stand in the way of fully committed passionate souls, who combine their inner and outer powers to protect and promote all that has value and beauty on planet earth.
While it may sound heroic, this is in fact the natural state of expression for a human being who has not succumbed to society’s ubiquitous mind control techniques and/or fallen prey to pretentious propaganda.
An unsullied human instinct will react to acts of obvious injustice by expressing a strong sense of righteous indignation which leads on to the desire to take action!
This is because we are all linked-up, and on the collective subconscious plain, are one.
When one see one’s fellow kind being kicked in the head by some crazed vagrant, one’s first (and best) instinct is to try to help the person in trouble.
Now extend that emotion into the animal, plant and all living matter kingdom, and one will find that it is one’s heart that is leading the way. It is one’s heart that is leading the rebellion against rank injustice – and no one will argue against the fact that the heart lies at the centre of our innate spirituality.
‘To follow one’s heart’ is the first stepping stone on the road of truth. Actions that flow from here represent a genuine spiritual response. One based on compassion and empathy for and with the divine diversity of creation.
Taking action to defend that creation is spiritual activism. Here is the response of someone whose inner and outer self are not alienated or in conflict with each other.
It is the dynamic of balance. A state in which the collective spirit of love that we share with fellow beings, is activated and acted upon. Yes, activated and acted upon. Both.
The spiritual activist is our natural state of pre mind controlled being.
The being who has not been pacified by indoctrination to the ways of the status quo. Who has not sought to identify with the spirit alone – or with the warrior alone – but quite naturally finds that he/she is, by sheer dint of being human, is both these.
How our world would rejoice should this breed of actor emerge at the forefront of the affairs of man!
We have had enough of compartmentalized divisions of oneness. Quite enough, thank you. ‘Nowhere’ is precisely where we will get so long as people continue to split themselves up into divisions of the whole and then believe they have found ‘the way’.
So, do meditation and spirit work by all means, but then immediately pour the fruits of it into taking action against injustice – and beyond that – towards the process of building a new model of humanity.
Real Action is not about congratulating one’s self for sending a pre-prepared text message to Greenpeace to stop oil drilling in the Arctic.
Real Action is where one puts one’s self on the line – body, mind and spirit – to fight for a decent future for humanity in all the myriad ways in which this is so absolutely vital today.
Albert Einstein said “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.” Never were truer words spoken.
At a time of mass deceit and corruption at the highest levels of society, worldwide, everyone who has a heart needs to have their hands clasp onto the rope of resistance.
Everyone who has a soul, and some basic level of awareness, needs to go forth into the world and start setting in motion a great turning in the affairs of man.
A turning which will reflect the potential, beauty and power of the human actor in full creative flow. Spirit and action in movement – conjoined as one.
So from here on in, say Godspeed to the emergence of the spiritual activist – and say goodbye to the world of half way houses that twist the truth into selfish self-concern for a cosseted life of make-believe sainthood.
And while you’re at it, also say goodbye to all other such deviations from the truth that sap the life blood out of existence.
They are windows of possibility where your soul is wanting to grow and expand into a new level of conscious existence. So the Universe conspires to present a cauldron of alchemical change, where you’re tested emotionally, physically and mentally to your threshold and beyond.
It’s a bit like a new flower, working to breakthrough tough surface layers. By those pathfinders who’ve endured them, they’ve become known as ‘initiations’.
They are the most earth-shattering, bone-shaking you will encounter.
So it pays to know something of what they are about. It can help you make sense of what’s going on…
Surrendering to the Soul
Your inner configuration of consciousness creates the exact outer circumstances of your life.
Based on the degree of soul infusion, determines how aligned that reality will be. If there’s still a lot of identity, ego or karmic filters, then you’ll create varying degrees of disharmony, frustration and lack of fulfillment.
And so as a result of these feelings, there’s then encouragement and motivation to reconfigure your existence by going within and unfolding new aspects of being - it’s the only way to truly change the outer.
There’s still a huge amount of talk in the spiritual mainstream and motivational circles about ‘manifesting the reality you want’.
The approach is to envision, then intentionally bring into being, that which you desire. It is an approach that is fatally flawed.
The soul will ultimately find a way through with an entirely different agenda: that of evolutionary growth and self-actualisation through unbounded self expression.
Intentional manifestation may work for a while, but ultimately, as the bubble bursts, there’s a surrendering once more to the soul’s rightful journey.
And initially, as you work to infuse soul, making that your aim, it’s going feel pretty expansive and at times blissful - because of the letting go, the surrender.
But that’s far from the end of the story, because the inner reality needs to then infuse into the outer, so as to create a congruent reflection. And this is where initiations take place.
In the Corridor of Change
There comes the point of Realignment on the path. I’ve spoken of it in the 5GATEWAYS Documentary. It where there’s realisation that only surrender to the soul’s calling can lead to fulfillment in life.
It’s not an intellectual shift; rather a kind of ‘breaking down sobbing of surrender’. “I will not do another thing until I can feel it coming from my soul!” It’s at this point that you open the doorway to the superhighway of spiritual growth, and with that, accelerating initiations.
The soul will work to merge your consciousness through your being and into the outer reality.
But in so doing, it’s going to hit not only your blockages and distortions of the old bodymind consciousness, but then also the imbalances and disharmony in the outer world you’ve created.
Thus begins a near constant confrontation with the old reality.
This is the point where many seekers on the path turn back.
I’ve witnessed it countless times: it becomes too intense to persist. There’s a losing of trust, and as the inner density gets churned up, it becomes exceptionally hard to hear your divine guidance mechanism.
It becomes all too easy to slip into denial and accept a lesser existence.
But this is not the time to stop! It’s the perfect time to remember exactly why you’re doing it. If you don’t persist, that window of opportunity will close, and it can take time to reconfigure and re-open.
It’s not going to be easy: it may mean the ending of a relationship where you’ve spent many years together, where ties have to be unbound; it may mean leaving a career or general living situation with no certainty of what is to come next.
The path is definitely not all love and light!
How To Open Your 7 Chakras As Explained In a Children's Show
Abandoned and Cast Adrift in Confusion: Key Signs of an Initiation
An initiation often feels like you’ve been abandoned, cast adrift in confusion, as if the Universe is having some great cosmic joke at your expense. It will make it easier to know the key signs you’re actually undertaking one...
Key Signs of an Initiation:
You’re beset with near constant patterns of outer confrontation in your life
Things don’t want to work in the ways they used to - everything seems to be breaking down
Where previously your internal guidance mechanism worked well for you, now it’s hard to figure out even the simplest of choices
Emotionally you’re pushed to the limit; physically your body aches; intellectually the mind struggles to make sense
It becomes exceptionally hard to trust what you know in the heart to be true – the outer world keeps reflecting the old consciousness
Relationships, careers and general living circumstances are all challenged.
When I’ve encountered these myself on the path, it kind of feels like the metamorphosis of a butterfly: you enter into a ‘crysalis phase’, where everything internal feels like it’s turning to mush - prior to the resplendent new form coming through.
So crucially, if you find yourself encountering a phase in your life like something I’ve described, you could well be engaged in an initiation.
It is not about making it easier! It is not about immediately dropping the pain like proverbial hot coals and turning away! It’s about walking courageously right into the jaws of it. But you can make the process more manageable. Here’s how…
Making Initiations Manageable:
Turn completely into it. Don’t reject or push the hardship away.
Don’t try to fix the outer world with some quick or expediently comfortable solution.
Don’t back away. Instead, go right into the very heart of it. Let it churn you up and break you down.
Keep looking for the internal tightness, whether it be physical, emotional, mental or karmi- express into it, let the pain and anguish come through you.
Then, when you’ve normalised in this internal tsunami of uncertainty - when the ‘boat’ has righted itself — look for a new aspect of beingness that wants to come through and light the path forwards.
Commit wholeheartedly to the new pathway.
Watch and celebrate as the new reality takes shape.
Project Total Control: Everything Is A Weapon When Totalitarianism Is Normalized + BRICS ‘Core’ Of Global Efforts To Build ‘Just’ World August 19 2024 | From: ZeroHedge / Geopolitics / Various
"The biggest mistake I see is people waiting for A Big Sign that’ll tell them that things have gone too far. One Big Thing that police or lawmakers or the president/leaders will do that will cross the line."
"It’ll never come because they won’t cross it. They’ll move the line. That line you think you stand behind is shifting everyday with little actions, bills, legislations…"
"That line will stop moving one day, & it’ll be too late... Every day, your sensitivity is being eroded by these willful atrocities. The envelope for what you’ll accept is being pushed. One day, all of these things will be your new normal.”- Nigerian writer Suyi Davies Okungbowa
The U.S. government is working to re-shape the country [world] in the image of a totalitarian state.
This has remained true over the past 50-plus years no matter which political party held office.
Yet we must never lose sight of the fact that both the Right and the Left and their various operatives are extensions of the Deep State, which continues to wage psychological warfare on the American people.
Psychological warfare, according to the Rand Corporation, “involves the planned use of propaganda and other psychological operations to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of opposition groups.”
We live in an age that is gesturing towards global government. This is not a conspiracy theory; it is something which perfectly respectable politicians, academics, policymakers and UN officials routinely talk about.
What is crystallising is not exactly a single world Government, but rather a complicated mixture of aligned institutions, organisations, networks, systems and fora which has sometimes been given the fancy name of a ‘bricolage’ by international relations theorists. There is no centre, but rather a vast and nebulous conglomeration.
For years now, the government has been bombarding the citizenry with propaganda campaigns and psychological operations aimed at keeping us compliant, easily controlled and supportive of the government’s various efforts abroad and domestically.
The government is so confident in its Orwellian powers of manipulation that it’s taken to bragging about them.
“Have you ever wondered who’s pulling the strings?” the psyops video posits. “Anything we touch is a weapon. We can deceive, persuade, change, influence, inspire. We come in many forms. We are everywhere.”
This is the danger that lurks in plain sight.
Of the many weapons in the government’s vast arsenal, psychological warfare may be the most devastating in terms of the long-term consequences.
Mind you, these psyops (psychological operations) campaigns aren’t only aimed at foreign enemies.
The government has made clear in word and deed that “we the people” are domestic enemies to be targeted, tracked, manipulated, micromanaged, surveilled, viewed as suspects, and treated as if our fundamental rights are mere privileges that can be easily discarded.
Aided and abetted by technological advances and scientific experimentation, the government has been subjecting the American people to “apple-pie propaganda” for the better part of the last century.
Consider some of the ways in which the government continues to wage psychological warfare on a largely unsuspecting citizenry in order to acclimate us to the Deep State’s totalitarian agenda.
Stories about increased food production in China and cows reducing greenhouse gas emissions by eating methane-emitting plants are being ignored by the media.
Perhaps, according to Daily Sceptic Environment Editor Chris Morrison, it is because they don’t square with the Net Zero “hysteria.”
Weaponizing Violence in Order to Institute Martial Law
With alarming regularity, the nation continues to be subjected to spates of violence that terrorizes the public, destabilizes the worlds ecosystem, and gives the government greater justifications to crack down, lock down, and institute even more authoritarian policies for the so-called sake of national security without many objections from the citizenry.
Weaponizing Surveillance, Pre-Crime and Pre-Thought Campaigns
Surveillance, digital stalking and the data mining of the American people add up to a society in which there’s little room for indiscretions, imperfections, or acts of independence.
When the government sees all and knows all and has an abundance of laws to render even the most seemingly upstanding citizen a criminal and lawbreaker, then the old adage that you’ve got nothing to worry about if you’ve got nothing to hide no longer applies.
Add pre-crime programs into the mix with government agencies and corporations working in tandem to determine who is a potential danger and spin a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports using automated eyes and ears, social media, behavior sensing software, and citizen spies, and you having the makings for a perfect dystopian nightmare.
A senior New Zealand police officer, verified by the Free Speech Union, has raised serious concerns about recent training and policy changes within the police force.
The officer, with a master’s dissertation on hate speech legislation, highlighted the problematic nature of these developments, particularly the internal so-called “Hate Hub” on the police intranet.
Weaponizing Digital Currencies, Social Media Scores and Censorship
Tech giants, working with the government, have been meting out their own version of social justice by way of digital tyranny and corporate censorship, muzzling whomever they want, whenever they want, on whatever pretext they want in the absence of any real due process, review or appeal.
Even the most well-intentioned government law or program can be - and has been - perverted, corrupted and used to advance illegitimate purposes once profit and power are added to the equation.
The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on COVID-19, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.
For the past century, the Department of Defense’s Entertainment Media Office has provided Hollywood with equipment, personnel and technical expertise at taxpayer expense.
Apart from the overt dangers posed by a government that feels justified and empowered to spy on its people and use its ever-expanding arsenal of weapons and technology to monitor and control them, there’s also the covert dangers associated with a government empowered to use these same technologies to influence behaviors en masse and control the populace.
It’s a short hop, skip and a jump from a behavioral program that tries to influence how people respond to paperwork to a government program that tries to shape the public’s views about other, more consequential matters.
“We saw the buildup of events from the swine flu of 2009, Zika, the Ebola scare of 2014, et cetera. Escalating throughout the 2010’s into the Covid scare of the past few years.
And now, we are on the cusp of potentially another scare which might cause the actual political impetus and even the public to get on board with the idea of the World Health Organization swooping in to save the day with their brand new pandemic agreement.”
Weaponizing Desensitization Campaigns Aimed at Lulling Us Into a False Sense of Security
The events of recent years - the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the lockdowns, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers - have conspired to acclimate the populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.
Weaponizing Politics
The language of fear is spoken effectively by politicians on both sides of the aisle, shouted by media pundits from their cable TV pulpits, marketed by corporations, and codified into bureaucratic laws that do little to make our lives safer or more secure.
Fear, as history shows, is the method most often used by politicians to increase the power of government and control a populace, dividing the people into factions, and persuading them to see each other as the enemy.
This Machiavellian scheme has so ensnared the nation that few Americans even realize they are being manipulated into adopting an “us” against “them” mindset. Instead, fueled with fear and loathing for phantom opponents, they agree to pour millions of dollars and resources into political elections, militarized police, spy technology and endless wars, hoping for a guarantee of safety that never comes.
All the while, those in power - bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporations - move their costly agendas forward, and “we the suckers” get saddled with the tax bills and subjected to pat downs, police raids and round-the-clock surveillance.
The Ardern years continue to blight the nation. It’s not just the destructive policies and debilitating debt but the lasting dysfunctional governance both public and private that routinely lies to us and infantilises us.
The legacy media are gone. They are now pimps for government and corporate propaganda.
Endless repetition makes lies truth, with dissent deplatformed and demonised.
Not only does fear grease the wheels of the transition to fascism by cultivating fearful, controlled, pacified, cowed citizens, but it also embeds itself in our very DNA so that we pass on our fear and compliance to our offspring.
It’s called epigenetic inheritance, the transmission through DNA of traumatic experiences. For example, neuroscientists observed that fear can travel through generations of mice DNA.
As The Washington Postreports, “Studies on humans suggest that children and grandchildren may have felt the epigenetic impact of such traumatic events such as famine, the Holocaust and the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.”
Weaponizing the Dystopian Future
With greater frequency, the government has been issuing warnings about the dire need to prepare for the dystopian future that awaits us.
What they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.
The chilling five-minute training video paints an ominous picture of the future bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots. “We the people” are the have-nots.
“Government gangsters are the group of individuals - career bureaucrats - who have been installed by what we call the deep state into every agency and department in the United States government,” explains Kash Patel, the narrator of the new documentary film Government Gangsters.
The end goal of these mind control campaigns - packaged in the guise of the greater good - is to see how far the people will allow the government to go in undermining our freedoms.
The facts speak for themselves.
Whatever else it may be - a danger, a menace, a threat - the government is certainly not looking out for our best interests, nor is it in any way a friend to freedom.
When the government views itself as superior to the citizenry, when it no longer operates for the benefit of the people, when the people are no longer able to peacefully reform their government, when government officials cease to act like public servants, when elected officials no longer represent the will of the people, when the government routinely violates the rights of the people and perpetrates more violence against the citizenry than the criminal class, when government spending is unaccountable and unaccounted for, when the judiciary act as courts of order rather than justice, and when the government is no longer bound by the laws of the Constitution, then you no longer have a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.”
BRICS ‘Core’ Of Global Efforts To Build ‘Just’ World
The Iranian deputy foreign minister says the BRICS group of emerging economies is resolved to build a justice-based world and serve the interests of independent countries.
The BRICS group serves as the “core and engine of a global collective effort for creating a world rooted in justice and safeguarding the interests of independent countries,” he told a meeting held to discuss Iran-Russia relations on Friday.
The Iranian diplomat is in Kazan, the Republic of Tatarstan, to take part in the 15th International Economic Forum “Russia-Islamic World: KazanForum 2024”.
He said Iran and Russia are determined to make use of BRICS’ active and joint capabilities to establish a just world.
"Our firm will in the BRICS group is to prepare the ground for the joining of other regional and international actors to move more effectively and efficiently in international relations,” he added.
He noted that member states of the BRICS, particularly Brazil, South Africa and India, can help independent countries play a role in creating a just world that will promote peace and welfare of nations across the globe.
Iran officially became a member of the BRICS at the beginning of 2024, five months after it announced its acceptance as full member into the group along with Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, the UAE and Saudi Arabia.
BRICS was formed by and initially consisted of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, which collectively represent around 40% of the global population and a quarter of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP).
Do you know this inner turmoil, where you swing from excited hope for a beautiful future, to a terrible sense of dread as you see what is happening in our world?
Iran was among dozens of countries that sought membership in BRICS and had submitted a formal application to join the body.
Elsewhere in his address, Bagheri Kani extended his congratulations to Russian President Vladimir Putin on his landslide reelection victory and expressed hope Tehran and Moscow will further promote cordial relations in all fields at regional and international levels.
He said Iran is actively participating in the Russia-Islamic World Economic Forum and seeks to make its utmost efforts to remove the obstacles in the way of enhanced cooperation.
Given growing relations between Tehran and Moscow in recent years, the two sides need to turn common capacities into multilateral projects to further boost mutual relations and use the capacities of regional and international countries in this regard, the Iranian diplomat emphasized.
He said Iran and Russia are determined to improve bilateral cooperation in different sectors with the purpose of establishing relations based on justice among independent countries.
Qatar Attends ‘Russia-Islamic World: Kazan Forum 2024’
Minister of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs H E Ghanem bin Shaheen Al Ghanim (centre) and Tatarstan’s President H E Rustam Minnikhanov (first right) along with officials during the forum
Doha, Qatar: The State of Qatar’s official delegation participates in the 15th International Economic Forum “Russia-Islamic World: Kazan Forum 2024”, held in Kazan city in Tatarstan Republic between May14-19 2024, as the delegation witnessed the official inauguration of “Russia Halal Expo” international exhibition.
On the sidelines of the forum, a series of bilateral meetings were held, as Qatar’s delegation headed by Minister of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, H E Ghanem bin Shaheen Al Ghanim met H E Rustam Minnikhanov Tatarstan’s President.
Mohammed bin Hassan Al Malki, Undersecretary of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, and H E Sheikh Ahmed bin Nasser Al Thani, Qatar’s Ambassador to the Russian Federation and accompanying delegation were also present during the meeting.
The delegation also met H E Marat Khusnullin, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, and H E Oleg Korobchenko, Tatarstan’s Minister of Industry and Trade.
The meetings witnessed discussing topics of common interest in aim of enhancing the cooperation between the two countries in commerce, investment, and industry, in addition to exchanging views on the topics in the forum’s agenda.
The meetings highlighted Qatar’s economic policies that proved successful in supporting the private sector, reviewing incentives, legislations, and opportunities available in the country that aim to encourage investors and businessmen to invest in Qatar.
On a related level, Qatar’s delegation toured the “Russia Halal Expo”, which is held within the framework of the forum, and were introduced to various pavilions, services, and products offered by participating companies.
It is worth to note that Kazan Forum 2024 aims to enhance commercial, economic, academic, technical, social, and cultural ties between the Russian Federation and (OIC) countries.
The forum witnessed throughout its days, organizing events and dialogue sessions that revolved over various topics including Islamic financing, Halal manufacturing, investment, industry, logistic services, tourism, technologies, international cooperation, diplomacy, principles of environmental, social, and governance practices, SMEs, medicine, sports, and others.
The forum also witnessed holding two media related sessions, on the occasion of the 55th anniversary of the establishment of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (IOC), one entitled as “Main Directions in Transformation of the Information Field in Modern world and IOC Countries”.
And the other as “Information Space Between Unification and Fragmentation” on global and Islamic countries levels for media representatives and heads of major broadcasting organizations, during which modern media issues in countries which have worldwide influence in terms of media was discussed, as well as highlighting modern technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things, and Cloud Computing, and their impact on reforming contemporary information.
How To Open The Doors Of Perception At Will Without Psychedelics August 18 2024 | From: CollectiveEvolution / Various
What if you found out there was a key that would enable you to open and close your doors of perception at will, void of psychedelics?
What if you found out you not only held the key, but you were the key? Would you unlock the doors, or keep them shut?
The Facts: Use of psychedelics are not necessary in the journey of opening the doors of personal and collective perception. In fact, one can go much deeper with sober practice.
Reflect On:
What do you do on a regular basis to expand or explore your consciousness? If you have used psychedelics before, have you implemented what they showed you? If you keep going back to psychedelics, why?
“The door to the soul is unlocked; you do not need to please the doorkeeper, the door in front of you is yours, intended for you, and the doorkeeper obeys when spoken to.”
- Robert Bly
What if you found out there was a key that would enable you to open and close your doors of perception at will, void of psychedelics?
What if you found out you not only held the key, but you were the key? Would you unlock the doors, or keep them shut?
Well, you are the key, and whether or not you choose to enter through the doors is a choice that, although invisible, is life changing.
You are the vehicle for the trip, consider this but a mere travel summary.
And for a detailed itinerary? Well, that can only be fetched by you -not the part of you reading this, but the altered dream state part of your consciousness that will travel beyond the doors of perception to the wildness of the world where there is a livingness to all things - as it can only be found in a place with exclusive access.
A place where you can travel, but no one may follow - not even the conscious, waking state version of yourself scanning these very words.
If you have experimented with psychedelics, you most likely know what it is like to sense the type of “livingness” to all things of which I speak.
Even if you haven’t used psychedelics, though, you almost certainly have still experienced this same livingness to all things in the world around you to a noticeable degree at least once, but probably various times as a child - a moment where the world around you took on a shimmery glow, colours suddenly appeared brighter, sounds louder and clearer, physical sensations amplified and, most notably, you could FEEL the world around you.
I am not referring to the physical, touching type of feeling, but to the intangible, energy sense of feeling where you could almost feel the luminosity of the world around you within, and you and the luminous rested in harmony as if you were one.
You were present, your perceptions altered, your senses heightened. In short, your sensory gating channels opened to some degree, a process more commonly referred to as opening your doors of perception.
Sensory Gating Explained: The Science Behind the Doors of Perception
The “doors of perception” are the part of our brain and central nervous system responsible for filtering input from all external stimuli, involving all of your senses -feeling (both physical and nonphysical), sight, sound, taste and smell.
This process, known as “sensory gating,” enables us to decipher the difference between “me” and “not me.” Through sensory gating, we are able to manage and comprehend the constant stream of sensory data from the external environment.
Without it, we would be unable to filter out what matters and what doesn’t, and all sensory data would touch us deeply and ultimately, we would become overstimulated and overwhelmed and go “crazy” - according to modern medicine, that is.
You see, many of the people who are now referred to as “schizophrenics” have wide sensory gating channels that they do not know how to close, causing an overload in stimulus.
In indigenous cultures, these people would have instead been called SHAMANS, and would have been taught how to control their doors of perception and open and close them as need be.
There are ways to begin opening the doors of perception, or sensory gating channels, without using psychedelics.
Of course, the experience will not be as intense or immediate, but nor will it be short lived.
Rather, by utilizing practices that help open your sensory gating channels to some degree by altering your state of consciousness, you learn to open the doors of perception into the metaphysical background of the world and continuously uncover deeper truths to yourself and the world around you.
In essence, playing with the doors of perception in this manner, rather than through the use of mind altering substances, allows you to do more than have a life changing experience in which you see the deeper meanings to life for a brief period of time (i.e. a “trip”), but to change your life where every moment is an experience in a continuous journey into further, unexplored depths of life.
Hypnosis and Meditation
“ …those who have experimented with hypnosis find that, at a certain depth of trance, it happens not too infrequently that subjects, if they are left alone and not distracted, will become aware of an immanent serenity and goodness that is often associated with a perception of light and of spaces vast but not solitary.”
Practicing hypnotherapy and/or meditation on a regular basis is an excellent way to begin dabbling into the metaphysical backgrounds of yourself and of the world by tapping into your subconscious, into otherwise ignored parts of your mind.
These practices help open doors in the mind where things such as past traumas that are holding you back have remained imprisoned for years, desperately waiting for you to free them and thus yourself.
Meditation and hypnotherapy are also great tools for getting in touch with your intuition, helping you to see the bigger picture of current problems, allowing you to focus on the deeper truths and lessons they withhold rather than getting trapped in the mundane surface details of your problems.
In fact, when observed in this light, they eventually cease to be problems and are instead rendered avenues of inner exploration and growth. Here are some guided hypnosis and meditation sessions that may be of benefit.
The Sixth Sensory Channel: The Feeling Capacity
The 6th sensory channel, also known as the feeling capacity, refers to the ability of humans to feel, as opposed to touch.
It refers to the invisible type of feeling, as opposed to the feeling sense of physical touch embodying the ingredients of the five senses of human beings.
One is invisible and subjective, the other solely portrays the mostly objective experience of physical touching, of feeling the texture of a person or object.
The feeling sense referring to the ability to feel the invisibles describes the feelings that stir within as we encounter various experiences in our day to day life, sometimes called a sixth sense, or the sixth sensory channel.
To better understand the sixth sensory channel, consider the following example: you come home from work and ask your partner what’s wrong.
“Nothing,” they brashly reply.
But, by the tone of their voice, you know nothing means everything, and that you better respond with something along the lines of, “please tell me what’s wrong,” unless you want to endure a silent dinner - one that also evokes a feeling sense, as the silence speaks volumes and is filled with tension, making you uneasy - and sleep on the couch that night.
Simply put, awakening to the feeling sense that is not often spoken of as it is not included in the five senses that we are taught we have, cultivates your feeling capacity, your ability to feel the invisible, unspoken and unseen meanings of situations, and of things both yourself and others do and say.
In order to develop your feeling capacity, pay attention to the way things feel.
Interpret situations with your heart first, then your thoughts.
For a deeper understanding of the sixth sensory channel and how you can begin to reclaim your feeling sense, consider listening to this in this interview with Stephen Buhner.
Left-Wing Media Run By Actual Demon-Possessed Anti-Human Evil Entities August 17 2024 | From: NaturalNews / Various
If you’re wondering why the left-wing media is infused with absolute evil, a seething, anti-human hatred of life, truth, healthy babies and human liberty, the answer is far larger than what you might have supposed.
An increasing number of so-called “journalists” working for the anti-human media are actually demon-possessed entities working to destroy human life, Christianity and belief in God.
Beyond a mere political war, we are engaged in a spiritual war of cosmic importance, as pure evil has taken over nearly the entire left-wing media, government bureaucracies, universities and public schools, Hollywood and the pop culture media, and even the ranks of “science” and medicine.
“They first cropped up seemingly out of nowhere about six years ago, adorned in black capes with curved devil horns affixed to their heads, holding posters and black American flags as they shouted ‘Hail, Satan’ on the steps of government institutions,”reports the UK Daily Mail in a story documenting the rise of Satanism in America.
“And they were growing, exponentially. Since The Satanic Temple’s founding in 2012, the organization has increased from a handful of members to tens of thousands, with chapters all over the US and the globe, from Stockholm to London and Los Angeles to Texas.”
Satanism is on the rise in the United States and around the world. Human-looking entities that were born as humans and previously possessed human souls are now entirely possessed by demonic spirits working to serve their dark lord Satan.
“The next thing I came to understand was they weren’t pretending to be Satanists to make a political point. They were Satanists,” says one observer quoted in the story. Read how Satanists define their movement:
“To us, Satan is the symbol that best suits the nature of we who are carnal by birth – people who feel no battles raging between our thoughts and feelings, we who do not embrace the concept of a soul imprisoned in a body.
He represents pride, liberty, and individualism – qualities often defined as Evil by those who worship external deities, who feel there is a war between their minds and emotions..”
Satan worshipers are now running the pop culture of America, where everything from Superbowl half-time shows to star-studded music videos now features overt Satanic imagery and symbolism as a form of mass indoctrination.
These Satanists relish evil and the destruction of all that is good.
How to Spot a Demon in Human Form – Watch the Mini-Documentary
How can you tell the difference between an actual human being with a divine soul vs. a human vessel that has been occupied and taken over by a demonic dark spirit?
In the following mini-documentary, I explain how you can “spot a demon” in human form.
Some of the more obvious signs are that demons in human form relish the thought of murdering babies (abortion), injecting people with vaccines made from aborted human babies (aborted human fetal tissue is one of the primary ingredients used in modern vaccines), attacking Christians and seeking harm upon children through toxic medicine, physical violence (the recent Covington Catholic School hoax) and mental indoctrination.
The goal of the Satanists is to attack all human vessels and possess them with demonic spirits by driving out divine human souls.
This war is already well under way. Many of the “people” you meet in society today are no longer humans on the inside. They are literal demon souls that have possessed and now operate human bodies like biological puppets.
These demonic entities appear human, but answer only to Satan. They operate at the highest levels of society, having infiltrated politics, media, entertainment, finance, science, medicine and even organized religion.
When you see people celebrating abortion and “shouting” praise for the murder of unborn babies, rest assured you are looking at a demon spirit which has possessed and taken over a human body.
They are anti-human for the simple reason that they are not human themselves.
Mainstream Media Assaults On Freedom Of Speech: “The Truth” Is No Longer “Important” & Google: Time To Kill Free Speech August 16 2024 | From: GlobalResearch / RedHeartland / Various
Alternative news sources have come under sustained attacks.
The New York Times unveiled a new slogan early in 2017 titled, “The truth is more important now than ever.”
It has acquired a seemingly noble motto but a perhaps contentious one if we examine the Times’ recent history.
Two international law specialists, Howard Friel and Richard Falk, published a book after the 2003 Invasion of Iraq called The Record of the Paper, which has scarcely been reviewed.
Friel and Falk focused on the Times due to the newspaper’s importance.
The authors point out that in 70 Times editorials on Iraq – from September 11, 2001 to March 20, 2003 – the words “international law” and “UN Charter” were never mentioned. The “truth” did not seem terribly “important” as the Times stood idly by in the destruction of Iraq.
Such was the barrage of propaganda directed at the American public that 69% believed Saddam Hussein was “personally involved” in the September 11 attacks.
That is a significant achievement in manipulation. The poll results must have been news to the Iraqi dictator himself, a forgotten one-time American ally.
Why Hussein would take it upon himself to orchestrate a surprise attack on the United States, of all nations, is anyone’s guess. Perhaps if he had a death wish but as later events proved he was not the suicidal type.
The Times was not alone in its position of selling the Iraq war to the American people, as television networks from Fox News to CBS and CNN were overwhelmingly pro-war.
Fox News, owned by Rupert Murdoch – who strongly backed the illegal conflict – placed a permanent US flag in the corner of the screen.
Fox employees were compelled to describe the invasion as “Operation Iraqi Freedom”, with hundreds of thousands of Iraqis later being killed.
The pattern continues into other illegitimate interventions as the liberal Guardian newspaper championed the demolition of Libya in 2011, with editorials imploring, “The quicker Muammar Gaddafi falls, the better.”
The Guardian encouraged NATO “to tip the military balance further against Gaddafi”, while later that year summarising that “it has turned out, so far, reasonably well” – by that point thousands had been killed.
In 2015 Ian Birrell, then deputy editor of the Independent, still assured his readers, “I would argue that Britain and France were right to step in [in Libya]. The failures came later on.”
Apparently it was fine for two old imperial powers to “step in” to shatter a sovereign nation, then afterwards absolve the invaders of blame with “the failures” only coming “later on”.
It’s a rare thing indeed to hear a prominent commentator question the balance of Western mainstream coverage.
The same voices can be heard piping up when alternative news sources take a different line not so palatable to their tastes.
Nick Cohen, writing in the Guardian, accused the network Russia Today (RT) of being a “propaganda channel” and that Russia was “prostituting journalism”. In the following sentence, Cohen describes the BBC and New York Times as being “reputable news organisations”.
Cohen firmly supported the Iraq war, writing at the time that “the Left betrays the Iraqi people by opposing war”, and “an American invasion offers the possibility of salvation”.
He was deemed not to be “prostituting journalism” in backing this violation of international law, nor when later supporting other interventions in Libya and Syria.
The BBC’s reputation, which Cohen previously claimed to be “reputable”, was dealt a blow when it was revealed by Cardiff University that the network “displayed the most ‘pro-war’ agenda of any broadcaster” with its coverage on the Iraq invasion.
Democrat Congressman Admits He’d ‘Love to Regulate’ Free Speech
Steven Erlanger of the New York Times described RT as “an agent of Kremlin policy” used to “undermine Western democracies” and to “destabilise the West” – failing to back up the claims with any evidence.
To gain perspective on these attacks, it may be worth pointing out a key excerpt from the First Amendment of the US Constitution: “Congress shall make no law… abridging [curtailing] the freedom of speech, or of the press.”
This law does not exist in Western democracies but attempts at limiting freedom of expression continue apace, while attacks on alternative media outlets by institutions of power grow.
It has reached a point whereby the French president Emmanuel Macron, shortly after assuming office, publicly attacked legitimate news sources of “behaving like deceitful propaganda”.
Perhaps the hidden concern about RT, for example, is its continued increase in both popularity and scope – with the channel enjoying a total weekly viewership of 70 million people and rising.
RT is available to viewers in Western heartlands such as Britain and the US, with eight million Americans watching the station each week.
It represents quite an achievement that a channel with the word “Russia”, featured in its title, can attract viewers in their millions, despite the growing anti-Russian sentiment espoused by the powers-that-be.
It is revealing that elite figures like Hillary Clinton have lamented in the past;
“We are in an information war and we are losing that war.”
For the first time in history, populations have broad access to alternative news angles – points of view that they likely find of a more balanced nature. Gone is the unchallenged monopoly on the public mind.
According to an 85-page internal company briefing fittingly titled “The Good Censor,” the American tradition of free speech is not an option.
In the briefing, Google acknowledges that it and other Silicon Valley platforms “control the majority of online conversations” and have actively taken a “shift towards censorship” in the wake of the 2016 presidential election and the rise of the political right in Europe.
Google has since tried to play it off as internal research and not an official company position…you know, like it’s official company policy to not censor conservatives. We’ll take this an admission of guilt.
“An internal company briefing produced by Google and leaked exclusively to Breitbart News argues that due to a variety of factors, including the election of President Trump, the “American tradition” of free speech on the internet is no longer viable.
Despite leaked video footage showing top executives declaring their intention to ensure that the rise of Trump and the populist movement is just a “blip” in history, Google has repeatedly denied that the political bias of its employees filter into its products.”
But the 85-page briefing, titled “The Good Censor,” admits that Google and other tech platforms now “control the majority of online conversations” and have undertaken a “shift towards censorship” in response to unwelcome political events around the world.
Examples cited in the document include the 2016 election and the rise of Alternative for Deutschland (AfD) in Germany.
Responding to the leak, an official Google source said the document should be considered internal research, and not an official company position.
Why The War On Conspiracy Theories Is Bad Public Policy August 15 2024 | From: UNZ / Various
On January 25 2018 YouTube unleashed the latest salvo in the war on conspiracy theories, saying“we’ll begin reducing recommendations of borderline content and content that could misinform users in harmful ways - such as videos promoting a phony miracle cure for a serious illness, claiming the earth is flat, or making blatantly false claims about historic events like 9/11.”
At first glance that sounds reasonable. Nobody wants YouTube or anyone else to recommend bad information. And almost everyone agrees that phony miracle cures, flat earthism, and blatantly false claims about 9/11 and other historical events are undesirable.
But if we stop and seriously consider those words, we notice a couple of problems. First, the word “recommend” is not just misleading but mendacious. YouTube obviously doesn’t really recommend anything. When it says it does, it is lying.
When you watch YouTube videos, the YouTube search engine algorithm displays links to other videos that you are likely to be interested in.
These obviously do not constitute “recommendations” by YouTube itself, which exercises no editorial oversight over content posted by users. (Or at least it didn’t until it joined the war on conspiracy theories.)
The second and larger problem is that while there may be near-universal agreement among reasonable people that flat-earthism is wrong, there is only modest agreement regarding which health approaches constitute “phony miracle cures” and which do not.
Far less is there any agreement on “claims about 9/11 and other historical events.” (Thus far the only real attempt to forge an informed consensus about 9/11 is the 9/11 Consensus Panel’s study - but it seems unlikely that YouTube will be using the Consensus Panel to determine which videos to “recommend”!)
YouTube’s policy shift is the latest symptom of a larger movement by Western elites to - as Obama’s Information Czar Cass Sunstein put it - “disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories.”
Sunstein and co-author Adrian Vermeule’s 2008 paper “Conspiracy Theories,” critiqued by David Ray Griffin in 2010 and developed into a 2016 book, represents a panicked reaction to the success of the 9/11 truth movement. (By 2006, 36% of Americans thought it likely that 9/11 was an inside job designed to launch wars in the Middle East, according to a Scripps poll.)
Sunstein and Vermuele begin their abstract:
"Many millions of people hold (sic) conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event.
A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States.
Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law."
Sunstein argues that conspiracy theories (i.e. the 9/11 truth movement) are so dangerous that some day they may have to be banned by law.
While awaiting that day, or perhaps in preparation for it, the government should “disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories” through various techniques including “cognitive infiltration” of 9/11 truth groups.
Such “cognitive infiltration,” Sunstein writes, could have various aims including the promotion of “beneficial cognitive diversity” within the truth movement.
What sort of “cognitive diversity” would Cass Sunstein consider “beneficial”? Perhaps 9/11 truth groups that had been “cognitively infiltrated” by spooks posing as flat-earthers would harbor that sort of “beneficial” diversity? That would explain the plethora of expensive, high-production-values flat earth videos that have been blasted at the 9/11 truth community since 2008.
Why does Sunstein think “conspiracy theories” are so dangerous they need to be suppressed by government infiltrators, and perhaps eventually outlawed - which would necessitate revoking the First Amendment?
Obviously conspiracism must present some extraordinary threat. So what might that threat be?
Oddly, he never explains. Instead he briefly mentions, in vapidly nebulous terms, about “serious risks including the risk of violence.” But he presents no serious evidence that 9/11 truth causes violence. Nor does he explain what the other “serious risks” could possibly be.
Why did such highly accomplished academicians as Sunstein and Vermuele produce such an unhinged, incoherent, poorly-supported screed? How could Harvard and the University of Chicago publish such nonsense? Why would it be deemed worthy of development into a book?
Why did the authors identify an alleged problem, present no evidence that it even is a problem, yet advocate outrageously illegal and unconstitutional government action to solve the non-problem?
The too-obvious answer, of course, is that they must realize that 9/11 was in fact a US-Israeli false flag operation. The 9/11 truth movement, in that case, would be a threat not because it is wrong, but because it is right.
To the extent that Americans know or suspect the truth, the US government will undoubtedly find it harder to pursue various “national security” objectives.
Ergo, 9/11 “conspiracy theories” are a threat to national security, and extreme measures are required to combat them. But since we can’t just burn the First Amendment overnight, we must instead take a gradual and covert “boil the frog” approach, featuring plenty of cointelpro-style infiltration and misdirection.
“Cognitive infiltration” of internet platforms to stop the conspiracy contagion would also fit the bill.
It is quite possible, perhaps even likely, that Sunstein and Vermeule are indeed well-informed and Machievellian. But it is also conceivable that they are, at least when it comes to 9/11 and “conspiracy theories,” as muddle-headed as they appear.
Their irrational panic could be an example of the bad thinking that emerges from groups that reflexively reject dissent. (Another, larger example of this kind of bad thinking comes to mind: America’s disastrous post-9/11 policies.)
The counterintuitive truth is that embracing and carefully listening to radical dissenters is in fact good policy, whether you are a government, a corporation, or any other kind of group. Ignoring or suppressing dissent produces muddled, superficial thinking and bad decisions. Surprisingly, this turns out to be the case even when the dissenters are wrong.
Scientific evidence for the value of dissent is beautifully summarized in Charlan Nemeth’s In Defense of Troublemakers: The Power of Dissent in Life and Business (Basic Books, 2018).
Nemeth, a psychology professor at UC-Berkeley, summarizes decades of research on group dynamics showing that groups that feature passionate, radical dissent deliberate better, reach better conclusions, and take better actions than those that do not - even when the dissenter is wrong.
Nemeth begins with a case where dissent would likely have saved lives: the crash of United Airlines Flight 173 in December, 1978. As the plane neared its Portland destination, the possibility of a problem with the landing gear arose.
The captain focused on trying to determine the condition of the landing gear as the plane circled the airport. Typical air crew group dynamics, in which the whole crew defers to the captain, led to a groupthink bubble in which nobody spoke up as the needle on the fuel gauge approached “E.”
Had the crew included even one natural “troublemaker” - the kind of aviator who joins Pilots for 9/11 truth - there almost certainly would have been more divergent thinking. Someone would have spoken up about the fuel issue, and a tragic crash would have been averted.
Since 9/11, American decision-making elites have entered the same kind of bubble and engaged in the same kind of groupthink. For them, no serious dissent on such issues as what really happened on 9/11, and whether a “war on terror” makes sense, is permitted. The predictable result has been bad thinking and worse decisions.
From the vantage point of Sunstein and Vermeule, deep inside the bubble, the potentially bubble-popping, consensus-shredding threat of 9/11 truth must appear radically destabilizing.
To even consider the possibility that the 9/11 truthers are right might set off a stampede of critical reflection that would radically undermine the entire set of policies pursued for the past 17 years.
This prospect may so terrify Sunstein and Vermeule that it paralyzes their ability to think. Talk about “crippled epistemology”!
Do Sunstein and Vermeule really think their program for suppressing “conspiracy theories” will be beneficial? Do YouTube’s decision-makers really believe that tweaking their algorithms to support the official story will protect us from bad information?
If so, they are all doubly wrong. First, they are wrong in their unexamined assumption that 9/11 truth and “conspiracy theories” in general are “blatantly false.”
No honest person with critical thinking skills who weighs the merits of the best work on both sides of the question can possibly avoid the realization that the 9/11 truth movement is right.
Second, and less obviously, those who would suppress conspiracy theories are wrong even in their belief that suppressing false conspiracy theories is good public policy.
As Nemeth shows, social science is unambiguous in its finding that any group featuring at least one passionate, radical dissenter will deliberate better, reach sounder conclusions, and act more effectively than it would have without the dissenter. This holds even if the dissenter is wrong - even wildly wrong.
The overabundance of slick, hypnotic flat earth videos, if they are indeed weaponized cointelpro strikes against the truth movement, may be unfortunate.
But the existence of the occasional flat earther may be more beneficial than harmful. The findings summarized by Nemeth suggest that a science study group with one flat earther among the students would probably learn geography and astronomy better than they would have without the madly passionate dissenter.
We could at least partially solve the real problem - bad groupthink - through promoting genuinely beneficial cognitive diversity.
YouTube algorithms should indeed be tweaked to puncture the groupthink bubbles that emerge based on user preferences.
Someone who watches lots of 9/11 truther videos should indeed be exposed to dissent, in the form of the best arguments on the other side of the issue - not that there are any very good ones, as I have discovered after spending 15 years searching for them!
Exposure to even those “truthers” who are more passionate than critical or well-informed would benefit people who believe the official story, according to Nemeth’s research, by stimulating them to deliberate more thoughtfully and to question facile assumptions.
The same goes for other issues and perspectives. Fox News viewers should get “suggestions” for good material, especially passionate dissent, from the left side of the political spectrum.
MSNBC viewers should get “suggestions” for good material from the right. Both groups should get “suggestions” to look at genuinely independent, alternative media brimming with passionate dissidents - outlets like the Unz Review!
Unfortunately things are moving in the opposite direction. YouTube’s effort to make “conspiracy videos” invisible is being pushed by powerful lobbies, especially the Zionist lobby, which seems dedicated to singlehandedly destroying the Western tradition of freedom of expression.
Nemeth and colleagues’ findings that “conspiracy theories” and other forms of passionate dissent are not just beneficial, but in fact an invaluable resource, are apparently unknown to the anti-conspiracy-theory cottage industry that has metastasized in the bowels of the Western academy.
The brand-new bible of the academic anti-conspiracy-theory industry is Conspiracy Theories and the People Who Believe Them (Oxford University Press, 2019).
Editor Joseph Uscinski’s introduction begins by listing alleged dangers of conspiracism:
"In democracies, conspiracy theories can drive majorities to make horrible decisions backed by the use of legitimate force.
Conspiracy beliefs can conversely encourage abstention. Those who believe the system is rigged will be less willing to take part in it.
Conspiracy theories form the basis for some people’s medical decisions; this can be dangerous not only for them but for others as well. For a select few believers, conspiracy theories are instructions to use violence.”
Uscinski is certainly right that conspiracy theories can incite “horrible decisions” to use “legitimate force” and “violence.” Every major American foreign war since 1846 has been sold to the public by an official theory, backed by a frenetic media campaign, of a foreign conspiracy to attack the United States.
And all of these Official Conspiracy Theories (OCTs) - including the theory that Mexico conspired to invade the United States in 1846, that Spain conspired to sink the USS Maine in 1898, that Germany conspired with Mexico to invade the United States in 1917, that Japan conspired unbeknownst to peace-seeking US leaders to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941, that North Vietnam conspired to attack the US Navy in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964, and that 19 Arabs backed by Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and everybody else Israel doesn’t like conspired to attack the US in 2001 - were false or deceptive.
Well over 100 million people have been killed in the violence unleashed by these and other Official Conspiracy Theories. Had the passionate dissenters been heeded, and the truths they told about who really conspires to create war-trigger public relations stunts been understood, none of those hundred-million-plus murders need have happened.
Though Conspiracy Theories and the People Who Believe Them generally pathologizes the conspiracy theories of dissidents while ignoring the vastly more harmful theories of official propagandists, its 31 essays include several that question that outlook.
In “What We Mean When We Say ‘Conspiracy Theory’ Jesse Walker, books editor of Reason Magazine, exposes the bias that permeates the field, pointing out that many official conspiracy theories, including several about Osama Bin Laden and 9/11-anthrax, were at least as ludicrously false and delusional as anything believed by marginalized dissidents.
In “Media Marginalization of Racial Minorities: ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ in U.S. Ghettos and on the ‘Arab Street’” Martin Orr and Gina Husting go one step further:
“The epithet ‘conspiracy theorist’ is used to tarnish those who challenge authority and power. Often, it is tinged with racial undertones: it is used to demean whole groups of people in the news and to silence, stigmatize, or belittle foreign and minority voices.” (p.82)
Unfortunately, though Orr and Husting devote a whole section of their article to “Conspiracy Theories in the Muslim World” and defend Muslim conspiracists against the likes of Thomas Friedman, they never squarely face the fact that the reason roughly 80% of Muslims believe 9/11 was an inside job is because the preponderance of evidence supports that interpretation.
Another relatively sensible essay is M R.X. Dentith’s “Conspiracy Theories and Philosophy,” which ably deconstructs the most basic fallacy permeating the whole field of conspiracy theory research: the a priori assumption that a “conspiracy theory” must be false or at least dubious:
"If certain scholars (i.e. the majority represented in this book! - KB) want to make a special case for conspiracy theories, then it is reasonable for the rest of us to ask whether we are playing fair with our terminology, or whether we have baked into our definitions the answers to our research programs.” (p.104).
Unfortunately, a few pages later editor Joseph Uscinski sticks his fingers in his ears and plays deaf and dumb, claiming that:
"The establishment is right far more often than conspiracy theories, largely because their methods are reliable. When conspiracy theorists are right, it is by chance.”
He adds that conspiracy theories will inevitably “occasionally lead to disaster” (whatever that means). (p.110).
I hope Uscinski finds the time to read Nemeth’s In Defense of Troublemakers and consider the evidence that passionate dissent is helpful, not harmful. And I hope he will look into the issues Ron Unz addresses in his American Pravda series.
Then again, if he does, he may find himself among those of us exiled from the academy and publishing in The Unz Review.
Los Alamos Research Explains How 5G Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA & Why We Must Stop The 5G Wireless Network August 14 2024 | From: CollectiveEvolution / Sott / Various
What are Terahertz waves? They’re the radiation that fills the spot between microwaves and infrared waves on the electromagnetic spectrum.
These waves can pass through non-conducting materials like clothes, brick, wood, paper, etc.
As a result, they can be utilized within cameras to look inside an enclosed structure, or sealed envelopes, into living rooms in order to “frisk” people at a distance.
In Brief:
The Facts: A model of the way the THz waves interact with DNA explains how DNA damage may occur and why evidence has been so hard to gather. This is simply a model, it's not experimental, but it does raise cause for concern.
Reflect On: Why are so many technologies approved for use without conducting the appropriate safety tests first? Studies have already shown cause for concern, yet too often the research goes ignored.
It’s not just Terahertz waves, it’s multiple sources of electromagnetic radiation. In the past, there were no artificial sources of electromagnetic radiation. Now, we are bombarded with them.
Cell phones, wifi, 5G and numerous other sources are all heavily present in our environment, and the corporations putting out this technology have not done any appropriate safety testing.
The studies that have emerged about this subject are eye-opening and very concerning.
The statement below emphasizes my point, which comes from Dr. Sharon Goldberg, an internal medicine physician. Dr. Goldberg announced this at Michigan’s 5G Small Cell tower legislation hearing.
"Wireless radiation has biological effects. Period. This is no longer a subject for debate when you look at PubMed and the peer-review literature.
These effects are seen in all life forms; plants, animals, insects, microbes. In humans, we have clear evidence of cancer now: there is no question.
We have evidence of DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, which is the precursor of congestive heart failure, neuropsychiatric effects…”
Dr. Martin Blank, Ph.D., from the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at Colombia University, is one of the leading experts in this area of study. He explained:
"Putting it bluntly they (EMFs) are damaging the living cells in our bodies and killing many of us prematurely.
There are thousands of peer-reviewed studies on this subject, and hundreds of scientists have been petitioning the United Nations to pay attention.
The problem is the industry and how they’ve taken over medical science. Information about harmful technological products that make a very small group of people billions of dollars every year is somehow brushed under the rug. Corporate control over science and government health regulators like the FDA and CDC is completely out of control.
In this article, I’d like to focus on research conducted by Boian S. Alexandrov et.al. at the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.
It revealed that these Terahertz waves could “…unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.”
This is concerning because Terahertz waves are used, as previously mentioned, to peer through things. Airport scanners are a perfect example. That does not mean that airport scanners can rip apart DNA, but it does suggest we need further testing on these instruments.
These Terahertz waves are absorbed and emitted can also be used to determine the chemical composition of a material. Even though they don’t travel far inside the body, there is hope that the waves can be used to spot tumours near the surface of the skin.
The author of the study states;
"With all the potential, it’s no wonder that research on terahertz waves has exploded in the last ten years or so.”
He then asks the question;
"But what of the health effects of terahertz waves?
At first glance, it’s easy to dismiss any notion that they can be damaging.
Terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionise atoms or molecules, the chief reasons why higher energy photons such as x-rays and UV rays are so bad for us. But could there be another mechanism at work?”
Apparently, the evidence that Terahertz radiation (which is different from the wireless and other EMF radiation that’s put out by multiple devices) damages biological systems is mixed. Alexandrov outlines how some studies reported significant damage, while others showed none.
This is concerning, regardless of how many studies have shown no DNA damage. The fact is that there are studies that do show damage. Even if only one study proved that there could be DNA damage, it’s confusing as to why this technology would be approved.
Alexandrov and his team created a model to investigate how the fields interact with double-stranded DNA. What they found was remarkable.
"They say that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.
It’s important to note that this particular study was a model, it wasn’t actually experimental. However, the team still presented enough information to suggest this technology could be dangerous to our health, especially given the hazardous biological effects of other waves on the electromagnetic spectrum.
"This should set the cat among the pigeons. Of course, terahertz waves are a natural part of environment, just like visible and infrared light. But a new generation of cameras are set to appear that not only record terahertz waves but also bombard us with them.
And if our exposure is set to increase, the question that urgently needs answering is what level of terahertz exposure is safe.”
The last point made in the quote above is important to note. We’ve never been bombard this much - our exposure has never been so high.
North America also seems to be running behind, as multiple countries have completely banned wifi technology and cell phones in nursing homes and elementary schools because of the dangerous effects these technologies can have on our health.
It’s concerning that we are approving technology that use these types of waves when one of the only studies on this subject outlines how “research in this field has only just begun, both at home and abroad.
In this paper, research progress with respect to THz radiation, including its biological effects, mechanisms and methods of protection, will be reviewed.” (source)
That paper goes on to emphasize that, although many biological effects are unknown, tremendous advancements in medical technology could come from their use.
This wouldn’t be the first time we’ve seen potentially dangerous technologies being used in the healthcare system, such as mammograms.
Who knows! I guess we will have to wait and see until more research emerges. At the end of the day, a lot of technology and pharmaceuticals we use have not gone through appropriate safety testing, and so we may be seeing the same thing here.
If you want to see some of this science, the best place place to start your research is with the Environmental Health Trust.
Although it’s unclear what will happen here, there is still so much electromagnetic radiation in our environment that it’s important to protect yourself.
There are many things you can do to combat electromagnetic radiation. You can have a wired internet connection, unplug all of your devices before you sleep, purchase EMF protective clothing, and even paint your walls with EMF protective paint.
You can live a healthy lifestyle, but I believe the mind body connection is so strong that anything can be mitigated through the deepest levels of healing.
Never forget that this is a 'two way street' in that those countries who control the satellites basically will incredibly control all people on Earth.
The global deployment of the fifth-generation wireless network,(5G) constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is nothing less than a crime under international law.
Yet the subject of the the enormous dangers of the imminent and rapid deployment of 5G technology was not mentioned when world leaders gathered earlier this month in Poland for the UN 'Earth' conference.
An inconvenient truth perhaps that our leaders could argue was not part of the overall subject in Poland of the well being of the Earth and all its inhabitants. Give me a break.
In Poland details of an important scientific report, commissioned by the UN, were released that stated the world has under 12 years to drastically cut emissions to avert catastrophe - that appeared to create a sense of urgency causing this closing statement.
"To waste this opportunity in [Poland] would compromise our last best chance to stop runaway climate change," UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said. "It would not only be immoral, it will be suicidal."
What is more suicidal, insane is a more appropriate word, is not to address the terrible impact on the Earth of the introduction of 5G.
Some of the world's largest companies, with the support of their governments, are poised, over the next two years, to roll out 5G. This is set to deliver what is acknowledged to be "unprecedented societal change" on a global scale.
As if that will not increase the potential in future for more cyber attacks by States and potentially terrorist organisations as well as further contribute to the ever emerging disturbing social networks consequences of 'people manipulation' by huge corporations and States led by by mainly psychopathic and inept political leaders.
The great writer Aldous Huxley, imagined such forms of 'technological progress' in his famous book Brave New World written nearly a 100 years ago.
The late Stephen Hawkins before he died said the greatest threat to mankind was artificial intelligence (AI) - well 5G is the road that will eventually lead us to AI domination.
5G will bring us "smart" homes, "smart" businesses, "smart" highways, "smart" cities and self-driving "smart" cars. Virtually everything we own and buy, from TVs to refrigerators and washing machines to milk cartons, hairbrushes and infants' nappies, will contain antennas and microchips and will be connected wirelessly to the Internet.
Every person on Earth will have instant access to super-high-speed wireless communications from any point on the planet, even in rainforests, mid-ocean and the Antarctic.
Never forget that this is a 'two way street' in that those countries who control the satellites basically will incredibly control all people on Earth. An almost unimaginable prospect.
This will allow the ultimate potential for the manipulation of the entire world's populace by essentially only 'Super Power' countries, dominated by American corporations who seem led by, what has become the acknowledged term, 'the Deep State' and not by the American President.
Trump cannot get his own Administration to heed his orders; witness the supposed Syrian troop withdrawal as being but one example.
The planned density to achieve global 5G of radio frequency transmitters is unfathomable. In addition to millions of new 5G base stations on Earth and 20,000 new satellites in space, an estimated 200 billion "transmitting objects", will be part of the Internet of "things" by 2020, and one trillion further "things" a few years later.
Commercial 5G at lower frequencies and slower speeds was deployed in Qatar, Finland and Estonia in mid-2018. The rollout of 5G at extremely high (millimetre wave) frequencies has now begun this month making the immediacy to reverse this plan absolutely essential.
Despite widespread denial, the evidence that radio frequency (RF) radiation is harmful to life is already overwhelming. The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilisation; cancer, heart disease and diabetes are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer reviewed studies.
If 5G is implemented, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet.
Each 5G phone will contain dozens of tiny antennas, all working together to track and aim a narrowly focused beam at the nearest cell tower. In America, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has permitted the effective power of those beams to be as much as 20 watts, ten times more powerful than the levels permitted for current phones using 3G and 4G.
At least five international companies, including defense companies like BOEING, are proposing to provide 5G from space from a combined 20,000 satellites in low and medium Earth orbit that will blanket the Earth with powerful, focused, steerable beams.
The alteration of the Earth's electromagnetic environment may be an even greater threat to life than the radiation from ground-based antennas where the harmful effects of radio frequency radiation have already been proven.
The WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) produced recently overwhelming evidence, including the latest studies on cell phone use and brain cancer risks, indicating that RF radiation is proven carcinogenic to humans and should now be classified as a "Group 1 carcinogen" along with tobacco smoke and asbestos.
As dramatic as it sounds, the deployment of 5G satellites and their accompanying earth stations must be stopped now.
This is a last chance situation so people must take to the streets all over the world, as they did in Paris, and force, or change, their governments.
2019 could be the year of revolutions as we the people become ever increasingly disenchanted with our incompetent and, in most cases, corrupt bureaucrats and politicians along with hopeless and useless world institutions like the UN and the EU.
Comment: The dangers of 5G are simply jaw-dropping when looked at in any detail, yet the people seem to be so enamored with the prospects of self-driving cars and refrigerators that order your groceries, that they willingly ignore the serious threat to their health. The world is about to become a lot more dangerous, once 5G is unleashed.
A New Worldview Is Emerging That Can Change Our Entire Perspective On Reality + Spiritual Intelligence: A Journey Of Inner Awakening August 13 2024 | From: ThePulse / CollectiveEvolution / Various
We're in a time of deep transition. The space between our current worldview and an emerging one can be uncomfortable, but it's an evolutionary pressure moving us forward.
What would change if from the moment you were born up until now, you were taught that in some way we are all truly connected?
What if a story of interconnectedness was the foundation of your worldview, letting you know that you are connected to the earth, plants, animals, people and universe in ways that may not be so obvious? I'm not talking about this in some matter of fluff, but practically.
What if instead of seeing all of us as separate material objects from one another, we saw each other as fragments of ourselves and truly acknowledged that deep within our being?
Well, if you grew up in an indigenous culture this would likely be your worldview already. But now we're seeing this understanding make its way into Western culture and mainstream thinking.
It was wanting to share ideas around this worldview with people in 2009 that birthed my first company Collective Evolution.
From a scientific standpoint, you can think of this inter-connection through quantum entanglement. Quantum entanglement occurs when two particles, in their quantum state, are separated from each other yet, when you do to something to one of them the other one does the exact same thing regardless of what distance is between them.
For example, if you were to separate the two particles by 1000 miles and 'spin' one of them, the other one will also instantaneously start spinning in the same way.
This suggests that the two material particles, even though separate and at a distance from one another, are somehow still interconnected in some way we don’t quite yet understand yet.
Concept illustration of quantum particles being 'connected' by an unseen force
Scientists have done these experiments many times over and have been fascinated by the possible explanations. One being that information may be travelling much fasting than the speed of light, which is an explanation that would likely break our current understanding of classical mechanics.
The other being that they are somehow still connected.
In 1965, alpha brain rhythms were elicited in one pair of identical twins as a result of evoking these rhythms in a conventional manner solely in the other. How is this possible?
How do participants in US government remote viewing programs view people, places and objects hundreds of miles away with nothing but their mind?
"Such phenomena and paranormal abilities of the human body are unimaginable for ordinary people. Nevertheless they are really true.”
Could it be possible that there is some deep connection not immediately apparent to us? One that maybe isn't recognized in our day to day mind but when we take the time to slow down, quiet ourselves and feel, it seems present?
My own experiences of remote viewing and non-locality through practice tells me that the material explanation that these 'abilities' are not possible and somehow an observation error or wishful thinking simply doesn't cut it for me.
In fact, personally I'm not even sure I need to know exactly 'how' it all works, but I can see the value in exploring it for what answers it could provide to our collective worldview.
If I could be so daring, I bet that even the biggest skeptics around these topics sense deep down that there is a truth to something 'non-material' about our reality, and that humans are plugged right into it.
That said I think it is useful to have doubt. It can help us challenge the knee jerk and jump to conclusions type of thought that can run rampant seeking a certain explanation. But in my mind it is also very important not to simply state: "we don't have a material explanation and therefore it's nonsense."
This is the fatal error in the religious and scientific dogma that's occurring today. It is an anti-science view that suggests we already know almost everything.
What I see happening here is a shift that seems to show up as a seed planted somewhere in our being. Perhaps it is the seeds planted by prior experiments or perhaps it's an evolutionary pressure within our consciousness to continually evolve, maybe both!
Either way, something is driving our curiosity to continue to ask questions in this realm, and for the scientists stepping outside of the incentive structure of our current scientific landscape, they are venturing into fascinating territory.
Is it possible we are affecting each other in this quantum way? If so, how? Do we affect some things and not others? Is there a sort of 'permission' that must be granted to affect certain things?
How could we know? In what ways might we be affecting nature, animals or our planet? What about other planets? How might other planets be affecting us, or perhaps even other dimensions? So many curious questions.
But even without going to such deep questions, we can simply ask: is it not obvious that we do impact our reality simply by the decisions and actions we take?
Can we not see that even though a decision seems like it will only effect us, it's actually possible it effects more people - even some for generations to come? Does this alone not suggest a deep interconnectedness?
What would change in your everyday decision making if you were to consider that you are connected to and must be a responsible steward of land, animals, each other, communities etc?
What if, as many indigenous cultures do, you asked how your decisions and choices might effect people for up to 7 generations after you. How might you go about thinking and feeling that out?
It can be hard to stretch our consciousness to a worldview like that. After all, we have been brought up thinking and seeing the world through a light of separation, anything else feels foreign.
In fact, in much of Western culture we have come to ridicule and make fun of that which is outside the realm of the material. We even scoff at the idea of doing more than just taking care of yourself... right now. You're a hippy if you think 7 generations deep!
But could a shift in our collective worldview from one of separation and competition to one of interconnectedness and collaboration be possible?
I think so and I feel so - I know so. It's happening right in front of us. Sure, I may have some bias here. For the last 15 years I've created companies, media, films and educational content exploring the idea that our collective worldview is in fact shifting, and that we will continually come to realize that we are all significantly more interconnected than we realize. But I'm not the only one.
Cultural historian and ecotheologian Thomas Berry viewed the universe as a community of beings not a collection of objects. His philosophy suggested an acknowledgement of connectedness between all things - a connected community.
Of course interconnection is also a central core of many First Nations worldview's and ways of knowing. As a people they carry a mindset that they are aware that everything in our world and universe is connected. This mindset reinforces that everyone and everything has a purpose, is worthy of respect and caring, and has a place in life.
How might we treat our world differently in the West if these ideas were embedded into our culture? Instead, dominance over everything and everyone is typically what drives Western life.
Within First Nations communities they embrace the idea of interconnectedness via a term "All My Relations." This connects them to their families, communities, ancestors and future descendants, the land, and all plant and animal life.
Even with this different worldview, these cultures exhibit a scientific understanding of the earth, weather, cycles of the seasons, medicinal and food sources, harvesting, and creating everything they need from nature’s abundance.
As you can see, this worldview is not a new idea, but one that we may more collectively return to. This of course is a process each of us can reflect on and embrace, as opposed to waiting for a politician to tell us what to think about the possible direction of our world.
This is What Life Was Meant to Be
Do you secretly suspect that life was supposed to be much better than the one you were offered?
If so, then let me be loud and clear: You Are Right.
As I point out in my newest video, life wasn't meant to be a drudgery that one has to endure from birth to death. On the contrary, life was meant to be a celebration, filled with excitement and purpose
New systems and ways of being are held within each of us, and not just within the external systems we create. If we cannot hold new worlds within ourselves, how can we expect them to be created?
This realization suggests we must take an active and engaged part in creating a better world. It does not have to be overly complicated either. Explore new ideas, reflect on why we do the things we do, question whether new ways of being make more sense to you deep down, and ask how you can begin embracing those ideas in your own life.
It can be daunting to try and 'fix' the world and wonder how everything can be changed in one go. For this reason it's best to see things as a progression, one that starts within you.
Begin alone if you feel or connect in community around new ideas and learn to hold them in ever increasing parts within your perception. It may be a bit tough right now as many around you may not think this way, but things are changing, and changing fast.
I recall 15 years ago, when I started Collective Evolution, this was not a common topic of conversation AT ALL. Now, it has grown so much it can be hard to believe. Even though there appears to be little incentive to think and be this way on the surface, especially within our current societal game, there is much beauty and peace in it.
And when it comes to science, this same evolution in thought is happening. There is a renaissance of sorts happening whereby many scientists are opening up to the study of consciousness and the non-material.
While pop culture and media suggests there is plenty of reason to be afraid of our future, I am very hopeful and optimistic. I see incredible things happening and all we are experiencing now is a wake up call to begin embracing a new way of thinking and being.
It's a birthing canal for a new world, and you're a key part of it.
Spiritual Intelligence: A Journey Of Inner Awakening
Have you ever wondered what lies beyond the surface of our everyday experiences? What if there’s a deeper layer to our existence that we’ve yet to fully explore?
For myself, this was a big part of how I began to awaken to other ways of exploring myself and our world. I became very curious about what was driving my thoughts, experiences, and even what happens in society.
This way of thinking, being and knowing birthed CE in 2009. This is also where the concept of spiritual intelligence (SQ) comes into play. No, it’s not about how much you know about the 3rd, 4th and 5th dimensions of consciousness or where your chakras are, it’s a way of being that takes into account the wholeness of YOU as a human.
Let’s dive into it.
Awakening to Our True Selves Through Spiritual Intelligence
The term Spiritual intelligence was initially coined by Danah Zohar in 1997 in her book Rewiring The Corporate Brain. She usefully notes a distinction between spirituality and religion in her work and outlines 12 principles of spiritual intelligence that become a useful boiler plate for exploring this subject.
1. Self-awareness: Knowing what I believe in and value, and what deeply motivates me.
2. Spontaneity: Living in and being responsive to the moment.
3. Being vision- and value-led: Acting from principles and deep beliefs, and living accordingly.
4. Holism: Seeing larger patterns, relationships, and connections; having a sense of belonging.
5. Compassion: Having the quality of “feeling-with” and deep empathy.
6. Celebration of diversity: Valuing other people for their differences, not despite them. (Difference of opinion, experience etc, not limited to skin color and gender.)
7. Field independence: Standing against the crowd and having one’s own convictions.
8. Humility: Having the sense of being a player in a larger drama, of one’s true place in the world.
9. Tendency to ask fundamental “Why?” questions: Needing to understand things and get to the bottom of them.
10. Ability to reframe: Standing back from a situation or problem and seeing the bigger picture or wider context.
11. Positive use of adversity: Learning and growing from mistakes, setbacks, and suffering.
12. Sense of vocation: Feeling called upon to serve, to give something back.
I feel these 12 principles get to the crux of what feels important when outlining spiritual intelligence, how it can be fostered, and used in various contexts.
Looking closely, it begins with self awareness. Being able to dive deep into the ocean of our inner thoughts, emotions, and motivations. Have you ever taken a moment to reflect on what truly drives you?
This awareness is more than just understanding ourselves superficially; it’s about recognizing our life’s purpose and the core values that guide us.
Think about the times you’ve felt truly connected to your actions and how that alignment brought a sense of peace and fulfillment. This is the essence of self-awareness in spiritual intelligence.
We also see the importance of spontaneity, perhaps even synchronicity. Being in the moment, orienting to the here and now mentally, emotionally, physically and spiritually means something.
Our senses connect to now, our thoughts connect to now, our emotions are responsive to now and ultimately this is held in a greater way of being and sensing that brings about the spiritual element.
This way of orienting to the now brings about a greater sense of the whole. A holistic way of seeing and knowing. At CE, this type of orienting has informed our method of writing, discussion and making sense of consciousness and current events via deeper ways of knowing. (Updated in 2020 – we call this Embodied Sensemaking.)
When orienting to the world in this way, we naturally have compassion, empathy, a sense of our values, and an appreciation for the diversity of others. We don’t need to carry a mental model of how to live, instead, this consciousness is more naturally emergent.
With this also comes humility as we are connected to the idea that it’s important to be curious, open and synthesize information – not defend it.
This way of being feels like the natural state of a human being not stuck in survival, but who can be curious and hold expanded states of consciousness. This births clarity around vocation and the ability to have resilience and capacity which helps us see a bigger picture in reframing and moving through adversity in an evolutionary way (as opposed to stagnancy.)
With an interconnected view of things, asking WHY becomes natural, as does the willingness to go against the grain because there is a deeply yet lightly held sense of conviction and curiosity to drive evolution.
How To Open Your 7 Chakras As Explained In a Children's Show 
5G network uses same EMF waves as crowd control system developed by Pentagon 
China’s Massive Amount Of Immunotoxic 5G Networking And The Wuhan Coronavirus: The Emperor’s New Virus 
What Does This Mean For Us? 
CURRENT AFFAIRS
Must Watch:
A Little History
The association with non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) cancer risk is stronger when the study is adjusted for more days of glyphosate use, longer study latency period (time since exposure for cancer to develop), which strengthens the confidence in the results;
1. Self-awareness: Knowing what I believe in and value, and what deeply motivates me.
