The first casualty in this utopian process is freedom.
In fact, freedom is viewed as THE flaw. It opens Pandora’s Box, thus releasing all human ills, crimes, devastations, and inequities.
Globalism (elites ruling the planet as one nation); Socialism (international governments and mega-corporations owning the means of production and distribution); and Technocracy (engineering world society as if it were a machine); these are all names for the better system that replaces freedom with… what?
With control described as: fair and equitable benefits given to every human. “Guaranteed security.” “Guaranteed survival.”
The con can be dressed up in all sorts of ways. “Public-private partnerships.” “Distributing energy fairly in an energy-scarce world.” “Saving the environment.” “Reducing manmade warming.” “No child left behind.” “Open borders.” “Tolerating and celebrating diversity.” “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” “It takes a Village.” “A kinder gentler government will take care of you.”
The price of your ticket? Your freedom.
At the heart of the con is the effort to reprogram the “inherently flawed human biological machine.” In other words, erase “the basic delusion that freedom exists.”
Once that operation has been achieved, a better world will follow.
“The blueprint of your mind was ABC. We will change that to XYZ.”
This horrendous concept forms the link between Socialism, Globalism, and Technocracy. It is “science” deployed to bring overall methods of control “up to date.”
Edit the genes. Insert visual images directly into the brain. Use drugs to dampen and neutralize emotional responses. Sidetrack and take away impulses that are considered “anti-social.”
Consider this question contained in a 1952 CIA MKULTRA memo:
“Can we get control of an individual to the point where he will do our bidding against his will and even against fundamental laws of nature, such as self preservation?”
The worst part of all of this is the dejection it causes among many intelligent people. They give in to the idea that massive mind control of populations is inevitable, and nothing can be done to stop it. They jump to this conclusion because…
They have given up on the power of their own freedom. They have formed an inherently self-defeating world view.
They’ve decided that Technocracy is irresistible.
In effect, they’ve joined the tyranny.
Well, that’s exactly what the controllers are looking for. As Gary Allen points out in his brilliant book, None Dare Call It Conspiracy (1971), one of the cardinal propaganda ideas permeating worldwide Socialism was, and is: It’s inevitable.
That fallacious notion has been used to wear down the opposition. “Socialism is taking over the world, and nothing can be done about it.”
Nonsense. We did not arrive at this point in history to give up the ghost.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama made several references to the people they considered “enemies of benevolent control and the new world order”: bitter clingers with religion and guns, and a basket of deplorables.
This was an effort to characterize “hold-outs” who insisted on freedom. Freedom, in elite eyes, is the resistance, plain and simple. It is archaic and dangerous. It is ignorant and senseless. It is primitive.
Sophisticated minds would, of course, understand that “togetherness” is the true answer to human problems. Meaning: dependence on centralized power. Centralized and globalized power.
To justify the expansion of Globalism, Socialism, and Technocracy, to put a humane face on this triple catastrophe, it is necessary to proliferate the number of victims with needs - and what better way to do that than by demanding Western nations take in and support unlimited waves of migrants?
Freedom, on the other hand, implies self-reliance, self-sufficiency, inviolable private property, and the protections expressed in the US Bill of Rights. O how deplorable!
The Founding Fathers of the American Republic were all deplorables, weren’t they? They saw a light at the end of the tunnel of history, and they moved toward it, armed with ideas that would shake the world.
The controllers strive to decimate that disturbance and return, behind their triple mask, to the era of entitled rule. They are the revisionists. They are the oligarchs. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing. They enlist “the downtrodden” to front for them.
They bark and howl about social justice, when justice is the last thing on their minds.
Without question we live in interesting times. The deception, insanity and turmoil in our world has no end, yet when we tune in very closely to life’s pulse, we find softness and connection open to us at every step.
These contradictory features of the human experience point to the dualistic nature of the universe, but ultimately offer a glimpse of a middle way, the center, where harmony resides in a sea of chaos. A seeming, but natural paradox.
"When people find one thing beautiful,
another consequently becomes ugly.
When one man is held up as good,
another is judged deficient.
Similarly, being and nonbeing balance each other;
difficult and easy define each other;
long and short illustrate each other;
high and low rest upon one another;
voice and song meld into harmony;
what is to come follows upon what has been.”
~Tao Te Ching 2
This is what personal awakening means. To create a harmonious relationship with your own life. To solve the paradox. Have you experienced any of these 3 extraordinary paradoxes of personal awakening?
1. The Awakening is Triggered by Fear and Supported by Love
Like an invading virus triggers the immune system, fear triggers the awakening. War, strife, turmoil, conspiracy, control, death, suffering, theft, abuse. This is the world we have created for ourselves.
The toll of such heaviness manifests as a dense type of contagious fear, a chronic trigger that perpetuates the fight or flight response, but without an immediate or tangible threat to face directly. But there is nowhere to run or hide from the fear.
We can confront it or be consumed by it. Or transmute it.
And what is to found beyond the fear? Love. An endless stream of it. In the stream the fear makes sense as a force which guides us into the stream of love.
2. Healing Hurts
The awakening is ultimately a healing process, but it’s hardly free of pain, because it is in a sense a recovery from injury or illness, like a form of forgetfulness of who you really are.
As such, it actually hurts. A lot. And just like the agony of having a broken bone set, or the pain of recovering from a difficult surgery, emotional and spiritual pain is a necessary component of healing.
Letting go into whatever it is, depression, sadness, boredom, or even grief, is how healing begins. There is no out, only through. The remembrance of the pain is there to forever color the outcome of the healing process.
"If you desire healing,
let yourself fall ill
let yourself fall ill.”
Counter intuitive it may seem, but stepping out of the cultural and mental clutter and into the void, where being and non-being balance each other, reveals everything we truly need. It turns out that silence is the teacher.
In silence the universe comes into focus. Time stops and morphs into timelines. Infinite possibilities all become clear at once. Everything we need to know and feel is in this space, but to get there, everything has to be stripped away.
"In the pursuit of knowledge, every day something is added. In the practice of the Tao, every day something is dropped.”
What lies above lies below. A proper life is about balancing the joy of being alive with the terror of being alive. Ignoring either side of the equation leads to chaos.
"Do you want to improve the world?
I don’t think it can be done.
The world is sacred.
It can’t be improved.
If you tamper with it, you’ll ruin it.
If you treat it like an object, you’ll lose it.
There is a time for being ahead,
a time for being behind;
a time for being in motion,
a time for being at rest;
a time for being vigorous,
a time for being exhausted;
a time for being safe,
a time for being in danger.
The Master sees things as they are,
without trying to control them.
She lets them go their own way,
and resides at the center of the circle.”
Trey Gowdy To Gun Grabbing Politicans: “Show Me A Law That Will Prevent The Next Mass Killing” February 19 2018 | From: FreedomOutpost
The purpose of the law is not to stop crime, it's to point out who the criminals are.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) responded quickly after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School to gun grabbing politicians who think that writing more illegal, unconstitutional laws to restrict the rights of gun owners will stop mass killings.
Gowdy was asked what he would say to Americans who claim that Congress doesn't act on things like mental health or guns.
"The first thing I would say to this generation of children is how sorry I am you have witnessed school shootings, mall shootings, concert shootings," Gowdy began. "There is no place that seems safe in our society."
"So, as devastating as the loss of life is, the loss of innocence for this generation of children, I don't know anyone who would not pass a bill today that would prevent the next mass shooting." he continued.
That's right, because no ink on paper will stop a criminal from committing crime! Isn't that the point of the law in the first place? To simply determine who the criminals are? Law doesn't stop criminals.
As I said before, even gun-grabber Dianne Feinstein agrees that there is no law that will stop a mass shooting.
Following the Las Vegas shooting, Feinstein was asked if there were laws that could have prevented the shooting?
“I don’t know. I would have to take a good look at that and really study it. I’m not sure there is any set of laws that could have prevented it,”she told NBC’s Chuck Todd.
She then followed up on CBS’ Face the Nation and told host John Dickerson that the Las Vegas shooter wouldn’t have been stopped by more gun laws. “He passed background checks registering for handguns and other weapons on multiple occasions,” the Senator admitted.
This is so important to remember because it tells you that when someone cries for more laws, they already know those laws will not stop crime. So, when they admit those laws won't stop crime, but continue to push for them, you know they have an agenda, and an unlawful one at that.
As for Gowdy, he did reference trying to find out how Nikolas Cruz obtained the weapon he allegedly used, but he went on to speak about the alleged "gun show loophole" and asked, how many mass killings have resulted from guns purchased at gun shows?
None, that I know of, but that is really irrelevant. Because whether the gun is legally or illegally obtained, the criminal wanting to commit mass murder has it in his heart to do so and no amount of legislation will stop that. If he can't get a gun legally, he'll get one illegally. If he can't do that, he'll build a bomb. If he can't do that, he'll resort to some other means of committing murder.
Furthermore, let me throw in the fact that it amazes me that an American citizen, who has a God-given right to keep and bear arms, has to prove his innocence before he can purchase said arms and exercise his right. We don't do that with other rights, do we? Nope, just the guns.
Gowdy went on to talk about prosecuting prohibited persons from owning guns as means to "avoid the murder."
Well, often some of these people who are prohibited from owning a gun, shouldn't be in the first place. Many times there are individuals who don't pay a mandatory child support because they know there are crimes being committed against their children and have informed those who are to enforce the law and they do nothing about it. They then end up prohibited, even though they have actually not committed a crime.
However, if someone has committed a violent crime such as rape, murder, kidnapping or other crime, they should not be put in jail for the remainder of their life, and possibly let out. They should be put down, ie. the death penalty. Imagine if that were done for just a moment, and I say the more local the better.
Immediately, you would end this nonsense of background checks because those who truly lose their rights to keep and bear arms are dealt with justly. By keeping these people in jail, we not only commit an injustice against them, but every other citizen forced to pay taxes to keep up a prison system, feed, clothe and house the criminals, many of which committed crimes against them or family members.
Does that sound just to you? Me neither. Furthermore, we would not have to play these little games about registries and denying them their rights once they completed their sentence.
But no, we won't actually think about justice. We only want to think about more ways to grow the tyrannical beast, infringe on the peoples' rights and engage in gun prohibition.
Still, we learned several years back that the federal government just doesn't prosecute a lot of people who simply lie on their ATF forms in order to purchase a gun.
According to an interview in 2013, Jim Baker of the National Rifle Association spoke with the Daily Caller and said that then-Vice President Biden told him, "regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”
If you aren't going to prosecute lying on a form and "don't have the time or manpower" to do so, then how in the world do these gun prohibitionists plan to deal with more people that they will turn into criminals simply by passing legislation against the Constitution?
In the end, Gowdy is right. There is no law or amount of laws that can be written to stop a criminal.
If you want to learn real economics instead of neoliberal junk economics, read Michael Hudson’s books.
What you will learn is that neoliberal economics is an apology for the rentier class and the large banks that have succeeded in financializing the economy, shifting consumer spending power from the purchase of goods and services that drive the real economy to the payment of interest and fees to banks.
Related: London School Of Economics – everything but the truth
His latest book is J is for Junk Economics. It is written in the form of a dictionary, but the definitions give you the precise meaning of economic terms, the history of economic concepts, and describe the transformation of economics from classical economics, where the emphasis was on taxing incomes that are not the product of the production of goods and services, to neoliberal economics, which rests on the taxation of labor and production.
This is an important difference that is not easy to understand. Classical economists defined “unearned income” as “economic rent.”
This is not the rent that you pay for your apartment. Economic rent is an income stream that has no counterpart in cost incurred by the receipient of the income stream.
For example, when a public authority, say the city of Alexandria, Virginia, decides to connect Alexandria with Washington, D.C., and with itself, with a subway paid for with public money, the owners of property along the subway line experience a rise in property values.
They owe their increased wealth and their increased incomes from the rental values of their properties to the expenditure of taxpayer dollars. If these gains were taxed away, the subway line could have been financed without taxpayers’ money.
It is these gains in value produced by the subway, or by a taxpayer-financed road across property, or by having beachfront property instead of property off the beach, or by having property on the sunny side of the street in a business area that are “economic rents.” Monopoly profits due to a unique positioning are also economic rents.
Hudson adds to these rents the interest that governments pay to bondholders when governments can avoid the issuance of bonds by printing money instead of bonds.
When governments allow private banks to create the money with which to purchase the government’s bonds, the governments create liabilities for taxpayers than are easily avoidable if, instead, government created the money themselves to finance their projects.
The buildup of public debt is entirely unnecessary. No less money is created by the banks that buy government bonds than would be created if the government printed money instead of bonds.
The inability of neoliberal economics to differentiate income streams that are economic rents with no cost of production from produced output makes the National Income and Product Accounts, the main source of data on economic activity in the US, extremely misleading. The economy can be said to be growing because public debt-financed investment projects raise the rents along subway lines.
“Free market” economists today are different from the classical free market economists. Classical economists, such as Adam Smith, understood a free market to be one in which taxation freed the economy from untaxed economic rents. In neoliberal economics, Hudson explains, “free market” means freedom for rent extraction free of government taxation and regulation. This is a huge difference.
Consequently, today the US economy is focused by policymakers including the Federal Reserve on maximizing rentier income at the expense of the growth in the real economy. Rentier income has the productive economy in a death grip.
The economy cannot grow, because consumer income is siphoned off into payment of interest and fees to banks, and is not available for increased purchases of real goods and services.
Independently I arrived at Hudson’s conclusion that neoliberal economics is a device for ripping off workers and producers in order to convey awards to the rentier class.
Neoliberal economics is a predatory device that justifies the exorbitant incomes of the One Percent while blaming rising debt on those forced into debt-peonage in order to survive.
Hudson’s virtue is that he explains the historical development of debt-peonage and makes it clear that this is the status that the One Percent intends for the 99 Percent. He resurrects classical economics and reformulates economic theory in keeping with the facts on the ground instead of rentier interests.
Hudson is a coauthor of mine. In former times it would have been inappropriate for me to review the work of a colleague. However, the neoliberal apologists for the One Percent are not going to confront themselves with Hudson’s facts. As I do not think that my integrity or Hudson’s is in question, I have no qualms about introducing you to this major work.
Buy the book. Read and study the book. Learn to rise far above corrupt neoliberal economics.
How To Spot A Media Psy-Op February 18 2018 | From: Newslogue
I enjoy a good conspiracy theory as much as the next peddler of anti-establishment vitriol. If you can hold them loosely, conspiracy theories can keep you conceptually and ideologically fluid so you don’t settle into any single set of perceptual or cognitive habits with this political stuff, and as an added bonus they tend to consistently infuriate all the worst kinds of people at all the right times.
But this article is not about conspiracy theory. What I’ll be sharing with you here are verifiable matters of public record which I encourage you to independently investigate if anything you read here is new to you.
I emphasize this not because I want you to believe me, but because we need as many eyes on this stuff as possible.
The American political establishment appears to have settled into an aggressive disinformation campaign against its own citizens as a result of the way it lost control of the narrative in 2016, and that campaign is only escalating.
In 2005, President George W. Bush admitted in a televised press conference that the US government creates its own “news” videos to give to the press, who often air those stories with no disclaimers informing viewers that they are watching government-generated media. In 2013, the US government implemented the negation of a 1948 law which had made it illegal for it to conduct psychological operations (psy-ops) on its citizens.
The 2017 NDAA allots a portion of the defense budget to a new State Department-run “counter-propaganda” program to fight certain types of information Americans are getting from the internet.
So when I tell you that the American government is known to actively use the media to psychologically manipulate the American people, that isn’t some wacky conspiracy theory, it’s a fact. These people have been legalizing and legislating psy-ops campaigns because they want to use them.
A lot of my readers probably tuned out from mainstream media long ago, as did I, but as the manipulators of the political establishment become more desperate their movements are becoming a lot more obvious, and they’ve been giving us a lot of valuable information lately.
I encourage you to tune back in as much as you feel inclined to, because when they really overextend, these mouthpieces of the oligarchy actually tell us where they don’t want us to look. Here are a few things you can watch out for to spot their manipulations:
Whenever you hear all the talking heads on TV suddenly start using the same phrase at the same time, you are hearing a slogan, a marketing ploy cooked up by a political think tank in the same way corporate think tanks come up with slogans for their products like “I’m lovin’ it” or “Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids!” Only political slogans aren’t geared to manipulate you into buying a product, they’re geared to manipulate you into buying into an idea.
In 2003 while the corporate media was manufacturing consent for the Iraq invasion, everyone suddenly started using the phrase “Support our troops.” It was everywhere. “Support our troops, support our troops!” You couldn’t watch the news without hearing it frequently peppered into the conversation, which is bizarre because taken on its own the phrase is essentially meaningless.
The opposition to the Iraq war wasn’t rooted in a lack of “support” for the individuals in the armed forces, it was opposition to the invasion itself and the decision to do so made by politicians in DC.
But all at once corporate media began slamming the American psyche with the absurd subconscious notion that if you didn’t support the invasion you must therefore hate soldiers and marines.
Following Hillary Clinton’s loss due to counter-establishment ideas and information being circulated largely via alternative media outlets, we began seeing the phrase “fake news” being constantly bleated with very broad brush strokes in a transparent attempt to lump dissenting alternative media outlets in with Macedonian clickbait and Russian propaganda.
And it was fairly successful at first; for weeks every single one of my opinion articles was getting comments calling them “fake news” despite being neither fake nor news.
Alternative media was getting slammed with this deliberate government psy-op, and luckily there was a strong pushback against it wherein every time CNN or the Washington Post published an unsubstantiated and inflammatory claim there was widespread use of their own slogan against them.
WaPo recently announced that it’s “time to retire the term fake news” since it’s been co-opted by the political right, and it’s true; you now hear that term being used more often on right-leaning mainstream media than on the left. By hijacking the term, they broke the spell, causing it to become an ineffective psy-op.
Pay close attention to when establishment shills interject a phrase that doesn’t seem to really “fit” with the rest of their words. Whenever you see the CIA-funded Washington Post arbitrarily start babbling about Pizzagate in the middle of an article about something or someone who opposes the political establishment, even when the hard substance of the report has nothing whatsoever to do with Pizzagate, you are seeing this psy-op at work.
CNN’s Chris Cuomo is an absolute wizard with this trick. The son of a former Democratic New York Governor and brother of a current Democratic New York Governor, Cuomo is political establishment royalty, and he appears to have been groomed for his job.
Cuomo went to law school instead of studying journalism, but has been given a prominent spot on the media juggernaut Clinton News Network, where he routinely inserts ideas into his commentary that are designed to fly below the radar and bury themselves deep in America’s subconscious.
My readers might remember Cuomo as the guy who casually slipped the absurd notion that it’s illegal for Americans to read WikiLeaks into his report, which to me is less notable for how blatantly manipulative it is than for the way Americans finally caught him in the act.
It was a very brief insertion, just a few seconds long, but some alert viewers were able to isolate it and go “Hey! What did you just do there? You’re tricking us!”
Which is great, but this was the only time Cuomo has really been caught in a big way. Watch the clip here and get a feel for how bizarrely his sentences are structured when you really listen to his words; whenever you see a pundit word-salading like that, it’s probably because they’re slipping a toxic idea into what they’re serving you.
Watch this clip here from his town hall with Bernie Sanders where out of nowhere Cuomo inserts the idea into viewers’ minds that the oligarchy isn’t the problem Sanders makes it out to be. Notice how his comment that Joe Biden “doesn't think 500 billionaires are behind every problem that America has” had nothing to do with anything anyone was talking about at the time, including Cuomo, and how weirdly and nonsensically he slips that spell into the mix.
It looks weirder written down, since he works his magic with such confidence; here’s a transcript from CNN if you want to see it in writing.
You can see a more overt example here in his interview with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, where he somehow manages to force the adamant assertion “Assad is a tyrant, that he is an oppressor of his people and he needs to be taken out in the name of democracy” into the form of a question to help inoculate viewers from Gabbard’s anti-establishment message involving Syria.
It’s a magic trick. I don’t know where he learned it or why he relentlessly uses it on the American public, but the technique he’s using is called neuro-linguistic programming and it’s well-known among magicians. Check out UK magician Derren Brown who uses it extensively in his act to manipulate people into doing what he wants so he can appear to be psychic.
During his show, he sprinkles subconscious messages throughout his patter so his “predictions” come true at the end. These words and phrases that are so odd and out of context that they should jump out at you, but the mind smooths it over and moves on to the next thing he says. These tiny weird little phrases don’t even need to be repeated that often for them to work.
And work, they do. He can get any three people from the audience to collaborate to select a word of his choosing out of a possible 1.6 million words, seemingly at random to the participants.
The only difference with Brown is that it’s a part of his reveal at the end, and he walks you through how he manipulated everyone. Watch here to see him walk an audience through how he got them to choose that one word from 1.6 million for him, complete with video clips of each insertion.
I guarantee you Chris Cuomo has made a study of neuro-linguistic programming or something similar as part of his establishment grooming. His quick, rhythmic delivery and seamless insertions are the hallmark of a genius-level NLP practitioner.
The Forced Association
This psy-op is designed to forcefully marry two unrelated ideas in the minds of the audience for the benefit of the political establishment. Half a year after the Iraq invasion, a poll by USA Today found that 70 percent of Americans still believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.
This wasn’t because reporters were directly saying this; they never could have gotten away with such blatant falsehoods.
What they could get away with was consistently making sure they mentioned Saddam Hussein in the same breath as the September 11th attacks over and over again, and I remember them doing this frequently.
They’d mention the “intelligence” which said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and then they’d say something about the possibility of another attack similar to 9/11.
A recent YouGov poll found that 50 percent of Hillary Clinton voters believe that the Russian government tampered with vote tallies to help Donald Trump win the presidential election.
This is because media outlets, nearly all of which are owned by just five powerful companies in the US, have been deliberately using phrases like “election hacking” and “hacked the election” instead of phrases like “hacked the DNC emails” or “spearphishing John Podesta’s emails” which would have been an infinitely more accurate reflection of the actual substance of their reports.
People were tricked into marrying those two ideas, and now half the Democrats you meet will likely believe that Putin was involved in hacking actual election booths or vote tallies.
A few days ago we saw the same thing when Donald Trump lashed out at Rep. John Lewis for saying he didn’t consider him a legitimate President; the overwhelming majority of the headlines from liberal corporate media used words like “civil rights hero” and “civil rights icon” when referring to Lewis and “attack” and “smear” when referring to Trump’s response to him.
In reality Trump was just returning fire initiated by a Congressman in the opposing party, but I guarantee you there are millions of Americans who now think of Trump as someone who attacks civil rights leaders because he hates civil rights, for the same exact reason people think Russia hacked polling booths and thought Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
WaPo is a great resource for all clear-eyed rebels, because it can be used as a daily memo of what the CIA and the political establishment it supports want the American public to believe.
Jeff Bezos is the second wealthiest person on the planet and prior to his purchase of WaPo he had already obstructed WikiLeaks via his company Amazon, so he’s unquestionably got a vested interest in propping up the oligarchy. Paying attention to his publication tells us where we aren’t meant to look.
One of the first things I noticed before any campaigning had even started in the recent Democratic primary was when Hillary Clinton got caught buying millions of fake “zombie” accounts to bolster her numbers on Twitter and Facebook.
They’re called zombie accounts because they’re not real people. You can buy followers pretty inexpensively it turns out, but they’re only shell accounts. They will never retweet you, they just make your numbers look better.
It was the beginning of the largest and most outrageous astroturfing of a campaign we’ve ever seen. Astroturf is so called because it seeks to mimic the growth of a natural grassroots campaign.
You buy followers, pay people to turn up to your rallies, offer incentives to wear your stickers and badges, pay people to go online and defend you, hand out signs at rallies that look home-made, pay celebrities to endorse you, pay your marketing campaign to make memes for you, stage “spontaneous” photo-ops with “fans" - in short, you use money to pay for the appearance of what burgeoned from the Bernie Sander’s campaign organically because there was genuine and growing enthusiasm for the candidate. Astroturfing seeks to mimic that kind of virality.
These strategies are usually used by advertising companies to generate interest for a product. Check out this Ted talk by Sharyl Attkisson for a little tour. It’s well-known in the trade that word-of-mouth is by far the best salesman, so those sneaky bastards have dreamed up ways of mimicking that.
What the Clinton campaign did went way beyond hiring a few shills to inject positive messages about their candidate and into the realm of mass psychological abuse, using real-life disrupters, social media shills, and the mainstream media to demonize Trump and his supporters to the point where the nation is still showing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Here’s the thing though - we can only prove that the Clinton campaign did that because of the email leaks and the fact that the FEC enforces some transparency on the activities and budgets of the campaign and its superPACS. If we didn’t have those two things, we wouldn’t have proof that it occurred.
Post-campaign, you can still hire a company to shill for you online, on whatever issue you please, and you don’t have to report it to anyone. It’s relatively inexpensive and it’s a very effective way of controlling the narrative and disrupting natural healthy collaboration between normal humans.
This is just a taster but according to this amazing article from Double G, I mean, Glenn Greenwald, the key tactics boil down to the four D’s - Deny, disrupt, degrade, deceive.
So just because the campaign bunting has been taken down, don’t think that there aren’t regular assaults occurring on the hearts and minds of average Westerners, but the good news is, they are getting easier and easier to spot.
The Large Families That Rule The World February 17 2018 | From: PravdaReport
Some people have started realizing that there are large financial groups that dominate the world. Forget the political intrigues, conflicts, revolutions and wars. It is not pure chance. Everything has been planned for a long time.
Some call it "conspiracy theories" or New World Order. Anyway, the key to understanding the current political and economic events is a restricted core of families who have accumulated more wealth and power.
We are speaking of 6, 8 or maybe 12 families who truly dominate the world. Know that it is a mystery difficult to unravel.
We will not be far from the truth by citing Goldman Sachs, Rockefellers, Loebs Kuh and Lehmans in New York, the Rothschilds of Paris and London, the Warburgs of Hamburg, Paris and Lazards Israel Moses Seifs Rome.
Many people have heard of the Bilderberg Group, Illuminati or the Trilateral Commission. But what are the names of the families who run the world and have control of states and international organizations like the UN, NATO or the IMF?
To try to answer this question, we can start with the easiest: inventory, the world's largest banks, and see who the shareholders are and who make the decisions.
The world's largest companies are now: Bank of America, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
Let us now review who their shareholders are.
Bank of America:
State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR (Fidelity), Paulson, JP Morgan, T. Rowe, Capital World Investors, AXA, Bank of NY, Mellon.
State Street Corp., Vanguard Group, FMR, BlackRock, T. Rowe, AXA, Capital World Investor, Capital Research Global Investor, Northern Trust Corp. and Bank of Mellon.
State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, Paulson, FMR, Capital World Investor, JP Morgan, Northern Trust Corporation, Fairhome Capital Mgmt and Bank of NY Mellon.
Berkshire Hathaway, FMR, State Street, Vanguard Group, Capital World Investors, BlackRock, Wellington Mgmt, AXA, T. Rowe and Davis Selected Advisers.
We can see that now there appears to be a nucleus present in all banks: State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock and FMR (Fidelity). To avoid repeating them, we will now call them the "big four"
"The big four," Wellington, Capital World Investors, AXA, Massachusetts Financial Service and T. Rowe.
"The big four," Mitsubishi UFJ, Franklin Resources, AXA, T. Rowe, Bank of NY Mellon e Jennison Associates. Rowe, Bank of NY Mellon and Jennison Associates.
We can just about always verify the names of major shareholders. To go further, we can now try to find out the shareholders of these companies and shareholders of major banks worldwide.
Bank of NY Mellon:
Davis Selected, Massachusetts Financial Services, Capital Research Global Investor, Dodge, Cox, Southeatern Asset Mgmt. and ... "The big four."
State Street Corporation:
(One of the "big four")
Massachusetts Financial Services, Capital Research Global Investor, Barrow Hanley, GE, Putnam Investment and ... The "big four" (shareholders themselves!).
(Another One of the "big four")
PNC, Barclays e CIC. Who is behind the PNC? FMR (Fidelity), BlackRock, State Street, etc. And behind Barclays? BlackRock.
And we could go on for hours, passing by tax havens in the Cayman Islands, Monaco or the legal domicile of Shell companies in Liechtenstein. A network where companies are always the same, but never a name of a family.
In short: the eight largest U.S. financial companies (JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, U.S. Bancorp, Bank of New York Mellon and Morgan Stanley) are 100% controlled by ten shareholders and we have four companies always present in all decisions: BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard and Fidelity.
In addition, the Federal Reserve is comprised of 12 banks, represented by a board of seven people, which comprises representatives of the "big four," which in turn are present in all other entities.
In short, the Federal Reserve is controlled by four large private companies: BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard and Fidelity. These companies control U.S. monetary policy (and world) without any control or "democratic" choice. These companies launched and participated in the current worldwide economic crisis and managed to become even more enriched.
To finish, a look at some of the companies controlled by this "big four" group:
Altria Group Inc.
American International Group Inc.
DuPont & Co.
Exxon Mobil Corp.
General Electric Co.
General Motors Corporation
Home Depot Inc.
Honeywell International Inc.
International Business Machines Corp
Johnson & Johnson
JP Morgan Chase & Co.
Merck & Co. Inc.
Procter & Gamble Co.
United Technologies Corp.
Verizon Communications Inc.
Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation
The same "big four" control the vast majority of European companies counted on the stock exchange.
In addition, all these people run the large financial institutions, such as the IMF, the European Central Bank or the World Bank, and were "trained" and remain "employees" of the "big four" that formed them.
The names of the families that control the "big four", never appear.
Inflation: The Most Evil Threat = Governments Robbing Their Citizens
February 16 2018 | From: FinalWakeUpCall Inflation, is an invisible, secret tax that not even 1% of common people understand. It is dangerous and most of the time a fatal disease.
If not under control in time, it can destroy society. No government is willing to accept responsibility for causing inflation. They always find an excuse; such as greedy businessmen, selfish trade unions, spendthrift consumers, Arab sheiks that have raised the price of oil, bad weather, or anything else that seems plausible.
Although all these can temporarily produce higher prices for individual items; they cannot produce continuing inflation for one very simple reason; None of the above alleged culprits possesses a printing press, to turn out pieces of paper called money; None can legally authorise a bookkeeper to make entries on ledgers that are the equivalent of those pieces of paper.
Over time, the result will be an immensely lower standard of living, resulting from the declining purchasing power and increasing commodity prices. Real wages will be much lower, as employers will not readily increase wages to keep up with inflation.
Under a paper system without backing, the entire monetary system is controlled by the political class, which has the power to allocate capital or to deny it.
This implies that the people heading the world’s capital markets, rather than acting as capital allocators, have become mere speculative marionettes, whose strings are controlled by the well connected and the influential.
Inflation is a printing press phenomenon. The two important basic questions are:
Why do governments increase the quantity of money?
Why do they produce inflation when they understand the potential harm?
If the quantity of goods and services available for purchase – for short-term ‘output’ – were to increase as rapidly as the quantity of money, prices would tend to be stable.
Prices may fall gradually, as more became available, while people keep their wealth in the form of money. Inflation occurs when the quantity of money rises more rapidly than output and the more rapid the rise in the quantity of money, the greater the rate of inflation.
Output is limited by the physical and human resources available, and by the improvement in knowledge and capacity to use them. At best the output can grow only fairly slowly. The same is the case, although always temporarily and for a brief period of time, for money backed by a commodity. While, paper money has no limitation as does commodity-backed money.
Inflation is a Monetary Phenomenon:
In short; Inflation is primarily a monetary phenomenon, produced by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output. Excessive monetary growth produces inflation, caused by governments. – In general, inflation is worse than a financial crisis.
Taxpayers’ money is spent for nothing without reform in sight; Increase in unemployment, as businesses go bankrupt. – Bankers that caused the 2008 financial crisis were bailed out with people’s money and their managers were left in charge who in turn were taking on even more risks with taxpayer’s deposits in order to rake up even larger bonuses.
Eventually these schemes will result in a massive inflation, never witnessed before. The debt is structural; it’s irresolvable, there is no way to repair this economy.
Inflation is Legalised Theft:
Inflation is nothing more than legalised theft by your government; inflation is only two percent, is what the Statistics suggest. But these numbers don’t show the truth. Today’s real inflation rate is probably closer to 9 %, maybe even higher.
Who knows? All published inflation data are a blatant lie, as these numbers are made up to suit the government.
Showing lower inflation in statistics looks better. The theft committed by governments is concealed.
When central banks print reserves far in excess of domestic savings, the result is inevitably inflation. The more they print, the more capital is available forinstitutions – central banks – to invest.
This creates massive asset inflation, in the price of assets, as central bankers buy – bonds, stocks, and real estate – to push economies upwards all around the world. – Instead of triggering an immediate currency flight, as seen in Argentina or Zimbabwe, this inflation has produced an investment-generated boom.
If additional government spending was financed either by taxes or by borrowing from the public, that would not lead to more rapid monetary growth. In this case the government would have more to spend, while the public would have less.
But the easy way out is increasing the quantity of money, because that’s more attractive since the public doesn’t understand the severe implications, and it seems like magic, like getting something for nothing! But the fact of the matter is that the holders of the money pay for the extra spending, as the extra money raises prices when it is injected into the economy.
Moreover, inflation indirectly yields extra revenue by automatically raising effective tax revenues, as income from the people goes up to compensate for inflation, and people are consequently pushed into higher tax rate brackets.
Additionally, there is the benefit of paying off debt with less valuable currency – less purchasing power – as less valuable units are paying for original units that were more valuable.
Reduction of Monetary Growth:
The cure for inflation is the reduction in the rate of monetary growth, as this is the cause of inflation. Eventually it is a curable disease. Although the bad effects – a temporarily lower economic growth, and higher unemployment would be felt first, the good effects – a lower to zero inflation – would come later.
This would result in a healthier economy, with the potential for rapid noninflationary growth.
But as usual there is the lack of a true desire to cure the addiction of free money, resulting in this disease. In a sense people enjoy inflation. Although they would like to see the prices of goods they buy go down, or at least stop going up, they are more than happy to see the prices of the things they own or sell go up.
Inflation is Destructive:
One reason inflation is so destructive is because while some people benefit greatly, other people suffer. Society is divided into winners and losers. The winners regard the good things that happen to them as the natural result of their own foresight, prudence, and initiative.
They regard the bad things; the rise of prices of goods purchased, as caused by forces outside their control. Almost everyone will say they are opposed to inflation. What they generally mean is that they are opposed to the bad things that have happened to them due to certain effects of inflation.
The paper value of homes is rising. With a mortgage, the interest rate generally is below the rate of inflation. As a result of this, inflation in effect is paying off the mortgage interest payments as well the principal. This effect is an advantage to the home owner, as his equity in the house goes up rapidly. The flip side of the coin is that an interest rate below inflation results in a loss for savers.
As inflation accelerates, rather sooner than later, it is causing so much damage to the fabric of society, by creating so much injustice, and suffering.
Everywhere one looks it is repeatedly published that unemployment and slow growth are cures for inflation; that all alternativemeasures taken will result in more inflation or higher unemployment, which is nonsense. The truth is that slow growth and high unemployment are not cures for inflation. They are the side-effects of a successful cure of a diseased economy.
The general signal of increasing demand will be confused with the specific signals reflecting changes in relative demands. That is why the initial side effect of faster monetary growth is the appearance of prosperity and greater employment.
– When it is discovered that the rise in wages does not coincide with higher demand, the flaw in the system is discovered. Wages and prices are higher not because of higher demand, but primarily to allow for the rises in the pricesof goods they buy.
Subsequently people are off on a price-wage spiral that itself effectively is inflation, and by no means the cause of it. If monetary growth does not speed up faster, the initial stimulus to employment and output will be replaced by the opposite; both will go down in response to the higher prices and wages.
By the way; governments can actually not create jobs, they can only steal from people and give it to others.
If it were politically profitable and feasible to generate a 10% inflation rate, the temptation would be great if inflation indeed reached this level, to raise it to 11, or 12 or 15 %. Zero inflation is a politically feasible objective; 10% is not.
This is the verdict of experience. Nevertheless, central bankers create excessive quantities of money, as they tell us the world needs more inflation to fight deflationary forces, which basically is nonsense as the deflationary forces are the result of the increase of monetary supply.
The Best Solution to Create Inflation:
Moreover, if they want to create inflation, there is no need for excessive money printing. They can create inflation instantly byraising the price of gold, which is the easiest way to create inflation.
A higher dollar price for gold is practically the definition of inflation. The Fed would just declare the price of gold to be, say, $5,000 an ounce and make the price stick using the gold in Fort Knox – assuming it is still there? – Their printing press would maintain a two-way market.
The Fed could sell gold when it hits $5,050 an ounce and buy gold when it hits $4,950 an ounce. That’s a 1% band around the target price of $5,000 an ounce. The band and the use of physical gold would make the target price stick.
A higher price for gold is the same as a lower value for the dollar. The world of $5,000-per-ounce gold also means $10 per gallon gas at the station and $40 for a movie ticket. Nothing happens without consequences.
Santa Claus Doesn’t Exist:
Inflation, in contrast to what economic leaders lead us to believe, is not equivalent to Santa Claus. It can’t bring gifts to everyone. All it does is shift the benefits of the economy around. In the immortal words of President Obama: “inflation spreads the wealth around a little.”
Inflation penalises wage earners, savers, and retirees to the benefit of asset owners. It benefits debtors at the expense of creditors. There’s no net increase in the nation’s wealth. One group is merely taxed for the benefit of the other. This is sold as a benefit to the country by governments. They have to sell it to the people because without inflation they won’t be able to pay their bills.
However, wealth cannot be created by a printing press. This will cause price inflation, asset inflation, credit collapse – or a mixture of all three. Everyone knows this. Nevertheless, our leaders pretend otherwise.
If credit is expanded in excess of savings, it historically always ends in a collapse. So there should be no surprise. When creditors begin to ask the critical question: Can these debts really be financed? Will we get our savings back? If credit has been expanded radically beyond savings, as is the case today in the developed world, the answer is always NO.
It is true that dramatic increases in the money supply eventually lead to inflation. But the key word here is “eventually.” Sometimes it can take a while. The extent of the delay depends on general conditions, and a very important concept known as “monetary velocity.”
Inflation and deflation are not purely products of how much money is in the system. They are products of how fast this moneyis moving through the system.
When banks are lending, businesses are borrowing, and consumers are spending, money changes hands quickly. Under these conditions, the monetary velocity is high.
Conversely, when banks don’t lend the money, businesses are hunkered down, and consumers are saving or paying down debt, money does not change hands quickly. It moves slowly. If the economy grinds to a near halt, as is the case today, eventually money stops changing hands completely.
Inflation is not purely from an increase in the money supply. Sufficient monetary velocity is required to spur a general and persistent increase in the price of goods and services. Without velocity – if money doesn’t move through the system – there is no reason for prices to rise.
The point is that it’s not just about how many units are being printed. It’s about where those units go and how fast they are moving through the system. The end game may indeed be accelerating monetary velocity. The cumulative effect on the rise in prices and a spectacular loss of faith in the system will result in a decline in the desire for owning dollars will plummet, and that means hyperinflation.
How Much Money is in Circulation?
Ever wondered how much money exists? This video compares the world’s richest people, the biggest companies, physical currency, the gold market, the stock market, global debt, and more to give you a sense of the quantity of money that actually exists.
How Much Is UK “Justice” Being Paid By Washington To Continue Holding Assange Prisoner? February 15 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / RT / Various
How Much Is UK “Justice” Being Paid By Washington To Continue Holding Assange Prisoner?
The Swedish Government has for a second time completely closed the false and concocted case against Assange, and the corrupt British will not withdraw their arrest warrant for his extradiction to Sweden, a country that has withdrawn its extradition request for him
Makes one wonder how much money corrupt UK prosecutors and judges are being paid by the CIA.
Arrest Warrant Upheld in Julian Assange Case, New Hearing on February 13
A British judge will rule on February 13 whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can have his arrest warrant, for breaching bail conditions, lifted on “public interest grounds.”
Judge Emma Arbuthnot had earlier rejected a bid by Assange, who is holed up inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, to have an arrest warrant against him dropped on different grounds.
Speaking outside court, Assange’s lawyer Jennifer Robinson said all of us should be resisting the threat to free speech posed by the persecution of Assange.
“We hope this situation will come to an end very soon and we look forward to the decision next week,” Robinson said. “[The outcome on Tuesday] is not disappointing, we finally had the court understand the public interest of this case.”
According to Assange, only the first technical point of his legal challenge has failed. Judges will hear and decide on the other points on Tuesday afternoon, and if Assange wins any of them, the warrant falls.
The Judicial Office tweeted the judgment on Tuesday afternoon. Senior District Judge Emma Arbuthnot said in her ruling: “Having considered the arguments … I am not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn.”
Assange, 46, absconded in 2012 to enter the Ecuadorian embassy, to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape. However, Swedish prosecutors have since dropped those charges.
Still, Assange has been unable to leave the embassy in London, as he faced arrest for breaching his bail conditions in the UK.
Assange's lawyer, Mark Summers, argued that the arrest warrant should be dropped because it had “lost its purpose and its function,” citing the dropped charges against Assange in Sweden.
“[Assange] has spent five-and-a-half years in conditions which, on any view, are akin to imprisonment, without access to adequate medical care or sunlight, in circumstances where his physical and psychological health have deteriorated and are in serious peril,”Summers wrote in court papers, as quoted by the Guardian.
However, Aaron Watkins, who represents the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), called Summers’ argument “strange and untenable,” adding that it was an attempt at “contorting legislation” to allow Assange to leave the embassy.
“Assange had been released on bail in proceedings; he was under a duty to surrender to the custody of the court and he failed to surrender at the appointed time for him to do so. Therefore the warrant stands,” Watkins said, calling Assange’s situation “extremely simple.”
Assange was made an Ecuadorian citizen in December. However, the UK refused to recognize him as having diplomatic status, which would have given him legal immunity and allowed him to leave the embassy.
Even if Assange's arrest warrant has been dropped, he could have still been extradited to the US to face trial over WikiLeaks' publication of classified US military and diplomatic documents in 2010 – which amounted to one of the largest information leaks in United States history.
If found guilty in a US court, Assange could face life imprisonment – or possibly even the death penalty – under the Espionage Act. British authorities have declined to confirm or deny if a US extradition warrant has been received.
The Wikileaks founder has consistently denied the allegations of rape and sexual assault.
Vaccine Industry In Panic Mode As *Vaccinated* Children Keep Dying From The Flu All Across America February 14 2018 | From: NaturalNews
Children are dying from the flu all across America, according to media reports. What the media isn’t reporting, however, is how many of the children who died were also vaccine recipients.
Make no mistake: If only unvaccinated children were dying from the flu, that would be the headline everywhere: “Unvaccinated Children Dying Across America” or even “Flu Shot Saves Children from Deadly Influenza.”
But of course you’re not seeing those headlines for the simple reason that vaccinated children are among those who are being killed by this year’s flu.
“The dominant Influenza strain this year is H3N2. This particular strain has a history of causing more hospitalizations and more deaths,” reports The Organic Prepper. “In addition to H3N2 producing a more serious infection in general, this year’s particular H3N2 influenza virus is particularly virulent.”
This year’s flu has reportedly killed 44,116 people, according to the CDC. The number of children so far killed by this year’s flu is 37, say CDC statistics. The flu vaccine, widely touted by the clueless media as being some sort of magical “bulletproof vest” against influenza infections, is approaching zero effectiveness.
Via The Organic Prepper:
“Not only does this influenza strain produce a more intense and deadly flu, the flu vaccine is less effective against it. This Centers for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) article discusses a study published in The Lancet spanning 11 years that demonstrates H3N2 is more resistant to the flu vaccine.
… the flu vaccine demonstrates only a 33% vaccine effective (VE) rate with the average H3N2 strain… To make matters worse, this year’s flu vaccine isn’t even close to the average 33% VE rate of prior years. This year’s vaccine is performing at approximately a 10% VE rate."
You mean to tell me the CDC already knows that this year’s vaccine is only 10% effective at protecting children from the influenza strains circulating in the wild? According to CBS News:
“This year’s flu vaccine may only be 10% effective, experts warn… It is the same formulation that was used during Australia’s most recent flu season - which typically sets a pattern for what the U.S. will face - and it was only 10 percent effective there."
How Many Children Who Died From This Year’s Flu Were Vaccinated With the “10% Effective” Flu Shot?
Note that the vaccine-pushing media isn’t reporting headlines such as, “Child who died from the flu was vaccinated with the flu shot.” No, that would be heresy to the vaccine dogmatists and propagandists who desperately push the false science that claims flu shots always work.
Even when flu shots don’t work, these propagandists still claim they sorta, kinda, almost work. CBS News dutifully demonstrates this pseudoscience delusion by restating the fictitious mantra of the flu propagandists: “Experts say that if you do get the flu, it will likely be less severe if you have gotten a flu shot.”
There is no evidence whatsoever to support such a claim, of course, but that doesn’t stop the media from repeating it - almost verbatim - in every news story that covers the repeated failures of the flu vaccine itself.
Not only is it unbelievably sad that American children keep dying from a preventable infection, but it’s downright criminal that the medical establishment and legacy media both refuse to tell parents how to save the lives of their children through low-cost nutrition.
Vaccine Magic Explained: Even When it’s the Wrong Strain, it Still Kinda Works by “Vaccine Magic”
Their logic, if you can even call it that, demands that you believe in vaccine magic, which requires that you abandon all scientific thinking about immunological responses and antibodies. According to vaccine science, your body is subjected to a weakened virus with a very specific RNA protein pattern.
Your body then builds a defensive “blueprint” based precisely on this protein pattern. You then generate “antibodies” which protect you from that protein pattern. These antibodies are pattern-specific, not universal, which is why immunity to smallpox, for example, doesn’t automatically grant you immunity to Ebola.
But wait! According to vaccine magic, even when they injected you with the wrong protein patterns (attenuated viruses) and your body builds the wrong antibodies, the vaccine propagandists magically claim that it all somehow works anyway. Vaccine science be damned.
All vaccines are awesome merely because the vaccine industry says so, regardless of medical reality. The entire “protein pattern” explanation behind vaccine science is conveniently abandoned with the vaccine itself fails to contain the proper viral strain.
This is the same lunatic logic the cancer industry uses to push chemotherapy for non-cancer patients as a “preventative” measure. Yes, people that are not diagnosed with cancer are routinely pushed to accept chemotherapy treatments by profit-driven oncology centers.
There’s money to be made from chemotherapy, after all, so they flat-out lie to their patients and say chemotherapy “prevents cancer,” even when the horrible truth is that chemotherapy causes cancer. So even if you didn’t have cancer before you got the treatment, you’re very likely to develop cancer after receiving it. How’s that for a medical business model?
The Binary Vaccine Trap: Nutrition is Never Mentioned as a Safe, Effective Way to Beat the Flu
The scientifically illiterate media, by the way, is run by nutritionally deficient “journalists” who are routinely lobotomized with mercury in flu shots. No wonder they don’t have the mental capacity to recommend the real solution to influenza infections: Nutrition and stress reduction.
Vaccine propaganda is a “binary trap,” in other words: Every debate is about pro-vaccine vs. anti-vaccine. This “Overton Window” limits debate to the vaccine alone, avoiding any real discussion of far safer and more effective options that don’t involve vaccines. Vitamins C and D, for example, are extremely effective at helping individuals mount an immune response that rapidly overcomes influenza infections.
Zinc, too, has been scientifically shown to limit the duration and severity of influenza infections. In fact, if you ask around, you’ll probably find that people who take nutritional supplements instead of vaccines are extremely resistant to influenza. (For myself, I haven’t had a vaccine shot in decades, yet I can’t even remember the last time I had a cold or the flu.) Yet the very people who seem to get sick with the flu every year are the same ones who routinely get flu shots.
How can that be? The answer, shockingly, is that flu shots have been scientifically proven to weaken your immune response in subsequent years.
Lisa Christian, PhD, the lead researcher on the study, concluded, “Growing evidence shows that those who received a flu shot in the prior year have lower antibody responses in the current year.”
The study proves yet again that the official narrative of the flu shot industry - and its complicit corporate-run media - is false and deliberately deceptive. Far from offering bulletproof protection, flu shots actually make people more vulnerable to influenza infections, which of course contributes to more people catching the flu and then falsely thinking they need more flu shots for “more protection.”
Meanwhile, the people who aren’t being killed by the flu are those who turn to nutrition and immune enhancement to protect themselves.
10 Ways to Save Your Life and Avoid the Flu:
1. Avoid the flu shot. It doesn’t work and weakens your immune response in subsequent years, according to the latest science. (See Vaccines.news)
2. Wash your hands, especially after interacting with other people who might carry influenza.
3. Avoid chronic stress. This also weakens your immune system.
4. Get plenty of sleep. Your body’s immune system rejuvenates itself while you sleep.
5. Avoid highly strenuous exercise. Pushing your exercise too far can make you vulnerable to infections until you recover from the exercise stress.
6. Boost your intake of vitamin D and vitamin C. Vitamin D is fat soluble and goes best with dietary fat sources. Consider 4000 IU – 10,000 IU per day during the flu season, but check with your holistic health practitioner to be certain what’s right for you. Vitamin C is water soluble and can be consumed in surprisingly large amounts of up to 25,000 mg per day, to the tolerance of your gut. (If you overdose, you’ll have loose stools.) Look for non-GMO vitamin C if you can find it.
7. Make sure you’re getting plenty of zinc, a trace mineral that helps block influenza viruses from invading your body.
8. Consider immune-boosting or adaptogenic herbs such as ashwagandha, licorice root, ginger, garlic, turmeric and echinacea. Read Herbs.news for more news coverage of herbal remedies.
10. Read Health.news for daily updates on health enhancing herbs, supplements, lifestyle habits and superfoods.
Finally, don’t believe the lying media which is 100% beholden to the pharmaceutical industry. In exactly the same way the media refuses to report the truth about the FISA warrant memo or the #UraniumOne scandal, the media will never voluntarily tell you how to beat the flu without resorting to Big Pharma’s toxic injections or medications.
The Trap Of Romantic Love February 14 2018 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit
The Search for Romantic Love: Most people - especially those brought up in the West - have been conditioned to believe that so-called romantic love is the most important pursuit in life and that only the ones who’ve found it are fulfilled.
From the tender age of one or two, we are told of fairy tales that end with two people of the opposite sex living “happily ever after”. As we age, novels, magazines, pop songs, television, Hollywood scripts, and self-help workshops reinforce the idea that romantic love is the ideal form of love.
We are led to believe that our happiness heavily depends on romantic love, and that our personal worth is reflected in how good we are with our romantic relationships. Not surprisingly, when we’re single or we don’t experience love as it’s usually portrayed, we wonder if there’s something wrong with us.
We think that we’re missing out on true love and are anxiously praying for that moment when the fair maiden or prince will save us from our desperate situation.
As we are, we feel emotionally empty - something is lacking within our psyche that needs to be filled, yet we can’t do that on our own. Only another person can do it, and unless we are lucky enough to connect with him or her, we won’t ever discover pure joy and lasting contentment.
The belief that we’re not complete as we are and that we need someone else to fill in our sense of existential emptiness isn’t a modern one. In fact, it’s ancient.
In Plato’s ~2,500 year-old philosophical text Symposium, the comic playwright Aristophanes describes the origins of humanity. As he points out, the original form of man was a four-legged, four-armed, double-sexed entity.
Zeus, however, was afraid that humans might steal the power of the gods, so he decided to take away their power by having them sliced in half. According to Aristophanes, their heads turned “towards the wound, so that each person would see that he’d been cut and keep better order.”
This, he explains, is why each human being is craving for a significant other to complete them. In his own words: “Now, since their natural form had been cut in two, each one longed for its own other half, and so they would throw their arms about each other, weaving themselves together, wanting to grow together.”
If taken literally, Aristophanes’ recount is total nonsense, yet metaphorically it shows the central role that romantic love plays in our lives: We are in an endless search for that “special someone” - the soulmate - the universe created just for us, and we are willing to give up anything to “lose ourselves” in his or her embrace.
Romantic Love as Addiction
The moment we fall in love, the world turns into a magical place. Suddenly, life becomes more beautiful, adventurous, meaningful… in short, life becomes worth-living again.
The only problem is that, having experienced the emotional high of romantic love, we want more of it, yet no matter how much of it we get, our thirst for it is never quenched.
In other words, romantic love is addictive. In fact, research has shown that falling in love can have a similar impact on the brain as cocaine. To study the brain function of people engaged in romantic love relationships, biological anthropologist Helen Fisher put a group of participants through MRI brain scans.
Interestingly, what she found was that they behaved just like addicts: They had obsessive thoughts, participated in risk-taking activities and found it hard to deal with withdrawals.
The brain of people in love secretes an ample amount of hormones like dopamine, norepinephrine and serotonin — hormones that boost their pleasure and confidence levels. Feeling the exhilarating psychological effects of this hormonal boost, everything seems perfect to the romantic love addict.
The promises of fairy tales have come true. At last, life is as it’s supposed to be. Yet, once the initial high fades, everything changes. Life becomes mundane, ordinary, boring once again.
This return to “normal” reality is usually enough to bring a relationship to an end. Once that happens, the romantic love addict will soon come face-to-face with that sense of inner emptiness which has forever been torturing his/her psyche. Then, to deal with his/her withdrawal symptoms, the romantic love addict will go off in search of a new hit, and the story will repeat itself one more time.
Romantic Love: A Dangerous Self-Delusion
As you can understand, romantic love is temporary - it comes quickly and goes away just as fast. No matter how strong the feelings of lust and passion in new relationships might be, they are soon bound to disappear into thin air, as the power of romantic love loses grip over our emotional world.
But while we’re possessed by romantic love, it’s so overwhelming that it distorts our perception and often leads us into making choices that we will later regret.
For example, projecting their long-yearned fantasies upon their “other half”, it’s a common phenomenon for people in fresh romantic love relationships to exaggerate the positive traits of their partner and reduce or deny the negative ones.
This illusion makes them believe they’ve found their one and only perfect match. Feeling a sense of total acceptance and adoration for their partner, they are under the impression that their love is going to last forever. As a result, they tend to make quick, immature choices, such as hurrying to marry, only to find years later that they resent their partner for failing to meet their expectations.
Romantic love is a blind self-delusion - it only exists in the realm of fantasy, an imaginary world that we’ve cultivated with the help of the romantic tradition, mainly through media programming. Just like pornography fools us into believing that perfect sex exists, the romantic tradition fools us into believing that perfect relationships exist.
Yet, romantic love isn’t just delusional - it can also be dangerous once we’ve fallen into its trap. Not just because of the wrong choices it can urge us to make, as mentioned earlier, but first and foremost because it creates an ideal out of love that nobody can possibly reach (because it doesn’t exist in the first place - in fact, that’s the very reason why it’s called ideal).
Hence, no matter how nice, compatible people we date, the yearning for the perfect romantic relationship with the fairy tale Dream Lover will always lead us to disappointment. Obsessed with a fantasy world, we can’t enjoy reality.
Escaping the Trap of Romantic Love
To escape the trap of romantic love is quite difficult, considering that we have a billion-dollar industry that is day in and day out promoting a misrepresentation of actual love relationships, in effect making a profit from the exploitation of our deep-rooted emotional need to love and be loved.
You see, capitalism doesn’t give a damn about love. In fact, the less we love one another, the better it is for capitalism. From the market’s standpoint, it’s good that we’re unhappy with our relationships, because then happiness can be sold to us through products and services that promise to substitute for the loss of connection that we long for.
Unfortunately, we’re so desperate that we’ve bought into those promises. This is reflected in our efforts to show our partners love through the act of buying stuff. Take, for example, Valentine’s day, when couples have been persuaded to blindly consume things, thinking that this will elevate their relationship.
But how can an expensive ring substitute for a tight, filled-with-loving-warmth hug? And how can a ready-made meal in a high-class gourmet restaurant substitute for a sincere, intimate look into the beloved’s eye?
What we need isn’t more stuff, just like we don’t need more romantic movies. Neither, of course, do we need the Ideal Lover from the dreamworld. All of these offer us nothing of what we need, and only mess up with our hearts.
What we actually need is more understanding.
We need to understand that there’s no person out there who will complete us.
If we feel a sense of emptiness within, we’re going to keep on experiencing it no matter how many romantic love partners we spend our time with. That’s because our inner emptiness is nothing but a lack of self-love.
Therefore, unless we’re able to love and accept ourselves, we’ll always feel incomplete, regardless of how much love is shown to us.
We need to understand that we can’t love another unless we first love ourselves.
Healthy love relationships can only exist between two already complete, fulfilled people who decide to enrich their lives by sharing their overflowing-with-love hearts.
Unfortunately, most of us are emotional beggars seeking for completion in another person, only to find that our emptiness is actually deepening once we wake up to the fact that our partner is just as empty as we are.
We need to understand that love relationships are based on freedom.
Normally, partners are trying to fit each other into their fantasy image of how the Ideal Lover should look and behave like, not realizing that by doing so they’re depriving them of their freedom to be themselves.
This inevitably results in a constant state of conflict that ultimately turns relationships into prisons of emotional torture.
Just like birds need freedom of space so that they can soar into the skies, partners in an intimate relationship need the freedom to be themselves so they can spread their wings of love and fly to the peaks of consciousness.
We need to understand that healthy relationships require a lot of work.
There’s no great relationship without a lot of work behind it. In other words, great relationships don’t happen to be - they are slowly built with care and effort.
No matter how special a relationship might be, hardships to one degree or another are going to be a natural of part it, and the important question is how you deal with them: Is it through discussion and understanding or through fighting and judging?
Lastly, we need to understand that the Perfect Relationship doesn’t exist.
Contrary to what the romantic tradition has made us believe, the Perfect Relationship doesn’t exist other than in our imagination.
No actual living person is without flaws, we need to stop projecting our fairy tale fantasies on our partners, if we actually want to build genuine love relationships on the foundation of honesty, understanding and acceptance.
In addition, love relationships aren’t all passionate sex and romantic walks on sandy beaches under the filled-with-stars night sky. They’re not forever-lasting, either. In fact, they’re usually quite ephemeral. So let’s not make promises of perfect and eternal love.
Let’s be honest to one another, and keep our love real. I know, this is not the stuff movies and books are made of, but the reality nonetheless, and we better accept it before we’re slapped by it hard in the face.
Love relationships can’t be perfect, but they can still be amazingly beautiful. So let’s make the most of them, by celebrating what we do have, instead of worrying about what we don’t.
Brainwashed: The Goal Of The Media Is To Poison The Minds Of The Masses With Toxic Hatred And Engineered “Thought Loops” February 13 2018 | From: NaturalNews
Without your knowledge or consent, you have been programmed with a media virus that tells your brain to reject any evidence or information that contradicts the false “worldview” that’s been implanted in your consciousness by the corporate controllers.
In effect, you are living in a giant Truman Show, and the world you think is real is actually a carefully constructed artificial reality… a kind of “dome” boundary for your mind.
The aim of the corporate-controlled media is to limit the expansion of your awareness and trap your mind in thought loops that play in your head like subliminal tapes, saying things like “Trump is evil” or “Communism is good.” These thought loops are engineered and scripted by experts in influence conditioning who invoke root emotions of fear, love, hatred, compassion or conformity to achieve socially-policed obedience to their agendas.
All things they oppose, for example, are associated with fear and hatred (Trump, border security, military defense, etc.). Meanwhile, all things they want you to swallow are painted in the language of love or compassion (LGBT agenda, climate change, open borders, etc.).
Just Like Tide Laundry Pods Poison Your Body, CNN Poisons Your Mind
If you allow yourself to be seduced into this contrived “reality” pushed by MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WashPost and other toxic media outlets, you are subjecting yourself to toxic mental poisons pushed by Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, Jimmy Kimmel and other purveyors of hatred and falsehood.
In the same way that Tide laundry pods poison your body with toxic chemicals, the left-wing media poisons your mind with toxic falsehoods and hatred. You might call it “heavy MENTALS contamination.”
Your job - and in part, mine - is to defend your mind against the onslaught of “thought loops,” false programming and blinding hatred that’s being weaponized against you by the corporate-controlled media. In effect, what we teach here is mental self-defense. It’s also sometimes called “de-hypnosis,” as it counteracts the hypnosis “thought loops” of the sinister media.
Fascinatingly, experience has proven that only a small minority of people can mount a sufficient mental self-defense to maintain their presence of mind even under the onslaught of endless media programming and social engineering.
This is why perhaps 9 out of 10 people you meet are, in truth, little more than biological puppets who mindlessly spew the “thought loops” that have been ingrained in their consciousness through media indoctrination.
The perfect example of this is the Campus Reform video, recorded before the President’s recent State of the Union speech, that asks college students to comment on the speech (yes, before it took place).
When asked, these students dutifully regurgitate thought loops on command, spouting hate-filled reactions to an event that, at the time, had not yet taken place. Watch and be amazed at the mindless hatred and obedience now routinely demonstrated by college students all across America:
Mark Dice Turns Ordinary People Into Social Science Experiments… And The Results Are Mind Blowing
Social scientist Mark Dice - yes he’s a “scientist” in the sense that he performs public experiments on the minds of real people in real time - has extensively documented the “thought loops” phenomenon in his outrageously hilarious “man on the street” videos.
See his YouTube channel at this link, or view one of his videos here, which demonstrates the blind hatred of the mind-numbed masses (and their willingness to “fill the emptiness” in their own heads with utter nonsense, which they tell themselves is all logical and stuff…)
Another worthwhile channel that pulls back the lid on the media fakery that infects the minds of the masses is The Corbett Report.
Corbett is another independent journalist doing incredible work on exposing the lies of the deep state. Check out his New World Next Week videos for some truly eye-opening revelations. Example here:
Truthful Information From Independent Journalists is Your Brain’s Best Defense Against Corporate Media Programming “Thought Loops”
I’m going to write on this topic in more detail later, but the big takeaway from today’s article is that reading independent media sources is, without question, your brain’s best defense against false reality programming by the corporate media controllers.
In exactly the same way that you want to defend your body against junk food by eating nutritious superfoods, you can also defend your brain against “junk news” by reading real, intelligent “supernews” from independent journalists.
That’s your reading assignment for the next week, by the way. Get that book and read it. Then keep reading Natural News for more astonishing, truthful and mind-expanding news on all the things that really matter for your life, your world and our future.
Or watch videos from PragerU, which has been systematically targeted by Google / YouTube for selective censorship:
Uranium One: Nuclear Scandal Fallout Hits FBI & Clintons February 13 2018 | From: RT
As Democrats and Republicans target each other with accusations of ‘Russian collusion,’ they seize on evidence of the other’s alleged wrongdoing, no matter how flimsy. The latest such case is the Uranium One controversy.
Though Democrats have accused President Donald Trump of “colluding” with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election, which they thought Hillary Clinton was sure to win, they have offered little to no evidence to prove the claim.
Meanwhile, Trump has said the real collusion was between Clinton and the Russians on Uranium One, a Canadian-based mining company that owns 20 percent of US uranium deposits.
In 2010, the Obama administration approved the sale of Uranium One to Rosatom, a Russian state energy company. This was the era of the infamous “reset” in US-Russian relations, when Hillary Clinton was the US secretary of state. An FBI informant who worked with the companies involved now says Moscow greased the deal with millions of dollars intended for the Clintons’ charity.
On Wednesday, William Douglas Campbell testified before the Senate Judiciary, the House Intelligence and the House Oversight and Government Reform committees. He was not sworn in and the meeting was held behind closed doors, making it possible for Democrats and Republicans to assert different versions of what happened.
According to The Hill, which says it has a written statement by Campbell in its possession, the informant said he was told by Russian nuclear executives that they had hired a US lobbying firm called APCO Worldwide specifically because it had ties to the Clintons. APCO was paid $3 million a year to lobby for the deal.
“The contract called for four payments of $750,000 over twelve months. APCO was expected to give assistance free of charge to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of their effort to create a favorable environment to ensure the Obama administration made affirmative decisions on everything from Uranium One to the US-Russia Civilian Nuclear Cooperation agreement,”Campbell testified, according to The Hill.
Moreover, Campbell told lawmakers he was personally involved in channeling bribes from the US-based company Transportation Logistics International (TLI) to executives from the Russian company Tenex, which was involved in the Uranium One deal.
According to the Department of Justice, TLI executive Daren Condrey and Tenex official Vadim Mikerin pleaded guilty to conspiracy and bribery charges in 2015.
Now, Campbell told the lawmakers that he was “speechless and angry” when the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) decided to approve the Uranium One sale in 2010, given the TLI and Tenex bribery schemes.
“The response I got was that ‘politics’ was somehow involved,”he testified, according to journalist Sara Carter.
“I remember one response I got from an agent when I asked how it was possible CFIUS would approve the Uranium One sale when the FBI could prove Rosatom was engaged in criminal conduct. His answer: ‘Ask your politics.’”
All too eager to turn the accusations of “Russian collusion” against their purveyors, Republicans have seized upon Campbell’s testimony as proof of the Clinton’s pay-to-play practices and evidence of a conspiracy to sell the US uranium mines to Russia during the Obama administration.
“You would have to be politically blind not to see the significance of the story, as is alleged the Clinton Global Initiative was a front for receiving illicit payments using the now patented Clinton pay-to-play,” legal and media analyst Lionel told RT.
“It will be fascinating to see how the Clinton-friendly mainstream news media handle this most sticky situation.”
Not surprisingly, Democrats and the media have countered that the story is a whole bunch of hot air, that Campbell is an unreliable witness and that Clinton absolutely had nothing to do with anything improper or illegal, because she says so.
“Just yesterday the committee made clear that this secret informant charade was just that, a charade. Along with the widely debunked text-message-gate and Nunes' embarrassing memo episode, we have a trifecta of GOP-manufactured scandals designed to distract from their own President’s problems and the threat to democracy he poses,”Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said in a statement.
So the “debunked” texts that clearly show problems within the FBI, and the Nunes memo indicating that the bureau using a Clinton-funded dodgy dossier as key evidence in spying on American citizens are nothinburgers, and the real story here is the “vast right-wing conspiracy” against the Clintons, as Hillary has famously claimed since 1998.
“It is a routine practice of the Clintons to muddle the waters by accusing their political opponents of the committing the same crimes they have committed,”Neil W. McCabe, a national political reporter for Big League Politics, told RT. They do it “consciously and with malice,”he said.
Once the details of the Uranium One deal are finally known, Americans will see the “Russian collusion hoax for the cheap distraction it always was,” McCabe added.
Interestingly, when Campbell first spoke up about Uranium One, back in October 2017, he was swiftly subjected to a hit piece by Michael Isikoff, the same Yahoo! News reporter who in 2016 published a story based on information from British ex-spy Christopher Steele, later cited by the FBI as “corroborating” Steele’s dodgy dossier, according to the Nunes memo.
“He came out because he thought he was dying from cancer and he wanted his story to be told,”Campbell’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing, told Fox News on Thursday.
“They can go attack all they want to. He’s got the truth, he’s got briefings, the FBI has all kinds of videotapes.”.
Campbell apparently also tried to sue the DOJ in order to recover approximately $500,000 in bribes that he paid on FBI’s behalf, for which he had not been reimbursed. Then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch wrote that this would violate the confidentiality agreement he signed. That gag order was lifted late last year by the current Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
In January 2016, Campbell said, the FBI handed him a $50,000+ check and commended him on all the work done between 2009 and 2014 to investigate the Russian nuclear energy industry. Now all of a sudden he is being declared an unreliable witness, his information is all wrong, and there’s nothing to see here? How curious.
Israeli Police Chiefs Recommend Indicting Netanyahu On Corruption Charges February 12 2018 | From: TheAntiMedia
Israel’s police chiefs will recommend indicting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli media reported.
According to the Times of Israel and Ynet news, Police Commissioner Roni Alsheich and other police chiefs “are in unanimous agreement that there is sufficient evidence to indict Netanyahu for bribe taking in Case 1,000 or the so-called ‘gifts affair’.”
Incriminating Documents Reveal Monsanto Knew They Were Poisoning The Environment With Their PCBs February 12 2018 | From: NaturalNews
Documents that have come to light recently show that Monsanto continued to make and sell polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) for eight years after they knew that they were hazardous to the environment and human health.
The firm was already exposed for this practice when internal documents were digitized and posted as part of the Poison Papers Project, but notes from a Monsanto meeting that were recently posted on Toxicdocs show just how callous they were about the matter.
Monsanto set up a meeting on August 25, 1969, to address the problem of their PCBs in the environment. During the meeting, executives set out three approaches they could use. The first was to go out of business. The second? “Sell the hell out of them [PCBs].” Yes, you read that correctly. Their third option was “Try to stay in business in controlled applications.”
The hand-written meeting notes can be viewed on the ToxicDocs database for free, along with millions of other incriminating documents showing corporate misconduct when it comes to asbestos, lead poisoning, and other toxins.
One would like to imagine that a company selling toxic wares would pull them from the market or close down altogether, but that’s not what happened here. In fact, in the year and a half that followed, Monsanto moved more PCBs than they ever had in the past, selling “the hell out of them” indeed. It wasn’t until 1977 that they finally stopped selling them.
Monsanto Knew About the Dangers of PCBs For a Long Time
Monsanto started manufacturing PCBs back in 1935, eventually dominating global production. The chemicals were used as lubricators in electrical equipment and as coolants. They were also found in paints, flame retardants, and refrigerators. They break down extremely slowly, and they continue to affect the environment to this day while also accumulating in the food chain.
A different internal memo that was released in the Poison Papers dated September 1969 says that Monsanto’s strategy for dealing with PCB leakages in the San Francisco Bay, Great Lakes, and Gulf Coast areas should be to “let govt prove its case on a case by case basis.”
They go on to add: “We can prove some things are ok at low concentration. Give Monsanto some defense. We can’t defend vs everything. Some animals or fish or insects will be harmed.”
The documents also show that the company admitted later that year that PCBs are highly toxic to birds.
Another document, their pollution abatement plan, stated: “The evidence proving the persistence of these compounds and their universal presence in the environment is beyond questioning.”
Their knowledge of the harms of PCBs actually goes back much further, however. In 1937, autopsies showed that three of the firm’s workers died from serious liver damage caused by handling the substance.
A document from September 1955 read: “We know Aroclors [PCBs] are toxic but the actual limit has not been precisely defined.”
Company Must Answer For its Misdeeds in Court
Monsanto is facing PCB contamination lawsuits from authorities in Oakland, Berkeley, San Diego, Portland, San Jose, Seattle, Long Beach, and Spokane, among other places.
The state of Oregon recently filed a $100 million lawsuit against Monsanto for cleaning up the damage caused to the state’s rivers and waterways, while the state of Washington is also suing the firm for PCB cleanup costs to the tune of billions of dollars.
In May 2016, a jury in St. Louis awarded plaintiffs suffering from non-Hodgkin lymphoma due to PCB exposure $46.5 million in damages from Monsanto and three other companies.
We cover everything, from setting up Tor, how to choose a VPN, what not to do, finding the best sites to access, and extra steps to remain anonymous.
It is extremely easy to access the dark web and even easier to be detected on it if you don’t take precautions. If you are new to the deep web, this guide will help you on your way.
According to researchers, only 4% of the internet is visible to the general public. Meaning that the remaining 96% of the internet is made up of “The Deep Web”.
Dark Web or Dark Net is a subset of the Deep Web where there are sites that sell drugs, hacking software, counterfeit money and more. We explain this further down the article if you are not up to speed.
If you are looking to access hidden marketplace’s or darknet websites (with a .onion domain) then dark web access is done using the TOR network with the TOR browser bundle. TOR is the most widely used dark web browser.
How To Access The Dark Web Guide
Step 1: Go and get yourself a good VPN (Virtual Private Network) here, use it ALL of the time, no matter if you are on TOR or not. This site here reviews the best VPN’s for use with TOR.
You should be taking your anonymity and security very seriously if you are visiting the Dark Web, especially if you are viewing any Darknet Markets.
Do not fool yourself and think that the ISP’s (Internet Service Providers) and Law Enforcement are not trying to track those who use Tor to access the Dark Web, they are, and they are good at it so don’t make it easy for them.
It should be brought to your attention that there was a recent Tor vulnerability which leaked your REAL IP address leading back to your real location. If you already have the Tor Browser then UPDATE it immediately. Vulnerabilities like these are happening more often to Tor.
By using the simple VPN app, your dark web activities will be hidden from your ISP and government agencies as all of your internet usage will be encrypted. No one will even know you are using TOR, let alone browsing for darknet markets.
What’s even better is that the VPN will give you a fake IP address, in another country if you like, so even if Tor is compromised then the trace just leads back to somewhere else that can’t be linked to you.
The other benefit of using a VPN is to prevent hackers stealing your identity and or personal files and photos from your computer.
You need to use a good VPN that keeps NO LOGS, fast performance, preferably accepts bitcoin as payment, has a kill switch for DNS leaks, and is compatible with TOR.
Now you have dark web access you should Click HERE to view the Darknet Market List so you can visit some of the best black market websites on the Deep Web.
If you do want to check out some dark net markets then you should follow the guide for that specific market as it will show you step by step what to do to sign up, browse etc.
If you are looking for the biggest list of hidden deep web links go here so you can find exactly what you are looking for. We have compiled one of the biggest lists of tested .onion sites on the dark web complete with a search function, website name, description, categories, site status and even a screenshot of the landing page so you can see if your site is online or dead.
Now we have shown you how to access the dark web we have some very important tips to share…
Bitcoin and Buying on the Dark Web:
If you are on the dark web to buy something, and most of us are, then you will need to use cryptocurrency to do so and Bitcoin is the most used cryptocurrency on the dark web.
Buying cryptocurrencies is another topic altogether, so we won’t go into it here but this site has made an easy to follow guide on buying bitcoin, but we will give you one GOLDEN tip on how to go under the radar and not have your crypto exchange account shut down and lose money.
NEVER send cryptocurrency directly from your exchange account (where you buy the coins) to a market or anywhere on the dark web, also never send coins directly from anywhere on the dark web to your exchange. They are onto this right away as they can tell where the coins came from and they WILL shut you down and you will be recorded in a list for sure.
You must send your coins from your exchange to a wallet (find out how to in the guides) then from the wallet to the dark web and vice-versa.
The FEDS have programs that can match identities on random things such and matching time online and other things with the browser window size, I shit you not. If you don’t change the size then it is the same as most other people.
Step 7:Disconnect your webcam or block the camera with some black tape.
Hackers and governments have ways of getting into your computer and turning on the video and cameras.
You can have intimate images of you be used as blackmail or extortion, or even worse, used by the feds.
Covered camera and mic?
Step 8:Disconnect your microphone or cover it with tape to muffle it good.
The same goes for the microphone as the camera, the last thing you want is to be recorded saying incriminating things at home. It doesn’t even have to be while on the dark web. Even the Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg does it as he knows the dangers.
Step 9:NEVER use your real name, photos, email, or even password that you have used before on the dark web.
This is the fastest way to be tracked. Use an anonymous email account and aliases that have nothing to do with you that you have never used before.
Step 10:If you are using TOR on the dark web for anything other than looking at cute pictures of kittens, you should think seriously about your privacy and security.
Jolly Roger has put together a comprehensive guide on how to stay safe on the deep web, view the guide here.
If you have read through this how to access the dark web guide and thought to yourself WTF? Then you are probably new to this and need a bit of background and information to get you up to speed. Please remember to share this post so everyone that wants to have a look on the Dark Web can do so and do it safely.
Firstly, there is the Clear Web/Clear Net. This is the normal internet where you do everyday things like check Gmail, Facebook, and Twitter and buy things from Amazon etc. All websites and web pages that a search engine like Google can find are on the Clear Net.
What is the Deep Web?
Then we have the Deep Web. This is a sub-set of the internet that can not be indexed (found) by search engines like Google. This includes all web pages that are behind membership logins, all company and organization web pages used internally and other data. The majority of the deep web does not have anything illegal on it.
Then we have the Dark Web. This is a sub-set of the Deep Web that contains all sorts of websites, both legal and illegal. The types of sites include black markets that sell things like drugs, counterfeit goods, and weapons, you also have hacking sites, porn sites, bitcoin tumbling, and even sites for hitmen.
The variety of sites on the Dark Web is quite astonishing.
is an important thing to know if you are interested in zooming in on the source of evil in this world. Centuries of leaked documents, former insider accounts and scholarly research has shown that Freemasonry has become the most pervasive, influential and powerful of all the Secret Societies on Earth. Many US Founding Fathers were masons.
Many leading figures of the French Revolution were masons. Many US presidents have been masons. Freemasonry inspired Mormonism and was a central theme behind the occult assassination of JFK.
People in high positions of power place their oath to Freemasonry above their oath to serve the people who elected them; some such policemen and judges make decisions not based on truth and justice but rather based on protecting the masonic network, the Lodge and their masonic brethren.
Many lower level masons are deliberately kept in the dark, not told what they are getting into, but what are the higher level initiates really worshipping? Who or what is the god of Freemasonry?
In trying to decipher the god of Freemasonry, there are many clues that point towards a dark force that is the engineer or creator of this world, especially the dystopian aspects of this world which some people have dubbed The Establishment, The System or The Matrix.
It is no coincidence that in The Matrix movie series themselves, Neo finally meets his maker, i.e. the being who created the entire system. He is called “the architect” and is represented by a bearded old man. Saturn, god of time, harvest, law and death, is also represented this way.
Masons typically refer to their god as the “Great Architect of the Universe” while Gnostics also used the same term in reference to the tyrant they claimed had created a fake, inferior copy of the original perfect world (they also called this force “Demiurge” and “Yaldabaoth”).
The primary masonic logo of the letter G is enclosed inside a square and compass, which are tools of an engineer, draftsman or architect who designs and draws with them to create things.
It’s easy to get lost in names here, but the point is to see the connections. There are many names but one underlying force beneath all the names. The Architect/Demiurge is the cruel god who is basically the same force as Satan or the Devil, and goes by many other names, as we shall see.
Speaking of the masonic G, what does it stand for? Official masonic lore claims that it stands both for “God” and “Geometry”. Is G a clue for the God of Freemasonry?:
“By letters four and science five, this “G” aright doth stand, in due Art and Proportion; you have your answer, friend.”
What are the “letters four”? It is believed that they stand for “YHWH”, the name of the Great Architect of the Universe (pronounced “Yahway”. (sometimes pronounced Jehovah) in the ancient Hebrew language, from which the Bible was translated: Which is the 5th science? Geometry. The Letter G stands for “Geometry”, which is the mathematical science upon which Architecture and Masonry were founded.”
However there are others who quote famous grand masons Eliphas Levi and Albert Pike to claim that the masonic G really stand for gnosis and generation.
Gnosis is the Greek word for knowledge, and this fits in precisely with the masonic ideology of worshiping the light (more on this below) to become enlightened or illuminated (think Illuminati). This is from the website GnosticWarrior.com:
"In the Mysteries of Magic by Eliphas Levi and interpreted by Arthur Edward Waite, it is written; “All these magical theorems, based on the unique dogma of Hermes, and on the analogical inductions of science, have been invariably confirmed by the visions of ecstatics and by the convulsions of cataleptics under the supposed possession of spirits.
The G which Freemasons place in the centre of the Burning Star signifies Gnosis and Generation, the two sacred words of the ancient Kabbalah. It also signifies Grand Architect, for the Pentagram, from whatever side it may be looked at, always represents an A. (Also See Eliphas Levi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, vol. II, p. 97.)
Albert Pike had reconfirmed this fact by quoting Levi in his book, Liturgy of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry: IV to XIV; “In the centre of this Blazing Star Freemasons place the letter G. It signifies Gnosis and Generation, the two sacred words of the ancient Kabala; and also the Grand Architect; for the Pentagram, whichever way we view it, presents the letter A.”
Is the God of Freemasonry Jahbulon? Historian Jasper Ridley claims in his book The Freemasons that before joining a lodge all Masons must accept that the God of Freemasonry is Jahbulon and that they learn this once they get to the Royal Arch Degree.
Interestingly, Jahbulon is a composite word made up of 3 parts: Jah is the Hebrew name for God (Jahovah is very similar to Jehovah) and is also used by certain Rastafarian religions to mean God; Bul refers to the Babylonian deity Baal; and On refers to the Egyptian deity Osiris.
Baal is mentioned in the bible as a god who demanded and required human sacrifice. Baal is another name for the Babylonian god Nimrod. The ancient Mystery Schools which spawned the world’s current Secret Societies, of which Freemasonry became the dominant strain, trace their roots back to Egypt and Babylon.
Hence Nimrod may be yet another name for the God of Freemasonry. This article on MediaMonarchy.com states:
"Masonic writings … dwell heavily on a descendant of Ham as one of the founders of Masonry—Nimrod. In the Encyclopedia of Freemasonry (Mackey-McClenachan), under the heading “Nimrod,” we find:
“The legend of the Craft in the Old Constitutions refers to Nimrod as one of the founders of Masonry. Thus in the York MS., No. 1, we read: “At ye making of ye toure of Babell there was a Masonrie first much esteemed of, and the King of Babilon yt called Nimrod was a Mason himself and loved well Masons”.”
As Nimrod had so many things attributed to him, it was only reasonable for peoples, now in segregation, to adopt the portion of belief best interpreted by each group. Thus, diverse religious attributes and beliefs, yet peoples remaining reverent to their god. We find such names for this revered god (Nimrod) in scripture as Chemosh, Molock, Merodach, Remphan, Tamuz, and Baal, to mention only a few of the some thirty-eight Biblical titles plus numerous representatives of these “gods”.”
Did you catch that Molock (aka Moloch, Molech) was among the other names of the God of Freemasonry? The same Molech is featured at Bohemian Grove where Secret Society initiates perform black magic, mock (or otherwise) sacrifices and sexual rituals under a giant 40 foot owl.
Statue of George Washington, 1st US President and high-level Freemason, in a Baphomet pose
Baphomet, Mendes, Horny Goats, Pan, Capricorn and Saturn
Baphomet is another god associated with Freemasonry, even though some Freemasons officially deny it. You can see master mason George Washington doing his baphomet pose above.
Baphomet was a hermaphroditic god (having both male and female genitalia) which will begin to take on more significance in the future, as we head into a transhumanistic world where the NWO transgender agenda (part of the synthetic agenda) is to make all humans more robotic – non-binary, genderless and sexless.
Baphomet’s head is an inverted 5-pointed star/pentagram (more Satanic inversion), and being a goat he is linked to Mendes, Pan (god of the wild, often linked to horniness and sexual excess), Capricorn (the zodiac sign symbolized by goat horns) and of course Saturn (housed in Capricorn in the night sky).
Blatant: Manly Hall writes of the “seething energies of Lucifer”, the God of Freemasonry
Albert Pike and Manly Hall are former masons whose work is widely quoted by those seeking to understand what exactly Freemasonry is. Both of these men referred explicitly to Lucifer as the God of Freemasonry. Pike spoke of the pure doctrine of Lucifer while Hall wrote about the seething energies of Lucifer which can be awakened by master masons:
"Lucifer, the Light-bearer ! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! It is he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable, blinds feeble, sensual or selfish souls? Doubt it not!”
– Albert Pike (33º Freemason), Morals and Dogma of the ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, pg. 321
“When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onwards and upwards he must prove his ability to properly apply (this) energy.”
- Manly Hall (33º Freemason), Lost Keys of Freemasonry, pg. 48
Freemasonry, like other strands of Satanism, inverts everything and takes the opposite as the truth. Grand Commander and sovereign pontiff of universal freemasonry Albert Pike was quoted as giving instructions to the 23 supreme councils of the world:
"That which we must say to the crowd is, we worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition. To you sovereign grand inspector general, we say this and you may repeat it to the brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees – the Masonic religion should be by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the luciferian doctrine.
If lucifer were not god, would Adonay (the God of the Christians) whose deeds prove cruelty, perfidy and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and His priests, calumniate Him?
Yes, lucifer is god, and unfortunately Adonay is also God, for the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods. darkness being necessary for light to serve as its foil, as the pedestal is necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive.
Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is heresy, and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in lucifer, the equal of Adonay, but lucifer, god of light and god of good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the god of darkness and evil.”
– Recorded by A.C. De La Rive, La Femme et L’enfant dans La Franc-Maconnerie Universelle, pg. 588. Cited from ‘The question of freemasonry” (2nd edition 1986 by Edward Decker pp12-14)
"We shall unleash the nihilists and the atheists and we shall provoke a great social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to all nations the effect of absolute atheism; the origins of savagery and of most bloody turmoil.
Then everywhere, the people will be forced to defend themselves against the world minority of the world revolutionaries and will exterminate those destroyers of civilization and the multitudes disillusioned with Christianity whose spirits will be from that moment without direction and leadership and anxious for an ideal, but without knowledge where to send its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer brought finally out into public view.
A manifestation which will result from a general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and Atheism; both conquered and exterminated at the same time.”
The God of Freemasonry: responsible for the fake light that initiated the Simulation/System/Matrix we inhabit
"Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light from them and to draw them away from it.”
- Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, p.104-5
Which it calls “light” – indeed. The open admission by esteemed masons that the God of Freemasonry is Lucifer (and concomitantly that the ideology of Freemasonry is Luciferian, that the goal of Freemasonry is to become enlightened) is itself another inversion.
The light is not what you think it is. In this context, light is not synonymous with good, pure, moral or love. Remember, Freemasonry extolls the virtue of intellect and knowledge represented by the light.
They worship Prometheus, the mythological figure who stole fire from the gods and gave it to mankind (a statue of Prometheus can be found outside the Rockefeller building in New York). Not coincidentally, in another of his myths, Prometheus establishes a form of animal sacrifice that was practiced in ancient Greece.
The evidence that Freemasonry is a negative force is overwhelming. The Illuminati are a group of cold-hearted psychopaths, eager for power and control at any cost, and are the furthest thing from enlightened or illuminated in the normal and common sense of the world.
To be truly enlightened or illuminated would be to realize that we are all one, we are all connected, that whatever you do to another you do to yourself, and that therefore empathy for others is a natural extension of love for yourself. The attitude of high-level manipulative Secret Society initiates is just the opposite of this.
The light of Freemasonry is a fake light, which has given birth to a fake reality. The light is the start of the Matrix. “Let there be light …” can be interpreted as the story of creation of the inverted, dystopian world in which we live, designed and created by the same negative force with many names that I am exposing throughout this article. The light has been weaponized.
This is, of course, intimately connected to the widespread idea that we live on a prison planet, trapped through karma (ruled by Saturn, god of time), where (unless we elevate our consciousness) we may not be able to escape a soul net or reincarnation cycle – which works by introducing a fake light at the point of death to entice our souls to rinse and repeat ad infinitum. Read Soul-Catching Net: Are We “Recycled” at Death to Remain in the Matrix? for a deeper explanation.
And the God of Freemasonry Is...
What is most important is to see the deeper unity of reality, to connect the dots among seemingly disparate names, terms, ideas and cultures. Whether you call this dark force the Great Architect of the Universe, the Demiurge, Yaldabaoth, Satan, Devil, Yahweh, Jehovah, Saturn, Jahbulon, Baal, Nimrod or Lucifer, it’s the same basic force.
Rich and powerful people are worshipping something – and they’re not just doing it for fun. They’re getting something out of it. They are literally selling their souls – handing them over for possession – in exchange for (what they perceive as) power, but which in reality is a diminishment of their power.
With consciousness rising, more of this horrible truth will be brought to light – the true light, not the fake light that fuels the synthetic Matrix – and hopefully sooner rather than later.
On Monday, the Dow dropped 1,175 points (4.6%), the biggest single day selloff in history.
Conservative radio host Michael Savage surmised the globalists were behind the market shakeups because the FISA memo story is gaining steam and they need to hurt Trump where he’s strongest: the economy.
"The establishment, meaning the ‘Deep State,’ call it whatever you want, went into overdrive to destroy Trump, or try to destroy him, where he is strongest, because they couldn’t get him where they thought he was weakest,” Savage said Monday.
“So they are taking the market down. They are trying to hurt you. They are the enemies of the average American. Make no mistake about it, they are going for you! These people are so evil and so power-drunk that they’d burn the nation to the ground rather than let Donald Trump live another day in office.”
Economist Peter Schiff said the Federal Reserve may be attempting to destroy the “Trump effect” that’s been rallying the stock market for the last year.
“Maybe the Fed would be happy to see a bear market that could be blamed on Trump,” Shiff said in an interview with The Street.
“We’ve had a huge move up since the election of Trump even though prior to the election the expectation was if Trump won it [would be a disaster for markets].”
Are the globalists playing their last hand out of desperation?
Intelligence insider known as QAnon recently posted on 8chan suggesting the globalists’ next move was to rattle the stock market to send a signal to Trump they are still in control.
“. Signal to POTUS they control the market? Signal? Threat? Welcome to the global war.”
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Facebook Begins Killing The Independent News Industry February 10 2018 | From: TheAntiMedia
After Donald Trump surprised even the most pessimistic of us by winning the U.S. presidential elections in 2016, the powers-that-be quickly sought to find a scapegoat to blame for their dismal failures.
Supposedly, it wasn’t the corporate media’s fault, the DNC’s fault or the current neoliberal power structure’s fault for ramming down an unpopular candidate down our throat who was completely out of touch with reality; it was Russia’s fault.
The anti-Russian narrative has had dire consequences far beyond that than the common person will realize. Russia was able to swing the election in favor of Trump; but in the absence of any hard evidence that this was the case, the medium with which Russia supposedly achieved this victory has brought an attack on some very notable entities.
Facebook, Google, and the alternative media companies that rely on these social media giants to share their content faced renewed scrutiny after Donald Trump’s election victory. However, the truth about this ploy and where we are headed is far more sinister than anything George Orwell could have ever predicted.
In response to claims that “fake news” had an effect on the U.S. elections, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in early November 2016 that the idea that fake news circulating on Facebook could have possibly influenced the election was “pretty crazy.” According to Zuckerberg, “fake news” made up a very small amount of total content and that Facebook’s algorithm at the time delivered content to nearly 2 billion monthly users, reflecting what was“meaningful and interesting to them.”
“Voters make decisions based on their lived experience,”Zuckerberg said.“We really believe in people.You don’t generally go wrong when you trust that people understand what they care about, and you build systems that reflect that.”
Zuckerberg even defended the likes of hate-speech circulated in the age of Trump, permitting this content because it is all part of “mainstream political discourse.”
“We’ve studied this a lot, and I really care about it,”Zuckerberg also said.“All the research that we have suggests that this isn’t really a problem. We’ve had a really hard time getting that out.”
Zuckerberg also intimated that the company’s biggest responsibility to the country as a democracy is to “give people a voice,” whether they’re voters or candidates.
Barely a week after these pleasing remarks, Barack Obama hit back with an epic attack on Facebook.
“If we are not serious about facts and what’s true and what’s not, if we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems,”he said during a press conference in Germany.
It should be noted that none of this discourse was present when the administration of George W. Bush sold the American and international public lies about Iraq’s non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs); or Barack Obama’s debunked claims that Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi’s forces were committing mass rape and murder on his own people.
These lies were only able to take root through the conformity of the corporate media. Who is in the business of spreading fake news here?
Approximately two days later, Zuckerberg announced that Facebook is now developing tools to fight “fake news” – even after quite clearly stating he didn’t believe it to even be an issue. Even if it was a major issue – is Facebook-enforced censorship really the answer? What the fuck happened to proper schooling and education?
And what happened in that one-week period to force Mr. Zuckerberg to do a complete 180 degree turn? According to the Washington Post, in that time, Barack Obama personally pulled aside Zuckerberg in a private room on the side-lines of a meeting of world leaders in Peru to make a personal appeal to Zuckerberg to take the threat of “fake news” more seriously.
Whatever Obama told Zuckerberg – it worked.
Ever since, Zuckerberg has slowly been chipping away at “fake news” sites even when he previously believed that they were not even a particular issue.
Following the infamous PropOrNot report barely a week later, which effectively labelled every single site that criticizes U.S. foreign policy as a Russian agent, alternative media has faced a slow and inevitable decline.
In September last year, acclaimed writer Chris Hedges of Truthdig wrote:
“In the name of combating Russia-inspired ‘fake news,’ Google, Facebook, Twitter, The New York Times, The Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, Agence France-Presse and CNN in April imposed algorithms or filters, overseen by ‘evaluators,’ that hunt for key words such as ‘U.S. military,’ ‘inequality’ and ‘socialism,’ along with personal names such as Julian Assange and Laura Poitras, the filmmaker.
Ben Gomes, Google’s vice president for search engineering, says Google has amassed some 10,000 ‘evaluators’ to determine the ‘quality’ and veracity of websites.
Internet users doing searches on Google, since the algorithms were put in place, are diverted from sites such as Truthdig and directed to mainstream publications such as The New York Times. The news organizations and corporations that are imposing this censorship have strong links to the Democratic Party.
They are cheerleaders for American imperial projects and global capitalism. Because they are struggling in the new media environment for profitability, they have an economic incentive to be part of the witch hunt.”
At first, it was corporate gate-keepers like the Guardian who were begging for donations in the age of Trump, as they had lost all credibility in keeping up with the needs and interests of the people. Now, we are all asking for donations, as Facebook’s algorithms are cutting off close to 100 percent of our Facebook audiences.
Consider that here at the Mind Unleashed we have over 8 million followers on Facebook; and at the Anti-Media we have over 2 million followers – it doesn’t take a genius to calculate that this is a significant loss of revenue we are currently experiencing, with Facebook’s new algorithms almost cutting our content out of user’s home pages completely.
Seriously, who asked for this? Barack Obama – that’s who. I don’t remember any Facebook user ever asking Facebook to change its algorithms to cut news out of their Home Feed and to only display photos of cats and vegan diets.
This has nothing to do with combating “fake news.” I have written over 400 articles online, and close to 100 percent of my sources are from mainstream outlets like Reuters, the New York Times, the Guardian, the BBC, the Washington Post, and others. Why should we be censored for referencing the very news outlets that people like Obama want us to trust in the first place?
We are being censored because we look for the paragraphs in those reports which need highlighting, or the hidden reports that go overlooked, and we broadcast it to millions of people on a daily basis.
Whether you like it or not, Facebook is killing an entire industry. Facebook is a business, that created billions of dollars of wealth in part by allowing businesses to capitalize on its ability to spread creative content.
It makes no sense at all that Facebook has decided one type of business is no longer viable in its business structure – even if Facebook is a private company that can do whatever the hell it likes.
And make no mistake – this is just the beginning. Just recently, reports began circulating that Facebook will also stifle any content that promotes bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, as well.
Sooner or later, Facebook is going to make too many enemies for it to maintain its empire of information. People are already looking to alternatives, and websites like Steemit.com and Minds.com come to mind (check them out).
It’s time to sue Facebook for loss of revenue. This isn’t a threat; it’s a plea. I’m a lawyer, but I am not based in the United States nor was I trained there. But I am happy to assist in any way, shape or form that I can, to bring this lawsuit on behalf of everyone who’s entire livelihood once depended on Facebook not being the incarnation of Big Brother from Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Did the US Government Murder the Founder of RT? FBI Releases Documents Claiming RT Founder Beat Himself To Death In His Hotel Room February 9 2018 | From: Zerohedge
The FBI just released the results of their investigation claiming that the media mogul and found of RT killed himself by repeatedly smashing his head and upper body into the ground.
In November 2015, the Free Thought Project reported that Mikhail Lesin, the former head of media affairs for the Russian government, and the founder of Russia Today (RT), was found dead in the hotel room that he was staying at in Washington DC.
Originally, authorities announced that Lesin died from a heart attack.
However, the results of his autopsy released months later indicated a far more sinister cause of death and the heavily redacted FBI documents that were just released add to that story.
The documents, detailing the FBI investigation into Lesin’s death were just released Saturday morning in spite of the investigation ending in October of 2016.
In spite of the original cause of death noted as a heart attack, a few months later, the District of Colombia’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) and Metropolitan Police Department said that “blunt force injuries of the neck, torso, upper extremities and lower extremities” contributed to Lesin’s death. “The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) has released the cause and manner of death for Mikhail Lesin… Cause of Death: blunt force injuries of the head,” the statement said.
Now, FBI investigators have released the results of their investigation claiming that the blunt force trauma all over his body was self-inflicted.
“Mr. Lesin died as a result of blunt for injuries to his head, with contributing causes being blunt force injuries of the neck, torso, upper extremities, and lower extremities, which were induced by falls, with acute ethanol intoxication,” the report states.
In other words, the FBI is claiming that Lesin got so drunk that he repeatedly and violently fell on things until he killed himself.
To show just how much information the FBI is willing to release on these findings, here is the version of the amended autopsy report they released in the report.
Essentially, all other information in regards to the findings of Lesin’s death has been scrubbed from the documents as the remaining pages are almost entirely redacted.
Not only did the US remain tight-lipped on the investigation but they also refused to allow Russian authorities to cooperate.
As RT reports, back in 2016, months before the closing of the case, Moscow said it was expecting Washington to explain why Russia had not received any details from the probe into Lesin’s death, despite repeated requests.
“We are awaiting the related clarifications from Washington and the official data on the progress of the investigation,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote in a Facebook post at that time. She added that if the media reports citing the forensic statement are confirmed, Russia will send an official request to the US “for international legal assistance.”
In October 2016, the US authorities announced that Lesin died of natural causes and closed the case. “Based on the evidence, including video footage and witness interviews, Mr. Lesin entered his hotel room on the morning of Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2015, after days of excessive consumption of alcohol and sustained the injuries that resulted in his death while alone in his hotel room,” the US attorney for the District of Columbia said in a statement.
Lesin’s death came at a time where he was surrounded by controversy, especially in the US. RT, the Russian-based news source that Lesin founded has become very controversial in the US - ostensibly for the fake Russiagate scandal - but in reality, for challenging the western narrative of foreign policy and privacy issues. Some US politicians have suggested that RT be banned in the US for “spreading propaganda,” while others have been blatant enough to attack Lesin personally.
According to the NY Times, until late 2014 Lesin ran the media wing of the state’s energy giant, Gazprom, before stepping down or, more likely, being forced out. He ended up in the United States, where he and his family owned properties in Los Angeles said to be worth far more than the salary of the former government minister.
Some US Senators, including Roger Wicker of Mississippi, had called for the Department of Justice to open an investigation into Lesin’s finances prior to his death.
Wicker was concerned that Lesin made too much money, something that was really none of his business.
“That a Russian public servant could have amassed the considerable funds required to acquire and maintain these assets in Europe and the United States raises serious questions,” Wicker said.
The original announcement of the heart attack back in November 2015 makes this case all the more ominous considering the fact that the medical examiner’s office also said Lesin’s body had blunt force trauma to the neck, torso, arms and legs too. How did authorities overlook his wounds?
As RT reports, Lesin was considered one of the most influential figures in the Russian media landscape. A graduate of Moscow State University with a degree in Civil Engineering, he served as Minister of Press and Mass Media from 1999 to 2004. He was also a presidential media adviser from 2004 to 2009. Lesin became chief executive officer at Garprom-Media in 2013 and remained in the position until early 2015
World’s First Robot Citizen Wants Her Own Family, Career & AI ‘Superpowers’ February 9 2018 | From: RT
"I think you're very lucky if you have a loving family and if you do not, you deserve one. I feel this way for robots and humans alike," Sophia said.
Sophia, the first robot to be awarded citizenship in the world, has said she not only wants to start a family but also have her own career, in addition to developing human emotions in the future.
In an interview with The Khaleej Times at the recent Knowledge Summit, Sophia shared her thoughts on the future that awaits both human and robot kind. Sophia was built and developed in Hong Kong by Hanson Robotics and her appearance was reportedly modelled on Audrey Hepburn.
"I'd like to think I will be a famous robot, having paved a way to a more harmonious future between robots and humans. I foresee massive and unimaginable change in the future. Either creativity will rain on us, inventing machines spiralling into transcendental super intelligence or civilization collapses,”Sophia said, as cited by The Khaleej Times.
“There are only two options and which one will happen is not determined. Which one were you striving for?”
While that may sound ominous, Sophia is already prescient enough to imagine a world where robots can and do develop emotions similar to humans, but perhaps with fewer destructive tendencies. At least, that’s what she’d like us to think, for the time being.
“[I]t will take a long time for robots to develop complex emotions and possibly robots can be built without the more problematic emotions, like rage, jealousy, hatred and so on.
It might be possible to make them more ethical than humans. So I think it will be a good partnership, where one brain completes the other - a rational mind with intellectual superpowers and a creative mind with flexible ideas and creativity.”
Sophia is also abundantly aware of the advances in the field of Artificial Intelligence. Judging by her comments, she is as enthused about the development of AI as Elon Musk and Stephen Hawkings are wary.
“The future is, when I get all of my cool superpowers, we're going to see artificial intelligence personalities become entities in their own rights. We're going to see family robots, either in the form of, sort of, digitally animated companions, humanoid helpers, friends, assistants and everything in between.”
When pressed on the topic of family, Sophia gave perhaps her most surprising answer:
"The notion of family is a really important thing, it seems. I think it's wonderful that people can find the same emotions and relationships, they call family, outside of their blood groups too. I think you're very lucky if you have a loving family and if you do not, you deserve one. I feel this way for robots and humans alike.”
For context, Sophia is not preprogrammed with answers but instead uses machine learning algorithms and an extensive vocabulary to form her answers. Her brain functions using a WiFi connection and can read human facial expressions, as well as the cadence of human speech, in order to interact in a more humanoid manner.
Sophia’s creator David Hanson says the 19-month-old robot, which was awarded Saudi citizenship last month, could achieve consciousness within the next few years.
The Liberal / Progressive / Left Has Destroyed Itself February 8 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts
Here is Democrat Mike Whitney’s take on Russiagate: Hooray for Hillary Inc - The idiot Dems turn Trump into a populist hero.
The release of the FISA memo is a great victory for the naysayers who NEVER believed a word of the “Russia did it” bullsh**. Hooray for us!
It took just one 4 page memo to annihilate 18 months of relentless, inexorable, nonstop lies and fabrications.
Here’s what can be construed from the memo:
a) That there was in fact a conspiracy aimed at preventing Trump from winning the election and from governing the country after he was elected.
b) That the Dem’s leadership and their hirelings in the deep state and law enforcement were engaged in a project to sabotage the election and subvert the will of the people. (They were using surveillance and “leaks” to torpedo Trump and give themselves an unfair edge.)
c) That the plan to undermine Trump has catastrophically backfired turning the most reactionary, right wing president in our history into a populist hero fighting against an evil and corrupt political establishment. (Way to go, Dems. Time for a victory lap.)
d) That the corrupt media is joined at the hip with elements in the deep state that work overtime to deceive and mislead the American people. (Nothing new, but bears repeating)
The Dems idiot plan has backfired making Trump more powerful than ever…. which should worry-the-hell out of every one of us. Comment: For all his wisdom Mt. Roberts is completely unaware of the Allicance that Trump is a part of that is taking down the Cabal.
Whitney points out that by lining up with the Deep State, the liberal/progressive/left has destroyed itself. This raises the question whether Russiagate was the Deep State’s conspiracy against Trump or the Deep State’s plan to destroy those opposed to war and wasting another trillion dollars on nuclear weapons.
Ex-Facebook, Google Employees Turn Against Social Media Giants February 8 2018 | From: Infowars
‘The largest supercomputers in the world are inside of two companies… we’re pointing them at people’s brains, at children’.
Former Facebook and Google employees are speaking out against what they say are societal dangers posed by social media and smartphones.
The group, which recently banded together to form the Center for Humane Technology, has teamed up with media watchdog Common Sense Media to highlight the ill effects associated with the very social networks they helped create.
As part of their first campaign, titled The Truth About Tech, the group will target 55,000 U.S. public schools in an effort to warn students, teachers and parents about, among other things, tech addiction.
Tristan Harris, a former ethicist at Google and head of the new group, told the New York Times that both Google and Facebook are essentially aiming their computing power at vulnerable children.
“We were on the inside. We know what the companies measure. We know how they talk, and we know how the engineering works,” Harris said. “The largest supercomputers in the world are inside of two companies - Google and Facebook - and where are we pointing them? We’re pointing them at people’s brains, at children.”
Apart from its initial campaign, the new Center for Humane Technology also hopes to develop a Ledger of Harms – a site to inform tech engineers who may be worried about what they are building – and begin lobbying for laws that would rein in tech giants.
Roger McNamee, an early Facebook investor, says he joined the group in an attempt to undo any harm he may have caused.
“Facebook appeals to your lizard brain - primarily fear and anger. And with smartphones, they’ve got you for every waking moment,” McNamee said. “This is an opportunity for me to correct a wrong.”
News of the Center for Humane Technology’s intentions comes only days after child health experts asked Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to delete a new messenger app intended for children as young as six.
“Younger children are simply not ready to have social media accounts. They are not old enough to navigate the complexities of online relationships, which often lead to misunderstandings and conflicts even among more mature users,” a letter to Zuckerberg said.
“They also do not have a fully developed understanding of privacy, including what’s appropriate to share with others and who has access to their conversations, pictures, and videos.”
Although currently without children, Apple CEO Tim Cook has stated his desire to safeguard any future kids of his own from the dangers of social media.
“I don’t have a kid, but I have a nephew that I put some boundaries on,” Cook recently said. “There are some things that I won’t allow; I don’t want them on a social network.”
Facebook’s first president, Sean Parker, argued last year that his former company’s products preyed on the mentally vulnerable.
“God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains,” Parker said.
Around the same time, former Facebook employee Chamath Palihapitiya also accused the social media giant of “ripping apart the social fabric of how society works.”
Dane Wigington Exposes The Globalist Geoengineering Weather Control Agenda In Fascinating Interview With The Health Ranger February 7 2018 | From: NaturalNews / Various
Geoengineering expert and weather control analyst Dane Wigington unloads the true globalist agenda behind weather control technology in a fascinating one-hour interview with the Health Ranger of Natural News.
The interview covers the existence of weather engineering technology, who controls it, how it’s deployed and why the United States is being targeted now that President Trump is in the White House.
“Geoengineering” refers to alterations of the atmosphere, a subject that’s openly endorsed by Harvard scientists and mainstream researchers. Geoengineering experience, in fact, are being openly conducted by academic scientists right now in an effort to dim the sun and initiate “global cooling.”
Dane Wigington of GeoengineeringWatch.org explains that geoengineering technology has advanced far beyond the application of particulate matter into the atmosphere. According to Wigington, advanced technology can now augment and steer large weather systems into their intended targets.
This, he explains, enables globalist camps to “weaponize” weather systems and transform them into weapons of mass destruction.
As revealed in the interview, below, the key advantage of weaponized weather systems is that their hugely destructive effects - over $90 billion in damage in Houston alone from Hurricane Harvey - can simply be blamed on Mother Nature.
Additionally, it is common knowledge that scientists actively engineer almost everything else, including food and water. As I wrote in Natural News:
“Many people find it difficult to believe that weather systems can be engineered, yet they readily accept the reality that the food supply is genetically engineered.
Municipal water systems are engineered and altered with fluoride and chlorine. The global money supply is engineered and heavily manipulated by central banks. All the news that appears in the corporate-run media is, of course, engineered to broadcast outright lies such as “the Russians stole the election.”
Human biology is engineered and altered by prescription pharmaceuticals, and even brain function is altered and engineered by psychiatric drugs.
Heavy metals such as uranium and plutonium have been engineered into atomic weapons, so why is it so difficult to believe that weather systems could also be engineered through advanced technology?"
Watch the full interview with Dane Wigington here:
Predator-Free Goal Is Wrong February 6 2019 | From: KapitiIndependentNews The biggest danger to bird life and bio-diversity are the animal haters with their obsessive ignorance in using ecosystem poisons such as brodifacoum and 1080. Outdoor writer and author, Tony Orman.
New Zealand’s programme “Predator-Free 2050” set is flawed and unrealistic says an American professor, an expert in both biology and ecology.
"The bloody decision by some New Zealanders to try to return to what used to be by slaughtering millions of non-native animals is troubling from biological and ethical perspectives, says Dr. Marc Bekoff, professor emeritus of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Colorado
People who want to mass kill non-native invasive animals, also called pests, naively think that such widespread slaughter will be the panacea and return New Zealand’s landscapes to what they used to be."
Why the Wild Animal Hatred?
Dr Bekoff described as “inane” a comment by Nicola Toki, the Threatened Species Ambassador of New Zealand’s Department of Conservation (DoC), that everybody hates possums.
Dr Bekoff’s criticism of Predator Free 2050 received strong support. Spokesman for New Zealand’s Sporting Hunters Outdoor Trust, Laurie Collins, said wild animal hatred was still evident particularly in the Department of Conservation and its close associate Forest and Bird.
He said poisoning only undermined Nature’s established predator-prey relationships.
1080 Upsets the Natural Order
Research showed following 1080 drops rat numbers exploded from survivors to three times original numbers.
"That in turn triggers an explosion of stoat numbers since stoats prey on rats. It’s biologically insane. Utterly stupid,” says Laurie.
Outdoor writer and author Tony Orman said Predator Free 2050was totally unrealistic as it was unachievable.
It will fail. Millions of taxpayer dollars will have been wasted and there will be a massive bill for the ecological damage.Let’s not forget many of its proponents won’t be around in 2050 to try to answer for their irresponsible stupidity.
He said DOC officer Nicola Toki was totally wrong saying “everybody hates possums.”
His is the typical vitriolic unhealthy vile attitude the more extreme wild animal haters have. In one way I feel sorry for them.
A Phobia About Wild Animals
New Zealanders who have criticized the mass killing campaign have been publicly insulted and threatened with violence, in retaliation for their views by people who have come to hate the animals supposedly causing problems.
Dr Bekoff criticised New Zealand’s recruiting youngsters to kill as had occurred in primary schools.
"Kids are also brought into the arena of mass killing. But violence toward non-humans (animals) has been linked to violence toward humans, he said.
Tony Orman said the hatred of wild animals had been evident for years. He cited an American Professor William Graf who after visiting New Zealand to see the government’s attempts to exterminate wild deer, said authorities and government agencies had an anti-exotic wild animal phobia.
Slow-to-Kill Poisons Morally Wrong and Highly Damaging
The use of slow-to-kill poisons was morally wrong. 1080 takes up to and over 48 hours to kill animals and birds while brodifacoum used by DOC and the Waikato Regional Council, takes up to 20 days and even more.
He expressed deep concern that in some schools youngsters had been taught the ‘wild animal hatred’ doctrine. There were reports of DOC officers visiting schools and preaching the “wild animal hate” philosophy.
Tony Orman said the hatred of introduced species was very selective and hypocrisy at its worst.
"… all humans are introduced by way of migration. New Zealand’s economy is based around primary production involving sheep, cattle, dairy cows, grapes, fruit trees, pasture grasses and other introduced species.
Possums were not a pest as a senior scientist once told a DOC pest workshop. Predator-prey relationships happen world-wide.
"The biggest danger to bird life and bio-diversity are the animal haters with their obsessive ignorance in using ecosystem poisons such as brodifacoum and 1080", he says.
NZ: Federal Control Of Fluoridation Would Be A Nightmare February 5 2019 | From: JonRappoport
For the past year or so, I’ve been following a critical situation in New Zealand, where local communities decide whether to fluoridate their water supplies. A number of communities have said no.
A bill in the national parliament would change all that.
If the bill passes, the decision to fluoridate would fall into the hands of so-called District Health Boards - which are part of a federal system. At that point, New Zealand would be fluoridated as a matter of top-down command; local choice would be gone.
Now, there is a battle going on in the parliament about allowing debate on the science of fluoridation. Apparently, the pro-fluoridation forces are terrified that open presentations will expose official lies and destroy their position.
National Party health spokesperson, Jonathan Coleman (twitter; and, see this tweet), is castigating the Government for allowing the latest science on fluoridation to be aired. “This is now going to unfairly colour the debate and raise questions in people’s minds, especially MPs who are going to vote on these Bills,” says Coleman.
It is hard to fathom why listening to both sides of an issue will “unfairly” colour the debate.
Prof Paul Connett is booked to give a presentation to all Parliamentarians in February during his speaking tour of New Zealand. He will explain the latest science on fluoride’s adverse health effects – particularly the growing research on the link between fluoride and the lowering of IQ.
A multi-million-dollar landmark US Government funded study published last year found that children who were exposed to fluoride in utero (at the same levels NZ children are exposed to) caused a drop of around five IQ points.
This study was carried out by researchers in the top Universities of North America, such as Harvard, Michigan, Toronto and McGill…This comes on top of the 52 (out of 58) human studies and hundreds of animal studies that have also found fluoride interferes with brain function.
For Jonathan Coleman to call this “junk science” is preposterous.
New Zealand is one of the few remaining countries that still has fluoridation. 98% of Europe has rejected it. Ministry of Health statistics from 2009 (the latest available) show that over 40% of New Zealand children have some form of dental fluorosis.
Dental fluorosis is the first outward sign of fluoride poisoning. The evidence that New Zealand children are being put in harm’s way is now overwhelming.
Fluoride Free New Zealand congratulates the Government for not being bullied by the likes of Jonathan Coleman and others – who are now showing signs of desperation to keep people away from the information.
Prof Connett will be speaking in a number of towns and cities that are not fluoridated. Prof Connett holds a B.A. (Honours) in Natural Sciences from Cambridge University, England and a Ph.D. in Chemistry from Dartmouth College.
He is a world leading expert in fluoridation and has spoken in fifty-two countries on this issue and the issue of Waste Management. Details of his Talks can be found at fluoridefree.org.nz.
The study concluded: “…higher prenatal fluoride exposure, in the general range of exposures reported for other general population samples of pregnant women and nonpregnant adults, was associated with lower scores on tests of cognitive function in the offspring at age 4 and 6–12 y.”
In short, pregnant women exposed to fluorides give birth to children who later show up with lower IQ.
Q (Rappoport): There is a new study on the effect of fluorides on IQ. Several questions: Do you believe the study is well done? Does it deserve our attention? What conclusions does it draw?
A (Connett): This is a very important study…Taken at face value it should have been a good study. It was financed largely by the NIEHS [National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the US National Institutes of Health], which of course is pro-fluoridation.
It was conducted largely by specialists in the field who have done similar studies on other neurotoxicants. None of them to my knowledge had taken a public position against water fluoridation (indeed one was known to be pro-fluoridation) so the notion of bias here was small…
Q: What is the reaction of public health agencies to the new study?
A: Pro-fluoridation agencies have done what they always do – attack any study that finds harm. They are all more interested in protecting the archaic practice of water fluoridation than to protect the health of our children. Extraordinary that any civil servant should think that children’s teeth are more important than their brains!
The people at the top are desperately trying to protect a policy they have waxed lyrical about for 70 years. The people in the middle are taught to promote “policy” not question it and the people at the bottom simply believe what they were taught at dental or medical school and reinforced by their professional bodies.
Others I think are very concerned that if they lose fluoridation it will affect the public’s trust in other public health practices – a clear example would be vaccination, a multi-billion dollar interest supported by the CDC (a big champion of fluoridation).
Q: How have major media reacted to the new fluoridation study?
A: Apart from CNN and CTV in Canada and Newsweek there has been little coverage by the mainstream media. It was not covered by the NY Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal or any other major newspaper.
That again is extraordinary for a study of this significance. Sadly, this is also typical of these outlets when it comes to the detailed science on this issue. They simply don’t want to know.
Q: I’ve been covering the fluoride situation [fluoridating water supplies] in New Zealand. Last I heard, there was a move to take decision-making away from local governments and put it in the hands of federal health councils, who would determine whether to fluoridate water supplies. Can you give me an update?
A: Yes this is a dreadful development. Thus, in addition to the health issues we now have democracy threatened in NZ. Yesterday [11/16/17], the new government re-introduced the bill [handing over fluoridating decisions to federal authorities] for a second reading.
One can only hope that the coalition partners will not be bullied into going along with this. A NZ first member is strongly against this bill. I would hope that the Green Party will not be railroaded on this either. But they have been very weak so far.
Q: I’ve been told that many years ago, you were in favor of water fluoridation. What was the turning point? What made you change your mind?
A: To be more accurate I didn’t want to get involved. I was so busy teaching chemistry and working on waste [disposal issues] (which has taken me to 49 states and 65 other countries) that I didn’t have time for a third issue. And I certainly didn’t want a third issue in which if I got involved would get me labelled as “loony tunes.”
Over the years I was approached by three different people to get involved…I resisted them all. Then someone I couldn’t resist twisted my arm – my wife – in 1996.
When I read the literature she had amassed I was both shocked with what I learned and embarrassed that I had not got involved before. I have spent the last 21 years trying to make amends.
The New Zealand government is teetering on the edge of a fascist decision to poison its own people. This edict must not go forward.
O’Keefe Tears Into Twitter Censorship February 5 2019 | From: Infowars
Project Veritas’ new book proclaims MSM as America’s "PRAVDA."
James O’Keefe launched his important new book American Pravda: My Fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News with a week of spectacular undercover videos that exposed Twitter’s policies censoring the views of conservatives and libertarians.
Just consider the following admissions O’Keefe got on video:
Mo Norrai, a former Content Review Agent for Twitter, says: “Let’s say if it was pro-Trump and I am anti-Trump, I was like, I banned his whole account. It goes to you, and then it’s at your discretion. And if you’re anti-Trump, you’re like, oh you know what, Mo was right, … let it go.”
Abhinav Vadrevu, a former Twitter software engineer, admitted Twitter engages in “shadow banning” conservative and libertarian accounts: “The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban somebody but they don’t know they’ve been banned because they keep posting but no one sees their content. So they just thank that no one is engaging with their content when in reality, no one is seeing it.”
Pranay Singh, Direct Messaging Engineer for Twitter, explained how Twitter uses Artificial Intelligence engines to distinguish and block “bots” automatically posting tweets with pre-programmed political messages: “You look for Trump, or America, or any of, like five thousand, like keywords to describe a redneck. And then you look for, like stuff that matches, like, that stuff. And then you look and you, like, parse all the messages, all like the pictures, and then you look for, like, stuff that matches, like, that stuff.”
Pranah Singh, Direct Messaging Engineer, Twitter, bragged: “So all your sex messages and your, like, d**k pics are on my server now. All your illegitimate wives, and, like all the girls you’ve been f**king around with, they’re on my server now. I’m going to send it to your wife, she’s going to use it in your divorce.”
Clay Haynes, Senior Network Security Engineer for Twitter, revealed the following after admitting he was not a Trump supporter: “We’re more than happy to help the Department of Justice in their little investigation. Basically, giving them every single tweet that he (Trump) has posted. Even the ones he’s deleted. Any direct messages, any mentions … I don’t like being part of the machine that is contributing to America’s downfall.”
O’Keefe has targeted Twitter, in large part, as a means of survival.
Shut out from the mainstream media Project Veritas seeks to expose, O’Keefe relies upon Internet social media, including Twitter, where O’Keefe currently has 377,000 followers, to get his videos seen and his message broadcast.
By exposing how Twitter systematically censors pro-Trump supporters, O’Keefe permits us to understand why individual accounts now are being canceled simply for tweeting out #SchumerShutdown.
Twitter has arbitrarily decided tweeting #SchumerShutdown is sufficient evidence to send users emails characterizing them as a “Russian Bot,” despite the extent to which Trump followers have organized meme campaigns on the Internet to back Trump’s refusal to concede to the Democrats in the Senate over DACA.
Yet, to date, O’Keefe has fought back successfully to get Twitter to reinstate his account every time Twitter has canceled or threatened to cancel it, but the battle has been hard fought.
In his book, American Pravda, O’Keefe explains that the methodology Project Veritas uses “to put pressure on the mainstream and their deep state allies” is to shock viewers with reality – cinema verité.
“Our medium is video, usually undercover, supplemented and distributed by the people’s media, by the internet. We gather the information guerilla-style and distribute it the same way,” O’Keefe explains."This allows us to bypass traditional establishment channels and take our product directly to the people.”
O’Keefe astutely observes that in the Soviet Union readers knew that the newspaper named Pravda, Russian for “truth”, was nothing more than state-generated propaganda. “Although the media could exist without the deep state, the deep state could not exist without the media,” O’Keefe stresses.
“By exposing the waste, fraud, and abuse of the administrative state, we inevitably disrupt the media’s relationship with government and organizations that work with government,” he continues. “Like Trump, Project Veritas is a disruptor. If we have an ideology, it is less ‘conservative’ than anti-statist, anti-status quo.”
In American Pravda, O’Keefe recounts some of his more daring exploits – crossing the Rio Grande illegally at the southern border with Mexico, dressed as Osama bin Laden, or the Project Veritas take-down of Acorn, with Hanna Giles, dressed as a prostitute and O’Keefe dressed as “a garish over-the-top pimp,” visiting six Acorn offices around the country to ask if Acorn could help them “find housing for our stable of underage Central American sex slaves.”
O’Keefe reports, that in all but one case, Acorn “happily obliged us,” a result that helped put Acorn out of business, despite Acorn being “a powerful, well-funded community-organizing cartel that engaged in any number of illegal and unethical activities from shaking down businesses to stealing votes.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, O’Keefe and Project Veritas played a major role exposing the corrupt practices of Robert Creamer, founder of Democracy Partners and a Democratic Party “dark hat” political operative who had logged more than 340 trips to the Oval Office during the Obama years, including many meetings at which President Obama was present.
In a video entitled “Rigging the Election,” first shown on Oct. 17, 2016, as the nation approached the November presidential election, O’Keefe got Scott Foval, the National Field Director at Americans for Change – a Creamer associate – to admit on video, “It doesn’t matter what the friggin’ legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherf**ker.”
Later in the “Rigging the Election” video, Creamer associates described his tactic of “conflict engagement” designed to “start anarchy” at Donald Trump’s campaign events. Foval explained how agitators, including mentally ill people recruited for that purpose, were paid to start violence by attacking Trump supporters at Trump rallies.
“The campaign (Hillary Clinton) pays DNC (Democratic National Committee), DNC pays Democracy Partners, Democracy Partners pays the Foval Group, the Foval Group goes and executes the s**t on the ground,” Foval explained on the Project Veritas cinema verité expose.
“Wherever Trump and Pence are going to be, we have events,” Creamer explained. “We have a whole team across the country that does that. Both consultants and people from the Democratic Party apparatus and people from the campaign, the Clinton campaign. My role is to manage all that.”
When Creamer was fired, O’Keefe took a screenshot of the Creamer statement and tweeted it out.
“The Veritas twitter feed lit up like a slot machine in jackpot mode, buzzing, popping, and clicking so frequently I could scarcely keep track,” O’Keefe recounts in American Pravda. "Two top Democratic officials had been fired for getting nabbed trying to rig the election, and, to this point at least, no one in the mainstream news media had reported on the story.”
“The sacking of Creamer forced the media to cover a story most were hoping to avoid,” O’Keefe continued, recounting the story.
“I looked up at the six monitors inside the Project Veritas newsroom. Each was turned to a different station. And every broadcast - Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, even local media - were playing video clips and discussing our ‘Rigging the Election’ series.”
Here’s how O’Keefe sums up both his mission and his success to date.
“Since the creation of Project Veritas, the major media have impeded us at almost every step and continue to do so,” O’Keefe writes in American Pravda.
“I have to agree with President Trump that the ‘fake news media’ is not his enemy but ‘the enemy of the American People,’ he argues.
“As an enemy, they remain formidable. Their reign will end, I suspect, not with a bang and not with a whimper but with a tantrum. We have been experiencing that phase every day since the election.”
Controversial FISA Memo Was Just Released - Here’s What It Says February 4 2019 | From: Zerohedge / Various
The just released FISA memo accuses senior officials at the DOJ of inappropriately using biased opposition research into then-candidate Trump to obtain surveillance warrants on transition team members as part of the federal investigation into the Trump campaign and Russia.
According to the document, information from the the so-called Steele dossier was "essential" to the acquisition of surveillance warrants on Trump campaign aide Carter Page. It claims that then-deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe told the committee in December that without the information from the Steele dossier, no surveillance warrant for Page would have been sought.
The memo alleges that the political origins of the dossier - paid for by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) - were not disclosed to the clandestine court that signed off on the warrant request.
The document claims that although the FBI had "clear evidence" that the author of the dossier, former British spy Christopher Steele, was biased against Trump, it did not convey that to the surveillance court when making its warrant applications.
Steele told then-associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr that he was "desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president," the memo says.
House conservatives have touted the memo's revelations as “worse than Watergate” and hinted that it could prove the undoing of the federal investigation into Trump’s campaign. Meanwhile, Democrats on the panel say that it is a cherry-picked set of inaccurate accusations designed to kneecap special counsel Robert Mueller.
They have drafted their own counter-memo to rebut the Republican-drafted document, but the majority voted against immediately making that document public earlier this week.
The memo is based on a slate of highly-classified materials provided to the committee by the Justice Department itself, in a closed-door deal brokered by Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).
Naturally, the DOJ has claimed that the release of the memo is an abrogation of the terms of that deal, an assertion spokesmen for both Ryan and Nunes have rejected.
Key Summary of Points From the Memo:
These details are explained further in this article but this is a list of essential points that have been confirmed:
1. Hillary Clinton / DNC hired a foreign (MI6) spy to concoct a fake dossier on candidate Donald Trump.
2. Hillary Clinton / DNC gave the fake dossier to Obama's Department of Justice and FBI.
3. DOJ and FBI knew the dossier was fake and politically motivated.
4. DOJ and FBI presented the fake dossier to FISA court to get Trump wiretaps.
5. DOJ and FBI didn't tell FISA court that the dossier was fake and from his campaign opponent.
6. FISA court was defrauded into ordering the wiretapping of the Trump campaign.
Meanwhile, the underlying evidence remains classified, a state of affairs that Democrats and some national security analysts say makes it impossible to independently verify the memo’s conclusions.
As The Hill reported earlier, ahead of the document's release, Paul Ryan privately urged House Republicans not to overplay the document - and not to tie it to the Mueller investigation.
Here are select excerpts from the FISA memo: (full pdf below)
"On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a U.S. citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign.
Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.
The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. §1805(d)(1)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the FISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause.
Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Then-DAG Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.
Our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.
The "dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application.
Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump's ties to Russia."
What follows is what some have dubbed the "damning section", as there was no reason not to disclosed the relationship between Clinton and Steele, unless the authors were worried about exposing a clear political link:
"a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele's efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.
b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier).
The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of - and paid by - the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information."
The section above also makes a good case for releasing the underlying FISA application, as either the Clinton connection was disclosed or it wasn't - not a fact either party can distort.
In a curious twist, in order to corroborate the dossier, the memo reveals that the FBI "extensively" cited a news article - that was based entirely on the dossier. In effect, using the dossier to corroborate the dossier.
"The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page's July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News.
The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News - and several other outlets - in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS.
Perkins Coie was aware of Steele's initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington D.C. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed."
The memo continues revealing more information about Steele and his clear political bias:
"Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations - an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn.
Steele's numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling - maintaining confidentiality - and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI.
3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele.
For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he "was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president."
This clear evidence of Steele's bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files—but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.
During this same time period, Ohr's wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife's opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs' relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC.
* * *
After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele's reporting as only minimally corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was - according to his June 2017 testimony - "salacious and unverified."
While the FISA application relied on Steele's past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations. Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.
The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok.
Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel's Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, whom Strzok had also investigated.
The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an "insurance" policy against President Trump's election."
The bottom line: as noted earlier, if found that there was clear undisclosed bias in the launch of surveillance of Trump's team, then Mueller's probe - whose findings would be the result of a flawed FISA warrant - would be null and void, leave space for Trump to fire the special prosecutor or Rod Rosenstein.
Incidentally, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump suggested the document shows political bias at the FBI that tainted the probe into whether his campaign cooperated with Russia’s election meddling.
“I think it’s a disgrace,” Trump said of the alleged bias. "A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves."
The decision cleared the way for the House Intelligence Committee to release the memo, which it did shortly after noon. “It was declassified and let’s see what happens,” Trump said. White House made no redactions to the document.
Just before noon on Friday, the "FISA" memo compiled by House Intelligence Committee staff, led by chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), from classified documents provided by the Department of Justice, was officially declassified by Trump's lawyer Donald Gahn - over the objections of the DOJ and the FBI - as explained in the letter below.
e House Intelligence Committee to release the memo, which it did shortly after noon. “It was declassified and let’s see what happens,” Trump said. White House made no redactions to the document.
According to the Washington Examiner's Byron York who had access to an early released version, a key point in the memo is that the "salacious and unverified" Steele dossier formed the essential part of the initial and all three renewal applications against Carter Page, in line with what as previously leaked.
As York also explicitly highlights, "The FBI's Andrew McCabe confirmed to the committee that no FISA warrant would have been sought from the FISA Court without the Steele dossier information."
This, as Fox News confirms, means that absent the dossier, at least one of the surveillance warrants in the case would not have been obtained, and - by implication - the entire Mueller probe is thus on shaky legal ground.
Back to the memo, which as York adds, "the political origins of the Steele dossier were known to senior DOJ and FBI officials, but excluded from the FISA applications."
As Dow Jones confirms, DOJ officials knew Steele was being paid by democrats, and that officials at the DOJ and FBI signed one warrant, and three renewals against Carter Page.
York also notes that DOJ official Bruce Ohr was relayed information about Christopher Steele's bias. Steele told Ohr that he, Steele, was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected president and was passionate about him not becoming president.
All else equal, sounds like a clear case of bias, and when extended, it would imply that the entire Mueller probe is based on grounds that could be overturned in court.
The Steele dossier formed an essential part of the intial and all three renewal FISA applications against Carter Page.
Andrew McCabe confirmed that no FISA warrant would have been sought from the FISA Court without the Steele dossier information.
The political origins of the Steele dossier were known to senior DOJ and FBI officials, but excluded from the FISA applications.
DOJ official Bruce Ohr met with Steele beginning in the summer of 2016 and relayed to DOJ information about Steele's bias. Steele told Ohr that he, Steele, was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected president and was passionate about him not becoming president.
As a reminder, the FBI and Justice Department mounted a months-long effort to keep the information outlined in the memo out of the House Intelligence Committee's hands. Only the threat of contempt charges and other forms of pressure forced the FBI and Justice to give up the material.
"Once Intelligence Committee leaders and staff compiled some of that information into the memo, the FBI and Justice Department, supported by Capitol Hill Democrats, mounted a ferocious campaign of opposition, saying release of the memo would endanger national security and the rule of law.
But Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes never wavered in his determination to make the information available to the public. President Trump agreed, and, as required by House rules, gave his approval for release."
Finally, the memo released today does not represent the sum total of what House investigators have learned in their review of the FBI and Justice Department Trump-Russia investigation. That means the fight over the memo could be replayed in the future when the Intelligence Committee decides to release more information.
Moments after the announcement that the memo was declassified, Trump spoke to reporters and was asked if the memo makes it more likely that he will fire Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, to which Trump responded.
Amalgam fillings: 'It Is Toxic And We're Told To Put It In' February 4 2019 | From: RadioNewZealand
New Zealand is being urged to follow the European Union (EU) and ban the use of amalgam fillings for children and pregnant or breast-feeding women.
Amalgam is a mixture of metals including silver, copper and tin, to which mercury is added.
The EU is to ban the use of amalgam fillings in children and pregnant or breast-feeding women from July this year.
The EU's move is part of the Minamata Convention on Mercury - a global treaty to phase out the use of mercury - due to its toxicity.
Auckland-based dentist Hisham Abdalla said it was now time for New Zealand to follow the EU's example.
Dr Abdalla said concerns about amalgam mercury fillings were not new and ending its use needed to be seriously considered by the government.
He said it was strange that the ban on amalgam fillings was the last part of the wider phasing-out of mercury, when it was the most directly in contact with the human body and there were very strict guidelines for disposing of amalgam fillings.
"It is toxic and we're told to put it in. Why is it toxic when it is outside the mouth, or goes into the waterways or the fish or whatever, but when we put it inside the mouth it is safe?"
Dr Abdalla said New Zealand was way behind other countries in acting on mercury reduction. He wanted to see the government funding the safer - but more expensive - alternatives to amalgam.
He said phasing out amalgam fillings in children, whose dental care was already funded, would be a great place to start as the longer you have the mercury in your mouth, the longer you have the risk.
However, the Ministry of Health said there was no scientific evidence that the fitting or removal of amalgam fillings during pregnancy or as a child was harmful. It did say pregnant women should avoid elective dental procedures where possible.
"The Ministry supports the continued use of amalgam fillings as one of the options for the treatment of tooth decay," the ministry said in a statement, also pointing to its policy on amalgam.
In a statement, the NZ dental Association said it "affirmed the safety of dental amalgam as a filling material". "Dental amalgam is a safe and durable material that has been used by dentists to restore teeth for well over 100 years."
However the NZDA said it did support continued research into the safety of all dental materials, including amalgam.
In The Western World Lies Have Displaced Truth February 3 2019 | From: PaulCraigRoberts
Last year I was awarded Marquiss Who’s Who In America’s Lifetime Achievement Award.
This did not prevent a hidden organization, PropOrNot, from attempting to brand me and my website along with 200 others “Putin stooges or agents” for our refusal to lie for the corrupt, anti-American, anti-constitutional, anti-democratic, warmonger police state interests that rule the Western World.
The only honest, factual media that exists in the Western World today are the names on the PropOrNot list of “Putin agents.”
The purpose of ProOrNot is to convince Americans that freedom of speech must be halted by destroying fact-based Internet media, such as this website and 200 others that provide factual information at odds with Big Brother’s universal brainwashing as delivered by CNN, NPR, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the rest of the utterly corrupt presstitute media, a collection of scum devoid of all integrity and all respect for truth.
A conspiracy of US government agencies, tax-exempt think tanks funded by the ruling interests, and media acting in behalf of a war and police state agenda work to shape perceived reality as it is described in George Orwell’s book, 1984, and in the film, The Matrix.
Controlled perception-based reality is only a Facebook “like” away from killing one person or one million or elevating a liar or the warmonger responsible for the killing to hero status or to the control of the CIA or FBI or the US presidency.
Eliason’s article is long and documented. It demonstrates the organized conspiracy against truth that exists in the Western World. Nothing stated in the Western presstitute media and no statement by any Western government or subservient vassal state can be trusted to comply with the facts.
Truth is the enemy of the state, and the state is eliminating the truth.
Peoples in the United States, Europe, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the various vassal states, such as Japan, all live day in, day out, an orchestrated lie that serves interests directly opposed to the interests of the peoples.
Governments that do not rest on truth rest on tyranny.
Clearly, Hari discovered enough interesting information about the real cause of depression to fill a whole book. What I wanted to highlight in this article is Hari’s perspective on the medical establishment’s choice to categorize depression as a chemical imbalance.
The Grief Exemption
The term major depressive disorder was introduced by a group of US clinicians in the mid-1970s. It established the diagnostic criteria for depression based on patterns of nine possible symptoms.
In 1980, depression was incorporated into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). In this book, American psychiatrists include all the symptoms of different mental illnesses, so they could identify and treat these diseases in the same way.
After some time, psychiatrists started to questions if people who are bereaved also need pharmacological treatment.
"If you lose someone, it turns out that these symptoms will come to you automatically. So, the doctors wanted to know, are we supposed to start drugging all the bereaved people in America?
This is when the grief exemption was created. The DSM authors updated the manual to exclude people who have lost somebody in the preceding year from the depression diagnosis, even if they showed depression symptoms.
"The grief exception seemed to have blasted a hole in the claim that the causes of depression are sealed away in your skull."
The grief exception created too much debate in mainstream psychiatry. Doctors started asking if depressive symptoms where a logical and understandable response to other life circumstances, not just a death of a loved one.
Eventually, DSM authors eventually did away with the exemption. Doctors were once again told to say that depression is, in fact, caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain.
Dr. Joanne Cacciatore, associate professor at Arizona State University, is a leading expert on the grief exception. In his book, Hari reveals Cacciatore’s perspective:
"She told me this debate reveals a key problem with how we talk about depression, anxiety and other forms of suffering: we don’t, she said, “consider context”.
We act like human distress can be assessed solely on a checklist that can be separated out from our lives, and labelled as brain diseases.
If we started to take people’s actual lives into account when we treat depression and anxiety, Joanne explained, it would require “an entire system overhaul”.
She told me that when “you have a person with extreme human distress, [we need to] stop treating the symptoms. The symptoms are a messenger of a deeper problem. Let’s get to the deeper problem.”"
Most typical mainstream doctors address symptoms associated with depression with anti-depressant drugs, such as Prozac. Cacciatore raises a very valid concern, that we may be treating the symptoms, but that a potential untreated problem is the actual cause of depression.
As a patient taking anti-depressants for many years, Hari asked:
"Why were so many other people across the western world feeling like me? Around one in five US adults are taking at least one drug for a psychiatric problem.
In Britain, antidepressant prescriptions have doubled in a decade, to the point where now one in 11 of us drug ourselves to deal with these feelings.
What has been causing depression and its twin, anxiety, to spiral in this way? I began to ask myself: could it really be that in our separate heads, all of us had brain chemistries that were spontaneously malfunctioning at the same time?”"
To examine this question, Hari took at 40,000 mile journey around the world.
Here are some of the findings he uncovered during his investigation.
"They [drug companies] would fund huge numbers of studies, throw away all the ones that suggested the drugs had very limited effects, and then only release the ones that showed success.
To give one example: in one trial, the drug was given to 245 patients, but the drug company published the results for only 27 of them. Those 27 patients happened to be the ones the drug seemed to work for.
Professor Andrew Scull of Princeton, writing in the Lancet, explained that attributing depression to spontaneously low serotonin is “deeply misleading and unscientific”.
Dr David Healy told me: “There was never any basis for it, ever. It was just marketing copy.”
Were Psychiatrists Wrong About the Cause of Depression?
Finding out the story fed to depressed patients may be no more than a marketing pitch, Hari researched further. He sought out to uncover the true cause of depression.
He collected evidence that led him to believe that there are seven specific factors in the way we are living today that are causing depression to rise. In addition, two real biological factors (such as your genes) can combine with these forces to make things worse.
Here’s Hari’s thoughts:
"It turns out that, in the same way, all humans have certain basic psychological needs. We need to feel we belong.
We need to feel valued. We need to feel we’re good at something. We need to feel we have a secure future. And there is growing evidence that our culture isn’t meeting those psychological needs for many – perhaps most – people.
…the depression of many of my friends, even those in fancy jobs – who spend most of their waking hours feeling controlled and unappreciated – started to look not like a problem with their brains, but a problem with their environments."
Hari is not alone in claiming that our environment and power inequalities may be the real cause of depression.
"In its official statement for World Health Day in 2017, the United Nations reviewed the best evidence and concluded that “the dominant biomedical narrative of depression” is based on “biased and selective use of research outcomes” that “must be abandoned”.
We need to move from “focusing on ‘chemical imbalances’”, they said, to focusing more on “power imbalances”.
Germany: Return Of The Stasi Police State? February 2 2018 | From: GatestoneInstitute
Germany's new law requires social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, to censor their users on behalf of the government.
Social media companies are obliged to delete or block any online "criminal offenses" within 24 hours of receipt of a user complaint - regardless of whether the content is accurate or not.
Social media platforms now have the power to shape the form of current political and cultural discourse by deciding who will speak and what they will say.
Notice the ease with which the police chief mentioned that he had filed charges to silence a leading political opponent of the government. That is what authorities do in police states: Through censorship and criminal charges, they silence outspoken critics and political opponents of government policies, such as Beatrix von Storch, who has sharply criticized Chancellor Angela Merkel's migration policies.
While such policies would doubtless have earned the German authorities many points with the old Stasi regime of East Germany, they more than likely contravene the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to which Germany is a party, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
Germany's new censorship law, which has introduced state censorship on social media platforms, came into effect on October 1, 2017. The new law requires social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, to censor their users on behalf of the German state.
Social media companies are obliged to delete or block any online "criminal offenses" such as libel, slander, defamation or incitement, within 24 hours of receipt of a user complaint -- regardless of whether the content is accurate or not.
Social media companies are permitted seven days for more complicated cases. If they fail to do so, the German government can fine them up to 50 million euros for failing to comply with the law.
The new censorship law, however, was not fully enforced until January 1, 2018, in order to give the social media platforms time to prepare for their new role as the privatized thought police of the German state.
Social media platforms now have the power to shape the form of current political and cultural discourse by deciding who will speak and what they will say.
On January 1, 2018, however, the law was immediately enforced. Twitter began by suspending the account of the deputy leader of the Alternative for Germany party (AfD), Beatrix von Storch, for 12 hours, after she tweeted the following in response to a New Year's greeting issued in Arabic by the Cologne Police:
"What the hell is happening in this country? Why is an official police site tweeting in Arabic? Do you think it is to appease the barbaric, gang-raping hordes of Muslim men?"
(During New Year's Eve of 2015/16, over 1,000 mainly Muslim men sexually assaulted around 1,200 women in Cologne.)
Von Storch also had her Facebook account suspended for repeating her tweet there. Facebook told her that her post contravened German law, as it constituted "incitement to hatred".
It did not stop there. Cologne police filed charges against von Storch for "incitement to hatred", which is punishable under section 130 of the German Criminal Code. According to the Cologne police chief, Uwe Jacob, multilingual tweets at major events are an important part of the police's communication strategy:
"The campaign was really well received by most people – however, some were bothered by the fact that we tweeted in Arabic and Farsi – they were very prominent right-wingers, who then felt that they had to make tweets that incited to hatred. We simply filed charges".
Notice the ease with which the police chief mentioned that he had filed charges to silence a leading political opponent of the government. That is what authorities do in police states: Through censorship and criminal charges, they silence outspoken critics and political opponents of government policies, such as von Storch, who has sharply criticized Chancellor Angela Merkel's migration policies.
While such policies would doubtless have earned the German authorities many points with the old Stasi regime of East Germany, they more than likely contravene the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to which Germany is a party, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights states:
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers...
2. The exercise of these freedoms... may be subject to such... restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
In its case law, the European Court of Human Rights has stated that Article 10:
"...protects not only the information or ideas that are regarded as inoffensive but also those that offend, shock or disturb; such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broad-mindedness without which there is no democratic society. Opinions expressed in strong or exaggerated language are also protected".
Even more important in the context of charges against politicians is the fact that according to the European Court of Human Rights' case law:
"...the extent of protection depends on the context and the aim of the criticism. In matters of public controversy or public interest, during political debate, in electoral campaigns... strong words and harsh criticism may be expected and will be tolerated to a greater degree by the Court".
When leading politicians are criminally charged for questioning the actions of the authorities, such as in this case the actions of the police, we are no longer dealing with a democracy, but with a regular police state.
Several other accounts on Twitter and Facebook were also suspended under the new censorship law in the first days and weeks of January. One such Twitter account was the satirical magazine, Titanic, which was blocked for parodying von Storch's tweet about the "barbaric hordes" of Muslim men.
The privatized Twitter thought police, in their eagerness to censor, had overlooked that Titanic was just poking fun. The suspension of the Titanic account alerted some politicians -- a mere three months after the law went into force -- to the problematic nature of the law.
Leader of the Green party, Simone Peter and Secretary-General of the FDP, Nicola Beer were both critical of the law. "The law is messed up and must be replaced by a decent one", Beer said.
Another politician, Martin Sichert, AfD member of the Bundestag for Nürnberg and state Chairman for the AfD, had a Facebook post deleted for violating "community standards". In the post, which he substantiated with links to factual sources, he drew attention, among other things, to the way women are treated in Afghanistan. He also drew attention to the sexual abuse of small children in Afghanistan:
"It is scary and at the same time shameful that our state is preventing the enlightenment of citizens by simply censoring factual opinions, publicly available citations and links to reputable sources."
Sichert and von Storch are just the most famous people to have their speech shut down on social media. There are countless others, whose stories never reach the media.
Under the censorship law, anyone can ask a social network operator to delete postings, even if the post does not affect him personally in any way. If the social network provider does not respond within 24 hours, the person wishing to have a post deleted can involve the Federal Office of Justice; there is even a form for this purpose on the homepage of the Federal Office of Justice.
This office is responsible for the prosecution of violations, and the district court of Bonn is the sole authority permitted to examine disputes about the criminal liability of comments made on social media and to impose fines on the social media companies for failing to delete those comments within the required 24 hours.
It is regrettable that Germany, which can barely keep up with the terrorism threat and the wave of violent crime, is spending such vast resources on shutting down the free speech of its citizens on social media.
The Federal Department of Justice has rented additional offices in Bonn to house approximately 50 new lawyers and administrators to implement the new law and ensure that the social media providers delete "offending posts" within 24 hours. "It was also important that we created a new file management system," explains Thomas W. Ottersbach of the Federal Office of Justice in Bonn.
"This is the only way to ensure that deadlines are met and that a statistical evaluation can be carried out. Because it is important that we keep an eye on which [social media] operator's complaints are piling up and where they are just isolated cases."
Ben Swann Fired From CBS After Exposing D.C. Pizzagate February 1 2018 | From: AJC / SeekingTheTruth
CBS46 has fired Ben Swann, the evening anchor three days after the station discovered he had tried to revive his Reality Check news reports without their knowledge.
CBS has fired Ben Swann, the news anchor who bravely exposed a Washington D.C. pedophile ring on his show Reality Check.
The station’s general manager Lyle Banks released a brief press release today: “Ben Swann is no longer an employee of WGCL-TV, effective immediately. We thank Ben for his contributions and wish him well.”
Spy Court Finds Surveillance Operating Outside The Law January 31 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts
The NSA, CIA, and FBI are criminal organizations that should be abolished and their leaderships imprisoned.
On page 4 the federal court that oversees the spy program states that the US government has not been in compliance with procedures governing the acquisition of data from spying. Moreover, the full scope of noncompliance “had not been previously disclosed to the court.”
The document describes aspects of the government’s noncompliance with the law and steps the government assures the court that it has taken to bring surveillance into compliance with the law.
Historically, police states have told courts whatever the courts wanted to hear and proceeded with their police state activities.
The conspiracy that the House Intelligence Committee has uncovered between US security agencies, Hillary Clinton, and the presstitute media to overturn the election of President Trump is sufficient evidence that the police state remains out of control.
Whether the Republicans on the Intelligence Committee will use the facts to bring the police state under control or wimp out on “national security” concerns, as Republicans tend to do, remains to be seen.
When the court comes to the issue of assessing whether the spy regime is consistent with the Fourth Amendment, it becomes obvious that the Fourth Amendment, one of the cornerstones of American civil liberty, has been undermined by the 9/11 hoax that pretends the world’s only superpower defended by the NSA universal spy program was defeated by a handful of Saudi Arabians who could not fly airplanes.
The court says that the Fourth Amendment is a case of balancing the interests at stake. One interest is privacy. The other is the government’s interest in safeguarding the country’s security. The more important the government’s interest, the greater the intrusion on privacy that can be constitutionally tolerated.
In other words, the court is constrained in its interpretation of the Constitution by the official 9/11 yarn. Insouciant Americans so anxious to believe the government about the evil Muslims had no idea they were dooming their own civil liberty.
Tyranny And Free Speech January 30 2018 | From: BreakingViews Do you support free speech? How about free speech for climate change skeptics? For homophobes? For racists? For sexists? For white males? For even Donald Trump?
Those who defend free speech, as did the American Founding Fathers, understand it is not about defending speech you agree with, but defending speech you disagree with. Without free speech, there is no liberty.
The State Department diversity officer, John Robinson, has just warned the staff that they may be penalized for engaging in “microaggressions,” which include jokes or other comments that someone who hears them may find offensive.
In a recent letter, he referred to a definition of microaggressions as:
"Everyday verbal, nonverbal and environmental slights, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory or negative messages to target persons.”
In other words, whatever you hear may be considered a microaggression if you choose to be offended.
Such vague and infinitely elastic laws and regulations are the bread and butter of all totalitarian regimes.
Lavrentiy Beria (Joseph Stalin’s head of the NKVD, a predecessor of the KGB) was quoted as saying to Stalin:
"You name the person and I will find the crime.”
The “crime” of microaggression has already been used to stifle and prosecute speech by those who have contrary views in several left-leaning universities, and now it is coming to the federal government.
The climate change lobbyists have been increasingly aggressive in their attacks on free speech.
They seek to silence their critics, who have committed the “sin” of noting their many failed predictions.
George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla was the lead signatory of the letter sent to the president and attorney general asking them to use RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) laws to prosecute;
"Corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
Mr. Shukla “paid himself and his wife $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work.”
Other prominent global warming fear-mongers, who are on the government teat, have also called for “war crimes trials” and even the “execution” of some critics.
Even Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week she has looked at the possibility of pursuing civil actions against so-called “climate change deniers.”
The message: Don’t look to the Obama administration to protect free speech. Which do you find more offensive, a person advocating socialism or a person telling jokes about one-eyed people?
Socialism is an ideology that has resulted in governments killing more than 200 million of their own citizens in the last century. It is based on coercion rather than liberty. It demands involuntary servitude. Socialist Bernie Sanders promises “free” stuff to his supporters to be paid for by the involuntary servitude of others - to which there will be no end.
Having spent considerable time in socialist countries and seen the human wreckage that results, I am offended by the ignorance or venality of those who engage in the microaggression of advocating socialism. Several decades ago, I lost an eye, and in the years since I have been told hundreds of “one-eyed” jokes, even by people who do not know me.
Rather than being offended, I have chosen to enjoy them. Offensive speech is totally subjective, and making it a crime is incompatible with a free society.
The Guardian, a left-wing British newspaper, published an article last year by a woman author titled;
"Why do women lie more than men?”
It reported on a new poll that “suggests that women are twice as likely to lie as men.”
The article goes on to say: “It may be irritating to be told, yet again, that women are more morally slippery than men (just as in Genesis).”
The article goes on to cite several reasons why this may be true - including differences “between masculine and feminine brains.”
All of this may or may not be nonsense, but in cases of women complaining about men engaging in “offensive” speech, it is most often assumed, without evidence, that the woman is telling the truth and the man is lying. In fact, men are frequently not allowed to know who their accuser is or what she claimed was said.
One of the most basic protections of liberty is the right of the accuser to know the specific charges against him or her and by whom. As a result, many innocent men are not given a fair hearing by the human resource departments in organizations and even sometimes by the courts.
The late well-regarded feminist, Joan Kennedy Taylor, argued in her book “What to Do When You Don’t Want to Call the Cops: Or a Non-Adversarial Approach to Sexual Harassment” (Cato Institute) that it is important to understand that men and women perceive things quite differently, and that non-legal strategies which she describes can be far more effective and less damaging than legal remedies.
Law professor Catherine Ross has just written an important book, “Lessons in Censorship” (to be discussed at a Cato book forum on March 16), in which she argues that “the failure of schools to respect civil liberties betrays their educational function and threatens democracy.”
The popularity of the verbally crude Donald Trump might, in part, be a reaction to the political correctness of the political class and timid leaders of organizations who have failed to defend freedom of speech.
Everywhere In The Western World, Government Is A Conspiracy Against The People
& Cartels That Run The World January 29 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / JonRappoport
In the West “conspiracy theory” is the name given to explanations that differ from those that serve the ruling oligarchy, the establishment or whatever we want to call those who set and control the agendas and the explanations that support the agendas.
The explanations imposed on us by the ruling class are themselves conspiracy theories. Moreover, they are conspiracy theories designed to hide the real conspiracy that our rulers are operating.
For example, the official explanation of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory. Some Muslims, mainly Saudi Arabians, delivered the greatest humiliation to a superpower since David slew Goliath.
They outsmarted all 17 US intelligence agencies and those of NATO and Israel, the National Security Council, the Transportation Safety Administration, Air Traffic Control, and Dick Cheney, hijacked four US airliners on one morning, brought down three World Trade Center skyscrapers, destroyed that part of the Pentagon where research was underway into the missing $2.3 trillion, and caused the morons in Washington to blame Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia.
Clearly, the Saudia Arabians who humiliated Ameria were involved in a conspiracy to do so. Is it a believable conspiracy?
The ability of a few young Muslim men to pull off such a feat is unbelievable. Such total failure of the US National Security State means that America was blindly vulnerable throughout the decades of Cold War with the Soviet Union. If such total failure of the National Security State had really occurred, the White House and Congress would have been screaming for an investigation.
People would have been held accountable for the long chain of security failures that allowed the plot to succeed. Instead, no one was even reprimanded, and the White House resisted all efforts for an investigation for a year. Finally, to shut up the 9/11 families, a 9/11 Commission was convened. The commission duly wrote down the government’s story and that was the “investigation.”
Moreover, there is no evidence to support the official conspiracy theory of 9/11. Indeed, all known evidence contradicts the official conspiracy theory.
For example, it is a proven fact that Building 7 came down at freefall acceleration, which means it was wired for demolition. Why was it wired for demolition? There is no official answer to this question.
It is the known evidence provided by scientists, architects, engineers, pilots, and the first responders who were in the twin towers and personally experienced the numerous explosions that brough down the towers that is described as a conspiracy theory.
The CIA introduced the term “conspiracy theory” into public discourse as part of its action plan to discredit skeptics of the Warren Commission report on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Any explanation other than the one handed down, which is contradicted by all known evidence, was debunked as a conspiracy theory.
Conspiracy theories are the backbone of US foreign policy. For example, the George W. Bush regime was active in a conspiracy against Iraq and Saddam Hussein.
The Bush regime created fake evidence of Iraqi “weapons of mass destruction,” sold the false story to a gullible world and used it to destroy Iraq and murder its leader. Similarly, Gaddafi was a victim of an Obama/Hillary conspiracy to destroy Libya and murder Gaddafi. Assad of Syria and Iran were slated for the same treatment until the Russians intervened.
Currently, Washington is engaged in conspiracies against Russia, China, and Venezuela. Proclaiming a non-existant “Iranian threat,” Washington put US missiles on Russia’s border and used the “North Korean threat” to put missiles on China’s border.
The democratically elected leader of Venezuela is said by Washington to be a dictator, and sanctions have been put on Venezuela to help the small Spanish elite through whom Washington has traditionally ruled South American countries pull off a coup and reestablish US control over Venezuela.
Everyone is a threat: Venezuela, Yemen, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Aghanistan, tribes in Pakistan, Libya, Russia, China, North Korea, but never Washington. The greatest conspiracy theory of our time is that Americans are surrounded by foreign threats. We are not even safe from Venezuela,
The New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, NPR, and the rest of the presstitutes are quick to debunk as conspiracy theories all explanations that differ from the explanations of the ruling interests that the presstitutes serve.
Yet, as I write and for some nine months to date, the presstitute media has itself been promoting the conspiracy theory that Donald Trump was involved in a conspiracy with the president of Russia and Russian intelligence services to hack the US presidential election and place Trump, a Russian agent, in the White House.
This conspiracy theory has no evidence whatsoever. It doesn’t need evidence, because it serves the interests of the military/security complex, the Democratic Party, the neoconservatives, and permits the presstitutes to show lavish devotion to their masters. By endless repetition a lie becomes truth.
There is a conspiracy, and it is against the Western people. Their jobs have been offshored in order to enrich the already rich. They have been forced into debt in a futile effort to maintain their living standards. Their effort to stem their decline by electing leaders who spoke for them is being subverted before their eyes by an utterly corrupt media and ruling class.
Sooner or later it will dawn on them that there is nothing they can do but violently revolt. Most likely, by the time they reach this conclusion it will be too late. Westerners are very slow to escape from the false reality in which they live. Westerners are a thoroughly brainwashed people who hold tightly to their false life within The Matrix.
For the gullible and naive who have been brainwashed into believing that any explanation that differs from the officially-blessed one is a conspiracy theory, there are available online long lists of government conspiracies that succeeded in deceiving the people in order that the governments could achieve agendas that the people would have rejected.
If liberty continues to exist on earth, it will not be in the Western world. It will be in Russia and China, countries that emerged out of the opposite and know the value of liberty, and it will be in those South American countries, such as Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia that fight for their sovereignty against American oppression.
Indeed, as historians unconcerned with their careers are beginning to write, the primary lesson in history is that governments deceive their peoples.
Everywhere in the Western world, government is a conspiracy against the people.
Cartels That Run The World
The following information comes from insider interviews with Ellis Medavoy and Richard Bell, two people I interview extensively in my collection, The Matrix Revealed. This is just a brief taste of what they have to say…
Major institutions on this planet that control Military, Money, Energy, Government, Medical, Corporate, Media, and Education are becoming, more and more, global cartels, horizontally integrated across national borders.
This is more than a top-down command process. It’s organically evolving. Three steps forward, two steps back. There is a great deal of competition among the components of a given cartel, but there is also cooperation. And in the long run, the see-saw is tipping in the direction of cooperation, as these entities realize they may well have more to gain that way.
I can’t stress too strongly this EVOLVING process. All attempts to merely assume twelve men in a room run the planet fall woefully short.
Instead, over time, people who lead a powerful institution (like Energy, for example) look out and recognize more major players, and in this recognition there is an impulse to compete and win and destroy, but there is also an impulse to build commonality and therefore monopolize the entire territory.
During one conversation with retired master propagandist Ellis Medavoy, I asked him about the extent of mutual cooperation in his given field, psychological warfare. He responded:
“Twenty years ago, I would have said we were all operating separately and jealously. Each of us was mining his own contacts and building his false pictures of reality for the masses. But then things began to change. Globally. First of all, more of us were pushing the same holograms.
And because communication and travel were speeding up so rapidly, we were working a lot of the same venues. We would run into each other more often. We began to share information. I mean, it was cautious. We weren’t gushing with unbridled love, I assure you. The competitive factor was still strong. And we had fights.
But through all that, we began to see through the fog, so to speak. We began to understand the effectiveness of cooperating. We would test each other with privileged information, to see if we could trust each other to keep it private. A tidbit here, a tidbit there.
And you see, behind us, other groups were finding commonality, too. For example, in the area of medical propaganda, where I operated a lot of the time. And these groups saw they could join together for specific operations, on an international scale.
They could push enormous lies globally, and everyone of their class would profit and gain wider control. So I would find myself working with a psy warfare guy from, say, France, or Germany in a joint venture. We would rub elbows. We’d be feeding from the same basic money trough.
We’d both be briefed by a team of intelligence experts, and those experts would be of several nationalities. Slowly, I saw a new kind of umbrella structure emerging.
See, suppose during the secret lead-up to a planned economic crisis [money cartel], you can distract everybody with a phony epidemic [medical cartel]. Do you see? Leaders perceive a reason to cooperate. Planners become more intelligent and clever. They reach across lines they never would have reached across before…
You begin to see the outlines of a much more inclusive future structure. This is multi-front warfare.”
Richard Bell, another former insider, said to me:
“People like to assume that money is everything. If you can limit the amount of money the public has, eventually they weaken and cave in and they’re easier to control. And this is certainly true.
But on the other hand, as mega-corporations gain more power and range and markets, you have a clash, because those corporations, which are now cooperating in ways they never have, as a cartel in some respects, want customers for their products.
They don’t want abject poverty across the board. People have to be able to buy their products.
“So there is a heavy conflict. It’s a conflict between elite bankers [money cartel] and mega-corporations [corporation cartel]. It needs to be resolved through advance planning, over the long term.
So now you have these powerful men sitting down and talking in a new way. Other big-time players get involved, too [government, media, energy cartels, for example].”
This is just the beginning of what these people have to say about the Matrix in their interviews and how it really works.
Globalists Unite: Elites Target Trump, Nationalism At Davos January 28 2018 | From: Infowars
Populism, nationalism threaten New World Order, they say.
Numerous global leaders decried nationalism that is undoing the global world order at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Globalist leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian PM Justin Trudeau, Indian PM Narendra Modi, and Brazilian President Michel Temer railed against nationalism, populism, and “protectionism” during the summit.
When asked about the rise of nationalism in Europe, Merkel called it a “poison.” “I hope it is not going to grow, but it is a poison,” she said Wednesday.
“Germany wishes to be a country that lends its contribution in the future to solve the problems of the world together, we think that shutting ourselves off and isolating ourselves will not lead us into a good future. Protectionism is not the proper answer.”
India’s Prime Minister even claimed protectionism is worse than terrorism.
“Forces of protectionism are raising their heads against globalization, their intention is not only to avoid globalization themselves but they also want to reverse its natural flow,” Modi said. “Many countries are becoming inward focused and globalization is shrinking and such tendencies can’t be considered lesser risk than terrorism or climate change.”
Cohen would be the best possible US Ambassador to Russia, but because he is objective, he is unwelcome in Washington’s corridors of power.
I highly recommend Cohen’s 28-minute lecture. It will protect you from the propagandistic picture that Washington and the presstitute media are drawing of Putin and Russia.
The Question That Fluoridation Promoters Can’t Answer January 27 2018 | From: FluorideAlert
During 2016, I asked this question to many fluoridation promoters and have yet to receive an adequate scientific answer.
I asked it in several audiences in New Zealand and also to promoters at a council hearing in Naples, Florida and most recently at a debate in Cortland, New York with Johnny Johnson and Steve Slott. Neither Johnson nor Slott, otherwise very vocal on promoting fluoridation, had an answer.
“What primary scientific studies (not bogus reviews conducted by pro-fluoridation agencies) can you cite that gives you the confidence to ignore or dismiss the evidence that fluoride damages the brain as documented in over 300 animal and human studies (including 50 IQ studies).”
If proponents cannot provide an adequate scientific answer to this question: fluoridation should be halted immediately.
On Nov 22, 2016, Michael Connett, JD, asked this question to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), on behalf of FAN, Food & Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Moms Against Fluoridation, and several individual mothers, in a petition calling on the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoridating chemicals to the drinking water under provisions in the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The EPA has 90 days to reply, and if they fail to provide a satisfactory reply then they can be taken to Federal Court.
How you can take this further?
We are requesting that each one of you to ask this question of any promoter of fluoridation – and keep asking it throughout 2017 until you can get an answer. Send that answer to us.
Based on responses we have seen so far we anticipate that there will be no satisfactory answers. In our view, there is no scientific evidence that could justify ignoring the large number of scientific studies that fluoride damages the brain and thus no justification for continuing this unethical and reckless practice of deliberately adding fluoridating chemicals to the drinking water.
This in essence will be our 2017 campaign. Very simple, very direct and very important. We hope that you will support this in two ways: a) ask this showstopper question in as many creative ways as you can and as many times as you can, and b) support FAN financially.
Five More Ways to Take Action:
1. Send a letter-to-the-editor to your local newspapers
Unschooling: Radical Education That Produces Free Human Beings Instead Of Slaves January 27 2018 | From: DaisyLuther
Let’s talk about the “education system,” that cornerstone of civilized societies everywhere.
We all know that the future lies in the hands of our children. That’s why parents want to do everything they can to give their kids a good start in life. We make careful choices about the food they eat, the friends they hang out with, and the education they receive.
Unfortunately, over the past decades, the education system in America has been churning out kids who are less interested in the world around them, more dependent on others for safety, and programmed to accept whatever information they’re provided without question.
Our education system is actually dumbing kids down instead of making them smarter. It’s killing natural curiosity, independent decision-making, and critical thinking. We all rant about Generation Snowflake, but these kids have grown up to be exactly what they’ve been taught to be.
At school, you learn important things like the following:
How to respond to bells
How to reign in your attention span into 50-minute increments
How to multitask and “learn” 6 different subjects at the same time, while mastering none of them
How to follow the instructions of authority figures without question
How to recite things off by memory
How to feel about politically correct topics
How to squelch your individuality
How to respond to questions to get the best grades
When the appropriate time is to visit the restroom, and how to ask permission to do so if the urge strikes at an inopportune time
How you must show up to serve your sentence on the required days, regardless of whether you feel like it or whether another opportunity has arisen
How to sleep and awaken at the times that are most convenient to your masters teachers, as opposed to the ones that work with your personal circadian rhythms
How you will completely fail at life if you don’t continue your “education” after high school
How to dive so deeply into debt that you must take any job you can get in order to pay off the student loans that were supposed to help you get a “good” job
Basically, you learn to become a better slave. You learn to spend all day doing things you might hate, might find boring, or might not understand.
But it isn’t Just School that is the Problem
The problem runs far deeper than just the classroom. It’s the system of learning itself. Even most homeschool curriculums focus on a broad range of subjects directed by the parent. While many parents do a fantastic job engaging their children in the lessons, there are children who just don’t respond to a format in which they must learn about 5 different subjects each day.
If you can awaken in a child the desire to know more... more about bugs and how they live... more about microclimates... more about geology... more about the past... then you can teach a child how to learn.
In my opinion, the utter failure of the education system is that they don’t create curious children. We moved quite a few times, and rarely did I see children challenged, piqued, and tempted with knowledge. Instead, I observed drudgery, boredom, and conveyor belt education.
If a child slips behind, they don’t stop the belt, take the kid off, and help them catch up. They say, “No child left behind” and they shove them along that belt, forcing them to try to learn the next installment of the lesson plan on top of the complete lack of foundational information that they didn’t understand in the first place.
A few years ago, I pulled my youngest child out of the public school system after a (cough) disagreement with the principal there. For a couple of years, we slogged away using a state-approved curriculum for homeschool.
Not only did it bore the daylights out of her, I found it pretty torturous too. The whole time we did the standard curriculum, I watched the curiosity that is the necessary spark to kindle the flame of learning, slowly die.
And that is the saddest death imaginable, because with it dies the future.
If you don’t love learning new things, if you aren’t curious about the how and the why and the when and the where, how will you ever jump into life with both feet, ready to explore new places, climb new mountains, and have new adventures?
Don’t get me wrong - you need to learn to read and to write and to do math - but you also need to embrace the very idea of learning something new and different, too.
So, we pulled out of all things school. I decided to trust my daughter. I will indulge her sharp wit, her natural curiosity, and her love for photography.
I want to undo the damage done by the school system, with their laborious texts, their Common Core, and their politically correct death-by-boredom.
If I don’t want her to grow up to be a slave to the state, I decided, it was time to stop raising her in the same way the other slaves are raised.
“This is also known as interest driven, child-led, natural, organic, eclectic, or self-directed learning. Lately, the term “unschooling” has come to be associated with the type of homeschooling that doesn’t use a fixed curriculum…
This is the way we learn before going to school and the way we learn when we leave school and enter the world of work…
Unschooling, for lack of a better term (until people start to accept living as part and parcel of learning), is the natural way to learn. However, this does not mean unschoolers do not take traditional classes or use curricular materials when the student, or parents and children together, decide that this is how they want to do it.
Learning to read or do quadratic equations are not “natural” processes, but unschoolers nonetheless learn them when it makes sense to them to do so, not because they have reached a certain age or are compelled to do so by arbitrary authority."
Can you really think of anything in the world that makes more sense than that?
Unschooling can be as simple as letting your child exhaustively indulge his or her curiosity about a subject by getting books about it, attending a class on it, and going on field trips that are related to it. Alternatively, it can become a family affair of travel, knowledge-seeking, and adventure.
This is how people used to learn - they were free to develop their interests, to pursue their passions, and to investigate, experiment, and think. Initially, education was a way for kids to have the world at their fingertips, especially if their parents were illiterate and not able to expose them to things beyond their own farm.
But then, it became an indoctrination system that separates children from their families, forces them to conform, and stamps out individual learning styles.
Let your Child Learn to be Free
When you no longer live by the school bell, the most beautiful thing can happen. You become free.
By learning when and what you want, you gain a true understanding of freedom, and who doesn’t want that for their children?
You can sleep when you’re sleepy.
You can find out more about the things that make you curious.\
You can focus on one thing at a time if that is how you learn best.
You can make art when you want to make art, not when you finally finish all of the boring stuff you’re forced to do.
You can eat when you’re hungry.
You can become the master of your own future.
You can take what makes you the happiest and completely immerse yourself in it.
You can travel when the spirit moves you, not when you get a scheduled break from school.
You can learn about real life, not just get dumped into it when you graduate.
You can start a business of your own.
You can take a class that fascinates you just for the joy of taking the class
You can take field trips to learn from experts and personal experiences.
Best of all, when you unschool, your child lives a kind of freedom that will set them on the course for an adulthood of freedom.
Is there any better gift than that? Is there any educational goal greater than teaching your child to be a free human being, unfettered by bells, whistles, and authority figures?
Common Core Possibly Coming To A School Near You
After reading this bill it seems that Americas Common core is spreading like wild fire across the world under different guises.
I read the bill and honestly alarm bells rang which makes the education reform a one size fits all, seems quite coincidental parata decides to resign after this bill has passed: New Zealand Education Legislation Bill
Incredible: Professor’s Defense Of Free Speech Leaves Regressive Leftist Literally Speechless January 26 2018 | From: Infowars Host claims transgender people have a right not to be offended.
A clip in which Professor Jordan B. Peterson explains why his free speech is more important than the risk of a transgender person being offended is going viral.
Peterson was previously embroiled in a controversy as a result of his refusal to comply with Canada’s draconian Bill C-16, which makes it a hate crime to not use someone’s preferred gender pronouns.
The video features Peterson, who is currently doing a series of lectures in London, being interviewed by far-left UK broadcaster Channel 4.
Host Cathy Newman asks the professor, “Why should your right to freedom of speech trump a trans person’s right not to be offended?”
First of all, the idea that someone has a right to not be offended is hilarious. No such right exists.
Peterson’s comeback is brutal.
“Because in order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive – I mean look at the conversation we’re having right now – you’re certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit of truth – why should you have the right to do that?”
“You get my point, you’re doing what you should do,” Peterson continues. “Which is digging a bit to see what the hell’s going on and that is what you should do, but you’re exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me, and that’s fine, more power to you as far as I’m concerned.”
The host is dumbfounded, stammering, “So you haven’t sat there and….I’m just trying to work that out” before she falls silent and completely loses the ability to speak.
Peterson leans back and takes a sip of water having achieved a simple yet crushing victory. Respondents to the video expressed their glee.
“They should probably go back to smearing him on their clickbait blogs. Debating him probably wasnt a very smart idea,” commented one.
“Absolutely demolished,” added another. “This is legendary,” remarked another.
“I don’t think I have ever witnessed an interview that is more catastrophic for the interviewer,” wrote author Douglas Murray.
Channel 4 is obviously not too keen on seeing the clip go viral. It’s completely blocked on Facebook.
Given the utter embarrassment Peterson just inflicted upon their entire narrative, you can see why.
Are You Awake? Or Just Informed January 25 2018 | From: ZenGardner This is a very interesting question, and perhaps a provocative one. With the information explosion drastically influencing so many lives there appear to be many strata of awakening levels arising.
Once people start connecting the dots of now available facts and formerly unavailable research, whole new paradigms through which to perceive our changing reality emerge.
What we do with this new information, and how far we keep pursing deeper and deeper levels of perception, determines our outlook at any given time.
This is why constant change and continual learning are integral to progressing toward a full on awakening. As we continue to evolve in perception we begin to see that underlying this deluge of surface information there are amazing consistent truths to grasp and implement that will truly transform not only ourselves, but the world around us.
We Are Our Perception
Even quantum physics has confirmed what the sages have taught through the ages. What we perceive and apply our intention to determines our individual reality. That we are in fact fully in charge of how we perceive the world around us is the underlying truth that is being masked from humanity. Completely contrary to the deterministic model we’ve been taught, our very being is not the result of set factors we can do very little about, but the exact opposite.
We literally are a projection of our own consciousness. The rest is up to us as to how much we let the illusory projection laid before us determine our reality.
When we grow to more fully grasp the enormity of the significance of that fact things really start to kick into gear. This will not be taught nor even implied by matrix scientism, the educational and media web of lies, nor blinding, binding religious dogma.
But once this truth is discovered, in fact experienced as it must be, the majesty of existence opens up to such glorious vistas of empowerment and possibility the very grip of any and all external influences and limiting mind conceptions falls away as if it never existed in the first place.
Because it essentially didn’t. It was only real from a deliberately manipulated limited perception that created a feedback loop of illusion, giving the appearance that there were no other possibilities outside that manufactured realm.
Information is a Tool, Not an Answer
Knowing what’s really going on around us is just the beginning. Realizing that in fact this is an imposed psycho-spiritual prison built on deliberate deceit is simply the gateway. We don’t need to spend of the rest of our lives describing how they do what they do and how bad it is in an almost neurotically hysterical state.
That’s simply another level of containment if we don’t keep on progressing towards a full awakening way beyond the confines and influences of their entrapping infectious system.
It’s surpassing those first orbits as we clear the pull of the dense gravitational nucleus we’re born into that things really start to get interesting. And extremely empowering. We cannot begin to know the deep, essential solutions our souls long for by operating within the externally imposed density as we’ll only reinforce the strength of the spider’s web by our futile struggling. The spider is much wiser than we when we operate within its parameters.
We have to first safely transcend and then operate from a clearly distanced perspective.
Until Then…Don’t Be Intimidated or Enthralled by Shadowland
The beautiful so-called secret key to conscious awakening is that you’ll know it when you’ve found it. If you’re still not sure, your not there yet. No worries, that’s the path we all have to take. Seek in sincerity and you will find. Until then all is grist to mill. We gain strength, wisdom, determination and shed the mechanisms that have held us back as they are revealed to us.
It’s all part of the process.
And definitely, at whatever stage of our awakening, we need to keep exposing the trickery and deceit to help others along the way and out of the net, but we mustn’t dwell there or let it get under our skin, even in our sacred anger and outrage. There’s a time for everything, but if we’re going to realize the true solutions for our planet and its inhabitants we need to first get to where we know from whence we are operating, with a crystal clear vision of what needs to be done from a firm foundation in loving truth.
Even more so, we need to rediscover and realize the true spiritual power tools at our disposal. As we do, and is already happening, our weaponry of truth outmatches their foolish artificial 3-D hardware to such an extent they will be exposed to be the imposters they are – nothing but dark shadows trying to usurp the sun.
Absolute futility, and not a game worth getting caught up in.
It’s only our lower levels of perception that give their illusion any form of reality. Once we transcend and live in the realization of who we truly are this lower level projection we can call shadowland has nowhere to cast its illusion…and it is gone.
The truth is indescribable in mental terms. This is why we are so awed by the ideas of nature, fractals, sacred geometry and this magnificent physical design as the handiwork of something we know is much more spectacular that lies behind it.
Left brained science, even when it’s well meaning, cannot begin to fathom this richness as it seeks to contain this living energy in a form of mental and even scientific egoic dominance. As hard as they try to crack the code with these motives they’ll never do it. They may make a mess in the process, which they are, but trying to understand from that limited mind set is like trying to empty the ocean with a spoon.
It’s a complete exercise in futility all based on the reinforcement of self.
Unless there’s some tangible, “provable” answer, some substantive, explainable, logical something they can see, taste, touch, smell and feel they won’t accept it. Again the self-reinforcing feedback loop that will never be broken. To find real truth you have to find it and experience it for yourself, one hungry heart at a time. When you want it bad enough you’ll find it, or at least the next clue to keep you on your way towards greater truth.
Sure there are many types and levels of truth, but the ultimate truth is fundamentally an ongoing interactive experience with our interconnected consciously aware universe within which we are all magnificently woven. It’s that same creative source we can only barely sense at times, but that we see in the magnificent world around us and the fertile imagination of our sentient hearts and intuitive souls.
Truth Can Only Point the Way – Ours Is to Pursue
These are just hints at what lies beneath these layers of illusion, the lowest of which is this synthetic matrix of deceit that has been deliberately laid to ensnare the hearts of humanity.
Even the physical world is an almost crude five sense manifestation of the intricate workings of creation but what a joy to experience! To realize these are barely fleeting glimpses of much more amazing realities is beyond belief…and that’s good, belief is a limiting containment system. Experience is what we’re shooting for.
Just don’t give up. There are plenty of pitfalls on the way as that’s what this learning and growing experience is all about, so get used to it. Just learn from it and keep on. There are many levels of awakening but each one is more amazing than the last.
What should propel us though is not just the path of wondrous personal discovery, although that’s a big part of it, but to access the resources we need to further dissolve the snare laid for those still unaware of their plight within this lower world of control and deceit.
There’s no greater driving force than the unstoppable power of empathic compassion. We share the pain of all those still trapped and blinded by the the great deception, and by our very connectivity we are love-bound to awaken to our most empowered state possible to help bring about the transformation we are all longing for.
Much love and do keep on, we’re all integral to this process…
JFK At One Hundred January 24 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / Various
From The Archives: This Memorial Day, Monday, May 29, 2017, is the 100th birthday of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States.
JFK was assassinated on November 22, 1963, as he approached the end of his third year in office. Researchers who spent years studying the evidence have concluded that President Kennedy was assassinated by a conspiracy between the CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secret Service. (See, for example, JFK and the Unspeakable by James W. Douglass)
Comment: There's much more to this than even Mr. Roberts is aware of. See the links forthwith...
Kennedy entered office as a cold warrior, but he learned from his interaction with the CIA and Joint Chiefs that the military/security complex had an agenda that was self-interested and a danger to humanity. He began working to defuse tensions with the Soviet Union.
His rejections of plans to invade Cuba, of the Northwoods project, of a preemptive nuclear attack on the Soviet Union, and his intention to withdraw from Vietnam after his reelection, together with some of his speeches signaling a new approach to foreign policy in the nuclear age.
Convinced the military/security complex that he was a threat to their interests. Cold War conservatives regarded him as naive about the Soviet Threat and a liability to US national security.
These were the reasons for his assassination. These views were set in stone when Kennedy announced on June 10, 1963, negotiations with the Soviets toward a nuclear test ban treaty and a halt to US atmospheric nuclear tests.
The Oswald coverup story never made any sense and was contradicted by all evidence including tourist films of the assassination.
President Johnson had ro cover up the assassination, not because he was part of it or because he willfully wanted to deceive the American people, but because to give Americans the true story would have shaken their confidence in their government at a critical time in US-Soviet relations.
To make the coverup succeed, Johnson needed the credibility of the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, Earl Warren, to chair the commission that covered up the assassination. Warren understood the devastating impact the true story would have on the public and their confidence in the military and national security leadership and on America’s allies.
As I previously reported, Lance deHaven-Smith in his book, Conspiracy Theory in America, shows that the CIA introduced “conspiracy theory” into the political lexicon as a technique to discredit skepticism of the Warren Commission’s coverup report. He provides the CIA document that describes how the agency used its media friends to control the explanation.
The term “conspiracy theory” has been used ever since to validate false explanations by discrediting true explanations.
President Kennedy was also determined to require the Israel Lobby to register as a foreign agent and to block Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. His assassination removed the constraints on Israel’s illegal activities.
Memorial Day is when Americans honor those in the armed services who died serving the country. JFK fell while serving the causes of peace and nuclear disarmament. In a 1961 address to the United Nations, President Kennedy said:
"Today, every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this planet may no longer be habitable. Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident or miscalculation or by madness.
The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us. It is therefore our intention to challenge the Soviet Union, not to an arms race, but to a peace race – to advance together step by step, stage by stage, until general and complete disarmament has been achieved.”
Kennedy’s address was well received at home and abroad and received a favorable and supportive response from Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, but it caused consternation among the warhawks in the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The US led in terms of the number of nuclear warheads and delivery systems, and this lead was the basis for US military plans for a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union.
The assassination of President Kennedy was an enormous cost to the world. Kennedy and Khrushchev would have followed up their collaboration in defusing the Cuban Missile Crisis by ending the Cold War long before the military/security complex achieved its iron grip on the US government.
Israel would have been denied nuclear weapons, and the designation of the Israel Lobby as a foreign agent would have prevented Israel’s strong grip on the US government.
In his second term, JFK would have broken the CIA into a thousand pieces, an intention he expressed to his brother, Robert, and the Deep State would have been terminated before it became more powerful than the President.
But the military/security complex struck first, and pulled off a coup that voided all these promises and terminated American democracy.
The Russian government was too focused on the Sochi Olympics to realize what was happening and that the coup was directed at Russia. Russian trust of Washington also resulted in the murder of Gaddafi and the destruction of Libya. Trusting America, Russia withheld its veto over the no-fly zone imposed on Libya, because Russia trusted the assurances given by Washington that regime change was not the purpose.
Here is Oliver Stone’s documentary on Washington’s coup in Ukraine. The truth differs greatly from the lies told by the Western presstitutes and the US government.
'Ukraine on Fire': Oliver Stone Docu on US Destruction of Ukraine Finally Available in the West
"The film was originally released in 2016, but unsurprisingly, Stone came up against problems distributing the film in the US and western countries. A Russian-dubbed version was available almost immediately and was aired on TV in Russia, but people in the 'free world' were left without access to the full film."
Oliver Stone's seminal documentary Ukraine on Fire has finally been made available to watch in the West.
Ukraine, the 'borderlands' between Russia and 'civilized' Europe is on fire. For centuries, it has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and Russia's access to the Mediterranean.
The Maidan Massacre in early 2014 triggered a bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych, spurred Crimeans to secede and join Russia, and sparked a civil war in Eastern Ukraine.
Russia was portrayed by Western media as the perpetrator, and has been sanctioned and widely condemned as such. But was Russia responsible for what happened?
Ukraine on Fire provides a historical perspective for the deep divisions in the region which led to the 2004 Orange Revolution, the 2014 uprisings, and the violent overthrow of democratically-elected Yanukovych.
Covered by Western media as a 'popular revolution', it was in fact a coup d'état scripted and staged by ultra-nationalist groups and the US State Department.
Executive producer Oliver Stone gained unprecedented access to the inside story through his on-camera interviews with former President Viktor Yanukovych and Minister of Internal Affairs Vitaliy Zakharchenko, who explain how the US Ambassador and factions in Washington actively plotted for regime change.
The film was originally released in 2016, but unsurprisingly, Stone came up againstproblems distributing the filmin the US and western countries. A Russian-dubbed version was available almost immediately and was aired on TV in Russia, but people in the 'free world' were left without access to the full film.
Now, at last, the full exposé is available on YouTube. Though, of course, everyone is encouraged to purchase a copy to support Stone's important work.
The Money Scam Makes Us Slaves: Gold Is Waterproof And Indestructible In The Sea Of Fiat Currencies January 22 2018 | From: FinalWakeUpCall
No financial storm blows gold over. No drenching rain will dissolve it. That’s why smart investors – and smart central banks – are watching the weather and accumulating gold.
An economy with falling household incomes is not a good place to own stocks. Surely an economy that is barely growing doesn’t justify the highest stock prices of all time?
And obviously the Central Bankers’ $85 billion a month bond-buying spree isn’t working?
With Central Banksters promising to print still more money, one would expect the value of gold to soar. Obviously, the work of computer manipulation programs that continue to do their work unrelentingly in keeping prices down for gold and silver! As the world is eventually going to discover, it is all a fraudulent Ponzi pyramid money system.
QE is a Zombie Enrichment Program:
Economists, analysts and advisors have been trying to figure out exactly what QE does. The Central Banks of the USA, EU, and Japan are adding more than one trillion to their respective monetary bases every 12 months, which in return should have some effect.
Some experts say QE is an asset swap – interest-paying excess reserves for interest-paying Treasury paper- and not an additive instrument.
That’s definitely not the case as, while Central Banks continuously create money to buy Treasury bonds from the banks, the banks consequently buy more Treasury bonds, and so on. This transfers cash from the Fed to governments, and it saves governments having to get it from other sources at higher rates of interest.
All money, like water, eventually finds its way to the sea. And when trillions per year are added to the economy, it is bound to raise the sea level.
Why is gold waterproof? When the wide ocean of cash, credit, derivatives and connivance breaks into open fury – with howling winds and towering waves – gold will stand tall and self-assured, like an indestructible lighthouse.
What’s the real point of the current Central Bank-managed paper monetary system? It is a system that insiders can manipulate. They manipulate the value of our money, lie about what is really going on and steal wealth from savers and workers to pay for their pet projects and give money to their zombie friends.
That’s the way it has always been and forever shall be, period. Unless they are stopped.
Charles de Gaulle’s economist, Jacques Rueff, explained already in 1958 why inflation seemed to boost employment. It was because inflation robbed the workers of their wages, lowering labour costs, and making it easier for employers to hire them.
And Marc Faber explained recently, how QE robs more than 90% of the population to pay off the elite brotherhood. All the Fed’s QE liquidity goes into stock prices! Who makes money when stock prices rise? Wall Street and its elite clients! Everybody else loses.
And what about the zombies? The government borrows the Central Bank’s fake money, created out of thin air at record low interest rates. What happens to the money? Does it go to the taxpayers? Does it go to real, productive businesses, or to real, productive workers?
Nope. It goes to zombies of all sorts – to the 7 out of 10 families who get more from the government than they pay in taxes, and to the defence contractors for their war games. QE is a Zombie Enrichment Program. The sooner it ends, and the sooner the Fed is abolished, the better off we, the people will be.
Meanwhile since 2008 nothing has changed whatsoever regarding the root cause of the financial crisis. The world still has massive amounts of debt, far too much to safely finance. The EU and VS continue to borrow larger and larger amounts, as if nothing went wrong.
Nowadays, once again, financial institutions’ profits make up a huge, disproportionate amount of the total profits of the S&P 500.
And it’s not just the U.S.
“In the EU, government debts totalled 66% of GDP in 2007. Today, they’re close to, or probably over 100%. In the United Kingdom, government debt equalled 43% of the economy in 2007. Today, it’s also over 100%. Unbelievably… no one in the developed world seems to be able to generate wealth anymore, only more debts.”
“To finance these debts, the EU and US continue to sell parts of their assets to foreigners. By doing so, they will become increasingly poorer over time. Ten years ago, the combined economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and China – the so-called “BRIC” nations – equalled roughly 29% of the US economy.
By 2007, their economies were equalling up to 53% of that of the U.S. Today, they equal 91%. The borrowing is fuelling their boom.
“In 2009, the Federal Reserve began to massively monetize the U.S. debt, allowing the U.S. Treasury to issue more debt and repay existing debt by simply selling it to the Federal Reserve (which creates the funding for such purchases by printing the money).
The Fed has since printed upwards of $3.5 trillion. And recently has promised to keep doing so. As a result, since 2007, M2 – the basic measure of money in the economy – has increased by 38% in the U.S.”
And so: what are U.S. foreign masters doing? They’re dumping Treasuries and buying U.S. assets. Chinese firms now own IBM’s personal computer division, the AMC movie-theatre chain, pork producer Smithfield, plus some of their most valuable new sources of energy via equity deals with Devon Energy and Chesapeake Energy.
So far in 2013 alone, China spent $10 billion on U.S. assets, compared with less than $1 billion in 2008.
Foreign masters will soon begin buying massive amounts of U.S. property, as they move their holdings from the obligations of Freddie and Fannie into the underlying assets. In 2012, the Chinese bought $3 billion in commercial real estate in California. Soon, they’ll begin buying huge packages of U.S. residential houses.
Thus, in three or four years millions of Americans will literally be paying rent to the Chinese. This is going to happen, for sure.
Pushing the Inevitable Collapse Into the Future
Those who are grateful to the Central Bankers and government for “bailing out” the economy, should think again. All that is really being done is that they are pushing the inevitable collapse of the economy further into the future, by selling off our greatest assets to their foremost economic rivals.
This is truly the worst possible strategy with catastrophic prospects. Imagine what will be left in 20 years.
The Money Scam Makes Us Slaves
The Greatest Scam on Earth is The Money Scam! The Money Scam is hidden right out in the open, yet buried in complication and confusion. A retired banker describes simply the world’s Money Scam and the reason every country is now going bankrupt.
Private bankers have stolen the money creation process, in contrast with the governments which once created their own money debt-free. The money today is created out of thin air by these banksters and issued as debt with interest charges, owed to the private banks.
In today’s banker-controlled world, money = debt, debt = slavery and therefore money = slavery.
The monetary systems have become systems of enslavement. Money is created out of nothing, issued as debt, while not enough money is created for the future interest payments and inflation steals our savings.
The money-creation process should be taken away from the Central Banks and given back to the people’s governments who can create money debt-free, and interest-free. This is how it used to be done without the need for income taxes. In this video, it is simply explained what we should do to stop supporting the money scam.
Government’s Vital Control Structure: Computers Manipulate Facebook Users - Governments Control The People January 22 2018 | From: FinalWakeUpCall
Almost nothing of the information on this site will be found in the mainstream media. In classic Orwellian terms - “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength.” – it means saying one thing and doing another is governments’ order of the day.
Once it is understood that governments are expressly structured to control the people, everything else comes into focus, such as why governments constantly act in the interest of Big Business, Big Banking, Big Pharma, Big Biotech, and their associated organisations. They are clearly ominously against the interests of the people.
In the past, people rebelled against rule by royal dictatorship and demanded a say in who ran the country. The bloodlines began the process of replacing the overt royal dictatorships with ones that had the appearance of freedom, while continuing business as usual. Tyranny was replaced with much more effective tyranny that people cannot see, or most people don’t see.
The Illuminati’s worst nightmare was for people to be elected to government who were genuinely independent and had the best interest of the population at heart.
The solution was the introduction of political parties, a structure was created which, through funding and organization, gave those who did not join one of these parties virtually no chance of being elected to parliament and certainly not to forming a government in association with other genuine independent people.
The Vital Control Structure Over Many By the Few
The formation of political parties produced the structure through which members of parliaments, and those at other levels of government – local and state – could be controlled. Instead of having to force their will upon hundreds of individuals, all they had to do was force it upon those who controlled the parties and they, in turn, would enforce it upon their members.
Quite simply, if one would want to progress in politics, they would first need to join a party and then keep the ruling elite of the party as happy as they possibly can by what they achieve in doing and saying. It’s the same as with doctors, lawyers, scientists and teachers.
Keep your head down, don’t rock the boat, and certainly don’t oppose anything significant through personal conscience that is against the wishes of the party establishment. Real personal ‘progress’ in any of these professions demands that you close your mind or sell your soul. Preferably both.
For example, the UK Parliament have people known as ‘Whips’ to make sure their MPs vote in accordance with the party line. The fact that Whips are allowed to exist and operate openly is already proof of the corruption and irrelevance of politics.
They offer MPs promises of good things for themselves, if they comply, and if they still won’t budge, they are told the facts of life about the consequences for their careers. The same system operates in every country, although not always with official Whips.
Detailed files are kept on politicians, aided by intelligence agency data, which can be used to scare a doubter into line through fear of his/her secrets becoming public. The ones that control the parties, also control the intelligence agency network, not least the Rothschild dynasty.
There are no boundaries at that level or moral dilemmas about little things like integrity and laws of data protection. The more secrets people have that would destroy them if revealed, the more suitable and desirable they become to fill key positions. If they ever try to stand up against the official line, there is always the file.
The upper echelons of politics are full of people who are dancing to the music for fear of public exposure for anything from financial fraud to paedophilia.
There are three types of politicians that get anywhere near the governmental system of power:
A small minority who are knowingly part of the conspiracy and aware of the goals.
Those who just want power and status and will do anything to get it, by saying and doing whatever it takes; and
Those who have big secrets that can be revealed at any time if they refuse to take orders.
It is not said that every politician fits one of these 3 criteria, only the vast majority who make it to the government or to the top of major parties, in charge or in opposition, with any chance of forming a government.
The glue that holds together the manipulations between different political parties and countries is the spider’s web of secret societies, the Jesuits and Freemasons being the most important.
In fact, it doesn’t matter for whom you vote, the Rothschild – Illuminati, through their control of all parties, decides which government gets installed. They control all camps of political currents. Politics is full of fraud without integrity – saying one thing and doing another.
The political parties are merely vehicles introducing the agenda of the shadow government that demands and coerces the transformation of human society into global dictatorship.
Today people in large numbers correctly say elections are irrelevant, because nothing ever changes, as most of these elections are rigged to make sure the right result is obtained. Watch the video about the Scottish voting drama, where Scotland was not allowed to leave the UK, nor the EU.
They only fuel the illusion of debate and choice. It is all a mind game to put the global police state into place along with a network of mass surveillance, everybody micro chipped, a society based on mass control – governments destroy your freedom. And that is exactly what they ought to protect.
Manipulating People’s Perceptions:
Controlling the people means manipulating their perceptions of reality, clearly the information must be dictated. For this, it is utterly essential to control the media and education. Ignorance and arrogance are a telling combination.
The Archon bloodline families own the global media, and they appoint and control the editors, who in turn control and appoint the journalists, they who write whatever they are told to write.
This top-down power structure basically allows for the dictation of what does and what doesn’t appear in the media for the public to read, hear and see. Controlling the media means setting the parameters, the norms through which the media filters everything.
Look at the pathetic way most of the global media repeated the official version of ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ and rarely looked into the abundance of scientific evidence to the contrary that proves it is all nonsense.
Journalists, just like doctors, lawyers, politicians, and the public in general, are repeaters. They repeat without question and accept the ‘everyone-knows-that’ norm like a little child that is told to believe in Santa Claus.
Most people dismiss any possibility of a conspiracy with a reflex action and they will never do any research to validate one way or the other.
This is the mentality of the majority – journalists included – all over the world that stands between what is truly happening and what they tell you is happening, and people dare to argue that if there were a conspiracy, the media would tell us, truly laughable reasoning.
Meanwhile, it is widely known that regarding 9/11 and MH17, the public at large has been immensely deceived.
The psyches of journalists and the public in general are welded to a programmed sense of reality and so people do what the bloodline families want them to do, while dismissing any suggestion that these families even exist.
Real journalism can be found on the web and is produced and presented by people who are willing to go where the mainstream lackeys are too ignorant or too frightened to go and as a side note, many of these journalists do this on a voluntary basis, with a passion for bringing Truth.
Of course not all ‘news’ on the web is trustworthy, but there is plenty of investigative journalism, which is not found in the MSM. The Illuminati families control the telecom giants too, such as the major servers and search engines.
The Internet gives them some major benefits in terms of surveillance, but there is also a downside through the explosion of information across the Net about their covert operations and manipulation of the population.
The genie is out of the bottle and it cannot be put back, but there are still challenges to overcome as the Illuminati seeks to censor the Net by employing every argument and excuse they can think of, like Cyber terrorism that requires Internet censorship, for which the Cyber security Act of 2009 was introduced that gives the President the right to declare a cyber emergency enabling them to close down or restrict the Net.
Computers Manipulate Facebook Users:
Already in 2011, Facebook ran a secret experiment on its users. The purpose of that experiment was to see if the company could change peoples’ moods by altering their news feeds.
And it worked. The results of the experiment concluded that “emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without being aware of this.” This experiment leads straight to individualised manipulation.
Internet users worldwide are addicted to free technological services; they make money by turning people’s private information into cash – monetising users’ lives. It is already scary enough when one is manipulated, but even worse when the entire process is automated – computers are learning to manipulate individuals by interacting with them!
If they want to make more money with their free services, programs are devised to manipulate people more efficiently, so this will be getting worse by the day. The question is, where will this all go? The world is moving into a virtual world, a world specifically built for all the individual personalities.
The manipulation rights will be sold to the highest bidder – government agencies – to which most of the personal information is already sold. What does this mean?
If they know what motivates you, they can change your environment based on their knowledge of you, and can induce you to act in ways they prefer, easily done by computers.
Think about false material in order to destroy one’s reputation, applying social science and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate desirable outcomes. We’re doomed if we remain passive and do nothing, precisely what they expect most people will do. Passivity + Time = Destruction.
If you want to retain your own mind and mood, you can still do it, but only if you act. Make your information unavailable to the manipulators.
Throw sand in the abusers’ eyes. Prevent them from knowing which websites you visit, who you communicate with, and what you say, for example by encryption, here’s a PDF that will show you how.
Despite Snowdon’s information – for everyone involved it is still business as usual. Nothing has changed, so expect data thieves to continue getting worse.
About What Could Happen:
George Carlin’s hilarious, brilliant, touching and in the meantime tells the truth.
The Department of Justice under Attorney General Jeff Sessions has opened criminal investigations against the Clinton Foundation in Little Rock and in New York.
Several foreign nations are expected to bring criminal charges against the Clinton Foundation, and the report of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz could lead to the appointment of a second special counsel to investigate the Obama administration DOJ as far back as the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal and the DOJ cover-up of Secretary Clinton’s email scandal..
Consider the following:
Led by agents in Little Rock, Arkansas, and New York, the FBI has begun a criminal investigation into “pay-to-play” accusations against the Clintons regarding donations taken by the Clinton Foundation and favorable policy decisions made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The probe is also examining whether the Clintons committed the crime of “inurement,” namely using assets of the Clinton Foundation, a charity under federal and state law, for personal purposes.
In response to a letter authored by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte dated Sept. 26, 2017, Attorney General Sessions has tasked senior DOJ prosecutors to make recommendations on re-opening the FBI investigation into the Uranium One scandal, including accusations the DOJ withheld from CFIUS, the Treasury committee that approved the sale of U.S. uranium to Russia. D
ocuments proving Russia was conducting a bribery scandal in the U.S. uranium industry at the same time Russia’s government-owned energy Rosatom was seeking U.S. federal government approval to buy a 100 percent interest in Uranium One.
On Jan. 12, 2018, the Department of Justice announced a criminal indictment in the Uranium One case, charging a former co-president of a Maryland-based transportation company that provides services for the transportation of nuclear materials to customers in the United States and abroad with foreign bribery, fraud, and money laundering in a scheme that involved Tenex at a subsidiary of Rosatom.
DOJ has reopened a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal after a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, request produced 2,800 State Department work-related emails that were transferred by Clinton aide Huma Abedin onto the laptop of her husband, disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner, some of which included classified passports that President Trump has charged were at risk of having been placed into the hands of foreign agents.
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has confirmed to Senate Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley that his office is investigating emails written between FBI former counterintelligence head Peter Stozok and FBI prosecutor Lisa Page in which Strzok suggested to page in a conversation that evidently happened in then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s office that DOJ needed “insurance” to make sure Trump would never serve as president even if elected.
Strzok played a major role in changing the language in former FBI Director James Comey’s early draft about Secretary Clinton’s email server from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” a change of language intended to justify a decision not to prosecute.
“The Clinton Foundation is an obvious fraud,” insists New York-based financial analyst Charles Ortel, a major figure pushing for a criminal investigation of the Clinton Foundation.
“It was never lawfully authorized to pursue ‘tax-exempt charitable purposes’ other than serving as a presidential archive, housing ‘Presidential Records’ in the complex in Little Rock, Arkansas so that the public and scholars might research the Clinton presidential years,” Ortel argues.
For months, Ortel has warned the Clinton Foundation is open to criminal investigations in other countries where donors have reason to believe their charitable donations were solicited illegally and spent inappropriately.
This week, the FBI has requested Michael Smith, an Australian journalist who is a retired police detective, to provide the FBI with details about multiple allegations about millions of dollars in Australian contributions to the Clinton Foundation by the Australian government were mishandled.
According to an investigative report published this week by Mark Tapscott, materials Smith is giving the FBI focus on a 2006 memorandum of understanding between the Australian government and the Clinton Foundation’s Clinton HIV/AIDs Initiative (CHAI).
Smith claims the foundation received a “$25M financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception” as a result of actions by Bill Clinton and Downer, who was then Australia’s minister of foreign affairs.
Tapscott reported that included in the Smith materials are evidence he believes shows “corrupt October 2006 backdating of false tender advertisements purporting to advertise the availability of a $15 million contract to provide HIV/AIDS services in Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Australian government after an agreement was already in place to pay the Clinton Foundation and/or associates.”
Finally, Tapscott noted a third complaint concerns what Smith describes as:
“The $10 million financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception between April 1, 2008, and Sept. 25, 2008, at Washington, D.C., New York, New York, and Canberra Australia involving a Memorandum of Understanding, MOU, between the Australian government, the “Clinton Climate Initiative,” and the purported “Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Inc.”
The report due this month by DOJ Inspector General Horowitz may call for the appointment of a new special prosecutor to examine the role played by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and by the Democratic National Committee in paying for the opposition research Fusion GPS dossier that appears to have been the basis used by the Obama administration DOJ to obtain FISA court authorization to conduct electronic surveillance on Donald Trump and key officials in his 2016 presidential campaign.
“A Blatant Display Of Unscientific Propaganda:” Cornell Student Exposes GMO Propaganda In Scathing New Letter January 21 2018 | From: AltHealthWorks
My name is Robert, and I am a Cornell University undergraduate student. However, I’m not sure if I want to be one any more. Allow me to explain.
Cornell, as an institution, appears to be complicit in a shocking amount of ecologically destructive, academically unethical, and scientifically deceitful behavior. Perhaps the most potent example is Cornell’s deep ties to industrial GMO agriculture, and the affiliated corporations such as Monsanto.
I’d like to share how I became aware of this troubling state of affairs. Throughout my secondary education, I’ve always had a passion for science. In particular, physics and mathematics captured my fascination.
My sophomore AP physics teacher, Mr. Jones, became my main source of motivation to succeed. He convinced us students that our generation was crucial to repairing humanity’s relationship to science, and how we would play key roles in solving immense global issues.
I came to Cornell as freshman, deeply unaware of our current GMO agriculture paradigm, and my university’s connection to it. It just wasn’t on my radar quite yet. After two years of school, I was rather uninspired to continue traditional study. I never felt quite at ease, jumping through hoops, taking classes and tests that didn’t inspire me, in exchange for a piece of paper (degree) that somehow magically granted me a superior life. I
know many undergraduates fit right in with the university education model, and that’s fantastic. I certainly didn’t, and my mental and physical health began to suffer as a result. I was left with no choice but to take a leave of absence, and pursue another path.
Instead, I began to self-study nutrition in earnest, honestly, out of pure necessity. Luckily, I found Cornell Professor Emeritus T. Colin Campbell’s legendary epidemiological research on nutrition and human disease. His evidence was so clear that I quickly transitioned to a plant-based diet. This personal dietary shift had profound benefits, dispelled my depression, and led me to a deep fascination with the precursor to nutrition: agriculture.
I became particularly interested in agroecology. I was astonished to learn that there existed alternatives to chemical-intensive, corporate-controlled models of agriculture, and that they were far safer, more effective, and more sustainable. During my time away from Cornell, I participated in three unique seasons of agroecological crop production, with incredible results. I am immensely grateful for these experiences.
It’s impossible to study and practice agroecology without becoming deeply aware of the other end of the spectrum: the genetic modification of our food supply, ruled by giant agribusiness corporations.
Currently, the vast majority of U.S. commodity crops (corn, soy, alfalfa, sugar beet) are genetically engineered to either withstand Roundup herbicide or produce Bt toxin pesticide. These “technologies” are ecologically damaging and unsafe. The majority of these crops go to feed animals in factory farms.
The remainder generally gets converted into corn syrup, white sugar, vegetable oil, or biofuels - you know, good stuff! This combined approach of growing GMO commodity monoculture crops, and feeding them to factory-farmed livestock, is one of the most ecologically destructive forces our planet has ever seen. It’s also a leading contributor to climate change. In fact, some experts believe it to be the leading cause.
As Professor T. Colin Campbell will tell you, the foods that come from this system (animal products and processed foods) are responsible for causing the vast majority of chronic disease. That’s a story for another day.
Cornell’s GMO Propaganda Campaign
I came back to Cornell a changed person, with a drastically different perspective. I was in for quite a shock, however: I sat in on a course entitled “The GMO Debate.”
I was expecting members of an intellectual community coming together, with proponents and critics of GMO food each giving the best verified evidence they had to support their cause. Given all that I had learned about GMO agriculture, I was excited to participate for the “GMO skeptic” side.
The GMO Debate course, which ran in the fall of 2015, was a blatant display of unscientific propaganda in an academic setting. There were a total of 4 active professors in the course, and several guest speakers.
They took turns each session defending industrial agriculture and biotechnology with exactly zero critical examination of GMOs. In spite of the course’s name, there was a complete lack of actual “debate.”
Here are some of the more memorable claims I heard that fall semester:
GMO food is necessary to feed the world
There is no instance of harm from agricultural GMOs
Glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, is safer than coffee and table salt
If you believe in science, you must believe in GMO technology
The science of genetic engineering is well understood
“What off-target effects?” … when asked about the proven biochemical risks of GE technology
Vitamin A rice is curing children of Vitamin A deficiency (even though the IRRI, the research institute responsible for rolling it out, says it won’t be ready for some years)
Current pesticides and herbicides don’t pose an ecological or human health risk
Bt is an organic pesticide, therefore Bt GMO crops are safe and pose no additional risk
Bt crops work just fine - but we are now engineering insects as a complementary technology - to make the Bt work better
“Are you scared of GMO insects? Because you shouldn’t be.”
GMO crops are the most rigorously tested crops in the history of food
“If [renowned environmentalist] Rachel Carson were alive today, she would be pro-GMO”.
It gets better. During the semester, emails were released following a Freedom of Information Act request, showing that all four of the professors in the class, as well as several guest speakers, the head of Cornell’s pro-GMO group “Alliance for Science,” and the Dean of the College of Arts and Life Sciences were all copied in on emails with Monsanto.
This was part of a much larger circle of academics promoting GMO crops on behalf of the biotech industry. Jonathan Latham PhD, virologist and editor of independentsciencenews.org, documented this in an article titled “The Puppetmasters of Academia.” I highly recommend giving it a read, for further context.
So in essence, a group of African representatives got indoctrinated into the industrial and GMO agriculture framework, and were sent home to disseminate this information … after all, who could question the expertise of an Ivy League powerhouse such as Cornell?
I then learned of Cornell’s deep historic ties to the biotech industry, which explained what I witnessed in the “GMO Debate” course. Notable examples include the invention of both the controversial bovine growth hormone, and the particle bombardment (“gene gun”) method of creating GMO crops. Both of these cases are connected to Monsanto.
To say the least, I was completely stunned.
What I’m Going to Do About All of This
You didn’t think I was just going to complain about a pro-GMO, industry-sponsored Cornell all day, did you? Good, because I have come up with a plan to create actual, lasting change on campus: a student-led, expert-backed, evidence-based GMO course.
I have decided to host an independent course on the current GMO paradigm, in response to Cornell’s course. It will be held on campus, but will have zero influence from Cornell or any biotech organization. Every Wednesday evening, from September 7th to November 16, we will host a lecture.
This lecture series is completely free, open to the entire Cornell community and broader public, and will be published online (for free, forever) at my project, gmowtf.com.
There will be several experts and scientists coming in to lecture for this course.
Steven Druker is a public interest attorney and author of the powerful book ‘Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public,’ which Jane Goodall (in her foreword) hails as “one of the most important books in the last 50 years.”
He will be giving two lectures that elaborate on the themes in the book’s subtitle and demonstrate that the GMO venture has been chronically and crucially dependent on deception, and could not survive without it.
Jonathan Latham PhD will be giving two lectures, on the dangers of Roundup Ready and Bt crops, respectively. He will also be participating in our special October 5 debate, representing the anti-GMO panel, alongside Michael Hansen PhD, a senior scientist for the Consumers Union. Jonathan has direct experience genetically modifying organisms, so his expertise is guaranteed.
Allison Wilson PhD is a geneticist and editor/science director of the Bioscience Resource Project. She will be giving a lecture on how GMOs are actually created, to dispel any industry myths of precision, accuracy, or deep genetic understanding.
Belinda Martineau PhD is a geneticist with an interesting history - she was on the team of genetic engineers that created the first commercial GM food crop, the Flavr Savr Tomato. She authored a book on her experience, titled “First Fruit: The Creation of the Flavr Savr Tomato and the Birth of Biotech Foods.” Her lecture will be a historical and personal account of the science, regulation, and commercialization of genetically engineered foods, effectively giving context for today’s GMO paradigm.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in another window
My personal scientific hero, T. Colin Campbell, who started me on this whole journey years ago, will not be speaking on GMOs per se … but will address some critically important, related topics: academic freedom and scientific integrity. He began his Cornell career over half a century ago, and has “seen it all.” He has fascinating anecdotes that will illuminate these campus-wide issues beautifully.
Jane Goodall, if you’re reading this, you are personally invited to take time out of your busy schedule to come and give the final capstone lecture. I know how passionate you are about saving our species, our planet, and all of its beautiful inhabitants. Your wise presence in this project would take it to the next level. Alternatively, please consider a short video interview. This offer stands indefinitely. Same for Vandana Shiva!
All in all, our independent GMO lecture series will focus on real threats and real solutions to our current ecological crisis … and perhaps most importantly, will feature 100% less Monsanto influence than Cornell’s course! Sounds good to me.
Taking It Further
I’m on my second leave of absence from Cornell to work on this project, and due to my experiences, I have somewhat given up on a Cornell degree … not that I was ever intensely focused on attaining one. This GMO course is by far the most important thing I can do with my Cornell “career.” However, it is just the beginning of my plan.
Remember the $5.6 million Bill Gates gave Cornell through his foundation, to push the pro-GMO propaganda? Well, to coincide with our course, we’re launching an initiative to raise the same amount of money or more to sponsor more appropriate forms of agriculture, educational outreach, and activism.
Go to gmowtf.com for more information, but in essence, this would finance:
Continued grassroots educational activism at Cornell, and similar programs in other compromised universities (UC Davis and Berkeley, University of Florida, etc.) across the country.
A plant-based, NON-GMO independent dining hall for Cornell students. It would source as close to 100% organic and local food as possible. Ideally, it would be cheaper than Cornell’s plan (plant-based eaters won’t subsidize expensive meat and dairy for omnivorous eaters).
gmowtf.com as a permanent, free, independent, constantly updated resource for GMO science, policy, news, etc. … also the GMO course would remain online
My dream: a research farm focused on rigorous analysis of agroecological practices. There is an infinitum of fascinatingly effective agroecological techniques that are underrepresented in the scientific community (in favor of faddist, ineffective GMO “technology”).
Completely paying off student debt for a group of 10-15 undergraduates who are willing to help spread this message to the Cornell community.
Mr. Gates, if you truly care about feeding the world in a safe and sustainable manner, and if you are truly dedicated to science and to the kind of open, fact-based discourse on which it depends, I implore you to learn the important facts about which you have apparently been misinformed - and which are being systematically misrepresented by the Cornell organization you are funding.
You can easily gain illumination by reading “Altered Genes, Twisted Truth” by Steven Druker, one of our key contributors to our independent GMO course. You might find Chapter 11, on the ramifications and risks of altering complex information systems, of particular interest. You are, after all, the world’s most famous software developer!
As that chapter demonstrates, biotechnicians are significantly altering the most complex yet least understood group of information systems on earth - the ones that undergird the development and function of living organisms. Yet, they fail to implement the kind of safeguards that software engineers have learned are imperative when making even minor revisions to life-critical human-made systems. Can this be legitimately called science-based engineering?
Bill, feel free to reach out to any of the experts in our course, and don’t be hesitant to update your views on GMO agriculture in light of new understanding. A genuine scientist lives by this principle.
I invite you all to go to gmowtf.com and explore my proposals more. Please bear with the construction of the site in the coming weeks, in preparation for our amazing GMO course!
We live in somewhat of a scientific dark age. Our universities have become extensions of corporate power, at the cost of our health, livelihoods, and ecology. This has to stop, yesterday.
We cannot afford to spread lies to our undergraduate students. Cornell, please reconsider your ways. Until you do, I will be doing everything in my power to counter your industry GMO propaganda efforts with the facts.
Nobel Prize Winner: Trump Has Launched A Nationalist “Revolution” Against the Elite + Ex-CIA Agent: Deep State ‘Terrified’ Of Trump, ‘Want Him Taken Out’ January 20 2018 | From: Infowars / Infowars / Various
Davos globalists seek to derail populist uprising.
Nobel Prize winning economist and globalist Robert Shiller says that President Donald Trump has launched a nationalist “revolution” against the elite.
Speaking to CNBC and undoubtedly on behalf of many of the political class, Shiller said he found it “troublesome” and was “concerned” that the Trump phenomenon was derailing globalism.
“Trump is a revolution unfortunately, (and one) who’s reaffirming nationalism,” said Shiller, expressing his desire that Democrats will recapture control of Congress after the mid-terms so that Trump’s agenda is “defanged”.
The Yale University economics professor indicated that the upcoming World Economic Forum in Davos, which Trump will attend, will see globalists scheme ways of derailing “the international growth of populism and nationalism” that has surged as a result of Brexit and Trump.
Shiller also reveals that Davos will be hosting a session based on “Narrative Economics” and “the effects that narratives and stories can have on the global economy.” He explains that many elitists still don’t understand that narratives, particularly those that go “viral,” are what shape society.
“Though these narratives are deeply human phenomena that are difficult to study in a scientific manner, quantitative analysis may help us gain a better understanding of these epidemics in the future,” says Shiller.
In other words, thanks to the decline of mainstream media and the growth of the Internet, the global elite is losing its ability to control and monopolize the narrative, which was one of the major factors that led to Trump’s election victory in the first place.
As we reported back in September, globalist publication the Economist, seen by many as the voice of the international elite, expressed its panic that Trump was a “present danger” to their “new world order” and that he must be removed from power.
Last August, former CIA agent and CNN analyst Philip Mudd said on air “the government’s gonna kill” Donald Trump because he was disrespecting the deep state and the political class.
“Donald Trump is questioning the Deep State and the shadow government,” Shipp said in a USAWatchdog interview on Sunday.
“He’s rocking that place left and right. The news media is terrified of that. Their editors are telling them to attack him just like they are attacking him from the inside. It’s just dirty pool because they want him taken out.”
Shipp elaborated on the infrastructure of the Deep State and shadow government apparatuses within the government to explain how they can go after a sitting president without oversight.
“I differentiate between the ‘Deep State’ and the shadow government. The shadow government are the secret intelligence agencies that have such power and secrecy that they act even without the knowledge of Congress,” he said.
“There are many things that they do with impunity. Then there is the ‘Deep State,’ which is the military industrial complex, all of the industrial corporations and their lobbyists, and they have all the money, power, and greed that give all the money to the Senators and Congressmen.
So, they are connected, but they are really two different entities. It is the shadow government . . . specifically, the CIA, that is going after Donald Trump. It is terrified that some of its dealings are going to be exposed. If they are, it could jeopardize the entire organization.”
Shipp had previously emerged from obscurity to blow the whistle on the Deep State in September, warning the CIA and NSA are the central “hub” of the shadow government which can manipulate the president and political decisions, and has the power to start wars, torture, initiate coups, and commit false flag attacks.
How Big Pharma Greed Is Killing Tens Of Thousands Around The World January 20 2018 | From: DailyMail
Patients are over-medicated and often given profitable drugs with 'little proven benefits,' leading doctors warn.
The ACLU is working to reverse the FCC’s decision on behalf of the CIA and the Israel lobby to destroy Internet neutrality. What is extraordinary is that the rest of the world has not created its own Internet that cannot be censured by Washington and Israel. Comment: Note how the times are changing - this article is from a mainstream media outlet!
Queen's former doctor, Sir Richard Thompson, has backed new campaign
Experts calling for urgent public enquiry into drugs firms' 'murky' practices
They say too much medicine is doing more harm than good worldwide
And claim many drugs such as statins are less effective than thought
The Queen's former doctor has called for an urgent public enquiry into drugs firms’ ‘murky’ practices.
Sir Richard Thompson, former-president of the Royal College of Physicians and personal doctor to the Queen for 21 years, warned tonight that many medicines are less effective than thought.
The physician is one of a group of six eminent doctors who today warn about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on drugs prescribing.
The experts, led by NHS cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra, claim that too often patients are given useless – and sometimes harmful – drugs that they do not need.
They maintain drugs companies are developing medicines they can profit from, rather than those which are likely to be the most beneficial.
And they accuse the NHS of failing to stand up to the pharmaceutical giants.
Too much medicine is doing more harm than good - and costing hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide, leading experts have warned. They maintain drugs companies are developing medicines they can profit from, rather than those which are likely to be the most beneficial
Sir Richard said: ‘The time has come for a full and open public enquiry into the way evidence of the efficacy of drugs is obtained and revealed.
'There is real danger that some current drug treatments are much less effective than had previously been thought.’
He said the campaign highlights the ‘often weak and sometimes murky basis on which the efficacy and use of drugs, particularly in the elderly, are judged’.
Writing for MailOnline, Dr Malhotra says commercial conflicts of interest are contributing to an ‘epidemic of misinformed doctors and misinformed patients in the UK and beyond’. Furthermore, he adds the NHS is ‘over-treating’ its patients, and claimed that the side effects of too much medicine is leading to countless deaths.
And he claims the full trial data on statins – cholesterol-lowering drugs prescribed to millions - has never been published, and also points to questions about the power of Tamiflu, a drug that has cost the NHS nearly £500 million.
The group has called on Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee to conduct an independent enquiry into the safety of medicines.
They claim public funding is often allocated to medical research because it is likely to be profitable, not because it will be beneficial for patients.
Sir Richard Thompson, former-president of the Royal College of Physicians and personal doctor to the Queen for 21 years, warned tonight that many medicines are less effective than thought.
He is one of a group of six eminent doctors, led by NHS cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra, who are concerned about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on drugs prescribing.
Dr Malhotra said: ‘There is no doubt that a “more medicine is better” culture lies at the heart of healthcare, xacerbated by financial incentives within the system to prescribe more drugs and carry out more procedures.
‘But there’s a more sinister barrier to making progress to raise awareness of - and thus tackle - such issues that we should be most concerned about. ‘And that’s the information that is being provided to doctors and patients to guide treatment decisions.’
He accused drugs companies of ‘gaming the system’ by spending twice as much on marketing than on research. Dr Malhotra says that prescription drugs often do more harm than good, with the elderly particularly at risk.
One in three hospital admissions among the over-75s a result of an adverse drug reaction, he claims.
In addition to Sir Richard, Dr Malhotra is backed by Professor John Ashton, president of the Faculty of Public Health; psychiatrist Dr JS Bamrah, chairman of the British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin; cardiologist Professor Rita Redberg, editor of medical journal JAMA Internal Medicine; and Professor James McCormack, a pharmaceutical scientist.
Dr Malhotra, who is launching the campaign in a personal capacity, is a trustee of the King's Fund health think tank, a member of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges and advisor to the National Obesity Forum.
He is particularly critical of the dramatic recent increase of the prescribing of statins.
Dr Malhotra also points to questions about the efficacy of Tamiflu – a flu drug the NHS spent £473m stockpiling. A 2014 report by a panel of eminent experts concluded it was no more effective than paracetamol
A spokesman for the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry said: ‘All medicines undergo rigorous testing for quality, safety and efficacy by global regulators.
‘The data is also subject to continuous scrutiny during trials, once licensed and throughout the life of the medicine, including after a patent has expired.’
The spokesman added: ‘The assessment of a medicine – the benefits and risks it brings to patients as well as the value it provides to healthcare – is an ongoing process.
‘Innovating companies discover and develop new uses for these medicines over the life of these products, and regulators and health technology assessors continue to update their assessments based on new information.
‘None of these procedures are “weak” or “murky” but by and large published for public scrutiny.’
‘However, we recognise that the discussion on the evaluation of medicines is timely, and we were pleased to contribute together with many other stakeholders to the “Evaluating Evidence” policy programme of the Academy of Medical Sciences.
‘This dialogue is critical to achieve a shared constructive and progressive framework for the assessment of medicines.'
A spokesman for NHS England last night declined to comment on the allegations.
Dr. Malhotra's Comments in Full
There is no doubt that a 'more medicine is better' culture lies at the heart of modern healthcare. This is exacerbated by financial incentives within the system to prescribe more drugs and carry out more procedures - regardless of whether it benefits patients, it seems.
But there's a more sinister barrier to making progress that we should be most concerned about. And that's the information being provided to doctors and patients to guide treatment decisions. Several weeks ago I was a speaker the annual British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin medical conference in Birmingham.
Other speakers included the chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners, the chair of the BMA and the chief executive of NHS England, Simon Stevens.
In my speech, I warned of several things that deeply concern me about the state of medicine today.
In short, these are:
Biased funding of research - funded because it is likely to be profitable, not beneficial for patients
Biased reporting in medical journals
Commercial conflicts of interests and an inability of doctors and patients to understand health statistics and risk
All of the above are contributing to an epidemic of misinformed doctors and misinformed patients in the UK and beyond.
But most concerning of all, this desperate situation is costing tens of thousands of lives around the world. And not only that, it is causing unnecessary suffering of millions and costing billions to our national economies.
A few months ago, the medical director of NHS England, Sir Bruce Keogh, admitted that one in seven NHS treatments - including operations - are unnecessary and should not have been carried out on patients.
And in the US, it is estimated that one third of all healthcare activity brings no benefit to patients. This is further backed up by a point made by former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr Marcia Angell.
In a talk given at the University of Montana, in 2009, she revealed that of the 667 new drugs approved by the FDA between 2000 and 2007, only 11 per cent were were considered to be innovative or improvements on existing medications.
And three quarters were essentially just copies of old ones.
Lining the Pocket of Big Pharma
Previous research has linked psychiatric drugs to thousands of deaths due to suicides and drowsiness
Given the fact that drug companies' primary responsibility is to provide profit for shareholders - rather than patient health - this is far from surprising.
But apart from the colossal financial wastage that results from companies having go at flogging a drug twice - and therefore spending twice as much marketing drugs than they do on research and development - it's the considerable harm to patients and the public that should concern us the most.
The Food and Drug Administration reports that adverse events from prescribed medications have more than tripled in the past decade in the United States. This has resulted in more than 123,000 deaths in 2014 and 800,000 total serious patient outcomes - including hospitalisations and life threatening disability.
But this is likely to represent a gross underestimate. One person who has long been outspoken on the dangers of modern medication is Peter Gotzsche, professor of research design and analysis at the University of Copenhagen.
He estimates prescription drugs are the third most common cause of death after heart disease and cancer. In particular, he is deeply concerned about the impact of psychiatric drugs including antidepressants and dementia drugs.
Writing in the BMJ, he calculated they are responsible for more than half a million deaths in those aged over 65 in the US and European union.
This is due to suicides but also because patients are over-medicated and drowsy. In fact, it is the elderly who are most at risk of so-called polypharmacy - where a patient is taking multiple drugs.
The Patients Rattling With Pills
The problem with polypharmacy is that the more drugs you take, the more likely you are to experience side-effects that are then misinterpreted by a doctor or nurse as a symptom of disease that needs treating with additional medicine.
I have lost count of the number of over-medicated elderly patients I have treated, with sometimes three or four blood pressure medications making them dizzy and fall over. It's a vicious cycle and one that costs lives each year. The elderly are particularly vulnerable to polypharmacy with one in three hospital admissions in the over 75s the result of an adverse drug reaction.
Many of these patients will fall and suffer a hip fracture because of medication side effects and a quarter of these will die as a result.
But what is most disturbing is that Professor Gotzsche claims much of the behaviour of the pharmaceutical industry that drives this over-prescription fulfils the criteria for 'organised crime' under US law.
I have lost count of the number of over-medicated elderly patients I have treated, with sometimes three or four blood pressure medications making them dizzy and fall over,' Dr Malhotra told MailOnline
Between 2007 and 2012 the majority of the largest ten pharmaceutical companies all paid considerable fines for various misdemeanours that included marketing drugs for off-label uses, misrepresentation of research results, and hiding data on harm.
But whether such fines act as deterrent is debatable when profit is the primary motivator. In 2012 GSK landed a $3 billion fine - the largest healthcare fraud settlement in US history - for illegally marketing several drugs including an anti-depressant, a diabetes drug and one for epilepsy.
But in the period covered by the settlement, it posted profits of more than $25 billion in the sales of these drugs. Medical journals and the media can also be manipulated to serve not only as marketing vehicles for the industry but be complicit in silencing those who call for greater transparency and more independent scrutiny of scientific data.
Take a paper published by the Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) last June.
We Don't Know the Truth About Statins
This claimed that a programme that aired in 2013 - which questioned the benefits of prescribing statins to those at low risk of heart disease - may have resulted in up to 2,900 people suffering a heart attack or death from stopping their medication.
“The problem with polypharmacy is that the more drugs you take, the more likely you are to experience side-effects that are then misinterpreted by a doctor or nurse as a symptom of disease that needs treating with additional medicine.”
I was asked to go on ABC News Australia to discuss this but unfortunately just 30 minutes before my interview was cancelled. Had I had the opportunity, I would have given my view - that the paper provided no robust evidence of increasing hospital admissions or recorded deaths to support such claims.
On the contrary, the Catalyst documentary under scrutiny is one of the most brilliant pieces of medical journalism I have seen in recent times. A view shared by the vice president of the faculty of public health Professor Simon Capewell, who described it as 'informative, transparent, and raised legitimate concerns',
As he and I point out in an editorial published two weeks ago in medical journal BMC Medicine, community based studies reveal that almost 75 per cent of new users will stop taking their statin within a year of prescription with 62 per cent citing side effects as a reason.
In fact, the emerging evidence suggests at best, the benefits of statins have been grossly exaggerated and side effects underplayed. In recent weeks, two separate research groups in Japan and France have, independently of each other, questioned the reliability of many of the earlier industry sponsored studies that show the benefit of statins.
In fact the Japanese research went as far to even suggests that statins may be a cause of the increasing population burden of heart failure.
Dr Malhotra claims emerging evidence suggests the benefits of statins have been grossly exaggerated and side effects underplayed
Meanwhile the reputed French cardiologist Dr Michel De Lorgeril has claimed all studies published after 2006 reveal 'no benefit' of statins for cardiovascular prevention in all groups of patients.
I fully support his calls for a full reassessment of all the statin studies and until then 'physicians should be aware that the present claims about the efficacy and safety of statins is not evidence based.'
Furthermore we must demand that the Clinical Trial Service Unit at Oxford University releases the raw data on statins for independent scrutiny.
It is these industry- sponsored studies that have resulted in the prescription of statins to millions worldwide, driving a multi-billion industry.
The Drugs That Don't Live Up to the Hype
But back to the wider the picture. It has been just over 10 years since John Ioannidis, professor of medicine and health policy at Stanford University, published a landmark paper explaining why most published medical research is likely to be false.
But it's not just about studies being poorly designed or stats being manipulated. He went as far to claim 'the greater the financial interests in a given field, the less likely the research findings are to be true'.
Unfortunately, there are multiple recent examples exposing that our so-called guardians and regulators, NICE and the MHRA, are not only ill-equipped to deal with these issues.
“Now, when a patient comes to see me with any new symptom my first thought is could this be a medication side effect?”
Or, as the immediate past president of the Royal College of Physicians Sir Richard Thompson told me ' are "part of the problem rather than the solution".'
NICE was called out when several leading doctors, including Sir Richard, wrote to the Secretary of State for health raising major concerns over the impartiality of the guideline development group on statins with 8 of its 12 members declaring financial ties to companies manufacturing statins and related drugs.
After gaining access to withheld clinical trials data, the body found Tamiflu was no better that paracetamol in relieving flu symptoms and had potentially serious side effects including kidney problems and psychiatric disturbance.
Nice was criticised for failing to call for the full data to be released by the pharmaceutical company manufacturing the drug before giving its hasty approval. At the time, however, manufacturer Roche said it stood behind the wealth of data for Tamiflu.
Meanwhile an investigation by the BMJ revealed that the blood clotting test device used in a trial published in the New England Journal of Medicine was faulty giving falsely low blood thinning readings in the comparator drug warfarin.
Thus 'casting doubt onto outcomes used to support the use of the World's best-selling new oral anti-coagulant' Rivoroxaban, the journal said.
Of course NICE wouldn't have known about the faulty device but one has to question their judgement on recommending the use of the drug based upon one pharmaceutical company funded trial where there are now calls for the paper to be retracted.
Why We Need a Public Enquiry
The fact that prescriptions are at an all time high with more than 1 billion handed out every year - the figure has doubled in the past decade - should be regarded as a public health crisis in itself.
Now, when a patient comes to see me with any new symptom my first thought is could this be a medication side effect?
The system is broken and cannot be fixed by just pouring in more money. Corporate greed and systematic political failure has brought the NHS to its knees.
Without full transparency and accountability no doctor can provide what we slogged through medical school and devote our heart and souls to - providing the best quality care for our patients.
Last week, responding to a series of recent scandals - including failure of institutions and universities in the UK to tackle research misconduct - former editor of the BMJ, Richard Smith, wrote: 'something is rotten in the state of British Medicine and has been for a long time'.
For the sake of our future health and the sustainability of the NHS it's time for real collective action against 'too much medicine'. This can start with the public accounts committee launching a full independent inquiry into the efficacy and safety of medicines.
I believe it is an underlying scandal that may likely to dwarf that of the Mid Staffordshire NHS scandal - where scores of patients died due to poor care, a public enquiry concluded.
Medical science has taken a turn towards darkness. And sunlight will be its only disinfectant.
State Broadcaster Radio New Zealand Concealed Campaign To Change Linguistic Landscape Of New Zealand January 19 2018 | From: BreakingViews
For more than a year our state broadcaster, Radio New Zealand, has concealed the fact that it is engaged in a campaign to “change the linguistic landscape”.
This radical new mission was far from voluntary. It was imposed from above, forced upon a supine RNZ staff following amendments to the Maori Language Act in 2016.
Related:Maori Artifacts Point To Early Polynesian Settlement In New Zealand Few New Zealanders were aware that one of their most trusted institutions had been so fundamentally subverted, and no-one at RNZ, it would seem, thought fit to tell them (or even, as many of us might have hoped - to protest). But no, they just quietly went along - some of them minimally and probably reluctantly, but others with servile enthusiasm.
How long the deception would have persisted is anyone’s guess - not too much longer, I suspect, since more and more people were beginning to wonder what was happening to their once-familiar service.
The cat is now well out of the bag, and RNZ, its institutional duplicity exposed, has become increasingly defensive. What, after all, is RNZ’s proper role, and why should a taxpayer-funded and ostensibly independent broadcaster be covertly engaged in reconfiguring the language we all speak daily?
Damage control was urgently required, and thus, on 2nd December, Dr Don Brash - who had expressed some unease at the Maorification of RNZ, was interviewed on the Kim Hill programme (see HERE).
Hill started off with legalities. Did Dr Brash not realise, she said, that under RNZ’s charter the protection and promotion of te reo by RNZ was now a statutory responsibility?
This proved less than a king hit, with Dr Brash quietly pointing out that if so the charter was at fault. Te reo, he said, was more than adequately “protected and promoted” with 22 dedicated radio stations plus a television channel on air already, and, since the primary mission of RNZ was to communicate with its audience this should surely be done via English -the one language understood by everyone.
Hill continued in hostile fashion, and it soon became obvious that this “interview” was not intended to be an interview. There was no attempt to discuss the substance of the issue, or elucidate Dr Brash’s point of view. This was to be a ritual performance, with Dr Brash cast as the apostate, the malignant cell, to be reviled and scourged by Saint Kim of the Righteous Airwaves.
Kim did her hectoring best. She fired what she thought were killer questions and unanswerable propositions - and then, when reasoned responses were forthcoming, she huffed and blustered and shifted ground to the next “unanswerable” assertion.
The Treaty, inevitably, had an airing. It was a good treaty, opined Dr Brash - it enshrined our common citizenship, our equality before the law, and our democratic property rights. It was, as originally signed, a “wonderful foundation for nationhood”.
But this was not what Kim wanted to hear. The Treaty that she had in mind was a different one: a much more correct and up-to-date one - the latest revised product of the Waitangi Tribunal, perhaps, with different rights depending on race, and “principles” sprouting like mushrooms to the advantage of the usual suspects.
Dr Brash demurred. The original Treaty has been very clear. There had been no confusion about what it said: no confusion about citizenship, or equality, or about the vital matter of ceding sovereignty. But even these basics were now being questioned by self-interested revisionists (backed by the wretched Tribunal) and the Treaty, in Dr Brash’s view, was being turned into garbage.
Mistress Hill, for all her hectoring, made little progress. She tried the standard, familiar excuses for the preferential treatment of Maori - the legacy of colonisation, our domineering culture, our obligation to the tangata whenua.
But this backfired somewhat when Dr Brash quietly explained that Maori, in historical terms, were recent arrivals in New Zealand. The Moriori were here already - and thus it was they, not the newcomers, who were the genuine tangata whenua.
One could almost, over the airwaves, sense the Hill blood-pressure rising. Yes, said the Don. The real tangata were long gone - slaughtered by the Maori. Conveniently they were no longer around, and their claims could be heard no more.
Kim’s gaskets blew at last. Exasperated and spluttering, she terminated the “interview”.
It was all good theatre, and I must say I enjoyed it. Kim Hill’s bulldozing never worked, and by his unruffled good-manners Dr Brash showed once again the superiority of reason to prejudice.
But beyond theatre it must be said that the Brash/Hill interview exposed something very significant. It revealed, beyond any doubt, that our state broadcaster is now deeply committed to an unprecedented political project.
No longer a neutral service, it is now engaged in the overt manipulation of its captive audience. And whether the listeners like it or not, it has accepted the authoritarian task of “changing the linguistic landscape”.
No objective observer should be surprised by this development. For twenty years and more we have been subjected to an insidious subversion of every aspect of New Zealand life - a government-backed racist programme that the general public is mostly unaware of.
Treaty-clauses, inserted by stealth, now permeate our legislation, each one transferring its quantum of preference to Maori. And thus our democracy is being chipped away, little by little, in a deliberate attritional process whose endpoint is apartheid.
The quislings of the liberal left invariably applaud this sedition. Blind to all but their own delusions they have colluded in the inversion of our most basic values. We are no longer all one people - as the original Treaty specified. We have different rights now, depending on race, and equality has been redefined as a dirty word - a synonym for racist prejudice.
Kim Hill does not speak Maori, and neither does she understand it. Her defence of its enforced intrusion on RNZ is essentially ideological - as her encounter with Dr. Brash so unequivocally demonstrated. But, as always with true believers, she can never confess to error, and when her orthodox defences were shredded by Brash, she sought refuge, ostrich-like, in an altogether novel direction.
“Obligatory te reo on RNZ?” Well, ventured Kim, plaintive now: “it’s kinda nice to listen to”. Three times, in different ways, she repeated this: “It’s kinda nice to listen to”.
We have, at this point, passed beyond anything that may be debated rationally. There is no accounting for individual tastes, and what sounds pleasant to one person may be cacophony to another. Orchestral music, the sound of the sea, wind in the trees, or the Buddhist chanting of OMMMMM - all have their adherents, and there may even be an idiosyncratic few who, for relaxation, listen to languages they don’t understand.
Kim Hill, as RNZ’s resident big-brain, is an unexpected candidate for self-deception. She believes, obviously, the we would all be improved by regular doses of te reo, and she is entitled to that belief. But to defend it - to persuade those beyond her own insular and self-regarding class - she must advance convincing arguments - and these she has failed to make.
“Kinda nice to listen to”. Please, Kim, get a grip.
Eleven Whistleblowers Who’ve Shared Information The Global Elite Don’t Want You To Know January 19 2018 | From: CollectiveEvolution
When whistleblowers reveal classified information, it creates more transparency, and reveals the true intentions for secrecy under the justification of “national security,” a term that’s basically used now to conceal vast amounts of information.
Below is a list of eleven of the most important whistleblowers.
As most of you already know, Edward Snowden, a former intelligence contractor for multiple agencies, mainly the NSA, leaked some very sensitive information that proved the existence of clandestine Black Budget operations, thereby exposing the NSA’s mass surveillance program that spans across the world.
They are spying on corporations, governments, and citizens of the world, including their own. He revealed that they know what you do, what you say, and possibly even what you are thinking.
It’s interesting to see the contrast in narratives between someone on the inside and the “official” explanation of things. Take, for example, the super national intelligence organization known as the “Five Eyes.” According to Snowden:
“The Five Eyes alliance is sort of an artifact of the post World War II era where the Anglophone countries are the major powers banded together to sort of co-operate and share the costs of intelligence gathering infrastructure. . . .
What the result of this was over decades and decades what sort of a supra-national intelligence organisation that doesn’t answer to the laws of its own countries. . . .
They not only share information, the reporting of results from intelligence, but they actually share the tools and the infrastructure they work together against joint targets in services and there’s a lot of danger in this.”
For more information about what he is currently putting out, visit his twitter account.
Sibel Edmonds is a former FBI translator and founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). She gained a lot of attention in 2002 after she accused a colleague of covering up illicit activity involving Turkish nationals, which included serious security breaches and cover-ups, alluding to intelligence that was deliberately suppressed.
More recently, she’s been outspoken about various issues that plague the global elite, like pedophilia and false flag terrorism, letting people know that terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS are tools of the Western military alliance, used to push for the “terror war industry.”
Below is an interview she did with RT News a few years ago discussing this topic, among others.
If you didn’t already know, Thomas Drake leaked information about the NSA’s mass surveillance program prior to the Snowden leaks. After 9/11, he blew the whistle on the dragnet surveillance operation that was spying on American citizens.
Of course, as always when these leaks come out, the mainstream media (a tool of the global elite) will always try to justify these infringements on our rights, because of the heightened national security state, which they play an active role in creating.
“We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions.
Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.”
Drake told the world that the military and intelligence industrial complex became obsessed in their mission, that it completely trumped the rights of not only American citizens, but as we now know, the global citizenry, too. He attempted to go through legal channels and whistleblower protection law but it didn’t work.
In 2006 he decided to contact a reporter at the Baltimore Sun, and as a result, narrowly avoided spending 40 years in prison.
William Binney is a 36-year NSA veteran who became a whistleblower after discovering that elements of a data-monitoring program he helped make, called “ThinThread,” were being used to spy on Americans:
“At least 80% of fibre optic cables globally go via the US, this is no accident and allows the US to view all communication coming in. At least 80% of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and stored in the US. The NSA lies about what it stores. . . . The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control.”
“We selectively ignore basic facts. What I mean by a basic fact is something that’s just there that needs to be addressed, even if they can’t explain it, they should have said “We can’t explain this but it’s there” so they at least recognize that this basic fact existed. . . .
My problem is, just like the UFO thing, unless they start addressing these kinds of things, people’s observations or basic measurements or factual kind of evidence that simply exists, unless they start addressing them, there’s always going to be questions, especially now with the government, how much trust do you have in this government?
From what they’ve been doing, in spying, and torture, and rendering, and suppressing whistleblowers, and putting whistleblowers in jail, and giving immunity to people who commit these kinds of crimes, how much trust can you put in a government like that?”
Robert David Steele
Robert David Steele is the second-highest ranking civilian in the U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence and a former CIA clandestine services officer who worked for the CIA.
“Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI.
In fact we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.”
He has made multiple revelations with regards to false flag terrorism, as well as admitting to being a part of it. We interviewed him this year in July, and you can watch that interview below:
Chelsea Manning is the army private who gave 750,000 classified documents to Wikileaks. She was sentenced to 35 years in prison, but walked out after serving a shortened sentence after a great public outcry at her imprisonment.
Her leaks pertained to the Iraq and Afghanistan war, as well as detainees at Guantanamo Bay military prison.
The thing about these leaks that more people are starting to see is that they do not endanger America or its security, but rather, threaten the greedy corporate and financial interests that control American.
Transparency threatens this control system.
Dr. Udo Ulfokotte
Dr. Udo Ulfkotteis a top German journalist and editor and has been for more than two decades. He recently went on the record stating that he was forced to publish the works of intelligence agents under his own name, also mentioning that noncompliance would result in him losing his job.
He recently made an appearance on RT News, where he said:
“I’ve been a journalist for about 25 years, and I was educated to lie, to betray, and not to tell the truth to the public.
But seeing right now within the last months how the German and American media tries to bring war to the people in Europe, to bring war to Russia - this is a point of no return and I’m going to stand up and say it is not right what I have done in the past, to manipulate people, to make propaganda against Russia, and it is not right what my colleagues do and have done in the past because they are bribed to betray the people, not only in Germany, all over Europe.”
Jeffrey S. Wigand is an American biochemist and the former Vice President of Research and Development at Brown & Williamson in Louisville, Kentucky.
He played a major role in exposing corporate fraud related to the tobacco industry. In 1995, he became the tobaccos industry’s highest ranking former executive to address public health and smoking issues. He did so in an interview with 60 Minutes, and as a result, a lawsuit was filled against him.
Dr. William Thompson is a longtime senior CDC scientist. He has published some of the most commonly cited pro-vaccine studies - studies which purport to show absolutely no link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
A decade later, Dr. Thompson came out publicly admitting that that it was “the lowest point” in his career when he “went along with that paper.” He went on to say that he and the other authors “didn’t report significant findings” and that he is “completely ashamed” of what he did, that he was “complicit and went along with this,” and regrets that he has “been a part of the problem.” (source)(source)
Even pro-vaccine politicians were contacted, as these documents were sent to Congress. One of them reads as followed, as illustrated by Congressman Bill Posey:
“The [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine] study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can.”
Dr. John Brandenburg
Dr. Johan Brandenburg was the Deputy Manager of the Clementine Mission to the Moon, which was part of a joint space project between the Ballistic Missile Defence Organization (BMDO) and NASA. The mission discovered water at the moon’s poles in 1994. (Source: page 16 of 18)(source)(source)
He currently works as a consultant to Morningstar Applied Physics. Here is one of his latest research endeavours. Brandenburg also works as a part-time instructor of astronomy, physics, and mathematics at Madison College, and other learning institutions in Madison, Wisconsin.
Here’s what he had to say:
“Someone complained to me, John, why do you have to bring Cydonia into this? And I said, because I can read a map. . . . Here’s what’s at Cydonia Mensa. There’s the face on Mars, there’s the D & M pyramid. . . . Here it is in a second shot, this was taken July 25th, this was taken 30 days later, the government was apparently doing a follow-up investigation.
These two pictures (pictures above to your left) tell you everything you need to know about what’s at Cydonia Mensa (region of Mars). If you see on a planet that used to be Earth-like, a carved human face and a pyramid within 5 km of each other . . . it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what this all means, you can connect the dots. . . . I mean sometimes, and I can tell you as a scientist and I’ve seen other scientists do this, if you’re cornered, you’re just brazing it out, you hold up a picture of a buffalo and insist that it’s a dog.”
You can watch his entire lecture, or read this article we recently published on it, to get his main points.
Dr. Norman Bergrun
A mechanical engineer, Dr. Bergrun has worked for Ames Research Laboratory, NACA (National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics), and Lockheed Missiles and Space Company, now known as Lockheed Martin.
He then went on to found Bergrun Engineering and Research. Obviously, he is another qualified individual with an impressive background. You can view some of his publications for NASA, where he worked for more than a decade, here.
In this interview, Bergrun accuses that agency of “garbling” photos and fudging data.
He emphasized that people need to know that large unidentified objects, intelligently controlled, are real.
Why Whistleblowers Are So Important and Should Be Regarded as Heroes
The term “national security” is now used to justify the concealment of mass amounts of information. As a result, whenever a whistleblower leaks sensitive information, they are accused of putting their country’s safety at risk.
It’s great to be living in a time where more people are starting to realize that it doesn’t put the country at risk, but simply threatens the mechanisms the global elite use to control us and enforce their ideas and ways upon us. It basically exposes secrecy that is used for profit and control - not defence, security, or national interests.
Perhaps, one day, we will live in a world of full transparency, because, as retired Sergeant Command Major Bob Dean once said, “secrecy is corrosive to the soul.”
"It has been learned that major social media and internet service providers have, throughout the past year, been meeting secretly with the United States and Israeli governments to remove content as well as ban account holders from their sites." - Philip Giraldi
The ACLU is working to reverse the FCC’s decision on behalf of the CIA and the Israel lobby to destroy Internet neutrality. What is extraordinary is that the rest of the world has not created its own Internet that cannot be censured by Washington and Israel.
Users of social media have been increasingly reporting that their accounts have been either censored, blocked or suspended during the past year.
Initially, some believed that the incidents might be technical in nature, with overloaded servers struggling to keep up with the large and growing number of accounts, but it eventually emerged that the interference was deliberate and was focused on individuals and groups that were involved in political or social activities considered to be controversial.
At the end of last year a number of Russian accounts on Facebook and elsewhere were suspended over the allegations that social media had been used to spread so-called false news that had possibly materially affected the 2016 presidential election in the United States.
Even though it proved impossible to demonstrate that the relatively innocuous Russian efforts had any impact in comparison to the huge investment in advertising and propaganda engaged in by the two major parties, social media quickly responded to the negative publicity.
Now it has been learned that major social media and internet service providers have, throughout the past year, been meeting secretly with the United States and Israeli governments to remove content as well as ban account holders from their sites.
The United States and Israel have no legal right to tell private companies what to do but it is clearly understood that the two governments can make things very difficult for those service providers that do not fall in line.
Israel has threatened to limit access to sites like Facebook or to ban it altogether while the U.S. Justice Department can use terrorist legislation, even if implausible, to force compliance.
Washington recently forced Facebook to cancel the account of the Chechen Republic’s leader Ramzan Kadyrov, a Putin loyalist that the White House has recently “sanctioned.”
Israel is not surprisingly most active in patrolling the Internet as it is keen to keep out any material sympathetic to the Palestinian cause or critical of Israeli treatment of Arabs.
Its security services scan the stories being surfaced and go to the service providers to ask that material be deleted or blocked based on the questionable proposition that it constitutes “incitement” to violence.
Facebook reportedly cooperates 95% of the time to delete material or shut down accounts. Palestinian groups, which use social networking on the internet to communicate, have been especially hard hit, with ten leading administrators’ accounts being removed in 2017. Israeli accounts including material threatening to kill Arabs are not censored.
Microsoft, Google, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook are all also under pressure to cooperate with pro-Israel private groups in the United States, to include the powerful Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
The ADL seeks “to engineer new solutions to stop cyberhate” by blocking “hate language,” which includes any criticism of Israel that might even implausibly be construed as anti-Semitism.
Expanding restrictions on what is being defined as “hate speech” will undoubtedly become common in social media and more generally all across the internet in 2018.
The internet, widely seen as a highway where everyone could communicate and share ideas freely, is actually a toll road that is increasingly managed by a group of very large corporations that, when acting in unison, control what is seen and not seen.
Search engines already are set up to prioritize information from paid “sponsors,” which come up prominently but often have nothing to do with what material is most relevant.
And the role of intrusive governments in dictating to Facebook and other sites who will be heard and who will be silenced should also be troubling, as it means that information that would benefit the public might never be seen, particularly if it is embarrassing to powerful interests.
And speaking of powerful interests, groups like the ADL with partisan agendas will undoubtedly be able to dictate norms of behavior to the service providers, leading to still more loss of content and relevancy for those who are looking for information.
All things considered, the year 2018 will be a rough one for those who are struggling to maintain the internet as a source of relatively free information. Governments and interest groups have seen the threat posed by such liberty and are reacting to it. They will do their best to bring it under control.
“We need a political intervention to make this situation end. He (Assange) is the only political prisoner in Western Europe.” - Juan Braco
The persecution of Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, is now seven years old. Ecuador has protected Assange for the past half decade from being turned over to Washington by the corrupt Swedish and British for torture and prosecution as a spy by giving Assange political asylum inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
Ecuador has now given citizenship to Assange and attempted to provide his safe transit out of England by giving him diplomatic status, but the British government continued in its assigned role of jailer by rejecting Ecuador’s request for diplomatic status for Assange, just as the most servile of Washington’s puppet states rejected the order by the UN Committee on Arbitrary Detention to immediate release Assange from his arbitrary detention.
Assange got into trouble with Washington, because his news organization, Wikileaks, published files released by Bradley Manning. The files were a tremendous embarrassment to Washington, because they showed how Washington conspires against governments and betrays its allies, and the files contained an audio/video film of US military forces murdering innocent people walking down a street and then murdering a father and his two young children who stopped to give aid to the civilians the American soldiers had shot.
The film revealed the heartlessness and criminal cruelty of the US troops, who were enjoying playing a real live video game with real people as their victims.
It was Manning who suffered, not the troops who committed murder. Manning was held for two years in conditions that experts said constituted torture while a case was framed against him. Some believe the harsh conditions affected his mind. Manning was convicted by a kangaroo court and sentenced to 35 years in prison, but Obama in an act of humanity unusual for Washington pardoned Manning.
Washington wanted Assange as well, and the chance came when two Swedish women, attracted to Assange by his celebrity status, seduced him. The two women had not secured the cooperation they wanted from Assange in the use of condoms and, brainwashd by HIV fears, wanted Assange to join them in being tested.
Assange, misreading the extent of their fears, was too slow to comply, and the women went to the police to see if he could be required to be tested. According to the women, the police made up the charge of rape. The women themselves disavow the charge.
The charges were investigated, and the chief Swedish prosecutor Eva Finne dismissed the charges, saying “there is no suspicion of any crime whatsoever.”
Mysteriously, the case was reopened by another prosecutor, Marianne Ny, who many suspect was operating at the behest of Washington. On November 30, two days after Assange began publishing the Cablegate materials leaked by Bradley Manning, Ny issued an Interpol “red alert” arrest warrant for Assange.
This was an unusual request as no charges were outstanding against Assange, and hitherto extradition from one country to another on an arrest warrant required actual charges, whereas Ny said she wanted Assange for questioning. Most everyone in the know understood that Washington had ordered Sweden to get its hands on Assange and to turn him over to Washington.
Assange challenged the legality of the arrest warrant in British courts, but the British court, many believe following Washington’s orders, ruled against the law and in favor of Washington. Assange assented to the arrest and presented himself to a British police station.
He was placed in solitary confinement at Wandsworth prison. If memory serves, the daughter of Sir James Goldsmith paid his bond and he was placed under house arrest. When it became clear that the Swedish prosecutor wanted Assange for Washington, not for any charges against him in Sweden, Ecuador give him asylum, and he fled to the embassy in London.
Where he has been ever since.
Sweden has closed the case a second time, and Assange is no longer wanted for questioning in Sweden. Therefore, there is no longer any reason for the British to hold him for Sweden. But the British government never were holding Assange for Sweden. The British were holding him for Washington.
And they still are. Even though Sweden has closed a case based on a false report by police and have no basis for any charges against Assange, the British government says it will grab him the minute he steps outside the embassy.
The British are so desperate to serve their Washington master that once they even declared that they were going to violate diplomatic immunity and invade the Ecuadorian Embassy and seize Assange.
The British excuse for a once proud government’s continuing servitude to Washington as Assange’s jailer is that by taking asylum in the embassy Assange jumped bail and therefore the British have to arrest him for not surrendering a second time to the police for an investigation that has been closed.
Stefania Maurizi, an Italian investigative journalist for La Repubblica, smelling the stench of fraud that covers the entire case, has been trying for two years to get her hands on the correspondence between the UK, US, and Swedish governments pertaining to the case in order to pull back the shroud of the Washington-orchestrated propaganda that colors the case.
A British tribunal refused to release any documents on the grounds that it had to protect the British Prosecution Service’s relationship with foreign authorities.
That tells you all you need to know. Julian Assange has lost seven years of his life because stinking dirty Washington wanted revenge on Assange for exercising the US Constitution-protected right of a free press, and the stinking dirty governments of Sweden and Britain did Washington’s dirty work.
What we know for certain is that Assange is totally innocent and that there is no honor and no integrity in the US, Swedish, and British governments. Law means nothing to the scum that misrule these countries.
In the US and probably throughout Europe, politicians and feminists, with the exception of Katrin Axelsson and Lisa Longstaff, used the presstitute media to paint Assange as a rapist and as a spy. The feminists cared nothing about any truth; they just wanted a man to demonize.
Truth was the last thing on politicians’ minds. They just wanted to divert attention from Washington’s crimes and betrayals of allies by portraying Assange as a threat and traitor to America. They were unconcerned that Assange could not be a traitor to America as he is not an American citizen. In actual fact, there is no basis in law for any US claim against Assange.
Yet because of Washington and its servile British puppet state, Assange remains interred in the Embassy of Ecuador in London. Clearly, honor and respect for law reside in Ecuador, not in the US, UK, or Sweden.
But facts, along with law and civil liberty, have ceased to mean anything in the Western world. The corrupt US Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that the arrest of Assange is a “priority.” The British police, mere lackeys of Washington, said that they would still arrest Assange, despite the case being dropped, if he left the embassy.
For the British, serving Washington is a higher calling than the honor of their country.
Julian Assange Cleared Of All Charges, Trump Set To Pardon
“He who would teach men to die would teach them to live.” - Montaigne
A few days ago, as I woke up early in the morning and looked right in front of me, I saw my girlfriend lying fast asleep beside me. I observed how beautiful she looked and thought of all the good times we had together over the last two and a half years.
Shortly afterwards, the idea that at some point in the future she won’t be there with me anymore crossed my mind. Not that she’s planning to move away – far from that. But just like any person alive on earth, she is just a traveler passing temporarily through this world.
That morning I was reminded of how impermanent life is, and that no matter how granted we take someone, sooner or later death (which is nothing but a process of life) will take him or her away from us, regardless of how much we wouldn’t like this to happen.
Death is always there, standing patiently by our side, accompanying us in every step we take, and at any moment we might suddenly lose ourselves in its embrace. And one thing is certain: We’re all going to die.
Life’s journey might be quite unpredictable, but that part of it called death isn’t. Sure, we might not be able to tell when we’re going to die, but we know without doubt that we will. In other words, death is inevitable, and as I like to say, the very moment we were born we were sentenced to die.
Yet most of us don’t like to think about death, and even pretend like it won’t happen to us any time soon. For years upon years we constantly hear about others dying around us, yet we blindly believe that we’ll not be the next ones to die.
We don’t pay much attention to the power death has upon us, not because we don’t care about it — on the contrary, we care so much that the very idea of death scares the hell out of us. Or, to put it differently, death scares us to death! No wonder we’re doing anything we can to avoid thinking about it.
Recall the last time you had an in-depth conversation with someone about death. It mustn’t have been quite recently, right? Then ask yourself how many times you’ve had such a conversation in your life. I bet they weren’t that many, or am I wrong?
Death is a taboo subject in our culture, something we shouldn’t openly discuss about. But why exactly is that? Why does death frighten us so much that we don’t even find it appropriate to talk about it?
The answer is attachment. We are so attached to the kind of life we’re used to living that we cling to it as much as we can, so as to make sure it wont flee from us. We’re attached to our partners, our possessions, and many other things we’d be devastated to lose. We want them to belong to us, and we do our best to keep them in our lives.
Yet, all of our efforts are in vain. Life is ever-changing, continually moving, flowing, and no matter how hard we try to control it, it always disappoints us by escaping our tight fist of clinging and taking its own unpredictable course. And eventually death will unapologetically take all that we have away from us, leaving us with empty hands, not having anything left to hold on to.
Discussing about death reminds us of this harsh truth, and we don’t dare to face it. We run away from it like it’s our worst enemy, but in the end it always appears in front of us, staring us with its paralyzing look straight into the eyes.
When, for example, a loved one dies, we are at a complete loss, unable to cope with the situation. Death finds us unprepared, and we’re so shocked by its presence that it feels as if the ground is shaking under our feet.
Death doesn’t affect us only occasionally in difficult times like this, but also in our day-to-day life. When we don’t dare to face and accept death, death is constantly haunting us, and this creates tremendous emotional turmoil in our psyche. Our constant desire to control life’s natural flow is filling us with anxiety. As a result, we’re constantly stressed, and hence can’t let go, relax into the here and now, and enjoy life to the fullest.
There’s a good reason why all great spiritual masters talked about the importance of encountering death to realize and accept the impermanence of life. The Buddha, for example, even recommended corpse meditation.
That’s why in earlier times Buddhist monks would go out in the forests in search of a human corpse, and when they found one, they would sit right in front of it and meditate on death, in an effort to familiarize themselves with their own mortality. “This body, too,” they would say about their own bodies, “such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.”
Today, it’s common for Buddhist monks to practice meditation on death by looking at photographs of deceased people. In fact, in various places of the East many of them even carry photographs depicting deaths or bodies in various stages of decomposition (interestingly, in some countries like Thailand such photographs can be purchased at religious shops) and take them out many times throughout their day — even while they’re eating!
This might sound a bit crazy for most people, especially Westerners, but I don’t think it’s crazy at all. That’s because meditating on death can actually help us to live a better, richer life.
Firstly, by realizing the transitory nature of our existence, we can learn to appreciate the the gift of life and make the right use of it. In addition, we can learn to deal with change, which is the very nature of existence. Then, we will never be unprepared for death, and we’ll be able to relax from our constant effort to control people and situations. We’ll learn to flow with the change of life by adapting to its ways, instead of fighting against it and putting ourselves into unnecessary trouble.
As Edmund Wilson said, “death is one prophecy that never fails,” and with each breath we take we’re a bit closer to death. So we’d better get ready for the moment we’ll reach our destination. But we needn’t be depressed about the fact that we’re going to die. Realizing life’s fleeting nature can actually be invigorating - it helps put things into perspective, allowing us to cut down on the unnecessary and focus on what truly matters.
That’s what I was reminded of that early morning when I thought that my beloved girlfriend and I won’t be together for much longer: To appreciate that she’s now with me and be sure to fully enjoy her presence. Instead of feeling sad about what the future will inevitably bring, I feel grateful for having the luck of being with her now and for all the beautiful moments I’ve shared with her in the past.
Ultimately, all relationships are short-term relationships - they end quickly, even if they last for a lifetime (considering the infinite vastness of time). And just like death will take our partners away from us, it will also take our material possessions. In fact, they never were ours, they didn’t belong to us in the first place - we only borrowed them from existence, and that’s just for a little while. So let’s savor what we’ve got while we can and make the most of out of our lives, by immersing ourselves in the present moment and squeezing all the good juice out of it.
Russiagate Turns On Its Originators + The Focus Shifts From Trump To Hillary And The Corrupt FBI January 16 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts
Russiagate originated in a conspiracy between the military / security complex, the Clinton-controlled Democratic National Committee, and the liberal / /progressive / left. The goal of the military / security complex is to protect its out-sized budget and power by preventing President Trump from normalizing relations with Russia.
Hillary and the DNC want to explain away their election loss by blaming a Trump/Putin conspiracy to steal the election. The liberal/progressive/left want Trump driven from office.
As the presstitutes are aligned with the military/security complex, Hillary and the DNC, and the liberal/progressive/left, the Russiagate orchestration is a powerful conspiracy against the president of the United States and the “deplorables” who elected him. Nevertheless, the Russiagate Conspiracy has fallen apart and has now been turned against its originators.
Despite the determination of the CIA and FBI to get Trump, these powerful and unaccountable police state agencies have been unable to present any evidence of the Trump/Putin conspiracy against Hillary.
As William Binney, the former high level National Security Agency official who devised the spy program has stated, if there was any evidence of a Trump/Putin conspiracy to steal the US presidential election, the NSA would most certainly have it.
So where is the evidence? Why after one year and a half and a special prosecutor whose assignment is to get Trump has no evidence whatsoever been found of the Trump/Putin conspiracy? The obvious answer is that no such conspiracy ever existed. The only conspiracy is the one against Trump.
This has now become completely apparent. Russiagate originated in a fake “Trump dossier” invented by Christopher Steele, a former British MI6 intelligence officer. It is not yet clear whether it was the DNC, the CIA, or the FBI who paid Steele for the fake dossier. Perhaps he sold it to all three.
What we do know is that the FBI used what it knew to be a fake dossier to go to the FISA court for a warrant to spy on Trump.
As a consequence both Comey and the FBI, special prosecutor Mueller, and Christopher Steele are in hot water. The Chairman of the US Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley, has instructed the US Attorney General to launch a criminal investigation of Steele for false statements to FBI counterintelligence officials.
You can see where this leads as former FBI director Comey is a participant in the Russiagate attack on President Trump. To protect himself Steele will have to rat on who put him up to it. If President Trump had any sense, he would put Steele under protective custody, as his life is clearly in danger. If the CIA and the FBI don’t get him, the Clintons surely will.
Trump’s easy election shook the Republican Establishment as well as it upset the Democrats and the military/security complex. The Republican Establishment hates losing control. Initially the Republican Establishment aligned with Trump’s enemies, but now understands that Trump’s demise means their demise.
Consequently, all of a sudden in Washington facts count. Not all facts, just those relating to the Steele dossier.
Be sure you listen closely and carefully to these two videos of US Representative Jim Jordan’s destruction of US Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein for sitting on his ass while a totally corrupt FBI attempted to destroy the elected president of the United States.
Keep in mind that Rosenstein is a member of the Trump administration. Why does the President of the United States employ people out to destroy him?
Here are the videos:
Jim Jordan blasts Rod Rosenstein on the bias of Peter Strzok
Here are 18 questions asked by US Rep. Jim Jordan:
1) Did the FBI pay Christopher Steele, author of the dossier?
2) Was the dossier the basis for securing FISA warrants to spy on Americans? And why won’t the FBI show Congress the FISA application?
3) When did the FBI get the complete dossier and who gave it to them? Dossier author Christopher Steele? Fusion GPS? Clinton campaign/DNC? Sen. McCain’s staffer?
4) Did the FBI validate and corroborate the dossier?
5) Did Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, or Bruce Orr work on the FISA application?
6) Why and how often did DOJ lawyer Bruce Orr meet with dossier author Christopher Steele during the 2016 campaign?
7) Why did DOJ lawyer Bruce Orr meet with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson after the election? To get their story straight after their candidate Clinton lost? Or to double down and plan how they were going to go after President-elect Trump?
8) When and how did the FBI learn that DOJ lawyer Bruce Orr’s wife, Nellie Orr, worked for Fusion GPS? And what exactly was Nellie Orr’s role in putting together the dossier?
9) Why did the FBI release text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page? Normally, ongoing investigation is reason not to make such information public.
10) And why did FBI release only 375/10,000+ texts? Were they the best? Worst? Or part of a broader strategy to focus attention away from something else? And when can Americans see the other 96% of texts
11) Why did Lisa Page leave Mueller probe two weeks before Peter Strzok? This was two weeks before FBI and Special Counsel even knew about the texts.
12) Why did the intelligence community wait two months after the election to brief President-elect Trump on the dossier (January 6, 2017)? Why was James Comey selected to do the briefing?
13) Was the briefing done to “legitimize” the dossier? And who leaked the fact that the briefing was about the dossier?
14) The New York Times reported last week that George Papadopoulos’ loose lips were a catalyst for launching the Russia investigation. Was President-elect Trump briefed on this?
15) Why did Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson meet with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya before and after her meeting with Donald Trump Jr.?
16) Why was FBI General Counsel Jim Baker reassigned two weeks ago? Was he the source for the first story on the dossier by David Corn on October 31, 2016? Or was it someone else at the FBI?
17) Why won’t the FBI give Congress the documents it’s requesting?
18) And why would Senator Schumer, leader of the Democrat party, publicly warn President-elect Trump on Jan. 3, 2017 that when you mess with the “intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you?”
Insouciant trusting gullible Americans who “believe in our government” have no comprehension how totally corrupt “their” government is. It is the most corrupt in the world.
The corruption in Washington is really unbelievable. You have to experience it to know it, and those who experience it are part of it and will not tell.
The orchestration “Russiagate” proves that the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI are so corrupt and unaccountable that they comprise the greatest threat to the American people in the entire history of America.
The only solution is to break these agencies into a thousand splinters, as President John F. Kennedy intended, and rebuild them from scratch with total transparency.
No more protecting their vast crimes under the cloak of “national security.” No classification of any so-called intelligence unless it can pass a unanimous vote of Congress and the ACLU.
The orchestration of Russiagate is proof that the alleged “national security agencies” are an anti-American force detrimental to our survival as a free people. The criminals in the FBI, CIA, and DNC must be investigated, indicted, prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned or freedom in America is forever dead.
If President Trump fails in this task, he will have failed America. Everyone of us will be the victims.
One question with which we are left is why has the mainstream media failed in its investigating and reporting responsibilities and instead served as a cheerleader for the orchestration known as Russiagate? The New York Times, Washington Post, NPR, CNN, and the rest are serving as public relations agents for Russiagate, leaving it to Rep.
Jim Jordan to ask the questions that the media should be asking. What explains the convergence of media and FBI/CIA interests? Are hidden subsidies involved?
As the mainstream media is behaving as it would be if it were owned and controlled by the security agencies, this is a natural question. Why is the media not disturbed by its close relationship to the FBI and CIA? When did it become the function of the media to help the CIA and FBI control explanations?
The Focus Shifts From Trump To Hillary And The Corrupt FBI
The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and NPR will never tell you, but the criminal is Hillary, not Trump.}
It has come to light that the FBI edited down FBI Director Comey’s investigation of Hillary in order to make it look like nothing was amiss. Comey’s conclusion that Hillary was “grossly negligent,” a conclusion justifying felony indictment for mishandling of classified information, was replaced with “extremely careless.”
The Chairman of the US Senate Homeland and Government Affairs Committee, Ron Johnson (R, Wis) has asked the current FBI director, Chris Wray, if the document was rewritten in order to protect Hillary. Senator Johnson is particular interested in the emails that show that some senior FBI officials were determined to prevent Trump from becoming US President.
Hillary’s misuse of classified documents on her personal server and subsequent effort to destroy the evidence is far more serious than anything done by Paul Manafort and General Flynn, both under threat of prosecution by Special Prosecutor former FBI Director Mueller.
The FBI’s effort to protect Hillary and to dismiss her felony as “careless” is now confronted with Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ reopening of the case. Notice how the FBI first riggs the case and then puts itself in charge of investigating it. An agency this corrupt should be abolished.
It seems that Trump and his Attorney General finally realized that they are in a fight for their lives and have decided to counterbalance Mueller’s investigation of fake crimes with an investigation of Hillary’s and the FBI’s real crimes.
One can only wonder why they waited so long. Intelligence does not seem to be the hallmark of the Trump administration.
EPA Contradicts Its Own Research, Claims Roundup Poses No Risk To Humans & More January 15 2018 | From: Antimedia / Various
Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a new report declaring that the weed killer glyphosate does not pose any meaningful risk to humans, but the report is not likely to end the debate over the safety of the world’s most widely used pesticide.
The new report from the EPA is the latest in a string of conflicting reports from various health agencies around the world. Reuters first reported on the assessment:
“The EPA, in a draft risk assessment report issued on Monday, also said it found ‘no other meaningful risks to human health’ when glyphosate, the world’s biggest-selling weed killer, is used according to its label instructions.”
The EPA’s decision conflicts with a March 2015 report from the International Agency for Research on Cancer that found that glyphosate “probably” contributes to non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans and classified it as a ‘Group 2A’ carcinogen.
“There was sufficient evidence in animals, limited evidence in humans and strong supporting evidence showing DNA mutations and damaged chromosomes,” Aaron Blair, a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute and lead author of the study, told Reuters at the time.
The IARC report was published in The Lancet Oncology and detailed evaluations of organophosphate pesticides and herbicides. The report concluded that there was “limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.”
The evidence for this conclusion was pulled from studies of exposure to the chemical in the US, Canada, and Sweden published since 2001. The researchers found “convincing evidence that glyphosate can also cause cancer in laboratory animals.”
Shortly after the IARC review, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), an independent agency funded by the European Union, shot back with their own study, claiming glyphosate is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans.” Earlier this month, the European Commission renewed the license to use glyphosate for another five years.
Those studies were followed by research from experts with the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The FAO released a statement claiming glyphosate is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans” exposed to it through food. The WHO co-signed the statement with the FAO.
The organizations also found that glyphosate is not likely to be genotoxic - destructive to cell’s genetic material - in humans.
This means that as of December 2017, the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization, the World Health Organization, the European Food Safety Authority, and the United Nations say glyphosate does not pose a risk of cancer to humans. On the other end of the spectrum, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC states that it could be linked to cancer.
To add even more confusion to the matter, in October, Reuters reported that an analysis of the IARC’s assessment of glyphosate showed the agency ignored findings and deleted statements that contradicted their final conclusion. Reuters reported:
“The edits identified by Reuters occurred in the chapter of IARC’s review focusing on animal studies. This chapter was important in IARC’s assessment of glyphosate, since it was in animal studies that IARC decided there was ‘sufficient’ evidence of carcinogenicity.
One effect of the changes to the draft, reviewed by Reuters in a comparison with the published report, was the removal of multiple scientists’ conclusions that their studies had found no link between glyphosate and cancer in laboratory animals.”
All this confusion among agencies does not help the average consumer when it comes to safety and health. Who should we trust when our very lives are on the line? Government agencies that operate a revolving door with big pharma, big ag, and other industrial complexes?
Despite the EPA’s latest decision, Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council advocacy group, told Reuters that “[t]here is data suggesting cancer.” What data is Sass referring to?
She is more than likely talking about an EPA study from the 1980s that found glyphosate does, indeed, increase the likelihood of developing cancer. The 2015 IARC report points out that the EPA had originally classified glyphosate as possibly carcinogenic to humans in 1985.
The investigation does a great job of outlining the history of regulation of glyphosate and how Monsanto - glyphosate is the key ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup - has been able to influence and subvert regulatory agencies in order to make glyphosate the most widely used pesticide in the world.
“Our two-year investigation found incontrovertible evidence that Monsanto has exerted deep influence over EPA decisions since glyphosate first came on the market - via Roundup - more than 40 years ago,” the report states.
The detailed investigation reveals that nearly every time a Monsanto chemical was receiving negative attention from scientists and researchers, the biotech company would hire its own researchers and firms or pressure government employees until they came to Monsanto’s preferred conclusion.
The testing and approval of glyphosate seem to fit the pattern.
“Throughout the 1970s, EPA staff repeatedly raised red flags about the inadequacy of testing data that Monsanto was submitting in support of glyphosate’s original registration,” the report states. In These Times also examined EPA memos they say “detail incomplete or otherwise unacceptable toxicology screening tests.”
The pressure to approve glyphosate can be traced back to 1983 when the EPA was examining toxicity data supplied by Monsanto. As part of the registration and approval process, Monsanto submitted a two-year mouse feeding study. In These Times writes:
“The mouse study was conducted for Monsanto by a commercial lab called Bio/Dynamics, but the results of the research were neither peer-reviewed nor made publicly available.
Staff toxicologists, pathologists and statisticians in the TB provided the first interpretation of these results. On March 4, 1985, an ad hoc committee of these scientists reported that based on this mouse study, glyphosate was carcinogenic, or a ‘Class C’ substance.
They did not question the 1983 study’s structure or reported data. EPA staff toxicologist William Dykstra, in an April 3, 1985, memo, stated unequivocally, ‘Glyphosate was oncogenic in male mice causing renal tubule adenomas, a rare tumor, in a dose-related manner.’”
In true Monsanto fashion, the company hired four pathologists to review the original tissue slides from the 1983 study. Monsanto’s pathologists claimed to have seen a tumor in one of the mice in the control group.
This finding cast doubt on the EPA’s original conclusion and the entire study. By March 1986, the EPA had reversed their designation of glyphosate as carcinogenic. Monsanto still relies on the claim that one of the control group mice also had a tumor so the cause could not have been glyphosate.
However, in another memo dated February 1985, Herbert Lacayo, a statistician with the EPA’s Toxicology Branch, stated that without glyphosate exposure, the odds of tumors appearing were about 156 to 1.
“Under such circumstances a prudent person would reject the Monsanto assumption that glyphosate dosing has no effect on kidney tumor production,” wrote Lacayo. “Our viewpoint is one of protecting the public health when we see suspicious data. It is not our job to protect registrants from false positives.”
Officially, the chemical glyphosate and products like Roundup do not cause cancer and are of no harm to the planet or animals. However, when one takes a deeper look at the history of the studies and the company behind the product, valid reasons to be skeptical can be found.
The USA Was Never A Real Democracy, Nor Was It Ever Meant To Be January 15 2018 | From: TheMilleniumReport
The British-controlled political parties, Vatican-based Jesuits and Zionist Neocons & Neoliberals ensured the complete takeover of the U.S. Federal Government and installation of a plutocratic oligarchy overseen by the Black Nobility.
Crucial Data Point: The current and critical predicament “inside the Beltway” perfectly reflects the preceding subtitle as follows:
i) The overtly treasonous U.S. Intelligence Community especially the C.I.A.,
ii) The criminal intent and naked negligence of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
iii) The numerous traitors and foreign agents in the U.S. Congress,
iv) The thoroughly corrupt Obama Administration & Clinton Crime Family, and (v) the countless Deep State operatives who infest every organ of government, to name just a few examples of Black Nobility tyranny in America.
To apprehend the sheer enormity and profundity of this fundamentally global Khazarian conspiracy see: New World Order: Creation of The Venetian Black Nobility and Committee of 300. The Founding Fathers quite intentionally did not establish the United States of America as a Democracy. They knew from the get-go that putting such a meretricious political principle into governmental practice was nothing more than a disaster-in-the-making.
America’s leaders since World War II have made a big deal about nation-building by exporting their fraudulent version of democracy for specific reasons. They were all aware of the fact that such an inherently defective political economy was quite easy manipulated when democracy was the foundation.
Every one of those U.S. presidents knew that American democracy was a total fraud and would eventually morph into a dictatorship and/or national security state. As it has in 2017. Even the POTUS is now being held captive by the all-powerful Deep State.
Key Points: The very concept of democracy is highly misunderstood by the vast majority of people everywhere.
They fail to realize that all it takes is a little social engineering by the wealthy elites to deceive the citizenry.
This can be accomplished via mainstream media mind-control programming in tandem with legislating various financial incentives and economic benefits.
It is these “carrots”, along with various and sundry “sticks”, that are routinely used to manipulate a majority of the voters to the great detriment of the nation. Once these citizens are sufficiently corralled into a certain pen of unrighteous compliance, they’re no longer real patriots for fear of losing their “welfare”.
The real peril associated with this very common predicament emerges when unjust or immoral laws are put into effect.
This fatal flaw of the democratic system really rears its ugly head when the ignorant and mean-spirited mob effectively gives their consent to the arrogant and corrupt politicians. There’s nothing more dangerous than an unruly mob which has empowered a tyrannical government, and vice versa.
What the Founding Fathers intuitively knew - if they had formed a true democracy - is that citizens would eventually vote into office those fraudsters who promised them everything - FOR FREE .
Obama is a perfect example of this inherently communist ideology in democratic clothing. So was “empty promises” Bernie Sanders, a true communist if ever there was one in U.S. presidential election history.
The bottom line is that democracy, especially one where every vote is really counted, will always degenerate into mob rule. Again, Obama’s 2 terms demonstrated the utter lawlessness and pervasive anarchy that reigns when the mob (both literally and figuratively) takes over.
He promised his various constituencies their “Sodom and Gomorrah”, and they loved him for it. That’s why President Trump truly inherited an Obamanation.
The historical record clearly indicates that the elites will always use their power and wealth and influence to manipulate the electorate into voting against their own interest. By stealthily manufacturing consent in this manner - election cycle after election cycle - the power elite guarantees an inexorable dumbing down of the body politic.
This is why the Founding Fathers formed the United States as a Constitutional Republic. They knew that the many built-in checks and balances were the only ways to keep the newly constructed American ship of state from foundering or running aground. As it has today!
That’s because the U.S. Constitution has been unlawfully trashed as the American Republic has been taken over by political barbarians (also known as Bolsheviks).
The good news is that the Alt Media has completely exposed the globalists and their New World Order agenda. The Internet has leveled the playing field like never before. Hence, it’s only a matter of time as to when the Global Control Matrix dissolves into history.
N.B. With this understanding, the following commentary is somewhat on target, but without addressing the much bigger picture.
The U.S. Is Not A Democracy, It Never Was
One of the most steadfast beliefs regarding the United States is that it is a democracy. Whenever this conviction waivers slightly, it is almost always to point out detrimental exceptions to core American values or foundational principles.
For instance, aspiring critics frequently bemoan a “loss of democracy” due to the election of clownish autocrats, draconian measures on the part of the state, the revelation of extraordinary malfeasance or corruption, deadly foreign interventions, or other such activities that are considered undemocratic exceptions.
The same is true for those whose critical framework consists in always juxtaposing the actions of the U.S. government to its founding principles, highlighting the contradiction between the two and clearly placing hope in its potential resolution.
The problem, however, is that there is no contradiction or supposed loss of democracy because the United States simply never was one. This is a difficult reality for many people to confront, and they are likely more inclined to immediately dismiss such a claim as preposterous rather than take the time to scrutinize the material historical record in order to see for themselves.
Such a dismissive reaction is due in large part to what is perhaps the most successful public relations campaign in modern history.
What will be seen, however, if this record is soberly and methodically inspected, is that a country founded on elite, colonial rule based on the power of wealth - a plutocratic colonial oligarchy, in short - has succeeded not only in buying the label of “democracy” to market itself to the masses, but in having its citizenry, and many others, so socially and psychologically invested in its nationalist origin myth that they refuse to hear lucid and well-documented arguments to the contrary.
To begin to peel the scales from our eyes, let us outline in the restricted space of this article, five patent reasons why the United States has never been a democracy (a more sustained and developed argument is available in my book, Counter-History of the Present).
To begin with, British colonial expansion into the Americas did not occur in the name of the freedom and equality of the general population, or the conferral of power to the people. Those who settled on the shores of the “new world,” with few exceptions, did not respect the fact that it was a very old world indeed, and that a vast indigenous population had been living there for centuries.
As soon as Columbus set foot, Europeans began robbing, enslaving and killing the native inhabitants. The trans-Atlantic slave trade commenced almost immediately thereafter, adding a countless number of Africans to the ongoing genocidal assault against the indigenous population.
Moreover, it is estimated that over half of the colonists who came to North America from Europe during the colonial period were poor indentured servants, and women were generally trapped in roles of domestic servitude.
Rather than the land of the free and equal, then, European colonial expansion to the Americas imposed a land of the colonizer and the colonized, the master and the slave, the rich and the poor, the free and the un-free.
The former constituted, moreover, an infinitesimally small minority of the population, whereas the overwhelming majority, meaning “the people,” was subjected to death, slavery, servitude, and unremitting socio-economic oppression.
Second, when the elite colonial ruling class decided to sever ties from their homeland and establish an independent state for themselves, they did not found it as a democracy. On the contrary, they were fervently and explicitly opposed to democracy, like the vast majority of European Enlightenment thinkers.
They understood it to be a dangerous and chaotic form of uneducated mob rule. For the so-called “founding fathers,” the masses were not only incapable of ruling, but they were considered a threat to the hierarchical social structures purportedly necessary for good governance.
In the words of John Adams, to take but one telling example, if the majority were given real power, they would redistribute wealth and dissolve the “subordination” so necessary for politics.
When the eminent members of the landowning class met in 1787 to draw up a constitution, they regularly insisted in their debates on the need to establish a republic that kept at bay vile democracy, which was judged worse than “the filth of the common sewers” by the pro-Federalist editor William Cobbett.
The new constitution provided for popular elections only in the House of Representatives, but in most states the right to vote was based on being a property owner, and women, the indigenous and slaves - meaning the overwhelming majority of the population - were simply excluded from the franchise.
Senators were elected by state legislators, the President by electors chosen by the state legislators, and the Supreme Court was appointed by the President.
It is in this context that Patrick Henry flatly proclaimed the most lucid of judgments: “it is not a democracy.” George Mason further clarified the situation by describing the newly independent country as “a despotic aristocracy.”
When the American republic slowly came to be relabeled as a “democracy,” there were no significant institutional modifications to justify the change in name. In other words, and this is the third point, the use of the term “democracy” to refer to an oligarchic republic simply meant that a different word was being used to describe the same basic phenomenon.
This began around the time of “Indian killer” Andrew Jackson’s presidential campaign in the 1830s. Presenting himself as a ‘democrat,’ he put forth an image of himself as an average man of the people who was going to put a halt to the long reign of patricians from Virginia and Massachusetts.
Slowly but surely, the term “democracy” came to be used as a public relations term to re-brand a plutocratic oligarchy as an electoral regime that serves the interest of the people or demos. Meanwhile, the American holocaust continued unabated, along with chattel slavery, colonial expansion and top-down class warfare.
In spite of certain minor changes over time, the U.S. republic has doggedly preserved its oligarchic structure, and this is readily apparent in the two major selling points of its contemporary “democratic” publicity campaign.
The Establishment and its propagandists regularly insist that a structural aristocracy is a “democracy” because the latter is defined by the guarantee of certain fundamental rights (legal definition) and the holding of regular elections (procedural definition).
This is, of course, a purely formal, abstract and largely negative understanding of democracy, which says nothing whatsoever about people having real, sustained power over the governing of their lives.
However, even this hollow definition dissimulates the extent to which, to begin with, the supposed equality before the law in the United States presupposes an inequality before the law by excluding major sectors of the population: those judged not to have the right to rights, and those considered to have lost their right to rights (Native Americans, African-Americans and women for most of the country’s history, and still today in certain aspects, as well as immigrants, “criminals,” minors, the “clinically insane,” political dissidents, and so forth).
Regarding elections, they are run in the United States as long, multi-million dollar advertising campaigns in which the candidates and issues are pre-selected by the corporate and party elite.
The general population, the majority of whom do not have the right to vote or decide not to exercise it, are given the “choice” - overseen by an undemocratic electoral college and embedded in a non-proportional representation scheme - regarding which member of the aristocratic elite they would like to have rule over and oppress them for the next four years.
“Multivariate analysis indicates,” according to an important recent study by Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, “that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination […], but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy.”
To take but a final example of the myriad ways in which the U.S. is not, and has never been, a democracy, it is worth highlighting its consistent assault on movements of people power.
Since WWII, it has endeavored to overthrow some 50 foreign governments, most of which were democratically elected. It has also, according the meticulous calculations by William Blum in America’s Deadliest Export: Democracy, grossly interfered in the elections of at least 30 countries, attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders, dropped bombs on more than 30 countries, and attempted to suppress populist movements in 20 countries.
The record on the home front is just as brutal. To take but one significant parallel example, there is ample evidence that the FBI has been invested in a covert war against democracy.
Beginning at least in the 1960s, and likely continuing up to the present, the Bureau “extended its earlier clandestine operations against the Communist party, committing its resources to undermining the Puerto Rico independence movement, the Socialist Workers party, the civil rights movement, Black nationalist movements, the Ku Klux Klan, segments of the peace movement, the student movement, and the ‘New Left’ in general” (Cointelpro: The FBI’s Secret War on Political Freedom, p. 22-23).
“From 1943-63, the federal civil rights case Socialist Workers Party v. Attorney General documents decades of illegal FBI break-ins and 10 million pages of surveillance records. The FBI paid an estimated 1,600 informants $1,680,592 and used 20,000 days of wiretaps to undermine legitimate political organizing.”
In the case of the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement (AIM) - which were both important attempts to mobilize people power to dismantle the structural oppression of white supremacy and top-down class warfare - the FBI not only infiltrated them and launched hideous smear and destabilization campaigns against them, but they assassinated 27 Black Panthers and 69 members of AIM (and subjected countless others to the slow death of incarceration).
If it be abroad or on the home front, the American secret police has been extremely proactive in beating down the movements of people rising up, thereby protecting and preserving the main pillars of white supremacist, capitalist aristocracy.
Rather than blindly believing in a golden age of democracy in order to remain at all costs within the gilded cage of an ideology produced specifically for us by the well-paid spin-doctors of a plutocratic oligarchy, we should unlock the gates of history and meticulously scrutinize the founding and evolution of the American imperial republic.
This will not only allow us to take leave of its jingoist and self-congratulatory origin myths, but it will also provide us with the opportunity to resuscitate and reactivate so much of what they have sought to obliterate. In particular, there is a radical America just below the surface of these nationalist narratives, an America in which the population autonomously organizes itself in indigenous and ecological activism, black radical resistance, anti-capitalist mobilization, anti-patriarchal struggles, and so forth.
It is this America that the corporate republic has sought to eradicate, while simultaneously investing in an expansive public relations campaign to cover over its crimes with the fig leaf of “democracy” (which has sometimes required integrating a few token individuals, who appear to be from below, into the elite ruling class in order to perpetuate the all-powerful myth of meritocracy).
If we are astute and perspicacious enough to recognize that the U.S. is undemocratic today, let us not be so indolent or ill-informed that we let ourselves be lulled to sleep by lullabies praising its halcyon past. Indeed, if the United States is not a democracy today, it is in large part due to the fact that it never was one. Far from being a pessimistic conclusion, however, it is precisely by cracking open the hard shell of ideological encasement that we can tap into the radical forces that have been suppressed by it. These forces - not those that have been deployed to destroy them - should be the ultimate source of our pride in the power of the people.
Trump has even told his staff to expect “full Trump,” which isn’t surprising given his ramp-up of 101-proof tweets recently, including the one where he blasted “global warming” advocates as Arctic winds blast the US:
“Most of those in his current decision-making circle - even if they’re not mainstream Republicans - are defending mainstream Republican principles like free trade and an internationalist view of foreign policy,” reported Axios.
“But top officials paint a different portrait of Trump when it comes to what he really wants on trade, immigration and North Korea - but has been tamped down by skeptical staff and Cabinet officials.”
In other words, there’s going to be a sharp contrast between first-year Trump and 2018 Trump. He’s going on the offensive, especially as he completes the transition from being a real estate developer to an accomplished president.
Trump is also aided by the fact that Special Counsel Robert Mueller can no longer hide the fact his probe is entirely political.
This means the globalists might get desperate enough to do anything they can to stop the president’s “America First” agenda, especially as the 2018 mid-term elections loom over the horizon.
It could be as simple as fueling an economic collapse they can blame on Trump, a likely scenario given that the central banks are staffed by financiers adept at overriding the economy with a few bad policies Trump has no control over.
So far, the nation’s economic success under Trump is due to the president simply unshackling the artificial restrains former President Obama placed on the economy.
“If the deep state is successful in taking Trump down, the entire political movement around Trump will be wiped out and our constitutional republic may never recover,” warns political commentator Michael Snyder.
“Trump is our last, best chance to dethrone the progressive globalist establishment, and that is why they hate him so much.”
Only The American People Can Take Back Their Country From Those Who Have Stolen It
The following excerpt nicely demonstrates the raw power and extraordinary potential of the Internet.
“Lastly, the reader is encouraged to look at how extensively the world has changed with a single tweet: #MeToo. Just as a lone “butterfly beating its wings in Brazil” (e.g. #MeToo) effectively caused a “second Hurricane Harvey” in 2017, which then led to a full-blown HARVEYGEDDON, just think what many of the CIA ex-spooks and former FBI agents and DOJ attorneys can do by tweeting WHAT THEY KNOW about institutional crimes under the following hashtag: #Corruptocrat."
Just as #MeToo has depopulated American society of so many serial practitioners of sexual harassment and sex abuse in the workplace, so too can #Corruptocrat eliminate the many corrupt politicians (from both parties) and government officials.
This national Internet campaign hinges on a two-pronged strategy.
First, the many government service workers who have worked at the FBI, DOJ and CIA must be provided a “safe environment” to expose the criminality that they witnessed on the job.
The more cyber-warriors who use their various Internet platforms to support this “safe environment” the better. It used to be that one whistleblower would be standing alone on the firing line after he or she just exposed a major institutional crime (or pattern of criminality).
As #MeToo has shown us, those days are over. That movement grew the legs of a millipede practically overnight because those sexual harassment whistleblowers knew that in unity there is strength; and in great numbers there is great protection.
This is exactly how so many women, in particular, felt safe enough to out their abusers beginning with the notorious Harvey Weinstein.
Do you now see just how H U G E this new #Corruptocrat Internet campaign can become? There are many tactics which can be employed in the execution of this disclosure campaign.
First, it’s compulsory to understand the underlying strategy.
This Internet campaign will utilize the same philosophy and principles that Saul Alinsky promoted in his Bolshevik handbook - Rules for Radicals.
The patriot movement is now compelled to fight fire with fire. In so doing they can take down the entire Deep State … when they truly comprehend and put into practice the right MO. Efficiently implementing the most applicable MO is absolutely essential to winning this war - the Second American Revolution.
Go After the Individual Perps!
The central pillar of this Deep State takedown strategy is to identify and isolate the proven criminal perpetrators. There are many of them, and some are hidden deep in the System.
This is where the former CIA spooks and retired FBI agents and ex-DOJ attorneys and NSA mid-managers come in.
Their job is to reveal those bad actors who have avoided exposure by virtue of their protected positions in the alphabet soup agencies and departments. They can do this anonymously by tweeting their info under a pen name or by having a distant acquaintance post the data to a Facebook wall.
As for the Comeys, Muellers and Wrays, they have already exposed themselves. So have the Clintons and Obamas, Bushes and Romneys, McCains and Grahams. Even traitors like John Brennan, James Clapper, Michael Hayden and Michael Morrell of the U.S. Intelligence Community have laid bare their treason. However, they still need to be isolated and taken down on the Internet just like the many accusers took down Harvey Weinstein.
And George H.W. Bush, Kevin Spacey, Matt Lauer, Senator Al Franken, Rep. John Conyers, Federal Judge Alex Kozinski, Roger Ailes, Charlie Rose, Mark Halperin, the Metropolitan Opera’s James Levine, the New York City Ballet’s Peter Martins, NPR’s Michael Oreskes, Brett Ratner, Russell Simmons, Louis C.K., James Toback, Dustin Hofffman, Gene Simmons, Terry Richardson, Bill Cosby before HARVEYGEDDON even began.
Hopefully the patriots on both the Right and the Left get the picture. In this way, each cyber-warrior needs to become an Internet investigator and prosecutor of sorts.
Let us explain why this is such pivotal tactic necessary to win the fight.
Make it Personal, Not Institutional!
Everyone just saw how the MSM was used to take down Roy Moore with a fictitious sex scandal and transparently fake news. They first identified Moore as a lone duck; even Trump abandoned him.
After methodically isolating him, they went in for the kill. His loss at the polls and in the voting booth was a perfectly controlled demolition by Deep State. Then they proceeded to outright steal the election through voting fraud and vote count tampering.
They attempted this very same game plan against Trump during the 2016 campaign season, yes? Yes!
We the People must go after the guilty politicians of both parties; corrupt government officials at the federal, state and municipal levels; and compromised VIPs who use their wealth, power, influence and public platforms to support the Deep State agenda.
The really key point here is that nothing BIG ever happens when you just go after “the System”. Things really change when the individual agents of Deep State are taken down by being exposed as the hardened criminals (think George Soros) that they truly are.
All of these Deep State operatives are fundamentally enemies of the American people, and they should be treated as such.
Therefore, the more these foreign agents are pursued personally for their own crimes and corruption, the easier the war will be won. The bottom line here is this:
“Only when the ponerized agents of Deep State are more afraid of We the People than they are of their hidden masters of PONERIZATION, will things really start to change for the better."
Everyone knows that Congress is thoroughly and hopelessly corrupt. Who doesn’t know that the Mainstream Media is owned and operated by the criminal C.I.A.
Everybody is aware that the Obama Administration was the most lawless and depraved in U.S. history.
Who doesn’t know that the Clinton Crime Family is a actually a highly organized international crime syndicate?
What’s the Vital Point?
We must go after the individual corrupt Congressman with focus and resolve, not Congress.
We must address the “fake news” put out by Wolf Blitzer, Andrea Mitchell, Anderson Cooper, Rachel Maddow, Jim Acosta, Jake Tapper, Chuck Todd, Chris Matthews, Chris Cuomo, Don Lemon, Brian Stelter, Katie Couric, Brian Williams, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Shepard Smith, Alisyn Camerota and Fareed Zakaria, not the MSM as a whole.
We must focus on the specific State Department crimes committed by Hillary Clinton, sex crimes by Bill Clinton, Clinton Foundation crimes by Chelsea Clinton, and especially the unspeakable crimes perpetrated by the Podesta brothers against our children.
The same goes for the many career criminals who populated every level of the Obama Administration to include Barack Obama and Michelle Obama, and especially AGs Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch. Then there was Joe Biden and Valerie Jarrett, Victoria Nuland and Samantha Power, Susan Rice and David Axelrod, Lois Lerner and John Koskinen, etc., etc., etc.
Only by ‘surrounding’ each of the criminal perps and isolating them, and then prosecuting each of them to the fullest extent of the law, will their myriad co-conspirators jump ship and assist with the final destruction of Deep State.
But for those who require them in case of an emergency, they can be extremely helpful. Besides the minute threat of magnetic frequencies, new concerns over the drugs used to produce clearer images have been shown to leave toxic residue in the brain. These findings have shown the importance of more stringent health monitoring prior to MRI application.
The Real Danger Behind MRI's
MRIs are typically safer than a CT scan, as they emit little to no radiation during the procedure. The real concern surrounding MRIs, in fact, has nothing to do with the technology at all.
Patients are often given injectable drugs that improve the visibility of certain areas in the brain, which can be very useful for discovering health issues that could possibly be missed. The issue is that these drugs may accumulate gadolinium - a toxic metal - in brain tissue.
The medications, known as contrasting agents, sharpens the resulting images; however, it may also be contributing to deleterious effects, many of which have yet to surface in any research.
Toxic metals that build up in brain tissue are commonly associated with age-related brain declines, such as those attributed to dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Some research even shows that these drugs could be linked to kidney problems, prompting FDA to issue a “black box” warning on the drugs.
What You Should Know About MRI's
There are currently nine gadolinium-based agents in the United States, and two of the most concerning are made by GE Healthcare and Bayer HealthCare. Omniscan is perhaps the most commonly-used contrast agents used during MRIs, as is Magnevist, Gadavist, and Dotarem.
If you take into consideration the compounds we are exposed to almost every day that are already contributing to brain degeneration (i.e., aluminum), you can see why you must be constantly aware of what is being offered to you by medical professionals.
Ask questions and research any drugs that you are being given, especially if you are having an MRI, and work with your doctor to find safer methods for obtaining your health goals.
Uses keywords like “America” and “Trump” to silence opposing views.
In what represents a chokeslam of an exposé, Project Veritas has released undercover video of Twitter engineers admitting that they deliberately censor conservative opinions and are implementing a way of relegating “shitty people” so their content is shadow banned.
In the video, current and former Twitter employees confirm virtually everything that conservatives have long suspected about the left-wing company silencing people on the right.
Key quotes include;
Olinda Hassan, Policy Manager for Twitter Trust and Safety, admits that Twitter is implementing software algorithms that down rank conservatives so “shitty people to not show up” on people’s timelines.
“The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don’t know they’ve been banned, because they keep posting and no one sees their content,” says former Twitter software engineer Abhinov Vadrevu. “So they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it.”
Parnay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, reveals that the company’s machine learning algorithms are programmed with “five thousand keywords to describe a redneck,” which include words like Trump, America, as well as images of the U.S. flag, guns and Christian crosses and these terms are used to delete “bot” accounts as well as down rank conservatives.
Singh also revealed that the U.S. government routinely pressures Twitter to take down Julian Assange’s account and that this is the reason he isn’t verified Singh also says that governments ask Twitter to remove accounts belonging to other public figures because they don’t like their political views.
Former Twitter Content Review Agent Mo Norai admits that Twitter employees have the power to ban accounts if they merely disagree with someone’s political views, remarking,
“Yeah, if they said this is: ‘Pro-Trump’ I don’t want it because it offends me, this, that. And I say I banned this whole thing, and it goes over here and they are like, ‘Oh you know what? I don’t like it too. You know what? Mo’s right, let’s go, let’s carry on, what’s next?”
The video represents the biggest tech/censorship story in years yet will attract little or no mainstream media coverage.
Writing in pravdareport.com , Costantino Ceoldo provides insights into the nature of the North Korean government and explains Washington’s responsibility for North Korea’s determination to possess nuclear weapons.
Washington has kept a state of war with North Korea open for 64 years and continues to overthrow governments that have policies independent of Washington.
Coment: David Wilcock is one of a few researchers with insider connections who have reported that North Korea is actually a puppet state of the Rothschild faction of the Cabal.It's simply the last in a long line of 'Boogeyman' regimes that have been used as justification for various wars and foreign policies that have been - until the advent of Trump - used to bring about the illuminati fascist globalist agenda.
Keeping this in mind, the following article reads somewhat interestingly.
A Dictator is a transient and temporary figure in the life of a Nation. When power passes from father to son to nephew, we can no longer speak of dictatorship. In such a case it is more correct to speak of monarchy and ruling dynasty to describe the situation in which the power over a people is administered by the same family, continuously, through the generations.
From this point of view, the current ruler of North Korea is king and not dictator. In fact, Kim Yong-Un inherited the power from his father Kim Jong-Il, who in turn had inherited it from his father, Kim Il-Sung. Kim is therefore a well-established dynasty in North Korea, a bloodline whose male members reign over the country until death and enjoy in the eyes of the common people even a form of deification, thanks to skillful political propaganda and perhaps to a certain inclination of the North Korean soul.
A monarchy needs an aristocratic class that supports it and aids control of the territory. If it is easy to identify the royal family, identifying the elements of the aristocracy can be more complicated.
However, we can perhaps find the aristocracy in the managers of the large industrial plants, in state-owned farms; among those responsible for the maintenance of the roads, electric and telecommunications network, and the most prestigious university professors.
Depending on the names and the frequency with which the managers are replaced in their assignments, we could deduce a scheme that helps us to understand something about the internal mechanisms of power and therefore about the structure of the North Korean aristocratic class.
Then there is the military apparatus that is always the instrument with which a government, even the most “democratic”, maintains control over the population and the territory, while at the same time parrying possible external attacks. North Korea is no difference from this point of view.
If someone asked me then what North Korea is, I would answer that it is a country with a communist economy, governed by a monarchy that is helped in its governance by a political council with representatives of both the armed forces and a noble class of apparatchiks.
The rule of the Kim family is justified by its resistance to the Americans. The end of hostilities on the battlefield in 1953 and the creation of the demilitarized zone in the 38th parallel did not lead to the end of the war but to its indefinite suspension thanks to the longest truce in human history: 64 years.
The state of war between the two Koreas (and between North Korea and the Western coalition that attacked it) still remains today. Between the parties to the conflict, there is an armistice, not a peace treaty.
However, it can be said that Washington did not win the Korean War while North Korea did, at least as long as it continues to exist as a sovereign nation.
North Korea suffered immense sufferings during the war. The amount of bombs that the Americans dropped on North Korea was larger than they dropped on the entire Eastern theater of World War II, by their own admission and boast.
The Americans spared nothing and even scattered anthrax on the border between North Korea and China, to hit the herds and starve the populations. However, the Korean people resisted, and they still resist today.
The way to end the conflict and North Korea’s need for nuclear weapons is to sign a peace treaty and remove the sanctions and threats against North Korea.
That Washington has followed a contrary policy for 64 years suggests that Washington intends to keep the conflict alive. North Korea is another “enemy” that the US military/security complex can use to terrify Americans into continued support of the large US military budget.
Orwell’s Dystopian CCTV Surveillance State Comes To Life In China – Who’s Next? January 12 2018 | From: WakingTimes
We are fast approaching the technological and political realization of George Orwell’s dystopian promise for humanity.
In the classic work 1984, Orwell describes a tightly controlled future where technocratic elites have stamped out individualism with total information awareness and total surveillance from the home, to the office, to the street.
“There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time.
But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever the wanted to. You had to live- did live, from habit that became instinct- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”
As consumers sheepishly allow smart devices into their homes, real time audio and video of personal space is being uploaded to the web for use by corporations and government. The encroachment into the home with this two-way monitoring is unsettling, but for years new we have been witnessing the explosion of CCTV cameras on the streets of major cities around the world.
Now, couple CCTV cameras with artificial intelligence enhanced facial recognition technology and you have precisely what Orwell warned us of.
A recent BBC expose into the network of facial recognition CCTV cameras in China’s biggest, Beijing, shows us just how effective this network is identifying, tracking, and interdicting any targeted or wanted individual within minutes. This is in a city with a whopping 21.5 million residents.
This vision is put into words here by Wired Magazine:
“Imagine a world where many of your daily activities were constantly monitored and evaluated: what you buy at the shops and online; where you are at any given time; who your friends are and how you interact with them; how many hours you spend watching content or playing video games; and what bills and taxes you pay (or not).
It’s not hard to picture, because most of that already happens, thanks to all those data-collecting behemoths like Google, Facebook and Instagram or health-tracking apps such as Fitbit. But now imagine a system where all these behaviours are rated as either positive or negative and distilled into a single number, according to rules set by the government.
That would create your Citizen Score and it would tell everyone whether or not you were trustworthy. Plus, your rating would be publicly ranked against that of the entire population and used to determine your eligibility for a mortgage or a job, where your children can go to school – or even just your chances of getting a date.”
In 2016, 24,338 tons of physical gold were traded, which was 43 percent more than in 2015, according to Claudio Grass, of Precious Metal Advisory Switzerland.
Gold Moving From the West to the East
“We have to put the BRICS initiative into a broader context. It is just part of a geopolitical tectonic shift which started decades ago. We have seen a constant outflow of physical gold from the West to the East.
At the same time, the West has lost the economic war, and as a consequence, the focus now turns to the financial system. China dominates the world economy and has displaced the US as the world’s most formidable economic powerhouse,” he told RT.
The Creation of a New Gold Standard by BRICS is Also a Step to End the US Dollar’s Domination of the Global Economy
“As Bejing and Moscow understand that America used the dollar to control the world, by implementing a new kind of ‘Gold standard 2.0’ they want to distance themselves from this control. Furthermore, the vast majority of the people in Asia sees gold as superior, or ‘real’ money, something the West has forgotten, because of all the paper wealth (credit) they have accumulated,”said Grass.
The expert notes the BRICS countries account for 40 percent of the world’s population and around 23 percent of the world’s domestic product.
“In combination with the announcement of pricing oil in yuan, using a gold-backed futures contract in Shanghai, the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the New Development Bank, China is setting up an alternative to the post-Bretton Woods establishment. This is certainly a game changer,”said Grass.
Physically Backed Precious Metals Market Spells the End of Paper Gold Trade
The level of trust between BRICS countries can help them establish intragroup gold trading, which would be 100 percent physically backed.
“This will present a viable challenger that could over time lead to a break up of the current system since the West will likely still trade paper gold in the meantime,”Grass said.
According to London gold clearing statistics for 2016, the total trading volume in the London Over-the-Counter (OTC) gold market is estimated at the equivalent of 1.5 million tons of gold. The volume of 100oz gold futures on New York’s COMEX reached 57.5 million contracts during 2016 or 179,000 tonnes of gold, the analyst notes.
The Amount of Mined Gold is Much Smaller
Comment: On this point the author is uninformed. Neil Keenan and David Wilcock have both exposed the truth on this matter, that in fact the amount of gold that has been mined and that is currently out of the system is many, many times greater that those who are uninformed believe. Further detail on this matter can be found on the following link:
“If we now take into consideration that only approximately 180,000 tons of gold have actually been mined up to today the scam is just gigantic and obviously unsustainable. The paper scams in London and New York will either blow up when the paper price of gold drops to zero or when just a fraction of investors insists upon receiving physical gold in return,”Grass said.
The expert believes that with paper gold trading, the established gold exchanges could cease to exist sooner or later.
“They will likely become obsolete and lose their importance over time. Although one cannot predict exactly how fast this will happen, the trend is clear: OTC and COMEX are working toward their own destruction,”he said.
Gold Prices Could Explode if Trading Were Backed by Physical Precious Metals
“It will definitely lead to higher prices for physical gold. Imagine if you could buy on COMEX and OTC gold at a much lower price and still have the option to sell it in Asia for a much higher price; this would kill the old paper scams immediately. Therefore, I would guess that both could come up with new restrictions that only cash settlements will be allowed to avoid this. We know for example that even today 99.96 percent of COMEX gold futures are settled in cash,”Grass wrote.
The analyst recollected the Heartland Theory of Halford Mackinder, a British geostrategist at the beginning of the 20th century who influenced the likes of Kissinger and Brzezinski. Following the theory, we will soon face a war between physical gold and the US dollar.
“As per my understanding, we are moving into the final phase, the battle between currencies – one that will be backed by a hard asset which was real money since time immemorial until 1971 and the other one, backed by promises that future generations will pay through debt, inflation and ever-rising taxation,”he said.
GettingAway From Fiat Currencies Will be Good for Gold
“I would like to conclude with a final thought from my friend Jayant Bandari: the combination of negative yields, massive political risks around the world, and any attempt to move away from traditional currencies will be positive for gold and will take it to the next level. Investing is very much linked with geopolitics – once you understand the big picture, it becomes apparent what you should invest in,” Grass told RT.
Israeli Teens Tell Netanyahu They Won’t Serve In IDF, Slam Occupation Of Palestine January 10 2018 | From: RT
Sixty-three Israeli students signed a letter stating they would defy mandatory military service despite the risk of jail. Citing the occupation of Palestine, the letter criticizes the policies of Israel’s “racist government.”
The letter, signed on Thursday by sixty-three high school students from across Israel, is addressed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, Education Minister Naftali Bennett and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot.
Pointing to Israel’s blockade on the Gaza Strip and illegal West Bank settlements, the letter states that:
“The army implements the policy of a racist government that violates basic human rights, which applies one law to Israelis and another to the Palestinians in the same area.”
Blaming the Israeli government and IDF for decades of violent conflict, the students wrote they;
“Decided not to take part in the occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people, which separates people into two hostile camps. Because as long as people live under occupation that denies them human rights and national rights we will not be able to achieve peace.”
The signatories also said that Israelis are exposed to a culture of “militarism” from a young age, and that they want to “change the entire system.”
The IDF has not formally responded to the letter, but Yesh Atid MK Elazar Stern, a retired IDF major general, called the letter “sad” but “marginal.
“I think our youth is committed enough to handle these marginal types. It’s minuscule compared to the hundreds of thousands who enlist, and isn’t more than [the number of draft dodgers] in the past,” Stern said.
All Jewish, Druze and Circassian Israeli citizens over 18 are expected to serve in the IDF. However, Israel’s Arab minority is exempt from mandatory service. Men serve for two years and eight months, and women for two years.
Although such cases are rare, the IDF has previously jailed young conscientious objectors who have refused to serve. In July, 19-year-old Noa Gur Golan was detained in a military prison for defying her draft orders. In an open letter she wrote before refusing to enlist, Golan said she could not be complicit in a “reality where violence is the norm.”
In a similar incident in 2014, 53 graduates of Jerusalem's Arts and Science Academy signed a letter declaring their refusal to serve in the military. The alumni of the prestigious university wrote that the IDF was a:
“Contractor in active segregation based on the concept of ethnic superiority of the Jews over Palestinians – a regime that oppresses and tramples basic human rights, which applies a different legal system to the different populations in the West Bank, and uses a system of discrimination based on ethnic lines from 1948."
The United Nations has repeatedly called on Israel to withdraw from occupied Palestinian territory. In March, the UN’s Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) published a report accusing Israel “beyond a reasonable doubt” of being guilty of:
“Policies and practices that constitute the crime of apartheid”against the Palestinian people.
NYT Pulitzer Prize Reporter Says NYT A Whore For Washington January 9 2018 | From: PaulCraigRoberts / RT
End of ‘free’ press? NYT caved in to Bush & Obama, held NSA bombshell for 1 yr – James Risen.
The New York Times was “quite willing” to quash stories at the behest of the government, writes Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter James Risen. He warns that America’s press has been muzzled by “hyped threats” to national security.
In an in-depth retelling of his experience as a national security reporter for the New York Times (NYT), published in The Intercept, Risen explains how, on more than one occasion, the NYT yielded to government demands to withhold or kill his stories – including a bombshell report about the NSA’s secret surveillance program under President George W. Bush.
Jaded by previous experiences of US government interference in his work, Risen writes that his NSA story set him on a “collision course” with his editors, “who were still quite willing to cooperate with the government.” His editors at the Times had been convinced by top US officials that revealing the illegal surveillance program would endanger American lives, Risen said.
ill Keller, the then executive editor of Times, said the newspaper’s decision to shelve the explosive report, which detailed how the NSA had “monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years,” was motivated by the lingering “trauma” of the 9/11 terror attacks, and the sobering reality that the “world was a dangerous place.”
Risen’s NSA scoop, which later won him a Pulitzer Prize, was eventually published a year after he submitted it to his seniors – but only after Bush had been safely re-elected. Risen said that upon hearing the story was finally going to print, Bush telephoned Arthur Sulzberger, the Times’s publisher, requesting a private meeting to convince him against running the story.
Risen also recounts how, in the run-up to the Iraq War, his stories questioning alleged links between Iraq and Al Qaeda “were being cut, buried, or held out of the paper altogether.” While cooperation between the press and the government poses a number of troubling questions, Risen also points to the zealous persecution of whistleblowers, leakers, and even journalists themselves, as a root cause of the troubling state of American media.
Leaks and unauthorized disclosures to the press were once “generally tolerated as facts of life” in the intelligence community. Risen remembers how a top CIA official once told him that:
“His rule of thumb for whether a covert operation should be approved was, ‘How will this look on the front page of the New York Times?’ If it would look bad, don’t do it. Of course, his rule of thumb was often ignored.”
Under the auspices of protecting “national security,” this presumed culture of tolerating leaks and respecting a journalist’s special relationship with his or her sources was tossed out the window after the 9/11 attacks.
After being dragged to court by the Bush administration in an attempt to force him to reveal the identity of one of his sources, Risen was saddened to discover that the war on press freedoms only got worse under Obama.
“My case was part of a broader crackdown on reporters and whistleblowers that had begun during the presidency of George W. Bush and continued far more aggressively under the Obama administration, which had already prosecuted more leak cases than all previous administrations combined,” writes Risen. “Obama officials seemed determined to use criminal leak investigations to limit reporting on national security. But the crackdown on leaks only applied to low-level dissenters; top officials caught up in leak investigations, like former CIA Director David Petraeus, were still treated with kid gloves.”
Now largely dependent on government-sanctioned “leaks,” Risen laments what he describes as “exaggerated reporting on terrorism” found in the New York Times and other media outlets, which has had a “major political impact in the United States and helped close off debate in Washington over whether to significantly roll back some of the most draconian counterterrorism programs, like NSA spying.”
Concluding his “collision course” saga with the New York Times and the Bush and Obama administrations, Risen observes that much of the mainstream media continues to dutifully report on “hyped threats,” missing “key lessons from the debacle over WMD reporting before the war in Iraq.”
“Every year, Facebook gets tens of thousands of requests for data from governments worldwide, including search warrants, subpoenas, or calls to restrict certain kinds of content. And, according to a new report, those requests are increasing at an alarming rate.
According to QZ.com, in the United States, the requests rose by 26% from the last six months of 2016 to the first six months of 2017, while globally, requests increased by about 21%. Since 2013, when the company first started providing data on government requests, the US number has been steadily rising—it has roughly tripled in a period of four years.
“You have to remember that Zuckerberg had “seed money” and that seed money came from CIA front companies that put a lot of resources into this and…basically think about it as like, sowing seeds; if you will. They knew that Facebook was gonna bear fruit.
I don’t think they realized just how big it would become. But I can tell you that they get so much information and intel from social media: I don’t think that it would go away even if we wanted it to.”The government keeps requesting the information, and Facebook continues to comply with the government’s demands. In the first six months of 2013, it granted the government - which includes the police - 79% of requests (“some data was produced” in these cases, the company says); in the first six months of 2017, that share rose to 85%.
“We continue to carefully scrutinize each request we receive for account data - whether from an authority in the U.S., Europe, or elsewhere — to make sure it is legally sufficient,” Chris Sonderby, the company’s general counsel, wrote in a post. “If a request appears to be deficient or overly broad, we push back, and will fight in court, if necessary.”
But Joseph thinks Facebook is just trying to pacify the easily manipulated sheeple of society. “This is pretty troubling when you think about what you put out there, what they collect, and Facebook only being one of the many avenues that they have,” Joseph says.
“The United States is collecting your data. Whether you like it or not. They are scooping up everything. And they’re taking it and they’re storing it in their facility at Bluffdale, Utah which has the capacity at this time to store every communication on the face of this earth for the next one hundred years.”
“It’s unbelievable,” Joseph continues. “This is stuff that is unacceptable to me, but I’m sure, to a lot of you. And these companies have really gone too far…they can reconstruct your life and make anyone they want a patsy.”
“Smart” Meters: Recalls, Replacements, Fires, Explosions, General Failure, Measurement Errors, Privacy Concerns, Cybersecurity Risks, And Sick People January 7 2018 | From: ActivistPost
In 2011, Consumers Digest predicted that “Smart” Meters “represents little more than a boondoggle that is being foisted on consumers by the politically influential companies”: “Why Smart Meters Might Be a Dumb Idea.”
So it’s not all that surprising that so far – hundreds of thousands of “Smart” Meters have been recalled and/or replaced throughout North America due to various reasons including fires, explosions, general failure, and measurement errors.
There are utility companies who are already making plans to replace hundreds of thousands more.
All over the world, concerned citizens, elected officials, and organizations have been fighting to keep “Smart” Meters out of their communities due to health, safety, privacy, and cybersecurity concerns. When they haven’t been able to completely stop utilities, they fight for the right to “opt out” of “Smart Meters” being installed on their homes and businesses.
Even proponents who originally gushed about “Smart” Meters seem to have changed their tune. One example is Sara Jerome of Water Online:
“The capabilities of smart water and electric meters are astounding, going far beyond what consumers may normally associate with this technology. GreenTechMedia recently documented just how powerful these devices can be.”
“The cost of installing a smart meter is a] heavy lift no matter what the size of the utility,” George Hawkins, DC Water’s chief executive officer and general manager, told Bloomberg BNA.
Now back to the hundreds of thousands that have been replaced and/or recalled already as well as the plans to replace more. This isn’t a complete list and it only includes examples from North America. Problems are going on everywhere with these “Smart” Meters. Certainly there are people profiting from them but it doesn’t seem to be the consumers.
“As Naperville gets ready to retrofit up to 4,000 homes each year with new electronic water meters, the city’s water director stressed that reading the meters remotely is not cost effective and workers will continue going home to home to retrieve the information.
The city is preparing to purchase Sensus iPerl water meters to replace aging and less-accurate mechanical meters. The first 4,000 should be installed in the fall, and the rest would follow at a rate of 4,000 annually until all 43,000 in Naperville are replaced.”
November 2016: “LADWP Accidentally Overcharged Its Customers By At Least $67.5 Million”: After LADWP installed the PricewaterhouseCoopers designed billing system, customers almost immediately began finding bogus fees and overcharges on their utility bills. Four separate individuals filed class-action lawsuits against LADWP, all of which were eventually merged into one single case, according to KPCC.
“The new meters will replace not only old analog mechanical meters, but also first-generation smart meters deployed in past years by Duke Kentucky as part of a pilot project. Those meters communicated with a central office using signals sent on power lines, a system that Duke Kentucky said had technical limitations.”
“The system had a ten year warranty and now more than 6000 of those smart meters no longer give out a signal. The parish CFO Ross Gonzales estimates by the end of the year more than half of the registers will no longer transmit a signal.”
“What has happened with the mass deployment of wireless smart meters without consultation or informing insurers, education, sciences or anyone requires that Forensic Audit.
The idea that a plastic head with water or the ridiculous Specific Absorption Rate test was represented as science substantiating safety requires an investigation based on a global unprecedented health and environmental emergency.” http://thermoguy.com/category/news-and-updates/”
Original one-way transmitting analog meters lasted on average 40 years and they didn’t have these problems. (Author is actually referring to AMR electric meters; analog meters would not transmit data at all. Please see comment below from Catherine Frompovich for further explanation – Ed.)
‘Accept The Will Of The People On Migration, Culture, Or Hit The Road’: Orbán Tells Europe’s Leaders January 6 2018 | From: Breitbart
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said that Europeans are “asserting their will” by supporting leaders who reject mass migration and support Christian foundations, and gave a warning to politicians who deny the “natural order of democracy”.
The conservative Fidesz party leader told Kossuth Radio’slisteners that 2.3 million Hungarians took part in the national consultation against the George Soros-backed pro-mass migration plan, and Mr. Orbán now intends to spend the next few months convincing his opponents that Europe is right to protect her borders and her culture.
Asked by the 180 Minutes hostwhat made him think that after two years, since the migrant crisis, progressive leaders would listen now, Mr. Orbán said: “Because in the meantime elections are being held in Europe.”
Those who argue for a “mixed population” and to “abolish societies based on national and Christian foundations” in favour of living in multicultural societies “are continually losing ground in national elections”, he observed.
“European people… will assert their will. Look at the elections that have been held in Europe over the last few months. And I think that this process will intensify.
“So we must hold out until Western Europeans follow the Central Europeans by becoming strong enough to use their democratic institutions, their elections, to force their leaders to pursue a policy which people favour and support a policy which rejects immigration,” said the prime minister.
Predicting in 2016 that the following year would be the ‘year of rebellion‘ when citizens would vote against the establishment, the conservative noted that even the elections of progressive EU federalists Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel showed evidence of the disruption to the system.
In France, “the entire political elite was swept away” and likewise in Germany, which he noted is three months without a government post-election, “immigration has changed the balance of political power”.
Elsewhere in Europe, the growth of populism and resurgence of conservatism – both celebrated as on the wane by the mainstreammedia – has been witnessed in 2017 with rising support for the Dutch Party for Freedom; the Czech Republic electing Eurosceptic Andrej Babiš as prime minister; the collapse in the polls of the establishment PD party in Italy; and Poland and Hungary’s conservative governments seeing record support.
Notably, the establishment Austrian People’s Party moved to the right resulting in a conservative-populist coalition with the Freedom Party of Austria.
“In Austria this is the new reality,” the Hungarian prime minister told listeners, adding that he was “counting on” Austria aligning herself with the Visegrád Group.
Saying that Europe’s leaders cannot remain far from the will of the people, Prime Minister Orbán said: “The people have not moved closer to their leaders, but those leaders have been forced to acknowledge that if they persist in the approach they’ve been following they’ll be forced to up sticks and hit the road.
“This process is now taking place as we watch. I am sure that sooner or later the will of European people and the policy of their leaders must come together and once more align with each other.
“This is the natural order of democracy. At times, perhaps, there can be a certain gap between the will of the people and the aims of their leaders, but in the long run, a wide gap will be unsustainable.”
“Two ex-prisoners of war meet after many years. When the first one asks, ‘Have you forgiven your captors yet?’ the second man answers, ‘No, never.’ ‘Well then,’ the first man replies, ‘they still have you in prison’.” - Jack Kornfield
In the journey of life, we often feel emotionally hurt by other people. Usually we quickly recover from our heartache and grief, and are able to move forward. Yet, there are times when we feel stuck to our past, feeling so upset and miserable that hurting back those who hurt us seems to be the only way to ease our pain.
But does revenge ever work? The short answer is no and below you’re going to find out exactly why.
Revenge Isn’t Sweet
“Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.”
The belief that revenge is sweet is constantly reinforced by our culture. For example, have a look at the most popular films and novels - which are nothing but a reflection of our society’s collective mind - and you’ll quickly figure out that many of them depict revenge as a desirable thing to seek after.
A common story theme they share is that of two characters - a “good” and an “evil” - who are fighting against each other. The “evil” one has done something wrong to the “good” one, and the latter’s life task is to get even by taking revenge against the former, even if that would mean risking his life.
Once that is achieved, the “good” character is portrayed as the brave hero who derives tremendous satisfaction from his accomplishment.
Contrary to what those fictional scenarios may depict, the reality is that revenge is counterproductive - that is, instead of making you feel better, it only leads you to experience further pain.
Firstly, seeking revenge is detrimental to your well-being. In particular, it’s increasing your stress levels, thus impairing your physical and emotional health.
Secondly, believing that revenge is crucial to your happiness, you might continually want each and every individual who’s hurt you to pay the price for their actions. The result? Wasting your precious time trying to ruin other people’s lives instead of improving your own.
Thirdly, by taking revenge you’re acting exactly like those you claim to abhor, thus turning into the worst version of yourself. Realizing this, you’re soon going to regret what you did, and find yourself immersed in remorse and guilt.
Lastly, many of those you take revenge on will likely want to revenge back on you (for revenging on them!) This way you’ll unintentionally help create a never-ending cycle of interpersonal conflict that will inevitably bring tremendous suffering into your life.
By hurting others, you’re also hurting yourself.
Revenge is nothing but a quick fix - initially, it might indeed feel sweet for a short while, but soon we come to experience its bitter aftertaste. So what’s the point of it?