It has two divisions, each focusing on different parts of the world: SIGINT Seniors Europe and SIGINT Seniors Pacific. Both are led by the U.S. National Security Agency, and together they include representatives from at least 17 other countries. Members of the group are from spy agencies that eavesdrop on communications – a practice known as “signals intelligence,” or SIGINT.
Details about the meetings of the SIGINT Seniors are disclosed in a batch of classified documents from the NSA’s internal newsletter SIDToday, provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden and published today by The Intercept.
The documents shine light on the secret history of the coalition, the issues that the participating agencies have focused on in recent years, and the systems that allow allied countries to share sensitive surveillance data with each other.
The SIGINT Seniors Europe was formed in 1982, amid the Cold War. Back then, the alliance had nine members, whose primary focus was on uncovering information about the Soviet Union’s military. Following the attacks on the U.S. in September 2001, the group grew to 14 and began focusing its efforts on counterterrorism.
The core participants of the Seniors Europe are the surveillance agencies from the so-called Five Eyes: the NSA and its counterparts from the U.K., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. As of April 2013, the other members were intelligence agencies from Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden.
The alliance – which the NSA sometimes refers to as the “14 Eyes” – has collaborated to monitor communications during major European events, such as the Olympics in 2004 (hosted in Greece), the Winter Olympics in 2006 (hosted in Italy), and the soccer World Cup in summer 2006 (hosted in Germany).
Between 2006 and 2007, as part of a counterterrorism operation, the agencies began working on “exploitation of the Internet,” which was described by the NSA as a “huge step forward” for the group, because some members of the alliance had previously been “reluctant to acknowledge there was such a thing as the Internet.”
As of 2010, the agencies were focused on targeting suspected terrorists, sharing intelligence related to piracy in the Horn of Africa, and they were collaborating on the development of new surveillance tools and techniques.
According to the documents, the Seniors Europe had its own dedicated communication network called SIGDASYS, through which each agency can share copies of intercepted communications. The group also used a system called CENTER ICE to share intelligence about the war in Afghanistan.
The documents indicate that the Seniors Europe hold an annual conference, each time in a different location. In 2013, for instance, the group gathered in Sweden; in 2011, it met in the U.K; in 2010, in Germany; and in 2009, in Canada. In 2013, the NSA expressed an interest in creating a permanent facility that would host representatives from the Seniors Europe in a joint collaborative space.
The NSA discussed the idea with its U.K. counterpart, Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ. The British were “all in” on the proposal, according to the NSA. However, from some unnamed members of the SIGINT Seniors, there was “persistent pushback” on the plan.
The NSA thought the facility would be best hosted in the U.K., as this would “be optimal in terms of having the most flexibility in tuning the operation to benefit the Five Eyes.” The agency also suggested the idea of France potentially hosting the unit, but outlined its reservations about setting up the spy hub in continental Europe.
“Some European nations may be leery about hosting a facility in their nation,” the NSA noted, partly due to “associated concerns for European human rights laws.” (Both NSA and its British counterpart, GCHQ, declined to answer questions for this story. GCHQ issued a statement asserting that it adheres to “a strict legal and policy framework, which ensures that our activities are authorised, necessary and proportionate.”)
The Pacific division of the SIGINT Seniors is younger than the European branch. The NSA formed it in 2005, with the aim of “establishing a collaborative effort to fight terrorism in the Asia-Pacific region.” In March 2007, the NSA said that it was in the process of “raising ideas for expanding [SIGINT Seniors Pacific’s] intelligence focus beyond counterterrorism.”
“The NSA was passing the Indians selected top-secret material, and India began leaking some of the intelligence..”
The founder members of the Pacific alliance were the spy agencies from the Five Eyes, as well as South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand. By 2013, France and India had joined the Pacific group.
The NSA was particularly keen on having India on board as part of a broader U.S. government effort to improve relations with the country, and “felt strongly that India’s participation in multilateral intelligence sharing would help mature its Indian SIGINT agencies as well as provide regional [counterterrorism] expertise.”
In March 2008, then-NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander led a delegation of officials – including representatives from Singapore and New Zealand – to New Delhi, where he asked India’s spy agencies if they would like to join forces. Three months later, the Indians accepted.
The Pacific group used a system called CRUSHED ICE to share information. According to an NSA document dated from November 2007, CRUSHED ICE is a secure network that enables sharing of secret intelligence, collected from intercepted communications, about counterterrorism.
“The system allows for collaboration by way of voice, binary-file/email exchanges, analysis and reporting, graphics and mapping, communities of interest, collection management, and other applications as needed,” the November 2007 document stated.
For the countries invited to participate in the SIGINT Seniors, there are obvious benefits. They can learn new surveillance techniques from the world’s most powerful spy agencies and at the same time, obtain information about their own countries or regions that they otherwise may have been unable to access.
But not all nations who have been invited to join the alliance have jumped on board. According to an NSA document from March 2007, Japan refused to sign up to the Pacific group, expressing concerns that “unintended disclosure of its participation would be too high a risk.”
A downside of SIGINT Seniors is the risk that a partner will mishandle sensitive information. This happened on at least one occasion with India. By the time terrorists had struck Mumbai in a series of attacks in November 2008, the country had been admitted to the Pacific group.
The NSA was passing the Indians selected top-secret material, such as interrogation reports and recordings of intercepted phone calls. In the weeks following the Mumbai incident, India began leaking some of the intelligence - “at times it seemed a daily occurrence,” the NSA’s country desk officer complained.
The NSA limited the provisioning of top-secret information to India after repeated warnings and meetings left it dissatisfied. Still, the NSA, which had deployed analysts to India, remained hopeful Indian intelligence agencies would “mature … into the partners NSA needs in South Asia.”
The SIGINT Seniors likely remains active today and has probably grown its capabilities in recent years.
According to the 2013 “black budget” – a portion of the U.S. federal budget dedicated to secret intelligence-gathering work – the NSA was that year working to bolster both the European and Pacific branches of the SIGINT Seniors, and planned to “expand the level of cooperation on [counterterrorism] and explore other potential areas of collaboration.”
An Objective Analysis Of The QAnon Phenomenon April 19 2018 | From: VigilantCitizen
Claiming to be a high-level government insider, “Q” has been posting cryptic messages on 8Chan, unveiling the extent of the “deep state” while claiming that it is about to be taken down. Here’s a look at this mind-boggling phenomenon.
At the center of it all: Hundreds of cryptic messages posted on a regular basis by an anonymous 8Chan user who claims to have “Q Clearance”, the “highest level of security within all departments”. (Although we don’t if Q is a man, woman or a group of people, the pronoun “he” will be used in this article for legibility).
Through short forum posts comprised of keywords, codes, riddles, questions, pictures, and bizarre computer commands, Q claims to be delivering the “biggest intel drop in known history”. Every few days, a piece is added to a gigantic conspiracy puzzle which, once understood, is said to unlock the truth about the powers that be. And nothing less.
Through his posts, Q describes a global elite that is evil, satanic, and bent on pedophilia. In his descriptions, this elite group deals with international human trafficking, it orchestrates false flag events to advance its agenda, and conducts occult rituals behind closed doors. It owns and uses Hollywood, mainstream media and social networks to control the narrative and to censor the truth.
Basics of the #QAnon Phenomenon
While the above might not surprise the average “truther”, Q’s message has a startling twist: Donald Trump is actually raging a silent war against this globalist elite and is even brewing a major “counter-coup” to retake the American government.
According to Q, Mueller’s investigation regarding Russian collusion is a front. In actuality, he’s about to indict hundreds of high-profile politicians and celebrities including the Clintons, Podestas, and Soros of this world. This operation is expected to cause intense turmoil and even riots.
Q followers refer to this period as “the storm” – a reference to Trump’s eyebrow-raising remark made on October 6th about a gathering of military officers being “the calm before the storm”. When asked what he meant, Trump responded: “You’ll see.”
Here’s a look at the main elements of the Q phenomenon.
Q uses 8Chan for his intel drops – a board that is virtually unmoderated and populated with users who love to sleuth online and obsesses over details. For this reason,
they refer to themselves as “autists”.
The “autistic” element is necessary because Q claims he cannot reveal things directly. He must use codes and questions to “reduce sniffer programs that continually absorb and analyze data”.
Q’s first post, made on October 28th, 2017, made a bold prediction about Hillary Clinton’s arrest, ensuing “massive riots” and the activation of the National Guard across the country on October 30th.
Evidently, October 30th came and went, and none of this happened. This did not stop Q from adding hundreds of additional posts in the following months.
The second crumb utilizes Q’s characteristic short questions and keywords to lay out the core of the plot.
Like many other Q crumbs, this post refers to lots people, theories, and concepts. “Mockingbird” is a keyword that is often used by Q. It most likely refers to the CIA project Operation Mockingbird:
“Operation Mockingbird was an alleged large-scale program of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that began in the early 1950s and attempted to manipulate news media for propaganda purposes. It funded student and cultural organizations and magazines as front organizations.”
- Wikipedia, Operation Mockingbird
Q’s crumb states that Trump is “isolated”, that he goes around the “three letter agencies”, that he relies on Military intelligence and that he purposely surrounded himself with generals. He adds that the battle is not about Democrats versus Republicans.
Post #133 details Q’s conception of the global elite which, in his words, is hard to swallow.
This post states that the “puppet masters” are based on 3 “sides”, like a triangle: The Saudis, the Rothschilds, and the Soros. At the center of the triangle, the “eye” is fed by governments worldwide using slush funds, wars, and environmental pacts.
Q then alludes to Satan worship and Epstein Island. More specifically, he mentions the bizarre temple on Epstein Island, which he believes has hidden levels below.
The temple on Jeffrey Epstein’s private Caribbean island Little St James.
Jeffrey Epstein is a highly influential billionaire who was known for organizing massive parties with high-profile politicians and celebrities. Flight records show Bill Clinton flew on Epstein’s plane 26 times. In 2008, Epstein was convicted of soliciting an underage “sex slave” for prostitution, for which he served 13 months in prison.
“Brought in on the billionaire’s private jets, nicknamed the Lolita Express by locals, numerous teenage girls were allegedly made to take part in depraved orgies at his US Virgin Islands bolthole.”
- The Telegraph, Stephen Hawking pictured on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Island of Sin’
Later crumbs allude to the importance of “spirit cooking” and mind controlled slaves in Hollywood.
Analyzing each crumb could fill an encyclopedia. Throughout his posts, Q touches on a variety of topics such as the Vegas shooting, the Saudi regime change, the North Korean negotiations, the tracking of Edward Snowden, a push for an Internet Bill of Rights and much more.
For many, these claims are hard to believe and “fake news”. However, Q’s “proofs” – evidence that he is directly connected with the POTUS – has turned many skeptics into believers.
To prove the fact that he is close to the POTUS, Q submitted revealing pictures and predicted some POTUS-related events. This led many to believe that he is indeed a White House insider. Some even believe Q is Trump himself. Here are some examples of proofs.
1. Do It Q
A Trump tweet posted on November 8th, which celebrated the one year anniversary of his election win, is said to contain clues relating to Q.
If one goes on Trump’s official Twitter account to this specific picture, the file name will be DOITQJ8UIAAowsQ.jpg. The fact that the first letters spell out “DO IT Q” is interpreted by some as clue confirming that Q is directly connected to Trump.
Also, the headline of the newspaper in front of Trump says: “Princes and tycoons arrested in Saudi crackdown on corruption” – a topic often brought up in Q crumbs.
Finally, this is one of the tweet’s replies:
2. Special Place
On December 10th, Q’s crumb said that they’ve picked out a “special place” for GS (possibly George Soros).
On December 17th, Trump posted a tweet using the words “special place” which was interpreted as another clue.
Q often insists on noting the similarity between his posts and the tweets sent out by the POTUS.
3. The Pen
On December 12th, Q posted a picture of a pen next to a White House stationery with the message “Merry Christmas”.
When an 8Chan user highlighted this connection, Q posted another picture of this mysterious pen.
In an interview, the journalist Jerome Corsi believes to have identified the mysterious desk.
“That’s the Laurel desk. It’s the one that Obama used and apparently Trump is also using at Camp David. That’s the desktop at Camp David.
The pen is a Montblanc ink pen that Trump has used for a long time. That’s Camp David over the weekend and that picture had to have been taken by somebody who was there with President Trump.
His pen on the desk; that pretty much authenticates that QAnon is very close to Donald Trump and present in some of these really important inner circle White House meetings.”
Obama sitting in the Laurel office in Camp David. Is it the same desk?
4. Consensual Tweet
On January 7th, a Trump tweet contained a mistake where the word “consensual” was used instead of “consequential”.
Left: The original tweet. Right: The corrected tweet
Although the mistake was corrected a few minutes afterward, it quickly made headlines and was widely ridiculed.
An example of a headline mocking the consensual tweet
However, according to Q followers, the typo was no accident. The fact that Trump omitted and then added a word with letter Q was interpreted as a message from Trump to Q followers. Q himself added that it was no accident.
In the evening of December 10th, Q’s drop contained the words Blunt & Direct Time. The next one mentioned “false flag(s)” and “fireworks”.
The next morning, a pipe bomb partially detonated in the New York City Subway’s Times Square–42nd Street/Port Authority Bus Terminal station. The suspected bomber was identified by police as 27-year-old Akayed Ullah, a Salafi Muslim immigrant from Bangladesh.
The following evening, Q explained what he meant by “Blunt & Direct Time”.
BDT is the currency of Bangladesh. Therefore, the crumb implies that Q was aware of the coming “fireworks” and of the nationality of the terrorist.
Several other proofs circulate around The Storm, all of which can be interpreted as undeniable clues from the POTUS himself or mere coincidences dreamt up by overactive minds.
As expected, media coverage about Q is extremely biased, partisan and opinionated. One of the first articles regarding Q appeared in NYmag. The article states:
“A new conspiracy theory called “The Storm” has taken the grimiest parts of the internet by, well, storm. the Storm conspiracy features secret cabals, a child sex-trafficking ring led (in part) by the satanic Democratic Party, and of course, countless logical leaps and paranoid assumptions that fail to hold up under the slightest fact-based scrutiny.”
At the other end of the spectrum, Alex Jones firmly believes in the authenticity of Q. On December 24th he stated:
“A lot of what QAnon has said, I had already gotten separately from my White House sources, my Pentagon sources, my CIA sources.”
Liz Crokin, a journalist for TownHall.com has stated in an interview that she believes that Q might be Trump himself.
“Now, I believe Q is President Trump, working possibly with Stephen Miller, to drop this information behind the scenes to get a campaign going, to red-pill people as to what is going on with The Storm, and their takedown of the Deep State, which includes the Deep State pedophile scene.
I’ve been telling people for a very long time the stuff that goes on with these elitists, these occult elitists, who literally are raping, sacrificing children, drinking blood, like eating babies literally. It’s too hard for an average person that has no idea that any of this is going on to take it in all at once.
So there’s been a very orchestrated effort behind the scenes by President Trump and his administration to slowly wake up the public as to what, that A), this goes on, that it’s real, and B), that they’re taking down these people.
When there are mass arrests, and there are names like Hillary Clinton that pop up, or thrown in prison for sex trafficking, there’s not mass hysteria. People will realize, ‘Oh my gosh, maybe this is real,’ or like, this isn’t just some kind of coup or whatever, this is real and this is really going on.”
While Q is an extremely polarizing figure, there are facts about the phenomenon that should be obvious to all. First, everything about Q is 100% pro-Trump and in full accord with Trump’s entire political agenda.
From a PR perspective, it is an effective and innovative way of bolstering support for Trump while bypassing mass media.
But is this all true? Is Trump truly taking down a network of globalist Satanists? Is this why 90% of the media coverage of Trump negative? Conversely, is The Storm actually a way of gaining the support of “truthers” while, in actuality, no storm is actually happening? Could it be the most elaborate LARP in human history, conducted by a brilliant troll?
One thing is for sure: There is something profoundly messianic about the Q phenomenon. Prophecies of great tribulations and promises of delivering the world from Satan’s followers indeed take on epic, biblical proportions.
Through “miraculous” tweets and pictures, Q has converted droves of skeptics into devout followers who are now believers and are ready to spread his word. Q himself adds to this mystique by often mentioning God and quoting the Lord’s Prayer.
So, is Q the real deal? As he says himself, “truth always wins”. Only time will tell if his prophecies of a Final Judgement will come to pass or if he’ll end up being another false prophet.
U.K. Is Lying: If Skripal Was Poisoned At His Home, The Agent Used Against Him Cannot Be Nerve Gas April 18 2018 | From: GlobalResearch
The United Kingdom unknowingly admitted that its government has been lying, accusing Russia of allegedly poisoning former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia by the nerve agent Novichok on March 4 in Salisbury. The British government has already made two grave mistakes.
Previously, the same doctors stated that Sergei Skripal and his daughter have only 1% hope of survival and ‘will be invalids for life’. Moreover, former chemical weapons scientist and former Russian chemical weapons’ program whistleblower Vil Mirzayanov, who is currently a leading western expert on toxic agents, assured the British media that 2 grams of Novichok will be enough to kill 500 people instantly. He also told the Daily Mail:
“These people are gone - this man and his daughter. Even if they survive they will not recover.”
It seems that Mirzayanov made these statements under the direction of the mainstream European and American media with the aim of discrediting his former homeland in the eyes of the world community.
If Sergey and Julia Skripal were poisoned in front of their house, then they wouldn’t have been able to walk through Salisbury. Thus, this fact completely excludes the use of nerve agent Novichok.
(The earlier report that Skripal and his daughter had been attacked while sitting on a bench at a shopping mall has also been refuted by Scotland Yard (GR Editor)).
Let us remind you, Scotland Yard detectives came to a conclusion that Sergey Skripal and his daughter were poisoned at their house. A particularly high concentration of agent was detected at the entrance door. If Skripal was poisoned at his home, then the agent used against him cannot be a nerve gas.
A number of experts believe that such gases can kill people within a few minutes. Skripal simply did not have time to walk to a restaurant or shopping center, where he was eventually found.
There is no way that the agent used to poison Skripal and his daughter could be Novichok. More likely the victims received an overdose of painkillers that are used for anesthetics.
This show with the involvement of pseudo-experts and baseless allegations was specially staged by the British government to increase tensions in Europe and contribute much to the rise of Russophobic sentiments around the world.
Why Were The Heads Of NZ’s Department Of Conservation & Hong Kong’s Goldman Sachs Touring Parts Of Fiordland Recently In A Six-Helicopter Entourage? April 17 2018 | From: EnviroWatchRangitikei
And this fly over, one week before Obama’s visit? What was going on? This entourage consisted solely of international bankers from all over the world it’s reported.
One could be forgiven for being somewhat suspicious of this company of people. Call me conspiratorial if you wish but add to that the fact it’s all a bit timely, especially with the fast & furious sale of vast swathes of South Island property including Otago to offshore wealthy folk who are supposedly escaping the apocalypse they believe is coming, and it’s difficult to believe it’s a case of ‘nothing doing here’.
The common denominator for the better part of all the aforementioned is the US.
NZ & the US military have been cosying up for quite a while now especially since our former ‘esteemed’ PM ‘Sir’ John (now managing other monies) spent a good part of his dubious ‘service’ oiling the US war machine.
The info on the six helicopter entourage was posted on the no to 1080 use in NZ Facebook page by Carol Sawyer. The company of international bankers along with DoC’s Director General went flying over Fiordland, reliable word has it, on 14 March 2018, quoted here (with minor edits, go to the source to read the original):
Six Squirrel helicopters were chartered from Alpine Helicopters, Wanaka. They only have five Squirrels so one was chartered in by them.
Apparently, Director-General of Conservation Lou Sanson, and presumably other DoC people, took a pile of international bankers on a Tiki Tour. I am told the Hong Kong-based head of Goldman Sachs was one of them.
They went to Fiordland – landing in the Murchison Mountains, (Takahe), Chalky Island (Kakapo) in Chalky Inlet, and Resolution Island in Dusky Sound.
I have also been told this helicopter operation would have cost at least $80,000 to hire. I thought DoC was short of money? Did the big bankers pay for this trip? A Squirrel helicopter seats the pilot and six passengers, so with six Squirrels that is at least 30 people involved.
In the evening they were seen landing at Manapouri, where they had their evening meal … at the Manapouri Hotel, before the trip back to Wanaka.”
Was Lou Sanson’s “great ‘success’ “ with “DoC’s Battle for the Birds program, and the importance of Predator Free 2050” part of the discussion?
Carol has noted the remoteness of the areas they viewed in their flight from Wanaka to Fiordland. Fiordland is very remote and the places they were going could not be reached by road. Resolution Island is in Dusky Sound, Fiordland and has no road access. Chalky Island is in Chalky Inlet, Fiordland and also has no road access.
The pertinent question is asked: “What the heck are we giving these rich international bankers in return … land? mining rights? our souls? …” I would concur on those questions and would place my bet on all of them.
It’s been put to me before by some readers that that mining is the agenda for clearing off our lands with 1080 of all things living. There is more than one theory on that.
Returning to the TPPA & the military, looking at the big picture, hear Prof Jane Kelsey explain the global power play going on:
Study Shows Kids Are Born Creative Geniuses But The Education System Destroys Imagination April 17 2018 | From: BlacklistedNews
Dr. George Land and Beth Jarman were commissioned by NASA to help the space agency identify and develop creative talent. The two were tasked to research school children in an attempt to identify creative individuals from which the agency could pick to help with their many products.
It seems American [read: Western] schoolchildren lose their ability to think creatively over time. As students enter their educational journey, they retain most of their abilities to think creatively. In other words, children are born with creative genius. Employing a longitudinal study model, Land and Jarman studied 1,600 children at ages 5, 10, and 15.
Surprisingly, Land said they discovered if given a problem with which they had to come up with an imaginative, and innovative solution, 98 percent of 5-year-olds tested at the “genius” level. Simply put, their answers to how the problem should be solved were brilliant.
Upon entry into the school system, those numbers started to drop dramatically. When the team returned to test those same subjects at age 10, the percentage of genius-level imaginative and innovative thinkers fell to an unthinkable 30 percent.
The indicators led the researchers to believe the current educational system is to blame. Not only did 68 percent of those students lose their ability to think with imagination and innovation, the thought that only 30 percent could still do is unfathomable.
The downward spiral continued to be demonstrated at age 15. When the researchers returned, the percentage of genius-level students had dropped to an abysmal 12 percent. Gasps could be heard all around the room as the audience attempted to process how such a brilliant group of students could sink so low in their imaginations and ability to solve problems with innovation.
Land blames the Industrial Revolution and its burgeoning factories for the demise of creativity. During that era, Land said the natural approach to teaching and learning led educators to develop“factories for human beings, too, called ‘schools’ so we could manufacture people that could work well in the factories.”
From a qualitative perspective, teachers point to governmental intrusion into the dumbing down of the nation’s school children. Starting with the development of the Department of Education, the federal government’s handprint is all over some of the worst decisions regarding public policy and education.
From the Clinton Administration’s mandated federal testing guidelines, to Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, to the disastrous Obama Administration’s Common Core Curriculum, teachers everywhere have complained they’re not teaching any longer.
They’re simply instructing students to achieve the minimum educational requirements necessary for them to pass a standardized exam.
Predictably, during those administration’s attempts to force a model of education upon the nation, the homeschool movement has flourished. Parents were forced to come to the conclusion their local public school was failing to provide an education sufficient for their children to be able to attend college.
As a result, Land’s team was not surprised to find only 2 percent of adults (Age 31) still retain their ability to think imaginatively, with creativity and innovation. He said:
“Look, folks, if we’re going to enter the future with hope, that’s not going to do it. We have to do something about it..”
Land says people can actually get back to thinking creatively with imagination if they will get rid of stinking thinking. He urges listeners to get rid of three aspects of education: judgment, criticism, and censorship.
When students come up with a brilliant idea they’re met with constant criticism, therefore they become conditioned to think like the masses, instead of coming up with an accepted alternative solution.
“Find the 5-year-old,” in yourself, Land implores.
He says it has “never gone away” and can be accessed at any moment. Land said “So, The Great Designer said, ‘I’m gonna put that mechanism in so they exercise it every day in case they ever need an idea.’ You’ve got that capability, absolutely!”
But Land says we only exercise that genius part of our brains when we’re dreaming. So dream big! Dream often. And don’t let naysayers rain on your imagination.
Using brain scan imaging, Land demonstrated how the brain is practically useless when it’s afraid. In contrast, the human brain is exceedingly active when it’s imagining.
Without specifically criticizing the educational system, Land addressed the major problem with teaching students to get the “right answer.”
He says, instead, students should imagine many possibilities to achieve innovation and problem-solving.
According to Land, in order for industry to survive, it must be continually innovating, and adapting to change, expecting the landscapes to evolve, and evolve with it. Instead of becoming fixated on one right solution, come up with 30-40 imaginative ones to become innovative.
The anchor is not a demanding voice on the air; therefore, the audience doesn’t have to be demanding.
The anchor isn’t hell-bent on uncovering the truth. For this he substitutes a false dignity. Therefore, the audience can surrender its need to wrestle with the truth and replace that with a false dignity of its own.
The anchor takes propriety to an extreme: it’s unmannerly to look below the surface of things. Therefore, the audience adopts those manners.
The anchor inserts an actor’s style into what should instead be a relentless reporter’s forward motion. Therefore, members of the audience can become actors shaping “news” about their own lives through Facebook.
The anchor taps into, and mimics, that part of the audience’s psyche that wants smooth delivery of superficial cause and effect. From their perch, the elite television anchors can deign to allow a trickle of sympathy here, a slice of compassion there.
But they let the audience know that objectivity is their central mission. “We have to get the story right. You can rely on us for that.”
This is the great propaganda arch of national network news. “These facts are what’s really happening and we’re giving them to you.” The networks spend untold billions to convey that false assurance.
The elite anchor must pretend to believe the narrow parameters and boundaries of a story are all there is. There is no deeper meaning. There is no abyss waiting to swallow whole a major story and reveal it as a hoax. No. Never.
With this conviction in tow, the anchor can fiddle and diddle with details.
The network anchor is the wizard of Is. He keeps explaining what is. “Here’s something that is, and then over here we have something else that is, and now, just in, a new thing that is.” He lays down miles of “is-concrete” to pave over deeper, uncomfortable, unimaginable truth.
The anchor is quite satisfied to obtain all his information from “reputable sources.” This mainly means government and corporate spokespeople. Not a problem.
Every other source, for the anchor, is murky and unreliable. He doesn’t have to worry his pretty little head about whether his sources are, indeed, trustworthy. He calculates it this way: if government and corporations are releasing information, it means there is news to report.
What the FBI director has to say is news whether it’s true or false, because the director said it. So why not blur over the mile-wide distinction between “he spoke the truth” and “he spoke”?
On air, the anchor is neutral, a castratus, a eunuch.
This is a time-honored ancient tradition. The eunuch, by his diminished condition, has the trust of the ruler. He guards the emperor’s inner sanctum. He acts as a buffer between his master and the people. He applies the royal seal to official documents.
Essentially, the anchor is saying, “See, I’m ascetic in the service of truth. Why would I hamstring myself this way unless my mission is sincere objectivity?”
All expressed shades of emotion occur and are managed within that persona of the dependable court eunuch. The anchor who can move the closest to the line of being human without actually arriving there is the champion. In recent times, it was Brian Williams - until his “conflations” and “misremembrances” surfaced.
The vibrating string between eunuch and human is the frequency that makes an anchor “great.” Think Cronkite, Chet Huntley, Edward R Murrow. Huntley was just a touch too masculine, so they teamed him up with David Brinkley, a medium-boiled egg. Brinkley supplied twinkles of comic relief.
The cable news networks don’t really have anyone who qualifies as an elite anchor. Wolf Blitzer of CNN made his bones during the first Iraq war only because his name fit the bombing action so well. Brit Hume of FOX has more anchor authority than anyone now working in network television, but he’s semi-retired, content to play the role of contributor, because he knows the news is a scam on wheels.
There are other reasons for “voice-neutrality” of the anchor. Neutrality conveys a sense of science. “We did the experiment in the lab and this is how it turned out.”
Neutrality implies: this is a democracy; an anchor is no more important than the next person (and yet he is - another contradiction, swallowed).
Neutrality implies: we, the news division, don’t have to make money (a lie); we’re not like the cop shows; we’re on a higher plane; we’re performing a public service; we’re like a responsible charity.
The anchor poses the age-old question about the people. Do the people really want to suck in superficial cause and effect and surface detail, or do they want deeper truth? Do the people want comfortable gigantic lies, or do they want to look behind the curtain?
The anchor, of course, goes for surface only.
The anchor is so accustomed to lying and so accustomed to pretending the lies are true that he wouldn’t know how to shift gears.
At the end of the Roman Empire, when the whole structure was coming apart, a brilliant and devious decision was made. The Empire would proceed according to a completely different plan. Instead of continuing to stretch its resources to the breaking point with military conquests, it would attack the mind.
It would establish the Roman Church and write new spiritual law. These laws and an overriding cosmology would be dispensed, in land after land, by official “eunuchs.” Men who, distanced from the usual human appetites, would automatically gain the trust of the people.
These priests would “deliver the news.” They would be the elite anchors, who would translate God’s orders and revelations to the public.
By edict, no one would be able to communicate with God, except through these “trusted ones.” Therefore, in a sense, the priest was actually higher on the ladder of power than God Himself.
In fact, it would fall to the Church to reinterpret all of history, writing it as a series of symbolic clues that revealed and confirmed Church doctrine (story line).
Today, people are believers because the popular stories are delivered by contemporary castrati, every night on the evening news.
If these castrati say a virus is threatening the world; and if they are backed up by neutral castrati bishops, the medical scientists; and if those medical scientists are supported by public health bureaucrats, the cardinals; and if the cardinals are given a wink and a nod by the President, the Pope - the Program is working.
And the news is spread to the people… But the true viruses are the anchors. They spread the illnesses.
New Study Finds Antidepressants To Be “Largely Ineffective And Potentially Dangerous” April 16 2018 | From: NaturalBlaze
The first two pharmaceutical antidepressants were clinically introduced in the 1950s, and the conditions they were supposed to treat would have at that time been found in about 50 to 100 persons per million.
As research develops, however, it is becoming clear that the truth about antidepressants is far different from the rosy picture painted by pharmaceutical marketers and biased or corrupt research journals.
In a recent study conducted at Zurich University of Applied Sciences in Switzerland, researcher Michael P. Hengartner came to the conclusion that, “antidepressants are largely ineffective and potentially harmful.”
“Due to several flaws such as publication and reporting bias, unblinding of outcome assessors, concealment and recoding of serious adverse events, the efficacy of antidepressants is systematically overestimated, and harm is systematically underestimated."
- Michael P. Hengartner, Researcher at Zurich University of Applied Sciences in Switzerland.
Remarking on the methodology of the study and the meaning of the statistical results is Peter Simons of Mad in America:
“Hengartner questioned why the “massive increase in antidepressant prescription rates over the last three decades did not translate into measurable public health benefits” in the treatment of depression.
Although meta-analyses tend to find a small difference between placebo and antidepressant effect, Hengartner argues that it comes nowhere near the “clinically significant” threshold of at least 7 points on the Hamilton Depression Scale.
Instead, a difference of 1 or 2 points is a meaningless numerical difference that would not be considered an improvement to a clinician or the person diagnosed with depression.”
Also noteworthy, the study’s author notes that long-term us of antidepressants actually increases the likelihood that the patient will have a relapse of depressive episodes.
This is one of many detrimental known side effects of antidepressants, which were also noted in this recent study, including higher risk of suicide.
“A growing body of evidence from hundreds of randomized controlled trials suggests that antidepressants cause suicidality, but this risk is underestimated because data from industry-funded trials are systematically flawed.
Unselected, population-wide observational studies indicate that depressive patients who use antidepressants are at an increased risk of suicide and that they have a higher rate of all-cause mortality than matched controls.”
Ron Paul: Assad Gassing His Own People Is “Total Nonsense” April 15 2018 | From: Antimedia
Former Congressman Ron Paul has strongly argued following the alleged chemical gas attack blamed on the Syrian government that it makes no logical sense for Assad to order a gas attack, and has called the accusations a telltale sign of a false flag attack meant to provide justification for the U.S. military to maintain a presence in Syria.
“Right now, recently, it’s all been in Syria, ‘Assad did it! Assad did it!’” explained the former congressman. “No proof at all.”
"The way the people that perpetuate these false flags [sic] say that Assad is gassing his own people, at the same time, he’s winning the war and the people are flocking back in to go to the territories that he has returned to the government of Syria,”explained Paul.
“But, nevertheless, he’s out there gassing his own people, which makes no sense whatsoever and fewer and fewer people are believing this.”
Paul, who founded the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity in 2013 after leaving the U.S. House, presented his analysis via the Ron Paul Liberty Report, describing how foreign policy goals related to Saudi Arabia and Iran, and Russia, as well as the influence of neoconservatives, oil interests, and the military-industrial complex play into the current paradigm we see playing out in Syria.
During an appearance on RT, Paul further elaborated. “This whole idea that all of a sudden Assad’s gassing his own people, I think, is total nonsense,” Paul said, pointing out that “over and over again” the US has claimed the Syrian or Russian government has been complicit in previous gas attacks in Syria – and the alleged poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in London - but “nothing panned out.” Or as Paul put it, one “fake news” story after another.
The libertarian icon then reasoned that the rush to condemn the Syrian government without evidence is meant to provide a justification for those wanting the US to remain in Syria and topple the Syrian government in hopes of installing a more western-friendly regime that is not within Russia or Iran’s sphere of influence.
Paul argued that, while it provides little to no strategic benefit for Assad to gas his own people, it would greatly benefit those that are pushing for regime change – especially after Trump recently said he would like to remove U.S. troops from Syria.
Nearly all the requests were transferred to the Attorney-General Chris Finlayson, who declined Mr Dotcom's requests on the grounds that they were "vexatious" and trivial.
The Solicitor-General also said Mr Dotcom had not provided sufficient reasons for urgency. On Monday, the Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the Attorney-General unlawfully withheld information from Mr Dotcom, meaning he perverted the course of justice.
The Government and Ministers have been ordered to comply with the original requests and supply all relevant documents to Mr Dotcom.
Mr Dotcom was awarded damages for loss of benefit and loss of dignity. In a series of celebratory tweets, Mr Dotcom claimed this decision meant his extradition case is "over".
What Is Globalism And Where Is It Going? April 14 2018 | From: JonRappoport
“Above all, the Globalist elite considers the human being is nothing more than a biological machine - a machine that is badly programmed, desperately in need of a complete overhaul and restructuring at the level of mind.” - The Underground, Jon Rappoport
He brought back, for the public, the concept, which had receded from press coverage. You could say he let the cat out of the bag.
So here I thought I would publish, in a series, some of the important material I’ve written on the subject. People need to be aware of the elite movement called Globalism and its aims and strategies.
1. “Over the weekend, thousands of protesters across multiple countries condemned impending [Globalist] trade deals promoted by governments and their corporate partners.
Though the protests received little coverage from mainstream media, they stretched from Paris to Warsaw.” (Carey Wedler, Blacklisted News, 10/19/16)
Now that the election is over, it’s important to review a few facts about Globalism. It was a centerpiece of controversy during the run-up to the vote.
Globalism isn’t just an abstract word or idea. It gives survival to some, and tries to take it away from others. It lights on populations like a storm of locusts. It undermines jobs and work. It steals. It is designed to make chaos.
Globalism is based on the elite conviction that “the best people” should rule over everyone else for the greater good. “We’re not trying to do harm. We’re spreading the wealth.”
We can find the seeds of Globalism in Plato and his ancient dialogue called The Republic. Plato made his final philosophic stand on that work. Step by step, he establishes that The Good, which is highest concept in the universe, which exists in a realm of “pure ideas” apart from the daily round of existence, must be accessed and understood, if society is to meet up with its best destiny.
But, naturally, not all people are able to fathom The Good or translate it into action here in this human realm. Only the few can grasp it - and they must rise to the top and rule.
So, in the end, there is a fascist paradise. It rebuffs all attempts at dilution.
This is how Plato, the humane philosopher, the champion of the individual and freedom and independent thought, painted himself into a terrible corner. But never mind. Down through the centuries, “the wisest of men” have taken their cue from him and built nations and civilizations based on their (self-serving) version of The Good.
And in the process, they have used propagandists to convince populations that rule from above is only carried out as altruistic service…
When a system has been devised, planned, launched, and maintained by criminals to undermine a nation, they are naturally going to defend it by saying:
"It’s good for everyone AND THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO MANAGE HUMAN AFFAIRS. BESIDES, WE CAN’T STOP IT NOW. THAT WOULD CAUSE WIDESPREAD CHAOS.”
In exactly the same way, a massive prison housing nothing but innocent people would superficially look like “chaos,” if the airtight security system were turned off.
The truth about the Globalist prison is simple. The underlying operation takes jobs away from America, in this instance, and sends them to Third World hell holes, where the same products are manufactured by the same companies, for pennies, using slave workers who labor in toxic environmental conditions that destroy their health.
Isn’t that easy to understand?
The American companies in those hell holes then sell the products back to Americans without paying taxes, tariffs, or penalties of any kind. The defenders of Globalism claim selling back the products cheaply is good for the American consumer. This is a lie, because many of those consumers no longer have jobs. Or they work at much lower wages than they used to, because the companies they worked for left America and went to the hell holes.
All in all, this arrangement is obviously designed to torpedo the national economy. It’s not an accident. It’s not an unintended consequence. The Globalists may be criminals, but they aren’t stupid criminals.
But what about the US companies who left America and set up shop overseas? Can’t they read the handwriting on the wall? Can’t they realize their base of consumers in the US is shrinking?
The companies are, in fact, stupid. They’re betting on short-term success vs. long-term collapse, and they’re going to lose. They plunge ahead with their eyes closed - because they can’t bring themselves to believe that the system they’re part of could have been fashioned with ultimate failure in mind.
The anti-Globalism movement is MUCH bigger than Trump, so no matter what you think of him, whether you believe in his honesty or not, the ideas he is bringing forward are having an immense impact on the populace - because the populace has figured out the Globalist game. They see and feel the destruction. They see and feel what is happening to jobs. Their jobs. They see the brutal reality, and they want no part of it.
They want America to endure. They want America to prosper. They want a free market. They don’t want their country reduced to Third World status.
All the politically correct humanitarian lingo in the universe is not going to change these basic realities. Globalism - the export of jobs, the rapid expansion of the Welfare State, the launching of senseless wars to pave the way for corporate plunder, the immigrant-flood through open borders - is a nation killer. It’s built to be a killer.
Decimating nations is an intentional precursor to ruling the planet from above by the Globalists-in-charge. “What we destroy we will resurrect on our own terms.”
No nation on Earth has a pure and clean history. But no nation deserves to be leveled and destroyed. The founding ideas of the original American Republic were and are the best ideas about government ever forwarded in human history. They imply:
Severely limited federal power. Free individuals. Independent individuals. Individuals who choose their own dreams and destinies. Individuals who work to achieve those dreams.
The so-called liberal press, and the academic institutions of America, have sold out completely. They are on board with what they can see of the Globalist agenda. The press will never challenge that agenda. They are grotesque cowards of the first order.
I have met some of them during my 30-plus years of working as a reporter. Behind their perfumed fronts, they give off a stench.
America is America. For the most part, its people are decent. Their leaders have betrayed them time and time again, without a second thought, without a shred of remorse.
The so-called populist movement which is growing by leaps and bounds, which got its legs under it with Ron Paul, must not come to a halt, no matter who sits in the White House, not matter what he does.
The future is now.
Globalist corporations are blind in the face of doom.
People don’t fully appreciate the capacity of mega-corporations. The 300 largest companies account for roughly 25% of all international trade.
And, even more startling, these behemoths are operating their production lines at half-strength. Why? Because only 1.5 billion people in the world have enough money to rate as true consumers.
So these corporations, which are the leading lights of the Globalist agenda, are looking and hoping for many more customers.
Meanwhile, Rockefeller Globalists are hyping the pseudoscience of manmade warming, in order to convince nations to cut their energy production. That plan, of course, would further erode the ability of mega-corporations to find new consumers. Indeed, Globalists are all for wrecking economies and deepening poverty - aims which infect the lifeblood of corporations.
We are looking at a huge crack - a contradiction - in the very foundation of the Globalism.
And if you want to take this farther, the notion of radical depopulation across the planet would do even graver harm to corporate dreams and ambitions. Far fewer consumers.
There are wild and woolly solutions. For example, provide a basic income to every human on Earth; or make governments the sole payer to corporations for their products, which are then dispensed to the population in a mad universal welfare scheme. In either case, you would have a new currency system.
Governments would openly and blandly create money out of thin air, as needed, to fund these harebrained schemes. Governments already invent money, but this would be occurring on a far larger scale, and without any pretense of legitimacy.
Given the propensity of governments to run their programs according to dizzyingly incompetent guidelines, I see no way the mega-corporations would welcome these “innovations.”
In short, the corporations are buying a pie-in-the-sky con. They insist on believing the favors and concocted advantages the Globalists are offering them in the marketplace are wonderful; but in fact, the long-term situation is a no-win. It’s a narrowing road, and a crack-up is coming.
Globalists are shrinking the worldwide consumer base. They want a chaos-ridden dystopia, which they will control with an iron hand. In that scenario, the mega-corporations will also shrink to shadows of their former selves. Their usefulness will rapidly decay.
Memo to CEOs: why don’t you try waking up? Your whole elite movement is a walking contradiction, and you’re on the downside.
Why don’t these CEOs awaken? Because their short-term greed exceeds their long-term vision. For them, it’s an easier way to live. Take the money and run.
3. "Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” David Rockefeller, Memoirs, 2003
The man who wrote those words represents a family that has dominated banking, oil, modern medicine, behind-the-scenes politics, and powerhouses of Globalism (e.g., the Council on Foreign Relations) for a century.
Globalism asserts that no nation can be independent from “the family” of other nations, as if it were a matter of fact beyond dispute. A nation claiming its sovereignty thus becomes a lunatic traitor to the natural order of things.
What really binds nations to one another is propaganda, and treaties which are based on the same propaganda, resulting in (temporary) engorged super-profits for mega-corporations.
Globalism is a secular piece of messianic hype. A Disneyesque altruism is the prow of the ship. Spend 10 minutes educating any street hustler on Globalist principles, and he would recognize it as a standard con.
Obama’s warning to the Brits, that their withdrawing from the Globalist European Union would put them at the back of the line in negotiating a separate trade treaty with the United States, was sheer fiction.
Britain, or any nation, that has goods to sell and a desire to buy will find trade partners. An agreement could be scratched out on a napkin over dinner.
Impending trade deals like the TPP and TTIP are thousands of pages and take so long to negotiate, because the heavy hitters at the table are looking for new ingenious ways to cut and paste the world into larger profits for themselves.
Globalism, hiding behind thousands of academic analyses, picks up jobs from one nation, where wages are reasonable and working conditions are tolerable, and dumps them in hell holes where wages are nearly invisible and conditions are poisonous. It’s that simple, and any moron could see how the industrial nations like the US would suffer…if by nations we meant people.
Instead of criminal corporations and criminal investors. But all this is layered over with “share and care” sop.
The United States government could repeal the NAFTA, CAFTA, and GATT trade treaties tomorrow, and throw current TPP and TTIP negotiating documents out the window…and all would be well. Better. Much better.
For instance, without NAFTA, US producers wouldn’t have been able to flood Mexico with cheap corn, throwing 1.5 million Mexican corn farmers into bankruptcy, leading many of them to cross the border and come to the US to find work.
No US President since Nixon has disturbed the march of Globalist “free trade.” All Presidents since then have been on board with the Rockefeller plan. And the US economy - which is to say, jobs - has thus faltered.
The 2008 financial crash was only one factor in the decline. The promise of cheap imports for sale in the US - the justification for free trade - doesn’t work when people here have no jobs and no purchasing power.
Major media, fronting for free-trade, have panicked over Donald Trump’s claim that he’ll reject Globalism.
They would have panicked over Bernie Sander’s similar promise, if they thought he had any chance of defeating Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. The media have their orders from on high - the deck is stacked, the cards were dealt long ago.
Hillary Clinton’s pathetic promises about creating jobs reveal nothing of substance. Small tax breaks for small businesses that “share profits with employees,” the “removal of government red tape,” “funding breakthroughs in scientific and medical research,” “expanding job training opportunities”- the truth is, her basic method for stimulating the economy has always been: find a war, any war, and fight it.
4. From GlobalisationGuide.org: “What does globalization mean to Australia?”
“Australian corporations participate in the oppression of workers and peasants in poor countries in Asia. Australian mining and forestry companies are involved in extracting wealth from countries such as Papua New Guinea, Irian Jaya and Indonesia, sometimes relying on military support to suppress local opposition.”
“The Australian support for trade liberalisation, particularly in agriculture, has been used to open up markets in poor countries where Australia’s commodity exports put local subsistence farmers out of work.”
“Australia has opened its own markets to goods made in countries that allow child labour, or forbid the formation of free trade unions.”
“The Australian government has opposed efforts to include environmental and labour protection clauses in World Trade Organisation agreements.”
“Australia should support reform of the WTO to make it more equitable for poor nations of the world.”
“Australia places few restrictions on the operations of transnational organisations, which take wealth from…[our] country, and are not managed in the interests of Australia.”
5. This is a bombshell. It’s a crucial piece of history that has been ignored by mass media.
I’ve published this interview before. Here I want to make new comments.
That glitch was President Richard Nixon. He began laying tariffs on certain goods imported into the US, in order to level the playing field and protect American companies. Nixon, a substantial crook in other respects, went off-script in this case and actually started a movement to reject the Globalist vision.
After Nixon’s ouster from the White House, Gerald Ford became president, and he chose David’s brother, Nelson Rockefeller as his vice-president. It was a sign Globalism and free trade were back on track.
But David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, wanted more. They wanted a man in the White House whom they’d created from scratch. That man was a peanut farmer no one had ever heard of: Jimmy Carter.
Through their media connections, David and Brzezinski vaulted Carter into the spotlight. He won the Democratic nomination (1976), spread a syrupy message of love and coming together after the Watergate debacle, and soon he was ensconced in the Oval Office.
Flash forward to 1978, the second year of Carter’s presidency. An interview took place.
It’s a close-up snap shot of a remarkable moment. It’s a through-the-looking-glass secret - in the form of a conversation between a reporter, Jeremiah Novak, and two Trilateral Commission members, Karl Kaiser and Richard Cooper.
The interview concerned the issue of who exactly, during President Carter’s administration, was formulating and controlling US economic and political policy.
The careless and off-hand attitude of Trilateralists Kaiser and Cooper is astonishing. It’s as if they’re saying, “What we’re revealing is already out in the open, it’s too late to do anything about it, why are you so worked up, we’ve already won…”
NOVAK (the reporter): Is it true that a private [Trilateral committee] led by Henry Owen of the US and made up of [Trilateral] representatives of the US, UK, West Germany, Japan, France and the EEC is coordinating the economic and political policies of the Trilateral countries [which would include the US]?
COOPER: Yes, they have met three times.
NOVAK: Yet, in your recent paper you state that this committee should remain informal because to formalize ‘this function might well prove offensive to some of the Trilateral and other countries which do not take part.’ Who are you afraid of?
KAISER: Many countries in Europe would resent the dominant role that West Germany plays at these [Trilateral] meetings.
COOPER: Many people still live in a world of separate nations [!], and they would resent such coordination [of policy].
NOVAK: But this [Trilateral] committee is essential to your whole policy. How can you keep it a secret or fail to try to get popular support [for its decisions on how Trilateral member nations will conduct their economic and political policies]?
COOPER: Well, I guess it’s the press’ job to publicize it.
NOVAK: Yes, but why doesn’t President Carter come out with it and tell the American people that [US] economic and political power is being coordinated by a [Trilateral] committee made up of Henry Owen and six others? After all, if [US] policy is being made on a multinational level, the people should know.
COOPER: President Carter and Secretary of State Vance have constantly alluded to this in their speeches.
KAISER: It just hasn’t become an issue.
SOURCE: “Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management,” ed. by Holly Sklar, 1980. South End Press, Boston. Pages 192-3.
Of course, although Kaiser and Cooper claimed everything being manipulated by the Trilateral Commission committee was already out in the open, it wasn’t.
Their interview slipped under the mainstream media radar, which is to say, it was ignored and buried. It didn’t become a scandal on the level of, say, Watergate, although its essence was far larger than Watergate.
US economic and political policy run by a Globalist committee of the Trilateral Commission - the Commission had been created in 1973 as an “informal discussion group” by David Rockefeller and his sidekick, Brzezinski, who would become Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor.
Shortly after Carter won the presidential election, his aide, Hamilton Jordan, said that if after the inauguration, Cy Vance and Brzezinski came on board as secretary of state and national security adviser, “We have lost. And I will quit.”
Lost - because both men were powerful members of the Trilateral Commission and their appointment to key positions would signal a surrender of White House control to the Commission.
Vance and Brzezinski were appointed secretary of state and national security adviser, as Jordan feared. But he didn’t quit. He became Carter’s chief of staff.
Flash forward again, to the Obama administration.
In the run-up to his inauguration after the 2008 presidential election, Obama was tutored by the Globalist co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Four years before birthing the Commission with his boss of bosses, David Rockefeller, Brzezinski wrote:
“[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”
Goodbye, separate nations. Hello, global government.
Any doubt on the question of Trialteral goals is answered by David Rockefeller himself, in his Memoirs (2003): “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”
Patrick Wood, author of Trilaterals Over Washington and Technocracy Rising, points out there are only 87 members of the Trilateral Commission who live in America.
Obama appointed eleven of them to posts in his administration. For example:
Tim Geithner, Treasury Secretary;
James Jones, National Security Advisor;
Paul Volker, Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee;
Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence.
Here is the payoff. The US Trade Representative (appointed by Obama in 2013), who was responsible for negotiating the Globalist TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) treaty with 11 other nations, was Michael Froman, a former member of the Trilateral Commission.
Don’t let the word “former” fool you. Commission members resign when they take positions in the Executive Branch of government. And when they serve in vital positions, such as US Trade Representative, they aren’t there by accident. They’re operatives with a specific agenda.
Flash forward one more time. Trump, who squashed the Globalist TPP treaty as soon as he was inaugurated, has been busy making staff appointments. Patrick Wood writes (2/6/17):
“According to a White House press release, the first member of the Trilateral Commission has entered the Trump administration as the Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, where he will sit on the National Security Council:
Kenneth I. Juster will serve as Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs. He will coordinate the Administration’s international economic policy and integrate it with national security and foreign policy. He will also be the President’s representative and lead U.S. negotiator (“Sherpa”) for the annual G-7, G-20, and APEC Summits.”
Juster’s duties will take him into the heart of high-level negotiations with foreign governments on economic policy.
Keep your eye on Mr. Juster. Will he take actions in line with Trump’s avowed anti-Globalist stance? Or will Juster work as one more Globalist Trilateral operative in the center of American decision-making?
If the answer is “operative,” does Trump know this? Does he condone what Mr. Juster will do? Or is this a case of secret infiltration, on behalf of the most powerful Globalist group in the world, the Trilateral Commission?
6. Globalized media. It’s nice plan. Let’s examine it.
The new technocratic media is based on profiling users. There is no impactful news unless each member of the audience is surveilled and analyzed on the basis of what he already likes and wants.
Shocking? It’s to be expected. How else would technocrats parlay the untold hours they’ve spent sizing up their consumers/users? Several years ago, I wrote:
“Tech blather has already begun, since Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, bought the Washington Post at a fire sale. Jeff Genius will invent new ways to transmit the news to ‘people on the go’ and make the Post a smashing success. Mobile devices. Multiple platforms. Digital taking over from print. Ads customized to fit readers’ interests (profiling). News stories customized to fit readers’ interests (more profiling).”
In other words, non-news. If you thought media were irrelevant and deceptive before, you haven’t seen anything. The “new news” will create millions of virtual bubbles in which profiled users can float contentedly, under the cozy cottage roofs of their favorite little separate paradigms.
The tech giant Apple has waded into this territory with an app that will deliver news to users.
“Apple News, part of the upcoming iOS 9 operating system, aims to be the primary news source for users of the iPhone and iPad… Apple says its news app ‘follows over a million topics and pulls relevant stories based on your specific interests’…
Joshua Benton of the Nieman Journalism Lab said the app will be important because ‘through the awesome power of default, Apple distribution puts it in an entirely other league. This [news] app will be on hundreds of millions of devices within 24 hours of its debut’.”
Translation: Profiling their users down to their toenails, Apple will present them with virtual bubbles of news they want to see and read.
Not just one overall presentation for all; no, different “news outlets” for Apple’s audiences.
This introduces a whole new layer of mind control.
“You’re an Obama fan? Here are stories confirming your belief in the Prophet.”
“You want neo-con on the rocks with a conservative Republican twist? Here’s some war footage that’ll warm your heart.”
“Do you believe ‘government gridlock’ is our biggest concern? Congress can’t get anything done? We’ve got headlines for that from here to the moon.”
“Tuned into celeb gossip? Here’s your world in three minutes.”
The idea: convince users, one day at a time, that what they already believe is important IS the news of the day.
It’s Decentralized Centralization. One media giant carving its global audience up into little pieces and delivering them a whole host of different algorithmically appropriate lies and fluff and no-context psyops.
And for “fringe users?” “You’re doubtful about GMOs? Well, look at what Whole Foods is planning for their healthier produce section. Cheer up.”
Nothing about Maui voters declaring a temporary ban on devastatingly toxic Monsanto/Dow experiments or the dangers of Roundup. “You’re anti-vaccine? Sorry, you don’t count. You’re not a recognized demographic. But here’s a piece about a little unvaccinated boy who was involved in car crash on the I5.”
Does this sound like science fiction? It isn’t. It’s the mainstream look of the near-future (if they could get away with it). Search engines are already “personalizing” your inquiries. US ABC national news is climbing in the ratings because it’s giving viewers “lighter stories,” and spending less time on thorny issues like the Middle East.
The mainstream news business is desperately looking for audience; and treating every “user” as a profiled social-construct-bundle of superficial preferences is their answer.
“Mr. X, we’ve studied the little virtual bubble you live in, and now we can sell you your own special brand of truth.”
“Hello, audience. We’re going to pitch you on becoming full-fledged obsessed consumers, as if there is no other worthy goal in life - and then we’re going to profile you from top to bottom, to find out exactly what kind of obsessed consumer you are, so we can hit you and trigger you with information that uniquely stimulates your adrenal glands…”
The one-two punch.
Any actual event occurring in the world would be pre-digested by robot media editors and profilers, and then split up into variously programmed bits of information for different audiences.
Who cares what really happened? In the new world, there is no ‘what really happened’. That’s a gross misnomer. A faulty idea. A metaphysical error. No, there is only a multi-forked media tongue that simultaneously spits out a dozen or a hundred variations of the same event…because different viewers want and expect different realities.
In 1984, Orwell’s Big Brother was issuing a single voice into the homes of the population. That was old-school. That was primitive technology. That was achieving unity by hammering unity into people’s skulls. This, now, is the frontier of unity through diversity.
“We want to make all of you into androids, through basic PR and propaganda and a pathetic excuse for education. However, we recognize you’ll become different varieties of androids, and we’ll serve that outcome with technological sophistication. Trust us. We care about what you prefer.”
User A: “Wow, did you see the coverage of the border war in Chula Vista?”
User B: “War? They had a fantastic exhibit of drones down there. At least a hundred different types. And then I watched an old WW2 movie about aerial combat.”
User C: “Chula Vista? They had a great food show. This woman made a lemon pie. I could practically taste it.”
User D: “That wasn’t a border war. It was a drill. And then afterwards, these cops gave a demonstration of all their gear. Vests, shields, communication devices, flash-bangs, auto rifles with silencers, batons. I watch drills all over the country. Love them.”
User E: “Chula Vista? The only thing I saw on the news was ‘sunny and mild’ this week. I watch all the weather channels. I love them.”
BUT when a Big One comes along, like the 2016 national election in the US, the separate tunes come together and ring as one. Then the overriding need to extend Globalism’s goals (in the person of Hillary Clinton) blot out every other priority. Then the major media twist whatever they need to twist. Then it’s the same bubble for everyone.
One problem, though. Major media have been lanced thousands of times by alt news sites, and by Wikileaks and Project Veritas. This attack has exposed the truth and the Clinton crimes.
And alt news reflects the growing interest of the public in what’s actually happening on many fronts.
The technocratic plan for the news is failing. It was a nice plan, but…It’s turning out to be a dud.
Alt media are forcing public awareness of one giant scandal after another: Hillary/Obama support for ISIS; pro-vaccine liars; the collapse of Obamacare; the GMO hustle; pesticide damage…on and on and on.
The result? Major media are being backed into a corner, where they must defend lies and build the same monolithic lies for EVERYONE all the time. The idea of creating separate news for each profiled user is ALREADY collapsing.
Major media are playing defense against the rest of the world.
It’s quite a party. And it has no expiration date.
A final note: Trump, Wikileaks, Project Veritas, Drudge, and many alt news sites created a perfect storm in 2016, raining down on major media. It was and is unprecedented. The mainstream press has been exposed down to its roots, as never before.
The lying, the collusion, the arrogant sense of entitlement, the desperation, the corruption - it’s all there to see, for anyone who has eyes and a few working brain cells. Expect more to come, regardless of the outcome of the election. The train has really left the station…
7. Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote, four years before birthing the TC with his godfather, David Rockefeller:
“[The] nation state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force. International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation state.”
Several other noteworthy Trilateral members: George HW Bush; Bill Clinton; Dick Cheney; Al Gore. The first three men helped sink the US further into debt by fomenting wars abroad; and Gore’s cap and trade blueprint would destroy industrial economies, while vastly increasing the numbers of people in Third World countries who have no access to modern sources of energy.
Does all this offer a clue as to why the US economy has failed to recover from the Wall Street debacle of 2008, why the federal bailout was a handout to super-rich criminals, and why Obama took actions which prevented a recovery?
A closer look at Tim Geithner’s circle of economic advisers reveals the chilling Trilateral effect: Paul Volker; Alan Greenspan; E. Gerald Corrigan (director, Goldman Sachs); and Peter G Peterson (former CEO, Lehman Brothers, former chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations). These men are all Trilateral members.
How many foxes in the hen house do we need, before we realize their Globalist Trilateral agenda is controlling the direction of our economy?
The TC has no interest in building up the American economy. They want to torpedo it, as part of the end-game of creating a new international currency, ushering in a de facto Globalist management system for the whole planet.
8. Now consider the vast propaganda efforts of the past 40 years, on so many levels, to install the idea that all nations and peoples of the world are a single Collective.
From a very high level of political and economic power, this propaganda op has had the objective of grooming the population for a planet that is one coagulated mass, run and managed by one force. A central engine of that force is the Trilateral Commission.
How does a shadowy group like the TC accomplish its goal? One basic strategy is: destabilize nations; ruin their economies; ratify trade treaties that effectively send millions and millions of manufacturing jobs off to places where virtual slave labor does the work; adding insult to injury, export the cheap products of those slave-factories back to the nations who lost the jobs and undercut their domestic manufacturers, forcing them to close their doors and fire still more employees.
And then solve that economic chaos by bringing order. What kind of order?
Eventually, one planet, with national borders erased, under one management system, with a planned global economy, “to restore stability,” “for the good of all, for lasting harmony.”
The top Trilateral players, in 2008, had their man in the White House, another formerly obscure individual like Jimmy Carter: Barack Obama. They had new trade treaties on the planning table.
Obama was tasked with doing whatever was necessary to bring those treaties, like the TPP, home. To get them passed. To get them ratified. No excuses.
That’s why, over a year ago, when anti-TPP criticism and rhetoric were reaching a crescendo, when Obama was seeking Congressional fast-track authority for the treaty, he was in a sweat and a panic. He and his cabinet were on the phones night and day, scrambling and scraping for votes in Congress. This was the Big One. This was why he was the President. To make this happen.
His Trilateral bosses were watching. These men run US policy, when and where it counts. They don’t like failure.
This is also why, after Obama was inaugurated for his first term, he shocked and astonished his own advisors, who expected him, as the first order of business, to address the unemployment issue in America. He shocked them by ignoring the number-one concern of Americans, and instead decided to opt for his disastrous national health insurance policy - Obamacare.
Obama never had any intention of trying to dig America out of the crash of 2008. That wasn’t why he was put in the Oval Office.
He could, and would, pretend to bring back the economy, with fudged numbers and distorted standards. But really and truly, create good-paying jobs for many, many Americans? Not on the TC agenda. Not in the cards.
It was counter-productive to the TC plan: torpedo the economy further.
Obama is on the move. He’s traveling to far-flung places, trying to shore up global consensus on the TPP treaty. His people are working around the clock to round up the necessary votes for TPP ratification in Congress. Obama plans to sneak through the treaty during Congress’ lame-duck session after the November election, before newly elected Congressional members take office.
Pushing through Globalist trade treaties: this is why he was put in the White House. This is his appointed task. This is his real job. His bosses are watching.
“I pledge allegiance to the Trilateral Commission, and to the domination for which it stands, one planet, indivisible, with tyranny and poverty and top-down order for all…”
[Update: the TPP was dead on arrival, after Trump was elected].
9. "Technocratic human beings are spiritually dead. They are capable of anything, no matter how heinous, because they do not reflect upon or question the ultimate goal.” - Chris Hedges
“River and ocean turbines for electricity; hydrogen power; urban farms; massive water desalination—these are just a few of the means for making an abundant non-technocratic future. By any rational standard, technocratic idiocy is already obsolete.”
- The Underground, Jon Rappoport
Again, thanks to Patrick Wood and his book, Technocracy Rising, for expanding my insight into these areas.
Consider the term “scientific humanism.” The Oxford Dictionary offers this definition:
“A form of humanist theory and practice that is based on the principles and methods of science; specifically the doctrine that human beings should employ scientific methods in studying human life and behaviour, in order to direct the welfare and future of mankind in a rational and beneficial manner…Origin mid-19th century.”
That definition gives you a good general meaning for “technocracy.”
Understanding the mindset of Globalist technocrats is necessary; they believe that since they can plan the shape of society, they should plan the shape of society.
Politicians are outmoded along this new evolutionary path. They will fade into extinction. Instead, engineers will take their place.
Human beings (all eight billion) will be accounted for. They will receive energy quotas. Because a master map exists for the amount of global energy available at any moment, every human will be permitted to consume just so much energy during a defined time period.
This is the technocratic “big picture.”
Wherever you see the Surveillance State, you see technocracy. The claim that surveillance is being utilized to prevent terror attacks is a cover story. In fact, there can be no all-embracing technocracy without real-time tracking of every citizen’s energy consumption.
But technocracy goes much farther than this. Humans are viewed as mis-programmed biological machines in need of basic corrections. Their tendency to engage in conflict needs to be curbed. Whatever they do, say, or think that runs counter to the tight organizing of “peaceful and harmonious” society from above is, a priori, irrational and must be eradicated at the level of Mind.
The necessary reprogramming would be achieved through genetic, electronic, and chemical means. Though never admitting it publicly, dyed in the wool technocrats see no reason to maintain the human population at its current level. Elimination of large numbers of “biological machines” would make their job easier.
Heraldic fairy tales about “transhuman” transformation are used to put a wondrous face on technocracy. For example, we’re told that soon it will be possible to connect a human brain with a super-computer and download “spiritual wisdom, knowledge, and talents” directly to the human.
Technocratic premise: society itself is a game board, and someone has to be in charge; who better than engineers with an overall plan?
So-called “advances” in human life will begin by stating the basic “rights” people are entitled to. For example, “an optimum state of social existence.” What this really means is “pegs in holes.” People will be fitted into slots that yield up the “largest amount of possible collective happiness.”
Click on the image above to open a larger versioon in a new window
It’s all about The Plan. Freedom? Freedom to choose? Never heard of it. Instead, what the individual is given from above is satisfactory to him because he has been engineered to believe it is. That’s the plan.
Smart-grid, sustainable development, green economy, land use, community planning, climate change, education in values, and other campaigns are signals and steps toward the far shore of technocracy. They all point to putting “pegs in holes.” They all ultimately involve quotas for energy consumption.
They all involve the assumption that, since there is only so much to go around, a higher authority must decide who gets what. Food, water, shelter, jobs, luxuries, energy…
Clue: scientists and engineers can arbitrarily say what science is, and therefore they can say The Plan is “scientific.”
If you say, “Well, look, there are genuine ways to vastly increase the amount of available water and energy and clean food,” you would be running against the technocratic blueprint.
Opting for abundance is not welcomed. Abundance cuts the chords of The Plan. Scarcity must rule and it must be promoted. The lack of all essentials must be cited as the reason for imposing technocratic answers. There is no way around it.
The irony is, when you talk to really hard-core environmentalists about the means for achieving abundance through alternative technologies, they balk and grow angry.
They don’t want technological solutions - and yet, the powers behind them, where the big money is, are, in fact, all about technology - technology of a certain kind, which is based on planning out a society in which permanent and growing scarcity is MAINTAINED AND PROMOTED as the immutable reality.
It’s quite mad, quite insane. But when has that ever stopped the men who are quite sure they should sit on thrones?
Vast abundance is more than a vision. It is a reachable possibility. The history of actual science and technology confirms that both essential materials and available human innovation were always downplayed as shortages - until some individual came along and demonstrated that a new way of doing things would break through the shortage.
Corporations, governments, think-thanks, and universities try to limit, curb, and bury inventions that open up the future to abundance. Technocrats are in a race to “plan society” before those inventions leak out into the public and make them, the technocrats, obsolete.
But they are obsolete. They just haven’t figured it out yet.
But we can figure it out.
10. Elites who invent reality need an unimpeachable operation, headed up by people who are relentlessly promoted as the sanest, most intelligent, competent, and caring representatives of the human race. Guess who that would be?” (The Magician Awakes, Jon Rappoport)
In 1976, the great critic of 20th-century society, Ivan Illich, wrote:
“Modern medicine is a negation of health. It isn’t organized to serve human health, but only itself, an institution. It makes more people sick than it heals.”
The medical cartel is the answer to the question: what do you with the population of Earth once they are living under a Globalist oligarchy?
It’s all about managing lives, from womb to grave, and no institution serves that management better than Medicine.
First of all, you have a system that dispenses toxic drugs in an endless stream, killing in the US alone, by conservative estimate, 100,000 people per year. On top of that, medical drugs cause anywhere from two to four millions severe adverse effects annually.
Beyond this straight-out destruction, there is the turmoil, suffering, grieving, and confusion that extends in ripples, from each one of the deaths and injuries, to families, friends, and co-workers. The overall effect? Demoralization and the inability to see and think past the emotional pain - which is exactly what you want if you are a psychopath running a planet.
The medical cartel (drug companies, public health agencies, medical schools, doctors) wants to assure cradle-to-grave treatment of every person.
This means 30 or 40 diagnoses of illnesses and mental disorders during a lifetime, and treatment with toxic drugs. It also means medical issues are at the forefront of every person’s mind as he/she wends through life, believing that Disease is the most important aspect of living.
People become proud, yes, proud of their diagnoses and treatment. They wear the diagnoses like badges of honor, and every social communication is an occasion for displaying badges and discussing treatments and comparing notes.
“You know, at first my doctor thought it was ADHD, but then he did one of those new brain scans, and realized it was Bipolar with a trace of genetically inherited Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Once he had the ODD under control with a major tranquilizer, he could go after the Bipolar. But then I developed tremors. So he implanted a chip…”
It’s not only a sick society, it’s a society about sickness.
Medical care is free, if by free one means: paid for by extraordinary levels of taxation.
The basic collectivist slogan, “We’re all in this together,” achieves its most fervent support from the axiom that Disease is our primary opportunity to help each other by accepting awesome tax burdens.
Of course, huge segments of the world population won’t be able to participate in modern, up-to-date, cutting-edge “care.” For them, there are several solutions.
The first is vaccines seeded with chemicals and genes that reduce fertility and potency. As birth rates gradually decline, cover stories are invented to explain the phenomenon: stress; rising employment rates; the social effects of urbanization; the dissolution of the nuclear family.
The second solution is epidemics that purportedly kill off large numbers of people. These epidemics are routine frauds, based on concocted science.
In the poverty-stricken Third World, announced epidemics are nothing more than cover stories; people aren’t dying because of germs; they’re dying because their water is contaminated, because of overcrowding, lack of basic sanitation, generation-to-generation starvation.
They’re dying because their fertile growing lands have been stolen. While medical experts crow about attacking the germ of the moment with (toxic) drugs and vaccines, these actual causes of death can be ignored and even enhanced.
Meanwhile, in industrialized technological sectors of the planet, psychiatry ascends to new heights of control over the educated classes. Although no so-called mental disorder has ever been diagnosed by a real laboratory test, the experts who dominate the field continue to invent new disorders at the drop of a hat.
Psychiatric patients believe they have brain conditions that must be treated with (highly toxic) drugs. The patients also believe their own aspirations are limited by their disorders, and so they acquiesce to a psychiatric model that circumscribes their lives.
At the top-end of society, new medical inventions are applied to the wealthy. Genetic enhancement is the most highly touted of these. Despite the fact that, as yet, there are no genetic treatments for any disease that work across the board, experiments will be done to extend life, to seed the unborn with special talents, to cure a wide variety of illnesses.
There will be efforts to substitute technological components for biological nature. Limbs, organs, whole body systems, brains.
The workability of high-tech pieces is not really the issue. The aim is simply to involve the rich in the entire grand experiment, thereby swallowing them up as well in a medical paradigm of existence.
At the front door of medical cartel operations, a person will be enrolled in the system while in utero, and a path will be laid out that extends all the way to the grave. Once he is on record with a medical ID package, he will be tracked and treated and tweaked without let-up.
Finally, the inevitable proposal and program will come into view. Why risk natural birth, which is already considered a medical event? Why not create birth in a laboratory?
And if, at any point in life, a person experiences doubts and regrets about his membership in the universal medical control apparatus, he can obtain a prescription for drugs that target “pleasure centers,” and then check out of his worries and anxieties.
Huxley’s Brave New World would move in like a wave on a beach.
At every way-stop toward that day, sophistication, elegance, assurance, and concern will be the watchwords of the practicing doctor, the secular priest in this drama of human dismantling.
And yet, for those who remember, who know what the Individual is, who know what freedom is, who know what imagination and creative power are, the rigging and distorting and flattening and collectivizing will look like nothing more than a horrible cartoon.
And these people who remember will lead a revolution like no revolution ever seen before.
Or we can defect from, and withdraw our consent to, this mad matrix now.
The Global Fascist State: Physical Control Of The Global Population Is Impossible April 13 2018 | From: FinalWakeUpCall / Various
Centralised, controlled Global fascist state:The momentum for the completion of the New World Order (NWO) through centralised control of global politics, business, banking, military and media is gaining pace by the day, and is clearly evident through the large scale spying upon us.
Whenever a hidden agenda is about to be implemented, something occurs to scare the people, justifying the action for implementation. Our world is more and more becoming a recurrence of fascist Nazi Germany, before WWII. This is, in accordance with the plans of the Deep State Brotherhood, the new world that awaits the global population.
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and multinational corporations already control most Governments;promoting the one world government through their control of the media, foundation grants, and education; with power exerted over all issues of the day; they already control almost all avenues; they have the financial power to promote the “New World Order”.
The key to their success is the control and manipulation bythe international bankers of the money systems of almost every nation, while making it appear as though they are controlled by the government.
If you wish to live in a world that is “urbane” enough to be run by a world government, managed by the Brotherhood of the élite and global bankers, then by all means, continue to follow the mainstream media to get all your information.
If, however, the idea of a select coterie of a global intellectual-financial elites running the world does not sound like the ideal society for humanity’s future, then it is time to come into action.
By battling the tide of misinformation and by helping to expose the dangers of the ‘New World Order.’
People have neither the slightest idea, nor the insight of the restrain that is going to be put on them. They would rather ignore the obvious and go into denial of the truth that has already become reality. Instead, people prefer assuring each other that they would never take people’s freedoms away and make us serfs of the elite.
Humanity has on a large scale given away its mind and its responsibility – it is advisable to consider the broader consequences of this behaviour for human existence.
When we give away our mind and responsibility, we give away our freedom and hence, our lives.
If enough people do it, we give the world away, and that is precisely what has been done throughout history. We’re now entering a fascist society, as was the case before WWII. The leaders of this era, such as Benito Mussolini in Italy and Adolf Hitler in Germany embodied the state and they claimed indisputable power, transforming countries into fascist states.
Now history is repeating itself and soon the world will become a fascist society all over again. The only difference is that this time, a few families, alias – the elite – are manipulating the entire planet, through the globalisation of business, banking and communications.
The primary goal of their control is to keep the people in ignorance, fear and at war. Divide, rule and conquer and keep the most important information secret.
Those who have applied these methods to control humanity for thousands of years are members of the same force, following a long-term Brotherhood Agenda, which now is reaching its point of completion.
So, the global fascist state is upon us. People must wake up now – and see this as their “final wake up call” – to mobilise and organise themselves to rebel against this injustice, as the real power is still with the many of us, and not with the few of the elites!
Infinite Power is Within Every Individual:
Infinite power is within each and every individual. The reason we are controlled is not because we don’t have the power to decide our own destiny, it is that we unknowingly give that power away when we don’t take responsibility for our destiny on all fronts.
When something happens that we don’t like, we look for someone else to blame. When there is a problem, people think first what are they, our so-called leaders going to do about it.
But remember it is they who have secretly created most problems, and they consequently respond to people’s demands by offering a ‘solution’ that always entails more centralisation of power and erosion of our freedom.
Man Sends Audition Tape To Globalists To Be Crisis Actor in Next False Flag Hilarious Satire Skit
If you want to give more power to the police, security agencies and military, that is exactly what they want the public to ask for, then they ensure there is more crime, more violence and more terrorism, and so they increasingly get exactly what they want, ever-increasing control and power.
Once people are in fear of being attacked by terrorists, they will demand to have their freedoms taken away, to protect them from what they have been manipulated to become – ‘fearful’.
As Benjamin Franklin once so typically stated:
“Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
The 9/11 Twin Tower destruction in New York in 2001 and the Global warming meme are both classic examples of ‘Problem - Reaction - Solution’ manipulations.
Physical Control of the Global Population is Impossible:
In short it is a technique of ‘problem - reaction - solution’. Create the problem; encourage the reaction that something has to be done about, and then offer the solution, their solution. In other words:
Create chaos and then offer a solution to restore order on people’s request, a solution which serves their agenda.
The masses are herded and directed by emotional and mental control. This is the only way their rules can be implemented. However, the few elites cannot control billions of people physically, unless a large number of people are involved.
So physical control of the global population is impossible. But when you can manipulate the way people feel and think to the point that they decide to do what they want us to do, by demanding to introduce regulations that they want to have implemented, then the door is set open for Centralised Global Control, by making people believe that it is their own idea.
Consequently, humanity becomes mind-controlled.
People are Mind Controlled:
The question is not how many people are mind-controlled, but how few are not. When you believe the news stories in the media, and allow these to affect your perception of events, your mind is controlled.
The answer to freedom of thought and perception is to take your mind back to conclude and decide for yourself.
The choice of interpretations is yours and not someone else’s. Remember they always want to have your mind, because once they have it, they have you. So keep your mind objective under all circumstances.
Think for yourself and don’t allow others to think for you, and if we All do this, their Agenda will not be able to be implemented and we will keep our freedoms, it’s as simple as that. Come into action now in the interest of our children, future generations, and in our own interest.
Remember; the secret Agenda is a conspiracy of minds, of people and events to ensure that the plans of the elite are employed. They conspire to put their people into positions of power, with hidden, stringent instructions to make the agenda happen, by conspiring to create events which will make the public demand the Agenda be implemented in complete ignorance of the devastating consequences.
It is frightening that we have entered the world George Orwell envisioned and wrote about in 1984 of mass surveillance, as portrayed in the movie ‘The Truman Show’.
Stick Your New World Order Up Your Arse!
Recently numerous scandals have revealed the surveillance state of the West and put it up for show. Whistleblowers have been warning about this for years!
But saying you were right won’t help you in the long run. Now we know that the government is listening, recording, and duplicating everything we do online or over the phone, it’s time to start taking action. It’s time to take back our right to privacy.
Although we may not fear Chinese tanks rolling through our streets, make no mistake; our most basic rights are under attack: reporters are being investigated and suspended by Government officials for exposing scandals, legislation is designed to water down our privacy rights and the NSA acts like it was nothing more than a necessity to crack down on terrorists, while presenting the matter as though they have the authority to do so.
Watch the powerful explanation of Snowden; it’s a lot easier, as was put forth by him, to change this intrusion on civilisation as has been laid out in the above writing: Be objective and make up your own mind; deciding for yourself.
The British Empire Is Un-Masked, But Desperate April 12 2018 | From: LarouchePac
The British Imperial Lords are in a state of shock. Their frantic effort to save the Empire came crashing down Tuesday when the scientists at Porton Down refused to lie for the Empire - refused to say that the nerve agent in the Skripal case came from Russia.
As a scientist he refused to lie. Kelly was “suicided” as a result, and the illegal and genocidal war went on.
Dr. David Kelly. “Suicided” after testifying against Blair’s “sexed up dossier” that lead to the Iraq War
This time, neither George W. Bush nor Barack Obama are around to provide cover for the Empire’s lies. President Trump, to the dismay of the British and American oligarchs and press whores, has refused to say (or tweet) a word about the Russian role in the Skripal case.
[Comment: It pays to remember that things are not always as they seem and that in the efforts of the Alliance to bring down the Cabal, that moves reported in the public mainstream media 'arena' are not necessarily in parallel to what is going on behind the scenes.]
He spoke to Putin afrter the incident without mentioning it, and, just yesterday, told the press yet again that “getting along with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing.”
The Empire is exposed, and badly wounded - but not yet dead, and therefore capable of anything to save itself.
Lyndon LaRouche has for fifty years warned Americans and others that the British Empire is not a thing of the past, but is at the center of the financial looting and speculation which has driven the western financial system to the brink of ruin, while manipulating the “dumb giant” in Washington to fight colonial wars on its behalf, first in Indochina, then in the Middle East.
He has also warned that the Empire would prefer a global war, even a thermonuclear war, rather than see their Empire disappear.
Helga Zepp-LaRouche today focused attention on this deadly reality. The Russiagate campaign collapsed, and its perpetrators in MI6 and in the Obama intelligence team are now facing criminal charges for their treasonous acts.
Theresa May’s controllers then desperately launched the Skripal incident, and demanded that the Western nations join in blaming Russia, with no evidence whatsoever.
Only half the EU nations went along, and, while Trump allowed his Administration to expel Russian diplomats, he himself laid no blame on the Russians, and announced that Moscow could replace their diplomats.
But now, the U.K.’s own chemical weapons experts have exposed the evil and dangerous lying of Prime Minister May and her buffoon of a Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson. Hysteria reigns in London today.
Will the Empire take even more desperate actions, by starting a war? Will they use the impending collapse of the multi-trillion dollar speculative bubble in the western financial system, which they created, to that end?
The LaRouche platform - for restoring American System methods and scientific progress in the U.S., and for the U.S. to join the New Silk Road, working with China and Russia in global nation building, as the United States once espoused - must be embraced and fought for now, today, by every person of good will.
The Empire is near defeat, but more dangerous than ever.
That is why this organization was founded, and the hard fought victory is within our grasp. As Helga said today: “Stay in reality - that’s what makes you sane, that’s what makes us unique. They never imagined that a genius like Lyndon LaRouche would be around to counter them.”
Do You Know What We Are Breathing In From Weather Geoengineering Efforts? April 11 2018 | From: ActivistPost
Air is one of the primary elements of life; without it for about three minutes, we cannot survive. If air is such an important biological and functional life component, why are weather geoengineers messing around with it?
Well, think again, since many independent and non-cabal-financially-sponsored “non-consensus scientists” are finding STUFF in the air we breathe that should not be there unless placed for nefarious reasons. What a mouthful! Is there any documentation to substantiate what I say? But of course! Would I say it, if there were none?
Well, I’m going to explain some things readers may find doubtful, interesting and even frightful, but cannot deny once you stop playing around with your iPhones, etc. and look up and study the sky, which no longer is the crystal clear gorgeous blue it used to be in my youth, since I was born during the Depression years.
“Nano particles and Smart Dust [is] being absorbed by all of us via inhalation of chemtrail fallout and from contaminated grocery store food (including organically grown food) where the crops pick up and absorb the same Nano particles and Smart Dust that we are breathing in.
In addition, food sources are intentionally being sprayed with Nano technology. I first became aware of “nanobots” as a component of chemtrails in 2005 when the topic of Morgellons first surfaced on the internet.
These nanobots were somehow integrating themselves with biological functions inside people’s bodies producing these colored fibers and wire-like threads that would ooze out of lesions on the skin.
I had no idea why some people produced the fibers and had the sensation of insects crawling under their skin, while other people had no symptoms at all.”
According to Tony Pantalleresco:
“[W]e’ve been breathing in Nano particles in the atmosphere since the 1960s and they’ve been adding Nano particles to food since the 1970s. The expresion [sic] “Nano particles” refers to the size of the particles.
A particle 1 micron wide is equivalent to one millionth of one meter, while 1 Nano is equivalent to one billionth of one meter. Our bodies can handle particles in the micron range, but Nano size particles in the 1-100 Nano range especially, cause a great deal of damage to the bodyl.”
Tony should know; he’s been making videos about them! Tony explained them in this podcast.
“He explains that many thousands of Nano particles are now residing in EACH human cell of all human beings (including you) and are integrating themselves with our biological functions to re-program our body (and our DNA) into an Android-like hybrid, that is part human biology and part Artificial Intelligence robotics.
These Nano particles inside our bodies are activated by (and programmable from a distance) using radio frequencies (microwaves) and ELF waves.
That means we are ALL being set up for a 21st Century version of enslavement employing electronic mind-control and body-control coercion harassment (which is what Targeted Individuals who call into the Ella Free podcasts are experiencing and talking about). l.”
Furthermore, there is much speculation the neurotoxic chemicals in all vaccines are part of that artificial intelligence robotics program.
There’s an amazing, astounding and seemingly unbelievable indication of what Tony contends, as a result of his research, being found in human bodies, and he demonstrates that using his arm and a special Anti-Nano Concoction protocol he created.
“Towards the end of the video, he immerses his arm in the anti-Nano bucket (after first adding vinegar, distilled water, salt, DMSO and a capful of olive oil) and following a few minutes, you can see the Nano metal dust particles coming out of the skin and sticking to the floating oil globules.
Jump ahead to 1:22 to see the Nano particles coming out of his skin.”
The above video, which I have watched in full and taken notes on, must be considered very seriously, as it deals with emerging protocols to counter Nano technology, which very few individuals know anything about, but all of us are exposed to and compromised by.
After watching more than an hour of his creating the electro-field bucket, Tony discusses the ‘recipe’ for the anti-Nano soaking mixture around 1 hour 12 minutes, more or less. The mixture includes cheap white vinegar, distilled water, salt, DMSO and oil, either olive or almond. The exact measurements are given.
At 1 hour 24 minutes “results” (Nano-dust particulates) start showing up emerging from Tony’s arm soaking in the anti-Nano mixture. Tony recommends soaking your feet, but with certain precautions.
If you have any electrical device implanted in your body, DO NOT use this method; it is NOT FOR YOU!
If you have a heart condition or pacemaker, this is NOT FOR YOU!
Tattoos use Nano-inks, which get into the bloodstream. The younger generations, who have gone bonkers over tats, are playing right into the NWO artificial intelligence agenda. Can that be why tattoos are not government regulated? Tattoo inks are neither regulated nor tested by the federal government and are considered a health risk . However, most states regulate “body art studios.”
“The American Red Cross requires someone who has had a tattoo to wait a year before donating blood if the tattoo was applied in Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, Wyoming or the District - jurisdictions that do not regulate tattoo facilities.”
Nano-dust and particulates make all human bodies receivers and transmitters, a necessary component for control of humans because we can be controlled by microwaves transmitted to those frequency receivers residing within our bodies. Hard to believe, isn’t it?
Furthermore, it’s my understanding that special “matching” frequencies even can be “designed” for those who have given DNA and body tissues sample, e.g., blood tests, which have been collected by certain ‘vested interest’ agencies doing such AI/transhumanism technology work.
It’s part-and-parcel of global weather geoengineering or “chemtrails,” which literally rain down 43 known chemicals and metals, especially aluminum - the key “tagging” mineral/element, which also is a constituent in most, if not all, vaccines.
Homo sapiens literally are being redesigned into another species created by man-made-technology. Will it be called Homo Nano-particulatem?
Is that the reason why “Sophia,” the humanoid robot, officially was made a ‘citizen’ of Saudi Arabia?
A new study has revealed that stress can make you physically ill by hijacking your immune system.
The study carried out by researchers at the University of Michigan revealed how stress interacts with immunity cells that protect the body against diseases and manifests into physical illness.
It was found that stress impacts the response of 'defense chemicals' which are responsible for fighting off bacteria or viruses, and amplifies inflammatory and allergic reactions such as irritable bowel syndrome, asthma and autoimmune disorders such as lupus.
Stress management tools like breathing exercises and yoga are prescribed by doctors to treat disorders like asthma and symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome.
Stress receptors, known as corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF1), send signals to certain immune cells, called mast cells, and this controls the body's defence.
Mast cells are a type of white blood cell which get triggered during stressful situations and are also involved with inflammatory responses like hypersensitivity and allergic reactions when the immune system fights off an assumed threat.
The researchers conducted a mouse study to understand immune cell responses to psychological and allergic stress. There were two groups of mice with one having stress receptors in their mast cells, while the other group didn't.
It was discovered that the mice with stress receptors had high levels of disease, while those without had less disease and were protected against both psychological and allergic stress.
Associate professor Adam Moeser who specializes in stress-induced diseases explained to the Daily Mail that when mast cells are triggered during stressful situations they are susceptible to being controlled by stress receptors.
He added, "When this happens, CRF1 tells these cells to release chemical substances that can lead to inflammatory and allergic diseases such as irritable bowel syndrome, asthma, life-threatening food allergies and autoimmune disorders such as lupus."
So chemical substances like histamine, which is produced by mast cells to get rid of invading allergens can become life-threatening.
While the normal response to an allergen would be inflammation, itching, sneezing and runny nose, under stress the responses got intensified and escalated to trouble breathing, anaphylactic shock and even death.
According to the American Psychological Association sleep and stress are inversely proportional, when stress increases, length and quality of sleep decreases.
And this lack of sleep can leave a person feeling more stressed.
Stress causes several problems other than just affecting your sleep, it is also responsible for health concerns like insomnia, depression, high blood pressure, inabilty to make decisions and lack of concentration.
The study was published in the Journal of Leukocyte Biology.
Is The Eurozone In A Dead End? April 10 2018 | From: Geopolitics
It’s remarkable that the Euro and the Eurozone currency grouping hasn’t fallen apart until now. Greece could have done it in 2010 but it was avoided by extraordinary acts of the Euro governments and European Central Bank.
This is one major reason that the anti-Brussels parties that triumphed in recent Italian elections - 5-Star and Lega, suddenly dropped talk about leaving the Euro.
They are betting that Macron and Markel and their proposed new EU architecture will pull their debt chestnuts out of the fire at expense of German taxpayers. It’s a timebomb ticking ever louder.
Ten years into the greatest financial meltdown in the history of finance, triggered by the USA sub-prime real estate bubble collapse in 2007, the Euro and its 19 member central banks are at a dangerous crossroad. It’s clear from her recent address to the German Parliament that Chancellor Merkel intends to lure Germany into what she and Macron intend to become a “transfer union.”
In plain English that would mean the strong surplus economies of Germany and northern Europe including Holland, would have to “transfer” hundreds of billions of Euros to subsidize the deficit countries of Italy, Spain and southern Europe. The ultimate winner would be the shaky French and Southern Eurozone banks.
It’s not surprising that Merkel, a close ally of former banker Marcon of France, is not being open with her people on what is at stake.
Target 2 Trap
In 2011, in the wake of the manipulated Greek bond crisis that triggered a Eurozone contagion panic in markets, the European Central Bank initiated a highly controversial and poorly understood disguised bailout known as Target 2.
Without getting into the complex details of how Target 2 central bank balances function, they in effect allow the central banks of the Eurozone crisis countries, led by Italy and Spain, to issue state bonds which are in effect taken by the strong central banks of the Euro, notably Germany’s Bundesbank.
Since 2011 and the Greek crisis, Target 2 balances have been growing phenomenally to where today the total is estimated for the Bundesbank alone at € 914 billion.
This is about one third of German GDP.In 2011 the highly-respected German economist and then-head of Munich’s IFO Institute, Hans-Werner Sinn, called the ECB use of Target 2 “The ECB’s stealth bail out.”
He was the first to warn that the ECB Target 2 system for “Target balances constitute public credit relations in the same way as credit that is given via official rescue packages.”
In 2011 the sums involved were still a fraction of the present total. Today the sheer size of these little-publicized Target 2 central bank balances in the Eurozone, especially the Bundesbank, put enormous pressure on the more prudent northern EU countries, especially Germany, to finally drop resistance to adoption of George Soros’ plan to have the Euro countries issue common Eurobonds.
With such Eurobonds, the public debt of euro-zone countries would be pooled and converted into Eurozone “Eurobonds” with collective responsibility.
De facto that would mean German or other north EU taxpayers would support the debt of stressed countries like Italy or Portugal or Greece.
For strong reasons former Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble fiercely resisted any supranational issuing of bonds as a disguised forced German bailout of the countries such as Italy or Spain.
As Sinn points out about the covert bailout Draghi’s ECB has created via the little-understood Target 2 central bank credits, “And yet the Bundesbank’s Target claims (on Italy, Spain, etc) are essentially worthless, because they can never be called due, and are issued at an interest rate determined by the debtors, which hold the majority on the ECB Governing Council.
For the time being, they have set the interest rate to zero.” This is €914 today, alone for the German Bundesbank.
Merkel, SPD and Eurobonds
Now it becomes clear why Merkel elegantly pushed Schäuble aside by naming him CDU Parliamentary leader. His replacement, Social Democrat Olaf Scholz, is rumored to be privately favorable to French President Macron’s proposal for a European banking union and a transfer union.
In her first speech in March as Chancellor in the new Grand Coalition, Merkel suggested favoring plans to turn the €500 billion European Stability Mechanism, the eurozone’s crisis rescue fund since the crisis in 2013, into a permanent European Monetary Fund, an EU version of Washington’s International Monetary Fund.
In a transfer union, the healthier countries of the Euro will support the weaker. This is behind Macron’s call for a common Eurozone Finance Minister who would develop a common tax budget for the ECB member countries.
Under the Macron Plan, which Merkel and the SPD have endorsed, each euro transferred from a Northern to a Southern European country would reduce the Target claims and liabilities by one euro.
The deeper underlying problem in all these schemes is the fact that the countries of the ECB and Euro have done nothing fundamental to clean up their banking insolvency mess. Instead the ECB under Draghi has been used to create what is today a de facto insoluble problem for the German and other strong central banks of the Euro using Target 2 balances as a stealth bailout.
Now the Merkel-Macron axis in the EU is ready to spring the next step - Eurobonds, a common Eurozone Finance Minister and fiscal policy and a transfer union.
This is the real reason Italy’s “Euroskeptic” parties suddenly dropped election demands for a referendum on leaving the Euro or the EU. They realized Italy could be a huge benefactor by staying in and backing an EU Transfer Union. Bond market speculators like Soros will have a field day.
German and Dutch and other more prudent countries will de facto pay the bill. For Germany where the demographic reduction in working age population is already apparent and will accelerate in coming years, a growing pension obligation makes German debt obligation in the long run unsustainable.
To now add a fiscal transfer from Germany to the indebted Southern EU countries spells political and economic Tsunami.
Has The Australian Government Gone Stark-Raving Mad? + Basic Vaccine Lies In The World Of Fake News April 9 2018 | From: ActivistPost / JonRappoport / Various
Just when you think things can’t get any worse than they are regarding the suppression of human rights, denial of personal dignities and the right to self-determination regarding one’s health, the Government of Australia has pulled off what it probably thinks is a “hat trick” upon its citizens.
It’s denying them their Creator-given and natural rights of securing life, liberty and the pursuit of safety and happiness by mandating no contradictory information can be stated by any member of the medical profession regarding the horrendous history of current vaccines and vaccinations, or they will lose their licenses!
That and other apparent totalitarian aspects and implementations of governance caught the attention of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which issued a report titled “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders on his mission to Australia,” a 21-page document that can be read here.
The Conclusions of the Rapporteur’s Report are self-explanatory:
106.The Special Rapporteur concludes the report by putting forward the following recommendations.
107.The Australian Government is recommended to:
(a) Consider adopting a federal human rights act to constitutionally guarantee human rights with a clause of precedence over all other legislation.
(b) Review and revoke laws that unduly restrict the right to free and peaceful assembly.
(c) Review secrecy laws, Crimes Act and the Border Force Act with a view to revising provisions that contravene international human rights norms and standards.
(d) Scrutinize and condemn violations of the rights of defenders and raise awareness of their legitimate role in the protection and promotion of human rights.
(e) Ensure sufficient funding and legal assistance to CSOs and refrain from introducing measures that reduce, obstruct or unduly control the funding for civil society.
(f) Restore adequate operational funding to legal, environmental and indigenous peak bodies and recognize their important role in advocacy and strategic litigation.
(g) Remove the ‘gagging clauses’ from all Federal and State funding partnership and funding agreements.
(h) Ensure prompt and impartial investigations into alleged threats and violence against defenders and trade unionists.
(i) Guarantee meaningful participation of defenders and civil society in government decision-making.
(j) Initiate a prompt and impartial inquiry into the attempts by public officials to intimidate and undermine the Australian Human Rights Commission.
(k) Ensure that future appointment of AHRC commissioners is made through public, transparent, merit-based appointment that are fully compliant with the Paris Principles.
(l) Formulate national action plan on business and human rights, in consultation with civil society.
(m) Ensure that environmental impact assessments are prepared in full transparency and with meaningful participation of affected communities prior to the approval of large-scale projects.
(n) Engage with investors and business enterprises to uphold their human rights responsibilities and sanction those companies associated with violations against defenders, both at home and abroad.
108.The Australian Human Rights Commission and other state-level human rights institutions are recommended to:
(a) Include, within the programme of work, specific activities on the protection and promotion of defenders.
(b) Compile and analyse data on the number of complaints received, cases monitored and recommendations adopted on the safety and security of defenders.
(c) Establish a focal point for defenders with decision-making power.
(d) At state levels, adopt and contribute to the preventive and protective measures for defenders, as well as develop means for their public recognition.
109.Business enterprises and other non-State actors are recommended to:
(a) Adopt and implement international human rights standards, including the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights and the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights;
(b) Fulfil legal and ethical obligations, including rigorous human rights due diligence, and perform human rights impact assessments for large-scale projects, ensuring full participation with affected communities and defenders.
(c) Refrain from verbal attacks or legal intimidation against defenders and CSOs.
(d) Disclose information related to planned and on-going large-scale projects in a timely and accessible manner.
(e) Establish grievance mechanisms necessary to avoid, mitigate and remedy any direct and indirect impact of human rights violations.
(f) Ensure that subcontractors respect the rights of indigenous peoples and affected communities and establish accountability mechanisms for grievances.
As a journalist, it is not my place to tell the people of Australia how to run their country, but it is within my purview to point out the problems involved, especially those that affect Australians’ ability to protect and maintain their health and wellness as being shackled upon them by the current Turnbull Administration regarding vaccines and vaccinations, which are a total medical sham currently being documented around the globe, but suppressed.
Furthermore, I cannot take a position one way or another regarding the above Report, only point to its existence and as a forewarning of what probably can be expected as government over-reach to be copied and implemented in other western culture countries regarding vaccines and vaccinations!
According to Vaccination Update Newsletter, March 6, 2018 edition, published by Judy Wilyman, PhD:
“In Australia the Medical Board of Australia (MBA) has removed the autonomy of doctors and nurses to advise their patients on vaccination based on their experiences and knowledge of vaccines. This is being done by linking the promotion of government vaccination programs to their medical registration.
This is contrary to their own Good Practice Guidelines in medicine based on the Geneva Convention. [….]
The MBA is currently investigating doctors, some with 40 years experience of clinical practice in using vaccines, based on allegations that “they are undermining a protective health program”.
Yet the MBA and the Australian Government did not provide evidence for the necessity to use 16 vaccines when they linked financial benefits to this intervention and removed conscientious and religious exemptions at the same time.”
Has Australia inadvertently returned to its original intent as founded, a penal colony for the British?
“New South Wales, a state in southeast Australia, was founded by the British as a penal colony in 1788. Over the next 80 years, more than 160,000 convicts were transported to Australia from England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, in lieu of being given the death penalty."
“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” - Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977.
In many previous articles, I’ve rejected, with evidence, a whole host of false claims about vaccine safety and efficacy. Here I want to look at basic flaws in the rationale for vaccination.
First of all, a child with a strong immune system will exile illnesses like measles or flu without incident. If he does become sick, his immune defense system will swing into high gear, mount a full inflammatory response, and the acute phase of illness will fade away. There are millions of such examples throughout recent history.
If a person has a weak and compromised immune system, vaccination is not going to cure that fact.
In the best presentation of conventional vaccine theory, a shot in the arm brings on antibodies, which are scouts for the immune system. They broadcast alerts: “Invaders detected.” But if the rest of the “immune army” is weak, what good are alerts? No good at all. Thus, a compromised immune system is a problem that can’t be solved by vaccination.
These are simple and basic realities - once you clear away pseudoscientific hocus-pocus.
Over the years, I’ve interviewed a number of people who grew up with no vaccinations. They were fed good clean food. They exercised. They had loving strong parents. They thrived. They rarely got sick, and when they did, the bout was over quickly. To them the idea of vaccination was a bizarre illusion. They never needed it. Period.
And as I say, the people with weak and compromised immune systems, who are basically unhealthy, are NOT going to be cured or protected by vaccination.
Many doctors know these facts, but are afraid to speak out. They also know about the dangers of vaccines, because they’ve seen children, whom they just vaccinated, fold up with devastating neurological injuries - but the doctors are silent about that, too.
The mainstream press, with non-stop pro-vaccination propaganda, is colluding with the medical establishment and governments to silence critics.
The press is fake news. We who point out fatal flaws in vaccination are actual news.
For example, now that the CDC schedule of “necessary” vaccines has greatly expanded, where are the proper studies proving that this increased load of chemicals and germs (in the vaccines) is safe? Where? Nowhere.
Does that sound acceptable? “Previously, we said X amount of chemicals and germs in vaccines was safe. Now that we’re piling on more of these substances, there is no need to prove safety. We just assume it.”
Can you name a single large mainstream news outlet that has devoted time and space to a complete and rational debate about vaccine safety and efficacy, representing both sides of the issue fairly? Can you?
Of course not. Does this seem reasonable? “The science is settled.” Only fools and unthinking minds would accept that position.
Who is the culprit here? Critics of vaccination, or the delinquent imperious press?
99.9% of mainstream reporters, news anchors, and medical bureaucrats know nothing about vaccine safety or efficacy. Their skill, such as it is, consists of pretending they have acquired knowledge.
In other words, if you were watching the evening news, and a parrot in a tree kept repeating, “Get your vaccinations, get your vaccinations,” would you trust the source?
Instead of treating mainstream news as a reliable fount of information, back up a step and realize this operation has been a heavily funded and protected monopoly - and all monopolies commit egregious acts to sustain their position. They cooperate with other would-be monopolies (e.g., the medical cartel) to improve their power.
By “egregious acts,” of course, I mean: crimes. Any criminal who is in the public spotlight, day in and day out, will bend, distort, fabricate, and concoct more lies to cover up his past offenses. This is common sense. Face this fact head-on. Don’t avoid it.
The horrendous SB277 bill was passed by the California legislation, in 2015, and signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown. It mandated an array of vaccines for all schoolchildren. During debate on the bill, did the legislature permit extended discussion about the dangers and ineffectiveness of vaccines?
No. Why not? Were these issues somehow automatically censor-able? Sweeping them into a garbage can is called a CLUE. Major players didn’t want certain information to see the light of day. Otherwise, why not turn on the light?
Let me explain how the game works with an example. In the mid-1990s, I sat in a courtroom in Los Angeles and watched the opening of a grotesque trial, in which the federal government was prosecuting a young man for selling a nutritional supplement. The man had made health claims for the product.
He told the judge he wanted to present evidence that:
a) The substance was produced naturally by the body, and
b) It had provably beneficial effects.
The judge refused to allow the defendant to present any evidence along these lines. No, the judge said. The only question was: had the defendant violated a federal rule about selling supplements? If so, he was guilty. Period.
And that was the verdict. The young man went to prison. Evidence be damned.
Who, in his right mind, would support such a ruling? A monopoly. That’s who. Truth, validity, facts? Out of bounds.
This is the same approach of the mainstream news establishment, when it comes to vaccination. It is the approach of inveterate liars.
For many reasons, a few of which I’ve listed here, the whole vaccination system is crashing. The oceanic sound of that crash hasn’t yet reached many ears tuned to the evening news.
When Life Gets Too Complicated: Minimalist Living: How To Enjoy Life More With Less April 9 2018 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit
If it feels like your life sucks, there are extreme chances that it's too complicated. On the other hand, if it feels like it doesn't suck, I bet your life is quite simple.
How do I know? Well, I've found my life sucking many times, and that was always when it became wildly complicated. Now that it doesn't suck anymore (or at least it feels like it doesn't), it's simpler than ever before
Of course, my life didn't just get simple on its own. I played my part in getting it the way it is. A BIG part, in fact.
How? By making a few small yet tremendously effective lifestyle changes. If you're entangled in the complexity of your own life, and would like to know what those changes were so that you can apply and benefit from them too, I have good news for you.
For most people, life has become a burden on their shoulders, and year by year its weight is growing heavier and heavier, until one day they can’t carry it anymore.
But does life have to be such a drudgery? No, it doesn’t. In fact, life can be stunningly great, if we allow it to be so.
How? Keep scrolling and I’ll show you.
Why is Life So Messed Up?
This is a question I get a lot from readers. I find it quite misleading, since life in itself isn’t messed up. Rather, we insist on making it look like it. Here’s how: By complicating it to such a degree that we can’t enjoy it anymore.
Let me give you a few examples: We do work we don’t enjoy, we buy stuff we don’t need, we say things we don’t mean, we eat food that doesn’t contribute to our health… you get what I mean.
Of course, no person is entirely to blame for that. From an early age, society has conditioned us to live this way. Just consider, for example, the advertising industry, which is constantly preying on our insecurities in order to make us want new products.
Or, contemplate on our school system, which is indoctrinating us with the belief that success is nothing but the result of getting good at things we don’t like just for the sake of an external reward. Or, lastly, think of our economic system, which is forcing us to work as wage slaves just so we can merely feed ourselves and sleep under a roof.
As you can understand, it’s not surprising that life seems messed up. But it’s in our hands to change this, if we want to, and make life worth-living again. There are various ways we can do so, and here I’m going to share with you some helpful ways you can create more space for peace, contentment, and health in your life.
Minimalism: A Turn Back to Simplicity
So how can we design a life that is less complicated and more meaningful? With minimalism.
If you haven’t heard of the term minimalism before, here’s it’s key idea: Getting rid of what isn’t adding value to your life in order make room for what does, such as removing clutter, distractions and unhealthy relationships, and allowing more space for things that are essential to our well-being, such as creativity, love, and play.
Therefore, minimalism or minimalist living is about intentionally focusing on what truly matters to you, and letting go of what doesn’t. Or, to put it differently, it’s about enjoying life more with less.
Now, this might sound like an easy thing to do, but it’s actually quite hard. Why? Because during the course of our lives most of us have lost touch with our true needs and wants.
This has resulted in a lack of inner fulfillment, out of which arises a desperate effort to fill our psychological void with physical, mental and emotional clutter, which, instead of making us feel better, actually makes us feel much worse.
The question is: How can one break free from this chaos we’re entangled in and which seems so out of hand?
If you’re trying to figure this out for yourself, I created the following guide to assist you in your journey to living a simpler yet fuller life. It consists of easy yet empowering tips and practices that you can apply in your everyday life in order to reap the incredible benefits of a minimalist lifestyle. Are you ready to dive into it?
A Guide to Minimalist Living: 10 Ways to Enjoy Life More with Less
1. Get Rid of Stuff that Doesn’t Serve Your Happiness
Most people’s living space is cluttered with myriads of things they never use and which don’t contribute to their well-being.
On the contrary, those objects are only standing in their way, distracting their attention and preventing them from finding calm, clarity and focus. Some of them even need regular maintenance, and hence require money, time and energy to be spent - or, to be more precise, wasted - on them.
Have a look at your possessions and ask yourself: Do I really need ALL of them? Separate the one’s you do need from the ones you don’t, and throw the latter right into the rubbish bin - or better, give them away to people who might actually benefit from them.
2. Resist Consuming Products You Don’t Need
Discarding things you don’t need is crucial to emptying your life from unnecessary stuff, but if you keep on acquiring new material possessions, it’s going to be filled up pretty soon again.
The solution? It’s simple: Stop buying things you don’t need.
However, the reality is that once we have enough to satisfy our basic human needs, products can’t improve our well-being in any way. They can only provide us with momentary gratification that quite soon vanishes into thin air, leading us in an even worse psychological state than before.
3. Appreciate all the Amazing Things You Already Have
In the day and age of Instagram, so many people are having terrific self-esteem issues. That’s because they constantly compare themselves to others who, in their eyes, always seem happier, more beautiful and way more important than them.
As they are, they feel like crap, and they try their best to imitate those they are jealous of, in a desperate effort to feel better about themselves. Yet no matter how much they try, they always fail.
If you’d like to stop feeling crappy, you need to learn to appreciate what you already have, instead of always being focused on what you don’t. That means you need to stop comparing yourself to others and embrace yourself for who you are, with all your flaws and imperfections. Only then will you be able to make peace with yourself, focus on what’s truly important and feel grateful for the amazing gift of life.
But you aren’t alone in that. In fact, nowadays most people are constantly fixated on an electronic screen, wasting hours upon hours everyday being carried away by a constant flood of information. They endlessly jump from one social media network to the other, from this article to that, from one picture to the next.
Don’t get me wrong, I adore the internet and spend much of my time online myself, but if we don’t learn how to use it mindfully, and instead let it use us, then it can play havoc with our mental health.
If you’d like to find more a peaceful state of mind, then you likely need to minimize your internet distractions.
To help you get started, here are some practical tips:
Close as many tabs you can.
Check your emails up to two times a day, filter and process them immediately, and clear out your inbox.
Spend as less time on social media as possible (I’d recommend not more than an hour per day).
Pick a handful of good sources and check them only once a day.
Set some hours offline each day.
After you’ve applied them for a month or so, shoot me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org and let me know about your progress and the impact this small minimalist lifestyle change has had on your well-being.
5. Build Intimate Relationships
What’s missing in the world more than anything else is human connection.
People feel disconnected from one another, and that’s for plenty of reasons, with the main being our economic system, which is compelling us to compete with and exploit each other in an endless effort to maximize our personal gain, and thus is constantly reinforcing the idea that others are inimical, or at best indifferent to us.
The result? Loneliness, insecurity, depression.
Every person - including you - is a social being with an emotional need to connect with other people. We all deep down want to be heard, understood, and embraced for who we are.
So whenever you find an opportunity for human connection, don’t shy away from it. Put your mobile phone aside for a while and take the time to look at someone in the eye, listen to their story, and open your heart to them.
One of the main reasons why our lives are so complicated is that we’re not quite honest with each other. We say things we don’t mean and we don’t say those things that we do mean, and this inevitably leads to plenty of misunderstandings and interpersonal conflict.
From now on, be sure to avoid uttering lies, and instead voice your sincere thoughts as well as express your feelings.
This way you’ll be able to form healthier and more genuine relationships, which will do wonders to simplify your day-to-day life.
7. Do One Thing at a Time
Minimalist living in essence means focused living, and focused living means making the most out of each and every moment.
The problem is that, because of the constant distractions we experience in the modern world, most of us haven’t learned to fully concentrate on one act at a time. Instead, we’re usually carrying out different tasks at the same time, and so whatever we are doing, our mind is partly wondering somewhere else.
Here are some examples:
We check our phones while we’re eating.
We are jumping between tasks in a browser.
We are lost in our thoughts when others are talking to us.
We are thinking of what thing to do next before finishing the current thing.
This way, not only aren’t we able to give our best to what we’re doing, but also we can’t enjoy the task at hand.
If you’re used to multi-tasking and would like to change that in order to be better at what you do as well as to get totally immersed in the things you like, make sure that you concentrate on a single thing or task at a time. For instance, when you’re eating, don’t check your phone at the same time and just focus on savoring every bite of your food.
Or when you’re talking to someone, don’t be preoccupied with what you’ll say next when your turn to talk comes - instead, give your full attention to your partner so that you can understand what he or she is saying.
8. Treat Your Body With Care
In order to be able to enjoy your life, you first and foremost need to be in good health. Hence, it’s vital that you treat your body with loving care.
Unfortunately, this isn’t how most people treat their bodies. They tend to consume toxic foods, they don’t exercise, they sleep less than needed, and do all sorts of other things that mess up with their health. Of course, they don’t do so on purpose.
Rather, they usually act like this either out of ignorance or because the stress of everyday life has led them to make poor lifestyle choices. But one thing is certain: They’ve stopped feeling connected to their bodies, and no longer understand how their actions are impacting their health.
As a result, they sooner or later end up experiencing all sorts of illnesses that could have been avoided if they payed more attention to their physical needs.
If you’d like to optimize your health, you need to turn your attention inwards, get in tune with your body, listen to its needs and act accordingly.
For example, if you feel like moving, move. If, on the other hand, you feel tired, stop moving your body to recharge your batteries. Or, to give you another example, if you feel hungry, eat to feed your body with fuel, but if you feel that your stomach is full, don’t eat any more and burden yourself with extra food.
The body has its own wisdom but we’ve lost touch with it. By starting to pay more attention to it, we can re-connect with it and allow it to lead us to a healthier and more fulfilling life.
9. Focus on Your Most Important Goals
People usually have a big number of goals they want to achieve, and often they are even opposing to each other. One day they want this thing, the next day another, and the next still another. No wonder they usually end up achieving nothing but complicating their lives.
A life that is simple has a clear purpose. To live such a life, you need to discover those few things that you’re most interested in and dedicate yourself to them.
Whatever they are, be sure to make them your top priority. By doing so, you’ll be able to live a life that is filled with meaning and purpose, without getting sidetracked by things that don’t matter to you.
Lastly yet perhaps most importantly, minimalist living requires a calm and undisturbed mind - that is, a mind that is free of conflicting thoughts and in tune with the present moment.
Unfortunately, in our busy, stressful lives, our minds are filled with worries - worries about what happened in the past or what is going to happen in the future, which don’t allow us to let go and enjoy the only moment that ever was, is and will be - the here and now.
To be able to regain a peaceful state of consciousness, you need to develop mindfulness. Mindfulness means fully attending what’s happening in the present, instead of dwelling in the past or the future.
It also means observing your thoughts and feelings without judging, resisting or feeding them. Lastly, it means consciously responding to situations instead of overreacting to them or being overwhelmed by them.
Every single person can develop mindfulness, and there are many ways one can do so. Perhaps the most common way is to sit for about 30 minutes somewhere comfortably with your upper back straight and pay full attention to your breath as it’s coming in and out through your nostrils, without allowing yourself to be distracted by your thoughts.
When, however, you feel that your mind has carried you away, make sure that you return your attention to your breath and continue your practice. By doing so, you’ll find that slowly slowly your thoughts become less and less, and as a result you’ll experience more clarity, focus and a sense of inner peace, which you can carry with you throughout your day.
Mindfulness is an ancient practice that is now backed up by science. By implementing it into your daily routine, you’ll be able to relieve yourself from the constant stream of thoughts that is flooding your mind and savor each and every moment of your life.
Former Facebook Executive: “You Don’t Realize It, But You Are Being Programmed” + Inventor Of The World Wide Web Warns Tech Giants Must Be Regulated, Or The ‘Net Will Plunge Into “Weaponization” That Harms Society April 8 2018 | From: Ideapod / NaturalNews “I think we have created tools that are ripping apart the social fabric of how society works. The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops we’ve created are destroying how society works,” former Facebook vice-president of user growth Chamath Palihapitiya, told an audience at Stanford Graduate School of Business.
His comments first emerged on Verge. Palihapitiya expressed regret for his part in building tools that destroy “the social fabric of how society works” and warned his audience: “If you feed the beast, that beast will destroy you. It’s time to take a hard break from some of these tools.”
The former Facebook executive who left Facebook in 2011 said: “The short-term, dopamine-driven feedback loops that we have created are destroying how society works. No civil discourse, no cooperation, misinformation, mistruth."
“And this is not an American problem. This is not about Russian ads,” he added. “This is a global problem … It is eroding the core foundations of how people behave by and between each other.”
“I don’t have a good solution. My solution is, I don’t use these tools anymore. I haven’t for years.
Bad actors can now manipulate large swaths of people to do anything they want. It’s a really bad state of affairs and we compound the problem. We curate our lives around this perceived sense of perfection because we get rewarded in these short-term signals (hearts, likes, thumbs ups) and we conflate that with value and we conflate that with truth.”
He warned his audience of bright Stanford graduates that whether they realize it or not, “you don’t realize it, but you are being programmed” (as are all of us). It was unintentional, he said, but now you have to decide how much of your intellectual independence you’re willing to give up, he told his audience.
Palihapitiya is not the only Facebook executive who has expressed belated insight into the consequences of the work they did at Facebook years ago. His comments are part of an ongoing debate about the seemingly unlimited power and reach of social media.
At an Axios event Facebook’s founding president, Sean Parker also sounded the alarm on how social networks purposely hook us and potentially cause mental damage.
Parker had said that he was “something of a conscientious objector” to using social media, and Palihapitaya revealed that he doesn’t use “that shit” anymore and neither are his children allowed to use it.
What Parker said at the Axios event is actually very damning.
“The thought process that went into building these applications, Facebook being the first of them, … was all about: ‘How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?'”
“And that means that we need to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever. And that’s going to get you to contribute more content, and that’s going to get you … more likes and comments.”
“It’s a social-validation feedback loop … exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology.”
And to crown it all this acknowledgement:
“The inventors, creators - it’s me, it’s Mark [Zuckerberg], it’s Kevin Systrom on Instagram, it’s all of these people - understood this consciously. And we did it anyway.”
Interesting: Palihapitiya said it was unintentional, yet here Parker admits they all knew what they were doing – hook customer engagement through regular dopamine spurts.
These two executives echo the feelings expressed some time ago by Google, Twitter and Facebook software engineers who helped make technology so addictive, announcing that they are disconnecting themselves from the internet.
The group includes the likes of Justin Rosenstein, creator of the “Like” button, Tristan Harris former design ethicist at Google and founder of the advocacy group Time Well Spent, Loren Brichter who created Tweetie and the pull-to-refresh feature and James Williams, the ex-Google strategist who built the metrics system for the company’s global search advertising business.
The Clouds are Gathering
Social media companies have been in the dog box since it has become clear that their reach stretches as far as influencing political outcomes like the US presidential election and Brexit, through facilitating the spread of fake news, conspiracies and propaganda, effectively taking over the minds of an unsuspecting Facebook audience.
Most recently Facebook has been accused of allowing hatred against the Rohingya in Myanmar to escalate through newsfeeds that claim that there is no “ethnic cleansing” against Burma’s Muslim Rohingya minority.
Thing is, in a closed country like Myanmar, Facebook is the source of news. It’s the quickest way to find out what’s happening on the ground. If Facebook knows that, the company should start taking responsibility as a news provider just like any other and stop hiding pretending to be just “a social utility that connects people.” It clearly has become more than that.
Inventor Of The World Wide Web Warns Tech Giants Must Be Regulated, Or The ‘Net Will Plunge Into “Weaponization” That Harms Society
Inventor of the World Wide Web, British computer scientist Sir Tim Berners-Lee, is speaking out about how the internet is being weaponized against people. He believes that tech giants should be regulated so that free speech can be restored across the net. Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc., control a vast proportion of the information people receive.
The groupthink that dominates these organizations drives them to censor dissenting voices on the internet and favor the content that aligns with their goals.
In 2019, the internet celebrates its thirtieth birthday. What was once an open portal for communication and sharing information, the internet has slowly become a totalitarian hub of thought control. Tech giants now censor certain viewpoints while favoring the content they want people to consume.
Helpful information and contrarian viewpoints are a threat to specific authority figures and industries, and tech giants have the power to police this. For instance, 1700+ videos from the Health Ranger’s YouTube channel were taken down with no justification.
These videos teach critical thinking and self-reliance; the content penetrates the fragile philosophies and groupthink that pervades big tech culture. This leftist groupthink is so strong, Google will terminates employees for recognizing the fact there are only two genders and that male and female are inherently different.
“The web that many connected to years ago is not what new users will find today. What was once a rich selection of blogs and websites has been compressed under the powerful weight of a few dominant platforms.
This concentration of power creates a new set of gatekeepers, allowing a handful of platforms to control which ideas and opinions are seen and shared.”
Perhaps, Berners-Lee should consult the Social Media Neutrality Panel, which featured censored voices such as Pamela Geller of the Geller Report and Margaret Howell of Rightside Broadcasting.
The panel discussed social media bias, shadow banning and various other methods used to silence voices and restrict access to information on the web.
Berners-Lee is now working to make internet free, open, and affordable to more people around the world while advocating for decentralization of thought and information.
The web cannot welcome innovation and the free flow of ideas if a handful of tech giants have the power to control which ideas and opinions are shared. How can small, innovative online stores and bloggers get their products and message out if the most powerful players in the industry dominate what people see online?
Berners-Lee warns that these platforms become dominant by “creating barriers for competitors.” With their deep pockets and heavy-handed influence, these platforms may “acquire startup challengers, buy up new innovations and hire the industry’s top talent.”
These dominant platforms meticulously collect user data from people, which give them an extreme advantage in the online marketplace.
All the data that is being collected on internet users, including searches, connections, and interests, can be used against them to target market products, news, and information.
This predatory breach of privacy and target marketing is motivated by profit and is all about controlling what people read, so any voluntary changes made by the tech giants will not be done for the public good because any changes will be counterproductive to their financial mission. There must be a new incentive that changes the way platforms operate.
This incentive should stop tech giants from suppressing any competition or dissent. It should not give them more power to police content.
For example, Facebook cannot be trusted to weed out “fake news” from being shared on its platform; this only equates to censorship.
Regulations that empower the tech giants will only embolden the problem. New regulations should hold the tech giants accountable for violating freedom of ideas and freedom of expression, even if they disagree with the content or find it “offensive.”
The Outside And The Inside April 7 2018 | From: WakingTimes
We’re all outsiders and insiders in various respects. Social circles, generally speaking, are just one aspect but they often affect us to drastic degrees.
Acceptance by others and needing a sense of “belonging” are strong driving forces in most people’s lives. Sometimes these coincide with our need for a sense of purpose, but often what ultimately drives our heart can alienate us from previous surroundings as we progress through life.
I know for myself my close acquaintances that I still resonate with have narrowed down drastically, but then again I’ve had several drastic shifts. But this has always been the case in my life, with each new paradigm dissolution or correction, as many have experienced.
Going through what appears to be loneliness in taking a new direction and leaving the old life behind is a precious opportunity. In most cases we don’t see that as the case when we’re younger and learning about this earthly place and getting knocked around by this mechanistic matrix, but we get the hang of it as life progresses.
Social conditioning and group consciousness are weird things to integrate and fully grasp, and often even individual changes are part of a larger shift and new “collectives” form outside the old ones with new awarenesses arising.
These then gain their own group characteristics which in turn are broken out of in various ways, sometimes shifting the “group” think and status, and sometimes birthing another potential tectonic shift in awareness.
What’s evident in most collectives is the formation of new sets of stated or unstated control mechanisms, mores, and regulations for a host of reasons. Religions are a great example, how a system with the stated intention to liberate and empower actually becomes a highly controlled diversion from real truth, giving the illusion of freedom.
How we allow these encrusted, paralytic structures to do what they do is a massive subject, but we essentially draw these upon ourselves as a personal extension of our own lack of awareness of ourselves. We can be free, and are, at any and all given times, yet we succumb to external control for a wide variety of reasons.
These are fundamentally driven by fear – a literal fear of freedom, of what we consider to be the “unknown”, because it directly implies taking responsibility. This can be largely driven by fear of scarcity – being without our basic needs for food, shelter and community.
As long as that’s the driving force, humanity is a sitting duck for anyone seeking to manipulate the controls in any way possible.
The amazing and wondrous truth underlying any social system is that any and all control mechanisms can be easily thrown off in a heartbeat by not falling for the illusion of fear.
Fear is another huge subject as it permeates so many of our mental and emotional mechanisms and eludes recognition for what it is, being so deeply woven into the lower vibrational human fabric and our fascination for it which can lure us in without our realizing it.
Are You a True Outcast?
If so, treasure it. In fact cherish it. There’s freedom there. You don’t want to be “accepted” or on the inside of any confinement system in this low dimension. In fact, just about everything we experience in this realm of limitation is a potential trap, no matter how innocuous anything may seem.
Anything that limits or even hints at conditions and restrictions, watch out. If it encloses, encircles, is conditional and draws unnecessary boundaries, it’s not your friend and it’s time to make tracks outta there.
It’s just another control system within the overarching control matrix, no matter how cleverly disguised. We draw these conditions upon our unawakened selves. Layers upon layers of them. But we’re getting there as we work our way out of the cocoon we were born into and our wings of truly awakened flight develop.
Once we bend to conformity we’ve lost our edge. Living truly consciously is an open agreement to be freewheeling together, which is a whole different “story”.
That’s when what’s essential connects us and remains the focus. Otherwise any and every new normalcy bias will take control, pick up on social as well as negative spiritual rules and “norms”, and quash true freedom of expression individually and collectively.
Just look how imagination is treated like a fanciful flight into fantasy, when it’s actually our highest expression of creativity.
Being your true individual heart-led self might seem to be “lonely” at first but just give it time. A whole new world will open up to you. The seeming loss of old, restricting and conditional acquaintances and surroundings is a small price to pay to explore the boundless nature of existence.
So why do such an “uncomfortable” thing as to be your true sovereign self? It depends on where your head and heart are at and what your priorities are. What’s more important to you? Truth, or comfort just surviving in someone else’s construct, group or otherwise?
We live in our own shadows or that of others when we could be basking in the light, if we’re willing to step out. Aren’t you tired of the same old stories, including your own? It’s not that hard, it just takes a little honesty with yourself and you’re off and running. But don’t stop. There’s always new enclosures seeking to trip you off into another new construct.
It’s fear that keeps us confined. Fear of many things, most of which are intensely reinforced by this group agreement called society. And fear is all based on lies, complete lies.
It’s more obvious by the day that the world doesn’t need to be the way it is, yet the personal implications of our own responsibility regarding this group projection continue to escape most.
The wonderfully empowering reality is that as we honestly pursue truth these energizing and liberating dynamics take hold no matter what.
Truth is not popular, especially when it touches on cherished beliefs or sensitive personal issues. It’s very painful at first, even though it liberates the true essence of who we truly are.
No worries, it only means constant change. And wow, the worlds that open up are beyond comprehension!
Stay on the outside. The infinite knows no boundaries.
“Being an outsider to some extent, someone who does not “fit in” with others or is rejected by them for whatever reason, makes life difficult, but it also places you at an advantage as far as enlightenment is concerned. It takes you out of unconsciousness almost by force.”
- Eckhart Tolle
Science Is Broken, And The Peer-Review Process Produces “Utter Bulls##t” Parading Around As Real Science April 6 2018 | From: NaturalNews
Much of what gets published in so-called “science journals” or “medical journals” is actually complete “bulls##t,” warn many observers.
In recent years the defects in the peer review system have been the subject of a profusion of critical editorials and studies in the literature. It is high time that the world took heed of what the critics are saying, not least of all because of the medical and health ramifications.
The notion of peer review has long occupied special territory in the world of science. However, investigation of suppressed innovations, inventions, treatments, cures, and so on, rapidly reveals that the peer review system is arguably better at one thing above all others: censorship.
This can mean censorship of everything from contrarian viewpoints to innovations that render favored dogmas, products, or services obsolete (economic threats).
The problem is endemic, as many scientists have learned the hard way.
In truth, the systemic failure of peer review is one of science’s major, embarrassing open secrets.
As Dr David Kaplan tells us, “Peer review is known to engender bias, incompetence, excessive expense, ineffectiveness, and corruption. A surfeit of publications has documented the deficiencies of this system.”
Australian physicist Brian Martin elaborates in his excellent article Strategies for Dissenting Scientists:
"Certain sorts of innovation are welcome in science, when they fall within established frameworks and do not threaten vested interests. But aside from this sort of routine innovation, science has many similarities to systems of dogma. Dissenters are not welcome. They are ignored, rejected, and sometimes attacked."
Electric universe researcher and Big Bang critic Wal Thornhill (a REAL scientist) stated plainly in our GFM Media interview that the peer review system amounts to censorship. Fellow independent scientist Gary Novak agrees scathingly:
"Peer review is a form of censorship, which is tyranny over the mind. Censorship does not purify; it corrupts… There is a lot of junk science and trash that goes through the peer review process."
Brian Martin asks us rhetorically:
"What do [scientists] have to gain by spending time helping an outsider? Most likely, the alleged discovery will turn out to be pointless or wrong from the standard point of view.
If the outsider has made a genuine discovery, that means the outsider would win rewards at the expense of those already in the field who have invested years of effort in the conventional ideas."
Herein lies the problem in moving science forward and shifting paradigms. A paradigm is only as malleable (or mutable) as the minds and egos invested in it.
The Problem of “Experts”
The reality is (as any real scientist will tell you) that scientists are prone - just like lay people - to being cathected to their pet theories and opinions, especially if they have been visibly rewarded or publicly obtained accolades or financial remuneration as a result.
Scientists, like laypeople, have susceptible emotional bodies and often fairly hefty egos - partially due to their “expertise” and academic titles, qualifications, theories, etc.
Once those hefty egos - belonging to people generally known as “experts” - rise to positions of power and/or influence, they can calcify the flow of scientific progress as well as the understanding of new discoveries or theories - particularly if they end up acting as “peer reviewers” at high levels in prestigious publications.
In that capacity, too many become mere gatekeepers and seek not to facilitate innovation or vital new Copernican-scale revelations, but to maintain the status quo which got them there in the first place.
Dr Malcolm Kendrick comments in his excellent book Doctoring Data that, “by definition, anyone who is an ‘expert’ in an area of medicine will be a supporter of whatever dogma holds sway.” Close study of power dynamics in medicine bears this out.
The players with the deepest pockets have the funds to buy all of the “experts” they need to sell a bogus product or ideology to an unsuspecting public.
Consider the following words from The Lancet’s editor Richard Horton (pictured below):
"The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability - not the validity - of a new finding… We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller.
But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong."
Peer review, as a “quasi-sacred” process that somehow supposedly transcends the foibles and follies human nature has taken on sacred ritual status. Has the paper been blessed by the Peer Review Priest?
Peer review is held to be more than just pragmatically useful and functional (which clearly it is not, generally speaking) - it is held as a transcendent, almost magical, organizing force occurring in the heavenly ivory towers of Science, which somehow avoids falling prey to human weaknesses by virtue of those humans’ lofty qualifications as “scientists” or “experts.”
Scientists, of course, aren’t quite human - they are something more, something pure, something that the layman can never be. Students undergo a magical alchemical process as they proceed through educational institutions and emerge transformed from their chrysalis with their doctorates, masters, stethoscopes and equations.
They are the Chosen Ones, the purified, the holy, the redeemed, the righteous. They do not have to answer to the lowly non-scientific peasantry – let alone unbelieving heretics.
It is clear, however, that not only is the popular view of peer review misleading, but the most prestigious publications are some of the very worst offenders. Significant scientific publications - for example, the journal Nature - have a well documented history of prejudice against findings or hypotheses that run contrary to established scientific dogma.
Writing in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in May 2000, Canadian-based researcher, David Sackett, said that he would “never again lecture, write, or referee anything to do with evidence based clinical practice,” over his concern that “experts” are stifling new ideas. He wants the retirement of experts to be made compulsory and I think it’s a brilliant proposition.
Sackett says that “…progress towards the truth is impaired in the presence of an expert.”
Trusting “experts” in oncology, for example, is generally a very good way to artificially speed one’s trip to the grave, particularly if one has metastatic cancer (allopathic medicine is notoriously ineffective in that realm). And yet “experts” are now on a rarified level that perhaps only popes and celebrities can understand - they are virtually demigods today.
In the main, “experts” are those people in the establishment who espouse the mainstream dogma and reify the politically correct belief structures. “Experts” are lionized because the world that made them experts promotes and validates them when they affirm the already established (and profitable) beliefs - and the media is complicit in this.
If you want to be horribly misled on any number of important issues, just head straight to just about any mainstream news media outlet and listen to the establishment’s “experts.”
Is it not time to get the crusty, rigidified, and corrupt Old Guard out of the way so we can let science move forward?
Harvard Medical School’s Dr. Marcia Angell is the former Editor-in-Chief at the New England Journal of Medicine, where she spent twenty years poring over scientific papers, saturated in the dubious practices that pervade the world of medical research. She states bluntly:
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine."
Most “experts” in medicine are, psychologically speaking, simply engaged in well-paid groupthink and confirmation bias exercises, vigorously affirming and defending their ego’s (lucrative) construction of the world. To paraphrase physicist Max Planck, medicine, like science, “advances one funeral at a time.”
Once the public has accepted the scientific establishment’s truths, narratives, and designated “experts” then researchers who yield findings deviating from the accepted norm can be immediately branded as crackpots, lunatics, fringe nuts, pseudo-scientists and so on, regardless of how meticulous their methods, and irrefutable their results.
The media is crucial in this control dynamic because it sells the establishment’s reality.
Thus is the politically correct status quo maintained.
Peer “Review” Lets Garbage Through - and Lots of it!
“Peer review” censorship exemplifies the neophobia in the world of science which serves to protect the status quo rather than improve knowledge by weeding out dubious epistemologies and results, as it is meant to.
This supposed mechanism of “quality control” has resulted not only in the dismissal of much important and credible research, but it has also let fraudulent research - and lots of it! - be published at the same time. Papers that appear to support fashionable ideas or entrenched dogmas are likely to fare well, even if they are badly flawed - or outright rubbish!
David Kaplan, a professor of pathology at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland, has stated that;
"Peer review is broken. It needs to be overhauled, not just tinkered with. The incentives should be changed so that: authors are more satisfied and more likely to produce better work, the reviewing is more transparent and honest, and journals do not have to manage an unwieldy and corrupt system that produces disaffection and misses out on innovation."
Is it any wonder that John Ionnidis reported in his famous 2005 paper that, “Most research findings are false for most research designs and for most fields”? Given the already outlined problems, is it really surprising that, in Ionnidis words, “Claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias”?
Dr. Marc Girard, a mathematician and physician who serves on the editorial board of Medicine Veritas (The Journal of Medical Truth), has written;
"The reason for this disaster is too clear: the power of money. In academic institutions, the current dynamics of research is more favourable to the ability of getting grants - collecting money and spending it - than to scientific imagination or creativity."
In general, peer reviewers - generally not time-rich - don’t try to replicate experiments and rarely even request the raw data supporting a paper’s conclusions. Who has the time for all that? Thus, peer review is, according to Richard Smith writing in Peer review in health sciences;
"Thought to be slow, expensive, profligate of academic time, highly subjective, prone to bias, easily abused, poor at detecting gross defects, and almost useless for detecting fraud."
What about fake peer review? This is where the corrupt and abysmal becomes the theatre of the absurd. For example, Berlin-based Springer Nature, who publishes the aforementioned Nature journal announced the retraction of 64 articles in 10 journals in an August 18th statement in 2015. This followed an internal investigation which found fabricated peer-review write-ups linked to the articles.
The purge followed similar discoveries of “fake peer review” by several other major publishers, including London-based BioMed Central, an arm of Springer, which began retracting 43 articles in March citing “reviews from fabricated reviewers”.
Yes, that means reviewers that don’t exist - recommended as “reviewers” by the people submitting their work for review.
Imagine writing a paper and being able to nominate a non-existent person to review your work, and the contact email supplied to the publisher for this purpose is actually one you made up, which routes the paper back to you (unbeknownst to the publisher), so that you can then secretly carry out a (favourable) review of your own work under a pseudonym!
It’s being done, folks, this is not a joke.
In response to fake peer review some publishers have actually ended the practice of author-suggested reviewers.
And now for the Conceptual Penis…
Recently two scientists performed a brilliant Sokal-style hoax on the journal Cogent Social Sciences. Under the pen names “Jamie Lindsay” and “Peter Boyle,” and writing for the fictitious “Southeast Independent Social Research Group,” Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay wrote a deliberately absurd paper loosely composed in the style of “post-structuralist discursive gender theory” - what exactly that is they made no attempt to find out.
The authors tell us:
"The paper was ridiculous by intention, essentially arguing that penises shouldn’t be thought of as male genital organs but as damaging social constructions…
We assumed that if we were merely clear in our moral implications that maleness is intrinsically bad and that the penis is somehow at the root of it, we could get the paper published in a respectable journal."
And they did. After completing the paper, and being unable to identify what it was actually about, it was deemed a success and ready for submission, which went ahead in April 2017.
It was published the next month after some editorial feedback and additional tweaking. To illustrate how deliberately absurd the paper is, a quote is in order:
"We conclude that penises are not best understood as the male sexual organ, or as a male reproductive organ, but instead as an enacted social construct that is both damaging and problematic for society and future generations… and is the conceptual driver behind much of climate change."
In plain English, they (seemingly) argued here that a penis is not a male sexual organ but a social construct; the “conceptual penis” is problematic for “gender (and reproductive) identity,” as well as being the “conceptual” driver of climate change. No, really. How this ever got published is something to ponder. The paper is filled with meaningless jargon, arrant nonsense, and references to fake papers and authors.
As part of the hoax, none of the sources that were cited were even read by the hoaxers. As Boghossian and Lindsay point out, it never should have been published. No one - not even Boghossian and Lindsay - knows what it is actually saying.
Almost a third of the sources cited in the original version of the paper point to fake sources, such as created by Postmodern Generator, making mock of how absurdly easy it is to execute this kind of hoax, especially, the authors add, in “‘academic’ fields corrupted by postmodernism.” (emphasis added)
The Spectacular Success of Hoax Papers and Non-existent Authors
In April 2010, Cyril Labbé of Joseph Fourier University in Grenoble, France, used a computer program called SCIgen to create 102 fake papers under the pseudonym of Ike Antkare. SCIgen was created in 2005 by researchers at MIT in Cambridge in order to demonstrate that conferences would accept such nonsense…as well as to amuse themselves.
Labbé added the bogus papers to the Google Scholar database, which boosted Ike Antkare’s h-index, a measure of published output, to 94 - at the time, making Antkare the world’s 21st most highly cited scientist. (emphasis added)
So a non-existent scientist has achieved the distinction of being one of the world’s most highly cited authors - while “authoring” papers consisting of utter gibberish. Congratulations are certainly in order. In February 2014 it was reported that Springer and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), were removing over 120 such bogus papers from their subscription services after Labbe identified them using his own software.
Going back at least as far as 1996 journalists and researchers have been getting spoof papers published in conferences or journals to deliberately expose weaknesses in academic quality controls.
“Physicist Alan Sokal (of the famous Sokal Affair) succeeded in the journal Social Text in 1996,” while Harvard science journalist John Bohannon revealed in a 2013 issue of Science that he had duped over 150 open-access journals into publishing “a deliberately flawed study.”
Bohannon organized submission of the flawed study (technically, many different but very similar variations of the study) to 304 open access journals worldwide over a period of 10 months. 255 went through the whole editing process to the point of either acceptance or rejection.
"Any reviewer with more than a high-school knowledge of chemistry and the ability to understand a basic data plot should have spotted the paper’s shortcomings immediately. Its experiments are so hopelessly flawed that the results are meaningless."
The hoax paper was accepted by a whopping 157 of the journals and rejected by only 98. Of the 106 journals that did conduct “peer review,” fully 70% accepted the paper.
If peer review was a transparent and accountable process, according to Gary Novak;
"There might be a small chance of correcting some of the corruptions through truth and criticism; but the process is cloaked in the darkness of anonymity…Due to the exploitive and corrupt process, nearly everything in science has official errors within it… A culture of protecting and exploiting the errors creates an official reality which cannot be opposed."
Returning specifically to the arena of (mainstream) medicine, a quote in PLoS Medicine, states:
"Journals have devolved into information laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry”, wrote Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, in March 2004.
In the same year, Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, lambasted the industry for becoming “primarily a marketing machine” and co-opting “every institution that might stand in its way”…
Jerry Kassirer, another former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, argues that the industry has deflected the moral compasses of many physicians, and the editors of PLoS Medicine have declared that they will not become “part of the cycle of dependency…between journals and the pharmaceutical industry”.
In the words of John Ionnidis, “Most scientific studies are wrong, and they are wrong because scientists are interested in funding and careers rather than truth.”
If most studies are wrong, and most scientists are more interested in their own careers and funding than getting at the truth - while journals daily allow bogus and flawed pharmaceutical research to be published and promoted - then why would anyone in their right mind believe the claims made by doctors about the efficacy of products based upon “peer review” or pharmaceutical “studies”?
What does a term like “safe and effective” even mean in this world of deception and subterfuge?
Clearly the problem of corruption and conflicts of interest have been increasingly on the radar of professional academics for some time now, so much so that it has been the subject of an increasing number of harshly critical articles and editorials. Conveying the depth and breadth of deception to the “uninitiated,” however, presents a unique challenge.
And it isn’t just conflict of interest and corruption to blame for the failure of peer review, there is human bias, shoddy review work, fake reviewers and fraud, and varying other human interests to factor in.
At the very least we need to cease indoctrinating students into the dogma that all good things have been peer reviewed, and the converse: anything that has not been peer reviewed is clearly blasphemous and crafted by the unholy hands of sinners.
In the meantime, the public needs to be warned: peer review is largely a sham and will not protect you or your family from medical pseudo-science or dangerous pharmaceutical products.
Your doctor’s word should not be blindly trusted, especially when we know that doctors rely absurdly heavily on information (read: propaganda) provided by the pharmaceutical industry itself (can you say “conflicted”?!) in developing their views and opinions.
I can’t help but cringe when I hear people ask if a study has been “peer-reviewed.” The response this question most often deserves is simply, “Who cares?”
"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."
- Richard Horton, Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma? The Lancet, 11 April 2015, thelancet.com (Horton is editor of The Lancet)
Shipp believes that this entire scandal, which will likely end up being the biggest in American history, could result in a Constitutional crisis. In an interview withUSA Watchdog‘s Greg Hunter, Shipp contends, “There could be a Constitutional crisis in that we could see Congressmen, Senators, former Directors of the FBI, and the CIA perp walked after they receive charges.
Could you imagine if senior DOJ officials were arrested, some Congressmen and Senators were arrested and other government officials were arrested on charges and walked out of office? That’s the Constitutional crisis I am talking about.
Those kinds of high-level arrests would shake up this nation. It would be huge, and that’s why it has taken so long and methodical in doing this.”
To begin, Shipp just lays it out, as plain as day, and it’s not difficult to understand.
"Hillary Clinton was running and is running a global financial criminal syndicate. She was using these secret servers to conduct Clinton financial money laundering business.
The shocking thing about that is all the former directors of the CIA that have come out to support her, from Clapper to Brennan to Morell even Robert Gates supporting her being elected, knew about this criminal syndicate.
Comey was protecting it. Lynch was protecting it. Weissmann was protecting it. And that is the big why. What’s she got on these people? Are they financial ties? They had to be aware of this, especially the counter-intelligence units.
We know it was hacked into by foreign intelligence services because it was just hanging out there. Hillary Clinton was running a secret server outside the Department of State for the purposes of laundering money through the criminal Clinton Foundation.”
"It’s not just an anvil, I think it is a mountain and the nexus of everything. This “Clinton Global Initiative” (CGI) is worldwide, and it’s been out there for a couple of decades. It has now, of course, intertwined former Directors of the CIA and FBI.
George Soros is a part of it. It’s connected to all kinds of global financial institutions…These people have been backing her, protecting her…James Comey protected Hillary Clinton from prosecution of multiple espionage laws…They have to be connected to this because they are completly witting of the whole thing.
[The global charity fraud is] at least a $100 billion and it connects into a whole lot of things…
All these people protecting and defending Hillary Clinton and knowing about her criminal syndicate, this goes into the so-called “Deep State” of our government, and it is connected, involved and intertwined in the global criminal crime syndicate called the Clinton Foundation. This is probably going to be the biggest scandal in U.S. history–once it’s busted.
I think they are quietly working on it now, and I think they have been for the last year. It is so huge the arrests and indictments could cause a Constitutional crisis with some people being removed. Maybe that’s why they are moving slowly. It all comes back down to the Clinton Foundation and the criminal syndicate.”
When Hunter asked who all was involved in this money laundering scandal, the regular players’ names surfaced, like George Soros. But Shipp also named Barack Obama as a culprit after Hunter specifically asked if the former president was also involved.
"Yes, I am absolutely convinced of it. George Soros gave $30 million to Obama’s campaign. Then he gave $27.1 million to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Both Obama and Clinton are tied directly into George Soros. Obama was put into office with millions of dollars that came out of nowhere. Yes, he’s part of this cabal. Yes, he’s part of this global syndicate, and in my opinion, the subversion of our government.”
In his article, Horgan rightly points out that today's so-called "science skeptics" are little more than dogmatic tribal cultists (my words, not Horgan's) who celebrate "skeptical" thinking concerning their selected philosophical targets while vehemently denying anyone's right to question their own beliefs on things like breast cancer screening, vaccine safety, global warming and genetically engineered foods.
As Horgan eloquently explains in his piece, real skeptics are skeptical of everything, not just selected topics that are targeted by the madness of status quo science crowds (i.e. the "cult of scientism").
Real Skepticism Means Questioning Everything... Especially the Status Quo
A real skeptic, in other words, would bring critical thinking to all of our science narratives and cultural beliefs, including those that cover the origin of the universe (cosmology), the origin of the human species, the nature of consciousness, the long history of indigenous botanical medicine, the cancer industry and mammography, homeopathy, antidepressant drugs, water filters, the existence of God and everything else imaginable.
But far too many of today's infamous "skeptics" (such as Richard Dawkins) are really just cultists who labor under the false banner of "science."
And they're offensive to real critical thinkers, it turns out.
"I don’t hang out with people who self-identify as capital-S Skeptics. Or Atheists. Or Rationalists," explains Horgan. "When people like this get together, they become tribal.
They pat each other on the back and tell each other how smart they are compared to those outside the tribe. But belonging to a tribe often makes you dumber."
I've seen this myself, on both ends of the medicine spectrum. I've seen insanely stupid pharmacology experts swear that statin drugs are such miraculous chemicals that they should be dripped into the public water supply. But I've also seen "raw foodies" at festivals swearing that their "water vortexer machines" could levitate water in defiance of the laws of gravity.
In both cases, my critical thinking alarms go haywire, and I shake my head in disbelief that so many people are so gullible, regardless of their level of academic education or technical mastery of certain subjects.
A highly trained doctor with an IQ of 200 can be just as functionally stupid as a high school dropout, I've observed. In fact, when it comes to medicine and health, many so-called "experts" are so ignorant of reality that they almost seem cognitively retarded.
My Experience as a Food Research Scientist Has Taught Me to Distrust Everything by Default
As a food scientist and lab science director of CWC Labs where I conduct food analysis via ICP-MS, LC/MS-TOF and other instruments, I've become even more skeptical of the mainstream natural products industry over the last few years.
Take note of the massive scam of commercial almond milk sold in grocery stores. Such products contain almost no almonds at all. Instead, they're thickened with carageenan and made to look milky white by the addition of an inorganic mineral compound called calcium carbonate - ground up rocks!
This calcium carbonate, when consumed in large quantities, can cause extreme bone pain, kidney calcification and may even contribute to the calcification of arteries. Yet it's added to a so-called "natural" health product that people are drinking in huge quantities while thinking they're being smart about their health. Truth be told, you'd be far better off drinking raw, unpasteurized cow's milk than commercial almond milk.
I've also seen so much pollution in "natural" products - including toxic heavy metals and alarming quantities of pesticides and herbicides in supposedly "clean" products - that I've reached the point where my own food manufacturing operation now rejects 80% of the raw material lots we test. (See my upcoming book Food Forensics for detailed ICP-MS analysis revealing the heavy metals concentrations in over 800 foods, supplements and spices.)
Similarly, I find myself rejecting 80% of the total B.S. science nonsense reported by the scientifically illiterate mainstream media... (and sometimes even the "science" media).
I've literally seen seemingly credible reports in the mainstream media that claim the most ludicrous science nonsense, including claims that cars can be "powered" by air and that cell phones can be "powered" by water. The air powered cars stories always neglect to mention that the air must be pressurized by some other energy source; usually coal-generated electricity that's used to power the compressors in the first place.
I've also seen the Associated Press falsely report that all mercury has been removed from all vaccines in America (blatantly false), and I've seen the obedient Monsanto-puppet media (i.e. Forbes.com, a propaganda rag steeped in utterly false journalism) report ridiculous claims such as asserting that glyphosate disintegrates quickly in the food supply.
In truth, this cancer-causing weed killer survives food processing and human digestion, showing up in both urine and breast milk, fully intact in its original molecular form.
So why is there no skepticism among "skeptics" about the food chain persistence of pesticides? The false diagnosis hoax of mammography? The lunatic quack medicine diagnosis of "psychiatric disorders" that are treated with mind-bending psychiatric drugs? Or even the scientifically proven fact that some children are seriously harmed by certain vaccines, most notably HPV vaccines?
As Horgan writes in Scientific American:
"The Science Delusion” is common among Capital-S Skeptics. You don’t apply your skepticism equally. You are extremely critical of belief in God, ghosts, heaven, ESP, astrology, homeopathy and Bigfoot. You also attack disbelief in global warming, vaccines and genetically modified food...
Meanwhile, you neglect what I call hard targets. These are dubious and even harmful claims promoted by major scientists and institutions. In the rest of this talk, I’ll give you examples of hard targets from physics, medicine and biology. I’ll wrap up with a rant about war, the hardest target of all."
What Horgan is doing is, dare we say, exercising REAL scientific skepticism. He's refusing to sign up for the "cult of scientism" that all the other closed-minded skeptics obediently follow as their dogmatic mental prison.
Horgan understands that legitimate science is a process, not a belief system. "Science" isn't belief in vaccines, GMOs, chemotherapy and global warming. Those are conclusions, not processes.
Real science is a process of discovery; and that process must be subjected to questioning and criticism, or it isn't science at all.
Let me repeat that for emphasis: Real science is a PROCESS, not a set of conclusions. Any "scientific" belief system which rejects critical questioning isn't based in real science at all. It's just dogma.
This explains why the entire vaccine industry - as it is fraudulently promoted today - isn't scientific at all.
Vaccine propaganda is founded in a dogmatic belief system that demands absolute obedience to political vaccine narratives while rejecting even the slightest questions or criticisms about vaccine ingredients, vaccine safety, vaccine adverse events or vaccine efficacy.
For example, merely asking the question of why flu shots still contain over 50,000 ppb mercury -- that's over 25,000 times the EPA limit of mercury in drinking water -- earns you widespread ridicule and condemnation. And yet the mercury is still being injected into children. Yet the entire vaccine propaganda establishment rejects even the hint of discussion of mercury in vaccines, pretending it doesn't exist.
The vaccine establishment, as Natural News readers well know, is practicing delusional thinking masquerading as science. It's just as delusional as so-called "psychic surgeons" who claim to pull diseased liver parts out of a patient's body (which later turn out to be chicken livers, go figure...).
Any real skeptic, upon observing the quackery, propaganda and blatant deception of the vaccine industry, would have to conclude that the way vaccines are formulated, approved and promoted today makes a mockery of science.
More "Science" B.S. is Readily Found in the Fields of Physics and Medicine, Too
Speaking on the subject of computing and AI systems, Horgan explains;
"The Singularity is an apocalyptic cult, with science substituted for God. When high-status scientists promote flaky ideas like the Singularity and multiverse, they hurt science. They undermine its credibility on issues like global warming."
Of course, Horgan may not yet understand that belief in man-made global warming as the primary cause for rising CO2 levels is also based on a politicized science cult. But that's not even the point. I don't expect other scientists to arrive at the same conclusions I've reached.
What I do expect, however, is that scientists should honor the process of critical scientific thinking. If they honor the process, they will eventually reach the correct conclusions on subjects such as man-made global warming, vaccine safety problems, the total con job of statin drugs and so on.
On medicine, Horgan nails it. He gets the fact that today's medical screening system is largely a fraud:
"Over the past half-century, physicians and hospitals have introduced increasingly sophisticated, expensive tests. They assure us that early detection of disease will lead to better health.
But tests often do more harm than good. For every woman whose life is extended because a mammogram detected a tumor, up to 33 receive unnecessary treatment, including biopsies, surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. For men diagnosed with prostate cancer after a PSA test, the ratio is 47 to one. Similar data are emerging on colonoscopies and other tests."
He's also right on the mark when it comes to psychiatric drugs and their fraudulent marketing:
"Over the last few decades, American psychiatry has morphed into a marketing branch of Big Pharma. I started critiquing medications for mental illness more than 20 years ago, pointing out that antidepressants like Prozac are scarcely more effective than placebos.
In retrospect, my criticism was too mild. Psychiatric drugs help some people in the short term, but over time, in the aggregate, they make people sicker.
He also exposes the total fraud of so-called "gene discoveries" that ridiculously claim genes have been discovered for things like gay-ness or intelligence:
Another hard target that needs your attention is behavioral genetics, which seeks the genes that make us tick. I call it gene-whiz science, because the media and the public love it.
Over the past several decades, geneticists have announced the discovery of "genes for" virtually every trait or disorder. We’ve had the God gene, gay gene, alcoholism gene, warrior gene, liberal gene, intelligence gene, schizophrenia gene, and on and on.
None of these linkages of single genes to complex traits or disorders has been confirmed. None!"
Much of What You'reTold Today Under the Banner of "Science" is Complete Bullshit
Horgan has come to the same conclusion that I've reached through a different path: Much of what we are taught today under the banner of "science" is complete bunk. Some of it is sheer hucksterism, and a lot of it qualifies as criminal fraud.
Check out my recent video compilation:
The 12 Biggest SCIENCE LIES You've Been Told by Corporations, Government and the Corrupt Media
At the top of that list of science frauds is, of course, vaccines. As I've exhaustively documented here on Natural News, many popular vaccines (flu shots, measles, mumps) simply don't work at all. Shockingly, outright admissions of a complete lack of scientific testing of the efficacy of such vaccines is admitted on their insert sheets.
Yet despite these extraordinary admissions of lack of efficacy, vaccine research fraud and the known toxicity of vaccine ingredients (which still include formaldehyde, mercury, aluminum and MSG), the systematic rejection of such evidence by vaccine promoting "science skeptics" borders on the fringe of mental illness.
As a real scientist, I've dared to ask 21 questions we're never allowed to ask about vaccines. Such questions are based on reason and rationality. They include commonsense questions such as, "If measles vaccines confer measles immunity, then why do already-vaccinated children have anything to fear from a measles outbreak?"
The government tells us that lead in water is bad, but mercury in vaccines is good...
It is notable that the entire vaccine establishment not only refuses to answer such questions; they consider the mere act of questioning vaccine dogma to be blasphemy. The demand for absolute obedience to the false narratives surrounding vaccines has reached such a fever pitch that anyone can now see it's no longer based in science at all.
It is a kind of religious fervor put on by deranged zealots who claim an intellectual monopoly over all things related to vaccines. This phenomenon is, in a very real way, a "scientific dictatorship" - an apt oxymoron to describe today's juxtaposition of conformist demands and so-called "scientific evidence."
Hint: If you aren't allowed to ask questions about the evidence, it isn't evidence at all. It's dogma, plain and simple. Vaccine proponents, as they operate today, are faith-based dogmatists who don't need any legitimate evidence because they BELIEVE in vaccines. Their belief is so strong that it outweighs all evidence contrary to their current beliefs. And in case you didn't notice, what I've just described here is a cult, not a science.
Vaccine "Science" is a Massive Con Job
The other huge con job found in vaccines is described thusly: Vaccines only "work" on those who don't need them. In other words, when vaccines do work, they do so by initiating an immune response to a weakened virus that's introduced into the body.
This response requires an active and complex immune system that's functioning well... the same kind of immune system, in other words, that could ward off an infection of a live virus encountered in the wild.
Meanwhile, people who have suppressed immune systems and are therefore extremely vulnerable to infections in the wild also happen to have extremely poor (and sometimes completely nullified) responses to vaccines. They don't build antibodies, in other words, so the vaccines don't work for them (they are non-efficacious).
In order to make vaccines "work" better on those with weakened immune systems, vaccine manufacturers add adjuvant chemicals that are irritants which cause excessive inflammation in the hope of eliciting a stronger immune response. While this may help some people, it also carries a very real risk of causing inflammatory damage to the neurology of some children who receive these vaccines.
The results, as borne out by the vaccine adverse events databases and Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, is a growing number of children who are maimed, neurological damaged, put into comas or even killed by vaccines.
The entire "skeptics" cult of modern medicine denies any of this is happening, and that's one reason why the skeptics are increasingly seen as high-functioning idiots who are possibly vaccine damaged themselves.
Zealotous hate-bloggers like Doctor David Gorski - a psychopathic, mentally ill vaccine promoter who also carries out cancer surgery on African-American victims in Detroit - now characterize the skeptics cult, a cabal of mentally deranged lunatics and gay sex fetish seekers like James Randi who was caught on tape soliciting sex from a young man.
Richard Dawkins, for his part, is also an anti-consciousness cultist who believes in the irrational dualism that no other humans on this planet are conscious beings other than himself. Everybody else, he claims, is an unconscious biological robot suffering under the illusion of self awareness.
Meet Three Real Scientists We Need to Empower to Ask More Questions of the Scientific Establishment
What kind of people do we really need to see more of in the realm of scientific skepticism? People like Rupert Sheldrake, author of Science Set Free. Sheldrake's work is transformative, as it challenges the underlying non-scientific assumptions of modern science.
We also need more people like Gilbert Welch, author of Less Medicine, More Health. This book challenges the seven false assumptions of modern medicine.
Dr. Lewis was maliciously attacked, discredited and ultimately thrown out of the government-funded scientific establishment for the simple reason that he questioned the safety of toxic biosludge -- recycled human and industrial waste that's sold as "organic fertilizer" to be spread on home gardens, childrens' playgrounds and city parks.
(I am currently investigating biosludge in my laboratory and will have some truly shocking, mind-blowing results to share with everyone this summer... you won't believe what's in this crap...) Check out Dr. Lewis's recent post entitled Inspector General dismantled scientific integrity at EPA.
The other thing we need, quite frankly, is independent scientists like myself who are conducting cutting edge, truly independent science, without any financial ties to governments, corporations or academia.
My science lab, which has now passed our ISO 17025 accreditation audit, is free to pursue precisely the kind of scientific analysis of food and medicine that is blackballed or censored in the government-funded scientific community.
Other scientists would lose their jobs if they pursued the kind of science I'm pursuing on a daily basis with absolute freedom.
Notably, this makes me a rare practitioner of real, independent science and a protector of the very kind of independent skepticism and scientific analysis that should be embraced by any system of knowledge that's based on legitimate science.
Yet the science I'm conducting is widely considered a threat to the scientific establishment, precisely because I'm willing to analyze vaccines for heavy metals and organic chemicals, for example.
Such research is simply not allowed by the cult of scientism (the vaccine zealots) because they depend on widespread ignorance of vaccine composition to continue parlaying their fraudulent lies about vaccine safety.
I Honor Scientists Who Pursue a Rigorous Process of Critical Thinking... and I Despise Obedient Status Quo Cultists
John Horgan might not yet be aware of the full story on vaccines, so he might disagree with me on such conclusions. But that's not the point. I honor Horgan's commitment to asking big questions. In fact, I honor those who vehemently disagree with me as long as they are following a process of authentic inquiry and open-minded skepticism.
What I despise is science cultists, dogmatic science propagandists and the worship of the "high priests" of science such as Neil DeGrasse Tyson, who can only be described as a "sciency" sleight-of-mind huckster who has more in common with stage illusionist David Copperfield than, say, Richard Feynman.
Tyson, like Dawkins, is a cultist. He has zero intellectual integrity and has sold out to the tribal dogmatists who spin tall tales of irrational mysticism that currently pass for "accepted science."
For my part, I don't claim to have all the answers - no human mind can possibly dare to claim a full understanding of the mysteries of nature (or the mind of God, for that matter). But as a real scientist, I'm willing to skeptically explore the evidence on just about anything.
I don't reject entire fields of scientific inquiry merely because they are taboo. It doesn't mean I'm a sucker for silly claims, just that I'm intelligent and humble enough to realize that nature is far more mysterious than any human mind can possibly grasp. And we have much more to learn... many more scientific discoveries to make in the years ahead.
For example, psychic phenomena are often called "paranormal." But what if they are so commonplace that they're actually normal? Why can't we study things like pets somehow anticipating the random arrivals of their owners many minutes in advance? Or mothers having a seemingly intuitive emotional connection to their children even when separated by distance? Why can't we study dream premonition?
Consciousness after biological death? Or even the possibility that the brain is a "quantum antenna" that can receive information transmitted from other conscious sources, transmitted by a quantum entanglement mechanism that Einstein described as "spooky action at a distance?"
If we are true scientists, we must at least BE CURIOUS about the nature of the universe and the apparent consciousness we seem to experience inside that universe. The minute we lose curiosity and decide we have all the answers, we cease being scientists at all.
At that point, we just become mentally incapacitated dogmatic fools... like Dawkins and Randi, two people whom history will judge as being not just unwise hucksters, but even for slowing the progress of human knowledge into realms of understanding that are viciously attacked by "skeptics" today.
I often wonder just how many people have died needlessly due to the malicious "skepticism" of info-terrorist David Gorski or the Quackwatch propagandist Stephen Barrett.
How many cases of cancer could have been prevented or reversed by natural and complementary medicine? How many studies might have been conducted in the pursuit of natural cures if not for the vicious, aggressive assaults on scientific curiosity being waged by "cult of scientism" intellectual bigots?
We'll never know the answer to that question, but at least a few people like John Horgan are willing to start asking some legitimate questions about the false assumptions of "skeptics." Have no doubt that Horgan himself will be maliciously slandered, attacked, defamed, censored and lied about for daring to ask such questions.
The one thing today's bullshit scientific establishment cannot tolerate is actual skepticism. It threatens the cultist beliefs of the faithful "scientism" worshippers, you see...
Willful Ignorance: Why We Stay Oblivious To Facts That Threaten Our Health And The Planet April 3 2018 | From: WakingTimes
How many times have you read or heard that refined sugar and processed meats are bad for you? Or how many pictures have you seen that show plastic pollution pervading the oceans?
But yet, many of us remain willfully blind to these fundamental facts. We make very little changes in our lifestyle even though our habits may be destroying our bodies and planet. Why does this happen?
Basically, we have to make ourselves disbelieve our initial belief. That, my friends, takes effort. Many of us are not willing to put in that effort.
Hence, we’re back to willful ignorance.
“People are about twice as likely to seek information that supports their own point of view as they are to consider an opposing idea.”
The Influencers of our Beliefs
What’s concerning is that many of our beliefs are shaped by corporations and media.
We do not give this much thought, because very few people are willing to talk about subliminal programming. (This is a perfect example of willful ignorance!)
Yet, most generations living today grew up in front of the TV. Newscasters, Hollywood producers, and advertisers have been feeling ideas of what is rights, what is acceptable and what should be ridiculed.
The problem is surmounted with the influence of religions, educators and governments. Most of these have their own agendas, unbeknownst to us during our childhood and young adulthood.
It’s OK to Change Your Mind
What’s exciting is that we now live is a completely different world than even 20 years ago. We have access to massive amounts of information. It is all at our fingertips.
Social psychologists, activists, and thought leaders, such as Hefferman, are able to share their knowledge, experience and wisdom with the masses.
Where the challenge lies is in our willingness to give thought to contradictions. It’s ok to consider information that oppose the official story you were fed in school or the marketing pitch of massive corporations. It’s ok to change your mind.
Perhaps milk “Does not do A Body Good.” When you’re drinking a Coke, you don’t “Catch the Wave”…instead you pollute the wave.
Maybe, just maybe, it’s not weird but smart to homeschool, opt out of politics, and stop reading/watching the news.
Ms. Hefferman writes in the book:
“Whether individual or collective, willful blindness doesn’t have a single driver, but many. It is a human phenomenon to which we all succumb in matters little and large. We can’t notice and know everything: the cognitive limits of our brain simply won’t let us.
That means we have to filter or edit what we take in. So what we choose to let through and to leave out is crucial. We mostly admit the information that makes us feel great about ourselves, while conveniently filtering whatever unsettles our fragile egos and most vital beliefs..”
It may be beneficial to reflect on what you’re filtering out because it intimidates your ego.
Next time something contradicts one of your beliefs, it may be a noteworthy practice to give these new ideas some thought.
As scheduled, the Shanghai International Energy Exchange (INE) started entertaining investors for its listed crude oil futures for a total of 23 overseas brokerage. In just a week, it already has a total of 278,234 transactions, worth 115.92 billion yuan.
China is currently the top energy user, and it is only fitting that it must dictate where it wants to go as far as the currency to use in its oil purchases from here on. This, of course, spells doom for the warmongering Petrodollar industry.
No, this is just a shift between two elements of the same world order.
In China today, there’s an ongoing construction of 33 highly advanced nuclear power plants, and its intermediate end goal is to export turnkey power plants around the world, at a price that only China could offer.
Even Donald Trump is forcing China to drink its more expensive hydrocarbons, hence the tariffs on Chinese steel. But the US has only shot itself in the foot, as the latter is much cheaper that the local counterparts. Why is that?
China is not playing on the same scarcity-based economic game of the West.
It wants to show the other side that there’s a better way to run the planet for everyone’s benefit.
It is wise enough to understand that the only way it can protect itself is to empower other nations on the planet by way of large scale development and the massive establishments of free energy systems via the peaceful use of nuclear power.
The British Empire is not happy with the latest defeat of its terror group in Ghouta Syria.
About 6,000 CIA employed militants got a safe passage again towards Idlib. But one journalist took it upon himself to confront some of them and question the wisdom of their senseless actions.
The militants were offered reconciliation by the Syrian government, but they refused it and chose instead to relocate themselves to Idlib, where they can be unified with the other defeated CIA stooges.
Highly volatile Trump, on the other hand, is hinting that the US is leaving Syria soon.
Clap, clap, clap for Trump. But really, the damage done in Syria cannot be undone with just one statement. Not to mention the fact that he just signed the highest Pentagon budget eve in his entire history, a few weeks ago.
The latest anti-Trump British coup attempt using Cambridge Analytica psyop is not working either.
Childish Behaviour from An Old Empire
Back in the UK, the immaturity in world affairs is manifested in the wanton use of its intelligence department to initiate poorly executed anti-Russian false flag, i.e. poisoning its own Russian asset, Sergei Skripal, and blame it on Russia.
This was followed by the massive EU and US expulsion of Russian diplomats, which is in some ways a huge improvement considering that more than a year back, they were actually assassinating them, openly and otherwise.
As of late, the Russians have responded with their own proportionate diplomatic expulsion of Western diplomats, due in large part to the latter’s failure to show evidence relevant to the Skripal poisoning case, and the UK’s refusal to cooperate in its investigation.
The British Empire’s desperation continues with the unannounced and unwarranted raid of one Aeroflot commercial airliner, and with the shutting down of Julian Assange’s internet access.
The Swedish government has no criminal case against the Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, and therefore, the Empire has nothing to pin down the activist with. What crime is there when all that Julian Assange is doing is just what mainstream journalists worth their salt would have done, i.e. unearth and publish government wrongdoings?
The Deep State controlled governments around the world want to curtail our freedom of expression and intrude into our private lives, but the same cannot afford to open themselves up for public scrutiny.
Multipolarity is Gaining Ground; Leaving the West Behind
You have made the offer, but the other side is refusing your terms of mutual benefit. What are your options?
As the chips fall where it should be, the revival of the ancient Silk Road continues unabated as more African nations are availing themselves of the massive infrastructure projects facilitated and 70% financed by China.
This major economic lift is coupled with technology transfer that will a profound impact on the lives of the local population. Compare that to the shallow rock concerts for Africa, where the proceeds went only to the pockets of those who run the shady and bogus humanitarian NGOs.
All that the Western critics could do is to watch these developments, and malign China that it is only after the exploitation of the recipient’s natural resources, like the West is doing for last 500 years.
No, China’s participation in the construction of basic infrastructures in Africa is to make the entire continent truly independent from Western exploitation instead.
That is a far cry from the Western regime change, war, and biochemical attacks against the Africans.
The United States of America needs to remember also that in its infancy as a republic, it was China which financed its early economic development, with the same railroad constructions across the continent, using hardworking Chinese labor that in the American history books were labeled as slaves.
It is so good to watch that in Africa right now, they are already talking about how to intercourse with China through economic terms;
… rather than using their knowledge in mathematics counting dead bodies by Western injected wars. Remember how the Deep State controlled UN responded to the Rwanda genocide in 1994.
Who triggered that event if not the Western intelligence assets in the region?
As it stands today, the East is tired of dealing with the immaturity and exceptionalism of the West, and it is forging ahead with globalwide development, with or without, Western participation.
The West is not in a position anymore to dictate the terms by which mankind ascends towards shared prosperity.
The privileged position of the Parasitic Western Elite will become irrelevant soon, as their hosts gain more knowledge on how to decontaminate, detoxify and deconstruct the imaginary prison cells built around them.
There’s never been a theoretical and physical limits to what the human being can do.
The established, dogmatic limitations in Science are exactly where the Western hegemony derives its own power.
But the combined scientific achievements of the RIC Alliance between Russia, Iran and China, have effectively neutralized that.
All of the above is the real cause of the panic within the Deep State Empire.
A study [see article below] has documented the presence of vast quantities of water locked far beneath the earth’s surface. That study confirmed “that there is a very, very large amount of water that’s trapped in a really distinct layer in the deep Earth… approaching the sort of mass of water that’s present in all the world’s ocean” We have an abundance of water. Why would the corporate government agencies create the false science of water
scarcity and the fear we are running out of water?
The goal is control, money and creating compliance to water monitoring, required reduced water use and charging higher usage costs all based upon our ignorance of where water really comes from. Sadly, out of fear many
people will forfeit their ranches, farms and livelihoods believing they are out of water due to a drought.
Primary Water is in abundance and we MUST start looking down for water instead of up!
The evidence mad available via this article will provide you with the knowledge to combat the corporate media fear campaign. Spread this truth to everyone you know, and demand your cities access the Primary Water to recharge the ground water basins that have been over pumped.
We cannot continue to be tricked for the benefit of those that intend to privatize the water for profit and control.
Primary Water, The Original Source of Our Oceans, is Still Being Created by Geological Forces
That water, usually in a potable form, comes to the earth’s surface in thousands of places, some well known like Jericho and Bahrain where it has provided drinking water for thousands of people for thousands of years. It pours into deep mines all over the world.
Hundreds of houses on the rocky shores of Maine get their fresh water from wells drilled into the shoreline granite. Copenhagen gets all its water from a few wells. In Northern Europe, water that can be tapped by wells that do not depend on aquifers is called “ground water”.
The hallmark of new, or primary, water springs and wells is that they provide water at constant temperature and flow.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
But this world-wide source of “new water” has been ignored by geologists and laymen in most countries including the United States. They were taught that all potable water comes from the “hydrological cycle” which merely recycles water already on the surface of our earth.
Michael H. Salzman, an engineer and administrator, researched, wrote and published a book providing detailed information on “new water”. As published in 1960, it can be read and/or downloaded from this website. It is not readily available in libraries.
Mike handed us one of his last copies in 1970 and asked us to see if we could get some recognition for it. He told us some wealthy people wanting to get approval for funds to build an aqueduct to bring water from the Colorado River to southern California (they succeeded) had bought up and burned all the copies they could find.
They also tried (and failed) to have him fired as Director of the Los Angeles Housing Authority.
"It's actually the confirmation that there is a very, very large amount of water that's trapped in a really distinct layer in the deep Earth," said Graham Pearson, lead study author and a geochemist at the University of Alberta in Canada. The findings were published in the journal Nature.
The worthless-looking diamond encloses a tiny piece of an olivine mineral called ringwoodite, and it's the first time the mineral has been found on Earth's surface in anything other than meteorites or laboratories. Ringwoodite only forms under extreme pressure, such as the crushing load about 320 miles (515 kilometers) deep in the mantle.
What's in the Mantle?
Most of Earth's volume is mantle, the hot rock layer between the crust and the core. Too deep to drill, the mantle's composition is a mystery leavened by two clues: meteorites, and hunks of rock heaved up by volcanoes.
First, scientists think the composition of the Earth's mantle is similar to that of meteorites called chondrites, which are chiefly made of olivine. Second, lava belched by volcanoes sometimes taps the mantle, bringing up chunks of odd minerals that hint at the intense heat and pressure olivine endures in the bowels of the Earth.
In recent decades, researchers have also recreated mantle settings in laboratories, zapping olivine with lasers, shooting minerals with massive guns and squeezing rocks between diamond anvils to mimic the Earth's interior.
These laboratory studies suggest that olivine morphs into a variety of forms corresponding to the depth at which it is found. The new forms of crystal accommodate the increasing pressures.
Changes in the speed of earthquake waves also support this model. Seismic waves suddenly speed up or slow down at certain depths in the mantle.
Researcher think these speed zones arise from olivine's changing configurations. For example, 323 to 410 miles (520 to 660 km) deep, between two sharp speed breaks, olivine is thought to become ringwoodite. But until now, no one had direct evidence that olivine was actually ringwoodite at this depth. [What is Earth Made Of?]
"Most people (including me) never expected to see such a sample. Samples from the transition zone and lower mantle are exceedingly rare and are only found in a few, unusual diamonds," Hans Keppler, a geochemist at the University of Bayreuth in Germany, wrote in a commentary also published in Nature today.
Earth's Deepest Ocean
The diamond from Brazil confirms that the models are correct: Olivine is ringwoodite at this depth, a layer called the mantle transition zone. And it resolves a long-running debate about water in the mantle transition zone. The ringwoodite is 1.5 percent water, present not as a liquid but as hydroxide ions (oxygen and hydrogen molecules bound together).
The results suggest there could be a vast store of water in the mantle transition zone, which stretches from 254 to 410 miles (410 to 660 km) deep.
"It translates into a very, very large mass of water, approaching the sort of mass of water that's present in all the world's ocean," Pearson told Live Science's Our Amazing Planet.
Plate tectonics recycles Earth's crust by pushing and pulling slabs of oceanic crust into subduction zones, where it sinks into the mantle. This crust, soaked by the ocean, ferries water into the mantle. Many of these slabs end up stuck in the mantle transition zone.
"We think that a significant portion of the water in the mantle transition zone is from the emplacement of these slabs," Pearson said. "The transition zone seems to be a graveyard of subducted slabs."
Keppler noted that it's possible the volcanic eruption that brought the deep diamond to Earth's surface may have sampled an unusually water-rich part of the mantle, and that not all of the transition-zone layer may be as wet as indicated by the ringwoodite.
"If the source of the magma is an unusual mantle reservoir, there is the possibility that, at other places in the transition zone, ringwoodite contains less water than the sample found by Pearson and colleagues," Keppler wrote. "However, in light of this sample, models with anhydrous, or water-poor, transition zones seem rather unlikely."
Ride on a Rocket
A violent volcanic eruption called a kimberlite quickly carried this particular diamond from deep in the mantle. "The eruption of a kimberlite is analogous to dropping a Mentos mint into a bottle of soda," Pearson said. "It's a very energetic, gas-charged reaction that blasts its way to Earth's surface."
The tiny, green crystal, scarred from its 325-mile (525 km) trip to the surface, was bought from diamond miners in Juína, Brazil. The mine's ultradeep diamonds are misshapen and beaten up by their long journey.
"They literally look like they've been to hell and back," Pearson said.
The ringwoodite discovery was accidental, as Pearson and his co-authors were actually searching for a means of dating the diamonds. The researchers think careful sample preparation is the key to finding more ringwoodite, because heating ultradeep diamonds, as happens when scientists polish crystals for analysis, causes the olivine to change shape.
"We think it's possible ringwoodite may have been found by other researchers before, but the way they prepared their samples caused it to change back to a lower-pressure form," Pearson said.
As we learn and become wiser, we go through various stages of spiritual transformation, which, according to one of the most brilliant people in human history, Friedrich Nietzsche, could be boiled down to just three main ones.
In order to shed some light on what those stages are, I spent the last few days writing this article, with the intention to offer you some guidance on your spiritual path based on what I've learned so far from my own experiences
I consider myself to be extremely lucky, and one of the reasons why I do so is that at the age of 17 I had the chance to come across one of the greatest books ever written in human history.
Just mentioning its name, I can feel shivers running down my spine. Such a powerful effect it has had on my life.
Written by Friedrich Nietzsche, this book is a difficult read, filled with allegories and fragmented thoughts. Yet the insights contained in it are so profound that even now, nearly 15 years since reading it, I still carry them like a treasure in my mind.
One of the greatest ideas expressed in Thus Spoke Zarathustra is that of The Three Metamorphoses of the Spirit. According to Nietzsche, as humans grow and mature, they naturally go through three stages of spiritual transformation.
Most of them only make it to the first one where they are stuck for life, some are able to progress to the second, while only a few manage to pass through to the third. However, it’s only when the third and final transformation has been reached that one can realize his or her full potential and make the most out of life.
Now you must be wondering: which are those three spiritual transformations?
Well, let’s find out!
Transformation #1: The Camel
The first transformation of the human spirit is that of becoming a camel. The camel is a symbol that represents obedience and tolerance. Just like most people, the camel is living in harsh conditions that have been imposed upon it and which it has to endure.
Think of how a camel lives: it is day in and day out being loaded with heavy weights that it has to carry through the hot dessert merely for the sake of satisfying the wishes of its masters.
Now think of how most people live: they are constantly doing things they don’t enjoy doing just so as to satisfy the expectations of others, such as parents, teachers and employers, but they are sacrificing themselves in the process.
The camel is a carrier, a collector of burdens. It hasn’t learned to say no. Whatever it’s told to do, it does without objection. It kneels down and lets others place burdens upon it without offering the least resistance.
Doesn’t that sound similar to the way the majority of people behave? They follow rules and orders, doing whatever authority figures tell them to do, even if that is against their well-being. They are afraid to disobey and never gather the courage to go against the sick normalcy that society has forced them to fit in.
The camel has accepted hardship as its fate. In its eyes, life is a drudgery and nothing can be done to alter it. Yet the camel isn’t intimidated by discomfort or discouraged by the challenges life presents it on its way. On the contrary, it is ready to face head-on any difficulty it comes across and is willing to do anything it takes to go through it.
That’s because the camel feels a sense of duty to carry out the tasks that were given to it, and finds egoistic gratification in demonstrating that it can successfully do so.
So many of us do all sorts of things because we feel that we have to, without ever stopping for a moment to question our behavior.
We’ve been conditioned to believe that it’s our duty to live in a certain way, and that if we don’t then we aren’t good enough to be accepted by society. So we try to do whatever it takes to prove ourselves to others, and by achieving that we (temporarily) feel better about ourselves.
As it ages, the camel finds that the weights it is carrying on its back are growing heavier and heavier, and at some point starts to question its way of living.
Despite its great achievements, the camel feels empty of joy and purpose, and it deep down knows that if it continues existing this way, it will be filled with bitterness and regrets for having experienced such a painful and pointless life.
The camel finds itself limited by the duties and obligations that have been placed upon it. If it continues carrying them for much longer, their weight might break its spirit. If, however, it chooses to rebel against them, it can pass through the next stage of spiritual transformation - that of becoming a lion - and free itself from the burdens that have been keeping it down.
Just like the camel, we all desire freedom. Yet we’re confined within unconscious ideological cages that were handed to us from tradition, and unless we realize their existence, and take action to get rid of them, we’ll always remain prisoners of our own limiting beliefs.
The then camel, now lion, questions everything it knows, and soon finds out that its long-held values and morals are nothing but the result of years of brainwashing, as well as that ultimately there’s no universal truth or morality.
As a result, it rejects all beliefs and chooses to dedicate its life to fighting against the structures that have been restricting its freedom.
Only once we dare to doubt and scrutinize our beliefs, can we start our quest for truth. If we do so, however, we’re soon bound to discover that what was offered to us as truth by tradition isn’t quite the truth.
Consequently, this can lead us to experience immense anger for having been deceived since the very moment we were born, and, in turn, our anger can lead us to fight against anyone that has been trying to persuade us into believing untruths.
The lion symbolizes disillusionment, courage, and anger. Being the king of the beasts, it follows no one’s rules; rather, it creates its own and imposes them on the world. It doesn’t bow down to others or take orders - instead, it stands proud and follows its inner voice. In essence, the lion is a rebel - it rebels against the duties and moral codes that were forced upon it.
Yet, although it has renounced external values and obligations, it still hasn’t found true freedom. Because of its reactive nature, the lion’s freedom is negative, for its existence depends on battling tradition. The lion is totally focused on destroying existing structures, and not on creating new ones. In other words, it is living against something else, and not for itself.
This is exactly how people usually react under the influence of anger: instead of searching to find a solution to their problems, they are fighting against what created them.
For example, many fight against the established system of society, but they don’t seem to comprehend that, although fighting might be to some extent necessary for the progress of our civilization, it isn’t going to bring any positive change on its own unless it is coupled with the creation of a new system that will render the old obsolete.
Hence, they ultimately achieve nothing other than possibly causing further harm to themselves and the world.
Looked at this way, the lion is still, in a sense, a prisoner - a prisoner of its own mind. To escape this mental prison, it needs to let go of its past and start living afresh by creating a new way of life. For this to happen, however, it has to go through the next and last stage of spiritual transformation - that of becoming a child.
Spiritual masters from both the West and East point out again and again the importance of reconnecting with our “inner child.” Why? Because, as a symbol, the child represents all the good qualities that reside within each person, such as innocence, playfulness and creativity.
As we’ve seen, the lion has tremendous power to destroy, but it’s unable to create. It is stuck to its past - hence, it can’t move forward and make a new beginning. However, once it transforms into a child, it can at last create its life anew by making up its own values, meaning and purpose.
The child has achieved spiritual liberation from the unconscious forces that were keeping it tied to a fixed pattern of thought and behavior. Unlike the lion, the child isn’t emotionally reacting based on what happened in the past - instead, it mindfully responds to life according to what’s happening in the moment.
Thus, the child can shift its focus from destroying the old structures to creating new, better ones that will actually allow humanity to enter a brighter future.
To the child, life is neither a drudgery nor a struggle; it is a pure celebration, and the child immerses itself totally in it. It finds life so precious that it doesn’t want to waste a single moment. Whatever the child does, it does it with its whole heart. Not because of external reward or validation, but simply because it finds great joy in doing so.
And its joy is contagious - anyone who comes close to the child can experience it. Therefore, just by its innocent and playful presence, the child spreads peace and happiness to the world.
By letting go of the emotional and mental constraints of our past, we can come in touch with our inner child, and thus reconnect with our creative nature. Then, we’ll be able to build a new path of life that will serve our freedom and well-being.
In addition, we’ll be able to look at the world with fresh eyes and see all the beauty that it has to offer. As a result, we’ll want to stop fighting against it, and instead we’ll start using our energy to set up systems that will enable us to live in harmony with it.
When we develop a child-like mind, our spiritual journey will be completed. We started the journey as children, and we can reach to the end of it only as “children” again. But first we need to come back to the source of our being and rediscover who we truly are.
Or, to put it differently, we need to go through a new birth - a spiritual birth. Once we do so, we won’t be bothered by our past hurts anymore. On the contrary, we’ll feel cheerful and content, wearing a big smile on our face that will radiate joy all around us.
Colonizing The Western Mind April 1 2018 | From: Counterpunch
In Christopher Nolan’s captivating and visually dazzling film Inception, a practitioner of psychic corporate espionage must plant and idea inside a CEO’s head.
The process is called inception, and it represents the frontier of corporate influence, in which mind spies no longer just “extract” ideas from the dreams of others, but seed useful ideas in a target’s subconscious.
Inception is a well-crafted piece of futuristic sci-fi drama, but some of the ideas it imparts are already deeply embedded in the American [Western] subconscious.
The notion of inception, of hatching an idea in the mind of a man or woman without his or her knowledge, is the kernel of propaganda, a black art practiced in the States [West] since the First World War. Today we live beneath an invisible cultural hegemony, a set of ideas implanted in the mass mind by the state and its corporate media over decades.
Invisibility seems to happen when something is either obscure or ubiquitous. In a propaganda system, an overarching objective is to render the messaging invisible by universalizing it within the culture.
Difference is known by contrast.
If there are no contrasting views in your field of vision, it’s easier to accept the ubiquitous explanation.
The good news is that the ideology is well-known to some who have, for one lucky reason or another, found themselves outside the hegemonic field and are thus able to contrast the dominant worldview with alternative opinions.
On the left, the ruling ideology might be described as neoliberalism, a particularly vicious form of imperial capitalism that, as would be expected, is camouflaged in the lineaments of humanitarian aid and succor.
In a short span of time in the 1970s, dozens of think tanks were established across the western world and billions of dollars were spent proselytizing the tenets of the Powell Memo in 1971, which galvanized a counter-revolution to the liberal upswing of the Sixties.
The neoliberal economic model of deregulation, downsizing, and privatization was preached by the Reagan-Thatcher junta, liberalized by the Clinton regime, temporarily given a bad name by the unhinged Bush administration, and saved by telegenic restoration of the Obama years.
The ideology that underlay the model saturated academia, notably at the University of Chicago, and the mainstream media, principally at The New York Times. Since then it has trickled down to the general populace, to whom it now feels second nature.
Today think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, the Brookings Institute, Stratfor, Cato Institute, American Enterprise Institute, Council on Foreign Relations, Carnegie Endowment, the Open Society Foundation, and the Atlantic Council, among many others, funnel millions of dollars in donations into cementing neoliberal attitudes in the American [Western] mind.
The ideological assumptions, which serve to justify what you could call neocolonial tactics, are relatively clear: the rights of the individual to be free of overreach from monolithic institutions like the state. Activist governments are inherently inefficient and lead directly to totalitarianism.
Markets must be free and individuals must be free to act in those markets. People must be free to choose, both politically and commercially, in the voting booth and at the cash register.
This conception of markets and individuals is most often formulated as “free-market democracy,” a misleading conceit that conflates individual freedom with the economic freedom of capital to exploit labor.
So when it comes to foreign relations, American and western aid would only be given on the condition that the borrowers accepted the tenets of an (highly manipulable) electoral system and vowed to establish the institutions and legal structures required to fully realize a western market economy.
These demands were supplemented with notions of the individual right to be free of oppression, some fine rhetoric about women and minorities, and somewhat more quietly, a judicial understanding that corporations were people, too.
Together, an unshackled economy and an unfettered populace, newly equipped with individual rights, would produce the same flourishing and nourishing demos of mid-century America that had been the envy of humanity.
A False Promise
This ‘Washington Consensus’ is the false promise promoted by the West. The reality is quite different. The crux of neoliberalism is to eliminate democratic government by downsizing, privatizing, and deregulating it.
Proponents of neoliberalism recognize that the state is the last bulwark of protection for the common people against the predations of capital. Remove the state and they’ll be left defenseless.
Think about it. Deregulation eliminates the laws. Downsizing eliminates departments and their funding. Privatizing eliminates the very purpose of the state by having the private sector take over its traditional responsibilities. Ultimately, nation-states would dissolve except perhaps for armies and tax systems.
A large, open-border global free market would be left, not subject to popular control but managed by a globally dispersed, transnational one percent. And the whole process of making this happen would be camouflaged beneath the altruistic stylings of a benign humanitarianism.
Globalists, as neoliberal capitalists are often called, also understood that democracy, defined by a smattering of individual rights and a voting booth, was the ideal vehicle to usher neoliberalism into the emerging world. Namely because democracy, as commonly practiced, makes no demands in the economic sphere.
Socialism does. Communism does. These models directly address ownership of the means of production. Not so democratic capitalism.
This permits the globalists to continue to own the means of production while proclaiming human rights triumphant in nations where interventions are staged. The enduring lie is that there is no democracy without economic democracy.
What matters to the one percent and the media conglomerates that disseminate their worldview is that the official definitions are accepted by the masses.
The real effects need never be known. The neoliberal ideology (theory) thus conceals the neoliberal reality (practice).
And for the masses to accept it, it must be mass produced. Then it becomes more or less invisible by virtue of its universality.
A Pretext for Pillage
Thanks to this artful disguise, the West can stage interventions in nations reluctant to adopt its platform of exploitation, knowing that on top of the depredations of an exploitative economic model, they will be asked to call it progress and celebrate it.
Washington, the metropolitan heart of neoliberal hegemony, has numerous methods of convincing reluctant developing nations to accept its neighborly advice.
To be sure, the goal of modern colonialism is to find a pretext to intervene in a country, to restore by other means the extractive relations that first brought wealth to the colonial north. The most common pretexts for intervention depict the target nation in three distinct fashions.
First, as an economic basket case, a condition often engineered by the West in what is sometimes called, “creating facts on the ground.”
By sanctioning the target economy, Washington can “make the economy scream,” to using war criminal Henry Kissinger’s elegant phrasing. Iran, Syria, and Venezuela are relevant examples here.
Second, the West funds violent opposition to the government, producing unrest, often violent riots of the kind witnessed in Dara, Kiev, and Caracas.
The goal is either to capsize a tottering administration or provoke a violent crackdown, at which point western embassies and institutions will send up simultaneously cries of tyranny and brutality and insist the leader step aside. Libya, Syria, and Venezuela are instructive in this regard.
Third, the country will be pressured to accept some sort of military fettering thanks to either a false flag or manufactured hysteria over some domestic program, such as the WMD restrictions on Iraq, chemical weapons restrictions on Syria, or the civilian nuclear energy restrictions on Iran.
Given that the U.S. traffics in WMDs, bioweapons, and nuclear energy itself, insisting others forsake all of these is perhaps little more than racially motivated despotry. But significant fear mongering in the international media will provide sufficient moral momentum to ram through sanctions, resolutions, and inspection regimes with little fanfare.
Schooling the Savages
Once the pretext is established, the appropriate intervention is made. There’s no lack of latent racism embedded in each intervention. Something of Edward Said’s Orientalism is surely at play here; the West is often responding to a crude caricature rather than a living people.
One writer, Robert Dale Parker, described western views of Asia as little more than, “a sink of despotism on the margins of the world.” Iran is incessantly lensed through a fearful distrust of the ‘other’, those abyssal Persians.
Likewise, North Korea is mythologized as a kingdom of miniature madmen, possessed of a curious psychosis that surely bears no relation to the genocidal cleansing of 20 percent of its population in the Fifties, itself an imperial coda to the madness of Hiroshima.
The interventions, then, are little different than the missionary work of early colonizers, who sought to entrap the minds of men in order to ensnare the soul. Salvation is the order of the day. The mission worker felt the same sense of superiority and exceptionalism that inhabits the mind of the neoliberal.
Two zealots of the age peddling different editions of a common book. One must carry the gospel of the invisible hand to the unlettered minions. But the gifts of the enlightened interloper are consistently dubious.
It might be the loan package that effectively transfers economic control out of the hands of political officials and into the hands of loan officers, those mealy-mouthed creditors referred to earlier. It may be the sanctions that prevent the country from engaging in dollar transactions and trade with numberless nations on which it depends for goods and services.
Or it might be that controversial UNSC resolution that leads to a comprehensive agreement to ban certain weapons from a country.
Stipulations of the agreement will often include a byzantine inspections regime full of consciously-inserted trip wires designed to catch the country out of compliance and leverage that miscue to intensify confrontational rhetoric and implement even more far-reaching inspections.
The U.S. is currently sanctioning around 30 nations in some fashion; dozens of countries have fallen into ‘protracted arrears’ with western creditors; and entire continents are witnessing huge outflows of capital - on the order of $100B annually - to the global north as debt service.
The profiteering colonialists of the West make out like bandits. The usual suspects include Washington and its loyal lapdogs, the IMF, World Bank, EU, NATO, and other international institutions, and the energy and defense multinationals whose shareholders and executive class effectively run the show.
So why aren’t Americans [Westerners] aware of this complicated web of neocolonial domination?
Italian communist Antonio Gramsci, who pioneered the concept of cultural hegemony, suggested that the ruling ideologies of the bourgeoisie were so deeply embedded in popular consciousness that the working classes often supported leaders and ideas that were antithetical to their own interests.
Today, that cultural hegemony is neoliberalism. Few can slip its grasp long enough to see the world from an uncolored vantage point.
You’ll very rarely encounter arguments like this leafing through the Times or related broadsheets. They don’t fit the ruling dogma, the Weltanschauung (worldview) that keeps the public mind in its sleepy repose.
But French-Algerian philosopher Louis Althusser, following Gramsci, believed that, unlike the militarized state, the ideologies of the ruling class were penetrable. He felt that the comparatively fluid zones of Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) were contexts of class struggle.
Within them, groups might attain a kind of ‘relative autonomy’, by which they could step outside of the monolithic cultural ideology. The scales would fall. Then, equipped with new knowledge, people might stage an inception of their own, cracking open the cultural hegemony and reshaping its mythos in a more humane direction.
This seems like an imperative for modern American [Western] culture, buried as it is beneath the hegemonic heft of the neoliberal credo.
These articles of false faith, this ideology of deceit, ought to be replaced with new declarations of independence, of the mind if not the mainstream.
Good Hearts, Fooled Minds: 4 Fallacies Of The (Hijacked) Environmental Movement April 1 2018 | From: WakeUpWorld
The hijacked environmental movement is a symptom of the current general, collective state of humanity: good hearted but ignorant.
Many people in the environmental movement are in it for the right reasons: they see the ongoing poisoning and destruction of the planet, led by corporations, and are determined to defend and speak out for the Earth.
By continuing to push notions that carbon dioxide is a poison, that global warming exists and all of mankind is responsible for it, that we need a worldwide carbon tax and that we require Agenda 21-style global governance, these people are unknowingly promoting the New World Order program – and unwittingly placing elite controllers in power who don’t care about the environment and view it merely as a resource to be exploited.
Welcome to Planet Earth. If your opinion diverges too much from the mainstream, you could get locked up for thinking “wrongly”.
With the current focus being on the outcomes of the recent 2015 UN Summit, the hackneyed buzzword of sustainability is being thrown around like there’s no tomorrow. In this context, it’s worth revisiting how the environmental movement came to be so hijacked and co-opted.
Basis for the Hijack: Conspiracy Reports from The Iron Mountain and The Club of Rome
The basis for the hijacked environment movement lies within formerly secret military reports, and one of the elite Round Table groups that run the world: the Club of Rome.
The Club of Rome meeting in Salzburg in 1972. "The Club of Rome, the prestigious think tank founded in 1968, is for the first time meeting in the Dutch capital Amsterdam. Key guest is former Russian President Mikhail Gorbachov, who is to speak on Monday. Other guests include Queen Beatrix, former Dutch Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers and Environment Minister Jacqueline Cramer.The think tank, which comprises economists, scientists, politicians and business people, meets once a year to discuss environmental pollution, the depletion of natural resources and the growth of the world population." As pointed out by an astute reader, the man fifth from the left is the Prime Minister of Canada - Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliot Trudeau.
I wonder if those who believe in AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) or Manmade Global Warming have any idea that the elite came up with the idea of using mankind itself as the global threat against which we are all supposed to gather behind a One World Government?
The 1966 Report from the Iron Mountain was commissioned by John F. Kennedy and considered by Lyndon B. Johnson as too dangerous to reveal to the public at the time when it was completed. This excerpt from it discusses how a global government could be imposed without war, and suggests the threat could instead be environmental pollution:
“The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which no government can long remain in power… An effective political substitute for war would require “alternate enemies,” some of which might seem equally farfetched in the context of the current war system.
It may be, for instance, that gross pollution of the environment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruction by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to the survival of the species.
Poisoning of the air, and of the principal sources of food and water supply, is already well advanced, and at first glance would seem promising in this respect; it constitutes a threat that can be dealt with only through social organization and political power.
But from present indications it will be a generation to a generation and a half before environmental pollution, however severe, will be sufficiently menacing, on a global scale, to offer a possible basis… [however] the rate of pollution could be increased selectively for this purpose”.
The Club of Rome’s 1991 document entitled The First Global Revolution? contains this passage:
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together …
all these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
Are You Being ‘Green Washed’?
The current environmental movement we see today was hijacked a long time ago. Let’s take a look at the top 4 fallacies the NWO conspirators have managed to get ‘greenies’ to believe.
The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #1: Carbon Dioxide is a Poison
Let’s start with the basics: carbon dioxide (CO2) is a nutrient, not a poison. We breathe out carbon dioxide every breath, but we also take some of it in on the inbreath. According to the IPCC (Interplanetary Panel on Climate Change), we are therefore poisoning ourselves every breath!
Think about it – if CO2 were really a poison, why does it help plants grow so much?
Why is it a key part of the fundamental equation of biology: sugar + oxygen = carbon dioxide + water + heat?
How is it that those in the environmental movement are ignorant of basic biology?
As the website PlantsNeedCO2.org states, the more CO2 around, the better plants grow:
“In Idso and Idso’s (1994) analysis of soil nutrient limitations, the percentage growth enhancement due to a 300-ppm rise in the air’s CO2 content actually did exhibit a slight (but statistically non-significant) decline, dropping from 51% to 45% when nutrients went from non-growth-limiting to limiting in a group of 70 experiments.
But when the atmospheric CO2 enrichment was 600 ppm, this slight negative trend reversed itself, going from a CO2-induced growth stimulation of 43% when nutrients were present in abundance to a 52% enhancement when their supply was sub-optimal.
And for a 1200-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2, the percentage growth enhancement jumped from 60% when the soil nutrient supply was adequate to 207% when it was less-than-adequate.”
It’s a simple equation: the more CO2 you have, the more the plants like it, and the faster they will grow.
The demonization of carbon dioxide is not about helping the environment.
The NWO idea has always been to attach the worsening condition of the environment to an individual’s energy usage – and even his or her breathing – so as to introduce a carbon tax.The Government literally wants to tax you for breathing – for merely being alive.
The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #2: The Manmade Global Warming Hoax
That is why the term global warming got changed to climate change – this way, no matter what happens with the weather, the IPCC can say the climate is changing. But climate change is a slick truism – you can’t argue against it. Of course the climate is changing. When has it not changed?
The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #3: The Carbon Tax and Global Governance as Eco-Solutions
As pointed out above, all this focus on carbon is for one reason: taxation. The whole scheme to get people and corporations fixated on their carbon footprint – rather than how much actual benefit or harm they are doing the environment – is to pave the way for more taxation and centralization of power.
To have a worldwide carbon tax, of course, you need a One World Government to enforce and collect it. The UN, ICLEI and its other subdivisions are constantly talking about global governance for this very reason.
It also means extending the reach of the United Nations so that local bodies such as local councils and municipalities that belong to ICLEI, (the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, created in 1990 as a non-governmental spin-off of the United Nations) can implement its global directives and make it look ‘grassroots’, or like it was locally decided.
For further information on this topic, check out George Hunt’s work in exposing how Evelyn Rothschild and David Rockefeller were cooking up the cap-and-trade scheme in the 1980s. Hunt was present at some of the meetings where the carbon tax was first being discussed.
The Hijacked Environmental Movement Fallacy #4: Overpopulation
Mahatma Gandhi once said: “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not every man’s greed.” There is no doubt that rising populations can put a strain on resources, yet where is the proof that the Earth cannot support 7 billion people? Or 9 billion people? Is it really population that is the problem here, or is it rather self-centered greed and destructive environmental practices and technologies?
We can accept the world’s rising population not as a threat or a reason to justify killing (which goes by the euphemism of depopulation) but rather as a challenge. It can propel us into living more from the heart, to having more compassion for those less well off than us, to doing a better job of sharing, of distributing resources equitably.
It can stimulate us into better modes of efficiency. Could the rising population help a critical mass of people awake to the truth of free energy, and the fact that free energy or over unity devices already exist which provide practically unlimited energy for free or very cheaply?
When people gain a higher education, they organically choose to have less kids. If the conspirators really cared about the planet’s population, why not use their money to help everyone access better education? The answer is, of course, that they don’t.
Underpinning the propaganda of overpopulation is eugenics. It’s the idea that some humans are superior to others, and that some humans don’t deserve to be here.
This is really the philosophical and spiritual basis of the hijacking. As they have confessed, the conspirators in their delusions view the rest of the population as a virus that must be rid from the planet. Yet, the real virus is the fear mindset that runs the show in the brains of the elite controllers.
“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”
Some of the most powerful and wealthiest environmental organizations have… led the climate movement down various dead ends: carbon trading, carbon offsets, natural gas as a “bridge fuel” - what these policies all held in common is that they created the illusion of progress while allowing the fossil fuel companies to keep mining, drilling and fracking with abandon.
Startling Evidence Indicates Funded Propaganda Campaign Responsible For War On Fake News March 29 2018 | From: TheMindUnleashed
“Is ‘fake news’ real?” asked investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson during a Tedx talk - posing the paradoxical question in the context of its explosion in popularity during the 2016 presidential election - or is the term, fake news, itself, a fabrication?
In its absurd extreme, identifiably fake news appears on supermarket shelves as tabloid magazines, in ‘reports’ on human births of alien hybrid babies and other blatant fabrications; while its more pernicious iteration, issued by traditional pillars of journalism - such as the New York Times and Washington Post, among many others - manifests in reports citing unsubstantiated sources and unnamed ‘officials,’ and often favors corporate sponsors as well as the political establishment.
Fake news isn’t new to the media landscape, in other words, but the catchphrase, as a descriptor, is.
Thus, what if fake news - peddled to the public as a pressing problem in need of solution - is itself a deception, intentionally constructed to silence legitimate critique, opposing viewpoints, and dissent?
Attkisson, who surmised the abrupt entrée of an artificial problem must have had assistance, investigated the origins of the phrase, ‘fake news,’ and its employment as accusation and insinuation, whether or not accompanied by substantiating evidence. And she was frighteningly on point.
“What if the whole anti-fake news campaign was an effort on somebody’s part to keep us from seeing or believing certain websites and stories by controversializing them or labeling them as fake news?” the seasoned journalist and winner of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting asks.
Weighing the evidence, timeline, and money trail Attkisson discovered - coupled with the resulting heavy-handed crackdown on social media and video-sharing platforms, as well as by search engines and advertisers, on the fictitious false information crisis - not only does it seem likely the term was premeditated and unleashed as a propaganda device, but as a loaded weapon inherently threatening to the future of the free press as protectively enshrined in the First Amendment.
“First Draft - a project of the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government - uses research-based methods to fight mis- and disinformation online. Additionally, it provides practical and ethical guidance in how to find, verify and publish content sourced from the social web,” the site’s About section states.
“The goal was supposedly to separate wheat from chaff,” Attkisson explains, “to prevent unproven conspiracy talk from figuring prominently in internet searches. To relegate today’s version of the alien baby story to a special internet oblivion.”
However innocuous-sounding that agenda, just one month passed before First Draft’s battle against fake news found a megaphone in the president, as Obama abruptly “insisted in a speech that he too thought somebody needed to step in and curate information of this wild, wild west media environment,”she notes.
But there hadn’t been a ruckus, much less a few lone voices, griping about fake news as an issue of any import - or even complaining, at all.
“Nobody in the public had been clamoring for any such thing,” Attkisson continues, “yet, suddenly, the topic of fake news dominates headlines on a daily basis. It’s as if the media had been given its marching orders.
“Fake news, they insisted, was an imminent threat to American Democracy.”
Aware “few themes arise” in the mass media environment “organically,” the seasoned investigator followed the money to First Draft’s funders - to discern which interested parties might be backing the rally against fake news.
Google, in fact, financed the group “around the start of the election cycle” - Google, whose parent company Alphabet’s CEO Eric Schmidt both acted as adviser and multi-million-dollar donor to the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.
Mirroring Obama’s lament, Clinton soon championed quashing fake news as a priority - and her “surrogate, David Brock of Media Matters, privately told donors he was the one who convinced Facebook to join the effort,” she adds.
“I’m not the only one who thought that the whole thing smacked of the roll-out of a propaganda campaign.”
Indeed, the nascent fake news allegation almost exclusively centered around conservative-leaning outlets, journalists, and articles perceived as favoring then-candidate Trump - and repeatedly alongside allegations those media entities were acting directly, indirectly, or haplessly at the behest of the Russian government - while the majority of the mud-slinging was levied without proof or the flimsiest of supporting evidence.
To wit, a succession of pieces published by mass media dispensed with the indispensable journalistic protocols of source- and fact-checking - then shied away from accepting responsibility for the incendiary and damaging claims once a furious backlash ensued.
Although Attkisson did not mention them specifically in the roughly ten-minute Tedx talk at the University of Nevada, two lists published at the height of the Fake News Scare - both of which were either republished or alluded and linked to by multiple corporate outlets - came into public purview under highly suspect circumstances, each lending albeit indirect credence to the hypothesis a propaganda crusade was underway.
On November 13, 2016, Merrimack College associate professor Melissa Zimdars out of the blue made public a Google document entitled, “False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and/or Satirical ‘News’ Sources,” she later described as essentially a worksheet intended for colleagues and students to offer one another tips for avoiding disseminating fake news.
“So … I posted it to Facebook to my friends, you know, ‘Hey, media and communication people, if you think of other examples you come across,’” she explained of the list’s creation to USA Today College in an interview, “and so many of them sent me Facebook messages or comments and emails and I looked through them or through some of the people sent me blogs or other sources.”
Admittedly, without vetting whether or not each (or even a few) of the sites conjured from that Facebook post deserved a place on the inflammatory list, Zimdars committed the precise journalistic fraud putatively motivating its formation in the first place - as did the Los Angeles Times, whose piece,
“Want to keep fake news out of your newsfeed? College professor creates list of sites to avoid,” let loose the unverified, unchecked, and unauthenticated aggregation, with its purely subjective guidelines, onto a populace stirred to frenzy over fake news, to expectedly viral results.
Critics and listees - many of which cogently included established if smaller conservative and pro-Trump outlets, as well as those covering the deluge of corruption allegations spawned from a series of leaks against then-candidate Clinton, John Podesta, and the Democratic National Committee - lambasted Zimdars, the Times, and other propagators for failing the integrity litmus test.
Slapped with requests for removal and a firestorm of fury, Zimdars temporarily revoked public access to the contentious list with vows to edit and update information as appropriate, and authored an editorial defense, appearing in the Post on November 18, titled, “My ‘fake news list’ went viral. But made-up stories are only part of the problem.”
Despite the mayhem and arguable damage it caused to myriad legitimate sources listed among the obvious disinformation outlets, Zimdars’ list is once again open to the public - on Google Docs.
After having established itself as a defender of the associate professor’s worksheet, the Washington Post took the L.A. Times’ lead, issuing an article on November 24 almost wholly pertaining to a list it failed to embed or even link - only the name of the problematic organization, PropOrNot, provided clues for readers dedicated enough to search on their own. And they did in droves.
But the Post’s reckless foray into tabloidesque journalism - perhaps wary of negative perception beginning to foment against the anti-fake news brigade - crossed several lines demarcating standards of journalism; and weaved another narrative of equally dubious stature into the already unraveling anti-disinformation war: Russia.
“Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say,” the outlet proclaimed in the title for the article - whose un-accompanying blacklist pegged hundreds of independent, conservative, pro-Bernie Sanders, pro-Trump, and even left-leaning and award-winning sites as suddenly verboten due to direct or indirect Russian influence, or for acting as Russia’s “useful idiots” - all while vocally preserving the anonymity of the “four sets of researchers” responsible. Among them, PropOrNot.
“The flood of ‘fake news’ this election season got support from a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy, say independent researchers who tracked the operation,” the piece’s lede contends.
But, devoid named sources to question, transparency of methodologies, nor any other potentially mitigating factors which would have allowed independent verification contained in the original article, outrage this time included the Post’s competition.
In fact, several organizations listed as ‘allies’ by PropOrNot immediately disavowed the claim.
Eliot Higgins of research-focused Bellingcat, one of several entities named as such, tweeted that prior to the Post’s article, he had never heard of PropOrNot - incidentally indicating a lack of contact by reporters from the media organization - and, further, he “never gave permission to them to call Bellingcat ‘allies.’”
Fortune’s Mathew Ingram penned an incredulous response, entitled, “No, Russian Agents Are Not Behind Every Piece of Fake News You See.”
Effectively destroying every facet of the Post’s anathema piece, Ingram points out there is:
“Also little data available on the PropOrNot report, which describes a network of 200 sites who it says are ‘routine peddlers of Russian propaganda,’ which have what it calls a ‘combined audience of 15 million Americans.’
How is that audience measured? We don’t know. Stories promoted by this network were shared 213 million times, it says. How do we know this? That’s unclear.”.
Ultimately forced into addressing the resulting chaos, the Washington Postarticle eventually bore a note from the editor - not a retraction - asserting [with emphasis added],
“The Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets of researchers who have examined what they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American democracy and interests.
One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda.
A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions.
The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so.
Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list.”
To reiterate, the Post did not retract the article abruptly conflating fake news with Russian propaganda - regardless the brazen if planned distancing of itself from the content therein - and has never divulged its justification for publishing such threadbare work, nor for allowing the empty allegations to remain available for the world to read online in perpetuity.
On January 8, 2017, amid continued outrage over specious and vapid fake news and Russian propaganda accusations, Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan declared the entirety of the outlet’s relentless anti-fake news jihad null, titling an article, “It’s time to retire the tainted term ‘fake news,’” positing the term’s mere monthslong duration may have served a purpose at its advent, but “its meaning already is lost.”
Attkisson notably emphasizes, however, the term never imparted a steel definition nor universally agreed-upon guidelines delineating precisely what it constitutes.
That ambiguity disputably explains placing the term front and center in a propaganda campaign - as it is sharply suggested by Attkisson’s funding investigation of First Draft with bulk of the aforementioned body of evidence - for doubt before persuasion wields power.
For its irresponsible reporting of the unsubstantiated blacklist, false claims Russia had hacked into Vermont’s power grid, and all-out push to - for all intents and purposes - vilify or discredit opposing but legitimate viewpoints, the Washington Post and its controversial owner Jeff Bezos, also CEO of Amazon, garnered praise from failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who professed without a hint of irony to an audience May 31, 2017, at the annual Code Conference, as quoted byCNBC,
“I think Jeff Bezos saved The Washington Post. But newspapers, like the Post, the Journal, the Times, others - still drive news. … It was a very good use of his financial resources. Because now we have a very good newspaper again operating in Washington, and driving news elsewhere.”
All bold tit-for-tat back-patting aside, Clinton’s adoration for an ostensive news organization, which displayed an egregious lack of journalistic standards on several occasions might be only telling, were the audacious effort to mute dissenting and critical voices - who had reported factually on damning evidence of layers of corruption plaguing the former secretary of state’s campaign, officials, and party as divulged by Wikileaks - not also tandemly gaining momentum.
It has been theorized the work of journalists not employed by traditional, corporate mass media organizations had - in wading through the vitriol of election season to report the avalanche of information dumped in leaks and pivotal to outcome, yet ignored by mass media - assisted in stoking rage against the establishment and was responsible for the concurrent astronomical success of the Sanders campaign, to the detriment and consternation of Clinton.
Whether or not that hypothesis holds weight, that responsible reporting picked up mainstream’s slack, as the big-name outlets instead trained their audiences’ attentions on questioning Wikileaks, whistleblowers, and similar diversions.
In short, the widely-varied body of independent media became essential for the dissemination of accurate information.
But that vitality, under the vacuous premise of combating fake news, is being strangled by oppressive social media algorithms, yanked advertising and sponsor dollars, and other tactics perhaps comprising the truer imminent threat to vestiges of democracy: censorship, through suppression and omission, of a free press.
This debilitating loss - the neutering of media still upholding its duty to question government and report facts for their own sake - to a concerted effort to solve the manufactured fake news problem would be irrevocable tragedy.
Attkisson - a noted dissenting voice, critical of lapdog media, herself - stopped short of a definitive conclusion regarding a coordinated propaganda campaign, warning;
“What you need to remember is that when interests are working this hard to shape your opinion, their true goal might just be to add another layer between you and the truth.”
New Zealand's Privacy Commissioner Deletes His Facebook Account + It Begins: Facebook Under Federal Investigation For Use Of Personal Data March 31 2018 | From: TheGuardian / TheGatewayPundit
John Edwards accuses social media giant of flouting the country’s laws.
New Zealand’s privacy commissioner has accused Facebook of breaking the country’s privacy laws and has deleted his account on the site.
John Edwards released a scathing criticism of the social media giant, accusing it of breaching privacy laws after it refused to release personal information held about the accounts of other Facebook users.
Writing on the website the Spinoff, Edwards said that when his office had issued Facebook with a statutory demand to produce the information, the company said it was not subject to the New Zealand Privacy Act, and was therefore under no obligation to provide it.
A statement from the Edwards’ office said Facebook was “subject to the Privacy Act and had fundamentally failed to engage with the act”.
But Facebook has hit back at the commissioner’s findings, saying the request for information had been refused because it was “overly broad” and “intrusive”.
“We are disappointed that the New Zealand privacy commissioner asked us to provide access to a year’s worth of private data belonging to several people and then criticised us for protecting their privacy,” a spokeswoman for the company said.
“We scrutinise all requests to disclose personal data, particularly the contents of private messages, and will challenge those that are overly broad."
“We have investigated the complaint from the person who contacted the commissioner’s office but we haven’t been provided enough detail to fully resolve it.”
While acknowledging that beyond naming Facebook he was essentially powerless to force the company to hand over information, Edwards raised the spectre of a legal challenge.
He said he would:
“Continue to assert that Facebook is obliged to comply with New Zealand law in relation to personal information it holds and uses in relation to its New Zealand users”.
He wrote: “And in due course a case may come before the courts, either through my office, or at the suit of the company.”
“Every New Zealander has the right to find out what information an agency holds about them,” he said, adding:
“It is a right of constitutional significance, and even this week’s Dotcom case noted that the right of individuals to access, challenge and to correct personal data is generally regarded as ‘perhaps the most important privacy protection safeguard’.” .
“The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is investigating whether the use of personal data from 50 million Facebook users by Cambridge Analytica violated a consent decree the tech company signed with the agency in 2011, Bloomberg reported Monday. […]
“We are aware of the issues that have been raised but cannot comment on whether we are investigating. We take any allegations of violations of our consent decrees very seriously as we did in 2012 in a privacy case involving Google,” a spokesman for the FTC said Tuesday.
A violation of the consent decree could carry a penalty of $40,000 per violation, which could mean a fine conservatively estimated to be “many millions of dollars in fines” for Facebook, The Washington Post reported over the weekend, citing a former FTC official.”
“We reject any suggestion of violation of the consent decree. We respected the privacy settings that people had in place. Privacy and data protections are fundamental to every decision we make,” the social network giant said in a statement to the Washington Post over the weekend.
Facebook’s stock fell during pre-trading on reports of the probe.
“In a Sunday tweet thread, Carol Davidson, former director of integration and media analytics for Obama for America, said the 2012 campaign led Facebook to “suck out the whole social graph” and target potential voters. They would then use that data to do things like append their email lists.”
So many of the factors that are negatively influencing public heath could easily be prevented or removed from society, yet the decisions of the ruling class continue to ensure that our food supply is toxic, that our environment is compromised, and that our exposure to chemicals and industrial waste is total. Why?
With the stroke of a pen carcinogenic poisons like Monsanto’s Roundup could be banned. Industrial disasters like Fukushima or the Deepwater Horizon could easily get the attention they deserve from world powers, but the will to intervene on behalf of human and environmental health is zero, while the will to intervene militarily in corporate and political affairs is guaranteed.
People are suffering more than ever from a host of chronic conditions and illnesses that can wreck even the healthiest and strongest of us. To be sick is the new normal, and to be healthy is outstanding and unusual.
Concerned citizens are battling grass roots struggles on all fronts, yet, at the top levels of society the corruption, gross negligence, and seeming incompetence continue unabated, ensuring that important decisions always favor the health of corporations and special interests.
With such obvious disregard for life, it would be naive to presume that our national and global leadership have our best interests at heart, and also to assume that any of this could be accidental.
And when we look at comments and statements from some of the world’s most influential people, a dark philosophy is uncovered, and a shocking agenda to depopulate planet earth is revealed. See for yourself:
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”
– Bill Gates
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” – U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.”
– Jacques Coustea
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
– Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburgh
“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
– Dave Foreman, Earth First Co-Founder
“This planet might be able to support perhaps as many as half a billion people who could live a sustainable life in relative comfort. Human populations must be greatly diminished, and as quickly as possible to limit further environmental damage.”
– Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka
“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”
Make what you will out of these statements, but the fact remains that globally, human health and the environment are in critical condition and there is no sign of relief in sight.
Couple this with the fact that many of the world’s elite do publicly fantasize of culling the human population, and the realization is harsh: we are targets.
Our world simply does not have to be poisoned with chemtrails, radiation leaks, GMO’s, electro-magnetic pollution, frack wells, fluoride, mercury, vaccine adjuvants, depleted uranium, oil spills, antibiotics, endocrine disrupting chemicals, toxic food additives, agro-chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and so much more.
The aggregated, generations long effect of such total contamination is the explosion of a host of bizarre and life-altering illnesses and ‘conditions,’ that chronically sap our energy and vitality, slowly debilitating us, separating us from our power and putting us into the doctor’s office.
The following 11 common symptoms are signs that the global depopulation slow kill is in play and is effective, and that within a couple of generations the human race will no nothing of health, wellness and vitality.
1. Gut and Digestive Issues
The primary attack on the body’s immune system takes place in the digestive system where the body’s natural bacterial defenses live.
Chronic poor digestion, leaky gut syndrome, gastritis, colitis, inflammatory bowel syndrome, candida overgrowth, food sensitivities and other serious issues are become increasingly common, resulting from the consumption of denatured foods laden with chemicals and sugars, GMO poisoning and so on.
Roundup herbicide is known to kill healthy bacteria in the body after being ingested in only residual amounts. Antibiotic overuse and contamination in the water supply means that building a health but biome is nearly impossible.
2. Chronic Fatigue and Low Energy
The body’s natural store of energy is the first thing to become depleted when the body and mind are over-exposed to pollution and stress. The persistent exposure to toxic foods, poisoned spaces, electromagnetic radiation, psychological attacks, continually forces the body and psyche to be in a state of crisis.
The regular amount of energy needed to perform the ordinary rigors of life is not available, and as a result we become chronically tired, low-energy, lethargic and generally slowed down.
Even when we balance diet, exercise and meditation, maintaining personal energy is difficult, so many people are having to constantly dose themselves with caffeine and so-called energy drinks just to accomplish an ordinary day.
3. Dietary Diseases Like Obesity And Diabetes
Dietary illnesses such as the sweeping obesity and diabetes epidemics are a sign that the soft kill is greatly impacting public health. Public relations and social engineering have changed the public’s understanding of what food actually is, and as our consumption of crap corporate foods increases, so do our wastelines and our chances for getting getting chronic disease like diabetes.
Of course, both of these conditions are entirely curable with a proper diet, but in a country where raw milk is illegal, the truth about food and health is rarely spoken in the mainstream.
The maintenance of chronic illness is very profitable for the medical establishment, and obesity is a gateway to many chronic and life-threatening illnesses.
4. Disorientation and Brain Fog
Many people these days suffer from spells of disorientation and fogginess of the mind, without any clear cause or reason as to the mind should be functioning so poorly. Brain fog is a difficult to identify chronic condition where a person feels disconnected, confused and distant, almost an illness of consciousness.
A spell can last for a day, or it can last for years, often persisting until a person finally isolates the primary cause. Candida overgrowth, a condition where negative bacteria is being over-produced within the body, is the result of poor diet and a compromised gut biome, and is thought to cause disorientation and brain fog.
5. Chronic Inflammation
Chronic inflammation is part of a biological response to harmful stimuli and is increasingly being recognized as a serious silent killer because of the health problems it trigger.
The purpose of inflammation is to rid the body of any causes of damage or injury and to initiate repair. It is a defense mechanism that being constantly activated primarily consuming by inflammatory foods.
Modern wheat is an example of a food that has been so genetically altered that it now no longer provides nutrition, but rather instead irritates the tissues of the body, causing chronic inflammation, leading to bigger health problems.
People suffer more seriously from seasonal and random allergy attacks than ever before, and some attacks can be severe enough to temporarily disable a person. Everyone is watching pollen counts on the nightly news, but allergies simply weren’t this serious a generation ago.
Something has changed in the body and in the environment, and with the omnipresence of chemtrails and geo-engineering projects in the sky, suspicion that the respiratory system is being attacked is warranted.
Autism in children is rising frighteningly and without a precise indication of exactly what is causing it, we should be dramatically erring on the side of caution. It could be environmental, it could be vaccines, GMO’s, or household chemicals, but something is taking our children. Will autism rates have to get to one-in-two before a Manhattan Project like effort is initiated to end this?
It is predicted that soon at least 1 in 3 adults will have some form of cancer, which, as we know, has become a booming industry.
Alternative cures, treatments and therapies are targeted for extermination by the state, and the sick are corralled into risky, expensive treatments that fail to address the root causes of cancer and promote healthier living.
9 . Morgellon’s
This strange and scary disease appears to be an infection of sorts by some still unknown type of organic material. Manifesting as tiny living threads or worms that surface at the skin, irritating the patient, it is believed that no Morgellon’s patient has ever been able to undergo an autopsy due to an attempted global cover up.
With no clear answers available from science, many point to geo-engineering and chemtrail spraying as the source.
10. Dental Fluorosis
The public fluoridation of water in the US and other nations is medication without consent and without controlling dosages. This is a form of torture. The US government just admitted that Americans are overdosed on fluoride when they lowered the recommended amounts to put in public water supplies.
Fluoride is linked to many health problems including cancer and lowered IQ in children, yet the government still forces into just about everyone. Dental fluorosis is a sign of overexposure to fluoride, and a sign of deliberate poisoning.
11. ‘Chemical Imbalances’
Some will disagree, but mental health issues like ADD/ADHD, anxiety, insomnia, and depression can all be cured with proper diet, exercise and supplementation. In fact, these conditions are fairly new to the human population, and are on the rise, or at least diagnoses are on the rise.
Of course the medical establishment benefits greatly from having more and more patients consuming drugs to remedy mental health issues.
The soft kill is about distracting you from life, debilitating you, and getting you out of the game and into the pharmacy.
It would take very little to eradicate so much of the toxicity from our modern world, but the initiative of the ruling elite is to destroy, contaminate and compromise all that which is most fundamental to life on planet earth. A deliberate soft kill.
Is this an accident, or the global depopulation soft kill strategy working effectively for the world’s elite? What do you think?
On a NASA page intended to spread climate alarmism (climate.nasa.gov), NASA’s own data reveal that world-wide ocean levels have been falling for nearly two years, dropping from a variation of roughly 87.5mm to below 85mm.
These data, of course, clearly contradict the false narrative of rapid, never-ending rising ocean levels that flood continents and drown cities - a key element of the climate change “boogeyman” fiction that’s used to scare gullible youth into making Al Gore rich.
Check out the sea level chart for yourself, showing the downward trend across 2016 – 2017:
Even in the Worst Case, Sea Levels Will Only Rise About a Foot in a Century
Global warming alarmists might say this is only a “pause” in the rising ocean levels, and that the long-term trend is clearly in the direction of rising oceans. However, these people wildly exaggerate the degree of ocean level increases to the point of absurdity.
If you zoom out on the NASA chart, you’ll see a long-term trend of sea levels rising 3.4mm per year on average, according to NASA’s own analysis. This means that over an entire century, the oceans would rise 340mm, or 13.4 inches … a little over a foot.
Why do Climate Change Alarmists Hate Rainforests? A Wetter, Warmer World is More Lush and “Green”
Finally, there very idea that melting ice is somehow bad for the planet is total hokum and bunk. By what lunacy do climate alarmists arrive at the conclusion that a frozen, dry planet is somehow better than a wet, warm, lush planet with more rainforests and food production?
Planet Earth would actually be far more green with higher CO2 levels and warmer temperatures that promote more continental rainfall. Deserts would be restored to plains or forests. Sparse areas, now devoid of plant life, could become food production areas.
As I explain in these science education videos, “greening” the planet requires higher CO2, warmer temperatures and less ice.
That’s not a crisis, it’s a blessing for all plant life and ecosystems across the planet. It makes me wonder: Why do climate change alarmists hate rainforests so much that they want to freeze the planet and turn warm water back into frozen ice?
The answer is because they are all mindless cultists who don’t understand anything at all about climatology, science or botany.
They are nothing more than Programmable Life Forms (PLFs) who have been brainwashed by a wholly dishonest, globalist-run media that uses the climate change baloney to enslave and indoctrinate the masses.
The entire climate change hoax demonstrates just how incredibly stupid and gullible most humans really are, revealing that if they could turn Earth into a lifeless, cold, icy wasteland, they would consider that the ultimate success of the “green” movement.
Stupid beyond belief.
Dr. Tim Ball Crushes Climate Change: The Biggest Deception in History
President Trump was correct to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement. He could have explained that the science was premeditated and deliberately orchestrated to demonize CO2 for a political agenda.
Wisely, he simply explained that it was a bad deal for the United States because it gave a competitive economic edge to other nations, especially China. A majority of Americans think he was wrong, but more would disagree if he got lost in the complexities of the science.
I speak from experience having taught a Science credit course for 25 years for the student population that mirrors society with 80 percent of them being Arts students.
Promoters of what is called anthropogenic global warming (AGW) knew most people do not understand the science and exploited it.
With a 50-year academic career focusing on Historical Climatology, Dr. Tim Ball is uniquely qualified to address man-made climate change, and he demonstrates that it is a flat-out hoax. Thinking people everywhere should get multiple copies of this book and hand them out to everyone they know.
The plants need more atmospheric CO2 not less. Current levels of 400 parts per million (ppm) are close to the lowest levels in 600 million years. This contradicts what the world was told by people using the claim that human production of CO2 was causing global warming.
They don’t know the UN agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established to examine human-caused global warming, were limited to only studying human causes by the definition they were given by Article 1 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
It is impossible to identify the human cause without understanding and including natural causes. Few know that CO2 is only 4 percent of the total greenhouse gases. They assume that a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase. It doesn’t, in every record the temperature increases before CO2.
The only place where a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase is in the computer models of the IPCC.
This partly explains why every single temperature forecast (they call them projections) the IPCC made since 1990 was wrong. If your forecast is wrong, your science is wrong.
I studied weather as aircrew with the Canadian Air Force, including five years of search and rescue in Arctic Canada. After the Air Force, I went to university to study weather and climate, culminating in a Ph.D., in Historical Climatology from the University of London, England.
When I began in the late 1960s global cooling was the consensus. I was as opposed to the prediction that it would continue cooling to a mini-Ice Age, as I later was to the runaway AGW claim. I knew from creating and studying long-term records that climate changes all the time and are larger and more frequent than most know.
I also knew changes in CO2 were not the cause.
The Club of Rome (COR), formed in 1968, decided that the world was overpopulated and expanded the Malthusian idea that the population would outgrow the food supply to all resources, especially the developed nations.
COR member Maurice Strong told Elaine Dewar in her book Cloak of Green that the problem for the planet were the industrialized nations and it was everybody’s duty to shut them down. Dewar asked Strong if he planned to seek political office. He effectively said you cannot do anything as a politician, so he was going to the UN because:
He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda.
Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.
He created the crisis that the by-product of industry was causing global warming. Even Obama claimed that 97 percent of scientists agree. If he checked the source of the information, he would find the research was completely concocted.
It is more likely that 97 percent of scientists never read the IPCC Reports. Those who do express their concern in very blunt terms. Consider German meteorologist and physicist Klaus-Eckart Puls experience.
“Ten years ago, I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements.
To this day, I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.”
He discovered what I exposed publicly for years. My challenge to the government version of global warming became increasingly problematic.
They couldn’t say I wasn’t qualified. Attacks include death threats, false information about my qualifications posted on the Internet, and three lawsuits from IPCC members. Most people can’t believe that such things occur about opinions in a democratic society.
Test the idea by telling people that you don’t accept the human-caused global warming idea. The reaction from most, who know nothing about the science, will invariably be dismissive at best.
I documented what went on in a detailed, fully referenced, book titled The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science. A lawyer commented that it lays out and effectively supports the case, however, it was “a tough slog.”
I recently published a brief ‘non-slog’ handbook (100 pages) for the majority of people, not to insult their intelligence, but to help them understand the science and its misuse for a political agenda.
It provides the motive and method for the corruption of science to substantiate and bolster Trump’s decision.
Google Exposé Reveals Scam Behind Climate Change
Professors get funding to push "global warming."
Google’s scheme of paying professors to influence public opinion is also how the “global warming” scam works.
“Google operates a little-known program to harness the brain power of university researchers to help sway opinion and public policy, cultivating financial relationships with professors at campuses from Harvard University to the University of California, Berkeley,” the WSJ reported.
In a similar fashion, politicians, foundations and corporate magnates also fund professors to perform “research” into “man-made climate change” which almost always reaches the existing consensus that it’s a threat only global government can handle.
The arguments claiming “the science is settled” and “97% of scientists believe in global warming” are appealing to authority fallacies that are easily debunked given the Google revelations.
And those were nearly the same arguments tobacco companies were making decades ago when they were funding scientists to downplay health risks associated with smoking.
“Research and other professional activities are professionally rewarded only if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic establishment - funding, ease of getting your papers published, getting hired in prestigious positions, appointments to prestigious committees and boards, professional recognition, etc.,”revealed climatologist Dr. Judith Curry, who once held a tenured position at Georgia Tech before resigning in disgust.
Simply put, academia is not independent but is rather just one tentacle of a vast network of politicians and conformists in finance, media and entertainment who all work in unison to push agendas that originated from the private meetings of the world’s power players.
They’re motivated by the feelings of prestige that comes with joining the upper echelons of society that, unknown to them, only leads to decline of civilization thanks to the heavy burden this predatory class places on productive people who are the real sources of human innovation.
It’s an inherent maxim of social climbers to abandon independent thought out of fear of public disapproval, and that’s why the elites use them to push “global warming” and other propaganda meant to empower the state despite leading to an empty shell of civilization.
The Vatican Is A Criminal Hornets’ Nest March 29 2018 | From: FinalWakeupCall
The Jesuits and the Roman Church, dictate to the world:
The Vatican: The Holy See and the Vatican have been instrumental in converting all national governments on the planet into national corporations, deceitfully, with the same name in capital letters, operating under the international jurisdiction of the sea and the Roman Curia, that have forged all these fraudulent manipulations into a legal, fictional reality.
Now, it is the sole responsibility of the Holy See and Pope Francis to correct this breach of trust, and to stop the deliberate mismanagement of all corporate nations, as they are first and foremost responsible for their monstrous creation.
They pretend that we the living people are responsible for paying off our debts to them, while they created corporations by deception, while simultaneously creating a Trust with the same name in capital letters, to be plundered by the banking cartels.
The truth is that those that have created this mess are responsible for it. They are simply deceptively using similar names and holding positions in what appears to be public office for their private benefit.
Complex Fraud Scheme:
The Federal Reserve and central banks, are running the incorporated nations, as a bankrupt pass-through to purposefully advance vast sums of credit, based on people’s assets and their respective earthly nations, and use this fraud scheme to establish covert bonds against us the people.
Our property and assets serve as security, as part of the overall fraud, designed to usurp people’s assets and credit to the benefit of the cabal criminals. For this scheme they literally stole people’s identities, by using our names for the creation of companies in a claim to ownership and control of each individual person.
They made the fraud scheme complex, and long term, hidden by deceptive covers of shamming, creating lucrative fraud schemes carried out over decades and even centuries on a mindboggling scale.
The Federal Reserve and central banks, unlawfully converted private accounts of millions of people into corporate accounts, technically belonging to corporate contractors, simply named after living people.
This facilitates the seizure of these accounts that banks unlawfully convert into accounts belonging to the central banks, without the disclosure hereof.
Eventually these fraudulently acquired accounts are converted into assets of the IMF, all of this being executed without people’s knowledge or consent.
Fortunately, the Germans are beginning to understand, that their country is not sovereign as it should be, but instead, a corporate vassal state of Washington DC and that their chancellor Angela Merkel serves these crooks, their financial interests and the interests of the Roman Curia at large and certainly not the interests of the Germans.
The Holy See:
The abuse of the corporations continue, and has reached legendary proportions, while still there is no comprehensive statement from the Holy See revealing the fictitious nature of these entities that have been spawned under its auspices and without public denunciation of criminality, and there is no visible undertaking to punish, regulate, or liquidate them.
The Holy See has officially been informed for about a decade of the illegal and immoral actions against humanity and against humanity’s lawful governments, which has been ongoing since the 1800’s, as all these covert goals have been accomplished by fraud and deceit.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
All these illegally established corporations must be liquidated, without harming the millions of innocents who have been misrepresented, and mischaracterised by them, as willing contractors.
Unfortunately, many people still don’t have a clue what has been done in their names and assets, and have never had the opportunity to respond.
It is at the Pope’s discretion, that these evil men continue their actions unopposed, and each day drag more innocent people into the web as accomplices-after-the-fact and still many others fall victim to this system of lies.
The Jesuits are the Real Spiritual Potentates:
The Jesuit controlled Vatican, is the sole owner of all western corporate countries: Satan, through the Freemasons, owns the Vatican, while the Pope is his slave. Catholicism will be eradicated forever, probably sooner than later in the course of this decennium. Throughout history, the Satanic Luciferian Jesuit Order has been tied together with war and genocide.
The Jesuits were formally removed from many countries, including France and England, but are still widely present in Spain and Italy.
Researchers claim that the Jesuits are the real spiritual potentates of the New World Order. Their choice for President of The United States was Paul Ryan, which is why the Pope demanded he become inserted as Speaker of the House in October of 2015, as the Vatican was the sole owner of the United States of America Inc., which defaulted on it’s credit facility – the Federal Reserve Bank – in December of 2012 and came out of international bankruptcy in August of 2015.
All Nation-corporations are created by the Roman Curia. It is no problem to trace this back to the Pope. At the same time; virtually all governments and their agencies in the world are corporations and are tied to, and ultimately under the control of the Holy See.
Puppet-Pope Francis, a Jesuit and selected by the cabal as Roman Pontiff and leader of the Holy See, basically owns and operates worldwide all these “governments” and their sub-corporations. The Pope is the CEO in charge of this whole criminal fraudulent system.
The Jesuits and the Roman Church:
The Jesuits and the Roman Church have altered history and hidden the rest by fabricating fairy tales about the earth’s real history. One such lie was about Mary Magdalene, who was in truth, the wife of Jesus, and bore him two sons with the names Jesus II Justus, and Joseph, along with a daughter named Tamar.
This has been suppressed by the Roman Church. The Church began the procedure of killing scientists in 1600, to change the narrative to serve their goals.
The Holy Grail or Sangreal (Grail) is all about the blood of Jesus, and about the truth of who is a descendant of whom. Many have made false claims to certain Bloodlines, including the Rothschilds and the Monarchs.
Some believe that RH Negative blood comes from the Christ, and that a large portion of the Basques, have this blood type. Jesus was one of the few messengers sent to mankind to enlighten us about what and who we really are, and that if we are to grow in spirit, we must understand this information and drive out the negativity on the planet.
Major changes are occurring now to restore our standing, and teach us about what has been done to us by the Crime Cabal, which includes Draco Reptilians, Grays, and other creatures from a universe that has been intentionally hidden from us by these dark beings. Pope Francis preached recently that his god is Lucifer.
On earth the light workers have restored much of the truth, and it has rectified the Sangreal treaty of 300 A.D. proclaiming that all of earth’s people are sovereign, and should be treated as such.
This will be the end of the Phony Elites and their Slave-Scam that they have been running to the detriment of the people of the world for many centuries. – Scientists know that there were nuclear wars thousands of years ago, and that radiation still exists in small quantities in the Middle East as a result thereof.
Movies like “Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind” are true stories along with the alien abductions and the existence of multidimensional creatures, like Bigfoot and its ancestry, whose planet Marduk was obliterated and now forms our asteroid belt.
The Roman Pontiff and all his war criminals, some pretending to be Jews, who are in reality Khazarian Mafioso, Royalty, Nazis, and Pedophiles, are in truth Satanists. They hold office in the Vatican, the City of London, Washington District of Columbia, and the United Nations City State – located in New York City.
This information was received from an insider who, for obvious reasons, wishes to remain anonymous:
All those in positions of absolute power like the Queen of England, The Rothschilds, The Bushes, The Clintons, The Rockefellers, The Pope, the hidden Jesuit Hierarchy, etc. they are all ONE big happy blood family. They are all cousins, nephews, uncles and nieces to each other. I know some of these people so don’t let them fool you!
They are like Medusa, one single but intricate brain with many little serpent heads attached. The main figures are not even in the public eye.
The top of the pyramid is known as the black nobility – the Ancient Egyptian Ptolemaic Dynasty Rulers; The Saturnalia brotherhood, “The Real 13 Zoroastrian Bloodlines of the Illuminati”
The crime families are in total control of the company of Jesus – Jesuits, High Grey Council of Ten, the Black Pope, the White Pope, and everything else often talked about including all kingdoms around the globe.
These are the families that make up the intricate brain/head of the serpent. The self-designated Luciferian Demi-Gods who rule over their own G.O.D. (Gold-Oil-Drugs):
The Rothschilds were supposedly appointed by the Vatican, and that’s how it started. There are of course other powerful crime families like the Maximus Family, The Pallavicini – Maria Camila Pallavicini is more powerful than Queen Elizabeth.
Yes, indeed Queen Elizabeth is a subordinate to these people. The most powerful man in the world is The Grey Pope, his name is Pepe Orsini and he lives somewhere in Italy, most likely in Venice and The Vatican. He controls the Black and White Popes who are now both commoners. The Grey Pope always remains unseen!
The Knights of Malta, ostensibly a charitable organisation, are the oldest military order in the Catholic Church, and the fascist faction of that order has been secretly responsible for controlling world leaders through a combination of bribery, threats and murder.
In other words, they have been one of the main enforcement arms of the secret world government. They have also exercised strong influence over the US military, as many top brass are Knights of Malta.
Many of these top people now live in Asia, mainly China, India, Japan, Singapore, Indonesia and the Philippines. What does that tell you? Is this to create a New NWO with Asia at the helm? This is perhaps why they slowly moved all the US manufacturing infrastructure to Asia and China over the years.
In reality, the Black Pope is the President of this world, and the Bourbon King of Spain is the Monarch of the world – Not Queen Elizabeth as most believe. The King of Spain controls the Vatican through the Jesuits -The Spanish Borgia’s created the Jesuits.
The King of Spain is also known as the King of Jerusalem. What does this reveal about who secretly rules the Zionist-Khazarians’ state of Israel? The Grey Pope is the “designated” Ruler of it all!
If you are wondering why it is always the Italians and not the Spaniards who rule the Vatican City, it is because their modus operandi is always to run the show from behind the scenes, without any publicity, or public acclaim and so as to not arouse the 500+ age- old Italian hatred for the Spanish.
For details of this, see the history of the terrible reign of Pope Alexander VI and also The Divorce of Henry VIII of England- from Catherine of Aragon – Spain. – This short video, the Pyramid of Death, will enhance your insight about what is happening behind the scenes.
We need to stop looking at Countries as enemies and start tracking down these bloodlines and their foot soldiers such as the Committee of 300, the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, etc. as the true enemies not only of the human race but of all life upon this planet!
If we really want to create the Power vacuum we need at the top of the Pyramid of power, to effectively start implementing some real changes, we need to make a move on these diabolic, malevolent people.
One last note, the best US political leader we have is by far, Ron Paul. He has proven to be the ideal leader for the USA; a leader of utmost integrity! Research him thoroughly. Let’s not support another clown for office.
Paul Ryan or any military man would be a mere continuation of the present fiasco. They only know how to follow orders. It is astonishing how mind-controlled the military people are, always following orders blindly.
5 Most Powerful Families that Control the World:
Overseas Banking Villains Suck New Zealanders’ Wealth Offshore March 28 2018 | From: TheDailyBlog
The ANZ is our biggest bank, with around one million Kiwi customers and 31.3% of the market. The ANZ lending business is worth about $72.35 billion, with net loans worth $117.24 billion. That reflects staggering wealth to have in the hands and at the mercy of overseas banks.
The news that the four main banks in New Zealand, all foreign owned, made record profits in the last financial year, and shipped those profits offshore, generated little obvious controversy. But economists and commentators agree that NZ’s oligopolistic banks are in a privileged position.
They can create their own wealth out of thin air, lend it out to the public, charge rent on it in the form of interest, and shift profits offshore.
This means the banks share ‘an extraordinary privilege’ not enjoyed by any other type of business.
But their huge market share means the four biggest banks operating in New Zealand, are among the most profitable in the world, and last year, they made their biggest profits in three decades.
The biggest banks in New Zealand, ANZ, BNZ, Westpac, and ASB, all owned by Australian banks, who all own each other, plus Kiwi owned, Kiwibank, collectively made a $5.19 billion profit last year, including a massive increase of 7.35% or $355.11 million in net profit, after tax, last year.
They own $504.19 billion in (NZ) assets. The four big overseas banks own about 90% of New Zealand’s banking industry, as well as insurance and other financial services.
Though they’re bit players, other overseas banks also recorded record profit increases, with three Chinese banks, growing profits by as much as 139%. 95% of those total whopping great banking profits leave the country and are lost to peoples’ disposable incomes, to their pockets, and the New Zealand economy.
Unfair fees and charges, arbitrary interest rates and induced debt, add to poverty, dangerously high levels of personal debt, a distorted housing market, inequality, and economic instability. Banks act like parasites, sucking the money and life out of debtors and shifting the profits off shore.
Fees comprise almost 40% of the banks’ profits, and the big four Australian owned banks in New Zealand charge higher fees here than their Aussie parents do at home. New Zealander debtors are wage slaves to overseas owned banks who owe no loyalty to their customers (It’s a business transaction), or their staff (note banking sector layoffs of late), or communities (branch closures).
These banks encourage debt and trap the public in to unjustified credit and account charges. In a perfectly competitive market with ‘well informed and rational consumers’, customers would reflect their dissatisfaction with such a rort by finding another bank.
But when the main banks dominate the market (“monopolistic competition”), and customer inertia is high, it’s hard to swap banks and most of them are the same in different guises anyway.
Marginal competition means marginal choice, and maximum chance of consumer capture.
Unfortunately, high fees and lending rates from banks that lack integrity, are little disincentive when would be home owners are faced with the decision to borrow on usurious conditions or not to borrow and own a home at all. (And then there’s the housing speculation fueled by enthusiastic bank lending).
Even though bank switching is likely at major life changing junctures, even where customer dissatisfaction with banks is high, bank switching is infrequent because of the transaction costs and other complications involved. Surprisingly also, most people are satisfied with their bank.
In a recent survey, the banking sector had a customer performance ranking of 79.5% satisfaction. This is a high satisfaction rate compared with overseas standards, but though the smaller banks score more highly than the overseas institutions, the bigger banks dominate market share.
The ANZ is our biggest bank, with around one million Kiwi customers and 31.3% of the market. The ANZ lending business is worth about $72.35 billion, with net loans worth $117.24 billion. That reflects staggering wealth to have in the hands and at the mercy of overseas banks.
But the imbalance within the banking system goes as far as the top. The CEO of the ANZ, David Hisco in 2015, earned about $5million, 120 times the pay rate of the ANZ’s lowest paid workers. The CEO of the Commonwealth Bank in Australia who owns the ASB, earns $A12.3 million per annum, in three days what the average Aussie earns in a year.
Cheap credit and eager bank lending mostly by overseas banks, has fueled the New Zealand housing market and left citizens with household debt higher than ever before, sitting now at 167.5% of household income.
That’s debt you know the banks would be more than willing to call in if interest rates rose and current lending viability and profit expectations were negatively affected.
So while New Zealand’s attention, and that of the government, is on the alleged impact of foreign ownership of residential houses on the inflated property market, the biggest foreign owners of New Zealand wealth (current and future), in the form of Australian banks, goes unaddressed.
Foreign ownership of banks is of greater scale here in New Zealand than almost anywhere else in the world. Net interest margins and profitability rates are higher here than in most other developed countries. Our current and future earnings, wealth, and real estate are in the hands of foreign banking oligarchs.
That’s of greater concern, and greater scale, than individual foreign ownership of houses. But there will be no crack down on the banks, in fact in times of crisis, they’re more likely to be bailed out or at least assured of some security, because they’re too big to fail.
Attention to small scale overseas buyers of residential land in New Zealand is a misplaced energy, when a magnitude of different wealth is extracted, debt created, and a housing boom exaggerated, by the construction of credit, the entrapment of debt, and the transfer offshore of profit by the big four overseas banks who are the major players in the New Zealand finance sector.
The old saying is as apt as ever “The law locks up the man or woman, Who steals the goose from off the common, But leaves the greater villain loose, Who steals the common from the goose”.
China Launches Petro-Yuan To Challenge Greenback’s Dominance March 28 2018 | From: Geopolitics
The highly anticipated yuan-backed crude oil futures have been launched in Shanghai. China is the world’s biggest oil consumer, with eyes on rival benchmarks Brent and WTI as well as the US currency.
Trading of the new oil futures contracts for September settlement started on the Shanghai International Energy Exchange at 440.20 yuan ($69.70) per barrel, reports Chinese daily the South China Morning Post. Some 18,540 lots have reportedly been sold and purchased so far.
The long-awaited step evoked a surge in global prices for oil with Brent Crude soaring to $71 a barrel for the first time since 2015. US crude benchmark West Texas Intermediate (WTI) reached the highest level in three years at $66.55 per barrel, before retreating to $65.53.
Experts see China’s yuan-dominated contracts as historic as the new futures symbolize the first time that foreign investors can access a Chinese commodity market. The launch ends years of setbacks and delays since the country’s first attempt at listing the securities in 1993.
At the same time, the petro-yuan launch is seen as a blow to the US dollar that has been weakening in recent months. The US dollar is the predominant settlement currency for oil futures contracts. On Monday, the greenback slipped to a 16-month low against the Japanese yen, but remained steady against a basket of six major currencies.
Chinese authorities have reportedly accelerated the launch amid growing crude imports. Last year, the country outpaced the US as the world’s number one importer of oil. Thus, the contracts may not only help to win some control over pricing from the major international benchmarks, but also promote the use of Chinese currency in global trade.
The greenback will get weaker, as soon as other nations have a real credible alternative to it, Ann Lee, Adjunct Professor of Economics and Finance at New York University and author of the book ‘What the US Can Learn From China’, told RT.
"It is more of a game changer for the US. As soon as other nations have a real credible alternative to the US dollar, they can dump dollars and switch to the yuan which can spark a dollar crisis. If that happens, not only will there be inflation from the tariffs, but also from the flood of dollars,”said Lee.
Agents create fake user accounts on social media platforms, such a as Facebook, Twitter and others, to argue any ideology they are instructed to.
According to RT news, agents have up to “10 fake shill accounts” used to troll and create the illusion of having a genuine network of friends.
"They will defend current administration decisions with relentless irrational stubbornness that one can only be paid to do.”
25 Rules of Disinformation – Possible Rules of Operation Mockingbird
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evi: Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it - especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant:. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers: Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumors.”
If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man: Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad.
Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent / opponent arguments / situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule: This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviants”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run:. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer.
This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain critical reasoning - simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motive:. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority: Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows,” and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb: No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion.
Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news: A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues - so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions: Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made - but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminality which, “just isn’t so.”
Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas that have no solution: Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic: Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions: Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions: This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses: If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject: Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic.
This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, antagonize, and goad opponents: If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism.”
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs: This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon).
In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence: Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body: Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled.
For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can ensure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
22. Manufacture a new truth: Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions: If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics: If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely.
This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish: If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
Are You Chatting With a CIA Agent On-Line? It’s Possible You May Already Have
Abby Martin, from RT’s “Breaking the Set,” reported on an up to date Operation Mockingbird with the sole purpose of misleading the public on-line.
In the congressional hearing from 1976 (below) listen to how many agents are in the media to write false stories.
"The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda.
These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.”
By the year 1953 Operation Mockingbird dictated information in over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. These organizations were run by people with well-known right-wing views such as William Paley (CBS), Henry Luce (Time and Life Magazine), Arthur Hays Sulzberger (New York Times), Alfred Friendly (managing editor of the Washington Post), Jerry O’Leary (Washington Star), Hal Hendrix (Miami News), Barry Bingham, Sr., (Louisville Courier-Journal), James Copley (Copley News Services) and Joseph Harrison (Christian Science Monitor).
Even Rolling Stone claimed that journalist Joseph Alsop was under the control of Operation Mockingbird in 1977.
His articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists alleged by Rolling Stone Magazine to have been willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), Charles Douglas Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (The Miami News), Herb Gold (The Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times).
According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman), these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner, creator of the program. The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.
Let’s Be Honest About What Key & Obama Discussed While Golfing: [NWO Agendas +]TPPA & Kim Dotcom March 26 2018 | From: TheDailyBlog / Various
Key had golf with Obama on January 3rd 2014 and by 19th February 2014 the old boy network of the New Zealand appeals court overruled the 28 June 2012 decision, and declared the search warrants against Kim Dotcom to be valid.
Current [pregnant] New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Adern
with Barack Obama
On the TPPA front, Obama will be assuring Key that the TPPA will get signed when Trump leaves so Key can tell his corporate mates in the South Pacific that American Hegemony will be asserted, but the real debate will be on Dotcom.
Let’s never forget the timeline to this intrusion into NZ domestic affairs and America’s attempt to assert their sovereignty over cyberspace.
March 8th 2011 – Jerry Mateparae is stepped down as head of the GCSB
March 15th 2011 – Top NSA spook, James Clapper, flies to NZ to meet with Key to discuss ‘synchronicity’ between the NSA and GCSB
March 22nd 2011 – High level intelligence meetings
May 2011 – McCully visits Washington
June 17th 2011 – Key meets with Ian Fletcher for breakfast at Stamford Plaza
July 22nd 2011 – Key is invited to Washington as pay back for this new ‘synchronicity’
July 26th 2011 – Key side steps normal protocols and appoints his old school friend Ian Fletcher to take over at the GCSB
October 2011 – John Key, the head of the SIS and NZDF join Ian Fletcher, the MFAT Head, and the DPMC boss for a secret dinner at the British High Commissioner’s home
December 8th 2011 – A letter states that Key is going to meet Ian Fletcher on 12th December
December 12th 2011 – Key meets with Ian Fletcher
December 14th 2011 – The Police boss responsible for spying on Dotcom meets John Key with other intelligence agencies present
December 16th 2011 – Kim Dotcom starts to be illegally spied upon
January 2012 – Raid on Kim Dotcom
Key had golf with Obama on January 3rd 2014 and by 19th February 2014 the old boy network of the New Zealand appeals court overruled the 28 June 2012 decision, and declared the search warrants against Kim Dotcom to be valid.
Whilst many middle managment in the Cabal (examples include Obama, the Clintons et al.)
know that their names are among the 14,000 sealed indictments (issued by the Trump administration as part of the covert Alliance that is working to bring down the NWO / Illimunati / Cabal (pr whaever you wish to call it.) - they continue to do their part in a pathetic hope that they will some how survive the end of the NWO globalists' master plan.
Apparently one of the topics of dicsussion with with regards to George Soros and others in the Cabal networks who continue to work to fund the NWO agenda - and the implications of this for New Zealand.
Well, they aren't. It was publicly announced that there was a complete ban on any reporting by any means of what was actually disccused between Obama and the 1,000 invite-only attendees of his main speech.
It is also a given that most of the other meetings held by Obama whilst he was covorting round NZ had
agendas in either full or in part.
US Defense Sec. Mattis Admits U.S. Has No Evidence Syrian Government Used Sarin Gas March 26 2018 | From: TruthInMedia
U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis confirmed that the U.S. government has no evidence that the Syrian government used sarin gas on its people - a claim that was used by the White House as justification for an April 2017 launch of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the Al Shayrat airfield in Syria.
“We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. “We do not have evidence of it.”
“We’re looking for evidence of it, since clearly we are dealing with the Assad regime that has used denial and deceit to hide their outlaw actions,” Mattis continued. “We’re even more concerned about the possibility of sarin use.”
Mattis explained that he was not refuting the third-party reports of chemical weapons used by the Syrian government led by President Bashar Assad. Assad has steadfastly denied that his government has used chemical weapons throughout the conflict.
“Carla Del Ponte, head of the independent UN commission investigating reports of chemical weapons use in Syria, told a Swiss-Italian television station that UN investigators gleaned testimony from victims of Syria’s civil war and medical staff which indicated that rebel forces used sarin gas - a deadly nerve agent.
‘Our investigators have been in neighboring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals and, according to their report of last week which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated,’ Del Ponte said in the interview, translated by Reuters.
‘This was use on the part of the opposition, the rebels, not by the government authorities,’ she added.”
During his comments on Friday, Mattis referred to the April 2017 cruise missile strikes on a Syrian airbase, noting that the Syrian government would “be ill-advised to go back to violating” the chemical weapons prohibition.
In addition to the UN investigation, one of the foremost academic experts in the field of missile fired chemical weapons, Theodore Postol, Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), came forward in a series of reports to note his opposition to the official Trump administration’s narrative in regards to the Khan Sheikhoun nerve agent attack in Syria, blamed on the Assad government, which precipitated the cruise missile strikes by the U.S., according to a report in the International Business Times.
According to Postol, the Syrian gas attack was not carried out by the Syrian government.
In one of his reports, Postol concluded that the US government’s report does not provide any “concrete” evidence that Assad was responsible, adding it was more likely that the attack was perpetrated by players on the ground.
I have reviewed the [White House’s] document carefully, and I believe it can be shown, without doubt, that the document does not provide any evidence whatsoever that the US government has concrete knowledge that the government of Syria was the source of the chemical attack in Khan Sheikhoun, Syria at roughly 6am to 7am on 4 April, 2017.
In fact, a main piece of evidence that is cited in the document point to an attack that was executed by individuals on the ground, not from an aircraft, on the morning of 4 April.
This conclusion is based on an assumption made by the White House when it cited the source of the sarin release and the photographs of that source. My own assessment is that the source was very likely tampered with or staged, so no serious conclusion could be made from the photographs cited by the White House.”
Postol noted that he has “unambiguous evidence that the White House Intelligence Report (WHR) of April 11, 2017 contains false and misleading claims that could not possibly have been accepted in any professional review by impartial intelligence experts.”
Postol called for an independent investigation into the decision to launch cruise missile strikes in Syria, concluding:
“It is now obvious that this incident produced by the WHR, while just as serious in terms of the dangers it created for US security, was a clumsy and outright fabrication of a report that was certainly not supported by the intelligence community.
In this case, the president, supported by his staff, made a decision to launch 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian air base. This action was accompanied by serious risks of creating a confrontation with Russia, and also undermining cooperative efforts to win the war against the Islamic State.”
Assange Lashes Out: "Hypocritical Motherf*ckers... Remember How I Exposed Your Secret Deal With The Saudis" March 25 2018 | From: Zerohedge
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange lashed out at the UK government over Twitter on Friday after Britain's official UN account (UK Mission to the United Nations) tweeted "A free and independent media fulfils a vital role in holding the powerful to account and giving a voice to the powerless," with a link to a puff piece waxing eloquent over the UK's commitment to free speech.
Assange - apparently not included in the UK's definition of "free and independent media" (facing arrest and detention should he leave the Embassy), fired off a stunning reply - claiming that the UK's has spent roughly twice as much spying on him as it has on their entire international human rights program. Related:Assange Suggests British Government Was Involved In Plot To Bring Down Trump
“And that is exactly why you have detained me without charge for eight years in violation of two UN rulings and spent over 20 million pounds spying on me you hypocritical mother fuckers. Your entire international human rights programme is £10.6m you pathetic frauds.”
Assange then followed up with "Remember how I exposed your secret deal to put Saudi Arabia on the Human Rights Council?" referring to a 2015 vote-trading deal in which the UK approached Saudi Arabia in secret, promising it a seat on the UN Human Rights Council in exchange for council support.
Assange, 46, remains confined in the Ecuadorian embassy in London following a failed appeal of his arrest warrant for skipping bail to enter the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault (which Sweden has dropped).
The UN, meanwhile, has twice ruled that Assange's detention is unlawful. Despite this, the judge in his most recent appeal - Emma Arbuthnot, who said “I find arrest is a proportionate response even though Mr Assange has restricted his own freedom for a number of years." Judge Arbuthnot's impartiality in the Assange matter has been called into question, while her husband and ex-Conservative MP, Baron James Arbuthnot, is listed as the director of a security company along with the former head of MI6. Not exactly friends of WikiLeaks.
Moreover, a February report from the Guardian reveals that Sweden wanted to drop their case against Assange as early as 2013, but was pressured by the UK to maintain it.
“The newly-released emails show that the Swedish authorities were eager to give up the case four years before they formally abandoned proceedings in 2017 and that the CPS dissuaded them from doing so.
The CPS lawyer handling the case, who has since retired, commented on an article which suggested that Sweden could drop the case in August 2012. He wrote: “Don’t you dare get cold feet!!!”.
In yet another angry tweet by the WikiLeaks founder, Assange replied to a two-week old comment by former Eric Holder - blaming the former Attorney General for putting him in the position to release emails from the DNC, Hillary Clinton and John Podesta during the 2016 US election.
Ostensibly getting ahead of the upcoming midterm elections in November, Holder tweeted "Russian threat to our upcoming elections: do something!" Holder then called for sanctions, ending the tweet with "We were attacked!"
Assange replied: "Attacked? By what? The truth? It's entirely your own fault, Eric. Thanks to your unconstitutional grand jury against @WikiLeaks you left me with nothing to do but work 24/7, in harsh conditions, for years--and I'm good, very good, at my job."
Holder, who was President Obama's Attorney General, attempted to prosecute WikiLeaks and Assange personally over the publication of military documents and US diplomatic cables regarding Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Russia-theorists" - particularly neoconservatives and hawkish Democrats, have maintained that WikiLeaks is a "cutout" for Russian to engage in information warfare, and blame Moscow for the theft and publication of the leaked emails.
Assange added to his response to Holder, tweeting "Next time, not that there will be one, try following the constitution you swore to uphold," with a link to a 2014 article calling for Holder to drop the investigation against WikiLeaks or resign.
MSNBC Panics About Americans Waking Up To The Deep State March 24 2018 | From: Infowars
‘It’s very dangerous when most of a country believes a small group is manipulating decisions.’
“This is real,” Mika Brzezinski said, suggesting that Trump “may be on to something” as he continues to call out the intelligence community and highlight their misdeeds and failings.
“The attacks against the so-called deep state … by the president and some Republicans actually might be taking hold,” Brzezinski told viewers.
“America is an idea, it’s not a democracy, it’s not a republic before it is an idea,” said analyst Mike Barnicle.
“And the idea that 74 percent, according to the Monmouth University poll, believe there is a deep state run by a military-political intellectual hierarchy, apart from government, and this is the gift we’ve gotten from Donald Trump.”
“This is the gift we’ve gotten from him surrendering to Vladimir Putin and causing chaos in the country.” Barnicle charged.
Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haas declared that “This is not happening in a vacuum,” expressing concern over how a mistrust in a deep state among Americans would affect foreign policy.
“Over the next two or three months this administration is going to face three enormous decisions, what to do about these tariffs, and what to do about the Iran nuclear agreement, and the idea that it is consumed by this chaotic churn of people and what to do about this investigation, the combination of the two, again, this is about as bad as it gets.” Haas complained.
NBC News political reporter Carol Lee suggested that the survey is “a direct result of what we’ve seen the president try to do which is sew doubt” about “the FBI and other agencies.”
Washington Post columnist David Ignatius chimed in, declaring it to be “a very dangerous time,” consisting of “Real challenges for an inexperienced president.”
“It’s a very dangerous thing when most of a country believes a small group in the country is manipulating decisions,” he said. “We’ve seen that historically in countries that begin to break down.” Ignatius exclaimed.
Ignatius then suggested that such beliefs lead to dictatorships, implicitly comparing Trump to past dictators in the middle east and beyond.
“You get a situation where a demagogic leader - gosh think of who that might be - that appeals to precisely that feeling people have, and then you really start to go over the edge.” Ignatius said.
Clearly these elitists and their media mouthpieces are in shock over how many Americans are waking up to the actions of those who lurk in the shadows, with the President unwilling to go along with their endless scheming.
Ron Paul: Gun Control Won’t Solve The Problem - Let’s Look Beyond Politics March 24 2018 | From: Zerohedge
Another terrible school shooting took place in Parkland, Florida recently and unfortunately many politicians and pundits have used the tragedy – as they often do – to push their own agenda. Many will use the tragedy to argue that Americans should be prohibited from owning guns.
It’s unfortunate that while many are quick to demand that guns be taken away from peaceful Americans, they don’t seem to have much to say about guns when they’re in the hands of government authorities shooting innocent people.
If we need any gun control, it is to get control of the guns in the hands of thousands of government employees who use them against innocent people with impunity.
For example, why do those calling for more gun control remain silent when armed federal agents raid Amish farms to stop them from selling raw milk? This shows the hypocrisy of those who call for restrictions on private firearms ownership while supporting the use of government violence as a means of controlling our lives.
Unfortunately there are many key questions lost in the race to score political points from the shooting.
Why does it always seem that the shooter in these mass killings has been on some kind of psychotropic drugs? As the New American magazine pointed out this week, at least ten high profile mass shootings have been committed by individuals who “were either on - or just recently coming off of - psychiatric medications.”
The young killer in Florida was no different. According to his aunt, he had been on these medications to treat mental problems.
Why is no one questioning these medications – all of which come with labels warning of horrific side effects?
Perhaps one reason they are ignored is that the pharmaceutical industry spends billions of dollars lobbying Congress.
Also, how is it possible that the FBI once again missed so many obvious clues that a violent person intent on causing massive harm to others was about to strike? Is the FBI actually this incompetent, or perhaps its focus was in other areas -- like meddling in our own elections by presenting “evidence” they knew was flawed to the FISA court to get permission to spy on the Trump campaign?
We’ve heard many stories of how alert FBI field agents tried to alert their bosses before 9/11 that foreigners were taking flight lessons but were not interested in learning how to land the planes.
Is giving the federal government more power to spy on us – as they demand – the answer to stop these terrible crimes? Hardly!
Those who think that giving federal authorities greater surveillance powers might prevent mass shootings should consider that the FBI has been alerted that the latest school shooter had made Facebook posts and YouTube comments talking about his intention to be, as he put it, “a professional school shooter.”
But the Bureau failed to properly investigate the tips. If the FBI fails to stop someone who openly boasts about their intentions on social media why should we believe that giving them the power to snoop on every American would increase our safety?
We cannot stop tragedies like this by banning guns. We need to look seriously into the psychotropic drugs that more and more Americans are being prescribed. We need to demand that our elected Representatives demand a real day of reckoning at the FBI. We need to keep focused and ignore those who politicize such events.
Edward Snowden: Facebook Is A Surveillance Company Rebranded As "Social Media" March 23 2018 | From: Zerohedge
NSA whistleblower and former CIA employee Edward Snowden slammed Facebook in a recent tweet following the suspension of Strategic Communication Laboratories (SCL) and its political data analytics firm, Cambridge Analytica, over what Facebook says was imporoper use of collected data.
After making Kogan and Cambridge Analytica promise to delete the data the app had gathered, Facebook received reports (from sources they would not identify) which claimed that not all the data had been deleted - which led the social media giant to delete Cambridge Analytica and parent company SCL's accounts.
“By passing information on to a third party, including SCL/Cambridge Analytica and Christopher Wylie of Eunoia Technologies, he violated our platform policies.
When we learned of this violation in 2015, we removed his app from Facebook and demanded certifications from Kogan and all parties he had given data to that the information had been destroyed. Cambridge Analytica, Kogan and Wylie all certified to us that they destroyed the data.”
Of note, Cambridge Analytica worked for Ted Cruz and Ben Carson during the 2016 election before contracting with the Trump campaign. Cruz stopped using CA after their data modeling failed to identify likely supporters.
In response to the ban, Edward Snowden fired off two tweets on Saturday criticizing Facebook, and claimed social media companies were simply "surveillance companies" who engaged in a "successful deception" by rebranding themselves.
Snowden isn't the first big name to call out Silicon Valley companies over their data collection and monitoring practices, or their notorious intersection with the U.S. Government.
In his 2014 book: When Google Met WikiLeaks, Julian Assange describes Google's close relationship with the NSA and the Pentagon.
“Around the same time, Google was becoming involved in a program known as the “Enduring Security Framework” (ESF), which entailed the sharing of information between Silicon Valley tech companies and Pentagon-affiliated agencies “at network speed.”
Emails obtained in 2014 under Freedom of Information requests show Schmidt and his fellow Googler Sergey Brin corresponding on first-name terms with NSA chief General Keith Alexander about ESF Reportage on the emails focused on the familiarity in the correspondence:
“General Keith . . . so great to see you . . . !” Schmidt wrote. But most reports overlooked a crucial detail. “Your insights as a key member of the Defense Industrial Base,” Alexander wrote to Brin, “are valuable to ensure ESF’s efforts have measurable impact.”
Kim Dotcom has also opined on social media's close ties to the government, tweeting in February "Unfortunately all big US Internet companies are in bed with the deep state. Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc. are all providing backdoors to your data."
In 2013, the Washington Post and The Guardian revealed that the NSA has backdoor access to all major Silicon Valley social media firms, including Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, and Apple - all through the notorious PRISM program which began in 2007 under the Protect America Act.
PRISM's existence was leaked by Edward Snowden before he entered into ongoing asylum in Moscow. Microsoft was the first company to join the PRISM program.
“The NSA has the ability to pull any sort of data it likes from these companies, but it claims that it does not try to collect it all.
The PRISM program goes above and beyond the existing laws that state companies must comply with government requests for data, as it gives the NSA direct access to each company's servers essentially letting the NSA do as it pleases."
After PRISM's existence was leaked by Snowden, the Director of National Intelligence issued a statment which stated that the only people targed by the programs are "outside the United States," and that the program "does not allow" the targeting of citizens within US borders.
In 2006, Wiredmagazine published evidence from a retired AT&T communications technician, Mark Klein, that revealed a secret room used to "split" internet data at a San Francisco office as part of the NSA's bulk data collection techniques used on millions of Americans.
“During the course of that work, he learned from a co-worker that similar cabins were being installed in other cities, including Seattle, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego, he said.
The split circuits included traffic from peering links connecting to other internet backbone providers, meaning that AT&T was also diverting traffic routed from its network to or from other domestic and international providers, Klein said."
"They are collecting everything on everybody," Klein said.
Bank Of America Admits Cryptocurrencies Threaten Its Business Model March 22 2018 | From: TheAntiMedia / BenSwann
The world’s major banking institutions, however begrudgingly, may be starting to change their tune on the legitimacy of cryptocurrencies. Though not surprising, this shift is rooted in the most selfish of reasons - survival.
Last week, in an annual report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Bank of America acknowledged that the growing acceptance of digital assets like bitcoin poses a major threat to its business model.
“Technological advances and the growth of e-commerce have made it easier for non-depository institutions to offer products and services that traditionally were banking products,” the report authors write, noting that this increased competition could “reduce our net interest margin and revenues.”
Indeed, Bank of America, which recently barred its customers from using credit cards to purchase cryptocurrencies, seems very much concerned that this “widespread adoption of new technologies, including internet services, cryptocurrencies and payment systems” could have it falling out of favor with customers if it doesn’t adapt to the changing landscape:
“Clients may choose to conduct business with other market participants who engage in business or offer products in areas we deem speculative or risky, such as cryptocurrencies.”
A failure to do adapt, the report states, could “negatively affect our earnings” and adversely affect “the willingness of our clients to do business with us.” Staying relevant, however, would require “substantial expenditures” to Bank of America’s existing business model.
On the issue of adapting, the authors acknowledge that Bank of America already faces “competitors with more experience and more established relationships with clients, regulators and industry participants in the relevant market, which could adversely affect our ability to compete.”
Astonishingly, the report even admits that the bank may already be too late to the game:
“We might not be successful in developing or introducing new products and services, integrating new products or services into our existing offerings, responding or adapting to changes in consumer behavior, preferences, spending, investing and/or saving habits, achieving market acceptance of our products and services, reducing costs in response to pressures to deliver products and services at lower prices or sufficiently developing and maintaining loyal customers.”
While this is just one report from one bank - a bank that happens to be the second largest in the U.S. in terms of assets - it’s difficult to imagine that other major financial institutions aren’t experiencing similar concerns about the ever-expanding cryptocurrency movement.
Reality Check: Is Crypto Backed by “Radical Transparency”?
Houston Anthropologist Reveals Irrefutable Proof That Recorded History Is Wrong March 21 2018 | From: WakingTimes
Evidence Found Across the Globe of Highly Evolved Human Species from before the Ice Age, Demand Scientific Recognition of our Past that Depicts Societies of Advanced Technology and Culture.
Houston anthropologist, Dr. Semir Osmanagich, founder of the Bosnian Archaeology Park, the most active archaeology site in the world, declares that irrefutable scientific evidence exists of ancient civilizations with advanced technology that leaves us no choice but to change our recorded history.
An examination of the age of structures across the earth reveals conclusively that they were built by advanced civilizations from over 29,000 years ago.
“Acknowledging that we are witness to fundamental proof of advanced civilizations dating back over 29,000 years and an examination of their societal structures forces the World to reconsider its understanding of the development of civilization and history,” explains Dr. Semir Osmanagich.
“Conclusive data at the Bosnian Pyramid site revealed in 2008 and confirmed this year by several independent labs who conducted radio carbon testing dates the site at 29,400 +/-400 years minimum.”
The radiocarbon dating tests of 29,200 years +/- 400 years was done by Radiocarbon Lab from Kiew, Ukraine, on organic material found at the Bosnian Pyramid site. Physicist Dr. Anna Pazdur of Poland’s Silesian University first announced the news at a Press Conference in Sarajevo in August of 2008.
Professor of Classical Archaeology from the University of Alexandria Dr. Mona Haggag called this discovery “writing new pages in European and World history.”
The C14 date of 29,000 years at the Bosnian Archaeological Park was obtained from a piece of organic material retrieved from a clay layer inside the outer casing to the pyramid. It follows a sample date obtained during the 2012 dig season on material located above the concrete at 24,800 years, meaning this structure has a construction profile stretching back almost 30,000 years.
“The ancient people who built these pyramids knew the secrets of frequency and energy. They used these natural resources to develop technologies and undertake construction on scales we have never witnessed on earth,” said Dr. Osmanagich.
Evidence clearly shows that the pyramids were built as ancient energy machines aligned with the earth’s energy grid, providing energy for healing as well as power.
Ancient historians in the US have news just as astonishing as anything found in the far corners of the globe. For instance, the Rockwall discovery outside of Dallas, Texas, is only one example of how we are now re-examining ancient mysteries to reveal more about our past, right in the United States.
H2 (History 2) popular series Unearthing Ancient America recently filmed an episode about the Rockwall that will air later this year. The Texas site is a complex and massive wall ten miles in diameter built over 20,000 years ago and covered by soil seven stories below the ground.
The question is by whom was this structure built and for what purpose and, most importantly, how can knowledge left by these past civilizations help shape our future?
Newly-revealed or rediscovered traces of ancient civilizations have ignited an innate curiosity about human origins as reflected by recent coverage in mainstream media and TV. The November 2013 issue of National Geographic: 100 Greatest Mysteries Revealed-Ancient Civilizations Unearthed says;
“Sometimes cultures leave behind mysteries that baffle those who come after them, from standing stones to coded manuscripts, indications that ancient people indeed had a profound purpose.”
Forward-thinking scientists continue to pursue knowledge from our past that is useful to determine a better future. Renowned author Michal Cremo in his book Forbidden Archeology theorizes that knowledge of advanced Homo-sapiens has been suppressed or ignored by the scientific establishment because it contradicts the current views of human origins that don’t agree with the dominant paradigm.
Cremo’s body of work has been described as “a useful teaching resource, raising a wide range of issues covering aspects of knowledge transfer, sure to be provocative in the classroom.” It has been reviewed with widespread appraisal by hundreds of academic journals.
Gobekli Tepe in Eastern Turkey
Results clearly indicate that similar advanced civilizations of humans were present all across the globe at that time in history. For example, Gobekli Tepe located in Eastern Turkey, is a vast complex of enormous megalithic stone circles with a radius of between 10 and 20 meters, much larger than the well-known Stonehenge in Great Britain.
Excavations at Gobekli Tepe that began there in 1995 revealed radio carbon dating at least 11,600 years. German archaeologist Dr. Klaus Schmidt from the German Archaeological Institute, Berlin, Germany, with the support of ArchaeoNova Institute from Heidelberg, Germany, has led the excavation of these recently-discovered pre-historic megalithic circles at the Turkey location.
“Gobekli Tepe is one of the most fascinating Neolithic locations in the world,” Dr. Klaus Schmidt claims. But as he explains in a recent report, to understand the new finds, archaeologists need to work closely with specialists in comparative religion, architectural and art theory, cognitive and evolutionary psychology, sociologists using social network theory, and others.
“It is the complex story of the earliest, large settled communities, their extensive networking, and their communal understanding of their world, perhaps even the first organized religions and their symbolic representations of the cosmos,” as reported by Klaus Schmidt.
In addition to the megalithic structures, figures and carvings have been discovered, depicting animals of pre historic nature such as dinosaurs and other wild life. Since excavations started in 1995, four of the circles have been partially cleaned, but it is thought that there are a total of up to 50 circles hidden underground.
These vast monoliths, soaring seven meters in height and 25 tons in mass at Gobekli Tepe, are situated right in the heart of what we perceive as the origin of civilization. This find offers new guidance to the true history of earth and our ancient civilizations.
“Our archaeological research goal is not to simply uncover all of the megalithic circles but to try to figure out their purpose,” adds Schmidt.
Bosnian Pyramid Now in Eighth Year: Proof of Advanced Civilizations from over 30,000 years ago
The Bosnian Valley of the Pyramids now in the eighth year of excavation spans six square kilometers in the Visoko River Basin 40km northwest of Sarajevo. Comprised of four ancient pyramids almost three times the size of Giza and an extensive subterranean pyramid tunnel complex, new discoveries each year continue to reveal proof of a much different history of mankind on earth.
The central pyramid of the Sun rises a colossal 420 meters in to the air and has a mass of millions of tons. By comparison the Great pyramid of Cheops (Khufu) in the Giza plateau is 146 meters high, making the Bosnian Pyramids the largest and oldest known pyramids on the planet.
Since research began at the Bosnian site, Dr. Osmanagich has amazed the scientific and archaeological community by gathering a team of interdisciplinary engineers, physicists and researchers from around the world to conduct open and transparent investigation of the site to try and discover the true nature and purpose of this pyramidal complex.
“This is an unknown culture presenting highly-advanced arts and sciences, technology capable of forming truly massive structures and we believe in that process demonstrating an ability to harness pure energy resources,” comments Tim Moon, who has recently joined Osmanagich as lead archeologist at the Bosnian site.
The archaeological project delivered another significant finding this year in the pyramid tunnel complex known as Ravine. Tunneling deep into a ridge line leading toward the Pyramid of the Sun the team has unearthed several megalith stones.
Oh yeah, that one was definitely made with ropes and pulleys too. Sigh.
In August an enormous stone estimated at 25,000 kgs was uncovered approximately 400 meters into the labyrinth. “This is a hugely significant find,”comments Moon. “Here we have a massive stone, possibly a constructed ceramic, buried under hundreds of thousands of tons of material.
We are locating foundation walls around its perimeter and cut stone blocks.” Large quantities of artifacts have been recovered from the associated tunnels leading to the site, including effigies painted on stone, art objects and a series of hieroglyphics or ancient texts carved into the tunnel walls.
Dr. Osmangich stresses that it is time for open sharing of knowledge so we can understand and learn from our past.
“It is time for us to open our minds to the true nature of our origin and destruction of each other as a civilization on this planet. Our mission here is to realign science with spirituality in order to progress as a species, and this demands a clear path of shared knowledge.”
Visitors are welcome to the Bosnian Valley of the Pyramids and its Foundation offers a volunteer program each dig season, running June to September.
To hear Dr. Sam’s interview on Lost Knowledge go here.
JFK Jr. Told The World Who Murdered His Father - But Nobody Was Paying Attention March 20 2018 | From: FromTheTrenches / TheDarkLegacy / Various
I suppose most people think that from the day he saluted his father’s casket at just three years old, til the evening his plane went down, he just went about his business, playing the game of life like everyone else.
After all, he did live, for the most part, a relatively ordinary life, in spite of being the Prince of America’s Camelot.
So, what do you suppose was going on in the mind of the sexiest man alive? He could have written his own political ticket, yet he went into publishing. Many expected him to land in politics and most likely were a bit perplexed when he decided to publish a magazine instead.
Some thought he was afraid to go into politics because of the “Kennedy Curse.” However, nothing could be further from the truth. What he did proved to be more dangerous than any political arena, and he knew that from the start. But…John-John had a mission…and that mission was to expose the villain who orchestrated that “dastardly act” upon his father.
Unbeknownst to the public, John-John was digging deep for proof. And, how else could he expose the truth when all the media outlets were controlled by the very cabal he planned to expose? Enter…”George.”
When he presented his magazine, “George,” to the world, he was, for all practical purposes, signing his own death warrant.
“George” was a veiled threat…in a symbolic sort of way. Do you see? How many men named “George” comes to mind at just the thought of President John F. Kennedy’s so called assassination? The cabal wanted his father dead, that is a fact, but the namesake of John F. Kennedy, Jr.’s magazine…their minion, arranged it. And…once he had the proof, the truth would come out in his very own magazine. Do you see?
"As President, John F. Kennedy understood the predatory nature of private central banking. He understood why Andrew fought so hard to end the Second Bank of the United States. So Kennedy wrote and signed Executive Order 11110 which ordered the US Treasury to issue a new public currency, the United States Note.
Kennedy was working with President Soekarno of Indonesia who was at that time the signatory for the Global Collateral Accounts which were intended to be used for humanitarian purposes but which were subverted at the time of the Bretton-Woods agreement at the end of WWII.
The intention of Kennedy and Soekarno was to end the reign of the globalist privately owned central banking system - which is the main reason that Kennedy was killed, and for his part Soekarno remained under house arrest for the rest of his life."
There was a rumor that John-John had obtained the proof he needed and an expose’ was in the works, until his untimely, and mostly “suspicious,” death. Of course, the media campaigned that he was an irresponsible thrill seeker; but then they would, wouldn’t they? Although many people knew JFK, Jr. was murdered; and they were right about who was responsible…they were just wrong about the reason.
John Jr. was warned by family members about the risks involved in his pursuit. But, he was determined to get justice for his father and bring truth to light, exposing the darkness that shrouds our planet. So ask yourself…what would you do, if you were a mere babe when your father, who just happened to be the most important man in the country, was murdered in such a gruesome manner, and you never had the opportunity to know him…would you just let it go?
Although he was from one of the main Illuminati family bloodlines, JFK was in fact trying to undo some of the mess - and to bring an end to the Reserve Banking System. For his efforts he was assasinated on November 22, 1963.
There are photographs claiming to show that George Bush was at Dealey Plaza on the day of the killing, and while they might be inconclusive there are multiple other sources that George Bush was one of those responsbile for the assassination of JFK and that he was indeed there that day. The Dark Legacy takes an in depth look into the evidence supporting this.
It Never Ends - MORE Startling Evidence of Bush in Dallas - by John Hankey - TheDarkLegacy.com
I don't think we are much encouraged to see History as science. Quite the opposite, actually. And of course, that's all politics. The winners write history, and the truth be damned. Even science can have trouble trying to act like science when political issues are involved, as we see with evolution, tobacco-and-cancer, and global warming.
But I think History does have a lot in common with physical science. For example, I can remember when "Continental Drift", the idea that Africa and America were once stuck together, was very much considered "just a theory"; ridiculed by some, and regarded with amusement by many, and promulgated as likely by a tiny minority.
"Fifty men have run America, and that's a high figure."
- Joseph Kennedy, Father of JFK, in the July 26th, 1936 issue of The New York Times
But as time goes by, the evidence accumulates; and the meaning of old evidence begins to settle in; and ideas that were once considered outrageous gradually get worn in and start to be regarded as obvious common sense. Part of this process is the continual accumulation of new evidence.
New pieces are added to the puzzle and the picture becomes more clear. And sometimes the hidden meaning of old evidence, that has been lying around for years, suddenly jumps out.
Evidence of the fossils and minerals that can be found on the east coast of Africa, and on the west coast of Brazil, may have been lying around for years, before someone decided to look and see if they matched, and found that they did; and proved conclusively that west Africa and Brazil were once attached.
With regard to George HW Bush and the murder of John Kennedy, Joseph McBride found this memo in 1988.
FBI director J. Edgar Hoover wrote this memo 5 days after the assassination, naming George Bush as a CIA officer.
The last, and most crucial paragraph, is very hard to read. The following is a transcription:
"The substance of the forgoing information was orally furnished toMr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. V.T. Forsyth of this Bureau."
When it was first released in 1978, George Bush was an obscure bureaucrat, a virtual unknown. So when the best researchers on the planet saw this memo in 1978, they didn't pay much attention to it. When Bush became vice president two years later, no one was able to connect his now well-known name to this obscure memo.
But when Joseph McBride was messing around in 1988, Bush was running for president; and when McBride saw the memo, he jumped up and shouted:
"Hey, this memo is about Bush! It says he was in the CIA, way back in 1963!"
And for the longest time, the focus was on this simple isolated fact: that Hoover said Bush was in the CIA in '63.
Bush said the memo must be referring to another "George Bush," because he wasn't in the CIA at that time. But over the years, people were able to assemble the facts from Bush's personal life, showing his deep involvement with the CIA at that time, and with the CIA's anti-Castro Cubans (in the memo, Hoover calls them “misguided anti-Castro Cubans”).
And over time, it has become undeniable; that Hoover was referring, in his memo, to none other than George Herbert Walker Bush. And for a while, that was it. End of story.
But the title of this Hoover memo is, "Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy". Isn't that important?
Well, you'd think so. But for the longest time, no one made much out it. Besides, Hoover scarcely mentions the assassination in the memo, instead focusing on these "misguided anti-Castro Cubans." The body of the memo does not appear, at first, to be in any way related to the title of the memo “the assassination of President John F Kennedy”.
But then Mark Lane, in his book Rush to Judgment, did the fabulous work of demonstrating, and in fact persuading a jury, that E. Howard Hunt, a major lieutenant in the CIA's "misguided anti-Castro Cuban" program, was in Dallas and involved in the assassination.
With this background, with this framework to guide the researcher, it was then possible to assemble the considerable evidence linking Bush to Hunt.
People might have taken some notice before that Bush made the unusual request, as Nixon's ambassador to the UN, to be given an office in the White House. They may have noticed that Hunt, although he was not being paid by anyone in the White House, or answering to anyone that we know of in the White House, also had a White House office.
“The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings…
Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe…no war ever posed a greater threat to our security.
If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger,” then I can only saythat the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent… For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.I
t is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised.
No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.”
But with the Hoover memo in hand, establishing Bush as a supervisor of the CIA's "misguided anti-Castro Cuban" operation, it is possible to connect Bush to Hunt at the Bay of Pigs. With this memo in hand, it is possible to connect Bush and Hunt as two CIA operatives with offices inside the White House.
With this memo in hand, it is possible to answer who it was that Hunt answered to inside the White House; and how he got the office in the first place. And with all that, it is possible to connect Bush to Hunt, and therefore to Dallas, to Hunt in Dallas, and to the "misguided anti-Castro Cuban" assassins of John Kennedy.
J. Edgar hoover
Which is what Hoover did for us when he wrote the title of the memo. Little by little, the pieces start to fall into place. And pieces that in isolation meant nothing, become key parts of a whole picture.
But even so, this is not a rock-solid connection: Hunt was directly involved in the murder of JFK. And Bush supervised Hunt.
But Bush probably supervised a lot of CIA people, not all of whom were directly involved in the assassination. A high-ranking officer may be connected to all of the acts of all of his troops, by reason of his being their commander. But it's not a direct connection. It doesn't establish that the officer knew about, or approved of, or was involved in, all the actions of those troops.
Enter FBI memo # 2:
It will come up again in a minute, so please read the first line carefully. Bush identifies himself to the FBI as an independent oil man from Houston.
This memo establishes that sort of direct connection between Bush and Hunt, in Dallas, on the day of the assassination.
This memo records Bush's phone call to the FBI, precisely an hour and fifteen minutes after the assassination. When I first encountered this memo, and when I first put it into my movie, JFK II, I simply called it "weird".
I saw it only in isolation, a weird, isolated connection between Bush and the assassination. It took me years to see it in context. That is, to see that this phone call demonstrates, clearly, that George Bush, was on duty that day.
He was staying at the Dallas Sheraton because his duty assignment was in Dallas. His phone call to the FBI cannot have been random. This James Parrott worked for Bush as a sign-painter; he was not an assassin; this phone call is not what it purports to be; Bush was fulfilling some obscure under-cover function in making this call.
So the phone call has to be seen as part of his CIA assignment; which was clearly connected to the assassination. This memo then establishes that Bush was in the Dallas area, and on duty; and that his duty assignment was connected to the assassination. And if his men were in Dallas shooting the President, as they were, he was certainly on duty supervising them.
"The Society [Society of Jesus aka the Jesuits] employs a variety of ruthless tactics to accomplish its long-term goal (of a New World Order which pays homage to their Black Pope). One is carrying out political assassinations of world leaders who refuse to comply with its demands.
These assassinations in the U.S. have included presidents (Abraham Lincoln, JFK), cabinet members, congressmen, senators, diplomats, journalists, scientists and religious and business leaders. "
"Assassinations are carried out by the aforementioned intelligence agencies and their Mafia partners in the drug and gambling trades, often with collateral assistance from the Knights of Malta, the Freemasons, the Knights of Columbus, and Propaganda Due (P2). Such was the case in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and some former Popes."
If he were not supposed to be supervising them, his bosses would have assigned him to be at his home office in Houston, Texas; or on his oil rigs in the Caribbean.
But, even in context, this memo and the phone call it describes is still weird, no? I mean, how could Bush have been so stupid as to make this insanely incriminating phone call? Without this FBI memo, recording this phone call, we don't know, or even have a good clue as to where Bush was, or what he was doing the day of the assassination. Do we?
Bush has, until recently, simply said that he did not remember what he was doing the day of the assassination. But with this memo, Bush tells us where he was and what he was doing - he hands us his head on a silver platter.
What could possibly have motivated him to make such a stupid error as making this phone call to the FBI? It's a valid question. It's not an essential question. We can still value this memo, and extract a great deal of important content from it without answering the question of why, but the question remains.
And we can make a stab at answering it. Russ Baker in his fine book, Family of Secrets suggests that Bush was attempting to establish an alibi. Now, by making this phone call, he, in fact, establishes that he was in the Dallas area, and that he was on duty, related to the assassination.
So if he's trying to establish an alibi to cover-up where he actually was and what he was actually doing, what he is trying to cover up must be some pretty bad stuff, some pretty incriminating stuff, if it's worse than what he gives us with this alibi.
And what could be worse than what he gives us? Well, obviously, he must have actually been in Dallas. In fact, I think, this situation suggests he must have actually been in Dealey Plaza. I mean seriously. Think about it. He's so panicked about the truth coming out, that he puts his head in a noose and hands it to us.
It makes me think he must have been in Dealey Plaza, he must have been in the company of the shooters, and he must have felt that there would be evidence to prove that.
We're just speculating at the moment. We'll get to the evidence right now, but I’m trying to set the scene. If a guilty party is in a panic, trying to cover evidence connecting them to a crime, they may invent an explanation, or an alibi, that seems like a good idea at the time; but that in fact constitutes a very damaging admission. Anyway, stew on that while you consider this photo:
You see this tall thin man in a suit, with a receding hair line. Many people claim this is Bush, standing in front of the Texas School Book Depository. And it might be. It might be a lot of people. And perhaps, when he called the FBI and incriminated himself, Bush was concerned that he might show up in a better picture than this, where he was positively recognizable, looking towards the camera.
Personally, I don't think this photo looks much like Bush; and in fact, I didn't think he'd be stupid enough to just be hanging around the murder scene. I thought he was sufficiently high ranking that he'd leave such on-scene stuff to his underlings. Right?
At least in my mind, if you're an officer like Bush, you're the coach. You plan, you train and prepare your people, and then you stand back and watch it happen. Or so I thought. Fletcher Prouty was certain that he saw pictures of Ed Lansdale, a military operative of the highest rank, signaling to the "tramps" arrested behind the grassy knoll to "be cool," that everything was alright.
Hunt was a high-ranking CIA officer, chief of the CIA's Mexico station; and his son says he is one of the "tramps" who show up in several photos of men who were arrested behind the grassy knoll. So, some of the highest ranking members of the killers' operation were apparently there, on the front line, to make sure that when things went wrong, as they inevitably do, these high ranking officers could be there to fix whatever the problem was.
So, given that high- and low- ranking CIA officers were present, this photo of this thin man in a suit might, indeed, be Bush. It's possible.
And now, look at this picture of the Dal-Tex building. The Dal-Tex building is across the street from the Book Depository, and many leading researchers into the assassination, including Jim Garrison, say there was certainly a team of shooters in this building:
And as you can see, some imaginative individual has added some colour to indicate three men in this window. Very creative, very imaginative; and at least plausible. Still, it takes way too much imagination and effort, to see Bush's face. But now observe this link.
Actually, You don't have to stop and read it, because I'll quote the relevant part. It's a statement from Roger Craig, winner of the deputy of the year award for Dallas in 1960, and one of the most honest men working that day in Dallas. He's an amazing and heroic fellow, worthy of all the time you could take looking into his background and character. And here, in the following passage, he is describing a conversation he had with Jim Garrison, and he says,
"Jim also asked me about the arrests made in Dealey Plaza that day. I told him I knew of twelve arrests, one in particular made by R. E. Vaughn of the Dallas Police Department. The man Vaughn arrested was coming from the Dal-Tex Building across from the Texas School Book Depository.
The only thing which Vaughn knew about him was that he was an independent oil operator from Houston, Texas. The prisoner was taken from Vaughn by Dallas Police detectives and that was the last that he saw or heard of the suspect."
Holy Moe Lee! Please notice that, in speaking to Jim Garrison, Craig says "in particular". Apparently he and Vaughn thought this was the most significant arrest made that day; pretty amazing given that E.Howard Hunt was arrested in the rail yard behind the grassy knoll. And the only thing Craig knew about this “particular” arrestee was that he had exactly the same singular CIA-cover, "an independent oil operator from Houston, Texas", that George Bush had used that same day in his contact with the FBI.
Now. There are a very limited number of possible explanations for who this "independent oil operator" was. Let's look at them.
It is conceivable that the CIA had two men in Dallas area that day, supervising the shooters, who both had the designated cover of being an "independent oil operator from Houston." Bush was one, as the evidence above clearly shows; and perhaps there was another who was with the shooters in the Dal-Tex building, supervising them directly.
But unless the CIA overlords were trying to set Bush up, they would not have told anyone else to use Bush's CIA cover to identify themselves to the police. If another man was involved in the crime, and was arrested for it, and he told the cops he was an "independent oil operator from Houston," this would tend to throw suspicion in Bush's direction.
"The Khazarian Mafia’s intense hatred of anyone who professed faith in any God but their god Baal has motivated them to murder kings and royalty, and make sure they can never rule. They have done the same with American presidents - running sophisticated covert operations to disempower them.
If that doesn’t work the KM assassinates them, like they did to McKinley, Lincoln and JFK. The KM wants to eliminate any strong rulers or elected officials who dare to resist their Babylonian money-magick power or their covert power gained from their deployment of their human compromise network."
Bush's association with the CIA's Cubans was already widely known. Fletcher Prouty knew and wrote of it. Fabian Escalante, the head of Cuban counter intelligence, knew and has written about it. James Files, who claims very credibly, to have been a driver for the Mafia shooters in Dallas, has spoken on-camera about it.
And FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, knew about it and wrote about it in his memo. So Bush was already a suspect in Hoover’s eyes. The CIA planners, then, would not have told anyone else, "in case you get arrested, tell the cops you're an independent oil man from Houston". Right? They would not have done this, since it would tend to incriminate Bush, who was already in a highly visible, highly suspicious position.
Another unlikely possibility is that this "independent oil operator from Houston" was just some innocent oil operator, who somehow managed to attract suspicion, and was arrested. Do you think it's possible that another oil man from Houston just happened to be in that corner of Dealey Plaza?
Dealey Plaza today
I hope you think it's possible. Because, as unlikely as it seems, if you think it was possible, then certainly Bush would have been reasonable in thinking that, as he was being arrested, there were other independent oil operators in the crowd who witnessed his arrest.
You see, Bush spoke to a group of oil men in Dallas the night before the assassination. If it were possible that some of them were in Dealey Plaza, he would need to be terrified of the possibility that some of them might actually have seen the arrest, and would have been able to identify him as the object of that arrest.
No wonder, then, that Bush freaked out, and made this stupid incriminating phone call to the FBI. Even if it showed that he was not in Houston, or in the Caribbean, but in Dallas, at least it suggested that he was not in police custody for the murder of the President, in Dealey Plaza.
But now stop and think a minute: Why was he arrested? What was he doing that drew this cop's attention at all? What could he possibly have been doing to make this cop think that he needed to arrest Bush?
Perhaps walking out of a building without attracting attention is harder than it sounds; and it reasonable to suppose that the crowd outside the Dal-Tex building had heard the shots, had heard that the President had been wounded, and they were carefully scrutinizing anyone who came out of the building.
But this story shows clearly that Bush was not the sort of cold-blooded killer who could take part in the murder of a man, and then act and look like nothing was going on as he tried to leave the scene of the crime. And it turns out that as an old man, Bush continues to suffer from this character trait, of being unable to hide feelings that need to be kept secret.
As you can see below, at Gerry Ford's funeral, Bush suddenly breaks into a wide grin while speaking of the Kennedy assassination. This is not a Mona Lisa smile. This is face-wrenching spasm of glee.
In a minute we'll take up the question of why Bush would grin at his recollection of watching John Kennedy's brains splatter; the point for us now is that he apparently had a similarly inappropriate, show-stopping expression on his face as he attempted to exit the Dal-Tex building; he had the look of a murderer in his eye, so clearly that it could not be missed; as this funereal-grin could not be missed.
And the guilt plastered all over Bush's face drew people's attention. And this cop, Vaughn, arrested him.
Now remember, Roger Craig tells this story in the context of his discussions with New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison about the suspects who were arrested that day and who then evaporated without leaving a mugshot, interview, fingerprint, or name. Garrison spoke not only to Roger Craig, but he no-doubt spoke to Vaughn, who made the arrest. And Garrison adds the following:
“At least one man arrested immediately after the shooting had come running out of the Dal-Tex Building and offered no explanation for his presence there. Local authorities hardly could avoid arresting him because of the clamor of the onlookers.
He was taken to the Sheriff's office, where he was held for questioning. However, the Sheriff's office made no record of the questions asked this suspect, if any were asked; nor did it have a record of his name. Later two uniformed police officers escorted him out of the building to the jeers of the waiting crowd.
They put him in a police car, and he was driven away. Apparently this was his farewell to Dallas, for he simply disappeared forever.”
- On the Trail of the Assassins, p. 238
This vision of the panicked Bush being arrested, no-doubt terrified as he was taken to the police station, and possibly even booked (though the record of any such booking has been destroyed) provides a context that explains a number of Bush's otherwise-mysterious actions. Certainly Bush was freaked out and panic-stricken! An angry crowd clamored for his arrest, and jeered his release.
Being a newbie in these dark affairs, Bush didn't have confidence in the ability of the old devils at CIA to make water run uphill, to make time run backwards, to silence the witnesses, to destroy the records, and make it all go away. And so he panicked; he acted on his own, stupidly; he called the FBI, thinking that he was "cleverly" providing evidence that it wasn't him who was arrested in front of the Dal-Tex building that day.
In his panic-stricken state, this seemed like a good idea. He was unable to see that he was actually creating a permanent absolutely-positive record of his involvement.
We can now also explain the grin. He grins ridiculously at Gerry Ford's funeral, at the mention of John Kennedy's murder, not because he is such a ghoul that he thinks splattering the contents of Kenney's head all over Jackie Kennedy was funny; but because mentioning the assassination causes him to recall the comedy of errors that produced his own ridiculous panic, arrest, more panic, and so on.
Garrison wrote his paragraph about Bush's arrest in 1988. Deputy Craig's article was written in 1971 and posted in 1992. But the significance of these paragraphs was discovered last week. There hardly was an internet in 1992 when Craig's article was posted. And for 19 years, no one noticed that this phrase, "independent oil man from Houston", is a very unique description of Bush.
No one noticed until last month, when one of the moderators of JFKMurderSolved showed it to me. And I wrote about it to some friends, and one of them suggested I read what Jim Garrison had to say.
So the pieces continue to fall into place. Little by little, the picture is filled in, the questions get answered. And the conclusions become more incontrovertible. This is just the sort thing that happened with the theory of Evolution and the Big Bang theory; and the theory of continental drift [all three of which are actually bunkum].
And someday they may start to teach history, as a science, based on evidence, in the universities. Really! It could happen!
At which point, Bush's involvement in JFK's murder will be taught, like evolution, as the only plausible explanation of the available reliable evidence.
Final note: Until recently, Bush had nothing more to say about his whereabouts the day of the assassination than that he doesn't remember where he was. That in itself is extraordinarily incriminating.
Everyone who was alive at the time remembers where they were on 9-11, and on the day Kennedy was murdered. But, saying that he doesn't remember, however improbable, is at least consistent with Bush's autobiography, which mentions nothing.
Lately, however, perhaps at least partly in response to my work, Bush and Co. have concocted a story that he was speaking in Tyler, Texas to the Rotary Club. The vice-president of the Rotary Club, Aubrey Irby, says that Bush was speaking when the bellhop came over and told him, that Kennedy was dead [Kitty Kelley, The Family: the Real Story of the Bush Dynasty, p.213; cited by Russ Baker in Family of Secrets, p.54].
Mr. Irby passed the information on to Mr. Wendell Cherry, who passed it on to Bush; who stopped his speech. Irby says that Bush explained that he thought a political speech, under the circumstances, was inappropriate; and then he sat down. As a would-be alibi proving Bush's innocence, there are at least three huge problems with this story.
The first is that it is inconceivable that Bush would not have remembered such an event; or that he would have left it out of his autobiography, since it shows what a fine and respectful fellow he is. If he didn't remember it sooner, or include it in his autobiography, it's clearly because it never happened.
The second huge problem with this story is that it couldn’t possibly have happened; that is, it is made impossible by Bush’s original alibi, his phone call to the FBI, as you’ll see:
The witness who tells this story, Aubrey Irby, says that Bush excused himself and sat down. It doesn't say that he rushed out of the room in a frantic search for a phone.
The problem is that Walter Cronkite's announcement to the world that Kennedy was dead came at 1:38 PM.
Certainly, no one was listening to Walter Cronkite in the same room in which Bush was speaking. Therefore we can be sure that this bellhop, who told Irby that Kennedy was dead, was in another room. The bellhop had to make the decision that he had heard enough of the news to leave off listening to the news.
This is no small point. Texas governor Connally was severely wounded. Lyndon Johnson was reportedly wounded. There was much other news to be confirmed. At some point, then, the bellhop decided to stop listening and go make an announcement. There's no reason to think Irby would be the first person he would tell.
But at some point he went to the room where Bush was speaking and informed Mr. Irby that the president was dead. This walk to find Irby took time, of course. Mr. Irby had to receive the information, and then he had to decide to inform Mr. Wendell Cherry, the president of the Kiwanis.
Mr. Cherry had to decide that he should interrupt Bush's speech; Mr. Cherry had to then walk over to Bush and tell him the news.
Bush had to decide what to say; and he had to say it. And, according to the only witness, Mr. Irby, Bush "then sat down". Somehow, when he was finished sitting, without attracting Mr. Irby's attention, Bush had to seek and find a phone. This would have been a hotel phone, so he would likely have had to go through the hotel switchboard to get an outside line.
Do you suppose the switchboard was busy after the announcement of the President's death? It's a good guess. In Washington D.C. so many people rushed to make a phone call that the phone system went down. In any case, once he got through to the hotel operator and got an outside line, Bush then had to call information and get the number of the FBI.
After getting through to information, and getting the number, he then had to call the FBI; and penetrate their switchboard, which was, no doubt, very busy; and he had to locate an agent, on what must have been the busiest day in the history of the Dallas bureau.
How many minutes do you suppose that would take? Twenty seems a fair guess, though it seems implausible that a civilian could even get through, given all the official police business going on at the time.
We know that the Dallas FBI was all over the murder scene, confiscating camera film and intimidating witnesses; so it's hard to imagine how Bush, an hour after the shooting, was able to reach an agent at all. Given the "sitting" that Mr. Irby observed Bush doing, for all this to have transpired in 45 minutes would be tidy work.
But Bush had to do all of this, as the FBI memo states, by 1:45, seven minutes after the news of Kennedy's death first went out; which is blatantly impossible.
The third problem is this question of why Bush would feel that it was necessary to concoct such a story at all? Why does he have to tell us this lie? Why does he have to get others, like Irby, to lie for him? The irony is that the harder he tries to make himself appear innocent, by lying, the more evidence he gives us of his guilt.
There are some people who manage to point to this and say "ahah! That's why Bush was in Dallas! Not to kill the President, but to speak to the other oilmen!" But as the Hoover memo shows, being an oilman was just a cover for Bush's real occupation as a CIA supervisor of trained killers. He needed an excuse for being in Dallas. This speaking engagement provided him with one.
From the Director of Dark Legaqcy:
George Bush killed Kennedy. Or was it the Mafia? Maybe Castro did it. Who cares? It was 40 years ago. What difference does it make?
The day he died we lost an invaluable treasure. This video documents that we lost a man of peace, who tried to cool off the cold war, and to get the American people to see their Russian enemies, not as despicable inhuman monsters, but as people like us.
On November 22, 1963, you lost the man who saved your life on October 17, 1962. At the height of the missile crisis, Kennedy’s generals and advisors were urging him to launch a first strike attack against Cuba.
They assured Kennedy that the Russian missiles in Cuba were not nuclear and were not ready; but that he and they should quietly slip away to the safety of bomb shelters anyway, just to be safe; and then launch an attack, leaving the rest of us out to die. Kennedy thought about it. And then he told them that nobody was going anywhere.
If anyone died, they would be the first to go, sitting as they were in the Whitehouse, the prime target of those Russian missiles. Together they then figured out a safer plan. Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense at the time, recently learned from the Russians that the missiles were armed, were ready, were nuclear, and that their commanders were authorized to use them in case of an attack.
If you live in the northern hemisphere, the lives of your parents, and your future, were certainly saved by John Kennedy on that day. It matters that his killers be exposed.
In his farewell address, President Eisenhower had warned Kennedy, and the rest of us, of the threat posed to democracy by what Eisenhower called “the military industrial complex.”
And while Kennedy famously went after the CIA, and refused to commit troops to Vietnam, I always wondered why he didn’t more openly attack this military industrial complex. And then I stumbled upon a speech he gave at the United Nations.
As you will see in the video, he called upon the Russians, and United Nations, to help him to take on this military industrial complex, in order to “abolish all armies and all weapons.” But he was swept away.
And in the years since, millions have died in needless wars, trillions of dollars have been wasted on “defense”, and millions more people have lived and died needlessly in poverty. It matters that we lost him.
In 2007, Bruce Willis told Vanity Fair magazine;
"They still haven’t caught the guy that killed Kennedy. I'll get killed for saying this, but I'm pretty sure those guys are still in power, in some form. The entire government of the United States was co-opted.”
Now Willis probably would not mind my suggesting that he’s no genius. At best, his observation is common sense. 80% of the American people agree with him. Indeed, this video, proving that Kennedy was brought down by the most powerful men in the world and their hired thugs, is not based on secret documents.
It is all information that has merely been suppressed. Oswald allegedly shot Kennedy from behind. But the day he died, the NY Times carried the story, told by the doctors in Dallas, that Kennedy had an entrance wound in his throat, another in his right temple, and a large gaping exit wound in the back of his head.
After talking to the emergency room doctors, Kennedy’s press secretary described, to the assembled press, a shot to the right temple from the right front that went “right through the head.”
All of the witnesses near the right front, the grassy knoll, described hearing shots from that direction, and dozens of witnesses raced up the knoll in pursuit of the shooters. These witnesses talked to the press. But all of this information has been suppressed for the last 50 years. By whom? Who could?
You will also see in this video the overwhelming best evidence, from the best witnesses, proving beyond a reasonable dispute, that Kennedy's body was stolen from Air Force One, and the wound to his right temple was mutilated, before the autopsy.
Jackie Kennedy kept watch over an empty casket on the flight from Dallas to Bethesda Naval Hospital. Then the body was quietly taken to Bethesda for the autopsy, arriving 20 minutes before Jackie and the empty casket. Who had the power to arrange this?
Who HAS the power today to suppress all this evidence?, and to continue to bombard us with ridiculous lies about a lone gunman? It's a short list, isn't it? It doesn't include the mafia, or the Russians, or Castro. It does include the Bush family - or rather their masters in Big Oil; the banking elite; the backbone of the military industrial complex. These men, and their successors, carried out the attacks of 9-11. It matters.
In the covert war against the communist regime in Cuba under the CIA’s Operation Mongoose, the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously proposed state-sponsored acts of terrorism in side the United States.
The plan included shooting down hijacked American airplanes, the sinking of U.S. ships, and the shooting of Americans on the streets of Washington, D.C. The outrageous plan even included a staged NASA disaster that would claim the life of astronaut John Glenn.
Reeling under the embarrassing failure of the CIA’s botched Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, president Kennedy rejected the plan in March of 1962. A few months later, Kennedy denied the plan’s author, General Lyman Lemnitzer, a second term as the nation’s highest ranking military officer.
In November of 1963, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas.
Relying exclusively on government documents, statements from the best witnesses available, and the words from the mouths of the killers themselves, Dark Legacy produces a thoroughly substantiated criminal indictment of George Herbert Walker Bush, establishing beyond a reasonable doubt his guilt as a CIA supervisor in the conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. If we could present this evidence to a jury in Texas, he would pay with his life.
Part one presents the overwhelming mountain of evidence that President Kennedy was hit by bullets from the front and rear. Every witness in the Dallas emergency room attests, on camera, to the fact that a bullet from the right front blew a fist-sized whole in the back of the President's head. The New York Times carried these statements on the day of the murder; and has covered them up ever since.
Part two presents the on-camera testimony of the witnesses who actually handled the President's body, the FBI report, and the photographic evidence all proving unequivocally that the President's body was stolen from the Secret Service and the wounds altered, before the body was delivered to Bethesda Naval hospital for the autopsy. Jackie Kennedy accompanied an empty casket on the plane flight home. Who had the power to do all this without attracting public attention? It's a short list.
Part three presents the Nazi-connections of the Bush family, which prompted the FBI to seize their assets during WW II, as Nazi assets. It presents the suppressed fact that Watergate burglar and CIA operative E. Howard Hunt was found by a jury to have been in Dallas and involved in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy.
Hunt was a supervisor of the misguided CIA-led anti-Castro Cubans who broke into the Watergate. He is not only connected to Bush through Watergate; and through Bush's father, Prescott; but five days after the assassination, the head of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, wrote a memo, titled "Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy" in which he named "George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" as the supervisor of what Hoover himself called the "misguided anti-Castro Cuban" killers of the President. Bush has said he doesn't remember the events of that day, but FBI documents place him in Dallas.
It is difficult to assess the stature and significance of someone who has been dead as long as John Kennedy. His killers have also been his detractors, actively desecrating his memory, as they did his body. The movie begins with a short presentation of some of his most powerful and important speeches; including a stunning speech to the UN in which Kennedy calls for the complete abolition of the military industrial complex. These same men the military industrial complex, ripped him from us, and the darkest features of our history since that time are all directly the result of his murder.
What will happen when the American people, and those of other Western nations, emerge from their cocoon of denial and face the reality that their rulers are among the worst criminals in human history?
Will the people follow their leaders’ example and lapse into lawless, psychopathic behavior? Will Western leaders “flee forward” by launching wars designed to conceal the bloody tracks linking them to past misdeeds? Or will the pathocracy be overthrown and replaced by something more humane?
On such questions hinges the future of humanity. Given the high stakes, you would have to be crazy not to help spread the truth, change the system, and save the planet.
Evidence of Revision is a 9 hour long documentary series whose purpose is to present the publicly unavailable and even suppressed historical audio, video, and film recordings largely unseen by the American public relating to the assassination of the Kennedy brothers.
It also details t
he little known classified Black Ops actually used to intentionally create the massive war in Viet Nam, the CIA "mind control" programs and their involvement in the RFK assassination and the Jonestown massacre and other important truths of our post-modern time.
Experts Insist All Sources Of Wireless Radiation Be Classified Carcinogenic – Not “Possibly Carcinogenic” March 19 2018 | From: ActivistPost
If You Don’t Want Cancer and You Know it, Use Wired Internet.
Harm from exposure to sources of wireless radiation (cell phones, cell towers, utility “smart” meters, WiFi routers, etc.) continues to be debated despite multiple research studies that have actually proven harm over several decades. This includes:
1. Industry funded research.
2. Independently funded research.
3. Government funded research. (U.S. and elsewhere)
"…radiofrequency (RF) radiation from any source – such as the signals emitted by cell phones, other wireless and cordless and sensor devices, and wireless networks – fully meets criteria to be classified as a “Group 1 carcinogenic to humans” agent, based on scientific evidence associating RF exposure to cancer development and cancer promotion..”
According to other researchers, as many as 1/3 of the population is “sensitive” to wireless radiation and other sources of electrical pollution (Electrosmog) and 3% is clinically sensitive.
This “sensitivity” may not result in cancer; however, it may lead to a condition first discovered in the 1950s called “Microwave Sickness.”
Here are some “expert” quotes from the 1960s regarding the “health benefits” from smoking cigarettes:
Max Cutler, cancer surgeon of Chicago: “I feel strongly that the blanket statements which appeared in the press that there is a direct and causative relationship between smoking and cigarettes, and the number of cigarettes smoked, to cancer of the lung is an absolutely unwarranted conclusion.”
Sir Charles Ellis, Senior Scientist at British American Tobacco Company: “It is my conviction that nicotine is a very remarkable, beneficent drug that both helps the body to resist external stress and can as a result show a pronounced tranquillizing effect.” 
Ian MacDonald, a Los Angeles surgeon: “For the majority of people, smoking has a beneficial effect.” (Source)
Deranged pharma trolls in Australia have been pushing hard to outlaw herbal medicine and force all the citizens of Australia to use toxic, overpriced chemical prescription medications to treat everything.
Shocking Victory for Proponents of Alternative Medicine
Breaking: In Australia, an effort to label all alternative (traditional, complementary) medicine products as “based on pseudoscience” has failed.
Traditional remedies (much older than mainstream medicines) are defended as appropriate, and can include health claims.
The Crazz Files, a major defender of health freedom in Australia, reports: “In a major win, the Federal Government has ignored the Australian Greens and anti-complementary medicine activists like Doctor Ken Harvey…and passed a reform package that protects traditional medicine.”
“The Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill, which passed Parliament on February 15, supports positive claims for complementary medicines based on traditional evidence, and abolishes the current complaints system.”
“Greens voters were shocked to learn Greens Leader and General Practitioner, Senator Dr Richard Di Natale was aligned with skeptics, whose platform is: ‘There is no alternative to [modern] Medicine’.”
“One of his [Dr. Di Natale’s] ‘concerns’ was that people were being ‘misled’ by traditional claims about the effectiveness of complementary medicine. He, and the skeptics, wanted labels on complementary and traditional medicines to state: ’this traditional indication is not in accordance with modern medical knowledge and there is no scientific evidence that this product is effective’.”
“The Minister for Rural Health, Senator Bridget McKenzie, told Di Natale: ‘I think it is offensive and disrespectful to those who practice traditional medicine’.”
“’For some, particularly those using Chinese medicine, the history of practising in that traditional medicine paradigm goes back thousands of years. It’s been extensively refined, practised and documented and in many cases incorporated into mainstream medicine.
So, a statement required by the Australian Government that the indication is not in accordance with modern medical knowledge and that there is no scientific evidence will be seen as arrogant and insensitive to those practising and using traditional Chinese medicines,’ Senator McKenzie said.”
All right. Now I want to treat readers to a brief analysis of “modern medicine,” the so-called scientific system that is the “only valid system.” It is the system employed in Australia, America, and virtually all countries in the world.
People who watch the news or read mainstream news have the impression that “scientific” medical research is remarkably valid and always progressing.
Doctors and medical bureaucrats line up to confirm and ceaselessly push this view.
But they are concealing a dark truth.
Let’s go to the record. Here are two editors of two of the most prestigious and respected medical journals in the world. During their long careers, they have read and scrutinized more studies than any doctor, researcher, bureaucrat, or so-called medical blogger. And this is what they have written:
One: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.
I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)
Two: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…
"The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too.
We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
There are many ominous implications in these two statements. I will point out one.
Incompetent, error-filled, and fraudulent studies of medical drugs - for example, published reports on clinical trials of those drugs - would lead one to expect chaos in the field of medical treatment. And by chaos, I mean: the drugs cause widespread death and severe injury.
Again, if a person obtains his news from mainstream sources, he will say, “But I see no evidence of such a vast scandal.”
That is a conspiracy of silence. Because this widespread death and grievous harm HAS been reported. Where? In open-source medical literature.
For example: On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.
The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:
Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people.
On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.
All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.
On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.
Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?
A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.
Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?
A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).
Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?
Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?
A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.
Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?
A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!
- End of interview excerpt -
Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.
WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON - ARE SAYING.
If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.
As in: DISASTER.
The Nostalgia Pendulum: A Rolling 30-Year Cycle Of Pop Culture Trends March 18 2018 | From: ThePatterning
You may have noticed that there’s been a fair amount of 80’s nostalgia hanging in the air for the past several years.
There’s a reason that the culture of the 1980’s is experiencing a resurgence right now. Just as there’s a reason that we’re in the early days of getting more build-up of 90’s nostalgia. It’s not all that complicated, but it is a pattern that has profound consequences for how art is created, how we conceptualize culture, and perhaps even what sort of political rhetoric comes into vogue.
The pattern is this: pop culture is forever obsessed with a nostalgia pendulum that regularly resurfaces things from 30 years ago.
How Memory Shapes the World
There are a number of reasons why the nostalgia pendulum shows up, but the driving factor seems to be that it takes about 30 years for a critical mass of people who were consumers of culture when they were young to become the creators of culture in their adulthood.
The art and culture of their childhood (e.g. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle comics in 1984) helped them achieve comfort and clarity in their world, and so they make art that references that culture and may even exist wholly within that universe (e.g. the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2014 film reboot, 30 years later).
Since most of the other fashionable creators around them also lived through the same period, they too indulge in the “new” nostalgic trend that’s being repurposed, creating a kind of feedback loop where all parties involved want to contribute more and more work that revives that same zeitgeist.
It can be explained equally well from the consumer side. After about 30 years, you’ve got a real market of people with disposable income who are nostalgic for their childhoods. So artists working in popular mediums are rewarded for making art that appeals to this audience.
Like many pop culture patterns, some aspects of this phenomenon are intentional, and some aspects are an organic product of the personal histories of the creators involved. Film studios and advertisers, for instance, often consciously use the nostalgia pendulum to build an audience’s emotional attachment with the release of something new.
On the flip side, the writers and toy makers and musicians who are creating the artifacts of culture really do have fondness and nostalgia for the themes of their childhood that they’re referencing.
So J.J. Abrams really was a kid during the summer of 1979 in which Super 8 is set. It just so happens that 1979 was 32 years prior to the film’s release in 2011, which means it also resonates with a broad market of newly financially solvent adults.
The nostalgia pendulum also matches up nicely with Walter Dean Burnham’s theory of critical realignment in U.S. elections. Building on previous theories of realigning elections, he posits that, due to demographic changes like the ones described above, every 30-38 years, a critical election occurs that drastically changes the dominant political framework.
In these realignments, the ideology tends to oscillate between a focus on private interest and a focus on public interest. There seems to be general agreement that 2016 was not a realigning election, but a rhetoric of nostalgia certainly played a crucial role in the outcome of the 2016 election.
Slogans like “Make America Great Again” coupled with racist dog-whistle politics that makes references to things like “law and order” hearkens back to the Reagan era of 30 years ago and its antecedents.
The nostalgia pendulum is a phenomenon I’ve been taking note of anecdotally for several years now, but I decided it was worth gathering some more evidence to support my hypothesis.
While all sorts of artistic mediums get remade, remixed, and adapted in this same 30-year cycle (hip hop beats reused in pop songs, comics turning into movies, books becoming plays, etc), film remakes are some of the most noticeable artifacts of this process.
I therefore decided to analyze over 500 film remakes from the past century to see if the nostalgia pendulum would rear its head out of the data [*]. Short answer: it did. The far left side of this graph shows that many films get remade only a few years after the original. This is a kind of bandwagon effect, which in its most benevolent form can be attributed to multiple discovery (people coincidentally arriving independently at the same idea by tapping into the same cultural themes), and in its most capitalist interpretation is clearly market-driven (using the success of the original to make a few extra bucks by iterating on the same story, characters, or ideas).
That cluster on the left-hand side is also why twin films are so often released only months apart (think of Dante’s Peak vs. Volcano, Antz vs. A Bug’s Life,The Illusionist vs. The Prestige, or (heaven help us) Unfriended vs. Friend Request).
However, it’s the next big cluster of remakes that concerns us here. If we include all the data, the average time-to-remake is 22.92 years, with the median at 24 years.
But, of course, those early bandwagon remakes skew things toward the lower end, masking that the next biggest cluster of remakes happens right at the next swing of the nostalgia pendulum - around 30 years after their original.
Prominent Examples of the Nostalgia Pendulum
Below, in order to drive this home with some examples you’ll recognize, I’ve included some famous remakes from the past 20 years that fit into the paradigm of the nostalgia pendulum.
The Parent Trap (1961 - 1998, 37 years) Star Wars (1977) -> Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (1999) - 22 years Gone in 60 Seconds (1974-2000, 26 years) Planet of the Apes (1968-2001, 33 years) Carrie (1976-2002) — 26 years Strawberry Shortcake Doll (1979) -> Strawberry Shortcake TV series (2003) - 23 years Dawn of the Dead (1978-2004, 26 years) King Kong (1933-1976, 43 years; 1976-2005, 29 years) The Omen (1976-2006, 30 years) Halloween (1978-2007, 29 years) Raiders of the Last Ark (1981) -> Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) - 27 years Fame (1980-2009, 29 years) Tron (1982) -> Tron: Legacy (2010) - 28 years Footloose (1984-2011, 27 years) RoboCop (1987-2014, 27 years) Jurassic Park (1993) -> Jurassic World (2015) - 22 years Ghostbusters (1984-2016, 32 years) Beauty and the Beast (1991-2017, 26 years)
As mentioned in the opening of this article, probably one of the most beautifully shameless culprits to intentionally exploit the nostalgia pendulum is the Netflix original series Stranger Things. In this case, it wasn’t just a few people gathered in a room that decided which retro TV shows and movies to hearken back to.
There’s a great side-by-side comparison video that shows just how exactly Stranger Things paid homage to its predecessors. For our purposes, here is a list of many of those influences and how long it was between their release and the release of Stranger Things (2016).
Dungeons & Dragons tabletop game (1974) - 42 years (reached popularity in late 70’s and early 80’s, which makes this closer to 30 years) Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) - 39 years Alien (1979) - 37 years E.T. (1982) - 34 years The Thing (1982) - 34 years Poltergeist (1982) - 34 years Firestarter (1984) - 32 years A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) - 32 years Explorers (1985) - 31 years The Goonies (1985) - 31 years Stand By Me (1986) - 30 years
Still, there is a certain comfort in watching these cultural patterns come back around. The wheel of time rolls forward, yet remains steady on its axle. [*] Notes (nerdy thoughts to follow, continue at your own peril):
My data source for comparing original and remake films was Wikipedia - List of film remakes (A–M) and List of film remakes (N–Z). Wikipedia can be a great resource for aggregated data, especially for non-controversial data like film release dates. And because there’s such a large community around Wikipedia, there are a number of export tools that can help you quickly grab the data from an article, no coding required.
In this instance, I used Wiki Table to CSV to get a CSV-formatted version of the table that displayed original and remake movies with their dates. After opening the CSV in Excel, I was able to use some FIND functions in Excel to extract the dates from between parentheses.
A little bit of clean-up, and voila! A nice, neat set of columns with a date for the original and a date for the remake of 533 titles. After that it’s just a subtraction function to get the difference between the year of the remake and the year of the original.
In the analysis, I always used the earliest original date listed, and if multiple remakes were listed, I tended toward using the date of the most famous remake (e.g. 12 Angry Men (1997) instead of 12 (2007)). In situations where I was less familiar with the film (certain foreign films, for instance) or there were 2 films of equal popularity, I chose the date of the earlier remake.
For the sake of my sanity I did not try to go through every film and figure out the month they were released and whether that impacted the number of years between original and remake. I therefore just subtracted one year from the other. Lastly, I made the histogram graph at