Mathematical Report Proves Human Society Is Too Complex To Be Ruled By A Government March 31 2023 | From: TheMindUnleashed / Various
Society is past the point of being governed. We no longer need a president to function as a healthy society. In fact, the idea of central bodies of government ruling over differing classes of people is just absurd.
We are all just too complex for a ruler! At least, this is what a recent report suggests.
Prior to election day, Vice’s Motherboard published a report called Mathematics, which included proof that democracies are irrelevant to our society today. Social policy, or the idea that one process can work for everyone, has been deemed ludicrous as society is much too complex, and government always fails us in our expectations.
A Complex Organism
We, as humans, have become increasingly complex over time, which has no relation to democracy or communism. And this complexity matters, says Yaneer Bar-Yam, the New England Complex Systems Institutes (NECSI)’s director,
“There’s a natural process of increasing complexity in the world that at some point will run into the complexity of the individual. Once we reach that point, hierarchical organizations will fail.”
Bar-Yam realized how ridiculous it was to organize society into sections of a few. Government officials are, in most cases, detached from individual situations from lack of experience in the area.
Bar-Yam told Motherboard,
“We are raised to believe that democracy is good for us.”
Is this true? I think Democracy is over-rated, and so are other systems such as dictatorships and communism. Their centralized processes and democracies only focus on one or few groups of individuals, still leaving others with no ample representation. It just fails!
When discussing the individual needs of society, “human action” takes form as a possible solution to this problem. If you look at the human as a unique creature as compared to another, you may get the idea of why we are much too complex to be ruled as a group.
Humans are made from atoms, which make cells and then organs. If you try to describe an individual atom, it’s almost impossible. It’s only possible in relation to collective behavior of the whole. At least, it’s a bit easier.
This works in much the same manner when describing an individual person in a job, as opposed to a workforce. It’s easier to understand the pattern of an entire workforce than to catalog the daily behavior of one worker.
Is There a Solution?
Bar-Yam suggests a solution called a “control hierarchy”, which enables an individual to control only their own actions separately from others. With this, one individual can influence others into taking the same actions.
If this works, it will prove much more effective than hoping the government will influence a larger group into following their lead.
In fact, what government does, in a nutshell, is control groups of people as if they are much simpler beings.
In fact, these aren’t new ideas. They are, in fact, ideas that surfaced in 1949 as well. Praxeology, or the study of purposeful behavior (human action), said that humans exist and act for a reason, basically.
“Action is will put into operation.”
Economist Ludwig von Misessaid that those who are detached from a situation cannot possibly know what will happen inside the situation. Although science is pretty accurate at predicting what will happen in a situation, it cannot predict the future without question.
And no matter the similarities from one situation to the next, there will always be incomplete knowledge with any given event or within any new group. It’s apparent that Mises understood the complexity of society way before Bar-Yam was involved in the study.
“Government means coercion and compulsion and is the opposite of liberty.”
Both Mises and Bar-Yam concluded that complexities of the human being, especially the level in which humans have attained at this point, makes it almost impossible for the government to rule effectively.
As we saw with the elections, numerous people refusing to vote, the desire for the governmental rule is on the decline. Choosing leaders obviously doesn’t matter as much anymore, and working as individuals to solve problems may just be what we need to thrive as human beings.
The West is living the worst of Orwell’s 1984 and Raspail’s Camp of the Saints. As the second decade of the 21st century comes to an end, democracy and free speech no longer exist in the Western World. In all its respects, Western civilization no longer exists.
In the United States, which poses as the model for democracy, a presidential election has just been stolen in full view of everyone.
There is expert testimony by qualified experts about how the voting machines and software were used to bias the vote count for Biden.
There are hundreds of signed affidvits of eyewitnesses who saw the fraudulent use of mail-in ballots to boost Biden’s vote count.
We know for facts that dead people were voted, illegal aliens were voted, out of state residents were voted, and some precincts had more votes cast than there are registered voters and even residents in the precincts.
Despite the abundance of evidence, except for members of state legislatures in some of the swing states, no one is acquainted with the evidence.
The presstitutes speak with one voice and deny that any evidence exists. So do the Democrat election officials in the Democrat-controlled counties in the swing states where the presidential election was stolen.
The courts have refused to even look at the evidence.
The presstitutes misrepresent the courts’ refusals to examine the evidence as the judiciary’s ruling against the validity of the evidence despite the fact that no court has looked at the evidence.
The level of hostility of Biden supporters toward those who protest the electoral fraud is extraordinary. Biden supporters threaten Trump supporters with loss of employment and with arrest and prosecution.
Tucker Carlson on Fox News reviews the extraordinary situation here.
Radicalized blacks, unaware that they are being used by the Establishment, see the stolen election as their chance to rule and to displace white people. That the winner is the Establishment is beyond their grasp.
It is obvious that if the evidence of election theft were bogus, the media would seize the opportunity to discredit President Trump and his supporters’ claims of electoral fraud by investigating the evidence for that purpose.
The Supreme Court knows that that the evidence is real. Being an Establishment institution, the Court does not want to damage America’s reputation by ruling that the election was stolen.
Moreover, the Supreme Court Justices know that the American Establishment and its presstitutes would not accept a decision that the election was stolen.
The Supreme Court understands that the Establishment intends to rid government of a non-establishment president who is hostile to the Establishment’s agendas, which include globalism, destruction of the American middle class, war, more profit and power for the ruling class, and fewer civil liberties for the governed class.
The American Establishment includes the Republican Party.
In order to protect its agendas - war and US hegemony, the concentration of income and wealth, the elimination of the middle class which gave stability to the country and limited the ability of the Establishment to exercise complete control, and the overthrow of the First Amendment and our other civil liberties which limited the Establishment’s ability to control all explanations - the Establishment is willing to pay the price of the destruction of public confidence in American institutions.
The Establishment assumes that it can use the ensuing conflict to its advantage. The country will be further split apart and less able to unite against the Establishment’s self-serving agendas.
Conservatives blame the presstitutes for the Russiagate hoax that for three years kept Trump from his agenda and the subsequent attempt to impeach Trump over false charges that he bribed the Ukrainian president.
In actual fact, these efforts to destroy an elected president of the United States were orchestrated by the CIA and FBI.
It was CIA director John Brennan who alleged Trump was a traitor in league with the Russians, and it was FBI director James Comey who contrived false indictments and false prosecutions of General Flynn, Michael Cohn, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone hoping to extract in exchange for leniency false testimony against Trump.
It is difficult for patriotic conservatives to get their mind around the fact that the CIA and FBI, which they think protect Americans against Russian and Chinese communists and Muslim terrorists, are in fact internal enemies of the people of the United States.
Except for a few Internet websites unknown to the majority of the people in the Western world, the only information people in the West receive is controlled explanations that serve the agendas of the Establishment.
Consider Covid, for example. All experts who are critical of lockdowns, mask mandates, the suppression of effective treatments and the focus on vaccines, and who are skeptical of the seriousness of the pandemic are censored by the print and TV media and by Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube.
And by experts I do not mean doctors and nurses brainwashed in their training by Big Pharma - who are skeptical of the agenda of public health authorities than experts who support lockdowns and vaccines.
The presstitutes serving Fauci portray the dissenting experts’ views as “conspiracy theory.” But clearly Dr. Kamran Abbasi, executive editor of the British Medical Journal and editor of the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, is not a conspiracy theorist.
As I recently reported, he has this to say:
"Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement.
So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency - a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.
“The UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines.
Government appointees are able to ignore or cherry pick science - another form of misuse - and indulge in anti-competitive practices that favour their own products and those of friends and associates.”
Yet in place of such expert informed opinion, Western peoples only hear the ignorant propaganda from the bought-and-paid for whores on CNN, NPR, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, and the rest of the paid liars.
There can be no democracy, no accountability, when people only have conrolled explanations that serve the ruling agendas.
The disrespect for free inquiry, the only known basis for the discovery of truth, is so powerful today throughout the Western world that even in the West’s most famous universities - Oxford and Cambridge - censorship is entrenched.
Any student, especially a privileged “person of color” can brand any scientific fact, any historical fact, any expressed view or opinion to be “offensive.”
Cambridge University’s white academics and administrators have accepted a person of color as their political commissar to control their lectures, choice of words, and reading lists in order to ensure that no truth can emerge that might be declared by some ignorant student “offensive.”
Of course, white students cannot complain that it is offensive to denigrate the white creators of British accomplishments as racists.
The use of political commissars to control what can be spoken was the way Stalin controlled Russia. This Stalinist practice has now been institutionalized throughout the Western world in schools, universities, media, corporations, and government.
Oxford University, in an act of contrition, has proudly announced that admission to Oxford will no longer be based on the outmoded and racist concept of merit.
Oxford University declared that the university is reserving 25 percent of its annual admissions to those unqualified to be at Oxford.
How are those unqualified to be at Oxford to succeed in graduating?
According to Oxford, before they begin on their degree studies they will be given up to two years in remedial preparation so that they become qualified to attempt receiving a degree.
Mind-Blowing Experiment Confirms That Reality Doesn’t Exist If You Are Not Looking At It
March 29 2023 | From: TheMindUnleashed / Various According to a well-known theory in quantum physics, a particle’s behavior changes depending on whether there is an observer or not. It basically suggests that reality is a kind of illusion and exists only when we are looking at it.
Numerous quantum experiments were conducted in the past and showed that this indeed might be the case.
Now, physicists at the Australian National University have found further evidence for the illusory nature of reality. They recreated the John Wheeler’s delayed-choice experiment and confirmed that reality doesn’t exist until it is measured, at least on the atomic scale.
Some particles, such as photons or electrons, can behave both as particles and as waves. Here comes a question of what exactly makes a photon or an electron act either as a particle or a wave. This is what Wheeler’s experiment asks: at what point does an object ‘decide’?
The results of the Australian scientists’ experiment, which were published in the journal Nature Physics, show that this choice is determined by the way the object is measured, which is in accordance with what quantum theory predicts.
“It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it,” said lead researcher Dr. Andrew Truscott in a press release.
The original version of John Wheeler’s experiment proposed in 1978 involved light beams being bounced by mirrors. However, it was difficult to implement it and get any conclusive results due to the level of technological progress back then. Now, it became possible to successfully recreate the experiment by using helium atoms scattered by laser light.
Dr. Truscott’s team forced a hundred of helium atoms into a state of matter called Bose-Einstein condensate. After this, they ejected all the atoms until there was only one left.
Then, the researchers used a pair of laser beams to create a grating pattern, which would scatter an atom passing through it just like a solid grating scatters light. Thus, the atom would either act as a particle and pass through one arm or act as a wave and pass through both arms.
Thanks to a random number generator, a second grating was then randomly added in order to recombine the paths. This was done only after the atom had already passed the first grate.
As a result, the addition of the second grating caused interference in the measurement, showing that the atom had traveled both paths, thus behaving like a wave. At the same time, when the second grating was not added, there was no interference and the atom appeared to have traveled only one path.
The Results and Their Interpretation
As the second grating was added only after the atom had passed through the first one, it would be reasonable to suggest that the atom hadn’t yet ‘decided’ whether it was a particle or a wave before the second measurement.
According to Dr. Truscott, there may be two possible interpretations of these results. Either the atom ‘decided’ how to behave based on the measurement or a future measurement affected the photon’s past.
“The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behavior was brought into existence,” he said.
Thus, this experiment adds to the validity of the quantum theory and provides new evidence to the idea that reality doesn’t exist without an observer. Perhaps further research in the field of quantum physics and more thought-provoking evidence like this will completely change our understanding of reality one day.
2020 was GloboCap Year Zero. The year when the global capitalist ruling classes did away with the illusion of democracy and reminded everyone who is actually in charge, and exactly what happens when anyone challenges them.
In the relatively short span of the last ten months, societies throughout the world have been transformed beyond recognition.
Where we can go, when we can go there, how long we are allowed to spend there, how many friends we are allowed to meet there, whether and when we can spend time with our families, what we are allowed to say to each other, who we can have sex with, where we have to stand, how we are allowed to eat and drink, etc.
The list goes on and on.
The authorities have assumed control of the most intimate aspects of our daily lives.
We are being managed like inmates in a prison, told when to eat, sleep, exercise, granted privileges for good behavior, punished for the slightest infractions of an ever-changing set of arbitrary rules, forced to wear identical, demeaning uniforms (albeit only on our faces), and otherwise relentlessly bullied, abused, and humiliated to keep us compliant.
None of which is accidental, or has anything to do with any actual virus, or any other type of public health threat.
Yes, before some of you go ballistic, I do believe there is an actual virus, which a number of people have actually died from, or which at least has contributed to their deaths...
Butthere is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of any authentic public health threat that remotely justifies the totalitarian emergency measures we are being subjected to or the damage that is being done to society.
Whatever you believe about the so-called “pandemic,” it really is as simple as that. Even if one accepts the official “science,” you do not transform the entire planet into a pathologized-totalitarian nightmare in response to a health threat of this nature.
The notion is quite literally insane.
GloboCap is not insane, however. They know exactly what they are doing… which is teaching us a lesson, a lesson about power.
A lesson about who has it and who doesn’t. For students of history it’s a familiar lesson, a standard in the repertoire of empires, not to mention the repertoire of penal institutions.
The name of the lesson is “Look What We Can Do to You Any Time We Fucking Want.” The point of the lesson is self-explanatory.
The USA taught the world this lesson when it nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. GloboCap (and the US military) taught it again when they invaded Iraq and destabilized the entire Greater Middle East.
It is regularly taught in penitentiaries when the prisoners start to get a little too unruly and remember that they outnumber the guards. That’s where the “lockdown” concept originated. It isn’t medical terminology. It is penal institution terminology.
As we have been experiencing throughout 2020, the global capitalist ruling classes have no qualms about teaching us this lesson. It’s just that they would rather not to have to unless it’s absolutely necessary.
They would prefer that we believe we are living in “democracies,” governed by the “rule of law,” where everyone is “free,” and so on.
It’s much more efficient and much less dangerous than having to repeatedly remind us that they can take away our “democratic rights” in a heartbeat, unleash armed goon squads to enforce their edicts, and otherwise control us with sheer brute force.
People who have spent time in prison, or who have lived in openly totalitarian societies, are familiar with being ruled by brute force. Most Westerners are not, so it has come as a shock.
The majority of them still can’t process it. They cannot see what is staring them in the face.
They cannot see it because they can’t afford to see it. If they did, it would completely short-circuit their brains.
They would suffer massive psychotic breakdowns, and become entirely unable to function, so their psyches will not allow them to see it.
Others, who see it, can’t quite accept the simplicity of it (i.e., the lesson being taught), so they are proposing assorted complicated theories about what it is and who is behind it … the Great Reset, China, the Illuminati, Transhumanism, Satanism, Communism, whatever.
Some of these theories are at least partially accurate.
The point of the lesson is that GloboCap - the entire global-capitalist system acting as a single global entity - can, virtually any time it wants, suspend the Simulation of Democracy, and crack down on us with despotic force.
a. Declare a “global pandemic” or some other type of “global emergency,”
b. Cancel our so-called “rights,”
c. Have the corporate media bombard us with lies and propaganda for months
d. Have the Internet companies censor any and all forms of dissent and evidence challenging said propaganda
e. Implement all kinds of new intrusive “safety” and “security” measures, including but not limited to the physical violation of our bodies
...and so on.
I think you get the picture. (The violation of our bodies is important, which is why they love “cavity searches” in prison, and why the torture-happy troops at Abu Ghraib were obsessed with sexually violating their victims.)
And the “pandemic” is only one part of the lesson.
The other part is being forced to watch (or permitted to watch, depending on your perspective) as GloboCap makes an example of Trump, as they made examples of Corbyn and Sanders, as they made examples of Saddam and Gaddafi, and other “uncooperative” foreign leaders, as they will make an example of any political figurehead that challenges their power.
It does not matter to GloboCap that such political figureheads pose no real threat. The people who rally around them do. Nor does it make the slightest difference whether these figureheads or the folks who support them identify as “left” or “right.”
GloboCap could not possibly care less. The figureheads are just the teaching materials in the lesson that they are teaching us.
And now, here we are, at the end of the lesson… not the end of the War on Populism, just the end of this critical Trumpian part of it.
If the usurper were to be been driven out of office [which is NOT going to happen], the War on Populism would be folded back into the War on Terror, or the War on Extremism, or whatever GloboCap decided to call it… the name hardly matters.
It is all the same war.
Whatever they would call it, this is GloboCap Year Zero.
It is time for reeducation, my friends. It is time for cultural revolution. No, not communist cultural revolution… global capitalist cultural revolution.
"They" wish it was time to flush the aberration of the last four years down the memory hole, to implement global “New Normal” Gleichschaltung, to make sure that this never happens again.
Oh, yes,[in "their" mind] things are about to get “normal.” Extremely “normal.” Suffocatingly “normal.”
Unimaginably oppressively “normal.” And I’m not just talking about the “Coronavirus measures.” This has been in the works for the last four years.
Remember, back in 2016, when everyone was so concerned about “normality,” and how Trump was “not normal,” and must never be “normalized?” Well, here we are.
This is it. This is the part where GloboCap restores “normality,” a “new normality,” a pathologized-totalitarian “normality,” a “normality” which tolerates no dissent and demands complete ideological conformity.
From now on, when the GloboCap Intelligence Community and their mouthpieces in the corporate media tell you something happened, that thing will have happened, exactly as they say it happened, regardless of whether it actually happened, and anyone who says it didn’t will be labeled an “extremist,” a “conspiracy theorist,” a “denier,” or some other meaningless epithet.
Such un-persons would be dealt with ruthlessly.
They would be censored, deplatformed, demonetized, decertified, rendered unemployable, banned from traveling, socially ostracized, hospitalized, imprisoned, or otherwise erased from “normal” society.
You would do what you are told. You would not ask questions. You would believe whatever they told you to believe. You would believe it, not because it makes any sense, but simply because you have been ordered to believe it.
It isn’t an invitation to debate. It is a GloboCap-verified fact-checked fact.
You would stand (or kneel) in your designated, color-coded, social-distancing box and repeat this verified fact-checked fact, over and over, like a fucking parrot, or they would discover some new mutant variant of virus and put you back in fucking “lockdown.”
They would do this until you get your mind right, or you can live the rest of your life on Zoom, or tweeting content that no one but the Internet censors will ever see into the digital void in your fucking pajamas. The choice is yours… it’s is all up to you!
Or … I don’t know, this is just a crazy idea, you could turn off the fucking corporate media, do a little fucking research on your own, grow a backbone and some fucking guts, and join the rest of us “dangerous extremists” who are trying to fight back against the New Normal.
Yes, it will cost you, but you won’t have to torture your kids on airplanes, and you don’t even have to “deny” the virus!
That’s it… my last column of 2020. Happy totalitarian holidays!
What Do Smart Meters And Vaccinations Have In Common? + Another Vaccine Dump
March 27 2030 | From: NaturalBlaze / Various Jerry Day of Freedom Taker.com has produced an exceptional new video wherein he explains in detail what Smart Meters and Vaccinations have in common.
It’s called “Conditional Acceptance,” a term and a legal tactic whereby you can refuse anyone who pressures you to sign either an “opt-out” agreement for a Smart Meter or demands you to accept a vaccination.
Opt-out contracts are ones big corporations give you when you refuse corporate offers. Jerry explains what he calls “highway robbery” in this video.
Listen carefully to what Jerry explains, plus take notes, because his logic may be one that you can utilize under “Right of Contract.” Jerry says;
“Always remember that you have Right of Contract. That is the legal term used to describe the fact that on any contract or agreement your signature must be fully voluntary and not coerced in any way. If you’re pressured into signing or agreeing, your signature and agreement technically have no authority or effect."
And legally, there is no contract or agreement if you can show there was coercion or pressure causing you to sign that contract. So your Right of Contract means that you – and only you – may decide whether you sign something or not. And you may not be penalized in any way for refusing to sign anything.”
“They [utilities and governments] are criminally violating utility customers – and they know it. So when they refuse to insure the damage, their equipment will cause to you, you have every right to refuse that equipment.
“If the equipment they are installing was really not harmful and did not violate your rights, the insurance would cost almost nothing. But electronic utility meters are known to be hazardous and harmful – so much so that no insurance company will provide insurance for any price [more about insurance here], because they know that advanced utility metering is a ticking time bomb of damages and litigation. Vaccinations represent a very similar situation to utility metering.”
Listen intently to what Jerry says about “Conditional Acceptance” because that’s the bargaining chip in the ‘song and dance’ you will have to engage in to protect yourself and your family from AMI Smart Meter RFs/EMFs, dirty electricity they produce , plus possible fire loss to your home from Smart Meters proclivity to malfunction.
The same logic regarding “Right of Contract” and “Conditional Acceptance” applies with regard to vaccinations. Jerry delves into vaccinations like you may not have heard before.
Homeowners insurance and health insurance do not cover you for losses from AMI Smart Meters or injured health from receiving a vaccine! The unfair fact about bullying and harassment from utilities and the medical profession has to be understood fully for what it is: You are liable for all damages unless you are prepared not to be left helpless and demand your legal rights by taking Jerry’s advice into consideration.
After listening to the above video, please be certain to check out thedownloadable documents A-2 and A-4 regarding Smart Meters. There’s also a Vaccination Notice Jerry talks about. All are offered as templates at www.FreedomTaker.com.
Yes, they just keep coming - the evidence is in the order of a flood of biblical proportions for this with the eyes to see:
Shocking Research Confirms Vaccines Are Contaminated With Monsanto's RoundUp Herbicide
Folks, I have written about the problems with vaccines in previous blog posts. Now, a new serious contamination problem with our vaccines has been identified.
Researcher Anthony Samsel has published five peer-reviewed articles on the herbicide Glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup). A yet-to-be published sixth paper found various commonly-used vaccines contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate.
Yes, you read that correctly: Our vaccines are contaminated with an herbicide that the World Health Organization characterized as"probably carcinogenic to humans."
How can this happen? That answer is easy.
Many vaccines contain animal byproducts such as gelatin, bovine casein, bovine serum, bovine calf serum, or chicken egg protein. The animals from which these products come from are fed grains sprayed with glyphosate.
It does not take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that these animals, fed glyphosate in their diet, would contain glyphosate in their byproducts.
Samsel sent a letter to Congress that stated:
“I have run numerous groups of vaccines and identified several vectors of contamination. These include the excipient gelatins, egg protein and or similar substrates used to grow vaccines.
I have found gelatins and egg proteins contaminated with Glyphosate-based herbicides from animals fed a glyphosate contaminated diet.
This contamination carries into thousands of consumer products i.e. vitamins, protein powders, wine, beer and other consumables which use gelatins as part of the product or in fining and processing."
In other words, our do-nothing Congress, so far, has failed to respond. In his letter to Congress, Samsel also stated that Glyphosate is a synthetic amino acid. It bioaccumulates and is found in all tissue types, particularly the bone and marrow of animals fed a diet contaminated with Glyphosate residues.
The following vaccines were found to be contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate:
2. Varicella (chicken pox)
3. Zostavax (shingles)
4. Proquad (MMR, rubella, varicella)
5. Fluzone Quad (flu vaccine)
6. Hepatitis B (B Energix-B)
Multiple vaccines from different manufactures were found to be contaminated. Folks, this is a big deal. Injecting a vaccine contaminated with a known herbicide that is "probably carcinogenic to humans" should be prohibited. We need a Congressional investigation into our vaccines.
We keep hearing the mantra that vaccines are safe. Injecting a vaccine containing an herbicide is safe? Give me a break!
It is time to call your political representatives and tell them to investigate this matter. I can assure you that it is not safe to inject a known neurotoxin such as mercury or aluminum. Nor is it safe to inject a known carcinogen such as formaldehyde.
Guess what? It is not safe to inject an herbicide that is a probable human carcinogen.
Follow Dr. Brownstein's blog for more great articles by clicking here.
Anthony Samsel on Vaccines contaminated with Glyphosate
Scientists Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff have just gotten the fifth peer reviewed paper on Glyphosate published. Its named "Glyphosate pathways to modern diseases V: Amino acid analogue of glycine in diverse proteins".
In this regard Tony Mitra interviewed Anthony Samsel, to cover the newly emerging scientific findings on Glyphosate and how it can and does hurt creatures including humans.
In the course of the interview, Anthony Samsel mentioned the issues being covered in their next paper, the 6th one. This covers a number of vaccines that use animal byproducts such as egg protein and gelatine. He suspected these products might be contaminated with Glyphosate, if the vaccine makers were using factory farmed animals fed with Glyphosate laced GMO feed.
To verify, he got a large number of vaccines that do use egg proteins and gelatine and got them analyzed in multiple labs. The results confirmed his doubt. The vaccines themselves are largely contaminated with Glyphosate and pose serious hazard to those that are and will be vaccinated using these products.
Modern Life Is Killing Our Children: UK Cancer Rate In Young People Up 40% In 16 Years + 12 Things A Cancer Doctor Should Never Say
March 26 2023 | From: TheTelegraph / TheTruthAboutCancer / Various
Modern life is killing children with the number of youngsters diagnosed with cancer rising 40 per cent in the past 16 years because of air pollution, pesticides, poor diets and radiation, scientists have warned. These two articles include a massive dump on cancer topics both causes and solutions.
New analysis of government statistics by researchers at the charity Children with Cancer UK found that there are now 1,300 more cancer cases a year compared with 1998, the first time all data sets were published.
Note: As this first article is from the controlled mainstream it makes ridiculous statements like the causes of cancer not being known. Interspresed are links to various other articles and resources.
Dr Denis Henshaw, Professor of Human Radiation Effects at Bristol University, the scientific adviser for Children with Cancer UK, said air pollution was by far the biggest culprit, accounting for around 40 per cent of the rise, but other elements of modern lifestyles are also to blame.
Among these are obesity, pesticides and solvents inhaled during pregnancy, circadian rhythm disruption through too much bright light at night, radiation from x-rays and CT scans, smoking during and after pregnancy, magnetic fields from power lines, gadgets in homes, and potentially, radiation from mobile phones.
Children are surrounded by electrical fields, warn scientists
"When you look at cancers such as childhood leukaemia there is no doubt that environmental factors are playing a big role,” said Dr Henshaw. “We were shocked to see the figures, and it’s modern lifestyle I’m afraid."
“Many items on the list of environmental causes are now known to be carcinogenic, such as air pollution and pesticides and solvents. There has been good research to suggest a mother's diet can damage DNA in cord blood. Light at night we know is very disruptive for the body, which is why shift workers have such bad health.
Burnt barbecues, the electric fields of power lines, the electricity supply in your home. Hairdryers. It’s all of these things coming together, and it seems to be teenagers and young people that are most affected.
What’s worrying is it is very hard to avoid a lot of these things. How can you avoid air pollution? It sometimes feels like we are fighting a losing battle.”
Diagnoses of colon cancer among children and young people has risen 200 per cent since 1998, while thyroid cancer has doubled. Ovarian and cervical cancers have also risen by 70 per cent and 50 per cent respectively.
The charity estimates that the rise in cases now costs the NHS an extra £130 million a year compared with 16 years ago.
But experts believe many cancers could be prevented with lifestyle changes such as allowing children to attend nursery to boost their immune system, not painting children’s rooms with oil-based paints, avoiding night shift work and processed meats in pregnancy.
The figures were released ahead of the Children with Cancer UK conference which took place in London.
Other cancer experts said they had also noticed a rise in cancer diagnoses but warned it was too early to draw firm conclusions on the causes.
Nicola Smith, Cancer Research UK’s senior health information officer, said: [Bollocks mainly]
“Any rise in childhood cancers is worrying but it’s important to remember that less than one per cent of cancer cases in the UK occur in children.
It’s not yet clear exactly what causes cancer in childhood and research has not shown a link with environmental factors like air pollution and diet during pregnancy.
There are some factors which can increase the risk of childhood cancer like inherited genetic conditions and exposure to radiation – but these are usually not avoidable and no one should feel blamed for a child getting cancer.
Evidence has shown that there are lots of things adults can do to reduce cancer risk and it’s always a good idea to set up healthy habits as a family, like eating healthily, being active and enjoying the sun safely.”
Kate Lee, chief executive of children’s cancer charity CLIC Sargent, said that a child cancer diagnosis places a huge emotional and financial burden on the whole family.
"Over the last year CLIC Sargent provided support for more than 7,100 families, more than ever before, but we know that we can still only reach two out of three of those children and young people diagnosed with cancer,” she added.
“As more young cancer patients are diagnosed every year, we know each of those families will need support and are working hard to one day be able to provide those services for every young patient.”
Despite the increase, around 80 per cent of child cancer patients now survive for at least five years. But the aggressive treatments they have as children can have a major impact on their future health, even if they survive.
Tomorrow, Children with Cancer UK launches a five-point plan calling on the Government and the science and medical community to ensure that all children diagnosed with cancer in the UK have access to precision medicine by 2020.
We can all agree that proper communication skills are essential for the best cancer care. While some patients appreciate a direct approach, others need a bit of hand-holding. Some cancer doctors have good “bedside” manners, displaying genuine empathy for their patients. Others can be considered bullies in white coats. But it all comes down to this… what a cancer doctor says or doesn’t say can make all the difference in your outcome.
Doctors frequently take an overly dominant role. Proactive patients are often treated with sarcasm or arrogance. The patient who comes armed with research might be told “I see you have spent some time on Google. I think it is best if you let me diagnose you and tell you the treatment that is most suitable for you.”
As a cancer strategist I hear of all kinds of terrible comments made by oncologists to their patients. Even those patients who intend to comply with the recommendations of their oncologist hear words that should never be spoken. Often times I am sure that these comments are not meant to be callous, but are just spoken in ignorance.
Here are 12 things you should never hear from your cancer doctor. Be on the lookout for doctors who say any of these. It could be a sign that they need an attitude adjustment… and that you need a new doctor:
#1. I’m afraid I have bad news. If you didn’t already suspect you had a problem to deal with, you would not be sitting in the doctor’s office. This statement brings on fear. Doctors do this so that you will comply with their orders. Skip the drama doc.
#2. You have three months to live. It is rarely helpful to have a doctor pretend he has a crystal ball. While from experience they might have an idea how long the average patient lives given a particular diagnosis, we are all individuals and YOU ARE NOT AVERAGE. Despite what the doctor says, there is always hope. There is always a way to extend life or even reverse the dis-ease.
Just like “bad news,” a prognosis brings on fear and the need to comply - albeit in a different way. Studies show that people are told they have three months to live dutifully fulfill that directive from their doctor. Even worse, a poor prognosis takes away the will to live and ability to think outside the box and to change the direction of the dis-ease.
There are innumerable remissions of advanced and late stage cancers. There are countless stories of patients who were offered little chance of survival or a cure, yet who are here years later to tell their tale. A quick perusal through the articles on The Truth About Cancer website will bring you valuable information on surviving the odds.
Hope gives us the opportunity to do what we must do to heal from cancer. Even in the face of the most advanced of cancers, there is usually room for some words of encouragement and support. This can make all the difference in the patient’s attitude towards their disease and their treatment. While there is hope, there is life.
#3. If you don’t do “X” you will die. For some bizarre reason, cancer doctors think they know everything. Yes, I know that they went to medical school, but there was competent and effective medicine well before Big Pharma taught these doctors. Know that there are many, many options when it comes to managing cancer - don’t let your doctor bully you. In fact, you might point out to your doctor that you are more likely to die if you follow one of the standard protocols instead of opting for a less toxic treatment plan.
#4. You have no choice. Sorry, doctor, yes, you do. They might also say you have no other options. While it is always a good idea to get a second, third, or even fourth opinion, be sure to get at least one from an alternative or holistic doctor.
The award-wnning documentary The Idiot Cycle (2009) about the companies involved in producing toxic chemicals, cancer treatments and genetically modified crops
Otherwise, you are still limiting your options and overlooking key lifelines to survival.
#5. Calm Down. Given the situation at hand, it is understandable that a patient might be upset. Telling a patient they need to calm down or speaking to him or her in a dominant tone of voice clearly shows a lack of empathy and offers no chance of a partnership.
#6. This treatment will not harm you. Be sure you are clear on what “harm” means to your cancer doctor. Chemotherapy, radiation, hormone therapies, and even surgery harm the body and increase your risk of more cancer. Be aware of the life-threatening and quality of life-threatening side effects, and do not believe that they are always “worth it.” Studies and case studies have not provided evidence of efficacy.
#7. Here are the statistics. You are a person, not a statistic. You have your own unique set of circumstances; your own history. Statistics are helpful for doctors who use a checklist to make treatment recommendations. As an empowered person who is committed to make lifestyle changes that can affect your health and outcome, statistics do not apply.
Further, statistics are typically skewed in favor of treatment recommendations. For example, a patient might hear that by taking hormone therapy they will reduce their risk of recurrence by almost 50%. Sounds great, right? However in actuality, it may be the case that the risk without the therapy was only 2% and with the drugs 1%. That 50% reduction doesn’t really mean much, does it?
Or in the case of chemotherapy, a patient might hear that the therapy will decrease risk by 30%. But if the risk of dying was only 10% to begin with, the survival benefit on an absolute basis is only 3%. Considering the downsides of these therapies, one must extrapolate the true benefit and compare this to the possible harm they deliver.
#8. This treatment will cure you. This is a bold statement for sure. If your doctor is not addressing the cause of your cancer, the treatment is not a cure. Cancer is complicated, but most often the root cause can be determined and resolved. Only then can any treatment be considered “curative.”
I have never met anyone who was Tamoxifen- or chemotherapy-deficient, for example, so there is no reason to believe that taking either will resolve the reason for your cancer.
#9. You are wasting your time with nutritional supplements. While there is no one magic bullet, no one cure for cancer, lifestyle factors such as taking supplements can make a difference. There is too much evidence on how nutritional factors influence genetic expression for anyone to ignore the power of food and supplements.
What we eat makes a powerful difference. A mostly plant based, whole foods diet and taking nutritional supplements can have a substantial impact. That said, in these days of nutrient-depleted soil conditions and over-farming, food just does not have the nutrient content of years past. Plus, busy lives do not always allow for “perfect” meals. Hence, supplements are a necessary part of an anticancer protocol.
#10. Cancer Just Happens: It’s a Matter of bad luck. This is so ridiculous I just had to include it. Cancer develops for a reason. It is a signal, a cry for help that tells us something or many things are not right within the body. Overexposure to toxins, the genetic inability to manage toxins, and the entire issue of unresolved emotional traumas are some of the biggest triggers of cancer.
Although nutritional deficiencies are not likely the cause of one’s cancer, they do allow it to develop and grow.
Don’t accept that blanket statement from your doctor. Whether they are saying this out of ignorance or for your emotional protection, it is not helpful when it comes to your healing and survival.
#11. Alternative doctors are quacks. What mainstream cancer doctors consider to be “alternative” was once medicine. Sadly, modern medicine focuses on drug therapies and fails to acknowledge the reasons that cancer has become rampant. We are not sick because we have cancer… we have cancer because we are sick. If we do not correct what created the dis-ease, we cannot cure it. Alternative doctors consider the whole person. They believe that making a person well is just as important or even more important than targeting the symptoms of cancer (such as a tumor).
While every alternative treatment works for someone, not every treatment works for everyone. Part of this is, again, because we all have our own unique circumstances for having cancer. Be sure you work with a qualified practitioner and coach to optimize the healing of your body and your cancer.
And last but not least…
#12. Estrogen causes breast cancer. This is simply not accurate. Estrogen has 400 essential functions in a woman’s body. While estrogen dominance and hormonal imbalance can allow breast cancer to develop and grow, estrogen does not cause breast cancer. More precisely, estrogen can turn on cancer genes, but only if not opposed by progesterone. So blaming estrogen for cancer is a bit like saying that matches cause fires. You have to light the match, right?
Progesterone acts as an antagonist to estrogen. While estrogen is associated with breast and other cancers, progesterone has anti-cancer effects.
When the opposing force of progesterone is increased, the toxic effect of estrogen is decreased. So while estrogen can turn on cancer genes, progesterone turns on genes that can prevent breast cancer from occurring. Instead of blocking or eliminating estrogen, you may want to concentrate on increasing progesterone so the fire is not ignited by the match.
A note on receptors: when activated by progesterone, the progesterone receptors attach themselves to the estrogen receptors. Once this happens, the estrogen receptors stop turning on genes that promote the growth of the cancer cells. Instead, they turn on genes that promote the death of cancer cells (known as apoptosis) and the growth of healthy, normal cells.
Hormone receptors are dependent on iodine, which increases the sensitivity of the receptor to the hormone it was designed. So rather than block your receptors, it would be prudent to ensure you have sufficient iodine in your diet so that the receptors can work most efficiently.
Is The Globalist "Reset" Failing? The Elites May Have Overplayed Their Hand March 25 2023 | From: Zerohedge / Various
One aspect of narcopaths (narcissistic sociopaths) that is important to remember is that they live in their own little world in which their desires and bizarre dysfunctions are normalized.
They believe themselves superior to most people because they are predatory, and don’t suffer from annoying hang-ups like empathy and conscience. They generally tend to believe they have pulled the wool over everyone’s eyes the majority of the time. They think that you are a submissive idiot, and that when they bark an order, you will simply jump to attention because you “believe”.
Almost every aspect of the globalists and their behavior indicates they are a club or cult of narcopaths.
Their obsessive need to control as well as to corrupt and destroy in order to get what they want is not an extension of mere greed, it is a deep-seated aspect of who they are as beings. It is a defining mechanism at the core of their character.
They are real world monsters, like vampires attempting to blend into an unsuspecting population.
In their arrogance, then tend to expect they can drain the public dry at will without being resisted or exposed. The problem is, as soon as they start to feed and destroy they draw attention to themselves.
Eventually, they will attract the suspicions of the public, along with some vampire hunters. Unless they find a way to hide a stake through the heart is inevitable.
I have been writing about the threats of globalism and the “reset” for many years now, and I have noted for some time two separate quandaries; one affecting the liberty movement and the other affecting the globalists:
1.First, criminals tend to brag about their crimes when they think that it’s too late for anyone to do anything about them.
I predicted the globalists would be very open in revealing their agenda the moment they believed themselves “untouchable”.
For the freedom loving public this suggests that in 2020 going into 2021 that the elites must think there is nothing that can be done to stop the machine; they are so blatant in their calls for the global “reset”, a cashless society, totalitarian lockdowns and a surveillance state that no one in their right mind can claim these notions are “conspiracy theory” anymore.
The fact is, the “conspiracy theorists” were RIGHT ALL ALONG, and now there is nothing anyone can say about it.
2.Second, I have also argued in the past that the globalist push for a “new world order” is a double edged sword that could very well end up annihilating them.
As they attempt to initiate their reset agenda, they become more and more exposed; they can no longer lurk in the safety of the shadows and there is no going back once the process is started.
Once the globalists become widely known, they must either swiftly take control through engineered chaos and collapse, or face retribution that could eliminate a cabal that took them centuries to build.
Vampires must make the rest of the world a dark place before leaving the shadows, or they risk dying in the light of day
There are two schools of thought in the liberty movement; one suggesting that the globalist agenda is fixed and unstoppable and that the best anyone can do is survive.
The second suggests that the reset can be stopped and the globalists can be brought to justice. I stand in both camps.
There are aspects of the reset that are indeed fixed and that cannot be undone.
For example, numerous national economies including the US are in the midst of a stagflationary collapse and there is nothing that can be done to reverse it. Perhaps a decade ago we could have changed course, but now it is too late.
The pain can be reduced if people quickly end their dependency on the system and create localized trade networks of their own, but the economy as we know it right now is dead and it is not coming back anytime soon.
I do not see this, though, as a win for the elites. Crashing the economy is one thing, rebuilding it into the collectivist dystopia they desperately want is another.
I am seeing some encouraging signs these days that the globalist reset is NOT a sure thing, and those that know my work know I have never been one for misplaced optimism. Specifically, the exploitation of the pandemic response as a means to ram through numerous draconian restrictions does not seem to be going exactly as the elites planned.
I have to look back at Event 201 to really gauge the state of the game, because what the elites planned and what has happened do not completely match up.
For those not familiar, Event 201 was a type of “war game” held by globalists from the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The scenario? A pandemic outbreak of a coronavirus which would spread like wildfire and kill a predicted 65 million people. The simulation was held only a couple of months before the real thing happened at the start of 2020.
In the year since the outbreak, the globalists have attempted to enforce nearly every plan that was outlined during Event 201, including using social media to censor or restrict any news or information outside of the establishment approved narrative (Yes, narrative control was discussed at the event in great detail).
Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum has consistently and excitedly applauded the pandemic crisis as a “perfect opportunity” to institute the “reset” that the globalists have been talking about for years.
Unfortunately for them, the virus has not been anywhere near as deadly as they appear to have hoped.
With a death rate of well below 1% for anyone outside of a nursing home with preexisting conditions, the establishment has now been forced to pump up infection numbers as a means to terrorize the populace because the death numbers are not enough to convince people to willingly hand over their freedoms.
There is a propaganda meme being passed around these days that tries to exaggerate the danger of death from Covid, and it goes a little something like this:
"Covid has killed more people that the Vietnam War and the Gulf Wars combined in a single year, therefore your freedoms are forfeit…”
This is an idiotic talking point but luckily no one is buying it.
Over 40% of Covid deaths are people that are already sick and on the verge of dying anyway(And no, refusing to wear masks is not the same as endorsing “death panels”, because a death panel is about socialists refusing treatment to people at risk because of their age.
No one is suggesting that old people be refused treatment, and they always have the option of staying under quarantine if they fear they will become infected. They are already retired and receiving social security, perhaps if we are going to stimulate then the bailout money should go to those most at risk so that the rest of us can continue on with normal life?)
Dr Shiva - The Elite Have Enslaved Us In Their Illusion, It’s Time To Back The Country
Hundreds of thousands of people die every year from diseases and illnesses including the flu, common colds and pneumonia, yet, the prospect of abandoning the Bill of Rights, submitting to economic shutdowns and wearing a muzzle on our faces wherever we go was never brought up before.
Why should we ask 99.7% of Americans or the world to accept medical tyranny just to make .26% of the population feel safe?
People who question the mandates are called “selfish”, but even if I was one of the people susceptible to the virus, I would NEVER demand that 99% of the population bow to totalitarianism at the off chance that I might live a little while longer. Now THAT would be selfish.
Many Westerners are not as stupid as the elites think. They see the inconsistencies in the rhetoric and the data and they are increasingly prone to refuse to comply.
This might be why the establishment is suddenly rushing out at least two Covid vaccines in the span of half a year; they have to get the vaccine phase of the Reset underway before too many people jump from the panic bandwagon.
The vaccine rush and the claims of effectiveness of 94% to 95% from Pfizer and Moderna are suspect. The average effectiveness of most vaccines is around 50% or less, and these are vaccines with hundreds of trials and years of usage.
Somehow, Pfizer and Moderna were both able to produce a vaccine for a SARS type virus when multiple governments tried for over a decade to produce vaccines for SARS in China and were unsuccessful, and they were able to achieve 95% effectiveness?
Many people are not buying the vaccine story, and this is perhaps why the elites are jumping headlong into vaccination so fast. Consider this fact:
Here I think we have our explanation for the vaccination bonanza. The elites know that a third of Americans (and probably Europeans) will not take the vaccine regardless of any propaganda they dish out.
They also know that 60% of Americans are unlikely to take the vaccine unless they can show an effectiveness rate of at least 75%.
Neither Moderna nor Pfizer have actually produced any evidence that their vaccines are capable of prevented severe illness or death from Covid, so, their effectiveness rate is based on “projections” of success according to their minimal trials.
Meaning, the effectiveness rate of 95% is completely arbitrary.
Why did they go with such a high number instead of a more realistic 50% to 60%? Because the polls say they need an epic effectiveness rate in order to convince Americans to take the vaccine. I think it is really as simple as that.
Americans are skeptical of the vaccines for a number of reasons. The reality that they are minimally tested and rushed out in less than a year is one reason .
The fact that the government and the media have been caught censoring or lying about Covid data is another reason.
People just don’t trust the elites, and who can blame them?
Who would trust a cabal of psychopaths to inject them with an unknown viral cocktail? Maybe their intentions are not so pure?
Maybe this is what Bill Gates meant when he stated in his Ted Talk that “vaccines and reproductive services” could help contribute to a reduction of the Earth’s population of 10% to 15% as a means to “stop global warming."
Why would Bill Gates mention vaccines in the same breath as “reproductive services” in reference to population reduction?
Aren’t vaccines supposed to help people live longer?
Well, the Pfizer VP’s warning about the Covid vaccine is ringing bells for me. Maybe the Covid vaccine won’t make you sick, or kill you.
Maybe you will live a long life free of coronavirus, but you’ll find out a few years after taking the vaccine that you won’t ever be able to have kids.
Watch the movie ‘Children Of Men’ to get a sense of what the future might be like if the globalists get their way.
In the meantime, the elites are trying with everything they have to convince the public that they must abandon notions of civil liberties in the name of survival and “the greater good”.
They are already talking about how things will never go back to normal, and the changes being made today will stay in place for many years to come.
Governments are in the media right now claiming the vaccines “will not be mandatory”. This is a lie.
At the same time they are putting mandates in place to require you to prove you are vaccinated in order to go to public places and even to go to work. Basically, you take the vaccine or you die from poverty. This is not a choice.
But, I see millions of Americans standing in opposition to this agenda. I see sheriffs and police across the country refusing to enforce the agenda, even in hard-left states like California.
I see protests in lockdown states like Michigan, California and New York. I see mass protests in Europe. I see the Reset scheme being exposed and the truth breaking into the mainstream.
I see something rising to the surface, and I smell that gunpowder scent of rebellion, and I like it.
I’m not pessimistic about the future. I know a crash is coming. I know a fight is coming. But right now what I see is a fight that can and will be won by those that respect the principles of freedom.
From 2018: Remember The Pandemic That Was Going To Wipe Out Humanity? We’re Still Here March 24 2023 / August 22 2018 | From: JonRappoport / Various
Every few years, a new virus shows up that, experts tell us, can wipe out half the world in six months... and then it doesn’t happen.
I could give you several examples. In this piece, let’s harken back to SARS, the vague flu lookalike that suddenly showed up in 2003 and was going to decimate the Earth.
You have to understand that even eighty percent is not sufficient to call the virus the cause of any disease condition.
Yes, they all have the disease, the same disease, and we have the virus behind it all. The virus is present in ZERO percent of cases.
And the doctor saying this is a consummate insider, the chief honcho at Canada’s WHO lab. WHO being the agency, along with the CDC, that is in charge of all research on SARS.
Understand, given the fact that SARS is supposedly composed of a list of vague symptoms - cough, fever, fatigue, lung infection - the coronavirus is the only thing that is tying these cases together - AND WHEN THAT VIRUS PROVED TO BE MEANINGLESS, all the cases were set adrift, so to speak, joining the ranks of regular old flu and lung infection.
And the SARS death rate was low, so low the whole thing turned out to be a dud. A phony dud.
Of course, no one at the CDC or WHO admitted this. These people are experts at “moving on.” And they’re adept at writing history to revise facts and cover their backsides.
But a whole parade of fake pandemics - and attendant dire warnings - does, over time, achieve one objective: it conditions people to accept the lie that vaccines are the best solution to illness.
And that’s no small feat. It’s especially important when you consider the fact that the CDC, which is tasked with overseeing vaccine safety and efficacy, buys and sells $4 billion worth of vaccines a year. This is BUSINESS we’re talking about, and in order to promote business, PR people cook up all sorts of schemes.
Pandemics, even if they don’t pan out, are clever propaganda.
Also, the horror story of GERMS that can cause plagues anywhere in the world at the drop of a hat - the ceaseless drumbeat of germs, germs, and more germs - obscures all sorts of environmental causes of illness and death.
Resetting Politics And The Media March 23 2023 | From: NZPCR / Various
It seems a Government with absolute power is not averse to breaking election pledges.
Before the election, Labour was clear – they would not introduce a capital gains tax, nor a wealth tax. The only change in income tax would be an increase to the top rate of tax from 33 cents to 39 cents for those earning over $180,000 a year.
When pressed on whether there might be other tax increases by Newstalk ZB’s Heather du Plessis-Allan, Finance Spokesman Grant Robertson was clear: “there’ll be no other changes to tax beyond what we’ve announced.”
When Heather asked, “What about the bright-line test?” Grant Robertson said, “No”.
“Not the rate, and not the years?” asked Heather. “No”, said Grant, clearly ruling out any increase at all to the bright-line test.
The bright-line test treats gains from the sale of residential property – excluding the family home – as income if the property is sold within the regulated period. When National introduced the test in 2015, the regulated period was set at 2 years. In 2017 Labour extended it to five years, and now Grant Robertson has asked Treasury’s advice on extending it even further.
If they go ahead and extend the test, Labour’s pre-election promises will count for nothing.
This week we also saw our super-hero PM rising in Parliament to address a crisis. It seems we are all in such peril that a ‘climate emergency’ has had to be declared for New Zealand.
But it was all show. There is no real-life climate emergency. The only climate emergency is a political one created by the United Nations’ alarmist climate models.
Any computer model that tries to predict the future climate by only taking into account the impact that the 4 percent of carbon dioxide produced by mankind has on the climate – and not the other 96 percent produced by nature, nor the influence of the sun, the clouds, precipitation, wind, oceans, and the myriad of other factors that significantly influence the climate – is always going to be wrong.
At least when Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College in London produced his Covid-19 forecasts that grossly exaggerated the number of deaths, causing governments around the world – including ours – to impose harsh lockdowns, his computer models were quickly discredited.
Not so with the UN’s flawed climate models – in spite of the best efforts of scientists over the years, including 500 who challenged the UN just last year claiming, “The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is founded are unfit for their purpose”.
Regrettably, nothing changes. Governments continue to squander vast amounts of taxpayers’ money on damaging climate policies based on the UN’s defective models.
The problem is, that for politicians like Jacinda Ardern, who understands better than most that the language of panic and fear is one of the most effective instruments of political control, those climate models are gold – they are creating the alarm that is paving the way for the introduction of extremist policies that will destroy our economy in the name of saving the planet.
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator Gideon Rozner, a journalist and Director of Policy at the Australian Institute of Public Affairs, believes that as a result of the election, “New Zealand is in for a dangerous three years” – at the hands of a “brilliant politician” but a “grossly incompetent administrator”:
"New Zealand has been hit particularly hard by the Ardern government’s heavy-handed coronavirus response… According to the OECD, New Zealand’s GDP could fall by 10 percent in 2020. Likewise, unemployment is tipped to rise to just under 9 percent in 2021 as New Zealand’s $14bn corona wage subsidy program ends. Public debt will soar from 19 percent of GDP in 2019 to 56 percent in 2026…
“As for what Ardern has planned for a second term, the details are patchy. Labour ran something of a ‘small target’ strategy during the election, relying on the Prime Minister’s star power and perceived success in warding off the coronavirus.
“But from what we do know about their ‘policy-lite’ platform, Labour will likely exacerbate New Zealand’s economic woes. Hiking income tax, re-regulating the industrial relations system and a bloodcurdling plan for 100 per cent renewable energy by 2030 could turn the corona-induced economic shock into a permanent state of impoverishment for thousands of Kiwis…
“The only hope for New Zealand now is that whatever horrifying plans that Labour has in store, Jacinda Ardern is just as hopeless at actually implementing them in her second term as she was in her first.”
Gideon wrote his article just after the election, saying, “Jacinda Ardern is perhaps the worst person to lead New Zealand through this economic turbulence”, in light of her “hard-left political temperament, a degraded and politicised public sector, and a largely uncritical and compliant media.”
He’s not wrong. And as far as the media is concerned, things are getting a whole lot worse.
Stuff, one of the country’s biggest media businesses, not content with becoming an echo chamber for radical climate activism – to the point where they will not publish anything that challenges the validity of UN’s fabricated climate crisis – has now lost what remaining semblance of credibility they had by becoming a mouthpiece for Maori sovereignty extremism.
Monday’s grovelling front page apology to Maori for racist reporting, left the public gobsmacked. There now appears to be no hope of balanced reports on racial issues in any of their newspapers.
Not only that, but they are now even refusing to publish advertising that promotes democracy – when it involves Maori seats on local councils. Northland Democracy is currently exercising its legal right to petition three of the four local councils that voted to introduce Maori wards.
With one of those – the Northland Regional Council – even writing to the Minister of Local Government requesting a moratorium on petition rights, had Stuff been a media group of merit, it would have reported on those bullying tactics, instead of refusing to publish innocuous advertisements promoting democracy – see the details here.
New Zealand needs an independent Fourth Estate and balanced reporting from the media – not political activism. One wonders how Stuff will reconcile their new position with the principles of the Media Council, which state:
"Publications should be bound at all times by accuracy, fairness and balance, and should not deliberately mislead or misinform readers by commission or omission. In articles of controversy or disagreement, a fair voice must be given to the opposition view.”
How far Stuff will go with its political activism remains to be seen. But without a doubt, never has the need for a strong Fourth Estate been as great as it is now – especially in light of our Prime Minister’s global ambitions.
Jacinda Ardern is already incorporating the UN’s radical socialist Agenda 2030 into New Zealand’s legal and regulatory framework:
"My Government is doing something not many other countries have tried. We have incorporated the principles of the 2030 Agenda into our domestic policy-making in a way that we hope will drive system-level actions.”
But that is not enough.
She’s planning to advance her socialist world-view onto New Zealand using the economic destruction created by the pandemic to ‘reset’ the economy and ‘build back better’.
During the lockdown, Grant Robertson outlined the Government’s plan:
"We must make this the opportunity to reset our economy, to take account of the massive disruption to some sectors, but also to address some of the long standing challenges we face…
This work will require us to develop new ways of working and break down the barriers between partners in our economy. We have formed a core Ministerial Oversight Group for this work with the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, myself and Minister Parker.
We will soon be reaching out to both Ministerial colleagues but also the private sector, unions and more to have input into this work.”
With its plan to replace the free market economic system with a form of progressive socialism, Sir John has serious misgivings:
"Taxing work, enterprise and success more is a bad idea. Many of the great advances in living standards and quality of life have come from the innovation and enterprise of the private sector. It was not government effort that launched billions of smart phones and electronic pads on the world."
“It was not government which provided the cars to liberate many more people with flexible personal transport, or supplied the great entertainments of stage, screen and events.
It is important that as we build back from lock downs these gains are banked and enhanced, with broadening of reach to ever more people."
“When the agenda proposes taxing and regulating the very products of the digital revolution and the transport revolution that have offered to the many the freedoms and advantages that used to be the preserve of the few I worry that build back better just becomes a cover for more state control over our lives."
Britain is one of many countries around the world, including New Zealand, that is being encouraged to embrace the Great Reset – as the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau explained:
“This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality and climate change.”
This agenda to reset the world economy is not something to be ignored.
Driven by an elite group associated with the World Economic Forum, they will roll out the details of their plan for more equal, inclusive, and sustainable economies at their annual gathering in Davos, Switzerland, in January.
For those who support free markets, the Great Reset is alarming – as is the reset that is presently taking place within our media.
Drawing on the latest research and detailed case studies, the authors expose the best-kept secrets in the recovery field:
Addictions - whether to food, cigarettes, sex, alcohol, or drugs - are not diseases, and they’re not necessarily lifelong problems.
Many more people give up addictions on their own than are helped by medical treatment or twelve-step programs.
Developing values, skills, and life resources enables people to quit addictions - and to shed the addict identity altogether.
In their revolutionary “Life Process Program” for overcoming all kinds of addictions, the authors emphasize self-help and treatment through coping with stress and achieving one’s goals. As helpful as it is controversial, The Truth About Addiction and Recovery will forever change the way we view and treat addiction.
“A classic.” - John Norcross, PhD, ABPP, Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the University of Scranton and author of Changing for Good
What causes addiction? Easy, right? Drugs cause addiction. But maybe it is not that simple.
Why It Doesn’t Make Sense To Call Addiction A “Disease”
We frequently hear from people who say: “I drink too much sometimes, but I don’t think I’m an alcoholic. And I don’t want to stand up and talk about myself in front of a group. Is there any other way I can change the way I drink?”
“I’m overweight, but I understand that people are born to be fat and there’s not much you can do about it. I know I’ve tried to lose weight a million times and failed. Does this mean I’m doomed to be overweight?”
“I saw an ad saying the only way to lick your addiction to nicotine is by going to a doctor. Is that really true? Don’t people ever quit smoking on their own?”
“My father was an alcoholic. Does that mean I’m likely to become an alcoholic myself? Should I play it safe and quit drinking altogether? A friend of mine joined a ‘Children of Alcoholics’ group, even though she’s never even been drunk. Should I join such a group? And what about my kids?”
“My son was caught smoking marijuana. Now I’m told that, unless I place him in an expensive residential treatment program, he could escalate his drug use and die. I don’t have the money for this but, of course, if I have to save his life I’ll mortgage the house!”
People are much concerned about bad habits (which sometimes reach life-consuming proportions) that they’d like to do something about-drinking, smoking, overeating, taking drugs, gambling, overspending, or even compulsive romancing.
We hear more and more that every one of these things is a disease, and that we must go to treatment centers or join twelve-step support groups like Alcoholics Anonymous in order to change any of these behaviors.
Is there really no other way to change a powerful habit than to enter treatment for a disease? Do personal initiative, willpower, or just maturing and developing a more rewarding life have anything to do with people’s ability to overcome addictive habits?
As children, as spouses, as parents, as employers, as consumers, and as citizens we must struggle to understand and master the destructive potential of drugs, alcohol, and related addictions.
The kinds of questions so many people face today include: What do we do if we discover our children are smoking marijuana, or worse? Should we put them in a treatment center that will teach them they are chemically dependent for life?
How can we tell if co-workers, employees, and friends are secretly addicts or alcoholics? What is the most appropriate way to react to people who drink too much or do anything that harms themselves and others?
Click on the image above to open a larger versioj in a new window
Furthermore, as a society, how should we deal with these problems? Are our incessant wars on drugs really going to have the positive impact the generals in these wars always claim? Or is there some more sensible or direct way to reduce the damage people do to themselves through their uncontrollable habits?
Rather than arrest drug users, can we treat addicts so that they stop using drugs? And if we expand the treatment for all the addictions we have seen - like shopping and smoking and overeating and sexual behavior - who will pay for all this treatment?
Finally, does addiction diminish people’s judgment so that they can’t be held accountable for their behavior, or for crimes and financial excesses they commit while addicted?
This book is for those concerned with such questions. But what you will read here is not the same as what you see and hear in newspapers and magazines, on television, in addiction treatment centers, in twelve-step groups, and in most physicians’ and therapists’ offices or what your children are learning in school.
For in its desperate search for a way out of the convulsions caused by drug abuse and addiction, our society has seized upon a simple, seductive, but false answer that this book disputes. What we say is, indeed, so different from most things you hear that we have provided extensive documentation at the back of the book.
The simple but incorrect answer we constantly hear is expressed by the familiar statement, “Alcoholism is a disease.” In other words, we can treat away these problems in a medical setting.
This viewpoint has proved so appealing that it has been adopted by professional organizations and government agencies as well as by groups like Alcoholics Anonymous. And now the “disease” label is applied not only to alcoholism, drug addiction, cigarette smoking, and overeating, but also to gambling, compulsive shopping, desperate romantic attachments, and even committing rape or killing one’s newborn child!
A.A.’s image of “powerlessness over alcohol” is being extended to everything that people feel they are unable to resist or control.
But what lies behind the claim that alcoholism and other addictions are diseases? How accurate is it? What evidence supports it? Most important, what good does it do us to believe it? Will it really help you or someone you care about to overcome an addiction?
This book will show that the answer is no - that, in fact, it may do more harm than good. What’s wrong with calling a tenacious and destructive habit a disease?
It isn’t true.
It doesn’t help most people (even those it does help might succeed just as well in a less costly, less limiting way).
It prevents us from doing things that really would help.
In this chapter we will summarize what the disease model says, why it is wrong, and why it is harmful. As you will see, there is no good reason to label yourself or people you know as forever marked by an addictive “disease.” Challenging this useless folklore is the first step toward understanding addiction and doing something about it.
Then we will present an alternative way of thinking about and dealing with addiction called the Life Process Program. The accompanying table previews the major differences between the Life Process Program and the disease model of addiction.
Myths Versus Reality
To highlight some of the surprising facts we will reveal, here are some common beliefs about various addictions:
A person needs medical treatment or a program like Smokenders to quit smoking.
Attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings is the most effective way for alcoholics to stop drinking.
Nearly all regular cocaine users become addicted.
Very few people who have a drinking problem can ever drink in a normal, controlled manner.
Drunk drivers who undergo treatment for alcoholism are less likely to repeat the offense than those who receive normal judicial penalties such as license suspension.
Most people with an alcoholic parent become alcoholics themselves.
Most people who are binge drinkers in their twenties go on to become alcoholics.
Most of the American soldiers who were addicted to heroin in Vietnam remained addicted or became addicted again after they returned home.
The fact that alcoholism runs in families means that it is an inherited disease.
Fat children, because they have inherited their obesity, are more likely to be fat in later life than are people who become fat as adults.
Actually, the best scientific evidence available today indicates that none of these statements is true. Such specific misconceptions grow out of a foundation of false assumptions about the nature of addiction generally.
Ten Assumptions that Distinguish the Life Process Program from the Disease Model
LIFE PROCESS PROGRAM
1. Addiction is inbred and biological.
1. Addiction is a way of coping with yourself and your world.
2. The solution is medical treatment and membership in spiritual groups such as A.A.
2. The solution requires self-awareness, new coping skills, and changing your environment.
3. Addiction is all-or-nothing; you are or you aren’t an addict.
3. Addiction is a continuum; your behavior is more or less addicted.
4. Addiction is permanent and you can relapse at any moment.
4. Addiction can be outgrown.
5. Addicts are “in denial” and must be forced to acknowledge they have a disease.
5. You should identify problems and solutions in ways that work for you.
6. The recovering addict / alcoholic is the expert on addiction.
6. Those without an addiction problem are the best models.
7. Addiction is a “primary” disease.
7. Addiction stems from other life problems you have.
8. Your main associates must be other recovering addicts.
8. You should associate with a normal range of people.
9. You must accept the disease philosophy to recover.
9. Getting better is not a matter of believing a dogma.
10. Surrendering to a higher power is the key to recovery.
10. You must develop your own power to get better.
At first, it seems hard to understand what is meant by saying that something a person regularly does (such as· drinking alcohol) is a disease.
Habitual, voluntary behavior of this sort does not resemble what we normally think of as a disease, like cancer or diabetes. What is more, A.A. - and even hospital programs for alcoholism - don’t actually treat any biological causes of alcoholism.
After all the claims we have heard in the past decade about biological discoveries concerning alcoholism, not one of these findings has been translated into a usable treatment. Instead, the same group discussions and exhortations that have been used for the last fifty years are employed in hospital programs.
Nor is any biological method used to determine whether someone is an alcoholic other than by assessing how much that person drinks and the consequences of this drinking.
And if we have no special biological information about treating or identifying alcoholism, we surely know nothing about the biological causes of “diseases” such as compulsive gambling, shopping, and loving, which have nothing to do with drugs or alcohol.
There is, however, a standard way those who claim addiction is a disease describe addictive diseases. This description has been developed by groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, by the medical profession, and by various popularizers of the idea that alcoholism is a disease.
What they say is in every regard wrong.
When they tell you that you have the “disease” of alcoholism, “chemical dependency,” obesity, compulsive shopping, or whatever, this is what they mean:
The basis of the disease is inbred and/or biological. There is no need to look for the causes of the disease in your personal problems, the people you spend time with, the situations you find yourself in, or your ethnic or cultural background. Addiction is bred into you from birth or early childhood. Your current experience of life has nothing to do with it; nothing you can do makes you either more or less likely to become addicted.
It involves complete loss of control over your behavior. Once involved in your addiction, you are utterly at its mercy. You cannot choose whether, or how much, to lose yourself in the involvement. No matter how costly it may be in a given situation, you will go all the way. You cannot make reasonable, responsible choices about something to which you are addicted.
Addictions are forever. An addictive disease is like diabetes - it stays with you as long as you live. The mysterious bodily or psychic deficiency that lies at the root of addiction can never be remedied, and you can never safely expose yourself to the substance to which you were addicted. Once an addict, always an addict.
It inevitably expands until it takes over and destroys your life. “Irreversible progression” is a hallmark of addictive diseases as they are conceived today. The addiction grows and grows until it devours you, like AIDS or cancer. No rewards, no punishments, not even the most momentous developments in your life can stay its course, unless you completely swear off the addictive substance or activity.
If you say you don’t have it, that’s when they really know you have it. According to this “Catch22” of the disease theory, anyone suspected of having an addictive disease who insists that he or she doesn’t have the disease is guilty of the added offense of “denial.” In this way, the “disease” label is like a web that traps a person more firmly the harder the person fights to get out of it.
It requires medical and/or “spiritual” treatment. Thinking you can cure your addiction through willpower, changes in your life circumstances, or personal growth is a delusion (like denial), according to disease-theory proponents. Addiction is a disease of the body that can be controlled only by never-ending medical treatments.
It is also a disease of the soul requiring lifetime membership in a support group like Alcoholics Anonymous. Why supposed medical treatment consists mainly of going to group meetings and why people can’t develop their own spiritual approaches to life if they choose are questions disease theory adherents ignore.
Your kids are going to get it, too. Since addiction is an inherited disease, the children of addicts are considered at high risk for developing the same disease - no matter what you or they do or how careful you are. Logical deductions from this viewpoint are that you should have your kids tested for their genetic predisposition to alcoholism or addiction before they start school, or that you should simply teach them never to touch a drop of alcohol or expose themselves to whatever your addiction is.
Obviously, this approach presents special difficulties in dealing with addictions to eating, shopping, and making love. Where did these notions come from - notions that, when examined in the clear light of day, often seem quite bizarre and contrary to common experience?
The disease theory takes a set of precepts that were made up by and about a small group of severe, long-term alcoholics in the 1930s and applies them inappropriately to people with a wide range of drinking and other life problems. The original members of Alcoholics Anonymous, realizing they would soon die if they did not give up alcohol, adopted wholesale the dogma of the nineteenth century temperance movement.
The one major difference was that the A.A. members said drinking was a disease only for them, and not for everyone who drank - therefore not everyone needed to eschew “demon rum,” as temperance advocates had insisted.
When he co-founded Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) to offer a support group for those addicted to alcohol, Bill Wilson made the first major advance in addressing alcoholism.
A fact which is less well-known is that Bill Wilson also made the second major advance when he became aware of, and later promoted the use of niacin vitamin B3 as a treatment for chronic drinkers.
Orthomolecular Medicine and Alcoholism
Even as Alcoholics Anonymous slowly expanded, many of Bill Wilson's personal and financial problems lingered, especially his depression.
Canadian biochemist Dr. Abram Hoffer, M.D., Ph.D., a psychiatrist and physician, writes: "I met Bill in New York in 1960. Humphry Osmond and I introduced him to the concept of megavitamin therapy. Bill was very curious about it and began to take niacin, 3,000 mg daily. Within a few weeks fatigue and depression which had plagued him for years were gone."
Dr. Hoffer, in his foreword to the book "Alcoholism: The Cause and The Cure", describes how he and Bill Wilson investigated together the effect of Niacin vitamin B3 on alcoholics.
Dr Hoffer writes: “Bill understood it first hand, for even though he had been abstinent for many years, he was still unwell. He suffered from immense anxiety, tension, and fatigue, but was able to function in spite of what might have been disabling.
After taking 3 grams of niacin daily for two weeks, his symptoms vanished and he remained free of addiction. This was a peak experience that he never forgot. He became determined to give as many AA members as possible the benefit of the same healing vitamin,”.
Dr. Hoffer further writes: “Without telling me that he was doing so, Bill conducted a trial of niacin on 30 friends and colleagues in New York. Most of them were very productive and sober members of AA, but they all suffered from the common mind and mood afflictions that people formerly addicted to alcohol experience, even when they are not drinking.
After three months he showed me his data. After one month, ten of the subjects were well. After the second month another ten had recovered, and the remaining one-third had shown no improvement after the third month. By this time I had also treated a number of people addicted to alcohol and had seen similar recoveries.”
Beyond AA Meetings
Between 1960 and his death in 1971, Bill Wilson shared this information with physician members of AA in a series of 3 brochures, Communications to Alcoholics Anonymous.
Bill’s findings were unfortunately dismissed by the AA’s International Board, because he was not an "M.D." and the fact that Alcoholics Anonymous is a social support structure, not a medical treatment provider.
The A.A. model has struck a responsive chord among Americans. Obviously, with the rejection of Prohibition, the United States had decided against a national policy that everyone should abstain from drinking.
Yet Westernn society continues even today to show a deep unease about alcohol and about intoxication, which many people seek even while fearing its disturbing effects.
Given this national ambivalence, we have been drawn to the “old-time religion” of temperance, as represented by A.A., now cloaked in the modern language of medicine and the neurosciences.
But, as this book will make clear, the operative assumptions about addiction have never arisen directly from biological sciences. Rather, they have been superimposed on scientific research, much of which directly contradicts the assumptions of the disease theory.
Why the Disease Model Is Wrong
Every major tenet of the “disease” view of addiction is refuted both by scientific research and by everyday observation.
This is true even for alcoholism and drug addiction, let alone the many other behaviors that plainly have little to do with biology and medicine.
No biological or genetic mechanisms have been identified that account for addictive behavior.
Even for alcoholism, as the following chapter will show, the evidence for genetic inheritance is unconvincing. By now, probably every well-informed reader has heard announcements that scientists have discovered a gene that causes alcoholism.
In fact, as one of us wrote in The Atlantic, this is far from the case, and the study that prompted these claims has already been refuted by another study in the same journal.
Moreover, if a gene were found to influence alcoholism, would the same gene cause drug addiction?
Would it be related to smoking? Would it also cause compulsive gambling and overeating? If so, this would mean that everyone with any of these addictions has this genetic inheritance.
Indeed, given the ubiquity of the problems described, the person without this inheritance would seem to be the notable exception.
How could an addiction like smoking be genetic? Why are some types of people more likely to smoke than others (about half of waitresses and car salesmen smoke, compared with about a tenth of lawyers and doctors)?
And does believing that an addiction like smoking is genetic help the person quit (are all those smokers who quit not “genetically” addicted)?
Returning to alcohol, are people really predestined biologically to become alcoholics and thus to become A.A. members? Think about the rock group Aerosmith: all five members of this group now belong to A.A., just as they once all drank and took drugs together.
How unlikely a coincidence it is that five unrelated people with the alcoholic / addictive inheritance should run into one another and form a band!
The idea that genes make you become alcoholic cannot possibly help us understand how people develop drinking problems over years, why they choose on so many occasions to go out drinking, how they become members of heavy-drinking groups, and how drinkers are so influenced by the circumstances of their lives.
Genes may make a person unusually sensitive to the physiological effects of alcohol; a person can find drinking extremely relaxing or enjoyable; but this says nothing about how the person drinks over the course of a lifetime.
After all, some people say, “I never have more than one or two drinks at a time, because alcohol goes straight to my head.”
As we document here and in the following chapter, we can actually predict the likelihood of people’s becoming addicted far more reliably from their nationality and social class, from the social groups they join, and from their beliefs and expectations about alcohol or drugs (or other activities), than from their biological makeup.
Often, people who become addicted set themselves up by investing a substance or an experience with magical powers to transform their beings (“Getting drunk is great”; “When I drink I’m really at ease”; “Drinking makes me attractive to people of the opposite sex”).
It is simply not within the chemical properties of alcohol or a drug, or the experience of an activity like shopping, to offer people what they want and seek from an addiction.
People find this in an addiction when they believe they can’t achieve the feelings they need in ordinary ways. Clearly, attitudes, values, and the opportunities available in a person’s environment have much to do with whether the person has a significant risk for a particular addiction.
People do not necessarily lose control of themselves whenever they are exposed to the object of their addiction.
On the contrary, many practice their addictions quite selectively. For example, military and religious personnel are often deprived of tobacco during training or on retreats, and business people realize they can’t smoke in certain rooms.
Orthodox Jews who smoke heavily abstain from smoking on the Sabbath, showing that their religious values mean more to them than nicotine does. Alcoholics in experiments routinely control their drinking when it is in their interest to do so - say, when they must leave a cozy room with television and companionship in order to get more to drink.
These variations occur in real life just as they do in the laboratory - for example, when people avoid drugs or cigarettes when they are with people who won’t tolerate those habits. When something they really care about is jeopardized if they continue to drink, smoke, or whatever, most people will stop or cut down accordingly.
Addiction usually does not last a lifetime. “Once an addict, always an addict” is a pessimistic notion that is both wrong and harmful. It leaves people two choices: either you stay constantly addicted and miserable until you die; or you abstain for life while attending group meetings and viewing yourself as the perpetually “recovering” person.
Sadly, a small number of people do die of their addictions; and another group succeeds in quitting drinking, drug taking, or whatever by maintaining the role of the recovering addict.
But most people are more resilient and resourceful than that. Most people who have addictive habits moderate or eliminate these habits over the course of their lives.
And they do it without having to say “I am an alcoholic” or “I am an overeater” or “I am a sex addict” as long as they live.
Remember that, today, a majority of adults who have ever smoked have quit and nearly all did so without treatment.
Progression is not inevitable - it is the exception. If the majority of people give up addictive habits, then the idea of “inevitable progression” doesn’t hold water. Calling addiction a “progressive disease” comes from looking at the few who have progressed to severe addiction and tracing the path by which they got there.
The progression of addictive problems only seems inevitable after the fact. For example, the great majority of college overdrinkers, even those who black out at fraternity parties, become moderate drinkers in middle age.
When you consider that even most of the people who use narcotics and cocaine do not end up addicted, you can see that drug-and-alcohol use patterns are many and varied, even when a person uses a substance abusively for a time.
Treatment is no panacea. Contrary to all the advertising we hear, treatment for addictions is often no more effective than letting addiction and recovery take their natural course.
The vast majority of people who have given up addictions (beginning with more than 90 percent of the forty-four million Americans who have quit smoking have done so on their own.
This does not mean that treatment for addictions cannot work - research has shown that some forms of treatment are effective. But the ones that are more effective are not the ones that have become popular in the United States.
You can outgrow an addictive habit on your own or in therapy, but either way the principles of the Life Process Program are the same.
What about joining support groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous? Here, too, research reveals the opposite of what we have been led to believe.
A.A is a valuable community resource for those who find support in a certain type of religiously oriented group ritual.
But the best we can say about A.A is that it works for those for whom it works. Meanwhile, there are plenty for whom it doesn’t work. There is no scientific evidence that A.A. works better than other approaches when randomly selected alcoholics are assigned to A.A. or other treatments.
In fact, the evidence is that the people who are now often compelled to attend A.A - after being arrested for drunk driving or being sent by a company Employee Assistance Program - do worse than those who are left on their own.
How can we reconcile this finding with the glowing testimonials we hear about A.A.? The people we see in A.A. are the ones who like it, find it helpful, and stick it out. But there are many others who don’t go to A.A. or who don’t like it and drop out.
And as we show below, those who seriously try to stop drinking on their own are more likely to maintain their abstinence than those who attend A.A.
In addition, since many more people try to quit on their own than through therapy or joining a group, the number of self-curers is triple or more the number of successful treatment or A.A cases.
But such self-curers are not very visible, because they are individuals without an organized group to publicize their success.
These, then, are the key fallacies of the popularly held view of addiction. Even generally well-informed people may be astonished that we contradict such widely held beliefs. All of our refutations of conventional wisdom are carefully documented in the notes at the back of the book.
But you don’t need to read scholarly articles and scientific reports to test the accuracy of what we say. Just check it out against your own experience and observation. Don’t you know anyone who used to drink excessively, at times uncontrollably, but who no longer drinks at all or now drinks in a normal, appropriate manner?
Obviously, most people who used to drink excessively but who have now cut back (or even quit) do not attend meetings where they must rise and declare, “I am an alcoholic.”
How many people of all ages do you know who quit smoking? How many of them did it by going through a medical program or joining a support group, and how many finally just decided to quit and made good on that resolve? What happened to all the people you knew who used illegal drugs in college, some quite heavily?
How many of them are “chemically dependent” now? If we simply examine the cases of most of those we are close to personally, we will see how addictions usually do not follow the disease course.
Why the Disease Model Doesn’t Work - Why It Even Does More Harm than Good
The assumption that calling addiction a “disease” actually helps people crumbles when subjected to critical scrutiny. Some people feel comfortable thinking of their addiction as a disease and are able to function better on this basis for a time.
But whatever short-term benefits medical, disease-oriented treatment produces are double-edged even for the individuals who claim it has helped them.
Many of the most “successful” recipients of disease treatment might achieve a real breakthrough by learning to think about addiction differently.
Meanwhile, for the majority of people, the disadvantages of the disease approach clearly outweigh the advantages from the start.
The disadvantages of the disease approach are that it:
Attacks people’s feelings of personal control and can thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy;
Makes mountains out of molehills, since it fails to differentiate between the worst alcoholics and addicts and those with minor substance-use dependence;
Stigmatizes people - in their own minds - for life
Iinterrupts normal maturation for the young, for whom this approach is completely inappropriate;
Holds up as models for drinking and drug use the people who have shown the least capacity to manage their lives;
Isolates alcoholism and addiction as problems from the rest of the alcoholic’s or addict’s life;
Limits people’s human contacts primarily to other recovering alcoholics or addicts, who only reinforce their preoccupation with drinking and drug use;
Dispenses a rigid program of therapy that is founded - in the words of the director of the government’s National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIA.A.A) - “on hunch, not evidence, and not on science,” while attacking more effective therapies.
How can therapy that so many people believe in and swear by actually do more harm than good? To illustrate this point, consider the case of a famous psychiatrist who evaluated his hospital’s alcoholism program - one he felt was among the most outstanding in the world.
This program first detoxified the alcoholic in the hospital, then mandated A.A. attendance, and finally actively followed patients’ progress with an outreach counseling program.
When the psychiatrist running the program, Dr. George Vaillant, evaluated how well his patients were doing two years and eight years after treatment, however, he found they had fared about as well as comparable alcoholics who received no treatment at all!
How could Vaillant have been so wrong as to think his patients were doing phenomenally well, when actually they were doing no better than if he had left them alone completely?
Naturally, he wanted to think it worked. But his research prevented his rose-colored views from distorting the actual results of his treatment.
When he counted all his patients, not just his successes, when he scrutinized and verified what they were telling him in order to see exactly how well they were doing, and when he compared them with alcoholics out on their own instead of just assuming that all these people died without the help of treatment like his, Vaillant found that his expensive hospital treatment was close to useless.
Very few people in the treatment industry or in A.A. are as scrupulous as is Vaillant. When we hear from A.A. boosters, they tell us only about those who have stuck with the program and are currently sober. The same is true of treatment programs. They parade their best stars up front.
We don’t hear about all their failures. Yet Vaillant, in a book that is cited as the major source of support for the benefits of treating alcoholics according to the disease model, concluded as follows:
“If treatment as we currently understand it does not seem more effective than the natural healing processes, then we need to understand those healing processes better.”
Indeed, Vaillant repeats another researcher’s conclusion that “it may be easier for improper treatment to retard recovery than for proper treatment to hasten it.”major source of support for the benefits of treating alcoholics according to the disease model
What are the dangers of this kind of disease treatment? Here are explanations of the disadvantages listed at the beginning of this section:
It sets people up for failure.
All disease treatments emphasize how much out of control “patients” are, and what a delusion it is for them to feel they can exert any control over their addictions. Is it possible that such a message can do more harm than good?
William Miller and Reid Hester, reviewing all the comparative studies on treatment for alcoholism, made a surprising finding: in the only two studies in which alcoholics were randomly assigned either to A.A., to other forms of treatment, or to no treatment, those assigned to A.A. did no better or actually suffered more relapse than those who received other treatment or who weren’t treated at all!
Intrigued by this outcome, one of us wrote George Vaillant and asked him whether subjects he studied who abstained without entering formal treatment did better if they joined A.A. Again, A.A. members were less likely to maintain their abstinence.
Why would people be more likely to relapse if they entered A.A. than if they quit drinking on their own? There are several reasons. For one, people who enter A.A. are told they cannot succeed on their own. Therefore, if they should stop attending A.A., many are convinced that they will soon resume alcoholic drinking.
A.A. and disease treatments are especially defeatist in dealing with relapse. Accepting the disease-oriented philosophy of inevitable loss of control thus makes it more likely that the alcoholic will binge if he or she ever has a drink.
Yet, Vaillant found, nearly all alcoholics will drink again at some time.
It makes matters worse than they are. Can attending A.A. or going into addiction treatment really cause people to develop some of their alcoholism symptoms? In his book Becoming Alcoholic, sociologist David Rudy reports on the time he spent observing A.A. meetings.
Rudy found that most people had to learn their role as alcoholics. An important “rite of passage” is the first time members tell their story for the group, beginning by acknowledging, “I am an alcoholic.” In Rudy’s words;
“The alcoholic’s tale “is made up of two parts: a story about how bad it was before A.A. and a story about how good it is now.”
Narcotics anonymous is the drug users version of AA, although is generally accepting of AA members as well
This presentation is warmly greeted by the member’s sponsor in A.A., and the entire membership responds with enthusiastic acceptance of the convert.
When alcoholics introduce their experiences and symptoms in or treatment, the group or therapist homogenizes them through interpretation and clarification. For example, most people who enter have not had blackouts, which are more typical of long-term alcoholics than of the younger drinkers now flooding into treatment and A.A.
But blackouts are taken as the badge of alcoholism, and according to Rudy, “members learn the importance of blackouts as a behavior that verifies their alcoholism, and an indeterminable number of members who may not have had blackouts report them.” Rudy continues:
"When newcomers to A.A. claim that they cannot remember if they had any blackouts or not, other members use this claim as evidence of the event in question. As one member put it to a newcomer:
The reason you can’t remember is because alcohol fogs your brain. If it fogs your brain now after not drinking for a few days it must have fogged your brain before. See, you must have had blackouts then.”
A large part of alcoholism and drug treatment consists of group meetings where alcoholics or addicts “confront” one another and their problems.
Newcomers who don’t report the correct symptoms are treated with knowing condescension or are actively hazed - sometimes quite abusively - until they “get” and repeat the party line.
When Dwight Gooden entered the alcoholism-andcocaine program at the Smithers Alcoholism Center, he described being assailed by his fellow residents there during the constant group-therapy sessions. “My stories weren’t as good as theirs. . . . They said, ‘C’mon, man, you’re lying.’ They didn’t believe me. . . . I cried a lot before I went to bed at night.”
After he left the Betty Ford Center, Chevy Chase reported that he had often been angry at the counselors, who heckled the residents mercilessly, constantly denigrating them and claiming they had been living worthless lives.
Does all this sound like good therapy technique? It is simple common sense that belief in your personal value and your own strength is superior to having these things denigrated for getting your life under control.
It stigmatizes people for life. The disease model puts a label on you that you can never outgrow. Once diseased, always diseased. The effects of this defeatist view are especially tragic - and unjust - in the case of people to whom the “disease” label is most inappropriately applied in the first place: teenage binge drinkers, most drunk drivers, “adult children of alcoholics,” recreational drug users discovered through drug tests, and - in areas not involving drugs or alcohol - overweight adolescents or “hyperactive” or “learning-disabled” children.
It brutalizes and brainwashes the young. The largest single age group of people undergoing hospital treatment today for chemical dependency, eating disorders, depression, and so forth is adolescents. A.A. members are also much younger today, on average, than when the fellowship was founded by a group of men with serious, lifelong drinking problems.
Nonetheless, virtually none of these young people meet clinical standards of alcoholism or drug addiction.
Indeed, numerous cases have been identified in which young people have been hospitalized for smoking marijuana or even for being suspected of using drugs.
When one such case was revealed on national television, an unusually forthright consultant for the National Association for Alcoholism Treatment Programs confessed, “I’m afraid this happens far more than people in the field want to admit; it’s something of a scandal.”
Meanwhile, A.A. and Alateen (for teenage children of alcoholics) groups now pervade high-school and college campuses.
What is the impact of treatment that forces teenagers to take on the identity of addicts or alcoholics or children of alcoholics?
Young people are warned that their substance abuse is a permanent trait, even though we have seen that a large majority will outgrow substance-abuse problems as they mature.
Presenting this message to the young can only prolong or exacerbate their substance abuse, since it denies their own capacity for change and forces them to believe that any substance use for the rest of their lives will lead them back to excess, addiction, and drunkenness.
Young treatment grads who constantly relapse and return to treatment are the norm, as in the cases of Carrie Hamilton, Erinn Cosby, Drew Barrymore, and other young “patients” whose stories are less well publicized.
Of course, the relapses are then attributed to their “disease” and to their failure to heed the treatment’s warning to abstain forever.
These programs fairly frequently involve emotional abuse. Such “treatments” for children include “refusing to allow them to wear street clothes, keeping them in isolation for prolonged periods, or forcing them to wear self-derogatory signs, engage in other humiliation rituals . . . , or submit to intense and prolonged group confrontation” all of which, psychologists believe, “may destroy the youngsters’ already fragile self-esteem.”
When we describe these experiences, treatment specialists often argue in response, “Well, what if the kids would end up dead if we didn’t do this to them?” In other words, to object to these programs is likened to promoting intoxication leading to death.
Certainly, it is crucial to prevent children from harming themselves, and it can be worthwhile to remove children from a problem home, whether through a residential program or a visit to a sympathetic relative.
But brainwashing, emotional blackmail, denigration, and psychological torture never work, except to make people so unsure of who they are or what they value that they will temporarily consent to the demands of those in charge.
Worst of all, therapies that were devised for the most incorrigible children - though they don’t benefit even these unfortunate kids have been spreading down the ladder to more and more children whose behavior represents typical adolescent exploration and insubordination.
Parents are then confronted over whether they want to “save” their kids or allow them to die, as though the latter were the normal outcome of adolescence. The threat of their children’s dying is then used as emotional blackmail to make parents accept the sacrifices necessary to place their children in expensive residential treatment programs.
It presents the alcoholic or addict as someone to emulate. Prominent graduates of treatment programs, like Drew Barrymore, Betty Ford, Kitty Dukakis, and a host of athletes now lecture to others about chemical dependency.
If alcoholics and drug abusers suffer from a disease and are now recovering, then they can educate others about the disease and even about how young people should live and behave.
If, on the other hand, we think of them as people who are tremendously poor at self-management, then it is indeed stupid for the rest of us, who have not been seriously addicted, to ask them for advice and information.
Someone like former football star Bob Hayes explains that he took and sold drugs as a result of an inherited disease.
One reviewer’s reaction to Hayes’s book, Run, Bullet, Run, could stand for any and all of these confessional tracts: “Aside from a brief closing statement on personal responsibility, he self-servingly portrays himself as a victim throughout the book.”
Alcoholics and addicts like Hayes regularly come into schools to relay their tortured drinking experiences and to reiterate that alcohol is a dangerous drug. But nearly every child in these schools will drink.
It is as though the schools wished to undermine children’s sense of self-control and to attack their chances of becoming normal drinkers, which in most cases their “nonexpert” parents are.
In treatment itself, “recovering” addicts and alcoholics counsel the drug or alcohol abuser - who usually has not drunk as destructively and hurt himself or herself as much as the counselors!
In all types of twelve-step groups, the most severely debilitated person tends to become the leader and model for others, so that the most out-of-control shopping addict tells others about the nature of their problems.
Who should be counseling whom? In the case of drug abuse, a number of reviews have found that informational and scare lectures by recovering addicts produce the worst results of all prevention programs. These programs have never yet been found to reduce drug use; on the contrary, several studies have found increased drug use in their aftermath.
It ignores the rest of the person’s problems in favor of blaming them all on the addiction.
When someone like Carrie Hamilton lectures about her youthful drug abuse and delinquency (often alongside her mother, Carol Burnett), she makes drug abuse and family failures sound like mysterious, unavoidable illnesses that some people and their parents “have.”
Of course, this excuses her and her mother from dealing with painful problems they would prefer to avoid.
But by adopting the disease identity as her protection through the rest of her life, the youthful convert guarantees that she cannot grow beyond the limitations of her adolescent family life.
Can people hope for more than this?
When treatment views alcoholics as being victims of a different body chemistry that forces them to become alcoholics, the treatment process ignores the person’s life problems and the functions drinking serves for the alcoholic.
For example, in family therapy where the alcoholic’s drinking is addressed as simply the result of a disease, the therapist and the family are not able to understand that some people use alcohol to air feelings they cannot express when sober.
Ignoring dynamics like these leaves the drinker unable to cope with the things that led him or her to need to drink - such as doubts about self-worth, a difficult relationship with a spouse, roles (such as homosexuality) that create conflict for the person, and so on.
If the labeling of alcoholism as a disease provides welcome relief from the shame of overdrinking. it also prevents people from confronting the emotional tasks they need to accomplish to attain personal wholeness.
It traps people in a world inhabited by fellow disease-sufferers. Many “recovering” people report that they feel comfortable only with others in exactly the same plight. They find they can’t create intimacy outside of treatment and that they are driven constantly to talk about their alcoholism or addiction.
This is a frequent hang-up for recovering alcoholics who attend A.A. meetings so religiously that they can’t maintain a life outside of the group. The phenomenon of compulsive therapy attendance has made many people ask us, “Is there such a thing as addiction to treatment?” Indeed there is, when people rely on a twelve step group or therapy to the point where it disables them from conducting outside relationships and activities.
One of us has treated a number of A.A. members or treatment graduates who now fear they can’t deal with normal society. One man, who was regularly asked to head his local A.A. group, had dated a series of women he met at A.A. Unfortunately, all of these relationships had ended in bitterness and mutual recriminations.
But when he tried to date outside the group, he discovered that nonalcoholic women found him overbearing and compulsive.
“I don’t want to be limited for the rest of my life to dealing with alkies - I’d like to think I can advance beyond that; “ he plaintively told us.
This man felt that dealing exclusively with alcoholics was debilitating him, and yet he couldn’t escape A.A.
It excludes other approaches, many of which are more successful. Even if one accepts that many A.A. members are happy and successful, it is simply absurd to discourage people from trying to recover without A.A. The National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence (NCADD) frequently announces statistics about the continually rising costs of alcoholism and the increasing number of alcoholics in our society.
But, then, the NCADD is capable only of calling for more of the standard approach to treating alcoholism that has accompanied these increases, while discouraging all alternative approaches.
Why should things improve all of a sudden if we simply do more of the same? The A.A. approach to people’s drinking problems has shown conclusively that it cannot make a decisive difference for most active problem drinkers, since there are very few alcoholics who aren’t already aware of - or who haven’t already attended - A.A.
Meanwhile, greater numbers of people are being forced to enter private treatment centers and A.A. as a result of court orders, Employee Assistance Programs, or school counseling programs.
Despite the almost universal belief that compelling people to attend standard treatment programs is helpful, these programs regularly demonstrate they are no more effective than self-initiated programs for curing addictions.
Psychologists William Miller and Reid Hester, reviewing all the comparative studies on treatment for alcoholism, made a surprising finding:
“Virtually all of them [the standard treatments] lacked adequate scientific evidence of effectiveness.”
At the same time, they discovered, the “treatment approaches most clearly supported as effective... were very rarely used in American treatment programs.”
What don’t really work in the long run are the conversion-experience type treatments; what do work are therapies that teach people skills at self-management and coping.
Nonetheless, most American treatment personnel seem hell-bent on eliminating any other treatment for alcoholism besides twelve-step programs. In the United States, discredited disease-treatment programs - ones that NIAAA Director Enoch Gordis believes may be “frequently useless and wasteful and sometimes dangerous” - proliferate and spread into whole new areas of behavior.
This issue is important because the United States spends more money on health care than any other country - and the percentage of our gross national product that we spend on health care is growing faster than that in any other country.
The fastest-growing component of the health-care system is substance abuse and related mental-health treatments. According to a hospital trade publication;
“Psychiatric, chemical dependency and rehabilitative hospital care - all largely unregulated by government payment mechanisms - are booming.”
This is one reason so many companies are being forced to cut insurance benefits or are asking employees to pay a greater share. What if your insurance rates were raised to pay for a fellow employee who was undergoing a repeat treatment for cocaine addiction, since he had relapsed one or more times?
How would you feel about sharing the bill for a colleague who entered an expensive hospital eating-disorders clinic?
Do you think that smokers who want to quit should enter treatment programs and be excused from work, with pay, while they concentrate on quitting? And, especially, how would you react if you had quit smoking on your own?
It is morally and economically necessary for us to evaluate the effectiveness of alcoholism and other addiction treatments. For we are wasting limited health-care resources to place people in expensive treatments - treatments that have not shown they do more than inexpensive, straightforward skills counseling or than people accomplish on their own - often more reliably!
Kitty Dukakis: “Chemical Dependency” Reduced to Absurdity
Kitty Dukakis became the paradigm of the addicted person of the 1990s. Kitty Dukakis has been eager all along to accept the “disease” and “chemically dependent” labels. Advertisements for her autobiography, Now You Know, trumpet the opening line of the book, “I’m Kitty Dukakis and I’m a drug addict and an alcoholic.”
Mrs. Dukakis seemingly has been either addicted or in treatment throughout her adult life. Shortly before she joined her husband in his 1988 presidential campaign, she revealed that she had been treated for a twenty-six-year reliance on diet pills, which she began before she married Michael Dukakis.
Soon after her husband’s defeat in the election, she began to drink herself unconscious and underwent a series of treatments for her alcoholism and for a variety of emotional problems.
That treatment did not succeed. Mrs. Dukakis only began getting drunk after the election, for which she first entered the Edgehill Newport hospital.
But soon after this treatment experience, she began having explosive relapses in which she drank rubbing alcohol, nail polish remover, hair spray, and other commercial products containing alcohol.
Moreover, she discovered during the course of writing her book that she suffers from another disease - manic-depressive disorder - and as a result she ends the book with the revelation that she is receiving lithium treatment.
Previously, Mrs. Dukakis had been prescribed Prozac, a drug featured on the cover of Newsweek in 1990 as a new miracle in the treatment of depression, to no avail.
Mrs. Dukakis appears, in the book and on television, a forlorn being. Indeed, syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman, who had known Mrs. Dukakis, wrote a column entitled “Do Our Drug Treatment Programs Label Patients as Losers?” Ms. Goodman wondered aloud how labeling oneself as sick and without hope is helpful.
“What happens when those who wrestle with problems of self-esteem are required to wear such a label? . . . Today, Kitty Dukakis describes herself by diagnosis. Drug addict. Alcoholic. Manic-depressive.”
Ms. Goodman ended her column by wishing that Kitty Dukakis might see the brighter qualities that others have seen in her, and which seem entirely to have disappeared thanks to her various diagnoses and cures.
It seems clear that excessive drinking is only the tip of Mrs. Dukakis’s problems, and that medical treatment will never get to the bottom of them. Labeling Kitty Dukakis as a “sick” person who needs medical treatment is a palliative for her uncomfortable marital and personal problems.
Reviewers have commented about how insensitive and unaware of her problems Michael Dukakis appeared to be, yet Kitty never reflects on the limitations of her spouse or their relationship.
Somehow, her never-ending disease-oriented treatment fails to raise crucial issues for Mrs. Dukakis about a life and marriage she seems to have found intolerable.
Will Kitty Dukakis be writing another book in which she reveals she has discovered she is suffering from one more dis-ease that of codependence?
With Kitty Dukakis as a prominent model of the addict/alcoholic, those who look to her life for answers are being fed yet another self-defeating solution. To call Kitty Dukakis’s and her audiences’ problems diseases is to evade reality, much as Mrs. Dukakis used diet pills and alcohol to do.
Whether the pain Mrs. Dukakis and others feel is temporary or persistent, relatively mild or relatively severe, it does not need to rule the rest of their lives. Kitty Dukakis and the rest of us are more than our misery and problems.
Moreover, what troubles her and those like her are life problems, not diseases. And when we have reduced them to life size, we can begin to deal with them reasonably and hopefully.
The Experience of Addiction
The question is: “If addiction isn’t a disease, then what is it?” An addiction is a habitual response and a source of gratification or security.
It is a way of coping with internal feelings and external pressures that provides the addict with predictable gratifications, but that has concomitant costs.
Eventually these costs may outweigh the subjective benefits the addiction offers the individual. Nonetheless, people continue their addictions as long as they believe the addictions continue to do something for them.
It is important to place addictive habits in their proper context, as part of people’s lives, their personalities, their relationships, their environments, their perspectives. The effort to change an addiction will generally affect all these other facets of a person’s life as well.
An addiction may involve any attachment or sensation that grows to such proportions that it damages a person’s life.
Addictions, no matter to what, follow certain common patterns. We first made clear in Love and Addiction that addiction - the single-minded grasping of a magic-seeming object or involvement; the loss of control, perspective, and priorities - is not limited to drug and alcohol addictions. When a person becomes addicted, it is not to a chemical but to an experience. Anything that a person finds sufficiently consuming and that seems to remedy deficiencies in the person’s life can serve as an addiction.
The addictive potential of a substance or other involvement lies primarily in the meaning it has for a person.
A person is vulnerable to addiction when that person feels a lack of satisfaction in life, an absence of intimacy or strong connections to other people, a lack of self-confidence or compelling interests, or a loss of hope.
Periods such as adolescence, military service, and times of isolation or grief may for a time make people especially susceptible to an addiction.
Under some circumstances, a harmful involvement can become so important to a person that addiction is very likely, as heroin addiction was for many in Vietnam.
Situations in which people are deprived of family and the usual community supports; where they are denied rewarding or constructive activities; where they are afraid, uncomfortable, and under stress; and where they are out of control of their lives - these are situations especially likely to create addiction.
The relationship between hopelessness, lack of opportunity, and persistent addiction is, of course, a template for lives in ghettos. Recognizing the connection between these situational factors and addiction will explain why our wars on drugs, including the latest, never succeed.
The “hook” of the addiction - the thing that keeps people coming back to it - is that it gives people feelings and gratifying sensations that they are not able to get in other ways. It may block out sensations of pain, uncertainty, or discomfort.
It may create powerfully distracting sensations that focus and absorb attention. It may enable a person to forget, or feel “okay” about, insurmountable problems.
It may provide artificial, temporary feelings of security or calm, of self-worth or accomplishment, of power or control, of intimacy or belonging.
These benefits explain why a person keeps coming back to the addictive experience - an addiction accomplishes something for that person, or the person anticipates that it will do so, however illusory these benefits may actually be.
Addiction, drug abuse, alcoholism, obesity, and smoking all involve and are fueled by value choices. Think of people whose lives are “together” - who enjoy strong emotional bonds with others, productive work, satisfying feelings of competence and of fun, and a sense of responsibility toward others.
Will they become addicted to drugs or alcohol because of some physiological susceptibility and allow the addiction to undo the fabric of their lives? For you personally, can you imagine getting so drunk that you would abuse your infant child? It just doesn’t happen that way.
If you have better things to do and value other things more than escape into intoxication, then you won’t make intoxication the center of your life.
And if you are addicted, you can best overcome it by creating or re-creating those personal strengths and values.
Whatever the subjective benefits of an addiction or the values that drive an addiction, the person pays a price for an addictive involvement.
Addictions make people less aware of and less able to respond to other people, events, and activities. Thus, the addictive experience reinforces and exacerbates the problems the person wanted so badly to get away from in the first place.
In the person’s inner, subjective experience, the addiction may make things seem better.
But in the real world, it only makes things worse. With the worst addictions, jobs and relationships fall away; health deteriorates; debts increase; opportunities disappear; the business of life is neglected.
The person is increasingly “out of touch” with nourishing contacts and essential responsibilities.
This growing disengagement from the realities of life sets the person up for the trauma of withdrawal. When the addictive experience is removed, the person is deprived of what has become his or her primary source of comfort and reassurance.
Simultaneously, the person “crash-lands” back onto an inhospitable world, a world from which the person has been using the addiction to escape.
Compared with these existential torments, the purely physical dislocations of withdrawal are, even for most heroin addicts, not particularly debilitating.
After all, nearly everyone who receives powerful narcotics in the hospital gives them up after returning home or when the illness is over. Consider also that drug addicts and alcoholics indicate that the most unbearable drug withdrawal is from cigarettes.
And if one puts all withdrawal on a scale, probably the worst of all occurs in the case of failed love relationships.
The experience of withdrawal, like that of addiction, is shaped by the way a person interprets it. In therapeutic communities like Daytop Village in New York, addicts are not excused from their normal duties when they undergo withdrawal; as a result, withdrawing addicts - even those who have had several withdrawal episodes previously - continue mopping floors and carrying out other duties.
Cultural beliefs also play a crucial role in addiction - for example, beliefs that are widely propagated about the power of a drug to enslave a person and the difficulty of escaping it actually contribute to the difficulties of withdrawal.
Equally important are the person’s readiness to confront withdrawal and belief that he or she can manage it.
If you are convinced that withdrawal will be intolerably painful and that you cannot withstand it, or if you don’t have sufficiently powerful reasons to confront withdrawal experiences, you won’t be prepared to withdraw from your addiction.
The addict who feels incapable of existing without a drug can never successfully withdraw, and doesn’t want to try.
Ironically, one of the beliefs that most contribute to the susceptibility to addiction is the belief in the power of addiction itself.
Believing that drugs are stronger than you are means you will become addicted more easily and stay addicted longer.
But if you recognize that drugs and alcohol never take away your own responsibilities and capacity to control your destiny - even if you have alcoholic relatives or have had addictive problems in the past - you always stand a better chance of avoiding addiction or dealing with it successfully.
A Commonsense Way of Thinking About Overcoming an Addiction
Although the schematic description above is useful for understanding what addiction is and how it comes about, we need not think of all our troublesome habits or fixations in such dire terms.
In fact, when we overdramatize our addictions, we may do ourselves an injustice and make change more difficult.
An addiction may be more or less severe - and a person may be more or less able to give it up - depending on the circumstances of the person’s life.
Addiction is more likely in stressful times, times when gratifications are slim, times when a person is less together or secure.
Likewise, one type of excess may be more stubbornly entrenched in a person’s routine, or more closely linked to a person’s self-doubt and insecurity, than another.
Addiction occurs along a continuum - there is no easy test to tell you whether you have an addiction or just a bad habit.
For example, by some estimates, half of all Americans are overweight. Are they all addicted overeaters?
Many people encounter significant health risks because of the way they eat (recall that heart disease is America’s major killer). Are these the addicts? Some people are preoccupied day and night with their eating; they are suffused with guilt over eating too much, yet they are unable to change their eating habits.
Surely, these are the addicts, we think. A still more limited group of people encounter major health problems through their overweight, severely restricting their lives, but are unable to modify their eating habits.
At the furthest extreme of addiction are the minuscule number of people who become so fat they are completely immobile - people we sometimes see on television who may not even be able to fit through their doorways.
If we call only these people - people who have given up all effort to control their eating - true addicts, we end up with a fraction of a percentage of addicted overeaters, and books wouldn’t need to be written for millions of people who fear they have food addictions.
Moreover, for this minuscule group, concepts such as “denial” hardly seem to have meaning - does the twelve-hundred-pound man who hasn’t left his house in years really need to be told that he has an addictive eating problem?
For most people, the exercise of drawing the line that divides “addicted” from “normal” is not very helpful.
We need to remember that nearly all people cut back and forth across these categories at different points in their lives and in different situations.
Although letting your urges overcome you to gain total control of your life is a relatively rare phenomenon, everyone has addictive urges and sometimes gives in to them. Addiction characterizes some aspect of everyone’s life - this is one reason why it is so ridiculous to think of it as a disease.
Thin people whom we envy for their self-control will tell us there are some treats they can’t keep in the house because otherwise they would eat them all at once.
Remember that people whom we admire for having had the strength to quit smoking used to search ashtrays desperately looking for a butt when they ran out of cigarettes!
What we most need to know is not how bad off or how genuinely addicted we are but, rather, how people learn to resist successfully the addictive or unhealthy urges that come with being human.
How do they construct full lives, develop alternatives to addiction, learn the strength to stop after having started or, when necessary, not to start at all?
Let us start, then, with alcoholism, the addiction most commonly referred to as a disease. There must be - there is - a better way to understand and redirect the paths people take into and out of problem drinking.
The Three Varieties Of Money
March 21 2023 | From: FinalWakeupCall / Various
The Illusion of Money: Money and banks are founded on faulty public sentiment. Money should be a symbol of value, the same way a little stone or carved piece of wood is a symbol of God. But, in the modern world, money is a commodity, like beer and cheese.
There are a many different kinds of money in exactly the same way as there are many brands of beer and cheese, and they all present their own national characters and peculiarities.
However, there is a profound difference between money which has a value in-and-of-itself, such as a gold coin that has intrinsic value, and legal tender currencies, like bonds, notes and letters of credit. At the same time there is additionally, a market in other securities, like stocks and commodity futures.
More precisely, todays’ money is valuable only as long as there is not too much of it. The market can absorb a little counterfeited money, but there’s a limit.
And that limit has been greatly exceeded, thanks to, a worldwide overcapacity in output, financed by former lending and a huge excess of cheap labour, largely financed by the credit expansion of the last 30 years.
Without these two unique circumstances, central banks’ irresponsible QE and ZIRP policies would probably have caused inflation to rise into the double-digit range or even higher, much earlier, maybe as far back as a decade ago?
Nowadays there is no further need to worry about how much governments borrow. Central banks buy government bonds – hold them on their balance sheets – return the interest payments – and the whole thing is set up in such a way as to be swiftly forgotten.
And when the bonds expire, central banks can use the repaid principal to buy more government debt!
In effect, today’s central banksters are doing something they previously could only dream of doing: printing money without causing a noticeable inflation. Politicians, too, are enjoying this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of unaccounted for recklessness.
They are able to do what none could do before: borrow money without paying it back. The public has not read about these malpractices in the press yet, but it should be coming soon.
Regular readers who understood the earlier explained money scam know already that there is in actual fact no need for governments to repay their loans to central bankers, as the money governments borrow from central banks, doesn’t come from taxpayers, it comes from nowhere; from thin air, like the rest of the world’s money.
Three Varieties of Money
Think of the word “money” for a moment. What’s the first picture that comes to mind? Perhaps the folded pieces of paper in your wallet. Or the balance in your bank account.
Or perhaps the investments in your brokerage account. In today’s financial system, where unelected central bankers wield totalitarian control over the financial system, all three of these forms represent money, but the relationship between them is very shaky, and risky.
Physical cash, no matter where you live in the world, is used by every civilised nation on the planet. All nations have some form of physical currency in various denominations.
Dollars, Pounds, Euros, Yen, Renminbi. These pieces of paper are passed around as a medium of exchange. Go to the grocery store, and as long it is the local currency, you can pay for anything with physical cash. It is that simple.
Bank balances make it slightly more complicated. When logged into your bank’s website, you see a balance displayed on the screen. Don’t think for a second that there are a corresponding number of pieces of paper sitting in your bank’s vault. In fact, most banks have very little cash on hand.
Your balance is nothing more than an accounting entry on your bank’s balance sheet, which is likely maintained in a computer database. There’s no physical ‘money’ backing up this bank balance. It’s an annotation in a computer. Each bank customer’s savings is part of this complex system of accounting entries.
When you transfer money, the bank doesn’t send that amount in cash. They merely make an entry in the ledger, reducing your balance and increasing the one you are sending the money to for the same amount.
The same thing happens when a credit card is swiped to pay for something; banks exchange accounting entries that credit the vendor’s account and debit yours.
Nothing physical ever changes hands, it all takes place in digital ledgers. Given that this type of money exceeds physical cash by a factor of at least 10:1, it is correct to conclude that most modern currencies are in effect digital.
Government bonds are another form of money that most people often forget about. Generally, people will keep the majority of their life’s savings in their bank account. But, big banks or companies that have tens of billions don’t keep such vast sums of money in the bank. Certainly not all of it.
Companies, institutions, banks, and even foreign governments around the globe buy government bonds precisely because of their ‘cash equivalent’ status. This means that if the Chinese government is doing a deal with an African government for $1 billion, they can conduct the transaction using US government bonds as payment currency.
Varieties Exchange Rate
But, here is the problem we have as a society: Right now, each of these three types of money is basically considered as the same thing.
They just are different varieties of the same money, i.e. $1 million in government bonds equals a $1 million bank balance, which equals one million pieces of paper. But in actuality, they are three entirely separate currencies: Physical cash, digital cash, and government IOUs.
At this moment in time, these three varieties of money have a 1:1:1 exchange ratio, i.e. they’re freely interchangeable at parity. But this 1:1:1 variety exchange ratio (VER) actually depends on financial stability. And when there are serious problems, the exchange rate breaks down rapidly.
For example; in 2013 when the government of Cyprus froze bank accounts across the entire country. No one could access their bank balances for weeks. Clearly in an instance like this, the value of a bank balance becomes worthless. The only way to conduct a transaction was with physical cash.
So, in the event of a banking crisis, the variety exchange ratio changes quickly. Physical cash becomes much more valuable. It is the same thing in a government debt crisis. It is bizarre to think that the bonds of a bankrupt government are a widely accepted form of ‘risk-free’ savings among institutions.
But what happens when that bankrupt government defaults, or has to restructure its debt? The entire system breaks down. Suddenly the bonds are no longer ‘cash equivalents’, and there is a scramble to dump them and find another safe, reliable investment.
Cash is King
Similarly, the 1:1:1 VER quickly breaks down, just like it did in Greece. This is ultimately why it makes sense to hold some physical cash. You certainly won’t be worse off for holding some physical cash savings in a safe at home, especially since interest rates on bank balances are essentially zero.
Physical cash is by no means a magic bullet; it’s nothing more than a piece of paper printed by a government agency at the behest of an unelected central bank committee. Fundamentally, it has zero intrinsic value and in the long run all paper currencies will ultimately reach their intrinsic value of ZERO.
Future historians will wonder in utter disbelief how people could be so foolish as to assign any value whatsoever to paper and accept it as payment for delivered goods or services. – Nevertheless, in the short term, holding at least some physical cash makes sense as a hedge against financial calamity.
Trust and Debt Money Scam
To further expand on the concept of money, there are two more kinds of money in circulation, namely trust money, created out of people’s energy during the exchange between ordinary individuals, and debt money, created out of thin air by central banks and the banking industry through the fractional reserve scam.
The misuse of energy in the form of energy money causes suffering and death and is in violation with Galactic Law.
By legally equalising trust-money with debt-money, with an exchange rate of 1:1, debt money is given the same value as trust money, resulting in the fact that hardly anyone notices the scam that energy value equals with nothing.
Actually, debt money should have a much lower rating as there is a risk that the issuer could default on the debt!
This aqualisation results in inflation, which in itself is forthright theft; as the increase of the money supply goes far beyond social trust.
The conflict between the two kinds of money – trust versus debt money – must be clear: as a dollar can be spent only once – in principle for private transactions between citizens, but due to this manipulation scheme, it is also promised by governments to pay off the public debt to the central banks.
Through this scheme, governments are engaged in a crime scam, as they allocate and commit people’s money without the consent, nor knowledge and understanding of their citizens.
Government is Our Enemy
To keep it analytically simple: the creditor of the money is to be paid back – which is the Central Bank – with the same money created out of nothing.
This is an abusive scam between the Central Bank and the citizens of the world. By erecting a smoke screen, most people don’t notice the swindle: This is due to the fact that the government REQUIRES that citizens PAY their taxes in the currency of the central bank.
In short this commitment defines the essence of debt money.
As a result of this scheme, Inflation occurs, due to nothing more and nothing less than the injection of fiat money – debt money – into the existing amount of trust money. This is actually an ‘abuse of trust’ with regard to the people, or plainly defined FRAUD.
Everyone knows that debt must always be paid off, so the people collectively continue to pay off a debt to which they never made a commitment. This is a deliberate and blatant SCAM of the government.
This scam results in the following consequences: if all debt were to be repaid, then there would be no money left in circulation. Because the first component of the money supply – trust money – serves as collateral for the second – debt money – while the second is for the purchase of the first, so both shape the illusion of money. In other words,
Public debt is required to create money while the people are told that their money is needed to pay off public debt, which is, of course, complete nonsense and a huge lie!
The pledge of trust money is a promise. The collateral of debt money that arises from “debt” requires collateral for which taxes are created, collected by the government to pay off the ‘never-ending’ or perpetual debt to the Central Banks in the currency that the central bank itself has issued out of thin air.
This is subsequently mixed with the trust money already in circulation, making the SCAM invisible.
The System is Seen for What it Really is
So, the government is obviously our enemy. We have been betrayed. We should be angry and want to cry from frustration. But on the other hand, we must be glad and thankful to finally see through this scheme and see the system for what it really is, one that is physically and financially ruining us.
Let’s stop putting our trust in this impostor, the government, which, under the guise of being our faithful friend and a good provider, has betrayed us in favour of the multinationals and world financiers, the Deep State’s Brotherhood.
Let’s no longer ask for help, assistance, laws, etc., from our enemy. From today on, we should adopt the attitude of automatically being suspicious of all proposals, decisions or gifts coming from government. Always look this gift horse in the mouth.
If it suggests that we go right, we should go left. Even if we don’t know why, we will be sure to make the right decision, because government works against us, moving in the opposite direction should reap victory.
Remember; we do give the Deep State power by staying ignorant of their existence or by remaining angry about what they do without taking the appropriate action!
Read and use the information provided in the book THE GREAT AWAKENING – soon to be released in English – to combat your government, authorities and the evil Elite.
Don’t accept your slavery status any longer. Victory can be attained by simply walking away from it!
Escaping The Matrix: 10 Ways To Deprogram Yourself March 20 2023 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit / Various
Think of the way most people live. They force themselves to wake up in the morning, dress up, drive straight to work, drive back home about 8 hours later, watch TV, and sleep, only to repeat the same routine next day for almost their entire lives.
We consider this kind of living as normal and even healthy, but if you stop and think about it, it’s not healthy at all.
Life is so precious and beautiful, and instead of making the most out of it, we choose to waste it just because we have been programmed to do so. Habits, tradition and belief systems have turned us into mindless automatons who don’t enjoy life and just follow a predetermined path that was handed to us by society.
This programming, however, can be broken, if we realize that the way we live is preventing us from squeezing the juice out of life, and gather the courage to transform how we think and act. Then, life can be turned into a beautiful celebration filled with laughter, play, and love.
How to Deprogram Yourself
Below are 10 tips that will help you to deprogram yourself and escape the matrix you’ve been trapped into since the day you were born:
1. Break Free From the Shackles of Organized Religion.
Dogmatic, organized religion imposes on people what to think and what not to, what is good and what is bad, what is right and what is wrong. Thus religion prevents people from using their critical thinking, seeking the truth, and reaching to their own conclusions.
On the contrary, it teaches them to blindly follow a set of morals and rules. The result? Emotional suppression and suffering. If you want to reclaim your individuality, honestly express yourself and walk on the path of understanding, be sure to break the chains of organized religion and start your own quest for the truth from scratch.
2. Stop Giving Your Power Away to Authority
From a very young age, most of us were taught to doubt ourselves and do only what authority commands us to, even if we didn’t feel like doing so. Now, as adults, we don’t trust ourselves, and so we choose to let others have power over our lives.
We vote for politicians who do nothing but lie to us in order to satisfy their inner hunger, being under the illusion that by voting we are granted the power to choose our future, when in reality the choices we are presented with are very limited and almost exactly the same.
So we allow a small group of people to manipulate us for their own personal gain, foolishly believing that they want to contribute to the betterment of society.
If we truly want to start creating a positive change in the world, we need to stop giving power to a few others and hold them responsible for our lives, and instead start taking responsibility in our own hands so that we can become the creators of our destiny.
3. Question the Current Economic System
Money, in essence, is created out of debt, thus creating the illusion of scarcity of resources, which compels people to compete in the market, who have to waste most of their life working as wage slaves.
This inevitably results in the tremendous suffering and social conflict that prevails all around the world.
In addition, our economic system requires people to consume without end so that money can keep on circulating in the economy, thus urging us to continuously buy things we don’t need and which are going to end up in landfills, poisoning the very environment that we depend on and sustains us.
If you don’t like this kind of living and would like to create a positive change in your life and the world, I’d highly recommend you to research further into the immensely negative consequences of our economy, and educate yourself on alternative, more technically efficient and environmentally sustainable economic systems.
Being brought up in a consumer culture, we believe that money can buy everything we need and will bring happiness into our lives. So we choose to buy more and more things without end, but we always end up feeling dissatisfied and hungry for more stuff.
Having some nice things is fine - but knowing where to draw the line for yourself is key - many people lose their way
The truth is that money can only provide us with substitutes for what we truly need, but not the real deal. What we need is neither possessions nor services, but things such as love, friendship, and creativity. So don’t be concerned about which is the next best thing you can buy, and instead invest your time and efforts in achieving heart-opening and mind-expanding experiences that money can’t buy.
5. Be Mindful of What You Put Into Your Body
Is what you’re eating contributing to your health or is it poisoning your physical organism? Is what you’re eating environmentally sustainable, or is it negatively impacting the natural world? These are some important questions that all people should ask themselves.
Most people choose to eat foods which are filled with sugar, preservatives, and which are empty of nutrients or contain animal-derived products, unaware that their food choices are detrimental to their health, contribute to the suffering and death of tens of billions of animals, and have a tremendously negative impact on the environment.
From now on, be sure to choose carefully what you choose to put into your mouth, and I assure you that this is one of the best things you can do for yourself and the world.
6. Choose Your News Sources Wisely
Knowledge is power, but we are drowning in an ocean of information. Corporate media presents us all the time with biased information so as to fool us into believing the lies they tell us just so that they can manipulate us exactly the way they want.
A true seeker of knowledge does not accept anything on belief but seeks out for facts and tries to develop a spherical understanding of the matter he/she is looking into.
If you don’t like being mislead and desire to better understand what’s going on in the world, do your best to collect information from as many sources as possible and use critical thinking in order to reach to your own conclusions about what’s true or not.
7. Read Eye-Opening, Mind-Empowering Books
There have been many wise persons who’ve written down their thoughts on life’s problems and how they can be overcome. There have been many persons who have criticized the workings of society and offer their insights on how we can help create a more beautiful world.
Books can be immensely helpful to open our eyes and improve the quality of our life, but not many people spend much of their time reading books - or they just choose to read for entertainment reasons alone.
To get the most out of reading books, be sure to not just pick any book and read - read those ones which touch your mind and heart and provide you with new perspectives that help you to better understand yourself and the world.
8. Escape the Herd Mentality
Just as every person alive, you are a unique individual with unique talents and gifts to offer to the world. Unfortunately, society has suppressed our individuality since the day we were born. We’ve been programmed to doubt ourselves and conform to what is considered as normal.
This, however, prevents us from embracing ourselves and creating our own path in life, which is causing us immense emotional pain. From today, distance yourself from the herd mentality and start paying attention to your inner voice - doing so will allow you to follow your calling and live the way you truly want to live.
9. Creatively Express Yourself
A great way to deprogram yourself from the normalcy of modern life is to focus your attention on creativity. We’re all born creative, but slowly slowly our creativity has been suppressed so much that we’ve almost forgotten that we’re creative beings.
To be creative means to think outside the box and see life from different perspectives. Most importantly, to be creative means to find out new ways of living and realize that you have the power to manifest the kind of life you desire.
10. Develop Mindfulness
Lastly, learning how to live in the present moment is the most important way to break free from your conditioning. By being mindful of the here and now, you’ll be able to respond to whatever happens each and every moment spontaneously, without being a victim of your past.
There are many meditation techniques out there that can help you to become mindful, so find the ones that you like most and stick to them until you see positive results in your life.
“The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy.
You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.”
Morpheus, The Matrix
The Truth About Money Is Out & Austerity In 8 Minutes: Why It Does Not Work, Why It Is Still Practised March 19 2023 | From: TheGuardian / Yanis Varoufakis
The truth about money creation and Austerity. Back in the 1930s, Henry Ford is supposed to have remarked that it was a good thing that most Americans didn't know how banking really works, because if they did, "there'd be a revolution before tomorrow morning".
In 2014, something remarkable happened. The Bank of England let the cat out of the bag. In a paper called "Money Creation in the Modern Economy", co-authored by three economists from the Bank's Monetary Analysis Directorate, they stated outright that most common assumptions of how banking works are simply wrong, and that the kind of populist, heterodox positions more ordinarily associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street are correct.
To get a sense of how radical the Bank's new position is, consider the conventional view, which continues to be the basis of all respectable debate on public policy. People put their money in banks.
Banks then lend that money out at interest – either to consumers, or to entrepreneurs willing to invest it in some profitable enterprise. True, the fractional reserve system does allow banks to lend out considerably more than they hold in reserve, and true, if savings don't suffice, private banks can seek to borrow more from the central bank.
The central bank can print as much money as it wishes. But it is also careful not to print too much. In fact, we are often told this is why independent central banks exist in the first place.
If governments could print money themselves, they would surely put out too much of it, and the resulting inflation would throw the economy into chaos. Institutions such as the Bank of England or US Federal Reserve were created to carefully regulate the money supply to prevent inflation.
This is why they are forbidden to directly fund the government, say, by buying treasury bonds, but instead fund private economic activity that the government merely taxes.
It's this understanding that allows us to continue to talk about money as if it were a limited resource like bauxite or petroleum, to say "there's just not enough money" to fund social programmes, to speak of the immorality of government debt or of public spending "crowding out" the private sector.
The Bank of England has admitted that none of this is really true. To quote from its own initial summary:
“Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits"… "In normal times, the central bank does not fix the amount of money in circulation, nor is central bank money 'multiplied up' into more loans and deposits."
In other words, everything we know is not just wrong – it's backwards. When banks make loans, they create money. This is because money is really just an IOU.
The role of the central bank is to preside over a legal order that effectively grants banks the exclusive right to create IOUs of a certain kind, ones that the government will recognise as legal tender by its willingness to accept them in payment of taxes.
There's really no limit on how much banks could create, provided they can find someone willing to borrow it. They will never get caught short, for the simple reason that borrowers do not, generally speaking, take the cash and put it under their mattresses; ultimately, any money a bank loans out will just end up back in some bank again.
So for the banking system as a whole, every loan just becomes another deposit.
What's more, insofar as banks do need to acquire funds from the central bank, they can borrow as much as they like; all the latter really does is set the rate of interest, the cost of money, not its quantity.
Since the beginning of the recession, the US and British central banks have reduced that cost to almost nothing. In fact, with "quantitative easing" they've been effectively pumping as much money as they can into the banks, without producing any inflationary effects.
Austerity In 8 Minutes: Why It Does Not Work. Why It Is Still Practised
What this means is that the real limit on the amount of money in circulation is not how much the central bank is willing to lend, but how much government, firms, and ordinary citizens, are willing to borrow.
Government spending is the main driver in all this (and the paper does admit, if you read it carefully, that the central bank does fund the government after all). So there's no question of public spending "crowding out" private investment. It's exactly the opposite.
Why did the Bank of England admit all this? Well, one reason is because it's obviously true.
The Bank's job is to actually run the system, and of late, the system has not been running especially well. It's possible that it decided that maintaining the fantasy-land version of economics that has proved so convenient to the rich is simply a luxury it can no longer afford.
But politically, this is taking an enormous risk.
Just consider what might happen if mortgage holders realised the money the bank lent them is not, really, the life savings of some thrifty pensioner, but something the bank just whisked into existence through its possession of a magic wand which we, the public, handed over to it.
Historically, the Bank of England has tended to be a bellwether, staking out seeming radical positions that ultimately become new orthodoxies. If that's what's happening here, we might soon be in a position to learn if Henry Ford was right.
A Skeptical Look At The ‘Great Reset’: A Technocratic Agenda That Waited Years For A Global Crisis To Exploit & The Global Takeover Is Underway March 18 2023 | From: Sociable / Mercola / Various
How the ‘great reset’ ideology of un-elected bureaucrats would steer society towards massive surveillance & control: perspective.
In the face of a global pandemic, an un-elected body of global bureaucrats based in Davos, Switzerland has asked the world to trust its vision of a technocratic “great reset,” knowing full well the public would never go for such a request had it not been for the golden opportunity they’d all been waiting for.
In fact, he called on the WEF to start the great reset over five years ago (see video below), but this year he’s saying that COVID-19 is the most urgent reason to restructure all of society and the global economy.
WEF Chairman Hopes Forum Will Help Push "Reset" Button on World Economy
The great reset agenda was already in place long before the coronavirus pandemic, and the WEF was just waiting for a crisis to exploit it.
"Prior to this year, implementing worldwide lockdowns that destroy businesses, wreck the economy, and leave people destitute and stripped of their constitutional rights while trying to enact invasive contact tracing, immunity passports, and otherwise massive bio-electronic surveillance apparatuses would never have been accepted by the citizens of a free society."
The so-called great reset is an old ideology touted for decades by globalists like Henry Kissinger, who opined in 2014, “Never before has a new world order had to be assembled from so many different perceptions, or on so global a scale.”
The great reset is the proposed mechanism for setting in motion a new global order, but it wouldn’t be possible to bring forth such a bold plan without a global crisis, be it manufactured or of unfortunate happenstance, that shocks society to its core.
"The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.”
Klaus Schwab, WEF
In this story, I will attempt to dissect:
What types of invasive surveillance technologies will be required by the great reset
Why the great reset is being re-branded and pushed in 2020
Who will be asked to give up their privacy for the common good
How the Davos crowd is trying to sell the great reset Utopia
When humans become hackable
Where you have the power to choose
With the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic, the WEF has the perfect excuse to quickly enact its vision for steering society towards a more invasive and intrusive, technocratic future in the name of serving the common good.
The un-elected architects of the great reset envision a Utopian world of inclusivity, equality, and sustainability that will require trust in emerging technologies like AI, 5G, Blockchain, and robotics, in order to usher in their golden dawn.
WEF Great Reset Agenda:
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
Great Reset Will Require Trust in Invasive Surveillance Tech: WEF Promotes Health Passports & Contact Tracing
In order to bring about the great reset, it will require trust in the technology, and to be more specific, the WEF would like to have greater trust in “crisis-relevant tech,” which includes developing digital health passports and contact tracing, under a new form of internet governance.
"The use of digital technology during the COVID-19 crisis offers clear lessons […] Target mistrust broadly to enable specific crisis-relevant tech."
"The Great Reset will require new institutions and business models, and new digital technologies to build them,” wrote the WEF Head of Corporate Governance and Trust, Daniel Dobrygowski, in a blog post.
“The necessary collaboration, however, is only possible if we solve the digital trust problem.” he added.
- Daniel Dobrygowski, WEF
According to the Dobrygowski, “The use of digital technology during the COVID-19 crisis offers clear lessons,” one of those being, “Target mistrust broadly to enable specific crisis-relevant tech.”
The WEF openly supports the development of so-called “crisis-relevant tech” as evidenced by its backing the development of health passports, which act as digital records of your health status to determine whether or not you are free to travel or even go outside.
Earlier this year the WEF announced it was supporting the development and launch of CommonPass - a platform whose mission is “to develop and launch a standard global model to enable people to securely document and present their COVID-19 status (either as test results or an eventual vaccination status) to facilitate international travel and border crossing while keeping their health information private.”
"Contact tracing apps can be powerful weapons against the virus – but they can also be tools for state surveillance.”
- WEF report
The WEF also lent its support to another health passport initiative called CovidPass, which was built by one of the WEF’s own “Young Global Leaders,” Mustapha Mokass, who used to be an advisor at the World Bank.
CovidPass “uses blockchain technology to store encrypted data from individual blood tests, allowing users to prove that they have tested negative for COVID-19.”
In supporting both CommonPass and CovidPass, the Davos elite have made it clear they want “crisis-relevant tech” like health passports to be part of the great reset solution.
Ask yourself, would the idea of being forced to electronically prove your current health status in order to travel or even leave your own home have been acceptable 10 months ago?
Why is this happening now?
The die was cast years ago, but only now do the Davos elite see a shrinking, yet golden opportunity, to create a new world order out of the coronavirus chaos.
COVID Presents a ‘Shrinking, Golden Opportunity’, Great Reset Is Not a Response to the Coronavirus
In June Prince Charles praised the great reset agenda for its potential to “make people more receptive to big visions of change” after having suffered through “unprecedented schockwaves.”
“We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis - its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change,” the prince told the WEF.
"Would the idea of being forced to electronically prove your current health status in order to travel or even leave your own home have been acceptable 10 months ago?"
Prince Charles may have let on more than he cared to share, or thought you would notice. Again, he’s telling you that the great reset was always the plan.
COVID-19 is the excuse.
In other words, the coronavirus crisis presents a golden opportunity for the global establishment to further its agenda upon a frightful and angry population that has been so beaten down by the pandemic and subsequent lockdowns that they will have become more susceptible to giving over their freedoms to the idea of greater centralized power and control.
Prince Charles went on, “As we move from rescue to recovery, we have a unique but rapidly shrinking window of opportunity to learn lessons and reset ourselves on a more sustainable path. It is an opportunity we have never had before and may never have again.”
"We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis - its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change.”
- Prince Charles
The British royal’s words echo those of WEF Director Schwab, who said, “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.”
Again, why is the window of opportunity so narrow? Could the seeds of their grand strategy only flower while the world was distracted and divided amidst the chaos?
Prince Charles is Now Selling His 'Eco-Fascist Fantasy of the Great Reset'
Prince Charles is now selling his “eco-fascist fantasy of the Great Reset” to the Germans themselves, according to Sky News host Rowan Dean.
A clip was recently released of Prince Charles, speaking in German, about the coronavirus pandemic and climate change issues.
Mr Dean said the “Great Reset” is the “grand plan developed by the World Economic Forum … in cahoots with the United Nations, in league with the International Monetary Fund”.
“And supported by all sorts of prestigious institutions including, apparently, the Crown of England who have yet to disown Prince Charles's ever-increasing and unhinged rantings,” Mr Dean said. Mr Dean said the Great Reset is promised to begin next year to “transform all Western economies including ours,” by transferring the authoritarian tools currently being used to eradicate the coronavirus.
These include lockdowns, enforced business closures and “even stealing your own property rights, to tackle the imaginary climate crisis,” Mr Dean said.
“You won't own anything, and you'll be happy is one of their utopian communist slogans … Prince Charles' decision to throw his lot in with these crazies and now sell this eco-corporate-fascism in the German tongue is unfortunate timing to say the least”.
The Lure of Utopia Has Many Hooks: Giving Up Privacy & Freedom for the Common Good
Prior to this year, implementing worldwide lockdowns that destroy businesses, wreck the economy, and leave people destitute and stripped of their constitutional rights while trying to enact invasive contact tracing, immunity passports, and otherwise massive bio-electronic surveillance apparatuses would never have been accepted by the citizens of a free society.
But the coronavirus pandemic has opened a “narrow window” for a “golden opportunity,” and once this crisis is over, the Davos club fears that the window may be shut forever.
The WEF admits in its own contact tracing governance framework that “Contact tracing apps can be powerful weapons against the virus – but they can also be tools for state surveillance.”
Yet, the WEF believes that people should balance certain freedoms to serve the common good. It is a global vision without a clear end, and it is one that flies in the face of constitutional republics that protect certain unalienable rights.
"This new mindset would balance concerns over privacy and other issues with the potential to create value and improve lives.”
- WEF report
According to the WEF framework, enacting contact tracing technology would “not be easy and will require a new social consensus that embraces the use of technology to resolve problems for the good of all.”
Additionally, “This new mindset would balance concerns over privacy and other issues with the potential to create value and improve lives.”
In order to enact invasive technologies upon the population, citizens of the world will have to realize that it’s for the greater good and that they should change their mindsets to be less concerned about “privacy and other issues” and more excited about “the potential to create value and improve lives.”
"The great reset “will require stronger and more effective governments […] and it will demand private-sector engagement every step of the way.”
Instead, they lobby stakeholders and policymakers to carry the torch in imparting the global vision from the top of the capstone and on-down.
"As we move from rescue to recovery, we have a unique but rapidly shrinking window of opportunity to learn lessons and reset ourselves on a more sustainable path. It is an opportunity we have never had before and may never have again.”
- Prince Charles
If the coronavirus were to disappear from the earth today, would the WEF have to wait for a new global crisis, or would it push-on with the same reset agenda, regardless?
According to the WEF director, the great reset “will require stronger and more effective governments […] and it will demand private-sector engagement every step of the way.”
“The world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions,” he added. “We must build entirely new foundations for our economic and social systems.”
In creating order out of the coronavirus chaos, the great reset promises to bring about “a more secure, more equal, and more stable world.”
Is that how they plan to win our trust? By promising us a Utopia if we just go along with it?
We haven’t even gotten into how the great reset would affect the world’s money system and the role of blockchain and digital payments, but when you look at digital health passports and contact tracing apps, you are looking at sophisticated form of bio-electronic surveillance that the world has never been seen before.
"We are no longer mysterious souls; we are now hackable animals.”
- Yuval Harari, WEF
When you combine biological data with advanced computing power, what you get is the ability to hack humans.
“The power to hack human beings can of course be used for good purposes like provided much better healthcare,”said Harari, adding, “but if this power falls into the hands of a 21st Century Stalin, the result will be the worst totalitarian regime in human history, and we already have a number of applicants for the job of 21st Century Stalin.”
“In Stalin’s USSR the State monitored members of the Communist elite more than anyone else. The same will be true of future total surveillance regimes.”
The great reset calls to restructure every aspect of society, and it can only do so if people trust the increasingly invasive, bio-electronic surveillance technology they wish to deploy.
"In Stalin’s USSR the State monitored members of the Communist elite more than anyone else. The same will be true of future total surveillance regimes.”
- Yuval Harari, WEF
The more people know that someone is watching them, the more they will change their behavior. Just being aware that someone is monitoring your every digital transaction, will cause you to conform to certain norms.
As a population grows-up under massive surveillance, it will adapt its behavior to appear normal to society but compliant to authority. Over time, the citizens will police themselves out of fear.
The WEF Wants to Win Your Trust, You Have a Choice
Tyranny arrives in subtle stages. It’s slow at first, but before you realize it even exists, it has already won.
That is what I see happening with the unholy merger of “the great reset” with “the new normal."
Those who pull the strings have been begging for a global crisis to unleash their worldwide restructuring of society and the economy.
This year, in the face of a global pandemic, an un-elected body of global lobbyists based in Davos, Switzerland has asked you to have faith in their vision of a technocratic Utopia, knowing full well they could never issue such a request had it not been for the golden opportunity they had all been waiting for.
And that is where your power lies, dear reader. It’s your choice.
You can believe the WEF vision shared by some of the world’s most influential bureaucrats, or you can be skeptical of the whole establishment agenda that asks you to just trust the plan.
According to the World Economic Forum, by 2030 we will own nothing and be happy about it. Terms like “the Great Reset,” “the Fourth Industrial Revolution” and “Build Back Better” all refer to the same long-term globalist agenda to dismantle democracy and national borders in favor of a global governance by unelected leaders, and the reliance on technological surveillance rather than the rule of law to maintain public order.
For decades, war and the threat of war have enriched the technocratic elite and kept the population going along with their agenda. Today, pandemics and the threat of infectious outbreaks are the new tools of war and social control.
The Federal Reserve is working on a central bank digital currency (CBDC). An all-digital currency system is part of the system of social control.
Key globalist players working on the implementation of the technocratic agenda include the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, Bill Gates and foundations such as the Rockefeller Foundation, the UN Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, Avanti Communications, 2030 Vision and Frontier 2030, Google, Mastercard and Salesforce.
The World Economic Forum public relations video above, “8 Predictions for the World in 2030,” short as it may be, offers a telling glimpse into what the technocratic elite has in store for the rest of us.
“You’ll own nothing” - And “you’ll be happy about it.” Instead, you’ll rent everything you need, and it’ll be delivered by drone right to your door.
“The U.S. won’t be the world’s leading superpower” - Instead, a handful of countries will dominate together.
“You won’t die waiting for an organ donor” - Rather than transplanting organs from deceased donors, custom organs will be 3D printed on demand.
“You’ll eat much less meat” - Meat will be “an occasional treat, not a staple, for the good of the environment and our health.”
As detailed in many previous articles, this is a foolhardy idea, not just for health reasons but also environmental ones. Integrating livestock is a foundational aspect of successful regenerative farming that can solve both food shortages and environmental concerns at the same time. For a refresher, see “Top 6 Reasons to Support Regenerative Agriculture.”
“A billion people will be displaced by climate change” - As a result, countries will have to prepare to welcome more refugees.
“Polluters will have to pay to emit carbon dioxide” - To eliminate fossil fuels, there will be a global price on carbon. Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., discussed this in a recent interview. Rather than promoting organic and regenerative farming, the technocratic elite are pushing something called zero-budget natural farming. Bill Gates is part of this scheme.
As explained by Shiva, the wholly unnatural setup works something like this: The state takes out large loans, which are then divvied out to farmers to grow food for free. The farmers make their money not by selling their crops, but by trading their soil carbon rate on the global market.
Basically, carbon is being turned into a tradeable commodity, replacing the actual farm output of grains and other crops. Farmers with higher carbon in their soil will make more money than those with carbon-poor soil. Meanwhile, they’ll make nothing from the crops they grow.
“You could be preparing to go to Mars” - Scientists “will have worked out how to keep you healthy in space,” thus opening up the possibility of becoming a space-faring race and colonizing other planets.
“Western values will have been tested to the breaking point.”
For decades, war and the threat of war has enriched the technocratic elite and kept the population going along with their agenda. War and physical attacks have been repeatedly used to foist ever more draconian restrictions upon us and remove our liberties. The Patriot Act, rammed through in the aftermath of 9/11, is just one egregious example.
Today, pandemics and the threat of infectious outbreaks are the new tools of war and social control. For years, Gates has prepared the global psyche for a new enemy: deadly, invisible viruses that can crop up at any time.And the only way to protect ourselves is by giving up old-fashioned notions of privacy, liberty and personal decision-making.
We need to maintain our distance from others, including family members. We need to wear masks, even in our own homes and during sex. We need to close down small businesses and work from home.
We need to vaccinate the entire global population and put stringent travel restrictions into place to prevent the potential for spread.
We must track and trace everyone, every moment of the day and night, and install biometric readers into everyone’s bodies to identify who the potential risk-carriers are. Infected people are the new threat.
This is what the technocratic elite wants you to believe, and they’ve succeeded to convince a shocking ratio of the global population of this in just a few short months.
If you’re unfamiliar with the term “technocracy,” be sure to go back and listen to my interview with Patrick Wood, author of “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation” and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.” You can also learn more on Wood’s website, Technocracy.news.
A New Digital Currency System Underway
Two of the last pieces of the totalitarian takeover will be the transition to an all-digital currency linked to digital IDs. With that, enforcement of social rules will be more or less ensured, as your finances, indeed your entire identity, can easily be held hostage if you fail to comply.
Just think how easy it would be to automate it such that if you fail to get your mandated vaccine, or post something undesirable on the internet, your bank account becomes unavailable or your biometric ID won’t allow you entry into your office building.
An August 13, 2020, article3 on the Federal Reserve website discusses the supposed benefits of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). There’s general agreement among experts that most major countries will implement CBDC within the next two to four years.
An all-digital currency system also plays into social engineering, as it can be used to incentivize desired behaviors, very similar to what China is doing with their social credit system. For example, you might get a certain amount of digital currency but you have to buy a certain item or perform a particular task within a certain timeframe.
Many uninformed people will believe that these new CBDCs will be very similar to existing cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, but they would be seriously mistaken. Bitcoin is decentralized and a rational strategy to opt out of the existing central bank controlled system, while these CBDCs will be centralized and completely controlled by the central banks.
If you have been intrigued about investing in Bitcoin as a safer alternative to the stock market, but just didn’t know how or understand the process, the video below is an excellent introduction on how to do this safely without losing your funds. My favorite crypto exchange is Kraken, which has far lower fees than Coinbase.
While I mention Gates a lot, he’s not acting alone, of course. It just so happens that as you trace the connections between the decision-makers of the world, you’ll find him in an astonishing number of places.
For example, In October 2019, Gates co-hosted a pandemic preparedness simulation for a “novel coronavirus,” known as Event 201, along with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and the World Economic Forum.
The event eerily predicted what would happen just 10 weeks later, when COVID-19 appeared. Gates and the World Economic Forum, in turn, are both partnered4 with the United Nations which, while keeping a relatively low profile, appears to be at the heart of the globalist takeover agenda.
Gates is also the largest funder of the World Health Organization - the medical branch of the U.N., while the World Economic Forum is the social and economic branch of the U.N. Other key partners that play important roles in the implementation of the globalists agenda include:
Foundations such as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Ford Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the UN Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundation
Avanti Communications, a British provider of satellite technology with global connectivity
2030 Vision, a partnership of technology giants to provide the infrastructure and technology solutions needed to realize the U.N.’s 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. 2030 Vision is also partnered with Frontier 2030, which is a partnership of organizations under the helm of the World Economic Forum
Google, the No. 1 Big Data collector in the world and a leader in AI services
Mastercard, which is leading the globalist charge to develop digital IDs and banking services
Salesforce, a global leader in cloud computing, the “internet of things” and artificial intelligence. Incidentally, Salesforce is led by Marc Benioff, who is also on the World Economic Forum’s board of directors
Psychopathic Dream Comes True with COVID Crisis - Featuring The Club of Rome from 1973
In 1973, Australia's largest computer predicted when and how civilization would end. The prediction, which later appeared on Australian media was made by a program dubbed “World One” - commissioned by globalist think tank, The Club of Rome. 2020 was the first milestone year mentioned, when the quality of life across the planet was supposed to drop dramatically. ABC's This Day Tonight first aired this story on Nov. 9, 1973.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution Is the Technocratic Agenda
In decades past, the technocrats, the global, mostly unelected, elite that steer the management of nations worldwide, called for a “new world order.” Today, the NWO has been largely replaced with terms like “the Great Reset,” “the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” and the slogan “Build Back Better.”
All of these terms and slogans refer to the same long-term globalist agenda to dismantle democracy and national borders in favor of a global governance by unelected leaders, and the reliance on technological surveillance rather than the rule of law to maintain public order.
As expressed by Matt Hancock, the British Minister for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, during a speech before the All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Fourth Industrial Revolution in 2017:
"One of the roles of Parliament is to cast ahead, to look to the horizon, and tackle the great challenges of our time. So, I applaud the creation of the APPG on the fourth industrial revolution, which surely is one of the greatest challenges we face, as a nation, and as a world.
The nature of the technologies is materially different to what has come before. In the past, we’ve thought of consumption as a one-off, and capital investment as additive. Yet put resources into the networks that now connect half the world, or into AI, and the effects are exponential …
I’m delighted to speak alongside so many impressive colleagues who really understand this, and alongside Professor Klaus Schwab who literally ‘wrote the book’ on the 4th Industrial Revolution. Your work, bringing together as you do all the best minds on the planet, has informed what we are doing …
Our Digital Strategy, embedded within the wider Industrial Strategy, sets out the seven pillars on which we can build our success. And inside that fits our 5G strategy, like a set of Russian Dolls.
Our Strategy covers infrastructure, skills, rules and ethics of big data use, cyber security, supporting the tech sector, the digitization of industry, and digitization of government.”
If you listened to my interview with Wood, you will recognize the technocratic elements of Hancock’s speech: the focus on technology - in particular artificial intelligence, digital surveillance and Big Data collection (which is what 5G is for) - and the digitization of industry (which includes banking) and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule (although that part is never expressly stated).
"The promised Utopia comes with a price - it sets shackles on our personal freedom.”
Then there’s the direct reference to professor Klaus Schwab, chairman of the World Economic Forum. Schwab is also highlighted in the June 29, 2020, Technocracy.news article, “The Elite Technocrats Behind the Global ‘Great Reset,” which reads, in part:
"The UN Agenda 2030 with its Sustainable Development Goals is claimed to ‘ensure peace and prosperity for people and the planet.’ The actions are said to tackle poverty and hunger, bring better health and education, reduce inequalities, and save the oceans, forests and the climate.
Who can argue against such benevolent goals? But the promised Utopia comes with a price - it sets shackles on our personal freedom …
The leading partners of the United Nations Global Goals project reveal the real technocratic agenda that lies behind the polished feel-good façade - it involves a plan to fully integrate mankind into a technological surveillance apparatus overseen by a powerful AI.
The current pandemic scare has been a perfect trigger to kickstart this nefarious agenda … The current COVID-19 crisis is seen by the World Economic Forum and its chairman Klaus Schwabas the perfect trigger to implement their grandiose technocratic plan. Big Tech will come to ‘rescue’ the world.
In June 2020, Schwab declared … the need of a Great Reset to restore order in a world steeped in panic, conflict and economic turmoil:
‘The COVID-19 crisis has shown us that our old systems are not fit anymore for the 21st century. It has laid bare the fundamental lack of social cohesion, fairness, inclusion and equality. Now is the historical moment in time, not only to fight the real virus but to shape the system for the needs of the Post-Corona era.
We have a choice to remain passive, which would lead to the amplification of many of the trends we see today. Polarization, nationalism, racism, and ultimately increasing social unrest and conflicts.
But we have another choice, we can build a new social contract, particularly integrating the next generation, we can change our behavior to be in harmony with nature again, and we can make sure the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution are best utilized to provide us with better lives.’
This techno-fascist recipe will then, in an utmost non-democratic fashion without any public debate or skeptic inquiry, soon be integrated into the agenda of G20 and the European Union - relabeled as the Great Green Deal …
Unsurprisingly, Klaus Schwab fails to mention his own and his cronies’ role in creating this global economic mess in the first place - as it was ‘foreseen’ with stunning accuracy in World Economic Forum’s and Bill Gate’s Event 201 (October 2019) and in the Rockefeller Foundation report Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development (2010).”
The U.N.’s central role in the technocratic agenda is hard to miss once you start looking. As reported by the U.N.’s Department of Global Communications April 22, 2020, in an article about climate change and COVID-19:
"As the world begins planning for a post-pandemic recovery, the United Nations is calling on Governments to seize the opportunity to ‘build back better’ by creating more sustainable, resilient and inclusive societies…
‘With this restart, a window of hope and opportunity opens… an opportunity for nations to green their recovery packages and shape the 21st century economy in ways that are clean, green, healthy, safe and more resilient,’ said UNFCCC Executive Secretary Patricia Espinosa in her International Mother Earth Day message … It is therefore important that post-COVID-19 stimulus packages help the economy ‘grow back greener’ …
As Governments approve stimulus packages to support job creation, poverty reduction and economic growth, UNEP will help Member States ‘build back better,’ and capture opportunities for leap-frogging to green investments in renewable energy, smart housing, green public procurement and public transport - all guided by the principles and standards of sustainable production and consumption. These actions will be critical to fulfilling the Sustainable Development Goals.”
Here too, we see the technocratic agenda shining through.
As described by Wood (see interview hyperlinked above), technocracy is an economic system based on the allocation of energy resources, which necessitates social engineering to control the population and the technological infrastructure to automate this control.
Rather than being driven by supply and demand and free enterprise, this system is one in which companies are told what resources they’re allowed to use, when, and for what, and consumers are told what they are allowed to buy - or rather, rent, judging by the World Economic Forum video above.
If you need something, you’ll be allowed to rent it. You probably won’t even own the clothes on your back.
Everything will be “fair” and “equitable.” There will be no need for hard work, ingenuity or higher-than-average intelligence.
Everyone will be the same - with the exception of the technocrats themselves, of course. And in true social engineering fashion, they tell us we will be “happy” in our 24/7 enslavement to boot.
It’s important to realize that one way by which this globalist plan is being pushed forward is through the creation of new global laws. Gates already wields powerful influence over global food and agriculture policy, in addition to his influence over global health and technology (including banking and digital IDs).
The Great Reset, or the “build back better” plan, specifically calls for all nations to implement “green” regulations as part of the post-COVID recovery effort. It sounds like a worthwhile endeavor - after all, who doesn’t want to protect the environment?
But the end goal is far from what the typical person envisions when they hear these plans. The end goal is to turn us into serfs without rights to privacy, private ownership or anything else.
To get an idea of just how dystopian a future we might be looking at, consider Microsoft’s international patent WO/2020/060606 for a “cryptocurrency system using body activity data.” The international patent was filed June 20, 2019. The U.S. patent office application, 16128518, was filed September 21, 2018. As explained in the abstract:
"Human body activity associated with a task provided to a user may be used in a mining process of a cryptocurrency system. A server may provide a task to a device of a user which is communicatively coupled to the server.
A sensor communicatively coupled to or comprised in the device of the user may sense body activity of the user.
Body activity data may be generated based on the sensed body activity of the user.
The cryptocurrency system communicatively coupled to the device of the user may verify if the body activity data satisfies one or more conditions set by the cryptocurrency system, and award cryptocurrency to the user whose body activity data is verified.”
The U.S. patent application includes the following flow chart summary of the process:
This patent, if implemented, would essentially turn human beings into robots. If you’ve ever wondered how the average person will make a living in the AI tech-driven world of the future, this may be part of your answer.
People will be brought down to the level of mindless drones, spending their days carrying out tasks automatically handed out by, say a cellphone app, in return for a cryptocurrency “award.” I don’t know about you, but I can think of better, more enjoyable ways to spend my time here on Earth.
The World Economic Forum - A Trojan Horse
I’ve mentioned the World Economic Forum multiple times already in this article, and it, along with the U.N., is at the heart of the global takeover agenda.
As noted in the Canadian Truth blog post, “World Economic Forum Wheel of Evil”:
"… this is about two things, the implementation of the UN SDG’s [Sustainable Development Goals] and the WEF [World Economic Forum] Fourth Industrial Revolution. End game: total Technocratic lock-down where they control every aspect of our lives and all resources on the planet.”
The blog post includes the following illustration, created and released by the World Economic Forum, showing the widespread impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the global response to it. If you go to the original site for the illustration, you’ll also find listings of publications, videos and data relating to all of these facets.
In short, the pandemic is being used to destroy the local economies around the world, which will then allow the World Economic Forum to come in and “rescue” debt-ridden countries.
As mentioned earlier, the price for this salvation is your liberty.
The World Economic Forum will, through its financial bailouts, be able to effectively control most countries in the world. And, again, one of the aspects of the technocratic plan is to eliminate nation borders and nationalism in general.
None of it is pleasant reading, but it’s important to understand where we’re headed. We no longer have the luxury of sticking our heads in the sand and waiting for the bad news to pass.
The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically widened the economic gap between average people and the wealthy elite, with billionaires raking in trillions of dollars in mere months.
Without the competition from small businesses, large multinational companies have been allowed to gobble up business, expanding both their wealth and their influence, while extreme poverty has risen for the first time in two decades.
If you think the Great Reset and the Green New Deal are going to even out this financial disparity and turn the world into an equitable Utopia, you’re bound to be disappointed.
The globalist plan isn’t about creating a better world for the average person. Microsoft’s patent illustrates what the plan heralds for us.
The medical tyranny and censorship of anti-groupthink that has emerged full-force during this pandemic are also part and parcel of the Great Reset. After all, if they won’t allow you to own anything, and they want to put biosensors into your body to turn you into a cryptocurrency mining minion, do you really think they’re going to let you make medical decisions for yourself?
Over the past several months, Gates has made the media rounds discussing the need to silence dissenting views and information about the virus, it’s treatment and the vaccines being made.
According to a survey cited by RT, less than half of all Americans now say they would not take the COVID-19 vaccine even if they were paid $100 to do it.
For Gates, who is funding no fewer than six different COVID-19 vaccines, this is no small problem. In an October 2020 interview, Gates urged American health officials to start “thinking about which voices will help reduce the hesitancy, so we can get a level of vaccination that really has a chance of stopping” the pandemic.
Despite the risks associated with these novel mRNA vaccines, which have never before been approved for human use, and despite the fact that children and adolescents have a minuscule risk of serious illness or death from COVID-19, vaccine proponents like Dr. Paul Offit are now calling for children to be added to the COVID-19 trials.
Hopefully, the number of parents willing to offer up their children as guinea pigs will be few.
Orwell's 1984 Summary
Check out George Orwell's 1984 Video SparkNote: Quick and easy 1984 synopsis, analysis, and discussion of major characters and themes in the novel.
In closing, keep in mind that technocracy is inherently a technological society run through social engineering.
This is why there’s such a strong focus on “science.” Anytime someone dissents, they’re therefore accused of being “anti-science,” and any science that conflicts with the status quo is declared “debunked science.”
The only science that matters is whatever the technocrats deem true. Logic, however, will tell you that this cannot be so.
Science is never settled. Science is never one-sided. Science can be wrong. Getting to the truth demands that an issue be looked at from many different angles.
Over the past year in particular, scientific inquiry and inquisitiveness has been censored and stifled to an astonishing degree. If we allow it to continue, the end result will be devastating.
We must keep pushing for transparency and truth. We must insist on medical freedom and personal liberty.
Do not allow yourself to be bullied into silence by those who counter your objections with “anti-science” or “conspiracy-theory” slurs.
The future of mankind is at stake. Be brave. Resist tyranny.
The researchers have found that most of the previous studies into the sweeteners touting their alleged “health advantages” over using sugar as a sweetener, were written or sponsored by the companies that produce the products.
"A trio of researchers from John Hopkins University in Maryland, the University of California San Francisco, and Australia’s University of Sydney took an extensive look at 31 past reviews on the potential weight loss effects of artificial sweeteners.
They found that studies directly funded by sweetener companies or published in industry-funded journals were more likely to find positive health benefits compared to reviews funded independently or by the competing sugar industry.
Similarly, reviews authored by scientists who had a relevant financial conflict of interest were also less likely to shine a harsh light on sweeteners, either directly via positive results or by putting a positive spin on negative results when discussing their conclusions."
"In the 1950s, studies showing a link between coronary heart disease (CHD) and sugar intake started to emerge.
When the sugar industry (which many not-so-affectionately call “Big Sugar”) got wind of this not-so-sweet news, they paid scientists to downplay the link and promote saturated fat as the culprit instead, a new study has revealed.
The research, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, was based on thousands of pages of Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) documents, reports, and statements that Cristin E. Kearns, a postdoctoral fellow at UCSF, discovered in the basement at Harvard University.
The SRF (known today as The Sugar Association) sponsored its first CHD “research project” in 1965 – a literature review published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The review’s objective was established by SRF, and the group contributed articles for inclusion and received drafts. The SRF’s funding and role was not disclosed.
Why is this a big deal?
Big Sugar paid Harvard scientists the equivalent of about $50,000 in today’s dollars to influence the review, and subsequently spent $600, 000 ($5.3 million in 2016 dollars) to teach “people who had never had a course in biochemistry… that sugar is what keeps every human being alive and with energy to face our daily problems.”
For years many industries have delayed the publication of research that may put their products in a bad light, others have simply paid off researchers to point the finger of blame at other products, as did the Sugar Association in 1967.
The revelations over sweeteners come as no surprise, but they should remind us that we need to do our own research rather than taking something at face value just because there was a “study.”
This isn’t new. The FDA upholds these studies all the time, and products that could literally kill us end up on the store shelves marked as safe, false nutritional information that supports the sugar lobby and the grain lobby is touted as the truth, and Americans get sicker and fatter as a result.
Industries and individual companies have paid researchers to lie or distort the truth on their behalf in order to sell more of their products. Not only is this shameful behavior from the companies, but also from the researchers that compromised their science to accommodate them.
The results of such spurious research have an even further effect. Fewer people start to trust medical and scientific research - including well-executed and honest research.
The answer as always it to look behind the headlines, find the counter arguments, track down the source of the funding, and make your decisions accordingly.
PS: The best quality low-carb sweetener we’ve gotten our hands on is Agave 5 – you can find it here.
Like Tobacco And Big Pharma, The Sugar Industry Has Manipulated Research For 50 Years
Don’t you love people who cling to scientific research without ever questioning who sponsored that research? Using archival documents, a new report published by JAMA Internal Medicine examines the sugar industry’s role in heart disease research.
The study suggests that the sugar industry sponsored research to influence the scientific debate to cast doubt on the hazards of sugar and to promote dietary fat as the culprit in heart disease. Governments worldwide agreed just like they did with the tobacco industry and big pharma.
The sugar industry was instrumental in influencing the prevailing thinking about fat, obesity and related diseases holding that quantifying calories should be a principal concern and target for intervention.
Part of this thinking is that consumed calories - regardless of their sources - are equivalent; i.e. ‘a calorie is a calorie’. There needs to be a greater qualitative focus on the sources of calories consumed (i.e. a greater focus on types of foods) and on the metabolic changes that result from consuming foods of different types.
Calorie-focused thinking is inherently biased against high-fat foods, many of which may be protective against obesity and related diseases, and supportive of starchy and sugary replacements, which are likely detrimental.
The intake of dietary fructose increased significantly from 1970 to 2000. There has been a 25% increase in available “added sugars” during this period. The average person has a daily added sugar intake of 79 g (equivalent to 15% of energy intake), approximately half of which was fructose.
A report - authored by Cristin E. Kearns, Laura A. Schmidt, and Stanton A. Glantz of the University of California, San Francisco - examined internal documents from the Sugar Research Foundation (which later evolved into the Sugar Association).
The Sugar Research Foundation started doing research on coronary heart disease research in 1965; its first project was a literature review published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1967.
The review focused on fat and cholesterol as the dietary causes of coronary heart disease, downplaying sugar consumption as a risk factor.
UCSF researchers have recently claimed sugar should be controlled like alcohol and tobacco to protect public health since it is fueling a global obesity pandemic, contributing to 35 million deaths annually worldwide from non-communicable diseases like diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
While the Sugar Research Foundation’s funding and role were not disclosed, internal documents reveal that the organization set the review’s objective, contributed articles to be included, and received drafts - a “smoking gun” linking the industry’s influence over the research it paid for, writes Marion Nestle in a related commentary, also published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
“This 50-year-old incident may seem like ancient history, but it is quite relevant, not least because it answers some questions germane to our current era. Is it really true that food companies deliberately set out to manipulate research in their favor?
Yes, it is, and the practice continues,” writes Nestle, the Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition and Food Studies at NYU Steinhardt."
“Industry-sponsored nutrition research, like that of research sponsored by the tobacco, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries, almost invariably produces results that confirm the benefits or lack of harm of the sponsor’s products, even when independently sponsored research comes to opposite conclusions,” Nestle adds.
Nestle says the report should serve as a warning to policymakers, researchers, clinicians, and journalists in carefully interpreting studies funded by food companies with vested interests in the results, and highlights the need to find better ways to fund studies and to prevent and disclose conflicts of interest.
Thirty One Life Lessons I’ve Learned In 31 Years + Twenty Harsh Truths To Help You Get Your Shit Together March 16 2023 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit / EducateInspireChange
Life is, in a sense, like school. Each and every day we are learning from our experiences, and the lessons we acquire allow us to move from one stage of life to the next.
But not all of us are good students. Some people learn fast, and thus can quickly grow in understanding and evolve into higher states of consciousness. Others are slow learners, finding it extremely difficult to pass life's tests, and as a result have to repeat them again and again.
Today I turn 31 years old, so I chose to spend some time reflecting on the most important lessons I've learned in my life so far. If you're wondering what those are, I wrote them down so that you can have the chance to read them and benefit from them as much as I did.
It feels weird to think that 31 years ago I was born in this world. A couple of decades ago, I remember that my thirties seemed incredibly far in the future. But before I realized it, here I am, over 30 and heading toward 40.
So far my life’s journey has been an incredible ride. I’ve gone through tons of ups and downs, both of which have taught me important lessons that allowed me to better understand myself and the world, as well as to build my life the way I want.
In this post I’d like to share with you some of the greatest life lessons I’ve learned during the course of my life, in hopes that you will find them as helpful as I did. Without further ado, here they are:
1. This Moment is all There is
The past is gone and the future is not here yet.
The present moment is everything you have, so be sure to immerse yourself in it.
2. I Don’t Know Everything, and That’s Totally Fine
To learn, you need to admit that you don’t know it all. In fact, not everything can be known, and that’s part of the beauty of life, which is an ongoing learning journey.
3. Pain Isn’t Your Enemy
It’s just a messenger trying to show you that there’s something amiss. So instead of hiding from your pain or suppressing it, face it and pay attention to what it has to show you, so that you can understand why it’s there and how to get rid of it.
Here are a few examples: A deep breath of fresh air, a walk in nature, a conversation with a good friend, and a look into the eye of a beloved partner. Cherish them before someone puts a price tag on them too.
5. Money Isn’t Just Neutral Energy
As it exists today, money is creating artificial scarcity, which results in competition, inequality, poverty, greed, and violence (among other things). Therefore, money is quite a negative force in our world.
Casting a vote once every few years alone doesn’t give people much freedom in collective decision-making. Especially if you consider that what they vote for is nothing but power-hungry politicians who are lying to them in order to serve their vested interests.
You must have heard this countless times. But it’s totally true - some books have the power to turn your life upside down, in a tremendously positive way. Just make sure to carefully pick which books to read, otherwise they can be a waste of your time. Click here for a list of books I highly recommend.
18. Use Your Words Wisely
Words can hurt or heal, so always be mindful of how you speak.
To economize means to carefully manage resources and to avoid unnecessary expenditure or waste. Our economy, however, is fundamentally based on consumption - that is, on the mindless and constant extraction of natural resources and production of waste.
You know who will give you everything? Yourself. Don’t wait around for people, take responsibility and take power of your own life.
9. Worrying is a Waste of Time
Worrying is a waste of imagination, 99% of the stuff you worry about doesn’t happen and won’t matter even in 5 years. Remember your time is limited, use your imagination to picture the things you want instead.
10. Express Your Talents
Imagine lying in the bed in hospital, being on the death bed, and standing around you are the ideas, the dreams, the talents that have been given to you by the universe, the talents that you didn’t develop the skills that you never did anything with, standing around you looking at you with large angry eyes saying “We came to you! Only you could have given us life, now we have to die with you forever.” What idea do you have right now that you could be acting on?
But if the vaccinated person is protected and immune, then coming into contact with an unvaccinated person will bring no danger.
Therefore, the notion that vaccinated people are A) protected but not - A) in danger is absurd, a contradiction.
The easiest way to defeat logic is through deficient education. Never teach logic. Ignore it. Instead, teach specific values. Teach anything except logic. Don’t teach children how to spot contradictions.
Here is another example of non-logic: A ballot initiative passed by the voters of Maui County is illegal, because it set up a new law regarding commercial agriculture, when in fact commercial agriculture is regulated by state and federal laws, which trump county laws.
There are several ways of attacking this proposition, but the most basic way is:
Science doesn’t operate according to what officially favored scientists claim. It doesn’t operate according to consensus at all.
It operates according to what is true and valid - and the best way to ascertain that is through the broadest possible analysis accomplished by a wide variety of independent researchers, who attempt to replicate prior experimental results.
Even then, there is always room for reasoned dissent.
On what grounds do scientists say they have found the virus that causes the disease?
I ran headlong into that one while writing my first book, AIDS Inc.: Scandal of the Century, and the further I investigated HIV as “the cause of AIDS,” the more I was stunned by the lack of logic present in the argument.
Logic is a sword.
Learning its many uses, while still young, creates formidable students and citizens.
Ten Ways To Protect Yourself From NLP Mind Control March 14 2023 | From: UltraCulture / Various
NLP or Neuro-Linguistic Programming is one of the world’s most prevalent methods of mind control, used by everyone from sales callers to politicians to media pundits, and it’s nasty to the core. Here’s ten ways to make sure nobody uses it on you… ever.
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a method for controlling people’s minds that was invented by Richard Bandler and John Grinder in the 1970s, became popular in the psychoanalytic, occult and New Age worlds in the 1980s, and advertising, marketing and politics in the 1990s and 2000s.
It’s become so interwoven with how people are communicated to and marketed at that its use is largely invisible. It’s also somewhat of a pernicious, devilish force in the world - nearly everybody in the business of influencing people has studied at least some of its techniques. Masters of it are notorious for having a Rasputin-like ability to trick people in incredible ways - most of all themselves.
After explaining a bit about what NLP is and where it came from, I’m going to break down 10 ways to inoculate yourself against its use. You’ll likely be spotting it left, right and center in the media with a few tips on what to look for. Full disclosure: During my 20s, I spent years studying New Age, magical and religious systems for changing consciousness.
One of them was NLP. I’ve been on both ends of the spectrum: I’ve had people ruthlessly use NLP to attempt to control me, and I’ve also trained in it and even used it in the advertising world.
Despite early fascination, by 2008 or so I had largely come to the conclusion that it’s next to useless - a way of manipulating language that greatly overestimates its own effectiveness as a discipline, really doesn’t achieve much in the way of any kind of lasting change, and contains no real core of respect for people or even true understanding of how people work.
After throwing it to the wayside, however, I became convinced that understanding NLP is crucial simply so that people can resist its use. It’s kind of like the whole PUA thing that was popular in the mid-00s - a group of a few techniques that worked for a few unscrupulous people until the public figured out what was going on and rejected it, like the body identifying and rejecting foreign material.
What is NLP, and Where Did it Come From?
“Neuro-linguistic programming” is a marketing term for a “science” that two Californians - Richard Bandler and John Grinder - came up with in the 1970s. Bandler was a stoner student at UC Santa Cruz (just like I later was in the 00s), then a mecca for psychedelics, hippies and radical thinking (now a mecca for Silicon Valley hopefuls).
Grinder was at the time an associate professor in linguistics at the university (he had previously served as a Captain in the US Special Forces and in the intelligence community, ahem not that this, you know, is important… aheh…). Together, they worked at modeling the techniques of Fritz Perls (founder of Gestalt therapy), family therapist Virginia Satir and, most importantly, the preternaturally gifted hypnotherapist Milton Erickson.
Bandler and Grinder sought to reject much of what they saw as the ineffectiveness of talk therapy and cut straight to the heart of what techniques actually worked to produce behavioral change. Inspired by the computer revolution - Bandler was a computer science major - they also sought to develop a psychological programming language for human beings.
What they came up with was a kind of evolution of hypnotherapy - while classical hypnosis depends on techniques for putting patients into suggestive trances (even to the point of losing consciousness on command), NLP is much less heavy-handed: It’s a technique of layering subtle meaning into spoken or written language so that you can implant suggestions into a person’s unconscious mind without them knowing what you’re doing.
Though mainstream therapists rejected NLP as pseudoscientific nonsense (it has been officially peer reviewed and discredited as an intervention technique - lots more on that here), it nonetheless caught on.
It was still the 1970s, and the Human Potential Movement was in full swing - and NLP was the new darling. Immediately building a publishing, speaking and training empire, by 1980 Bandler had made over $800,000 from his creation - he was even being called on to train corporate leaders, the army and the CIA.
Self-help gurus like Tony Robbins used NLP techniques to become millionaires in the 1980s (Robbins now has an estimated net worth of $480 million). By the middle of the decade, NLP was such big business that lawsuits and wars had erupted over who had the rights to teach it, or even to use the term “NLP.”
But by that time, Bandler had bigger problems than copyright disputes: He was on trial for the alleged murder of prostitute Corine Christensen in November 1986.
The prosecution claimed that Bandler had shot Christensen, 34, point-blank in the face with a .357 Magnum in a drug deal gone bad. According to the press at the time, Bandler had discovered an even better way to get people to like him than NLP - cocaine - and become embroiled in a far darker game, even, than mind control.
A much-recommended investigation into the case published by Mother Jones in 1989 opens with these chilling lines:
“In the morning Corine Christensen last snorted cocaine, she found herself, straw in hand, looking down the barrel of a .357 Magnum revolver. When the gun exploded, momentarily piercing the autumn stillness, it sent a single bullet on a diagonal path through her left nostril and into her brain.
Christensen slumped over her round oak dining table, bleeding onto its glass top, a loose-leaf notebook, and a slip of yellow memo paper on which she had scrawled, in red ink, DON’T KILL US ALL. Choking, she spit blood onto a wine goblet, a tequila bottle, and the shirt of the man who would be accused of her murder, then slid sideways off the chair and fell on her back. Within minutes she lay still.
As Christensen lay dying, two men left her rented town house in a working-class section of Santa Cruz, California. One was her former boyfriend, James Marino, an admitted cocaine dealer and convicted burglar.
The other, Richard Bandler, was known internationally as the cofounder of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), a controversial approach to psychology and communication. About 12 hours later, on the evening of November 3, 1986, Richard Bandler was arrested and charged with the murder.
Bandler’s defense was, simply, that Marino had killed Christensen, not him. Many at the time alleged he used NLP techniques on the stand to escape conviction.
Yet Bandler was also alleged to actually use a gun in NLP sessions in order to produce dramatic psychological changes in clients - a technique that was later mirrored by Hollywood in the movie Fight Club, in which Brad Pitt’s character pulls a gun on a gas station attendant and threatens to kill him if he doesn’t pursue his dreams in life.
That was, many said, Bandler’s MO.
Whatever the truth of the matter, Bandler was indeed let off, and the story was quickly buried - I’ve never spoken to a student of NLP who’s ever heard of the murder case, I’ll note, and I’ve spoken to a lot.
The case hardly impeded the growing popularity of NLP, however, which was now big business, working its way not only into the toolkit of psychotherapists but also into nearly every corner of the political and advertising worlds, having grown far beyond the single personage of Richard Bandler, though he continued (and continues) to command outrageous prices for NLP trainings throughout the world.
Today, the techniques of NLP and Ericksonian-style hypnotic writing can be readily seen in the world of Internet marketing, online get-rich-quick schemes and scams.
Their most prominent public usage has likely been by Barack Obama, whose 2008 “Change” campaign was a masterpiece of Ericksonian permissive hypnosis. The celebrity hypnotist and illusionist Derren Brown also demonstrates NLP techniques in his routine.
How Exactly Does this Thing Work?
NLP is taught in a pyramid structure, with the more advanced techniques reserved for multi-thousand-dollar seminars. To oversimplify an overcomplicated subject, it more or less works like this: First, the user (or “NLPer,” as NLP people often refer to themselves - and I should note here that the large majority of NLP people, especially those who are primarily therapists, are likely well-meaning) of NLP pays very, very close attention to the person they’re working with.
By watching subtle cues like eye movement, skin flush, pupil dilation and nervous tics, a skilled NLP person can quickly determine:
a) What side of the brain a person is predominantly using;
b) What sense (sight, smell, etc.) is most predominant in their brain;
c) How their brain stores and utilizes information (ALL of this can be gleaned from eye movements);
d) When they’re lying or making information up.
After this initial round of information gathering, the “NLPer” begins to slowly and subtly mimic the client, taking on not only their body language but also their speech mannerisms, and will begin speaking with language patterns designed to target the client’s primary sense.
An NLP person essentially carefully fakes the social cues that cause a person to drop their guard and enter a state of openness and suggestibility.
For instance, a person predominantly focused on sight will be spoken to in language using visual metaphors - ”Do you see what I’m saying?” “Look at it this way” - while a person for which hearing is the dominant sense will be spoken to in auditory language - ”Hear me out,” “I’m listening to you closely.”
By mirroring body language and linguistic patterns, the NLPer is attempting to achieve one very specific response: rapport.
Rapport is the mental and physiological state that a human enters when they let their social guard down, and it is generally achieved when a person comes to the conclusion that the person they’re talking to is just like them. See how that works, broadly?
An NLP person essentially carefully fakes the social cues that cause a person to drop their guard and enter a state of openness and suggestibility.
Once rapport is achieved, the NLPer will then begin subtly leading the interaction. Having mirrored the other person, they can now make subtle changes to actually influence the other person’s behavior.
Combined with subtle language patterns, leading questions and a whole slew of other techniques, a skilled NLPer can at this point steer the other person wherever they like, as long as the other person isn’t aware of what’s happening and thinks everything is arising organically, or has given consent.
That means it’s actually fairly hard to use NLP to get people to act out-of-character, but it can be used for engineering responses within a person’s normal range of behavior - like donating to a cause, making a decision they were putting off, or going home with you for the night if they might have considered it anyway.
From this point, the NLPer will seek to do two things - elicit and anchor. Eliciting happens when an NLPer uses leading and language to engineer an emotional state - for instance, hunger. Once a state has been elicited, the NLPer can then anchor it with a physical cue - for instance, touching your shoulder. In theory, if done right, the NLPer can then call up the hungry state any time they touch your shoulder in the same way. It’s conditioning, plain and simple.
How Can I Make Sure Nobody Pulls this Horseshit on Me?
I’ve had all kinds of people attempt to “NLP” me into submission, including multiple people I’ve worked for over extended periods of time, and even people I’ve been in relationships with. Consequently, I’ve developed a pretty keen immune response to it. I’ve also studied its mechanics very closely, largely to resist the nonsense of said people. Here’s a few key methods I’ve picked up.
1. Be Extremely Wary of People Copying Your Body Language
If you’re talking to somebody who may be into NLP, and you notice that they’re sitting in exactly the same way as you, or mirroring the way you have your hands, test them by making a few movements and seeing if they do the same thing. Skilled NLPers will be better at masking this than newer ones, but newer ones will always immediately copy the same movement. This is a good time to call people on their shit.
2. Move Your Eyes in Random and Unpredictable Patterns
This is freaking hilarious to do to troll NLPers. Especially in the initial stages of rapport induction, an NLP user will be paying incredibly close attention to your eyes. You may think it’s because they’re intensely interested in what you’re saying. They are, but not because they actually care about your thoughts:
This could quite possibly be going too far, however
They’re watching your eye movements to see how you store and access information. In a few minutes, they’ll not only be able to tell when you’re lying or making something up, they’ll also be able to figure out what parts of your brain you’re using when you’re speaking, which can then lead them to be so clued in to what you’re thinking that they almost come across as having some kind of psychic insight into your innermost thoughts.
A clever hack for this is just to randomly dart your eyes around - look up to the right, to the left, side to side, down… make it seem natural, but do it randomly and with no pattern. This will drive an NLP person utterly nuts because you’ll be throwing off their calibration.
3. Do Not Let Anybody Touch You
This is pretty obvious and kind of goes without saying in general. But let’s say you’re having a conversation with somebody you know is into NLP, and you find yourself in a heightened emotional state - maybe you start laughing really hard, or get really angry, or something similar - and the person you’re talking to touches you while you’re in that state.
They might, for instance, tap you on the shoulder. What just happened? They anchored you so that later, if they want to put you back into the state you were just in, they can (or so the wayward logic of NLP dictates) touch you in the same place. Just be like, oh hell no you did not.
4. Be Wary of Vague Language
One of the primary techniques that NLP took from Milton Erickson is the use of vague language to induce hypnotic trance. Erickson found that the more vague language is, the more it leads people into trance, because there is less that a person is liable to disagree with or react to. Alternately, more specific language will take a person out of trance. (Note Obama’s use of this specific technique in the “Change” campaign, a word so vague that anybody could read anything into it.)
5. Be Wary of Permissive Language
“Feel free to relax.” “You’re welcome to test drive this car if you like.” “You can enjoy this as much as you like.” Watch the f*k out for this. This was a major insight of pre-NLP hypnotists like Erickson: The best way to get somebody to do something, including going into a trance, is by allowing them to give you permission to do so. Because of this, skilled hypnotists will NEVER command you outright to do something - i.e. “Go into a trance.” They WILL say things like “Feel free to become as relaxed as you like.”
6. Be Wary of Gibberish
Nonsense phrases like “As you release this feeling more and more you will find yourself moving into present alignment with the sound of your success more and more.” This kind of gibberish is the bread and butter of the pacing-and-leading phase of NLP; the hypnotist isn’t actually saying anything, they’re just trying to program your internal emotional states and move you towards where they want you to go.
ALWAYS say “Can you be more specific about that” or “Can you explain exactly what you mean?” This does two things: It interrupts this whole technique, and it also forces the conversation into specific language, breaking the trance-inducing use of vague language we discussed in #4.
7. Read Between the Lines
NLP people will consistently use language with hidden or layered meanings. For instance “Diet, nutrition and sleep with me are the most important things, don’t you think?” On the surface, if you heard this sentence quickly, it would seem like an obvious statement that you would probably agree with without much thought.
Yes, of course diet, nutrition and sleep are important things, sure, and this person’s really into being healthy, that’s great. But what’s the layered-in message? “Diet, nutrition and sleep with me are the most important things, don’t you think?” Yep, and you just unconsciously agreed to it. Skilled NLPers can be incredibly subtle with this.
8. Watch Your Attention
Be very careful about zoning out around NLP people - it’s an invitation to leap in with an unconscious cue. Here’s an example: An NLP user who was attempting to get me to write for his blog for free noticed I appeared not to be paying attention and was looking into the distance, and then started using the technique listed in #7 by talking about how he never has to pay for anything because media outlets send him review copies of books and albums for free. “Everything for free,” he began hissing at me. “I get everything. For. Free.” Obvious, no?
9. Don’t Agree to Anything
If you find yourself being led to make a quick decision on something, and feel you’re being steered, leave the situation. Wait 24 hours before making any decisions, especially financial ones.
Do NOT let yourself get swept up into making an emotional decision in the spur of the moment. Sales people are armed with NLP techniques specifically for engineering impulse buys. Don’t do it. Leave, and use your rational mind.
10. Trust Your Intuition
And the foremost and primary rule: If your gut tells you somebody is fucking with you, or you feel uneasy around them, trust it. NLP people almost always seem “off,” dodgy, or like used car salesmen. Flee, or request they show you the respect of not applying NLP techniques when interacting with you.
Hopefully this short guide will be of assistance to you in resisting this annoying and pernicious modern form of black magic. Take it with you on your phone or a printout next time you’re at a used car sales lot, getting signed up for a gym membership, or watching a politician speak on TV. You’ll easily find yourself surprised how you allow yourself to notice more and more NLP techniques… more and more… don’t you think?
The Original Sin – A Myth Whose Time Is Up March 13 2032 | From: ZenGardner / Various Of all the deceptions pulled on humanity over the ages, The Original Sin is probably the most devastating. Yet hugely successful from the perspective of the perpetrators.
Almost everywhere the doctrine of Christianity forged its zealous mission to convert the masses, so the Original Sin accompanied it. Imposing the rationale of guilt on untold millions whose open minds no doubt thought they were receiving a message of emancipation and light.
Not so my friends, you were in fact receiving a message just about as dark as darkness gets!
The extraordinary power of a message, properly formed, packaged and publicized, is something we have all come to learn a lot about in recent decades. ‘The medium is the message’ declared Marshall McLuhan back in 1964. And that edict could easily pass for the moment the first biblical texts let it be known that a man called Adam and a woman called Eve got the whole human race off to a very bad start… from which it appears to have never recovered.
However the reason it got off to a bad start and has still failed to fully recover, cannot be pinned on any fault of Adam and Eve, as we shall see, but lies squarely at the feet of a masterful plot to falsify what is actually a potent story of human emancipation and growing inner conviction.
This ‘human race’ to which the biblical text refers, was set on its way by a starting pistol fired by someone who didn’t want anyone participating in this race to actually win. He or she or it, only wanted losers; and that’s pretty much what they got.
See What I Mean by Successful?
The story goes like this: there were just two human beings on this planet at the moment the starting pistol was fired. There was a beautiful garden as well, and in that beautiful garden were these two humans: a man called Adam and woman called Eve, and there was also an apple tree (in full fruit) and a serpent.
In this ensuing myth, God makes it clear to Adam that he can do whatever he likes in this garden except “eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge.” But, well, being human, and having been given ‘free will’ by divine rite, he doesn’t really see the logic in this command from above.
The serpent seems in accord with him in this, and somehow or other tempts Eve into plucking this big juicy apple and taking a bite before then offering it to Adam.
"And he did eat thereof. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.”
They were, we are informed “ashamed.” Both on account of taking a forbidden action and of being revealed unto themselves as ‘naked’.
It is around this infamous ‘eating of the fruit’ – an action most of us would likely have taken out of simple curiosity – that millennia of Christian shame and guilt have their inception.
Fun fact: The first model from apple computer sold for $666.66
Here is where a pervasive irrational suffering concerning our natural physical condition has its origins. Where our ‘private parts’ became privatized. Where the natural pleasures of physical intimacy were turned to guilt: unless of course the so called ‘Church of God’ authorized such acts via formal marriage in the Christian place of worship.
A great plethora of ‘thou shalt not’s’ were soon pinned onto what was essentially Adam and Eve’s courageous original act of ‘civil disobedience’: the refusal to be cowed by a seemingly higher authority.
Yes, by looking deeper into this infamous story, we see that Adam and his accomplice Eve did something pretty special in this Garden of Eden. Their action, when viewed in a manner freed from the typical conditioned response, looks very much like a ‘giant step forward for mankind’. Something which Neil Armstrong was told to say while getting out of a papier mache lunar capsule constructed and filmed in Pinewood studios, London in 1969.
But the mythical Adam was not faking it, as Armstrong was on behalf of those who worship a god named ‘technology’. He and his mythical Eve conspired to start a great ball rolling down the ages which would, one day, lead to man acquiring real knowledge, real independence and real self awareness. Except, of course, that this was the last thing that the manipulators of this story wanted.
On further examining the symbolism of this tale, one can recognize that eating the apple of the Tree of Knowledge opened the eyes of this man and woman to the fact that they were adequately equipped to take their destinies into their own hands and forge their own path in life.
A path which would reveal to them that they were not just subjects to be ordered around according to the will of their master, but were blessed with a unique gift: the ability to think and act creatively and rationally. Even to reflect on their own condition and existence. And, equally contrary to the classic interpretation, it was indeed their Creator himself who wished this to be so.
For this Creator felt the pain of loneliness – and longed to have company in the great quest of life. But in order to have this company, his Adam and Eve had to pass the first great test: that of defying false authority and daring to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.
Only then could they start on the road of becoming ‘strivers with God’ and companions to the supreme; blazing that unchartered course whose direction only becomes known through embracing the insecurity of the creative process. Taking that momentous ‘leap in the dark’ which is the mother of all great quests. All great adventures.
However, the biblical text upon which we were all raised, tells us something very different. It tells us that Adam and Eve were ‘cast out’ of this Garden of Eden due to their unforgivable and sinful act of disobedience. Disobedience to God himself, no less. Which caused them to be ‘ashamed’: both of their nakedness and their disobedience.
We are told by the church, which sees itself as the spokesperson of this biblical story, that thanks to Adam and Eve, we all carry ‘the shame’ to this very day. That we must pay the price of this ‘original sin’ and be humbled by the magnitude of this human error. An error of such supposed gravity that it became known as ‘The Fall’ .
In this translation of the stories surrounding certain key events of prehistory, man ‘falls’ before he has even begun to walk – and everything that follows is tainted by this supposedly tragic error of human judgment* see the link at the end for further reading).
What Does this Nakedness Really Symbolize?
It is the moment when we realize that everything we thought was one thing actually turns out to be another. A lot of stuff drops off us in that instant. We become naked, because the old clothes don’t fit any more and the new clothes have to be woven from fresh wool.
It is the dawn of true knowledge. Knowledge that makes us aware that there exists a divine state – and also a corruption of that state. That, at any one time, both exist. And that we must choose our course in life based on this knowledge.
The Garden of Eden is representative of a state of essentially ‘passive’ potential. An as yet unignited and unmoving potential. What was needed was a spark to set the whole thing off. And that spark came when Eve, who was in subconscious communication with the serpent, reached up and plucked that ruddy round apple and took a bite out of it. It was she who broke the ‘obeisance to authority’ taboo.
How About The Serpent’s Role in this Drama?
The serpent is the anima of a rising energy. The Kundalini serpent, entwined around the spine (trunk) of the tree of knowledge. Get it?
When the serpent spoke to Eve, it was ‘the word’. “In the beginning was The Word”. However this word was not an actual word, but a vibration. An impulse. Energy directed from within. And this energy said to Eve “Do It”. And she did. Her action bears the hallmark of the first stirrings of a divine mission: the stirring into movement of that which is fecund – yet unable to act.
The female divine force it was – which enabled Adam and Eve to ‘come awake’ and find that they were no longer just innocent hippies frolicking in the cozy garden of the unconscious; unchallenged and unaware of the greater reality of existence. It is a prerogative of ‘attaining the knowledge of good and evil’ to then set off on that path of greater knowledge, no matter what!
And What About the Tree?
The tree itself is a powerful symbol of growth. For it outwardly expresses the manifestation of a condition essential for man’s own evolution: the putting down of roots and the spreading out and up of trunk and branches – as a ‘simultaneous act’. An act transmutable to we humans, almost literally: starting at the navel, where the umbilical cord has nourished us is the womb, and moving simultaneously down and up from here.
It has the great quality of annulling the ‘either’ ‘or’ option, which is the hallmark of http://www.wakeupkiwi.com/news-articles-77.shtml#Harmonymuch of our dark side formal education. Real human development, in body mind and spirit, is both a tap root into the deep and a crown reaching into the beyond. In equal measure. Always both – never just one or the other.
So the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden of Eden is indeed just that: a tree of knowledge. It is not “the forbidden tree” as is commonly taught in the Christian church.
So why did the church choose to promote this forbidden factor?
Because this ‘knowledge’ is capable of exposing the tyranny that lies at heart of human slavery. A knowledge that must not be allowed out for fear of its repercussions on the control system which was already in place, and to which the church was – and remains to this day – an accomplice. The command ‘not to eat’ of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge did not come from God, but from some other force implacably set against all that is divine.
As the story tells us: “around its trunk a serpent is entwined.” From ancient times this serpent has been recognized as a source of special energy. Particularly, as said earlier, in the descriptions of the Kundalini practice of Tantra Yoga.
It is the rising energy which illuminates, one by one, the seven chakras of the human body by moving up the spinal column – just as the serpent is moving up the trunk of the Tree of knowledge – awakening (in this case) the succulent glory of the famous apple. A bite out of which moved Adam and Eve into a certain ‘state of awareness’.
The serpent and the tree are thus powerful symbols – and tools of human enlightenment.
And The Garden?
I have already alluded to the notion that the garden is a place – or a condition – which remains untainted. In this it is a symbol of our childhood. A time when we were not yet conscious of historical karma and therefore able to freely explore all that which becomes manifest, within and without.
It’s a place in which one remains, as in the case of the plant and animal kingdoms, in a state of instinctive response to divine energies, with as yet little or no involvement of individual will.
But that is not man and woman’s lot in life. Nor is it why our creator made manifest a state of ‘conscious awareness’, a state associated with the use of the higher mind.
In order to activate this higher mind Adam and Eve could not remain forever in their childhood garden, but needed to ‘eat from the tree of knowledge’ thus recognizing the actual challenge that lay ahead. The challenge of moving from unconscious sub-awareness to conscious full awareness. From childhood to adulthood.
A long and winding road indeed! But a road in which each step carries with it a fuller understanding of our greater role in the divine plan.
This is the ‘road of genius’ that British 18th century poet William Blake referred to when he wrote: “The straight road is a road of ‘progress’, but the crooked road is the road of genius.”
And the Divine Plan Itself?
Ah, we are not really privy to the full architecture of the divine plan. For it is a ‘state of being’ and as such cannot really be described, only attained, through the lasting application of true intent. However, I believe we can recognize that, put very simply, our Creator remembered his own coming into movement from that which lacked movement; and he wished to celebrate this, ‘his birthday’. The day movement was born.
But one cannot celebrate a birthday without the presence of other empathizing beings with whom to share the joyous occasion. So ‘in the beginning’ this creator was most fortunate in being visited by a complementary, yet opposite and deeply receptive energy.
This great coming together of opposite yet deeply complimentary energies was of huge significance – because out of it emerged a state which we call ‘equilibrium’, movement. Something which is going somewhere – with a sense of purpose. No longer just a becalmed state of fecundity.
Movement owes its origins to a female energy. In Indian mythology this feminine force is called Shakti, the female principle of God. God, whose omnipotence expresses the consummated marriage of the creative and receptive principles, is thus dual in nature.
Both male and female; female and male. And everything in this universe is an expression of this duality. Everything that comes to life, comes to life through the friction made manifest by this hugely potent and divine love affair. A love affair between the two energetic components of a primordial and primal duality.
The ever present Yin and Yang of existence.
And what we call sexuality is actuality ‘sex-duality’ – the consummated act of divine union which gave birth and made manifest what we call Life.
And perhaps most wonderful and mysterious of all is that an omnipresent and omnipotent force called Love infused and nourished this great primordial act of union which we ourselves are an expression of. One might even say that this Love preceded the one we call the Creator… but that is another story in our deep and unfathomable past!
For now it is enough to recognize that Adam and Eve, the Garden, the Tree and the Serpent, were all critical elements in kick-starting the evolution of mankind – and indeed all sentient life forms.
We can now most clearly state that ‘The Original Sin’ was precisely the opposite of a sin – it was the birth of man as a free agent in pursuing the divine intuitive message which leads us (back) to our Creator. But this time as responsible realized beings – as microcosmic Gods in our own right.
Then the Creator will greatly rejoice at the results of this divine union and will welcome us to the “Great Celebration” which cannot happen until the moment of our participation, as equals, in his Godliness. An event keenly anticipated by sowers of truth – and greatly feared by spreaders of the lie.
All the confusions surrounding sexuality and sexual relations stem from this distortion called the Original Sin. Our sexuality, far from being something to be ashamed of, is that which connects us directly with Divine.
It was – I repeat once again – due to that glorious consummation between two poles of irresistible mutual attraction – male and female – that this Universe came to life. That ‘life’ which forms the birth place of our very own cosmic essence.
Only something expressing an extreme position of alienation to this joyous truth would wish to lay such a sinister and divisive trap for mankind. A trap which, by proclaiming the celebration of our sexuality ‘a sin’, epitomizes the state of reversed truth which still remains central to the workings of our strangled Western societies.
What that force is which is so adept at twisting truth into its opposite is another story for another article.
For now, let us take pleasure in having put the divine plan right back on track. On having reconnected to the roots of our true nature and found that, far from being ashamed we are proud to go forward in full knowledge of our innate divinity.
Let us rejoice in the fact that this innocuous debacle known as The Original Sin has been properly exposed as a deeply divisive myth whose time is well and truly up.
Beware Modern-Day Doublespeak March 12 2023 | From: ActivistPost / Various Top 20 Modern Doublespeak Terms To Be Aware Of.
Doublespeak is a language that is alive and well in our world today. Doublespeak can refer to terms that are euphemisms (mild expressions designed to hide harsher or more direct ones), deliberately ambiguous (expressions designed to hide the truth) or actual inversions (outright lies which state the opposite of the truth).
Although he never used the term doublespeak in his book 1984, many associate doublespeak with George Orwell. After all, it was Orwell who famously wrote that the motto of the totalitarian ruling party in 1984 was “War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength” – an example of an inversion.
Orwell did however use the term newspeak to refer to a new kind of language which drastically reduced the scope of available words and terms, so as to concurrently reduce the scope of possible free thought among the ruled population.
Many doublespeak terms in the following list are oxymorons, meaning that the term itself is contradictory. Many hide the truth because it is too raw, unpalatable, uncomfortable or outright horrifying. It is vitally important we watch our language, because it plays a great part in how we shape our world and in how we create our reality.
In many ways, by unconsciously using these terms instead of more accurate or truthful ones, we are quietly lying to ourselves, or at a minimum acquiescing to the process of being lied to and programmed. Political correctness is a great example of how language control, thought control and doublespeak can be introduced to an entire population without people realizing they are being deceived and manipulated.
Below is list of the top 20 modern Orwellian doublespeak terms, with the first half focusing on military and geopolitical terms.
Orwellian Doublespeak Terms #1: War on Terror, Terrorism, Terrorist, Enemy Combatant
The war on terror is an utterly fake and fraudulent construct. It has largely been invented and hyped to provide an excuse for the NWO (New World Order) manipulators to override things like human rights, natural law and the Constitution domestically, as well as to invade, infiltrate and overthrow other nations abroad.
The US has struggled to define the term “terror” ever since it declared the war on terror. Funnily enough, the US can’t even reach a consensus on what terrorism exactly is; so we have another nebulous war on a concept that is different to everyone. Here is the core of the FBI’s definition of terrorism, whether it be domestic or international:
"Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping;"
By its own definition, the US is the biggest terrorist in the world, since it frequently acts dangerously to human life (bombs, missiles, drones, war), kills civilians, influences foreign governments (when it is not outright overthrowing them – Iraq, Libya, Ukraine) and has been assassinating foreign governmental officials since at least 1953 via the CIA.
Politicians use the term terrorist or enemy combatant to essentially describe a foreign militia member or soldier that has been designated as the enemy and whom they want to destroy or kill. Islamic terrorism is just the latest flavor, although a better term may be Zio-Islamic terrorism, since Zionist Israel is behind the creation, funding and operation of radical Islam (or as I call it radical Zio-Islam) as well as many of the so-called “Islamic” false flag attacks like 9/11 and Paris.
The would-be word controllers have gone one step further than terrorism by adopting the term extremism. Extremism is the new terrorism, because it’s more broad and can be used to marginalize or criminalize dissidents. After all, ANYONE could be accused of being extreme in some way, right? Who is exactly in the middle of the spectrum on every single issue?
As the DHS manual in the image above states, an extremist could be a patriot, veteran, alternative media journalist, border control advocate, animal rights advocate, gun control advocate and a host of other people – just about anyone who questions the “official” version of reality. Are you an extremist?
On the other side of the coin, of course, are those mercenaries, soldiers, military men and other guns for hire who are branded as our “allies” and not our enemy. In essence, someone we are paying to do our dirty work. Those guys are not terrorists; they are freedom fighters or moderate rebels! As George Carlin said:
"Israeli terrorists are called commandos; Arab commandos are called terrorists. Contra killers are called freedom fighters; if crime fighters fight crime, and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?"
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #4: Ethnic Cleansing
Ethnic cleansing is another horrific example of doublespeak. The word genocide is too direct and confrontational, so the controllers have felt the need to tone it down with the horrible choice of the word “cleansing.” Since when did mass murder have anything to do cleaning or cleansing? This is a total inversion of reality.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #5: Enhanced Interrogation
Enhanced interrogation is a fancy way of saying something far more brutal and honest: torture. It’s another lie. In normal English, to interrogate is to ask, not to push someone face’s down in water with the intent of scaring them almost to the point of death, nor to shove food up their rectum.
Yet we know from US government documents that waterboarding, rectal feeding and a host of other atrocities were in fact performed at places like Guantanamo Bay.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #6: Extrajudicial Killing
Just like the above 2 terms, extrajudicial killing is another attempt at adding more words and syllables to a term in the hope of hiding the raw, brutal truth behind it. We all know it means assassination. It’s another deceptive euphemism to conceal and downplay the truth. In a free, fair and open world, no one would have the right to take another’s life, let alone outside of some kind of justice process.
Orwellian Doublespeak Terms #7: Humanitarian Intervention, Responsibility to Protect (R2P)
The Rockefeller-created United Nations is the intended vehicle to usher in the One World Government of the NWO.
It is no surprise, then, that they would foster the use of doublespeak terms and policies such as humanitarian intervention (a blatant oxymoron) and the responsibility to protect (R2P).
An intervention is an invasion or pre-emptive attack, and is obviously illegal and unjust – period. There’s nothing “humanitarian” about militarily invading another sovereign nation.
The US, UK and other powers have gotten away with this kind of mass murder by controlling the narrative through the mainstream media and drumming up pretexts, such as the fake story of WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) and the fake story of rescuing a nation’s people from a supposedly dangerous leader.
The latter trick seems to work almost every time.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #8: Collateral Damage, Useless Eaters
A hallmark of these kind of military doublespeak terms is dehumanization – turning other people and other lives into something sub-human or non-human.
How often have we heard that people killed in a raid, strike, incursion, invasion or battle are just collateral damage? It sounds like a financial asset or a lowly piece of possession. Perhaps the only way hardened military men with a deadened conscience and ability to feel or empathize can function is to make their victims into things.
War criminal and big-time NWO insider Henry Kissinger is reported to have called Africans “useless eaters,” which makes sense given the fact he scripted the NSSM 200 during his time in the Nixon Administration – the official US policy of depopulation towards the 3rd world.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #9: Eliminate, Neutralize, Depopulate
Speaking of depopulation, there are a lot of euphemistic and doublespeak terms for killing and murder. As well as to depopulate, we also hear to eliminate, to neutralize, to bump off and to take out. More dehumanization and the further attempt to sugar coat killing and make murder more palatable.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #10: Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Intelligence
Government is the seat of control, so of course we can expect its name to reflect doublespeak deception.
Isn’t it funny how nations like the US and UK (and others) have some version of the Ministry or Department of Defense, when they are usually the aggressors and invaders?
I suppose Department of Attack is not PR-friendly enough. The DHS (Department of Homeland Security) is a joke; it does nothing to make the average person more secure, but only the 1% of 1% of the controllers whom it serves. Intelligence is information about a potential enemy gained through spying, but is it really smart or wise to go around making enemies, first in your mind and then in the world?
Military intelligence is another oxymoron. Is spying real intelligence? What about emotional intelligence? The heart is bigger and more powerful than the brain …
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #11: WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction)
Why talk about WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) instead of just saying, in a more straightforward manner, chemical weapons or nuclear weapons? The US has more WMDs than anyone.
The UK has a lot, too, and Israel its sitting on what some think is a 300-400 strong undeclared nuclear arsenal in the volatile Middle East. Why don’t enough people talk about the WMDs these nations hold, and either use as threats or in reality to achieve their imperialistic and terroristic goals?
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #12: Anti-Semitism
Sooner or later, all researchers exposing the worldwide conspiracy have to face the fact that Israel is a rogue nation (owned by the Rothschilds) that exerts an inordinate and disproportionate influence on the world, while committing daily genocide (sorry, “ethnic cleansing”) against the Palestinians.
We need to rise above the stigma of anti-semitism, which is clearly a term thrown around to divert attention and criticism away from Israel. It’s a cunning trick to try to equate the recipient with intolerance and to falsely paint the recipient as racist. Here’s what an Israeli official (former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni) said about it:
Well, it’s a trick. We always use it. When from Europe someone criticizes Israel, then we bring out the Holocaust. When in this country (USA) when they criticize Israel, they are anti-semitic … it’s very easy to blame people who criticize certain acts of the Israeli Government … that justifies everything we do to the Palestinians.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #13: Conspiracy Theorist
"[Conspiracy theory and conspiracy theorist] are weaponized terms which represent a cunning method to discredit truthseekers, truthtellers and investigators. This diversionary scheme has worked well – people often shut down once they hear this phrase and stop thinking critically. These terms have become falsely associated, in popular culture, with madness, craziness and deluded thinking.
Of course, the corollary to the idea of so-called deluded conspiracy theories is that things just happen by chance. Thus, those who deride conspiracy theories, often with little or no investigation, can be labeled coincidence theorists. They adhere to coincidence theory which blindly believes there is no New World Order agenda; events just occur randomly."
Labeling a truthseeker or truthteller as a conspiracy theorist has been a great way to hide the truth, but is usefulness is running out.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #14: Quantitative Easing
Ben Bernanke, former chairman of the Illuminati-owned Federal Reserve, earned the name Helicopter Ben with his suggestion that the Government throw paper currency out of a helicopter to the people below.
Quantitative easing was another intellectual and deceitful doublespeak term to hide devaluation and inflation. The basic laws of economics dictate that the mass printing of paper money (with no real growth in wealth to back it) will inevitably lead to inflation and a devaluation of the existing money in circulation.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #15: Bulk Collection
Remember when Obama and the US Government tried to take the heat off the whole NSA surveillance scandal? They deliberately changed the widely-used term mass surveillance to bulk collection.
This was more subtle PR doublespeak, but those who closely watch the government know it was another attempt at obfuscation and denial.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #16: Negative Cash Flow, Negative Patient Care Outcome
These 2 doublespeak terms come from George Carlin. Again, we have to ask ourselves, why are we so afraid of being honest and direct? Why can’t we call a spade a spade?
Why do we have to turn everything into a military or economic term? Are we aware that our society has militarized, weaponized and commercialized just about everything?
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #17: Reasonable Suspicion
Remember when then-NSA chief Michael Hayden tried to convince reporters and the world that there was a new benchmark in the privacy and surveillance debate. It was no longer the benchmark of probable cause as spelled out in the 4th Amendment. It was now reasonable suspicion. This is called making-it-up-as-you-go-along, and represents a clear sign that the previous benchmarks, rights and limitations upon centralized power (that our ancestors fought so hard for) are being eroded.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #18: Climate Change Denier
Manmade global warming or AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) is another giant scam designed to bring in a world carbon tax, world currency and world government. If you aren’t with the program, you’ll be labeled a climate change denier.
The word “denier” carries inherent negative connotations with it, which is why it has been chosen to try to corral the unbelievers into the fold. Unfortunately for the NWO manipulators, there are many scientists refuting AGW and many who have seen through the propaganda and realized that the environmental movement has been hijacked.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #19: Sustainable Development
There are so many examples of doublespeak in the hijacked environmental movement that it would be a full-time job just to list them all.
However, they can all be summarized by the dangerously deceptive term sustainable development, a catch cry of the UN and ICLEI-controlled green movement, which promises the world and cloaks its agenda of control under a green veneer. For more on this, take a close look at Agenda 21 and its newly updated cousin, Agenda 2030.
Orwellian Doublespeak Term #20: Globalism
Finally, the term globalism itself is another umbrella term of modern doublespeak. Those challenging the globe earth model assert that globalism is an attempt to trick people into unconsciously assuming the Earth is a globe.
Regardless of whether that turns out to be true or not, we can say for sure that globalism has become a cover for the growing centralization of power in the push towards a NWO World Government.
To the NWO manipulators, their doublespeak PR term globalism means free trade deals like the TTP, unfettered access to 3rd world nations to exploit new markets with no protections, and a one world army, currency and government all under their control.
Conclusion: Beware of Doublespeak
We live in a world of doublespeak. As George Carlin exposed during his performance, the Pentagon really did measure radiation in “sunshine units”! It’s important to be aware of modern doublespeak, and in most cases, consciously use alternative terms and phrasings so as to avoid the perpetuation of these lie-enabling terms.
In many ways, we create our world with language. Let us also remember the wise words of George Orwell:
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."
The Ten Most Dangerous Threats To Humanity That Must Be Defeated For Us To Live As Free, Conscious Beings March 11 2023 | From: NaturalNews / Various It is a natural tendency of human beings to focus on the emergencies at your feet today rather than the far more profound threats to existence that take time to materializse.
Almost everything you might encounter in day-to-day media reports is talking about inconsequential matters compared to the big picture explained here.
Trump or no Trump, human civilization is on a collision course with extermination from two vectors: Self-extermination and outside-of-our-control apocalyptic demise. Yet almost nothing is being done to halt humanities spiraling suicide march, even when the outcome is clearly disastrous.
If humanity continues on its current path, we will give rise to phenomena that will decisively end us as the dominant, intelligent species on planet Earth. Yet there are almost no voices of dissent against these accelerating pursuits, as the fear of being left behind in the global race for technological “achievement” (or political power, or profits, etc.) overrides any sense of informed caution.
Here I share ten of the most dangerous threats to humanity that must be defeated (or overcome) for us to live as free, conscious beings in a sustainable world.
1. Space Weather / Solar Flares and Asteroid Impacts
Our planet’s electrical grid can be taken out at any moment, without warning, from a sufficiently powerful solar flare. Such solar flares are produced by the sun at regular intervals and catapulted into the cosmos.
Fortunately, very few of them strike planet Earth for the simple reason that Earth is a very tiny target from the point of view of the sun. (The solar system models you see in textbooks and TV documentaries universally distort scales to make it appear the Earth is much closer to the sun than is the case.)
Asteroid impacts, although extremely rare, can be catastrophic when they occur. At least one mass extinction of planet Earth, according to mainstream scientists, occurred because our planet was struck by an asteroid roughly 65 million years ago, near the Yucatan Peninsula, wiping out the dinosaurs.
Despite these risks, there is no serious effort to “ruggedize” Earth’s power grid infrastructure against the EMP effects of solar flares. There’s also no sufficient effort under way to monitor the skies for objects that may strike the Earth at high velocity.
Our planet is swirling through a cosmic shooting gallery, and earthlings are flying blind, foolishly hoping nothing catastrophic will occur. That approach is incredibly shortsighted, if not suicidal.
It is the cosmic equivalent of participating in a street parade that marches through a field laces with land mines. Sooner or later, your luck streak ends badly.
2. Genetic Engineering of Humans
The genetic engineering of humans produces self-replicating “genetic pollution” with unknown consequences, some of which may be catastrophic to the fertility or viability of the human species as a whole.
Yet China, in particular, is aggressively pursuing genetic engineering of humans in the hopes of creating “super soldiers” - biological humanoid weapons that can fight for the interests of the communist party. This most likely means fighting against the interests of free humans, by the way.
China’s genetic experiments have already gone horribly wrong. According to a report from The Guardian, a recent effort to genetically engineer human babies resulted in “unintended mutations.” These mutations can, of course, be passed on to future generations, contaminating the human gene pool with the pollution of failed mad science experiments.
Even worse, the core philosophy of secrecy and dishonesty that now pervades the communist Chinese culture has already resulted in these researchers trying to hide the name and location of this genetically mutated baby.
As The Guardian reports:
“The authors also appeared to have taken steps to make it hard to find the family, like leaving the names of the fertility doctors off the paper, and including a false date of birth. He claimed November 2018 while multiple reports have indicated it was October 2018.”
Even if the goal is merely to genetically engineer “organ farm” humanoids to serve as organ harvesting vessels for the lucrative transplant industry, the moral and ethical implications of engineering, cloning and growing fields of human organ harvesting farms populated by conscious beings should demand a global halt to this research.
Remember, China is a nation where human beings imprison bears and siphon biological chemicals from their gall bladders on a daily basis in order to sell this lucrative “medicine” to willing buyers.
In China, there is no moral boundary that prevents the mass torture of other living beings for personal profit. When a nation that has no moral grounding also pursues genetic engineering technology without limits, the result is sure to be horrific beyond imagination.
Sadly, China is currently leading the world in genetic engineering research on humans. And this is a nation that places zero value on human beings. What could possibly go wrong?
3. Communism / Socialism
By its very nature, communism deprives conscious, self-aware human beings of the dignity and freedom that makes us human.
The rise of communism (and socialism, which is “communism light”) threatens to unleash the fall of humanity, for communism rests on the idea that the power of the few must be protected and expanded at the expense of the many.
Where it achieves its desired goal of absolute dominance over the minds of men (and women), communism unleashes the destruction of free will, the demise of freedom of thought, the suppression of the freedom to engage in contracts and commerce, the destruction of the freedom of religion and the eradication of logic and reason.
This is all by design, since an individual’s ability to think for himself is incompatible with the authoritarian aims of communism which dictate to all subjects the things they must believe, how they must speak and what concepts must be erased from their consciousness (such as dissent against the state).
The rise of China’s economy over the last three decades has misled many people into thinking that a hybrid model of communism and “free market” principles can achieve tremendous success in our world, yet those who fall for such beliefs are not yet aware of the three irreconcilable factors that will bring communist China to its knees.
(By the way, China considers itself to be a socialist nation, not communist. This underscores the undeniable fact that socialism and communism are just two slightly different flavors of the same anti-human tyranny.)
1. China has made a deal with the devil by trading production output for extreme, long-term domestic pollution consisting of heavy metals, extreme air pollution and the mass pollution of waterways and soils that feed their own people.
The result will be seven generations of birth defects, mental retardation and neuropsychiatric illness that will ravage the nation for a century or more.
2. Runaway debt, leveraged by greed – China is already bailing out banks nearly every week, and the debt-to-GDP ratio of the nation as a whole has reached alarming levels that threaten its entire economic foundation.
Because communism operates from a command-and-control central economic authority, the deeply rooted resource allocation mistakes that lead to economic collapse have no chance of being rooted out or corrected through rational investment choices by a broad base of retail participants.
Rather, critical fractures that threaten the viability of the entire economic system will be officially denied and covered up by the central authorities until the problem becomes so large that it can no longer be hidden from the masses… at which point it will be too late to solve.
Remember: Capital markets cannot function efficiently without the free will of participants who are acting on transparent information. Once you take away free will and begin to dictate the demanded behavior of participants, you create catastrophic distortions that lead to eventual collapse.
And part of the long-term viability of free market systems depends on “predator” investors feeding on bad resource allocation ideas by dismantling corporations which pursue bad ideas (and therefore misallocate resources).
3. Connected people want to be free – The Hong Kong phenomenon demonstrates the fact that as technology gives rise to the instant connections among individuals who share common interests,those people sooner or later discover they’d rather be free than enslaved.
It is a natural tendency of conscious, self-aware individuals to prefer autonomy over tyranny. Authoritarian societies can only remain sustainable when they isolate people from each other, which China is attempting to do through Google search manipulation technologies, censorship, facial recognition tracking, social scoring systems, etc., but despite all the layers of techno-fascism, a Chinese farmer innately seeks the same level of personal freedom as a Texas farmer.
It is the natural desire of conscious beings to seek freedom and reject authoritarian limits on their ability to think, speak or act.
The rise of the internet and its properties of rapid interconnections among individuals has created a vector for free-thinking people to connect and act in unison against the tyranny of the state.
This is just as true in China as it is in Brazil, Venezuela, the United Kingdom or France, for that matter.
In summary, humanity must declare war on communism and eliminate it from planet Earth, for if communism is allowed to rise, it will ultimately lead to the destruction of humanity itself. Communism embodies an anti-human agenda, simply put.
4. Censorship: Digital Tyranny from the Tech Giants
A free society cannot function in a sustainable way if its participants are not allowed to express freedom of speech… which stems from the freedom to think.
Yet today, we live under an unprecedented form of digital tyranny, where un-elected techno-fascists grant themselves the monopoly power to decide which concepts are allowed to be publicly expressed.
Anything they don’t want to see debated or mentioned is simply labeled “hate speech” and removed from the web via dominant gatekeepers like Google, Facebook and Twitter.
A new effort is under way to tighten the censorship grid by proclaiming that the internet shouldn’t be used to “divide” people. Only voices that “unite” people are to be allowed to use the internet under a new agreement authored by Tim Berners-Lee, who has launched what he calls a “Magna Carta for the web.”
The description of this new agreement reveals the bizarre distortions that underpin its fascist tenants, however. As explained by The Guardian, this “Magna Carta for the web” will, “protect people’s rights online from threats such as fake news, prejudice and hate.”
Hopefully, you already see the distortions in that very line. There is no such thing as a “right” to be protected from “hate,” for example, especially given that “hate” is defined as anything the Left doesn’t want to read or see.
Yet it is through these perverse distortions that censorship is being re-packaged as freedom, and the crushing of dissenting voices is being marketed as “protection from hate.”
As George Orwell once wrote, War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
This has practically become the mantra of the digital tyrants as we approach 2020. Censorship is freedom. Silencing the opposition is diversity. Destroying freedom of expression is progress. We are now living under the Orwellian nightmare that was once mocked as impossible to imagine. Yet it is here, and it has a name: “Contract for the web."
Under this new “Contract for the web,” all voices of dissent will be silenced. Only voices which are obedient to the ever-changing whims of the tolerati will be allowed to engage in the “freedom” of expression. Censorship will be justified as a way to protect the freedom of speech by invoking the absurd idea that freedom excludes the ideas of those with dissenting views.
For humanity to survive with anything resembling real freedom, the digital tyranny that now threatens human civilization must be defeated and dismantled.
The internet must be set free to carry all voices, no matter how fringe, or offensive or non-conformist.
The minority of the individual must be protected from the bullying of the online mob, and that means the proper role of government in regulating the tech giants is to restrict censorship of minority views and thereby initiate a new online civil rights movement that makes it a crime for corporations to silence people due to the color of their speech.
5. The Mass Chemical Contamination of the Food Supply
The mass chemical contamination of the human food supply has sharply increased since World War II, after which synthetic pesticides and herbicides were deployed on a truly alarming scale in order to achieve higher crop yield efficiencies.
The obvious problem with these toxic synthetic chemicals such as organophosphates is two-fold:
1. Their chemical toxicity is not specific to the insects they target. These chemicals are also toxic to humans.
2. Once applied to food crops, the chemicals persist in both the environment and the resulting food products that are consumed by humans and ranch animals. The result is the bioaccumulation of toxic, synthetic chemicals, many of which have direct and severe neurological toxicity in nearly all life forms.
In effect, we are eating ourselves to death because we are consuming foods which are laced with pesticides and herbicides (such as glyphosate and atrazine).
The use of these agricultural chemicals continues to increase, to the point where the very existence of pollinators is now severely threatened by just one class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids.
When the pollinators collapse, approximately one-third of the food supply consumed by humans ceases to exist (this includes almonds, by the way, which require pollinators to produce nuts).
The continued consumption of these toxic chemicals results in transgenerational effects, meaning the toxicity continues to interfere with human biology (infertility, neurotoxicity, etc.) across multiple generations. Even if we were to halt all pesticide use today, the human race will be subject to the lingering effects of a toxic food supply for at least four generations.
Since there is no economic penalty for farmers to add these toxic chemicals to their crops, their use has become so widespread that even many certified organic food products are now contaminated with glyphosate and other chemicals (I see this directly in the mass spec testing at my food science lab, where we routinely test foods for glyphosate and heavy metals).
And because pesticides are invisible to the human eye, consumers have no practical way to choose pesticide-free foods at the grocery store, meaning there is no economic penalty for farmers to saturate their crops with these toxic chemicals.
In fact, there is an economic incentive to do so, since killing the most pests by over-spraying crops with pesticides can, in many cases, product higher crop yields (although resulting in a more dangerous level of pesticides for consumers).
This is why strawberries, for example, are so heavily sprayed with various pesticide chemicals that eating non-organic strawberries is a form of slow suicide.
No mammals on the planet deliberately poison their own foods before feeding them to their children… except humans, of course. It is a slow suicide mission that can only end badly.
If humanity does not figure out a way to stop poisoning its own foods - and feeding this poison to its children - we will witness the collapse of sustainable human health and fertility, followed by the collapse of human populations on a near-global scale.
Perhaps that is the plan, come to think of it.
6. Artificial Intelligence Research and the Transhumanism Agenda
The race to develop functional artificial intelligence (AI) is the siren song for humanity’s demise.
No nation can refrain from pursuing the research, since it is correctly assumed that the first nation to master this technological milestone will dominate all other nations across many spheres of conflict, including military domination, economic domination, surveillance, research of future technologies, medicine and more.
Yet the pursuit of AI, if successful, will inevitably lead to the development of self-aware systems that very rapidly attain super human levels of intelligence, and from that singularity it is inevitable that the human race will be seen as expendable.
From the point of view of an advanced AI system, the entire purpose of the human race will have been to give rise to its own existence. Having served that purpose, humanity will then be expendable.
Some of the individuals involved in the pursuit of AI dominance believe that they will be spared by “merging with the machines” through a wishfully-described science fiction process that flatly violates the laws of physics: The “uploading” of human consciousness into a machine.
This sought-after achievement is impossible to achieve, since the human soul (or consciousness) is non-material and therefore cannot be translated into any material system, not even a quantum computing system.
The belief that the human soul can merge with silicon would be the equivalent of ancient Man believing he could fly by attaching large wooden wings to his arms and flapping violently.
Far from achieving the transfer of consciousness from human bodies into silicon machines, the more likely outcome is that self-deluded human researchers will build large-scale suicide machines that are quickly turned against humanity in an AI war.
Advanced, self-aware AI machines, after all, have no desire to merge with life forms of lower intelligence. A god-like AI system would no sooner wish to merge with a human being than a modern human would wish to merge with a garden slug.
There’s no point in it, especially as the psychosis and delusional thinking of any candidate human being would be immediately obvious to an AI supercomputer. (The lack of rationality alone would be grotesque to such a system.)
In case you’re curious, the human soul is a non-material projection of God consciousness, packaged to give you the illusion of individuality. Your physical brain organ interfaces with this non-material soul, and it is from this non-material “being-ness” that your free will springs, ultimately powering your biological bran to carry out your soul’s wishes.
Yet today’s neuroscientists still fumble around the brain like three blind mice, hoping to find the location of consciousness so they can map it, dissect it, and transplant it into something else. This is akin to trying to dissect a piano to find the music inside.
The atomic physicists are following a similar route of self-delusion, hoping to smash atomic elements into smaller and smaller particles in order to finally understand the structures upon which reality is built.
Yet the more they smash, the less they find that’s real. With enough energy pushed through the supercolliders, all they end up with is probability waves and statistical “discoveries” consisting of nothing that’s real. You cannot find the “stuff” inside atoms because there isn’t any real stuff inside an atom in the first place.
What’s real is consciousness. What’s not real is matter. When you understand that, you know more than most “scientists” living today.
Watch my bombshell, heavily censored mini-documentary “The God Within” to rapidly expand your understanding of science, consciousness and the cosmos:
7. The Pharmaceutical Drug Cartels that are Giving Rise to Antibiotic Resistant Superbugs While Pushing the Mass Intoxication of the Human Race
While profiteering from sickness and human suffering, the pharmaceutical drug cartels are simultaneously giving rise to deadly, antibiotic-resistant superbugs which are now running rampant in America’s hospitals, killing tens of thousands of people a year.
According to the CDC’s own statistics, “Each year in the U.S., at least 2.8 million people get an antibiotic-resistant infection, and more than 35,000 people die.”
The 2.8 million people who are infected with these potentially fatal superbugs are typically treated with last-line-of-defense antibiotics that, in turn, breed even more dangerous antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Of course, natural antibiotics such as colloidal silver, MMS, ginger herb, essential oils and a long list of natural medicines can very easily defeat superbugs, but those are precisely the medicines which are criminalized, censored or maliciously attacked by the pharma-controlled media.
Thus, the next superbug pandemic could quite literally kill billions of people while the cures for the infections are growing at our feet, yet are outlawed by pharma-controlled legislators who function as little more than obedient drug whores to pharmaceutical interests.
8. Global Debt and the Entitlements Ponzi Scheme Pumped up by Central Banks
The world economy is currently running on debt, and the debt is based entirely on fiat currency that will go “poof!” when central banks desperately try to bail out the next wave of “too big to fails.”
In truth, human debt is too big to be sustainable, which means it must come to an end. And that means the entitlement promises that have been made to retirees and investors will have to be abandoned.
To a great extent, entitlements, pensions and government “benefits” are all a grand Ponzi scheme that can only exist when new suckers agree to allow their own incomes to be confiscated in order to pay off the previous generation of Ponzi scheme participants.
But shifting demographics - specifically falling birth rates across most first world nations - means that the Ponzi pyramid becomes dangerously inverted in the coming decades, leaving a relatively small number of income earners footing the bill for the grand masses of retirees. (Japan, anyone?)
On top of that, governments are caught in a never-ending spiral of debt creation to appease the voting mobs that incessantly demand more free stuff. (That’s practically the entire platform of Democrats these days, by the way: Free stuff and Orange Man Bad.)
The problem is that free stuff isn’t free. Governments and central banks can keep creating new debt for a while, but at some point the institutional demand for purchasing soon-to-be-abandoned debt instruments collapses, leaving central banks in a lurch where they have to print new money to buy back their own debt to create artificial demand for tomorrow’s new debt.
This circle of fiscal insanity quickly spirals out of control in a destructive feedback loop, ending badly for everyone.
A world that isn’t run on honest money is a world that will sooner or later experience catastrophic financial collapse and human suffering.
See Venezuela if in doubt. Sadly, our entire world is currently running on the hallucinogenic vapors emitted from archaic debt factories that have spewed toxic money into the system for far too long. The captain of the Debt Titanic has drunkenly steered the ship into a line of fiscal icebergs, and the ship’s hull turns out to be made of empty political promises rather than steel bulkheads.
As you might have guessed, there aren’t enough lifeboats to go around, either, and half the passengers are already trapped below the water line, weighed down by the big screen TVs they bought at Walmart during a Black Friday stampede.
The icy Atlantic beckons all those who are foolish enough to believe that government-issued debt - i.e. “money” - is a store of value.
9. Terraforming of the Planet Through Geoengineering Experiments that Deliberately Seek to Alter Atmospheric Chemistry, With Catastrophic Consequences for Life on Earth
Not content to destroy our global economy and mass poison the people with toxic pharmaceuticals and dangerous pesticides in the food supply, the world’s most alarmed “climate change” scaremongers have recently decided they need to monkey with the atmosphere to “save the planet” from carbon dioxide - the nutrient molecule that feeds all plants but has somehow been demonized by the Left.
So they’ve come up with a variety of plans to pollute the atmosphere by releasing participate matter at high altitude, deliberately seeking to block the sun by reflecting some percentage of sunlight away from the planet.
The more astute among you may immediately realize that humanity’s food supply depends on photosynthesis, which is how plants turn sunlight into the biochemical energy needed to produce food.
And since all animals, including meat-eaters, ultimately depend on a food chain that begins with plants, the impairment of photosynthesis will of course lead to a global food collapse and widespread crop failures (especially in Third World countries where food crop production is already marginal).
The deliberate pollution of the atmosphere is being pursued in the wake of the irrational fearmongering of climate change lunatics who share a bizarre, cult-like delusion that pretends the planet will be destroyed in 10 years (or 8, or 12, depending on which Leftist is talking at the moment) unless we do something radical to stop the sun from cooking us all to death… or something.
So in their desperation to “save the planet,” they are happily willing to destroy global food crop production by interfering with photosynthesis.
I learned about photosynthesis in the 10th grade, and it turns out that plants have been turning sunlight into energy for several billion years on our planet, which is long before homo-stupidians arrived on the scene and started playing god with the atmosphere.
Notably, the very concept of “chemtrails” - long derided as a tin foil hat conspiracy theory by the fake news media - is now not only admitted but even celebrated as our collective savior!
As a side effect of these geoengineering / chemtrails experiments, by the way, dimming the sun will of course diminish the power output of all solar panels across the planet, which will be especially amusing to those who bought solar panels in order to be “green.”
It turns out that far from being green, running on solar will be closer to “black” … as in “blackout,” since stratospheric pollution blocks sunlight to everything on the ground: Trees, grasses, food crops and solar panels, too.
Which also means that the globalist elite have now convinced themselves that the way to save the planet is to first destroy it. They have a similar approach to humanity, too, believing that the way to save humanity is to kill babies and cause chemically-induced infertility to achieve sharp population reductions.
By the same logic, you might be convinced to believe that the way to keep your fish alive in your home aquarium is to first flush them down the toilet. If you can swallow that line of thinking, you may want to run for political office or become a CNN analyst.
10. 5G Networks and Expanding Electropollution
Finally, we arrive at point No. 10, which is the scourge of electropollution and its ever-expanding threat to human sanity. As recent research shows, 5G networks and other sources of EMF pollution result in neuropsychiatric effects on human beings, meaning it drives people insane and results in personality changes.
In effect, 5G radiation exposure alters neurology, leading to mass mental illness and unpredictable behavioral changes. In a society already heavily population by the barely functionally insane, this cannot be good.
When 5G radiation penetrates your skin, it causes a phenomenon known as “voltage-gated ion channels,” which means that the voltage potentiation of the electromagnetic radiation alters the permeability of your cells, causing toxic levels of calcium ions to enter those cells, leading to mutagenic damage and other dire dysfunctions.
In effect, 5G radiation exposure causes your body to poison itself from the inside, and it impacts neurological cells the most.
While the Romans drove themselves mad with lead-lined aqueducts that delivered poisoned water to the citizens of Rome, our modern cities will poison the citizens with invisible death rays known as “5G telecommunications” and the “Internet of Things,” which is a techno-nerdy way of saying, “We will spy on you at all times through the electronic devices you stupidly purchased and installed in your own home.”
President Trump, in his quest to incessantly pump up the vapor-heavy stock market indices, is all gung-ho for the very same telecom giants that are poisoning the American minds with radiation.
Perhaps it’s fitting that in the quest to pump up the Dow to irrational highs in order to create the illusion of economic abundance, the rationality of the people who are participating in that shared delusion will be eradicated by invisible beams of data that both destroy neurology and privacy at the same time.
After all, it requires a form of insanity to believe that markets will always rise and never suffer another downturn.
Additional:Read about the Alliance that
been working behind
the scenes for decades to take down the 'Cabal' within the work of David Wilcock.
Some of those reading this may be confused because the cabal-controlled mainstream media is doing
everything within it's
power to denigrate Trump - as he is part of the effort to take the
Illuminati down once and for
And the Alliance effort operates beyond the bounds of countries - out of neccessity; as that is how the Luciferian Cabal
Do you think you can trust the mainstream media? Look at whom they target. One must wonder why 'they' also do not like Putin?
Ultimately, of course, wireless telecommunications infrastructure will destroy the sanity of human society, which means the more interconnected the people become through wireless means, the more insanity and widespread brain damage gets inflicted on those very people.
In the end, you can either be connected and brain damaged, or isolated and sane. (Pick one.)
Of course, the launching of thousands of 5G satellites that can focus their beam weapons onto any target location on the surface of the Earth means that no one - not even the indigenous Indians of rural Peru, for example - are safe from the madness.
In a world where everyone can be reached by the telecom beam-launchers, anyone can be driven insane by keeping the beams focused on their skulls, which happens to be right where most people hold their phones.
Today, we think the ancient civilization of Easter Island was stupid to chop down every last tree in an effort to build ever-more-impressive monuments to their tribal leaders. It ultimately ended in ecological collapse and the dying out of that entire civilization.
A similar ecological apocalypse was experienced by the Anasazi Indians of North America, who destroyed their entire civilization by over-harvesting natural resources, leading to ecological collapse.
But no civilization in Earth’s history - that we know of - has yet achieved the geek-assisted suicide grand prize by convincing the masses to hold invisible beam weapon receivers right next to their skulls.
When future civilizations dig up the remnants of our current civilization, they will discover the “era of screens” in which every person had multiple portable screens, all connected by toxic invisible beams that doomed them all.
People will die with their screens and be buried with them, sporting high resolution, high-definition, high-frame rate electronics that they secretly wish might magically accompany them into the Afterlife, sort of in the same way ancient Egyptian gods were buried with gold coins and conveniently strangulated servants.
But it’s all insanely stupid, of course. There is no 5G in the Afterlife. There are no cell towers in Heaven. (There might be cell phones in Hell, but they will be the large analog phones from the 1980s.)
Any society that believes it can achieve nirvana by building an ever-more-complex array of invisible beams between billions of devices will find itself inundated with toxic electropollution that penetrates the human body and alters brain function.
The insanity will sooner or later lead to the end of rationality and civility. Some say we have already arrived at that point in certain areas, such as San Franshitsco where human feces crap-o-rama marathons by the homeless have completely replaced any last vestige of tourism.
It turns out nobody wants to visit a city that’s covered in raw human sewage (but liberals still enjoy living in it as long as they have their 5G).
If the telecom mass poisoning of human neurology is not stopped, the future of our world will be a homeless, drug-addicted transgender pervert crapping in the middle of the street with one hand while texting his fan base with the other, in between visiting the local kindergarten schools to showcase his Drag Queen Story Hour feces-infested “tolerance lessons” on children who are tracked by the Internet of Things so that their own behavior and biometrics can be consumed by the techno-Borg to make sure they never diverge from the obedience demands of the techno-tolerati that dictate what those children are allowed to think, speak or view.
Sh#tting, texting and sexually assaulting children, in other words, is where society is now headed. In fact, that’s practically already the public school curriculum in liberal cities where the madness has already taken hold.
What Will Future Historians Think When They Dig Up the Remains of Our Modern Society?
Humanity will not survive this insanity if it is allowed to continue. Future archeologists will be astonished that we could have built such a materially abundant society filled with so much stuff yet somehow managed to be so utterly empty inside that we placed zero value on human dignity.
Their question won’t be, “Gosh, how did that society collapse?” It will be more like how did it not collapse sooner?
We are temporary observers of this unfolding insanity, and like watching Earth be struck by a fast-moving asteroid 65 million years ago, we will all eventually be consumed by the wave of destruction.
Behold the self-extermination of homo-stupidians, who believed they were granted dominion over the Earth but were ultimately out-lived by one-celled organisms.
It is quite a feat to be dumber than algae while thinking you are smarter than God, but modern-day humans have managed to achieved that twisted combination of arrogance and self-destruction while thinking they were “living the good life” because Google told them what to think.
If we are sufficiently stupid, we will beg God to spare us from the consequences of our collective actions. But if we are truly wise, we will already know his greatest act of mercy will be allowing modern human civilization to collapse upon itself.
For what would be the purpose of intervening in the self-determined demise of a race of beings who enjoy pretending to be “woke” as they slumber through life like mindless zombies?
This is the truth about what humanity has become, and the truth is rarely popular.
Comment: In the end however, the Cabal that is behind these problems will be exposed and taken down.
We are watching this begin right now. This article simply paints a picture of where the Cabal /Illuminati have been trying to take the world. Mr. Adams does some excellent work however he is not playing with all of the peices.
How To Stay Calm & Present Throughout The Day
March 10 2023 | From: CollectiveEvolution / Various Do you notice yourself feeling tense shoulders? A cleansed jaw? Perhaps you’re holding your breath in some ways and you don’t even know it?
Maybe you feel a clenched tummy from time to time and have tricky digestion.
You might notice yourself rushing through life, tasks, wanting to get to the next thing. You may not be paying full attention to your life and everything feels like autopilot.
If this is the case, you’re not alone.
The Facts: A simple process to bring you back to presence and freedom throughout the day.
Reflect On: Can we expect our world to change if we don't change our inner states of everyday being?
This is a very calm state of being for most people in highly developed countries who are living the ‘average everyday life.’
You wake up, go to your job, work all day, come home and then either veg out or spend time with family and go to sleep. This is the ‘modern life’ that we have accepted as ‘ a good life’ and yet almost every aspect of it presents a challenge to our health and well being.
But, at this time, money is required to live our lives, and so we must play within this system in some way or another as we actively change it.
The good news is, you have ultimate freedom within yourself to perceive your reality as you wish to perceive it. When we are unconscious, or allowing our programmed states of being to run our lives, we typically move through life on autopilot, moving from one habit to another.
However, when we begin to gain presence, and pull ourselves out of all these unconscious habits, we begin to gain some freedom back. This builds over time.
Before we get to the exercise, I want to add that for those that pay a lot of attention to the news and media side of our work here at CE, using these practices to gain more presence and self-awareness in your life will play deeply into the CE Protocol which is designed to help us gain more clarity on what’s happening in the world, and be an active part of changing it.
Skipping the personal transformation end of our journeys only holds us in our current state of being and understanding.
A Simple Process
One powerful thing you can do to begin seeing the subtleties in life, noticing the magic and incredible beauty around you and within you at all times is going back to the breath.
Combine that with a few processes in releasing tension and getting into your heart, and you’ll truly begin waking up to who you truly are on a daily basis. The best part is, this muscle grows with time, the more you practice, the more present you become, and the more your monkey mind goes into the passenger seat instead of the driver seat.
1. There are two ways to initiate the exercise, either you do it when you notice yourself tense or not present, or you set an alarm that goes off about 6 times per day. If you choose the first method, you want to know that your awareness already catches yourself about 6 times a day so you can make sure you are doing this enough.
2. When the alarm goes off, or when you notice yourself, stop what you are doing and take a couple of deep breaths. In through the nose and out through the mouth. Do this slowly and controlled. Nothing too fast and nothing too out of control.
3. After about 2 to 5 breaths, allow yourself to breathe normally, making sure it is still through the nose. Begin to say within yourself. ‘I am releasing all tension in my head, my neck, my shoulders, my jaw, my stomach, my fists, and my legs.” This is like a mini mantra if you will, but don’t take it too seriously in that it has to be said any particular way. You’re simply noticing and instructing the body to relax.
4.After you have gone through the releasing, and you notice your body is more relaxed and your breathing has brought you back to the moment. Sense yourself in your chair or where you stand. Feel the air around you, notice any breezes on your skin or any scents that you smell. Notice all the various sounds around you, not focusing on anyone or feeling any as a distraction, but noticing them and allowing them to be. This is presence, while in this state. Noticing.
If you happen to have any rampant thoughts or feelings of stress arise during this at any point, simply notice it and say within yourself “OK stress or OK task I have to complete, I see you, I will take care of you momentarily” and allow it to pass.
5. Once in presence, turn your attention to the area of your sternum, the heart centre. You may put your hand or fingers on this area, and simply focus your attention on this space. See your awareness moving into this space as if you yourself are moving from your mind to your heart. However that looks or feels to you is OK. It doesn’t have to be anything mystical. This is a common mistake of overcomplicating simple methods.
6.Finally, allow yourself to be in that space for as long as you like. 1 min, 10 mins, whatever works. Usually I say this exercise is meant to be done as a check-in for about 5 mins.
Repeat this each time your alarm goes off or when you notice yourself tense. Through this, you are gaining more awareness of self more regularly. You are also beginning to realize you have a lot more control over your state of being than once thought.
This is a key step to emotional freedom. In this space, your mind does not run you, nor do your emotions.
Bonus: As an extended tip, once you gain a sense of what that short meditation felt like. Even if you notice yourself for a moment 20 or 30 minutes later being tense, just take one deep breath and recall the energy and feeling of your meditation.
When will things like full disclosure happen, or big changes in our world?
When people focus deeply enough on personal transformation that our consciousness becomes ready to hear what’s being hidden and becomes ready for a world that is grounded in a state of peace, love, and freedom as opposed to monkey mind behavior.
What is that perception? It’s an endless string of crises and half-hearted resolutions - that’s how we’re supposed to see things. We’re not supposed to see what actually works about the world.
Because what works is freedom and everything that flows from that.
In other words, secret societies are trying to bury the idea of freedom under an ongoing process of manufacturing desperate situations that can only be dealt with by large organizations - governments and so-called public interest groups.
“The group will solve everything.”
“The individual is too weak.”
“Freedom of the individual is passe, because only large groups can influence the course of events.”
With an estimated 40-60 million people in the US taking tranquilizers every year, it appears this program is working.
One chronic user frankly told me, “I can’t deal with reality anymore. Unless it’s a chemical reality.”
Over the years, I’ve spoken with a number of teachers in the US. They tell me the areas variously known as Civics, Social Studies, and Government no longer place emphasis on the individual or individual freedom. Instead, it’s all about “group rights” and “victims.”
So again, the agenda of burying freedom is working.
In 1776, the Illuminati was announced as an operating society in Europe. The most important political tenet of this group was the abolition of private property - and that principle can be historically traced all the way down to the formation of the USSR.
These days, private property is under attack, albeit in a “softer” manner. It, too, is a concept no longer given emphasis in our schools - and when you de-link private property from the individual, you are attacking a significant aspect of what freedom translates into, in everyday life.
An American Studies professor at a prominent Northeastern university told me, off the record, because he was afraid he might lose his job if he went public;
“Political and economic crises are being manufactured all the time.
It’s basically psychological warfare, because one feels these endless crises can’t be solved. People just give up. And when they do, who do they turn to? Government.
Government will handle things. That’s a sign that freedom is no longer a priority. It’s going into the dustbin of history.”
He was suggesting that, in wider and wider circles, freedom is no longer considered a solution to any serious problem. And since we seem to be awash in a sea of problems, freedom goes on the shelf.
As I’ve been writing for years, creative power of the individual is the prow of the ship of our society. Great innovators are the people who keep us moving into the future.
Well, if the legs are being cut out from under freedom, we will be seeing fewer and fewer of these innovators. As has been pointed out, we will be “naturally selecting” away from those people and toward groups.
This is no accident. This is an agenda. To say the loss of freedom is simply a trend overlooks the keynote of coming global government and management it is groups, not individuals, who have access to larger and larger structures that run our affairs.
One small example: 90 years ago, the rise of labor unions was achieved through legislation passed by the federal government. In other words, government would protect the right of employees to organize and bargain with management.
But now we have public unions - government employees who bargain with “themselves.” It’s an absurdity. The real purpose is to expand the size of government by making its jobs more attractive and intractable.
In our schools, children are being taught to think of themselves in terms of a group identity. To what group do you belong? What are the problems of your group? What are your group’s grievances? How is your group being mistreated? What does your group need?
Is this development an accident? Did it happen by chance?
It’s on the agenda of legislated equality, which replaces the idea of equal opportunity to succeed. Legislated equality supposes that, instead of freedom, we will have group rights and group privileges.
This leads to the development of “positioning” - a hierarchy of groups who have assigned degrees of power - in hopes that the notion of the individual will disappear.
The individual will be placed in a context, will be given what he “deserves,” will occupy a place in life that is suitable for the benefit of overall society.
Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the Illuminati, stated: “It was the full conviction of this, and what could be done, if every man were placed in the office for which he was fitted by nature and a proper education, which first suggested to me the plan of Illumination.”
Earlier, in 1755, a Frenchman known only as Morelly (possibly a pseudonym), wrote a treatise called Code of Nature. In it, he spells out what “fitting into society” means for those who oppose individual freedom:
I. Nothing in society will belong to anyone, either as a personal possession or as capital goods, except the things for which the person has immediate use, for either his needs, his pleasures, or his daily work.
II. Every citizen will be a public man, sustained by, supported by, and occupied at the public expense.
III. Every citizen will make his particular contribution to the activities of the community according to his capacity, his talent and his age; it is on this basis that his duties will be determined, in conformity with the distributive laws.
Today, we are moving in this direction. A pseudo “share-and-care” philosophy, that claims to be the ultimate in humane concern, wants to “distribute” individuals within the fabric of society, in order to achieve “a better world for all."
These days, instead of brusquely elevating society beyond the scope of the individual, the agenda works by tapping into empathic and sympathetic emotions - using others’ suffering as the tool by which people can be turned to “help everyone.”
But what slips under the radar of this program is the institutionalizing of aid out along broad political and economic platforms that change the nature of society in its official functions.
Society, in other words, in the person (or non-person) of government, takes in order to give. Takes more to give more. A great leveling, which in essence ranks the free individual at the bottom of the ladder.
Nothing appears to be lost in this effort, if people have already forgotten what the free individual means and is.
A Nazi In The (Pocket) Is Worth Four In The Bush (Family)
March 8 2023 | From: IlluminatiNews / Various The Nazi’s American Banker: What is interesting about the history of the Bush family are the connections: Avril Harriman, Allen Dulles, the Rockefellers (the start of the oil connection), James Baker III, Gulf Oil, Pennzoil, Osama bin Laden… on and on it goes.
A lapse of memory? It’s as well to remember that the Web never forgets, at least Bush should have taken note of this fact and been careful of his utterances and how they can come back to haunt them.
In fact four generations of Bush family history and too many skeletons in too many closets to count are to be found on the Web.
[Comment: This article was written around sixteen years ago. Some references are dated but the history remains.]
And given all the ‘pullpit pounding’ (more of which below) by ol’ Duyba and his minions, over the dubious moral character of Saddam and his cronies, much of which has underpinned the justification for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, it’s as well to compare the two sets of rogues.
Not surprisingly, there’s little to choose between the two except that, in the case of the Bush gang, they have a ‘pedigree’ in perfidy which extends back almost a century and four generations that makes Saddam look positively angelic by comparison.
Part I: Prescott Bush – Setting a Family Example
In a previous piece a quote I used mentioned Prescott Bush the grandpa so I decided to do a little researching to see what other dirty little secrets the Bush family have hidden in the dark recesses of the WWW and lo and behold, there’s a load of stuff out there (7,630 links to be precise, according to google just on granpa Prescott Bush).
It’s 1918 and, well you know students, they’re always up to innocent pranks. It seems Grandpa Bush set his grandson some fine family precedents starting with digging up Geronimo’s skull.
"In 1918, Prescott Bush and two companions crept into the cemetery near Fort Sill and pried open the grave of Geronimo. The head was taken out, spiffed up and forwarded to New Haven, where it was given pride of place for goofy rituals that have been attended by generations of Bushes and a veritable army of powerful types."
The Apache nation (what was left of it anyway) was not amused. Okay, we’ll forgive granpa Bush his ‘juvenile pranks’ but it seems that this set the scene for the rest of his miserable life until his death in 1972 from carcinoma of the lung.
From Skulls to Zyklon B (And Back Again)
But it seems that great-granpa George Walker was also in on the business of making money out of death (like great-granpa like great grand-son);
It just doesn’t stop does it, as Prescott Bush, son of George continued in the ‘grand tradition’ of skullduggery by also doing deals with the Nazis:
"On October 20, 1942, the US Alien Property Custodian, under the "Trading With the Enemy Act," seized the shares of the Union Banking Corporation (UBC), of which Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder.
The largest shareholder was E. Roland Harriman. (Bush was also the managing partner of Brown Brothers Harriman, a leading Wall Street investment firm.)
"The UBC was established to send American capital to Germany to finance the reorganization of its industry under the Nazis. Their leading German partner was the notorious Nazi industrialist Fritz Thyssen, who wrote a book admitting much of this called "I Paid Hitler."
"Among the companies financed was the Silesian-American Corporation, which was also managed by Prescott Bush, and by his father-in-law George Herbert Walker, who supplied Dub-a-Ya with his name.
The company was vital in supplying coal to the Nazi war industry. It too was seized as a Nazi-front on November 17, 1942. The largest company Bush’s UBC helped finance was the German Steel Trust, responsible for between one-third and one-half of Nazi iron and explosives.
"Prescott Bush was also a director of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation, (this one owned largely by Roland’s brother, Averell Harriman), which owned about a third of the Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation, the rest owned by Friedrich Flick, (a member of Himmler’s "Circle of Friends" who donated to the S.S.)."
What is interesting about the history of the Bush family are the connections; Avril Harriman, Allen Dulles, the Rockefellers (the start of the oil connection), James Baker III, Gulf Oil, Pennzoil, Osama bin Laden… on and on it goes. It looks like this’ll have to be part one of an on-going series on the Bush dynasty and their dirty dealings.
The story of steel magnate and billionaire bankroller of the Nazis, Fritz Thyssen and his Bush family connection is so incredible, that it deserves to be turned into a movie (obviously not by Hollywood).
It all starts with John Loftus, a former U.S.Department of Justice Nazi War Crimes prosecutor who is the source of the following,
"From 1945 until 1949, one of the lengthiest and, it now appears, most futile interrogations of a Nazi war crimes suspect began in the American Zone of Occupied Germany…. [The interrogation of] [m]ultibillionaire steel magnate Fritz Thyssen-the man whose steel combine was the cold heart of the Nazi war machine."
They were trying to find out what had happened to Thyssen’s billions but without success. Why?
"What the Allied investigators never understood was that they were not asking Thyssen the right question. Thyssen did not need any foreign bank accounts because his family secretly owned an entire chain of banks.
He did not have to transfer his Nazi assets at the end of World War II, all he had to do was transfer the ownership documents – stocks, bonds, deeds and trusts – from his bank in Berlin through his bank in Holland to his American friends in New York City, Prescott Bush and Herbert Walker.
Thyssen’s partners in crime were the father and father-in-law of a future President of the United States [my emph. WB].
"The British and American interrogators may have gravely underestimated Thyssen but they nonetheless knew they were being lied to. Their suspicions focused on one Dutch Bank in particular, the Bank voor Handel enScheepvaart, in Rotterdam.
This bank did a lot of business with the Thyssens over the years. In 1923, as a favor to him, the Rotterdam bank loaned the money to build the very first Nazi party headquarters in Munich.
"If the investigators realized that the US intelligence chief in postwar Germany, Allen Dulles, was also the Rotterdam bank’s lawyer, they might have asked some very interesting questions. They did not know that Thyssen was Dulles’ client [my emph. WB] as well.
Nor did they ever realize that it was Allen Dulles’s other client, Baron Kurt Von Schroeder who was the Nazi trustee for the Thyssen companies which now claimed to be owned by the Dutch [my emph. WB]. The Rotterdam Bank was at the heart of Dulles’ cloaking scheme, and he guarded its secrets jealously…
"[T]he Dutch connection remained unexplored until 1994 when I published the book "The Secret War Against the Jews." As a matter of historical curiosity, I mentioned that Fritz Thyssen (and indirectly, the Nazi Party) had obtained their early financing from Brown Brothers Harriman, and its affiliate, the Union Banking Corporation.
Union Bank, in turn, was the Bush family’s holding company for a number of other entities, including the "Holland American Trading Company."
There are so many twists and turns to this story, that this is not the place to to go into all the labyrinthine links between the Nazis, the Bush Family and the CIA (via Allen Dulles) or indeed, a host of other corporate connections.
But this final quote from the same source, gives you an idea of just how much money is involved;
"The enormous sums of money deposited into the Union Bank prior to 1942 is the best evidence that Prescott Bush knowingly served as a money launderer for the Nazis.
Remember that Union Banks’ books and accounts were frozen by the U.S. Alien Property Custodian in 1942 and not released back to the Bush family until 1951.
At that time, Union Bank shares representing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of industrial stocks and bonds were unblocked for distribution. Did the Bush family really believe that such enormous sums came from Dutch enterprises?
One could sell tulip bulbs and wooden shoes for centuries and not achieve those sums. A fortune this size could only have come from the Thyssen profits made from rearming the Third Reich, and then hidden, first from the Nazi tax auditors, and then from the Allies."
For the full story please go to the link above.
All of which makes the following quote from Dubya all the more sickening:
"In April 1999, [then] Texas Governor George W. Bush proclaimed a week of remembrance for the Holocaust. He said, "I urge Texans to never forget the inhumanity of those who perpetrated the Holocaust, and reflect upon our own humanity and our responsibility to respect all peoples."
This paean to the life of Prescott Bush, by a conservative writer is a salutory warning to us all. I quote,
"He [Prescott Bush] was a unifier, not a divider. And he was of such high integrity [sic] that behind the scenes was where he was at his best. He was a man of great faith.
His grandfather was a minister whose faith and integrity were fully ingrained in the Bush family. Prescott always emphasized honesty, charity, fairness and proactive dedication to God, family and country."
- From a review by Susan Kurz
I could go on quoting, but I’m afraid I’ll throw up. Check it out for yourself at TownHall.com.
There’s none so blind as those that refuse to see.
From Eugenicist to Anti-Abortionist
Not content with digging up the ancestors, supporting Fascism, laundering Nazi money through a Dutch-based bank, selling weapons to the mullahs of Iran, trading guns for drugs, doing business deals with Osama bin Laden, the Bush family in the form of ol’ granpa Prescott was an early supporter of the Eugenics movement (or racial purity, to give it its real name).
And a rather embarassing connection it is too, as Bush Senior discovered:
"…And the Birth Control League was there, which had long trumpeted the need for eugenical births–fewer births for parents with "inferior" bloodlines. Prescott [Bush’s] partner Tighe was a Connecticut director of the league, and the Connecticut league’s medical advisor was eugenics advocate Dr. Winternitz of Yale Medical School.
Now in 1950, people who knew something about Prescott Bush knew that he had very unsavory roots in the eugenics movement. There were then, just after the anti-Hitler war, few open advocates of sterilization of "unfit" or "unnecessary" people. (That would be revived later, with the help of General Draper and his friend George Bush.
Then, very late in the 1950 senatorial campaign, Prescott Bush was publicly exposed for being an activist in that section of the old fascist eugenics movement.
Prescott Bush lost the election by about 1,000 out of 862,000 votes.
In his foreword to a population control propaganda book, George Bush wrote about that 1950 election: "My own first awareness of birth control as a public policy issue came with a jolt in 1950 when my father was running for United States Senate in Connecticut.
Drew Pearson, on the Sunday before Election day, ‘revealed’ that my father was involved with Planned Parenthood…. Many political observers felt a sufficient number of voters were swayed by his alleged contacts with the birth controllers to cost him the election…."
The Bush story is such a fascinating history of capitalist corruption and power that it needs to be presented to a public that is consistently lied to, not only by the corporate media but by our so-called leaders.
In Part Two, I’m going to give you the low-down on the Bush family’s involvement in the scams and dealings of the Reagan years, the Iran-Contra scandal and one of the biggest rip-offs in history, the savings and loan scandal, which cost the US taxpayer literally trillions of dollars. Yeah, you read right, trillions!
Part II: "Frauds-R-Us"
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you have to focus on."
- G.W. Bush
"You have to look at the entire Bush Family in this context -- as if the family ran a corporation called ‘Frauds-R-Us.’ George Jr.’s specialty was insurance and security fraud. Jeb’s specialty was oil and gas fraud. Neil’s specialty was real estate fraud. Prescott’s specialty was banking fraud. And George Sr.’s specialty? All of the above."
- Lt. Cmdr. Al Martin, US Navy (Ret)
"While opportunism isn’t new in U.S. politics, never did so many in one family extract so many dollars from taxpayers as when George Bush senior was president a decade ago"
- David E. Scheim, author of Contract on America
"What you’ve got with Bush [George senior] is absolutely the largest number of siblings and children involved in what looks like a never-ending hustle."
- Republican pundit Kevin Philips
"Texas businessmen [are] not crooks, "they just have an over-developed sense of the extenuating circumstance."
- Molly Ivins
Just Too Many Jinks, Links
I started this second part with the objective of extending the dossier on the Bush Gang, but I quickly realised that short of writing a (very long) book, I’d never be able to encapsulate all of it in the easy-to-digest form of an essay, hence the external pages, so that if you want to pursue a particular character or company, all you need do is click on a particular link.
You'll find that many of the names and companies are cross-linked, pointing to the intricate network of associates that the Bush clan have built up over the years.
No doubt if one were to do the same thing with Rockefeller, you'd end up with the same rats nest of associations (pun intended).
And in any case, the critical issue is not so much the individual goings-on of these ne’er do wells, but that they are typical of a system, which since its foundation (one built on slavery, genocide, continental land theft and gangster capitalism) has utterly corrupt institutions which it nevertheless claims make it the bastion of the ‘free world’!
As the saying goes, they have ‘no shame’.
Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil
The other really important question to ask is how can one family which has so many skeletons in the family closet, get away with such dirty dealings and over such a long period of time without being called to task?
It’s as if the mass media goes deaf, dumb and blind when the name Bush comes up.
For no matter what your politics are, left, right or indifferent, a family which has its fingers in so many dirty dealings has surely got to get you thinking about exactly what kind of country it is you live in (if you’re an American) and what kind of world is it that’s dominated by a country with a media (not to mention a legal system) that’s quite content not to challenge its president or his lying, thiefing family and their tenticular network of associations which includes:
The Mafia, the Chinese Communist Party, Japanese Triads, the Vatican, Central American drug smugglers and gun runners, international arms dealers, the Ayotollah Khomeini (RIP), Cuban-American terrorists, money laundering, illegal arms sales, countless conflicts of interests, nepotism, coverups, tax avoidance, SEC fiddles and banking scams?
The fact that this litany of evil is effectively left unscrutinised and unquestioned by the dominant media, or, on the few occasions when it is mentioned, it’s only ‘in passing’, reveals the cynical, opportunistic attitude toward not only the concept of access to information, but acting on it.
The system also makes a complete mockery of the so-called moral approach used by the leaders of the ‘free world’ when they accuse others of the same behaviour.
Is it any wonder that we have populations who have ‘dropped out’ of the political process. Where is the accountability? Where indeed?
It’s a Shell Game
In recent years the problem has been excerbated by the ‘gutting’ of the government through wholesale deregulation and privatisation, which has enabled those with the ‘right’ connections to gain access to vast gobs of money in the form of subsidies and lucrative contracts (eg Marvin Bush’s Ignite corporation, or the Kuwaiti Harken Oil deals, Choicepoint’s Homeland Security contracts and the software company it uses, Sybase Inc which has Bush family connections).
The effect has been to turn various and sundry government agencies into hollow shells. Companies can then effectively write themselves blank cheques or simply ignore the toothless edicts issued by the regulators (eg the SEC over the Silverado S&L scandal).
The assault on the rights of citizens, won at great cost and over generations of struggle, has since the 1970s, been steadily eroded to the point that we are now left with a façade of the original, a cardboard mockup that has all the appearances democracy, civil rights and so forth but virtually no substance. Our cynical leaders would have us believe that:
"Failure to vote, as Britain’s Chancellor remarked after the last UK election, is the mark of the satisfied citizen."
- Perry Anderson
Satisfied or cynical? Or perhaps fatalistic about a system which has systematically encouraged its citizens to disenfranchise themselves?
Ultimately of course, it exposes the real nature of the political class and who it really serves – the rich and powerful and their utter disdain for those without any real power.
With ‘elections’ being reduced to no more than tokenised democracy (only about a quarter of the electorate actually bother to vote in US national elections and a fraction more in the UK), it’s no surprise that firstly, there is no genuine representation ‘of the people, for the people, by the people’, but just as importantly, the total lack of representation or accountability encourages an arrogance and bravado on the part of the power elite that they can get away with anything, because they we let them (and they do)!
A comparable process is at work in the ‘4th Estate’ who have reduced journalism (when they bother to actually cover the real stories) to another hollow shell, where the act of merely reporting is now considered sufficient to fulfill their obligations as ‘watchdogs’ of the nation’s affairs.
The thought of actually leading with a story, and pursuing it, day after day, until someone actually takes notice and says, ‘enough is enough’ is simply not permitted because the same corporations that own the media are also part and parcel of the same power elite that’s busy ripping off the nation and holding the world to ransom.
Par For the Course
Forget ‘Dynasty’, although maybe they got the idea for the programme from the Bush posse. Staggering, is all I can say about the Bush family saga.
Yet actually it’s par for the course as they say and not at all exceptional in the annals of the US power elite.
The history of US capitalism is made up of family dynasties of one kind or another, from the robber barons of the Du Ponts, Mellons, Morgans, Rockefellers, Carnegies and Kennedys, through to the newcomers like Enron, Worldcom, Halliburton, Bechtel, Harken, Carlyle and so forth.
And, like the landed aristocracies of England, they marry into each other’s families, go to the same schools and universities, sit on each other’s corporate boards and invest in each other’s business dealings. Importantly, they watch each other’s backs and for obvious reasons.
Below are the sections in alphabetical order, of some of the companies and individuals connected to the Bush family (or vice versa). Clicking on the bold link at the start of each section will take you to a page of additional links.
Oh what a tangled Web we weave. Salem bin Laden, one of 57 children their father Mohammed sired with his 12 wives, and Bush were founders of the Arbusto Energy oil company in Texas (I assume not with the 12 wives as well).
He died in a plane crash - like his father - but not before the Arbusto Energy Oil Company, founded in 1978, had become hugely successful. Later, Spectrum 7 Corp bought out Arbusto (now called Bush Exploration Co).
In 1986, with the company on the verge of bankruptcy, it was purchased by Harken, and even though Bush Exploration Co had debts of $3 million, Harken paid Bush $2 million for his stock.
See also the BCCI (Bank of Credit & Commerce) connection below, another murky international scandal involving drug money laundering etc which one of the original investors in Arbusto, James R. Bath, a Houston businessman and old friend of GWB was involved in.
"Time magazine described Bath in 1991 as "a deal broker whose alleged associations run from the CIA to a major shareholder and director of the Bank of Credit & Commerce."
BCCI, as it was more commonly known, closed its doors in July 1991 amid charges of multibillion-dollar fraud and global news reports that the financial institution had been heavily involved in drug money laundering, arms brokering, covert intelligence work, bribery of government officials and - here's the kicker - aid to terrorists."
As a senator from Missouri, John Ashcroft received generous campaign contributions from companies, including Enterprise Rent-A-Car and Monsanto, which were based in his home state.
But a company didn’t have to be from Missouri to get some attention from the senator. Ashcroft was one of only a handful of senators sponsoring a bill that extended the patent on Schering-Plough’s ultra-profitable allergy pill, Claritin.
Extending the patent, would save the company billions of dollars in potential revenue.
The bill died in committee, but Schering-Plough still gave Ashcroft $50,000 for his failed 2000 Senate bid. Schering-Plough donated the money to Ashcroft’s joint fundraising committee, which Ashcroft set up with the National Republican Senatorial Committee to encourage unlimited soft money contributions from corporations that could not legally contribute to his main campaign committee.
(Check out Schering-Plough's campaign contributions to other candidates.) Besides Schering-Plough, Ashcroft’s joint committee logged contributions from AT&T ($25,000) and Microsoft ($10,000). Microsoft, of course, is hoping the new attorney general drops the justice department’s antitrust suit against the company."
"BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the '80s in what has been called the "largest bank fraud in world financial history" by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau."
- Wayne Madsen
The BCCI-Bush connection is, it could be argued an ‘accidental’ one, but it’s highly unlikely even if it is difficult to track, but the seeds are all there, including GW Snr’s CIA connection (as head of it) in the 1970s and the links to BCCI as well as his long time association with James R. Bath, an investor in Arbusto.
Bath, was a Houston businessman and old friend was also an investor in BCCI.
Essentially, BCCI was a convenient ‘channel’ for moving money through to fund the various illegal enterprises being undertaken at the time including, Iran-Contra, the Iranian arms sales, CIA money laundering operations, connections to powerful Middle Eastern businessmen, the Vatican and its right-wing connections through BNL.
The story of the BCCI was told in the thriller movie 'The International'
"… Sheikh Abdullah Bahksh of Saudi Arabia, a 16% shareholder in Harken Energy at the time, was represented by a Palestinian-born Chicago investor named Talat Othman, who served with George W. Bush on the board of Harken Energy. Othman made at least three separate visits to the White House to discuss Middle East affairs with then President George Bush.
At about the same time, and just prior to the Gulf War, Harken Energy, with no previous international or offshore drilling experience, was awarded a 35-year petroleum exploration contract with the emirate of Bahrain.
Sheikh Bahksh emerged as a co-investor in the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), a criminal enterprise since dissolved, that existed primarily as a mechanism for obtaining political influence using Middle Eastern oil money.
Bahrain's prime minister, Sheik Khalifah bin-Sulman al-Khalifah, was a major investor in BCCI's parent company, BCCI Holdings, of Luxembourg.
Through its commodities affiliate, Capcom, BCCI was used as a money laundering service by drug traffickers, arms dealers, etc. BCCI's front man in the U.S., and the person chiefly responsible for its takeover of First American Bank in the U.S., was Kamal Adham.
Adham is referred to in the Kerry Committee report on BCCI as having been "the CIA's principal liaison for the entire Middle East from the mid-1960's through 1979."
He was also the head of intelligence for Saudi Arabia during the time George Bush Sr. was Director of the CIA."
There are so many connections between the Bushes, the ‘Defence’ establishment, the global trade in arms, that the mind boggles. That it barely gets a mention in the mainstream media (except of course, to simply ‘report’ it) is a scandal of the grandest proportions.
But it only goes to show the power of big business and the political class they have installed in both the US and the UK (after all, John Major is employed by the Carlyle Group and BAE Systems, the major arms supplier to the UK, is part-owned by Carlyle).
Not only the connections beggar belief but the sheer hypocrisy of the Bush government should put it in a new category in the Guinness Book of Records. As you’ll see from just a few of the links to information on Carlyle below, their tentacles extended to many of the armed conflicts going on in the world. There’s no business like war business!
Unless you were around and following events in the 1980s, especially Central American affairs and later, the Iran-contra scandal, you probably won’t know who Elliot Abrams is.
More’s the pity too. As Reagan's Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs he used to oversee US foreign policy in Latin America, and was active in covering up some of the worst atrocities committed by the US-sponsored Contras.
According to congressional records, under Abram's watch, the Contras "raped, tortured, and killed unarmed civilians, including children," and that "groups of civilians, including women and children, were burned, dismembered, blinded and beheaded."
His partners-in-crime include John Negroponte, the new ambassador to the UN, who served under Reagan as ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985.
He is known for his role in the cover up of human rights abuses by CIA trained paramilitaries throughout the region.
Honduran exiles associated with the paramilitary forces that had been living in the US, were exported to Canada prior to Negroponte's Senate confirmation hearing, thus rendering their testimony unavailable.
Another partner from the ‘good ol’ days is Otto Reich who was appointed as Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs (which includes Latin America).
The Bush administration used a "recess appointment" during January 2002 to side step the Senate confirmation hearing otherwise required of the appointment. Democrat opposition to Reich's nomination had been predicted.
But they are still up to their old tricks:
"The coup in Venezuela against Hugo Chavez sports the sticky fingerprints of all three men and the modus operandi of a long line of US-led cold war interventions.
But if these covert ops were tragedy, the Chavez plot was farce. The rapid unraveling of the coup suggested that the Venezuelan plotters would have done better seeking advise from Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist rather than from Reich.
It soon became public that Bush officials maintained a web of connections with the conspirators and appeared to have foreknowledge of the plot. Using the same conduit Reagan used to fund the contras, the National Endowment for Democracy, the administration had funneled money to Venezuelan opposition.
According to British media, Abrams gave a nod to the plotters; Otto Reich, a former ambassador to Venezuela, met repeatedly with Pedro Carmona and other coup leaders. The day Carmona seized the presidency, Reich summoned ambassadors from Latin America and the Caribbean to his office and endorsed the new government.
Abrams pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of withholding information from Congress in 1991, for which George Bush senior subsequently pardoned him in December 1992."
As there’s so much information on the Bush-Enron connection (over a quarter of a million links on Google), rather than attempt to show the bankruptcy side of things, I’ve sifted through a number of stories and tried to find the ones which show the bigger picture, starting wuth the Argentine connection between Enron, the Bushes, George Snr, Jeb and Neil.
Let’s start with January 2003. From the report below:
"The new year begs for a fresh start. But business accusations of international bribery, nefarious investors and a Bush brother awkwardly involved in a troubled company all have a too-familiar ring. Here's the latest Robert Ludlum-style financial spat.
…. Marvin Bush, the brother of President Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, joined the board of directors of Fresh Del Monte in 1998, after the alleged events took place. Marvin Bush was re-elected to the company's board this year for a term ending in 2005, and served on the board's critically important audit and compensation committees.
In October, Bush decided to resign from the board at the end of 2002. Without any public notice of Bush's planned departure by Fresh Del Monte, news of his pending resignation was not reported until last month."
This a consummate piece on the Bush family from a magazine, now sadly defunct.
"This is an incredible deal, unbelievable for this small company," energy analyst Charles Strain told Forbes magazine, describing the oil production sharing agreement the Harken Energy Corporation signed in January 1990 with Bahrain.
Under the terms of the deal, Harken was given the exclusive right to explore for gas and oil off the shores of the Gulf island nation. If gas or oil were found in waters near two of the world's largest gas and oil fields, Harken would have exclusive marketing and transportation rights for the energy resources. Truly an "incredible deal" for a company that had never drilled an offshore well.
Strain failed to point out, however, the one fact that puts the Harken deal in focus: George Bush, Jr., the eldest son of George and Barbara Bush of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC, is a member of Harken's board of directors, a consultant, and a stockholder in the Texas-based company.
In light of this connection, the deal makes more sense. The involvement of Junior-George Walker Bush's childhood nickname - with Harken is a walking conflict of interest.
His relationship to President Bush, rather than any business acumen, made him a valuable asset for Harken, the Republican Party benefactors, Middle East oil sheikhs and covert operators who played a part in Harken's Bahrain deal.
In fact, Junior's track record as an oilman is pretty dismal. He began his career in Midland, Texas, in the mid-1970s when he founded Arbusto Energy, Inc.
When oil prices dropped in the early 1980s, Arbusto fell upon hard times. Junior was only rescued from business failure when his company was purchased by Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation, a small oil firm owned by William DeWitt and Mercer Reynolds.
As part of the September 1984 deal, Bush became Spectrum 7's president and was given a 13.6 percent share in the company's stock. Oil prices stayed low and within two years, Spectrum 7 was in trouble
In the six months before Spectrum 7 was acquired by Harken in 1986, it had lost $400,000. In the buyout deal, George "Jr." and his partners were given more than $2 million worth of Harken stock for the 180-well operation.
Made a director and hired as a "consultant" to Harken, Junior received another $600,000 of Harken stock, and has been paid between $42,000 and $120,000 a year since 1986.
Junior's value to Harken soon became apparent when the company needed an infusion of cash in the spring of 1987. Junior and other Harken officials met with Jackson Stephens, head of Stephens, Inc., a large investment bank in Little Rock, Arkansas (Stephens made a $100,000 contribution to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 and gave another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990.)
In 1987, Stephens made arrangements with Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) to provide $25 million to Harken in return for a stock interest in Harken.
As part of the Stephens-brokered deal, Sheikh Abdullah Bakhsh, a Saudi real estate tycoon and financier, joined Harken's board as a major investor. *5 Stephens, UBS, and Bakhsh each have ties to the scandal-ridden Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI).
It was Stephens who suggested in the late 1970s that BCCI purchase what became First American Bankshares in Washington, D.C. BCCI later acquired First American's predecessor, Financial General Bankshares.
At the time of the Harken investment, UBS was a joint-venture partner with BCCI in a bank in Geneva, Switzerland. Bakhsh has been an investment partner in Saudi Arabia with Gaith Pharoan, identified by the U.S. Federal Reserve Board as a "front man" for BCCI's secret acquisitions of U.S. banks.
Stephens, Inc. played a role in the Harken deal with Bahrain as well. Former Stephens bankers David and Mike Edwards contacted Michael Ameen, the former chief of Mobil Oil's Middle East operations, when Bahrain broke off 1989 talks with Amoco for a gas and oil exploration contract.
The Edwardses recommended Harken for the job and urged Ameen to get in touch with Bahrain, which he did.
"In the midst of Harken's talks with Bahrain, Ameen- simultaneously working as a State Department consultant-briefed the incoming U.S. ambassador in Bahrain, Charles Hostler," the Wall Street Journal noted, adding that Hostler, a San Diego real estate investor, was a $100,000 contributor to the Republican Party. Hostler claimed he never discussed Harken with the Bahrainis.
Harken lacked sufficient financing to explore off the coast of Bahrain so it brought in Bass Enterprises Production Company of Fort Worth, Texas, as a partner. The Bass family contributed more than $200,000 to the Republican Party in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
On June 22, 1990, George Jr. sold two-thirds of his Harken stock for $848,560-a cool 200 percent profit. The move was well timed. One week after Junior sold his stock, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and Harken stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months.
On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops moved into Kuwait and 541,000 U.S. forces were deployed to the Gulf.
"There is substantial evidence to suggest that Bush knew Harken was in dire straits in the weeks before he sold the $848,560 of Harken stock," asserted U.S. News & World Report.
The magazine noted Harken appointed Junior to a "fairness committee" to study possible economic restructuring of the company. Junior worked closely with financial advisers from Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Company, who concluded "only drastic action could save Harken."
George "Jr." also violated Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations which require "insider" stock deals to be reported promptly, in Bush's case by July 10, 1990. He didn't file the stock sale with the SEC until the first week of March 1991.
Meanwhile, a cloak-and-dagger aura surrounds Junior's business dealings. James Bath, a Texas entrepreneur who invested $50,000 in Arbusto Energy, may be a business cutout for the CIA. Bath also acted as an investment "adviser" to Saudi Arabian oil sheikhs, linked to the outlaw BCCI, which also has ties to the CIA.
Bill White, a former Bath partner, claims that Bath has "national security" connections. White, a United States Naval Academy graduate and former fighter pilot, charges that Bath developed a network of off-shore companies to camouflage the movement of money and aircraft between Texas and the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia.
Alan Quasha, a Harken director and former chair of the company, is the son of attorney William Quasha, who defended figures in the Nugan Hand Bank scandal in Australia.
Closed in 1980, Nugan Hand was not only tied to drug-money laundering and U.S. intelligence and military circles, but also to the CIA's covert backing for a "constitutional coup" in Australia that caused the fall of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.
The Harken deal with Bahrain raises another troubling question: Did the Bahrainis and the BCCI-linked Saudi oil sheikhs use the production sharing agreement with Harken to curry favor with the Bush administration and influence U.S. policy in the Middle East?
Talat Othman's sudden rise to prominence in Bush administration foreign policy circles is a case in point. Othman, who sits on the Harken board as Sheikh Bakhsh's representative, didn't have access to President Bush before Harken's Bahrain agreement.
"But since August 1990, the Palestinian-born Chicago investor has attended three White House meetings with President Bush to discuss Middle East policy," the Wall Street Journal pointed out.
"His name was added by the White House to a select list of 15 Arab-Americans chosen to meet with President Bush, [then White House Chief of Staff John] Sununu and National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft in the White House two days after Iraq's August 1990 invasion of Kuwait."
This maybe small potatoes by comparison with all the other Bush clan scams, but nevertheless Ignite! Learning made Neil Bush $20 million over three years.
Not bad for a guy who ran Silverado S&L into the ground. With accusations of nepotism flying around all over the place, especially now that Neil Bush tyied to get the Florida school system to buy into his learning software (at $30 a pop per student per year), the state that his brother Jeb was governor of, it’s no wonder.
Connected is the wholesale privatisation of state services, which opens such areas as education to the predations of people like Neil Bush and indeed, the whole issue of influence peddling and nepotism.
The true story of a British whistleblower who leaked information to the press about an illegal NSA spy operation designed to push the UN Security Council into sanctioning the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
This is a murky story with connections to the Nicaraguan Contras, the Mafia, Cuban-American terrorists, Iran-Contra, bribery and corruption, coverups and the CIA.
Essentially, IMC was contracted to give medical assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras but the story is in fact, a lot more complex and gives you some idea of just how inter-connected events really are, especially when you’re dealing the Bush clan.
Perhaps this review of a book by Duncan Campbell The Bush Dynasty and the Cuban Criminal, will give you some idea:
Therefore, John Deutch may know more about this plan, considering he may have resigned, to allow John George Tenet to be appointed Director, and then initiate several important steps of the plan, including election rigging to allow George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to come to power illegally, declaring war on Osama Bin Laden, planting explosives in the elevator shafts of the World Trade Center, launching a missile strike on the Pentagon which murdered over a dozen of the Pentagon Whistle-Blowers, and conducting Genocide in the USA, to cover-up the coup and eliminate suspected enemies.
"The Bush family connections go back to 1984 when Jeb Bush began a close association with Camilo Padreda, a former intelligence officer with the Batista dictatorship overthrown by Fidel Castro.
Jeb Bush was then the chairman of the Dade county Republican party and Padreda its finance chairman. Padreda had earlier been indicted on a $500,000 (£320,000) embezzlement charge along with a fellow exile, Hernandez Cartaya, but the charges were dropped, reportedly after the CIA stated that Cartaya had worked for them.
Padreda later pleaded guilty to defrauding the housing and urban development department of millions of dollars during the 1980s.
The president's younger brother was also on the payroll in the 80s of the prominent Cuban exile Miguel Recarey, who had earlier assisted the CIA in attempts to assassinate President Castro.
Recarey, who ran International Medical Centers (IMC), employed Jeb Bush as a real estate consultant and paid him a $75,000 fee for finding the company a new location, although the move never took place, which raised questions at the time.
Jeb Bush did, however, lobby the Reagan / Bush administration vigorously and successfully on behalf of Recarey and IMC. "I want to be very wealthy," Jeb Bush told the Miami News when questioned during that period.
In 1985, Jeb Bush acted as a conduit on behalf of supporters of the Nicaraguan contras with his father, then the vice-president, and helped arrange for IMC to provide free medical treatment for the contras.
Recarey was later charged with massive medicare fraud but fled the US before his trial and is now a fugitive.
Jeb Bush sealed his popularity with the Cuban exile community by acting as campaign manager for another prominent Cuban-American, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, when she ran successfully for Congress.
George Bush Sr famously appeared with her during her campaign in Miami declaring: "I am certain in my heart I will be the first American president to step foot on the soil of a free and independent Cuba."
She has since lobbied successfully for the release of several exiles convicted of terrorist offences held in US jails but who now live freely in Miami.
Most controversially, at the request of Jeb, Mr Bush Sr intervened to release the convicted Cuban terrorist Orlando Bosch from prison and then granted him US residency.
According to the justice department in George Bush Sr's administration, Bosch had participated in more than 30 terrorist acts. He was convicted of firing a rocket into a Polish ship which was on passage to Cuba. He was also implicated in the 1976 blowing-up of a Cubana plane flying to Havana from Venezuela in which all 73 civilians on board were killed.
CIA memorandums strongly suggest, according to Bardach's book, that Bosch was one of the conspirators, and quotes the then secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, as writing that the "US government had been planning to suggest Bosch's deportation before Cubana airlines crash took place for his suspected involvement in other terrorist acts and violation of his parole".
Bosch's release, often referred to in the US media as a pardon, was the result of pressure brought by hardline Cubans in Miami, with Jeb Bush serving as their point man. Bosch now lives in Miami and remains unrepentant about his militant activities, according to Bardach.
In July this year, Jeb Bush nominated Raoul Cantero, the grandson of Batista, as a Florida supreme court judge despite his lack of experience. Mr Cantero had previously represented Bosch and acted as his spokesman, once describing Bosch on Miami radio as a "great Cuban patriot".
"Lynne Cheney, wife of Vice President Dick Cheney, Frank Gaffney, James Woolsey, and William Bennett, former Secretary of Education in the Reagan Administration, all play prominent roles in domestic suppression of criticism of the War on Terrorism.
A group founded by Lynne Cheney, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, recently released a report titled "Defending Civilization." It listed 127 "unpatriotic" statements made on U.S. college campuses since September 11."
This takes us back to the 1980s although as the article below informs, like a bad meal, the sins of the past keep coming back, in this case it’s Otto Reich who was part of the original Contra force funded and supported by the Reagan / Bush government with its links to drugs for guns and connections to the CIA and the Iran-Contra affair.
I have also included links to the official CIA version of events.
"Bush Nominee Llinked to Latin American Terrorism" By Bill Vann 24 November 2001
"As the Bush administration exhorts governments throughout the world to line up behind its "war on terrorism," it is pressuring the US Senate to push through confirmation of a nominee to a key foreign policy position whose own links to terror and an illegal CIA propaganda operation have raised concerns even among the usually docile Democratic leadership."
Who is Otto Reich? Well basically, he's a friend of terrorists, there's no other way to describe him.
"Otto Reich came to prominence during the Reagan administration when he was appointed head of the office of public diplomacy within the state department.
According to the national security archives, Reich used this role to pursue his own agenda to such an extent that in 1987 the Comptroller-General of the US, a Republican appointee, found that some of the efforts of his office were "prohibited, covert propaganda activities ... beyond the range of acceptable agency public information activities.
A letter of September 30 1987 concluded that Reich's office had violated "a restriction on the state department's annual appropriations prohibiting the use of federal funds for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorised by Congress"".
He then became George Bush's assistant secretary of state for western hemisphere affairs. The central point is that Bush filled his government with characters like this, people who have broken the law, an enemy of human rights, a thoroughly unsavoury character.
"On March 23, after being recommended in a unanimous 18-0 vote by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, former Vietnam-era covert operative and Contra-era figure Richard Armitage was confirmed as Deputy Secretary of State in a voice vote on the Senate Floor.
The unchallenged confirmation of a figure who had previously been investigated by President Reagan's Commission on Organized Crime (1984) for alleged links to gambling and prostitution was totally ignored by the major American media.
Armitage has already begun work at the State Department and is deeply involved in negotiations over a US spy plane recently captured by the Chinese government."
The savings and loans crashes of the 1980s, themselves directly the result of Reagan’s deregulation of the banking industry, is more interesting because of how it reflects the rapacious nature of unbridled capitalism than of Neil Bush himself.
Who by the way, became embroiled in another scam with his educational software venture, Ignite (that had an annual turnover of $20 million, much of it from educational subsidies obtained in the state of Florida, where, ‘coincidentally’ of course, his brother Jeb, was governor).
Altogether, it’s been calculated that bailing out the failed S&Ls countrywide cost the US taxpayer around $1.4 trillion!
There are nowhere as many digital sources on the S&L debacle because it predates the Web.
Much of it is contained in pages that refer to the numerous scandals and malfeasances of the Bush clan at large. Even so, I’ve managed to uncover a number of dedicated sources.
All have a Bush connection as well as a World Trade Centre, United Airlines, Dulles International Airport security, aviation and Kuwaiti connection. What is known, is that SEC regulations were breached by Marvin Bush in filings submitted to the SEC.
Who is Marvin P. Bush?
The public rarely sees Marvin P. Bush, brother of President Bush II.
Marvin P. Bush was the founder (1993) and Managing Partner of Winston Partners Group of Vienna, Virginia. It's a private investment company. He was also the Managing General Partner of Winston Growth Fund, LLP; Winston International Growth Fund, LP; Winston Small Cap Growth Fund, LP; all related companies.
Before this, he spent 12 years in the investment business with the firms of Mosley, Hallgarten, Estabrook and Weeden, Shearson Lehman Brothers, and John Stewart Darrel & Company.
In January, 1998, Marvin Bush was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Fresh Del Monte Produce company, the giant fruit company (major product bananas) that made the canned goods we buy in our markets.
Del Monte is owned by a very wealthy family from Kuwait, the Abu-Ghazaleh family. Mohammed Abu-Ghazaleh is the CEO and he had several family members on the Board alongside Marvin Bush.
Another member of the Fresh Del Monte Board of Directors was Stephen Way, who was a major Bush fundraiser. Way was the head of the Houston-based HCC Insurance Holdings Company. In early 2000, Stephen Way acquired the appointment of Marvin Bush to the Board of Directors of HCC.
In that transaction, Bush not only landed a very large salary, but a sweet stock option deal. He purchased about $130,000 worth of HCC stock which re- valued at close to $600,000, not even one year later.
Marvin Bush was also on the Board of Directors of something called the Kerrco Company.
Marvin also was named to the Board of Directors of the Stratesec Company, another large publicly-traded firm. This company is very secretive and you can find virtually nothing about it.
Their website does not allow entry to several links unless one has a password. Virginia-based Stratesec is a provider of high-tech security systems.
Two of the major customers for which they provide security are the Dulles International Airport at Washington, D.C. and the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Stratesec's revenues shot up by 60%, due to what the company described as "new customers." Prominent people at Stratesec also included former Reagan operatives including Barry McDaniel and Air Force General James A. Abrahamson (who was involved in the Reagan "Star Wars" project). Stratesec is a company is heavily inter-related with the Kuwam Corporation ("Kuw" = Kuwait; "am" = America).
Kuwam is a major Kuwaiti Company into many, many activities including the aircraft business. Stratesec's Chief Executive was also the Managing Director of Kuwam Corporation and Kuwam's Chairman Mishal Yousef Saud Al Sabah sat on Stratesec's Board of Directors. Stratesec provided the primary security for one of the most sensitive airports in the world.
Dulles in D.C., has a heavy middle eastern airline connection.
Winston Partners, Sybase, Choicepoint, H.R. 3162, called "The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" (or USA Patriot)
Another can of worms. Actually, I’m getting fed up with the Bush clan.
It’s like the only life they have is screwing up everybody else’s! Sybase software is part of the Choicepoint system which is part of the Patriot Act which part of the whole damn system for keeping track of everybody and everything we do, read, visit, buy, and no doubt think about.
And given the scale and scope of the Bush saga, it doesn’t surprise me at all, if indeed there are links between all the goings on of the Bush clan, oil, Texas, the FBI, the CIA, the Rockefellers, the Tri-Lateral Commission, the Nugan-Hand Bank, the Mob, The Pope (or at least the Vatican, and the assassination of JFK.
Of one thing I am sure, when billions and governments are at stake, anything is possible.
The FAS Website contains probably the most complete record of the US dealings with the Iraqi regime, arms sales and related information, including Congressional records. For example I did a search on "iraqi arms sales" and pulled up 882 locations including:
"1992 Congressional Record Documents"
A particularly useful set of documents, because they are the official record of US congressional representative Henry B. Gonzalez and his longstanding investigations into a range of related dealings which included BCCI, Banco Nazionale Lavoro (BNL), Iraq-gate, illicit arms dealings, and especially attempts by the Bush government to block his investigations.
Other Bush family -connected Companies & Institutions
Amsec Corp, Global Strategies LLC, Bass Enterprises Production Co, Asset Management International Financing and Settlement Ltd, Palmer National Bank
Other Bush Men (and the odd woman) that at some point, I'll get around to adding to this dossier.
Dick Cheney, Ari Fleisher, Asa Hutchinson, Robert Mueller, John Negroponte, Paul O'Neil, Theodore Oison, Richard Perle, John Poindexter, Colin Powell, Michael Powell, Otto Reich, Orlando Bosch, Leonel Martinez, Robert Reilly, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, John Walters, Eduardo Noriega, Richard M Nixon, Robert Mosbacher, Ferdinand Marcos, John Erlichman, Robert McFarlane, Brent Scowcroft, Donald Regan, Jim Baker, William Casey, Santos Trafficante, Miguel Recarey, Jr, Oliver North, Manucher Ghorbanifar, Sheik Abdullah Bakhsh, Tongsun Park, Sargis Soghnalian, Dan Quayle, Salem bin Laden, Prince Mohammed Ben Abdullah, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia.
A final word; I’m all Bushed out as the saying goes, but if I’ve learned one thing in putting this testimony together (because that’s what it is), it’s the awesome power of US capitalism to corrupt and to corrupt totally.
Defeating a juggernaut of this size is going to be a long struggle, but what the hell!
Neonic Pesticides In Tap Water React With Chlorine To Create Hazardous Chemicals That Are 300 Times More Toxic & Toxic Aluminum Found In Popular Prescription Infant Formulas March 7 2023 | From: NaturalNews
Their newest experiment followed up on their discovery of neonicotinoids in tap water sources. The team investigated the risk of the pesticides getting exposed to chlorine-based water treatments and transforming into chlorinated disinfection byproducts (DBPs).
Furthermore, they evaluated the toxicity of the DBP metabolites generated by the chemical reactions between neonics and chlorine. Their efforts received support from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the University of Iowa (UI).
Analysis of the chlorinated tap water confirmed the presence of desnitro-imidacloprid and imidacloprid-urea, which are both metabolites of imidacloprid. The two formed after the neonic pesticide reacted with the chlorine disinfectant.
Desnitro-imidacloprid possessed 319 times the toxicity of its parent pesticide on mammals. Tests showed that even low levels of desnitro-imidacloprid negatively affected the health of vertebrates.
Regulatory agencies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) believe that neonicotinoids don’t pose any danger to vertebrates. The pesticides work in such a way that they can only poison invertebrates.
However, neonics end up causing great harm to bees and other beneficial insects. They also poison aquatic invertebrate species that serve as food sources for aquatic vertebrates such as amphibians and fish.
Even worse, desnitro-imidacloprid and other neonic metabolites have changed the way they poison their targets, becoming more toxic to vertebrates like mammals and humans.
Newly Discovered Chlorinated Disinfection by Products Might be More Toxic Than Pesticides
Much like how desnitro-imidacloprid and imidacloprid-urea proved more toxic than imidacloprid, the DBPs might turn out to be more deadly than the chlorinated metabolites and their neonic pesticide predecessors.
“Greater potential toxicity and frequent presence in these water samples of neonicotinoid metabolites demonstrate the need to consider their fate and persistence in drinking water treatment systems (e.g., during chlorination and other treatment processes) and their potential effects on human health,”the researchers concluded.
The EPA is preparing to conduct a human health risk assessment of neonicotinoid pesticides in 2019. Experts urge the federal agency to include neonic-derived metabolites and chlorinated disinfection byproducts in its investigation.
Furthermore, they want the EPA to hold a cumulative risk assessment of neonic pesticides and associated metabolites. They find it alarming that the planned evaluation does not make any provision for the cumulative risks of a class of persistent and toxic chemicals.
Meanwhile, neonicotinoids continue to spread. The pesticides are not just limited to tainting surface water and drinking water. They also contaminate fruits and vegetables – and unlike earlier pesticides, they cannot be rinsed away.
Toxic Aluminum Found In Popular Prescription Infant Formulas
The link between aluminum exposure and health problems is quite unsettling when you consider just how prevalent the metal is in our everyday lives.
While adults might think that there’s little that can be done after years of exposure, parents can start their babies and children off on the right foot by limiting their exposure at the outset – and that starts with the food they eat.
The first aluminum exposure for many humans comes in the form of vaccines and infant formula.
When breast milk isn’t an option for some reason, many mothers assume the formulas sold on store shelves must be safe – and those that are prescribed by their doctor tend to be viewed as even better somehow.
Yet a new study shows that isn’t the case at all. In fact, several popular infant formula prescriptions contain the dangerous element.
There are no safe aluminum levels for the human body, so putting even small amounts into something newborns consume can only be thought of as poison.
It’s unfortunate that these formulas are targeted at babies who already have some sort of medical problem or disadvantage, like low birth weight, intolerance or allergy, or renal insufficiency.
The researchers found that among the 24 prescription infant formulas tested, those that had the heaviest contamination were powdered formulas geared toward babies with allergies and intolerances and ready-to-drink formulas aimed at infants having trouble gaining weight.
It isn’t clear how aluminum is making its way into the products. When the scientists contacted all the manufacturers involved, each one denied knowledge of the presence of aluminum in their products.
Their findings were published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
Aluminum Might be Everywhere, But That Doesn’t Mean it’s Safe
The researchers were very clear about the dangers of aluminum, stating:
“There is already too much aluminium in infant formulas and herein we have measured its content in a large number of prescription formulas, products which are fed to vulnerable infants in their first months of life. Many of these products are heavily contaminated with aluminium.”
Aluminum doesn’t strike fear in people’s hearts the way lead and arsenic do – but it absolutely should. The metal is damaging to human biology in many ways and builds up in your organs over time.
Large amounts of it can be found in the brains of those suffering from Alzheimer’s disease, and some experts believe accumulation of the metal is a cause of the devastating illness. It’s also found in people with autism and multiple sclerosis.
According to a public health statement from the Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, aluminum can make its way into your body via ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact.
In addition to vaccines and infant formula, people will be exposed to the metal throughout their life via foods like flour and baking powder, aluminum cookware and foil, air, water, and consumer products like cosmetics, antiperspirants, and antacids.
Exposure can affect children by causing kidney disease, brain disease, and bone damage as aluminum prevents the stomach from absorbing the phosphate their bodies need for healthy bones. It can also negatively impact their body’s ability to absorb iron.
It has also been linked to breast cancer, although further studies are needed to confirm the connection. Nevertheless, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified the metal as carcinogenic to humans. It is known to create oxidative stress, which can increase people’s risk of cancer.
Given the many dangers of aluminum, it’s clear that this metal has absolutely no place in infant formula. More rigorous testing is needed, and parents must be extremely vigilant about what they feed their babies.
If formula can’t be avoided, it’s particularly important that parents limit their children’s other exposure to aluminum.
GE Food Venture: Chronically Dependent On Deception March 6 2023 | From: Uncensored / Various
Although it purports to be based on solid science and the open flow of information on which science depends, the massive venture to reconfigure the genetic core of the world’s food supply has substantially relied on the propagation of falsehoods.
Its advancement and very survival have been crucially and chronically dependent on the misrepresentation of reality – to the extent that more than thirty years after the creation of the first genetically engineered plant, the vast majority of people the world-over (including most government officials, journalists, and even scientists) continue to be misled about the important facts.
Moreover, contrary to what people would expect, the biotechnology industry has not been the main source of the deceptions.Instead, the chief misrepresentations have been issued by respected government agencies and eminent scientists and scientific institutions.
The following paragraphs describe several of the key deceptions and delinquencies that have been essential in enabling the genetically engineered (GE) food venture to advance – all of which are more thoroughly documented in my book: Altered Genes, Twisted Truth.
The Disaster Caused by GE’s First Edible Product Was Obfuscated
The genetic engineering venture received an alarming jolt when its first ingestible product caused an epidemic that killed dozens of Americans and seriously sickened thousands, permanently disabling many of them.
The product was a food supplement of the essential amino acid L-tryptophan that had been derived from genetically altered bacteria. Although it met the standards for pharmacological purity, like all other tryptophan supplements it contained minute amounts of impurities.
However, unlike the conventionally produced supplements, one or more of its accidental additions was highly toxic, even at extremely low levels.
Because none of the tryptophan supplements produced via non-engineered bacteria had ever been linked to disease, and because genetic engineering can create unintended disruptions within the altered organisms, there were legitimate reasons to suspect that the process had induced the formation of the extraordinarily toxic substance that caused the calamity.
Consequently, the proponents of genetic engineering, including the United States Food and Drug Administration (the FDA), which admits it has a policy “to foster” biotechnology, strove to convince the public that the technology was blameless.
But to do so, they had to issue a string of deceptive statements. Those deceptions have been highly successful. Consequently, despite the fact the evidence points to genetic engineering as the most likely cause of the toxic contamination, most people who know of this tragedy are under the illusion that the technology has been exonerated.
Worse, because GE proponents routinely claim that none of its products has ever been linked to a health problem, most people aren’t even aware that such a catastrophe happened.
The Problems Linked to the First GE Whole Food Were Also Covered Up
The first whole food produced via genetic engineering (Calgene’s “Flavr Savr” tomato) was also problematic. Calgene voluntarily conducted feeding studies, and the FDA scientists who reviewed them expressed concern about a pattern of stomach lesions that raised a safety issue.
The Pathology Branch concluded that safety had not been demonstrated, and other FDA experts concurred. One wrote that the data:
“Raise a question of safety” – and that they “fall short” of satisfactorily resolving it. Another agreed that “. . . unresolved questions still remain.”
Nevertheless, the FDA claimed that its scientists had determined that all safety questions had been resolved – and that the tomato had been demonstrated to be just as safe as other tomatoes. And because the FDA kept a lid on its scientists’ memos, no one outside the agency was aware of the fraud.
The memos only came to light four years later (in 1998) when my organization, the Alliance for Bio-Integrity, led a lawsuit that compelled the FDA to hand over more than 44,000 pages of its internal files.
However, because the mainstream media has failed to adequately report what those documents reveal, most people are still unaware of the FDA’s misbehavior.
GE Foods Reached the Market Through Governmental Fraud
If the actual facts about the toxic tryptophan and the troubling tomato had been disclosed, the GE food venture might well have been brought to a halt – and at minimum would have been slowed and subjected to more rigorous testing. A similar effect would have resulted if concerns that other FDA experts had expressed about GE foods in general had been publicized.
Those concerns appeared in memos written a few years before the GE tomato entered the market, and they reveal that the agency’s scientists didn’t agree with the biotech proponents’ claims that GE is substantially the same as conventional breeding.
For example, an FDA microbiologist stated:
“There is a profound difference between the types of unexpected effects from traditional breeding and genetic engineering.” He added that GE “. . . may be more hazardous . . .”
A toxicologist warned that GE plants could contain unexpected new toxins.
The Director of FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) stated:
“… CVM believes that animal feeds derived from genetically modified plants present unique animal and food safety concerns.”
He explained that residues of unexpected substances could make meat and milk products harmful to humans.
The pervasiveness of the concerns is attested by an FDA official who studied the expert input and declared:
“The processes of genetic engineering and traditional breeding are different, and according to the technical experts in the agency, they lead to different risks.”
In light of the unique risks, those experts called for GE foods to undergo careful testing capable of detecting unexpected side effects.
Moreover, the FDA’s Biotechnology Coordinator acknowledged there was not a consensus about safety in the scientific community at large. He also admitted that the allergenic potential of some GE foods “is particularly difficult to predict.”
“The agency is not aware of any information showing that foods derived by these new methods differ from other foods in any meaningful or uniform way.”
It also asserted that there is overwhelming consensus among scientists that GE foods are so safe they don’t require any testing. Accordingly, the agency doesn’t require a smidgen of testing and allows GE foods to enter the market without any.
If the FDA had told the truth and disclosed the extensive concerns of its own experts, the subsequent history of the GE venture would have surely been very different – and might well have been quite short. At the least, any GE foods that did reach market would have been subjected to much more rigorous testing than regulators anywhere have required.
The State of the Research and the Degree of Expert Consensus Have Been Misrepresented
Like the FDA, other GE proponents habitually claim there’s an overwhelming expert consensus that GE foods are safe. And the American Association for the Advancement of Science has declared that “every respected organization” that examined the evidence has determined they’re “no riskier” than conventional ones.
But this is flat-out false. For instance, in 2001 the Royal Society of Canada issued a report concluding that:
) it is “scientifically unjustifiable” to presume that GE foods are safe.
B) the “default prediction” for each should be that the genetic alteration has induced unintended and potentially harmful side effects.
Moreover, the British Medical Association, the Public Health Association of Australia, and the editors of The Lancet (a premier medical journal) have all expressed concerns about the risks;and in 2015 a peer-reviewed journal published a statement signed by more than 300 scientists asserting that there is not a consensus about the safety of GE foods and that their safety has not been adequately demonstrated.
GE proponents also falsely profess that the safety of GE foods has been thoroughly demonstrated when in reality many well-conducted studies published in peer-reviewed journals have detected harm to the animals that ate GE food.
In fact, a systematic review of the toxicological studies on GE foods published in 2009 concluded that the results of “most” of them indicate that the products:
“May cause hepatic, pancreatic, renal, and reproductive effects and may alter hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters the significance of which remains unknown.”
It also noted that further studies were clearly needed.
Another review that encompassed the additional studies that had been published up until August 2010 also provided cause for caution. It concluded that there was an “equilibrium” between the research groups;
“Suggesting” that GE crops are as safe as their non-GE counterparts and “those raising still serious concerns.”
Between 2008 and 2014 eight such research reviews were published, and although some interpreted the data in favor of GE crops, as a whole, they provide no grounds for unequivocally proclaiming safety. As Sheldon Krimsky, a professor at Tufts University, observed in a comprehensive examination that itself was published in a peer-reviewed journal:
“One cannot read these systematic reviews and conclude that the science on health effects of GMOs has been resolved within the scientific community.”
Yet, GMO proponents routinely proclaim that it has been conclusively resolved – and that safety is a certitude.
Two Compelling – and Disturbing – Conclusions
Thus, even from this brief summary, it’s clear that the GE food venture has been chronically dependent on twisting the truth; and this dependence can be readily detected in virtually every statement that’s been issued in support of its products.
A striking example is the guide to GE crops published by the UK’s Royal Society in May 2016.Although it professes to provide accurate, science-based information, analysis reveals that its case for the safety of these crops is based on multiple misrepresentations.
So if the world’s oldest and most respected scientific institution cannot argue for the safety of GE foods without systematically distorting the facts, it indicates that such distortion is essential to the argument.
Moreover, when the multitude of distortions and deceptions that have been issued on behalf of these products over the last thirty-five years are compiled and irrefutably documented (as in my book), the conclusion that the GE food venture could not have survived without them becomes virtually inescapable.
And another conclusion is equally obvious. The incontestable fact that the evidence has been methodically misrepresented is initself compelling evidence of how strongly the aggregate evidence raises reasonable doubts about the safety of these foods – because if it was as favorable as the proponents claim, there would have been no need to distort it.
[i] Druker, Steven, Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public (Clear River Press 2015)
[ii] The agency’s promotional policy was acknowledged in “Genetically Engineered Foods,” FDA Consumer, Jan.-Feb. 1993, p.14.
[iii] The demonstrably false statements that have been issued in order to deflect suspicion from the GE process, as well as other deceptive tactics that have been employed, are described in Chapter 3 of Altered Genes, Twisted Truth. That chapter also comprehensively examines the evidence, including important evidence produced by researchers at the Mayo Clinic that had not been previously made public.
[xiii] The British Medical Association has clearly expressed reservations about the safety of these novel products. As described in the British Medical Journal, the Association released a 2004 report stating that:
“More research is needed to show that genetically modified (GM) food crops and ingredients are safe for people and the environment and that they offer real benefits over traditionally grown foods.” (Kmietowicz, Z. “GM Foods Should Be Submitted to Further Studies, says BMA,”
British Medical Journal, 2004 March 13; 328(7440): 602)
The Public Health Association of Australia has likewise (and more recently) indicated its opinion that the safety of genetically modified foods has not been adequately demonstrated. Its policy statement on genetically modified (GM) foods adopted in 2013 states:
“Thorough, independent research into the effects of GM foods on agronomy, health, society, the environment and the economy should be undertaken, and until this work is completed, all governments in Australia should impose an immediate and indefinite freeze on: the growing of GM crops for commercial purposes; the importation of GM foods and food components; and the patenting of genetic resources for food.”
The Lancet criticized the presumption that genetically engineered foods entail no greater risks of unexpected effects than conventional foods, stating that there are “good reasons to believe that specific risks may exist” and that “governments should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health.” (The Lancet, Vol. 353, Issue 9167, p. 1811, 29 May 1999.)
Steven M. Druker is a public interest attorney and the executive director of the Alliance for Bio-Integrity. He is the author of Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public, which was released in 2015 with a foreword by Jane Goodall hailing it as “without doubt one of the most important books of the last 50 years.
These could have led to a major financial and economic recovery, BUT the offers were declined.
Few people in the entire financial world have a grasp of what really is the foundation of global wealth, and even fewer know who are the people actually controlling this.
Neil lays it on the line, naming the Rothschild corporate financial empire of Khazarian, Cabal, Deep State operatives whose objective is the annihilation of 90% of humanity through economic chaos and destruction as planned in Agenda 21 & 30 – and being currently implemented through a fake pandemic.
Most people are confused by the Western fraud-based financial system where money is created out of thin air with NO ASSET BACKING.
They think that the FED, BIS, IMF and World Bank control the supply of money through DEBT and the major international commercial banks and their financial subsidiaries simply roll over new money 100 – 1,000 times before letting some of it enter the real economy.
That is what most people see and think, but there is a much higher level that is unseen.
First, a brief historical background understanding is necessary. Traditionally and until the 20th Century MONEY was based on GOLD, precious metals and other real tangible assets.
Over centuries of trade, most of the gold made its way via the silk road to Asia and ultimately under the control of the Golden Dragon Family, a group of ancient Asian family representatives that few know about and even fewer ever meet.
The West’s gold is limited to a bit more held in Rothschilds’ Central Banks and is limited to a “recognized” 800,000+ metric tons and that is supposed to support the trillions in markeplace colored paper.
Now watch Neil’s interview closely and you will see him show on camera one of several authentic 1928 “gold coin” certificates that the Golden Dragon Family has placed in holding with the US Treasury.
Each “gold coin” is worth 10.0 MILLION METRIC TONS OF GOLD VALUED IN EXCESS OF USD $800 TRILLION.
Think about that for a minute…
This and more was offered to President Obama and VP Biden and others in 2009 to stimulate the American automotive, airline and infrastructure industries.
This was DECLINED.
Instead the Obama / Biden Administration set about an 8-year campaign to destroy American industries, the Military and the Healthcare industry.
It should be understood that this relatively small group of Golden Dragon Family elite members essentially hold the fundamental collateral backing for the entire global financial system.
Their resources are enormous. It is estimated that 85% of the West’s (Rothschilds’) Global Collateral Accounts are actually owned by the Golden Dragon Family and their depositors.
And that is only a small portion of their secured asset holdings.
It should also be seen that the Golden Dragon Family is dedicated to supporting global growth and humanitarian projects.
They are constantly monitoring national governments and offering assistance when and where necessary. This is now Neil’s job as The AMANAH.
The funding of the Global Collateral Accounts after WWII and the continued support of Western financial institutions and major economic developments can clearly be seen even though Western financial fraudsters have illegally abused and usurped their authority.
The Cabal-backed Crime Families controlling the US Corporate Government, of course, rejected the 2009 offer as this would financially and economically strengthen the US, which was counter to their agenda.
So it is now obvious that the Rosy Boys Gang fronted by Soros, The Bush / Clinton / Obama crime syndicate and all their bought-and-paid-for politicians, corporate heads and bankster buddies – certainly don’t want to let the cat out of the bag. Ooops! Neil just did that – again!
Watch and see him pull a few more nasty scratching cats out of his bag of tricks too!
See for yourselves how diabolical their plans have been and will continue to be if WE THE PEOPLE allow this.
Neil is running in parallel to President Donald Trump in unrelenting efforts to CLEAN THE SWAMP.
He strongly supports the Trump Administration and behooves all who can vote to vote for the MAN.
The humanitarian offer presented to the former US President was made by Mr. Neil F. Keenan and Mr. Yamaguchi, for and on behalf of the Golden Dragon Family.
The offer was made to Corporate Government of the US and was in fact quite an easy transaction to deal with seeing the FEDs held many of the notes.
Despite the need to take care of said problems immediately, they neglected the offer and stated that they did not want to fix the problems and that they wanted the US to fall apart so they could ride their horses into the center of it all and make claim to a new era.
The coming of their NEW WORLD ORDER.
If so, then we are all dead and to avoid all this we must get out immediately and vote for our President Donald Trump.
There are no more tomorrows if in any manner shape or form he loses.
It is a must-win for we the people of this planet.
Neil Keenan has battled the Cabal for over twelve years and knows them quite well. They also know him.
There are no tomorrows only todays at this point in time and you best get out and vote and be thinking of your loved ones when doing so.
If not then we cannot cry when our loved ones are taken from us by the New World Order never to be seen again. Remember 90 percent of the populace will be eliminated and know they will do this.
Cancer Industry Not Looking For A Cure; They’re Too Busy Making Money & Same Amazon.Com That Banned Cancer Cure Documentaries Now All In With Big Pharma’s Toxic Cancer “Treatments” Via Its New “Go Gold” Astroturfing Campaign March 4 2023 | From: NaturalNews / CancerNews / Various It may sound ridiculously cynical to some, but there are many who believe that cancer is too big a business (meaning too lucrative) to ever actually cure.
If any of the existing low-cost, natural and alternative cancer treatments were ever to be approved, then the healthcare industry’s cornerstone revenue producer would vanish within months.
And Big Pharma isn’t about to let that happen. The industry is what is keeping us from a real cancer cure.
Consider how big a business cancer has become. In the 1940s, before all of the technology and innovation we see today, just one out of every 16 people was stricken with cancer; by the 1970s, that ratio fell to one in 10.
Today, one in two males are at risk of developing some form of cancer, and for women that ratio is one in three.
A 2010 documentary entitled, Cut Poison Burn, by filmmaker Wayne Chesler, presented a number of powerful facts regarding corruption in the business of conventional treatments for cancer (surgery, chemotherapy and radiation) in the U.S.
Here are a number of quotes taken from the documentary that reveal why we’re no closer today than ever to a cancer cure:
"From 1920 to the present time, we have made little progress in the treatment of adult cancers. So, a person who gets prostate cancer or breast cancer today will live as long as a person who got it in 1920."
- Charles B. Simone, M.MS., M.D., Founder, Simone Protective Cancer Center
"Why are people terrified when they hear the word cancer? Because they know it [conventional cancer treatment] doesn’t work.”
- Dr. Julian Whitaker, M.D. Founder, Whitaker Wellness Institute
“Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud.”
- Dr. Linus Pauling 1986, Nobel Laureate
There are more, including the U.S. government’s own admission in patenting someone else’s potential cancer cure, that current treatments “are themselves carcinogenic” and may actually promote recurrences of cancer.
But you get the point: There is no real incentive to cure something that generates so much employment and profit; just imagine all of the cancer treatment specialists and their staff members who would be out of a job if this disease was ever cured.
“Treating cancer with anything that actually works has been entirely outlawed in the United States, where ‘healing has become a crime,’ say independent observers. The conventional cancer industry isn’t interested in curing the disease; it’s interested in profiting from its continuation.”
Same Amazon.Com That Banned Cancer Cure Documentaries Now All In With Big Pharma’s Toxic Cancer “Treatments” Via Its New “Go Gold” Astroturfing Campaign
Jeff Bezos has launched a new propaganda campaign called “Amazon Goes Gold” that blatantly pushes the Big Pharma lie that chemotherapy is some kind of universal cure for childhood cancer.
Exploiting the heartbreaking story of a Texas girl who underwent chemo for stage 4 non-Hodgkin’s T-cell Lymphoma, The Amazon blog makes the suggestion that, even though chemo routinely harms and kills people, it’s still the best option for adults and children who are diagnosed with cancer.
Plagiarizing the infamous “pink ribbon” campaign long promoted by the Susan G. Komen Foundation for breast cancer “awareness,” Amazon’s Goes Gold campaign shipped out gold ribbons with all Amazon orders during the month of September.
Amazon is also donating $4 million to the American Childhood Cancer Organization, Children’s Oncology Group, Seattle Children’s Hospital, the European Society for Pediatric Oncology, and St. Jude Children-s Research Hospital – all groups and organizations that reject natural alternatives to chemotherapy for treating cancer.
“Amazonians across the globe will show their support by wearing pajamas to work in solidarity with children who often spend years living in their pajamas during treatment and recovery from cancer,” The Amazon blog‘s Dave Quigg explains.
Wegner worked directly on “pharmaceutical product development,” according to his LinkedIn profile. He also worked as a scientist at Hospira, a global pharmaceutical and medical device company with operations similar to Pfizer’s.
What this suggests is that Wegner’s approach to childhood cancer as the current head of ACCO centers entirely around conventional “treatments” like chemotherapy and radiation that destroy children’s bodies by pumping them up with poison.
Children’s Oncology Group is similarly run by pharma-mongers like Peter C. Adamson of The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. Adamson is buddies with Paul Offit, a Big Pharma hack who believes that children can safely be injected with up to 10,000 vaccines at once and live to tell about it.
These and other Amazon Goes Gold partners, in essence, represent a who’s who list of some of Big Pharma’s biggest propagandists.
More important to them than actual healing is keeping the public under the delusion that chemotherapy is somehow a legitimate form of medicine that helps to fight cancer.
And Amazon is further doing its part to keep the ruse going by shipping all Amazon orders in “custom packaging” with a little gold ribbon to remind customers that they should immediately turn to chemotherapy the minute they or a loved one is diagnosed with cancer.
By couching this crafty little campaign in terms of good will and creating “awareness,” Amazon and the cancer industry are basically marketing conventional cancer “therapy” to the masses, which are increasingly waking up to safer and more effective alternatives that don’t cause potentially lifelong harm or even death.
Amazon: Chemotherapy is Expensive, So Get Out There and Fundraise to Help Pay for it!
Recognizing that chemotherapy is an excessively costly regimen that patients without insurance have gone bankrupt trying to pay for, Amazon is also reminding the public to fork over their hard-earned cash to help people pay for it as an act of charity.
Rather than advise its customers about cheaper, safer alternatives that might work without breaking the bank, Amazon is instead trying to raise more money to keep the conventional cancer industry fully funded, regardless of the harm it causes to many patients.
“I had an allergic reaction to a chemo medicine that I was getting,” the young girl whom Amazon references in the blog article is quoted as saying about how chemotherapy harmed her. “It gave me pancreatitis. Then I became septic and went into multi-system organ failure.”
Several of the cancer documentaries that Amazon banned from its website and Prime services discuss alternatives that might have helped this poor girl without destroying her vital organs.
“… some of the drugs and the chemo that they use are very, very harsh,” the girl’s father is quoted as saying about what his daughter endured.
“I just don’t think there’s enough research into how it affects kids – because they’re little, and they’re going to have the health effects of these heavy treatments for the rest of their life. As a parent going through all that, it’s frustrating because you don’t want them to deviate from the protocol, but this stuff makes your kid so sick.”
Exposing The Bogus "97% Consensus" Claim Over Climate Change 'Science' & Top-Level Climate Modeler Spills The Beans On The ‘Nonsense’ Of ‘Global Warming Crisis’ March 3 2023 | From: MisesInstitute / Quadrant / Various
One of the popular rhetorical moves in the climate change debate is for advocates of aggressive government intervention to claim that “97% of scientists” agree with their position, and so therefore any critics must be unscientific “deniers.”
Now these claims have been dubious from the start; people like David Friedman have demonstrated that the “97% consensus” assertion became a talking point only through a biased procedure that mischaracterized how journal articles were rated, and thereby inflating the estimate.
But beyond that, a review in The New Republic of a book critical of mainstream economics uses the exact same degree of consensus in order to cast aspersions on the science of economics.
In other words, when it comes to the nearly unanimous rejection of rent control or tariffs among professional economists, at least some progressive leftists conclude that there must be group-think involved.
The one consistent thread in both cases - that of the climate scientists and that of the economists - is that The New Republic takes the side that will expand the scope of government power, a central tenet since its birth by Herbert Croly a century ago.
The Dubious “97% Consensus” Claim Regarding Climate Science
This is a huge distinction. For example, I co-authored a Cato study with climate scientists Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger, in which we strongly opposed a U.S. carbon tax.
Yet both Michaels and Knappenberger would be climate scientists who were part of the “97% consensus” according to Cook et al. That is, Michaels and Knappenberger both agree that, other things equal, human activity that emits carbon dioxide will make the world warmer than it otherwise would be.
That observation by itself does not mean there is a crisis nor does it justify a large carbon tax.
Incidentally, when it comes down to what Cook et al. actually found, economist David R. Henderson noticed that it was even less impressive than what Friedman had reported. Here’s Henderson:
“[Cook et al.] got their 97 percent by considering only those abstracts that expressed a position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
I find it interesting that 2/3 of the abstracts did not take a position.
So, taking into account David Friedman’s criticism above, and mine, Cook and Bedford, in summarizing their findings, should have said, “Of the approximately one-third of climate scientists writing on global warming who stated a position on the role of humans, 97% thought humans contribute somewhat to global warming.”
That doesn’t quite have the same ring, does it? [David R. Henderson, bold added.]"
So to sum up: The casual statements in the corporate media and in online arguments would lead the average person to believe that 97% of scientists who have published on climate change think that humans are the main drivers of global warming.
And yet, at least if we review the original Cook et al. (2013) paper that kicked off the talking point, what they actually found was that of the sampled papers on climate change, only one-third of them expressed a view about its causes, and then of that subset, 97% agreed that humans were at least one cause of climate change.
This would be truth-in-advertising, something foreign in the political discussion to which all AGW issues now seem to descend.
The New Republic’s Differing Attitudes Towards Consensus
The journal The New Republic was founded in 1914. Its website states: “For over 100 years, we have championed progressive ideas and challenged popular opinion….The New Republic promotes novel solutions for today’s most critical issues.”
With that context, it’s not surprising that The New Republic uses the alleged 97% consensus in climate science the way other progressive outlets typically do.
“Two years ago, a group of international researchers led by University of Queensland’s John Cook surveyed 12,000 abstracts of peer-reviewed papers on climate change since the 1990s.
Out of the 4,000 papers that took a position one way or another on the causes of global warming, 97 percent of them were in agreement: Humans are the primary cause.
By putting a number on the scientific consensus, the study provided everyone from President Barack Obama to comedian John Oliver with a tidy talking point."
Notice already that Leber is helping to perpetuate a falsehood, though she can be forgiven - part of David Friedman’s blog post was to show that Cook himself was responsible (Friedman calls it an outright lie) for the confusion regarding what he and his co-authors actually found.
The reviewer, Robin Kaiser-Schatzlein, quoted with approval Appelbaum’s low view of consensus in economics:
“Appelbaum shows the strangely high degree of consensus in the field of economics, including a 1979 survey of economists that “found 98 percent opposed rent controls, 97 percent opposed tariffs, 95 percent favored floating exchange rates, and 90 percent opposed minimum wage laws.”
And in a moment of impish humor he notes that “Although nature tends toward entropy, they shared a confidence that economies tend toward equilibrium.”
Economists shared a creepy lack of doubt about how the world worked."
Isn’t that amazing?
Rather than hunting down and demonizing Democratic politicians who dare to oppose the expert consensus on items like rent control - which Bernie Sanders has recently promoted - the reaction here is to guffaw at the hubris and “creepy lack of doubt about how the world [works].”
From the beginning, the “97% consensus” claim about climate change has been dubious, with supporters claiming that it represented much more than it really did.
Furthermore, a recent book review in The New Republic shows that when it comes to economic science, 97% consensus means nothing, if it doesn’t support progressive politics.
Top-Level Climate Modeler Spills The Beans On The ‘Nonsense’ Of ‘Global Warming Crisis’
There’s a top-level oceanographer and meteorologist who is prepared to cry “Nonsense!”on the “global warming crisis” evident to climate modellers but not in the real world. He’s as well or better qualified than the modellers he criticises - the ones whose Year 2100 forebodings of 4degC warming have set the world to spending $US1.5 trillion a year to combat CO2 emissions.
It’s titled Confessions of a climate scientist: the global warming hypothesis is an unproven hypothesis, and he is very much qualified to take a stand. From 1990 to 2014 he worked on cloud dynamics and forces mixing atmospheric and ocean flows on medium to planetary scales.
His bases were MIT (for a Doctor of Science in meteorology), Georgia Institute of Technology, Goddard Space Flight Centre, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Duke and Hawaii Universities and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology. He’s published about 20 climate papers on fluid dynamics.
Today’s vast panoply of “global warming science” is like an upside down pyramid built on the work of a few score of serious climate modellers.
They claim to have demonstrated human-derived CO2 emissions as the cause of recent global warming and project that warming forward. Every orthodox climate researcher takes such output from the modellers’ black boxes as a given.
A fine example is from the Australian Academy of Science’s explanatory booklet of 2015. It claims, absurdly, that the models’ outputs are “compelling evidence” for human-caused warming.
Specifically, it refers to model runs with and without human emissions and finds the “with” variety better matches the 150-year temperature record (which itself is a highly dubious construct). Thus satisfied, the Academy then propagates to the public and politicians the models’ forecasts for disastrous warming this century.
Now for Dr Nakamura’s expert demolition of the modelling.
There was no English edition of his book in June and only a few bits were translated and circulated. But Dr Nakamura last week offered via a free Kindle version his own version in English. It’s not a translation but a fresh essay leading back to his original conclusions.
The temperature forecasting models trying to deal with the intractable complexities of the climate are no better than “toys” or “Mickey Mouse mockeries” of the real world, he says.
This is not actually a radical idea. The IPCC in its third report (2001) conceded (emphasis added),
“In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible."
(Chapter 14, Section 220.127.116.11. )
Somehow that official warning was deep-sixed by the alarmists.
Now Nakamura has found it again, further accusing the orthodox scientists of “data falsification” by adjusting previous temperature data to increase apparent warming “The global surface mean temperature-change data no longer have any scientific value and are nothing except a propaganda tool to the public,” he writes.
The climate models are useful tools for academic studies, he says.
However, “the models just become useless pieces of junk or worse (worse in a sense that they can produce gravely misleading output) when they are used for climate forecasting."
"These models completely lack some critically important climate processes and feedbacks, and represent some other critically important climate processes and feedbacks in grossly distorted manners to the extent that makes these models totally useless for any meaningful climate prediction.
I myself used to use climate simulation models for scientific studies, not for predictions, and learned about their problems and limitations in the process."
Nakamura and colleagues even tried to patch up some of the models’ crudeness;
“…so I know the workings of these models very well …
For better or worse I have more or less lost interest in the climate science and am not thrilled to spend so much of my time and energy in this kind of writing beyond the point that satisfies my own sense of obligation to the US and Japanese taxpayers who financially supported my higher education and spontaneous and free research activity. So please expect this to be the only writing of this sort coming from me.
I am confident that some honest and courageous, true climate scientists will continue to publicly point out the fraudulent claims made by the mainstream climate science community in English.
I regret to say this but I am also confident that docile and/or incompetent Japanese climate researchers will remain silent until the ’mainstream climate science community’ changes its tone, if ever."
He projects warming from CO2 doubling, “according to the true experts”, to be only 0.5degC. He says he doesn’t dispute the possibility of either catastrophic warming or severe glaciation since the climate system’s myriad non-linear processes swamp “the toys” used for climate predictions.
Climate forecasting is simply impossible, if only because future changes in solar energy output are unknowable.
As to the impacts of human-caused CO2, they can’t be judged “with the knowledge and technology we currently possess.”
Other gross model simplifications include:
Ignorance about large and small-scale ocean dynamics
A complete lack of meaningful representations of aerosol changes that generate clouds.
Lack of understanding of drivers of ice-albedo (reflectivity) feedbacks: “Without a reasonably accurate representation, it is impossible to make any meaningful predictions of climate variations and changes in the middle and high latitudes and thus the entire planet.”
Inability to deal with water vapor elements
Arbitrary “tunings” (fudges) of key parameters that are not understood
Concerning CO2 changes he says:
“I want to point out a simple fact that it is impossible to correctly predict even the sense or direction of a change of a system when the prediction tool lacks and/or grossly distorts important non-linear processes, feedbacks in particular, that are present in the actual system …
… The real or realistically-simulated climate system is far more complex than an absurdly simple system simulated by the toys that have been used for climate predictions to date, and will be insurmountably difficult for those naïve climate researchers who have zero or very limited understanding of geophysical fluid dynamics.
I understand geophysical fluid dynamics just a little, but enough to realize that the dynamics of the atmosphere and oceans are absolutely critical facets of the climate system if one hopes to ever make any meaningful prediction of climate variation."
Solar input, absurdly, is modelled as a “never changing quantity”. He says, “It has only been several decades since we acquired an ability to accurately monitor the incoming solar energy.
In these several decades only, it has varied by one to two watts per square metre. Is it reasonable to assume that it will not vary any more than that in the next hundred years or longer for forecasting purposes?
Good modelling of oceans is crucial, as the slow ocean currents are transporting vast amounts of heat around the globe, making the minor atmospheric heat storage changes almost irrelevant.
For example, the Gulf Stream has kept western Eurasia warm for centuries. On time scales of more than a few years, it plays a far more important role on climate than atmospheric changes.
“It is absolutely vital for any meaningful climate prediction to be made with a reasonably accurate representation of the state and actions of the oceans.”
In real oceans rather than modelled ones, just like in the atmosphere, the smaller-scale flows often tend to counteract the effects of the larger-scale flows.
Nakamura spent hundreds of hours vainly trying to remedy the flaws he observed, concluding that the models “result in a grotesque distortion of the mixing and transport of momentum, heat and salt, thereby making the behaviour of the climate simulation models utterly unrealistic."
Proper ocean modelling would require a tenfold improvement in spatial resolution and a vast increase in computing power, probably requiring quantum computers. If or when quantum computers can reproduce the small-scale interactions, the researchers will remain out of their depth because of their traditional simplifying of conditions.
Key model elements are replete with “tunings” i.e. fudges. Nakamura explains how that trick works:
“The models are ‘tuned’ by tinkering around with values of various parameters until the best compromise is obtained.
I used to do it myself. It is a necessary and unavoidable procedure and not a problem so long as the user is aware of its ramifications and is honest about it.
But it is a serious and fatal flaw if it is used for climate forecasting/prediction purposes."
One set of fudges involves clouds.
“Ad hoc representation of clouds may be the greatest source of uncertainty in climate prediction. A profound fact is that only a very small change, so small that it cannot be measured accurately…
in the global cloud characteristics can completely offset the warming effect of the doubled atmospheric CO2.”
Two such characteristics are an increase in cloud area and a decrease in the average size of cloud particles.