Del Bigtree w/ Alfie Oakes, Owner of Mask-Free Store in Florida: On Business Owners Standing Together in Support of Freedom

Mask-Free Store Goes Viral

by Del Bigtree, The HighWire
February 26, 2021



Video available at The HighWire Brighteon and BitChute channels.

Florida grocery store owner, Alfie Oakes, made national headlines recently when a video of maskless employees and customers at his store went viral.

Del talks to our “HighWire Hero of the Week” about what inspired him to stand up against Covid mandates, and how his opposition has put his thriving business in the spotlight.

#AlfieOaks #SeedToTable #Naples #MasklessGroceryStore #HeroOfTheWeek #ViralVideo #UnMask #TheHighwire #DelBigtree

Justice Centre Takes Legal Action on Behalf of Canadians Affected by Mandatory Hotel Quarantines and Travel Restrictions

Mandatory hotel quarantines and travel restrictions

by Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
February 22, 2021

The Justice Centre has filed legal action in response to news that the Trudeau government will force Canadian residents into mandatory quarantine, in a hotel at their own expense, after returning from international travel.

The new mandatory quarantine takes effect February 22. Full details of the government’s plan can be reviewed here.

We first issued a news release outlining the situation, and  then a legal demand letter to the Government demanding that they stop this practice immediately and release anyone they may be currently holding in federal facilities. Despite the pending litigation, the Trudeau government has decided to proceed with this forced confinement of travellers. The legal action will be heard in Federal Court.

Trudeau also announced all Canadian airlines had agreed to cancel all the flights to ‘sun and sand destinations’ until the end of April, including Mexico and the Caribbean.

“We all agree that now is just not the time to be flying,” Trudeau said.

However, not all Canadians agree. The Justice Centre has received thousands of emails since the federal government announced that Canadians returning to the country, regardless of their reason for travel, will be forced into mandatory quarantine, in a hotel at their own expense of $2000 for a three day stay.

Also, it should be noted that the new measures are being implemented under Transport Canada and the Aeronautics Act. There is still people being detained for not having any Covid tests under the Quarantine Act, which is a different issue. The government began requiring all people arriving in Canada by air to show a negative PCR-based Covid test in early January.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced February 9 that anyone arriving at a land border with the U.S. after February 15 will be required to have taken a COVID-19 test 72 hours before seeking entry.

According to Global News, “lack of a negative test won’t necessarily prevent people from entering the country. Should Canadians or permanent residents not be able to provide that test result, they could face “severe penalties,” including fines of up to $3,000 per person. Trudeau said his government will also be implementing new measures to ensure “extensive follow up by Health Canada” to ensure they are getting tested and properly quarantining. “It’s not legal to refuse entry to a Canadian who wants to come home. That’s the major difference between land borders and air borders. You can prevent someone from boarding a flight in Miami or elsewhere, you can’t prevent someone standing at a land border crossing from coming into Canada, because technically they’re already on Canadian soil,” Trudeau said to reporters.” Starting Feb. 22, travellers entering Canada at the land border will also be required to take a COVID-19 molecular test on arrival as well as toward the end of their 14-day quarantine.

From what we know right now, if a Canadian citizen or permanent resident shows up at the land border without a negative test,  officials cannot deny you entry as you are a Canadian citizen on homeland, and you will not be taken to a quarantine facility, however the federal government has stated travellers could be given tickets of up to $3000 per day. You will be required to go home and quarantine.

If you are detained or receive a ticket as a result of returning home, please contact the Justice Centre by filling out a case submission.

Read more at Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

New Survey of Vaccine-Free Group Exposes Long-term Impact of Vaccination Policies on Public Health

by Greg Glaser and Pat O’Connell, Vaxxter
February 22, 2021

They tell us vaccines are “safe and effective.”

They tell us the risks of common diseases outweigh the risks of vaccines.

They tell us vaccine risks are “rare.”

What if none of these claims are true?

In 2019, Joy Garner with The Control Group set out to answer that question by conducting a litigation survey of never-vaccinated people. They found that, in every case, the claims we hear from our vaunted government and TV experts about the risks and benefits of vaccines are demonstrably false.

In fact, they learned that the tiny, vaccine-free minority of Americans is far healthier overall than the vaccinated majority.

But let’s step back for a moment to the questions we should all be asking about those familiar claims.

(Q) Are vaccines safe?
(A) No.

In its 2011 case, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, the US Supreme Court acknowledged that vaccines cause injuries.

“The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act) created a no-fault compensation program to stabilize a vaccine market adversely affected by an increase in vaccine-related tort litigation and to facilitate compensation to claimants who found pursuing legitimate vaccine-inflicted injuries too costly and difficult.”

The Court noted that vaccine injuries are unavoidable.

“Most importantly, the Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects.”

Justice Scalia noted that the FDA regulations specify no criteria for measuring, much less ensuring, the claimed safety or effectiveness of vaccines.

“Indeed, the FDA has never even spelled out in regulations the criteria it uses to decide whether a vaccine is safe and effective for its intended use.”  (Emphasis added.)

To make our answer even clearer, the law classifies vaccines as “unavoidably unsafe products.”

“Unavoidably unsafe products. There are some products which, in the present state of human knowledge, are quite incapable of being made safe for their intended and ordinary use. These are especially common in the field of drugs.” 

The excerpt above aptly notes the common and more direct synonym for the word unsafe. That synonym is: dangerous.

Unavoidably dangerous products include motorcycles, parachutes, chainsaws guns …

… and vaccines.

To emphasize the point, the 1986 law gave vaccine makers immunity from legal liability and created a no-fault vaccine court that compensates families for documented vaccine injuries and deaths out of a taxpayer fund.

So the answer to the question “Are vaccines safe?” is a solid and resounding “No.”

We know for a fact vaccines are dangerous. They absolutely cause injuries and deaths. And yet “the authorities” have decided for us that the benefits outweigh the risks. What is that decision based on?

(Q) Do the risks of common diseases outweigh the risks of vaccines?

(A) We don’t know.

That’s right:  We. Don’t. Know.

Why we don’t know is a long story. But the key reasons are these:

1. The real risks of common, short-term, vaccine-targeted diseases are routinely exaggerated, and the truth about those risks is suppressed by the authorities and the media. One recent report on changes to the vaccine court’s injury table from the US Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) repeats empty claims of vaccine benefit and discounts the scope and severity of vaccine harms without a shred of proof.
2. The benefits of common diseases are rarely, if ever, acknowledged by the authorities. (Yes there are benefits of getting diseases, including reduction in the risks of more serious illnesses like shingles and certain cancers.)
3. Emergency vaccines (like those for covid-19) may not be properly tested in animals before being approved for Phase 1 human trials. Animal trials are crucial to determine how vaccinated subjects react later, when they are exposed to the wild virus, to ensure they don’t create pathogenic priming, which can trigger a dangerous, sometimes deadly, immune overreaction called a “cytokine storm.”
4. Vaccines are not safety tested against harmless (inert) placebos like saline. They’re tested against false “placebos” consisting of other unavoidably unsafe vaccines already on the market or the most toxic ingredients in the new vaccine. That’s why we never know how vaccines stack up against Nature, or random chance. Similarly, vaccine clinical trials never use fully unvaccinated control subjects. This is like a tobacco company claiming cigarettes are safe because they compared people who smoke 70 cigarettes per week to those who smoke 69 cigarettes per week.
5. The authorities have never systematically and broadly compared the long-term health of the vaccine-free who have caught these infections versus the health of those who have been vaccinated for the diseases.

Despite what we’re told, we simply can’t know whether getting common infections is more dangerous than getting vaccinations for them without studying the health outcomes of both vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects.

(Q) Are the risks of vaccines “rare”?
(A) We don’t know.

Again, there’s something vitally important we don’t know about a widely and coercively used class of product.

And again, it’s a long story.

There are many reasons we don’t know how “rare” (or common) vaccine injuries and deaths are. They include these:

1. The national Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) captures fewer than 1% of all vaccine reactions and deaths according to the government’s own study by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. In other words, the system misses more than 99% of harms caused by vaccines. That means any statistics showing the number of adverse reactions must be multiplied by 100 for a reasonably accurate estimate.
   

   (To be clear: injuries and deaths occurring after vaccines are not necessarily caused by the vaccines. Correlation does not equal causation. But when associations stretch the bounds of coincidence to the breaking point, we are obligated to look deeper for possible connections.)

2. And there is no system that tracks long-term vaccine consequences that only emerge after months or years of immune overstimulation by vaccine toxins that can’t be easily purged from the body.
3. In three separate reviews of the best available science on claimed vaccine harms, the government’s Institute of Medicine (IOM) found the majority (as high as 85%) of studies were “inadequate” to either prove or disprove causation. This means the studies were so poorly designed and/or executed they can’t prove anything, one way or the other.
4. The entire vaccine schedule and the specific combinations of vaccines that children are routinely given at one time have never been studied for interactive or cumulative harms.
5. The authorities have never systematically and broadly compared the overall health of the vaccinated to that of vaccine-free populations.
6. Our healthcare providers are taught, perhaps pressured, to see even distressing vaccine reactions as “normal,” and to categorize diseases and disorders that arise weeks, months or years after vaccination as “unrelated coincidences.” They may indeed see and worry about the declining health among patients, but never connect those declines with vaccines because the evidence that might connect them is lacking, inadequate or suppressed.

“Rare” can only be judged in relation to something else. In the case of vaccine harms, we need a substantial group of vaccine-free citizens and a clear accounting of their health issues to compare the relative “rarity” (or frequency) of harms in people who get vaccines to the frequency of such harms in people who don’t.

This reference population exists for moment, though their numbers are falling. And our esteemed authorities steadfastly refuse to study them.

That’s why the answer to question three, “Are vaccine risks rare?” is also “We don’t know.”

The Looming Extinction of Our Endangered Vaccine-Free Population

Joy Garner realized that the most important group of people in America was being driven toward extinction by ever more forceful vaccine mandates, dwindling exemptions, and blatant coercion.

Her survey group represents the desperately needed “control group” for this massive experiment our authorities have been conducting on our children, and increasingly on adults, for at least 30 years now. Only the never-vaccinated among us can show us what life and health look like when we let our immune systems do their jobs and manage illnesses as they come along.

The vast majority of Americans—99.97%, or more than 329 million—have been exposed to vaccines.

By contrast, our tiny group of vaccine-free citizens makes up only about 0.26% of the population, or roughly 800,000 children and adults.

Yet, curiously, they are often feared and blamed for all the ills of the majority. Do the healthy, unvaccinated few among us really have that much power?

Garner saw the decline of the unvaccinated control population and knew it was vitally important to gather the wisdom manifested in their health trajectories while it was still possible. And it was important to protect this endangered species from extinction.

The Control Group Survey

Garner named her litigation The Control Group for obvious reasons. Her passion and love for others drove her to tackle this project our authorities should have done, and still should do on a larger scale.

But it was her intelligence and business experience that gave her the skills and confidence to pull it off.

After all, at its core, the task was straightforward:

• Create a survey like the ones the authorities typically use to gather health data on Americans.
• Get the survey into the hands of the target population (the never-vaccinated).
• Crunch the numbers from the surveys, and validate the results.
• Compare health outcomes from the survey results to national health statistics for the vaccinated majority.

The survey instruments themselves were streamlined into two forms, and the process followed appropriate protocols for collecting and reporting health data for litigation. The forms prompted respondents to report all illnesses and disabilities.

Garner reached the subject population by promoting the survey through social media, radio interviews, events, referrals and other means.

Surveys were manually completed and mailed back (or handed back at events) to help eliminate some of the flaws in online, electronic surveys.

Follow-up calls clarified unclear answers and helped ensure participants recalled and reported all health issues.

Garner compiled and evaluated the results using established statistical practices, and engaged experts in relevant fields to validate the forms and the process as well as the results.

And she acquired comparable statistics for the vaccination population from national health reports.

In the end, survey respondents represented a solid 0.179% of the entire vaccine-free population, estimated during the survey period at around 832,521 Americans, and ranged in age from under 1 year to 73.

From the data on both groups—the vaccinated and the never-vaccinated—her team generated graphs that tell a powerful story, one every American, indeed, every citizen of the world, should hear. Now. While they still can.

Go to VAXXTER to read full article

Greg Glaser is a health freedom lawyer in California.
Pat O’Connell is a health freedom advocate in Texas.

STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF HEALTH OUTCOMES IN THE UNVACCINATED Full Report PDF

2020 Pilot Survey Data Comparison VACCINATED -VS- UNVACCINATED Graphs PDF

Petitioning Government or Courts Will Never Result in Gaining Freedom: Only Mass Disobedience Can Prevail

by Gary D. Barnett, GaryDBarnett.com
February 22, 2021

“Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or corrupt. And a citizen who barters with such a state shares in its corruption and lawlessness.” ~ Mahatma Gandhi (2012). “The Essential Gandhi: An Anthology of His Writings on His Life, Work, and Ideas”, p.144, Vintage

We are now at the threshold of hell concerning our natural rights and freedom. This evil government and its controllers have destroyed our sacred lives through lies, deceit, theft, plotted divisive policies, torture, isolation, dystopian mandates, crippling orders by executive fiat, and murder. This is not hidden; it is open and exposed, but the people have ignored the blatant nature of this conspiracy to take over humanity, and instead have as expected by their masters, acquiesced to every command given. After all this tyranny levied against this society, they now beg for crumbs from the very scum that has enslaved them. This collective and pathetic response can result in nothing less than mass enslavement.

In the face of this obvious and extreme immoral injustice against all Americans, the people clamor for redress by petitioning those falsely claiming authority instead of relying on self and the inherent right to live free. This is akin to asking your master to be your slave, and expecting him to voluntarily comply. This attitude is not only meaningless; it actually emboldens your oppressor, and strengthens his position over you.  Weakness in the face of tyranny can only bring more tyranny.

To understand how the total domination over the people by the state occurred only requires one to accept reality. The population at large has accepted to date almost every controlling measure demanded by those that claim power over them.

It began with mandated quarantines, lockdowns, and isolation, as the abuse continued to worsen over the past year.

Then, most small businesses nationwide were told to close down, employees dependent on their jobs were told to go home and not work, unemployment and poverty became widespread, and places and events where people could gather together were outlawed.

Next, government created and funded criminal terrorist groups like BLM and Antifa, were let loose on society, allowed to riot, burn and pillage businesses, and allowed to assault and murder citizens, all while being protected by the ruling class.

State governors and their corrupt ‘health’ ministers then required “social distancing” and deadly mask wearing in order to just move about, function, and survive. In addition, these harmful and senseless rules were expanded in many cases to restrict the ability to get vital sunlight, exercise, and most other outdoor activities, and in some cases people were told they could not leave their home prisons at all. This of course brought the purposeful destruction of our innate ability to fend off sickness by destroying our immune systems.

Travel was not only restricted, but in some cases international travel was completely forbidden. This travesty has not only worsened, but also forced testing for a fake ‘virus’ that has never once been proven to exist in order to move about or return to country, has been ordered. These tests are extreme, and are seemingly being used to not take samples, but to insert pathogens into the healthy and unhealthy alike.

Police state tactics have steadily increased, and the state enforcers have not only protected actual criminal behavior while abusing their power against the innocent, but also have enforced completely illegal mandates by the state goons.

Experimental injections falsely called ‘vaccines,’ concoctions that contain bio-weapons, toxins, and gene-altering synthetic pathogens, and that create operating systems by injection of nanoparticles and RNA/DNA changing technology, are now in many cases, required in order to function normally. They are also propagandized as medicine when in fact they cannot curb, stop, or prevent sickness and death, but actually cause sickness and death.

Those targeted first have been the elderly, the infirmed, ‘healthcare’ workers, the mentally disabled, homeless, and children. This should alert anyone able to think even marginally that premeditated murder of the old and sick, and control of the young and upcoming generations are primary agendas of the state monsters.

People are having horrible adverse reactions to these experimental injections, many are dying across this country and the world due to these shots, and the cover-up of this travesty is in full gear by the government, its fascist corporate partners, and the controlled mainstream media. This is a crime beyond imagination, and one that could only be perpetrated by psychopathic, evil, and conscienceless demons in positions of power.

In addition to all this, the executive branch of this murderous government has now become the maker of all law sought by the controlling ‘elites’ through dictatorial executive orders. Biden has signed, (whatever he was instructed to sign) over 60 executive orders just since January 20, 2021. Not that it is any surprise, but Congress has done absolutely nothing to challenge this atrocity, and in fact is fully on board with this dictatorial takeover.

These orders include, but are not limited to, creating another $1.9 trillion dollars out of thin air for so-called ‘Covid’ relief, rejoining the bogus manmade ‘climate change’ agreement and using this lie to advance policy to control farmlands, creating racist “equity as policy goals,” federal mask mandates, rejoining and funding the WHO, and including all illegal aliens in the census in order to alter future elections. He has signed orders to close down the Keystone XL pipeline, cutting energy supply to the country, imposing his transgender agenda on all women’s sports, imposing mask wearing on all domestic flights, and funding all state National Guard for all Covid related activities, which would certainly include martial law efforts. He has signed orders to force private workplaces to comply with ‘Covid’ rules, making fake “climate change” a national security and foreign policy issue, forcing the use of the fascist partnerships with government funded science and technology in order to stifle all dissenting facts from surfacing, and promoting all homosexual, transgender, and every ‘LGBTQI’ agenda. He has also extended orders that renters and homeowners do not have to pay their rent or mortgages through June of this year, creating more bankruptcy and property confiscation by the state supported players at the top.

In addition to all this and much more, Biden just signed an executive order to allow the federal government, at taxpayers expense of course, to control over 30% of all American land and 30% of what are referred to as “U.S. oceans.” The effects of this are beyond comprehension, as this will be used to destroy farmlands, to put farmers and ranchers out of business, to lay the groundwork for destroying natural foods for GMO and chemical food sources that can be used to harm, sicken, and control the entire population.

Keep in mind that this is a very short list of atrocities being committed by fiat at the executive level. And this is only after one month in office. Gun control, gun confiscation, ammo blocking orders, more travel restrictions, injection mandates, and 1000 more restrictive measures by the stroke of a pen will be in our future if people do not rebel and stand against this onslaught against all Americans by the now totalitarian regime that has taken over this country. This is not in any way party specific, as the entire political class are nothing more than complicit criminal agents for the state, and are all working against the people in this war against freedom.

Petitioning government, voting, letters to congressional scum, court proceedings managed and controlled by corrupt state officers, and begging for relief from the purveyors of tyranny, is a worthless and pathetic response to what can only be called a violent assault against the citizenry, and a war on mankind.

Never comply, never submit, never close any business, never wear a mask, never isolate, and never believe a single word coming from this government or mainstream media. Disobey every state mandate en masse at every juncture or face sickness, slavery, poverty, starvation, loss of power access, total censorship and destruction of free speech, isolation, and the final destruction of this country. If you continue to comply and do nothing, the certain death of millions will occur.

“Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of leaders…and millions have been killed because of this obedience…Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves… (and) the grand thieves are running the country. That’s our problem.” ~ Howard Zinn, debate versus Charles Frankel – 1970

Source links: Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

They Know What You Are (Now They’re Haggling Over the Price)

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
February 22, 2021

There’s an old joke about a wealthy man talking to a famous actress. After asking her if she would sleep with a stranger for a million dollars she delivers an enthusiastic, “Yes!” He then inquires if she would do the same for five dollars. Offended, she fumes: “Five dollars? What kind of woman do you think I am?”

“We’ve already established that,” the man rejoins. “Now we’re just haggling over the price.”

Although this joke probably doesn’t fly in today’s PC climate, we all get the point. The woman has already admitted that her principles are negotiable for the right sum. Determining the lower bounds of that sum, then, should not be inherently offensive.

This may seem like just a crude joke, but it’s actually an insightful glimpse into the fundamental philosophical debate of our time—perhaps the fundamental philosophical debate of all time. And it helps us respond to the lockdowners, the anti-free speechers and other enemies of civilization with an answer that actually gets to the heart of the issue.

To really understand what’s going on here, we need to go back to one of the oldest pursuits known to man. No, not that pursuit! I’m talking about moral philosophy, of course, the attempt to differentiate right behaviour from wrong behaviour. Along with natural philosophy (the study of the natural world that we would today understand as “science”) and metaphysics (the study of existence, God, the mind and other abstract phenomena), moral philosophy (what we commonly refer to as “ethics”) forms one of the three main pillars of philosophy. As such, it has been one of the most discussed and debated subjects in human history.

How do we know right from wrong? How should we act in any given situation? What is the right way to live? These questions have been discussed for thousands of years, and the answers that have resulted from these debates have informed, explicitly or implicitly, almost every major social, political and religious movement in history.

In the Nicomachean Ethics, for example, Aristotle founded what is today known as “Virtue Ethics,” arguing that the ethical virtues were to be found in finding the “golden mean” between vices of excess and deficiency. Thus, courage is the balance between foolhardiness and cowardice, modesty is the virtue between shyness and boastfulness, etc.

The Discourses of Epictetus outline the foundational ideas of the Stoic school, including the insight that happiness lies in controlling one’s reaction toward external events and on directing one’s attention to that which is within one’s power to control.

The Letter to Menoeceus, meanwhile, lays out the Epicurean form of hedonism, namely that pleasure is the highest good and the aim of life. (Spoiler: Epicurus’ understanding of “pleasure” is not the common one, eschewing drinking, debauchery and revelry in favour of “sober reasoning, searching out the motives for all choice and avoidance, and banishing mere opinions, to which are due the greatest disturbance of the spirit.”)

There’s deontological ethical theories and divine command theories (or “theological voluntarism,” if you prefer), theories of ethical intuitionism, theories of anarchist morality and many, many more.

But at the risk of boring you to tears (or have I already done that?), let’s concentrate on two main camps in the ethical debate. On one side are the moral idealists—those who believe that there are objective moral standards (however understood) that are applicable in all circumstances. On the other side are the moral relativists—those who hold that there are no absolutes in the ethical arena, that what is “right” or “wrong” is always dependent on circumstance.

Of course, these are huge categories and each one encompasses many schools of thought, but in the end the debate comes down to a core question: Are there moral absolutes, or can actions only be judged based on the surrounding circumstances? Answer this question wisely, because the implications of your answer may be much larger than you imagine.

Take our hypothetical actress in the joke above, for example. Her sense of the impropriety of prostitution (“What kind of woman do you think I am?”) is demonstrably not absolute; after all, she can be persuaded to engage in the act for the right sum of money. Her interlocutor, then, can correctly point out that she is, in fact, a prostitute. The only question is the sum of money that is necessary for her to overcome her moral qualms.

In short, you don’t need a Ph.D. in philosophy to understand the horns of this particular dilemma. Either you live by certain inviolable principles which you will not under any circumstances negotiate, or you don’t.

Perhaps now you see why I brought the recent Question For Corbett about excess mortality down to the question of principle. How many dead bodies during a pandemic would it take for you to agree that your inalienable human rights are, in fact, alienable? If there is in fact a number of excess deaths at which you would concede the government has the right to lockdown cities and force vaccinate the population, then you are like the woman in the joke. The so-called “health authorities” know what you are. Now they’re just haggling over the price.

The utility of this framework for interrogating our own self-professed ideals and what they imply should be evident by now.

Those who are crying for the state to come in and regulate Big Tech can’t claim to be offended when the state then tells Big Tech they have to purge COVID “disinformation” or other unapproved speech from their platform. After all, they’ve already established what you are (a government interventionist), now they’re just haggling over the price.

And is it OK for the government to tax your income by 1/10th of 1% in order to feed and clothe orphaned children? “Yes!” Then how about if they steal 99% of your income and use it to fund the military-industrial complex? “Heavens, no! That’s absurd!” But why are you so offended? They’re just haggling.

You’re in favour of wearing masks and staying home for two weeks to flatten the curve during this deadly pandemic, aren’t you? Well how about if we force vaccinate you and institute a “health passport” system that will regulate your every movement and interaction for the rest of your life? Haggling.

You see where this is going. And you see why arguing with people about the terms of the situation that has convinced them to abandon their principle will not actually get to the root of the problem. The problem is that they are not arguing from principle. They have already admitted what they are. The only thing left is to haggle over their price.

This is a deep and important topic, and should not be summed up tritely. There are many schools of thought making different arguments for consequentialist moral philosophy: utilitarianism, ethical pragmatism, situation ethics, etc. These arguments are lightly dismissed at our peril, precisely because they have become the default mode of thinking for so many people.

After all, how many people would answer differently than the woman in the joke if the price named was sufficiently high? How many people really do stand on principle and are unwilling to negotiate away their rights? How popular would it be to say that there are certain positions that are not negotiable under any conceivable circumstance? These are not simple questions, and we must confront them head on and articulate our positions on them before engaging others on these points.

But one other point to note from the joke is that the woman is offended by the implication that she is, in fact, a prostitute. One senses in her indignation the potential for a moment of self-realization, and that is perhaps the point to press. Like it or not, she’s just admitted to being a prostitute. The man is just haggling over the price.

So rather than arguing numbers and figures with a committed COVID lockdowner, you might want to haggle with them over their price.

This weekly editorial is part of The Corbett Report Subscriber newsletter.

To support The Corbett Report and to access the full newsletter, please sign up to become a member of the website.

cover image credit mohamed_hassan / pixabay

James Corbett w/ John Carpa of The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms: On Violations of Human Rights in Canada

Canadian Government Delays Mandatory Traveler Quarantine

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
February 9, 2021

The Canadian government announced it was going to subject Canadian residents to mandatory quarantine, at their own expense, after returning from international travel, regardless of their negative COVID status. After public backlash and the threat of legal action, the government is now delaying those plans, but some are alleging that the government has already arrested Canadians arriving in the country by air and transported them to a secret hotel location. Joining us to discuss this developing story and what Canadians can do about it is John Carpay of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES:

PM Trudeau announces new travel restrictions, provides vaccine update – January 29, 2021

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Federal government faces imminent lawsuit over unlawful confinement of returning Canadian travelers

Federal government delays plan to forcibly confine travellers after public backlash and threat of litigation

‘I was detained at Calgary COVID detention centre for 11 days’

Former Federal Security Minister urges more politicians to speak out against secret airport detentions

Those held in COVID-detention preparing class-action suit

Canadian Govt. doubles down on its threats to tightly censor online “hate” and “misinformation”

JCCF Letter to Transpor Minister Omar Alghabra

COVID restrictions are the most severe violation of human rights Canadians have faced and it’s time to fight back

The Danger of Giving the Group Priority Over the Individual

by Brian David Crane, Spread Great Ideas
January 27, 2021

While mankind is a social animal, history is filled with examples of the danger of prioritizing the collective over the individual. This is the basis of all totalitarian states — that some imagined “collective good” is paramount and that the individual, when considered at all, is superfluous.

More than this, there is also the attitude among many otherwise intelligent men that they know what is best for others. While this might well be true, it is a big and dangerous step to begin giving this opinion the force of law.

These kinds of dangerous collectives are often driven by group thought. If collectivism is the symptom, the disease is groupthink, whereby people begin prizing intellectual conformity over rational thought, open discourse, and critical reflection. Indeed, there has scarcely been any political thinker in human history worth anything who did not recognize the danger that groupthink presented.

One need not look far to find examples of just how far this kind of thinking can go. However, one does not need to find the most extreme and grisly examples in human history to make the point that collectivism and groupthink are dangerous. Satanic Panic, McCarthyism and even idle gossip in a small community provide examples of such dangers far in advance of the death camp.

The following quotes all show a deep and penetrating insight into the dangers of collectivism and groupthink. We urge you to read them all and reflect on them.

Quotes About Government Control and Totalitarian States

“A tax-supported, compulsory educational system is the complete model of the totalitarian state.”
~ Isabel Paterson, God of the Machine

“Where you find the laws most numerous, there you will find also the greatest injustice.”
~ Arcesilaus

“Most of the people buying the Soviet paraphernalia were Americans and West Europeans. All would be sickened by the thought of wearing a swastika. None objected, however, to wearing the hammer and sickle on a T-shirt or a hat. It was a minor observation, but sometimes, it is through just such minor observations that a cultural mood is best observed. For here, the lesson could not have been clearer: while the symbol of one mass murder fills us with horror, the symbol of another mass murder makes us laugh.”
~ Anne Applebaum

“Beware of those who seek to take care of you lest your caretakers become your jailers.”
~ Jim Rohn, The Treasury of Quotes

“However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
~ George Washington, speaking about the two-party political system in his Farewell Address, 1796

“No self-respecting person who loves humanity or wishes for a world of greater equality and justice should have anything to do with whitewashing the slavery and extermination of Marxism-Leninism.”
~ Anthony Gregory

“As little State as possible!”
~ Friedrich Nietzsche, The Dawn of Day

“The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests and his own are the same.”
~ Marie Beyle

“…to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical…”
~ Thomas Jefferson

“There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism – by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide.”
~ Ayn Rand, L.A. Times, September 2, 1962

“Either we believe that the State exists to serve the individual or that the individual exists to serve the State.”
~ Ayn Rand

“…we are fast approaching the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it please, while the citizens may act only by permission.”
~ Ayn Rand

“Free people can treat each other justly, but they can’t make life fair. To get rid of the unfairness among individuals, you have to exercise power over them. The more fairness you want, the more power you need. Thus, all dreams of fairness become dreams of tyranny in the end.”
~ Andrew Klavan

“The more the state plans, the more difficult planning becomes for the individual.”
~ Frederich A. Hayek

“Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.”
~ Noam Chomsky, Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda

“Social order at the expense of liberty is hardly a bargain.”
~ Marquis de Sade

“Before mass leaders seize the power to fit reality to their lies, their propaganda is marked by its extreme contempt for facts as such, for in their opinion fact depends entirely on the power of man who can fabricate it.”
~ Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism

“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves!”
~ Edward R. Murrow

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
~ Alexander de Tocqueville

“We’ve got a hundred million corpses stacked up to demonstrate (the perils of statist ideology). Yet there are those who say that Stalin was a bad individual, a poor implementor. Same for Mao, Pol Pot, etc. The thing is, wherever it was tried the end consequence was always the same. I’ve heard this all many, many times: “That wasn’t real communism.” You know what that means? That means that if I’d been the benevolent dictator in the place of a Stalin, a Mao or a Pol Pot, that it would’ve brought in utopia. There isn’t a more narcissistic and toxic and inexcusable statement that you can make.”
~ Jordan Peterson

“What luck for rulers, that men do not think.”
~ Adolf Hitler

“The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic.”
~ H.L. Mencken, Minority Report

“Never do anything against conscience, even if the state demands it.”
~ Albert Einstein

Quotes About the Dangers of Group Thought and the Importance of the Individual

“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”
~ John Quincy Adams, letter to Johnathan Jackson, October 2, 1780

“What is possible for individual man is impossible for the masses.”
~ G.I. Gurdjieff

“A sect or party is an elegant incognito devised to save a man from the vexation of thinking.”
~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Truth does not become more true by virtue of the fact that the entire world agrees with it, nor less so even if the whole world disagrees with it.”
~ Maimonides

“Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it.”
~ William Penn

“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”
~ George Carlin

“The larger the group, the more toxic, the more of your beauty as an individual you have to surrender for the sake of group thought. And when you suspend your individual beauty you also give up a lot of your humanity. You will do things in the name of a group that you would never do on your own. Injuring, hurting, killing, drinking are all part of it, because you’ve lost your identity, because you now owe your allegiance to this thing that’s bigger than you are and that controls you.”
~ George Carlin, Last Words

“I see the liberty of the individual not only as a great moral good in itself (or, with Lord Acton, as the highest political good), but also as the necessary condition for the flowering of all the other goods that mankind cherishes: moral virtue, civilization, the arts and sciences, economic prosperity. Out of liberty, then, stem the glories of civilized life.”
~ Murray N. Rothbard

“To damage the sovereignty of the individual is to replace a community inspired by love, benevolence, and beauty by another based solely on power.”
~ Anwar Sadat

“Anyone who believes that we can afford collectively what we cannot afford individually is delusional.”
~ Arnold King, Learning Economics

“A ‘collective’ mind does not exist. It is merely the sum of endless numbers of individual minds. If we have an endless number of individual minds who are weak, meek, submissive and impotent – who renounce their creative supremacy for the sake of the “whole” and accept humbly that the ‘whole’s’ verdict – we don’t get a collective super-brain. We get only the weak, meek, submissive and impotent collective mind.”
~ Ayn Rand, The Journals of Ayn Rand

“In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.”
~ Friedrich Nietzsche

“The force of public opinion cannot be resisted, when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary to keep the waters pure.”
~ Thomas Jefferson

“The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information.”
~ Henry A. Wallace

“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”
~ Unknown

“The tyranny of majorities may be as bad as the tyranny of kings.”
~ Arthur Balfour

“The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject.”
~ Marcus Aurelius

“Our power does not know liberty or justice. It is established on the destruction of the individual will.”
~ Vladimir Lenin

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”
~ Winston Churchill

“They hate because they fear, and they fear because they feel that the deepest feelings of their lives are being assaulted and outraged. And they do not know why; they are powerless pawns in a blind play of social forces.”
~ Richard Wright, Native Son

“Liberty is not collective, it is personal. All liberty is individual liberty.”
~ Calvin Coolidge, Address to the Holy Name Society, Washington, D.C., September 21, 1924

“The smaller the domain where choices among alternatives are made collectively, the smaller will be the probability that any individual’s preference gets overruled.”
~ Anthony De Jasay

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”
~ Edward Bernays, Propaganda

“The cult of xenophobia is the cheapest and surest method of obtaining from the masses the ignorant and savage patriotism, which puts the blame for every political folly or social misfortune upon the foreigner.”
~ Mao Zedong

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect).”
~ Mark Twain

“Non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

“We will not obey unjust laws or submit to unjust practices. We will do this peacefully, openly, cheerfully because our aim is to persuade. We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Most people can’t stand up for their convictions, because the majority of people might not be doing it. See, everybody’s not doing it, so it must be wrong. And since everybody is doing it, it must be right.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it politic? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular – but one must take it simply because it is right.”
~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

Connect with Brian David Crane

Individual Rights and Freedoms Under Siege in Era of COVID

“The COVID-19 pandemic has proven an opportunity of convenience for totalitarian elements who have put individual rights and freedoms globally under siege,” said CHD chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in his letter to 100,000 lawyers.

by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., The Defender, Children’s Health Defense
January 26, 2021

In a letter to 100,000 lawyers, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Children’s Health Defense (CHD) chairman and chief legal counsel, urges his fellow attorneys to read “Protecting Individual Rights in the Era of COVID-19,” a special report prepared by the CHD team.

The report explores the legal rights to informed consent, bodily integrity, the right to refuse unwanted medical interventions, religious expression and autonomy. All of these rights will be “dramatically constricted” if employers, states and/or the federal government impose vaccine mandates.

Dear Colleague,

The COVID-19 pandemic has proven an opportunity of convenience for totalitarian elements who have put individual rights and freedoms globally under siege. A medical cartel composed of pharmaceutical industry, government regulators, financial houses, and telecom and internet billionaires are systematically obliterating freedom of speech and assembly, religious worship, property rights, jury trial, due process, and — ultimately — America’s exemplary democracy.

That’s why I am sending you this new Special Report, “Protecting Individual Rights in the Era of COVID-19.”

As a fellow lawyer who has practiced in our country’s courts for more than 40 years, I am alarmed by the growing power of global corporations to overwhelm our justice system, obliterate our constitutional liberty, and destroy public health. Throughout my career as a litigator, law professor, public advocate and author, I have worked to hold corporate giants and government institutions accountable. My life’s work has provided me with a unique perspective on our individual rights to clean air, clean water, unobstructed access to the commons, and our rights to make our own decisions about our bodies.

As chairman and chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), I have now dedicated myself to protecting children’s health by ending harmful environmental exposures to children, ending the exploding chronic disease epidemic that has debilitated over half of American kids born after 1989, and to holding those responsible accountable.

A 2006 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) study found that 54% of America’s children today have chronic health conditions — allergies, ADHD, autism, eczema, asthma, obesity, autoimmune conditions and more. When I was growing up, most of these conditions were rare or unknown. When I was a boy, I received three vaccines. Today, children receive 72 mandated doses of 16 vaccines, prior to age 18. A mountain of peer-reviewed studies points to vaccines as the primary culprit in this public health calamity. That isn’t stopping our health authorities from mandating more hugely subsidized, shoddily tested, zero-liability vaccines for children. Our vaccine safety program falls dangerously short of what our children deserve.

The COVID-19 pandemic has allowed captive corporate regulators to hold the population hostage to justify the transfer of $45 billion of taxpayer money to pharmaceutical companies to finance a gold rush of new vaccines.

Protecting individual rights in the era of COVID-19 is essential 

I urge you to read this short legal dossier, “Protecting Individual Rights in the Era of COVID-19”, with an open mind and to draw your own conclusion about the legal and ethical implications of one-size-fits-all vaccine mandates for zero-liability, heavily subsidized mandatory vaccines.

Current vaccine mandates now require most school children to receive between 50-75 shots just to attend school. A vaccine-injured child, or adult, cannot sue the healthcare provider or the vaccine producer — but rather must go to a rigged national injury compensation program to sue the very government that ordered vaccine compliance in the first place. After studying this subject for years, I am more horrified than ever by the system’s pervasive corruption.

Given existing federal legislation and judicial precedents, it is all but impossible to hold vaccine manufacturers or healthcare providers accountable for vaccine injury in the courts. Vaccine injuries are not rare — HHS’s own studies show that the agency claims that injuries only occur with “1 in a million” vaccines is a mendacious canard. The true injury rate is actually 1 in every 39 vaccines, according to the Federal Agency for Health Research Quality.

Problems with vaccine safety aren’t isolated just to children 

Federal and State officials are considering mandates for the new COVID-19 vaccine. The New York State Bar Association, an organization for which I have great respect, has given its imprimatur to a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all New Yorkers if “experts” deem that necessary. But those experts are mainly regulators from captured public health agencies with pervasive and corrupt financial entanglements with pharmaceutical manufacturers.

The pharma-controlled media’s advice that we “trust the experts” is anti-democratic and anti-science. You and I know that “experts” can differ on scientific questions and that their opinions can vary in accordance with and demands of politics, power, and financial self-interest. In every lawsuit, leading, highly credentialed experts from opposite sides routinely offer diametrically antithetical positions based on the same set of facts. The trouble is that today, in the political arena, dissenting voices that question government policies and corporate proclamations are silenced by censorship and vilification.

In this special report, our CHD Team explores the legal rights to informed consent, bodily integrity, the right to refuse unwanted medical interventions, religious expression and autonomy. All of these rights will be dramatically constricted if employers, states and/or the federal government impose vaccine mandates.

I hope that “Protecting Individual Rights in the Era of COVID-19” can help you work with any future clients as you navigate the uncertain COVID-19/vaccine mandates landscape.

Sincerely yours,

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Chairman, Children’s Health Defense

James Corbett w/ Professor Dolores Cahill: On Natural Law, Bodily Integrity, Right to Travel, World Freedom Alliance | The Freedom Airway as One Solution

Freedom Airway – #SolutionsWatch 

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
January 19, 2021

Professor Delores Cahill joins the deprogram today to discuss a solution for freedom-respecting travel in the age of COVID. The Freedom Airway & Freedom Travel Alliance is seeking to create travel options that don’t require travelers to submit to vaccination, face masks or quarantines. Find out more in this week’s edition of #SolutionsWatch.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES

FreedomAirway.com

DoloresCahill.com

U.S. to Require Covid-19 Tests for All International Visitors

World Doctors Alliance

World Freedom Alliance

How a License Is Like a Vaccine

by Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath, Nature of Healing
January 18, 2021

Every year, more and more people require a government-issued license to do their job.

License definition: permission granted by an authority (as of a government or a business) to do some act or transaction which would be unlawful without such permission.

Licensure is on the rise despite a 2018 Institute of Justice study estimating that licensing costs the American economy nearly 2 million jobs and up to $197 billion annually. The document License to Work found that, for lower and moderate income occupations – hair stylists, massage therapists, preschool teachers – licensing was overly burdensome and irrational. In 2016, The Wisconsin Institute for Justice reported:

Onerous occupational licensing laws that force people to undergo thousands of hours of often redundant and gratuitous training to perform jobs like auctioneering, tree trimming, and hair styling. …licensing laws are the result of higher-skilled professionals seeking to protect their market share at the consumers’ expense.

The Medical License Landscape

Between 1875 and 1900, conventional medicine began passing license laws that granted national associations, such as The American Medical Association, (AMA), the right to oversee and regulate the practice of medicine, as well as collect heavy license fees. Government agencies, such as the FDA, do not apply regulations to treatment regimens or practices, only to products.

Conventional medicine, today, is a for-profit global industry, with the top 11 drug companies in 2012 making almost 85 billion in profit. With disease rates rising over the last century, and facing poor medical outcomes during a flu pandemic that is no different from any other flu, many professionals from diverse fields are pleading to go back to traditional medicine used by indigenous medicine physicians.

However, licensed medical doctors, under the direction of the AMA, have not stopped crusading to criminalize unlicensed holistic practitioners for ‘practicing medicine without a license’ under the Medical Practice Acts. In addition, licensed holistic practitioners, who want to be like their medical counterparts, would also force licensure for everyone.

In a 2016 study by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL)”

licensing laws raise prices for consumers by $1.93 billion each year and result in roughly 31,000 fewer jobs. Over the past two decades, the number of license holders has jumped by 34 percent in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the number of occupational licensing categories has soared by 84 percent.

How A License Is Like A Vaccine

While licensed doctors attempt to legislate choice for everyone, their medicine continues to be a one-size-fits-all approach. In failing to evolve, the medical system applies a license like a vaccine:

Where a license is used as a shield to protect the medical industry, a vaccine is a shield to that provides legal immunity to vaccine makers against lawsuits from vaccine damage.

Where a license replaces inherent rights for acquired rights and privileges, a vaccine usurps innate immunity for acquired immunity.

Where a license reflects a transfer of power from a free market (self-regulation) to a controlled-market (state-regulation), a vaccine reflects a transfer of power from self-healing to disease management.

Where a license is legal permission from an authority (i.e. State government, medical board) to do something that would otherwise be deemed illegal, a vaccine is legal permission to inject toxins that would otherwise be deemed illegal to ingest.

Where a license is based on the theory of “standard of care,” a vaccine is based on the standard of “The Germ Theory of Disease.”

If vaccines work so well, then what do the vaccinated fear from the unvaccinated?

The “Standard of Care” Deception

The medical authority determines the “standard of care” which is a degree of care a doctor is expected to exercise. Standard of Care is based on practice guidelines, the medical literature, hospital policies and procedures, state and federal regulations, and other sources. A 2005 article in the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law stated that “The precise definition of the standard of care varies from one state to another… Practice guidelines evolve and change, driven by new developments in clinical practice and science… After 5.8 years, half of the practice guidelines are outdated.”

In reality, standards do not exist. They shift with opinions, especially in a world where patients can get a second or third or fourth medical opinion for each diagnosis. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) holds the opinion that vaccines are “safe and effective.” The US Supreme Court holds the opinion that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.” And the British Medical Journal holds the opinion that medical error is the third leading cause of death in America, known as iatrogenic, or “doctor-caused” death. In 2021, with rising healthcare costs, rising disease rates, and rising uninsured people, it appears as if the medical system is designed to fail.

What Does Licensed Medicine Have To Fear?

Under the scope of the Medical Practice Act, a medical school graduate must first acquire a license before he or she can legally practice and use the title “MD,” “DO, “DC, “physician,” or “doctor.”

Licensed allopathic medicine allows the doctor to prescribe toxic synthetic drugs that include black box warnings and adverse health effects, many of which come with an LD50; the Lethal Dose of a drug that kills 50 percent of the tested population.

Licensed medicine limits free thinking and professional growth by keeping doctors busy, while also threatening doctors for suggesting holistic healing alternatives since the doctor is liable under threat of malpractice. Malpractice is  “an instance of negligence or incompetence on the part of the professional.”

Licensed medicine authorizes a doctor to regulate your body using standard medical protocols and bill you according to standard medical codes.

Licensed medicine means the State owns your body, as a ward of the state, and can claim your body, if they determine you to be incompetent.

Licensed medicine allows a medical doctor to “prescribe,” “treat” and “diagnose,” to puncture the skin, and to cut into the body.

If the license works so well, what do licensed doctors fear from unlicensed healers?

Holistic Medicine Is Not Licensed Medicine

Holistic practitioners do not attend medical school. They do not practice licensed medicine. They do not prescribe, treat, or diagnose. They do not puncture the skin, and do not cut into the body. They do not suggest medical alternatives. They do not use standard medical protocols or bill using standard medical codes.

Holistic healers work with Nature’s tools such as herbs, sunshine, clean water, real food. They do not treat symptoms with FDA-approved synthetic drugs, but look for the cause and allow the body to heal itself. The holistic healer sees each individual as pure potential and unique in body, mind, and spirit. Individuality over Uniformity.

Both allopathic and holistic medicine are healing modalities on a spectrum of choice. Where allopathic medicine ends, holistic medicine begins. One does not encroach upon the other. One is an apple, the other an orange.

As has been the case since 1900, the practice of licensed medicine co-exists alongside unlicensed medicine because choice exists. One cannot legislate choice for another. As history shows, rulers do not eliminate choice through unjust laws. They only drive it underground.

In a free society, everyone has the right to give advice and the right to choose advice from allopaths, osteopaths, naturopaths, homeopaths, herbalists, and chiropractors.

Right To Be Left Alone

The right of privacy is a Constitutional right that means the right to personal autonomy, or the right to choose whether or not to engage in certain acts or have certain experiences.  The right to privacy:

includes a general right to be left alone and to be protected from governmental interference. It also includes the freedom of the individual to make fundamental choices involving the individual, his or her family, and relationships with others, except where such choices prove to be harmful to others and possibly oneself.”

With few exceptions, an absolute right to choose any treatment has not held up in court. One exception:

In Schneider v. Revici, 817 F.2d 987 (2nd Cir. 1987), the court’s opinion addressed responsibility of a patient for his own care:

[W]e see no reason why a patient should not be allowed to make an informed decision to go outside currently approved medical methods in search of an unconventional treatment. While a patient should be encouraged to exercise care for his own safety, we believe that an informed decision to avoid surgery and conventional chemotherapy is within the patient’s right “to determine what shall be done with his own body.

How to Preserve Choice?

According to a National Health Statistics survey published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, two out of five, or 40 percent of Americans choose to spend $33.9 billion annually, out-of-pocket, on products and services ranging from nutritional supplements to yoga and chiropractic care. Alternatively, Forbes magazine reported in 2019 that healthcare system waste hit $935 billion a year.

The State of Wisconsin was featured in the March 2000 Journal of Family Practice  showing demand for more alternative healing options. Four reasons emerged as the basis for this: 1) Holism (whole person approach), 2) Empowerment, 3) Access, and 4) Legitimization.^[i]

Like rights, healing and freedom are embodied. They are inherent. They require no license. Using free-will, each individual authorizes any practice over his own body, his private property, through consent or the withdrawal of consent.

People who seek to preserve choice and legitimize holistic medicine must stand up and speak out for that right. Each is responsible for her own body and her own health. When it comes to choice, the only freedom you have is the freedom you defend.

In legislating the choice to heal, do legislators practice medicine without a license?

The National Health Freedom Action is a non-profit organization working to protect your choice in order to access natural healing modalities, while also protecting the rights of practitioners of Naturopathy, Herbalism, Homeopathy, Ayurveda, etc., to practice medicine without a license. Contact them at www.nationalhealthfreedom.org/nhfa. In Wisconsin, contact the Wisconsin Health Freedom Coalition  and join me to preserve choice and access to holistic practitioners.

[i] Barlett, B., L. Marchad, J. Scheder, and D. Applebaum, Bridging the Gap Between Conventional and Alternative Medicine, Journal of Family Practice 49, no. 3 (March 4, 2000): 234-9; available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10735483 (accessed June 15, 2017).

Updated from December 2017

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath, writer, earth keeper, health freedom advocate and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally.

Rosanne Lindsay is available for consultation through Turtle Island Network.  Subscribe to her blog at natureofhealing.org.

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, ND

Massachusetts Department of Public Health Has Withdrawn the Mandate for All Students to Receive an Influenza Vaccine

by ICAN (Informed Consent Action Network)
sourced from ICAN newsletter
January 15, 2021

Freedom Cells and The Greater Reset – #SolutionsWatch

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
January 12, 2021

In this inaugural edition of #SolutionsWatch, James talks to John Bush, the host of Live Free Now with John Bush and an activist who founded the Freedom Cell Network to help like-minded solutions-oriented freedom lovers meet, organize and collaborate. Now, he is co-organizing The Greater Reset Activation conference which is due to take place later this month. We talk to him about these different projects and how people can get involved to start taking back power into their own hands.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES

Introducing #SolutionsWatch

Live Free Now with John Bush

FreedomCells.org

The Freedom Cell Solution with Derrick Broze

The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress – FLNWO #33

FreedomCells.org – Corbett Report Members Group

Episode 387 – Your Guide to The Great Reset

The Greater Reset

Interview 1609 – James Corbett on Resisting the Great Reset

Dr. David Martin at January 6 Rally: “Nature Has Never Conspired Against Us. Criminals Do.”

by New Earth Project w/ Dr. David Martin
January 10, 2021



Original video is available at New Earth Project BitChute channel.

[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.] 

Connect with Dr. David Martin at https://www.davidmartin.world/
Dr. David Martin in collaboration with New Earth Project: hhttps://lineinthesand.us/

Unofficial Transcript:

…But we’re not going to do that today. We’re going to do something very simple.

I’ve got three messages for you.

The first message is very simple:

Nature has never and will never conspire against humanity. Nature loves humanity and nature loves humans.

The only things that conspire against humanity are humans who have sold their souls.

Our job today is very simple. And for those of you who don’t get the memo, the great news is there’s a print copy of the memo.

But, for the record, I am actually standing in front of the senate office building and I’m actually going to read the crimes — and I mean literal crimes — against humanity perpetrated by Dr. Anthony Fauci, by Dr. Robert Redfield, and by Mr. Alex M. Azar, the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

These are crimes and these, in the first instance, are felony crimes — resulting in jail time and fines.

And, not one office of inspector general, not one attorney general, and not one US attorney for any district in this country has had the courage that I have on this stage today.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Redfield and Mr. Azar have done the following crimes against the United States and against the citizens of the world.

They have violated 18 U.S. Code, Section 2339 in funding and conspiring to take engage in acts of terror against the citizens of the United States. That is a felony.

They have engaged in a violation which is a felony of 18 U.S. Code, Section 2331, Section 802 of the Patriot Act, where they have willfully lied and manipulated and coerced the population to induce fear in that population for their self-interest. That is a felony violation.

They have, in fact, in October of 2020, lied to Congress — a felony violation of 18 U.S. Code Section 1001.

In violation of 15 U.S. Code, Section 1 through 3, they have conspired to commit criminal activities by appropriating US taxpayer dollars, to fund those taxpayer dollars into their market-selected corporate interests, including Moderna, and Pfizer, and Gilead Sciences, and a whole host of others.

In violation of 15 U.S. Code, Section 8, they have engaged in market manipulation and market allocation by price fixing the prices of vaccines and therapeutic interventions for COVID-19.

In violation of 15 U.S. Code Section 19, they have actually violated a federal felony crime of interlocking directorates — controlling both the means, the motive, and the message around what is, in fact, the COVID-19 campaign.

Those are criminal violations. Those are things for which they should be arrested, cuffed and taken into custody right now.

And, if anyone within the hearing of my voice here, or anywhere else, has courage and has a freakin’ drop of patriot blood in them, they have an obligation under the oath that they take to protect and defend this Constitution, to bring these criminals to justice. And on their way, they can actually charge them for the civil complaints as well.

Violation of 35 U.S. Code, Section 206, which is the disclosure of government interests. In fact, Dr. Anthony Fauci on October of 2020 failed to disclose 40 patents generating over 4.5 billion dollars a year that he is actually directly benefitting from in NIAID and NIH’s response to the office of the general accountability office investigation into NIH.

They have violated Section 35, Section 101 of the patent laws of the United States by patenting nature, which is actually a violation of the fundamental rights of patent laws in the United States. And finally, in violation of 21 Code of Federal Regulations.

And, by the way, this goes to everybody standing here, and everybody around the country, they have forced us to participate in a clinical trial in violation of 21 CFR and in violation of the Nuremberg code.

They have actually forced us to participate in a clinical trial and violated the federal trade commission laws that say that you actually cannot promote the treatment or prevention of disease by an untested medical technology.

As recently as April of 2020, the actual journal of medical association said there was no evidence, no scientific evidence, that masks did anything to prevent or treat or ameliorate any form of disease.

But against the law — and it’s 21 CFR, Section 50.24 and following, they violated the law and they violated the federal trade commission act that says you’re not allowed to do that.

That is the same act that they have used to shut down natural medicine solutions for the last 115 years.

And it’s time we throw their own law back in their face. This is about actually holding people accountable to their own thing.

Now, that’s part two.

Here’s part three:

You’ve been lied to.  And you’ve been lied to time and time and time again.

But I’m going to bring you some evidence. And this is evidence that you never saw before.

This little book here is actually a book I published in May of 2005.  And, in it, I have the evidence that the programs that Anthony Fauci has funded and supported are, not only, not in the interest of health, but worse than that, they are part of bioweapons programs.

And what we are experiencing right now is not an accident of nature. It is the willful virulent enhancement of a pathogen that has been unleashed for the purpose of destroying this country.

This is an act of war. This is not just a treasonous act, this is an act of war.

And, in this book, on page 76, I actually have the evidence that the United States Department of Defense actually patented the weaponization of biologic agents at the exact same BSL facilities. They are the same facilities where the coronavirus allegedly was amplified.

This particular document details — are you ready for this — the blast-resistance, so that a pathogen could be placed in a rocket-propelled grenade. Does that sound like an injection? Does that sound like public health? Does that sound like the way you would distribute a health-related project? With rocket-propelled grenades? And blast-resistant pathogens? That’s in 2005, ladies and gentlemen.

That was published and given to the FBI, to law enforcement, to intelligence agencies. And, for the entirety of the last 15 years, no one has done a single thing to disrupt this.

So when people say, ‘Dave, how did you suddenly know so much about coronavirus? How did you suddenly know? Like, how is it, December came along, January came along, and suddenly you knew everything there was to know about coronavirus? “

Well, ladies and gentlemen, I have been following the money. One hundred and ninety-one billion dollars of your taxpayer money, appropriated in the building right behind us. One hundred and ninety-one billion dollars — and I have followed every dollar into the hands of over 6,500 organizations, over half of them who are foreign agents.

This is not some sort of interesting public health crisis created by nature. This is a bioweapons terror attack on the United States and we have to call it what it is.

I am done. I am absolutely done with people who have no courage. Every AG, every Department of Justice official, the Anti-Trust Division — which has 180 million dollars to investigate whether facebook and google are criminal organizations. You don’t need 180 million dollars that facebook and google are criminal organizations. The European Union has spent millions of dollars establishing that fact already.

We don’t have to spend 180 million dollars for that. We need to spend five dollars to get one person, one law enforcement agent, somewhere on this planet , to actually have the courage to stand up and say ‘acts of terror in this country will not be tolerated’. Period.

This is our time to reclaim the fact that we the people are, in fact, products of, participants in, and stewards of the nature that surrounds us. And we the people have a legal and moral and ethical obligation to actually use one of those rare talents that most of us lost a long time ago — and that is the courage to use our voice.

Each and every one of you has that within you. And you need to use this moment, on this chilly January 6th 2021 to light the fire of patriotism inside of you, so that you will not allow this to happen again.

Remember, nature has never conspired against us. Criminals do. And it’s time that we hold the criminals accountable.

Thank you very much. God bless you.

See related:

Focus on Fauci’s Crimes Against Humanity: Sacha Stone, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., David Martin, Rocco Gallati, Judy Mikovits 

RFK, Jr. w/ Dr. David Martin: Fauci’s “Sick, Demented” Criminal Ponzi Scheme, Dangerous Vaccines & Harmful Technology

TRUTH’ With RFK, Jr. and David Martin: Fauci’s Checkered Past, Moderna’s Warp Speed Vaccine

Joseph P. Farrell: On the July 6 Events, the History of the US Constitution & Where We Go From Here

News and Views From the Nefarium Jan 7 2021

by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star
January 7, 2021



[Original video is available at Giza Death Star Community YouTube channel. As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]

Truth Comes to Light Editor’s references and excerpts:

Excerpts:

“…But 2021 is certainly off to a rocky start. And  I really don’t have any prepared remarks because, first of all, it’s very difficult for me to express what I’m thinking and feeling right now in the wake of the absolute disaster of the American federal elections of last year, and what we saw yesterday — the spectacle that we saw yesterday — of the mob storming the capitol.

Now, you may think that, when I refer to ‘the mob’ storming the capitol that I’m referring to those people that pushed their way into the capitol building and basically shut down a session of Congress. I’m not referring to them because, primarily, what it appears to my eyes to have been, was a few agents provocateur  infiltrating a rally and driving it into that sort of activity. The mob that I’m referring to is the mob called Congress and what we saw in terms of police behavior breaking up protestors, who as far as I could tell…were protesting rather peacefully.”

___

“We have now witnessed, in my opinion, an election that is not only fraudulent, but stolen. We have a man who is essentially a grifter, and as far as I’m concerned, an agent of influence for communist China. We have republicans and democrats who are not even willing to look at, nor address the concerns, of the millions of voters that they just disenfranchised.”

___

“Now, they’re going to try to portray this as a return to normal. And in a certain sense, it is. But, at best, at best, if this is a return to business as usual, grift as usual, approach of the swamp — and that’s the best case scenario. The worst case scenario is we’ve just had a coup d’etat and what we now have in charge of this country is a shill for communist China.”

___

“America likes to view itself as the “exceptional” nation, as if are exempt — by dint of our constitution and political superiority and administrative genius — to the ways of history that befall all corrupt governments. Particularly those that are founded in ideologies that are, quite frankly, against the laws of the cosmos or the laws of God or whatever you prefer to say.

The idea that we are an exception to that rule has inculcated in this country and in this culture, if you want to call it that, a kind of hubris that is so divorced from reality that I think there will be geopolitical consequences to this election, right now, that we can scarcely imagine. Because what we’ve revealed ourselves to be, to the world, is a banana republic, operating under the color of law.”

___

Following his reading from Conceived in Liberty, Volume 5: The New Republic, by Murray N. Rothbard, who wrote about the constitutional convention and our current system of government:

“In other words, what he’s saying is it was an oligarchy cloaking itself as a republic under color of law, that was designed to create an empire and ultimately, ultimately, with so many short circuits in it that any so-called populist expression of national will could be short circuited. So, in other words, what we saw yesterday is built-in. It’s endemic to the system. It’s endemic to the system. And it’s time to wake up and realize that maybe those Anti-federalists had a point and that the Hamiltonians had fastened an absolute monster onto this country.”

___

As he is about to read excerpts from Why America Failed: The Roots of Imperial Decline by Morris Berman:

“Berman makes the point, in this book, that American culture is essentially a hustling culture. It’s a grift. It’s all in the pursuit of economic power. And we certainly saw what that culture operates like yesterday. “

___

“So, in other words, the other thing I’m suggesting to you is that the adolescent behavior, the constant pursuit of progress, is also, so to speak, inbuilt into this current constitution. This is why you saw what you saw yesterday with the adolescent mob of Congress doing what it did and overriding the actual will of most of the electorate in a stolen election. “

___

“I do know that any way forward must take an honest, thorough, moral search of the foundations of this culture and, more importantly, of this country and of it’s polity. Because no progress can be made without that. So, we can wrap ourselves in the flag like many of those protestors that we saw on tv yesterday. And we can talk about constitution. But we’d better realize that maybe some of that document might be the problem.”

 Final Chapter of Conceived in Liberty, Volume 5: The New Republic by Murray N. Rothbard
(Segments read by Joseph are highlighted.)

Conceived in Liberty

38. Was the U.S. Constitution Radical?

It was a bloodless coup d’état against an unresisting Confederation Congress. The original structure of the new Constitution was now complete. The Federalists, by use of propaganda, chicanery, fraud, malapportionment of delegates, blackmail threats of secession, and even coercive laws, had managed to sustain enough delegates to defy the wishes of the majority of the American people and create a new Constitution. The drive was managed by a corps of brilliant members and representatives of the financial and landed oligarchy. These wealthy merchants and large landowners were joined by the urban artisans of the large cities in their drive to create a strong overriding central government—a supreme government with its own absolute power to tax, regulate commerce, and raise armies. These powers were sought eagerly as a method of handing out special privileges to commercial groups: navigation acts to subsidize shipping, tariffs to protect inefficient artisans stampeded by national depression from foreign manufactured goods, and a strong army and navy to pursue an aggressive foreign policy designed to force the opening of West Indies ports, the Mississippi River, and the Northwest. And, to pay for all of these bounties, a central taxing power would be harnessed that could also assume and pay the public debt held by wealthy speculators. But government, by its nature, cannot supply bounties and privileges without taking them from others, and these others were to be largely the hapless bulk of the nation’s citizens, the inland subsistence farmers. In western Massachusetts, taxes to pay a heavy public debt owned by wealthy men in the East had produced Shays’ Rebellion. Now, a new super government was emerging and carrying out on a national scale the mercantilist principle of taxation, regulation, and special privilege for the benefit of favored groups (“the few”) at the expense of the bulk of producers and consumers in the country (“the many”). And while to acquire sufficient support they had to purchase allies among the mass of the people (e.g., urban artisans), the major concentration of benefits and privileges would undoubtedly accrue to America’s aristocracy.

As part of the agreed-to division of the coming spoils, the northern nationalists, though permanently abhorring slavery in a region where it was not viable and was being abolished, rather swiftly moved to protect and even encourage slavery in other regions in order to obtain support of the southern nationalists and thus the Constitution. To these nationalist leaders, abandoning the slave to his fate was a small price to pay for a strong central government to further markets for northern merchants and shippers.

Dispute has long raged among historians as to whether the Constitution was the completion, the fulfillment, of the spirit of the American Revolution, or whether it was a counterrevolution against that spirit. But surely it is clear that the Constitution was profoundly counterrevolutionary. The American Revolution has, in recent years, been depicted by “revisionist” historians as solely a struggle for independence against Great Britain on behalf of rather abstract principles of constitutional law. But legal principles are seldom passionately held and fought for unless instinctively bound up with conflicts in politico-economic reality. The Americans were not anti-British; on the contrary, the need to declare independence was acknowledged very late and almost reluctantly. The Americans were struggling not primarily for independence but for political-economic liberty against the mercantilism of the British Empire. The struggle was waged against taxes, prohibitions, and regulations—a whole failure of repression that the Americans, upheld by an ideology of liberty, had fought and torn asunder. It was only when independence was clearly necessary to achieve their goals did the American Revolution take final form. In other words, the American Revolution was in essence not so much against Britain as against British Big Government—and specifically against an all-powerful central government and a supreme executive.

In short, the American Revolution was liberal, democratic, and quasi-anarchistic; for decentralization, free markets, and individual liberty; for natural rights of life, liberty, and property; against monarchy, mercantilism, and especially against strong central government. From the very beginning of that Revolution and even before, wealthy financial oligarchs in New York and Philadelphia, beginning with Benjamin Franklin, had toyed with the idea of a strong central government in America that would grant them mercantilist powers over the people. In the last phase of the war, Robert Morris, the “grandfather of the Constitution,” came within an inch of imposing a nationalist-mercantilist regime upon a revolutionary nation fighting for its existence.

The Articles of Confederation were themselves a concession to nationalism as against the original Continental Congress, but basically they had kept the Congress chained to a leash, and so nationalist power was checked. But with the postwar breakup of the liberal Adams-Lee Junto, the aftermath of wartime destruction, and the opportunity provided by the depression of the mid-1780s, the nationalists fished in troubled waters and succeeded in imposing a counterrevolution.

It has also been charged by recent historians that there was really no continuity between the contending forces during the Revolution (radicals versus conservatives) and the opposing camps in the struggle over the Constitution. But, in the first place, the continuity of ideas is striking: from the very beginning, it was the dream of the Right, once remaining with the British government became impossible, to remold America into a form as close as possible to the powerful government of Great Britain. In leadership personnel, the sticking point is that the Right in 1776, the ones most reluctant to break with England (the Morrises, the Dickinsonses, the Jays, the Schulyers—in short, the Philadelphia and New York oligarchy along with the Pendletons and Washingtons in Virginia) were the leaders of the reaction throughout the period and the leaders in the drive for a Constitution. The leaders of the Right in 1776 were also the leaders of the Right in 1789.

The difference between the two periods—and the significant break in continuity—was the shift of large numbers of radical leaders during the war into the conservative ranks a decade later. Indeed, one of the prior reasons for the defeat of the Antifederalists, though they commanded a majority of the public, was the decimation that had taken place in radical and liberal leadership during the 1780s. A whole galaxy of ex-radicals, ex-decentralists, and ex-libertarians, found in their old age that they could comfortably live in the new Establishment. The list of such defections is impressive, including John Adams, Sam Adams, John Hancock, Benjamin Rush, Thomas Paine, Alexander McDougall, Isaac Sears, and Christopher Gadsden. Perhaps an explanation of many of the defectors (Sam Adams, Sears, McDougall, Gadsden, and Paine) was the rightward shift of the big-city artisans who provided these men with their political power base.

Conversely, the Left in 1788 was very apt to have been on the Left in the early years of the Revolution. Among those faithful to the liberal cause: Luther Martin, James Warren, Elbridge Gerry, George Clinton, Abraham Yates, generally the Clintonians in New York, the Constitutionalist Party in Pennsylvania fighting against the counterinsurgency of the conservative Republican Party (except for defections like Paine), Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Person of the old radical Regulator movement in North Carolina. An important test of this hypothesis would be to find individuals or groups who were on the Right in 1776 but had shifted sharply leftward by 1788. Prominent men in that category are undoubtedly rare indeed.

If, then, the Constitution was a counterrevolution, what kind of a reactionary movement was it? Contrary to the famous “Beard Thesis,” it was not at all a struggle between a sound-money “creditor class” against a small-farmer “debtor class” in favor of inflation and paper money. These were categories that Beard impermissibly smuggled from his experience of the monetary struggles of the late nineteenth century. It is impermissible to speak of debtor and creditor “classes,” for these are categories that shift from month-to-month and even day-to-day. Consequently, while it is true that paper money is likely to be favored by debtors, the aggressive debtors were far more likely to be wealthy merchants and great planters than rural farmers far removed from the seats of financial and political power. Wealthy mercantilists have higher credit ratings, can do more with borrowed money, and have much stronger political connections that allow them to secure favorable legislation. In truth, most groups, especially most of the wealthy, favored paper money; the difference came largely in the ways in which that money could be emitted and in whether legal-tender laws would accompany them. The oppressive form of debt, against which, for example, the Shaysites rebelled, was not private debt but public debt, i.e., against the fastening of a Revolutionary War debt owned by the wealthier classes upon the masses and small farmers who would be taxed to pay for it.

The Constitutional counterrevolution, then, was not a struggle of sound-money men against inflationists or creditors against debtors. Jackson Turner Main’s brilliant demonstration that it was a conflict of commercial versus non-commercial factions can be subsumed under a broader truth. It was, as Patrick Henry grasped, a struggle of power and privilege, and to a lesser extent, of aristocracy against democracy. Those familiar categories can also be subsumed in the Liberty versus Power dichotomy, for while aristocracy was the most determined to acquire special privileges, they could not have won without the lures of apparent privileges offered to the urban artisans.

Contrary to Forrest McDonald, the Antifederalists have received a poor historical press, and even the most supposedly extreme Antifederalist historian dedicated his book on the formation of the Constitution to James Madison. He concluded his book as follows:

Today, Americans continue to debate, as they have ever since the eighteenth century, about the division of power between the states and the central government, and about the role the latter should play in the economy and social life of the nation. Such debate had validity in an earlier and simpler age, but it is now little more than a romantic exercise. Although the Constitution itself remains what it was, the realities of political life in the twentieth century have created an all-powerful national government in fact.

And Staughton Lynd, though utilizing the commercial/non-commercial view of the struggle, and sympathetic to the individualist-libertarianism of the Antifederalists, concludes that Federalism was right by turning to “‘positive, planful government’” to “‘promote, guide, and discipline’ all economic enterprise towards national goals.” All this was justified, and even an aggressive internationalist policy was needed “to protect American economic independence” and secure “national economic development.”

Professor Cecilia Keyna has derided the Antifederalists as “men of little faith,” i.e., little faith in political power.6 Some recent historians have termed the Federalists “radicals” and liberal reformers, and the Antifederalists “conservatives” because the Federalists favored a sharp change in the status quo, while the Antifederalists did not. But to base the concept of radicals versus conservatives solely on the formal fact of change, regardless of context, is to (a) blur the critical difference between revolution and counterrevolution and (b) to arrive at such conceptual absurdities as designating Francisco Franco’s rebellion in the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s as “radical,” while the Spanish Loyalists were “conservative.” But the point is that this “little faith” was precisely in the tradition of the American Revolution Bernard Bailyn writes of the revolutionary thinkers:

Most commonly the discussion of power centered on its essential characteristic of aggressiveness: its endlessly propulsive tendency to expand itself beyond legitimate boundaries. … The image most commonly used was that of the act of trespassing. Power, it was said over and over again, has “an encroaching nature”; … power is “grasping” and “tenacious” in its nature; “what it seizes it will retain.” Sometimes power “is like the ocean, not easily admitting limits to be fixed in it.” Sometimes it is “like a cancer, it eats faster and faster every hour.” … It is everywhere in public life, and everywhere it is threatening, pushing, and grasping; and too often in the end it destroys its benign—necessarily benign—victim.

What gave transcendent importance to the aggressiveness of power was the fact that its natural prey, its necessary victim, was liberty, or law, or right. The public world these writers saw was divided into distinct, contrasting, and innately antagonistic spheres: the sphere of power and the sphere of liberty or right. The one was brutal, ceaselessly active, and heedless; the other was delicate, passive, and sensitive. The one must be resisted, the other defended, and the two must never be confused.

The Federalists, on the other hand, in their faith in quasi-monarchical power, especially with themselves in the driver’s seat, are strongly reminiscent of the Tories—another indication of continuity in the ideological struggle and of the Federalist movement as a reaction against the spirit of the American Revolution. Forrest McDonald is the latest historian to treat the adoption of the Constitution as a counterrevolution in restoring Toryism. However, in contrast to earlier historians of a similar view, McDonald extravagantly eulogizes this process. Apparently for McDonald, the American Revolution was the first step down the inevitable road to Bolshevism, a fate from which America was saved only by the “miracle … of all ages to come” of the Federalists, “giants” “who spoke in the name of the nation.” Happily for McDonald, the giants triumphed instead of those “who, in 1787 and 1788, spoke in the name of the people and of popular ‘rights.’”

Overall, it should be evident that the Constitution was a counterrevolutionary reaction to the libertarianism and decentralization embodied in the American Revolution. The Antifederalists, supporting states’ rights and critical of a strong national government, were decisively beaten by the Federalists, who wanted such a polity under the guise of democracy in order to enhance their own interests and institute a British-style mercantilism over the country. Most historians have taken the side of the Federalists because they support a strong national government that has the power to tax and regulate, call forth armies and invade other countries, and cripple the power of the states. The enactment of the Constitution in 1788 drastically changed the course of American history from its natural decentralized and libertarian direction to an omnipresent leviathan that fulfilled all of the Antifederalists’ fears.

With the ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the new government was now a fact and the Antifederalists would never again agitate for another constitutional convention to weaken American national power and return to a more decentralized and restrained polity. From now on American liberals, relying on the Bill of Rights and the Tenth Amendment, would go forth and do battle for Liberty and against Power within the framework of the American Constitution as states’-righters and Constitutionalists. Their battle would be a long and gallant one, but ultimately doomed to fail, for by accepting the Constitution, the liberals would only play with dice loaded implacably against them. The Constitution, with its inherently broad powers and elastic clauses, would increasingly support an ever larger and more powerful central government. In the long run, the liberals, though they could and did run a gallant race, were doomed to lose—and lose indeed they did. In a sense, the supposedly unrealistic radicals who would totally reject the Constitution and try to rend it asunder (in different ways and from very different perspectives, e.g., the Whiskey Rebels, William Lloyd Garrison, John Brown, and the secessionists of the South) would be far more perceptive about the realities and the potentials of the American constitutional system than those liberals working within it.

 References:

Conceived in Liberty, Volume 5: The New Republic by Murray N. Rothbard is available as a free PDF download at Mises Institute — or hardcover or ebook form: Conceived in Liberty, Volume 5: The New Republic

Conceived in Liberty, Volumes 1-4 by Murray N. Rothbard is available as a free PDF download at Mises Institute — or hardcover or ebook form:  Conceived in Liberty, Volumes 1-4 by Murray N. Rothbard

Why America Failed: The Roots of Imperial Decline by Morris Berman in paperback or hardcover.

Also referenced – the essay “I’ll Take My Stand” by John Crowe Ransom: I’ll Take My Stand: The South and the Agrarian Tradition (including the essay by poet John Crowe Ransom) by Susan V. Donaldson

Crowd Shames Police as 92-Year-Old Man Is Arrested at Assange Bail Hearing

by Subject Access
January 6, 2021

“Look at yourselves This is shameful. Disgraceful.”

“He’s 92 years old! What’s wrong with you?”

“Leave him alone.”

“You’ll kill him.”

“Shame on you! Let him go now!”

“It doesn’t take 18 police officers to arrest one 92-year-old man!”

“Leave him alone.”

“Where is the respect?”

“How does it feel? You are arresting a 92-year-old man?” “

“How does it feel as a human being?”



92-year-old man, Eric, arrested at Assange bail hearing at Westminster Magistrates Court.

The Quarantine Act on the World Stage

by Rosanne Lindsay, Nature of Healing
January 3, 2021

Event 201 programmed world governments to fall in line and respond with one voice. However, in order for the plan to succeed, the people would have to comply in large numbers. Now that deadlines of declared National Emergencies have long since expired, new laws are being set up that will, again, require the compliance of the people.

The meaning of OVID?  “a sheep”

The Quarantine Act In Canada

Under the Crown, the newly amended law in Canada, The Quarantine Act (pages 1 & 2), states that anyone coming into Canada will have to be examined /tested by quarantine officers and also must accept any proposed treatment from them (ie vaccines). If anyone refuses to be screened they can be arrested & detained without warrant. This lines up with the leaked memo from Canadian political officials a few months back.

Quarantine facilities

(7) The Minister may by order designate any place in Canada as a quarantine facility and amend, cancel or reinstate the designation.

Screening technology

14 (1) Any qualified person authorized by the Minister may, to determine whether a traveller has a communicable disease or symptoms of one, use any screening technology authorized by the Minister that does not involve the entry into the traveller’s body of any instrument or other foreign body.

Refusal to be screened

(2) If a traveller refuses to be screened with the screening technology and the person using it is not a screening officer or quarantine officer, the person shall immediately inform a screening officer or quarantine officer of the refusal.

New York Dictate

New York is proposing similar laws. Democrat N. Nick Perry introduced Assembly Bill A416, which calls for the “removal and/or detention” of individuals who are identified as a “case, contact or carrier” of a contagious disease.

THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE COMMISSIONER OR THE HEADS OF
LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS, MAY ORDER THE REMOVAL AND/OR DETENTION OF SUCH A PERSON OR OF A GROUP OF SUCH PERSONS BY ISSUING A SINGLE ORDER, IDENTIFYING SUCH PERSONS EITHER BY NAME OR BY A REASONABLY SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF THE INDIVIDUALS OR GROUP BEING DETAINED. SUCH PERSON OR GROUP OF PERSONS SHALL BE DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY OR OTHER APPROPRIATE FACILITY OR PREMISES DESIGNATED BY THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE AND COMPLYING WITH SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION.

According to a January 2, 2021 article, the law allows the governor or a health official to unilaterally approve such detentions for any health emergency, not only for Coronavirus. However, a court order is required within 60 days of confinement, and judicial review is also required if the individual is still in detention after 90 days. Citizens that are placed in detention will only be released once “health authorities” determine that they are no longer contagious.

The Great Reset

These “Acts” are in line with The Great Reset, a campaign to homogenize all laws, all nations, all minds.  Under the Great Reset, one group of people declare themselves authority over all others, all movement and all medical choices, property rights, and other rights.

You will be told that “For The Good of All” you must obey new restrictions. For the good of all, you must conform. Uniformity over unity. Conformity over freedom. Sustainability “for urgent times” under the United Nations as the New Normal.

You will be strongly encouraged to reset the language, reset creativity, and reset your thoughts, and your solutions, under new Global Norms dictated by the United Nations. These new ‘norms’ will claim to offer a “window of opportunity” to change “the future state of global relations, the direction of national economies, the priorities of societies, the nature of business models and the management of a global commons.”

 

All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts, – Shakespeare, As You Like It,

If all the world is a stage, as disclosed under the pseudonym of William Shakespeare, then all Acts are scripts for actors.

What secret group is behind the 2020 Pandemic script?  Could it be the authors of The Secret Covenant?

The Secret Covenant

A secret group that remains ‘Anonymous’ has made their intentions known on how the Acts on the world stage will play out in the Secret Covenant. Some points are listed as follows:

We will always hide our objectives but carry our our plan.

We will use soft metals, aging accelerators and sedatives in food and water, also in the air.

They will be blanketed by poisons everywhere they turn.

Their minds will belong to us and they will do as we say. If they refuse we shall find ways to implement mind-altering technology into their lives.

When they give birth, we will inject poisons into the blood of their children and convince them it is for their help.

We will render them docile and weak before us by our power.

We will establish a money system that will imprison them forever; keeping them and their children in debt.

When they shall ban together, we shall accuse them of crimes and present a different story to the world, for we shall own all the media.

When they shall rise up against us, we will crush them like insects, for they are less than that.

So grand the illusion of freedom will be, that they will never know they are our slaves.

We will use our media to control the flow of information and their sentiment in our favor.

When our goal is accomplished, a new era of dominion will begin.

But if they ever find out they are our equal, we shall perish then. THIS THEY MUST NEVER KNOW

If they ever find out that together they can vanquish us, they will take action.

– Author Unknown

Individual Power in a Staged Reality

Could a global frequency grid, controlled by Artificial Intelligence (A.I.), create an illusion of reality?

For centuries humans have been made to fight for freedom on roads paved with blood under the direction of an unseen group, synonymous with A.I.. When humans follow dictates and Acts, and accept untested A.I. as truth, they lose touch with their own intuition, energy, thoughts, and humanity.

When you allow your body to be herded and monitored like sheep, when you allow yourself to be branded with masks, when you allow your nose to be tested with swabs, when you allow your mind to be captured by dictates, when you allow your body to be injected with poisons, you lock your own gates from within. You consent to be controlled as a sheep. Livestock are vaccinated nasally.

What if refusing the Act and its dictates preserves your authentic frequency? What is preserving your frequency is one easy solution to separate yourself from the rest of the herd mentality?  What if creating an inner state of calm, peace, joy, and gratitude throws a wrench in the fear-based control system and unleashes freedom for humanity on a larger scale than a single stage? What if you create a Notice of Non-consent when it comes to mandates of any kind? You operate in the realm of the private (not public) where your inherent rights are protected.

Freeing yourself from a staged reality must begin with taking the bull by the horns and seeing yourself as energy first, unique, with your own distinct energy signature, your own energy fingerprints, your own senses and sensibilities, and your own ability to choose a road paved by choice, not by blood or poison. Do you choose your own script on your own stage?

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath, writer, earth keeper, health freedom advocate and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally.

Rosanne Lindsay is available for consultation through Turtle Island Network.  Subscribe to her blog at natureofhealing.org.

cover image credit Peggy_Marco / pixabay

Another Solution to Lockdowns: The Constitutional Lawyers

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
December 30, 2020

There are a few principles involved in any effort to change the direction of fascist control.

One person alone doing or saying something may have an effect.

Two hundred people—each on his own—doing or saying the same basic thing—will have a significant effect.

Two hundred people—some alone and some together—will have a larger effect.

A person who sees himself as isolated and alone will probably not believe his actions have any effect. So he stays silent. He could have an IQ of 90 or 190; he stays silent.

The primary mistake lockdown opponents are making comes down to: failure to see the bigger picture.

And the big picture is composed of many different individuals and groups taking action of various kinds—which add up to a tsunami of our own, against the wall-to-wall messaging of the lockdown liars and fascists.

I’ve read a great deal of what constitutional lawyers have to say about the lockdowns. I’m not talking about heroic lawyers who are actively filing lawsuits against governments. I mean lawyers who are largely spelling out problems in bringing these cases to court.

Problems having to do with judges, with the intricacies of the law, with past court decisions, with technical issues.

If two hundred of those lawyers instead turned their attention to BASIC constitutional foundations, and published papers and essays and spoke out on THAT subject, we would see a tide beginning to turn in our favor.

Constitutional lawyers are, first and foremost, supposed to understand the underlying meaning and purpose of the Constitution, which takes precedent over minutiae.

If they can’t see the forest for the trees, they should pack up their offices and seek other work.

So let me repeat what I’ve been saying for months. There is a constitutional line that can’t be crossed for ANY reason. A government can’t take away the freedom of citizens because some disaster has occurred.

This goes beyond the question of whether the disaster is real or imagined. It doesn’t matter. Freedom to live, to live out in the open, to work, to do business, to survive, is untouchable.

There are a million ways to spell this out. I challenge constitutional lawyers to DO IT. Not just a few lawyers. MANY. Go to work. Your area of focus is the jackpot of all legal focuses: the Constitution itself, why it is there, what it means, what it is FOR.

What are you waiting for? The sky to collapse?

Why aren’t 200 or 5000 of you turning into tigers?

Are you trying to prove to doomsayers that they’re right and we’re all irretrievably going down the drain?

Is that your final response to the constitutional crisis we’re facing?

Is the measure of your worth the amount of dilly-dallying you can perform on the minutiae surrounding the eternal struggle for FREEDOM?

Realize that if a few hundred of you publish and speak out, you can have an enormous effect.

I understand that some of you know very little about gaining publicity for your views. I do know something about gaining publicity for the truth. If a group of 20 of you comes to me, I will give you what I can to help you achieve visibility.

Turn your attention to writing and speaking on behalf of the people, instead of the media and your colleagues. Come to grips with what first inspired you to study the founding documents of the Republic—before the practicalities of your profession turned you into…

Whatever you are now.

If you think I’m being unduly harsh on you, take a look at the economic and political landscape. Look at the devastation. Ask yourself under what banner this tyrannical operation marches. And what it is doing to people.

Everyone speaks of “culture” these days. Well, you constitutional lawyers can influence the culture directly. You can make a heroic stand. You can make your words have fire, just as the words of Paine and John Adams and Samuel Adams ignited minds, when it counted.

Be heroes, not clerks.

ADDITIONAL READING:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/lawsuit/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/09/15/grand-ohio-covid-legal-case-against-kings-on-their-thrones/

[3] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/29/covid-open-letter-to-business-owners/

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/28/covid-where-are-the-courageous-religious-leaders/

To Know the Enemy That Has Caused This Tyrannical Carnage, Just Look at the Reflection in the Mirror

by Gary D. Barnett
December 29, 2020

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”
~ Soren Kierkegaard

If you wish for freedom, you will never know it—but if you take and protect your freedom, it will be yours. Instead of succumbing to fear, and looking to government for answers, take charge of your own lives, and make all those that would assault you, your mind, your body, or your liberty, know fear. Fear is just a catalyst used by the ruling class in order to frighten and divide the people so as to gain power and control over them. This fabricated fear leads to dependence, which leads to indifference; indifference leads to silence, silence leads to oppression, and oppression leads to slavery. It is better for the people to instill great fear in the minds of any that would choose to rule over them, instead of accepting tyranny from the scourge that is the political class. All of this boils down to the fact that the citizens themselves are entirely to blame for their current lot in life.

Most of the people in this country are fond of claiming that this is a republic, and that the people rule over the government through their alleged ‘representatives,’ not the other way around. The irony is that this belief is ridiculous, while also being partially true, because the people are their own worst enemy. They have voluntarily allowed others to rule over them, and they believe that by voting for their own masters that they have some control over the process, and the policies created therein. This thinking of course is lunacy, but it is the prevalent attitude of the masses. This asinine notion has been instilled in them since birth, and the bulk of society still believes that they are ‘free.’ The people could be fully in charge in that they have the power to accept or deny rule, but in the case of the majority of people in the United States, they have accepted state domination instead of self-rule. In order to reverse this situation, all that is necessary is for the public at large to remove all consent from any claiming authority.

The solution seems simple enough, but the problem lies in how to achieve it given the weakness, cowardice, and gullibility of the herd. In order to regain the upper hand in any quest for freedom, all that is necessary is for a fairly large number of people to disobey any government order, and to deny any support whatsoever for the political class. Disobedience, non-compliance, and self-defense against any aggression by the oligarchic few attempting to gain power and control over you, will end immediately any attempt by the state to acquire that control. So why is this population so seemingly consumed with an attitude of acquiescence? This society continues to wallow in self-pity and such irrational timidity as to allow for its own servitude at the hands of tyrants when simple rebellion would save the day.

The problem once again lies directly with the people themselves. This is one case where redundancy needs to be expressed. To find the problem and the culprits in this debacle we face today, only requires one look into a mirror by most every American. What should be obvious even to the most obtuse individual is that very few in this country are willing to risk anything that could help them regain and protect their own freedom. In fact, they want only to depend on others to either fix the problems for them, or tell them what to do. But even if they are told what is necessary, they have not the backbone to see it through, and instead come up with every manner of questions, and what ifs; and are completely terrified of not fitting in with the crowd. This attitude is one of pathetic apathy by the bulk of society concerning its own defense of life, love, family, and liberty.

It is horribly upsetting to listen to the comments received from the crowd about the fate of individuals at the hands of the state. At once, they ask for solutions and complain that no one has ‘given’ them any solutions, but this is not true. They have been told the truth, but they “can’t handle the truth!” In other words, they what to be told what to do, but only if all do it at the same time. They need to hide. When the answer is to practice dissent and disobedience, they immediately claim that they are just one, and excuse the solution based on fear of not being a part of the herd. This is no doubt due to cowardice, but it is also due to the fact that they do not think as individuals, and therefore will not act as individuals. Almost all want total anonymity, and desire to be invisible from any view of scrutiny. What is not understood, is that acting as individuals en masse will bring great power to any effort to protect freedom, but almost none are willing to act alone, even with the knowledge that when many act alone, they become one. None can ‘give’ them a solution to this madness because the American population is not willing to take any individual risk for the sake of their own protection, or that of their family, their neighbors, or even their own liberty. Until this attitude changes, we are all doomed to a tyrannical existence based on the collective stupidity and disinterest of the majority.

What is going on today is a psychological experiment by ‘governing’ forces meant to accomplish a global takeover referred to often as “The Great Reset.” This experiment in order to be successful requires that the masses acquiesce to those in power, follow orders, and obey all rules ‘mandated’ by the state. Once this mindset is in place, as is the case now, regulation of every aspect of life becomes evident. Thought is controlled, as is behavior and movement, and the one test of the psyche of this country’s people used to gauge total compliance has already been achieved. That test is the almost universal wearing of useless and deadly masks. Allowance has replaced all freedom, confusion has replaced clarity, and sacrifice by all is expected.

We are now in a time where the people in the name of condemning any that choose to resist and disobey, are justifying evil. Government edicts are being protected by the masses due to false fear of ‘virus’ monsters that do not exist. The American people are being used to solidify their own servitude, and are operating in concert with the ruling class to destroy their own liberty. This is only the beginning of a greater hell on earth. Once the economy is completely destroyed, once the biosecurity state is fully in place, once digital money and tracking are complete, and once this terrible and life-changing ‘covid’ vaccine is widely injected, will there be any way out?

Arguments will continue, and blame will be spread wide, but in the end as Pogo so eloquently put it, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” Collectivism and collective ‘thinking’ are the ruination of man, and can only lead to communal self-destruction.

“Independence is the recognition of the fact that yours is the responsibility of judgment and nothing can help you escape it-that no substitute can do your thinking, as no pinch-hitter can live your life-that the vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence.”

~ Ayn Rand (1988). “The Ayn Rand Lexicon: Objectivism from A to Z”, p.225, Penguin

The Best of Gary D. Barnett

cover image credit 12019 / pixabay

What If the Christ Child Had Been Born in the American Police State?

by John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute
December 21, 2020

 

“When the song of the angels is stilled, when the star in the sky is gone, when the kings and princes are home, when the shepherds are back with their flocks, the work of Christmas begins: to find the lost, to heal the broken, to feed the hungry, to release the prisoner, to rebuild the nations, to bring peace among the people, to make music in the heart.” ― Howard Thurman

The Christmas story of a baby born in a manger is a familiar one.

The Roman Empire, a police state in its own right, had ordered that a census be conducted. Joseph and his pregnant wife Mary traveled to the little town of Bethlehem so that they could be counted. There being no room for the couple at any of the inns, they stayed in a stable (a barn), where Mary gave birth to a baby boy, Jesus. Warned that the government planned to kill the baby, Jesus’ family fled with him to Egypt until it was safe to return to their native land.

Yet what if Jesus had been born 2,000 years later?

What if, instead of being born into the Roman police state, Jesus had been born at this moment in time? What kind of reception would Jesus and his family be given? Would we recognize the Christ child’s humanity, let alone his divinity? Would we treat him any differently than he was treated by the Roman Empire? If his family were forced to flee violence in their native country and sought refuge and asylum within our borders, what sanctuary would we offer them?

A singular number of churches across the country have asked those very questions in recent years, and their conclusions were depicted with unnerving accuracy by nativity scenes in which Jesus and his family are separated, segregated and caged in individual chain-link pens, topped by barbed wire fencing.

Those nativity scenes were a pointed attempt to remind the modern world that the narrative about the birth of Jesus is one that speaks on multiple fronts to a world that has allowed the life, teachings and crucifixion of Jesus to be drowned out by partisan politics, secularism, materialism and war, all driven by a manipulative shadow government called the Deep State.

The modern-day church has largely shied away from applying Jesus’ teachings to modern problems such as war, poverty, immigration, etc., but thankfully there have been individuals throughout history who ask themselves and the world: what would Jesus do?

What would Jesus—the baby born in Bethlehem who grew into an itinerant preacher and revolutionary activist, who not only died challenging the police state of his day (namely, the Roman Empire) but spent his adult life speaking truth to power, challenging the status quo of his day, and pushing back against the abuses of the Roman Empire—do about the injustices of our  modern age?

Dietrich Bonhoeffer asked himself what Jesus would have done about the horrors perpetrated by Hitler and his assassins. The answer: Bonhoeffer was executed by Hitler for attempting to undermine the tyranny at the heart of Nazi Germany.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn asked himself what Jesus would have done about the soul-destroying gulags and labor camps of the Soviet Union. The answer: Solzhenitsyn found his voice and used it to speak out about government oppression and brutality.

Martin Luther King Jr. asked himself what Jesus would have done about America’s warmongering. The answer: declaring “my conscience leaves me no other choice,” King risked widespread condemnation when he publicly opposed the Vietnam War on moral and economic grounds.

Even now, despite the popularity of the phrase “What Would Jesus Do?” (WWJD) in Christian circles, there remains a disconnect in the modern church between the teachings of Christ and the suffering of what Jesus in Matthew 25 refers to as the “least of these.”

Yet this is not a theological gray area: Jesus was unequivocal about his views on many things, not the least of which was charity, compassion, war, tyranny and love.

After all, Jesus—the revered preacher, teacher, radical and prophet—was born into a police state not unlike the growing menace of the American police state. When he grew up, he had powerful, profound things to say, things that would change how we view people, alter government policies and change the world. “Blessed are the merciful,” “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and “Love your enemies” are just a few examples of his most profound and revolutionary teachings.

When confronted by those in authority, Jesus did not shy away from speaking truth to power. Indeed, his teachings undermined the political and religious establishment of his day. It cost him his life. He was eventually crucified as a warning to others not to challenge the powers-that-be.

Can you imagine what Jesus’ life would have been like if, instead of being born into the Roman police state, he had been born and raised in the American police state?

Consider the following if you will.

Had Jesus been born in the era of the America police state, rather than traveling to Bethlehem for a census, Jesus’ parents would have been mailed a 28-page American Community Survey, a mandatory government questionnaire documenting their habits, household inhabitants, work schedule, how many toilets are in your home, etc. The penalty for not responding to this invasive survey can go as high as $5,000.

Instead of being born in a manger, Jesus might have been born at home. Rather than wise men and shepherds bringing gifts, however, the baby’s parents might have been forced to ward off visits from state social workers intent on prosecuting them for the home birth. One couple in Washington had all three of their children removed after social services objected to the two youngest being birthed in an unassisted home delivery.

Had Jesus been born in a hospital, his blood and DNA would have been taken without his parents’ knowledge or consent and entered into a government biobank. While most states require newborn screening, a growing number are holding onto that genetic material long-term for research, analysis and purposes yet to be disclosed.

Then again, had Jesus’ parents been undocumented immigrants, they and the newborn baby might have been shuffled to a profit-driven, private prison for illegals where they first would have been separated from each other, the children detained in make-shift cages, and the parents eventually turned into cheap, forced laborers for corporations such as Starbucks, Microsoft, Walmart, and Victoria’s Secret. There’s quite a lot of money to be made from imprisoning immigrants, especially when taxpayers are footing the bill.

From the time he was old enough to attend school, Jesus would have been drilled in lessons of compliance and obedience to government authorities, while learning little about his own rights. Had he been daring enough to speak out against injustice while still in school, he might have found himself tasered or beaten by a school resource officer, or at the very least suspended under a school zero tolerance policy that punishes minor infractions as harshly as more serious offenses.

Had Jesus disappeared for a few hours let alone days as a 12-year-old, his parents would have been handcuffed, arrested and jailed for parental negligence. Parents across the country have been arrested for far less “offenses” such as allowing their children to walk to the park unaccompanied and play in their front yard alone.

Rather than disappearing from the history books from his early teenaged years to adulthood, Jesus’ movements and personal data—including his biometrics—would have been documented, tracked, monitored and filed by governmental agencies and corporations such as Google and Microsoft. Incredibly, 95 percent of school districts share their student records with outside companies that are contracted to manage data, which they then use to market products to us.

From the moment Jesus made contact with an “extremist” such as John the Baptist, he would have been flagged for surveillance because of his association with a prominent activist, peaceful or otherwise. Since 9/11, the FBI has actively carried out surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations on a broad range of activist groups, from animal rights groups to poverty relief, anti-war groups and other such “extremist” organizations.

Jesus’ anti-government views would certainly have resulted in him being labeled a domestic extremist. Law enforcement agencies are being trained to recognize signs of anti-government extremism during interactions with potential extremists who share a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

While traveling from community to community, Jesus might have been reported to government officials as “suspicious” under the Department of Homeland Security’s “See Something, Say Something” programs. Many states, including New York, are providing individuals with phone apps that allow them to take photos of suspicious activity and report them to their state Intelligence Center, where they are reviewed and forwarded to law-enforcement agencies.

Rather than being permitted to live as an itinerant preacher, Jesus might have found himself threatened with arrest for daring to live off the grid or sleeping outside. In fact, the number of cities that have resorted to criminalizing homelessness by enacting bans on camping, sleeping in vehicles, loitering and begging in public has doubled.

Viewed by the government as a dissident and a potential threat to its power, Jesus might have had government spies planted among his followers to monitor his activities, report on his movements, and entrap him into breaking the law. Such Judases today—called informants—often receive hefty paychecks from the government for their treachery.

Had Jesus used the internet to spread his radical message of peace and love, he might have found his blog posts infiltrated by government spies attempting to undermine his integrity, discredit him or plant incriminating information online about him. At the very least, he would have had his website hacked and his email monitored.

Had Jesus attempted to feed large crowds of people, he would have been threatened with arrest for violating various ordinances prohibiting the distribution of food without a permit. Florida officials arrested a 90-year-old man for feeding the homeless on a public beach.

Had Jesus spoken publicly about his 40 days in the desert and his conversations with the devil, he might have been labeled mentally ill and detained in a psych ward against his will for a mandatory involuntary psychiatric hold with no access to family or friends. One Virginia man was arrested, strip searched, handcuffed to a table, diagnosed as having “mental health issues,” and locked up for five days in a mental health facility against his will apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait.

Without a doubt, had Jesus attempted to overturn tables in a Jewish temple and rage against the materialism of religious institutions, he would have been charged with a hate crime. Currently, 45 states and the federal government have hate crime laws on the books.

Had anyone reported Jesus to the police as being potentially dangerous, he might have found himself confronted—and killed—by police officers for whom any perceived act of non-compliance (a twitch, a question, a frown) can result in them shooting first and asking questions later.

Rather than having armed guards capture Jesus in a public place, government officials would have ordered that a SWAT team carry out a raid on Jesus and his followers, complete with flash-bang grenades and military equipment. There are upwards of 80,000 such SWAT team raids carried out every year, many on unsuspecting Americans who have no defense against such government invaders, even when such raids are done in error.

Instead of being detained by Roman guards, Jesus might have been made to “disappear” into a secret government detention center where he would have been interrogated, tortured and subjected to all manner of abuses. Chicago police have “disappeared” more than 7,000 people into a secret, off-the-books interrogation warehouse at Homan Square.

Charged with treason and labeled a domestic terrorist, Jesus might have been sentenced to a life-term in a private prison where he would have been forced to provide slave labor for corporations or put to death by way of the electric chair or a lethal mixture of drugs.

Indeed, as I show in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, given the nature of government then and now, it is painfully evident that whether Jesus had been born in our modern age or his own, he still would have died at the hands of a police state.

Thus, as we draw near to Christmas with its celebrations and gift-giving, we would do well to remember that what happened on that starry night in Bethlehem is only part of the story. That baby in the manger grew up to be a man who did not turn away from evil but instead spoke out against it, and we must do no less.

The Transhumanist Agenda: Loss of Identity

by Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath, Nature of Healing
December 19, 2020

The Face You Wear Matters

By wearing a mask over your face, you conceal your identity. One of the most common forms of human communication is facial expressions. Infants learn identity using facial expressions. Children learn to self-identify by observing body language without words. The ritual of mask wearing heralds in a loss of identity for a whole generation.  Why obliterate individual identity for a fusion of identities?

A fusion of identities is part of a One World Order, a Great Reset, that includes:

No individual
No independence
No liberty
No responsibility
No property
No rights
No self concept

What the 4th Industrial Evolution will lead to is a fusion of our physical, our digital, and our biological identities. – Klaus Schwab, The Fourth Industrial Revolution – Founder & Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation.



A One World Order by another name is…

The Transhumanist Agenda

The Transhumanist agenda is more than just Artificial Intelligence (AI), self-driving cares, robots taking over American jobs, or transgender restrooms at public facilities to accommodate uniformity among the masses.

Transhumanism is Posthumanism. It is humanism with the optimism taken out. A movement that advocates for the transformation and the “advancement of humanity through technology” that merges humans and machines. Transhumanism runs the gamut from nanotechnology to A.I. This paradigm is not limited to gadgets and medicine but also molds social, economic, cultural, institutional design, language, and the psyche.

To be clear, Transhumanism is a manufactured endpoint to human evolution by the year 2030.

Where reproductive and genetic control technologies serve as forms of social control.
Where technology promotes a Scientific Dictatorship called Scientism.
Where scientists are gods under the religion of Technocracy.
Where politicians are priests and science is politicized.
Where the more you separate yourself from your heart-self, the more you create something non-human.

A Democratic Society is a Manipulated One

Transhumanism is a reality of a perfect “controllable race.” This human race began taking shape in the 1930s under Social Engineers like Edward Bernays who believed that the conscious manipulation of the habits and opinions of the masses is the central feature of a democratic society.

Bernays’ book Propaganda revealed the method of mind control for anyone curious enough to pay attention:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.

Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.

This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.…

In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses.

It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.

~ Edward L. Bernays, Master Propagandist

Technocracy is The New Democracy. Why else are democratic governors and legislators changing behavior and opinion through mandates for democrats to obediently fall in line to support them?

Social Engineers have manipulated people/masses through fiction (i.e., Brave New World), non-fiction, film, media, the educational system, politics, religion, sports, Hollywood celebrities, and rigged elections throughout the centuries. And each time people/masses have consented through their silent acquiescence and participation.

Brave New World

Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World predicted a world of bio and social engineering controlled by the intellectual elite, of which Huxley was a member. Huxley described a future that had already begun to take shape under his pen. To grasp the Huxleyesque nature of current culture we only need to look at what he predicted: Listen to his 30-minute speech here:

There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution ~ Aldous Huxley, 1961

In 1962, Huxley gave a follow-up speech, The Ultimate Revolution, at Berkley:

. . .we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably will always exist to get people to love their servitude. This is the, it seems to me, the ultimate in malevolent revolutions shall we say, and this is a problem which has interested me many years and about which I wrote thirty years ago, a fable, Brave New World, which is an account of society making use of all the devices available and some of the devices which I imagined to be possible making use of them in order to, first of all, to standardize the population, to iron out inconvenient human differences, to create, to say, mass produced models of human beings arranged in some sort of scientific caste system. Since then, I have continued to be extremely interested in this problem and I have noticed with increasing dismay a number of the predictions which were purely fantastic when I made them thirty years ago have come true or seem in process of coming true.

Transhumanism is mind control to shift perception to a hybrid society. As perception shifts, the individual is homogenized into an amorphous “public persona.” The term “Public Health” is a public relations term, created in 1913 by the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research (RIMR), to convince individuals to give up their identity to an outside, unseen authority.

Inversion Reality

Transhumanism is Inversion Reality to create order out of chaos, where up is down, black is white, sickness is health, male is female, abnormal is normal, and uniformity is unity.

The Transhumanist Movement has been playing out before our eyes under the deception of politics and Hollywood make-up and glamour for more than a century. Transgendered actors have been ‘coming out’ to be recognized as non-gendered. Caitlyn Jenner is a role model for the right to reshape and choose a different identify. These are influencers. However, what happens when true identity is concealed and used for deception?

How many Hollywood actors, mainstream news anchors, super models, leaders and politicians are disguised behind wigs, false eyelashes, or beards to create The Great Deception? What deeper meaning rests behind celebrity worship, the golden idols actors give themselves, or the pentagrams they bow down to on the Hollywood Walk of Fame?

People have been measuring themselves against a standard of beauty and worth based in illusion. Does Hollywood entertainment and its teachings go back to the Freemasons? Back to Babylon and the Sodomites? To the Primordial Man? Have actors been mocking their audiences openly as when Stephen Colbert offered a display on national TV in 2006?

Good Evening Godless Sodomites… …It warps The Minds of Our Children and Weakens The Resolve of Our Allies… By Giving You a Golden Idol To Worship… KNEEL BEFORE YOUR GOD, BABYLON! ~ Stephen Colbert, 2006 Emmy Awards

The Transhumanist-Posthuman agenda is not about the equality of the sexes since the sexes are meant to merge into an androgynous blob. Under the Trans Agenda, an era of social and ecologic inequities are the new standard where nature is unnecessary and human relationships are replaced by sexbots that cook, clean, converse (or not), and provide for physical needs.

The deeper agenda is to weaken the male energy as “protector and defender,” subvert the female essence, and neutralize the divine through technologies such as CRISPR. CRISPR genetically modifies DNA to redesign gender at the level of the human embryo to create an androgyne that cannot reproduce. What if this technology has been seeded in vaccines that has changed the DNA of a whole generation? What if the new genetically modified mRNA COVID vaccine not only changes DNA, but acts as an infertility drug in the same jab?

The Transhumanist agenda offers a radical downgrade of humanity. It suggests we are entering a virtual reality without a discussion of morals or spiritual matters, where we can transcend our biological limitations with implants and injections. Do we extend life, prevent death, or bring the dead back to life even if life is no longer worth living? Are we suddenly convinced that vampires are sexy, and adrenochrome is the latest energy drink? Why else is the BBC writing about blood drinkers?

Do we leave the light behind because the darkness brings a different type of eternity? Do we accept that the Transgender agenda has infiltrated the classroom to indoctrinate children in Kindergarten?

In agreeing to the Trans Agenda, it is important to know the risks and the consequences of accepting a program that was set into motion many decades ago by an elite class. The program to introduce new technology in the 1990s promised to feed the world with genetically-modified foods (GMOS). In 2000, it became the technology of electro-magnetic frequencies EMFs “to download movies faster.” When GMO foods were not enough to feed the world, the message shifted to change behavior. “For every flu shot given at our Pharmacy or The Little Clinic, we’ll donate a meal to Feeding America.”

The message of the Transhumanist Agenda will declare that humanity will go extinct or permanently destroy itself unless Transhumanistic technologies are accepted. Are the adverse health effects of GMOs, EMFs, and vaccine technologies the real reason humans need to find new ways to preserve themselves? Has our participation led us to this point?

Humanity appears to be repeating a process that led to extinction once before, in Atlantis. History wrote that the Golden Age, the Silver Age, the Bronze Age ended at the hand of an “angry god” who destroyed the world because “humans” went astray. Humanity is again at the end of an Age; The Iron Age. Do humans accept the “angry god” story again and follow along with the plan that is laid out?

Post-human World

While you’ll feel compelled to charge forward it’s often a gentle step back that will reveal to you where you are and what you truly seek. ~ Rasheed Ogunlaru

The survival of a Transhumanist world happens at the expense of humans.

The liabilities are unknown. Does the soul remain intact? Can a Posthuman being with increased life expectancy, intelligence, health, and memory cease to exist on a spiritual level?

There is an elite class that exists, from all walks of life, that includes doctors, bankers, lawyers, police, judges, researchers, military, congressmen, senators, groomed for their position. They travel in exclusive circles and are part of prominent, old families that may sacrifice more than their soul to worship an androgynous god. Listen to a 2017 interview with a whistleblower reveal an agenda that could lead to martial law.

Policy guidance, that is not law, is being written by a hidden hand to forge a Brave New Global World. What happens next depends on our mutual cooperation. Those who follow a Trans religion have a right to believe what they want, as long as it does not infringe upon another’s rights. And those who choose not to believe? Their rights must be preserved too. Informed-consent means transparency and accountability, which is something that no longer exists.

Reject Technocracy

We are in a critical time in history. However, no one, and no group of politicians, scientists, priests, or actors can succeed in isolating people, suppressing free speech, and subverting human identity without your consent.

Knowing who you are protects you.Living beings are governed by Natural Law. They have rights. If you are a living being, you are not bound by man-made laws without your consent. United States case law from 1796 that still stands today says:

It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent.” CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70.

Man-made laws, or statutes, or mandates, apply only to “persons” or “legal entities/fictions.”Are you a living being? If so, statutes have no power over you without your consent. However, do not make a claim of who you are without understanding the fundamentals  of law or you may incriminate yourself. There is a process to hold your position. For more information on the fundamentals of law, listen to Tom Barnett.

Technology must serve everyone. We must reject Scientism and be ready to say NO when basic freedoms are threatened. It is time to clean house from the ground up starting with our local governments. Are we humans or robots? Do we own our own thoughts and beliefs, or are our minds the property of a global elite?

As Americans, we must take back the language, take back our morality, and reclaim our true identities. We maintain our humanity by connecting to our true selves and connecting to each other. If not, we enter a world where separation of the self is the new normal.

For more on this topic, check out Losing Identity to the Hive Mind.

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath, writer, earth keeper, health freedom advocate and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally.

Rosanne Lindsay is available for consultation through Turtle Island Network.  Subscribe to her blog at natureofhealing.org.

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay

cover image credit jim_ / pixabay

How Civil Disobedience Safeguards Freedom and Prevents Tyranny

by Academy of Ideas
December 14, 2020



The following is a transcript of this video.

“Monsters exist, but they are far too few in number to be truly dangerous; the most dangerous monsters are ordinary [men and women] ready to believe and obey without asking questions.”

Primo Levi, The Truce

Is a peaceful and prosperous society dependent on strict obedience to the laws and dictates of the state? Is voting the only proper means to show displeasure with the commands of politicians and bureaucrats? While school systems and the mainstream media try to indoctrinate us with an obedient mindset and while politicians desire an almost blind obedience from the populace, history tells a different story about the value of always doing what we are told. In this video we are going to discuss why obedience, not disobedience, is the greatest threat to mankind, while also examining how civil disobedience keeps a society free.

“The problem is not disobedience, it is obedience.”

Howard Zinn, Civil Obedience is the Problem

“The real question is not to know why people rebel, but why they don’t rebel.”

Wilhelm Reich

While the Grimke sisters, famous for their work with the abolitionist and woman’s suffrage movements of the 19^th century, put it this way:

“The doctrine of blind obedience and unqualified submission to any human power, whether civil or ecclesiastical [i.e., religious], is the doctrine of despotism.”

Sarah Grimke, Angelina Grimke “On Slavery and Abolitionism: Essays and Letters”

In the 20th century as millions upon millions of bodies pilled up in socialist and fascist countries it became evident to all those who cared to look that obedience can kill. In the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, China and North Korea, it was not rebellion or a disregard for law that sent hundreds of millions to an early death but the fact that in such countries people obeyed too much. They obeyed laws that were immoral and they accepted commands from politicians and bureaucrats that were socially destructive. The horrific experiences in these countries taught us a very important lesson, but one that has quickly been forgotten: sometimes it is obedience, not disobedience that is the true crime, or as Peter Ustinov wrote in a 1967 article in the New Yorker:

“For centuries, men were punished for having disobeyed. At [the Nazi trials of] Nuremberg, for the first time, men were punished for having obeyed. The repercussions of this precedent are only now beginning to make themselves felt.”

Peter Ustinov, New Yorker

But even if laws that lead to the suffering of innocent people and to the destruction of a society should be disobeyed, this proves very difficult after a country has descended into full-blown totalitarianism. For with totalitarianism comes an enslavement of the population. First an enslavement of the minds of the masses through incessant propaganda and then a physical enslavement through mass surveillance, police forces and a judicial system whose main job is to keep people in a state of submission. Under these oppressive conditions of the all-powerful centralized state, disobedience takes a heroic act of the will as stepping out of line can easily be paid for with one’s life. What makes disobedience even more challenging under totalitarianism is that when the state controls all, economic activity grinds to a halt. This leads to shortages in life’s necessities, and when one is hungry, finding food, not resisting tyranny, is front of mind, or as Theodore Dalrymple explains:

“In [totalitarianism] shortages of material goods, even of necessities, were not a drawback but a great advantage for the rulers. These shortages were not accidental to the terror, but one of its most powerful instruments. Not only did shortages keep people’s minds strictly on bread and sausage, and divert their energies to procuring them so that there was no time or inclination left over for subversion, but the shortages meant that people could be brought to inform, spy and betray each other very cheaply. . .”

Theodore Dalrymple, The Wilder Shores of Marx: Journeys in a Vanishing World

Disobedience, therefore, is not an antidote to full-blown tyranny. Disobedience rather is a preventative measure to tyranny. But to be effective at returning freedom to a society at risk of losing it, disobedience must endure widespread support, it must in other words take the form of civil disobedience. When an individual practices disobedience in a solitary manner this is referred to as dissidence or conscientious objection. Civil disobedience, on the other hand, occurs when a group of people disobey and in a public manner. This act of mass non-compliance sends a message that no politician wants to hear: the people no longer fear them, no longer respect them and will no longer obey them. The current form of governance has been deemed no longer acceptable and in contrast to a protest whereby a populace asks for its freedom back, with civil disobedience a populace begins to take its freedom back, or as Murray Rothbard explains:

“…mass non-violent resistance as a method for the overthrow of tyranny, stems directly from…the fact that all rule rests on the consent of the subject masses… For if tyranny…rests on mass consent, then the obvious means for its overthrow is simply by mass withdrawal of that consent. The weight of tyranny would quickly and suddenly collapse under such a non-violent revolution.”

Murray Rothbard, Intro to Politics of Obedience

But how can enough people be awakened to the necessity of disobeying laws that are socially destructive? What, in other words, leads to a movement of civil disobedience that can defeat tyranny? One possible tactic is to use reason, logic and argumentation to make the masses aware of the deceptions, lies and manipulations which are being used to herd them into totalitarianism. This approach is based on the notion that if the truth were presented and the propaganda deconstructed most people would rise up in defiance and cast off their chains. But an appeal to reason and evidence only works on minds that are open and receptive and when tyranny is rising ever fewer minds exist in this state. Rather fear, confusion, anger and uncertainty run rampant and these emotions can easily trump the power of reason.

“The mass crushes out the insight and reflection that are still possible within the individual. . .Rational argument can be conducted with some prospect of success only so long as the emotionality of a given situation does not exceed a certain critical degree. If the affective temperature rises above this level, the possibility of reason’s having any effect ceases and its place is taken by slogans and chimerical wish-fantasies. That is to say, a sort of collective possession results which rapidly develops into a psychic epidemic.”

Carl Jung, Civilization in Transition

This observation that a people can become immune to logic and reason was shared by the writer Elie Wiesel who upon visiting the Soviet Union wrote:

“Logic will not help you here. You have your logic, they have theirs, and the distance between you two cannot be bridged by words.”

Elie Wiesel

What is needed more than words and arguments are individual dissidents who act as the motivating examples for the larger movements of civil disobedience. For the power of example always reigns supreme in its ability to influence others. When people see that someone is willing to take risks in defence of their beliefs, and that their words are congruent with their actions, this lends more credence to their position. And while the example of a dissident may not awaken those most blind to the chains of control that are being placed around them, it can exert a strong influence on the many who are on the fence as to what to think and how to act. But without an intrepid few willing to be the example for others a sort of prisoner’s dilemma exists: no one is willing to be the first to disobey, and so everyone sits idly by hoping that others will save society for them:

“So many others are better qualified, more competent and effective than me. A throng of good-willed souls is projected onto the horizon, ready to rise, so that I can retreat more easily: another will act instead of me, and so much better.”

Frederic Gros, Disobey

But the question that a potential first-mover faces is when is it right to disobey? For while it is relatively easy to disobey when a movement of civil disobedience has gained momentum, the initial dissenters face a challenging predicament. Is disobedience worth the risk? Has the act of obedience reached such immoral proportions that to be compliant is to be complicit in the destruction of society and in the harming of innocent life? Each person must answer these questions for them self but an answer usually comes from within, as a command from conscience:

“The etymology of the word “conscience” tells us that it is a special form of “knowledge” . . .The peculiarity of “conscience” is that it is a knowledge of, or certainty about, the emotional value of the ideas we have concerning the motives of our actions.”

Carl Jung, Civilization in Transition

Conscience is a felt state, it is an intuitive form of knowledge about the rightness or wrongness of an action. One of history’s most famous examples of an individual who relied on his conscience to direct him in acts of disobedience is Socrates. Socrates was commanded by the Thirty Tyrants to arrest an innocent man and to bring him to his death. Socrates, however, did not practice blind obedience even if the commands came from tyrants who held the power of life and death over him. Socrates instead listened to his conscience:

“. . .the Thirty sent for me” says Socrates “. . .and ordered [me] to bring Leon the Salaminian to be put to death. . .I, however, showed again, by action, not in word only, that I did not care a whit for death. . .but that I did care with all my might not to do anything unjust or unholy… For that government, with all its power, did not frighten me into doing anything unjust…I simply went home.”

Plato, The Apology

In going about our day-to-day life our conscience tends to speak quietly and often the messages it sends are ambiguous. But this can be used to one’s advantage when making the decision as to whether disobedience has now become the right choice. For as Jung points out while many of life’s moral dilemmas only elicit a whisper from our conscience there are times when our conscience speaks so loudly and clearly that it almost seems to be the voice of a god or as Jung writes in Civilization in Transition:

“Since olden times conscience has been understood by many people less as a psychic function than as a divine intervention; indeed, its dictates were regarded as…the voice of God. This view shows what value and significance were, and still are, attached to the phenomenon of conscience. . .Conscience. . .commands the individual to obey his inner voice even at the risk of going astray.”

Carl Jung, Civilization in Transition

If our conscience commands us to stop obeying unjust laws and if each time we do obey we experience feelings of loathing and guilt, then we face a difficult choice: we either obey our conscience and become a dissident or we continue to obey the commands of tyrants and we become a traitor to our self. The men and women whose inner voice speaks loudest in the face of a rising tyranny are those most likely to step forward as dissidents and it is when a common vibration of conscience rings out through a society that civil disobedience becomes possible. First the call of conscience is answered by a relative few, but these few serve as the example for others. Whether enough people will follow to create a movement of civil disobedience is contingent on how much a populace still desires freedom compared to what degree the populace has been psychologically subdued by the fear, hate and confusion that is sown by the propaganda of tyrants. If, however, tyranny comes knocking in the society in which we live and if our conscience then issues the command that we stop being complicit in the crime of obedience we should keep in mind the following comment by Henry David Thoreau:

“Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves.”

Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

Sherry Peel Jackson: Our Rulers Want Us to Hate Each Other

by Drew Media
December 6, 2020



Original video is available at Drew Media YouTube channel.

[As a service to protect truth from censorship & to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]

Open Letter to Patriots Everywhere | LIVE FREE

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
November 25, 2020

In the modern secular church of fakers, they tell us anger is wrong, outrage is wrong, acceptance in hypnotic sleep is what we must aim for.

Always bow to “smooth transitions.” When there is disagreement, swallow your bile, give in, make peace with tyranny. The pain will only last for a little while. Then you will reach a higher understanding.

The authorities and their minions of the press have the final word. Our job is to fit ourselves into their scheme of things.

WE must be flexible. THEY can be inflexible.

If these rules seem backwards and upside down, that is OUR problem, not THEIRS.

This is the position of our would-be masters.

I realize your attention is focused on the election and vote-fraud right now. But I want to comment on the disaster we’re all facing these days:

The COVID restrictions. Lockdowns—de facto in-house arrest. Limits on public gatherings. Economic devastation.

Cutting to the bottom line: There is NO state of emergency that justifies sweeping away Americans’ basic freedoms. No war, natural or manmade disaster.

NO emergency can override the meaning and spirit of the Constitution.

There is a line that can’t be crossed for any reason. Otherwise, an official or legislature or court could, armed with an excuse, cancel the Constitution.

That’s exactly what’s happened. COVID. It’s diabolically clever, because officials will say: “You can’t make a choice about how to live your life, because what you do affects other people. If you carry the virus and live out in the open, you’ll infect those around you. Therefore, you must obey the commands we lay down…”

You must agree to in-house arrest, if a gangster governor deems it necessary. You can’t go to church. Your children can’t go to school. You have to shut down your business. You can’t earn a living. You need to go on the public dole.

The infernal logic of this is inescapable, once you allow the crossing of the Constitutional line. Then, freedom is gone. The United States is gone.

I’ve spent the past nine months proving that COVID is a medical and scientific fraud. There is no emergency or great danger. But even if there were, that bright line from freedom to slavery cannot be breached. Or we all go down.

Instead, we have to rise up. We have to live life, work, move forward. WE HAVE TO OPEN UP THE ECONOMY OURSELVES, every which way we can, regardless of orders from governments—federal, state, or local.

Protests? Yes. But more than that, we go back to work.

All over this country, we stand on our natural and Constitutional freedoms. We don’t give in.

Our government is based on the consent of the governed. WE decide. We aren’t property of the State. We aren’t products shaped by the State. We weren’t born to be medical patients all our lives.

No one said this would be easy. We aren’t living in easy times. It does no good to park ourselves in a swamp of complaining about what should be and spin our wheels.

Again: WE OPEN UP THE ECONOMY EVERY WHICH WAY WE CAN. We FIND a way. We barter and trade, if necessary. I’m told that, during the Depression of the 1930s, local citizens in America created 3000 currencies. Their own forms of money.

It’s an option. There are many options, if people think and plan. Right now (and I receive reports), there are pockets all over the country where the economy is wide open. People are ignoring government mandates. And they’re not wearing masks or distancing.

What about the political Left? They seem to want the COVID restrictions. They want to obey political dictates. They are willing to submit to governors’ edicts. They bow down and believe and accept the statements of public health officials as if they were written in stone.

What was written in stone, with a war just past, was the Constitution. And that law of the land has remained visible, despite all attempts to erase it.

“The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” Thomas Paine, 1776.

Should we be sidetracked and tricked and bedeviled now, by these politicians and their official experts, we will find ourselves in a new world not of our making; surely not a world matching our desires.

Instead, we will be nothing more than units and numbers, organized to fit into slots, our labor harvested for purposes beyond our control, in a new normal no free human can tolerate.

We are being told to walk on a road that leads to that place.

As strong as the State seems, this is an illusion, because if enough of us refuse—millions of us—we will win. The State and its machinations will be exposed as just another tyranny, in a long line of tyrannies that fell and failed.

Be free. Live free. If there is Rescue From Above, isn’t it possible the Rescue is waiting to see, first, whether we show the courage that signals we will use that help?

Whether you believe the COVID operation was designed to wreak economic destruction, or whether the devastation was an offshoot managed and directed by lunatic politicians, the effect is the same—and the giant X painted across the Constitution is apparent to those who can see. We are living in a post-Constitutional America. That has been the case for a long time, but the violations are so egregious now, no one who is a patriot can look away without betraying his principles.

We are in a tunnel. We are carrying the light. Around us are sheep and doomsayers and hostile actors. They have redefined freedom in Orwellian terms to mean obedience. They now see privation and isolation as consecrations to a new cause: allegiance to a phantom germ.

That America could be brought down in such a preposterous way is evidence of how far this country has traveled from its origins. Its founding ideas.

Our enemies want to destroy those ideas. They attack them from all sides. They say justice never existed here, and they will bring it about now.

But all they know is destruction.

We will outflank them if we have the will.

So let us have the will.

“There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.” John Adams, 1772.

The night appears long, but we can end it.

We are the cure.

This is the war.

Whoever Controls the Ideological Landscape Controls the World

by Dustin Broadbery, The Cogent
sourced from Activist Post
November 22, 2020

The following quotes are from the Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Neil Basu, published in the Evening Standard on 19th November . I have highlighted some keywords in capitals which I will refer to later in the analysis.

“Britain’s top counter-terrorism officer today called for a NATIONWIDE DEBATE on the introduction of new laws to punish people who spread ANTI-VACCINATION CONSPIRACY THEORIES.”

“Met Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu said that there should be a DISCUSSION about whether it is “the correct thing for society to allow” people to spread “MISINFORMATION THAT COULD COST PEOPLE’S LIVES” as he responded to concern that false claims online could undermine the take up of Covid-19 vaccines.”

“There is a DEBATE FOR SOCIETY to have about FREE SPEECH and responsibility and people who are spreading misinformation that could cost people’s lives”

Do you see what they’re trying to achieve?

This propagandised message from the Met is attempting to reconstruct the ideological landscape, reframe the parameters of what a debate is, reclassify free speech, weaponise information, and obfuscate the important legal principle: ‘Innocent until proven guilty.’

In other words, the government is attempting to whitewash free speech towards the kind of one world ideology that was endemic in the former Soviet Union, where thinking contrary to the ideology of the Communist Party was criminalised.

But there is something even more odious concealed within this Goebbelsian public service announcement: here we have a senior police officer using threatening language to intimidate and shakedown the general population.

This is on the very same day that Boris Johnson flexed his own military muscle, announcing: record defence spending for laser guns, direct energy weapons, an artificial intelligence agency and the creation of a national cyber force (a group of computer hackers to conduct offensive operations).

Offensive operations against who exactly?

Britain is not currently at war, but according to the Assistant Commissioner of the MET, the government is waging an ideological war against anti vaccination conspiracy theorists. Ideological wars of this nature typically take place online, which is where much of the government’s military budget is being invested.

What does that tell us about who the government is at war with?

These strong arm tactics by a fledgling totalitarian regime, learning its trade, could be interpreted as coercion against the British public, and it is likely that the government is not only targeting dissenters, skeptics or those unwilling to wear the uniform of the Red Army, they are in fact threatening the entire population.

We can therefore interpret the stern warning from the Deputy Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, as follows:

1), DEBATES and DISCUSSIONS are permissible only when it comes to determining the extent of punishment to be served on those publicly voicing concerns or questioning the legitimacy or safety of vaccinations.

2), Despite the fact that a DEBATE and DISCUSSION is being proposed and this DEBATE is apparently open to all (NATIONWIDE), ANTI-VACCINATION CONSPIRACY THEORISTS are not authorised to participate in this discussion. In other words: if your own set of ideologies conflicts with state doctrine, you effectively have no voice. In fact, your voice has already been criminalised, and it is only the extent of your punishment that is so far undetermined.

3), The proposed NATIONWIDE DEBATE is in fact a fiction, when the definition of debate is: ‘a regulated discussion between opposing views.’ What’s more, there can be no debate without FREE SPEECH, which it is implied, does not exist anymore, because the war on MISINFORMATION and the ANTI-VACCINATION CONSPIRACY THEORISTS has established that the principle of free speech is, as a result of the threat of COVID, no longer permissible. As the Met’s Assistant Commissioner points out: one side of the DEBATE has already been silenced and criminalised. Needless to say, the DEBATE does not involve the other side of the DEBATE. This in turn implies that what is being proposed here is in fact a witch hunt and not a DEBATE.

4), An important legal precedent has now been established that overrides the principle of ‘innocent until Proven guilty.’ due to the implied guilt of ‘ANTI-VACCINATION CONSPIRACY THEORISTS, without the enactment of legislation. In other words, this witch hunt commenced before the rule of law convened. We can therefore assume that some kind of Kangaroo Court has taken place behind closed doors, without scrutiny or DEBATE from the legislative or judicial branches of government. This in turn implies that the legal process for enacting laws is surpassed by arbitrary policing by preference.

5). Despite the word ‘NATIONWIDE’ implying an open and transparent culture of DEBATE for everyone, as we have already established: the DEBATE will be mediated and directed by a small constituent belonging to one side of the DEBATE. Namely, the executive branch of government (the police), and its public relations agency (the media).

6), The emergency powers which the government granted itself back in March, under the Public Health (Control of Disease Act) 1984 and the Coronavirus Act 2020, not only abolished debates and scrutiny in parliament, these measures dissolved parliament from 650 MP’s to 50 MP’s. Therefore, If the constitutional affairs of this country cannot be determined by lawmakers in parliament through DEBATE, it is improbable that the general population would be invited into such a DEBATE. Therefore what is implicitly meant by the word DEBATE is official diktat.

7). The notion that MISINFORMATION COULD COST PEOPLE’S LIVES, is one of the most dangerous legal propositions in the history of democracy. Implying the government has decreed a new category of criminal activity, equivalent to thought-crime. Granting the government powers to regulate our thoughts and communications. If it can be argued that a person could be killed by misinformation, then the very principles of ‘intent,’ ‘premeditation’, ‘motive’, and in turn ‘guilt’, are transformed into something else, and each of these parameters of guilt could be preceded by ‘thought’ or ‘word’, as an incitement to cause injury or death. This kind of legal precedent could therefore become an important weapon of censorship, the likes of which has not been attempted previously, and Orwell’s concept of Thought Crime might become a reality in the 21st century. The intervention of Britain’s top anti-terrorist officer in this debate is especially alarming, because it presents evidence that the state is looking to brand anyone questioning the official narrative, with what it deems MISINFORMATION, as a terrorist.

8). All systems of ideological control are concerned with dissolving the power of their opposition. Whether a political party looking to gain more seats in parliament or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) prohibiting other political parties altogether. The idea that a CONSPIRACY THEORIST presents a threat to people’s lives, grants unprecedented emergency powers to the government to censor, criminalise and prosecute its opposition. Unlike apartheid in South Africa – where a social segment was discrimnated against because of the colour of their skin – a conspiracy theorist is not identifiable by any incontrovertible features, and are instead singled out on the basis of the governments interpretation of their dissenting ideological stance. It could therefore be argued that anyone disagreeing with the state, is in fact a CONSPIRACY THEORIST and open to prosecution.

Dustin Broadbery is an anarchist based in London, interested in social theory and particularly how a mutual society could bring about great advancements in the social fabric. Reach him on Twitter: twitter: https://twitter.com/TheCogent1

Hacking at the Root

Eric Peters, Libertarian Car Guy
November 20, 2020

The chief enforcement mechanism being deployed to force Americans to join the Sickness Cult – to give the appearance of universal agreement with its tenets via the wearing of the Holy Rag over their faces – isn’t the government.

It is the “free” market.

In air quotes to emphasize that it is not free.

The market – businesses – have become adjuncts of the government by dint of having accepted that they must obtain permission from the government in order to be in business. This, in turn, gives government control over the business – which now extends to the demand that businesses enforce “mandates” that are not even laws such as the wearing of the Holy Rag within their establishments.

If they fail to enforce the “mandates” – irrespective of their dubious legality – they are threatened with extortionate fines and the rescinding of the government’s permission to be in business.

And so they enforce the “mandates.”

This follows naturally – inevitably – from the precedent set once-upon-a-time that it is the job of businesses to collect taxes on behalf of the government. Which they now do unconsciously, as a matter of routine.

How did it come to be that to be in business in this country means becoming an unpaid tax collector for the government as well as the enforcer of government “mandates” that aren’t even laws?

The very concept of having to obtain permission to exercise a right – and what right could be more foundational than the right to buy and sell without permission? – is anathema to morality as well as obviously unconstitutional in the sense that it is unimaginable that the men who wrote the thing and approved it ever conceived that free men would be required to beg leave of the government to buy and sell.

The notion is absurd.

As ridiculous as the notion that free men are obliged to obtain the permission of the government to posses arms, something every man possessed without permission – and without question – when the Constitution was ratified. Search the records in vain to find a copy of a permit to carry a gun from that era. Or any law requiring one. And yet, men carried guns. No one questioned their right to do so – just as no one, at that time, questioned the right of free men to freely exchange goods and services – to be in business – without permission from the government.

Because free men once understood that to beg permission from the government is to cede control to the government. Try to imagine Ben Franklin’s print shop printing freely if Ben knew that the government could “pull” his business license at its pleasure.

So how did it come to pass that businesses must obtain permission to freely exchange goods and services?

It happened because Americans accepted it. Along with the income tax, the education of their children in government schools – paid for by compulsory and never-ending taxes on real estate, thereby obviating the possibility of true home ownership – and other planks of the Communist Manifesto.

It is a hard truth to look in the face but America has been a communist country for at  least the past 107 years – the date the 16th Amendment was imposed on the American people empowering the government to not only “collect” – that is to say, to take – their earnings but also by dint of that to have control over their transactions, including the no-longer-free exchange of goods and services. Everything we transact must now be “reported” to the government – so that the government can exercise control over everything we transact, in addition to seizing a portion of the proceeds of our labor.

It was inevitable that government would expand the principle by taking it back one step farther and telling the American people – per Karl Marx – that they were obliged to get permission from the government to be allowed to earn the money the government would then take whatever portion of which it deemed its “fair” share.

So, here we are.

With government in control of everything and freedom in tatters.

Businesses exist only with permission and that permission can be yanked by the issuer of permission whenever it likes, which means that businesses are become mere puppets of the government.

They cringe, pathetically, in fear of it. They do its bidding – including the enforcement of “mandates” that aren’t even laws – for the sake of being allowed to earn money.

I empathize with small businesses and want to support them. But money isn’t everything and this business has got to be resisted. And I mean resisted at the basement, foundational level.

Business owners have got to reject the idea that they are obliged to obtain permission from the government to engage in the free exchange of goods and services. A despicable, servile thing our ancestors would never have tolerated.

People have been conditioned to accept these outrageous affronts to their liberty as normal but they are only normal in a system where people have lost and forgotten their basic rights – including the right to freely exchange goods and services.

It is time to remember those rights – and insist they be respected.

The very idea that one can be fined – caged! – for opening his door  to customers who are free to not walk through it but who choose to do so because they wish to engage in the free exchange of goods and services is an inversion of morality, an assault upon decency that the men who wrote the Constitution and the once-free people of this country would never have tolerated.

The question is, why do we?

Follow Eric Peters at Eric Peters Autos

World Freedom Alliance: Stockholm | Global Voices of Courage | Full Documentary, November 2020

by Oracle Films
November 17, 2020

Full Documentary — Parts 1 & 2:

[Truth Comes to Light Editor’s note: We joined Parts 1 & 2, as found at Oracle Films YouTube channel, into one mirrored copy.  You will find the full documentary embedded below and is also available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry/Odysee channels.  All credit goes to Oracle Films. Please support their work at links below.]



World Freedom Alliance: Stockholm 

Watch the full uncut documentary at https://oraclefilms.com

If you like our videos, please consider donating to help us keep producing content for the World Freedom Alliance: https://paypal.me/oraclefilms

View on YouTube in two parts:

Part 1: https://youtu.be/Icz5ByckK1Q

Part 2: https://youtu.be/R7fy7oXxBvc

This Feature-Length documentary surrounds the establishment of the World Freedom Alliance (WFA) in Stockholm, Sweden, in November 2020.

The World Freedom Alliance will provide a worldwide platform linking with various associations and organisations offering access to justice, true dialogue for health science and politics while holding worldwide officials to account under the law. We will offer transparent evidence-based solutions and encourage robust debate with media, scientists and governments to ensure our fundamental freedoms of the people of the world are restored and maintained.

Our mission is to PROTECT our cherished freedoms, PROMOTE collaborations and links between groups of doctors, scientists, lawyers, professionals and freedom campaigners worldwide. We will PROVIDE transparent analysis of the data for business and innovative solutions to build a wonderful world for us, our children and future generations.

President of the WFA – Prof Dolores Cahill, a professor in Molecular Biology and Immunology.

Vice President of the WFA – Heiko Schöning, M.D, a founding member of ACU2020.org

Chairman of the WFA – Maneka Helleberg, Chairman of People’s Court and Member of New Earth.

Legal Advisor for the WFA – Martin Byrne, Barrister at Law practising in the Superior Courts, Dublin.

Treasurer of WFA – Mads Palsvig, Chairman of Political Party JFK21, a former investment banker.

General Secretary for the WFA – Fiona Hine, Political Activist and Events Manager, Founder of CoviLeaks.

Oracle Films stands with the WFA as the official video production team for the alliance – https://oraclefilms.com

Publishing rights: All rights belong to Oracle Films. This video can be downloaded and re-uploaded on any non-monetised media channels. For TV licensing or monetisation rights contact Oracle Films at info@oraclefilms.com

Upcoming Freedom Rally: Copenhagen November 21, 2020 @ 12PM Bertel Thorvaldsens Plads

Until an official website is set up, World Doctors Alliance or ACU2020.org  might be useful points of contact.

Thick Red Line: Supporting the Police to Say No to Immoral, Unlawful Orders of Politicians

“Tyranny only comes to your door in a uniform and a badge. And if the police say no, then the politicians are absolutely, positively impotent. We’re supporting the police to say no.” ~ Howard Lichtman

Howard Lichtman on The Thick Red Line

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
November 16, 2020

Howard Lichtman joins us today to introduce ThickRedLine.org, an effort to restore respect for law enforcement by abolishing victimless crime. ThickRedLine seeks to upend the narrative that keeps the public afraid of breaking the unlawful orders of the politicians and prevents officers from following their own conscience.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES:

ThickRedLine.org

David Rodriguez and Howard Lichtman at Dominican Hospital

Howard Lichtman at Santa Clara Medical Center

Derrick Broze Updates Us on the Underground Railroad

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report, with Derrick Broze, The Conscious Resistance
November 11, 2020

Derrick Broze of TheConsciousResistance.com joins us today to provide an update on the counter-economic underground railroad which we discussed last year. The first group has crossed the border and more people than ever are looking to escape the Collapsing States of America and finding freedom elsewhere. We discuss the exit and build strategy, Freedom Cells, and how you can find out more about the growing number of people who are looking to start communities of purpose.

Contact Derrick at opurr [at] protonmail [dot] com



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES

TheConsciousResistance.com

The Darkest Winter (2020)

Interview 1534 – Derrick Broze on Building the Counter-economic Underground Railroad</a

Interview 1268 – Derrick Broze on The Theory and Practice of Agorism

Interview 1218 – The Freedom Cell Solution with Derrick Broze

How To Opt-Out of the Technocratic State

Where Can We Run To? – Questions For Corbett #072

Interview 1512 – Derrick Broze on Opting Out of Technocracy

8 predictions for the world in 2030 (World Economic Forum)

The Counter-Economic Underground Railroad (overview video)

Goodbye YouTube Party!!!

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
November 10, 2020

Q: What’s the biggest event of the year? A: The Goodbye YouTube Party, of course! Join James, Derrick, Ryan, Dan and Josh as they celebrate being kicked off the enemy’s controlled information platform (well, everyone except James, that shill!). We look forward to pioneering the next phase of the development of the independent media and share our ideas about exciting new opportunities for sharing information outside of the grasp of the controlled Big Tech social media oligopoly.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

Follow Derrick Broze at TheConsciousResistance.com

Derrick Broze on Flote / Minds / Hive / Remind / BitChute / LBRY / Telegram

Follow Ryan Cristian at TheLastAmericanVagabond.com

Ryan Cristian on Rokfin / Flote / Periscope / 3Speak / BitChute / LBRY

Follow Dan Dicks at PressForTruth.ca

Dan Dicks on BitChute / Flote / Minds.com /  LBRY

Follow Josh Sigurdson on LBRY / BitChute / Flote /

End the Government’s War on America’s Military Veterans

by John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute
November 09, 2020

 

“For soldiers … coming home is more lethal than being in combat.” ― Brené Brown, research professor at the University of Houston

The 2020 presidential election may be over, but nothing has really changed.

The U.S. government still poses the greatest threat to our freedoms.

More than terrorism, more than domestic extremism, more than gun violence and organized crime, even more than the perceived threat posed by any single politician, the U.S. government remains a greater menace to the life, liberty and property of its citizens than any of the so-called dangers from which the government claims to protect us.

This threat is especially pronounced for America’s military veterans, especially that portion of the population that exercises their First Amendment right to speak out against government wrongdoing.

Consider: we raise our young people on a steady diet of militarism and war, sell them on the idea that defending freedom abroad by serving in the military is their patriotic duty, then when they return home, bruised and battle-scarred and committed to defending their freedoms at home, we often treat them like criminals merely for exercising those rights they risked their lives to defend.

The government even has a name for its war on America’s veterans: Operation Vigilant Eagle.

As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, this Department of Homeland Security (DHS) program tracks military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and characterizes them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”

Coupled with the DHS’ dual reports on Rightwing and Leftwing “Extremism,” which broadly define extremists as individuals, military veterans and groups “that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” these tactics bode ill for anyone seen as opposing the government.

Yet the government is not merely targeting individuals who are voicing their discontent so much as it is taking aim at individuals trained in military warfare.

Don’t be fooled by the fact that the DHS has gone extremely quiet about Operation Vigilant Eagle.

Where there’s smoke, there’s bound to be fire.

And the government’s efforts to target military veterans whose views may be perceived as “anti-government” make clear that something is afoot.

In recent years, military servicemen and women have found themselves increasingly targeted for surveillance, censorship, threatened with incarceration or involuntary commitment, labeled as extremists and/or mentally ill, and stripped of their Second Amendment rights.

In light of the government’s efforts to lay the groundwork to weaponize the public’s biomedical data and predict who might pose a threat to public safety based on mental health sensor data (a convenient means by which to penalize certain “unacceptable” social behaviors), encounters with the police could get even more deadly, especially if those involved have a mental illness or disability coupled with a military background.

Incredibly, as part of a proposal being considered by the Trump Administration, a new government agency HARPA (a healthcare counterpart to the Pentagon’s research and development arm DARPA) will take the lead in identifying and targeting “signs” of mental illness or violent inclinations among the populace by using artificial intelligence to collect data from Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home.

These tactics are not really new.

Many times throughout history in totalitarian regimes, such governments have declared dissidents mentally ill and unfit for society as a means of rendering them disempowering them.

As Pulitzer Prize-winning author Anne Applebaum observes in Gulag: A History: “The exile of prisoners to a distant place, where they can ‘pay their debt to society,’ make themselves useful, and not contaminate others with their ideas or their criminal acts, is a practice as old as civilization itself. The rulers of ancient Rome and Greece sent their dissidents off to distant colonies. Socrates chose death over the torment of exile from Athens. The poet Ovid was exiled to a fetid port on the Black Sea.”

For example, government officials in the Cold War-era Soviet Union often used psychiatric hospitals as prisons in order to isolate political prisoners from the rest of society, discredit their ideas, and break them physically and mentally through the use of electric shocks, drugs and various medical procedures.

Insisting that “ideas about a struggle for truth and justice are formed by personalities with a paranoid structure,” the psychiatric community actually went so far as to provide the government with a diagnosis suitable for locking up such freedom-oriented activists.

In addition to declaring political dissidents mentally unsound, Russian officials also made use of an administrative process for dealing with individuals who were considered a bad influence on others or troublemakers.

Author George Kennan describes a process in which:

The obnoxious person may not be guilty of any crime . . . but if, in the opinion of the local authorities, his presence in a particular place is “prejudicial to public order” or “incompatible with public tranquility,” he may be arrested without warrant, may be held from two weeks to two years in prison, and may then be removed by force to any other place within the limits of the empire and there be put under police surveillance for a period of from one to ten years. Administrative exile–which required no trial and no sentencing procedure–was an ideal punishment not only for troublemakers as such, but also for political opponents of the regime.

Sound familiar?

This age-old practice by which despotic regimes eliminate their critics or potential adversaries by declaring them mentally ill and locking them up in psychiatric wards for extended periods of time is a common practice in present-day China.

What is particularly unnerving, however, is how this practice of eliminating or undermining potential critics, including military veterans, is happening with increasing frequency in the United States.

Remember, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) opened the door for the government to detain as a threat to national security anyone viewed as a troublemaker. According to government guidelines for identifying domestic extremists—a word used interchangeably with terrorists—technically, anyone exercising their First Amendment rights in order to criticize the government qualifies.

It doesn’t take much anymore to be flagged as potentially anti-government in a government database somewhere—Main Core, for example—that identifies and tracks individuals who aren’t inclined to march in lockstep to the government’s dictates.

In fact, as the Washington Post reports, communities are being mapped and residents assigned a color-coded threat score—green, yellow or red—so police are forewarned about a person’s potential inclination to be a troublemaker depending on whether they’ve had a career in the military, posted a comment perceived as threatening on Facebook, suffer from a particular medical condition, or know someone who knows someone who might have committed a crime.

The case of Brandon Raub is a prime example of Operation Vigilant Eagle in action.

Raub, a 26-year-old decorated Marine, actually found himself interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for standing by his views, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys.

On August 16, 2012, a swarm of local police, Secret Service and FBI agents arrived at Raub’s Virginia home, asking to speak with him about posts he had made on his Facebook page made up of song lyrics, political opinions and dialogue used in a political thriller virtual card game.

Among the posts cited as troublesome were lyrics to a song by a rap group and Raub’s views, shared increasingly by a number of Americans, that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were an inside job.

After a brief conversation and without providing any explanation, levying any charges against Raub or reading him his rights, Raub was then handcuffed and transported to police headquarters, then to a medical center, where he was held against his will due to alleged concerns that his Facebook posts were “terrorist in nature.”

Outraged onlookers filmed the arrest and posted the footage to YouTube, where it quickly went viral. Meanwhile, in a kangaroo court hearing that turned a deaf ear to Raub’s explanations about the fact that his Facebook posts were being read out of context, Raub was sentenced to up to 30 days’ further confinement in a psychiatric ward.

Thankfully, The Rutherford Institute came to Raub’s assistance, which combined with heightened media attention, brought about his release and may have helped prevent Raub from being successfully “disappeared” by the government.

Even so, within days of Raub being seized and forcibly held in a VA psych ward, news reports started surfacing of other veterans having similar experiences.

“Oppositional defiance disorder” (ODD) is another diagnosis being used against veterans who challenge the status quo. As journalist Anthony Martin explains, an ODD diagnosis

“denotes that the person exhibits ‘symptoms’ such as the questioning of authority, the refusal to follow directions, stubbornness, the unwillingness to go along with the crowd, and the practice of disobeying or ignoring orders. Persons may also receive such a label if they are considered free thinkers, nonconformists, or individuals who are suspicious of large, centralized government… At one time the accepted protocol among mental health professionals was to reserve the diagnosis of oppositional defiance disorder for children or adolescents who exhibited uncontrollable defiance toward their parents and teachers.”

Frankly, based on how well my personality and my military service in the U.S. Armed Forces fit with this description of “oppositional defiance disorder,” I’m sure there’s a file somewhere with my name on it.

That the government is using the charge of mental illness as the means by which to immobilize (and disarm) these veterans is diabolical. With one stroke of a magistrate’s pen, these veterans are being declared mentally ill, locked away against their will, and stripped of their constitutional rights.

If it were just being classified as “anti-government,” that would be one thing.

Unfortunately, anyone with a military background and training is also now being viewed as a heightened security threat by police who are trained to shoot first and ask questions later.

Feeding this perception of veterans as ticking time bombs in need of intervention, the Justice Department launched a pilot program in 2012 aimed at training SWAT teams to deal with confrontations involving highly trained and often heavily armed combat veterans.

The result?

Police encounters with military veterans often escalate very quickly into an explosive and deadly situation, especially when SWAT teams are involved.

For example, Jose Guerena, a Marine who served in two tours in Iraq, was killed after an Arizona SWAT team kicked open the door of his home during a mistaken drug raid and opened fire. Thinking his home was being invaded by criminals, Guerena told his wife and child to hide in a closet, grabbed a gun and waited in the hallway to confront the intruders. He never fired his weapon. In fact, the safety was still on his gun when he was killed. The SWAT officers, however, not as restrained, fired 70 rounds of ammunition at Guerena—23 of those bullets made contact. Apart from his military background, Guerena had had no prior criminal record, and the police found nothing illegal in his home.

John Edward Chesney, a 62-year-old Vietnam veteran, was killed by a SWAT team allegedly responding to a call that the Army veteran was standing in his San Diego apartment window waving what looked like a semi-automatic rifle. SWAT officers locked down Chesney’s street, took up positions around his home, and fired 12 rounds into Chesney’s apartment window. It turned out that the gun Chesney reportedly pointed at police from three stories up was a “realistic-looking mock assault rifle.”

Ramon Hooks’ encounter with a Houston SWAT team did not end as tragically, but it very easily could have. Hooks, a 25-year-old Iraq war veteran, was using an air rifle gun for target practice outside when a Homeland Security Agent, allegedly house shopping in the area, reported him as an active shooter. It wasn’t long before the quiet neighborhood was transformed into a war zone, with dozens of cop cars, an armored vehicle and heavily armed police. Hooks was arrested, his air rifle pellets and toy gun confiscated, and charges filed against him for “criminal mischief.”

Given the government’s increasing view of veterans as potential domestic terrorists, it makes one think twice about government programs encouraging veterans to include a veterans designation on their drivers’ licenses and ID cards.

Hailed by politicians as a way to “make it easier for military veterans to access discounts from retailers, restaurants, hotels and vendors across the state,” it will also make it that much easier for the government to identify and target veterans who dare to challenge the status quo.

Remember: no one is spared in a police state.

Eventually, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we all suffer the same fate.

It stands to reason that if the government can’t be bothered to abide by its constitutional mandate to respect the citizenry’s rights—whether it’s the right to be free from government surveillance and censorship, the right to due process and fair hearings, the right to be free from roadside strip searches and militarized police, or the right to peacefully assemble and protest and exercise our right to free speech—then why should anyone expect the government to treat our nation’s veterans with respect and dignity?

It’s time to end the government’s war on the American people, and that includes military veterans.

Certainly, veterans have enough physical and psychological war wounds to overcome without adding the government to the mix. Although the U.S. boasts more than 20 million veterans who have served in World War II through the present day, large numbers of veterans are impoverished, unemployed, traumatized mentally and physically, struggling with depression, suicide, and marital stress, homeless, subjected to sub-par treatment at clinics and hospitals, and left to molder while their paperwork piles up within Veterans Administration offices.

At least 60,000 veterans died by suicide between 2008 and 2017.

On average, 6,000 veterans kill themselves every year, and the numbers are on the rise.

The plight of veterans today—and their treatment at the hands of the U.S. government—remains America’s badge of shame.

So here’s a suggestion: if you really want to do something to show your respect and appreciation for the nation’s veterans, why not skip the parades and the flag-waving and instead go exercise your rights—the freedoms that those veterans swore to protect—by pushing back against the government’s tyranny.

It’s time the rest of the nation did its part to safeguard the freedoms we too often take for granted.

Freedom is not free.

David Icke: “Common Law Is the Real Law of the Land” | Understand & Disconnect Yourself From the Deceit of Statute Law

Excerpts:

“It is a deceit imposed upon the human race, generation after generation, on a scale that beggers belief and defies the imagination.”

“Common law is the real law of the land. Not the laws coming out of government, government agencies, and the institutions of state in general. Not the laws administered by the police forces and other forms of law enforcement.”

“There are two different systems of law. One they don’t want you to know about and the other one, they want you to believe it’s something that actually it isn’t.”

“This appreciation of the difference between common law and what is called statute law…offers a way to disconnect yourself, and it seems your business, from the impositions of law imposed currently in all the covid nonsense by governments and its agencies.”

“Common law is lawful. Statute law is legal. These are different terms having different meanings.”

[Note: Enhanced audio version is at bottom of this post. Several reported difficulty hearing John Smith’s voice in the original post.]

How you can lawfully disconnect yourself, your family and your business from governments and the institutions of law enforcement and no longer comply with ‘Covid’ fascism. David Icke talks with common law expert John Smith at Commonlawcourt.com. A must-watch for those who choose freedom and want to end this madness.

by David Icke
November 8, 2020

LAW OF THE LAND? NO, THE CORPORATE LAW OF CONTRACTS – DAVID ICKE PLEASE SHARE

Common Law Court website:
https://www.commonlawcourt.com/

Attention all law enforcement:

https://www.themagnacartaarticle61.co.uk/lobby-the-bobby/

[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note:  We have enhanced the audio and uploaded to our channels as a service in sharing truth. Below you’ll find a version at our Lbry/Odysee channels with enhanced audio. Links to new versions on our BitChute & Brighteon channels will also be found as soon as they are finished processing on their servers.]



[As a service to protect truth from censorship & to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry & Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]

Link to register under international Common Law

Connect with David Icke

Freedom Exists Under Natural Law

by Rosanne Lindsay, Nature of Healing
October 23, 2020

Losing Freedom

What happens when the legislative and justice systems become corrupt and you no longer have control over your body, your property? What happens when illegal mandates replace laws; when tyranny replaces freedom?

Return to Nature.

Sound simple?

Truth is simple.

To know freedom is to know Nature. Living in harmony with Nature leads to peace, prosperity, knowledge, truth, action, and freedom. Nature reflects the order of the universe. Living in opposition to Nature leads to war, control, ignorance, fear, stagnation, and enslavement.

Today, America, The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave, finds herself muzzled in masks, shackled, and homeless. The foundation of American freedom is cracked. New restrictive mandates form the walls of a prison cell which we have built through our own apathy and ignorance.

The original Charters of Freedom: The United States Constitution, The Bill of Rights, and The Declaration of Independence were written to reflect Inherent Rights of the individual. Yet these documents are being ignored by the very government created to uphold them because, by themselves, they are only metaphorical shields.

Why have we lost freedom?

Because we have forgotten where our rights come from. Human rights are natural and inborn, granted by the Creator. They come from our humanity under the Laws of Nature. Natural Law and Justice is, and always has been, the primary fundamental force in the universe. It is a body of Universal Spiritual Laws which governs Consciousness. Consciousness creates through each of us using free will. If we could become conscious, we would discover that we are Consciousness.

Being unconscious, we have stopped taking action to secure freedom. We thought that when we created government in America as a Constitutional Republic, individuals would be recognized to hold certain inalienable rights; rights which are not transferable and which can never be revoked, regardless of what the majority wants, or who holds power. However what we have agreed to is a Democracy.

A Republic is where the people control the government. A Democracy, is where the Government controls the people.

When Rights Are Legalized

Rights granted and legalized by governments are not rights at all. They are privileges and benefits that can be altered restricted, and abolished by legislation or Executive Orders. Note how this happens with the removal of vaccine exemptions granted by governments. When governments calls the shots, exemptions are nothing but a ruse.

ANY and ALL exemptions for government vaccine programs, whether medical, religious or philosophical/personal belief, are fundamentally illegal, because they transpose an inherent human RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and BENEFIT, on the presumption that you acknowledge and thus forfeit your natural born “freedom of choice” to an external authority.

Privileges and benefits are codified, or codes in legalese. Legalese is the language of statutes, which redefines words as tools to expand the scope and power of the State. Under statutes, a “person” is a legal fiction, not a human being with free will. At the same time, a “corporation” is defined as “a number of persons united in one body, so it can acquire wealth, expand, and enjoy other rights.” Note: a corporation is incapable of loyalty or love. Governments also regulate behavior through licensure. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, a license is:

A permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or a tort.

A government entity that gives itself power and competence by its own authority is a rogue government and must be restrained. If not, the trend is toward a concentration of power where laws are homogenized and standardized to one-opinion rule, a monarchy, a global Technocracy. We must wake ourselves up to the post-modern times Technocratic society in which we live, since the United Nations (UN) International treaties (UNCRC), intend to “reduce inequality” by implementing new norms of global socialism and corporate fascism as part of their Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals.

What is Freedom?

To go to the next level in human evolution is to return more deeply into Nature, where freedom lives. Freedom is the ability to:

• express without limits,
• to seek truth and understanding,
• to access the foods of our choice,
• to choose what we allow into our bodies and our minds,
• to grow our own foods and plant medicines,
• to speak our truth,
• to raise children without government interference,
• to choose power and knowledge instead of fear,
• to choose healing over treatment,
• to embody and integrate the Charters of Freedom,
• to claim responsibility for individual choices, and the consequences of those choices.

“How few of us have made our individual declaration of independence, and until we do that, we are not free.”– Edwin Manners

The American Declaration of Independence reminds us:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

When governments ignore the will of the people and “go rogue” for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many, it is time to remember from where true freedom comes. Our system derives from our free will and consent. The source of informed consent? You!

The Polarity Principle

There are two belief systems representing the polarity existing on Planet Earth. Under the Polarity Principle everything has poles or pairs of opposite charge:

• One belief system says that a human being is separate from all others, designed to control others when they cannot or do not reason for themselves. This belief derives from man-made written codes that must be learned.
• Another belief system says that each human is a cell of the collective web, and that all humans are connected as one entity, one interconnected humanity. This belief derives from Natural Law. Natural Law is not written, but intuitive and knowable by simple observation, reason, common sense, and deduction. ‘By your action, ye shall be known.’

On a free-will planet, everything is presented as an offer to contract and it is always up to each of us to consent or to withdraw consent. Silence is acquiescence. Ignorance of the law is no excuse in the Age of Information.

Legal Vs. Lawful

There is a difference between legal and lawful. Legal pertains to the letter of law, whereas lawful pertains to the spirit of law. Legal matters reflect statutes between government entities and the color of law (i.e., the appearance or semblance, without the substance), whereas lawful matters reflect common law, the law of the land—the law of the people—and are actual in nature, not implied. Going forward, if we are to be free, we must resist playing a game of wits in a corrupt system that seeks to destroy Inherent Rights.

Instead, we must take back the language and determine who we are. Are we a “person-corporation” or a soul embodied? Do we have free-will or do we ask for permission from an outside authority?

Do we consent to the dictates of a rogue government or do we withdraw consent?

Do we own our bodies or does the State? Do we recognize inalienable rights and act on them? Do we reclaim our sovereignty as free-will beings?

It is time to redefine the words we live by to work in our favor.

The Freedom Toolkit

More people are identifying little used lawful tools that work within the legal system to ensure individual freedom. Today you must play the game in honor by putting criminals in dishonor because they are violating their oaths of office. You play the game better than the game masters. Whether you work with groups such as InPower, SolutionsEmpowerment, or Lena Pu at Lenasfabulousfrequencies, you utilize tools that you were never taught in school, because you are learning empowerment, not indoctrination. You put the ball in your court using Natural Law. You retain your rights under illegal mandates using the Notice process. See my September article here for an introduction on serving notices to officials.

Listen to a Crrow777 podcast with Lena Pu on the Notice of Liability:

Follow Intuition

As part of nature, we connect to Nature to experience freedom. As Within So Without.

When we follow government dictates as truth, we lose touch with our own intuition. We lose connection with our true nature. As long as we remain distracted, debating the details of the system, such as war, mandates, rigged elections, the NFL, politics, science, we are directionless, lost in a maze of confusion. By consenting to a system of contradictions through our participation and acceptance, the system feeds off our energy.

If America is held up as an example of Freedom to the rest of the world, we must get our act together and identify with Natural Law. Through the power of our vision we become the architect of the life we want to create for ourselves and for our families. We only need to reclaim responsibility for our bodies and our minds, and act on it in order to see it take hold. Such is the Law of Nature.

Sound simple?

Truth is simple.

In the American system no government is sovereign. The peoples of the states are the sovereigns. It is they who apportion powers between themselves, their state governments, and the federal government. In doing so they are not impairing their sovereignty in any way. To the contrary, they are exercising it.” – Tom Woods, Tenth Amendment Center

Article updated from October 2017.

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath, writer, earth keeper, health freedom advocate and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally.

Rosanne Lindsay is available for consultation through Turtle Island Network. Link here to find more information about Rosanne Lindsay’s services and how to contact her.

Subscribe to her blog at natureofhealing.org.

 Read more and connect with Rosanne Lindsay at Nature of Healing

cover image credit fietz fotos /pixabay

Totalitarianism Is Taking Over America

by Gary D. Barnett, garydbarnett.com
November 1, 2020

We are in the midst of the most dangerous time to liberty since this country was founded. Actually, we have already had more loss of freedom, and more tyranny just this year than has ever happened to the country as a whole.

California, a state that leads in tyrannical behavior by the political class, has taken tyranny to a more ludicrous level. The criminal cretin governor in California is Gavin Newsom, and he is now attempting to mandate all behavior for personal households for Thanksgiving and Christmas. To gain obedience to such draconian and insane rules would be the end of California, but that might be a blessing in disguise, as the west coast is a poster child for dictatorial and control tactics.

The California Department of Health (CDHP) mandates can be accessed at this link.

The mandatory requirements are listed below, and it is very important to read this asinine compliance section. This is citizen submission training, and it will not be limited to California. Draconian measures such as these and worse will be universal if allowed, and everything being done in these test states like California and New York will come to your city or town soon, just as what is going on in Europe and Australia will as well. After enough submission, violent enforcement will begin for all that dissent unless enough fight back.

While all of these mandates are ridiculous, I have highlighted some of the more idiotic and egregious ones.

“Mandatory Requirements for All Gatherings“

All persons planning to host or participate in a private gathering, as defined above, must comply with the following requirements. Local health jurisdictions may be more restrictive than this guidance. Refer to your local guidance for what is allowed in your area.

1.    Attendance

• Gatherings that include more than 3 households are prohibited. This includes everyone present, including hosts and guests. Remember, the smaller the number of people, the safer.
• Keep the households that you interact with stable over time. By spending time with the same people, risk of transmission is reduced. Participating in multiple gatherings with different households or groups is strongly discouraged.
• The host should collect names of all attendees and contact information in case contact tracing is needed later.

2.    Gather Outdoors

• Gatherings that occur outdoors are significantly safer than indoor gatherings. All gatherings must be held outside. Attendees may go inside to use restrooms as long as the restrooms are frequently sanitized.
• Gatherings may occur in outdoor spaces that are covered by umbrellas, canopies, awnings, roofs, and other shade structures provided that at least three sides of the space (or 75%) are open to the outdoors.
• A gathering of no more than three households is permitted in a public park or other outdoor space, even if unrelated gatherings of other groups up to three households are also occurring in the same park or other outdoor space.  If multiple such gatherings are occurring, mixing between group gatherings is not allowed.  Additionally, multiple gatherings of three households cannot be jointly organized or coordinated to occur in the same public park or other outdoor space at the same time – this would constitute a gathering exceeding the permitted size.

3.    Don’t Attend Gatherings If You Feel Sick or You Are in a High-Risk Group

• Anyone with any COVID-19-like symptoms (fever, cough, shortness of breath, chills, night sweats, sore throat, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, tiredness, muscle or body aches, headaches, confusion, or loss of sense of taste/smell), must stay home and not come into contact with anyone outside their household.
• Anyone who develops COVID-19 within 48 hours after attending a gathering should notify the other attendees as soon as possible regarding the potential exposure.
• People at higher risk of severe illness or death from COVID-19 (such as older adults and people with chronic medical conditions) are strongly urged not to attend any gatherings.

4.    Practice Physical Distancing and Hand Hygiene at Gatherings

• For any gatherings permitted under this guidance, the space must be large enough so that everyone at a gathering can maintain at least a 6-foot physical distance from others (not including their own household) at all times.
• Seating must provide at least 6 feet of distance (in all directions—front-to-back and side-to-side) between different households.
• Everyone at a gathering should frequently wash their hands with soap and water, or use hand sanitizer if soap and water are not available. A place to wash hands or hand sanitizer must be available for participants to use.
• Shared items should not be used during a gathering. As much as possible, any food or beverages at outdoor gatherings must be in single-serve disposable containers. If providing single-serve containers is not possible, food and beverages must be served by a person who washes or sanitizes their hands frequently, and wears a face covering. Self-serve items from communal containers should not be used.

5.   Wear a Face Covering to Keep COVID-19 from Spreading

• When gathering, face coverings must be worn in accordance with the CDPH Guidance on the Use of Face Coverings (PDF), unless an exemption is applicable.
• People at gatherings may remove their face coverings briefly to eat or drink as long as they stay at least 6 feet away from everyone outside their own household, and put their face covering back on as soon as they are done with the activity.
• Face coverings can also be removed to meet urgent medical needs (for example, to use an asthma inhaler, take medication, or if feeling light-headed).

6. Keep it short

• Gatherings should be two hours or less.  The longer the duration, the risk of transmission increases.

7.   Rules for Singing, Chanting, and Shouting at Outdoor Gatherings

• Singing, chanting, shouting, and physical exertion significantly increases the risk of COVID-19 transmission because these activities increase the release of respiratory droplets and fine aerosols into the air. Because of this, singing, chanting, and shouting are strongly discouraged, but if they occur, the following rules and recommendations apply:
  • All people who are singing or chanting should wear a face covering at all times while singing or chanting, including anyone who is leading a song or chant. Because these activities pose a very high risk of COVID-19 transmission, face coverings are essential to reduce the spread of respiratory droplets and fine aerosols;
  • People who are singing, shouting, chanting, or exercising are strongly encouraged to maintain physical distancing beyond 6 feet to further reduce risk.
  • People who are singing or chanting are strongly encouraged to do so quietly (at or below the volume of a normal speaking voice).
• Instrumental music is allowed as long as the musicians maintain at least 6-foot physical distancing. Musicians must be from one of the three households.  Playing of wind instruments (any instrument played by the mouth, such as a trumpet or clarinet) is strongly discouraged.

Tony Roman,  Courageous Owner of Mask-Free Italian Restaurant in CA, in Conversation with Del Bigtree

by Del Bigtree, The HighWire
October 30, 2020



Restaurant owner Tony Roman, of Basilico’s Restaurant in Huntington Beach, CA, not only decided to never shut down, but doesn’t allow people with masks to enter the premises.

Surprisingly, his restaurant has remained packed despite a direct challenge from CA Governor Gavin Newsom and the liquor board.

With liberty and freedom at stake, Tony is laying it all on the line.

#BASILICOSHB #BeATony #Freedom #Masks #LeaveTheMask #PastaVinoAndFreedom

[As a service to protect truth from censorship & to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, Lbry & Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]

Excerpts:

“Trump passively gave in. He opened the door to a coup and then stood aside.

Biden is a complete puppet of the coup. He wants to take the tyranny to a whole new level, as his masters have commanded.”
—
“Periods of tyranny come from the Right and they come from the Left. This one is coming mainly from the Left with its delusional Marxist utopian fantasies. But when all is said and done, all tyrannies, no matter their disguise, no matter their brand of rhetoric, come from power at the top. And power at the top has no political ideology. Ideology is merely a tool for propaganda and mind control.”
—
“Trump is the lesser foe. With a large enough outpouring of public sentiment and demand on behalf of freedom, he could become, in certain but not all respects, an ally. Don’t trust him. Try to force his hand.”
—
“The Oligarchs—bankers, mega-corporate CEOs, financiers, government leaders, intelligence agencies—collude to cut out competition so they can stand alone at the summit of the mountain. And they call this arrangement SOCIALISM. They PROMOTE socialism. They’ve staked out OWNERSHIP of socialism worldwide.”
—
‘ “We are being socialized in America and everybody knows it. If we had a chance to sit down and have a cup of coffee with the man in the street…he might say: ‘You know, the one thing I can never figure out is why all these very, very wealthy people like the Kennedys, the Fords, the Rockefellers and others are for socialism. Why are the super-rich for socialism? Don’t they have the most to lose…?’ In reality, there is a vast difference between what the promoters define as socialism and what it is in actual practice. The idea that socialism is a share-the-wealth program is strictly a confidence game to get the people to surrender their freedom to an all-powerful collectivist government. While the insiders [Oligarchs] tell us we are building a paradise on earth, we are actually constructing a jail for ourselves.” ‘

Trump/Biden: Two Bombshell Breaking Stories
And, Why Trump Must Win

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
October 29, 2020

ONE: Tucker Carlson announced, on his highly popular FOX broadcast, that a trove of Biden documents implicating Biden in illegal business relationships with China, the Ukraine, and other countries has gone missing. [1]

The documents were shipped through a major commercial courier, from Manhattan to Carlson by FOX staff, and somewhere along the route, the envelope was found open by courier employees—and the contents were gone.

The courier did an extensive investigation of the route and found no evidence to indicate how this happened.

Questions: Did no one at FOX make a copy of these documents? There was only one set? The docs couldn’t have been sent to Tucker electronically? Tucker should consider the possibility that someone at FOX was the culprit.

TWO: “Executive Order on Creating Schedule F in the Excepted Service.” Sounds meaningless, right? It’s not. [2]

President Trump has just released a new executive order which gives him the power to fire a wide range of bureaucratic federal employees who resist implementing White House policies.

The executive order strips these bureaucrats of all sorts of built-in job protections.

It’s no secret that, since taking office, Trump has been receiving huge pushback from federal agencies, all of which are part of the Federal Branch, under his command.

If Trump wins the election, his order will stay intact. If Biden wins, he’ll cancel the order and go back to federal business as usual.

For decades, these alphabet agencies have been exceeding their legal powers by essentially making law. They do this by taking newly passed Congressional legislation and fashioning enforcement-regulations that “fit” the legislation.

Except, in practice, the agencies interpret the laws to their liking. They pervert the meaning of laws.

The American Thinker quotes the Washington Post [3]: “The directive [executive order], issued late Wednesday, strips long-held civil service protections from employees whose work involves policymaking, allowing them to be dismissed with little cause or recourse, much like the political appointees who come and go with each administration.”

“Federal scientists, attorneys, regulators, public health experts and many others in senior roles would lose rights to due process and in some cases, union representation, at agencies across the government. The White House declined to say how many jobs would be swept into a class of employees with fewer civil service rights, but civil service experts and union leaders estimated anywhere from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands in a workforce of 2.1 million.”

There is major upside and downside to this executive order.

On the one hand, the president can fire bureaucrats who resist his policies because they want to undermine him. He can also fire bureaucrats who fashion regulations that pervert Congressional legislation.

On the other hand, the president can also fire bureaucrats who are simply doing an honest job which happens to get in the way of the president’s corrupt practices.

For example, the president wants a new class of dangerous pesticides green-lighted by the EPA. The EPA refuses to knuckle under. But under threats of being fired, EPA executives “reconsider.”

Of course, big-time corporations and other actors already exert corrupt influence over these federal agencies.

On the plus side, Trump might be able to fire Tony Fauci from his long-held throne at the National Institutes of Health.

Here are two backgrounders…

ONE: Why Trump must win.

For people who want to live free lives, who know what freedom is, it’s time to acknowledge that we’re living in a new age of tyranny.

It’s not coming, it’s already here.

Developments over the past nine months have shown this. On the back of a false pandemic, states have been locked down; over a million businesses have been closed; thus, millions of lives have been destroyed or taken to the brink of destruction; large cities have been decimated.

If that isn’t tyranny, I don’t know what is.

And it’s not over. Not by a long shot. At the drop of a hat, new lockdowns can be imposed.

But understand—-human society does pass through these episodes and periods of tyranny. We are in one now. We are not immune.

So at this point, there are questions about what to do, and these questions are strategic. They are asked from the basis of realizing what we are IN and UNDER. Rule by force. Rule through deception.

The last nine months were presided over by Donald Trump. There is no escaping that fact. He gave in. He stood aside. He was grievously and criminally derelict in his duty to freedom and liberty and the Constitution. He failed to keep America open.

He will never admit it, and neither will his most ardent supporters, who weave tales of imminent Trump-rescue by “citing” his unparalleled genius and his brilliant secret plans.

Popular leaders always have legions of true believers. This is nothing new. Don’t you think, in centuries past, when kings claimed to rule by Divine Right, that their followers concocted and believed extraordinary myths justifying their kings’ monumental acts of oppression?

But from where we stand now, and the questions of STRATEGY we are facing, in this new age of tyranny, we’re looking at two men who are vying for the presidency.

Who would be worse, Trump or Biden?

Trump passively gave in. He opened the door to a coup and then stood aside.

Biden is a complete puppet of the coup. He wants to take the tyranny to a whole new level, as his masters have commanded.

Biden doesn’t require his followers to make excuses for his criminal acts—as in the case of Trump. Biden’s followers WANT those criminal acts. They want more lockdowns. They want national mask mandates. They want forced tracing, testing, and vaccination, ORDERED FROM THE FEDERAL LEVEL, wiping out any resistance from brave governors, however few they may be.

Biden’s followers want climate change to move to the top tier of the federal agenda, in the form of reduced energy-output quotas for all companies. More destruction.

Biden’s followers want more riots in cities, and widespread defunding of the police. They truly believe “social justice” movements will effect beneficial change—when, in fact, these movements are funded by the super-wealthy, on behalf of socialism, which IS an illusion of share-and-care, a covert operation leading to even greater government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich. Because treacherous billionaires will end up owning all the means of production. If you need an education along these lines, start with Gary Allen’s 1971 classic, None Dare Call It Conspiracy.

For those who think Trump is an inveterate liar through and through, Biden is easily his equal.

Periods of tyranny come from the Right and they come from the Left. This one is coming mainly from the Left with its delusional Marxist utopian fantasies. But when all is said and done, all tyrannies, no matter their disguise, no matter their brand of rhetoric, come from power at the top. And power at the top has no political ideology. Ideology is merely a tool for propaganda and mind control.

Liberty and freedom are not ideological, either. They are the outcome of thousands of years of struggle. Their adherents know individual responsibility is a key corollary. The individual is free to live his life in any way he wants to, as long as he doesn’t encroach on another’s freedom.

Trump, even in his addled and manic state, understands some part of this. Biden has given up any pretense of understanding. He now comes from the school of, “Since we know what is best for you, we’ll impose it.” And that’s assuming Biden is mentally coherent, even on his best day.

On the medical front, Trump has shown some willingness to challenge the dictates of Fauci and the CDC. Biden is solidly in the camp of, “I’ll consult the experts and follow their advice.” That is a lethal position. For example, expect him, if elected, to push for a FEDERAL mandate to impose a toxic COVID vaccine.

If enough of the public demands freedom from lockdowns and masks and distancing, Trump will go along, at least part of the way. Biden will try to crack down.

Before his brain aneurysm and pulmonary thrombosis, in 1988, Biden was a highly intelligent political operator. His brand of globalism was similar to Bill Clinton’s, but without Clinton’s self-confident flair and big bullshit front. Since 1988, Biden has gradually deteriorated. If elected, there is every chance he won’t be able to finish his term, and the dangerously corrupt hatchet woman, Kamala Harris, would take over the Oval Office.

Trump modulates his failures by maintaining a relentlessly upbeat attitude. He covers his COVID betrayal (refusing to keep the economy open) with this super-salesman’s con and shuck and jive.

All in all, we are looking at a choice of opponents in the war for freedom. Trump and Biden. Strategically speaking, the choice is clear.

Trump is the lesser foe. With a large enough outpouring of public sentiment and demand on behalf of freedom, he could become, in certain but not all respects, an ally. Don’t trust him. Try to force his hand.

In a new age of tyranny, that’s enough for now.

Presidents are not messiahs.

BACKGROUNDER TWO: The Biden agenda.

I wrote this article several years ago. It spells out one of the central ruses of our time, and it is a ruse the puppet Biden prefers, because the men who control his strings prefer it…

There are “people’s” groups all over the world who advocate the overthrow of the Oligarchs who control nations.

These people’s groups want to install socialism as the answer to Oligarchy.

That’s preposterous.

The Oligarchs—bankers, mega-corporate CEOs, financiers, government leaders, intelligence agencies—collude to cut out competition so they can stand alone at the summit of the mountain. And they call this arrangement SOCIALISM. They PROMOTE socialism. They’ve staked out OWNERSHIP of socialism worldwide.

In other words, the “people’s” groups, who claim to be battling for a better world, are doing the Oligarchs’ bidding. Unconsciously, or on purpose.

Useful idiots.

Socialism has never been about toppling power-hungry leaders. Its pretension of equality and share-and-care is a cover for totalitarianism by the few, for the few.

Karl Marx, while predicting a coming utopia on Earth, expressed the absolute need for a “transition” phase called the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

Of course, that was a partial misnomer. The “dictatorship” part was correct, but the proletariat would never run it. They would labor for it. They would look up from ground level at the leaders who were supposedly their friends and guardians—and soon realize they’d been taken in by a long con. There was no transition government. There was just the same old Oligarchy under another name, that’s all.

From Gary Allen’s classic, None Dare Call It Conspiracy, published 50 years ago:

“We are being socialized in America and everybody knows it. If we had a chance to sit down and have a cup of coffee with the man in the street…he might say: ‘You know, the one thing I can never figure out is why all these very, very wealthy people like the Kennedys, the Fords, the Rockefellers and others are for socialism. Why are the super-rich for socialism? Don’t they have the most to lose…?’ In reality, there is a vast difference between what the promoters define as socialism and what it is in actual practice. The idea that socialism is a share-the-wealth program is strictly a confidence game to get the people to surrender their freedom to an all-powerful collectivist government. While the insiders [Oligarchs] tell us we are building a paradise on earth, we are actually constructing a jail for ourselves.”

When a mega-corporate CEO, whose company is in deep financial trouble, magically secures a giant loan through a crony, and when that corporation continues to pollute the land and destroy lives, and while the government agency that should be hauling off the CEO to prison sits on its hands, that’s socialism in practice. That’s the real thing.

The government may not officially own such corporations, as in the classical definition of socialism, but at the top, the government and the biggest corporations are cooperating, as one. It’s a distinction without a difference.

Why don’t more people understand all this?

Because their minds are clouded with propaganda and feel-good New Age oatmeal. Because they’re convinced that believing in something that sounds good on the surface (“a better and more just world for all”) is enough, is a pinnacle of achievement for them. And since they’re told this belief is socialism, they’re for it.

They will fall for any program on that basis. If pernicious medical experts assure them that mandated mass vaccination will protect the planet from disease, they will snap up that vision in a minute. “A healthy Earth for everyone.” It must be true. It feels right.

Here is an astonishing statement from the Mayor of New York, Bill de Blasio [4]: “What’s been hardest is the way our legal system is structured to favor private property. I think people all over this city, of every background, would like to have the city government be able to determine which building goes where, how high it will be, who gets to live in it, what the rent will be. I think there’s a socialistic impulse, which I hear every day, in every kind of community, that they would like things to be planned in accordance to their needs. And I would, too…Look, if I had my druthers, the city government would determine every single plot of land, how development would proceed. And there would be very stringent requirements around income levels and rents. That’s a world I’d love to see, and I think what we have, in this city at least, are people who would love to have the New Deal back, on one level. They’d love to have a very, very powerful government, including a federal government, involved in directly addressing their day-to-day reality.”

The control of private property, from above, is of course one of the tenets of socialism.

Oligarchs, who promote their brand of socialism, who are also Globalists (no nations; no borders; global governance), want to sweeten their pot through floods of immigrants. No, they’re not thinking about “doing good.” They have propaganda operatives who spout that line.

They’re thinking about how they can blur and erase all sorts of distinctions surrounding private ownership of private property—and instead, disruptively resettle immigrants, make them dependent on the State, sink property values, and induce more and more citizens to accept the idea that “everything belongs to everybody.”

This gibberish phrase actually means: the Oligarchs own it all.

This is their premise and their goal.

They mean business, literally and figuratively.

On a much lower level, scratch the surface of any self-proclaimed socialist who happens own a home, and watch what happens when you demand he turn that home over to “the people.” He suddenly becomes a raw naked capitalist. He rails against the State…

The State—to whom, when the pressure is off, he claims every citizen should swear allegiance, so that money and property and services and goods and energy and every necessity and luxury of life can be managed, for the benefit of all.

This article illustrates the Biden agenda, stripped of pretense.

Echoing across 50 years, here is another excerpt from Gary Allen’s, “None Dare Call It Conspiracy”:

“What we are witnessing is the Communist tactic of pressure from above and pressure from below, described by Communist historian Jan Kozak as the device used by the Reds to capture control of Czecho-Slovakia. The pressure from above comes from secret, ostensibly respectable Comrades in the government and Establishment, forming, with the radicalized mobs in the streets below, a giant pincer around middle-class society. The street rioters are pawns, shills, puppets, and dupes for an oligarchy of elitist conspirators working above to turn America’s limited government into an unlimited government with total control over our lives and property.”

“The American middle class is being squeezed to death by a vise…In the streets we have avowed revolutionary groups such as the Students for a Democratic Society (which was started by the League for Industrial Democracy, a group with strong C.F.R. ties), the Black Panthers, the Yippies, the Young Socialist Alliance. These groups chant that if we don’t ‘change’ America, we will lose it. ‘Change’ is a word we hear over and over. By ‘change’ these groups mean Socialism. Virtually all members of these groups sincerely believe that they are fighting the Establishment. In reality they are an indispensable ally of the Establishment in fastening Socialism on all of us. The naive radicals think that under Socialism the ‘people’ will run everything. Actually, it will be a clique of Insiders in total control, consolidating and controlling all wealth. That is why these schoolboy Lenins and teenage Trotskys are allowed to roam free and are practically never arrested or prosecuted. They are protected. If the Establishment wanted the revolutionaries stopped, how long do you think they would be tolerated?”

“Instead, we find that most of these radicals are the recipients of largesse from major foundations or are receiving money from the government through the War on Poverty. The Rothschild-Rockefeller-C.F.R. [Council on Foreign Relations] Insiders at the top ‘surrender to the demands’ for Socialism from the mobs below. The radicals are doing the work of those whom they hate the most.”

Does that excerpt from “None Dare Call It Conspiracy,” written in 1971, sound familiar today? Of course it does. It reflects the same old strategy of pressure applied from both the top and bottom. The squeeze play.

The super-rich monopolists pretend to “bow to the socialist wishes” of the underclass and the protestors and the rioters.

It’s a straight con.

Don’t get caught in the word game which confuses Communism, Socialism, the Corporate State, Fascism, and Crony Capitalism.

When you put all these terms through the wash, they come out looking the same. They mean power at the top, disguised to appear as popular movements.

This is what lies beneath the “I have a plan” statements of Joe Biden.

SOURCES:

[1] https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1321608055549775872

[2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating-schedule-f-excepted-service/

[3] https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/president_trump_makes_a_bold_move_to_weaken_the_swamps_power.html

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2019/01/16/mayor-of-new-york-is-karl-marxing-again/

Connect with Jon Rappoport at No More Fake News

James Corbett: Where Can We Run To?

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
October 26, 2020

Today on Questions For Corbett, James answers a frequently asked question about where people can move to in order to escape the globalist agenda.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds.com / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES:

How is Japan Reacting to the Crisis? – Questions For Corbett #057

How is Japan Reacting NOW? – Questions For Corbett #061

Free Republic of Liberland

The Seasteading Institute

Connect with James Corbett at The Corbett Report

James Corbett: How Do You Police A Free Society?

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
October 19, 2020

Today we delve into the Questions For Corbett archives for an answer to Big-_-Brother, who writes in to ask about policing in a free society. How does policing function in a free society, and what would that look like? Join James for a very timely exploration of this increasingly important question.



Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds.com / YouTube or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES:

Big-_-Brother’s question

What’s On Your Bookshelf? – Questions For Corbett #035

What Anarchy Isn’t

Anarchy and Legal Order: Law and Politics for a Stateless Society

Defense and Law Enforcement in an Anarchist Society

Bob Murphy: The Case for Private Defense

The Market for Security | Robert P. Murphy

Connect with James Corbett at corbettreport.com

Why Public Schools and the Mainstream Media Dumb Us Down

by Academy of Ideas, academyofideas.com
May 19, 2019



Original video available at Academy of Ideas YouTube channel.

[As a service to protect truth from censorship, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Lbry, Odysee & Brighteon channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video.]

The following is a transcript of this video.

 

“Resist much, obey little; Once unquestioning obedience, once fully enslaved; Once fully enslaved, no nation, state, city, of this earth, ever afterward resumes its liberty.”
Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass

These were the words of caution which the great poet Walter Whitman offered to his fellow Americans. For Whitman recognized that crucial to a free and flourishing society are men and women who are willing to question, and even resist authority when necessary. But today very few of us live by the ideal espoused by Whitman, rather blind obedience is the norm. We have become populations of sheep, easily to be herded into the chains of tyranny.

But what has led those of us in the West to largely shun the advice of Whitman? In this video we will examine two institutions that have played an integral role in the breeding of a passive citizenry – the compulsory state-run education system, which in North America is called the public school system, and the mainstream media.

Public schooling is viewed as one of the shining lights of the modern Western world. Who could question the value of an institution that provides free and compulsory education for all? But as with many institutions of our day the textbook picture of how the institution should work, greatly diverges from the reality of how it does work. If public schools taught individuals how to think, if they promoted intellectual curiosity and produced citizens healthy in body and mind, then few would question their value. But beneath the veneer presented by the bureaucrats that run this institution, a darker reality emerges. Or as John Taylor Gatto, a former teacher, turned one of public schooling’s greatest critics, writes:

“Schools are intended to produce…formulaic human beings whose behavior can be predicted and controlled. To a very great extent schools succeed in doing this, but…in a national order in which the only “successful” people are independent, self-reliant, confident, and individualistic…the products of schooling are…irrelevant. Well-schooled people are irrelevant. They can sell film and razor blades, push paper and talk on telephones, or sit mindlessly before a flickering computer terminal, but as human beings they are useless. Useless to others and useless to themselves.
John Taylor Gatto, Dumbing us Down

Noam Chomsky echoed this sentiment, writing in his book Understanding Power:

“…given the external power structure of the society in which they function the institutional role of the schools for the most part is just to train people for obedience and conformity, and to make them controllable and indoctrinated.”
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power

To some this may sound like heresy, but a study of history reveals that this was the intention from the very start. The state run school systems in the West were modeled off the factory style of education first introduced in Prussia in the early 1700s.

“. . .what shocks is that we should so eagerly have adopted one of the very worst aspects of Prussian culture: an educational system deliberately designed to produce mediocre intellects, to hamstring the inner life, to deny students appreciable leadership skills, and to ensure docile and incomplete citizens – all in order to render the populace “manageable”.”
John Taylor Gatto, Weapons of Mass Instruction

Albert Einstein, an individual who reached heights of genius rarely seen, did not credit his compulsory schooling with his intellectual development. Reflecting back on his school years, Einstein noted that after completing his final examinations his interest in the field he would go on to revolutionize was all but dead: “I found the consideration of scientific problems” he wrote “distasteful to me for an entire year”. Einstein believed that one of the major flaws of compulsory, state run education systems is their forced style teaching:

“It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle”, he wrote, “that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry…It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty.”
Albert Einstein, Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist

After well over a decade of indoctrination in the school system, few emerge with a great thirst for knowledge and a curiosity toward the many mysteries of the world. Instead, as Bruce Levine writes in his book Resisting Illegitimate Authority, by the time a student graduates they have been bred “to be passive; to be directed by others; to take seriously the rewards and punishments of authority; to pretend to care about things that they do not care about; and that one is impotent to change one’s dissatisfying situation.” (Bruce Levine, Resisting Illegitimate Authority) But if our schooling cannot be relied upon to generate the critical and curious minds needed to protect a society from the actions of corrupted authorities, can the mainstream media play this role?

While there has been an increasing skepticism toward this institution in recent years, distaste and distrust toward the mainstream media has a long history:

“I have given up newspapers, in exchange for Tacitus and Thucydides, for Newton and Euclid, and I find myself much the happier.”
Thomas Jefferson

Nietzsche, one of the most intellectually free and curious minds of history, was also no fan of the mainstream media:

“Sick are they always; they vomit their bile and call it a newspaper.”
Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Richard Weaver, a professor at the University of Chicago in the first half of the 20^th century, found it ironic that while we have freed ourselves from the earth-centered view of the cosmos, we have all the while dove headlong into an illusory view of the world created by the mainstream media. And while Weaver focuses on newspapers in the following passage, as they were the dominant medium of his day, his words are even more applicable today, where modern technology offers far better tools for the manipulation of the masses:

“A great point is sometimes made of the fact that modern man no longer sees above his head a revolving dome with fixed stars…True enough, but he sees something similar when he looks at his daily newspaper…The newspaper is a man-made cosmos of the world of events around us at the time. For the average reader it is a construct with a set of significances which he no more thinks of examining than did his pious forebear of the thirteenth century…think of questioning the cosmology.”
Richard Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences

But why does the mainstream media so often choose deception over truth? Noam Chomsky in his book Media Control, suggests that like many politicians, the mainstream media is dominated by individuals who adhere to an elitist ideology. The 20th century American journalist Walter Lippmann epitomized this view, calling the masses “the bewildered herd” and suggesting that one of the main functions of the media is to put this herd in its proper place as passive spectators, not active participants, in the organization of a society. Or as Chomsky explains this elitist ideology is built on the notion that:

“…that the mass of the public are just too stupid to be able to understand things. If they try to participate in managing their own affairs, they’re just going to cause trouble. Therefore, it would be immoral and improper to permit them to do this. We have to tame the bewildered herd, not allow the bewildered herd to rage and trample and destroy things.”
Noam Chomsky, Media Control

For those of us who are not among the self-anointed elite, the question arises as to whether the controlling of the bewildered herd is done in order to promote a prosperous and flourishing society, or merely to maintain certain institutional structures which favour the elites to the detriment of society at large. This open question only reinforces the need for a more skeptical attitude toward the authority figures of our day. We need, in other words, more anti-authoritarians.

It must be stressed that an anti-authoritarian is not someone who in place of a passive acceptance of authority, adopts a passive rejection of all authority. Many institutions and authority figures serve a beneficial purpose and therefore should be accepted. But anti-authoritarians recognize that consensus does not mean truth, that power corrupts, that people lie, and that some institutions in the words of Chomsky “have no moral justification…they are just there in order to preserve certain structures of power and domination.” (Noam Chomsky, On Anarchism) Recognizing these undeniable facts, the anti-authoritarian is willing to look at all authority figures with a healthy dose of skepticism, and potentially even resist their commands, if such authority proves corrupt and harmful to the well-being of a society. Or as Henry David Thoreau wrote:

“If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.” (Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience)
Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience

But should we fear a world with more anti-authoritarians? The obedience bred into us in school and the blind deference to authority promoted by the talking heads of the mainstream media, may lead some to view anti-authoritarians as a threat to the stability of society. But nothing could be further from the truth. Anti-authoritarians are the crucial protectors of a flourishing society. For as the author C.P. Snow noted:

“When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.”
CP Snow, Public Affairs 1971

Malevolent authority, combined with a passive citizenry is the recipe for tyranny and so anti-authoritarians should not be feared or ostracized, they should be welcomed. They are the individuals who raise the alarm and awaken the slumbering masses to the existence of corrupt authority. A society without a healthy number of anti-authoritarians, or a society in which anti-authoritarians are shunned and silenced, is a society that has chosen the comfort of illusions, over the desire for truth, and is therefore a society paving the way for its own destruction. For as the 18th century French philosopher Voltaire cautioned:

“So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious or otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.”
Voltaire

These Sheriffs Are the Difference Between Freedom and Tyranny

by Dr. Joseph Mercola, Mercola.com
October 11, 2020



STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• Your local sheriff is in charge of enforcing the laws laid down by your state legislature, city or county councils and executive orders made by your state’s governor. If you do not have a sheriff who knows the Constitution and adheres to it, you could end up at the mercy of tyrannical government officials
• One area where your local sheriff might end up playing a crucial role is if they roll out forced COVID-19 vaccinations. Were rules or laws enacted saying you must get vaccinated or be barred from various locations, your sheriff could refuse to enforce them
• Your sheriff should safeguard your Constitutional rights and protect your civil liberties against unlawful government overreach. Many, however, lack the proper training
• The purpose of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA) is to create a partnership between the people, the sheriff and the local law enforcement chiefs, to make sure county sheriffs are trained on Constitutional rights and their own role as guardians of the Constitution and protectors of civil liberties
• If enough people get involved, we can create Constitutional counties and take back America, county by county, one sheriff at a time. Eventually, all the police forces will be on the same page as well, and will no longer enforce unlawful, unconstitutional orders, whatever they might be

Richard Mack, a retired sheriff and current president of Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers (CSPOA),1 is hard at work, educating sheriffs around the country to get them up to speed on the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, I was essentially clueless as to the importance of your local county sheriffs. I had no idea how crucial they are. Today, I view them as some of the most important elected officials we all have the opportunity to vote for. (Three states — Alaska, Hawaii and Connecticut — do not have sheriffs, so their laws are enforced by other officers such as marshals or deputy sheriffs.2)

In this interview, Mack details the action steps you can take to make sure your sheriff is safeguarding your Constitutional rights and protecting your civil liberties against unlawful government overreach.

Your Sheriff Is the One Protecting Your Constitutional Rights

Ultimately, your local sheriff is in charge of actually enforcing whatever rules and regulations are laid down by state lawmakers, your city or county councils,3 and executive orders from city mayors or governors. Contrary to what some people think, mayors and governors don’t make laws — the state legislatures do that — but they can influence city and state legislation as well as invoke executive orders under certain circumstances.4

Sometimes sheriffs and local and state police may be asked by their mayor or governor to enforce an executive order. However, some sheriffs may refuse to do that, if they believe the executive order is unconstitutional. For example, some Michigan5 and Texas6 sheriffs informed their governors they won’t enforce mandatory mask orders since they aren’t actual laws.

Knowing this, if you do not have a good sheriff who knows the Constitution and adheres to it, you could end up at the mercy of tyrannical government officials trying to create rules and orders outside the powers of your elected legislative officials.

During this pandemic, we’ve seen quite a few mayors and governors implementing pandemic response mandates that violate the U.S. Constitution and infringe on civil liberties. The counterbalance to such overreaches is the local county sheriff. As explained by Mack:

“This is a crucial time in American history, and we actually have a peaceful and effective solution to it. The only thing that needs to happen is your local officials, especially your sheriff, keep [their] oath of office.

That’s the only thing he has to do in order to effectuate the philosophy you just mentioned, and that is that the sheriff is here to protect your civil liberties, your God given rights.

As the founding fathers put it in the Declaration of Independence, ‘The laws of nature are nature’s God.’ Either way, you don’t have to believe in God to appreciate this or to be a part of it. You don’t, because these are the rights you were born with.”

The Brady Bill

Mack is perhaps best known for suing the U.S. government over the Brady Bill, also known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act,7 signed into law by President Clinton in November 1993, which for the first time in U.S. history conscripted county sheriffs to enforce federal law.

“Cornell University did the best review8 of the case that I ever saw. If you want to look up the case, see Printz, Mac V. U.S.9 It’s the most amazing 10th Amendment decision in the history of our country. It is so powerful,” Mack says.

“Justice [Antonin] Scalia wrote the decision, and it went 10 times further than I ever dreamed. In fact, I never dreamed of even going to the Supreme Court. I thought it would all be squashed and forgotten at the district level. But we went through the district court. Six other sheriffs joined me in this lawsuit. All of them won at the district court except the one in Texas.

I don’t know how you lose a 10th Amendment, Second Amendment case in Texas. People need to understand we sued on the 10th Amendment to protect the Second Amendment, yes, but also to protect state sovereignty. This is the one thing that really got to me the most.

I understand we’re always going to have people believing in gun control. I do not, because it’s against the Constitution. However, and I’m not a big gun guy — I never even owned a gun until I was elected sheriff … But I am a freedom guy. That’s all this was about.

And I said that the federal government cannot tell any sheriff what to do. Not me, not the sheriff in Bangor, Maine, or any sheriff across this country. They have no authority. They have no jurisdiction to tell us what to do. And that is where we won.

It pushed the federal government back, but nobody knows about this decision. It’s very hidden. Nobody enforces it, and I’m trying to wake the country up to enforce (1) the Constitution, and (2) this decision that just reinforced the Constitution and the principle of Federalism.”

The Constitution Protects Us From Our Best Intentions

Had it not been for Mack winning this lawsuit, sheriffs would not have had the legal ability to stand up against tyranny and protect Constitutional rights today. Hundreds of sheriffs have refused to enforce the often ridiculous and biased mandates issued by mayors and governors under the guise of protecting public health.

“One of our best Constitutional sheriffs is Mike Carpinelli out of Lewis County, New York, and he’s actually announced10 that he’s going to run against [New York governor Andrew] Cuomo …

[Carpinelli] is a really solid Constitutional conservative — somebody who actually believes in freedom, who wants to put aside the socialist, communist takeover of our states and our country, and who really believes in individual liberty.”

Another example is sheriff Sharon Wehrly in Nye County, Nevada. She is a lifetime member of the CSPOA. Pam Elliott in Edwards County, Texas, is also a Constitutional sheriff who has gone through CSPOA’s training.

“Sheriffs know that when they come to our training, it will change America,” Mack says. “I’m going to tell everybody right now; communism and socialism are the antithesis of individual liberty. They do not allow for property rights.

They do not allow for personal freedom. It’s all about the state mandating and controlling everything, including your own property. You don’t have property under those systems.

Scalia, like I said, went a lot further than I ever thought he would. He said this: ‘But the Constitution protects us from our own best intentions.’ You would think that quote right there would be enough to get everybody so excited about this case that they would go to our website and buy the reviews of the case.

I have this little pocket sized review, all the highlights, all the best parts of the case, called ‘The Victory for State Sovereignty.’ You can get that at cspoa.org. You should be passing them out to everyone so that they wake up to this.”

The Constitution Protects Us From the Crisis of the Day

In his court decision, Scalia also talked about how the Constitution protects us from the crisis of the day. “It prevents the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day,” he said. And the COVID-19 pandemic is just that, Mack says. It’s the crisis of the day.

“How many Americans die from obesity, heart disease and the effects of smoking? About a million a year? Yet we don’t make cigarette smoking against the law. Why don’t we make obesity against the law? It would be easy to put a little computer chip in everybody or just have everybody keep their federal obesity card.

When you go to a Dairy Queen, they run it and go, ‘Whoops. You can’t have a Blizzard today. You had one last week’ … I mean, aren’t they going to take care of us? … Isn’t this the same thing as them trying to ‘protect us’ and make sure that we’re all ‘safe’ by [telling us we must] stay … in our homes, social distance and wear masks in public?

There’s no freedom of choice in any of that … My message is to all peace officers because we’ve already seen … where sheriffs and peace officers across the country are saying, ‘I will not force people to do that.’

It might be a good idea to wear a mask. I don’t know. But I do know that it has to be up to the individual because liberty is based on the choices that the individual makes, not that the government makes for us.

Even now we have some cities in America, like Englewood, Colorado, that have instituted a rule that if you’re not wearing a mask, it’s a $2,600 fine and a year in jail.11 At the same time, we’re releasing tens of thousands of convicted hardcore felons so, I guess, we can make room in our prisons for the non-mask wearers.”

Americans Jailed and Shot Over Unconstitutional Rules

Among the most egregious overreaches we’ve seen during this pandemic is the case of a supermarket security guard who shot a customer in the back for refusing to wear a mask. He is now charged with murder.12 Many of these mask mandates are in direct violation of the Constitution and shouldn’t be enforced to begin with, let alone get killed over.

“This is a question I ask on every program. Sheriff [Scott] Nichols in Franklin County, Maine, told his governor, ‘We will not make our county a police state. We will not conduct ourselves like Nazi soldiers. We will follow the Constitution.’ He was refusing … social engineering orders …

The question is, do you want the sheriff in Florida who arrested pastor Howard Brown [for holding church services in violation of stay-at-home order], or do you want the sheriff in Maine who said, ‘We won’t conduct ourselves like that? We will still respect the rights of the people to make their own choices, even if it’s uncomfortable for other people.’ Isn’t that what liberty is? …

You would think we already made a law that freedom of religion would be the one principle that we would all agree on, yet we’re arresting people in this country, literally, just for going to church … This is so absurd.

So, which sheriff do you want in your county? The one who will protect your liberty, still educate you as to how you should be careful, but then respect your right to choose for yourself?

I also submit that he actually protects you from other governments trying to arrest you. He protects you from that security guard. They’re not actually very well trained. Sometimes cops aren’t either, and we need to understand de-escalation, and that we don’t shoot somebody over a mask issue, which isn’t even a law.

The insanity just seems to get worse and worse every day, and I’m saying, let’s go back to American ideals. Let’s go back to the Constitution. And we literally train sheriffs and peace officers across this country to follow the Constitution, and to do that you have to know and understand the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights.”

Most of us would probably want a sheriff who will protect your civil liberties and personal freedoms. One area where your local sheriff might end up playing a crucial role is if they roll out forced vaccinations. Undoubtedly, that’s the next step in this COVID-19 pandemic.

I believe the orders to wear masks everywhere we go is a preliminary step in that direction. Were rules or laws enacted saying you must get the COVID-19 vaccine or you’ll be barred from various locations, your sheriff would be the one to either comply with such orders or refuse to enforce them.

How Do You Get a Constitutional Sheriff in Your County?

The question then becomes, how do you ensure your local sheriff understands and protects your rights under the Constitution? You basically have two options here. Either vote a Constitutional sheriff in, or educate the one you have.

“We the people need to be involved in that process. Remember, [Thomas] Jefferson said the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. And that’s one place where we have failed in this country,” Mack says. “We the people have trusted government to take care of liberty. Big mistake.

We were told to never do that. Never trust. I don’t care if it’s your brother that’s in office, never trust anybody in government, including me. Check on me. Always be checking and see what I’m doing, and your public officials should be making that very transparent. This is what I believe. This is what I’m doing.”

Mack urges everyone to join the CSPOA — The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. Its purpose is to create a partnership between the people, the sheriff and the local law enforcement chiefs. I encourage you to join me in supporting this worthy organization.

Next, you need to vet your candidates. There are just under 3,100 sheriffs in the U.S., and as in all other professions, some are better educated and informed than others. In the case of sheriffs, it’s imperative that they understand, and vow to uphold, the Constitution of the United States.

“Be friendly, be tactful, but you need to ask every sheriff candidate running right now if he will be a Constitutional sheriff,” Mack says. “You should be able to find that out with one quick phone call, or you can look at their history …

They need to hear from you, and they need to know you’re concerned about this issue. It’s great that you go to them and say, ‘Sheriff, I’m a member of the CSPOA. I’m on the Constitutional Sheriff’s Posse’ … If a sheriff hears from 10 of his constituents, he’ll say hundreds of people are calling. They can’t ignore you …

Everybody needs to be a member of the CSPOA. It’s the only one out there doing this, and believe me, it’s a peaceful and effective solution that is working.”

Why Join the CSPOA?

It’s important to realize the CSPOA is the only organization of its kind and helps educate sheriffs all around the country. Joining the CSPOA is really one of the most highly leveraged investments you could make to secure your personal liberties.

If we get just a third of the sheriffs to do this Constitutional training, we take back American liberty tomorrow. We don’t have to wait for another piece of legislation. We don’t have to wait for another election. We can do it now, today.

Their funding comes from private donations and membership fees, which are then used to train sheriffs. The organization doesn’t even have any paid employees. But the sheriffs don’t flock there by themselves (although some might). The only way the organization can work is by getting citizens involved in the process.

“If people want this solution, become a part of it. The success of this organization is based on your involvement in it, how much time you spend on this, how much money you put into this …

We want you to have these books. They’re tools for liberty. We want you to be able to take a copy of the Supreme Court decision to your sheriff candidate, to your sheriff forum, and you’ve got to get going on that because some of these primaries have already happened. You might only have two candidates left, a Democrat and Republican. And you need to find out which one will be a Constitutional sheriff.

I get calls from these candidates all the time. In fact, yesterday I got another one from Florida saying, ‘Will you endorse me?’ CSPOA does not endorse, but I do. And you need to go [to them] and say, ‘Sheriff, have you heard of the Constitutional Sheriffs Association?… Most of them have already heard about us.

Whether they have or not, you need to ask them, ‘Will you be a Constitutional sheriff? Will you protect me from being victimized by other government? Will you protect me if I don’t wear a mask in public? Will you protect me if they come and knock on my door and want to come into my home? Will you protect me and my choice to take a vaccination or not?’ …

You need dozens of people to make those calls … These sheriffs need to create their own policies also, and we train in that. But we train sheriffs to do all this. And we go as far as your donations and your membership fees take us. That’s just the simple fact of it.”

Join CSPOA

Don’t All Sheriffs Already Know Everything They Need to Know?

The training CSPOA offers is crucial, as the traditional training sheriffs receive is fairly inadequate with respect to the understanding and appreciation of their oath, which is to protect and uphold Constitutional rights. Many get distracted or confused by the belief or idea that they must enforce things that really are not within their scope of duty.

“Look, we’re not going to get every sheriff. We really hope to get about a third of the nation’s sheriffs, that’s 1,000. If we get just a third of the sheriffs to do this [Constitutional training], we take back American liberty tomorrow. We don’t have to wait for another piece of legislation. We don’t have to wait for another election. We can do it now, today,” Mack says.

“And so, folks, this is where you come in. The sheriff’s position is extremely vital to all of this because he is elected by you. You’re the only boss. You’re the sheriff’s only supervisor. He does not report to anyone else, except you, the voters. And he needs to hear from you. If he never hears from you, he’s going to do whatever he wants.”

What Does It Mean to Take an Oath?

As explained by Mack, Article 6 in the Constitution requires federal and state peace officers, including state officials, to swear an oath of allegiance to the U.S. Constitution. This is important, because when they do, liberty is protected at every level of government in all three branches.

All agents, on local, state and federal levels, are supposed to be enforcing the principles in the Constitution. Looking around today, it’s clear that many do not, and part of the problem is that people do not understand what the oath they’re taking actually means.

“How can you take an oath and then not study and know and understand what that means? If you take an oath to the Constitution, that presupposes that you know the Constitution. And that’s where the training in law enforcement has failed miserably.

The police academies, ongoing certification training and all agencies in this country do not train at all to understand what your oath means, how you keep your oath, and what our role is in America as peace officers and sheriffs. What our role truly is is in protecting liberty.

The place we start is the Declaration of Independence because … most of us don’t even know what form of government we have in America. How can we be a part of protecting the liberties of America when we don’t even know what form of government America has? So, we teach all that. We get rid of all the brainwashing, like ‘We’re a democracy.’ That’s brainwashing. That’s a lie.

If you take an oath, how will you keep it? And then we go into the Bill of Rights. I’m telling you, if our peace officers in this country understand that quote, ‘To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,’ right from the Declaration of Independence, we find what the proper role of government is, and that is to secure God given rights, natural rights, our innate rights. That is the job of every peace officer in this country.”

The Best Way to Reform Our Police Force

As noted by Mack, when you get sheriffs and police officers to understand that upholding the Constitution is their actual role, that this is their No. 1 job, the paradigm shifts from kicking in doors and arresting people for not wearing a mask to being a defender of liberty and a guard of the Constitution. It results in a mental paradigm shift.

“That paradigm will make a huge shift and the beneficiary of that will be the American people,” Mack says. “The best tool for any situation in de-escalation is the Constitution of the United States of America.

If [police officers] know and understand the Constitution and their role in defending it, then I believe the problems with police brutality are going to disappear in this country, at least diminish extremely …

Once we understand the principles of freedom that we as peace officers swore an oath to uphold and defend, our job is going to change immensely. If I can enforce the law without beating people into compliance, which I did for 20 years, then every peace officer can do the same.

Isn’t it amazing the coincidence that I studied and became a convert to the oath of office and the Constitution back when I was a rookie cop in 1983? When I found out what all that was for, it changed how I viewed my job in law enforcement, and it really took me from a by-the-numbers jerk to a by, for and of the people peace officer and defender.

This would’ve never happened to George Floyd if we had officers that truly were converted to why we have peace officers in the first place. And when we understand that my job is to protect liberty … [then] how we effectuate all those arrests … will change America … Getting sheriffs and peace officers in this country to go from the master to the servant is a huge process, and that’s what we’re doing.”

Naturally, once a sheriff has been re-educated and is committed to the principles of being a defender of the Constitution, then they will typically train their entire police department, since the deputies are the ones with boots on the ground, answering most of the calls.

Interestingly, Mack is now also working with a national health freedom organization. His goal with that organization is to start promoting health freedom and food freedom as well, using the Constitution as a guide.

More Information

September 30, 2020, the CSPOA is scheduled to train most of the sheriffs in Virginia at Liberty University in Lynchburg. The Virginia Sheriff’s Association helped sponsor that event.

As noted by Mack, if enough people get involved, we can create Constitutional counties and take back America, county by county, one sheriff at a time. Eventually, all the police forces will be on the same page as well, and will no longer enforce unlawful, unconstitutional orders, whatever they might be.

“I believe that this is a ministry of putting people’s freedom back where it belongs, and that’s with you,” Mack says. “We can do this. I promise, we can. We’ve had so many different success stories throughout this coronavirus meltdown of American freedom. I love America, and it breaks my heart to see what’s going on. Let’s rise up together and do something about it.”

Remember, providing financial support via your membership is just one part of the solution. The more important part is to contact your local sheriff and urge him or her to participate in this process.

A single person can make a major difference, but I encourage you to get your friends and neighbors involved too. The more phone calls or visits your sheriff gets, the more incentive they’ll have to get involved and start safeguarding everyone’s Constitutional rights and civil liberties against tyrannical overreach.

Not only do we need your support of CSPOA, but we also need you to reach out to your local sheriff to get them onboard. The more people from your local community you get to contact them, the more likely they will listen.

However, as we discuss in the interview, if you live in large urban, Democratic-party controlled centers like Chicago, New York, Los Angeles or Portland, it would likely be a waste of time and a better strategy would be to consider moving to a community that has a Constitutional sheriff.

Bill Gates’ Global Agenda and How We Can Stop the Machine and Defend Our Humanity

by Vandana Shiva, sourced from Children’s Health Defense
September 29, 2020

In March 2015, Bill Gates showed an image of the coronavirus during a TED Talk and told the audience that it was what the greatest catastrophe of our time would look like. The real threat to life, he said, is “not missiles, but microbes.” When the coronavirus pandemic swept over the earth like a tsunami five years later, he revived the war language, describing the pandemic as “a world war.”

“The coronavirus pandemic pits all of humanity against the virus,” he said.

In fact, the pandemic is not a war. The pandemic is a consequence of war. A war against life. The mechanical mind connected to the money machine of extraction has created the illusion of humans as separate from nature, and nature as dead, inert raw material to be exploited. But, in fact, we are part of the biome. And we are part of the virome. The biome and the virome are us. When we wage war on the biodiversity of our forests, our farms and in our guts, we wage war on ourselves.

The health emergency of the coronavirus is inseparable from the health emergency of extinction, the health emergency of biodiversity loss and the health emergency of the climate crisis. All of these emergencies are rooted in a mechanistic, militaristic, anthropocentric worldview that considers humans separate from — and superior to — other beings. Beings we can own, manipulate and control. All of these emergencies are rooted in an economic model based on the illusion of limitless growth and limitless greed, which violate planetary boundaries, and destroy the integrity of ecosystems and individual species.

New diseases arise because a globalized, industrialized, inefficient agriculture invades habitats, destroys ecosystems, and manipulates animals, plants and other organisms with no respect for their integrity or their health. We are linked worldwide through the spread of diseases like the coronavirus because we have invaded the homes of other species, manipulated plants and animals for commercial profits and greed, and cultivated monocultures. As we clear-cut forests, as we turn farms into industrial monocultures that produce toxic, nutritionally empty commodities, as our diets become degraded through industrial processing with synthetic chemicals and genetic engineering, and as we perpetuate the illusion that earth and life are raw materials to be exploited for profits, we are indeed connecting. But instead of connecting on a continuum of health by protecting biodiversity, integrity and self-organization of all living beings, including humans, we are connected through disease.

According to the International Labour Organization, “1.6 billion informal economy workers (representing the most vulnerable in the labour market), out of a worldwide total of 2 billion and a global workforce of 3.3 billion, have suffered massive damage to their capacity to earn a living. This is due to lockdown measures and/or because they work in the hardest-hit sectors.” According to the World Food Programme, a quarter of a billion additional people will be pushed to hunger and 300,000 could die every day. These, too, are pandemics that are killing people. Killing cannot be a prescription for saving lives.

Health is about life and living systems. There is no “life” in the paradigm of health that Bill Gates and his ilk are promoting and imposing on the entire world. Gates has created global alliances to impose top-down analysis and prescriptions for health problems. He gives money to define the problems, and then he uses his influence and money to impose the solutions. And in the process, he gets richer. His “funding” results in an erasure of democracy and biodiversity, of nature and culture. His “philanthropy” is not just philanthrocapitalism. It is philanthroimperialism.

The coronavirus pandemic and lockdown have revealed even more clearly how we are being reduced to objects to be controlled, with our bodies and minds as the new colonies to be invaded. Empires create colonies, colonies enclose the commons of the indigenous living communities and turn them into sources of raw material to be extracted for profits. This linear, extractive logic is unable to see the intimate relations that sustain life in the natural world. It is blind to diversity, cycles of renewal, values of giving and sharing, and the power and potential of self-organizing and mutuality. It is blind to the waste it creates and to the violence it unleashes. The extended coronavirus lockdown has been a lab experiment for a future without humanity.

On March 26, at a peak of the coronavirus pandemic and in the midst of the lockdown, Microsoft was granted a patent by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Patent WO 060606 declares that “Human Body Activity associated with a task provided to a user may be used in a mining process of a cryptocurrency system….”

The “body activity” that Microsoft wants to mine includes radiation emitted from the human body, brain activities, body fluid flow, blood flow, organ activity, body movement such as eye movement, facial movement and muscle movement, as well as any other activities that can be sensed and represented by images, waves, signals, texts, numbers, degrees or any other information or data.

The patent is an intellectual property claim over our bodies and minds. In colonialism, colonizers assign themselves the right to take the land and resources of indigenous people, extinguish their cultures and sovereignty, and in extreme cases exterminate them. Patent WO 060606 is a declaration by Microsoft that our bodies and minds are its new colonies. We are mines of “raw material” — the data extracted from our bodies. Rather than sovereign, spiritual, conscious, intelligent beings making decisions and choices with wisdom and ethical values about the impacts of our actions on the natural and social world of which we are a part, and to which we are inextricably related, we are “users.” A “user” is a consumer without choice in the digital empire.

But that’s not the totality of Gates’ vision. In fact, it is even more sinister — to colonize the minds, bodies and spirits of our children before they even have the opportunity to understand what freedom and sovereignty look and feel like, beginning with the most vulnerable.

In May 2020, Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York announced a partnership with the Gates Foundation to “reinvent education.” Cuomo called Gates a visionary and argued that the pandemic has created “a moment in history when we can actually incorporate and advance [Gates’] ideas…all these buildings, all these physical classrooms—why with all the technology you have?”

In fact, Gates has been trying to dismantle the public education system of the U.S. for two decades. For him students are mines for data. That is why the indicators he promotes are attendance, college enrollment, and scores on a math and reading test, because these can be easily quantified and mined. In reimagining education, children will be monitored through surveillance systems to check if they are attentive while they are forced to take classes remotely, alone at home. The dystopia is one where children never return to schools, do not have a chance to play, do not have friends. It is a world without society, without relationships, without love and friendship.

As I look to the future in a world of Gates and Tech Barons, I see a humanity that is further polarized into large numbers of “throw away” people who have no place in the new Empire. Those who are included in the new Empire will be little more than digital slaves.

Or, we can resist. We can seed another future, deepen our democracies, reclaim our commons, regenerate the earth as living members of a One Earth Family, rich in our diversity and freedom, one in our unity and interconnectedness. It is a healthier future. It is one we must fight for. It is one we must claim.

We stand at a precipice of extinction. Will we allow our humanity as living, conscious, intelligent, autonomous beings to be extinguished by a greed machine that does not know limits and is unable to put a break on its colonization and destruction? Or will we stop the machine and defend our humanity, freedom and autonomy to protect life on earth?

The above is excerpted from Vandana Shiva’s book Oneness vs. the 1%: Shattering Illusions, Seeding Freedom (Chelsea Green Publishing, August 2020) and is reprinted with permission from the publisher via Independent Science News.

Vandana Shiva is a world-renowned environmental thinker and activist, a leader in the International Forum on Globalisation, and of the Slow Food Movement. Director of Navdanya and of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, and a tireless crusader for farmers’, peasants’, and women’s rights, she is the author and editor of a score of influential books, among them Making Peace with the Earth; Soil Not Oil; Globalization’s New Wars; Seed Sovereignty, Food Security: Women in the Vanguard; and Who Really Feeds the World?. Her latest book is Oneness vs the 1% (Chelsea Green Publishing, August 2020).

“CLIMATE LOCKDOWN” – The End Game Becomes Clear: Post-Human Future

by Christian Westbrook, Ice Age Farmer
September 26, 2020

A “Climate Lockdown,” to extend into perpetuity, reveals the true nature of #COVID1984: normalization of the police state, “climate tracing” and now “climate lockdown” as technocrats shove society towards their post-human future.

Their hand is forced as the Global Warming narrative breaks down and the Modern Grand Solar Minimum goes mainstream.

In their panic, they are seizing for total control — we are at a demarcation point: we either fight now, or forever lose the opportunity. Christian breaks it down on this Ice Age Farmer broadcast.



Available at Ice Age Farmer BitChute & YouTube channels.

Support Christian’s work:  http://patreon.com/iceagefarmer

Attorney Tom Renz w/ Jon Rappoport: Ohio Stands Up Against the Crushing of Human Rights Via This Fake COVID Narrative

by Solari Report w/ Jon Rappoport & Attorney Tom Renz
September 20, 2020



Available at Solari Report BitChute and YouTube channels.

[Mirrored at Truth Comes to Light Lbry & Brighteon channels.]

Ohio Stands Up!

Tom Renz website

Jon Rappoport’s website

Solari.com

How the “Greater Good” Is Used as a Tool of Social Control

by Academy of Ideas
September 22, 2020



[Mirrored at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Lbry & Brighteon channels.]

The following is a transcript of this video.

“The great citizens of a country are not those who bend the knee before authority but rather those who, against authority if need be, are adamant as to the honor and freedom of that country.”

Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death

Instead of respect for reason, open dialogue, freedom of speech and individual and property rights, political systems across the world are becoming increasingly authoritarian. Deceptions and lies, manipulation and propaganda, fear-mongering and psychological operations are all being used to justify political actions and policies that destroy life. How do politicians continue to convince the public to do away with their freedoms in favour of  heavy-handed government control? Why are so few people defending liberty when a world absent of it is a world of mass suffering? In this video we are going to examine these questions.

“…if freedom is regressing today throughout such a large part of the world, his is probably because the devices for enslavement have never been so cynically chosen or so effective, but also because her real defenders, through fatigue, through despair, or through a false idea of strategy and efficiency, have turned away from her.”

Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death

It is often said that one cannot solve a problem if one is not even cognizant of it, and herein lies one of the reasons freedom is retreating so rapidly from our world. Many people still believe themselves to be free and as Goethe wrote: “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Those who believe themselves to be free disregard the fact that to be governed in the modern world is to be

“…watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured [and] commanded, by beings who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so.”

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Accepting our lack of freedom is a necessary step to counteract this undesirable condition. For so long as we remain in denial of the chains of servitude that are upon us, we will do nothing to cast them aside. But when we acknowledge our chains we can begin to push back against them and in the process contribute to the creation of a better world, or as Camus noted:

“The task of men…is not to desert historical struggles nor to serve the cruel and inhuman elements in those struggles. It is rather to remain what they are, to help man against what is oppressing him, to favor freedom against the fatalities that close in upon it.…Man’s greatness…lies in his decision to be greater than his condition. And if his condition is unjust, he has only one way of overcoming it, which is to be just himself.”

Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death

But widespread ignorance as to the lack of freedom is not the only reason why freedom is retreating from the world. Rather, there is also an idea that has infected many minds and this idea, if not defeated, could prove to be the kiss of death for freedom in our generation. This idea is promoted by most politicians, indoctrinated into the youth at school and via popular culture, and championed by the vast majority of talking heads in the mainstream media. This idea is collectivism. To understand what collectivism is we must consider the question: “Does the individual exist for the sake of society? Or does society exist for the sake of individuals?” Those who adhere to collectivism believe that the individual exists for the sake of society and therefore that:

…the individual has to subordinate himself to, and conduct himself for, the benefit of society and to sacrifice his selfish private interests to the common good.”

Ludwig von Mises, Epistemological Problems of Economics

This collectivist mindset is foundational to communism, fascism and socialism: “The common good before the individual good.” proclaimed one collectivism’s most infamous adherents. (Adolf Hitler) The doctrine of collectivism has been put into practice by many dictators such as Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao. Death, destruction and suffering on a mass scale was the end-result in each case.

How does placing the good of society above the good of the individual tend toward such unfortunate outcomes? Is it not a display of compassion to sacrifice our personal interests for the greater good of our society? At first glance collectivism may seem to be a virtuous position to take, but on closer investigation a philosophical error called the fallacy of misplaced concreteness corrupts the practical application of this ideology. The fallacy of misplaced concreteness occurs when one treats what is merely an abstraction as an entity that exists in the real world. Collectivism, in claiming the individual must sacrifice his or her private interests for the sake of society, takes what is merely a concept – “society” – and treats such a concept as if it had a concrete existence, but as Jung points out:

““Society is nothing more than a term, a concept for the symbiosis of a group of human beings. A concept is not a carrier of life.”

Carl Jung, Volume 15 Practice of Psychotherapy

In contrast to the individual that has a real existence in the world, society is an abstraction used to represent an ever-changing collection of individuals living and interacting in proximity. As far and as wide as one looks, one will never find a concrete entity called society that we can point to and identify in the manner analogous to how we can identify an individual.

“Society does not exist apart from the thoughts and actions of people. It does not have “interests” and does not aim at anything. The same is valid for all other collectives.”

Ludwig von Mises, The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science

Or as Jung put it:

“. . .the “nation” (like the “State”) is a personified concept …The nation has no life of its own apart from the individual, and is therefore not an end in itself…. All life is individual life, in which alone the ultimate meaning is to be found.

Carl Jung, The Swiss Line in the European Spectrum

As a society is a concept it cannot think, act, speak or choose, and therefore, an individual, or group of individuals, must be granted the ability to define the so-called societal greater good and then granted the power to force individuals to act in service of this good. Since the dawn of civilization, it has been ruling classes who anoint themselves the arbiters of the greater good, and so not surprisingly the greater good, more often than not, merely amounts to the good of those in power, or as the 20^th century psychologist Nathaniel Branden wrote:

“With such [collectivist] systems, the individual has always been a victim, twisted against him-or-her-self and commanded to be “unselfish” in sacrificial service to some allegedly higher value called God or pharaoh or emperor or king or society or the state or the race or the proletariat – or the cosmos. It is a strange paradox of our history that this doctrine – which tells us that we are to regard ourselves, in effect, as sacrificial animals – has been generally accepted as a doctrine representing benevolence and love for humankind. From the first individual…who was sacrificed on an altar for the good of the tribe, to the heretics and dissenters burned at the stake for the good of the populace or the glory of God, to the millions exterminated in…slave-labor camps for the good of the race or of the proletariat, it is this [collectivist] morality that has served as justification for every dictatorship and every atrocity, past or present.”

Nathaniel Branden, The Psychology of Romantic Love

The philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, a staunch collectivist who exerted a profound influence on the ideas of Karl Marx, promoted collectivisms’ negation of the individual with the following words:

“A single person, I need hardly say, is something subordinate, and as such he must dedicate himself to the ethical whole. Hence, if the state claims life, the individual must surrender it…All the worth which the human being possesses…he possesses only through the State.”

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Elements of the Philosophy of Right

Contrary to the philosophical trickery promoted by collectivism, neither the “greater good” of society nor the state nor any other concept used to describe a symbiosis of human beings is superior to flesh-and-blood individuals, whose spontaneous actions are the real creative and generative force in the world. As the 19^th century British philosopher Auberon Herbert wrote,

“The individual is king, and all other things exist for the service of the king.”

Auberon Herbert, Lost in the Region of Phrases

Or as he further explained:

“[The individual] is included in many wholes – his school, his college, his club, his profession, his town or county, his church, his political party, his nation…but he is always greater than them all…All these various wholes, without any exception….exist for the sake of the individual. They exist to do his service; they exist for his profit and use.”

Auberon Herbert, Lost in the Region of Phrases

The conviction that “the individual is king” informed the ideas of the Enlightenment thinkers of the 17th and 18th centuries and led to a rapid awakening to the vital connection between freedom and the individual rights of life, liberty, and property.  Generally speaking, individual rights specify that:

“The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily or mental and spiritual.”

John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

Those who support individual rights are not motivated by an insensitivity to the plight and suffering of others, but rather by the recognition that in granting each of us the freedom to pursue our own good, social cooperation, the division of labour and a prosperous society emerge in a bottom-up manner and thus the ability to help others also improves. For without the wealth generating mechanism of freedom all the good intentions in the world will not clothe, house and feed the poor. Collectivists claim the opposite. An emphasis on the rights of the individual, they suggest, rather than on the greater good, tends to inhibit social cooperation and promote an atomized population in which every man and woman is an island left to fend for themself. But here collectivists have it backwards. We are naturally social animals and so the atomization of individuals only results when a government, under the guise of the “greater good”, is granted the power to enforce social isolation or else to sow the seeds of fear and suspicion amongst friends and neighbours. In his classic study of 20^th century collectivist political systems, the medical doctor Joost Meerloo noted that

“…behind the iron curtain the most prominent complaint in the totalitarian system was the feeling of mental isolation. The individual feels alone and continually on the alert. There is only mutual suspicion.”

Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind

Carl Jung, who lived through the totalitarianism which swept across mid-20^th century Europe, likewise observed:

“The mass State has no intention of promoting mutual understanding and the relationship of man to man; it strives…for atomization, for the psychic isolation of the individual.”

Carl Jung

The best way to promote social cooperation and a prosperous society is not through top-down centralized control, but to remove the clamps of control and to let individuals make their own choices with respect to their own lives. And this is what a society structured on individual rights accomplishes. Live and let live, as the age-old adage puts it. Or as David Kelley explains:

“[Individual rights] leave individuals responsible for living their own lives and meeting their own needs, and they provide the freedom to carry out those responsibilities. Individuals are free to act on the basis of their own judgment, to pursue their own ends, and to use and dispose of the material resources they have acquired by their efforts. Those rights reflect the assumption that individuals are ends in themselves, who may not be used against their will for social purposes.”

David Kelley, A Life of One’s Own: Individual Rights and the Welfare State

As individual rights leave us free to pursue our own good in our own way so long as we do not aggress upon the person or property of others, it follows that each of us has the right to freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association and assembly, the right to property and bodily autonomy, and the right to work and retain the fruits of our labor.

“Man is absolute lord of his own person and possessions, equal to the greatest, and subject to nobody.” (Locke)

John Locke, Second Treatise

Individual rights are universal in that they apply to all human beings everywhere:

“…rights exist regardless of whether they are implemented in the legal constitution of a given country.”

David Kelley, A Life of One’s Own: Individual Rights and the Welfare State

And they are inalienable in that they cannot be given or taken away by any man, government, or institution.

“A man’s natural rights are his own, against the whole world; and any infringement of them is equally a crime…whether committed by one man, calling himself a robber…or by millions, calling themselves a government.”

Lysander Spooner, No Treason The Constitution of No Authority

When a society and the judicial system are predicated on a deep respect for and commitment to individual rights, the individual is king and therefore the individual is free. But when individual rights are transgressed under the pretext of public safety or the “greater good”, the individual turns into mere political property which any mob or government or institution in power can oppress, detain, or eliminate if deemed necessary. As Lysander Spooner explained:

“…there is no difference…between political and chattel slavery. The former, no less than the latter, denies a man’s ownership of himself and the products of his labor; and asserts that other men may own him, and dispose of him and his property, for their uses, and at their pleasure.”

Lysander Spooner, No Treason The Constitution of No Authority

In the modern world we are moving ever closer to a widespread acceptance of collectivism and thus the condition of political slavery to which Spooner alludes. At times such as these it is useful to recognize that while the majority are complicit in their servitude, in standing on the side of freedom, we unite ourselves in spirit with all other guardians of freedom across the globe.

“I rebel – therefore we exist.”

Albert Camus, The Rebel

Or as Camus Further wrote:

“Every insubordinate person, when he rises up against oppression, reaffirms thereby the solidarity of all men.” (Camus)

 

Community and Countries United! We Say NO!

by Children’s Health Defense
September 14, 2020



Original video available at Children’s Health Defense YouTube channel.

[As a service to protect truth from censorship, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, LBRY & Brighteon channels. All credit goes to the original source of this video.]

Children’s Health Defense is proud to stand with organizations and countries as we work together to pushback on medical mandates, unsafe vaccines, and increasingly totalitarian governments.

In the coming months, these issues will be front and center in discussions around the world as people decide whether to cling tightly to their freedoms or blindly follow whatever edicts are put in place by corrupt government officials and profit-driven corporations.

The making of this video was accomplished through the teamwork of organizations and individuals who will not stand by and watch liberty be stripped away from citizens little by little until total tyranny reigns.

Please join us in standing up and demanding that our individual and medical freedom rights are forever protected. The time to be courageous is now.

From 9/11 to Covid-19: Nineteen Years of Permanent “Emergency”

by Ryan McMaken, Mises Institute
September 11, 2020

During March and April of this year—during the early days of the covid-19 panic—each day came to be accompanied by a general feeling of dread. As new emergency orders and decrees rained down from governors, mayors, and faceless health bureaucrats, I wondered, What new awful thing will governments think up today? As business and churches were closed by government edict, politicians increasingly were threatening to arrest and jail ordinary citizens for doing things that were perfectly legal mere days before.

Even worse was the new orthodoxy that seemed to immediately spring up. All dissent from the new regime of lockdowns and business seizures was denounced and mocked. We were now all expected to chant new slogans. “We’re all in this together. Flatten the curve.”

There was no sign of any sizable opposition. The courts were silent. So-called due process was abandoned.

But for those of us who are old enough to remember the dark times that followed the 9/11 attacks, the feelings of dread had a familiarity to them.

The blind sloganeering, the anger toward dissent, and the obeisance toward politicians who were credited with “keeping us safe” brought back bad old memories.

They were memories of the days and months and years that followed the 9/11 attacks. These were the days of so many new assaults on basic human freedoms and human rights. They were days when the public was bullied into accepting whatever new scheme politicians were dreaming up in the name of keeping us “safe.”

In many ways, the current hysteria is even worse than that of the early years of the twenty-first century. It affects the everyday lives of countless Americans in ways the 9/11 panic did not.  But the current crisis is nonetheless very much a continuation of the attitudes and paranoia that surged nineteen years ago.

Trust the Experts!

Then, as now, the public was repeatedly instructed to trust the experts and not question government officials in any way. This manifested itself in a couple of ways. First of all, there was new legislation like the so-called Patriot Act, a smorgasbord of new freedom-destroying federal initiatives that would authorize all sorts of new spying and search powers by the federal government. Soon after, of course, came new additional powers, such as the president’s power to declare anyone an “enemy combatant” and subject to torture, imprisonment, and forfeiture of all legal rights.

Those who objected were denounced as reckless and naïve, and unconcerned for human life. Torture, we were told, was absolutely necessary for public safety. The opposition was said to be unfit to comment on the matter or question federal powers because the “experts”—i.e., CIA personnel, etc.—understood the real dangers.

The trust-the-experts claim was trotted out again when the Bush administration and the CIA began to collaborate to “prove” that Saddam Hussein was somehow responsible for the 9/11 attacks and was harboring “weapons of mass destruction” (WMDs) to use on Americans. Politicians and bureaucrats went into high gear, creating countless reports, studies, and claims from alleged witnesses showing that the Iraqi regime was just itching to launch its WMDs at innocents around the world.

The experts, of course, were wrong. Moreover, many were simply lying. There were no WMDs, and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. But millions of Americans believed the experts, and thus believed the lies.

And now we see the same thing today. We’re repeatedly ordered to trust the official arbiters of scientific truth. Never mind the fact, however, than many other experts have dissented on a wide variety of topics, from the lethality of covid-19 to the wisdom of lockdowns. But they’re not the real experts, we’re told. Then as now, it’s only acceptable to believe the experts who support untrammeled growth in state power.

Support the Troops!

Any outbreak of panic, fear, and uncritical support for despotism requires its own vocabulary. Nowadays we have all sorts of new slogans. These include “we’re all in this together,” “flatten the curve,” “this is the new normal,” “#stayhome,” and “sixfeetapart.”

Many of the slogans are delivered in a cheerful tone, but they’re really joyless commands, issued to communicate to the hearer that obedience to these declarations is not really optional. Either you obey, or you are essentially a murderer.

The world of post-9/11 hysteria was similar. We had slogans like “support the troops,” “thank you for your service,” and “if you see something, say something.”

Other catchphrases weren’t quite at the level of slogans, but they were invoked repeatedly to encourage uncritical acceptance of the official government line. Examples include “they hate us because we’re free,” “you’re with us or your with the terrorists,” and “we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here.”

Due to the lack of social media back then, we didn’t have quite the proliferation of slogans we have now. Had we had hashtags in 2003, it’s likely we would have regularly encountered ones like #globalwaronterror, #wmds, and #supportthetroops.

The use of these phrases also functioned as a means to “virtue signal.” In 2002, putting a yellow ribbon magnet on one’s car or sporting an American flag lapel pin were ways to publicly show one’s loyalty to the cause and show opposition to one’s less enthusiastic neighbors and relatives who “hate America.”

The real message behind these phrases and signals, of course, was that we are required to support the regime and its “new normal” whatever it may be. In 2001, that meant supporting new wars while ignoring the Bill of Rights, and turning a blind eye to abuses like CIA torture programs. Today it means calling the cops on your neighbor for not social distancing. It means screaming at people for not wearing a mask. It means blindly trusting the “experts” so long as those experts support unlimited government power.

Be Always Afraid!

The “if you see something, say something” slogan was part of a larger effort to remind the public that it should live in a state of constant fear. Maybe your neighbor is plotting to blow you up. It’s better to be safe than sorry: spy on your neighbors for the FBI.

Many people now forget that in the days immediately following 9/11, Americans were buying gas masks and planning backyard bunkers. The then new Department of Homeland Security in February 2003 advised Americans to prepare for a chemical attack from terrorists:

Stash away duct tape and pre-measured plastic sheeting for future use. Experts tell us that a safe room inside your house or apartment can help protect you from airborne contaminants for approximately five hours – that could be just enough time for a chemical agent to blow away.

For those who wanted all the “best” new information on how to prepare, the federal government created the website ready.gov, complete with a section for children called Ready Kids, where kids could learn—in the spirit of the old Duck and Cover videos from the Cold War—how to prepare for an attack from terrorists.

And then there was the color-coded Homeland Security Advisory System. This was a visual aid which allowed the federal government to let us know just how much we should fear terrorism on any given day. Of course, the government always kept the warning level at “elevated” or “high.” It never dropped down to “low,” of course, lest some form of terrorism take place on that day and the “experts” look like they were asleep at the switch.

Today, of course, we have countless websites, models, and news stories devoted to reminding the public that it must constantly fear covid-19 infection. Were there a color-coded alert system for the current crisis, we can be quite confident it would be set each day to “high” or “severe.” As with the 9/11 panic, this all serves to encourage unquestioning obedience to government authorities and to send the message there is no time for political debate, dissent, or even due process. Our “leaders” keep us safe and we must defer to their judgment completely.

The media itself remains an accomplice in this. Then, as now, media pundits and “journalists” side reflexively with officials promoting fear and obedience to the state.

Living with the Aftermath

It takes many years for a society to recover from fits of panic and paranoia such as these. Nineteen years after 9/11, the federal government still has the power to spy on law-abiding Americans with impunity. It still has the power to simply assassinate American citizens—including children—without any due process. American police have been militarized with “surplus” military hardware from various failed and failing wars. The taxpayers will still be paying interest on the trillions of dollars spent on disastrous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan decades from now. Thousands of American troops died for nothing in conflicts that have done nothing to make any American safer. (Hundreds of thousands of innocent foreigners have died in those same conflicts.)

Thanks to the reaction to 9/11, governments in the US are now far larger, far more expensive, and far less limited by laws and constitutions than in the past. This is what happens when a country believes itself to be in a constant state of emergency. Due process is out the window. Governments get away with far more than would have been the case otherwise.

This process, which was so greatly accelerated after 9/11, has now been supercharged by the current panic of covid-19. Government officials issue “laws” and decrees without any debate and without any due process. Americans are ruined, arrested, destroyed, and humiliated in the name of “safety.” Those who dissent and seek to limit the regime’s powers are silenced, threatened, arrested, shouted down, and ignored.

This is America in a state of permanent emergency. The justification for the regime’s ever growing power changes over time. But the results are the same.

Mile Markers of Tyranny: Losing Our Freedoms on the Road from 9/11 to COVID-19

by John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute
September 8, 2020

“No one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end.”—George Orwell

You can map the nearly 20-year journey from the 9/11 attacks to the COVID-19 pandemic by the freedoms we’ve lost along the way.

The road we have been traveling has been littered with the wreckage of our once-vaunted liberties, especially those enshrined in the Fourth Amendment.

The assaults on our freedoms that began with the post-9/11 passage of the USA Patriot Act laid the groundwork for the eradication of every vital constitutional safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse.

The COVID-19 pandemic with its lockdowns, mask mandates, surveillance, snitch lines for Americans to report their fellow citizens for engaging in risky behavior, and veiled threats of forced vaccinations has merely provided the architects of the American police state with an opportunity to flex their muscles.

These have become mile markers on the road to tyranny.

Free speech, the right to protest, the right to challenge government wrongdoing, due process, a presumption of innocence, the right to self-defense, accountability and transparency in government, privacy, press, sovereignty, assembly, bodily integrity, representative government: all of these and more have become casualties in the government’s ongoing war on the American people. In the process, the American people have been treated like enemy combatants, to be spied on, tracked, scanned, frisked, searched, subjected to all manner of intrusions, intimidated, invaded, raided, manhandled, censored, silenced, shot at, locked up, denied due process, and killed.

What the past 20 years have proven is that the U.S. government poses a greater threat to our individual and collective freedoms and national security than any terrorist, foreign threat or pandemic.

In allowing ourselves to be distracted by terror drills, foreign wars, color-coded warnings, partisan politics, pandemic scares, and other carefully constructed exercises in propaganda, sleight of hand, and obfuscation, we failed to recognize that the U.S. government—the government that was supposed to be a “government of the people, by the people, for the people”—has become the enemy of the people.

Indeed, the U.S. government has grown so corrupt, greedy, power-hungry and tyrannical over the course of the past 240-plus years that our constitutional republic has since given way to an idiocracy, and representative government has given way to a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves) and a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens).

Although the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments to the Constitution—was adopted as a means of protecting the people against government tyranny, in America today, the government does whatever it wants, freedom be damned.

“We the people” have been terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance by a government that cares nothing for our lives or our liberties.

The bogeyman’s names and faces have changed over time (terrorism, the war on drugs, illegal immigration, a viral pandemic), but the end result remains the same: in the so-called name of national security, the Constitution has been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts.

What we are left with today is but a shadow of the robust document adopted more than two centuries ago. Sadly, most of the damage has been inflicted upon the Bill of Rights.

Here is what it means to live under the Constitution, post-9/11 and in the midst of a COVID-19 pandemic.

The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom to speak your mind, assemble and protest nonviolently without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. In other words, Americans should not be silenced by the government. To the founders, all of America was a free speech zone.

Despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Increasingly, Americans are being arrested and charged with bogus “contempt of cop” charges such as “disrupting the peace” or “resisting arrest” for daring to film police officers engaged in harassment or abusive practices. Journalists are being prosecuted for reporting on whistleblowers. States are passing legislation to muzzle reporting on cruel and abusive corporate practices. Religious ministries are being fined for attempting to feed and house the homeless. Protesters are being tear-gassed, beaten, arrested and forced into “free speech zones.” And under the guise of “government speech,” the courts have reasoned that the government can discriminate freely against any First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum.

The Second Amendment was intended to guarantee “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Essentially, this amendment was intended to give the citizenry the means to resist tyrannical government. Yet while gun ownership has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court as an individual citizen right, Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against SWAT team raids and government agents armed to the teeth with military weapons better suited to the battlefield. As such, this amendment has been rendered null and void.

The Third Amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military by prohibiting the military from entering any citizen’s home without “the consent of the owner.” With the police increasingly training like the military, acting like the military, and posing as military forces—complete with heavily armed SWAT teams, military weapons, assault vehicles, etc.—it is clear that we now have what the founders feared most—a standing army on American soil.

The Fourth Amendment prohibits government agents from conducting surveillance on you or touching you or invading you, unless they have some evidence that you’re up to something criminal. In other words, the Fourth Amendment ensures privacy and bodily integrity. Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment has suffered the greatest damage in recent years and has been all but eviscerated by an unwarranted expansion of police powers that include strip searches and even anal and vaginal searches of citizens, surveillance (corporate and otherwise) and intrusions justified in the name of fighting terrorism, as well as the outsourcing of otherwise illegal activities to private contractors.

The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment work in tandem. These amendments supposedly ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without the right to an attorney and a fair trial before a civilian judge. However, in the new suspect society in which we live, where surveillance is the norm, these fundamental principles have been upended. Certainly, if the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial. Yet when the populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution—civic education has virtually disappeared from most school curriculums—that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears. However, as a growing number of citizens are coming to realize, the power of the jury to nullify the government’s actions—and thereby help balance the scales of justice—is not to be underestimated. Jury nullification reminds the government that “we the people” retain the power to ultimately determine what laws are just.

The Eighth Amendment is similar to the Sixth in that it is supposed to protect the rights of the accused and forbid the use of cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Supreme Court’s determination that what constitutes “cruel and unusual” should be dependent on the “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” leaves us with little protection in the face of a society lacking in morals altogether.

The Ninth Amendment provides that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution are nonetheless retained by the people. Popular sovereignty—the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers—is clearly evident in this amendment. However, it has since been turned on its head by a centralized federal government that sees itself as supreme and which continues to pass more and more laws that restrict our freedoms under the pretext that it has an “important government interest” in doing so.

As for the Tenth Amendment’s reminder that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution, that assurance of a system of government in which power is divided among local, state and national entities has long since been rendered moot by the centralized Washington, DC, power elite—the president, Congress and the courts.

If there is any sense to be made from this recitation of freedoms lost, it is simply this: our individual freedoms have been eviscerated so that the government’s powers could be expanded.

Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats. Rather, I’m referring to the Deep State—the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that has set itself beyond the reach of the law and is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.

This is a government that, in conjunction with its corporate partners, views the citizenry as consumers and bits of data to be bought, sold and traded.

This is a government that spies on and treats its citizens as if they have no right to privacy, especially in their own homes.

This is a government that is laying the groundwork to weaponize the public’s biomedical data as a convenient means by which to penalize certain “unacceptable” social behaviors.

This is a government that subjects its people to scans, searches, pat downs and other indignities by the TSA and VIPR raids on so-called “soft” targets like shopping malls and bus depots by black-clad, Darth Vader look-alikes.

This is a government that uses fusion centers, which represent the combined surveillance efforts of federal, state and local law enforcement, to track the citizenry’s movements, record their conversations, and catalogue their transactions.

This is a government whose wall-to-wall surveillance has given rise to a suspect society in which the burden of proof has been reversed such that Americans are now assumed guilty until or unless they can prove their innocence.

This is a government that treats its people like second-class citizens who have no rights, and is working overtime to stigmatize and dehumanize any and all who do not fit with the government’s plans for this country.

This is a government that uses free speech zones, roving bubble zones and trespass laws to silence, censor and marginalize Americans and restrict their First Amendment right to speak truth to power. The kinds of speech the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation, prosecution and outright elimination include: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, left-wing speech, extremist speech, politically incorrect speech, etc.

This is a government that adopts laws that criminalize Americans for otherwise lawful activities such as holding religious studies at home, growing vegetables in their yard, and collecting rainwater.

This is a government that persists in renewing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which allows the president and the military to arrest and detain American citizens indefinitely.

This is a government that saddled us with the Patriot Act, which opened the door to all manner of government abuses and intrusions on our privacy.

This is a government that, in direct opposition to the dire warnings of those who founded our country, has allowed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish a standing army by way of programs that transfer surplus military hardware to local and state police.

This is a government that has militarized American’s domestic police, equipping them with military weapons such as “tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft,” in addition to armored vehicles, sound cannons and the like.

This is a government that has provided cover to police when they shoot and kill unarmed individuals just for standing a certain way, or moving a certain way, or holding something—anything—that police could misinterpret to be a gun, or igniting some trigger-centric fear in a police officer’s mind that has nothing to do with an actual threat to their safety.

This is a government that has allowed private corporations to get rich at taxpayer expense by locking people up in private prisons for non-violent crimes, while providing Corporate America with a source of cheap labor.

This is a government that has created a Constitution-free zone within 100 miles inland of the border around the United States, paving the way for Border Patrol agents to search people’s homes, intimately probe their bodies, and rifle through their belongings, all without a warrant. Incredibly, nearly 66% of Americans (2/3 of the U.S. population, 197.4 million people) now live within that 100-mile-deep, Constitution-free zone.

This is a government that treats public school students as if they were prison inmates, enforcing zero tolerance policies that criminalize childish behavior, failing to teach them their rights under the Constitution, and indoctrinating them with teaching that emphasizes rote memorization and test-taking over learning, synthesizing and critical thinking.

This is a government that is operating in the negative on every front: it’s spending far more than what it makes (and takes from the American taxpayers) and it is borrowing heavily (from foreign governments and Social Security) to keep the government operating and keep funding its endless wars abroad. Meanwhile, the nation’s sorely neglected infrastructure—railroads, water pipelines, ports, dams, bridges, airports and roads—is rapidly deteriorating.

This is a government whose gun violence—inflicted on unarmed individuals by battlefield-trained SWAT teams, militarized police, and bureaucratic government agents trained to shoot first and ask questions later—poses a greater threat to the safety and security of the nation than any mass shooter. There are now reportedly more bureaucratic (non-military) government agents armed with high-tech, deadly weapons than U.S. Marines.

This is a government that has allowed the presidency to become a dictatorship operating above and beyond the law, regardless of which party is in power.

This is a government that treats dissidents, whistleblowers and freedom fighters as enemies of the state.

This is a government—a warring empire—that forces its taxpayers to pay for wars abroad that serve no other purpose except to expand the reach of the military industrial complex.

This is a government that has in recent decades unleashed untold horrors upon the world—including its own citizenry—in the name of global conquest, the acquisition of greater wealth, scientific experimentation, and technological advances, all packaged in the guise of the greater good.

This is a government that allows its agents to break laws with immunity while average Americans get the book thrown at them.

This is a government that speaks in a language of force. What is this language of force? Militarized police. Riot squads. Camouflage gear. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Surveillance cameras. Kevlar vests. Drones. Lethal weapons. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Stun grenades. Arrests of journalists. Crowd control tactics. Intimidation tactics. Brutality. Contempt of cop charges.

This is a government that justifies all manner of government tyranny and power grabs in the so-called name of national security, national crises and national emergencies.

This is a government that exports violence worldwide, with one of this country’s most profitable exports being weapons. Indeed, the United States, the world’s largest exporter of arms, has been selling violence to the world in order to prop up the military industrial complex and maintain its endless wars abroad.

This is a government that is consumed with squeezing every last penny out of the population and seemingly unconcerned if essential freedoms are trampled in the process.

This is a government that believes it has the authority to search, seize, strip, scan, spy on, probe, pat down, taser, and arrest any individual at any time and for the slightest provocation, the Constitution be damned.

In sum, this is a government that routinely undermines the Constitution and rides roughshod over the rights of the citizenry.

This is not a government that believes in, let alone upholds, freedom.

So where does that leave us?

As always, the first step begins with “we the people.”

Those who gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights believed that the government exists at the behest of its citizens. It is there to protect, defend and even enhance our freedoms, not violate them. Our power as a citizenry comes from our ability to agree and stand united on certain freedom principles that should be non-negotiable.

It was no idle happenstance that the Constitution opens with these three powerful words: “We the people.” In other words, we have the power to make and break the government. We are the masters and they are the servants. We the American people—the citizenry—are the arbiters and ultimate guardians of America’s welfare, defense, liberty, laws and prosperity.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we have managed to keep the wolf at bay so far. Barely.

Our national priorities need to be re-prioritized. For instance, some argue that we need to make America great again. I, for one, would prefer to make America free again.

Statism: The Most Dangerous Religion

featuring Larken Rose

by Liberty or Death Media
September 25, 2014



Transcript provided by TCTL:

Quite simply, a statist is somebody who believes in having a state.  Basically, anybody who wants government.

Government is the exercise of authority over a people or place.  And that is basically the “right to rule”.

It’s not just the ability to control other people, because most people have that in one way or another. It’s the “right”; it’s the idea that certain people — it’s legitimate for them to forcibly control others.

Belief in government is a purely faith-based, indoctrinated belief. It doesn’t actually make any sense, in practical terms, or in evidence, or in logic.

For years I thought it was a really good analogy to compare government to religion.  And only a few years ago did I realize it’s not an analogy.

It IS a religion, in every way. It has a superhuman deity, government, that has rights that mortals don’t. It isn’t restricted by the rules that apply to mortals. It issues commands. And if you disobey you’re a “sinner” — and you deserve to be punished.

The faithful, the true believers, they have great faith in these bizarre rituals:  Elections, and legislation, and appointments.

And they dress up and then they say: “Ta-da! Now I represent government. I know I just look like a person, but I don’t just have the rights of a person because I represent the magical deity called government. And so I’m allowed to demand your money, and boss you around, and hurt you if you disobey me. I’m acting on behalf of government, and it has commandments called laws. And these laws aren’t just the threats of humans, they are decrees from something superhuman. And so all you good people out there should bow to this deity, and if you want the world fixed, this is what you pray to. And we give you certain rituals of how to pray to it, and when you’re supposed to pray to it.”

Pray to the god to make the world what you wish it was and to save you from all the uncertainties of reality.

The doctrine people are taught is just patently absurd, and a bunch of examples of that are like consent of the governed.

There isn’t such thing. If it’s consent, it’s voluntary. If it’s being governed, it’s not.

The actual given excuse is: “We have the right to rule you because you decided we did, even if you didn’t vote for us, and even if you oppose everything we do to you.”

And: “Well, they represent us.”

Okay, they “represent us” by doing a lot of things that we don’t have the right to do?

And they “represent us” by bossing us around and taking our money?

Like I bet if I went to my neighbor and bossed him around, and took his money, and said “I’m representing you”,  he would say, “What?! What a stupid thing to say!”

To me, the most insane is: “we are the government“, which you hear everywhere.

And I asked somebody: “Wait, do you really not notice that there’s a group of people over there, they issue threats, and they call them laws, and they issue demands for money, and they call it taxes, and if you disobey, they send men with guns to hurt you. Now, are you really incapable of distinguishing between yourself and them?”

One of the biggest giveaways that the belief in government is a complete blind-faith religious belief, is the way people respond.

One very easy line of questioning is: “Can you give somebody else a right that you don’t have?”

And everybody says,  “Well no, of course not.”

“Well how about you and your buddy? Can the two of you give someone else a right that neither of you have?”

“Well, no.” And it only takes a couple more questions to get to, “Well, how did Congress get rights that you don’t have?”

They get emotional and they get angry, or they get defensive, or they run away.

They didn’t come to this belief through reasoning and evidence, and logic.

They came there by having a blind-faith belief smashed into their heads starting before they could even talk.

It’s just something they were taught to believe — that there’s this thing called “authority”. And that it’s allowed to do things human beings aren’t, and that people have an obligation to obey it. To the point where some people—they weren’t gods or anything—some people wrote down a thing on paper and then they called it “legislation”, and they did certain rituals, and then people go around saying “well, this is law.”

Most people literally feel physical discomfort and fear at the thought of disobeying anyone in “authority”.

Most people can’t say, “No, I’m not going to do that”, because it goes against their years and years of programming and indoctrination that trains them to think: “If you do as you’re told, you’re good. If you don’t, you’re bad.”

And that’s the message of school, and that message gets pounded into people’s heads.

Students are taught over and over and over and over again, every stinking day they’re in school that the measure of your virtue is how well you obey authority. The whole approval-disapproval thing.

The one thing you learn in school is: if you do as you’re told you get approval and reward, and if you don’t do as you’re told, you get disdain and condemnation. They’ll make sure everybody knows you’re a bad person because you didn’t do as you were told.

The belief in authority leads everybody — good people, bad people, everything in between — to advocate and do things they wouldn’t otherwise do. Bad things they wouldn’t otherwise do.

Including cops, because the cops really and truly believe that they have the right to do things that I don’t have the right to do and you don’t have the right to do.

The only reason most of them do what they do is because they believe in authority, and they really believe that legislation gives them an exemption from morality.

So that when they do something and someone says, “Hey, what you’re doing is bad.”

“Hey, I don’t make the law, I just enforce it. I’m not responsible for my actions. I’m just a tool of some weird thing somewhere else called “government. You can’t blame me for what I am personally doing because I’m not really doing it.”

As loony as that is, that’s what most of them will say whenever somebody says, “Hey, what you’re doing is wrong. It’s not okay to lock people up for smoking marijuana. It’s not okay.”

You know, all the ways in which “law enforcement” initiates violence against non-violent people. And if you bring that up to them, they literally talk as if they didn’t do it.

The only reason they do that is because they were taught the lie of authority and government and law, along with everyone else. And then they were told,”You’re just a tool of the thing called ‘law’, and that makes it so you have rights that other people don’t have. So you don’t have to feel bad about physically assaulting non-violent people, because ‘the law’ says it’s okay.”

It really is just permission to ignore your conscience, by saying “You have rights that other people don’t.”

You don’t have the right to tell other people what habit to have on your own.

You don’t have the right to extort people on your own.

But once you’re ‘law enforcement’, then, not only is it okay, it’s noble and great to go around robbing people and bossing them around.

That is the biggest danger of the belief in authority. It tricks good people into condoning or doing really nasty, horrible, violent things because they think: “Well, this is okay if government and authority does it.”

They are raised by their parents, by the school, by the government, by the culture, by all the authoritarian messages built into everything to think that obedience is a virtue.

And when you raise a culture to think that, and you get one nasty psycho at the top who says: “Hey, go do bad stuff”, people say, “Well, I have to follow orders. I have to obey the law. I have to do as I’m told because that’s a virtue.” And then good people march off and do evil stuff.

I’m not scared of the Maos and the Stalins and the Hitlers, I’m scared of the thousands or millions of people that hallucinate them to be authority and so do their bidding, and pay for their empires, and carry out their orders.

I don’t care if there’s one loony with a stupid mustache. He’s not a threat if the people do not believe in authority.

Some people assume that, well, you must trust everybody if you don’t want government. That’s not at all true. I don’t nearly trust everybody, but if I don’t trust people to run their own lives, why on earth would I trust them to be in a position of power where they can forcibly run other people’s lives?

Really what it boils down to is saying: “I don’t trust people. People are untrustworthy and unpredictable. So my solution is to take some of those people — some of the most untrustworthy around — give them permission to violently control us all. And that will protect us from the untrustworthiness of mankind.”

Okay, you’re so scared of the average man out there, and so thankful for government. Let me ask you, who has taken more of your money under threat of force? Private people threatening you? Or agents of authority threatening you?

How many murders are committed by private people compared to how many are committed by people acting on behalf of authority? It’s not even close.

The number of murders committed in the name of law enforcement, and government, and authority completely dwarfs private murder.

Even governments killing the people of other countries is small compared to them killing their own people.

In the last 100 years, over 270 million human beings were killed by their own governments, not counting war.

That first step is always the hardest — to get someone to dare to set aside his blind faith long enough to think about things.

To back up enough to say: “Maybe government isn’t even legitimate at all.”

It takes a lot for people indoctrinated into the faith to dare to think of those literally blasphemous ideas.

That no, those people in Washington don’t have the right to rule. Their threats aren’t “laws”, they’re just threats.

Their demands aren’t “taxes”, it’s just extortion.

And that really feels like heresy because it is! It is heresy against the god called “government”.

I now have a huge amount of hope, because I see an acceleration of the number of people who dare to think about these things.

And now the number of people able to have this conversation is just hugely exploding. And they’re still a minority, but that exponential curve — I don’t think it’s stopping. I really think the cult of statism is as good as dead.

Ultimately, I think the belief in government is doomed for the exact same reasons that the belief in a flat Earth was doomed.

There’s too many people pointing out the utter, inherent insanity in the belief, and that’s just not going to go away.

Nobody who understands self-ownership, and understands why authority is inherently bogus, wakes up the next day and says: “You know what, suddenly I think I should do whatever the politicians say.”

I think, really, humanity is just beginning to wake up to what it’s supposed to be.

Humanity wasn’t meant to be a domesticated species, owned by a ruling class.

Every human being owns himself; is in charge of his own life.

I’d like to see actual rational, moral civilization in my lifetime. But, we are going to get there. Sooner or later, we are totally going to get there.

The lie will never outlive the truth forever.

Connect with Larken Rose  BitChute | Youtube

Connect with Larken Rose  BitChute | Youtube

Source:  The Daily Bell

by Joe Jarvis
April 26, 2017

What do you call it when someone takes 100% of your labor by force? Slavery.

Slavery is being forced to work against your will for the benefit of your master, your owner. The only reason they own the products of your labor is because they own you. If you had exclusive control over what is done to and with your body, the most basic right of self-ownership, you would not owe anybody your labor.

So then a lesser percentage of forced labor is also slavery, though to an obviously lesser degree.

Whether a cent or a million dollars is taken without consent, it is theft. And if someone forces you to work for them 1% of the time, or 100% of a time, that is still slavery.

Frederick Douglass was a slave, by any reckoning. So it is interesting to read his own words, on having his rightfully earned wages taken by force. In his book My Bondage and My Freedom, Douglass laments the state of his servitude, that all his hard work is confiscated from him.

Besides, I was now getting—as I have said—a dollar and fifty cents per day. I contracted for it, worked for it, earned it, collected it; it was paid to me, and it was rightfully my own; and yet, upon every returning Saturday night, this money—my own hard earnings, every cent of it—was demanded of me, and taken from me by Master Hugh. He did not earn it; he had no hand in earning it; why, then, should he have it? I owed him nothing. He had given me no schooling, and I had received from him only my food and raiment; and for these, my services were supposed to pay, from the first. The right to take my earnings, was the right of the robber. He had the power to compel me to give him the fruits of my labor, and this power was his only right in the case. I became more and more dissatisfied with this state of things…

Frederick Douglass sees correctly that the only “right” the government has to take your money, is the right of the robber. Yes, they have enough power to force you to give them money, and that is the only thing that makes it “legitimate”. Certainly no one argues that his slavery was justified by the food and shelter his master provided him.

Douglass then muses about what conditions make slave-masters able to keep men enslaved.

To make a contented slave, you must make a thoughtless one. It is necessary to darken his moral and mental vision, and, as far as possible, to annihilate his power of reason. He must be able to detect no inconsistencies in slavery. The man that takes his earnings, must be able to convince him that he has a perfect right to do so. It must not depend upon mere force; the slave must know no Higher Law than his master’s will. The whole relationship must not only demonstrate, to his mind, its necessity, but its absolute rightfulness. If there be one crevice through which a single drop can fall, it will certainly rust off the slave’s chain.

And this is the same reason people accept taxation. We revere authority and accept government as necessary, and believe we get some benefit out of our slavery.

How often do you hear people support something because “it is the law.”Is there no higher law than that which the government makes up for its own benefit, and then exerts through force? The force of government is the highest law we know.

Is there no higher law than that which the government makes up for its own benefit, and then exerts through force? The force of government is the highest law we know.

But as soon as we realize that it is never okay to be robbed, no matter how small, the injustice is a potent demonstration that we are at the mercy of a thieving gang who has convinced most people that somehow, in this case, theft and slavery are acceptable.

In case you are hung up on the percentage of stolen labor: it is interesting to note that Frederick Douglass did not always have 100% of his wages stolen from him by his masters.

I could see no reason why I should, at the end of each week, pour the reward of my toil into the purse of my master. When I carried to him my weekly wages, he would, after counting the money, look me in the face with a robber-like fierceness, and ask, “Is this all?” He was satisfied with nothing less than the last cent. He would, however, when I made him six dollars, sometimes give me six cents, to encourage me. It had the opposite effect. I regarded it as a sort of admission of my right to the whole. The fact that he gave me any part of my wages was proof, to my mind, that he believed me entitled to the whole of them. I always felt worse for having received any thing; for I feared that the giving me a few cents would ease his conscience, and make him feel himself to be a pretty honorable sort of robber.

How often do people squeal that the rich need to pay their “fair share”? It doesn’t matter how much any person earns, the government always wants to steal more. And somehow they have convinced millions of people that the thieves are the good guys, and the wage earners deserve to be enslaved and robbed.

continue reading the rest of this article

Larken Rose introduces conversation points designed to teach voluntaryists/anarchists how to be far more effective in talking to their statist friends, co-workers, family members, etc., using techniques that, by taking into account the quirks and complexities of human psychology, give a far better chance of getting others to understand and accept the concepts of self-ownership, non-aggression, and a stateless society.

About this Author:

Larken Rose

Larken Rose is an outspoken, nationally known proponent of individual liberty, self-ownership and a voluntary society. He lives with his wife and daughter in eastern Pennsylvania and is the author of several books, include The Iron Web and How to be a Successful Tyrant, (The Megalomaniac Manifesto). He just completed another book, The Most Dangerous Superstition. Visit his website for more info (Larkenrose.com).

PDF of The Most Dangerous Superstition

What is Sovereignty

by Zen Gardner
May 25, 2016

This subject or concept is a hot topic in the alternative community. I recently attended the Anarchapulco conference that featured a wide range of aspects of this important subject regarding our personal awakening and growing financial, legal and spiritual independence and empowerment.

Cryptocurrencies were featured along with our current geopolitical situation and alternative lifestyle choices, while roundly exposing the futility and anachronistic nature of statism, brilliantly done by Larken Rose and many other speakers. Understanding what we’ve been programmed to accept and learning to question every aspect of what the social engineers have indoctrinated us with is paramount to any real truth seeker.

When I approach these subjects touching on sovereignty, whether it be freedom from the binding maritime law-based legal system or questioning all forms of the hierarchical control paradigm, I look at it from a spiritual perspective.

What essentially IS freedom? How do we manifest our true nature more fully and thus naturally break the chains that bind us from whatever quarter?

It’s all about the initial question. And our perspective.

Standing Back

Conscious awareness may appear to be something vague and illusive but it’s not. It’s extremely practical. The fundamental step to be taken is to find the vantage point of our higher self. What is it that is observing you, and that speaks to you and even corrects your thoughts and behavior? What is this inner voice?

The fact that it exists at all, as Echhart Tolle so lucidly expounds upon, causes a major shift in awareness and breaks so many chains immediately. What exactly is this awareness observing the experience that is us? How do we develop and utilized that perspective and what implications does this realization the wise sages of the ages have all spoken about have on the course of my life?

This to me is the deep and wondrous world to be explored, which in its very seemingly esoteric nature has all the so-called answers to life we are seeking. But this awareness needs to mix and gel with our mental and heart awareness at the same time to make sense of this experience we call “life”.

It’s as practical as deciding what to eat or not to eat. Whether to go by impulse and just yield to our surrounding environment and accumulated habits, or learn to make a more conscious decision as to our actions as well as thoughts, this profound realization begs a whole new way of life.

If we let it. And take action on what we’re learning and hearing from this much more pure source of information and awareness. It needs to be developed which is the challenge of this school of higher learning in which we find ourselves.

Beware the Psychopathic Paradigm

Just look at the world today. Unfortunately, while the fact that non-empathic, power-crazed personages is well known to be the case amongst rulers, politicians, bankers, corporate monsters and the Orwellian media, people still take their word, hoping against hope that their empty promises will come true. What is that? Is it lethargy, apathy, psychotic denial, mind control, or what? Most likely it’s a convergence of many such conditions, but the reality of this form of mass Stockholm syndrome is absolutely pathetic.

Stockholm Syndrome:

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness. [Emphasis mine] (source)

Does that sound familiar? That’s society at large. Just the abuse/abuser cycle is rife in society, and designedly so. After all, these so-called rulers have themselves been abused by their handlers, physical and/or interdimensional, and so pass on that same paradigm. Hence the massive propagation of fear as the ultimate controlling signal. It’s the implanted and socially engineered parasitic mindset, be it archontic, wetiko or some other transdimensional explanation of this energetic vampirism. The dynamic is there and it’s designed to disempower and control through intimidation, fear and ignorance of the truth.

What are they afraid of ultimately? What is it they are trying to suppress? Because underlying this is the empowering reality that we can break from that cycle at any time; first by identifying what is going on and then by making the necessary changes in our thinking, behavior and attitudes while continuing to grow in manifestation of the infinite divine expression within each of us.

But whatever you do, don’t support it by participating in it. Elections are a perfect example.  They’re rigged and a total distraction. Just look at the strife they engender, dividing up the populace in yet another way in their effort to divide and conquer. It’s time people fully woke up to what’s really going on and how they’re energy is being siphoned off.

Appealing to a hierarchy that shouldn’t be in the first place only reinforces its grip, and is a form of voluntary self-subjugation. It’s eons old and evidenced not just in politics but religion, learning institutions, scientism, medicine and the entire corporate and monetary state model. It’s time to get conscious and disengage. Their entire manufactured structure many call the matrix will crumble. It’s the people who fall for the charade that support it. But first people need to see the extent of the lie, as well as discover their own power of spiritual sovereignty.

Taking the Stand

What invariably happens to a sincere truth seeker is a change of lifestyle. It usually happens in increments. It becomes obvious to have the least entanglement possible with any of the world’s systems. They’re essentially toxic and woefully binding, hindering our very being from being truly free in a whole range of ways.

It may mean to change jobs or careers, so called. It may mean, and usually does, finding some creative outlet where this conscious awareness can manifest via our imagination. It also means disengaging from any compromises we can, be it banking or credit card enslavement, poor eating and living habits, choosing the right people to engage with and leaving others and unfruitful relationships behind.

It’s profound, but only goes as far as we’re willing to go. As these changes progress more and more becomes completely obvious. You are not your name, therefore any legal attachments to your paper identity are essentially fraudulent or fundamentally ensnaring. The entire legal and political system becomes almost embarrassingly stupid and obviously built for control purposes.

Therefore, you strive to get free. Only not striving in their sense, fighting the very thing that only seeks affirmation by our unconscious response to it, but by sidestepping the entire matrix. If we think we can combat or dissipate their fabricated low vibrational world on their level we’ve already lost, and will only recreate another system with the same low vibrational construct in some form.

It just doesn’t work that way.

Be Practical, But Stay Spiritual

I’m all for activism, but it needs to be wisely targeted. When it builds community and most of all awareness it’s good, whatever it is. There are definitely times to lay ourselves on the line when it comes to the encroaching machine. There’s clearly a war on against humanity, one major thing that will become apparent to the seeker, and we cannot lay down and just take it, just as you wouldn’t let the state come in and take your children, never mind vaccinate them or some other such barbaric practice.

The most powerful and impactful effect any of us can have is being who we truly are. To what degree we’re willing to manifest our true self is the challenge we all face, including the apparent nuts and bolts on how we do that in a practical way, one step at a time as we continually raise our levels of consciousness.

Essentially it’s not complicated at all. Being honest, lovingly forthright and sovereign comes naturally to the soul. It’s the rest of our convoluted, conditioned and reflexive self that needs to snap out of the hypnosis and catch up.

Changing our personal environment is a big start. Cut away the hindrances to where you can gather some momentum in manifesting your integral, honest and authentic self. Drop the downers and energy vampires out of your life. You’re not helping them by continuing on as just another compromised gnome to appease and avoid confrontation. That’s the matrix working through our horrific psycho-social programming to hold us back at as low of a frequency as possible – and to NOT venture out into our full-on freedom but stay firmly in the yoke of their parasitic grip.

There’s plenty of motivation to do this for anyone even half awake. The exterior world of the system is closing down at a frantic pace, and your life, mine, and those of our loved ones and the many wonderful people worldwide as well as the life of our very planet are at stake.

It may mean doing more to expose the establishment and what’s behind it in a meaningful, awareness-generating and community building way. Whatever we do or refrain from doing, one cannot keep on business as usual once you’ve woken up, that’s for sure.

Whatever path you take, let it be a conscious one, done wisely and circumspectly. There are so many factors and each of us is our own unique expression of Universe and we need to honor that. But respond we must to the call of consciousness.

It’s not airy fairy, it’s not a religious retreat, it’s not some state of blissful ignoring of our circumstances. It’s being fully alive in the eternal here and now. We are communicating in very human bodies with very real restrictions and limitations as well as needs and desires. But at the same time we are primarily and first and foremost spiritual beings inhabiting these incredible bio-machines.

It may appear to be a conundrum but it’s not. It’s what it is, and we need to have that reality check in full and take on our responsibilities with courage and determination. Not judging by what’s going on around us and the actions of others or any kind of social or even alternative norm. But expressing our uniqueness, as living examples of authenticity and freedom in everything we do.

We are sovereign, in the very essence of the word. Now we need to operate from that all permeating knowing. Everything else will become clear.

“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” – Albert Camus

Much love, Zen

Zen Gardner is an impactful and controversial author whose writings have been circulated to millions and his personal story has caused no small stir amongst the entrenched alternative pundits. His book You Are the Awakening has met rave reviews and is available on amazon.com. You Are the Awakening examines the dynamics of the awakening to a more conscious awareness of who we are and why we are here – dynamics which are much different from the programmed approach of this world we were born into.