I recently published an essay (and short documentary) titled ‘Why Assume There Will be a 2024 Election?’ featuring the courageous intervention by a patriotic American General Smedley Butler who risked everything to stop a fascist coup d’etat sponsored by Wall Street financiers in 1934.
However this was not the last time that a military coup was nearly launched to overthrow a nationalist president during the 20th century.
The danger of World War and a military coup arose again during the short lived administration of FDR-admirer John F. Kennedy who found himself locked in a life or death struggle not with Russia, but with the Military Industrial Complex that had become dominated by the many Dr. Strangeloves of the Joint Chief of Staff and CIA who fanatically believed that America could win a nuclear war. JFK’s disdain for the military industrial complex and deep state parasite that took over control of much of the USA after FDR’s untimely death, and did everything he could between his time as congressman after WWII to his 900 days as President to restore his party and nation to FDR’s principles both at home and abroad.
These figures had even pushed fanatically to start a hot war with Russia during the Cuban Missile crisis and despised Kennedy’s threats to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds”.
Kennedy’s valiant efforts to achieve dialogue with his Soviet counterparts, move towards peace in Vietnam, support of colonial liberation, promotion of space exploration and advocacy of a Nuclear Test Ban treaty made him a target of the Deep State of his time.
During this period, this effort was led from the top by JFK’s two most powerful American opponents: Allan Dulles (director of the CIA) and General Lyman Lemnitzer (head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), both of whom were proponents of pre-emptive nuclear war, architects of the Bay of Pigs regime change trap and advocates of Operation Northwoods (an ultimate “inside job” precursor to 9/11 which JFK and his brother subverted).
As historian Anton Chaitkin recently reported: “Lemnitzer had displayed what his faction viewed as his qualifications for this role back in August 1960, when, as Army chief of staff, he announced that the Army was all ready to “restore order” in the United States after a nuclear war with the Soviet Union—to bring back normalcy just as the military does after a flood or a riot”
This plot was detailed in a quasi-fictional book written by investigative journalists Fletcher Knebel and Charles Bailey published in 1962 entitled Seven Days in May and swiftly made into a famous film with unprecedented support by JFK himself who gave the film crew and director John Frankenheimer full access to the White House, advisors and materials.
In the story, a patriotic lieutenant played by Kirk Douglas discovers the plans for the coup which is scheduled to take place during a vast military drill led by General James Mahoon Scott played by Burt Lancaster.
The plan involves “initiates” beholden to General Mahoon Scott stationed throughout the entire leadership of the US military which intends to use the drill as a cover for installing General Scott as a fascist leader and ousting a peace-making President Lyman (possibly a not-so-subtle ironical reference to the figure of General Lyman Lemnizer) who is close to finalizing a de-armament treaty with Russia.
Under this planned scenario, President Lyman will be incapacitated in a bunker while the new military regime who disapproves of the President’s naive soft approach to Russia, takes over America.
Tragically, where the lieutenant is able to expose the plot and save the constitution, by the time of the film’s 1964 release, JFK had been deposed by other means.
Now 58 years later, history has begun to repeat itself with distinctly 21st century characteristics… and a viral twist.
Today, a new systemic meltdown of a $1.5 quadrillion derivatives bubble has similarities to the 1929 crash and other similarities to the 1923 hyperinflation of Weimar. What particular spark might be used to unleash a blowout of the systemic bubble economy now teetering on the brink of meltdown, one thing is certain: a turn towards a bankers’ run military dictatorship made possible by Biden’s NDAA 2022 should be taken more seriously than ever.
So rather than stressing about who might be on the 2024 ballot, it is wiser to ask the question: Where are the patriots today who have the ability and wits to subvert a new attempt at a global bankers’ dictatorship?
Appendix: I just discovered that John Frankenheimer’s Seven Days is currently available to watch for free on YouTube. I’m not sure how long this will be accessible, so if the link below fails at any point, you can find a more reliable (albeit not free) link here.
[Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: Mirrored copies of Seven Days in May can also be found on BitChute. See here and here and here and here. If those disappear, try searching for it at BitChute, Odysee, Rumble or other alternative video channels.]
“It is the function of mass agitation to exploit all the grievances, hopes, aspirations, prejudices, fears, and ideals of all the special groups that make up our society, social, religious, economic, racial, political. Stir them up. Set one against the other. Divide and conquer. That’s the way to soften up a democracy.”― J. Edgar Hoover, Masters of Deceit
The U.S. government has become a master of deceit.
It’s all documented, too.
This is a government that lies, cheats, steals, spies, kills, maims, enslaves, breaks the laws, overreaches its authority, and abuses its power at almost every turn; treats its citizens like faceless statistics and economic units to be bought, sold, bartered, traded, and tracked; and wages wars for profit, jails its own people for profit, and has no qualms about spreading its reign of terror abroad.
Worse, this is a government that has become almost indistinguishable from the evil it claims to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.
With every passing day, it becomes painfully clear that this is not a government that can be trusted with your life, your loved ones, your livelihood or your freedoms.
Of the many weapons in the government’s vast arsenal, psychological warfare (or psy ops) can take many forms: mind control experiments, behavioral nudging, propaganda.
As Brianna Nofil explains, “MK-Ultra’s ‘mind control’ experiments generally centered around behavior modification via electro-shock therapy, hypnosis, polygraphs, radiation, and a variety of drugs, toxins, and chemicals.”
Similarly, the top-secret Montauk Project, the inspiration for the hit Netflix series Stranger Things, allegedly was working to develop mind-control techniques that would then be tested out on locals in a nearby village, triggering crime waves or causing teenagers to congregate.
As journalist Lorraine Boissoneault concludes, “Despite MK-ULTRA violating ethical norms for human experiments, the legacy of brainwashing experiments continued to live on in U.S. policy. The same methods that had once been used to train American soldiers ended up being used to extract information from terrorists in Abu Ghraib, Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.”
Fast forward to the present day, and it’s clear that the government—aided and abetted by technological advances and scientific experimentation—has updated its psy ops warfare for a new era. For instance, the government has been empowered to use its ever-expanding arsenal of weapons and technologies to influence behaviors en masse and control the populace.
Back in 2014, for example, a Fusion Center in Washington State (a Dept. of Homeland Security-linked data collection clearinghouse that shares information between state, local and federal agencies) inadvertently released records on remote mind control tactics (the use of “psycho-electronic” weapons to control people from a distance or subject them to varying degrees of pain).
This is how you persuade a populace to voluntarily march in lockstep with a police state and police themselves (and each other): by ratcheting up the fear-factor, meted out one carefully calibrated crisis at a time, and teaching them to distrust any who diverge from the norm.
This is not a new experiment in mind control.
Add the government’s inclination to monitor online activity and police so-called “disinformation,” and you have the makings of a restructuring of reality straight out of Orwell’s 1984, where the Ministry of Truth polices speech and ensures that facts conform to whatever version of reality the government propagandists embrace.
This “policing of the mind” is exactly the danger author Jim Keith warned about when he predicted that “information and communication sources are gradually being linked together into a single computerized network, providing an opportunity for unheralded control of what will be broadcast, what will be said, and ultimately what will be thought.”
We’ve already seen this play out on the state and federal level with hate crime legislation that cracks down on so-called “hateful” thoughts and expression, encourages self-censoring and reduces free debate on various subject matter.
The end goal of these mind-control campaigns—packaged in the guise of the greater good—is to see how far the American people will allow the government to go in re-shaping the country in the image of a totalitarian police state.
The government’s fear-mongering is yet another key element in its mind-control programming.
It’s a simple enough formula. National crises, global pandemics, reported terrorist attacks, and sporadic shootings leave us in a constant state of fear. The emotional panic that accompanies fear actually shuts down the prefrontal cortex or the rational thinking part of our brains. In other words, when we are consumed by fear, we stop thinking.
A populace that stops thinking for themselves is a populace that is easily led, easily manipulated and easily controlled whether through propaganda, brainwashing, mind control, or just plain fear-mongering.
Fear not only increases the power of government, but it also divides the people into factions, persuades them to see each other as the enemy and keeps them screaming at each other so that they drown out all other sounds. In this way, they will never reach consensus about anything and will be too distracted to notice the police state closing in on them until the final crushing curtain falls.
This Machiavellian scheme has so ensnared the nation that few Americans even realize they are being brainwashed—manipulated—into adopting an “us” against “them” mindset. All the while, those in power—bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporations—move their costly agendas forward.
It was almost 100 years ago when Bernays wrote his seminal work Propaganda:
“We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of… 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.”
As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, to this invisible government of rulers who operate behind the scenes—the architects of the Deep State—we are mere puppets on a string, to be brainwashed, manipulated and controlled.
For years now, the powers-that-be—those politicians and bureaucrats who think like tyrants and act like petty dictators regardless of what party they belong to—have attempted to brainwash us into believing that we have no rights: to think for ourselves, make decisions about our health, protect our homes and families and businesses, act in our best interests, demand accountability and transparency from government, or generally operate as if we are in control of our own lives.
Well, the government is wrong.
We have every right, and you know why? Because, as the Declaration of Independence states, we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights—to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness—that no government can take away from us.
It’s time we started reminding the government that “we the people” are the ones in charge.
On Thursday, I wrote about a Wednesday Washington Times article detailing allegations by current and former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents that FBI agents had been given quotas for investigations of “domestic terrorism” and “white supremacy” related crime. The results included a bunch of FBI agents spinning their wheels on trying to find crimes and criminals where none are, while surveilling and investigating plenty of people critical of government in the process.
Disturbingly, the investigations of these individuals would arise based on the individuals having exercised their right to criticize government. An FBI agent bluntly described the situation in the article: “If they have a Gadsden flag and they own guns and they are mean at school board meetings, that’s probably a domestic terrorist.”
Allegations by Department of Justice officials, reported in a Wednesday New York Post article by Miranda Devine, provide additional information about the FBI’s expansive efforts undertaken in the name of countering domestic terrorism. The allegations relate that Facebook repeatedly provided the FBI with customers’ private conversations in redacted form that the FBI then used to obtain subpoenas to seek more information from Facebook, and which Facebook then provided in spades. “But when the targeted Facebook users were investigated by agents in a local FBI field office, sometimes using covert surveillance techniques, nothing criminal or violent turned up,” the Post article reports.
What kind of people did Facebook turn over to the FBI? The article provides this answer:
The Facebook users whose private communications Facebook had red-flagged as domestic terrorism for the FBI were all ‘conservative right-wing individuals.’
‘They were gun-toting, red-blooded Americans [who were] angry after the election and shooting off their mouths and talking about staging protests. There was nothing criminal, nothing about violence or massacring or assassinating anyone.
‘As soon as a subpoena was requested, within an hour, Facebook sent back gigabytes of data and photos. It was ready to go. They were just waiting for that legal process so they could send it.’
It sure looks like investigation and surveillance targeting individuals due to those individuals’ political views — a disgraceful use of government power.
Sometimes police will be given quotas for ticketing drivers. Results of the pressure put on cops to meet their ticket targets tend to include that many drivers are pulled over and ticketed for minor infractions that would be better overlooked or based on dubious or fabricated grounds. Is a similar quota system, with expectable similar results, developing now in regard to “domestic terrorism” and “white supremacy” related crime at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)?
A Wednesday Washington Times article by Kerry Picket and Joseph Clark, referencing information provided by current and former FBI agents, suggests that is the case. Picket and Clark write:
Current and former FBI agents tell The Washington Times that the perceived threat has become overblown under the administration. They say bureau analysts and top officials are pressuring FBI agents to create domestic terrorist cases and tag people as White supremacists to meet internal metrics.
“The demand for White supremacy” coming from FBI headquarters “vastly outstrips the supply of White supremacy,” said one agent, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “We have more people assigned to investigate White supremacists than we can actually find.”
The agent said those driving bureau policies “have already determined that White supremacy is a problem” and set agencywide policy to elevate racially motivated domestic extremism cases as priorities.
“We are sort of the lapdogs as the actual agents doing these sorts of investigations, trying to find a crime to fit otherwise First Amendment-protected activities,” he said. “If they have a Gadsden flag and they own guns and they are mean at school board meetings, that’s probably a domestic terrorist.”
The Gadsden flag is a historical American flag with a yellow field showing a timber rattlesnake and the words: “Don’t Tread on Me.” It is often used as a symbol of liberty.
Today, students, we’re going to take a break from our usual lessons on Critical Race Theory, transgenderism, climate change, and open borders.
Instead, I’ve enrolled all of you in a study that tests your memory. We’re going to travel back into the mists of the distant past—2020—and see what you can recall about key events from that ancient period that shaped our nation.
Here are a set of questions. Write your answers and turn in your papers.
Who started out comparing COVID to the flu and commented that the flu, which kills between 20 and 60 thousand Americans a year, has never triggered restrictive public health measures?
Who permitted Anthony Fauci to step into the role of de facto President of the United States and lead the country into widely destructive mass lockdowns?
Who was the main figure fronting for the rapid development of COVID vaccines based on experimental RNA technology?
Who has never mentioned that his promotion of Operation Warp Speed resulted in 1.3 million reports of vaccine injuries and deaths in the US federal database, so far?
Bonus Question 1: Who signed a $460 billion arms deal with the Saudi regime in 2017?
Bonus Question 2: Who owns the golf club that will host the final event, this fall, on the new Saudi professional golf tour?
You have 45 minutes to enter your answers. Next to a question, it is acceptable to write “I don’t know” or “I don’t want to know.”
The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to privacy. Like other amendments in the Bill of Rights, it doesn’t create the right; it limits government interference with it. Last week, President Joe Biden misquoted the late Justice Antonin Scalia suggesting that Justice Scalia believed that the Bill of Rights creates rights. As Justice Scalia wrote, referring to the right to keep and bear arms but reflecting his view on the origins of all personal liberty, the Bill of Rights secures rights, it doesn’t create them; it secures them from the government.
Those who drafted the Bill of Rights recognized that human rights are pre-political. They precede the existence of the government. They come from our humanity, and, in the case of privacy, they are reinforced by our ownership or legal occupancy of property.
The idea that rights come from our humanity is called Natural Law theory, which was first articulated by Aristotle in 360 B.C. The natural law teaches that there are aspects of human existence and thus areas of human behavior that are not subject to the government. Aristotle’s views would later be refined by Cicero, codified by Aquinas, explained by John Locke, and woven into Anglo-American jurisprudence by British jurists and American revolutionaries and constitutional framers.
Thus, our rights to think as we wish, to say what we think, to publish what we say, to worship or not, to associate or not, to defend ourselves from crazies and tyrants, to own property, and to be left alone are all hard-wired into our human natures by God, the uncaused cause. Nature is the means through which God passes along His gifts to us. We come about by a biological act of nature, every step of which was ordained by God. His greatest gift to us is life, and He tied that gift to free will. Just as He is perfectly free, so are we.
In exercising our free wills, we employ rights. Rights are claims against the whole world. They don’t require approval of a government or neighbors or colleagues. The same rights exist in everyone no matter their place of birth, and each person exercises them as she or he sees fit. The government should only come into the picture when someone violates another’s natural rights. So, if someone builds a house in your backyard, you can knock it down and expel the builders or you can ask the government to do so.
Suppose the builders haven’t consented to the existence of the government? That does not absolve them. Though government is only moral and legal in a society in which all persons have consented to it — this is Thomas Jefferson’s “consent of the governed” argument in the Declaration of Independence — the only exception to actual consent is the use of government to remedy a violation of natural rights.
Professor Murray Rothbard examined all this under his non-aggression principle (NAP): Initiating or threatening force or deception against a person or his rights is always morally illicit. This applies to all aggression, even — and especially — from the government. The folks building a house in your backyard have either used force or deception to get there. Both violate your natural rights and the NAP.
Now, back to the Fourth Amendment and privacy. In a famous dissent in 1928, which two generations later became the law of the land, the late Justice Louis Brandeis argued that government surveillance constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment and thus, per the express language of the amendment, cannot be conducted by the government without a warrant issued by a judge. He famously called privacy the right most valued by civilized persons and described it as “the right to be let alone.”
Today, this is the most violated of personal rights; not by judges signing search warrants for surveillance, but by government officials — local, state and federal — ignoring and evading the natural right to privacy and pretending that the Fourth Amendment does not apply to them. The linchpin of the amendment is the judicial determination of the existence of probable cause — meaning that it is more likely than not that a crime has been committed, and that there is evidence of that crime in the place to be searched and in the things to be seized.
Today, the feds, and this has been picked up and mimicked by local and state police, have told themselves that so long as they are not looking for evidence of crimes, they needn’t follow the Fourth Amendment.
Today, the government rarely bothers to obtain a search warrant for surveillance because it is cumbersome to do so and because it is so easy to surveil folks on a massive scale without one.
Today, the National Security Administration — America’s 60,000-person strong domestic spying apparatus — captures every keystroke on every desktop and mobile device, and every conversation on every landline and mobile device, and all data transmitted into, out of or within the United States.
Moreover, you’d be hard-pressed to find a geographic area that is not covered by police using hardware that tracks the movement and use of mobile phones. When Edward Snowden passed on to journalists the facts of massive warrantless spying in the Bush and Obama administrations, he had the journalists put their mobile devices where his was — in his refrigerator, as anywhere else would have alerted his former colleagues of their collective whereabouts.
The government spends hundreds of billions of dollars annually just to watch and follow us. Who authorized this? Why do we tolerate a society where we have hired a government to secure our rights and instead it engages in aggression against them?
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom. To find out more about Judge Napolitano and to read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit creators.com.
With the passage of the 2022 Defense Authorization Act giving the executive branch sweeping powers over the use of the military in all domestic affairs, and with the obvious obsession by a supranational deep state technocracy intent on imposing a final endgame scenario onto the United States, it is important to recognize the historical precedent of the attempted Bankers’ Coup of 1934 that sought to impose a fascist puppet dictator into the White House. Unfortunately for the JP Morgan network managing this coup, the puppet they selected for their “American Mussolini” was a patriotic retired General named Smedley Darlington Butler.
In this new Canadian Patriot Review film based upon the essay “Why Assume There Will be a 2024 Election?” produced/narrated by Jason Dahl, you will be introduced to this dense period of history beginning with the orchestrated demolition of the financial system in 1929, the Wall Street/London fueled “economic miracle solution” of fascism and eugenics between 1930-1934, and the story of FDR’s war with the financier oligarchy’s London and Wall Street tentacles. From this vantage point, we are then thrust into a deep dive into the person of Smedley Butler and his courageous defense of the republic.
Despite being raided by armed U.S. Marshals and facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, Amos Miller explained that farmers need to stand strong.
Recently, Miller’s Organic Farm in Bird-in-Hand, Pennsylvania was raided by armed federal agents. They demanded the farm cease operations and are economically crippling the business with over $300,000 in fines.
The government is arguing that the farm isn’t adhering to federal regulatory requirements for food.
The water buffalo, the cattle, and even the camels are living and being processed in the way, as Miller argues, that God intended.
All of the animals on the farm eat fully organic diets, munching only on the wild plants, flowers, and the bugs in their pasture.
Veteran journalist, Michael Yoder, is a long-time customer of Amos Miller’s farm and has been closely covering the story for a local newspaper.
“I think they want to use Amos as an example,” Yoder said.
He explained that the government wants to make sure other farmers don’t attempt to replicate what Miller’s Farm succeeded in doing.
“Miller is selling his meat and dairy directly to the consumer, without the government acting as the middleman. The government doesn’t have as much control over this type of operation,” Yoder explained.
Amos Miller explained to me that because his farm doesn’t use chemical fertilizers, herbicides or patented seeds which are chiefly manufactured by industry giants with strong ties to the government, they’re using the power of the government to shut him down.
“Corporate America is taking over and putting people in our government…they have the government on their side and they’re making it harder for farmers to be farmers,” said Amos Miller.
Miller is legally arguing that because he’s selling to what he calls a “private food club” and not the open market, certain rules and regulations of the federal government don’t apply to him.
The customers are buying meat and dairy from his farm explicitly because his food isn’t processed and manufactured at giant industrial facilities and instead is grown, fed, and processed right here on the land.
“Some come from Florida, California, North Carolina, basically all over the country because they are seeking nutrient-dense foods like raw meat and raw buffalo milk…and they trust us for keeping our animals out on pastures and they can actually see the color in the fat of the beef and the distinct color of the milk…this color comes from the nutrient density of the animals feeding grass,” Miller explained to Rebel News.
Amos, despite being raided by armed U.S. Marshals and facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, explained that farmers need to stand strong.
“We farmers need to stand together and stand strong and we can’t just fall for the government’s rules and regulations,” he added.
With every passing day, the United States government borrows yet another leaf from Nazi Germany’s playbook: Secret police. Secret courts. Secret government agencies. Surveillance. Censorship. Intimidation. Harassment. Torture. Brutality. Widespread corruption. Entrapment. Indoctrination. Indefinite detention.
These are not tactics used by constitutional republics, where the rule of law and the rights of the citizenry reign supreme. Rather, they are the hallmarks of authoritarian regimes, where secret police control the populace through intimidation, fear and official lawlessness on the part of government agents.
If the government’s covert, taxpayer-funded employment of Nazis after World War II weren’t bad enough, U.S. government agencies—the FBI, CIA and the military—adopted many of the Third Reich’s well-honed policing tactics, and have used them against American citizens.
Indeed, the FBI’s laundry list of crimes against the American people includes surveillance, disinformation, blackmail, entrapment, intimidation tactics, harassment and indoctrination, governmental overreach, abuse, misconduct, trespassing, enabling criminal activity, and damaging private property, and that’s just based on what we know.
Compare the FBI’s far-reaching powers to surveil, detain, interrogate, investigate, prosecute, punish, police and generally act as a law unto themselves—powers that have grown since 9/11, transforming the FBI into a mammoth federal policing and surveillance agency that largely operates as a power unto itself, beyond the reach of established laws, court rulings and legislative mandates—to its Nazi counterparts, the Gestapo—and then try to convince yourself that the United States is not a totalitarian police state.
Today, the FBI employs more than 35,000 individuals and operates more than 56 field offices in major cities across the U.S., as well as 400 resident agencies in smaller towns, and more than 50 international offices. In addition to their “data campus,” which houses more than 96 million sets of fingerprints from across the United States and elsewhere, the FBI has also built a vast repository of “profiles of tens of thousands of Americans and legal residents who are not accused of any crime. What they have done is appear to be acting suspiciously to a town sheriff, a traffic cop or even a neighbor.” The FBI’s burgeoning databases on Americans are not only being added to and used by local police agencies, but are also being made available to employers for real-time background checks.
All of this is made possible by the agency’s nearly unlimited resources (President Biden’s budget projections allocate $10.8 billion for the FBI), the government’s vast arsenal of technology, the interconnectedness of government intelligence agencies, and information sharing through fusion centers—data collecting intelligence agencies spread throughout the country that constantly monitor communications (including those of American citizens), everything from internet activity and web searches to text messages, phone calls and emails.
Working through the U.S. Post Office, the FBI has access to every piece of mail that passes through the postal system: more than 160 billion pieces are scanned and recorded annually. Moreover, the agency’s National Security Letters, one of the many illicit powers authorized by the USA Patriot Act, allows the FBI to secretly demand that banks, phone companies, and other businesses provide them with customer information and not disclose those demands to the customer. An internal audit of the agency found that the FBI practice of issuing tens of thousands of NSLs every year for sensitive information such as phone and financial records, often in non-emergency cases, is riddled with widespread constitutional violations.
Much like the Gestapo’s sophisticated surveillance programs, the FBI’s spying capabilities can delve into Americans’ most intimate details (and allow local police to do so, as well).
In addition to technology (which is shared with police agencies) that allows them to listen in on phone calls, read emails and text messages, and monitor web activities, the FBI’s surveillance boasts an invasive collection of spy tools ranging from Stingray devices that can track the location of cell phones to Triggerfish devices which allow agents to eavesdrop on phone calls. In one case, the FBI actually managed to remotely reprogram a “suspect’s” wireless internet card so that it would send “real-time cell-site location data to Verizon, which forwarded the data to the FBI.” Law enforcement agencies are also using social media tracking software to monitor Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts. Moreover, secret FBI rules also allow agents to spy on journalists without significant judicial oversight.
Much like the Gestapo’s ability to profile based on race and religion, and its assumption of guilt by association, the FBI’s approach to pre-crime allows it to profile Americans based on a broad range of characteristics including race and religion.
The agency’s biometric database has grown to massive proportions, the largest in the world, encompassing everything from fingerprints, palm, face and iris scans to DNA, and is being increasingly shared between federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in an effort to target potential criminals long before they ever commit a crime. This is what’s known as pre-crime. Yet it’s not just your actions that will get you in trouble. In many cases, it’s also who you know—even minimally—and where your sympathies lie that could land you on a government watch list. Moreover, as the Interceptreports, despite anti-profiling prohibitions, the bureau “claims considerable latitude to use race, ethnicity, nationality, and religion in deciding which people and communities to investigate.”
Much like the Gestapo’s power to render anyone an enemy of the state, the FBI has the power to label anyone a domestic terrorist.
As part of the government’s so-called ongoing war on terror, the nation’s de facto secret police force has begun using the terms “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” interchangeably. Moreover, the government continues to add to its growing list of characteristics that can be used to identify an individual (especially anyone who disagrees with the government) as a potential domestic terrorist. For instance, you might be a domestic terrorist in the eyes of the FBI (and its network of snitches) if you:
Much like the Gestapo infiltrated communities in order to spy on the German citizenry, the FBI routinely infiltrates political and religious groups, as well as businesses.
As Cora Currier writes for the Intercept: “Using loopholes it has kept secret for years, the FBI can in certain circumstances bypass its own rules in order to send undercover agents or informants into political and religious organizations, as well as schools, clubs, and businesses…” The FBI has even been paying Geek Squad technicians at Best Buy to spy on customers’ computers without a warrant.
Just as the Gestapo united and militarized Germany’s police forces into a national police force, America’s police forces have largely been federalized and turned into a national police force.
In addition to government programs that provide the nation’s police forces with military equipment and training, the FBI also operates a National Academy that trains thousands of police chiefs every year and indoctrinates them into an agency mindset that advocates the use of surveillance technology and information sharing between local, state, federal, and international agencies.
Just as the Gestapo’s secret files on political leaders were used to intimidate and coerce, the FBI’s files on anyone suspected of “anti-government” sentiment have been similarly abused.
As countless documents make clear, the FBI has no qualms about using its extensive powers in order to blackmail politicians, spy on celebrities and high-ranking government officials, and intimidate and attempt to discredit dissidents of all stripes. For example, not only did the FBI follow Martin Luther King Jr. and bug his phones and hotel rooms, but agents also sent him anonymous letters urging him to commit suicide and pressured a Massachusetts college into dropping King as its commencement speaker.
Just as the Gestapo carried out entrapment operations, the FBI has become a master in the art of entrapment.
In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks the FBI has not only targeted vulnerable individuals but has also lured or blackmailed them into fake terror plots while actually equipping them with the organization, money, weapons and motivation to carry out the plots—entrapment—and then jailing or deporting them for their so-called terrorist plotting.
When and if a true history of the FBI is ever written, it will not only track the rise of the American police state but it will also chart the decline of freedom in America, in much the same way that the empowerment of Germany’s secret police tracked with the rise of the Nazi regime.
How did the Gestapo become the terror of the Third Reich?
It did so by creating a sophisticated surveillance and law enforcement system that relied for its success on the cooperation of the military, the police, the intelligence community, neighborhood watchdogs, government workers for the post office and railroads, ordinary civil servants, and a nation of snitches inclined to report “rumors, deviant behavior, or even just loose talk.”
In other words, ordinary citizens working with government agents helped create the monster that became Nazi Germany. Writing for the New York Times, Barry Ewen paints a particularly chilling portrait of how an entire nation becomes complicit in its own downfall by looking the other way:
In what may be his most provocative statement, [author Eric A.] Johnson says that ‘‘most Germans may not even have realized until very late in the war, if ever, that they were living in a vile dictatorship.’’ This is not to say that they were unaware of the Holocaust; Johnson demonstrates that millions of Germans must have known at least some of the truth. But, he concludes, ‘‘a tacit Faustian bargain was struck between the regime and the citizenry.’’ The government looked the other way when petty crimes were being committed. Ordinary Germans looked the other way when Jews were being rounded up and murdered; they abetted one of the greatest crimes of the 20th century not through active collaboration but through passivity, denial and indifference.
Much like the German people, “we the people” have become passive, polarized, gullible, easily manipulated, and lacking in critical thinking skills. Distracted by entertainment spectacles, politics and screen devices, we too are complicit, silent partners in creating a police state similar to the terror practiced by former regimes.
Had the government tried to ram such a state of affairs down our throats suddenly, it might have had a rebellion on its hands. Instead, the American people have been given the boiling frog treatment, immersed in water that slowly is heated up—degree by degree—so that they’ve fail to notice that they’re being trapped and cooked and killed.
“We the people” are in hot water now.
The Constitution doesn’t stand a chance against a federalized, globalized standing army of government henchmen protected by legislative, judicial and executive branches that are all on the same side, no matter what political views they subscribe to: suffice it to say, they are not on our side or the side of freedom.
From Presidents Clinton to Bush, then Obama to Trump and now Biden, it’s as if we’ve been caught in a time loop, forced to re-live the same thing over and over again: the same assaults on our freedoms, the same disregard for the rule of law, the same subservience to the Deep State, and the same corrupt, self-serving government that exists only to amass power, enrich its shareholders and ensure its continued domination.
The Veterans Administration (VA) purchased 11 million rounds of ammunition (equivalent to 2,800 rounds for each of their officers), along with camouflage uniforms, riot helmets and shields, specialized image enhancement devices and tactical lighting.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) acquired 4 million rounds of ammunition, in addition to 1,300 guns, including five submachine guns and 189 automatic firearms for its Office of Inspector General.
According to an in-depth report on “The Militarization of the U.S. Executive Agencies,” the Social Security Administration secured 800,000 rounds of ammunition for their special agents, as well as armor and guns.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) owns 600 guns. And the Smithsonian now employs 620-armed “special agents.”
This is how it begins.
We have what the founders feared most: a “standing” or permanent army on American soil.
This de facto standing army is made up of weaponized, militarized, civilian forces which look like, dress like, and act like the military; are armed with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment; are authorized to make arrests; and are trained in military tactics.
Mind you, this de facto standing army of bureaucratic, administrative, non-military, paper-pushing, non-traditional law enforcement agencies may look and act like the military, but they are not the military.
Rather, they are foot soldiers of the police state’s standing army, and they are growing in number at an alarming rate.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the number of federal agents armed with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment, authorized to make arrests, and trained in military tactics has nearly tripled over the past several decades.
While Americans have to jump through an increasing number of hoops in order to own a gun, federal agencies have been placing orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point bullets and military gear. Among the agencies being supplied with night-vision equipment, body armor, hollow-point bullets, shotguns, drones, assault rifles and LP gas cannons are the Smithsonian, U.S. Mint, Health and Human Services, IRS, FDA, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Education Department, Energy Department, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and an assortment of public universities.
The militarization of America’s police forces in recent decades has merely sped up the timeline by which the nation is transformed into an authoritarian regime.
What began with the militarization of the police in the 1980s during the government’s war on drugs has snowballed into a full-fledged integration of military weaponry, technology and tactics into police protocol. To our detriment, local police—clad in jackboots, helmets and shields and wielding batons, pepper-spray, stun guns, and assault rifles—have increasingly come to resemble occupying forces in our communities.
As Andrew Becker and G.W. Schulz report, more than $34 billion in federal government grants made available to local police agencies in the wake of 9/11 “ha[ve] fueled a rapid, broad transformation of police operations… across the country. More than ever before, police rely on quasi-military tactics and equipment… [P]olice departments around the U.S. have transformed into small army-like forces.”
A standing army—something that propelled the early colonists into revolution—strips the American people of any vestige of freedom.
It was for this reason that those who established America vested control of the military in a civilian government, with a civilian commander-in-chief. They did not want a military government, ruled by force.
Rather, they opted for a republic bound by the rule of law: the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, with the Constitution under constant attack, the military’s power, influence and authority have grown dramatically. Even the Posse Comitatus Act, which makes it a crime for the government to use the military to carry out arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other activities normally handled by a civilian police force, has been greatly weakened by exemptions allowing troops to deploy domestically and arrest civilians in the wake of alleged terrorist acts.
The increasing militarization of the police, the use of sophisticated weaponry against Americans and the government’s increasing tendency to employ military personnel domestically have all but eviscerated historic prohibitions such as the Posse Comitatus Act.
Indeed, there are a growing number of exceptions to which Posse Comitatus does not apply. These exceptions serve to further acclimate the nation to the sight and sounds of military personnel on American soil and the imposition of martial law.
Now we find ourselves struggling to retain some semblance of freedom in the face of administrative, police and law enforcement agencies that look and act like the military with little to no regard for the Fourth Amendment, laws such as the NDAA that allow the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens, and military drills that acclimate the American people to the sight of armored tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, and combat aircraft patrolling overhead.
The menace of a national police force—a.k.a. a standing army—vested with the power to completely disregard the Constitution, cannot be overstated, nor can its danger be ignored.
Historically, the establishment of a national police force accelerates a nation’s transformation into a police state, serving as the fundamental and final building block for every totalitarian regime that has ever wreaked havoc on humanity.
Then again, for all intents and perhaps, the American police state is already governed by martial law: Battlefield tactics. Militarized police. Riot and camouflage gear. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Drones. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Concussion grenades. Intimidation tactics. Brute force. Laws conveniently discarded when it suits the government’s purpose.
This is what martial law looks like, when a government disregards constitutional freedoms and imposes its will through military force, only this is martial law without any government body having to declare it.
The ease with which Americans are prepared to welcome boots on the ground, regional lockdowns, routine invasions of their privacy, and the dismantling of every constitutional right intended to serve as a bulwark against government abuses is beyond unnerving.
We are sliding fast down a slippery slope to a Constitution-free America.
This quasi-state of martial law has been helped along by government policies and court rulings that have made it easier for the police to shoot unarmed citizens, for law enforcement agencies to seize cash and other valuable private property under the guise of asset forfeiture, for military weapons and tactics to be deployed on American soil, for government agencies to carry out round-the-clock surveillance, for legislatures to render otherwise lawful activities as extremist if they appear to be anti-government, for profit-driven private prisons to lock up greater numbers of Americans, for homes to be raided and searched under the pretext of national security, for American citizens to be labeled terrorists and stripped of their rights merely on the say-so of a government bureaucrat, and for pre-crime tactics to be adopted nationwide that strip Americans of the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty and creates a suspect society in which we are all guilty until proven otherwise.
All of these assaults on the constitutional framework of the nation have been sold to the public as necessary for national security.
Time and again, the public has fallen for the ploy hook, line and sinker
We’re being reeled in, folks, and you know what happens when we get to the end of that line?
I’m afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.”
~ Jim Garrison
“National Security” is just the excuse for every form imaginable of tyranny, totalitarianism, privacy destruction, abuse of freedoms, aggression, terror, and war. Every time I hear this deceptive and scurrilous term, I cringe knowing that lies, deceit, and horror are on the horizon. It is based completely on false fear; fear planted in the minds of the people in order to force (goad) them to run to government and the state for protection from fabricated enemies. It is the state’s go to argument when additional control is sought, and it has worked nearly every time it has been tried. It is currently the mainstay of this fascist state called America, and it is still effective. The term ‘national security’ is nothing more than sheer propaganda based on unwarranted fearmongering.
One has to wonder, given that this country has never been aggressively attacked on its home soil by any foreign aggressor state, how the term ‘national security’ ever became the default reasoning for any and every aggressive war waged by this government against countries around the world. It is not just war against other innocent countries that has been waged, aggression in the name of national security has been levied against the American population almost continually, whether in the case of desired war, disasters, ‘pandemics,’ bogus ‘climate change’ risks, state and federal emergencies, and any number of other deceptive means of control.
Before the letters start rolling in claiming that the sinking of the Lusitania, the Pearl Harbor attack, the Gulf of Tonkin false flag, and the 9/11 inside job were acts of pure aggression by outsiders, please refrain from such nonsense. They all, and many more, were set up and staged, and led to major wars of aggression by the U.S. against multiple foreign countries that had nothing to do with attacking America. In the process, freedom was destroyed. This has been written about by very many scholars for decades, and plenty of proof has been forthcoming. As I have stated over and over again, the United States has aggressively attacked many other countries, as well as Americans, and has prosecuted wars of aggression for 93% (an understatement in my estimation) of its entire history against those who never attacked or were a threat to this country; all under the pretext of ‘national security.’
In that effort, the vast U.S. national security state has been built on the blood and property of every American citizen, and has grown into a bureaucratic behemoth unimagined in earlier times. U.S. military spending matches the rest of the world combined, and dwarfs every country on earth by a huge margin. One would think that this insanity would guarantee that the U.S. had the most powerful military, and the highest sophistication of military weaponry, but that is likely not accurate by any measure, as many criminal corporations, politicians, foreign heads of state, and contractors are enriched due to this ludicrous amount of spending, and waste and fraud are basically incalculable. Of course, this is all by design, as those controlling the government and the political heads, are always paid off and protected by their dependent pawns in government.
The total national security state budget for early 2019 was over $1.25 trillion, and it has grown exponentially since that time. Allotted military spending alone has increased by over a quarter of a trillion dollars in just the last three years. Just in the past few days, IRS spending increased by $80 billion in order to hire 87,000 new agents; 70,000 of them armed and willing to use deadly force against American citizens. Is this for ‘national security,’ or meant to control any who speak out against government? Obviously, it has nothing to do with collecting taxes, as this country through its atrocious central banks prints all the money it wants at will. A new militarized IRS can be nothing more than a heinous and murderous arm of the controlling class, and used to keep the sheep in line, and stifle truthtellers and dissent by brute force of arms.
Private self defense is always necessary in this world we live in, but national defense through a state-controlled military and ‘national security state’ system, is always meant to be used to dominate the masses by extreme tyrannical measures under the guise of protecting the hapless and helpless citizenry. It is never for the purpose of actual defense, as all government is based on brutal and forcible offensive control of its subjects. As long as the people of this country continue to voluntarily allow such a powerful state to exist, all will be relegated to the position of guaranteed slavery. In that light, is it any wonder what has happened since early 2020, and how can any thinking individual not understand that this extreme tyranny at the hands of the state was not only planned long in advance, but was completely and purposely exposed beforehand? The warnings were evident, but very few listened or paid any attention to the signs given, and have sat idle in a pool of indifference, as the downfall of this country has taken shape.
If one considers all the money and resources taken by and for the benefit of the state itself, little is left for any other purpose. The state simply sucks up all the production of its subjects through taxation and central bank money printing, and in the process, inherent inflation abounds. This is accomplished through theft, extreme deception, and propaganda, and destroys the psyche of the individual, leaving only a collective mass of non-thinking commoners, lost in a fog of ignorance.
The government consumes most all the energy of its population in one way or another. Bureaucracies abound, and the enforcement arm of the government is now at very extreme levels, as police, state and federal militaries, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the IRS, and hundreds of other enforcement and restrictive regulatory agencies abound. Virtually everything, every movement, every communication, every action by individuals is in one way or another the reasoning used for policing the people. Government and the state apparatus care nothing for its citizens, but revel in the ability to control them. This is the essence of the state, and why if freedom is desired, the state must be abolished.
If the so-called ‘national security’ arm of the state can be eliminated or made impotent, the power of government to monitor and control the masses will be severely curtailed, allowing for more liberty and less restriction. It is the vital first step, but in order for this heinous security state to be castrated, we as individuals must cease to rely on government promises of protection, stand on our own as individuals en masse, and destroy the entire notion of a ‘national security state.’
It has been said, and I agree; as goes the U.S., so goes the world. If nothing is done to stop this assault on Americans and the rest of the world, be prepared for more war; likely major or world war with nuclear armed nations. Be prepared for more tyranny and more slaughter. This will all be by design, will help eliminate much of mankind as is sought by the state, all while the ruling elites sit back in comfort and watch, as the civilian populations are used as fodder for the agenda of world government and a world ‘security state.’
Freedom and legitimate national security are one and the same, while the so-called state and its false promise of national security spells aggression, restriction and regulation, fascist control, murder, and slavery. In order to regain freedom, the elimination of government and its national security state must be achieved.
“The words ‘national’ and ‘security’ are like precursors for a binary chemical weapon: not overly dangerous by themselves, but capable of completely shutting down the brain and nervous system when used in combination.”
Hopefully by now you’ve had a chance to listen to or watch my interview with Keith Knight of Don’t Tread on Anyone about his new book, The Voluntaryist Handbook.
Even more hopefully, you’ve read or ordered your copy of that book. If not, here’s another chance: it’s available as a free pdf on Odysee or available to purchase HERE.
When you do read the book, you’ll see that Knight has chosen to publish an excerpt from my February 29, 2020, newsletter editorial, “5 Important Lessons Absolutely No One Will Learn From Iowa.” I’m glad he did include that excerpt in his book because in some ways I buried the lede—an important and informative rant about the true nature of government and the morality of anarchy—down far enough in that article that most people probably didn’t read it. Those who did likely forgot it. And the vast majority of people probably never knew it existed.
So, let’s correct that problem today. Here I re-present to you that section of the editorial on “Government Itself is Immoral.” Enjoy.
Government Itself is Immoral
No, I do not want better elections. I do not want to “clean up the system.” I do not want to “get the money out of politics” and “make sure every vote is counted” and “drain the swamp” so we can “Make America [or any other geographical area] Great Again.”
The state is not a benevolent force, despite what the most brainwashed of statists believe. It is not even a neutral tool that can be used for good or ill, as those who consider themselves pragmatists believe. It is violence. It is force. It is aggression. It is people believing that what is wrong for any individual to do is perfectly OK if an agent of the state does it.
If I steal, it is theft. If the state steals, it is taxation. If I kill, it is murder. If the state kills, it is warfare. If I force someone to work for me involuntarily, it is slavery. If the state does it, it is conscription. If I confine someone against their will, it is kidnapping. If the state does it, it is incarceration. Nothing has changed but the label.
What binds us to the state is the belief that there is a different morality for anything that has been sanctified through the political process. “Oh, 50%+1 of the population voted for forced vaccinations? Then I guess we have to comply.” If you scoff at that sentence, how about if the vote were 100%-1? Would that change the morality of resistance? How about if forced vaccinations were mandated by the constitution? Then would you be compelled to submit?
Does the ballot box transform the unethical into the ethical? Of course not. But I’ll tell you what it does do: It makes everyone who casts their ballot a part of the process that legitimizes the murder and violence committed by agents of the state.
No, I am not an efficiency manager for the state. I do not want to help it do its job of inflicting aggression and violence on peaceful people. I want the state to perish, not through violence or bloodshed, but by removing the mystical superstition from the minds of the general public that makes them believe that “government” is anything other than a gang of thugs with a fancy title.
This is the point that—in my experience as a communicator of voluntaryist ideas—I start butting up against a brick wall of incomprehension when talking to the normies in the crowd. They start having mental breakdowns, frothing at the mouth that “votes need to happen.”
As if voting, elections, positions of responsibility and other things that exist under statism could not exist under voluntary associations. As if voluntary association itself were such an arcane and bewildering concept that no one could possibly wrap their head around it (let alone, heaven forfend, read a book or two to see if some of their questions on the subject have already been answered).
No, much easier to go back to the comforting political wrestling match. “Red vs. Blue? Now that I can get behind!”
That’s a travesty, really. Because the truth is that this is not a complicated message. It’s actually remarkably simple, and remarkably hopeful. The truth is that . . .
There is Only One Vote That Matters
You’d think that a column like this would be all doom and gloom.
“Oh sure, James,” say the statists in the crowd, twirling their handlebar moustaches and fingering the “I Voted” sticker proudly displayed on their chest, “but what’s your solution? Sitting around and not voting is not going to change anything!”
Now I’m tempted to say, “Why ask for one solution when I’ve provided dozens?”
But, more seriously, I would say: You’re right.
No, really. You’re right. Sitting around and not voting is not going to change anything. Yes, by all means, let’s vote! . . .
. . .But (and you knew there was a “but” coming) I’m not talking about voting in some phony baloney (s)election to anoint some political puppet as President of this geographical location. I’m talking about the only vote that matters.
Hmmm . . . if only I had a way to explain this to the normies.
[. . .]For the rest of us, there is the realization that the political system itself is just another form of enslavement. An enslavement that is all the more insidious, because it asks us to buy into it. All we have to do is push a button or pull a lever or touch a screen once every four years and we are now absolved from our moral responsibility.
Ironically, this realization is in itself liberating and puts the world into focus with crystal clarity. We are not cogs in some machine called “society” to be dictated to by some nebulous entity we have been taught to call “the government” or “the authorities.” We are free individuals freely interacting with those around us, bound by the moral injunction not to initiate force against others or take things from others against their will. We are responsible for our actions and their consequences, both positive and negative. We are responsible for what we do or don’t do to help those in our community, and to make this world better or leave it to rot. There is no political messiah that will descend from the heavens to tell us what to do or to protect us from the bad men. All we have is our self and our choices.
We vote every day, not in some meaningless election, but in whom we choose to associate with, what we choose to spend our money on, what we choose to invest our time and energy doing. This is the essence of freedom.
For us, it is painful to watch our brothers and sisters getting swept up in the election-cycle hype. We watch the sad spectacle not with a sense of scorn or derision, but with sadness for those who have not yet woken up to the reality of their mental enslavement. That sadness, however, is tempered by hope: hope that one day, those poor voters who are trudging off to that booth to pull that lever will realize that all they are really doing is voting for which slavemaster they will allow to put the chains around their neck.
Beautiful. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Too bad the people who really need to hear this message stopped reading this article when they realized it wasn’t really about the Iowa caucuses.
Only two things in life are certain – death and taxes, and the IRS can take care of both.
As the agency prepares to add 87,000 new positions over 10 years, pending the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act that will give the agency $80 billion (half of which will be earmarked to help crack down on tax evasion), an online job posting for “Criminal Investigation Special Agents” has sparked outrage over a “key requirement” that applicants be “legally allowed to carry a firearm.”
“Major duties” of the job include “Carry a firearm and be willing to use deadly force, if necessary,” and “Be willing and able to participate in arrests, execution of search warrants, and other dangerous assignments.”
The IRS is hiring new special agents!
Requirements include working min “50 hours per week, which may include irregular hours, and be on-call 24/7, including holidays and weekends” and “Carry a firearm and be willing to use deadly force, if necessary.”https://t.co/uvwbrAkIitpic.twitter.com/z0aVX6uoMr
While Democrats say the IRS’s enhanced collections will raise an additional $124 billion in federal revenue from tax cheats over the next decade, Republicans warn that an army of IRS agents will do nothing but harass small business owners and lower-income workers. According to an analysis by House Republicans, Americans earning less than 75,000 per year will receive 60% of the additional tax audits.
The analysis, which is a conservative estimate based upon recent audit rates and tax filing data, shows that individuals with an annual income of $75,000 or less would be subject to 710,863 additional IRS audits, while those making more than $1 million would receive 52,295 more audits under the bill.
Overall, the IRS would conduct more than 1.2 million more annual audits of Americans’ tax returns, according to the analysis. Another 236,685 of the estimated additional audits would target individuals with an annual income between $75,000 and $200,000.
Democrats insist Americans making less than $400,000 will not be targeted by agents hired due to the spending bill. -NY Post
IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig, however, insists that “audit rates” won’t increase relative to recent years.
In a related piece of legislation reported by the Epoch Times, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) introduced a bill last month which would bar the IRS from acquiring ammunition. Known as the “Disarm the IRS Act,” the bill (pdf) stipulates that the IRS is “prohibited from acquiring ammunition” and “notwithstanding any other provision of law.” Reps. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-Ga.), Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), and Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) are co-sponsors of the measure, according to his office.
It came after Gaetz, in interviews with Fox News and other outlets, expressed concern after he discovered that the IRS purchased more than $700,000 in ammunition over a span of several days days. The congressman suggested that it’s part of a broader White House plan to disarm Americans.
“Here’s the Biden plan: Disarm Americans, open the border, empty the prisons–but rest assured, they’ll still collect your taxes, and they need $725,000 worth of ammunition, apparently, to get the job done,” he told Fox News last week.
The bill, he said, would put a “total moratorium on the IRS buying ammo. When we used to talk about the IRS being weaponized, we were talking about political discrimination, not actual weapons for the IRS.”
“Undeniably, part of the strategy is that with one hand, the Biden regime is doing everything they can to suppress access to ammunition for regular Americans, while with the other hand, they are scooping up all the ammo that they can possibly find,” Gaetz alleged.
5 Million Rounds
According to a report released by the Government Accountability Office in 2018, the IRS has been stockpiling ammunition and weapons for years. As of 2018, the agency had 4,487 firearms and 5,062,006 rounds of ammunition in its inventory, the report said.
A 2018 report from Forbes noted that the IRS buys guns and ammunition for its Criminal Investigation Division. Agents in that division are the only employees in the IRS that carry firearms, according to its website.
After two years of unprecedented government tyranny in the name of fighting a virus, the prime instigators of this infamy are walking free, writing books, and openly pretending they never said the things they clearly said over and over.
Take Trump’s White House Covid response coordinator Deborah Birx, for example. She was, as the Brownstone Institute’s Jeffrey Tucker points out in a recent article, the principal architect of the disastrous “lockdown” policy that destroyed more lives than Covid itself. Birx knew that locking a country down in response to a virus was a radical move that would never be endorsed. So, as she admits in her new book, she lied about it.
She sold the White House on the out-of-thin-air “fifteen days to slow the spread” all the while knowing there was no evidence it would do any such thing. As she wrote in her new book, Silent Invasion, “I didn’t have the numbers in front of me yet to make the case for extending it longer, but I had two weeks to get them.”
She was playing for time with no evidence. As it turns out, she was also destroying the lives of millions of Americans. The hysteria she created led to countless businesses destroyed, countless suicides, major depressions, drug and alcohol addictions. It led to countless deaths due to delays in treatment for other diseases. It may turn out to be the most deadly mistake in medical history.
As she revealed in her book, she actually wanted to isolate every single person in the United States! Writing about how many people would be allowed to gather, she said: “If I pushed for zero (which was actually what I wanted and what was required), this would have been interpreted as a ‘lockdown’—the perception we were all working so hard to avoid.”
She wanted to prevent even two people from meeting. How is it possible that someone like this came to gain so much power over our lives? One virus and we suddenly become Communist China?
Last week in a Fox News interview she again revealed the extent of her treachery. After months of relentlessly demanding that all Americans get the Covid shots, she revealed that the “vaccines” were not vaccines at all!
“I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection,” she told Fox. “And I think we overplayed the vaccines. And it made people then worry that it’s not going to protect against severe disease and hospitalization.”
So when did she know this? Did she know it when she told ABC in late 2020 that “this is one of the most highly-effective vaccines we have in our infectious disease arsenal. And so that’s why I’m very enthusiastic about the vaccine”?
If she knew all along that the “vaccines” were not vaccines, why didn’t she tell us? Because, as she admits in her book, she believes it’s just fine to lie to people in order to get them to do what she wants.
She admits that she employed “subterfuge” against her boss – President Donald Trump – to implement Covid policies he opposed. So it should be no surprise that she lied to the American people about the efficacy of the Covid shots.
The big question now, after what appears to be a tsunami of vaccine-related injuries, is will anyone be forced to pay for the lies and subterfuge? Will anyone be held to account for the lives lost for the arrogance of the Birxes and Faucis of the world?
Top-ranking Biden administration officials — including Dr. Anthony Fauci — and five social media giants have 30 days to respond to subpoenas and discovery requests in a lawsuit alleging the government colluded with social media companies to suppress freedom of speech “under the guise of combatting misinformation.”
Top-ranking Biden administration officials — including Dr. Anthony Fauci — and five social media giants have 30 days to respond to subpoenas and discovery requests in a lawsuit alleging the government colluded with social media companies to suppress freedom of speech “under the guise of combatting misinformation.”
Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry on Wednesday served third-party subpoenas on Twitter, Meta (Facebook’s parent company), Youtube, Instagram and LinkedIn.
“In May, Missouri and Louisiana filed a landmark lawsuit against top-ranking Biden Administration officials for allegedly colluding with social media giants to suppress free speech on topics like COVID-19 and election security,” Schmitt said in Tuesday’s press release.
Schmitt added:
“Earlier this month, a federal court granted our motion for expedited discovery, allowing us to collect important documents from Biden Administration officials. Yesterday, we served discovery requests and today served third-party subpoenas to do exactly that.
“We will fight to get to the bottom of this alleged collusion and expose the suppression of freedom of speech by social media giants at the behest of top-ranking government officials.”
Schmitt announced in a July 12 statement that Terry Doughty, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, ruled in favor of a June 17 motion for expedited preliminary injunction-related discovery and set a timetable with specific deadlines for depositions.
According to Schmitt, government officials “both pressured and colluded with social media giants Meta, Twitter and Youtube to censor free speech in the name of combating so-called ‘disinformation’ and ‘misinformation,’ which led to the suppression and censorship of truthful information on several topics, including COVID-19.”
“The Court’s decision cleared the way for Missouri and Louisiana to gather discovery and documents from Biden Administration officials and social media companies,” Schmitt said in a press release on Tuesday.
“The order states, ‘The First Amendment obviously applies to the citizens of Missouri and Louisiana, so Missouri and Louisiana have the authority to assert those rights,’” he said.
In a statement on Twitter announcing the court’s decision to grant the attorneys general’s request, Schmitt said, “No one has had the chance to look under the hood before — now we do.”
BREAKING: A federal court granted our request for discovery & documents from top ranking Biden officials & social media companies to get to the bottom of their collusion to suppress & censor free speech.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) President Mary Holland, who also serves as CHD general counsel, praised the ruling:
“CHD welcomes this groundbreaking ruling from Judge Doughty of the Western District of Louisiana to discover whether the Biden administration has violated the First Amendment through censorship.
“For two years, CHD and many other media outlets have not been able to comprehend the mechanisms whereby our major media platforms have ruthlessly censored, suppressed and distorted our information.
“Now, through the discovery process that the judge has allowed, we’ll find out how Meta, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube have been colluding with the federal government to curb so-called ‘disinformation’ and ‘misinformation.’ This is a new day.”
Fauci, CDC, White House press secretary and more must turn over documents
According to the press release, Fauci, chief medical advisor to President Biden and director of the NIAID, was asked to turn over any communications with social media platforms related to content modulation and/or misinformation, and to disclose all meetings with any social media platform related to the subject and to provide all communications with Mark Zuckerberg from Jan. 1, 2020, to the present.
Fauci also must turn over all communications with any social media platform related to the Great Barrington Declaration; the authors and original signers of the Great Barrington Declaration; Dr. Jay Bhattacharya; Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D.; Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, Sunetra Gupta, Ph.D.; Dr. Scott Atlas; Alex Berenson; Peter Daszak, Ph.D.; Shi Zhengli, Ph.D.; the Wuhan Institute of Virology; EcoHealth Alliance; and/or any member of the so-called “Disinformation Dozen,” including CHD chairman and chief legal counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is required to identify every officer, official, employee, staff member, personnel, contractor or any other person associated with the White House communications team who communicated or is communicating with any social media platform related to content modulation and/or misinformation — and to turn over those communications.
Jean-Pierre also must identify all persons who “engage[s] regularly with all social media platforms about steps that can be taken” to address misinformation on social media, which engagement “has continued, and … will continue,” as stated during an April 25 White House press briefing — and turn over all communications with any social media platform involved in such engagement.
Defendant Nina Jankowicz, who was tasked with heading up the Biden administration’s “Disinformation Governance Board” must provide all documents related to communications with social media platforms and content modulation and/or misinformation.
Jankowicz is required to identify the nature, purpose, participants, topics to be discussed and topics actually discussed at the meeting between DHS personnel and Twitter executives Nick Pickles and Yoel Roth scheduled on or around April 28.
The CDC is required to provide the names of every officer, official, employee, staff member, personnel, contractor or agent of CDC or any other federal official or agency who communicated or is communicating with any social media platform regarding content modulation and/or misinformation.
The CDC must disclose communications with any social media platform related to content modulation or misinformation, any meetings that took place with social media platforms related to content modulation and/or misinformation, and must identify all “members of our senior staff” and/or “members of our COVID-19 team” who are “in regular touch with … social media platforms,” as “Jennifer Psaki [former White House press secretary] stated at a White House press briefing on or around July 15, 2021.”
The agency must also disclose all “government experts” who are federal officers, officials, agents, employees or contractors, who have “partnered with” Facebook or any other social media platform to address misinformation and/or content modulation, including all communications relating to such partnerships.
Like Fauci, the CDC must turn over information and communications on the “so-called disinformation dozen,” Great Barrington Declaration, alternative news outlets and key experts and scientists who have spoken out against the government’s approach to treating COVID-19 or mandating face masks and lockdowns.
Meta (Facebook) was “commanded” to produce all communications with any federal official relating to misinformation and/or content modulation, to produce all documents and communications-related actions taken based in whole or in part on information received, directly or indirectly, from any federal official and to produce all communications and documents related to a list of search terms that include Kennedy’s name and/or the names of prominent doctors and physicians who were censored for their views on COVID-19.
Facebook also must disclose meetings, communications and documents related to remarks made by Psaki, who said the White House is “in regular touch with these social media platforms, and those engagements typically happen through members of our senior staff, but also members of our COVID-19 team,” and regarding the White House’s efforts to flag “problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.”
Similar requests were made to other government officials and social media platforms, including Twitter, YouTube, Instagram and LinkedIn.
Lawsuit alleges collusion to suppress disfavored speakers and viewpoints
Attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri in May filed a lawsuit alleging government defendants “colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms by labeling the content ‘disinformation,’ ‘misinformation’ and ‘malinformation.’”
The count lawsuit alleges social media companies falsely labeled truthful content “disinformation” and “misinformation” and contends the suppression constitutes government action, violating free speech protected by the U.S. constitution.
The complaint also alleges that DHS’ Disinformation Governance Board was created “to induce, label, and pressure the censorship of disfavored content, viewpoints and speakers on social-media platforms,” and that HHS and DHS violated the Administrative Procedure Act to “hold unlawful and set aside final agency actions” that are deemed to be an abuse of power and arbitrary and capricious.
The lawsuit provides several examples of truthful information that was censored by social media companies who later admitted the content was truthful or credible.
Jim Smith – whose concurrent roles as a Pfizer board member and Reuters CEO appear to pose a conflict of interest – serves as a board member of the World Economic Forum’s anti-corruption initiative.
Smith’s leading role with the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Partnering Against Corruption Initiative follows controversy over his position at the pharmaceutical giant and mainstream media outlet, which frequently reports on Pfizer. Reuters has published tens of thousands of articles covering or mentioning Pfizer, though the articles never disclose Smith’s affiliation with either entity.
Smith serves on the board of the WEF’s Partnering Against Corruption Initiative, dubbed the “leading business voice on anti-corruption and transparency.”
“It is one of the Forum’s strongest cross-industry collaborative efforts and is creating a highly visible, agenda-setting platform by working with business leaders, international organizations and governments to address corruption, transparency and emerging-market risks,” explains a WEF synopsis.
“Today’s common struggle against corruption goes far beyond compliance. More problematic is the profound and worsening trust deficit that exists between institutions and individuals,” Smith begins before lamenting the public’s loss of trust in mainstream media outlets:
“The widespread perception that institutions—both public and private—are not acting in the interests of the people they serve pervades the thinking of communities across the globe. News organizations, which have historically served as the watchdog for governments and business leaders, are less trusted by the public than ever before.”
“Public confidence has been corroded by a concentration on near-term priorities and payoffs, propelled by election-cycle politics or quarterly results targets that too often leave children worse off than their parents,” laments Smith.
The article, however, comes amidst the Federal Drug Administration and Pfizer attempting to delay the release of documents related to the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine.
The WEF has been accused of exploiting COVID-19 to advance its “Great Reset” agenda to advance its radical agenda of abolishing private property ownership.
The “anti-disinformation” industry has nothing to do with protecting a gullible public from information that might cause them to make bad or unhealthy choices. It’s about creating and directing a narrative for the purpose of controlling the population and hiding truths that might overthrow the ruling cabal and its plans for a one world government
In 1948, the CIA’s Office of Special Projects launched Operation Mockingbird, a clandestine CIA media infiltration campaign that involved bribing hundreds of journalists to publish fake stories at the CIA’s request
During the Cold War, CIA propaganda disparaged communist ideologies. Today, it promotes radical ideas that bring us closer to The Great Reset — which is based on a technocratic economic system — instead
Most of the organizations claiming to promote truth and counter disinformation are in fact doing the exact opposite. The latest and most blatant example of this was the Biden administration’s “Ministry of Truth” — the Disinformation Governance Board, set up by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Evidence shows scholars and academics who speak out against the establishment narrative on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine are being targeted by media personalities working hand-in-hand with the intelligence apparatus
The June 21, 2022, Grayzone article,1 “British Security State Collaborator Paul Mason’s War on ‘Rogue Academics’ Exposed,” shines a great big light on what the “anti-disinformation” industry is really all about.
Spoiler alert: It has nothing to do with protecting a gullible public from information that might cause them to make bad or unhealthy choices. No, it’s about creating and directing a narrative for the purpose of controlling the population and hiding truths that might overthrow the ruling cabal and its plans for a one world government.
Operation Mockingbird
Propaganda is as old as humanity itself, but the modern version of it can be traced back to 1948, when the CIA’s Office of Special Projects2 launched Operation Mockingbird,3,4 a clandestine CIA media infiltration campaign that involved bribing hundreds of journalists to publish fake stories at the CIA’s request.
The CIA reportedly spent $1 billion a year (about one-third of its entire budget5) on this enterprise. CIA-recruited journalists worked in most major news organizations, including CBS News, Time, Life, Newsweek and The New York Times, just to name a few.6 Later on, the campaign expanded to include foreign media as well.7 As reported by the Free Press:8
“In 1976, Senator Frank Church’s investigation into the CIA exposed their corruption of the media … The tactic was straightforward. False news reports or propaganda would be provided by CIA writers to knowing and unknowing reporters who would simply repeat the falsehoods over and over again.”
During the Cold War, CIA propaganda disparaged communist ideologies. Today, it promotes radical ideas that bring us closer to The Great Reset — which is based on a technocratic economic system — instead.
Media Is More Controlled Than Ever
While Operation Mockingbird is said to have been officially dismantled, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest it’s still in operation. If anything, the system has only gotten more efficient and effective, as the number of major media outlets has shrunk over these past decades, and a vast majority of journalists and news anchors simply parrot what’s reported by the three global news agencies.
What’s more, the CIA isn’t the only intelligence agency using the media for its own propaganda purposes. The intelligence agencies in other countries do it too.
For example, leaked documents9 reveal Reuters and BBC News received multimillion-dollar contracts to advance a covert propaganda program by the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) aimed at weakening Russia’s influence over its neighbors.10 You can learn more about this in “Reuters and BBC Caught Taking Money for Propaganda Campaign.”
One of the biggest changes we’re seeing right now is that most of the world’s intelligence agencies are controlling media in the same direction — toward The Great Reset and the technocratic control of the global population. That’s why we’re seeing the same narratives playing all over the world.
In 1977 Carl Bernstein wrote a 75-page article for Rolling Stone that exposed the CIA’s involvement with the media in even greater detail.11 Those were the days when Rolling Stone actually did decent investigative journalism. Today they are one of the largest spreaders of government disinformation.
It’s the Opposite of What They Claim It Is
It’s no small irony that most of the organizations claiming to promote truth and counter disinformation are in fact doing the exact opposite. The latest and most blatant example of this was the Biden administration’s “Ministry of Truth” — the Disinformation Governance Board,12,13 set up by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
It didn’t quite go as planned though. It was announced and then canceled just as quickly in the face of political and public backlash. The Orwellian connotations were just so blatant, few were able to dismiss them.
Perhaps they overestimated the level of brainwashing achieved over the past two years. They probably thought they could get away with what amounts to ripping up the U.S. Constitution in front of everyone’s face, but the time was not yet ripe for that kind of frontal assault.
If anything, it worked against them because many have suspected government uses media and Big Tech to censor and control narratives, and the past two years have provided undeniable evidence of that reality. So, the attempt to formalize this unlawful influence completely failed — for now.
Covert Assault on Academics
Getting back to The Grayzone story, Paul Mason, “one of Britain’s most prominent alleged left-wing journalists,” and other “covert helpers,” were found to have targeted scholars and academics who spoke out against the establishment narrative on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
As explained by Jimmy Dore in the featured video, Mason is basically pretending to be a left-leaning journalist but is working with the intelligence community to destroy political opponents. Emails obtained by The Grayzone and reviewed by Dore shows Mason is in favor of “relentless deplatforming,” getting people kicked off PayPal, demonetized by YouTube and so on. The Grayzone writes:14
“Amidst his campaign to neutralize the UK antiwar left, Paul Mason declared in an email to several academics willing to inform on and undermine their own colleagues: ‘the far left rogue academics is who I’m after … The important task is to quarantine their ‘soft’ influencers and expose/stigmatize the hard ideologists.’
Mason’s fishing expedition was conducted in apparent coordination with Andy Pryce, a senior British intelligence official involved in a series of malign information warfare and censorship initiatives.
The journalist’s key academic enabler, self-styled counter-disinformation researcher Emma Briant, not only helped further his campaign to target antiwar figures, but furnished bogus claims about one individual which appears to have inspired a BBC smear piece … Many of those she snitched on considered her a colleague and even a comrade.”
The Grayzone details how Briant introduced Mason with two individuals who would be able to furnish a meme-tracing tool to determine their source. Mason specifically wanted to find out “who in Britain denies the Bucha massacre” (thinks it’s a false flag) and/or believes Russia’s justifications for the invasion of Ukraine.
Ironically, the people Mason was most eager to trap weren’t falling into it, as they weren’t publicly discussing their views. Briant then offered to provide Mason with the names of the main organizers of an academic mailing list called “Organized Persuasive Communication,” run by Piers Robinson, described by Grayzone as “a dissident academic who has been relentlessly targeted in UK mainstream media.”
“Robinson was shocked to learn that a participant on his listserv was ratting out fellow members to a security state collaborator,” The Grayzone writes.15“‘I’m dismayed that a former colleague whom I have supported over the years appears to have abused an academic listserv,’ Robinson told The Grayzone.
‘Rather than engaging in open debate and critique, which would have been the scholarly and ethical thing to do, Briant has instead sought to support what seems to be underhand and nefarious attempts to damage reputations and silence critics.’”
In the featured Jimmy Dore Show video, Dore interviews Max Blumenthal, a Grayzone contributor, about this and related stories they’ve written about Mason and his covert relationship with the British government. Blumenthal details how The Grayzone was censored by YouTube, for the first time ever, after they started exposing Mason, and it seems clear YouTube was responding to demands by Mason himself.
This suggests he is indeed working for or with British intelligence. We’ve seen the same kind of censoring at the request of the U.S. government.
A Case of the Pot Calling the Kettle Black
One of the people singled out by Briant as a Russian collaborator was Greg Simons, “a communications researcher at Sweden’s Uppsala University specializing in Russian mass media,” whose only crime was filling out and circulating a survey relating to conflicts and war on the behalf of a Russian academic who was working on a research paper.
Not even the Russian academic could be rightly accused of being a threat to democracy, as he’d “played a key role in Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev’s liberalization agenda, freeing political prisoners, ending regulations on foreign travel, and enshrining fundamental rights in the country’s new constitution,” The Grayzone writes. Commenting on Briant’s betrayal, Simons told The Grayzone:16
“This puts a big spotlight on the professional integrity and knowledge of Briant, who spreads propaganda and misinformation on people, something claims on her Twitter profile to fight. It also demonstrates a clear lack of personal integrity and deficiency in knowledge on topics that she claims to be an expert in.”
The Spook Behind It All
Behind Mason’s and Briant’s pet project to “neutralize the U.K.’s grassroots antiwar left” is Andy Pryce, founding director of the Counter Disinformation and Media Development (CDMD) program at the British Foreign Office. In 2018, Pryce was also “exposed as a key player in the scandalous MI6/military intelligence project known as the Integrity Initiative.” The Grayzone writes:
“A January 2020 European Commission event listing identifies Pryce as the head of public diplomacy at UKREP, London’s diplomatic mission to the EU.
However, the same month Pryce appeared at the EU event, UKREP was replaced with a new office, the UK Mission to Europe, and Pryce has not been publicly mentioned in any official capacity since. So where did he go?
In his communications with Mason, Pryce mentions his personal involvement in activities placing him at the forefront of London’s public relations strategy on the Ukraine crisis, which is delivered by the recently formed Government Information Cell (GIC) and Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU).
Staffed by spies and charged with disseminating intelligence through the media and other forums for the purpose of information warfare, both the units have operated in highly clandestine fashion. Largely unknown to the public, they have played a pivotal part in NATO’s proxy war in Ukraine.”
‘Conspiracy Theorist’ Is a Propaganda Smear
Over the past two years, the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” have become household terms for anything and everyone who doesn’t agree with whatever crazy story the media claim to be fact. Few seem to realize that in using these terms, they’ve fallen for the oldest propaganda methods there is: When you can’t argue with the facts, just attack the person delivering them.
Belittling people and making them look silly, stupid, ignorant, gullible or incompetent are classic attack strategies by propagandists who don’t really have a leg to stand on otherwise. It’s all about firing up people’s negative emotions, which makes them less likely to sit back and evaluate both sides.
So, calling someone a “conspiracy theorist” is a strategy aimed at silencing dissent in general and truth in particular, plain and simple. In terms of health, COVID-19 reporting has taken censorship and media manipulation to brand new heights, eclipsing just about all previous propaganda efforts. They don’t even hide the bias anymore.
Many believe that the term “conspiracy theory” was actually created by the CIA in 1967 to disqualify those who questioned the official version of John F Kennedy’s assassination and doubted that his killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, had acted alone. It makes perfect sense since Oliver Stone has shared credible evidence that the CIA was behind the JFK assassination.
When it comes to the COVID jab, for example, we know the U.S. government spent $1 billion on a media campaign to build public confidence in, and uptake of, the injections using mainstream news outlets.17
In return for that paycheck, media rabidly lashed out at anyone who questioned the unsupported claim that the shots were “safe and effective” as either a crazy conspiracy theorist, an ignorant science-denier, a dangerous misinformation agent with a personal profit motive, a domestic terrorist hell-bent on maximizing the death toll, or all four. All the while, media never actually countered the data showing the narrative was riddled with holes and contradictory at its face.
How to Identify True Journalism
An example of how these kinds of smears have been, and continue to be, used by media, consider the June 19, 2022, Guardian article18 by Mark Townsend. He wrote:
“A network of more than two dozen conspiracy theorists, frequently backed by a coordinated Russian campaign, sent thousands of disinformation tweets to distort the reality of the Syrian conflict and deter intervention by the international community, new analysis reveals.”
As reported by The Hill (video above), Townsend identified Grayzone journalist Aaron Maté as “the most prolific spreader of disinformation” about the Syrian conflict “among the 28 conspiracy theorists identified.”
In a tweet, Maté responded to the article, stating Townsend had failed to contact him for comment, failed to provide any example of his alleged “disinformation” on the Syrian conflict, and failed to disclose the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) think tank responsible for the “analysis” is funded by the U.S. and U.K. governments and allied nations.
According to The Hill, Townsend was on vacation and not available for comment, but Katie Halper, who cohosts the “Useful Idiots” podcast with Maté came on to discuss Townsend’s attempted hack job. “Perhaps this can be a teachable moment for Townsend,” she said.
Not only did Townsend violate three basic standards of journalism, but the article’s main premise is also based on a lie, Halper says. The Guardian actually corrected the initial headline, which read “Russia-Backed Network of Syria Conspiracy Theorists Identified.” Since there’s no evidence of Russia backing any of these individuals, the headline was changed to the slightly less libelous “Network of Syria Conspiracy Theorists Identified.”
Townsend’s piece appears to be nothing more than a government-backed “Mockingbird”-style counterattack aimed at silencing Maté, who has been challenging the official narrative about the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria,19 and even delivered remarks to the United Nations Security Council on the matter.20
Considering he’s implicating both the U.S. and U.K., it seems rather obvious that Townsend’s article is an intentional propaganda piece aimed at chipping away Maté’s credibility. It can be helpful to always remember that we are, in fact, at war. It’s an information war, and the ruling powers whose aim it is to usher us into a new system of technocracy have many secrets.
They’ve rigged the game of life in a thousand different ways, and if people understood just how we’ve been robbed and enslaved, they’d become uncontrollable. Hence, the propaganda machine is in full swing, trying to control all aspects and shut down all truth tellers, lest the populace get wise to their games.
Truly, this now applies to just about every part of life. Politics, election integrity, the economy, the food system, energy, health and medicine, wars and conflicts — you name it — it’s all been rigged and it’s all falling apart.
The old guard is shooting for a controlled demolition of the old so they can transition to the new — which will be even more enslaving — but in order for that sleight of hand to work, pesky truth tellers must be silenced and the populace kept intellectually sedated. Don’t fall into that trap. One way to avoid it, is to interpret smears for what they are — attempts to silence. And ask yourself what the propagandists don’t want you to know.
Since the “bird flu outbreak” first hit the headlines OffG has been predicting how the inevitable agenda would unfold.
The first impact was as obvious as it was predictable – the price of chicken and eggs went up, this was just another front in the war on food.
The second planned impact was less immediate, but just as predictable if you know how to read the media, and potentially far more harmful in the longterm – clamping down on alternative chicken farming. This includes both organic farms and individuals keeping their own chickens in their garden.
It didn’t take long for the media to prove us right. In fact the Guardian has done it twice in the last ten days.
Firstly, last Thursday, the Guardian ran this article: “Spread of ‘free-range’ farming may raise risk of animal-borne pandemics – study”
Sponsored by the NGO Open Philanthropy, this piece reports that organic and free-range farming could increase the risk of a zoonotic disease outbreak, and quotes the authors of this new study:
If we can’t dramatically cut meat consumption then intensive ‘factory farming’ may be comparatively less risky
…yes. they’re actually arguing that the corporate mega-farms are better at preventing pandemics than free-range or organic farms because they have “tighter biosecurity controls” (meaning their animals never go outside or interact with nature in anyway whatsoever).
Back in January, when there were barely any bird flu cases to report, The Conversation was already hosting articles claiming…
Bird flu: domestic chicken keepers could be putting themselves – and others – at risk
And calling for a new policy on backyard chickens:
This is why it will be important in the future for Defra and APHA to provide specific policy for backyard chicken keeping.
It’s pretty easy to see where this is going, isn’t it?
But why take aim at ordinary people keeping a handful of chickens in their back garden?
Well, partly because they simply want to cut the amount of natural food people eat – most especially meat, but also eggs and other dairy produce. They want people entirely reliant on mega-corporations for their processed cubes of “food”.
But they also want people entirely reliant on the state for permission to do…almost everything. And in, some ways, the Covid pandemic narrative was counterproductive in that cause.
One of the unintentional effects of Covid in general and lockdown specifically was re-awakening in people an urge to go their own way. The powers-that-be are keen to reverse that trend.
As the above Guardian article points out [emphasis added]:
This may be due to the growing number of people keeping chickens or ducks, Brown said. Many of these keepers do not have to register with any authority because of the small numbers of birds involved.
During lockdown there was a spike in people keeping their own chickens.
Under UK law, it is illegal to keep a flock of fifty or more chickens without obtaining a license from the Poultry Register (yes, that’s a real thing) – but the vast majority of private flocks are much less than fifty birds, and therefore totally unregistered.
This scare-mongering on “spreading disease” is preparing the ground for “regulation” of these small private flocks.
Will that mean an outright ban? Maybe. But at the very least, I would expect the minimum number requiring a license to begin dropping from 50, and the cost of obtaining a license to rise.
We have already seen an example of this process with homeschooling.
Tens of thousands more people are homeschooling in the UK than were before the lockdown started. The government response has been to re-open their years-old war on homeschooling by creating a national register of homeschooled children, and threatening parents with fines or unspecified “sanctions” for refusing to sign-up for it.
The same exact process will likely be seen with backyard poultry.
That’s the specific and practical part of it.
More poetically put, the state resents them because they are free.
Keeping a few chickens in your garden may be a small, fragile, kind of freedom…but its freedom nonetheless, and power structures are easily petty enough to destroy even that modicum of independence.
At its heart, self-reliance of any kind is the antithesis of everything driving us toward the “new normal”.
No freedom. No independence. No living outside the carefully controlled machinery of the state. That’s their aim.
As we phase out of “Covid time” and career towards “world war 3 times” or “climate change times” or whatever the next stage of the grand narrative is, the gears of the state are intent on grinding up those pockets of resistance their relentless overreach has accidentally cultivated.
The good news here is that their ever-more tyrannical efforts to control people will only end up driving more and more people away.
To quote the philosopher Lucas, the more they tighten their grip, the more people will slip through their fingers.
If you worked for a federal agency that was studiously ignoring a kill-rate of 100,000 Americans a year, every year, like clockwork, and if you knew it, wouldn’t you feel compelled to say or do something about it?
At the FDA, which is that federal agency, no one has ever felt the need to step forward and speak up.
Let’s shift the venue and ask the same question. If you were a medical reporter for a major media outlet in the US, and you knew the above fact, wouldn’t you make it a priority to say something, write something, do something?
Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It [the report] calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”
The report called this “one of the most significant perils to humans resulting from human activity.”
And here is the final dagger. The report was compiled by outside researchers who went into the FDA’s own database of “serious adverse [medical-drug] events.”
Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows. The FDA knows and it isn’t saying anything about it, because the FDA certifies, as safe and effective, all the medical drugs that are routinely maiming and killing Americans.
And for the past 10 years or so, I have been writing about and citing a published report by the late Dr. Barbara Starfield that indicates 106,000 people in the US are killed by medical drugs every year. Until her death in 2011, Dr. Starfield worked at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Her report, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, was published in the Journal of American Medical Association on July 26, 2000.
Since the Department of Homeland Security is working its way into every nook and corner of American life, hyper-extending its mandate to protect all of us from everything, why shouldn’t the DHS investigate the FDA as a terrorist organization?
How many smoking guns do we need before a sitting president shuts down the FDA buildings, fumigates the place, and prosecutes very large numbers of FDA employees?
Do we need 100,000 smoking guns every year? Do we need relatives of the people who’ve all died in the span of merely a year, from the poisonous effects of FDA-approved medical drugs, bringing corpses to the doors of FDA headquarters?
And let me ask another question. If instead of drugs like warfarin, dabigatran, levofloxacin, carboplatin, and lisinopril (the five leading killers in the FDA database), the 100,000 deaths per year were led by gingko, ginseng, vitamin D, niacin, and raw milk, what do you think would happen?
I’ll tell you what would happen. SEALS, Delta Force, SWAT teams, snipers, predator drones, tanks, and infantry would be lining up and hovering outside every health-food store and nutritional supplement manufacturer in America.
All those fake stories in the press, reported dutifully by so-called medical reporters? The stories about maybe-could-be-possible-miracle breakthroughs just over the horizon of state-of-the-art medical research? Those stories are there to obscure the very, very hard facts of medically-caused death on the ground.
The buck stops at the FDA.
Except in the real world, it doesn’t. Which tells you something about the so-called real world and how much of it is composed of propaganda.
No medical drug in the US can be released for public use unless and until the FDA says it is safe and effective. That’s the rule. The FDA is spitting out drug approvals month after month and year after year, and the drugs are routinely killing 100,000 people a year and maiming two million more, which adds up to a million deaths per decade and 20 million maimings per decade. The FDA and the federal government are doing nothing about it, even though they know what’s going on. This is mass murder. Not accidental death. Murder. A holocaust.
Do you want another citation?
Here are a few horrific quotes. I’ll discuss the source afterwards:
“…appropriately prescribed prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death…About 330,000 patients die each year from prescription drugs in the US and Europe.”
“They [the drugs] cause an epidemic of about 20 times more [6.6 million per year] hospitalizations, as well as falls, road accidents, and about 80 million [per year] medically minor problems such as pains, discomforts, and dysfunctions that hobble productivity or the ability to care for others.”
“Deaths from overmedication, errors, and self-medication would increase these figures.”
In other words, the 330,000 deaths per year, the 6.6 million hospitalizations per year, and the 80 million “medically minor” problems per year…all of this stems from CORRECTLY PRESCRIBED medicines.
The quotes come from the ASA [American Sociological Association] publication called Footnotes, in its November 2014 issue. The article is “The Epidemic of Sickness and Death from Prescription Drugs.” The author of the article is Donald W Light.
Donald W Light is a professor of medical and economic sociology. He is a founding fellow of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2013, he was a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. He is a Lokey Visiting Professor at Stanford University and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine.
It’s been my policy to quote medical analysts who have mainstream credentials, when it comes to adding up the results of medical-drug destruction.
I do this to show that, in refusing to fix the holocaust, the federal government, medical schools, and pharmaceutical companies can’t claim their critics and detractors are “fringe researchers.”
Believe me, the officials who should have been fixing the enormous tragedy for at least the past 15 years are intent on hiding it.
When you stop and think about the meaning of these medical numbers, one of the things you realize is: this massive destruction of life envelops whole countries.
It not only maims and kills, it brings emotional turmoil and loss to the families, friends, co-workers, and colleagues of those who are killed and maimed: the 330,000 who are killed and the 6.6 million who are hospitalized and the 80 million whose productivity is hobbled or whose ability to care for others is significantly diminished.
If you consciously set out to bring a nation to its knees;
to kill it;
to make it unable to function at any reasonable level;
you would be hard pressed to find a more effective long-term method than exposing the population to the US/European medical-drug cartel.
Richard Cox of DeepStateConsciousness.com and author of The Essence of Anarchy joins me today to help answer a question about anarchy: How can we defend voluntarism in the face of arguments about the positive benefits of state regulation?
For anyone who thinks the federal government is created to solve your problems, be they financial or health-related, marital or parental, think again! People have grown complacent when federal dictates, mandates, or Acts are acceptable as the Rule of Law to be followed without question where you live.
In his article, There is No Federal Solution, author Lawrence Vance sets the broken record straight on the differences in purpose between state government and federal government:
Biden then surprisingly said that “there is no federal solution” to the COVID-19 pandemic and declared that it “gets solved at the state level,” before he boarded a helicopter and departed for his home state of Delaware.
The federal government wants you to believe that an entity, such as itself, can send a check in the mail and draft the Save America Act to create peace, prosperity, and health for all. For those who fell for the last Act, there is another Act coming, unless you can tell an Act from CoroNOvirus Reality. First know that the federal government is set up only to regulate commerce across state lines. Alternatively, it is State governments that regulate what happens to people within their state boundaries.
Federal Overreach
Through federal Acts, the federal government steers people into a confused herd called “The Public,” and uses terms such as “Public Health,” to control and regulate people as commodities.
In reality, there is no such thing as “Public Health.” Public Health does not exist outside of individual health. You cannot wear a life jacket to keep others afloat. So to consent to “Public Health mandates” is to give up bodily autonomy in exchange for “Public Rights” (i.e., Children’s rights, Gay rights, Parent rights, Women’s rights) granted by the State. State Rights can be modified, suspended, and revoked. Therefore, they are not Rights at all. Rights come from the Creator. They are inborn. See how the state of California revoked all vaccine-related exemptions.
Beware of ALL Federal Acts, old and new, naughty and NICE. If there is a federal Act, there are also multiple loopholes called exemptions that hold “the public” to the grindstone, while allowing whole industries to ignore the Act to do as they please. By the looks of it, federal Acts appear to do the opposite of what they claim to do. In other words, “Its all an Act, folks.”
From the first Act, passed in 1784, to the latest draft government Act, ALL Acts appear to be an extension of The CIRCUS Act. Yet, more than 30,000 statutes have been enacted since 1789. From the people’s perspective, success rates are dismal thanks to exceptions to every Act. A few examples include:
The US PATRIOT Act of 2001 and US Patriot and Reauthorization Act of 2005 “to unite and strengthen America,” with exemptions to banking agencies which serve to divide and weaken America.
The PREP Act of 2005, allows government to bypass Rights and Freedom. The DHHS Amended Version authorizes an increased workforce to administer COVID (experimental) vaccines. And The PREP Act 2022 – limits liability for COVID countermeasures.
In his article, Lawrence Vance shares founding father, James Madison,’s essay on the functions of state and federal governments: Federalist Essay No. 45 –
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States. If the new Constitution be examined with accuracy and candor, it will be found that the change which it proposes consists much less in the addition of NEW POWERS to the Union, than in the invigoration of its ORIGINAL POWERS.
The Federalist No. 46;
The federal and State governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes.
It has been already proved that the members of the federal will be more dependent on the members of the State governments, than the latter will be on the former.
Americans have neglected their duties to ensure that federal powers remain in check. As a result, federal government has assumed and subsumed powers it was never delegated. The United States was established as a federal system of government where the states, through the Constitution, granted a limited number of powers to a central government — not the other way around.
A Real Solution
If reading any federal Act, use it as an educational tool. Does the Act do the opposite of its intended purpose? Are these Acts distractions for other crimes, international crimes against humanity? Do you need to be saved by your government?
Do you need to be saved from your government?
As a first step to forming a real solution, it is important to understand the federal language of legalease, which is written, by design, to confuse. By taking the Public out of “Public Health,” we can begin to wake up to the truth about the governmental system, and the truth of who we are as humans. We can then begin the process to know how to see through the federal Acts to reclaim responsibility on an individual level in our own states where we live.
Following a federal judge vacating the federal mask mandate on transportation, the TSA responded, “TSA (Transportation Security Administration) will not enforce its Security Directives and Emergency Amendment requiring mask use on public transportation and transportation hubs at this time.”
Within hours various airlines began notifying customers the mask mandate is gone:
♦ American Airlines – “In accordance with the Transportation Security Administration no longer enforcing the federal face mask mandate, face masks will no longer be required for our customers and team members at U.S. airports and on domestic flights.” (link)
♦ Southwest Airlines – “As a result of this development, effectively immediately, Southwest Employees and Customers will be able to choose whether they would like to wear a mask, and we encourage individuals to make the best decision to support their personal wellbeing.” (link)
♦ Delta Airlines – “Effective immediately, masks are optional for all airport employees, crew members and customers inside U.S. airports and on board all aircraft domestically, as well as on most international flights.” (link)
♦ Alaska Airlines – “Effective immediately, all Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air guests and employees have the option to wear a mask while traveling in the U.S. and at work. Masks are no longer required for travel and will be optional.” (link)
♦ United Airlines – No press release. “Masks are no longer required on domestic flights, select international flights (dependent upon the arrival country’s requirements) or at U.S. airports. More comfortable keeping yours on? Go right ahead… the choice is yours (you look dino-mite either way)!” ~Twitter
Various videos show airline employees in a state of jubilation cheering the announcements.
The professional political left is very sad, apoplectic and filled with anxiety. However, the overwhelming majority are happy. This example again reflects how small that minority of rabid maskers was. Easily a 4:1 ratio. Additionally, with all the major carriers and the TSA making official statements, it would be almost impossible to reinstate the mask mandate now. It’s over.
Plane applauded as the stewardess announced the end of the mandate. She broke into tears as she got to take off her mask for the first time in 2 years pic.twitter.com/WlCpZk30QM
“Ladies and gentlemen, this is your pilot speaking. This is the most important announcement I’ve ever made. The federal mask mandate is over. Take off your mask if you choose!”
GeoEngineeringWatch.org is the most visited website in the world on the subject of covert climate engineering operations.
Dane Wigington begins this Q&A with his question for the day:
“If the human race remains on the current course of all-out planetary decimation, how much time do we have until the extinction of our species? And will we bring the entire web of life down with us? We’re getting close to that now and few even realize it.”
Dane and his callers cover many topics, including the link between HAARP and other ground-based, radio frequency transmitters, microwave transmission networks and other silent weapons for quiet wars.
A few quotes from Dane:
“So again, they’re using the atmosphere for a physics lab.”
“What’s happening in our skies will very soon determine our collective futures if it’s not stopped. At any point time, if those in power choose to, if they feel they’re losing control, they can put something much more lethal in this mix and put us all on our backs. Overnight. Literally.”
“We have a common thread of the various forms of mental deficiency with those in power — the common thread is this — a near total lack of comprehension as to the consequences of their actions even to themselves. Would they do this to themselves? Yes, they have and they continue to.”
“Those in power don’t care how toxic these elements are. And for those that don’t know what graphene is — look it up… Graphene toxilogical effects — it reads like a horror story. It’s a vascular machete, destroying parts of our bodies’ vascular system and countless other downstream elements. And it can be used for biological carrier, can be used to carry some sort of biological agent from the clouds to the ground.”
Those who follow this site will easily see the link between the toxic ingredients in the so-called covid vaccines and similar toxic nanoparticles that have, for decades, been pumped into our skies, continue to kill off forests and vegetation, and are being breathed in by all humans and all animal life on the planet.
On this Coming Collapse Q and A session, a highly credentialed scientist from a top 10 science testing facility joins us for a shocking front line report.
Recent testing has now confirmed that the highly toxic element graphene is in our precipitation, along with an already long list of toxins including aluminum nanoparticles.
Surfactants have also been confirmed in recent precipitation testing. Climate intervention operations are ubiquitously contaminating the entire planet and every breath we take.
How long do we have if the human race remains on the current course?
Please join us for this front line report on the most dire and immediate threats we collectively face.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light Odysee, BitChute and Brighteon channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Pulitzer Prize Winning New York Times Reporter: January 6 Media Coverage ‘Overreaction,’ FBI Involved, Event Was Not Organized Despite Ongoing Narrative
• NYT National Security Correspondent, Matthew Rosenberg, contradicts his own January 6 reporting: “There were a ton of FBI informants amongst the people who attacked the Capitol.”
• Rosenberg: “It was like, me and two other colleagues who were there [January 6] outside and we were just having fun!”
• Rosenberg: “I know I’m supposed to be traumatized, but like, all these colleagues who were in the [Capitol] building and are like ‘Oh my God it was so scary!’ I’m like, ‘f*ck off!’”
• Rosenberg: “I’m like come on, it’s not the kind place I can tell someone to man up but I kind of want to be like, ‘dude come on, you were not in any danger.’”
• Rosenberg: “These f*cking little dweebs who keep going on about their trauma. Shut the f*ck up. They’re f*cking b*tches.”
• Rosenberg: “They were making too big a deal. They were making this an organized thing that it wasn’t.”
• Rosenberg RESPONDS: “Will I stand by those comments? Absolutely.”
[NEW YORK – Mar. 8, 2022] Project Veritas published a bombshell video on Tuesday showing Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times correspondent, Matthew Rosenberg, speaking about the events of January 6, 2021, in a way that contradicts his own reporting.
Rosenberg, who covers national security matters for the Times says on the undercover video that “there were a ton of FBI informants among the people who attacked the Capitol.”
This revelation is a break from Rosenberg’s reporting on the matter where he characterized such a notion of FBI informants in the crowd as a “reimagining of Jan. 6.”
This was not the only time Rosenberg’s commentary to Project Veritas’ undercover reporter directly contradicted his own published words. Despite telling a Veritas journalist that January 6 was “no big deal,” his article says that downplaying the events of that day was “the next big lie.”
Soundbites of Rosenberg published Tuesday show him saying, “It’s not a big deal as they [media] are making it, because they were making too big a deal. They were making this an organized thing that it wasn’t.”
Project Veritas founder and CEO James O’Keefe revealed that Rosenberg’s article titled, “The Next Big Lies: Jan 6 was No Big Deal, or A Left-Wing Plot,” was written around the same time as he was making contradictory statements to a Project Veritas undercover reporter.
In the video, Rosenberg also revealed that January 6 was “fun,” a contradiction to his reporting that January 6 was “a violent interruption to the transition of power in American history.”
Rosenberg said, “It was like, me and two other colleagues who were there outside and we were just having fun.”
He even appears to make fun of his New York Times colleagues in one soundbite saying, “I know I’m supposed to be traumatized, but like, all these colleagues who were in the [Capitol] building, and are like, ‘Oh my God it was so scary!’ I’m like, ‘f*ck off!’” He adds, “I’m like come on, it’s not the kind place I can tell someone to man up but I kind of want to be like, ‘dude come on, you were not in any danger.’”
Rosenberg concludes, “These f*cking little dweebs who keep going on about their trauma. Shut the f*ck up. They’re f*cking b*tches.”
President Biden’s “maskless” State of the Union signifies the near-end of the COVID tyranny we have lived under for the past two years. Fortunately for Congress, the President, and the Federal Reserve, the Ukraine-Russia conflict is replacing COVID as a ready-made excuse for their failures and a justification for expanding their power.
Even before politicians began declaring the end of the pandemic, polls showed that rising prices were the people’s top concern – particularly the increase in gas prices. Since Russia is one of the world’s leading energy producers, sanctions imposed on Russia, as well as Germany’s decision (made under pressure from the US) to shut down the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, provide a convenient excuse for rising gas prices. This is the case even though the US, citing the “instability” in world energy markets created by the Russian-Ukraine conflict, has yet to officially ban imports of Russian oil.
The Federal Reserve has been planning several interest rate increases this year, even though some fear that rate increases could decrease growth and increase unemployment. The Russian crisis allows the Fed to either postpone rate increases or blame Russia for any unemployment that accompanies the rate increases. Either way, the Fed can use the crisis to deflect attention away from its responsibility for our economic problems. As of now, it appears the Fed will go through with at least a modest rate increase this month, but because of the Ukraine crisis, the increase will be smaller than previously expected.
The Ukraine crisis also provides an excuse for Congress to do what Congress does best: increase federal spending. President Biden has requested Congress provide an additional $10 billion in emergency military aid to Ukraine. Congress will likely quickly approve the President’s request. This will not likely be the last time Congress rushes billions of “emergency” money to Ukraine.
It is also certain that lobbyists for the military-industrial-complex are already “explaining” to a very receptive Capitol Hill audience why the Ukraine crisis justifies increasing the military budget to “counter the threats” from Russia, China, and whoever else can serve as a convenient boogeyman. It is unlikely there will be much resistance in Congress to a further increase, even though the US already spends more than the combined defense budgets of the next nine biggest spending countries.
Over the past two years, many leading Internet companies did the government’s bidding by “de-platforming” anyone who expressed skepticism of vaccines or promoted alternative treatments — even when they presented evidence to support their claims. These companies are once again helping the government by de-platforming those who question, or are suspected of questioning, the official narrative regarding Ukraine. Yet these companies’ concerns with “fake news” have not led them to stop people from sharing widely debunked stories supporting the US-backed Ukrainian government.
The lockdown and mandates did more harm than the coronavirus itself. They were based on lies promoted by the government and its allies in the “private” sector. Yet too many Americans refuse to even question the US government’s claims regarding the Ukraine crisis or question whether Russia is really responsible for our economic problems as opposed to a spendthrift Congress, successive spendthrift Presidents, and an out-of-control Federal Reserve. The only way to stop authoritarians from using crises like these to grow their power is to make enough people understand a simple truth: authoritarian politicians will always lie to the people to protect and increase their own power.
GOOD: Supreme Court holds vaccine mandate for businesses is illegal. (We absolutely gotta take a win when we get it!)
“Although Congress has indisputably given OSHA the power to regulate occupational dangers, it has not given that agency the power to regulate public health more broadly. Requiring the vaccination of 84 million Americans, selected simply because they work for employers with more than 100 employees, certainly falls in the latter category,” the unsigned opinion says.
BAD: The opinion absolutely leaves room for another mandate, tailored differently.
UGLY: The Court believes the feds had the power to pass the OSH Act in the first place – and get deeply involved in healthcare today.
It’s important to understand that the Supreme Court opinion today is largely based on the argument that Congress didn’t expressly authorize a vaccine mandate in the OSH Act of 1970.
So, if Congress does just that, we can count on SCOTUS to back up their power as they usually do.
But, under the Constitution, the OSH Act of 1970 was unconstitutional from day one.
Whether Congress gets around to expanding their own power this year, or in 50 years, we shouldn’t be surprised about it – unless the people reject the foundation of it all.
That includes – no longer waiting for the federal government to limit its own power.
It’s up to the people to preserve their own Constitution.
The message sent to journalists could not be clearer or more chilling: what happened to Assange could happen to you too
Middle East Eye – 17 December 2021
It is no accident that Julian Assange, the digital transparency activist and journalist who founded Wikileaks to help whistleblowers tell us what western governments are really up to in the shadows, has spent 10 years being progressively disappeared into those very same shadows.
His treatment is a crime similar to those Wikileaks exposed when it published just over a decade ago hundreds of thousands of leaked materials – documents we were never supposed to see – detailing war crimes committed by the United States and Britain in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These two western countries killed non-combatants and carried out torture not, as they claimed, in the pursuit of self-defence or in the promotion of democracy, but to impose control over a strategic, resource-rich region.
It is the ultimate, ugly paradox that Assange’s legal and physical fate rests in the hands of two states that have the most to lose by allowing him to regain his freedom and publish more of the truths they want to keep concealed. By redefining his journalism as “espionage” – the basis for the US extradition claim – they are determined to keep the genie stuffed in the bottle.
Eyes off the ball
Last week, in overturning a lower court decision that should have allowed Assange to walk free, the English High Court consented to effectively keep Assange locked up indefinitely. He is a remand prisoner – found guilty of no crime – and yet he will continue rotting in solitary confinement for the foreseeable future, barely seeing daylight or other human beings, in Belmarsh high-security prison alongside Britain’s most dangerous criminals.
The High Court decision forces our eyes off the ball once again. Assange and his supposed “crime” of seeking transparency and accountability has become the story rather than the crimes he exposed that were carried out by the US to lay waste to whole regions and devastate the lives of millions.
The goal is to stop the public conducting the debate Assange wanted to initiate through his journalism: about western state crimes. Instead the public is being deflected into a debate his persecutors want: whether Assange can ever safely be allowed out of his cell.
Assange’s lawyers are being diverted from the real issues too. They will now be tied up for years fighting endless rearguard actions, caught up in the search for legal technicalities, battling to win a hearing in any court they can, to prevent his extradition to the United States to stand trial.
The process itself has taken over. And while the legal minutiae are endlessly raked over, the substance of the case – that it is US and British officials who ought to be held responsible for committing war crimes – will be glossed over.
Permanently silenced
But it is worse than the legal injustice of Assange’s case. There may be no hack-saws needed this time, but this is as visceral a crime against journalism as the dismemberment of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi officials back in 2018.
And the outcome for Assange is only slightly less preordained than it was for Khashoggi when he entered the Saudi embassy in Istanbul. The goal for US officials has always been about permanently disappearing Assange. They are indifferent about how that is achieved.
If the legal avenue is a success, he will eventually head to the US where he can be locked away for up to 175 years in severe solitary confinement in a super-max jail – that is, till long past his death from natural causes. But there is every chance he will not survive that long. Last January, a British judge rejected extraditing Julian Assange to the US over his “suicide risk“, and medical experts have warned that it will be only a matter of time before he succeeds.
That was why the district court blocked extradition – on humanitarian grounds. Those grounds were overturned by the High Court last week only because the US offered “assurances” that measures would be in place to ensure Assange did not commit suicide. But Assange’s lawyers pointed out: those assurances “were not enough to address concerns about his fragile mental health and high risk of suicide”. These concerns should have been apparent to the High Court justices.
Further, dozens of former officials in the Central Intelligence Agency and the previous US administration have confirmedthat the agency planned to execute Assange in an extrajudicial operation in 2017. That was shortly before the US was forced by circumstance to switch to the current, formal extradition route. The arguments now made for his welfare by the same officials and institutions that came close to killing him should never have been accepted as made in good faith.
In fact, there is no need to speculate about the Americans’ bad faith. It is only too apparent in the myriad get-out clauses in the “assurances” they provided. Those assurances can be dropped, for example, if US officials decide Assange is not being cooperative. The promises can and will be disregarded the moment they become an encumbrance on Washington’s ability to keep Assange permanently silenced.
‘Trapped in a cage’
But if losing the extradition battle is high stakes, so is the legal process itself. That could finish Assange off long before a decision is reached, as his fiancee Stella Moris indicated at the weekend. She confirmed that Assange suffered a small stroke during a hearing in October in the endless extradition proceedings. There are indications he suffered neurological damage, and is now on anti-stroke medication to try to stop a recurrence.
Assange and his friends believe the stroke was brought on by the constant double strain of his solitary confinement in Belmarsh and a legal process being conducted over his head, in which he is barely allowed to participate.
Nils Melzer, the United Nations expert on torture, has repeatedly warned that Assange has been subjected to prolonged psychological torture in the nine years since he fled into Ecuador’s embassy in London seeking asylum from US efforts to persecute him.
That form of torture, Melzer has pointed out, was refined by the Nazis because it was found to be far more effective at breaking people than physical torture. Moris told the Daily Mail: “[The stroke] compounds our fears about [Assange’s] ability to survive the longer this long legal battle goes on. … Look at animals trapped in cages in a zoo. It cuts their life short. That’s what’s happening to Julian.”
And that indeed looks to be the prize for US officials that wanted him assassinated anyway. Whatever happens to Assange, the lawless US security state wins: it either gets him behind bars forever, or it kills him quietly and quite lawfully, while everyone is distracted, arguing about who Assange is rather what he exposed.
Political prisoner
In fact, with each twist and turn of the proceedings against Assange we move further from the realities at the heart of the case towards narrative distractions.
Who remembers now the first extradition hearings, nearly two years ago, at which the court was reminded that the very treaty signed by Britain and the US that is the basis for Assange’s extradition explicitly excludes political cases of the kind being pursued by the US against Assange?
It is a victory for state criminality that the discussion has devolved to Assange’s mental health rather than a substantive discussion of the treaty’s misapplication to serve political ends.
And similarly the focus on US assurances regarding Assange’s wellbeing is intended to obscure the fact that a journalist’s work is being criminalised as “espionage” for the first time under a hurriedly drafted, draconian and discredited piece of First World War legislation, the 1917 Espionage Act. Because Assange is a political prisoner suffering political persecution, legal arguments are apparently powerless to save him. It is only a political campaign that can keep underscoring the sham nature of the charges he faces.
The lies of power
What Assange bequeathed us through Wikileaks was a harsh light capable of cutting through the lies of power and power of lies. He showed that western governments claiming the moral high ground were actually committing crimes in our name out of sight in far-off lands. He tore the mask off their hypocrisy.
He showed that the many millions who took to the streets in cities around the world in 2003 because they knew the US and UK would commit war crimes in Iraq were right to march. But he also confirmed something worse: that their opposition to the war was treated with utter contempt.
The US and UK did not operate more carefully, they were not more respectful of human rights, they did not tread more lightly in Iraq because of those marches, because of the criticism beforehand. The western war machine carried on regardless, crushing the lives of anyone who got caught up in its maw.
Now with Assange locked up and silenced, western foreign policy can return comfortably to the era of zero accountability that existed before Assange shook up the whole system with his revelations. No journalist will dare to repeat what Assange did – not unless they are ready to spend the rest of their days behind bars.
The message his abuse sends to others could not be clearer or more chilling: what happened to Assange could happen to you too.
The truth is journalism is already reeling from the combined assaults against Khashoggi and Assange. But the hounding of Assange strikes the bigger blow. It leaves honest journalism with no refuge, no sanctuary anywhere in the world.
Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilizations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net. This originally appeared in the Middle East Eye.
The Victorian Government’s highly contentious pandemic powers laws have officially passed the upper house of state parliament.
The controversial legislation gives the Daniel Andrews’ government the ultimate authority to declare pandemics and issue public health orders once the state of emergency powers expire on December 15.
The Pandemic Bill has now passed despite our best efforts to stop it. It’s not what we wanted, but I think the resistance to the bill made the final product less terrible. This isn’t over. Now we double our efforts to stop mandates and passports.
The new laws were cemented into place with the help of Transport Matters MP Rod Barton who chose to stand with the government after intense debate both inside and outside parliament.
The bill passed 20 votes to 18, with the support of four crossbenchers: Andy Meddick, of the Animal Justice Party, Greens leader Samantha Ratnam, Reason Party’s Fiona Patten and Barton.
The "Pandemic Bill" has passed, 20-18 in the Upper House thanks to the support of the Andrews 4. In the minds of many Victorians these faces will forever be linked to this bill. Will history judge them kindly? pic.twitter.com/6S9VkaB3e9
“If Kyle Rittenhouse didn’t break the law, we should change the law”
This quote, from late-night TV host Stephen Colbert, is one of the more concerning reactions to Kyle Rittenhouse being found not guilty of murder.
What law, precisely, Mr Colbert would see changed is never specified. The vagueness only makes the sentiment more troubling.
Other responses have been just as dishonest, manipulative and foreboding.
Amber Ruffin, another late-night “comedian”, broke down in (very fake looking) tears. Ranting about the “fucked up” jury, “white people getting away with murder” and the “broken system”. Trying to insert racial issues that don’t apply, and telling lies about the facts of the case:
In Washington, “the Squad” decried the verdict, wailing that “the system is broken”, that it “protects white supremacy”.
Even alternate media aren’t immune. Democracy Now invited the family of Jacob Blake to discuss the verdict, who have no personal ties to the case save the riot was allegedly being carried out in response to Jacob’s shooting. They too wanted to headline the “system is broken”.
But why the misrepresentations and hyperbole? Why race-baiting and manipulation? Why the exploitation of victims’ families?
What exactly do they want to change about the “broken system”?
Is it private prisons?
Is it absurd incarceration rates?
Is it the fact prisoners are used as de fecto slave labour?
Nope. It’s jury trials.
Not just jury trials, however, there are some other areas ripe for “regulation” and “reform” too.
The relentless focus on Rittenhouse “crossing state lines with a firearm” (he didn’t actually, but never mind) would suggest perhaps one potential “fix” is tighter limitations on travel. Covid has highlighted just how much the powers that be really do hate us being able to move around.
Another obvious potential target for these vague reforms is the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms is, ironically, always in the firing line. The USA certainly can’t go full-Australia while guys are allowed to carry rifles around.
After Kyle Rittenhouse trial, Biden still thinks the jury system works. He’s wrong.
Jury trials have been under threat for years, with “educated” middle-class authors writing that, essentially, the law is too important to be put in the hands of ordinary people who are too stupid understand it.
Juries are routinely described as racist, too. Before the trial even started, the Rittenhouse jury was criticised for being “too white”.
The Rittenhouse trial is not alone in being used to undermine the jury system, Covid got there first.
In Spring of 2020, the Scottish parliament briefly tried to ban jury trials “as a response to the pandemic”, this was quickly repealed after complaints from the bar association. There’s also talk of removing juries from rape cases to “clear the backlog” and “protect the victim”.
In January this year, Simon Jenkins wrote in the Guardian that Covid has given us an “opportunity” to get rid of Jury trials for good. He would see it replaced with a “trial waiver system”, as much of the US already does.
Trial waiver systems are ripe for corruption, one report describes them as “highly coercive”, and this could easily result in a lot of innocent people pleading guilty to lesser charges because they can’t afford a lawyer or don’t want to risk going to prison. It is not a fair system at all.
Nevertheless, that’s where they want to go – and whether by Covid or Kyle Rittenhouse – they’ll get us there.
BRADY, Texas (Nov. 5, 2021) – The federal government imposes all kinds of mandates and regulations on states and localities through requirements attached to federal funding. More than 60 Texas cities have avoided some of these strings by rejecting federal coronavirus aid.
According to the Texas Department of Emergency Management (TDEM), Brady recently joined dozens of other Texas municipalities with populations under 50,000 in rejecting federal money doled out in response to the pandemic. The Brady City Council turned down $1.3 million offered through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). The council unanimously voted to send back nearly $675,000 it has already received and to decline a second payout scheduled for next year.
The U.S. Treasury manages the distribution of ARPA funds to Texas counties and cities with populations above 50,000. The TDEM distributes funding to smaller jurisdictions. The Texas legislature appropriated $16.3 billion in ARPA funds.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury contractually obligates governments taking ARPA money to comply with a long list of stipulations.
“Recipient agrees to comply with the requirements of section 603 of the Act, regulations adopted by Treasury pursuant to section 603(f) of the Act, and guidance issued by Treasury regarding the foregoing. Recipient also agrees to comply with all other applicable federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders, and Recipient shall provide for such compliance by other parties in any agreements it enters into with other parties relating to this award.” [Emphasis added]
The contract includes a list of applicable federal acts but does not detail what executive orders would apply. According to The Texan, activist Sheila Hemphill told the council “all other applicable” directives could include vaccine mandates, contract tracing programs, and any future coronavirus directives the federal government issues.
In an interview, Hemphill told The Texan that all city employees would be treated as “federal contractors” and bound by federal employment directives if Brady accepted the funding.
According to the unofficial meeting minutes, Councilwoman Jane Huffman opposed taking the funds, saying, “We live here in Brady because we want to be left alone. We want to control what happens in our community.”
Back in 2016, at least four local communities rejected HUD funding in order to avoid the onerous regulations. The HUD Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH) regulations total 377 pages. They give unelected HUD bureaucrats broad powers over grant recipient communities, including the power to reverse electoral decisions by local voters and force them to join “regions” against their wishes. Under AFFH, the federal government can control zoning, planning, land use, location of public transportation, and even the socioeconomic diversity of elementary and secondary classrooms.
While federal money with its promise of funding wonderful projects is an enticing carrot, a large stick inevitably follows close behind. By taking federal money, cities, towns, counties and states forfeit control over their own communities. Instead, bureaucrats in D.C. get to dictate and direct local concerns.
The best way to maintain local control is to reject federal funding and all the strings that inevitably come attached.
Federal money isn’t about helping poor people. It’s about command and control. State and local governments can’t complain when they willingly let the feds bribe them into relinquishing control.
But they can refuse the money.
This is the simplest and most effective nullification strategy there is: if you don’t want federal control, don’t take federal money. It’s as simple as that.
On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security and the Metro Transit Authority began a drill in which government agents will release a gas at over 100 locations to simulate a biological attack on the city. Authorities say the gas is “non-toxic” but will be released in closed spaces underground in the city’s subways system as well as outdoors.
The event, which is being referred to as an “airflow and dispersion study,” runs from October 18 through the 29th. It will simulate the aerosol release of a biological agent in a densely populated urban environment.
The project includes the release of “low concentrations of safe particle and gas tracer materials” as part of two programs, the Urban Threat Dispersion (UTD) program and the Chemical and Bio-defense Testbed (CBT) program, according to the DHS.
“The study will track movement of non-toxic material and the results from these tests will be used to learn more about the relationship between airflow in street level and underground environments,” the MTA said.
While a full list of locations was not made available to residents, a DHS document lists Times Square, Grand Central, Penn Station, Union Square, and the World Trade Center transit hub as sites for tests, with testing both indoors and outdoors.
The DHS claims the particle gas tracers are non-toxic and pose no health risks. The non-toxic substances include salt, glycerol, maltodextrin (sweetener), a fluorescent brightener, non-coding DNA oligos, amorphous silica among others. Sounds real healthy.
Naturally, the idea of government agents spraying the public with “safe gas” has many folks worried. Since these plans have been available for over a week, many folks are worried that they may be used as cover for an actual biological weapons attack. After all, many of the world’s recent attacks have taken place simultaneously with drills or exercises of a similar nature.
Many New Yorkers have taken to social media to voice their concerns with such an ill planned move during the middle of a pandemic.
“If you want to test Non-Toxic gas then you can do it in WASHINGTON DC not in NYC during a PANDEMIC in a subway that has 6 million commuters per day,” tweeted one New York resident.
Feds to Deploy Non-Toxic Gas in NYC Subways in Test of Biological Attack Readiness https://t.co/YM0sY1neuo
“One day this won’t be a drill… Homeland security releasing “non-toxic gas” in the subway systems for what reason? This doesn’t sit right with me, It’s time to really move out of NYC. We are basically lab rats and homeland security is running tests on us. Move out of NYC asap!” tweeted another.
This is not the first time the federal government has conducted such experiments and while it is a good idea to be prepared for possible future attacks, the United States has a less than stellar past when it comes to these types of tests.
In fact, as TFTP has reported, some of them have turned deadly.
In 1950, the U.S. government carried out this attack by spraying the city of San Francisco with the microbe Serratia marcescens in an attack that targeted thousands of innocent civilians. Discover Magazine reported that the experiment was conducted as a “vulnerability test to identify susceptible regions in the event of a biological terrorist attack.”
The attack was called “Operation Sea-Spray” and San Francisco was chosen as the target because it is close to the ocean and because it has a unique geography, tall buildings, and dense population.
For six days in September 1950, the United States Navy used giant hoses to spray clouds of Serratia along the San Francisco coastline, which resulted in the city’s 800,000 residents receiving heavy doses of the chemical. It is also estimated that residents in the neighboring communities of Albany, Berkeley, Daly City, Colma, Oakland, San Leandro, and Sausalito, were exposed to it.
While the military insisted that Serratia marcescens is “rarely a cause of illness,” Discover noted that there were a number of serious illnesses and even one tragic death reported as a result of the government’s chemical attack:
“A week after the spraying, 11 patients were admitted to the now defunct Stanford University Hospital in San Francisco with severe urinary tract infections, resistant to the limited antibiotics available in that era. One gentleman, recovering from prostate surgery, developed complications of heart infection as Serratia colonized his heart valves. His would be the only death during the aftermath of the experiment … Stanford published a report on the outbreak, noting that ‘the isolation of a red pigment-producing [bacterium] from the urine of human beings was of interest, at first, as a curious clinical observation. Later, the repeated occurrence of urinary-tract infection by this organism, with bacteremia in two patients and death in one, indicated the potential clinical importance of this group of bacteria.’”
While this experiment was one of the largest, it was not the only time the U.S. government intentionally poisoned its own citizens. Three congressmen began speaking out in October 2017 and calling for the government to be held accountable for conducting secret experiments across the country that involved testing radioactive material on vulnerable and poor populations in the 1950s.
The revelations were recently brought to light by author and professor Lisa Martino-Taylor in her book, “Behind the Fog: How the US Cold War Radiological Weapons Program Exposed Innocent Americans.”
She said she discovered that a small group of researchers “worked to develop radiological weapons and later ‘combination weapons’ using radioactive materials along with chemical or biological weapons.”
“They targeted the most vulnerable in society in most cases,” Martino-Taylor said. “They targeted children. They targeted pregnant women in Nashville. People who were ill in hospitals. They targeted wards of the state. And they targeted minority populations.”
A number of victims were poor, pregnant women in Nashville, Chicago, and San Francisco, who were unknowingly given a mixture that included radioactive iron on their first prenatal visit, to thousands of students who were subjected to “radiation fields” that were created at various high schools and universities in California.
When fields in St. Louis were sprayed with chemicals that included radioactive materials in the 1950s, Mary Helen Brindell, who is now 73, told the AP that she was aware of a squadron of green planes flying low overhead while she was playing a baseball game with friends, and covering them all in “a fine powdery substance that stuck to skin.”
Since then, Brindell said she has suffered from “breast, thyroid, skin and uterine cancers,” and her sister died of a rare form of esophageal cancer. “I just want an explanation from the government. Why would you do that to people?” she said.
The fact is that while some will call it just another “crazy conspiracy theory,” there is legitimate evidence to show that the federal government has been caught intentionally poisoning its citizens on numerous occasions, and the officials who are responsible have never been held accountable for the attacks that caused a lifetime of health problems for thousands of Americans.
[jamesfetzer.org editor’s note: For those who want more background about the Sandy Hook event, watch “Sandy Hook Update: Tracy loses, Wolfgang wins. The Deep State Strikes Back!”, where you can see much of the evidence for yourself, including how Shannon Hicks took staged photos of a mock evacuation of children from the school. This may be the most important article ever published on the Sandy Hook hoax.]
Among the Everest-like mountain of unbelievable “facts” and assorted discrepancies that make up the official Sandy Hook story delivered to Newtown residents and the American public, are the many mind-boggling and statistical-shattering “coincidences” that connect family members in key town positions. First up on our list for consideration: The Sandy Hook Fire Department.
Most anyone outside of Newtown (and maybe even those in Newtown who haven’t lived here long enough to know the names of certain town leaders and their well-placed family members) – probably wouldn’t piece together the mafia-like family ties and otherwise of those in Newtown’s power positions during and after the Sandy Hook event. But these local relationships between town, police, fire, church, newspaper, real estate, school and court – are incredibly revealing when taking a good, close-up look at what was delivered as the official Sandy Hook story according to the distorted lens of the controlled media and especially according to the Connecticut State Police (CSP) report on Sandy Hook issued in 2013 by Danbury District Attorney and Newtown resident (coincidence #1) Stephen J. Sedensky III.
For starters, let’s take a look at the Sandy Hook Fire Department who was so hyper-connected to the Sandy Hook terror production they could have hosted it and served refreshments at their fire station (oh yeah, they pretty much did). And let’s not neglect to examine the key divorces, marriages and family relations between Sandy Hook firefighters and important power players in our town leadership, the likes of which make the intermingling and intrigue of a 1980s soap opera look mild.
Horrified citizens of this country who watched the orchestrated terror descend on Newtown that fateful Dec. 14, 2012 morning, likely didn’t bat an eyelash when the media reported that Sandy Hook Elementary School secretary Barbara Halstead was one of the first “victims” to call 911 that morning. That’s because your average citizen (and maybe even your average Newtown resident) might not have known that among the first five emergency responders that morning, two were directly related to Barbara and all were firefighters from the Sandy Hook fire station located at the bottom of the Sandy Hook Elementary School’s driveway. The first to arrive on scene was Barbara Halstead’s former husband and long-time Sandy Hook Fire Chief William “Bill’ Halstead Sr. (coincidence #2), along with Barbara’s Sandy Hook firefighter daughter Karin Halstead who just happened to also be Captain of Newtown’s EMS (Emergency Management Services) department in charge of overseeing emergency communications that morning (coincidence #3).
Also in tow as among the first five responders, was former Sandy Hook Fire Captain John Jeltema who was Karin Halstead’s boyfriend at the time and now her husband. As head of Newtown’s Emergency Management on 12/14, Karin Halstead was therefore in charge of overseeing the 911 system and EMTs – and was likely one of the first to hear her mother Barbara’s 911 call from the Sandy Hook school office (coincidence #4).
At 9:46 a.m. that morning, Karin Halstead is also the one who absurdly and shockingly told the first two ambulances and paramedics responding to the emergency 911 call to NOT drive up the school driveway but rather park and wait in the rear lot of the Sandy Hook fire station. Karin Halstead’s husband is Sandy Hook firefighter and former Sandy Hook Fire Captain John Jeltema who is also brother to Connecticut State Trooper Christine Jeltema (coincidence #5) who we just saw give a press conference in May regarding the apparent mental breakdown and killing rampage reportedly perpetrated by Peter Manfredonia. Peter being the Sandy Hook native and UConn student who just happened to grow up on the same Yogananda Street as Adam Lanza (coincidence #6) and whose uncle Chris Manfredonia lived directly behind the Lanza house (coincidence #7) and … (try and swallow all of these “coincidences” without choking, please) .. arrived at the Sandy Hook school at 9:30 a.m. at about the same time as Adam Lanza (coincidence #8).
Chris Manfredonia was reported as saying he got to the school 15 minutes early with plans to attend a scheduled 9:45 a.m. gingerbread house-making activity with is first-grade daughter in Kaitlin Roig’s class. According to news reports in the L.A. Times and elsewhere, Manfredonia reportedly said he heard popping sounds, smelled sulfur and then ran around the outside of the school to try and get to his daughter when he was stopped and handcuffed by police. Chris Manfredonia and an armed, off-duty tactical SWAT officer who just happened to be near the school that morning and was running through the woods away from Sandy Hook Elementary School were both detained by police (as were three other men who are seen in aerial footage fleeing the school grounds). A troublesome entry on the official Sandy Hook Timeline (Page 1, A 84, Appendix) of the Connecticut State Police (CSP) report, states that a “parent” arrived at SHES at 9:30 a.m. for a gingerbread house project and was “buzzed into” the school at the main doors after which he reports hearing gunfire of about 15 shots.
Here’s the excerpt from Page 1 of the CSP Timeline:
09:30:00 Parent arrives at SHES for the gingerbread house event and has to be buzzed into SHES. At around 9:34, hears gunfire, reports approx 15 shots.
So the official narrative of the Connecticut State Police and Stephen Sedensky’s district attorney’s office puts Chris Manfredonia INSIDE Sandy Hook Elementary School at 9:30 a.m. at about the same time Adam Lanza reportedly shoots the glass out to the right side of the main entrance doors and begins shooting the teachers and kids. Why would the press report that Chris Manfredonia was running around the outside of the school trying to reach his daughter somehow and then was stopped by police? Who gave them this information? How could there be such a significant discrepancy in the CSP report and what was told to the public? How come nobody in the press ever interviewed Chris Manfredonia to clear up this matter? How come the Newtown police quickly cleared and released Chris Manfredonia that morning, especially if he was IN THE SCHOOL when the shots were reportedly being fired, as the official CSP report attests?
Read the rest of the article, including images and links, HERE.
BREAKING: A federal court granted our request for discovery & documents from top ranking Biden officials & social media companies to get to the bottom of their collusion to suppress & censor free speech.
