sourced from In Search of Truth
December 1, 2021
Video available at Rumble.
TCTL editor’s note: Video appears to have been created by Hindustan Monk Productions but no original source link was found.
cover image credit: kaleido-dp / pixabay
by Kit Knightly, OffGuardian
November 30, 2021
“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:
The “broken system” is all anybody wants to talk about. It’s all over the place.
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.
Indeed, given how far into the realms of tyranny so many governments are going, all these attacks on the very idea of “self defense” could be a worrying sign.
But, for now, it looks like the first item on the menu of “reform” is definitely trial by jury.
Why do I think that? Well, both Ruffin and Democracy Now make special mention of the jury being “fucked up” and “broken”.
Oh, and this article says so:
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 described as “old fashioned”, “slow” and “expensive”.
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.
by Mike Maharrey, Tenth Amendment Center
November 5, 2021
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.
Connect with Tenth Amendment Center
cover image credit: Billy Hathorn / Wikimedia Commons
by Matt Agorist, The Free Thought Project
October 20, 2021
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
— Christine Marie ♏️ (@passivec) October 12, 2021
“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.
Connect with The Free Thought Project
cover image credit: b2267969 / pixabay
by Rebecca Carnes
sourced from James Fetzer
July 12, 2020
[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.
