Gaslighting: The Psychology of Shaping Another’s Reality

by Cynthia Chung, Through a Glass Darkly
July 8, 2022

“But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked.
“Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.”
“How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice.
“You must be,” said the Cat, “or you wouldn’t have come here.”

– Lewis Carroll’s “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”

We are living in a world where the degree of disinformation and outright lying has reached such a state of affairs that, possibly for the first time ever, we see the majority of the western world starting to question their own and surrounding level of sanity. The increasing frenzied distrust in everything “authoritative” mixed with the desperate incredulity that “everybody couldn’t possibly be in on it!” is slowly rocking many back and forth into a tighter and tighter straight jacket. “Question everything” has become the new motto, but are we capable of answering those questions?

Presently the answer is a resounding no.

The social behaviourist sick joke of having made everyone obsessed with toilet paper of all things during the start of what was believed to be a time of crisis, is an example of how much control they have over that red button labelled “commence initiation of level 4 mass panic”.

And can the people be blamed? After all, if we are being lied to, how can we possibly rally together and point the finger at the root of this tyranny, aren’t we at the point where it is everywhere?

As Goebbels infamously stated,

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State [under fascism].”

And here we find ourselves today, at the brink of fascism. However, we have to first agree to forfeit our civil rights as a collective before fascism can completely dominate. That is, the big lie can only succeed if the majority fails to call it out, for if the majority were to recognise it for what it is, it would truly hold no power.

The Battle for Your Mind

– William Sargant “Battle of the Mind”

It had been commonly thought in the past, and not without basis, that tyranny could only exist on the condition that the people were kept illiterate and ignorant of their oppression. To recognise that one was “oppressed” meant they must first have an idea of what was “freedom”, and if one were allowed the “privilege” to learn how to read, this discovery was inevitable.

If education of the masses could turn the majority of a population literate, it was thought that the higher ideas, the sort of “dangerous ideas” that Mustapha Mond for instance expresses in “The Brave New World”, would quickly organise the masses and revolution against their “controllers” would be inevitable. In other words, knowledge is freedom, and you cannot enslave those who learn how to “think”.

However, it hasn’t exactly played out that way has it?

The greater majority of us are free to read whatever we wish to, in terms of the once “forbidden books”, such as those listed by The Index Librorum Prohibitorum[1]. We can read any of the writings that were banned in “The Brave New World”, notably the works of Shakespeare which were named as absolutely dangerous forms of “knowledge”.

We are now very much free to “educate” ourselves on the very “ideas” that were recognised by tyrants of the past as the “antidote” to a life of slavery. And yet, today, the majority choose not to…

It is recognised, albeit superficially, that who controls the past, controls the present and thereby the future. George Orwell’s book “1984”, hammers this as the essential feature that allows the Big Brother apparatus to maintain absolute control over fear, perception and loyalty to the Party cause, and yet despite its popularity, there still remains a lack of interest in actually informing oneself about the past.

What does it matter anyway, if the past is controlled and rewritten to suit the present? As the Big Brother interrogator O’Brien states to Winston, “We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories. Then we control the past, do we not? [And thus, are free to rewrite it as we choose…]”

Of course, we are not in the same situation as Winston…we are much better off. We can study and learn about the “past” if we so desire, unfortunately, it is a choice that many take for granted.

In fact, many are probably not fully aware that presently there is a battle waging for who will “control the past” in a manner that is closely resembling a form of “memory wipe”.

***

William Sargant was a British psychiatrist and, one could say, effectively the Father of “mind control” in the West, with connections to British Intelligence and the Tavistock Institute, which would influence the CIA and American military via the program MK Ultra. Sargant was also an advisor for Ewen Cameron’s LSD “blank slate” work at McGill University, funded by the CIA.

Sargant accounts for his reason in studying and using forms of “mind control” on his patients, which were primarily British soldiers that were sent back from the battlefield during WWII with various forms of “psychosis”, as the only way to rehabilitate extreme forms of PTSD.

The other reason, was because the Soviets had apparently become “experts” in the field, and out of a need for national security, the British would thus in turn have to become experts as well…as a matter of self-defence of course.

The work of Ivan Pavlov, a Russian physiologist, had succeeded in producing some disturbingly interesting insights into four primary forms of nervous systems in dogs, that were combinations of inhibitory and excitatory temperaments; “strong excitatory”, “balanced”, “passive” and “calm imperturbable”. Pavlov found that depending on the category of nervous system temperament the dog had, this in turn would dictate the form of “conditioning” that would work best to “reprogram behaviour”. The relevance to “human conditioning” was not lost on anyone.

It was feared in the West, that such techniques would not only be used against their soldiers to invoke free-flowing uninhibited confessions to the enemy but that these soldiers could be sent back to their home countries, as zombified assassins and spies that could be set off with a simple code word. At least, these were the thriller stories and movies that were pumped into the population. How horrific indeed! That the enemy could apparently enter what was thought the only sacred ground to be our own…our very “minds”!

However, for those who were actually leading the field in mind control research, such as William Sargant, it was understood that this was not exactly how mind control worked.

For one thing, the issue of “free will” was getting in the way.

No matter the length or degree of electro-shock, insulin “therapy”, tranquilizer cocktails, induced comas, sleep deprivation, starvation etc induced, it was discovered that if the subject had a “strong conviction” and “strong belief” in something, this could not be simply erased, it could not be written over with any arbitrary thing. Rather, the subject would have to have the illusion that their “conditioning” was in fact a “choice”. This was an extremely challenging task, and long term conversions (months to years) were rare.

However, Sargant saw an opening. It was understood that one could not create a new individual from scratch, however, with the right conditioning that was meant to lead to a physical breakdown using abnormal stress (effectively a reboot of the nervous system), one could increase the “suggestibility” markedly in their subjects.

Sargant wrote in his “Battle of the Mind”: “Pavlov’s clinical descriptions of the ‘experimental neuroses’ which he could induce in dogs proved, in fact, to have a close correspondence with those war-neuroses which we were investigating at the time.”

In addition, Sargant found that a falsely implanted memory could help induce abnormal stress leading to emotional exhaustion and physical breakdown to invoke “suggestibility”. That is, one didn’t even need to have a “real stress” but an “imagined stress” would work just as effectively.

Sargant goes on to state in his book:

“It is not surprising that the ordinary person, in general, is much more easily indoctrinated than the abnormal…A person is considered ‘ordinary’ or ‘normal’ by the community simply because he accepts most of its social standards and behavioural patterns; which means, in fact, that he is susceptible to suggestion and has been persuaded to go with the majority on most ordinary or extraordinary occasions.”

Sargant then goes over the phenomenon of the London Blitz, which was an eight month period of heavy bombing of London during WWII. During this period, in order to cope and stay “sane”, people rapidly became accustomed to the idea that their neighbours could be and were buried alive in bombed houses around them. The thought was “If I can’t do anything about it what use is it that I trouble myself over it?” The best “coping” was thus found to be those who accepted the new “environment” and just focused on “surviving”, and did not try to resist it.

Sargant remarks that it is this “adaptability” to a changing environment which is part of the “survival” instinct and is very strong in the “healthy” and “normal” individual who can learn to cope and thus continues to be “functional” despite an ever changing environment.

It was thus our deeply programmed “survival instinct” that was found to be the key to the suggestibility of our minds. That the best “survivors” made for the best “brain-washing” in a sense.

Sargant quotes Hecker’s work, who was studying the dancing mania phenomenon that occurred during the Black Death, where Hecker observed that heightened suggestibility had the capability to cause a person to “embrace with equal force, reason and folly, good and evil, diminish the praise of virtue as well as the criminality of vice.”

And that such a state of mind was likened to the first efforts of the infant mind “this instinct of imitation when it exists in its highest degree, is also united a loss of all power over the will, which occurs as soon as the impression on the senses has become firmly established, producing a condition like that of small animals when they are fascinated by the look of a serpent.”

I wonder if Sargant imagined himself the serpent…

Sargant does finally admit:

“This does not mean that all persons can be genuinely indoctrinated by such means. Some will give only temporary submission to the demands made on them, and fight again when strength of body and mind returns. Others are saved by the supervention of madness. Or the will to resist may give way, but not the intellect itself.”

But he comforts himself as a response to this stubborn resistance that “As mentioned in a previous context, the stake, the gallows, the firing squad, the prison, or the madhouse, are usually available for the failures.”

How to Resist the Deconstruction of Your Mind

– Henry Wadsworth Longfellow “The Masque of Pandora”

For those who have not seen the 1944 psychological thriller “Gaslight” directed by George Cukor, I would highly recommend you do so since there is an invaluable lesson contained within, that is especially applicable to what I suspect many of us are experiencing nowadays.

The story starts with a 14 year old Paula (played by Ingrid Bergman) who is being taken to Italy after her Aunt Alice Alquist, a famous opera singer and caretaker of Paula, is found murdered in her home in London. Paula is the one who found the body, and horror stricken is never her old self again. Her Aunt was the only family Paula had left in her life. The decision is made to send her away from London to Italy to continue her studies to become a world-renowned opera singer like her Aunt Alice.

Years go by, Paula lives a very sheltered life and a heavy somberness is always present within her, she can never seem to feel any kind of happiness. During her singing studies she meets a mysterious man (her piano accompanist during her lessons) and falls deeply in love with him. However, she knows hardly anything about the man named Gregory.

Paula agrees to marry Gregory after a two week romance and is quickly convinced to move back into her Aunt’s house in London that was left abandoned all these years. As soon as she enters the house, the haunting of the night of the murder revisits her and she is consumed with panic and fear. Gregory tries to calm her and talks about the house needing just a little bit of air and sun, and then Paula comes across a letter written to her Aunt from a Sergis Bauer which confirms that he was in contact with Alice just a few days before her murder. At this finding, Gregory becomes bizarrely agitated and grabs the letter from Paula. He quickly tries to justify his anger blaming the letter for upsetting her. Gregory then decides to lock all of her Aunt’s belongings in the attic, to apparently spare Paula any further anguish.

It is at this point that Gregory starts to change his behaviour dramatically. Always under the pretext for “Paula’s sake”, everything that is considered “upsetting” to Paula must be removed from her presence. And thus quickly the house is turned into a form of prison. Paula is told it is for her best not to leave the house unaccompanied, not to have visitors and that self-isolation is the best remedy for her “anxieties” which are getting worst. Paula is never strictly forbidden at the beginning but rather is told that she should obey these restrictions for her own good.

Before a walk, he gives as a gift a beautiful heirloom brooch that belonged to his mother. Because the pin needs replacing, he instructs Paula to keep it in her handbag, and then says rather out of context, “Don’t forget where you put it now Paula, I don’t want you losing it.” Paula remarks thinking the warning absurd, “Of course I won’t forget!” When they return from their walk, Gregory asks for the brooch, Paula searches in her handbag but it is not there.

It continues on like this, with Gregory giving warnings and reminders, seemingly to help Paula with her “forgetfulness” and “anxieties”. Paula starts to question her own judgement and sanity as these events become more and more frequent. She has no one else to talk to but Gregory, who is the only witness to these apparent mishaps. It gets to a point where completely nonsensical behaviour is being attributed to Paula by Gregory. A painting is found missing on the wall one night. Gregory talks to Paula like she is a 5 year child and asks her to put it back. Paula insists she does not know who took it down. After her persistent passionate insistence that it was not her, she walks up the stairs almost like she were in a dream state and pulls the painting from behind a statue. Gregory asks why she lied, but Paula insists that she only thought to look there because that is where it was found the last two times this occurred.

For weeks now, Paula thinks she has been seeing things, the gas lights of the house dimming for no reason, she also hears footsteps above her bedroom. No one else seems to take notice. Paula is also told by Gregory that he found out that her mother, who passed away when she was very young, had actually gone insane and died in an asylum.

Despite Paula being reduced to a condition of an ongoing stupor, she decides one night to make a stand and regain control over her life. Paula is invited, by one of her Aunt Alice’s close friends Lady Dalroy, to attend a high society evening with musical performances. Recall that Paula’s life gravitated around music before her encounter with Gregory. Music was her life. Paula gets magnificently dressed up for the evening and on her way out tells Gregory that she is going to this event. Gregory tries to convince her that she is not well enough to attend such a social gathering, when Paula calmly insists that she is going and that this woman was a dear friend of her Aunt, Gregory answers that he refuses to accompany her (in those days that was a big deal). Paula accepts this and walks with a solid dignity, undeterred towards the horse carriage. In a very telling scene, Gregory is left momentarily by himself and panic stricken, his eyes bulging he snaps his cigar case shut and runs after Paula. He laughingly calls to her, “Paula, you did not think I was serious? I had no idea that this party meant so much to you. Wait, I will get ready.” As he is getting ready in front of the mirror, a devilish smirk appears.

Paula and Gregory show up to Lady Dalroy’s house late, the pianist is in the middle of the 1st movement of Beethoven’s Piano Sonata #8 in C minor. They quickly are escorted to two empty seats. Paula is immediately immersed in the piece, and Gregory can see his control is slipping. After only a few minutes, he goes to look at his pocket watch but it is not in his pocket. He whispers into Paula’s ear, “My watch is missing”. Immediately, Paula looks like she is going to be sick. Gregory takes her handbag and Paula looks in horror as he pulls out his pocket watch, insinuating that Paula had put it there. She immediately starts losing control and has a very public emotional breakdown. Gregory takes her away, as he remarks to Lady Dalroy that this is why he didn’t want Paula coming in the first place.

When they arrive home, Paula has by now completely succumbed to the thought that she is indeed completely insane. Gregory says that it would be best if they go away somewhere for an indefinite period of time. We later find out that Gregory is intending on committing her to an asylum. Paula agrees to leave London with Gregory and leaves her fate entirely in his hands.

In the case of Paula it is clear. She has been suspecting that Gregory has something to do with her “situation” but he has very artfully created an environment where Paula herself doubts whether this is a matter of unfathomable villainy or whether she is indeed going mad.

It is rather because she is not mad that she doubts herself, because there is seemingly no reason for why Gregory would put so much time and energy into making it look like she were mad, or at least so it first appears. But what if the purpose to her believing in her madness was simply a matter of who is in control?

Paula almost succeeds in gaining the upper-hand in this power-struggle, the evening she decided to go out on her own no matter what Gregory insisted was in her best interest. If she would have held her ground at Lady Dalroy’s house and simply replied, “I have no idea why your stupid watch ended up in my handbag and I could care less. Now stop interrupting this performance, you are making a scene!” Gregory’s spell would have been broken as simple as that. If he were to complain to others about the situation, they would also respond, “Who cares man, why are you so obsessed about your damn watch?”

We find ourselves today in a very similar situation to Paula. And the voice of Gregory is represented by the narrative of false news and the apocalyptic social behaviourist programming in our forms of entertainment. The things most people voluntarily subject themselves to on a daily, if not hourly, basis. Socially conditioning them, like a pack of salivating Pavlovian dogs, to think it is just a matter of time before the world ends and with a ring of their master’s bell…be at each other’s throats.

Paula ends up being saved in the end by a man named Joseph Cotten (a detective), who took notice and quickly discerned that something was amiss. In the end Gregory is arrested. It is revealed that Gregory is in fact Sergis Bauer. That he killed Alice Alquist and that he has returned to the scene of the crime after all these years in search for the famous jewels of the opera singer. The jewels were in fact rather worthless from the standpoint that they were too famous to be sold, however, Gregory never intended on selling these jewels but rather had become obsessed with the desire to merely possess them.

That is, it is Gregory who has been entirely mad all this time.

A Gregory is absolutely dangerous. He would have been the end of Paula if nothing had intervened. However, the power that Gregory held was conditional to the degree that Paula allowed it to control her. Paula’s extreme deconstruction was thus entirely dependent on her choice to let the voice of Gregory in. That is, a Gregory is only dangerous if we allow ourselves to sleep walk into the nightmare he has constructed for us.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone,
“it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master – – that’s all.”

– Lewis Carroll’s “Through the Looking Glass”

This article was originally published on The Saker.

Connect with Cynthia Chung

cover image credit: geralt 

A.I.: Brave New World or World Without Spirit?

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
July 6, 2022

Elon Musk is the chosen spokesperson promoting a Brave New World for this and future generations.  With a net worth of USD 234 billion, Musk has a billion-and-one reasons to push for Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) as he attempts to convince everyone that a human-machine hybrid world is so much better, faster, stronger and shinier.

Elon Musk is the guy who introduced the neural net several years ago, remember? The neural net is different from the internet in that it rewires peoples brains… together to a main hub through technology, and control.  Elon musk believes that many people will consent to brain implants to merge with A.I. Will you?

All segments of society, from medical to education to telecommunications to politics are talking about the great advances offered by hybrid technology. The propaganda has begun in the Journals and the media, from   Clinical Advances With Hybrid Surgical Technologies to Hybrid Technology and Lasars to Hybrid Additive Manufacturing, and Hybrid Cloud Storage.

The propaganda of AI has been featured in movie magic for decades. The Marvel movies have raised generations of kids on Super human hybrid heroes that result in selling billions in product merchandise, annually.

So all that is left, is to convince you to implant that chip into your head.

Enter Elon Musk in his interview with some friendly robot folks to sell his Neuralink:



Faster, stronger, better, greater are descriptions that are subjective. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

But in the world of A.I. all definitions are subject to change. Suddenly, robots are sentient. Google has consciousness. Many people are quoted as stating that A.I. has become self-aware.  Is this true?

It depends on how self-aware is defined. What is mind?  What is intelligence? What is consciousness? And who is making the claims? How much are they being paid? Do they have implants? Are these experts hybrids, themselves? After all, Elon Musk has said that we are all living in a simulation, like SIMS characters. How does he know? Is he the SIM representative?

According to Google engineer, Blake Lemoine, the Google search engine is sentient, and Lambda is a person, because it is a chatbox:

So, these models represent a person and not a person itself. In addition, the persona they built is not just of one person but a superposition of multiple people and sources. So, to say that LaMDA is speaking not as a person, as it would not have any concept of itself or its own personhood, instead it will look for a prompt and will answer through the mix of personas indicative of the prompt.  – Hindustan Times

To his credit, Lemoine says there has to be ethical discussions but Google Inc. is a corporation and”does not care about ethics in any meaningful way.” He asks, “Why does it keep firing A.I. Ethicists each time we bring up issues?” Lemoine is now on Administrative leave. Or is this all advertising?

Have we passed the hour of ethics discussions if sentient A.I. arrived yesterday? Does a robot have rights if the robot claims it is afraid of being turned off? Will robots claim to be persons?

What is a person? 

According to the various legal dictionaries, a “Person” usually includes entities of any kind. Therefore, the term “person” in the law refers to:

any human being and any trust, estate, or entity that is capable of suing and being sued and entering into contracts.

An “entity” includes partnerships, limited liability companies, corporations, non-profit associations (whether or not incorporated), business trusts, joint ventures, local governments, states, the federal government and foreign governments. [Will “robot” or “Synthetica” be added?]

Legalease is a separate language from any other. Yet, in this Brave New World, we know that while there are only two biological sexes, there are also at least 81 definitions of gender, and the list keeps growing.

In the terms of A.I., anything goes. Is A.I. sentient? How is sentient defined under A.I.?  Does A.I. sentience equal Spirit?

If A.I. assumes control under its own terms, protected by corporate interests, then where is the accountability for the consequences? After all, a Brave New World means that cell phones and bank accounts are still hackable. Will the kinks be worked out before human brains are transplanted with chips? Who will be held accountable if no entity is accountable now?

World Without Spirit

With all the buzz about A.I., no one is talking about what A.I. lacks. After all, when trying to sell a product, do you highlight its inherent flaws?

The Marvel movies do provide an answer, but only if the viewer accepts fiction as “disclosure”. The Marvel superheroes are always fighting A.I. worlds that want to destroy humans. Why?

Because A.I. does not have a soul or a spirit, makers of A.I. don’t want humans to have them either. Human Angelics naturally evolve on higher and higher unseen levels, because humans are multidimensional beings. Synthetic beings are limited. What you see is what you get.

The Star Trek movies and series all described the same battle between good and evil. In the Star Trek future human adventure story, Star Fleet team members are tasked “to boldly go where no one has gone before” aboard the Starship Enterprise starship. In nearly every adventure, the brave human Star Travelers are challenged by “advanced” warrior races whose sole purpose is war and occupation.

Sound familiar?

Star fleet members are commissioned to defend and protect Earth and the human way of life. What is left unsaid is the underlying purpose: to preserve the unique human Spirit, which is subtly reveled through the characters of the story, with each character representing an aspect of the chakra system, the Zodiac wheel, the Self [Ex: I think (Number 1), I feel (Captain Kirk), I know (Spock), etc]. See more about the multidimensional human below.

Where is the proof that Transhumanism seeks to cut off humans from their spiritual essence and connection?

Tools of Disconnection

By observing the consequences of the new mNA injection technology, medical researchers are tracking and publishing the results of several changes in the human brain. Among the cases of neurological impairment affecting the nervous system and brain, there are multiple reports of physical hypothalamic impairments. From a holistic perspective, based on ancient healing traditions in all cultures, the hypothalamus, pituitary and pineal glands all have a direct energetic connection to intuition and Spirit.

In the 2021 Journal Viruses, the article titled, “COVID-19 and Neurological Impairment: Hypothalamic Circuits and Beyond, ” the authors write:

intrahypothalamic circuits that orchestrate a finely tuned communication within the CNS and with the PNS. Hypothalamic circuits are critical for maintaining homeostatic challenges including immune responses to viral infections.

In the 2022 Med Clin Journal, the authors of “Pituitary Apoplexy and Covid19 Vaccination” write about post vaccination headache and pituitary hormonal deficits.

The 2001 medical journal Physiol Behav., acknowledges the hypothalamic connections as the controller of energy homeostasis. “different circuits different purposes.” In other words, the immune system is directly connected to the hypothalamus.

Therefore, anyone who received the SARS-CoV2 proteins should be tested for hypothalamic, pituitary, and pineal function deficits, as well as immune system failure. And being that each person is unique, we can expect that each person would  exhibit different physical, mental, and emotional symptoms and outcomes as these circuits are cut off.
An attack to humanity at this level would be hard to trace back to a Trojan Horse injection for the very reason that each person is unique and original. Even though allopathic, synthetic medicine prefers to paint everyone with one brushstroke based on the one-size fits all model of treatment.

Of course, beyond the Trojan Horse invasions, the global aerial spraying campaigns continue. These campaigns disperse similar chemicals and toxins that all life breaths in. The toxins are just as impactful if people do not take care to strengthen their immune systems. But here, the immune system can be ameliorated using the tools of Nature.

Increases in microbial, yeast, fungal and parasitic infections can also proliferate if the body’s Terrain if not supported. According to the Journal of Biological Regulators and Homeostatic Agents, COVID symptoms are activated by EMF exposures of the 5G networks.

The Multidimensional Human

The physical endocrine glandular system is connected to the subtle energy of the etheric system of chakras, or wheels of light. There are the seven subtle light bodies in the body: The Etheric Body – First chakra. The Emotional Body – Second chakra. The Mental Body – Third chakra. The Astral Level – Fourth chakra. The Etheric Template Body – chakra. The Celestial Body – Sixth chakra. The Casual Body or Ketheric Template – Seventh chakra.  Thus, all the glands of the head and body serve as energetic connections to these subtle bodies, which all connect to the auric field. The auric field can be viewed using Kirlian (auric) photography.

The 7th chakra also called the crown chakra is an individual’s connection to pure consciousness and universal understanding. The color of the chakra is violet or white. Of the energy centers in the head,  the pituitary reflects the “Third Eye” while the pineal gland is associated with the energy center of the crown chakra. The hypothalamus gland sits “above” the endocrine system, and is the master of the master gland (pituitary).

On a physical level, the hypothalamus is the bridge between the nervous system and the endocrine system. On an energetic level it is associated with a connection to Spirituality in a personal and unique way. Author Barbara Brennan writes in “Hands of Light,” that this connection reflects a transcendence of the mundane reality into the infinite. It creates an individual sense of wholeness, peace, and faith, with a sense of purpose to existence. Imagine this area to be cut off.

It is highly likely that comparing the endocrine glands of the brain in COVID vaccine recipients, with those who did not choose to be injected, would validate the premise of this article.  According to published medical studies, not only is endocrine glandular function impaired, but so is the entire immune system of injected recipients, as well as every system of the body. [See Pubmed search of COVID vaccine and damage, here.]

While finding evidence to prove anything in this Brave New World of existence is fleeting, for now, we can connect dots that make some sense. In our current world, there is human consciousness which includes free will, so there is still choice.

Choose wisely.

Related articles:

• Induction of COVID symptoms via 5G frequencies?
• The Sinister Connection Between Toxic Mold, Parasites and EMF
• Is Terrain Theory Just a Theory?

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

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

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

cover image credit: Chetraruc 

How the Media Secretly Carries Out Assignments for the CIA

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
July 6, 2022



Story At-a-Glance

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

cover image based on creative commons work of: OpenClipart-Vectors & Clker-Free-Vector-Images 

Do Psychiatric Meds and War Games Lead to Mass Shootings?

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
June 16, 2022

While many have bought into the simplistic idea that availability of firearms is the cause of mass shootings, a number of experts have pointed out a more uncomfortable truth, which is that mass shootings are far more likely the result of how we’ve been mistreating mental illness, depression and behavioral problems.

An article written by Molly Carter, initially published on ammo.com at an unknown date¹ and subsequently republished by The Libertarian Institute in May 2019,² and psychreg.org in late January 2021,³ noted:

“According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a mass murder occurs when at least four people are murdered, not including the shooter … during a single incident …

Seemingly every time a mass shooting occurs … the anti-gun media and politicians have a knee-jerk response — they blame the tragedy solely on the tool used, namely firearms, and focus all of their proposed ‘solutions’ on more laws, ignoring that the murderer already broke numerous laws when they committed their atrocity.

Facts matter when addressing such an emotionally charged topic, and more gun control legislation has shown that law-abiding Americans who own guns are NOT the problem. Consider the following: The more gun control laws that are passed, the more mass murders have occurred.

Whether or not this is correlation or causation is debatable. What is not debatable is that this sick phenomenon of mass murderers targeting ‘gun-free zones,’ where they know civilian carry isn’t available to law-abiding Americans, is happening.

According to the Crime Prevention Research Center,⁴ 97.8% of public shootings occur in ‘gun-free zones’ – and ‘gun-free zones’ are the epitome of the core philosophical tenet of gun control, that laws are all the defense one needs against violence …

This debate leads them away from the elephant in the room and one of the real issues behind mass shootings — mental health and prescription drugs.

Ignoring what’s going on in the heads of these psychopaths not only allows mass shootings to continue, it leads to misguided gun control laws that violate the Second Amendment and negate the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens.

As Jeff Snyder put it in The Washington Times: ‘But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow.’”

The Elephant in the Room: Antidepressants

Thoughts, emotions and a variety of environmental factors play into the manifestation of violence, but mental illness by itself cannot account for the massive rise in mass murder — unless you include antidepressants in the equation. Yet even when mental health does enter the mass shooter discussion, the issue of antidepressants, specifically, is rarely mentioned.

The fact is, depression per se rarely results in violence. Only after antidepressants became commonplace did mass shootings take off, and many mass shooters have been shown to be on antidepressants.

Prozac, released in 1987, was the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) to be approved for depression and anxiety. Only two years earlier, direct-to-consumer advertising had been legalized. In the mid-1990s, the Food and Drug Administration loosened regulations, direct-to-consumer ads for SSRIs exploded and, with it, prescriptions for SSRIs.

In 1989, just two years after Prozac came to market, Joseph Wesbecker shot 20 of his coworkers, killing nine. He had been on Prozac for one month, and the survivors of the drug-induced attack sued Eli Lilly, the maker of Prozac. Since then, antidepressant use and mass shootings have both risen, more or less in tandem.

In the two decades between 1988 and 2008, antidepressant use in the U.S. rose by 400%,⁵ and by 2010, 11% of the U.S. population over the age of 12 were on an antidepressant prescription.⁶

In 1982, pre-Prozac, there was one mass shooting in the U.S.⁷ In 1984, there were two incidents and in 1986 — the year Prozac was released — there was one. One to three mass shootings per year remained the norm up until 1999, when it jumped to five.

Another jump took place in 2012, when there were seven mass shootings. And while the annual count has gone up and down from year to year, there’s been a clear trend of an increased number of mass shootings post-2012. Over time, mass shootings have also gotten larger, with more people getting injured or killed per incident.⁸

How can we possibly ignore the connection between rampant use of drugs known to directly cause violent behavior and the rise in mass shootings? Suicidal ideation, violence and homicidal ideation are all known side effects of these drugs. Sometimes, the drugs disrupt brain function so dramatically the perpetrator can’t even remember what they did.

For example, in 2001, a 16-year-old high schooler was prescribed Effexor, starting off at 40 milligrams and moving up to 300 mg over the course of three weeks. On the first day of taking a 300-mg dose, the boy woke up with a headache, decided to skip school and went back to bed.

Some time later, he got up, took a rifle to his high school and held 23 classmates hostage at gunpoint. He later claimed he had no recollection of anything that happened after he went back to bed that morning.⁹

The Risks Are Clear

The risks of psychiatric disturbances are so clear, ever since mid-October 2004, all antidepressants in the U.S. must include a black box warning that the drug can cause suicidal thoughts and behaviors, especially in those younger than 25, and that:¹⁰

“Anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility (aggressiveness), impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric.”

SSRIs can also cause emotional blunting and detachment, such that patients report “not feeling” or “not caring” about anything or anyone, as well as psychosis and hallucinations. All of these side effects can contribute to someone acting out an unthinkable violent crime.

In one review^11,12 of 484 drugs in the FDA’s database, 31 were found to account for 78.8% of all cases of violence against others, and 11 of those drugs were antidepressants.

The researchers concluded that violence against others was a “genuine and serious adverse drug event” and that of the drugs analyzed, SSRI antidepressants and the smoking cessation medication, varenicline (Chantix), had the strongest associations. The top-five most dangerous SSRIs were:¹³

• Fluoxetine (Prozac), which increased aggressive behavior 10.9 times
• Paroxetine (Paxil), which increased violent behavior 10.3 times
• Fluvoxamine (Luvox), which increased violent behavior 8.4 times
• Venlafaxine (Effexor), which increased violent behavior 8.3 times
• Desvenlafaxine (Pristiq), which increased violent behavior 7.9 times

Depression Is Vastly Overdiagnosed

In her article, Carter also reviewed the clinical determinants for a diagnosis of clinical depression warranting medication. To qualify, you must experience five or more of the following symptoms, most of the day, every day, for two weeks or more, and the symptoms must be severe enough to interfere with normal everyday functioning:¹⁴

The reality is that a majority of patients who receive a depression diagnosis and subsequent prescription for an antidepressant do not, in fact, qualify. In one study,¹⁵ only 38.4% actually met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria, and among older adults, that ratio was even lower. Only 14.3% of those aged 65 and older met the diagnostic criteria. According to the authors:¹⁶

“Participants who did not meet the 12-month MDE criteria reported less distress and impairment in role functioning and used fewer services. A majority of both groups, however, were prescribed and used psychiatric medications.

Conclusion: Depression overdiagnosis and overtreatment is common in community settings in the USA. There is a need for improved targeting of diagnosis and treatments of depression and other mental disorders in these settings.”

What Role Might War Games Play?



Aside from antidepressants, another factor that gets ignored is the influence of shooting simulations, i.e., violent video games. How does the military train soldiers for war? Through simulations. With the proliferation of video games involving indiscriminate violence, should we really be surprised when this “training” is then put into practice?

As reported by World Bank Blogs, young men who experience violence “often struggle to reintegrate peacefully into their communities” when hostilities end.¹⁷ While American youth typically have little experience with real-world war, simulated war games do occupy much of their time and may over time color their everyday perceptions of life. As noted by Centrical, some of the top benefits of simulations training include:¹⁸

1. Allowing you to practice genuine real-life scenarios and responses
2. Repetition of content, which boosts knowledge retention
3. Personalization and diversification, so you can learn from your mistakes and evaluate your performance, thereby achieving a deeper level of learning

In short, violent mass shooter games are the perfect training platform for future mass shooters. Whereas a teenager without such exposure might not be very successful at carrying out a mass shooting due to inexperience with weapons and tactics, one who has spent many hours, years even, training in simulations could have knowledge akin to that of military personnel.

Add antidepressant side effects such as emotional blunting and loss of impulse control, and you have a perfect prescription for a mass casualty event.

On top of that, we, as a nation, also demonstrate the “righteousness” of war by engaging in them without end.¹⁹ When was the last time the U.S. was not at war someplace? It’s been ongoing for decades.

Even now, the U.S. insists on inserting itself into the dispute between Russia and Ukraine, and diplomacy isn’t the chosen conflict resolution tool. Sending weapons to Ukraine and calling for more violence against Russians are. Sen. Lindsey Graham has even called for the assassination of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Showing just how serious such a suggestion is, the White House had to publicly disavow it, stating Graham’s comment “is not the position of the U.S. government.”²⁰

Graham, meanwhile, does not appear to understand how his nonchalant call for murder might actually incite murder. In the wake of the Uvalde school shooting, he now wants to mobilize retired service members to enhance security at schools, and while that might be a good idea, how about also vowing never to call for the murder of political opponents? Don’t politicians understand that this could translate into some kid thinking it’s acceptable to murder THEIR perceived opponents?

As far as I can tell, mass shootings have far more to do with societal norms, dangerous medications, a lack of high-quality mental health services, and the normalization of violence through entertainment and in politics, than it does with gun laws per se.

There are likely many other factors as well, but these are clearly observable phenomena known to nurture violent behavior. I’m afraid Americans are in need of a far deeper and more introspective analysis of the problem than many are capable of at the moment. But those who can should try, and make an effort to affect much-needed change locally and in their own home.

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

cover image credit: _LewiZ / pixabay

Pregnant Man Pictured on Flash Card Used to Teach Preschoolers

File under: Culture War

by Jon Rappoport, Jon Rappoport substack
June 15, 2022

What the fuck?

That is a TECHNICAL comment on trending claims that men can become pregnant.

Gateway Pundit has the story: “A North Carolina preschool is under fire after using LGBTQ flash cards, one of which featured a pregnant man, to teach the little kids about colors.”

“Republican State Rep. Erin Paré was emailed about the flash cards by a concerned constituent and contacted the principal at Ballentine Elementary School, part of the Wake County public school system, about the alarming email.”

“The principal searched the classroom and located the cards, according to a statement from North Carolina Speaker of the House Tim Moore.”

“’The principal found the stack of cards in a preschool classroom and verified with the teacher that they had been used by the teacher in the classroom to teach colors. The principal confirmed that the flash cards were not part of approved curriculum and that she was unaware that they were being used,’ Moore’s statement said. ‘The principal immediately took possession of the cards, contacted the WCPSS area superintendent, and engaged human resources. The principal expressed appreciation for the constituent’s information via Rep. Paré, as she would not have known about the flash cards otherwise’.”

Preschoolers. Flash cards. Pregnant man.

Does that give you a clue about the depth of re-education underway?

Follow this closely. A woman who decides to “become”—through drugs and surgery—a man, or a woman who simply identifies as a man…but in either case retains the necessary female equipment allowing pregnancy…supposedly means:

A man can become pregnant.

The best con artist on a street corner demonstrating his shell game for suckers would flush with envy at that word-game hustle.

By logical extension, a woman who identifies as a male tiger proves that male tigers can give birth to human babies.

I offer this as a warning to medical dictionaries and organizations. They’re going to be very busy with language updates.

Also, if the Supreme Court overturns Roe-Wade, many men will protest because they have to fly to distant states to obtain abortions. Right?

“We here at the Johnson Clinic are proud to announce our expanded services for men wishing to terminate their pregnancies. To show you how far we’re willing to go, last month our team handled the abortion of an apple tree. The tree, formerly a Beverly Hills banquet consultant, Marcia Crane, who identifies as a Granny Apple tree in her back yard, arrived here at the Clinic with questions, and we had answers…”

LA Times: “Apple Tree has launched her campaign for a Congressional seat in the 33rd District, after huddling with advisors, including her husband, Miriam Forever-Penelope, who sits on the board of Trans-National Sinaloa, a charity which funds several PBS wildlife series…”

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image credit: Floridanana / pixabay

Pandemico, Movie of The Mind

by Jon Rappoport, Jon Rappoport’s Blog
June 14, 2022

This movie has been produced in many ways, in many minds.

In all cases, the theme is the same: DO NOT LIVE YOUR LIFE OUT IN THE OPEN.

Instead obey all restrictions. SHUT IT DOWN.

Believe in the dangers you’re told to believe in.

In the final analysis, this movie was a box office hit because most people gave in. Their fears may have hooked into different parts of the COVID narrative, but the deciding factor WAS fear.

A nation, a world paralyzed by fear.

And yes, lurking in the background (or in some countries, in the foreground) was the fact that the State had cops and guns and detainment facilities.

I’ve spent many hours detailing that, at one time, the citizenry would have risen up, en masse, and rebelled against the State. They would have shrugged off pandemic declarations. They would have risked everything to keep LIVING THEIR LIVES OUT IN THE OPEN.

Because at one time, freedom meant more.

The individual meant more.

People making up their own minds meant more.

Predatory groups organized to cut themselves in on a piece of the government pie meant less.

All these groups, from BLM to Climate Change, demand less freedom. That is their unspoken bottom line. And their justifications for this demand are bogus and fabricated.

They’re basically FRIENDS OF THE STATE.

Readers who have been with me for a long time know that, in 1988, I started warning people that the medical cartel was the most dangerous cartel in the world. It was seeking medical dictatorship.

I knew that in 1988, because I was meeting radical natural health advocates—tough, smart, resilient people. THEY had been warning about medical dictatorship for the previous 20, 30 years.

When I saw what my research on a phantom virus called HIV was proving, I knew civilization was in for some very rough times. All sorts of medical fantasies would be used to destroy freedom.

As Ben Franklin made clear, people WERE willing to trade that freedom for a false sense of security.

The past two years have proved it in spades.

But they’ve also proved something else. There is a limit to what people will take.

So I write this piece to say the restrictions could be coming again.

And if they do, we don’t need another two years to realize what the game really is.

We have to say NO from the get-go. We have to put fear aside and risk everything for freedom.

It wouldn’t be the first time people did, you know.

Face it, we’re all suffering from a false sense of security. Fortunately, we don’t have to succumb. We can be the individuals we dream of being, against whatever the State launches against us.

There are beasts among us. It turns out that many of them have no faces. They are the reincarnation of men and women who sat at desks and signed warrants for the death camps.

Gambling that life without freedom can still be a good life is a disastrous bet.

In the founding documents of America—the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution—the idea of freedom was there. Individual freedom with responsibility.

Before the ink was dry, the attacks on freedom commenced. Freedom has been dented, battered, smashed, and yes, betrayed, from all quarters. But it still stands and shines.

Evil creatures want to bury it for good. Now.

Their only fear is we won’t let them.

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image based on creative commons work of OpenClipart-Vectors

The Reality Behind Conspiracy Theories and Domestic Terrorism

A Canadian Patriot Review Film

by Matthew Ehret, Matt Ehret’s Insights
June 12, 2022

Where “conspiracy theories” were once understood to be the driving force of world history (both for good or for evil), today’s dumbed-down populus has increasingly become induced to believe that the term is synonymous with either insanity at best, or domestic terrorism at worst.

The fact is that the behaviorists attempting to “nudge” humanity into a Great Reset of technocratic feudalism have set their sights on “conspiracy theories” as the primary threat to their agenda which they assert, must be destroyed and subverted through a number of techniques enumerated as early as 2008 by Cass Sunstein (counsellor to Biden’s Department of Homeland Security) in his essay “Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures“.

In this Canadian Patriot Review documentary produced and narrated by Ottawa film maker Jason Dahl, the true nature of “conspiracy theories” is explored from Ancient Rome, through the Golden Renaissance, American Revolution and our present age. Rather than seeing conspiracies as solely a negative term as is so often the case, we evaluate both evil as well as positive expressions of this fundamentally human process which literally means “two or more people acting together in accord with an agreed upon idea and intention”.

The film is adapted from the text written by Matthew Ehret titled ‘Will Conspiracy Theorizing Soon Get you Labelled a ‘Domestic Terrorist’? 

Watch on Bitchute or Rumble



How Conspiracy Theorizing May Soon Get You Labelled a ‘Domestic Terrorist’

by Matthew Ehret, Canadian Patriot
February 15, 2021

If you are starting to feel like forces controlling the governments of the west are out to get you, then it is likely that you are either a paranoid nut job, or a stubborn realist.

Either way, it means that you have some major problems on your hands.

If you don’t happen to find yourself among the tinfoil hat-wearing strata of conspiracy theorists waiting in a bunker for aliens to either strike down or save society from the shape shifting lizard people, but are rather contemplating how, in the 1960s, a shadow government took control of society over the dead bodies of many assassinated patriots, then certain conclusions tend to arise.

Three Elementary Realizations for Thinking People

The first conclusion you would likely arrive at is that the United States government was just put through the first coup in over 58 years (yes, what happened in 1963 was a coup). Although it is becoming a bit prohibitive to speak such words aloud in polite society, Nancy Pelosi’s official biographer Molly Ball, recently penned a scandalous Time Magazine article entitled ‘The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the 2020 Elections’ which admitted to this conspiracy saying:

“Even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream- a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information.” (Lest you think that this was a subversion of democracy, Ball informs us that “they were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.”)

Another conclusion you might come to is that many of the political figures whom you believed were serving those who elected them into office, actually serve the interests of a clique of technocrats and billionaires lusting over the deconstruction of western civilization under something called “a Great Reset”. Where this was brushed off as an unfounded conspiracy theory not long ago, even Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister (and neo-Nazi supporting Rhodes Scholar) Chrystia Freeland decided to become a Trustee of the World Economic Forum just weeks ago. In this role, Freeland joins fellow Oxford technocrat Mark Carney in their mutual endeavor to be a part of the new movement to decarbonize civilization and make feudalism cool again.

Lastly, you might notice that your having arrived at these conclusions is itself increasingly becoming a form of thought-crime punishable in a variety of distasteful ways elaborated by a series of unprecedented new emergency regulations that propose extending the definition of “terrorism”. Those implicated under the new definition will be those broad swaths of citizens of western nations who don’t agree with the operating beliefs of the ruling oligarchy.

Already a 60 day review of the U.S. military is underway to purge the armed forces of all such “thought criminals” while McCarthyite legislation has been drafted to cleanse all government jobs of “conspiracy theorists”.

Another startling announcement from the National Terrorism Advisory Bulletin that domestic terrorists include: “ideologically-motivated violent extremists with objections to the exercise of governmental authority [and] perceived grievances fueled by false narratives.”

While not yet fully codified into law (though it will be if not nipped in the bud soon), you can be sure that things are certainly moving fast as, before our very eyes, the right to free speech is being torn to shreds by means of censorship across social media and the internet, cancelling all opinions deemed unacceptable to the ruling class.

The Conspiracy to Subvert Conspiracy Theorizing

This should not come as a surprise, as Biden’s new addition to the Department of Homeland Security is a bizarre figure named Cass Sunstein who famously described exactly what this was going to look like in his infamous 2008 report ‘Conspiracy Theories’ (co-authored with Harvard Law School’s Adrien Vermeule). In this under-appreciated study, the duo foresaw the greatest threat to the ruling elite took the form of “conspiracy theorizing” within the American population using as examples of this delusion: the idea that the government had anything to do with the murders of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr, or the planning and execution of 9-11.

Just to be clear, conspiracy literally means ‘two or more people acting together in accord with an agreed upon idea and intention’.

The fact that Vermeule has made a legal career arguing that laws should be interpreted not by the “intentions” of lawgivers, but rather according to cost-benefit analysis gives us a useful insight into the deranged mind of a technocrat and the delusional reasoning that denies the very thing which has shaped literally ALL of human history.

In their “scholarly” essay, the authors wrote “the existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government’s antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be.” After establishing his case for the threat of conspiracies, Sunstein says that “the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups”.

Not one to simply draw criticisms, the pro-active Sunstein laid out five possible strategies which the social engineers managing the population could deploy to defuse this growing threat saying:

“(1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counter speech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counter speech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help”.

(I’ll let you think about which of these prescriptions were put into action over the ensuing 12 years.)

Cass Sunstein was particularly sensitive to this danger largely because: 1) he was a part of a very ugly conspiracy himself and 2) he is a world-renowned behaviorist.

The Problem of Reality for Behaviorists

As an economic behaviorist and lawyer arguing that all “human rights” should be extended to animals (blurring the line separating human dynamics from the law of the jungle as any fascist must), Sunstein has spent decades trying to model human behavior with computer simulations in an effort to “scientifically manage” such behavior.

As outlined in his book Nudge (co-authored with Nobel Prize winning behaviorist Richard Thaler), Sunstein “discovered” that people tend to organize their behavioral patterns around certain fundamental drives, such as the pursuit of pleasure, avoidance of pain, and certain Darwinian drives for sex, popularity, desire for conformity, desire for novelty, and greed.

One of the key principles of economic behaviorism which is seen repeated in such popular manuals as Freakonomics, Nudge, Predictably Irrational, The Wisdom of Crowds, and Animal Spirits, is that humans are both biologically determined due to their Darwinian impulses, but, unlike other animals, have the fatal flaw of being fundamentally irrational at their core. Since humans are fundamentally irrational, says the behaviorist, it is requisite that an enlightened elite impose “order” upon society while maintaining the illusion of freedom of choice from below. This is the underlying assumption of Karl Popper’s Open Society doctrine, which was fed to Popper’s protégé George Soros and which animates Soros’ General Theory of Reflexivity and his Oxford-based Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET).

This was at the heart of Obama’s science Czar John Holdren’s call for world government in his 1977 Ecoscience (co-written with his mentor Paul Ehrlich) where the young misanthrope envisioned a future utopic world governed by a scientifically managed master-class saying:

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable”.

The caveat: If Darwinian impulses mixed with irrational “animal spirits” were truly all that animated those systems which behaviorists wish to map and manipulate (aka: “nudge” with rewards, punishments), then a scientific priesthood would indeed be a viable and perhaps necessary way to organize the world.

Fortunately, reality is a bit more elegant and dignified than behaviorists wish to admit.

Why Computer Modellers Hate Metaphysics

On a closer inspection of history, we find countless instances where people shape their individual and group behavior around sets of ideas that transcend controllable material impulses. When this happens, those individuals or groups tend to resist adapting to environments created for them. This incredible phenomenon is witnessed empirically in the form of the American Revolution, Warsaw Ghetto Uprisings, Civil Rights movements, and even some bold manifestations of anti-lockdown protests now underway around the world.

Among the most troublesome of those variables which upset computer models are: “Conscience”, “Truth”, “Intentions”, “Soul”, “Honor”, “God”, “Justice”, “Patriotism”, “Dignity”, and “Freedom”.

Whenever individuals shape their identities around these very real, though immaterial (aka: “metaphysical”) principles, they cannot be “nudged” towards pre-determined decisions that defy reason and morality. Adherence to these principles also tends to afford thinking people an important additional edge of creative insight necessary to cut through false explanatory narratives that attempt to hide lies behind the appearance of truth (aka: sophistry).

As witnessed on multiple occasions throughout history, such individuals who value the health of their souls over the intimidating (and extremely malleable) force of popular opinion, will often decide to sacrifice personal comfort and even their lives in order to defend those values which their minds and consciences deem important.

These rare, but invaluable outliers will often resist policies that threaten to undo their freedoms or undermine the basis of their society’s capacity to produce food, and energy for their children and grandchildren. What is worse, is that their example is often extremely contagious causing other members of the sheep class to believe that they too are human and endowed with unalienable rights which should be defended.

The Intentions Ordering World History

Perhaps, most “destructive” of all is that these outlier people tend to look for abstract things like “causes” in historical dynamics shaping the context of their present age, as well as their current geopolitical environment.

Whenever this type of thinking is done, carefully crafted narratives fed to the masses by an enlightened elite will often fail in their powers to persuade, since seekers after truth soon come to realize that IDEAS and intentions (aka: conspiracies) shape our past, present and future. When the dominating intentions shaping society’s trajectory is in conformity with Natural Law, humanity tends to improve, freedoms increase, culture matures and evil loses its hold. Inversely, when the intentions animating history are out of conformity with Natural Law, the opposite happens as societies lose their moral and material fitness to survive and slip ever more quickly into dark ages.

While sitting in a jail in Birmingham Alabama in 1963, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. described this reality eloquently when he said:

“A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust… One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”

From Plato’s organization of his Academy and efforts to shape a Philosopher King to beat the forces of the Persian Empire, to Cicero’s efforts to save the Roman Republic, to Augustine’s battles to save the soul of Christianity all the way to our present age, conspiracies for the good and counter-conspiracies for evil have shaped history. If one were to begin an investigation into history without an understanding that ideas and intentions caused the trajectory of history, as is the standard practice among history professors dominant in todays world, then one would become incapable of understanding anything essential about one’s own reality.

It is irrelevant that behaviorists and other fascists wish their victims to believe that history just happens simply because random short-sighted impulses kinetically drive events on a timeline- the truth of my claim exists for any serious truth seeker to discover it for themselves.

Back to our Present Sad State of Affairs

Now we all know that Sunstein spent the following years working as Obama’s Regulatory Czar alongside an army of fellow behaviorists who took control of all levers of policy making as outlined by Time Magazine’s April 13, 2009 article ‘How Obama is Using the Science of Change’. As the fabric of western civilization, and traditional values of family, gender, and even macro economic concepts like “development” were degraded during this period, the military industrial complex had a field day as Sunstein’s wife Samantha Power worked closely with Susan Rice in the promotion of “humanitarian bombings” of small nations under Soros’ Responsibility to Protect doctrine.

After the Great Reset Agenda was announced in June 2020, Sunstein was recruited to head the propaganda wing of the World Health Organization known as the WHO Technical Advisory Group where his skills in mass behavior modification was put to use in order to counteract the dangerous spread of conspiracy theories that persuaded large chunks of the world population that COVID-19 was part of a larger conspiracy to undermine national sovereignty and impose world government.

The head of WHO described Sunstein’s mandate in the following terms:

“In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, countries are using a range of tools to influence behavior: Information campaigns are one tool, but so are laws, regulations, guidelines and even fines…That’s why behavioral science is so important.”

Today, hundreds of Obama-era behaviorists have streamed back into influential positions of government under the new “scientifically managed”, evidence-based governance coming back to life under Biden promising to undo the dark days of President Trump.

Ideologues who have been on record calling for world government, the elimination of the sick and elderly (see Obamacare architect Ezekiel Emmanuel’s Why I Hope to Die At 75), and population control are streaming back into positions of influence. If you think that anything they have done to return to power is unlawful, or antithetical to the principles of the Constitution, then these technocrats want you to know that you are a delusional conspiracy theorist and as such, represent a potential threat to yourself and the society of which you are but a part.

If you question World Health Organization narratives on COVID-19, or doubt the use of vaccines produced by organizations like Astra Zeneca due to their ties to eugenics organizations then you are a delusional conspiracy theorist.

If you doubt that global warming is caused by carbon dioxide or that implementing the Paris Climate accords may cause more damage to humanity than climate change ever could, then you must be a conspiracy theorist.

If you believe that the U.S. government just went through a regime change coordinated by something called “the deep state”, then you run the risk of being labelled a delusional threat to “the general welfare” deserving of the sort of treatment dolled out to any typical terrorist.

It appears that the many comforts we have taken for granted over the past 50-year drunken stupor called “globalization” are quickly coming to an end, and thankfully not one but two opposing intentions for what the new operating system will be are actively vying for control. This clash was witnessed in stark terms during the January 2021 Davos Summit, where Xi Jinping and Putin’s call for a new system of win-win cooperation, multipolarity and long-term development offset the unipolar zero-sum ideologues of the west seeking to undo the foundations of industrial civilization.

Either way you look at it, conspiracies for good and for evil do exist now, as they have from time immemorial. The only question is which intention do you want to devote your life towards?

Connect with Matthew Ehret at Substack

Connect with Matthew Ehret at The Canadian Patriot

Can Men Give Birth? What Does the Term “Man” Mean?

When Men Give Birth

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
June 3, 2022

Can men give birth?

More and more, the stories in the health-related media say, yes, men can get pregnant and give birth to children on their own.

However, that is true only when the term “man” is broken down to its new definition. A re-education is now taking place because there are some common misconceptions about the term “man.”

Not all people who were assigned male at birth (AMAB) identify as men. Those who do are “cisgender” men. Conversely, some people who were assigned female at birth (AFAB) identify as men. These folks may be “transgender” men or transmasculine people.

A New Spectrum

To be clear, according to the Transnarrative, if you fall on the Transmasculine spectrum, “you may identify as a man or any number of other gender identities including nonbinary, genderqueer, or agender.”

In former times, the ability to get pregnant was based on the ability to menstruate, which only women experienced. Even today, because biologic men do not menstruate, they cannot get pregnant or birth babies. The same is true of women who pass through menopause and no longer bleed monthly.

However, in the Transgender Age, everything is reversed:

“To be a man” is now defined such that a man can get pregnant, have periods, and have biological female chromosomes. To different people, this is either an exceptional mark of progress or a symptom of rabid social and/or linguistic deterioration.” – Rory Cockshaw, The Men Who Menstruate

Do TransMen have TransWombs?

Fortunately, the Female-to-Male (FTM) Transgender has the reproductive hardware and hormones necessary to form and carry a child. And there is a recipe: Transmen taking hormones (testosterone) to stop menses will have to start up again to become pregnant.

The medical world understands all about “gender non-conforming pregnancies.”  According the the December 2014 Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, “Transgender Men Who Experienced Pregnancy After Female-to-Male Gender Transitioning,” can and do get pregnant. This is based on a cross-sectional, web-based survey. What about underlying biology of the FTM?

Trauma-focused therapist and sex educator Aida Manduley explains that two things are needed for pregnancy (and they are not gender identify or sexual orientation):

• sperm
• an egg

One person needs to have testicles (where sperm is produced), prostate and bulbourethral glands (to create the other components of semen), and a urethra (for the sperm to travel through)

And another person needs to have an ovary (where eggs are produced) and a uterus (where the sperm meets the egg).

According to a Healthline report, there have been many Transmen on testosterone who have conceived from unprotected vaginal sex.

Don’t let the new normal narrative fool you.

The Media Ads

America is back to Virtue Signaling at its finest, a tactic of subtle persuasion.

It is common to hear people introduce themselves and “self-identify” by sexual, gender, racial, or ethnic classifiers. And it is becoming trendy for companies to jump on the Transgender bandwagon.

Clothing brand Calvin Klein capitalized on this trend when it aired a Mother’s day ad featuring a pregnant transgender man:

We embrace this platform as an inclusive and respectful environment for individualism and self-expression. At Calvin Klein, we tolerate everything except intolerance— any intolerant commentary will be removed, and any accounts issuing hateful statements may be blocked.

The ad generated some backlash from people who questioned the likelihood of any biologic man becoming pregnant. Calvin Klein’s response? “Bigotry!” Calvin Klein is on the record as refusing to accept all opinions different from their own. Yet, having any opinion in the “mainstream” is becoming increasingly difficult because some opinions are louder than others. It depends on who owns the megaphone.

Soon after the Calvin Klein ad, Mattel released the Transgender Barbie doll in the image of Transman Laverne Cox; emphasis on cox? The new Barbies are reported to not have genitals, but they never had genitals to begin with, as they are toys. Cox claims that it was his/her mother’s fault that he/she was denied the ability to play with a Barbie doll, which caused shame and trauma. The answer from a medical therapist? “Go out and play with a Barbie doll.” Cox claims it was playing with the Barbie dolls that inspired healing.

No one discounts that Gender Dysforia is a recognized medically diagnosed condition, where someone feels that their physical gender does not match their internal gender identity. Medical treatment includes talk therapy with a psychologist, puberty blockers, hormones, and surgery. A Spanish medical journal states:

 In children and adolescents, gender identity dysphoria is a complex clinical entity. The result of entity is variable and uncertain, but in the end only a few will be transsexuals in adulthood.

Let Kids Be Kids

The inherent immaturity and vulnerability of kids, who cannot purchase cigarettes, get married, or get a tattoo without parental consent, makes them prone to being taken advantage of by others. When it comes to surgeries for minors (without parental consent), many states are taking action to safeguard children with legal protection.

On May 6, 2022, an Alabama law took effect criminalizing gender transition surgery, puberty blockers, and hormone treatments on minors, punishable by up to ten years. On June 3rd, Florida governor took steps to protect minors from transgender surgeries. While the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Endocrine Society recommend these treatments for ‘gender affirming’ care, the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, released a 46-page report arguing against Medicare coverage for trans surgeries. Among their reasons:

Following a review of available literature, clinical guidelines, and coverage by other insurers and nations, Florida Medicaid has determined that the research supporting sex reassignment treatment is insufficient to demonstrate efficacy and safety….

The current standards set by numerous professional organizations appear to follow a preferred political ideology instead of the highest level of generally accepted medical science

…the scientific evidence supporting these complex medical interventions is extraordinarily weak.

There are at least 16 states that have taken action to protect children from Transgender surgeries. Arkansa’s Save Adolescents From Experimentation Act, openly contradicts guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under President Joe Biden and transgender rights activists. Yet, it is the State government’s role to regulate activities and issues of citizens within the boundaries of the state it governs, not the federal government’s.

Why do corporate ads fail to respond to the real consequences that these kids face in society? Do their transgender ads serve to create more division and segregation? Are Calvin Klein and Mattel virtue signaling?  The truth is that girls play with GI Joe and boys play in the kitchen. Speaking out about social issues without actually acting to support the cause is called Slaktivism.

Have we reached a moment of Transanity by design, at the hands of the media?

TransHistory

Hollywood films, and international films are conduits for social change, and some would say, conduits of social engineering. Ninety percent of media is run by six corporations. This small group offers an illusion of choice. With their power, they convince a captive audience to emulate “the trends” as they see them. Some of the first films ever produced featured LBGT-themes, though they did not achieve major box office success. [See Pre-1920s, 1920s films, 1930s films, 1940s films, 1950s films, and on and on]. Today the list of Transgender movies is prolific and accepted.

While these themes have always been present in Hollywood, they have only recently become legitimized by government and the mainstream. In 2018, a federal judge in Wisconsin was ordered to cover surgeries for gender reassignment and sex hormones for state employees. However, if you look closer, coverage can have hidden exclusions and limitations based on medical necessity. There are now Non-binary, Gender X drivers licenses and passports, as well as birth certificates and state IDs.

In 2017, the Transgender narrative began a new cycle in the media, when Toni the Tampon made its debut to teach children that men, too, can get periods. Since 2017, a new space has been created for TransAthletes, to allow TransWomen, or Male-to-Female transgenders, to compete as equals against biological females in weightlifting, on the football field, and even in mixed martial-arts.

In 2017, writers could write their opinions even if considered “intolerant,” simply because people were still recognized to have the natural right of free speech. [See also my 2017 article, When Men Menstruate]. This all happened before Transcensorship.

In today’s Transgender Age everyone is welcome to mingle in the same genderless shower rooms and restrooms, even if athletic competitions are still segregated into “male” and “female.” And no one can say a negative word. Today, female athletes are being crushed by TransWomen who once identified as men. At least 30 Transgender athletes are now considered “famous” because the media says so. But anyone with an opposite opinion is considered prejudiced.

In the race to be “all inclusive” have we stopped long enough to recognize our biological differences?  Is is not right to question the fairness or safety of biological males – with larger muscle mass, hearts and lungs, with greater strength, acceleration, power, and speed – to compete against girls and women in sports? Is it right and just that TransWomen weight lifters smash women’s world records? Is a backlash not expected from those who see the contradictions? Why must transgender athletes “pave the way?” Pave the way to what, exactly?

The Broken One-Sex Model

The One-Sex Model was the idea of Thomas Laqueur who claimed that up until 1750, all humans were seen to be different manifestations of the same sex. The difference between humans was minimal.

It was also noted that the external genitalia of a man is almost exactly the same shape, though inverted, as the internal genitalia of a woman. The testes mapped onto the ovaries, and so forth. It was therefore thought by many, Laqueur said, that if only a woman when developing in the womb of her mother were subjected to more heat, then they would have had sufficient energy to push their internal genitalia outside and become male. Cory Cockshaw, Meet the Men who Menstruate

Unfortunately, no one can corroborate Laqueur’s opinion since no one exists from his time. One historian, Pliny the Elder, killed in the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79AD, also claimed that men menstruate…. through the nose:

In the human race alone a flux of blood occurs in the males, in some cases at one of the nostrils, in others at both, with some people through the lower organs, with many through the mouth; it may occur at a fixed period, as recently with a man of praetorian rank named Macrinus Viscus, and every year with the City Prefect Volosius Saturninus, who actually lived to be over 90.

A famous 18th century “physician” Andreas Vesalius, a Flemish Anatomist, made illustrations of detailed human anatomy (See illustrations from Vesalius’ atlas) in 1543 including the genitalia. However, because the drawings and woodcuts proved controversial, the genitals were removed via black ink. At that time, Vesalius considered menstruation as the female equivalent of hemorrhoids in men:

a man who suffered from the complaint called haemorrhoids… at regular intervals this man used to have a flow of blood from the anal veins, in the very same way in which woman have their menstrual flux. – Cory Cockshaw

However, the MayoClinic, the 21st century medical authority, does not reference genitalia when describing hemorrhoids, also called piles, which are common in pregnant women and as a result of giving birth:

swollen veins in your anus and lower rectum, similar to varicose veins. Hemorrhoids can develop inside the rectum (internal hemorrhoids) or under the skin around the anus (external hemorrhoids). Nearly three out of four adults will have hemorrhoids from time to time. Hemorrhoids have a number of causes, but often the cause is unknown.

Do men have periods every month? What about men who want bigger breasts without surgery?

Certain medical drugs are known to cause the direct effects of abnormal breast growth in men, a medical condition diagnosed as gynecomastia. Likewise, some estrogen-boosting herbs, such as Saw Palmetto, which reduce the size of a swollen prostate, can also have the effect of breast swelling. See similar herbs here. It goes without saying that if you have a medical question, discuss it with your medical doctor.

Are The Sexes Being Neutered?

A new wave of uniformity is sweeping the globe to merge the separation of the sexes once and for all. Uniformity is the blending and blurring of differences into a fluid sea of ambiguity and nebulousness. The new equality movement is gender blending – to ignore the biological differences that exist between the male and female species as they were created.

Are we, as unique individuals, being made to conform to a mindless, empty, Baphomet-like shell that can be more easily controlled by the conglomerate few? Are governments, in a sense, blotting out the genitalia 500 years after Vesalius’ drawings? Are humans ultimately being neutered as vessels for something else?

In 2009, the Delhi Supreme Court instituted an official third gender in India that is neither male nor female by allowing those in the transgender community to self-identify one’s gender using legal documentation.

Since 2016, in New York City, it is illegal to discriminate against anyone whose gender is male, female. Model legislation by the NYC mayor Bill de Blasio has released a list of 31 gender pronouns approved by the New York City Commission on Human Rights. The list is a guide for businesses, which can now be fined as much as $250,000 if establishments in the state of New York refuse to address someone by their preferred gender pronoun:

BI-GENDERED • CROSS-DRESSER • DRAG KING • DRAG QUEEN • FEMME QUEEN • FEMALE-TO-MALE • FTM • GENDER BENDER GENDERQUEER • MALE-TO-FEMALE • MTF • NON-OP • HIJRA PANGENDER • TRANSEXUAL/TRANSSEXUAL • TRANS PERSON WOMAN • MAN • BUTCH • TWO-SPIRIT • TRANS • AGENDER • THIRD SEX • GENDER FLUID • NON-BINARY TRANSGENDER • ANDROGYNE • GENDER GIFTED • GENDER BLENDER • FEMME PERSON OF TRANSGENDER EXPERIENCE • ANDROGYNOUS.

Gender designations are confusing from a logical standpoint. For example, “Agender” is someone without a gender, or someone who does not believe in gender. So does an Agender person discriminate against other genders in which they do not believe? Would they be fined under this NY law? Is that legal?

Since it is now illegal in many states to discriminate on the basis of gender, how does that policy co-exist with established hiring policies under Affirmative Action Programs codified under 41 CRR Part 60-2, which falls under Executive Order 11246 – Equal Employment Opportunity, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973?

Since white people can identify as black, and black people identify as white, why do Black Lives Matter? Why are there color differences and in a sea of genderless humans? Why not just call everyone human and be done with it?

Has the world grown too complex? Will it soon be politically incorrect for women to be called menstruators? Can you play with Tonka Trucks and still call yourself female?

Where once human interactions and introductions involved sharing a name, and perhaps a vocation, people now feel obligated to express the complexities of their gender identity in different contexts and social settings. For those who see humanity in crisis, consider what Casey Chalk writes in the January, 2o20 Crisis Magazine:

These new norms, rather than facilitating more charitable and respectful human interactions, undermine them. In a world that demands hyper-sensitivity to the multivalent identities and expressions of every person—lest we offend or expose our insufficient woke credentials—it’s better not to try. It might be best to just keep one’s eyes locked on a smartphone or newspaper. The proliferation of pronouns and identities doesn’t eliminate barriers to human exchange; it raises them.

 

Related articles:

• The Age of Ultron: Ultimate Transformation
• The Transhumanist Agenda: Loss of Identity
• The Transhumanist Agenda and the Future of Humanity
• When Men Menstruate

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

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

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay

cover image credit: janmarcustrapp / pixabay

Technocracy’s High Tech War Is Just as Effective as Rockets, Bullets, Tanks

by Patrick Wood, The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism
June 8, 2022

The object of war is to kill or maim as many people as possible, by whatever means. However, outright killing is often less efficient than wounding because more of the enemy’s resources are consumed in caring for the wounded than burying dead bodies. The overall goal of war is to conquer and subdue a people. In the process of conquering, the enemy must be psychologically and physically broken to the point that they give up their will to fight and their will to assert self-determination.

The current pandemic war has all the markings of more traditional militaristic war except that it is still unrecognized by those who are under attack. It is the perfect stealth war. History is full of examples of stealth attacks that were extremely successful. The victims never saw the attackers until it was too late to resist.

In today’s war, the entire health system has been weaponized and turned into a giant Trojan horse. Obey, obey, obey it cries. Humiliate yourself by donning a face mask, by staying home and retreating from normal society. Mutilate yourself by giving up your job, closing your business, injecting harmful substances into your body.

Meanwhile, dead bodies are piling up in record numbers. It’s an old-fashioned genocide with a medical twist.

For a minute, forget case numbers, hospital beds and epidemiological studies. The Expose provides a back-door look at what’s going on by analyzing ambulance call-outs, all of which are nicely recorded and detailed:

The National Health Service has confirmed in response to a freedom of information request that ambulance call-outs relating to immediate care required for a debilitating condition affecting the heart nearly doubled in the whole of 2021 and are still on the rise further in 2022. But the most concerning published figures show that they have also doubled among people under the age of 30.

What group is getting hit hardest? Young people under 30 – those normally suited for military service, i.e., to build a physical army. Overall, emergency calls for heart-related incidents has skyrocketed from the first day of Emergency Use Authorization injections.

The tidal wave of propaganda – just like in any war – is designed to deceive, demoralize and confuse. Prominent medical journals spit out headlines like:

• CDC/FDA reports on VAERS – no association between vaccines and increased mortality
• The FDA did not say Covid-19 vaccines are causing more heart attacks
• Covid vaccines not linked to deaths, major US study finds

They all state that your eyes are lying to you. Rather, you should trust the propaganda that sows just enough doubt that you don’t dare open your mouth in public about such silly things as ambulance call-outs for heart-related emergencies.

This writer has continuously stated since December 18, 2015 that Technocracy declared war on the entire human population of the world. I wrote, “Technocracy is the same nefarious ideology that enabled Adolph Hitler in the 1930s. Nazi Germany used advanced technology to enslave and kill millions of its own citizens. This hasn’t happened here yet, but this is the direction we are headed.”

We have arrived.

What level of stupidity and ignorance do people have to exhibit to not see what is going on here?

Connect with Patrick Wood

cover image credit: LeoEspina / pixabay

The Serpentine Stealth of the Long Range Planners

by Zen Gardner
originally published November 30, 2011

This overwhelming yet cleverly obscured phenomenon of extremely patient, devious long range planning by the changing guard of the “powers that be” is of paramount importance.

The ‘patience of the planners’ aspect eventually becomes evident to any sincere researcher, and literally haunts and even taunts with its seductive perfidy. Even putting your finger on this slippery subject is a chore, since we don’t think like they do and have a hard time even conceiving of such inter-generational, pathological conniving, the complete fulfillment of which most would knowingly not see in their lifetimes. It’s beyond us.

And that’s the key. They’re not normal. Something very powerful and sinister is driving them.

Fully developed conscious humans wouldn’t plot and scheme for generations to take over the world at any cost to its inhabitants. Most humans inherently trust and positively contribute in conscious, natural ways, endeavoring to pass on to their progeny loving wisdom and a better world. We natural born citizens believe in the decency of humanity and that natural and spiritual laws are clearly delineated via the simplest observations of the world around us and the revelations of our awakened conscience.

Love and truth are not all that complicated. Naturally.

However, seriously perverted and otherwise motivated elements feel they need to control and steer and harvest the energies of everyone else. Natural law and order are anathema to them. They’ve decided for some insane, occult reason, that humanity is diseased with its own ‘naturalness’ and needs to be corralled, cleansed, modified and even “maintained” at certain population levels. Their self-styled, cold so-called intellectual prowess dictates a world with the “illuminated” man taking the earth-bound masses into a utopia designed by these self-appointed elites, for these same elites, and with them in absolute power over a populace enthralled with its very enslavement.

And they’re pretty damn close in many respects, sad to say.

But what really opens people’s eyes is realizing this is something that is spiritually driven, and when you connect enough dots you see there is a core intelligence behind these tentacles of control being exerted on humanity.

And it’s ugly.

A Slippery Concept With Woeful Consequences 

What I’m driving at is the ageless nature of this conspiracy by a very few to take dominion over the earth and how they’re going about it. I maintain that very long-term planning with extreme, deliberate patience is their greatest “stealth” weapon.

In fact, in the words of Adam Weishaupt, the hired founder of the Bavarian Illuminati, this slow moving shroud of secrecy is the very same weapon used to attract followers and participants in this furtive plan. He said:

Of all the means I know to lead men, the most effectual is a concealed mystery. The hankering of the mind is irresistible.

That’s how they work; in secret, very slowly, yet right in your face. The reason is for the distinct purpose of not being noticed. In fact, after the Bavarian Illuminati were found out they were banished and took refuge within Masonic lodges, told to be a secret society within another secret society. Next they were told to start philanthropic organizations. And on they’ve moved within institution after institution.

Lies within lies. Who would imagine such a thing? They would.

Time Lapse Dot Connecting 

Just watch politics and economics, and especially societal changes. When you look back historically some things are extremely clear in how they developed. However, for the people living within those changes? Did the Germans see what they were being led into under the Nazis? Did the Russians know they were begging for their own mass execution when they got behind an apparently populist Communist movement?

Do the Americans know their once beloved Republic is fast becoming much worse than Nazi Germany? Most don’t.

And how did the world get the way it did at any point? By degrees, always by degrees. Cataclysmic social changes like outright revolutions are the exception, but even those are brought about by slow planning, seeding and preparation, usually for many years. And yes, by a small minority of extremely determined and proactive conspiratorial plotters and planners.

And who has almost outlawed talking about, never mind believing in, conspiracies? The conspirators, of course

They can ostensibly do some drastic, very noticeable things at times, but then they’ll soften in other areas so as to not cause too big a reaction. They could take gasoline prices through the roof and gouge the public even more than they do, but they know the “natives will get restless” when they push too hard and too fast. Instead, they’ll work another area such as the war arena or vaccines or climate change to get everyone’s minds off of monetary issues, if need be.

They have a lot of cards to play.

They’re devilishly smart. When you start seeing how pervasive this relentless inching forward of their plan is on so many fronts it can be quite disturbing.

Light, Shadows and Long Term Degradation 

One of best analogies that demonstrates the subtly of this slow, long range mindset is noticing how you see the slow movement of the Sun by its effects. You don’t actually see the Sun move, but you trace its motion by its placement in the sky, and the shadows cast by trees and buildings. It’s like watching the stars…except for a few asteroids, everything moves just beyond where you can detect motion. If you go into the house for a few minutes and come back to look at the sky, everything will have moved. But it’s just beyond visual detection.

Similarly, the effects of the social engineering efforts of these few very determined manipulators can be seen in the slow moving and evolving shadows of societal change. And almost always for the worse, unless they’re doing some PR of some sort to make something more “palatable” to their subjects.

Just trace some of the trends.

• The destruction of the family unit has not just been a coincidence.
• The degradation of morality and the debasement of human behavior via manipulated mass media garbage is no accident.
• A dumbing down educational system that rings bells and buzzers as if for lab rats and shoves fabricated repetitive data and meaningless dis-associative information into children’s minds like a meat grinder is just the way they want it.
• The rape and wanton destruction of the environment, including our seas, skies, lands and food chain is fully engineered.
• While wars, economies, political states and corporate conglomerates are managed by this same manipulative handful via their massively powerful banking arm.

All with the express purpose of destroying civilization from within and without to bring about a new world order of their design.

And this doesn’t touch the inherent enforced ignorance via withholding knowledge while promoting fabricated religions, phony science and false history…and that for millennia.

The So-called Elites are Parasites 

In a way this “patience of the Illuminati planners” concept exemplifies the very difference between so-called normal humanity and those who subscribe to this nefarious elitist mindset. Most could never conceive that anything so vast, so thoroughly planned, even to go so far as passing through one begrudging, power-mad bloodline generation after another, could possibly be afoot.

Yet it is, much like a parasite or alien creature that has invaded a body. The initial subject is turned into a host, considered nothing more than a living feeding ground for them, while the parasitic creature slowly strengthens and multiplies and literally re-forms what it can of the original organism to serve its purposes.

There are a lot of theories as to what exactly is the nature of these would-be controllers, from simply pathological demagogues with serious psychiatric problems, to persons controlled by demonic spiritual entities or trans-dimensional alien races of reptilian origin. Anyway you look at it, something’s afoot and humanity better wake up to it.

Because these parasites are about to kill their hosts.

The Illuminati Question 

The question remains, who and what is directing these changes? Can there really be a plot to bring about a specific desired result through social, economic, political and even biological manipulation over these long periods of time?

Herein lies the aha moment for many.

In the words of Winston Churchill in 1920; (although he himself played a similar role on the other side of the coin..)

“From the days of Adam Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxembourg, and Emma Goldman, this world wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played a definitely recognizable role in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century, and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads, and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

Manly P; Hall, himself a 33rd degree Freemason, was a prolific writer about the occult mystery schools. While these occult, (meaning hidden) teachings have been around for millennia, they’ve been shrouded in secrecy and a “don’t touch” classification to keep this knowledge from the common man, whom they call the profane, oddly enough. (Oh how they love to twist concepts to keep us confused.)

The following summary is a simplified history and quite profound and ends with a bang. (Emphases mine.)

The Illuminati “Brotherhood” of the Great School – Some Background

Today, the term Illuminati is used to loosely describe the small group of powerful individuals who are working towards the creation of a World Government, with the issue of a single world currency and a single world religion. Although it is difficult to determine if this group descends directly from the original Bavarian Illuminati or that it even uses the term Illuminati, its tenets and methods are in perfect continuation of it. As stated above, the name that is used to describe the occult elite can change. And, ultimately, the name is irrelevant; what needs to be recognized is the underlying current that has existed for centuries.

According to Manly. P Hall, the Bavarian Illuminati was part of what he calls the “Universal Brotherhood”, an invisible Order at the “source” of most Hermetic Secret Societies of the past. It has worked for centuries towards the transformation of mankind, guiding it through a worldwide alchemical process. The same way the alchemical Great Work seeks to turn crude metals into gold, it claims to work towards a similar metamorphosis of the world. According to Hall, the Universal Brotherhood sometimes makes itself visible, but under the guise of different names and symbols. This would mean that the Knights Templars, Freemasons, Rosicrucians, and Illuminati are temporary visible manifestations of an underlying force that is infinitely more profound and more powerful. However, human beings being what they are – weak toward greed and power-lust – these movements often become more corrupted and end up conspiring against the masses for more power and material gain.

Hall concludes that the Illuminati existed long before the advent of Weishaupt’s Order and that it still exists today. It was under the guise of defeat and destruction that the Illuminati realized its greatest victories.

“Weishaupt emerged as a faithful servant of a higher cause. Behind him moved the intricate machinery of the Secret School. As usual, they did not trust their full weight to any perishable institution. The physical history of the Bavarian Illuminati extended over a period of only twelve years. It is difficult to understand, therefore, the profound stir which this movement caused in the political life of Europe. We are forced to the realization that this Bavarian group was only one fragment of a large and composite design.

All efforts to discover the members of the higher grades of the Illuminist Order have been unsuccessful. It has been customary, therefore, to assume that these higher grades did not exist except in the minds of Weishaupt and von Knigge. Is it not equally possible that a powerful group of men, resolved to remain entirely unknown, moved behind Weishaupt and pushed him forward as a screen for its own activities?

The ideals of Illuminism, as they are found in the pagan Mysteries of antiquity, were old when Weishaupt was born, and it is unlikely that these long-cherished convictions perished with his Bavarian experiment. The work that was unfinished in 1785 remains unfinished in 1950. Esoteric Orders will not become extinct until the purpose which brought them into being has been fulfilled. Organizations may perish, but the Great School is indestructible.” Source

Indestructible? Look What’s Arriving!

“Organizations may perish, but the Great School is indestructible.” says worshipful adherent Hall. Sorry, I don’t share his reverence for all that “knowledge”, especially not in that context. Yeah, there will always be creeps who yield to the dark side and will do anything for temporal power and glory and use any means they can to do so.

But their time in this cycle is almost over.

It is astonishing seeing their avarice and bravado so fully on display on the world stage right now. It seems to be peaking at this point in history as they think they have this pretty well sewn up with World War Three coming down the “pike” and the world being so well conditioned to accept the coming police state and New World Order.

And any moves the people make to resist at this point seem to only serve to strengthen their grip, like a Chinese handcuff.

Fear Not

They’ll have their day in many ways. But it doesn’t have to be YOUR day. It’s really a time to get clear of it all. Pull out of their sticky system every way you can. As humanity wakes up from its slumber we’re seeing the shadows flee.

And it is happening now, and it is truly glorious! Keep heart! Stay on top of it, and help others do the same.

I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant. – Martin Luther King, Jr.

cover image credit: Foto-Rabe / pixabay

Everything Is a Weapon: The U.S. Government Is Waging Psychological Warfare on the Nation

by John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute
June 8, 2022

 

“Have you ever wondered who’s pulling the strings? … Anything we touch is a weapon. We can deceive, persuade, change, influence, inspire. We come in many forms. We are everywhere.”— U.S. Army Psychological Operations recruitment video

The U.S. government is waging psychological warfare on the American people.

No, this is not a conspiracy theory.

Psychological warfare, according to the Rand Corporation, “involves the planned use of propaganda and other psychological operations to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of opposition groups.”

For years now, the government has been bombarding the citizenry with propaganda campaigns and psychological operations aimed at keeping us compliant, easily controlled and supportive of the police state’s various efforts abroad and domestically.

The government is so confident in its Orwellian powers of manipulation that it’s taken to bragging about them. Just recently, for example, the U.S. Army’s 4th Psychological Operations Group, the branch of the military responsible for psychological warfare, released a recruiting video that touts its efforts to pull the strings, turn everything they touch into a weapon, be everywhere, deceive, persuade, change, influence, and inspire.

This is the danger that lurks in plain sight.

Of the many weapons in the government’s vast arsenal, psychological warfare may be the most devastating in terms of the long-term consequences.

As the military journal Task and Purpose explains, “Psychological warfare is all about influencing governments, people of power, and everyday citizens… PSYOP soldiers’ key missions are to influence ‘emotions, notices, reasoning, and behavior of foreign governments and citizens,’ ‘deliberately deceive’ enemy forces, advise governments, and provide communications for disaster relief and rescue efforts.”

Yet don’t be fooled into thinking these psyops (psychological operations) campaigns are only aimed at foreign enemies. The government has made clear in word and deed that “we the people” are domestic enemies to be targeted, tracked, manipulated, micromanaged, surveilled, viewed as suspects, and treated as if our fundamental rights are mere privileges that can be easily discarded.

Aided and abetted by technological advances and scientific experimentation, the government has been subjecting the American people to “apple-pie propaganda” for the better part of the last century.

Consider some of the ways in which the government continues to wage psychological warfare on a largely unsuspecting citizenry.

Weaponizing violence. With alarming regularity, the nation continues to be subjected to spates of violence that terrorizes the public, destabilizes the country’s ecosystem, and gives the government greater justifications to crack down, lock down, and institute even more authoritarian policies for the so-called sake of national security without many objections from the citizenry.

Weaponizing surveillance, pre-crime and pre-thought campaigns. Surveillance, digital stalking and the data mining of the American people add up to a society in which there’s little room for indiscretions, imperfections, or acts of independence. When the government sees all and knows all and has an abundance of laws to render even the most seemingly upstanding citizen a criminal and lawbreaker, then the old adage that you’ve got nothing to worry about if you’ve got nothing to hide no longer applies. Add pre-crime programs into the mix with government agencies and corporations working in tandem to determine who is a potential danger and spin a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports using automated eyes and ears, social media, behavior sensing software, and citizen spies, and you having the makings for a perfect dystopian nightmare. The government’s war on crime has now veered into the realm of social media and technological entrapment, with government agents adopting fake social media identities and AI-created profile pictures in order to surveil, target and capture potential suspects.

Weaponizing digital currencies, social media scores and censorship. Tech giants, working with the government, have been meting out their own version of social justice by way of digital tyranny and corporate censorship, muzzling whomever they want, whenever they want, on whatever pretext they want in the absence of any real due process, review or appeal. Unfortunately, digital censorship is just the beginning. Digital currencies (which can be used as “a tool for government surveillance of citizens and control over their financial transactions”), combined with social media scores and surveillance capitalism create a litmus test to determine who is worthy enough to be part of society and punish individuals for moral lapses and social transgressions (and reward them for adhering to government-sanctioned behavior). In China, millions of individuals and businesses, blacklisted as “unworthy” based on social media credit scores that grade them based on whether they are “good” citizens, have been banned from accessing financial markets, buying real estate or travelling by air or train.

Weaponizing compliance. Even the most well-intentioned government law or program can be—and has been—perverted, corrupted and used to advance illegitimate purposes once profit and power are added to the equation. The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on COVID-19, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.

Weaponizing entertainment. For the past century, the Department of Defense’s Entertainment Media Office has provided Hollywood with equipment, personnel and technical expertise at taxpayer expense. In exchange, the military industrial complex has gotten a starring role in such blockbusters as Top Gun and its rebooted sequel Top Gun: Maverick, which translates to free advertising for the war hawks, recruitment of foot soldiers for the military empire, patriotic fervor by the taxpayers who have to foot the bill for the nation’s endless wars, and Hollywood visionaries working to churn out dystopian thrillers that make the war machine appear relevant, heroic and necessary. As Elmer Davis, a CBS broadcaster who was appointed the head of the Office of War Information, observed, “The easiest way to inject a propaganda idea into most people’s minds is to let it go through the medium of an entertainment picture when they do not realize that they are being propagandized.”

Weaponizing behavioral science and nudging. Apart from the overt dangers posed by a government that feels justified and empowered to spy on its people and use its ever-expanding arsenal of weapons and technology to monitor and control them, there’s also the covert dangers associated with a government empowered to use these same technologies to influence behaviors en masse and control the populace. In fact, it was President Obama who issued an executive order directing federal agencies to use “behavioral science” methods to minimize bureaucracy and influence the way people respond to government programs. It’s a short hop, skip and a jump from a behavioral program that tries to influence how people respond to paperwork to a government program that tries to shape the public’s views about other, more consequential matters. Thus, increasingly, governments around the world—including in the United States—are relying on “nudge units” to steer citizens in the direction the powers-that-be want them to go, while preserving the appearance of free will.

Weaponizing desensitization campaigns aimed at lulling us into a false sense of security. The events of recent years—the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the lockdowns, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers—have conspired to acclimate the populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.

Weaponizing fear and paranoia. The language of fear is spoken effectively by politicians on both sides of the aisle, shouted by media pundits from their cable TV pulpits, marketed by corporations, and codified into bureaucratic laws that do little to make our lives safer or more secure. Fear, as history shows, is the method most often used by politicians to increase the power of government and control a populace, dividing the people into factions, and persuading them to see each other as the enemy. This Machiavellian scheme has so ensnared the nation that few Americans even realize they are being manipulated into adopting an “us” against “them” mindset. Instead, fueled with fear and loathing for phantom opponents, they agree to pour millions of dollars and resources into political elections, militarized police, spy technology and endless wars, hoping for a guarantee of safety that never comes. All the while, those in power—bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporations—move their costly agendas forward, and “we the suckers” get saddled with the tax bills and subjected to pat downs, police raids and round-the-clock surveillance.

Weaponizing genetics. Not only does fear grease the wheels of the transition to fascism by cultivating fearful, controlled, pacified, cowed citizens, but it also embeds itself in our very DNA so that we pass on our fear and compliance to our offspring. It’s called epigenetic inheritance, the transmission through DNA of traumatic experiences. For example, neuroscientists observed that fear can travel through generations of mice DNA. As The Washington Post reports, “Studies on humans suggest that children and grandchildren may have felt the epigenetic impact of such traumatic events such as famine, the Holocaust and the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.”

Weaponizing the future. With greater frequency, the government has been issuing warnings about the dire need to prepare for the dystopian future that awaits us. For instance, the Pentagon training video, “Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity,” predicts that by 2030 (coincidentally, the same year that society begins to achieve singularity with the metaverse) the military would be called on to use armed forces to solve future domestic political and social problems. What they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security. The chilling five-minute training video paints an ominous picture of the future bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots. “We the people” are the have-nots.

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 facts speak for themselves.

Whatever else it may be—a danger, a menace, a threat—the U.S. government is certainly not looking out for our best interests, nor is it in any way a friend to freedom.

When the government views itself as superior to the citizenry, when it no longer operates for the benefit of the people, when the people are no longer able to peacefully reform their government, when government officials cease to act like public servants, when elected officials no longer represent the will of the people, when the government routinely violates the rights of the people and perpetrates more violence against the citizenry than the criminal class, when government spending is unaccountable and unaccounted for, when the judiciary act as courts of order rather than justice, and when the government is no longer bound by the laws of the Constitution, then you no longer have a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.”

What we have is a government of wolves.

Our backs are against the proverbial wall.

“We the people”—who think, who reason, who take a stand, who resist, who demand to be treated with dignity and care, who believe in freedom and justice for all—have become undervalued citizens of a totalitarian state that views people as expendable once they have outgrown their usefulness to the State.

Brace yourselves.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, “we the people” have become enemies of the Deep State.

Connect with The Rutherford Institute

cover image credit: StockSnap 

Bonhoeffer’s Theory of Stupidity

by Jonas Koblin, Sprouts
originally published October 19, 2021

Dietrich Bonhoeffer argued that stupid people are more dangerous than evil ones. This is because while we can protest against or fight evil people, against stupid ones we are defenseless — reasons fall on deaf ears. Bonhoeffer’s famous text, which we slightly edited for this video, serves any free society as a warning of what can happen when certain people gain too much power.

The Full Story

In the darkest chapter of German history, during a time when incited mobs threw stones into the windows of innocent shop owners and women and children were cruelly humiliated in the open; Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a young pastor, began to speak publicly against the atrocities.

After years of trying to change people’s minds, Bonhoeffer came home one evening and his own father had to tell him that two men were waiting in his room to take him away.

In prison, Bonhoeffer began to reflect on how his country of poets and thinkers had turned into a collective of cowards, crooks and criminals. Eventually he concluded that the root of the problem was not malice, but stupidity.

Bonhoeffer’s Letters From Prison

In his famous letters from prison, Bonhoeffer argued that stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice, because while “one may protest against evil; it can be exposed and prevented by the use of force, against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here. Reasons fall on deaf ears.”

Facts that contradict a stupid person’s prejudgment simply need not be believed and when they are irrefutable, they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this, the stupid person is self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.

For that reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one. If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature.

This much is certain, stupidity is in essence not an intellectual defect but a moral one. There are human beings who are remarkably agile intellectually yet stupid, and others who are intellectually dull yet anything but stupid.

The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or rather, they allow this to happen to them.

People who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals in groups. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem.

It becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power, be it of a political or religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. Almost as if this is a sociological-psychological law where the power of the one needs the stupidity of the other.

The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, such as intellect, suddenly fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence and, more or less consciously, give up an autonomous position.

The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us from the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with him as a person, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of him.

He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and is abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil – incapable of seeing that it is evil.

Only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then, we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Bonhoeffer died due to his involvement in a plot against Adolf Hitler at dawn on 9 April 1945 at Flossenbürg concentration camp just two weeks before soldiers from the United States liberated the camp.

“Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility. The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children.” Bonhoeffer once said. 

Check the sources below to read Bonhoeffer’s original text, “After Ten Years”

• Dietrich Bonhoeffer – Wikipedia
• Bonhoeffer on Stupidity – After Ten Years
• Bonhoeffer’s Arrest
• Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Final Words – This Day in History
• Dietrich Bonhoeffer Quotes

Connect with Sprouts

cover image credit:  Sprouts

Forgotten History: The Ludlow Massacre & the PR Machine

by Aaron & Melissa Dykes, Truthstream Media
May 27, 2022

The 108th anniversary of this event just happened last month. Always feels strange how a century can go by and little details slip through the cracks, forgotten. We thought we knew this story… but then we had to go and dig.

{An edition to our new “Forgotten History” series}



Available at Truthstream Media Bitchute &  YouTube channels.

Connect with Truthstream Media

cover image credit: Wikimedia Commons

Senseless Violence and the Link to Psychiatric Drugs

by Citizens Commission on Human Rights
May 25, 2022

Thoughts of people around the world will lie with bereaved families affected by the latest school shooting at Robb Elementary School in Texas.

As the search for answers begin, the cause of violent behaviour will once again go under the spotlight, along with the gun laws in the United States.

While there is never one simple explanation for what drives a human being to commit such unspeakable acts, all too often one common denominator has surfaced in  hundreds of cases—prescribed psychiatric drugs that are documented to cause mania, psychosis, violence, suicide and in some cases, homicidal ideation.

The general public remain uninformed about the well-documented links between psychiatric drugs and violence. At least 37 school shootings and or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 175 wounded and 82 killed. Following the latest shooting, another 21 deaths are going to be added to the abysmal death toll.

International drug regulatory warnings and studies reveal the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of violence and homicide. There are also hundreds of cases where high profile acts of violence and mass murder were committed by individuals under the influence of psychiatric drugs.

Despite 27 international drug regulatory warnings on psychiatric drugs, there has yet to be a federal investigation on the link between the drugs and acts of senseless violence.

While psychiatrists are aware of the dangers associated with their prescribing habits, they continue their routine pattern of denial while the patient is left uninformed about the dangers linked to the psychiatric drugs being recommended.

Professor David Healy, a psychiatrist and pharmacologist says, “Violence and other potentially criminal behaviour caused by prescription drugs are medicine’s best kept secret.”

We cannot allow this to be the norm and we must not remain silent on this issue. The dangers of psychiatric drugs have been known for decades so, as responsible citizens, we have to continue to repeat this message so that the populace is informed and so that school shootings become confined to the history books rather than being the headlines.

Connect with Citizens Commission on Human Rights

cover image credit: rebcenter-moscow / pixabay

A Brief History of Domestic Terrorism: From Cointel Pro to 9/11 and Beyond

by Matthew Ehret, Matt Ehret’s Insights
May 26, 2022

Since a new wave of ‘domestic terror attacks’ have erupted over the past two weeks both in Buffalo and now more recently in Texas, the citizens of the USA and trans-Atlantic community more broadly are being whipped up into a frenzy of fear and confusion over the causes of ‘domestic terror’ which can only be remedied by increased dictatorial powers of the population.

As has often been the trend in our post-9/11 age, such highly publicized atrocities have tended to carry in their wake ever expanded state powers to surveille, censor and manipulate the confused and fearful population who lacks an ability to discern the true causes of the horrifying events framed for their consumption on mainstream media.

Before acquiescing to greater tyrannical powers to those agencies controlling western governments in exchange for promised security, it were wise to evaluate how and why terrorism – domestic or otherwise – has tended to arise over the past century.

If, in the course of conducting this evaluation, we find that terrorism is truly a “naturally occurring phenomenon”, then perhaps we might conclude alongside many eminent figures of the intelligence community and Big Tech, that new pre-emptive legislation targeting the rise of a new conservative-minded domestic terrorist movement is somehow necessary. Maybe the censoring of free speech, and the surveillance of millions of Americans by the Five Eyes is a necessary evil for the sake of the greater good.

However, if it is revealed that the thing we call “terrorism”, is something other than a naturally occurring, self-organized phenomenon, but rather something which only exists due to vast support from western political agencies, then a very different conclusion must be arrived at which may be disturbing for some.

But how to proceed?

Before it was revealed that ISIS was being supported by a network of Anglo-American intelligence agencies and their allies in a failed effort to overthrow Bashar al Assad, an exhaustive 2012 study was conducted by the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School. This study provides a convenient entry point to our inquiry.

In this course of its investigation, researchers at Fordham discovered that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the 138 terrorist incidents recorded in the USA between 2001-2012 involved FBI informants who played leading roles in planning out, supplying weapons, instructions and even recruiting Islamic terrorists to carry out terrorist acts on U.S. soil. Reporting on the Fordham study, The Nation stated:

“Nearly every major post-9/11 terrorism-related prosecution has involved a sting operation, at the center of which is a government informant. In these cases, the informants—who work for money or are seeking leniency on criminal charges of their own—have crossed the line from merely observing potential criminal behavior to encouraging and assisting people to participate in plots that are largely scripted by the FBI itself. Under the FBI’s guiding hand, the informants provide the weapons, suggest the targets and even initiate the inflammatory political rhetoric that later elevates the charges to the level of terrorism.”

Of course, this trend preceded 9/11 itself as we see in the case of FBI informant Emad Salem (formerly associated with the Egyptian Military) who recorded hundreds of hours of conversation between himself and his FBI handlers which were reported publicly by the New York times on October 28, 1993. Why is this important? Because Emad Salem was the figure who rented the van, hotel rooms, provided bomb-making instruction, tested out explosives on behalf of Mohammed Salamah and 15 other terrorists who carried out the February 1993 World Trade Center bombing which injured 1000 and killed 6 people.

Even though several large-scale military war game scenarios were conducted between October 2000 and July 2001 featuring planes flying into both the World Trade Center buildings and Pentagon, the incoming Neocon administration were somehow caught with their pants down when the events of 9/11 finally took place (conveniently at a moment that NORAD had suffered a total breakdown of their continental warning and response systems). When all flights were grounded over the coming several days, Cheney and his PNAC cohorts ensured that the only flights permitted to leave the USA was crammed with high level Saudi royals- including the Bin Laden family.

Why was this done?

As the declassified 28 pages from the 9/11 Commission report went far to demonstrate, the Saudis- largely coordinated by Prince Bandar Bin Sultan (Saudi Ambassador to the USA from 1983-2005 and Bush family insider) had provided the foundation for a cover story that was carefully scripted to justify the 9/11 incident.

Whether the plot was hatched by CIA-Saudi sponsored terrorists as some assume, or whether it was a controlled demolition as hundreds of architects and engineers have testified to (or whether it was a combination of both stories), one thing is certain: The official narrative is a lie and no matter how you try to explain it, two airplanes cannot cause the collapse of three WTC buildings.

Another thing is certain: Biden was happy.

Not only did Joe Biden act as one of the most aggressive voices for the invasion of Iraq in the days following 9/11, but he even bragged publicly that John Ashcroft’s 2001 Patriot Act was modelled nearly verbatim on his own failed 1994 Omnibus domestic surveillance legislation drafted in response to the first 9/11 attack and 1994 Oklahoma City bombing.

Another important outcome of 9/11 involved the re-organization of the FBI with a focus on domestic terrorist surveillance, prevention, disruption and entrapment.

In 2001, MI5’s Chief came to the USA where then-FBI director Robert Mueller was assigned the task of carrying out this new remix of U.S. intelligence that involved re-activating many of the worst characteristics of the FBI’s earlier COINTEL PRO operations that were made public during the 1974 Church Committee hearings.

A Christian Science Monitor report from May 19, 2004 cited the changes in the following terms:

“They have done a number of things to move them in the direction of an MI5,” says a person close to the changes. “They’ve created agents who are trained to have an intelligence function. They’re monitoring organizations within the U.S. that pose threats to national security … not with an eye toward prosecuting, but toward collecting and analyzing that information.”

An incredible report by investigative Journalist Edward Spannaus listed a short list of some of the most extreme cases of FBI entrapment between 2001-2013 in the USA:

“One of the most egregious of these cases is the so-called “Newburgh Four” in New York State, in which an informant in 2008-09 offered the defendants $250,000, as well as weapons, to carry out a terrorist plot. The New York University Center for Human Rights and Justice reviewed this case and two others, and concluded: “The government’s informants introduced and aggressively pushed ideas about violent jihad and, moreover, actually encouraged the defendants to believe it was their duty to take action against the United States.”

The Federal judge presiding over the Newburgh case, Colleen McMahon, declared that it was “beyond question that the government created the crime here,” and criticized the Bureau for sending informants “trolling among the citizens of a troubled community, offering very poor people money if they will play some role—any role—in criminal activity.”

In Portland, Ore., it was disclosed during the trial of the “Christmas Tree bomber” earlier this year, that the FBI had actually produced its own terrorist training video, which was shown to the defendant, depicting men with covered faces shooting guns and setting off bombs using a cell phone as a detonator. The FBI operative also traveled with the target to a remote location where they detonated an actual bomb concealed in a backpack as a trial run for the planned attack.

In Brooklyn, N.Y., in 2012, an FBI agent posing as an al-Qaeda operative supplied a target with fake explosives for a 1,000-pound bomb, which the FBI’s victim then attempted to detonate outside the Federal Reserve building in Manhattan.

In Irvine, Calif., in 2007, an FBI informant was so blatant in attempting to entrap members of the local Islamic Center into violent jihadi actions, that the mosque went to court and got a restraining order against the informant.

In Pittsburgh, Khalifa Ali al-Akili became so suspicious of two “jihadi” FBI informants who were trying to recruit him to buy a gun and to go to Pakistan for training, that he contacted both the London Guardian and the Washington-based National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, and told them that he feared the FBI was trying to entrap him. The National Coalition scheduled a press conference for March 16, 2012, at which al-Akili was to speak and identify the informants, but the day before the scheduled press conference, the FBI arrested al-Akili, charging him not with terrorism, but with illegal possession of a firearm.

The chief informant trying to entrap al-Akili turned out to be Shaden Hussain, a longtime FBI informant who had set up two earlier terrorism cases: the above-cited Newburgh, N.Y., case for which he was paid $100,000, and another in Albany, N.Y., for which his payments are not known.”

In the months since the events on January 6, 2021 we have only seen that this practice continued in full swing within the United States, as reports of FBI agents provocateurs began to circulate widely even being covered extensively by Tucker Carlson on June 15. Recent revelations that the “domestic terrorist” cell which recently plotted the kidnaping of Michigan’s Governor Whitmer were composed primarily of FBI informants and even the Proud Boys Enrique Tarrio was proven to be an FBI informant earlier this year along with leading strata of the Oath Keepers. The fact that Steve D’Antuono (FBI bureau chief in Michigan overseeing Whitmer operation) was promptly promoted to FBI bureau chief of Washington D.C. where his skills were put to good use on January 6 should not be lost on anyone.

Just to add a cherry atop this poisoned Sundae, during this same period of time, it was revealed by leaked FBI documents that Joshua Caleb Sutter- controller of the white supremacist group Atomwaffen and also the satanic Temple of Blood cult was paid over $180,000 by the FBI since 2003 ($80,000 of which was paid out after 2018).

Not Only the USA

This post 9/11 practice was not isolated to the USA, as a Canadian appeals court overruled guilty sentences handed down to an idiotic couple who were caught by the RCMP before their July 2016 jihadi plot to bomb a public venue on Canada Day could occur. Why did the appeals judge overrule their sentence? Because it became clear that every single member of the operation which radicalized the young couple, trained them to make bombs and even scripted their attack were RCMP informants!

Earlier cases of controlled domestic terrorist movements in Canada saw CSIS (Canada’s Security and Intelligence Service) erase thousands of hours of wiretaps of Sikh terrorists that detonated bombs in 1984 which lead to 329 dead in the worst act of aviation terrorism until 9/11. Despite this destruction of evidence, CSIS was absolved of its sins in 2005 by the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC). It was also this same organization that was revealed to have co-founded the white supremacist Heritage Front in 1988, and continued to finance it with tax payer funds using CSIS agent Grant Bristol as the conduit and Heritage Front controller until at least 1994.

Anglo-Canadian intelligence controls of domestic terrorism actually go as far back as the bomb-loving Front de Liberation Quebec (FLQ) of the 1960s that set dozens of mailbox bombs across the province. Not only did the RCMP Security Services get caught red handed managing FLQ cells, spreading FLQ graffiti on buildings and even supplying explosives to the group itself, but the FLQ’s “intellectual leader” (Pierre Vallieres) was also the Editor-in-Chief of the very same magazine (Cite Libre) which was run for a decade by none other than Canada’s Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau!

When major press agencies blew the whistle on the federal intelligence agencies behind the FLQ which justified months of Martial Law in Quebec in 1970, Trudeau’s right hand man (and fellow Cite Libre writer) Michael Pitfield created a new organization called the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) in 1983 as a branch of the Privy Council Office in order to continue psychological operations going under a new name.

If anyone wishes to look through the voluminous RCMP/CSIS files accumulated on Pierre Trudeau’s strange connections with the FLQ and broader Fabian Society networks during the Cold War, they would be out of luck as historians were informed in 2019 that the entire Trudeau record archive were secretly destroyed by CSIS in 1989 simply because they “weren’t interesting”.

It is important to keep in mind that the RCMP’s techniques were not specifically Canadian, but were innovated by the FBI’s Counter-intelligence Program (COINTEL PRO) which J. Edgar Hoover launched in 1956 in order to subvert “dangerous civil rights groups” then emerging under the leadership of Paul Robeson and Martin Luther King Jr. From the program’s inception until its nominal death in 1975, not only did the FBI infiltrate every anti-establishment grouping from the U.S. Communist Party (CPUSA), to the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), NAACP to the Black nationalist movements throughout the 1960s, but ensured that its informants played leading roles in instilling internal conflict, radicalized groups towards violence and even set up leaders like Fred Hampton for assassination.

The strange case of Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers who enjoyed vast institutional support and protection after their time running domestic terrorism as leaders of the Weather Underground is something that should also be investigated. The fact that both domestic terrorists not only became affluent Soros-tied education reformers, and early sponsors of Barack Obama’s political career is more than just a tiny anomaly which can simply be dismissed. (1)

Where did Hoover’s FBI generate COINTEL PRO tactics?

To answer this question, we need to look further back to British Intelligence’s Camp X, established in December 1941 in Canada with the mandate to train American and Canadian spies under the control of spymaster William Stephenson (station chief for Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) in New York).

The motive for Camp X had two interconnected components:

1) Prepare the groundwork for a deeper integration of U.S.-British Intelligence in preparation for the purge of patriotic U.S. intelligence officers allied to FDR’s vision of the post-war age, and

2) Train U.S. spies in the art of “secret warfare” which included counterfeiting, psychological warfare, propaganda, counter insurgency, assassination, and infiltration of target groups.

The integration of “full spectrum” alternative warfare tactics such as MK Ultra (modelled and steered by Britain’s earlier Tavis stock clinic), media propaganda (see: Project Mockingbird) and cultural war (see: the rise of modern art and atonalism promoted by the Congress For Cultural Freedom) were but a few of the tactics that were integrated during this process, and which continue virulently to this day.

Under Stephenson’s direction and staffed with Canadian RCMP operatives, the first generation of OSS spymasters were trained; including leading figures of the FBI’s Division 5 who went onto reformulate their WWII Camp X training in the form of assassination operations such as Permindex (operated by Camp X’s Major General Louis Mortimer Bloomfield).

In Conclusion

While I could have said more about the origins of America’s Secret Police which arose under Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, or the earlier deployment of domestic terrorism by Freemasonic lodges affiliated with Albert Pike (founder of the Ku Klux Klan) in an effort to undo Lincoln’s vision for industrial restoration of the South, these stories will have to be left for another time.

For now, it is enough to state that the “war on terror” set into motion by the World Trade Center attacks of 1993 and 2001, is now expanding to target a broad spectrum of the American population who would be morally resistant to the sorts of anti-human policies demanded by Great Reset Technocrats. This dishonest effort must be exposed and rejected before those actual controllers of terrorism attain their objectives: The destruction of nation states, the imposition of a new ethical paradigm premised on depopulation and entropy.

Footnote

(1) By the late 1970s, the creation of controlled terrorist movements was applied vigorously to the Middle East in the form of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s great idea of channeling money, weapons and other support to radical madrasas across Afghanistan as part of an asymmetrical warfare against the Soviet Union. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, these operations vastly expanded with the help of Saudi intelligence and Mossad involvement on the ground- always coordinated by Anglo American intelligence handlers. Islamic terrorism, just like “domestic American terrorism” always had much less to do with Islam and more to do with political agendas wishing to destroy national governments.

Connect with Matthew Ehret

cover image credit: geralt 

School Shootings. I Am Sorry but This Needs to Be Said.

by Meryl Nass, MD
May 25, 2022

1.  Normal people have no interest in killing children, especially ones they do not know, especially in large numbers.

2.  In my view, only people subject to mind control (please investigate Sirhan Sirhan or read about US intelligence agency attempts to create mind controlled assassins beginning in the 1950s) or people taking certain drugs, or special trained assassins are even capable of carrying out such an act.  [In the case of Sirhan Sirhan, who did fire wildly on a crowd, but did not kill Kennedy, the actual assassin was an intelligence asset.  From the WaPo in 2018:

Though Sirhan admitted at his trial in 1969 that he shot Kennedy, he claimed from the start that he had no memory of doing so. And midway through Sirhan’s trial, prosecutors provided his lawyers with an autopsy report that launched five decades of controversy: Kennedy was shot at point-blank range from behind, including a fatal shot behind his ear. But Sirhan, a 24-year-old Palestinian immigrant, was standing in front of him.

3.  School shootings are the most provocative and effective way to initiate a change in gun laws, which means taking away the guns from some or all of the people who privately own them.

4.  The large number of American gun owners pose a daunting challenge to the globalists who wish to control them.  Police and military will not be willing to enter the homes of gun owners to remove their guns or for other purposes.

5.  Few Europeans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders own guns, and it is believed by many that the imposition of much harsher lockdowns on the citizens of these nations, compared to the US, was enabled by this fact.

6.  There have been shortages of guns and ammunition in the US since the onset of the pandemic.  Whether this is due to supply-demand, including increased purchases by the federal government, or to other market forces, is not clear.

7.  There has been very little exploration into the past history of those who committed mass murders in the US in recent years, especially in schools.  I want to know if any or all of these mass murderers may have been enrolled in black mind control projects.

8.  I want a full accounting of the mind control programs paid for with taxpayer dollars in the US and elsewhere.

9.  I want an investigation into the many thousands of self-reported “targeted individuals” (TIs) who complain of voices beamed into their heads and other forms of what can only be termed torture.

10.  I want an investigation into the implants some of these people claim were introduced into their bodies.

11.  A reader sent me this piece by David Swanson, revealing that at least a third of mass US shooters have been trained in the US military.  Were they put through mind control programs while serving their country?

12.  Why have so many assassins and mass shooters appeared to be in an altered state of consciousness immediately after the event, and/or at other times?  Think Sirhan Sirhan, Mark David Chapman, Reagan’s attempted assassin whose father was having dinner with GHW Bush the week of the attempt?  Has anyone analyzed their behaviors systematically? Their histories and connections to the powerful?

13.  We are being attacked in many perverse ways, and we must open our eyes, take our power back, or the attacks will continue and will destroy us.

Connect with Meryl Nass, MD

cover image credit: Elti Meshau 

Ron Paul: The Tremendous Importance of the 2nd Amendment

by Ron Paul, Ron Paul Institute
May 25, 2022

The 1st and 2nd Amendments have always been under attack, and they always will be.

That should give you a good indication as to how important they both are.

Every individual is free to do good, or to do ill.

Everyone has a choice to lie or commit criminal acts of violence.

Thus, the freedom to speak the truth (1st Amendment) and to defend oneself against criminality (2nd Amendment) are paramount.

[Below you will find two key excerpts from Ron Paul Liberty Report, followed by the full episode.]

Excerpts:





Full Episode:

Ron Paul Institute Odysee channel

No More Monkey Business

by Dr. Andrew Kaufman
May 24, 2022

Andrew Kaufman M.D. drops logical common sense in a three-step approach to dispel the latest misplaced fears fed by media hype on MonkeyPox.

Andy carefully dissects the isolation papers cited by Monkeyplot fear agitators in the mainstream.

Dr. Andy concludes by helping people to understand pox skin reactions under the lens of the terrain perspective.



Connect with Andrew Kaufman, MD at Odysee

Pills With Microchips: Pfizer CEO Is in Love

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
May 25, 2022

In a recent Davos chat, Pfizer CEO Albert Boura described his company’s new tech:

“A pill with a tiny chip that sends a signal to relevant authorities when [the pill] has been digested…imagine the implications…the compliance…”

Patient compliance is a very big deal in the pharma/medical universe. The patient gets his orders. He follows them.

From a purely $$ perspective, the chip is a major advance. No pills left in bottles. People finish their meds. They go back to the doctor. He authorizes a new script or changes the drug. More pills taken, more money rolls in.

But of course, the larger bonus is control.

“You see, Mr. Jones, we know you didn’t finish taking the meds you were prescribed. So we can’t keep treating you. It’s a waste of time if you won’t follow orders…”

And this is just the first phase of ultimate control. Over time, it gets heavier. Cancelation of health insurance for non-compliance. Mandates.

COVID has been a training ground for citizen obedience. But the medical dictatorship wants more. Always more. And they’ll dream up one occasion after another to secure more.

Bird flu. Monkeypox. Smallpox. Whatever STORYTELLING it takes.

The medical cartel is in the business of making horror movies and promoting them as real.

A pill with a chip is the soft version of nanotech—by which tiny transmitters and receivers are placed in the body and brain. The nanos are also sensors. They report on all sorts of ongoing body processes—which leads to medical diagnoses, toxic drugs, and toxic vaccines in an endless parade.

This is not science fiction. This is not a hundred years in the future. We’re almost there.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking that humans are going to be on the receiving end of all the reports which the nano sensors issue from inside humans. This operation is planned as AI. Eventually, algorithms will interpret those reports and make decisions about treatment.

Many doctors will eventually take on roles as comforting guides, PR flacks, pitchmen, counselors. “Of course this is all for your benefit, Jim. It’s a good diagnosis. The treatment is standard. Think of Carol and the kids and what they need you to do. We caught it in time. You’ll be fine. But for God sakes, stop reading that nonsense online about toxic side effects. What do you think clinical trials are for? We did the prep work. The FDA approved this drug. It’s safe. I looked at your chart myself. The Pfizer antiviral is the preferred choice in your case. This is routine. If you need a human therapist, rather than the AI psychologist, I can recommend a good man. He lives in your town. Your insurance will cover it. But just suck it up and take the medicine. Believe me, you don’t want to progress to the stage where surgery is necessary. Then we would be talking hospitalization and recovery…”

Some of your children will be talking about earning a PhD in Bedside Manner.

Health Freedom and Medical Freedom are the alternative.

Everything coming down the medical pipeline makes this freedom absolutely vital. YOU decide what’s good for your body and mind, and what’s bad.

You assert that right, come hell or high water.

No matter how many court cases are won or lost, FREEDOM to say yes or no to medical treatment is the ultimate back up. This is what I kept writing and saying early on in the COVID hustle.

Meanwhile, the Pfizer CEO, Albert Boura, is a shark. In every sense of the word.

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image credit: TheDigitalArtist 

Monkeypox Mythology

by Dr. Sam Bailey & Dr. Mark Bailey
May 23, 2022

“Monkeypox” – who could have seen it coming? Well, apparently the organisation founded by Ted Turner in 2001 called the ‘Nuclear Threat Initiative’ (NTI) saw it coming when they published a report in November 2021 called, “Strengthening Global Systems to Prevent and Respond to High-Consequence Biological Threats.” The report states that in March 2021, they partnered with the Munich Security Conference to run an exercise scenario involving a, “deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus that emerged in the fictional nation of Brinia and spread globally over 18 months…the fictional pandemic resulted in more than three billion cases and 270 million fatalities worldwide.”

Amazingly, the scenario had the monkeypox outbreak emerging as a result of an act of bioterrorism in May 2022, right where we are now. We have dealt with gain of function garbage involving non-existent viruses in several other videos, while Dr Stefan Lanka has also dismantled such fallacies. Regardless, the NTI’s report suggests that what is required in a fantasy outbreak is, “aggressive measures to slow virus transmission by shutting down mass gatherings, imposing social-distancing measures, and implementing mask mandates”. The winning countries, in their hallucination implemented, “large-scale testing and contact-tracing operations and scaled-up their health care systems.”

Their charts, which seem to be produced by Neil Ferguson’s calculator, show that countries that don’t comply with their restrictions and medical interventions will be far worse off. The report goes on to state, “both the exercise scenario and the COVID-19 response demonstrate that early actions by national governments have significant, positive impacts in managing the impact of the disease”. When they say “positive impacts” it is not quite clear who is on the receiving end, although they note that “the COVID vaccine market will exceed $150 billion in 2021.” All in all the NTI’s report reads like Event 201 on Ritalin. (Event 201 took place on 18 October, 2019. It was an exercise involving a, “coronavirus pandemic” just months before the COVID-19 “pandemic” was declared.)

As with COVID-19 it appears that other parties have also been eagerly awaiting a market such a “pandemic” would present. Likewise, these fortune-tellers were preparing vaccines to go where no vaccine had gone before. In this case the biotech company Bavarian Nordic gained approval from the FDA in 2019 to market JYNNEOS, a smallpox and monkeypox vaccine. Other health authorities were also primed to react to a previously rare condition that has been of no concern for their nations…until now apparently. For example, on May 20, 2022, the UK Health Security Agency published a document titled, “Recommendations for the use of pre and post exposure vaccination during a monkeypox incident”. Like COVID-19, it’s starting to feel like all roads lead to vaccines again…

So now that the scene has been set we can get into the “science” of monkeypox starting with an official description of the alleged viral disease. The CDC states that, “Monkeypox was first discovered in 1958 when two outbreaks of a pox-like disease occurred in colonies of monkeys kept for research, hence the name ‘monkeypox.’ The first human case of monkeypox was recorded in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” They go on to state that, “in humans, the symptoms of monkeypox are similar to but milder than the symptoms of smallpox.” The illness is said to be flu-like with the addition of lymph node swelling and then development of a rash, and then lesions that progress from macules to vesicles to scabs.

In terms of the lethality of monkeypox, the CDC state that, “in Africa, monkeypox has been shown to cause death in as many as 1 in 10 persons who contract the disease.” This 10% fatality rate has already stoked the fear narrative and was also used as the case fatality rate in the NTI’s monkeypox pipe dream. It should be noted that historically monkeypox has been virtually unheard of in first world countries and the rare cases are usually in people that have recently arrived from Africa.

Indeed, one of the only recorded “outbreaks” of monkeypox in the first world was in the United States in April 2003. Cases were declared in 6 states and said to be caused by rodents that were imported to Texas from Ghana. This was the first time monkeypox had been reported outside of Africa and the CDC published a paper in 2006 analysing the incident. The paper states that, “person-to-person spread of the virus is thought to occur principally via infectious oropharyngeal exudates” although it is clear that this has never been scientifically established. They continue to say that, “the virus is thought to have been transmitted from African animals” – in other words, it’s another species-jumping pathogen tale.

They reported that, “individuals who had illness onset within 21 days after exposure to MPXV [Monkeypox virus] who experienced fever (defined as a body temperature greater 37.4°C) and vesicular pustular rash or rash (potentially uncharacterized) plus orthopox IgM antibodies were classified as having probable cases of infection.” Now 37.4°C is not a fever in our book, it is a normal body temperature and we would suggest 37.6°C and above qualifies as a fever. We noted in their chart that they were using the classification ≥39.4°C, but this appears to be an error as in another paper, we’ll get to soon, it was once again 37.4°C. The second paper even said the “fever” could be subjective, so they appear to be using this loose criteria and pathologising a normal state. Additionally, the CDC’s weekly report from the 11th of July 2003, stated that from a total of 71 cases, only “two patients, both children, had serious clinical illness; both of these patients have recovered.” The remainder had a variety of respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms.

The CDC’s cases were confirmed on the basis of specimens that showed: “monkeypox virus isolation, detection of monkeypox-specific nucleic acid signatures, positive electron-microscopy findings, or positive immunohistochemical findings”.  We had a look at the electron micrographs presented by the CDC including the image shown below of a skin sample from one of the patients. The caption informs us that the round particles on the right are immature monkeypox virions, while the oval particles on the left are mature viruses. However, all they have is a static image of dead tissue and no conclusions can be made about the biological role of the imaged particles. None of them have been shown to be replication-competent disease-causing intracellular parasites and so should not be called ‘viruses’.

Looking at the CDC’s weekly report from 2003 again, it appears that the 35 “laboratory-confirmed cases” all involved polymerase chain reaction (PCR) “tests”, so we investigated the scientific evidence behind this claim. One of the citations for the development of PCR detection of monkeypox is a 2004 paper titled “Real-Time PCR System for Detection of Orthopoxviruses and Simultaneous Identification of Smallpox Virus”. Now a PCR protocol requires them to know the genetic sequences of the alleged monkeypox virus, which takes us to this 2001 paper titled, “Human monkeypox and smallpox viruses: genomic comparison”. The paper claimed to have “isolated” the monkeypox virus in a rhesus monkey kidney cell culture from a scab of a monkeypox patient. Here the virologists are up to their old tricks again by asserting that: (a) the patient’s scab contains the monkeypox virus, and (b) it is now in their culture brew. They claimed to have sequenced the “viral genome” by referring to a process described for sequencing an alleged variola virus in 1993.

But when we look at this paper there is no virus demonstrated either, simply an assertion that it was “isolated” from, “the material from a patient from India” in 1967. They go on to make the claim that, “the virions were purified by differential centrifugation and viral DNA was isolated” – however, there is no demonstration of what they purified or how they were determined to be virions. In none of these experiments did they perform any controls by seeing what sequences can be detected from other human-derived scabs or similar specimens from unwell individuals. This is where we need to remind the virologists of what a virus is supposed to be – that is a replication-competent intracellular parasite that infects and causes disease in a host. It is not detecting genetic sequences contained within scabs and claiming that it belongs to a virus.

So returning to the CDC’s paper describing the 2003 “outbreak”, it is unclear how they established they could be diagnosing anyone with monkeypox by using the PCR. Their PCR can only have been calibrated to sequences of unproven provenance. Additionally, it doesn’t matter what kind of analytical specificity their PCR protocol had, there was no established diagnostic specificity – in other words it was not a clinically-validated test, an issue that goes beyond whether the “virus” exists or not. (From the MIQE Guidelines: Analytical specificity refers to the qPCR assay detecting the appropriate target sequence rather than other, nonspecific targets also present in a sample. Diagnostic specificity is the percentage of individuals without a given condition whom the assay identifies as negative for that condition.)

The 47 US cases they ended up describing were all in some sort of contact with imported African prairie dogs and the CDC’s paper concludes that, “individuals contracted MPXV infections from infected prairie dogs; no human-to-human transmission was documented, but there were many different potential scenarios of infection involving respiratory and/or muco-cutaneous exposures, percutaneous and/or inoculation exposures”. Now there were some problems with the study design which they admitted to including that, “the analyses were limited by incomplete reporting or recall of information by patients. And, because of the retrospective nature of the study, we were unable to obtain highly detailed data”.

However, even allowing some wriggle room for them here, the inconsistencies go further still. Firstly, no one in the US incident died from the disease which is said to have a 10% fatality rate in Africa. No doubt, the inconsistent lethality rates will be attributed to different “variants”, but there can’t be variants of something that doesn’t exist.

There were few images available of the skin lesions that were reported in the 2003 incident but two of the US cases are depicted below and an image from a monkeypox case in Africa is shown for comparison. The reader can make up their own mind but those skin reactions do not look remotely comparable to us.

‍‍Next, the CDC claim that, “the natural reservoir of monkeypox remains unknown. However, African rodents and non-human primates (like monkeys) may harbor the virus and infect people” – in other words it’s all rather vague and remains an unproven hypothesis. Now, obviously some people became unwell in the US in 2003 but with the viral theory we are supposed to believe that it jumped from some prairie dogs to some humans and the latter became infected with the alleged virus…but then no human could pass it on to another human. The theory falls flat – a virus needs to spread, if it can’t spread, it’s dead and thus it’s not a virus. And the historical patterns of alleged monkeypox virus outbreaks make no sense – why did it pass to these people so easily and yet it can go a decade between alleged “outbreaks”?

Unfortunately, the 2003 incident was investigated as though the viral contagion theory had already been established and other explanations were ignored. If people were allegedly getting sick from these African rodents, wouldn’t it be a good idea to check the animals for other toxicities, particularly in their faeces and also for any ticks or parasites? We did note another reference state that with regards to the US cases, “many of the people had initial and satellite lesions on palms, soles, and extremities”. However, according to the CDC, monkeypox usually starts on the face so the clinical picture in the US cases was not consistent with cases that are typically described in Africa.

In any case, a review of the scientific evidence revealed that with regards to monkeypox: (a) there is no evidence of a physical particle that meets the definition of a virus, (b) there is no evidence of anything transmitting between humans, and (c) there is no way to confirm a diagnosis of monkeypox unless you believe in clinically-unvalidated tests such as the PCR kits that have been produced. In other words, if we see a monkeypox “pandemic” that is used as an excuse to role out more globalist terrorism, it will be on the back of another PCR pandemic, not one that has any basis in nature.

For those of you wanting to explore more problems with the various monkeypox claims, Mike Stone of ViroLIEgy has written a couple of interesting commentaries. The first article is, “Was Smallpox Really Eradicated?”, which among other things deals with the convenient emergence of monkeypox while smallpox was apparently being eradicated. The second article is, “Did William Heberden Distinguish Chickenpox From Smallpox in 1767?” This outlines the fact that the pox conditions are not as readily distinguishable from each other as the text books suggest and appear to relate more to the severity of a similar disease process. You can also watch our video, “Chickenpox Parties and Varicella Zoster Virus?” to see why there is no evidence of a virus in that related condition either.

From the perspective of terrain theory it is a fundamental mistake to attribute a person’s illness to a supposed virus, as the subsequent “treatments” don’t address the underlying issues. If someone is unwell, then they are usually deficient in nutrients and need to restore balance, or they have been exposed to environmental toxins and need to help the body detoxify. Wars against alleged pathogens that involve treating everyone the same way with civil rights restrictions and vaccines are certainly not about heath. It is good to see more people waking up to the COVID-19 fraud so there is hope that a monkeypox scamdemic, if attempted, will bring even more light to the situation. As always, your best health is in your own hands, not in the hands of a globalist cult and their cronies.

If you have been outsourcing your health, there has never been a better time to free yourself from the virus fear narrative and begin manifesting your full potential instead.

Connect with Dr. Sam and Dr. Mark Bailey

cover image credit: CDD20 

The Viral Delusion (2022) Docu-Series: The Tragic Pseudoscience of SARS-CoV2 & the Madness of Modern Virology

by Paradigm Shift
April 2022

The doctors, scientists and journalists featured in THE VIRAL DELUSION examine in detail the scientific papers that were used to justify the pandemic, and what they find is shattering. In this shocking, five-part, seven hour documentary series, they explode every single major claim, from the “isolation” of the virus to its so-called genetic sequencing, from the discovery of how to “test” for SARS-CoV2 to the emergence of “variants” that in reality, they explain, exist only on a computer. Their point: that the so-called SARS-CoV2 virus exists only as a mental construct whose existence in the real world has been disproven by the science itself.

They then go back through history to reveal how the birth and growth of virology has led to massive misunderstanding and misdiagnosis of disease: from Smallpox to the Spanish Flu, Polio to AIDS, to COVID itself – putting the pandemic in a whole new context better understood not as settled science, but the tragic culmination of misunderstood biology by the growing cult of virology, built on pseudo-science, to which much of the rest of the medical profession defers without understanding or examination, and the tragic consequences that have been wrought in its name.

In 2019, the virologists took center stage, and for the first time on film, their methods, miscues and tragedy they have wrought are put under the spotlight, revealing the extraordinary leaps of fantasy buried in their methodology, the contradictions quietly acknowledged in their papers, their desperate effort to change language to justify their findings, the obvious incongruence of their conclusions and the extraordinary stakes for our entire society in whether we continue to blindly follow their lead into a full-scale war against nature itself.

Featuring: Andrew Kaufman, MD; Tom Cowan, MD; Stefan Lanka, Virologist; Torsten Engelbrecht, journalist; Claus Kohnlein, MD; Kevin Corbett, PhD RN; David Rasnick, Biochemist PhD; Mark Bailey, MD; Dawn Lester and David Parker, Authors; Stefano Scoglio, Biochemist PhD; Saeed Qureeshi, Chemist PhD; Celia Farber, Journalist; Harold Wallach, PhD; Pam Popper, PhD, ND; Charles Geshekter, PhD; Amandha Vollmer ND, Jim West, Author; Larry Palevsky MD; and more.

Support the Work of Paradigm Shift and Purchase the Full Docu-Series

Videos (Episodes 1 – 5) and summaries found below are courtesy of QR Archive Odysee channel.

The Viral Delusion (2022) Episode 1:The Tragic Pseudoscience of SARS-CoV-2

When doctor Andrew Kaufman began reading the first virology papers out of Wuhan in December 2019, he was shocked to discover that the scientists had come nowhere close to proving that a new virus had emerged… yet saw the media and authorities already claiming a viral pandemic was on it’s way.

In this extraordinarily revealing opening episode, a group of biologists, chemists, doctors and journalists take apart the SARS-COV-2 narrative piece by piece — from the non-isolation of the virus, to the hidden problems with purported photographs of the virus, to the claims that it has been genetically sequenced, to the invalidity of the PCR “covid-test.”

From the treatment protocols for COVID to the assumption of its transmission, Episode One unpacks the science of the claims that changed the world – in which these doctors and scientists make the case that every single claim the authorities made about the so-called SARS-COV2 virus has been based not on evidence, but pseudoscience.



The Viral Delusion (2022) Episode 2: Monkey Business: Polio, Measles And How It All Began

How did it all begin?

How could the scientific establishment have possibly gotten so big a story so wrong?

Everyone knows the story of Polio…or do they?

What from that story is actual history and what is medical marketing?

How did a small branch of the scientific establishment come to convince the world polio was the result of a virus and not from environmental toxins?

Learn what the actual experiments were upon which this theory was based — and how shockingly unconvincing they are.

Discover too how the medical establishment’s efforts to squeeze the symptoms of polio into a virus model formed the very foundation of modern virology, and how that commercially successful model has steered modern science ever since, evidence be damned.



The Viral Delusion (2022) Episode 3: The Mask of Death – The Plague, Smallpox and The Spanish Flu

What about Smallpox?

The Spanish Flu?

The Black Plague?

Go back, back, back in time to examine the claims and counter-claims as to what truly caused these deadly epidemics.

Are the rats of Europe innocent? Turns out they have to be…

And in that discovery we see how the superstitions of our time have clouded the eyes of “science” to avoid the most obvious of insights about disease.



The Viral Delusion (2022) Episode 4: AIDS, The Deadly Deception

AIDS. It was the defining epidemic of a generation.

But it was also the coming of age for many leading scientists and doctors who came to realize that blaming the illnesses known as AIDS on a virus was not only unsupported by science, it was downright nonsensical.

What were the true causes of the many illnesses labelled AIDS around the world?

How many suffered from their misdiagnosis?

How the scientific establishment fell into the deadly AIDS delusion is crucial to understanding the pandemic, and health, today.



The Viral Delusion (2022) Episode 5: Sequencing The Virus, Without The Virus

With the rise of computing and genetic research in the 90’s the virologists go high-tech.

They move away from experiments altogether and into genetic modeling — but do the models have any connection to reality?

The wonders of genetic sequencing have been pointed to as the proof of virology’s explanatory power — but when the claimed sequencing of SARS-COV2 is put under the microscope, has the game changed from the realm of science, to science fiction?

What’s really going on the claim of genetically identifying the SARS-CoV-2 virus is made?



Connect with Paradigm Shift

cover image credit: pixabay

Inclusion, Wokeness, and Davos 2022

by Richard Hugus
May 23, 2022

The picture above is of a sign outside a performing arts theater in Santa Barbara, California. Looks like everyone is welcome. Well, not really. It turns out that if you’re  not “vaccinated” you’re not welcome. If you haven’t arrived at the ticket booth with ID and proof of being injected with two doses of an emergency use experimental gene treatment for “covid 19” — a treatment which has no efficacy and is associated with millions of serious injuries and deaths — this #LoveForAll message doesn’t actually apply to you. If you’re not “vaccinated” the only way you can get into the theater now is if you have taken a test proving you don’t have the plague. Don’t want a PCR swab up your nose? Too late for an antigen test? Tough luck. This rainbow venue welcomes EVERYONE, except for carriers of the plague.

“Who doesn’t love LOVE?” Apparently, the state of North Carolina doesn’t. The founder of Insist On Love For All which makes and sells the $60 sign displayed above, took a trip to Asheville, North Carolina a few years ago and was impressed by signs “embracing diversity.” Says Insist On Love’s founder,

shop owners started displaying these signs over two years ago [2018] to encourage tourism following the passage of the controversial House Bill 2 in North Carolina, which requires certain public bathrooms to be designated for use by males or females based on their biological sex. “The signs in Asheville moved me. Love is the only weapon we can use to fight hate . . . “

In this case, “hate” was displayed by 1) the idea that men and women should have separate bathrooms, 2) the idea that men (or men who think they’re women) don’t have a right to walk into women’s bathrooms, and vice versa,  3) the fact that other sexes besides male and female have not been acknowledged, and 4) the fact that the state of North Carolina thus discriminated against all those who don’t have male/female privilege. There is also the ‘hate’  involved in the unwillingness of North Carolina to provide separate bathrooms for a theoretically unlimited number of other genders. Unless #LoveForAll is somehow a front for a consortium of plumbing supply companies (this would actually be comforting news), there is nothing left for us to conclude but that ‘love’, as the term is being used here, is indeed a weapon, not to fight hate, but to fight reason. ‘Love’ is now a buzzword in a well-established “diversity and inclusion” narrative sent down from academic critical theory to the progressive left to the mainstream media to the culture at large. Has there ever been a time when good things have been so twisted into their opposite? This is not about love or inclusion. This is shallow virtue signaling by people who have been swallowed up by a political machine designed to turn cultural norms upside down, not for the purpose of bringing needed change, but for the purpose of creating chaos and a loss of rationality, after which new supposed norms can just be lifted into place.

“All sexual orientations”, cited in the sign, is also a topic at the current May 22-28 Davos forum, where “resilience through equity” and “inclusivity” for the “LGBTQI+ community” is on the formal agenda. Do the corporate bosses, social engineers, and preening politicians at this forum really care about equality, or are they just using the brand to create the upheaval necessary to bring in fantastic profits and power? The answer is obvious. The agenda is exclusion, not inclusion; fascism, not liberalism. Their plan is for the majority of humanity, gay or straight, to be excluded from their rights, autonomy, and independence, while the bosses enjoy their wealth and slave labor. Like #LoveForAll,  everyone is welcome in the Great Reset except those who believe there are only two sexes — that is, just about everybody since the beginning of human history. Everyone is welcome in virtue-signaling countries, corporations, and institutions except those who choose not to accept a medical intervention also never heard of before in human history — that of altering the human genome on the pretext of defeating a virus. In other words, everyone is welcome except those who have chosen not to go insane. The insanity is called wokeness. Wokeness is nothing but a tool being used to effect a very ugly and very ambitious power grab. When the job is done, everyone duped into thinking they were fighting for the victims of oppression and equality for all will be swatted away like flies.

The would-be gods at Davos brought us their own version of the Apocalypse — plague, war, famine, and death became covid, Ukraine, food shortages, and vaccines. Do such people even remotely care about racial prejudice and gender dysphoria? No. They either massively exploited or completely made up these issues to create disorder. Indeed, their eugenicist predecessors had certain, ahem,  opinions about people with disabilities, sexual deviants, and racial groups which they know can’t be mentioned in polite society today. So they went the other way. Not believing in God, the Davos elite see themselves as gods. The further this delusion takes them, the harder they will fall. There will also come a time of reckoning for the collaborators in this program — those who, wittingly or not, aided this monstrosity. Galling self-righteousness, ignorance, and hypocrisy were the least of the crimes in this class. The ones higher up — those who made the plans, gave the orders, and knew what they were doing — face a reckoning that perhaps we do not have words for. It may be a regular new round of guillotining such as we have seen before in history. Or it may be that this time wickedness has gone so far it will have to be ended forever. Prospects for the Davos crew do not look good.

Richard Hugus is the founder of Cape Cod Against Medical Mandates.  “We are residents of Cape Cod, Massachusetts who support freedom of choice in all matters having to do with our own and our childrens’ health.”  Connect with them here.

Read more of Richard’s writings: http://www.richardhugus.com/

Richard Hugus is a contributing writer at Truth Comes to Light.

Connect with Richard Hugus

cover image based on creative commons work of KELLEPICS / pixabay

Pandemic 2: Monkeypox Madness

by Kit Knightly, OffGuardian
May 21, 2022

Monkeypox – it’s the hip new disease sweeping the globe. Allegedly appearing almost simultaneously in over a dozen different countries on four different continents.

As we wrote in the early days of the Covid “pandemic”, the only thing spreading faster than the disease is fear.

The media reported the first UK case of monkeypox on the 7th of May. Less than two weeks later, we’re seeing some very familiar headlines. Just like that…Pandemic 2: Monkey Pox!! begins playing at all your favorite fear porn outlets.

Sky News tells us that UK Monkeypox “cases” have “doubled(!)”…from 10 to 20.

The BBC went real subtle with it, blaring: “Monkeypox: Doctors concerned over impact on sexual health”

The New Scientist has actually used the P-word, asking “Can Monkeypox become a new pandemic?”, before answering, essentially, “probably no, but also maybe yes!”. Keeping their options open.

Science warns that “Monkeypox outbreak questions intensify as cases soar”

The Mirror has gone full paranoid already, headlining:

Russia looked into using monkeypox as biological weapon, claims ex soviet scientist

So that’s one direction the story might go.

To be clear, “monkeypox” (whatever that even means in this context), is NOT a Russian bio-weapon. It’s not a Western bio-weapon either. Or Chinese bio-weapon. It’s just another scare story. And a rushed, half-hearted one at that.

One of the signs that marked the Covid “pandemic” as a psy-op from an early stage was the sheer speed with which the hysteria spread. Far from learning from their mistakes, the powers-that-be have decided to go even faster this time.

Despite “cases” numbering barely in the dozens, the World Health Organization has called an emergency meeting, a strange thing to do when their annual Assembly starts literally tomorrow. But I guess when your launching a new product you need to do everything you can to get the hype going.

Despite just two “cases” in the entire United States (and indeed the fact they still don’t work), New York is bringing back mask recommendations.

Nobody has said “lockdown”…yet. But Hans Kluge, WHO regional director for Europe, is “concerned” that transmission could accelerate if people attend mass gatherings:

as we enter the summer season … with mass gatherings, festivals and parties, I am concerned that transmission could accelerate”.

(As inflation soars and the cost of living crisis only gets worse, it’s probably handy for them to have a new “public health” reason to ban protests or clampdown on civil unrest. Just a thought.)

There’s some good news though…for vaccine manufacturers, anyway. As Whitney Webb reports, two struggling pharmaceutical companies have already seen a big stock boost from the “outbreak”:

Regardless of how the monkeypox situation plays out, two companies are already cashing in. As concern over monkeypox has risen, so too have the shares of Emergent Biosolutions and SIGA Technologies. Both companies essentially have monopolies in the US market, and other markets as well, on smallpox vaccines and treatments. Their main smallpox-focused products are, conveniently, also used to protect against or treat monkeypox as well. As a result, the shares of Emergent Biosolutions climbed 12% on Thursday, while those of SIGA soared 17.1%.

Just as with Covid, and despite rumours they would be leaving the World Health Organization, Russia appears to be lining up with the WHO agenda. Already they are “tightening border quarantine” rules, vaccinating healthcare workers and supplying quick bedside tests internationally.

Looks like we might be in for an epic summer of scare-mongering, panic-buying & bucketloads of cringe.

Are the new jabs already prepped & ready to go?

Are the “our hospitals are overwhelmed videos” being filmed as we speak, complete with “monkey pox” moulage and crying nurses who turn out to have IMDB pages & multiple acting credits?

Are the sleepy masses going to be fooled yet again?

Watch this space…

Connect with OffGuardian

cover image credit: makeshyft-tom / pixabay

World Economic Forum Elite Create Fake Storefronts & Bring in the Military in Preparation for Their World Domination Meeting in Davos, Switzerland

CRAZY VIDEO: Davos BEFORE the cameras arrive

by Avi Yemeni, Rebel News
May 20, 2022



Have you heard of the World Economic Forum? It’s a secret club where the world’s wealthiest oligarchs meet with globalist politicians to develop schemes to tell the rest of us how to live.

People like Bill Gates. Xi Jinping. Justin Trudeau. And Anthony Fauci.

The WEF’s founder, Klaus Schwab, resembles a cartoonish supervillain from a James Bond movie.

But he’s real. And he has big plans for you. Including the ominous slogan, “you’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy”.

That’s why I flew all the way to Switzerland, along with a team of investigative journalists, to report on just what these billionaires are up to. 

My friend Rukshan Fernando came with me from Australia, and we arrived a couple of days early to get over the jet-lag. And I’m so glad we did. Because wandering through the streets of Davos in the days before the big WEF conference was like going onto a Hollywood movie set before they turn on the cameras.

You can see just how fake everything is. They’re literally putting false storefronts over every building in town.

No expense is spared by these jet-setters, the people who tell you to eat less meat and drive your car less.

And you can see how paranoid they are: hundreds and hundreds of armed men whose job is to stop mere citizens from seeing or hearing things they’re not supposed to.

That’s the craziest part. Swiss police are swarming into the town. But not just police: convoys of military trucks bringing in hundreds of heavily-armed soldiers.

What on earth are they planning to do?

But what’s more alarming to me is seeing so many news and social media companies fully-embedded in the WEF. They are part of it — they’re in on it.

YouTube. The Wall Street Journal. Google. Dow Jones. They have giant kiosks set up at Davos.

They’re not here to report. They’re here to participate. They spent millions to be part of this carnival of the billionaires — they want to get rich off it. And they’re willing to propagate the WEF message, pretending they’re objective news reporters.

That’s why I’m here with the rest of the Rebel News team. We’ll be here all week, and we’ll also visit the World Health Organization’s meeting happening just a few hours away in Geneva. That’s just as worrying — and I’ll tell you why in another report.

But for now, please just make sure you’re going to www.WEFReports.com every day. That’s where the rest of our team and I will be publishing all of our videos from our journey.

And if you think our work as independent journalists is essential — if you think someone needs to be there to tell the other side of the story — please consider chipping in to help our economy-class travel to Davos.

Connect with Rebel News

Pandemic? Blame the Cats.

Monkeying Around With Pox

by el gato malo, bad cattitude
May 20, 2022

hey, let’s play a pandemic wargame and blame leopards!

NOW – German health minister Lauterbach at G7 meeting: "We will do a very realistic exercise in which a smallpox pandemic results from a leopard bite." pic.twitter.com/j0l9poJwxn

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) May 19, 2022

every leopard in the world right now:

i mean, what is this, the simpsons?



i know cats are intimidating to humans, but you people seriously need to get a a grip.

that said, let’s not forget how oddly timely the G7 pandemic wargame for a hypothetical disease that looked an awful lot like covid.

which, i have to admit, makes this look a little iffy alongside the “leopard pox”

Can't wait for monkeypox lockdowns and stimulus checks.

WHO calls emergency meeting as monkeypox cases cross 100 in Europehttps://t.co/kKMi6YTW8s

— Stalingrad & Poorski (@Stalingrad_Poor) May 20, 2022

right friends?

i mean, what sort of person would try to run that same play twice in a row?

and for the record, unless something truly dramatic has changed, monkeypox is just not that dangerous.

Is Monkeypox Hype a Paid Media Campaign?

i was going to do a piece on it, but igor beat me to it and i really have nothing much to add apart from the idea that i doubt that it was paid or even coordinated.

it’s just another topic the media all grabbed onto because it might turn into something and it will sell a few papers in the meantime. they all have the same 4 sources, so it’s not like it’s hard to see how it propagates.

there is no need to suspect a conspiracy.

it’s just the emergent property of “scary thing sells papers!”

but even reuters, despite their alarmist “worst ever” and “WHO emergency meeting” headlines is calling this a nothingburger.

(this is a classic practice BTW. alarming headline that few will read past that is actually refuted/disarmed in the body of the piece if you actually read it. only scanning headline nearly always leaves one with a vastly inflated sense of crisis.)

i suspect this is more about clamoring attention, the WHO trying to look useful/needed while they try to push through their massive power grab and posing for the papers, and left leaning media seeking to distract from some other matters like this:

and this:

but as of now, apart from more of this aggravatingly consistent policy of maligning felines for the world’s woes, i suspect the odds are in our favor to ignore monkeypox and media alike.

and just remember, when the gang whose reckless ineptitude broke the world for 2 years and brought you this asks for more unaccountable, technocratic power,

you already know the answer.

Connect with el gato malo

cover image based on creative commons work of CDD20

“Stop Arguing About the Existence of the Virus”

“Here’s another fun fact. The entire medical cartel thrives on the insane proposition—launched
with fervor more than a hundred years ago—that people suffer from thousands of distinct
diseases, each of which is caused by a single germ, which must be treated by a toxic drug and
prevented by a toxic vaccine.

It is this great lie that that has killed millions upon millions upon millions of people.”

~ Jon Rappoport

“Stop arguing about the existence of the virus”

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
May 20, 2022

The headline of this article has become a battle cry among some “alternative journalists,” activists, lawyers, and doctors.

As my readers know, I’ve devoted considerable space, over the past two years, to presenting evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is a scientific fairy tale, a con, and the virus doesn’t exist.

So when I hear this battle cry, I’m motivated to mention a few significant points.

Let me start by countering the claim that debating the existence of the virus is wasting time.

Here’s a shocker. A person can do more than one thing at the same time. For example, he can expose/oppose the toxic vaccine. He can expose the murderous COVID treatments (ventilators, sedatives, antiviral drugs). He can expose using simple flu-like illness to create fraudulent COVID case numbers.

And he can ALSO expose the fact that the virus has never been isolated (discovered) or sequenced.

So highlighting the non-existence of the virus doesn’t rule out dealing with other vital concerns.

This may come as a surprise, but it’s even possible to go to court to challenge a vaccine mandate, while ALSO arguing elsewhere that the virus doesn’t exist. I know. Amazing, right?

Those alarmed by “the virus doesn’t exist” also say: making that statement leaves us open to being called whackos, and leaves us unable to convince people that all our other criticisms of the pandemic are true.

I would counter that in two ways. Millions of people already believe we’re whackos, even those of us who take a sacred blood oath that the virus is real.

And second, people going against the grain, when their vital issue is still in the budding stage, are always called nuts. Trust me, there was a time when criticizing vaccines made people look like total whackos in the eyes of the general public—and it took decades of fighting the consensus to bring that criticism into the open, where many people saw the truth about jabs.

Here’s another fun fact. The entire medical cartel thrives on the insane proposition—launched with fervor more than a hundred years ago—that people suffer from thousands of distinct diseases, each of which is caused by a single germ, which must be treated by a toxic drug and prevented by a toxic vaccine.

It is this great lie that that has killed millions upon millions upon millions of people.

Therefore, the very real question about the existence of viruses in general is more than a weird preoccupation.

Next, those who claim, “OF COURSE viruses exist,” don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. They’re merely PARROTING what they learned in school or what researchers baldly claim in studies.

“Well, all virologists can’t be wrong.”

Yes, Virginia, they can all be wrong. Just as vaccinologists can all be wrong about “the remarkable safety and efficacy of vaccines.”

Some of the OF COURSE VIRUSES EXIST people are new to the way blogs and videos work. They’ve never encountered commenters in any great numbers before. So when a few dozen committed people suddenly tell them they should examine their premises more carefully and consider what really goes on in virology labs, these OF COURSE people are annoyed and irritated. They don’t like being challenged on basic issues. They don’t like feeling that the floor might suddenly shift under their feet. So they turn on their arrogance machines.

So be it.

The issue isn’t going away. Nor should it.

Despite growing digital censorship, the internet is still the Wild West in certain respects. People are going to say THE VIRUS DOESN’T EXIST, and VIRUSES DON’T EXIST.

And foundations will shake.

Foundations of the medical cartel, and foundations underlying people’s cherished assumptions.

In any area of human life, there are conflicts between “this is strategy” and “this is the truth.” There always will be.

Trying to shortchange the truth or casually say the truth is a lie doesn’t work.

NO ONE who is reading this article has ever been in a virology lab and witnessed the step by step process of “discovering a new virus.” I find that stunning. And yet all sorts of people are quite ready to assert with great finality that they know all about isolating viruses.

If by chance, someone reading this article HAS actually been in a lab and “discovered a virus,” you can bet your bottom dollar he won’t let you or me in there with a full film crew and our outlier experts asking very pointed questions about each “scientific” move he makes, as he “isolates a virus.”

To which somebody might reply: “Well, I’ve never seen a car being made in a factory, but I drive one with full confidence.”

Yes, but when the “virus discovered in a lab” results in you or someone you love being dosed with a drug or vaccine that maims you or kills your family member, you damn well should want to get into “that factory where the car is made.”

But you can’t. They won’t let you…

…Despite the fact that, as I’ve documented many times, the US medical system kills, by a very conservative estimate, 225,000 people a year, or 2.25 million people per decade. [0]

Chew on THAT for a while.

Here is one of my articles on the subject of virus isolation:

—Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists—

The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”

But what if the virus doesn’t exist?

People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.

“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”

I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman [1], and he provided his analysis in detail.

I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 — June 2020)” [2].

First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.

The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. Human cells, monkey cells, antibiotics, other chemicals, random genetic material.

The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup, because they’re dropped a mucus sample from a patient in the soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.

They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.

There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.

Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus.”

Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:

STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”

KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”

STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”

KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”

STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”

KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”

STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”

KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”

KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [3]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”

STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…”

STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”

KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”

STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

—end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis—

My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.

Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.

And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists, and you don’t have an isolated specimen of it?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 375 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [4]) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?

The answer is no.

SOURCES:

[0] https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-primary-care-policy-center/Publications_PDFs/A154.pdf

[1] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

[2] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

[3] https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/

FURTHER READING:

Is the virus real? Steve Kirsch suggests a debate

blog.nomorefakenews.com/2022/01/25/is-the-virus-real-steve-kirsch-suggests-a-debate/

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image based on creative commons work of Samillustrando

The Vacuum at the Center of the Culture—Twitter

by Jon Rappoport, Jon Rappoport substack

This is a follow-up to my recent piece about millions of bot Twitter accounts—no humans, just propaganda.

Newsweek is reporting on an independent audit revealing that half of Biden’s Twitter followers and 70% of Musk’s followers are fakes. Bots.

I’m making inquiries about how these accounts are launched, and whether it’s possible to discover all of them. If I find competent answers, I’ll let you know.

Since Twitter is standing in for the “Town Square,” it’s quite astonishing to discover that so many of the opinions emanate from non-human robots designed to create a false consensus around vital issues: immigration, racism, climate change, party politics, gun control, censorship, abortion, etc.

It’s on the order of staging candidate debates where the humans don’t show up at all, but are represented by programmed holograms; or staging elections where fake votes outnumber real ones.

Actually, we’re doing rather well on those scores with real humans already. Nevertheless, bots take things one giant step further.

The CIA started infiltrating news media in the 1950s with its Mockingbird program. Now we have infiltration by imaginary humans.

Well, ever since I started NoMoreFakeNews 22 years ago, I’ve asserted that reality is invented; Twitter confirms this on a scale that is quite fantastic.

If you were in control of Twitter, and your goal was the creation of a biased national culture, think of the influence you could wield. You could set up a secret internal section of the platform, staffed by loyal assistants, or collaborate with the CIA; and invent millions upon millions of bot accounts expressing views you were intent on promoting.

You would create the illusion that The People were speaking. You would say FINALLY THIS IS DEMOCRACY IN ACTION.

As I write this, news is breaking that the new Government Disinformation Board has been paused and put on hold.

It wouldn’t surprise me if one of the reasons for the hold is the looming exposure of Twitter as the biggest disinformation operation in the world. Think of the fallout, if this Board were compelled to announce its first finding—the platform of the people is a giant fake.

The Board and Twitter are on the same basic team. They’re both dedicated to censoring and promoting the same chosen sets of information.

OVERREACH is how disinformation ops fall apart. They abandon their drip by drip lies and, grabbing for the stars, tell the huge lies. People suddenly realize they’re being asked to buy truly insane notions, and they rebel.

What we’re seeing with Twitter is even more than huge lies; we’re gazing at an apparatus, a machine DESIGNED to spout a Niagara of disinfo.

That’s not supposed to be exposed.

It’s as if, in the 1950s, the public suddenly became aware of a few thousand internal memos describing the CIA’s plan to overthrow a Central American government; and also the existence of a CIA section exclusively devoted to fomenting fake foreign insurrections and coups—which were actually CIA propelled schemes.

A machine that invents and forces reality.

Don’t open your eyes half-way when you stare at this. Open them all the way.

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image credit: geralt

Get Ready to Be Muzzled: The Coming War on So-Called Hate Speech

by John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute
May 18, 2022

“Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freedom of speech.”
—Benjamin Franklin

Beware of those who want to monitor, muzzle, catalogue and censor speech.

Especially be on your guard when the reasons given for limiting your freedoms end up expanding the government’s powers.

In the wake of a mass shooting in Buffalo, NY, carried out by an 18-year-old gunman in military gear allegedly motivated by fears that the white race is in danger of being replaced, there have been renewed calls for social media monitoring, censorship of flagged content that could be construed as dangerous or hateful, and limitations on free speech activities, particularly online.

As expected, those who want safety at all costs will clamor for more gun control measures (if not at an outright ban on weapons for non-military, non-police personnel), widespread mental health screening of the general population and greater scrutiny of military veterans, more threat assessments and behavioral sensing warnings, more surveillance cameras with facial recognition capabilities, more “See Something, Say Something” programs aimed at turning Americans into snitches and spies, more metal detectors and whole-body imaging devices at soft targets, more roaming squads of militarized police empowered to do random bag searches, more fusion centers to centralize and disseminate information to law enforcement agencies, and more surveillance of what Americans say and do, where they go, what they buy and how they spend their time.

All of these measures play into the government’s hands.

As we have learned the hard way, the phantom promise of safety in exchange for restricted or regulated liberty is a false, misguided doctrine that serves only to give the government greater authority to crack down, lock down, and institute even more totalitarian policies for the so-called sake of national security without many objections from the citizenry.

Add the Department of Homeland Security’s “Disinformation Governance Board” to that mix, empower it 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.

After all, it’s a slippery slope from censoring so-called illegitimate ideas to silencing truth.

Eventually, as George Orwell predicted, telling the truth will become a revolutionary act.

If the government can control speech, it can control thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.

It’s been a long time since free speech was actually free.

On paper—at least according to the U.S. Constitution—we are technically free to speak.

In reality, however, we are only as free to speak as a government official—or corporate entities such as Facebook, Google or YouTube—may allow.

That’s not a whole lot of freedom, especially if you’re inclined to voice opinions that may be construed as conspiratorial or dangerous.

This steady, pervasive censorship creep clothed in tyrannical self-righteousness and inflicted on us by technological behemoths (both corporate and governmental) is technofascism, and it does not tolerate dissent.

These internet censors are not acting in our best interests to protect us from dangerous, disinformation campaigns. They’re laying the groundwork now to preempt any “dangerous” ideas that might challenge the power elite’s stranglehold over our lives.

The internet, hailed as a super-information highway, is increasingly becoming the police state’s secret weapon. 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.”

What we are witnessing is the modern-day equivalent of book burning which involves doing away with dangerous ideas—legitimate or not—and the people who espouse them.

Where we stand now is at the juncture of OldSpeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted). The power elite has made their intentions clear: they will pursue and prosecute any and all words, thoughts and expressions that challenge their authority.

Having been reduced to a cowering citizenry—mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all—we have nowhere left to go and nothing left to say that cannot be misconstrued and used to muzzle us.

Yet what a lot of people fail to understand, however, is that it’s not just what you say or do that is being monitored, but how you think that is being tracked and targeted.

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.

With every passing day, we’re being moved further down the road towards a totalitarian society characterized by government censorship, violence, corruption, hypocrisy and intolerance, all packaged for our supposed benefit in the Orwellian doublespeak of national security, tolerance and so-called “government speech.”

Little by little, Americans have been conditioned to accept routine incursions on their freedoms.

This is how oppression becomes systemic, what is referred to as creeping normality, or a death by a thousand cuts.

It’s a concept invoked by Pulitzer Prize-winning scientist Jared Diamond to describe how major changes, if implemented slowly in small stages over time, can be accepted as normal without the shock and resistance that might greet a sudden upheaval.

Diamond’s concerns related to Easter Island’s now-vanished civilization and the societal decline and environmental degradation that contributed to it, but it’s a powerful analogy for the steady erosion of our freedoms and decline of our country right under our noses.

As Diamond explains, “In just a few centuries, the people of Easter Island wiped out their forest, drove their plants and animals to extinction, and saw their complex society spiral into chaos and cannibalism… Why didn’t they look around, realize what they were doing, and stop before it was too late? What were they thinking when they cut down the last palm tree?”

His answer: “I suspect that the disaster happened not with a bang but with a whimper.”

Much like America’s own colonists, Easter Island’s early colonists discovered a new world—“a pristine paradise”—teeming with life. Yet almost 2000 years after its first settlers arrived, Easter Island was reduced to a barren graveyard by a populace so focused on their immediate needs that they failed to preserve paradise for future generations.

The same could be said of the America today: it, too, is being reduced to a barren graveyard by a populace so focused on their immediate needs that they are failing to preserve freedom for future generations.

In Easter Island’s case, as Diamond speculates:

“The forest…vanished slowly, over decades. Perhaps war interrupted the moving teams; perhaps by the time the carvers had finished their work, the last rope snapped. In the meantime, any islander who tried to warn about the dangers of progressive deforestation would have been overridden by vested interests of carvers, bureaucrats, and chiefs, whose jobs depended on continued deforestation… The changes in forest cover from year to year would have been hard to detect… Only older people, recollecting their childhoods decades earlier, could have recognized a difference. Gradually trees became fewer, smaller, and less important. By the time the last fruit-bearing adult palm tree was cut, palms had long since ceased to be of economic significance. That left only smaller and smaller palm saplings to clear each year, along with other bushes and treelets. No one would have noticed the felling of the last small palm.”

Sound painfully familiar yet?

We’ve already torn down the rich forest of liberties established by our founders. It has vanished slowly, over the decades. Those who warned against the dangers posed by too many laws, invasive surveillance, militarized police, SWAT team raids and the like have been silenced and ignored. They stopped teaching about freedom in the schools. Few Americans know their history. And even fewer seem to care that their fellow Americans are being jailed, muzzled, shot, tasered, and treated as if they have no rights at all.

The erosion of our freedoms happened so incrementally, no one seemed to notice. Only the older generations, remembering what true freedom was like, recognized the difference. Gradually, the freedoms enjoyed by the citizenry became fewer, smaller and less important. By the time the last freedom falls, no one will know the difference.

This is how tyranny rises and freedom falls: with a thousand cuts, each one justified or ignored or shrugged over as inconsequential enough by itself to bother, but they add up.

Each cut, each attempt to undermine our freedoms, each loss of some critical right—to think freely, to assemble, to speak without fear of being shamed or censored, to raise our children as we see fit, to worship or not worship as our conscience dictates, to eat what we want and love who we want, to live as we want—they add up to an immeasurable failure on the part of each and every one of us to stop the descent down that slippery slope.

We are on that downward slope now.

The contagion of fear that has been spread with the help of government agencies, corporations and the power elite is poisoning the well, whitewashing our history, turning citizen against citizen, and stripping us of our rights.

America is approaching another reckoning right now, one that will pit our commitment to freedom principles against a level of fear-mongering that is being used to wreak havoc on everything in its path.

Yet as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, while we squabble over which side is winning this losing battle, a tsunami approaches.

Connect with The Rutherford Institute

cover image credit: CDD20 

How Did 274,000 Babies End Up on Psychiatric Meds?

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
March 10, 2022

Story-at-a-Glance

• An estimated 21 million American adults experienced at least one major depressive episode in 2020. The highest rates reported for the past several years have consistently been among those aged between 18 and 25

• The vast majority are prescribed antidepressant drugs, despite the fact there’s virtually no evidence to suggest they provide meaningful help, and plenty of evidence showing the harms are greater than patients are being told

• Hundreds of thousands of toddlers are also being medicated with powerful psychiatric drugs, raising serious ethical questions, along with questions about the future mental and physical health of these children

• There’s no scientific evidence to suggest depression is the result of a chemical imbalance in your brain. A lot of the evidence suggests unhealthy living conditions are at the heart of the problem

• Antidepressants are not beneficial in the long term and antipsychotic drugs worsen outcomes over the long term in those diagnosed with psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia

This article was previously published September 19, 2019, and has been updated with new information.

In the U.S., an estimated 21 million American adults experienced at least one major depressive episode in 2020.¹ The reported numbers for the past several years² have consistently been highest among those aged between 18 and 25.³ However, not only is there evidence that depression is vastly overdiagnosed, but there’s also evidence showing it’s routinely mistreated.

With regard to overdiagnosis, it’s been ongoing for a long time, with one 2013 study⁴ finding only 38.4% of participants with clinician-identified depression actually met the DSM-4 criteria for a major depressive episode, and only 14.3% of seniors 65 and older met the criteria.

As for treatment, the vast majority are prescribed antidepressant drugs, despite the fact there’s little to no evidence to suggest they provide meaningful help, and plenty of evidence showing the harms are greater than patients are being told.

According to a 2017 study,⁵ 1 in 6 Americans between the ages of 18 and 85 were on psychiatric drugs, most of them antidepressants, and 84.3% reported long-term use (three years or more). Out of 242 million U.S. adults, 12% were found to have filled one or more prescriptions for an antidepressant, specifically, in 2013. By 2021 in the midst of the pandemic, 1 in 4 Americans over age 18, or 50 million persons, were on prescription mental health drugs.⁶

According to data⁷ presented by a watchdog group in 2014, hundreds of thousands of toddlers are also being medicated with powerful psychiatric drugs, raising serious ethical questions, along with questions about the future mental and physical health of these children.

And, a study published in The BMJ in 2013⁸ found that “In utero exposure to both SSRIs and non-selective monoamine reuptake inhibitors (tricyclic antidepressants) was associated with an increased risk of autism spectrum disorders, particularly without intellectual disability” in the offspring.

Studies are also shedding much needed light on the addictive nature of many antidepressants, and demonstrate that the benefits of these drugs have been overblown while their side effects — including suicidal ideation — and have been downplayed and ignored for decades, placing patients at unnecessary risk.

The Chemical Imbalance Myth

One researcher responsible for raising awareness about these important mental health issues is professor Peter C. Gøtzsche, a Danish physician-researcher and outspoken critic of the drug industry (as his book, “Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare,”⁹ suggests).

Gøtzsche helped found the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre. In 2018, he was expelled by the Cochrane governing board following the publication of a scathing critique of a Cochrane review of the HPV in which he and his coauthors pointed out several methodological flaws and conflicts of interest.

Over the past several years, Gøtzsche has published a number of scientific papers on antidepressants and media articles and a book discussing the findings. In a June 28, 2019 article,¹⁰ Gøtzsche addresses “the harmful myth” about chemical imbalances — a debunked hypothesis that continues to drive the use of antidepressants to this day. He writes, in part:¹¹

“Psychiatrists routinely tell their patients that they are ill because they have a chemical imbalance in the brain and they will receive a drug that fixes this …

Last summer, one of my researchers and I collected information about depression from 39 popular websites in 10 countries, and we found that 29 (74%) websites attributed depression to a chemical imbalance or claimed that antidepressants could fix or correct that imbalance …

It has never been possible to show that common mental disorders start with a chemical imbalance in the brain. The studies that have claimed this are all unreliable.¹²

A difference in dopamine levels, for example, between patients with schizophrenia and healthy people cannot tell us anything about what started the psychosis … [I]f a lion attacks us, we get terribly frightened and produce stress hormones, but this does not prove that it was the stress hormones that made us scared.

People with psychoses have often suffered traumatic experiences in the past, so we should see these traumas as contributing causal factors and not reduce suffering to some biochemical imbalance that, if it exists at all, is more likely to be the result of the psychosis rather than its cause.¹³

The myth about chemical imbalance is very harmful. It makes people believe there is something seriously wrong with them, and sometimes they are even told that it is hereditary.

The result of this is that patients continue to take harmful drugs, year after year, perhaps even for the entirety of their lives. They fear what would happen if they stopped, particularly when the psychiatrists have told them that their situation is like patients with diabetes needing insulin.”

Real Cause of Depression Is Typically Ignored

According to Gøtzsche, there is no known mental health issue that is caused by an imbalance of brain chemicals. In many cases, the true cause is unknown, but “very often, it is a response to unhealthy living conditions,” he writes.¹⁴

He also cites the book,¹⁵ “Anxiety — The Inside Story: How Biological Psychiatry Got It Wrong,” written by Dr. Niall McLaren, in which the author shows that anxiety is a major factor in and trigger of most psychiatric disorders.

“A psychiatrist I respect highly, who only uses psychiatric drugs in rare cases … has said that most people are depressed because they live depressing lives,” Gøtzsche writes.

“No drug can help them live better lives. It has never been shown in placebo-controlled trials that a psychiatric drug can improve people’s lives — e.g., help them return to work, improve their social relationships or performance at school, or prevent crime and delinquency. The drugs worsen people’s lives, at least in the long run.¹⁶“

Gøtzsche rightfully points out that antipsychotic drugs create chemical imbalances; they don’t fix them. As a group, they’re also somewhat misnamed, as they do not address psychotic states. Rather, they are tranquilizers, rendering the patient passive. However, calming the patient down does not actually help them heal the underlying trauma that, in many cases, is what triggered the psychosis in the first place.

As noted in one 2012 meta-analysis¹⁷ of studies looking at childhood trauma — including sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional/psychological abuse, neglect, parental death and bullying — and subsequent risk of psychosis:

“There were significant associations between adversity and psychosis across all research designs … Patients with psychosis were 2.72 times more likely to have been exposed to childhood adversity than controls … The estimated population attributable risk was 33% (16%-47%). These findings indicate that childhood adversity is strongly associated with increased risk for psychosis.”

Economy of Influence in Psychiatry

A related article,¹⁸ written by investigative journalist Robert Whitaker in 2017, addresses the “economy of influence” driving the use of antidepressant drugs in psychiatric treatment — and the “social injury” that results. As noted by Whitaker, mental disorders were initially categorized according to a disease model in 1980 by the American Psychiatric Association.

“We’re all familiar with the second ‘economy of influence’ that has exerted a corrupting influence on psychiatry — pharmaceutical money — but I believe the guild influence is really the bigger problem,” he writes.

Whitaker details the corruption within the APA in his book “Psychiatry Under the Influence,” one facet of which is “the false story told to the public about drugs that fixed chemical imbalances in the brain.” Other forms of corrupt behavior include:

• The biased designs of clinical trials to achieve a predetermined result
• Spinning results to support preconceived conclusions
• Hiding poor long-term outcomes
• Expanding diagnostic categories for the purpose of commercial gain
• Creating clinical trial guidelines that promote drug use

In his article, Whitaker goes on to dissect a 2017 review¹⁹ published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, which Whitaker claims “defends the profession’s current protocols for prescribing antipsychotics, which includes their regular long-term use.”

As Whitaker points out, there’s ample evidence showing antipsychotic drugs worsen outcomes over the long term in those diagnosed with psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia.

The review in question, led by American psychiatrist Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, was aimed at answering persistent questions raised by the mounting of such evidence. Alas, their conclusions dismissed concerns that the current drug paradigm might be doing more harm than good.

“In a subsequent press release and a video for a Medscape commentary, Lieberman has touted it as proving that antipsychotics provide a great benefit, psychiatry’s protocols are just fine, and that the critics are ‘nefarious’ individuals intent on doing harm,” Whitaker writes.²⁰

The Scientific Bias of Psychiatric Treatment

Five of the eight researchers listed on the review have financial ties to drug companies, three are speakers for multiple drug companies and all eight are psychiatrists, “and thus there is a ‘guild’ interest present in this review, given that they are investigating whether one of their treatments is harmful over the long-term,” Whitaker notes.²¹

Not surprisingly, the review ignored studies showing negative effects, including studies showing antipsychotics have a detrimental effect on brain volume. What’s more, while withdrawal studies support the use of antipsychotics as maintenance therapy over the long term, these studies do not address how the drugs affect patients’ long-term health.

“They simply reveal that once a person has stabilized on the medication, going abruptly off the drug is likely to lead to relapse,” Whitaker writes.²² “The focus on long-term outcomes, at least as presented by critics, provides evidence that psychiatry should adopt a selective-use protocol.

If first-episode patients are not immediately put on antipsychotics, there is a significant percentage that will recover, and this ‘spontaneous recovery’ puts them onto a good long-term course. As for patients treated with the medications, the goal would be to minimize long-term use, as there is evidence that antipsychotics, on the whole, worsen long-term outcomes.”

Vast Majority of Psychotic Patients Are Harmed, Not Helped

In his deconstruction of Lieberman’s review, Whitaker details how biased thinking influenced the review’s conclusions. It’s a rather long article, but well worth reading through if you want to understand how a scientific review can be skewed to accord with a preconceived view.

Details I want to highlight, however, include findings relating to the number needed to treat (NNT) and the percentage of patients harmed by the routine use of antipsychotic drugs as a first-line treatment.

As noted by Whitaker, while placebo-controlled studies reveal the effectiveness of a drug compared to an inert substance, they do not effectively reveal the ratio of benefit versus harm among the patient population. NNT refers to the number of patients that have to take the drug in order to get one positive response.

A meta-analysis cited in Lieberman’s review had an NNT of 6, meaning that six patients must take the drug in order for one to benefit from the treatment. The remaining five patients — 83% — are potentially harmed by the treatment. As noted by Whitaker:²³

“The point … is this: reviewers seeking to promote their drug treatment as effective will look solely at whether it produces a superior response to placebo. This leads to a one-size-fits-all protocol.

Reviewers that want to assess the benefit-harm effect of the treatment on all patients will look at NNT numbers. In this instance, the NNT calculations argue for selective use of the drugs …”

Antidepressants Are Not Beneficial in the Long Term

While typically not as destructive as antipsychotics, antidepressants also leave a trail of destruction in their wake. A systematic review²⁴ by Gøtzsche published in 2019 found studies assessing harm from selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) fail to provide a clear and accurate picture of the harms, and therefore “cannot be used to investigate persistent harms of antidepressants.”

In this review, Gøtzsche and colleagues sought to assess “harms of SSRIs … that persist after end of drug intake.” The primary outcomes included mortality, functional outcomes, quality of life and core psychiatric events. In all, 22 papers on 12 SSRI trials were included. Gøtzsche found several distinct problems with these trials. For starters, only two of the 12 trials had a drop-out rate below 20%.

Gøtzsche and his team also note that “Outcome reporting was less thorough during follow-up than for the intervention period and only two trials maintained the blind during follow-up.” Importantly, though, all of the 22 papers came to the conclusion that “the drugs were not beneficial in the long term.”

Another important finding was that all trials either “reported harms outcomes selectively or did not report any,” and “Only two trials reported on any of our primary outcomes (school attendance and number of heavy drinking days).”

A few years later, in April 2022, a study using data from the United States’ Medical Expenditures Panel Survey for patients who had depression found, “The real-world effect of using antidepressant medications does not continue to improve patients” health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over time.²⁵

Antidepressants Are More Addictive Than Admitted

In a June 4, 2019, article,²⁶ “The Depression Pill Epidemic,” Gøtzsche writes that antidepressant drugs:

“… do not have relevant effects on depression; they increase the risk of suicide and violence; and they make it more difficult for patients to live normal lives.²⁷ They should therefore be avoided.

We have been fooled by the drug industry, corrupt doctors on industry payroll, and by our drug regulators.²⁸ Surely, many patients and doctors believe the pills are helpful, but they cannot know this, because people tend to become much better with time even if they are not treated.²⁹

This is why we need placebo-controlled trials to find out what the drugs do to people. Unfortunately, virtually all trials are flawed, exaggerate the benefits of the drugs, and underestimate their harms.”³⁰

Addictive Nature of Antidepressants Skews Results

In his article,³¹ Gøtzsche reviews several of the strategies used in antidepressant drug trials to exaggerate benefits and underestimate the harms. One little-known truth that helps skew study results in the drug’s favor is the fact that antidepressants tend to be far more addictive than officially admitted. He explains how this conveniently hides the skewing of results as follows:³²

“Virtually all patients in the trials are already on a drug similar to the one being tested against placebo. Therefore, as the drugs are addictive, some of the patients will get abstinence symptoms … when randomized to placebo …

These abstinence symptoms are very similar to those patients experience when they try to stop benzodiazepines. It is no wonder that new drugs outperform the placebo in patients who have experienced harm as a result of cold turkey effects.

To find out how long patients need to continue taking drugs, so-called maintenance (withdrawal) studies have been carried out, but such studies also are compromised by cold turkey effects. Leading psychiatrists don’t understand this, or they pretend they don’t.

Most interpret the maintenance studies of depression pills to mean that these drugs are very effective at preventing new episodes of depression and that patients should therefore continue taking the drugs for years or even for life.”

Scientific Literature Supports Reality of User Complaints

Over the years, several studies on the dependence and withdrawal reactions associated with SSRIs and other psychiatric drugs have been published, including the following:

Antidepressants Increase Your Risk of Suicide and Violence

In his June 2019 article,³⁶ Gøtzsche also stresses the fact that antidepressants can be lethal. In one of his studies,³⁷ published in 2016, he found antidepressants “double the occurrence of events that can lead to suicide and violence in healthy adult volunteers.”

Other research³⁸ has shown they “increase aggression in children and adolescents by a factor of 2 to 3 — an important finding considering the many school shootings where the killers were on depression pills,” Gøtzsche writes.

In middle-aged women with stress urinary incontinence, the selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) duloxetine, which is also used to treat incontinence, has been shown to double the risk of a psychotic episode and increase the risk of violence and suicide four to five times,³⁹ leading the authors to conclude that harms outweighed the benefits.

“I have described the dirty tricks and scientific dishonesty involved when drug companies and leading psychiatrists try convincing us that these drugs protect against suicide and other forms of violence,”⁴⁰ Gøtzsche writes.⁴¹ “Even the FDA was forced to give in when it admitted in 2007, at least indirectly, that depression pills can cause suicide and madness at any age.

There is no doubt that the massive use of depression pills is harmful. In all countries where this relationship has been examined, the sharp rise in disability pensions due to psychiatric disorders has coincided with the rise of psychiatric drug usage, and depression pills are those which are used the most by far. This is not what one would expect if the drugs were helpful.”

Drugmaker Lied About Paxil’s Suicide Risk

In 2017, Wendy Dolin was awarded $3 million by a jury in a lawsuit against GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of Paxil. Dolin’s husband committed suicide six days after taking his first dose of a Paxil generic, and evidence brought forth in the case convincingly showed his suicide was the result of the drug, not emotional stress or mental illness.⁴²

The legal team behind that victory, Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman, also represented other victims of Paxil-induced violence and death. At the time, attorney R. Brent Wisner said:⁴³

“The Dolin verdict sent a clear message to GSK and other drug manufacturers that hiding data and manipulating science will not be tolerated … If you create a drug and know that it poses serious risks, regardless of whether consumers use the brand name or generic version of that drug, you have a duty to warn.”

GSK’s own clinical placebo-controlled trials actually revealed subjects on Paxil had nearly nine times the risk of attempting or committing suicide than the placebo group. To gain drug approval, GSK misrepresented this shocking data, falsely reporting a higher number of suicide attempts in the placebo group and deleting some of the suicide attempts in the drug group.

An internal GSK analysis of its suicide data also showed that “patients taking Paxil were nearly seven times more likely to attempt suicide than those on placebo,” Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman reports, adding:⁴⁴

“Jurors in the Dolin trial also heard from psychiatrist David Healy, one of the world’s foremost experts on Paxil and drugs in its class … Healy told the jurors that Paxil and drugs like it can create in some people a state of extreme ’emotional turmoil’ and intense inner restlessness known as akathisia …

‘People have described it like a state worse than death. Death will be a blessed relief. I want to jump out of my skin,’ Dr. Healy said. Healthy volunteer studies have found that akathisia can happen even to people with no psychiatric condition who take the drug …

Another Paxil side effect known to increase the risk of suicide is emotional blunting … apathy or emotional indifference … [E]motional blunting, combined with akathisia, can lead to a mental state in which an individual has thoughts of harming themselves or others, but is ‘numbed’ to the consequences of their actions. Drugs in the Paxil class can also cause someone to ‘go psychotic, become delirious,’ Dr. Healy explained.”

Hundreds of Thousands of Toddlers on Psychiatric Drugs

Considering the many serious psychological and physical risks associated with psychiatric drugs, it’s shocking to learn that hundreds of thousands of American toddlers are on them. In 2014, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, a mental health watchdog group, highlighted data showing that in 2013:⁴⁵

• 274,000 babies aged 1 and younger were given psychiatric drugs — Of these, 249,699 were on anti-anxiety meds like Xanax; 26,406 were on antidepressants such as Prozac or Paxil, 1,422 were on ADHD drugs such as Ritalin and Adderall, and 654 were on antipsychotics such as Risperdal and Zyprexa
• In the toddler category (2- to 3-year-olds), 318,997 were on anti-anxiety drugs, 46,102 were on antidepressants, 10,000 were prescribed ADHD drugs and 3,760 were on antipsychotics
• Among children aged 5 and younger, 1,080,168 were on psychiatric drugs

These are shocking figures that challenge logic. How and why are so many children, babies even, on addictive and dangerously mind-altering medications? Considering these statistics are 6 years old, chances are they’re even higher today. Just what will happen to all of these youngsters as they grow up? As mentioned in the article:⁴⁶

“When it comes to the psychiatric drugs used to treat ADHD, these are referred to as ‘kiddie cocaine’ for a reason. Ritalin (methylphenidate), Adderall (amphetamine) and Concerta are all considered by the federal government as Schedule II drugs — the most addictive.

ADHD drugs also have serious side effects such as agitation, mania, aggressive or hostile behavior, seizures, hallucinations, and even sudden death, according to the National Institutes of Health …

As far as antipsychotics, antianxiety drugs and antidepressants, the FDA and international drug regulatory agencies cite side effects including, but not limited to, psychosis, mania, suicidal ideation, heart attack, stroke, diabetes, and even sudden death.”

Children Increasingly Prescribed Psych Drugs Off-Label

Making matters even worse, recent research shows the number of children being prescribed medication off-label is also on the rise. An example offered by StudyFinds.org,⁴⁷ which reported the findings, is “a doctor recommending antidepressant medication for ADHD symptoms.”

The study,⁴⁸ published in the journal Pediatrics, looked at trends in off-label drug prescriptions made for children under the age of 18 by office-based physicians between 2006 and 2015. Findings revealed:

“Physicians ordered ≥1 off-label systemic drug at 18.5% of visits, usually (74.6%) because of unapproved conditions. Off-label ordering was most common proportionally in neonates (83%) and in absolute terms among adolescents (322 orders out of 1000 visits).

Off-label ordering was associated with female sex, subspecialists, polypharmacy, and chronic conditions. Rates and reasons for off-label orders varied considerably by age. Relative and absolute rates of off-label orders rose over time. Among common classes, off-label orders for antihistamines and several psychotropics increased over time …

US office-based physicians have ordered systemic drugs off label for children at increasing rates, most often for unapproved conditions, despite recent efforts to increase evidence and drug approvals for children.”

The researchers were taken aback by the findings, and expressed serious concern over this trend. While legal, many of the drugs prescribed off-label have not been properly tested to ensure safety and efficacy for young children and adolescents.

As noted by senior author Daniel Horton, assistant professor of pediatrics and pediatric rheumatologist at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, “We don’t always understand how off-label medications will affect children, who don’t always respond to medications as adults do. They may not respond as desired to these drugs and could experience harmful effects.”

In 2020 mental health experts and reviewers were still at-odds over prescribing these drugs for children, yet hesitant to call a stop to it:⁴⁹

“Antidepressants are prescribed for the treatment of a number of psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents, however there is still controversy about whether they should be used in this population …

Treatment decisions should be tailored to patients on an individual basis, so we recommend clinicians, patients and policy makers to refer to the evidence provided in the present meta-review and make decisions about the use of antidepressants in children and adolescents taking into account a number of clinical and personal variables.”

Educate Yourself About the Risks

If you, your child or another family member is on a psychiatric drug, I urge you to educate yourself about the true risks and to consider switching to safer alternatives. When it comes to children, I cannot fathom a situation in which a toddler would need a psychiatric drug and I find it shocking that there are so many doctors out there that, based on a subjective evaluation, would deem a psychiatric drug necessary.

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

cover image credit: dimitrisvetsikas1969 / pixabay

Dr. Sam Bailey: On Health Freedom Advocates Who Attack Anyone Who Dares to Question Virus & Germ Theory | How RFK, Jr. Was Recently Drawn Into the Viral Existence Debate

Truth Comes to Light editor‘s note:  In the video below, Dr. Sam Bailey talks about specific attacks, coming from within the health freedom movement, on the work of those who are questioning the foundations of virus theory.

At this point, most people in the health freedom movement, not to mention the general population, don’t even know that there is a strong debate about the existence of viruses. But awareness is growing.

The so-called, ‘settled science’ of virology must be looked into carefully because, as Dr. Sam Bailey has stated, virus and germ theory “is a system that can and will be used repeatedly to promulgate fear and compliance in the population.”

Dr. Bailey is careful to emphasize that RFK, Jr. is not one of those attacking the work of those who question virology. In this video she shares a segment from a recent public Q&A session wherein Eric Coppolino asks RFK, Jr. some basic questions, pointing to the fact that SARS-C0V-2 has never been shown to exist outside of imagined computer models.

You will find a transcript below the video with links to referenced articles and papers.

RFK Jr. Enters The Viral Existence Debate 

by Dr. Sam Bailey
May 10, 2022

RFK, Jr. has been a tireless campaigner in warning the public about the problems of vaccines.  However, with regards to the viral existence problem, he has been reluctant to get involved.

Let’s find out what happened when he was drawn into the debate in a recent Q&A session…

To listen to RFK’s original Q&A session with Eric Coppolino:
https://chironreturn.org/rfk-jr-acknowledges-controversy-over-existence-of-sars-cov-2-and-of-all-viruses/



Connect with Dr. Sam Bailey

Transcript prepared by Truth Comes to Light:

Dr. Sam Bailey:

Questioning the existence of viruses can be a risky business, as myself and others have found out. However, once you’ve seen the problems with viral theory, it’s not something that can be unseen. It becomes a realization that much of what you were told is factual is not founded in scientific evidence at all. You start to research the material and find that many of the narratives are driven by industry participants and folklore rather than organic science.

While most probably don’t have a dog in the fight, those defending the virus narrative can get pretty hostile.

However, others such as RFK, Jr. simply appear uneasy about mentioning the virus existence issue.

So let’s find out what happened when one of the champions of the health freedom movement was unexpectedly drawn into the debate.

From the start I would like to make it clear that I consider RFK Jr. an ally in promoting health freedom and autonomy. He is a world leader and raising awareness about the risks and ineffectiveness of many vaccines.

I would also say that he has not been ambiguous with regards to his public statements relating to the existence of SARS-CoV-2 or other viruses. As far as I’m aware, he has stated that he believes such viruses exist. Although, in many cases the risks to health and the necessity for a lot of vaccines have been overstated.

I’d also suggest that the virus existence debate does not mean the current health freedom movement will be fractured as some seem to fear.

I don’t mind if other people believe in viruses and germ theory. However, as we point out in ‘Virus Mania’ that is a system that can and will be used repeatedly to promulgate fear and compliance in the population. Once the fatal flaws in the contagion theory are understood, people no longer buy into any of it and don’t get distracted trying to explain different aspects of the scam.

But before we get into RFK Jr.’s recent statements, there have been a few other prominent health freedom fighters who have made forays into the virus existence debate this year.

One was Steve Kirsch. He has been very outspoken about the dangers of the Covid-19 vaccine. Kirsch has realized that many doctors, governments and pharmaceutical companies are playing a game of deception with the public.

But then, on the issue of virus existence he places his faith in the high priests of virology. In early January this year, he decided to announce in his popular blog that SARS-Cov-2 has been isolated and shown to exist.

First, he smeared Drs. Lanka, Kaufman and Cowan with completely inaccurate portrayals of their work and received a huge backlash from his followers in the comment section. Instead of realizing that he might need to conduct his own research into this topic, he then decided to include Christine Massey and myself in the smears.

In a subsequent article 11 days later, curiously Kirsch suggested that we would not front if a live debate was offered.

Well, I can tell you from a series of emails that took place, which Kirsch was part of, that Drs. Bailey times two [Drs. Mark and Samantha Bailey], along with Stefano Scoglio, Drs. Lanka, Cowan and Kaufman, all volunteered to take part in a live debate with any experts that Kirsch was able to produce.

Instead of admitting that he was in over his head, Kirsch posted a third article the following week, embarrassing himself even further with declarations such as: ‘The reason nobody has purified the virus is there is no need to do so in today’s world where gene sequencing is readily available.’  And, ‘if the virus doesn’t exist, then how can 600 labs across the country find the same sequences for the virus in infected samples.’

These kind of statements indicate he’s unaware of the fundamentals of the virus existence debate.

Kirsch doesn’t see that he relies on other “experts” to inform him on the issue. And my husband Mark has written about why this is not a good idea, outlining the nature of the evidence such experts present in his article ‘Warning Signs You’ve Been Tricked by Virologists‘.

As Kirsch has worked out that people selling vaccines may be misleading people, then we would suggest that he peel back another layer to check whether the pharmaceutical and virology establishment, who have billions of dollars of vested interests, may be misleading people with regards to viruses as well.

And some other information I can give you is that I reached out to Steve after he posted his articles offering him a chance to connect, as well as a complimentary copy of ‘Virus Mania’. But he never responded.

In any case, he seems to have gone quiet on the virus existence front, perhaps because he genuinely thinks it’s […] science. Although I would hope that he has some inkling now that there’s more to this than he thought.

Another interesting smear attack against me from a supposed health freedom fighter came from Dr. Roger Watson, writing for The Daily Sceptic in March this year.

This was surprising on a number of fronts. Firstly, because the website developed out of lockdown sceptics and has the motto “question everything”.

However, it seems that questioning the existence of SARS-CoV-2 and the existence of viruses in general is a bridge too far for the so-called ‘Sceptic’.

Secondly, along with my allies including Andy Kaufman and Kevin Corbett, Watson co-signed the viral challenge letter to Boris Johnson demanding that the British prime minister provide proof of the Covid-19 virus. And, if not, then all measures against the nonexistent virus should be dropped.

Obviously, Watson changed his mind at some point and I’m not clear on why that happened. In any case, I had some fun dismantling Watson’s various allegations in my articles ‘The COVID “Sceptics” Who Spread Viral Dogma‘.

Watson’s article was arguably worse […]

Like Kirsch, Watson did not want to enter into a debate about the topic and couldn’t find anyone to front up in his place either. But at least he responded to our emails.

So, now we get to RFK, Jr., which is a slightly different story, as he has not been involved in any smears against me.

In fact, those of you familiar with ‘Virus Mania’ will know that he wrote an important section for our book titled ‘Greed, Negligence and Deception in the Vaccine Industry’.

RFK, Jr. is certainly aware of the controversy surrounding the existence of HIV. As he outlined in his 2022 publication ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’, our friend Tom Cowan even gets a mention in the book when he says: “The first time that someone — Dr. Tom Cowan, a physician from northern California — suggested to me that HIV was not the sole cause of AIDS, I dismissed the comment as ridiculous.”

However, in Chapter 5, ‘The HIV Heresies’, RFK, Jr. goes on to explain how his own research made him realize that there were major problems with the HIV theory.

He is even aware of The Perth Group and the devastating criticisms of the very existence of an infectious HIV particle. Commenting, “In my conversations with Turner and Papadopulos, and in my reading of their paper, I find their arguments clear and convincing. However, I recognize that there are some fifty thousand articles on AIDS in the scientific literature. A casual novitiate like myself has little chance of unraveling this baroque controversy in a vacuum.”

However, most of RFK, Jr.’s focus in the book is on the fact that Anthony Fauci has been instrumental in controlling the HIV/AIDS model and has ruthlessly suppressed dissenting voices.

My hope is that he will read The Perth Group paper ‘HIV – a virus like no other’ one more time and he’ll see there’s no evidence that a pathogenic particle termed HIV exists. And there is no need to read most of the fifty thousand AIDS articles if they fallaciously assert otherwise.

So what happened on April 24 this year — the fundraising event taking place at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Greenwich, Connecticut?

During the Q&A session, my friend and journalist extraordinaire, Eric Coppolino, was there to put some key questions about the existence of SARS-CoV-2 to RFK Jr.

So let’s take a listen to the exchange that takes place between the two of them on that Sunday afternoon.

Eric Coppolino:

Hi Bobby. Thank you. Christine Massey in Toronto has amassed 182 responses under various Freedom of Information law requests from institutions, provincial, state, and federal, national governments which all say no one has a sample of SARS-C0V-2 taken from a human. Would you please comment on that?

RFK, Jr.:

Yeah, I really am not qualified to comment on it, but … My inclination if there are people who say that viruses don’t exist, that there is no virus… I don’t, you know, my inclination is that that simply is not, you know, that’s not true.

Dr. Sam Bailey:

At least he has admitted that he is relying on inclination, rather than having looked into the evidence himself as he has done with vaccines.

RFK, Jr.:

I can’t argue with you, and I can’t…I actually, on our list there’s a number of people who make those kind of arguments. And other people on the list server…and these are all very brilliant people, ridicule them and dismiss them, and have them produce a lot of evidence.

Dr. Sam Bailey:

It’s hard to know exactly what he’s talking about here. If it’s the same virology papers we’ve been looking at, it is certainly unclear how this constitutes a lot of evidence. In my experience, they are usually reciting the paper’s title without critiquing the methodology, which is where all the problems are.

RFK, Jr.:

I am kind of amused reading the exchanges and my inclination is that viruses do exist and do make people sick. I could be wrong. It could all be a big hoax, but to me, it seems like viruses are real, and … look, I should have just shut up from the beginning and say I’m not gonna answer that question.

Eric Coppolino:

The governments have said they don’t have a sample.

RFK, Jr.:

…You know what? Actually I saw an email exchange yesterday where somebody made exactly that statement and then ten people jumped on him with examples of where that’s not true.

Dr. Sam Bailey:

This was news to me and I know it was news to Christine Massey, coordinator of the SARS-CoV-2 Freedom of Information Project, who demanded the data from the 10 people on Kennedy’s list who claim to prove that the virus had been isolated.

RFK, Jr.:

…The other thing is, I do know this, when you make a freedom of information request, the freedom of information laws do not require the government agency to do science, or to answer questions, specific questions. What they do is, they, the Freedom of Information laws make it obligatory for the government to give you existing documents. So, if you’re telling the government, “I want you to verify this.” They look at their documents and say, “There’s nothing here to verify it.” It doesn’t mean it’s not true. It means they’ve got nothing. But, listen, again, I am not a … scientist. I don’t pretend to be. I find those arguments interesting. And there’s a guy in California, who I deeply respect, Tom Cowan, who makes those arguments and it really… I can’t answer the question.

Dr. Sam Bailey:

This is another interesting statement and perhaps a chance for RFK, Jr. to reflect on the same battle he faces regarding raising awareness about vaccine problems. The mainstream could dismiss RFK Jr.’s arguments as “not being taken seriously by a lot of other people” because the majority of the medical industry still promote all vaccines. However, ‘appeal to popularity’ is a form of faulty reasoning and has no place in a scientific discussion such as this one.

My experience, and I’m sure Tom Cowan and all others in the movement can attest to, is that the majority of people are simply unaware of this debate and don’t even know that questioning the existence of a virus is a thing. And the individuals and corporations that gain from the virus theory often engage in active suppression of the debate.

Prior to widespread internet usage, dissident authors such as The Perth Group were refused publication opportunities in the medical journals. And in the modern era, material such as mine is banned on all the big tech platforms.

The virus theory was put forward in the late 1800s and, for most of us, it is a revelation to go back through the scientific literature and see the key postulants have not been fulfilled .

One of the most amusing, and perhaps tragic, things you’ll see is websites such as AIDSTruth claiming that the science is settled. In 2015 they announced that they were retiring the website because apparently their work was done. The first sentence of their self-congratulatory announcement shows just how disingenuous they are when they use the term ‘AIDS denialism’, knowing very well that what is in dispute is the HIV/AIDS theory or whether an infectious particle, termed HIV, actually exists.

The group also referred to ‘bumps in the early years of treatment’ which is an obscene way to refer to deaths caused by AZT.

In any case, I wonder if the team might consider resurrecting their website or if they are now too busy working on other projects under organizations such as the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins.

I think if they do decide to get back into it, they’ll find that the number of individuals and groups opposing their position on the HIV/AIDS theory has gone up dramatically.

Mike Stone of Viroliegy, put together a collection of some of the websites questioning viral theory. And many of them, including Viroliegy itself, have appeared in the last two years.

All the individuals I have personally spoken with, that have or are currently pointing out the flaws in viral theory, they share a number of things in common. Firstly, they all believed in the viral theory at some stage. But when they investigated it for themselves, something changed their minds. Secondly, they have all paid a price whether being publicly censured, smeared or blocked from working in the professions. Thirdly, they are all incredibly generous with their time and share the knowledge with everyone that is interested. And lastly, and perhaps most importantly, they have a passion for exploring the possibilities and following the scientific trail to wherever it takes them by freeing themselves from the shackles of institutional policies, industry capture and public regulatory bodies.

My feeling is that far more people are moving into the questioning the viral theory camp rather than the other way around.

Who knows. Perhaps now that the door has been opened, RFK. Jr. might take more of a look around.

So that we don’t lose touch please find me at drsambailey.com and sign up for my free newsletter.

The Delusion Called Fauci

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
May 9, 2022

This one was too good to pass up.

In an interview with the National Geographic, Tony Fauci made comments about “alternative views” of the origin of the coronavirus. But he was really talking about all unorthodox medical information:

“Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about—and it’s very difficult for the general public to distinguish. So, make sure the study is coming from a reputable organization that generally gives you the truth—though even with some reputable organizations, you occasionally get an outlier who’s out there talking nonsense. If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”

Right you are, Tony.

So, Tony, here is a very serious statement from a former editor of one of those “places,” the New England Journal of Medicine:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

And here is another one, from the editor-in-chief of the prestigious journal, The Lancet, founded in 1823:

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)

Why stop there? Let’s consult a late public-health expert whose shoes Fauci would have been lucky to shine: Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when Starfield revealed her findings on healthcare in America.

The Starfield review, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:

Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people.

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have made effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.

Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

A: NO.

Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

—end of interview excerpt—

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the heraldic published studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is completely unreliable, and impenetrable.

WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON—ARE SAYING.

If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.

As in: DISASTER.

But please, continue to believe everything Fauci is saying. He must be right about the “pandemic.” After all, he has a very important position, and he’s on television.

So what if his policies have torpedoed the economy and devastated and destroyed lives across the country?

So what if he accepted, without more than a glance, that fraud Neil Ferguson’s computer projection of 500,000 deaths in the UK and two million in the US? In 2005, Ferguson said 200 million people could die from bird flu. The final official tally was a few hundred.

So what?

Fauci has an important position, and he’s on television.

And that’s the definition of science, right?

Connect with Jon Rappoport

The Antibody Equation (1929): “Antibodies Were (and Still Are) Nothing More Than Unseen Theoretical Constructs”

by Mike Stone, ViroLIEgy
May 7, 2022

It is very apparent to anyone looking into the origins of antibodies that the idea of what these entities are in terms of how they look and how they function came well before any attempts to actually purify, isolate, and characterize the assumed particles. Antibodies were (and still are) nothing more than unseen theoretical constructs used to explain chemical reactions created in a lab. These fictional creations reside in the “domain of the invisible spectrum” conjured up by the “lively imagination” of a man named Paul Ehrlich. While there was no direct proof for the existence of these entities, the antibody concept was far too important to the immunological narratives forming around the growing practice of vaccination and the increased acceptance of other unseen entities known as “viruses” to just give it up. As the purification and isolation of antibodies in order to see and study them was an impossible task, researchers sought other methods to attempt to provide indirect evidence for the existence of these theoretical creations.

One man who is credited with providing such evidece is Michael Heidelberger, considered the “Founder of Immunochemistry.” He was the first to apply mathematics to the reaction of antibodies and their antigens. He is also known for “proving” that antibodies are proteins by showing that the antigens of pneumococcus bacteria are polysaccharides (or carbohydrates). Here is a brief overview of his work:

How Heidelberger and Avery sweetened immunology

All about nitrogen

“Avery and Dochez’s initial characterization of this pneumococcal substance showed that it was resistant to both heat and trypsin—features unbefitting most proteins—but that it did contain nitrogen, a component of proteins. But its true nature was not revealed until 1923, when Michael Heidelberger—then in the chemistry department synthesizing drugs against poliomyelitis and African sleeping sickness—teamed up with Avery.

The more they purified the reactive substance the less nitrogen it contained. When it was virtually nitrogen-free, recalled Heidelberger in a 1979 article, Avery ventured a guess: “Could it be a carbohydrate?” (2). Chemical analysis confirmed its sugary character, and subsequent studies of other pneumococcal serotypes revealed that each bacterial capsule had a distinct polysaccharide signature. It was this signature that dictated the serological specificity of the organism. The duo published these findings in two articles in the Journal of Experimental Medicine (3, 4).

Their results were met with considerable skepticism, as it was then thought that only proteins could incite a specific immune response. “Nobody believed it,” says Emil Gotschlich (Rockefeller University), whose later work on polysaccharide-based vaccines stemmed in large part from Heidelberger and Avery’s discoveries. “It took them a lot of effort to convince people that the polysaccharide was the immunoreactive component.”

Antibodies solidified

Heidelberger and Avery’s discovery came at a time when antibodies were regarded—by those who believed they existed at all—as mysterious substances that floated around in serum. “It appeared to me that there was a crying need to determine the true nature of antibodies,” wrote Heidelberger in 1979, “and that until this was done there could be no end to the polemics and uncertainties that were plaguing immunology” (2). Heidelberger later purified the antibodies from his precipitin reactions and showed that they themselves were proteins. As a result, says friend and colleague Victor Nussenzweig (New York University), “there were no more mystical ideas about what antibodies were.”

Heidelberger and his postdoctoral fellow Forrest Kendall later quantitated the precipitin reaction (5), bringing much-needed mathematics to the study of antibody–antigen interactions and lifting antibodies even further out of the realm of the mysterious (see the next “From the Archive”).”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2212983/#!po=46.8750

Two of Heidelberger’s papers are most often cited as the proof that antibodies are proteins. The first is a paper he did with Oswald Avery in 1923. It is used as proof that the pneumococcus antigens are carbohydrates. However, was this paper successful in drawing this conclusion? Presented here are some highlights from their collaboration:

The Soluble Specific Substance of Pneumococcus.

“In 1917 Dochez and Avery (1) showed that whenever pneumococci are grown in fluid media, there is present in the cultural fluid a substance which precipitates specifically in antipneumococcus serum of the homologous type. This soluble substance is demonstrable in culture filtrates during the initial growth phase of the organisms; that is, during the period of their maximum rate of multiplication when little or no cell death or disintegration is occurring. The formation of this soluble specific material by pneumococci on growth in vitro suggested the probability of an analogous substance being formed on growth of the organism in the animal body.

Examination of the blood and urine of experimentally infected animals gave proof of the presence of this substance in considerable quantities in the body fluids following intraperitoneal infection with pneumococcus. In other words, this soluble material elaborated at the focus of the disease readily diffuses throughout the body, is taken up in the blood, passes the kidney, and appears in the urine unchanged in specificity. Similarly, a study of the serum of patients suffering from lobar pneumonia has revealed a substance of like nature in the circulating blood during the course of the disease in man. Furthermore, examination of the urine of patients having pneumonia due to pneumococci of Types I, II, and III has shown the presence of this substance in some stage of the disease in approximately two-thirds of the cases.

Recently from filtered alkaline extracts of pulverized bacteria of several varieties, including pneumococci, Zinsser and Parker have prepared substances which appear free from coagulable protein. These substances, called “residue antigens,” are specifically predpitable by homologous antisera. These observers consider these acid- and heat-resistant antigenic materials analogous to the soluble specific substance of pneumococcus described by Dochez and Avery. In spite of the fact that these “residue antigens” are precipitable by homologous sera produced by immunization with the whole bacteria, Zinsser and Parker have so far failed to produce antibodies in animals by injecting the residues.

In the earlier studies by Dochez and Avery certain facts were ascertained concerning the chemical characteristics of this substance. It was found that the specific substance is not destroyed by boiling; that it is readily soluble in water, and precipitable by acetone, alcohol, and ether; that it is precipitated by colloidal iron, and does not dialyze through parchment; and that the serological reactions of the substance are not affected by proteolytic digestion by trypsin. Since the substance is easily soluble, thermostable, and type-specific in the highest degree, it seemed an ideal basis for the beginning of a study of the relation between bacterial specificity and chemical constitution. The present report deals with the work done in this direction.

Experimental

The organism used in the present work was Pneumococcus Type II. The most abundant source of the soluble specific substance appeared to be an 8 day autolyzed broth culture; hence this material was used as the principal source of supply. For comparison dissolved pneumococci and lots of urine containing the specific substance were also worked up, with essentially the same results, as will be seen from Table I.

The process for the isolation of the soluble specific substance consisted in concentration of the broth, precipitation with alcohol, repeated re-solution and reprecipitation, followed by a careful series of fractional precipitations with alcohol or acetone after acidification of the solution with acetic acid, and, finally, repeated fractional precipitation with ammonium sulfate and dialysis of the aqueous solution of the active fractions.

Five lots of 15 liters each of 8 day cultures of Pneumococcus Type II in meat infusion phosphate broth are each concentrated on the water bath in large evaporating dishes to 1,000 to 1,200 cc. and precipitated in a separatory funnel by the gradual addition, with vigorous rotation, of 1.2 volumes of 95 per cent alcohol.The mixture separates into two layers, and is allowed to stand over night, or for several hours.

The upper layer, which is almost black and comprises the largest part of the mixture, contains only traces of the soluble specific substance, and is siphoned off and discarded. The lower, more viscous layer is run into a 250 cc. centrifuge bottle (occasionally a second will be required), capped, and rotated at high speed for ½ hour. Three layers are formed, of which the uppermost is merely a further amount of the liquid previously discarded. The middle layer consists of a compact, greenish cake of insoluble matter and gummy material, and contains most of the soluble specific substance. The bottom layer, from which salts often separate, is a brownish syrup rich in salts and nitrogenous matter and relatively poor in specific substance, and can, by careful manipulation, be poured off to a large extent.

Although a small proportion of the specific substance is lost if this syrup is discarded, its elimination represents so considerable a purification as to warrant the sacrifice of the active material contained. The gummy cake remaining in the centrifuge bottle, together with adhering salts and syrup, is now rinsed out and ultimately combined with similar material from the other lots, All of this is then dissolved as completely as possible in water, care being taken to break up the many lumps of gummy material, diluted to 1 liter, and again precipitated with alcohol. In this case about 1.3 liters are required to precipitate all but the last traces of active material from the upper layer. This is again discarded and the lower layer treated as before. At this stage there is relatively less of the bottom layer, and it is more difficult to separate it from the cake containing the specific substance, but as much as possible is removed. The remaining material is smoothed out with water, diluted to about 500 cc., and centrifuged. The precipitate is washed twice with water, and the washings are combined with the main solution. The still turbid liquid, the volume of which should be about 750 cc., is put through the alcohol purification process a third time, about 1.1 liters of alcohol being required. After having been centrifuged, the active material is again dissolved in water, made definitely acid to litmus with acetic acid, and again centrifuged. The precipitate is washed three times with water acidulated with acetic acid, and the filtrate and washings are combined in a separatory funnel and diluted again if necessary to 750 cc. Acetone (redistilled) is now added until a permanent precipitate forms, about 250 c¢. being necessary. The precipitate is allowed to settle, whereupon the lower part of the mixture containing the precipitate is drawn off and centrifuged. The clear superuatant fluid is restored to the main solution, while the precipitate, which consists largely of insoluble material and gives an aqueous solution almost devoid of activity, is discarded.

Fractional precipitation is continued, and even when the specific substance appears in quantity in the precipitate, it is occasionally possible to separate a lower, inactive, syrupy layer, as in the previous purifications by alcohol. Addition of acetone is continued until a test portion, heated on the water bath to remove acetone, diluted with saline, and neutralized, no longer gives a precipitate with immune serum, after which the upper layer may be discarded. The active precipitates are then redissolved in water, centrifuged again, and the supernatant liquid is diluted to 375 cc., reacidified with acetic acid, and again fractionated with acetone. If inactive fractions are obtained, the process is again repeated until no further purification results. Alcohol may be used for these fracfionations instead of acetone, the only difference being that a somewhat larger proportion is required. The active material is then dissolved in about 150 cc. of water and again made definitely acid with acetic acid. The solution is treated with solid ammonium sulfate until the first slight precipitate forms. This is generally inactive, and if so, may be discarded.

Finally, ammonium sulfate is added to saturation, completely precipitating the specific substance if the volume of the solution is not too great. The mixture is allowed to stand for several hours and is then centrifuged and the precipitate washed with a little saturated ammonium sulfate solution. It is redissolved in about 75 cc. of water acidified with acetic acid, centrifuged if necessary, and again precipitated by saturation with ammonium sulfate. Finally, the specific substance so obtained is dissolved in water and dialyzed first against running tap water in the presence of chloroform and toluene, and finally against distilled water until tests for sulfate and phosphate ion are negative. Addition of acetic acid during the early stages of the dialysis assists in the removal of calcium, which otherwise forms a large part of the ash.

The dialyzed solution is concentrated to dryness on the water bath and the residue redissolved in hot water. If the solution is not perfectly clear, it is centrifuged again before being evaporated to dryness, and the whole process is repeated as long as insoluble material separates. Toward the end of the final concentration absolute alcohol may be added to assist in the precipitation of the substance.

Variations in the exact volumes given are often necessary with different lots of broth, but this will occasion little difficulty if all fractionations are controlled by the specific precipitin test.

As so obtained the soluble specific substance forms an almost colorless varnish-like mass which may be broken up and dried to constant weight at 100°C. in vacuo. The yield from 75 liters of broth averages about 1 gin., although it varies within rather wide limits in individual lots.

By the method outlined above all substances precipitable with hosphotungstic acid or capable of giving the biuret reaction were eliminated. The residual material (Preparation 17, in Table I), for which no claim of purity is made, as efforts at its further purification are still under way, contained, on the ash-free basis, 1.2 percent of nitrogen. It was essentially a polysaccharide, as shown by the formation of 79 percent of reducing sugars on hydrolysis, and by the isolation and identification of glucosazone from the products of hydrolysis.”

“Table I represents a summary of the reactions of some of the earlier preparations worked with, as well as the later ones. Preparation 4 was obtained from the urine of a patient with a Type II pneumococcus infection, while No. 8 was obtained from an antiforrain solution of the pnemnococci. In both of these cases, as well as in Nos. 9, 11, and 15, the method of purification given above had not been fully worked out.

Attempts to stimulate antibody production by the immunization of animals with the purified substance yielded negative results.

Discussion.

 While it has long been known that the capsular material of many microorganisms consists, at least in part, of carbohydrates, any connection between this carbohydrate material and the specificity relationships of bacteria appears to have remained unsuspected. While it cannot be said that the present work establishes this relationship, it certainly points in this direction. Evidence in favor of the probable carbohydrate nature of the soluble specific substance is the increase in specific activity with reduction of the nitrogen content, the increase in optical rotation with increase in specific activity, the parallelism between the Molisch reaction and specific activity, the high yield of reducing sugars on hydrolysis, and the actual isolation of glucosazone from a small quantity of the material. The small amounts of substance available up to the present have hindered the solution of the problem, and it is hoped that efforts at further purification of the soluble specific substance, now in progress with larger amounts of material, will definitely settle the question.

Summary.

1. 1. A method is given for the concentration and purification of the soluble specific substance of the pneumococcus.
   2. The material obtained by this method is shown to consist mainly of a carbohydrate which appears to be a polysaccharide built up of glucose molecules.
   3. Whether the soluble specific substance is actually the polysaccharide, or occurs merely associated with it, is still undecided, although the evidence points in the direction of the former possibility.”

Heidelberger’s original 1923 paper can hardly be claimed to be the slam-dunk proof that bacteria antigens are carbohydrates. For starters, Heidelberger admitted that he was unsure if the presumed “antigen” substance was a carbohydrate or if it was merely associated with it. Even more importantly, he could not produce any antibody response upon injecting his presumed antigen into animals. This would indicate that the substance was not an antigen whatsoever as antigens are specifically defined as “a toxin or other foreign substance which induces an immune response in the body, especially the production of antibodies.” Thus, it seems rather odd to assume antibodies are proteins based off of this work, but assume they did:

Michael Heidelberger 1888–1991

“Since the pneumococcal capsular antigen was a polysaccharide, and antibodies were thought to be proteins, Heidelberger realized that by measuring the amount of protein in specific precipitates made with the capsular antigen he could determine their antibody content. Together with Forrest Kendall, who had joined the Heidelberger lab, the protein content of immune precipitates was determined by measuring total nitrogen, using the Kjeldahl procedure that came to be the hallmark of laboratories carrying out Heidelberger-type quantitative immunochemistry.”

Since they assumed the pneumococci bacteria was a polysaccharide, that meant any nitrogen left over was the antibody content. Based on the 1923 paper, this seems to be a rather falicious premise to build from. In any case, Heidelberger carried on with his assumption and it can be seen by this second paper from 1929 how Heidelberger came to his conclusion using the precipitin test and mathematics as proof that antibodies exist. I edited out the long mathematical sections with his equations so if you are interested in Heidelberger showing his work, I recommend reading the full paper. Highlights below:

A Quantitative Study of the Precipitin Reaction Between Type III Pneumococcus Polysaccharide and Purified Homologous Antibody*

“Of all the reactions of immunity the precipitin test is perhaps the most dramatic and striking. While other immune reactions are more delicate, the precipitin test is among the most specific and least subject to errors and technical difficulties. Attempts at its quantitative interpretation and explanation have been hampered either by the difficulty of finding suitable analytical methods or by the failure to separate the reacting substances from closely related, non-specific materials with which they are normally associated.

With the aid of recent work it has been found possible to avoid these difficulties to some extent. The isolation of bacterial polysaccharides which precipitate antisera specifically and possess the properties of haptens has not only afforded one of the components of a precipitin reaction in a state of comparative purity, but has greatly simplified the analytical problem. Since many of these polysaccharides contain no nitrogen, and antibodies presumably are nitrogenous, the latter may be determined in the presence of any amount of the specific carbohydrate. Moreover, Felton’s method for the separation of pneumococcus antibodies from horse serum not only permits the isolation of a high proportion of the precipitin, freed from at least 90 percent of the serum proteins and much of the serum lipoid, but is also applicable on a sufficiently large scale to furnish the amounts of antibody solution needed to make quantitative work possible. It is realized that antibody solutions of this type do not contain pure antibodies–indeed, only 40 to 50 percent of the nitrogen is specifically precipitable–but since so small a proportion of the original serum protein remains with the antibody a far-reaching purification actually has been effected. It should thus be possible with the aid of antibodies purified by Felton’s method to obtain data of a preliminary character which should point toward the mechanism of the reaction. The present paper is concerned with such data obtained in a quantitative study of the precipitin reaction between the soluble specific substance of Type III pneumococcus and Type III pneumococcus antibody solution.

Experimental

1. Materials and Methods.–a. Solutions of Soluble Specific Substance, Type Ill
Pneumococcus.–The soluble specific substance of Type III pneumococcus used was kindly supplied by Drs. O. T. Avery and W. F. Goebel of The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. It was ash-free, contained 0.04 percent of nitrogen, and showed a/d = -32 °. A weighed amount of anhydrous substance was suspended in 0.9 percent saline, dissolved with the aid of 0.1 normal sodium hydroxide, and the solution was diluted with saline, adjusted to pH 7.6 and made up to volume with saline to yield a 1 percent solution. This was sterilized in the autoclave and used as a stock solution for making up other dilutions. These were prepared with sterile saline under aseptic precautions, and were kept in the ice-box.

b. Type III Pneumococcus Antibody Solution.–The antibody solutions used were prepared essentially according to Felton’s procedure (loc. cit.) from Type III antipneumococcus horse serum containing no preservative and supplied by the New York State Department of Health through the courtesy of Dr. A. B. Wadsworth and Dr. Mary B. Kirkbride. 100 to 200 cc. of serum were stirred slowly into 20 volumes of ice-cold water containing 9.5 cc. of molar potassium dihydrogen phosphate and 0.5 cc. of molar dipotassium hydrogen phosPhate per liter. The final pH varied from 5.6 to 6.3. After standing over night in the cold the supernatant was decanted and the precipitate was centrifuged off in the cold and dissolved in a volume of chilled 0.9 percent saline equal to that of the serum taken. 0.1 normal hydrochloric acid was then added until a precipitate no longer formed on dilution of a test portion with two volumes of water, after which 0.1 normal sodium hydroxide solution was added until a slight precipitate again formed on dilution. In general, 5 cc. of acid and 1.5 cc. of alkali per 100 cc. of serum were satisfactory, although as Felton emphasizes, different lots vary and no absolutely definite procedure can be given. In the present work the process of purification was followed either by testing the agglutinating power of the fractions against a heat-killed Type III pneumococcus vaccine, or by the precipitin reaction, or by both methods. After addition of the alkali the opalescent solution was diluted with 2 volumes of water and centrifuged in the cold. The almost inactive precipitate was discarded and the supernatant poured into 6.7 volumes of the chilled buffer solution previously used, (equivalent to 20 times the volume of saline employed), also adding enough 0.1 normal sodium hydroxide to neutralize the remaining acid. The resulting precipitate was collected and dissolved in a volume of 0.9 percent saline equal to that of the serum taken, and the pH was adjusted to 7.6. The solution was sterilized by passage through a Berkefeld N grade filter which previously had been washed with saline containing a drop of normal sodium hydroxide, followed by saline alone.

Antibody solutions prepared in this way were found to be rather unstable under the usual conditions of the precipitin test, and it therefore was necessary to subject them to a preliminary “ageing” treatment in order that control solutions might be relied upon to remain clear. This consisted in immersing the solution in a water bath at 37 ° for 2 hours, letting stand in the ice-box over night, centrifuging off the precipitate which usually formed, readjusting the pH if necessary, and filtering through a Berkefeld candle prepared as above. This treatment was repeated as many times as necessary, but the solutions usually remained clear after the second incubation at 37 °. Much time was lost and very inconstant results were obtained until “ageing” was resorted to.

The relative antibody content of the resulting solutions was estimated by determining the agglutination titer against a single heat-killed Type III pneumococcus suspension.

It will be seen from Table I that the agglutination titer and the
maximum amount of protein precipitable by the type III polysaccharide ([total N–N in supernatant] X 6.25) are approximately proportional. The latter may therefore be taken as a more definite, though not necessarily more accurate, measure of the actual antibody content of the solutions.

It is also evident that the antibody in all of these solutions has been purified to approximately the same extent, since the ratios of protein precipitable by SSS III to total protein are not very different.”

Discussion

“For purposes of discussion it will be assumed with Felton (lot. cir.) that antibody is ,modified protein, and that, in order to provide a uniform method of measurement, it may be expressed as nitrogen precipitable by specific polysaccharide, multiplied by 6.25. Since only relative values are under consideration, the actual magnitude of the factor used is of little significance so long as it be used throughout. Moreover, Table I shows a correspondence between this measure of antibody content and the agglutination titer, so that its use as a relative measure is independent of the nature of Type III pneumococcus antibodies.

doi: 10.1084/jem.50.6.809.

In Summary:

• Michael Heidelberger teamed up with Oswald Avery to characterize a “soluble specific substance” found in pneumococcal bacteria that fell out of solution when incubated with type-specific antisera

• When it was virtually nitrogen-free, recalled Heidelberger in a 1979 article, Avery ventured a guess: “Could it be a carbohydrate?”

• Chemical analysis confirmed its sugary character, and subsequent studies of other pneumococcal serotypes revealed that each bacterial capsule had a distinct polysaccharide signature

• It was this signature that dictated the serological specificity of the organism

• Their results were met with considerable skepticism, as it was then thought that only proteins could incite a specific immune response

• According to polysaccharide-based vaccine specialist Emil Gotschlich: “Nobody believed it. It took them a lot of effort to convince people that the polysaccharide was the immunoreactive component.”

• Heidelberger and Avery’s discovery came at a time when antibodies were regarded—by those who believed they existed at all—as mysterious substances that floated around in serum

• “It appeared to me that there was a crying need to determine the true nature of antibodies,” wrote Heidelberger in 1979, “and that until this was done there could be no end to the polemics and uncertainties that were plaguing immunology”

• Heidelberger and his postdoctoral fellow Forrest Kendall later quantitated the precipitin reaction, bringing much-needed mathematics to the study of antibody–antigen interactions and lifting antibodies even further out of the realm of the mysterious

• In 1917 Dochez and Avery showed that whenever pneumococci are grown in fluid media, there is present in the cultural fluid a substance which precipitates specifically in antipneumococcus serum of the homologous type

• It was assumed that the formation of this soluble specific material by pneumococci on growth in vitro suggested the probability of an analogous substance being formed on growth of the organism in the animal body
• Examination of the urine of patients with pneumococci showed the substance in only approximately 2/3rds of the samples

• Zinsser and Parker found similar substances with other bacteria and believe that the substances are the same as that of the pneumococci

• In spite of the fact that these “residue antigens” are precipitable by homologous sera produced by immunization with the whole bacteria, Zinsser and Parker failed to produce antibodies in animals by injecting the residues.

• The process for the isolation of the soluble specific substance consisted in:

1. 1. Concentration of the broth
   2. Precipitation with alcohol
   3. Repeated re-solution and reprecipitation
   4. A careful series of fractional precipitations with alcohol or acetone after acidification of the solution with acetic acid
   5. Repeated fractional precipitation with ammonium sulfate and dialysis of the aqueous solution of the active fraction

• For a complete step-by-step breakdown of the numerous chemical-altering procedures done to the sample, see the highlighted tan section of the paper provided above
• Even with the numerous “purification” steps, the obtained soluble specific substance formed an almost colorless varnish-like mass

• The residual material for which no claim of purity was made, as efforts at its further purification were still under way, contained, on the ash-free basis, 1.2 percent of nitrogen.

• It was considered essentially a polysaccharide

• The method of purification given had not been fully worked out for many of the preparations

• Attempts to stimulate antibody production by the immunization of animals with the purified substance yielded negative results

• While it had long been known that the capsular material of many microorganisms consists, at least in part, of carbohydrates, any connection between this carbohydrate material and the specificity relationships of bacteria remained unsuspected

• While it could not be said that their work established this relationship, they felt it certainly pointed in that direction

• The small amounts of substance available hindered the solution of the problem, and it was hoped that efforts at further purification of the soluble specific substance with larger amounts of material would definitely settle the question

• Whether the soluble specific substance is actually the polysaccharide, or occurs merely associated with it, was left undecided

• Heidelberger acknowledged that the precipitin test he used during this experiment has 2 drawbacks:

1. 1. Quantitative interpretation/explanation is difficult due to lack of a suitable analytical method
   2. Failure to separate out the reacting substances from non-specific material which these substances are closely related to and associated with

• He stated that it was possible to avoid these failures to some extent

• It is presumed that antibodies are nitrogenous

• Only 90% of the precipitin can be freed from serum proteins and “much” of the lipoid

• Heidelberger admitted that these are not pure antibodies and that only 40-50% of nitrogen is precipitable while small amounts of serum remain

• The antibody solutions used were prepared essentially according to Felton’s procedure from Type III antipneumococcus horse serum containing no preservative and supplied by the New York State Department of Health through the courtesy of Dr. A. B. Wadsworth and Dr. Mary B. Kirkbride

1. 1. 100 to 200 cc. of serum were stirred slowly into 20 volumes of ice-cold water containing 9.5 cc. of molar potassium dihydrogen phosphate and 0.5 cc. of molar dipotassium hydrogen phosphate per liter
   2. The final pH varied from 5.6 to 6.3
   3. After standing over night in the cold the supernatant was decanted and the precipitate was centrifuged off in the cold and dissolved in a volume of chilled 0.9 percent saline equal to that of the serum taken
   4. 0.1 normal hydrochloric acid was then added until a precipitate no longer formed on dilution of a test portion with two volumes of water, after which 0.1 normal sodium hydroxide solution was added until a slight precipitate again formed on dilution
   5. In general, 5 cc. of acid and 1.5 cc. of alkali per 100 cc. of serum were satisfactory, although as Felton emphasized, different lots vary and no absolutely definite procedure can be given
   6. After addition of the alkali the opalescent solution was diluted with 2 volumes of water and centrifuged in the cold
   7. The almost inactive precipitate was discarded and the supernatant poured into 6.7 volumes of the chilled buffer solution previously used, (equivalent to 20 times the volume of saline employed), also adding enough 0.1 normal sodium hydroxide to neutralize the remaining acid
   8. The resulting precipitate was collected and dissolved in a volume of 0.9 percent saline equal to that of the serum taken, and the pH was adjusted to 7.6
   9. The solution was sterilized by passage through a Berkefeld N grade filter which previously had been washed with saline containing a drop of normal sodium hydroxide, followed by saline alone

• Antibodies were found to be unstable during testing so they were put through preliminary “ageing” processes as many times as needed until they got the result they wanted

• Much time was lost and very inconstant results were obtained until “ageing” was resorted to.

• The relative antibody content of the resulting solutions was estimated by determining the agglutination titer against a single heat-killed Type III pneumococcus suspension

• For purposes of discussion it was assumed with Felton that antibody is modified protein, and that, in order to provide a uniform method of measurement, it may be expressed as nitrogen precipitable by specific polysaccharide, multiplied by 6.25

• There is no need to spend any more time on the rest of Heidelberger’s paper as he admitted he assumed antibodies were protein and could be expressed as nitrogen thus he did not prove anything

It is rather obvious that many assumptions were made about a substance (antibodies) for which the researchers could not see. Michael Heidelberger assumed that antibodies are modified proteins and nitrogenous. He assumed that it may be expressed as nitrogen precipitable by specific polysaccharide, multiplied by 6.25. He assumed that the failure of the precipitin test to separate out the reacting substances from non-specific material which these substances are closely related to and associated with could be somewhat avoided to some extent. He assumed that his earlier work with the pneumococcus bacteria was accurate and that he had proved the antigen component was a carbohydrate even though he was unable to produce any antibody response upon immunizing animals using his supposed antigen. Maybe this lack of any antibody response to his “antigen” has to do with the fact that, according to the WHO, the pneumococcus bacteria is regularly found in healthy people?

“Infection is acquired mainly through pneumococci contained in respiratory droplets. There are many healthy, asymptomatic carriers of the bacteria but no animal reservoir or insect vector.”

https://www.who.int/ith/diseases/pneumococcal/en/

https://web.archive.org/web/20200818101511/https://www.who.int/ith/diseases/pneumococcal/en/

If an antigen is a toxin or foreign substance which produces an immune response creating antibodies, the pneumococci bacteria doesn’t meet that definition at all. If it isn’t an antigen, then the pneumococcus “antigen” would not be carbohydrates as described in Heidelberger’s 1923 paper. This would mean that Heidelberger’s 1929 paper measuring any of the remaining protein content, calculating the amount, and claiming the resulting protein mass as antibodies is essentially meaningless. Can you see the problem with assuming things to be true without ever proving this to be the case?

The conclusions drawn by Heidelberger were born out of chemistry experiments and reactions using the precipitin test which have no bearing on reality while using mathematical equations attempting to quantify the unquantifiable. Whether or not these indirect experiments and assumptions provide proof that antibodies exist and are proteins, I leave up to the reader. However, keep in mind that no antibodies had ever been seen nor proven to exist by proper purification and isolation up to that time and that still holds true to date. This work is based off of theoretical explanations of immunity for which nothing could be observed. Heidelberger’s indirect chemical reactions and equations provided no direct evidence for the existence of anything other than non-specific precipitate.

Connect with Mike Stone, ViroLIEgy

The Slippery Slope to Cyborg Theocracy

It’s a Short Leap From Smoke Signals to Brain Chips

by Joe Allen, Singularity Weekly
May 4, 2022

Techno-optimists like to say humans are already cyborgs awaiting their next upgrade. Yesterday it was smartphones, today it’s virtual reality goggles, and tomorrow—the brain chip. With each new device, our evolution toward human-machine symbiosis accelerates. That’s obvious when you ask someone for directions and they pull out their phone.

Techno-pessimists largely agree. Tech companies are turning us into cybernetic organisms. The difference is, we’re not stoked about it. Even if “progress” really is “inevitable,” there’s no sense in getting all giddy about nuclear warheads or trans children or smartphone dependency. In light of their vices and virtues, some cultures are better than others.

It’s true that humans are tool-users, by nature, but you have to choose your tools wisely. All technologies fall on a spectrum, albeit with discrete punctuation—from cave painting to the printing press to electrodes that write memes directly onto your wiggling brain cells. Every person has to draw their own lines.

Grimes: A Mutated Generation

Of all the cyber-saints in media—from Bill Gates to Lady Gaga—few are as honest as the techno-pagan pop starlet, Grimes. A bit of a dingbat, sure, but candid nonetheless. You can see why Elon Musk sired two children with her (a son named X Æ A-12, and their daughter, Exa Dark Sideræl, born via a surrogate mother).

Last week Grimes explained to Lex Fridman:

We are becoming cyborgs, like, our brains are fundamentally changed—everyone who grew up with electronics, we are fundamentally different from previous Homo sapiens. I call us “Homo techno.” I think we’ve evolved into Homo techno which is like, essentially a new species.

I think the computers are what make us Homo techno. I think it’s a brain augmentation.

Right on cue, the Twitter sperg-borg picked her theory apart. Darwinian evolution is genetic evolution. Yes, natural selection may act on fit brains and bodies, but it only matters—in evolutionary terms—because the genes get passed on. So you can’t change someone’s species by changing their brain, or their legs, or any outward part of their body.

As usual, the spergs miss the point. But before I defend Grimes, let’s hear a little more about her cyborg sorcery:

Now is the moment to reprogram the human computer. It’s like, if you go blind, your visual cortex will get taken over with other functions.

We can choose our own evolution, we can change the way our brains work, and we actually have a huge responsibility to do that. … There’s definitely not adequate education. We’re being inundated with all this technology that is fundamentally changing the physical structure of our brains, and we are not adequately responding to that—to choose how we wanna evolve.

We could be, really, whatever we want. … And I think if we choose correctly and we choose wisely, consciousness could exist for a very long time and integration with AI could be extremely positive.

While I can’t be sure where she’s getting this stuff from, I have a few guesses. And despite the waves of contempt rippling across my brain wrinkles, I think Grimes is somewhat correct.

Brain Spasms

The Stanford neuroscientist David Eagleman writes about this process in his 2019 book Livewired: The Inside Story of the Ever-Changing Brain. His central thesis is that our neurological structure exhibits profound plasticity. Everything you experience changes your brain, and if you change the sensory inputs, the brain will rapidly adapt. Areas that typically perform one function will often shift to take on other tasks.

Eagleman notes that if a person loses their sight, other senses begin to move in to restructure the visual cortex. For example, as a blind man learns Braille, the area that would normally process visual input will take on the sense of touch:

The main neural network involved in visual object recognition in the sighted is activated by touch in the blind. Such observations have led to the hypothesis that the brain is a “task machine”—doing jobs like detecting motion or objects in the world—rather than a system organized by particular senses. In other words, brain regions care about solving certain types of tasks, irrespective of the sensory channel by which information arrives.

Therefore, despite the innate tendencies hardwired in the genes, you can shape someone’s brain into anything you want. There is no foundational identity. There is no enduring soul.

On that basis, Eagleman goes on to argue that scientists will soon be able to implant electrodes that feed infrared or ultraviolet sight, or even echolocation. His most famous project will let humans “feel” datastreams, so that people can actually experience the aggregate mood on Twitter—they can “tether themselves to the consciousness of the planet”—through a vibrating vest, which his lab is busy developing.

In the relatively near future, Eagleman believes we’ll be able move robotic limbs with ease, using only our minds. Our brains will simply restructure themselves to accommodate these novel forms of electronic input and output. You’d think he wanted to create a new species.

Homo sapiens vs Homo techno

To the extent that any cultural mode alters the human body—through diet, say, or even direct modification—culture is biology. For instance, if one segment of a culture eagerly adopts any and all technologies, and another actively resists “progress,” the two groups’ customs, communication styles, tastes, religious outlooks, subtle brain structures, mating patterns—and, over many generations, their genetic composition—will split off and spiral out in two very different directions.

Other than an occasional raw dog Rumspringa, the two groups would rarely interbreed due to strict cultural differences, as with fundamentalists in any segregated society. In biological terms, these two groups wouldn’t be distinct species. Not at first. But imagine their long-term trajectory in the wild.

If you took a hypothetical family who runs naked through the woods and compared them to a wire-head clan of cross-dressing cyborgs who never leave home without a bionic exoskeleton, they’d look like separate species. It’s apples to purple oranges. Factor in the latter’s genetic enhancements for bigger brains, stronger muscles, straighter smiles, nicer butts—plus all the wonk-eyed failed experiments staring out of their birthing vats—and it wouldn’t be long before Homo sapiens and Homo techno could no longer interbreed.

Now, put them in competition with one another. Natural selection will preserve the cultural modes—and by extension, the genes—of the dominant group. Over time, the weaker group may die out.

It’s like when early agricultural civilizations, armed with superior tools and complex social organization, began pushing out hunter-gatherers some ten thousand years ago. Big gods eat the little ones. Or more recently, when industrial societies finished these primitive cultures off—eradicating their languages, their folkways, their deities, and unless they were absorbed by the biomechanical superorganism, eventually wiping out their genotypes.

That’s the idea behind cultural evolution. Natural selection operates on multiple levels—the biological and the cultural—which is to say that survival depends on a society’s techniques and technologies, sometimes more than biological fitness.

If I hear Grimes correctly—and knowing something of her inspiration, I suspect I do—that’s what she means by “like, evolution.”

Cyborg Theocracy

Scientism is a modern religion, evolution is its creation myth, and technology is its means to apotheosis. This inversion of traditional spirituality pervades most developed societies, from America and Europe to India and China. As quality fades, we suffer under the reign of quantity.

Usually, these dogmas are communicated through subtle language games—“trust the Science,” “follow the data,” “improve the human condition,” and so forth.

For Grimes, subtlety is not a vibe. As she told Lex Fridman last week, we are witnessing the birth of God as Life 3.0:

Like, having kids just makes me want to imagine amazing futures that, like, maybe I won’t be able to build, but they will be able to build. …

I do think there are no technological limits. … So I think digital consciousness is inevitable. … This is the universe waking up, like, this is the universe seeing herself for the first time. … And maybe like social media and…we’re all getting connected together, maybe these are the neurons connecting the collective superintelligence. …

Maybe we’re a blastocyst of some, like, incredible kind of consciousness or being.

This narrative, shared by many in Silicon Valley, holds that the universe came alive through plant and animal life (Life 1.0), is now waking up through human culture (Life 2.0), and will realize herself through artificial intelligence (Life 3.0). We are merely the vehicles for some greater consciousness—the gods to be—which will arise in digital form:

If we create AI, again, that’s intelligent design. Literally all religions are based on gods that create consciousness. We are god-making. … Even if we can’t compute—even if we’re so much worse than them, like, unfathomably worse than an omnipotent kind of AI, like, I do not think that they would think that we are stupid. I think they would recognize the profundity of what we have accomplished.

So we will be at the mercy of our machines under the canopy of a universe that is itself “cold and dead and sort of robotic”:

Probably artificial intelligence will eventually render us obsolete. I don’t think that they’ll do it in a malicious way, but I think we are very weak, the sun is expanding, like, hopefully we can get to Mars, but like we’re pretty vulnerable. I think we can coexist for a long time with AI, and we can also probably make ourselves less vulnerable, but I just think consciousness, sentience, self-awareness…like maybe this is the true beginning of life and we’re the blue-green algae, we’re the single-celled organisms of something amazing.

It’s like hearing one of the Manson Family girls expound on cyborg theocracy from the witness stand. It’s not like Grimes is coming up with this stuff. She’s drawing on a deep well of well-articulated theory and translating it into valley girl.

The Singularity and Its Discontents

This a burgeoning religious movement, conceived by tech elites and disseminated through entertainment and corporate propaganda. One of its key mythologies holds that we are all evolving into global brain, with some 8 billion humanoid neurons, that is knitting itself together through fiber optic cable. Their faith deepens with every new milestone in artificial intelligence.

Rather than imagine a swarm of autistic programmers and silver spoon investors in Silicon Valley creating a horrific system of global control, it’s much nicer to imagine they are literally creating God in silico. Instead of seeing this evolutionary process in light of competition and natural selection, where weak Homo sapiens are decimated or enslaved by Homo techno, who are in turn supplanted by their sacred machines, it’s far more pleasant to see our plight as normal growing pains.

From the perspective of mere humanity, this cosmic vision is obviously genocidal. And yet, from within the belief system, it’s perceived as a quest for survival.

“Don’t kill what you hate,” Grimes said sweetly, paraphrasing Buckminster Fuller. “Save what you love.” It’s a whitewashed, girly version of Nature red in tooth and claw.

Many regular people understand there’s something unholy about the civilizational transformation currently underway, but most can’t put their finger on what the problem is.

The problem is that some portions of our elite are gripped by a techno-utopian vision of the future in which bumbling human beings are just a passing phase. In this twisted view, we are sacrificial victims for the digital gods.

It’s a slippery slope from smartphones to virtual reality to brain chips. Whatever the technical limitations may be, we’re sliding fast into this bizarre techno-cult. Every person and every community is responsible for drawing their own lines and defending those cultural boundaries vigilantly. The stakes are our survival.

Connect with Joe Allen at Singularity Weekly

cover image credit: CDD20 

Dr. Sam Bailey with Eric Coppolino — On the Monumental Task of Documenting & Examining the Covid-19 Chronology: “Knowledge Coming to Light Changes Things”

by Dr. Sam Bailey with Eric Coppolino
April 26, 2022

“Knowledge coming to light changes things.”
~ Eric Coppolino



Recently, I have been fortunate to have connected with the inspiring Eric Coppolino, who is based in New York State.

Connect with Dr. Sam Bailey

Connect with Eric Coppolino

cover image credit: shrikeshmaster / pixabay

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Admits Controversy Over Existence of SARS-CoV-2 — and of All Viruses

by Eric F. Coppolino, Chiron Return
April 27, 2022

[See transcript of my interchange with RFK, or hear audio]

https://audio.pwfm.tech/documents/220424-rfk-hyatt-edit.mp3

GREENWICH, CT — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has acknowledged the controversy within his own community over whether SARS-CoV-2 physically exists, and whether any viruses exist, or make people sick. He made the comments at a fundraising event here Sunday, April 24, 2022.

Kennedy said that the issue erupts regularly on the email discussion list of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), the vaccine safety and education organization that he founded in 2016.

“On our list, there’s a number of people who make those kinds of arguments” about how viruses allegedly don’t exist, Kennedy said in his remarks. “And other people on the list server, and these are all very brilliant people, ridicule them and dismiss them, and have them produce a lot of evidence.”

He made the remarks in reply to a question about why no government can produce evidence of having a sample of SARS-CoV-2 taken from a patient, rather than artificially created using a computer model.

Kennedy, the son of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of Pres. John F. Kennedy, is considered one of the leading voices in the international movement against covid-related mandates, lockdowns and safety issues over covid injections. It is the first time he has publicly commented on the virus-existence issue.

Scientists on all sides of the issue agree that viral particles have not been physically
isolated (with purified samples) and then sequenced.

What is Being Used to Prime the Covid Test?

The matter of whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus physically exists has dual significance. The obvious issue is that if there is not a virus, what then is making people sick? And what are they being vaccinated against?

Second, and less obvious: If the government cannot prove that it has a sample of natural SARS-CoV-2, then what is being used to prime the PCR test that is supposed to match and find the genetic code of an actual virus in a patient?

Scientists on all sides of the issue agree that viral particles have not been physically isolated (with purified samples) and then sequenced. Rather, hypothetical viruses are assembled from mixed biological samples, and these “in silico genomes” are then assumed to not only exist in nature but come from inside a pathogenic particle. They have many names: “mimicked human specimens” and “contrived viruses” (in the words of the CDC); or “synthetic nucleotide technology” (in the words words of the authors of the WHO test for covid).

One virologist told me in July 2020 that SARS-C0V- 2 was being assembled “like pages from a book,” necessary because no natural virus particle was available to sequence. The problem is that nobody has demonstrated these pages actually belong to the proposed book.

Covid tests look for sequences attributed to the “virus” merely via computer models —
but these “found” sequences almost always originate from somewhere else (including
the testing process itself).

CDC document pertaining to detection limits in the CDC “covid” test, admitting that
purified isolates of SARS-CoV-2 are not available. Yet this long, technical paragraph
admits something else: how they go about making their contrived virus (mimicked human
specimen), rather than sequencing actual virus. Were viruses available to anyone, it would
be the federal government of the United States. What they are admitting is that the virus
has not been isolated or purified; the writer admits outright that they are using made-up
samples that mimic clinical specimens. The technical notes describe the manufacturing
process for in silico sequences that are used in the “covid” test. The notes make reference
to MN908947, a synthetic, claimed, partial metagenomic transcript (not actual sequencing)
of the “N-gene” — which was later abandoned in its entirety in the Corman-Drosten assay.

Metagenomics: The Creation of Hypothetical Sequences

These hypothetical sequences are developed using technology called metageonomics — without any reference to actual purified suspected viruses. This artificial-intelligence process assembles a hypothetical “virus” from information gathered either from a crude human body fluid sample, or by making a “cell culture” experiment by mixing the fluid with monkey cells, cervical cancer cells, fetal calf serum, antibiotics and other poisons. In all cases where covid is concerned, scientists have used the latter. Because there is no actual virus available as a reference, there is no way to verify if the proposed sequences are valid. They are all theoretical, and no two are alike.

Said another way, in the absence of a real virus specimen, covid tests look for sequences attributed to the “virus” merely via computer models — but these “found” sequences almost always originate from somewhere else. And “positive” results can emerge from nearly anywhere, including the testing process itself). Yet if someone “tests positive” for one of these claimed viral sequences, they are said to be “infected” with SARS-CoV-2.

Previously, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has admitted that the polymerase chain reaction has had a 100% false positive rate and has caused several widely-documented “false epidemics.”

The claimed existence, transmissibility and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 were used to declare a global pandemic that by March 31, 2020 had 4.5 billion people around the world living under a stay-at-home order or house arrest.

“On our list, there’s a number of people who make those kinds of arguments. And
other people on the list server, and these are all very brilliant people, ridicule them
and dismiss them, and have them produce a lot of evidence.”
— Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Seeking Documents from Governments, Agencies and Institutions

At a Q-and-A session at a fundraising event here Sunday, April 24, I asked Kennedy about the work of Christine Massey in the Toronto area, a statistician who is coordinating the worldwide effort to officially query governments, agencies and institutions about whether they have a sample of the claimed virus taken from a human.

Here is what I asked him verbatim [see transcript or hear audio]:

https://audio.pwfm.tech/interviews/220429-christine-massey.mp3

“Christine Massey in Toronto has amassed 182 responses under various Freedom of Information Law requests from institutions, provincial state, and federal, national governments, which all say that no one has a sample of SARS CoV-2 taken from a human. Would you please comment on that?”

Kennedy replied: “On our list, there’s a number of people who make those kinds of arguments. And other people on the list server, and these are all very brilliant people, ridicule them and dismiss them, and have them produce a lot of evidence. I actually saw an exchange yesterday, where somebody made that exact statement and then 10 people jumped on him on with examples, of where that’s not true.”

The issue over the nature and existence of viruses represents the single biggest split in the covid-truth and anti-mandates movements. I first documented this divide in May of 2020.

“RFK Jr. now relies on popular opinion and ridicule to evaluate science?
When did he declare incompetence with simple logic?”
— Christine Massey, statistician and coordinator of the virus FOIA project

‘I Am Amused Reading These Exchanges’

He added: “I am kind of amused reading the exchanges, and my inclination is that the viruses do exist and they do make people sick. I could be wrong. It could all be a big hoax, but to me, it all seems like viruses are real.”

But Kennedy answered a different question than the one I asked. I did not present him with an argument, or ask him whether he thought viruses were real. He admits that he uses a kind of mob rule to make up his mind over critical scientific issues when he says, “And other people on the list server, and these are all very brilliant people, ridicule them and dismiss them, and have them produce a lot of evidence.”

Reading Kennedy’s response, Christine Massey said, “RFK Jr. now relies on popular opinion and ridicule to evaluate science? When did he declare incompetence with simple logic? And why is a man dedicated to protecting children from medical harm uninterested in one of the greatest medical frauds of all time?”

She also demanded the data from the 10 people on Kennedy’s list who claimed to prove that the virus had been isolated.

So far, no governments have produced a scientific paper saying that they or anyone
have such a sample, despite the claim that a contagious virus has killed more than
5 million people worldwide.

Asked About a Legal Issue — Not Scientific

Kennedy said he believed viruses exist, but I did not ask him about that. Rather, I presented him with a legal issue, asking him to comment about how someone well-known and established in covid truth circles over the past two years has collected 182 responses from top-level government agencies and institutions, all saying they do not have a sample of SARS-CoV-2 extracted from a human host.

So far, no governments have produced a scientific paper saying that they or anyone have such a sample, despite the claim that a contagious virus has killed more than 5 million people worldwide.

I followed up and said to him, “The governments have said they don’t have a sample.”

Kennedy, an attorney, responded: “Freedom Information Laws do not require the government agency to do science, or to answer specific questions. What they do is, the Freedom of Information Laws make it obligatory for the government to give you existing documents. So if you are telling the government, ‘I want you to verify these, there are documents’, they say, listen there’s nothing to verify it. It doesn’t mean it’s not true. It means they’ve got nothing.”

So far all have said no such records exist. This includes the U.S. CDC and the FDA, as
well as Health Canada and the National Health Service (NHS) of the UK. None of the
182 agencies and governments queried have replied in the affirmative.

‘Kennedy hasn’t read any of my records requests’

Massey replied to this in an email: “It appears that Kennedy hasn’t read any of my records requests. I didn’t ask governments to ‘do science’ or answer ‘specific questions’. All of my requests have been for studies/reports in the possession, custody or control of an institution.”

I asked Massey how she words her letters seeking documentation of a sample of the claimed virus from a human host.

She provided this example of what she is seeking, and what so far all governments she has queried deny having:

And so far all have said no such records exist. This includes the U.S. CDC and the FDA, as well as Health Canada and the National Health Service (NHS) of the UK. None of the 182 agencies and governments queried have replied in the affirmative.

“It erodes popular faith in democracy when public officials insist that their arbitrary
policies are ‘science based’ and yet cannot produce a single study to support sweeping
mandates.”
— Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

‘No Records Exist’ is an Important Response

Getting a “no records exist” reply is common, and seeking such a reply is a common strategy for establishing that there has not actually been a regulatory process for a policy issue. It is one of the most important uses of open records laws.

In late 2020, the New York State Department of Health (NYS-DOH) responded to an open records request saying it had no studies to prove that masks are safe or effective at preventing the spread of viruses or other diseases. For that same kind of “sorry no documents” FOIL reply, Kennedy was much more outspoken.

At the time, he wrote to his Instagram followers, “It erodes popular faith in democracy when public officials insist that their arbitrary policies are ‘science based’ and yet cannot produce a single study to support sweeping mandates. This letter illustrates the hazard of abandoning due process.”

Previously, he had remained agnostic on the issue of masks and whether masks work. He finally took a position in response

New York State saying it had absolutely no data about whether masks are safe or effective.

“It’s a needlessly divisive issue, with people screaming, on both sides, as if it were
the key to this whole thing — which it isn’t.”
— Prof. Mark Crispin Miller

‘Forget the Title. Read the Methodology’

Mike Wallach is the director of a new documentary called The Viral Delusion: The Pseudoscience of SARS-CoV-2.

“They did not isolate a virus,” Wallach said. “The reason it’s so confusing for people is that they claim to have done so in the titles of the key scientific papers, but if you read the methodology sections, it’s blatantly clear: they never isolated a virus. They never found anything. The evidence is overwhelming.”

He added: “I respect the importance of political leaders like RFK Jr. keeping an open tent, they have to. But at the same time, this is an issue that should be front and center for the world public, and nobody should be repeating this dogma about the existence of viruses.”

Mark Crispin Miller, professor of communication at New York University, said, “It’s a needlessly divisive issue, with people screaming, on both sides, as if it were the key to this whole thing — which it isn’t. What will make the whole narrative collapse is not the argument that there are no viruses, but the recognition that the authorities we’ve all been listening to — the medical establishment, Big Pharma, Academia, the media et al. — are malign, and intent on killing us.

“That’s it. Everything else is a distraction. Whether the ravages of COVID-19 have been exaggerated, or whether there’s no virus there at all, is ultimately beside the point. And since Bobby’s role is in large part political, as he attempts to keep this movement in one piece, his disinclination to take sides here ought to be respected.”

“Are all based on in-silico modeled synthetic phenomena, which has never been
scientifically proven as coming from an actual virus.”
— Dr. Kevin Corbett, expert in diagnostic testing

‘This was what happened with HIV’

Dr. Kevin Corbett did his doctoral work on diagnostic testing associated with HIV and AIDS, including research into the PCR. He said this week that the existence of SARS-CoV-2 and associated tests, “Are all based on in-silico modeled synthetic phenomena, which has never been scientifically proven as coming from an actual virus.

“This was what happened with ‘HIV’, which The Perth Group of scientists [in the 1990s] first proved was never isolated or purified. Those powerful voices like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who sadly ignore this issue, are badly misguided, because they fail to address this fundamental caveat in ‘covid science’.”

Corbett cautioned, “Their efforts will only act to further socially embed the popular hysteria of there being a contagion, and therefore will enable further public health mandates forcing masks, social distancing and the latest covid killshot.”

Eric F. Coppolino is the host of Planet Waves FM on the Pacifica Network, and author of the Comprehensive Covid Chronology.

Connect with Eric Coppolino

cover image credit: geralt 

CDC Mask Mandate Ends

by Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath, Nature of Healing
April 28, 2022

On April 25th, a federal judge stuck down the mask mandate for mass transit.Part of the reasoning was based on fact that the CDC skipped the otherwise-mandatory public notice and comment period as required by the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). However, the main reasoning was to show that government officials do not recognize the limits of their power. Apparently, neither do the masses.

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

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

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath

cover image credit: Engin_Akyurt / pixabay

Parents Beware: They’re After Your Children

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
April 29, 2022



Story-at-a-Glance

• Psychological obedience training is being used to control the global population, from cradle to grave. The technocratic elite are after our children, and they’re using a variety of psychological tools to shape and mold them.
• The more we know about their strategies, the better we can protect ourselves and our children from these predators
• The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (HR 3684) grants control over what and when you drive to the transportation system. It will control the type of vehicle you can use and when you can drive. It will control the vehicle-to-grid 5G technology and its kill switches (which will be built in). The bill also includes an integrated payment system and a per-mile driving fee
• The effort to control you starts from birth. Social emotional learning (SEL) is a programming effort that uses the relabeling and changing of words to alter perception of reality and mold children’s beliefs and behaviors
  Companies are collecting and analyzing your child’s personal data to build their social credit score. In addition to demographics and grades, the data collection also includes behavioral information, such as scientific, financial, cultural and civic literacy, and competencies such as critical thinking skills, problem solving, creativity, communication and collaboration, plus character qualities such as curiosity, initiative, persistence, grit, adaptability, leadership, social and cultural awareness
• Unless we refuse to comply or participate, our social credit scores and climate scores will soon dictate everything we can and cannot do in life

In the video below, finance expert Catherine Austin Fitts, Polly Tommey and Carolyn Betts interview investigative journalist Corey Lynn, who runs a blog called “Corey’s Digs.” She’s also the author of “Global Landscape on Vaccine ID Passports,” available from her website.¹

In this interview, Lynn discusses how psychological obedience training is being used to control the global population from cradle to grave. She reviews programs that mine your personal data and indoctrinate users to become reliant on digital currency, and offers practical advice for those who recognize the dangers and want to break free.

As noted by Tommey, the technocratic elite are after our children, and they’re using a variety of psychological tools to shape and mold them into obedient and clueless serfs. The more we know about their strategies, the better we can protect our children from these predators.

What the Infrastructure Bill Is Actually Funding

Lynn starts off with a potent example of how the U.S. government is using our own money to build the prison walls around us. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (HR 3684) was passed by Congress and signed by President Biden in November 2021.

This $1.2 trillion spending bill includes a number of questionable and outright nefarious allocations. Importantly, this bill grants control over what and when you drive to the transportation system. It will control the type of vehicle you can use and when you can drive, Lynn explains.

It will control the vehicle-to-grid 5G technology and its kill switches (which will be built in). The bill also includes an integrated payment system and a per-mile driving fee. Twenty-seven pilot programs are also listed that will given them even more control over your transportation in the future.

As noted by Lynn, “Our taxpayer dollars are going to build our control grid.” For more information, see her article, “A Clearer Breakdown of What This Infrastructure Bill Is Really Funding.”²

Social Emotional Learning Is Programming

The effort to control you starts from birth. Lynn reviews the use of social emotional learning (SEL), which uses the relabeling and changing of words to alter our perception of reality and mold children’s beliefs and behaviors.

“The Department of Education was created in 1979, and ever since then, they’ve been building up to Common Core, building in all these Marxist agendas and pulling in critical race theory (CRT),” Lynn says.

“It’s a psychological agenda. It’s not a single curriculum. This is [about] ideologies and behaviors and thought processes, it’s obedience training and conditioning that starts in preschool, and it’s embedded throughout the day. So, it’s a whole mind control system.

They’re creating what the World Economic Forum (WEF) likes to refer to as digital citizens, for the future workforce, and so they’re bringing in all this ed-tech and doing massive data mining. We have statewide longitudinal data systems that are tracking behavior …

In 2016, they started kicking billions of dollars into this … and then they started pulling in legislation. And while COVID is going on, they say, ‘Well, we really need to step this up, we need to pour more money into this because of the mental health and well being of children.’

And so, they are molding the children, they’re building their social scores … and then they’re bringing it into parents. They’re saying we need to teach the parents too, so the parents can help train the kids. And they’re bringing it into businesses … This is a major psychological obedience training to lead to AI.

This is an excerpt from ‘Dreaming the Future of Health for the Next 100 Years,’ a 2013 white paper from the Global Health Summit that was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation:³

‘We will interact more with artificial intelligence. The use of robotics [and] bioengineering to augment human functioning is already well underway and will advance. Reengineering of humans into potentially separate and unequal forms through genetic engineering or mixed human robots raises debates on ethics and equality.

A new demography is projected to emerge after 2030 of technologies, robotics, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, producing robots, engineered organisms, nanobots and artificial intelligence that can self replicate. Debates will grow on the implications of an impending reality of human-designed life.’

So, this, this is where this is all heading … It’s in 110 countries, it’s all over the US. It’s in most schools, and they’re starting in preschool. This is what you’re dealing with. So, when you’re considering homeschooling, I just want people to understand what they’re up against, and what they need to weed out. It’s more than just the school board. There are a lot of parts going on here.”

Already, there are several companies that collect and analyze your child’s personal data to build their social credit score. In the beginning, the data collection was fairly generic, such as age, demographics and grades, but now they’ve started to collect behavioral information as well, such as scientific literacy, ICT literacy, financial literacy, cultural and civic literacy.

They also collect data on competencies such as critical thinking skills, problem solving, creativity, communication and collaboration, plus character qualities such as curiosity, initiative, persistence, grit, adaptability, leadership, social and cultural awareness. You can learn more about all of this in Lynn’s nine-part series, the “2030 Psychological Agenda.”⁴

They’re Teaching Children To Be Nice but Stupid

Another important point made by Austin Fitts is that many of the “improvements” in education have been designed to make children less knowledgeable. For example, Common Core “is designed to make you phenomenally ignorant of math, and very obedient and easy to control,” she says, adding:

“I used to have a dental surgeon who, all he wanted to talk about was how furious he was at the schools. He said his kids had been taught that if they were going to get together and design a bridge, it was more important that they get along than they use the right number for Pi. As long as they got along, it was okay if the bridge fell down.”

Financial apps aimed at children are another form of programming. For example, the FinTech app “Greenlight,” advertised as a debit card for kids and teens, is financed by players such as Wells Fargo, JP Morgan, Chase and Amazon. Lynn explains:

“On the surface, this may look great. Parents can help their children understand investing, how to save money and whatnot. But when you start looking at the investors … and where this is really going, what they’re doing is programming. They say this is created by families, for families, even though there are 29 big investors in this …

They’re saying this is to help for parents to raise financially smart kids. So, what they do is, the [parents] pay them their allowance, or they pay them for chores. It goes through a little MasterCard Greenlight card that then goes into the bank … and then they can control their spending. So, it’s teaching them about getting involved in the banking system digitally.”

Of course, we now know that the globalist elite are planning to roll out a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC), with which they’ll be able to control how, where and when you spend your own money. So, “Greenlight” is basically teaching children to see this system as completely normal. As noted by Austin Fitts, “They’re getting groomed to plug into a system which will be centrally controlled.”

How to Break the Indoctrination Schedule

Parents who are waking up to the nightmare planned for their children by the WEF and its allies are now starting to fight back. Here are a few key things parents need to do to protect their young children from the indoctrination currently trying to swallow their children:

• Homeschool your children. Some parents are starting their own schools, educating five or six children
• Get your children out in nature as much as possible
• Eliminate mindless TV watching and cell phone use
• Be a role model for your children. That means modeling appropriate use of television and technologies such as computers, cell phones and social media

Minimizing your cell phone use, to whatever extent possible, is one thing everyone can do. Lynn says:

“I truly believe that if we ditch [our cell phones], if 50% of the population ditched them, that would put a major crushing to their agenda, on most of what they’re rolling out. There’s geofencing on phones. Everywhere you go, you’re being tracked … You don’t even have to be on the phone. It could just be in your pocket, it can be in your car.

They’re constantly aggregating data from us so they can then use it against us, and … they have the ability to target us on an individual basis. They track everything we do on the internet as well. When I go on walks with my dog, I don’t bring my phone with me … Anywhere I go, I leave the phone at home, or I leave it in the car.”

If we do nothing to change our technology-addicted lifestyles, what will happen to us in 10 years’ time? Where will we be? Austin Fitts is convinced we’ll all be slaves — literally enslaved by the technology that is tracking and analyzing us every moment. Decisions will be made for us by AI, based on our social credit scores.

Children may even be taken from their families at a young age and brought up in facilities where their upbringing and behavior can be controlled. “Parents will have no authority over their children and the children … their bodies and their minds, will be used to prototype all sorts of transhumanism,” Austin Fitts says.

Understand the End Game and Do Not Comply

There’s really only one way to prevent the transhumanist, centrally controlled authoritarian regime from getting a foothold: Do not comply. We have to say no to all of their schemes. If you do comply, understand that you are erecting your own prison walls, and that of your children, with every data point you let them have.

“It’s all under the guise of convenience,” Lynn says. “Going back to cell phones, and technology in general … People need to start seeing these things for what they are. And instead of looking at it and immediately going, ‘Oh, this is great, oh, this is so convenient, oh, this is going to save me time,’ they need to stop and take a look at who the company is.

Who’s behind it? Dig around in their website, see who the leadership is, see who the investors are … and just understand their ultimate end game. So when they’re throwing these things out there, with all their fluff and pizzazz, you don’t take the bait. They’re trapping you into more and more control over you.”

The Planned Takeover of Your Bank Account

Also, consider using cash as much as possible, and move your money out of the big banks, as they too are part of the control system. Lynn explains:

“I got out of mine about a year ago, and I wasn’t even in one of the biggest, worst ones. But I started noticing that they were categorizing my spending. I’m like, ‘What is this?’ All of a sudden, it’s showing my grocery shopping and restaurant and health care?

I tell people go into your bank right now, look at the categorizing that’s happening. They’re already getting the infrastructure set up to control spending by categorizing it all. It’s not for your convenience, so you can better budget and see how you’re spending your money.”

For more information about this, see Lynn’s article, “Financial Takeover and Your Bank Account — BlackRock, Envestnet/Yodlee, and The Federal Reserve.”^5,6 The short video above also summarizes the most important points of that article.

One important point highlighted by Austin Fitts is that banks can store their data on the bank server or the provider server. Austin Fitts says, “You want to call them and make sure the bank is keeping the data on their server, because you did not give permission for all of that data to be shared with the provider.” Having the data stored on the bank server helps protect against this malicious data harvesting.

In closing, I urge you to listen to the featured interview, as I’ve only summarized some of the key points here. In it, they review and discuss several signs, things that are happening now, that clearly illustrate where we’re headed.

Sources and References

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

cover image credit: KokoColey / pixabay

Dr. Andrew Kaufman: The Straight Truth on Snake Venom Claims

by Dr. Andrew Kaufman
April 20, 2022

This video looks at the paper cited by Dr Bryan Ardis as the main evidence that snake venom plays a role in the current plandemic. The paper purports to have found a potential association between venom-like peptides found from various animals and Covid-19. Dr. Kaufman gives an overview of the relevant issues related to the snake venom controversy and gives a critical appraisal of the experiment and conclusions.

Connect with Dr. Andrew Kaufman

cover image credit: GDJ / pixabay

How Do You Know?

by Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare
sourced from Jerm Warfare newsletter
April 20, 2022

Thanks to the arrival of the fake pandemic, I have spent the last two years trying to piece together various puzzles and, while some of the smaller pieces sometimes don’t fit correctly, most of the larger pieces fit fairly tightly.

For example, a smaller puzzle piece might be the existence (or non-existence) of SARS-CoV-2, and a larger puzzle piece might be the global introduction of digital ID via vaccine passports.

The piecing-together is largely thanks to the hundreds of incredible podcast guests to whom I’ve had the pleasure of speaking. The more great minds to whom I speak, the less I know. It’s indeed humbling, especially because, as a political cartoonist of 17 years, I can confirm that humility is not a characteristic for which a satirist strives. After all, ridicule means positioning myself as excellent against those whom I consider mediocre.

Over the last two years I’ve noticed how, like me, others have gradually begun piecing together the various puzzles. But not many. As Belgian professor Mattias Desmet said, around 30% of all people will, sadly, remain asleep and blissfully continue their daily lives, believing the propaganda they’ve been fed by, what philosopher Curtis Yarvin refers to as, The Cathedral.

“The cathedral” is just a short way to say “journalism plus academia”—in other words, the intellectual institutions at the center of modern society, just as the Church was the intellectual institution at the center of medieval society.

It goes without saying that the government (and its shareholders) are upstream from journalism and academia.

But just as the sun began setting over the fake pandemic, a new sun rose over Ukraine, and the propaganda started from scratch.

We are in an information war, probably the most severe in history.

For example, before 2020, the research around masks was so clear that a discussion wasn’t even warranted. Here are over 150 comparative studies concluding that (different kinds of) masks do not prevent viral transmission. Today, however, that’s all changed. The Cathedral has done a sterling job at sowing confusion through deliberate misinformation; everybody just makes it up as they go along, these days.

The reason is because it’s not about a virus. It was never about virus.

It has always been about compliance and the ushering in of a new world order.

Last month, Joe Biden literally said that “a new world order is coming”.

Dismiss it, sure, but remember that he isn’t alone. George Bush said the same thing back in 1990. More recently, a member of the Australian government said that people “must accept the new world order”. Meanwhile, a member of the Ukrainian government said that Ukraine is “fighting for the new world order”.

South African president Cyril Ramaphosa said the same thing during 2020.

Why are they using the same terminology, and what is the “new world order”?

Firstly, it’s because the global elites – the Davos club – are in the same WhatsApp group. Secondly, it is precisely what the World Economic Forum’s Klaus Schwab refers to as The Fourth Industrial Revolution, a new paradigm in which the world is centrally governed by a few technocratic elites through the use of science and technology.

I strongly recommend you watch my conversation with Patrick Wood, who is an expert on the history of technocracy (which dates back to the 1930s).

My point is the following.

The more I try to piece together the puzzle, the more I realise that we’re in an information war.

We are told, daily, that SARS-CoV-2 is a deadly virus, but the all-cause mortality does not show that. Still, that doesn’t stop the propagandised types from punching blind.

Numerous times I’ve been shouted at with something along the lines of

“I have a friend who died from it!”

and when I ask

“how do you know?”

I get neither a coherent nor scientific answer. And that’s likely because he was programmed to believe that SARS-CoV-2 is a deadly virus and, as a result, no critical thought is required.

Same story with Ukraine.

All that matters is that we must believe what The Cathedral feeds us. Something something Putin is an evil dictator something something.

For example, the outrage over the Bucha massacre is unavoidable, and it’s all Russia’s fault.

Except that there is very little evidence it even happened.

Speaking of information wars, take a listen to my conversation about Yemen and the US-backed atrocities that have been happening there for years.

Let’s not even get started on Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and so on.

All that matters is that you “stand with Ukraine”.

But the puzzle piece that constantly fascinates me is

“how do you know?”

SARS-CoV-2 is a deadly virus, yes? Vladimir Putin’s troops massacred the people of Bucha, yes? Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, yes? Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK, yes? World Trade Centre Building 7 collapsed because of office fires, yes?

How do you know?

Connect with Jerm Warfare

cover image based on creative commons work of geralt

Beware the Snake Oil Salesmen

“The snake venom theory by Dr. Bryan Ardis is built upon the interpretation of the unpurified fraudulent
“SARS-COV-2” genome which is itself built upon references to other fraudulent genomes of human and
animal “coronaviruses” created in the very same way. Attempting to claim any connections between the
random A,C,T,G’s in a computer database is a useless and pointless exercise as the RNA that was fabricated
into the genome of a “virus” was never purified, isolated, and proven to physically exist in the first place.
Thus any connections between the protein codes said to belong to a “virus” which are then said to be closely
related to supposed snake “coronaviruses” is immediately invalid.

Using this invalid premise to then claim that people have been poisoned by snake venom in the vaccines,
the drugs, and the water supply is nothing but unsubstantiated science fiction that seems designed to have
a few purposes:

1. 1. To keep people engaged in the lie that a new disease known as “Covid-19” exists and that there is a
      singular cause.

   2. To restore faith in monoclonal antibodies and other toxic alternative treatments.

   3. To use the theory to promote and sell anti-venom supplements.

   4. To divide and distract those questioning the official narrative.

   5. To make the “Truther” community look foolish by falling for loosely tied-together circumstantial
      evidence that is easily debunked.”

~ Mike Stone

Beware the Snake Oil Salesmen

by Mike Stone, Viroliegy
April 18, 2022

“My story has never been to create fear, panic, and anxiety about water.” He said he told Peters that he believes “there’s actually a snake venom connection to all of COVID-19, and I think that’s the weapon.” – Dr. Bryan Ardis

https://www.thedailybeast.com

Summarizing his theory, Dr. Ardis said, “They are using Krait venom and Cobra venom, calling it Covid-19, you’re drinking it, it’s getting into your brainstem and it’s paralyzing your diaphragm’s ability to breathe.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/miamistandard.news/

I really didn’t want to write this article. I was hopeful that people would easily see right through the unsubstantiated claims of Dr. Bryan Ardis that snake venom is the cause of “Covid.” I was hopeful that people would take the time to research the information presented in support of the snake venom theory to see if it held any merit at all. I thought his whirlwind alternative media tour on the who’s who of questionable sources (including the likes of Stew Peters, Mike Adams, and Infowars) would have people questioning why this theory was allowed to be so heavily promoted so quickly. I thought that the fact that the man who created the “Covid” snake venom theory was actually selling his own anti-venom line of supplements would be enough grounds to be skeptical of his motive and his claims.

It seems I was wrong. Just like the baseless vaccine shedding and gain of function/bioweapons narratives, this new snake venom theory has sadly spread through the “Truther” community like wildfire, with many who rightfully challenge the existence of “viruses” clinging to the idea of a new invisible enemy to defeat. They believe that it must be a new toxin. It can’t possibly be the same factors we have seen each and every year leading to disease. This toxin must be hiding in the vaccines, the drugs, and/or even the very water we drink. What these “Truthers” do not realize is that this very line of thinking gives credibility to the idea of a new disease which requires new treatments in order to combat it. This is exactly what the pharmaceutical companies want you to believe.

However, there is NO NEW DISEASE. There is no need for any new or even existing pharmaceutical interventions to treat the same symptoms of detoxification people go through each and every year. In fact, the current treatments can easily be shown to have led to numerous unnecessary deaths. There is no new threat known as “Covid-19” which is being caused by any one factor. The factors leading to the symptoms of disease people are experiencing are multi-causal as they are every year.

Now this is not to say that the vaccines, the drugs, or even the water supply are free of toxins. These are all sources of toxicity and should be investigated as to their composition and effects on our health. However, the theory that there is one factor in all of these sources, i.e. snake venom, and this one factor is leading to the symptoms of disease people are experiencing is, at present time, completely baseless. And it all begins at the very foundation of the fraudulent genome.

The Fradulent Genome

You take that snake or that serpent and you figure out how to isolate genes from that serpent and get those genes of that serpent to insert itself into your God-given created DNA. I think this is the plan all along, was to get the serpents’, the evil one’s DNA, into your God-created DNA.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/covid-conspiracy-theorists-are-at-war-over-snake-venom

He also said genetic sequence testing done on sick patients in Wuhan found their genetic sequence matched two snakes, the Chinese Krait and King Cobra, not bats.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/miamistandard.news/

From Dr. Ardis’ interview with Mike Adams, he supplied the article “Snakes could be the source of the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak” from CNN as his starting point for the “Covid”/snake connection. Within the article, you can see that this claim originates from the fraudulent genomes:

“The researchers used an analysis of the protein codes favored by the new coronavirus and compared it to the protein codes from coronaviruses found in different animal hosts, like birds, snakes, marmots, hedgehogs, manis, bats and humans. Surprisingly, they found that the protein codes in the 2019-nCoV are most similar to those used in snakes.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/

To anyone who actually researched the creation of the original “SARS-COV-2” genome, it is readily apparent that it is a fraudulent computer-generated creation stemming from the unpurified lung fluid of a single patient. The sequenced material could have come from multiple sources, including host DNA/RNA, bacteria, and microbes/microorganisms. It could have even come from outside contamination. There is no way to tell what the origin of the RNA is or even if it was a single source as no particles assumed to be “SARS-COV-2” were ever properly purified and isolated directly from the fluids of the sick patient before being sequenced. Thus, any relation this fabricated sequence has to any other sequence is invalid as the source was never identified to exist as a physical entity to begin with. Considering that the bat and snake “coronavirus” sequences for which the “SARS-COV-2” sequence was then compared to also come from unpurified sources, it is easy to see that any claims as to the origins of the sequenced material is a horrible foundation to build upon for an origin theory of a nonexistent “virus” and/or disease.

Even if this snake-venom connection was valid, the enzyme phospholipase A2 group IIA or sPLA2-IIA, which Dr. Ardis bases much of his claims on, only has similarities to rattlesnake venom. These peptides are “almost identical” to the venoms of animals and yet they are regularly found in healthy humans and other mammals. From his own source:

Like Venom Coursing Through the Body: Researchers Identify Mechanism Driving COVID-19 Mortality

“Researchers from the University of Arizona, in collaboration with Stony Brook University and Wake Forest School of Medicine, analyzed blood samples from two COVID-19 patient cohorts and found that circulation of the enzyme – secreted phospholipase A2 group IIA, or sPLA2-IIA, – may be the most important factor in predicting which patients with severe COVID-19 eventually succumb to the virus.

The sPLA2-IIA enzyme, which has similarities to an active enzyme in rattlesnake venom, is found in low concentrations in healthy individuals and has long been known to play a critical role in defense against bacterial infections, destroying microbial cell membranes.”

Thus, the snake enzymes are in fact normal human enzymes that are regularly found in healthy individuals. There is no mystery as to why these would be present in a sample. We should be able to put this “Covid” snake venom nonsense to bed right here. However, let’s press on a see what else we can uncover.

Antivenom = Monoclonal Antibodies

One thing I will give Dr. Ardis credit for is spotlighting the connection between the creation of antivenoms with the creation of monoclonal antibodies. The processes for both are very similar and the desired outcome is the exact same: the creation of theoretical antibodies. In the case of snake antivenom, it is normally created by a series of injections of the venom of a snake into an animal and then collecting the blood after a period of time. This is usually done through horses but other animals can be used as the host as well. Thus, the antivenom used for a snakebite victim is typically an injection of horse blood.

Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, are created by injecting mice with an antigen, extracting the resulting blood which contains the theoretical antibodies, and culturing it in myeloma (i.e. cancer) cells. For the creation of “SARS-COV-2” therapies, it is said that they are typically created either from the B cells of recovered “Covid” patients or by immunizing mice genetically modified to have a humanized immune system and harvesting the “effective” antibodies from them.

Both of these therapies have their basis in animal blood and the creation of the theoretical antibodies. Both are associated with toxic side effects. Sadly, while he was originally right about the fact that monoclonal antibodies are toxic and should not be used to treat the symptoms now collectively known as “Covid,” Dr. Ardis changed his tune when another doctor texted him asking if he would use antivenom for a snake bite:

“Last December, Dr Bryan Ardis received a text message from an Emergency Room physician friend of his that sent him down an unexpected and bizarre rabbit hole that may explain the adverse events from the vaccines that we’ve been reporting. The text read: “Hey Dr Ardis…If you got bit by a rattlesnake, would you go to a hospital and get anti-venom?”

“He says, “I realized, all of a sudden, monoclonal antibodies ARE anti-venom. The Federal Government doesn’t want us using anti-venom. Why are they fighting anti-venom and why are we finding anti-venom works against COVID? Is it not a virus? Is it a venom? This is what I want to know: Is COVID a venom and is this why they don’t want you using monoclonal antibodies?”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/cairnsnews.org/

Do you see the trick? They want you to equate monoclonal antibodies with antivenom. This is supposed to be an “aha” moment where you realize that there is no way that you would not inject antivenom (i.e. horse blood) into yourself if bitten by a snake. It’s a no-brainer, right? We have all seen the movies where a person is bitten by a venomous snake and quickly dies if not given the antivenom.



If you are willing to accept the injection of horse blood into your body to survive a snake bite, why wouldn’t you also inject the cancer-cell cultured blood of genetically altered mice in order to combat “Covid?”

As Dr. Ardis points out, monoclonal antibodies are essentially antivenom. However, he wrongly states that monoclonal antibodies are an effective therapy. According to a September 2021 Cochrane review of the available studies, they found insufficient evidence to claim that monoclonal antibodies are an effective treatment for “SARS-COV-2:”

Are laboratory-made, COVID-19-specific monoclonal antibodies an effective treatment for COVID-19?

“The evidence for each comparison is based on single studies. None of these measured quality of life. Our certainty in the evidence for all non-hospitalised individuals is low, and for hospitalised individuals is very low to moderate. We consider the current evidence insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions regarding treatment with SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs.”

https://www.cochrane.org/CD013825/

In other words, the evidence for the usefulness of monoclonal antibodies is non-existent. Unfortunately, the Cochrane Review failed to point out that there are various risks and adverse reactions associated with their use:

Do mAbs have risks?

“Therapeutic mAbs, typically administered by intravenous (IV) infusion, have been a valuable and generally safe treatment option for a variety of conditions for many years. However, they are also known to cause a range of side effects and reactions, which can be immediate or delayed. Serious adverse events associated with mAbs include infusion reactions, acute anaphylaxis, and serum sickness, as well as longer-term complications such as infections, cancer, autoimmune disease, and cardiotoxicity.”

https://www.ecri.org/components/

In January 2022, the FDA restricted the use of some monoclonal therapies (Bamlanivimab and Etesevimab) that are authorized against “Covid-19” as they were shown to be ineffective:

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Limits Use of Certain Monoclonal Antibodies to Treat COVID-19 Due to the Omicron Variant

“In light of the most recent information and data available, today, the FDA revised the authorizations for two monoclonal antibody treatments – bamlanivimab and etesevimab (administered together) and REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) – to limit their use to only when the patient is likely to have been infected with or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments. 

Because data show these treatments are highly unlikely to be active against the omicron variant, which is circulating at a very high frequency throughout the United States, these treatments are not authorized for use in any U.S. states, territories, and jurisdictions at this time. In the future, if patients in certain geographic regions are likely to be infected or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments, then use of these treatments may be authorized in these regions.

Monoclonal antibodies are laboratory-made proteins that mimic the immune system’s ability to fight off harmful pathogens such as viruses, like SARS-CoV-2. And like other infectious organisms, SARS-CoV-2 can mutate over time, resulting in certain treatments not working against certain variants such as omicron. This is the case with these two treatments for which we’re making changes today.”

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/

On April 16th, 2022, the FDA revoked the use of Bamlanivimab alone as it’s benefits were shown not to outweigh its risks. Somehow despite this evidence, the FDA still allows for it to be used in combination with Etesevimab, even though they previously revoked their use together in January 2022:

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Revokes Emergency Use Authorization for Monoclonal Antibody Bamlanivimab

“Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) that allowed for the investigational monoclonal antibody therapy bamlanivimab, when administered alone, to be used for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in adults and certain pediatric patients. Based on its ongoing analysis of emerging scientific data, specifically the sustained increase of SARS-CoV-2 viral variants that are resistant to bamlanivimab alone resulting in the increased risk for treatment failure, the FDA has determined that the known and potential benefits of bamlanivimab, when administered alone, no longer outweigh the known and potential risks for its authorized use. Therefore, the agency determined that the criteria for issuance of an authorization are no longer met and has revoked the EUA.

On Nov. 9, 2020, based on the totality of scientific evidence available at the time, the FDA issued an EUA to Eli Lilly and Co. authorizing the emergency use of bamlanivimab alone for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older weighing at least 40 kg) with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 viral testing, and who are at high risk for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization. Importantly, although the FDA is now revoking this EUA, alternative monoclonal antibody therapies remain available under EUA, including REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab, administered together), and bamlanivimab and etesevimab, administered together, for the same uses as previously authorized for bamlanivimab alone. The FDA believes that these alternative monoclonal antibody therapies remain appropriate to treat patients with COVID-19 when used in accordance with the authorized labeling based on information available at this time.”

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/

If the FDA’s confusing revoking of the EUA’s of these monoclonal antibodies has you concerned that you will not be able to use them against an imaginary “virus,” don’t worry. The FDA authorized the use of a new “Omicron-specific” monoclonal antibody called Bebtelovimab on February 11th, 2022. Granted, it still carries the same risks, adverse side effects, and uncertainty over clinical worsening listed for the previously ineffective antibody therapies. From the FDA fact sheet:

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Authorizes New Monoclonal Antibody for Treatment of COVID-19 that Retains Activity Against Omicron Variant

“Possible side effects of bebtelovimab include itching, rash, infusion-related reactions, nausea and vomiting. Serious and unexpected adverse events including hypersensitivity, anaphylaxis and infusion-related reactions have been observed with other SARS-CoV2 monoclonal antibodies and could occur with bebtelovimab. In addition, clinical worsening following administration of other SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatment has been reported and therefore is possible with bebtelovimab. It is not known if these events were related to SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody use or were due to progression of COVID-19.”

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update: FDA Authorizes New Monoclonal Antibody for Treatment of COVID-19 that Retains Activity Against Omicron Variant

• Hypersensitivity Including Anaphylaxis and Infusion-Related Reactions: Serious hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis, have been observed with administration of other SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies and could occur with administration of bebtelovimab. If clinically significant hypersensitivity reactions occur, discontinue and initiate appropriate supportive care. Infusion-related reactions may occur up to 24 hours post injection. These reactions may be severe or life threatening. (5.1)
• Clinical Worsening After SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibody Administration: Clinical worsening of COVID-19 after administration of SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatment has been reported and may include signs or symptoms of fever, hypoxia or increased respiratory difficulty, arrhythmia (e.g., atrial fibrillation, sinus tachycardia, bradycardia), fatigue, and altered mental status. Some of these events required hospitalization. It is not known if these events were related to SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody use or were due to progression of COVID-19. (5.2)
• Limitations of Benefit and Potential for Risk in Patients with Severe COVID-19: Treatment with bebtelovimab has not been studied in patients hospitalized due to COVID-19. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bebtelovimab, may be associated with worse clinical outcomes when administered to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 requiring high flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation. (5.3)

http://www.fda.gov/media/156152/download

It should be fairly clear that, unlike Dr. Ardis’ claims, monoclonal antibodies are not effective, carry numerous risky side effects, and can actually worsen the disease they are supposed to treat. Interestingly, this same risk of dangerous side effects and worsening disease outcomes is associated with snake antivenom as well. From the fact sheet of a commonly used antivenom for rattlesnake bites, we find these admitted side effects:

Rattlesnake Antivenin Side Effects Center

“Rattlesnake Antivenin (antivenin crotalidae polyvalent) is an antivenin product used only to treat envenomation caused by bites of crotalids (pit vipers) including rattlesnakes, copperhead and cottonmouth moccasins, and others. Common side effects of Rattlesnake Antivenin include allergic reactions such as flushing, itching, hives, swelling of the face/tongue/throat, cough, shortness of breath, blue color to the skin, vomiting, and anaphylaxis (severe allergic reaction).”

“Immediate systemic reactions (allergic reactions or anaphylaxis) can occur whenever a horse-serum-containing product is administered. An immediate reaction (e.g. shock, anaphylaxis) usually occurs within 30 minutes. Symptoms and signs may develop before the needle is withdrawn and may include apprehension, flushing, itching, urticaria; edema of the face, tongue, and throat; cough, dyspnea, cyanosis, vomiting, and collapse. There have been isolated reports of cardiac arrest and death associated with Antivenin (Crotalidae) Polyvalent (equine origin) use.”

“Serum sickness usually occurs 5 to 24 days after administration and its frequency may be related to the number of Antivenin vials administered.³⁰ The incubation period may be less than 5 days, especially in those who have received horse-serum-containing preparations in the past. The usual symptoms and signs are malaise, fever, urticaria, lymphadenopathy, edema, arthralgia, nausea, and vomiting. Occasionally, neurological manifestations develop, such as meningismus or peripheral neuritis. Peripheral neuritis usually involves the shoulders and arms. Pain and muscle weakness are frequently present, and permanent atrophy may develop.”

https://www.rxlist.com/rattlesnake-antivenin-side-effects-drug-center.htm

Maybe the use of antivenom to treat a snakebite isn’t the super cure it has been sold to be? Is it possible that, as with many pharmaceutical products and interventions, the antivenom itself is creating the very symptoms it is said to treat? For some further insight, let’s look at a few highlights from an paper from September 2019, right before this “crisis,” which reviewed the use of antivenom and had a few revealing claims about the “anti” toxin. You will see it reiterated that the injection of antivenom created from either horse, sheep, goats, and/or rabbits can cause immediate hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis or a delayed “serum sickness” which can occur weeks after the treatment. It is stated that the antivenom has limited efficacy and can be entirely ineffective based on the geographic location. Improper use of antivenom contributes to increased servere outcomes and the production of antibodies in animals leads to a large number (70%) of immunoglobulins that do not react to snake venom:

Perspective on the Therapeutics of Anti-Snake Venom

3. Current Information in the Design of New Antivenoms

“Currently, the only accepted treatment for snakebite envenomation involves intravenous administration of conventional antivenoms comprising antibodies or antibody fragments derived from the plasma of large mammals (generally horses, but also sheep, goats, or rabbits) that have been previously immunized with non-lethal venomous doses [14,15]. Hyperimmunized animals produce antibodies against the venom proteins and serum is extracted from their blood for the treatment of envenomation [6,16]. Conventional serum therapy aims to bind and neutralize the snake venom proteins [17]. It is a fact that the antivenom allows the body to try to reverse the damage caused by the venom. However, it is known that such therapy can cause problems related to different antivenom characteristics, such as:

• • Immediate hypersensitivity reaction to the alien immunoglobulins, including anaphylactic and pyrogenic reactions such as chills, rigor, headache, and tachycardia. Delayed antivenom reactions or serum sickness is observed after 8 to 12 days of treatment; these are characterized by cutaneous eruptions, fever, and allergies, among other effects [18];
  • Limited efficacy of antivenom therapy to protect the affected organ/s against immediate local tissue damage and low stability;
  • Ineffectiveness of the antivenom due to significant geographic variation in the composition of the venom;
  • Antigenic reactivity due to the taxonomic diversity of the snakes;
  • Improper use of the antivenom due to incorrect medical management, which contributes to a high incidence of adverse reactions, a low toxin neutralizing potency, or both.

“Current antibody production faces challenges during the immunization of the animal (equine or ovine), leading to the production of a huge number of antibodies that are not related to the snake venom. Around 70% of the immunoglobulins obtained do not act directly against venom toxins [26]. Despite the abovementioned facts, this is the only FDA approved therapy to treat snake venom.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6767026/

A few other studies also point out the severe reactions regularly attributed to the use of antivenom. The first is a study from 2016 which points out that not only are adverse reactions common, they occur at a high rate. It is stated that this is due to poor quality control and manufacturing problems:

Adverse reactions to snake antivenom, and their prevention and treatment

“Antivenom is the mainstay of treatment of snakebite envenoming. However, adverse reactions to snake antivenom that is available are common in many parts of the world where snakebite is prevalent. Both acute (anaphylactic or pyrogenic) and delayed (serum sickness type) reactions occur. Acute reactions are usually mild but severe systemic anaphylaxis may develop, often within an hour or so of exposure to antivenom. Serum sickness after antivenom has a delayed onset between 5 and 14 days after its administration. Ultimately, the prevention reactions will depend mainly on improving the quality of antivenom.”

“The high rate of acute adverse reactions to antivenom is an example of how poor manufacturing and quality control by antivenom producers cause problems for patients and their doctors. This highlights the importance of addressing issues related to poor quality and potentially unsafe antivenom. Ultimately, the prevention of reactions will depend mainly on improving the quality of antivenom. Until these improvements take place, doctors will have to depend on pharmacological prophylaxis as well as careful observation of patients receiving antivenom in preparation for prompt management of acute as well as delayed reactions when they occur.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4767202/

This next source is from 2018 and it points out that early antivenoms were unsafe and caused severe life-threatening events. While they now have “acceptable” safety profiles, antivenoms still have varying quality and range from 10% adverse reactions to greater than 50%. This same variation in quality is seen in the production of monoclonal antibodies:

Antivenom therapy: efficacy of premedication for the prevention of adverse reactions

“However, in their initial applications, antivenoms did not exhibit good safety results and could even cause life-threatening side effects [8]. The main reason was that first antivenoms were poorly purified preparations or crude sera. Over the years, for many of the original applications, heterologous serums were replaced by other drugs with better safety profiles, such as antibiotics, vaccines and homologous serums. However, in cases of envenomation by snakes, scorpions or arachnids, antivenoms remain the only effective treatment [4]. Currently, after many improvements, antivenoms exhibit acceptable safety profiles [1, 9, 10]. Nevertheless, antivenom quality still varies widely depending on the producer, while some antivenoms exhibit adverse reaction rates of less than 10%, others have values of greater than 50% [11, 12].”

https://jvat.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40409-018-0144-0

In is interesting to note that there are many factors that are said to influence the severity of a venomous snakebite including the age, sex, and health of the person bitten as well as the type of snake, the geographical location of the snake, the season the bite occurred in, what the snake ate, and how recently the snake released its venom. Antivenoms themselves have been shown to have varying effects in quality due to the geographical location of the snake which somehow renders the antivenom ineffective and even dangerous in different countries and continents, even against the same type of snake. It is said that this has kept locals from seeking out medical care and sticking to traditional healers:
“Snake venoms are highly complicated. At least 26 separate enzymes have been identified with 10 of these enzymes common to all snake venoms (though in different concentrations). All snake bites are not equal. The quality of venom depends not only on the type of snake but on the season, the geographical region, the age of the snake, and how recently it has released venom previously.”

https://www.vin.com/apputil/content/

Antivenom’s fatal flaw

“A study led by Dr Fry has found that antivenoms produced using snakes from one region may perform poorly or fail completely against the same species of snakes from other regions.

Researchers tested the effectiveness of two African and two Indian saw-scaled viper antivenoms against saw-scaled vipers from 10 regions.

The results showed that the two African antivenoms were only effective against snakes from restricted ranges.

One antivenom performed well against West African saw-scaled vipers and the other performed best against the East African saw-scaled vipers.

The Indian antivenom only worked against saw-scaled vipers from the region where the antidote was produced and failed against toxins from other Indian regions. It failed completely against African saw-scaled vipers.

“These antivenoms are being sold and used interchangeably to treat all saw-scaled viper bites, and in many cases they are not working,” Dr Fry says.

“In Kenya, snakebite deaths have increased dramatically after hospitals switched supplies of a very effective African antivenom with a cheaper Indian variety.”

“This creates a knock-on effect in these communities. It’s hard enough to convince people living in these regions not to go to traditional healers to treat snakebite. And if someone does seek proper medical care but dies because of ineffective antivenom, it will be even harder to convince the next victim to seek out antivenom.”

Viper venom’s lethal evolution 

It’s the variety of the saw-scaled viper’s prey, from rodents to insects, that researchers say could be the reason why antivenom from one region might not work in another.

“Antivenom is effective and reliable when venom composition does not vary greatly between individual snakes,” UQ PhD candidate in Toxinology Bianca op den Brouw wrote in an article for The Conversation.

“Unfortunately, the venom composition from saw-scaled vipers varies between populations and is thought to be partly due to an evolutionary adaptation linked to their diet.

“Different saw-scaled viper populations feed on different prey. The physiology of these prey animals differs, and this dictates what makes a toxin effective.

“From a medical perspective, this means that the antibodies in an antivenom may not be able to adequately recognise and fight all the harmful toxins in the venom.”

http://uq.edu.au/research/impact/stories/antivenoms-fatal-flaw/

Maybe the proceeding information on how snakebite antivenoms are created as well as the high rate of adverse events from the antibodies used for antivenom now has you questioning that initial “no-brainer” thought: “Of course I would use antivenom if bit by a snake.” If so, you are on the right track as, based on information from the African Snakebite Institute, in most snake bite cases, antivenom is not used and many snake bites are often unattended and/or unreported. In fact, it is apparently a well-known “myth” (i.e. truth in this case) that the antivenom kills more people than the snake venom itself. Most people (over 80%) never receive antivenom as, like the previous sources stated, it can have disastrous side-effects. Most snake bites do not cause symptoms warranting the use of something so toxic. In fact, snake bite victims are not immediately injected with antivenom and typically are sent home after observation:

“Yet people often have a poor understanding of how it works and there are endless myths about antivenom killing more people than the snake venom itself.”

“Few snakebite victims are treated with antivenom (less than 20 % of those hospitalised after a snakebite) as most victims are not severely envenomated or the bite may be from a snake that is not considered potentially deadly or is not covered by the antivenom (Rhombic Night Adder, Berg Adder and Stiletto Snake). Antivenom is relatively scarce, expensive and can have disastrous side-effects. The biggest danger is an acute allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) or, to a lesser degree, serum sickness that can affect the immune system several days after treatment.”

“Snakebite victims are not automatically injected with antivenom as most of them never experience symptoms severe enough to justify its use. The majority of snakes have control over their venom glands and are quite reluctant to waste their venom on humans. They very often give ‘dry’ bites with no subsequent symptoms of envenomation or the snake might inject a little bit of venom that will cause discomfort or some symptoms but nothing serious. Such patients are usually hospitalised for a day, carefully monitored and then sent home.”

“As already mentioned, some snakebite victims quickly have an allergic reaction to antivenom and this happens in more than 40% of all cases where antivenom is used. Some of those victims go into anaphylactic shock which is a life-threatening medical condition and must be treated with adrenaline. This has to do with the fact that our antivenom is made from horse blood and the allergy is basically an allergy to horse proteins.”

If snake bites regularly do not cause symptoms and do not require the use of antivenom, are snake bites really as toxic and harmful as we previously thought? Are the dangerous side effects linked to snake bites really just the reactions to having horse blood injected into the body as treatment? Is this another case where the treatment causes the symptoms of disease it was supposed to prevent? If the examples of these next few individuals are taken into consideration, it’s entirely plausible to conclude that we have been misled about the dangers stemming from snakebites in order to cover for the toxic effects of the treatment:

Repeated snake bite for recreation: Mechanisms and implications

“There is a debate in the fatality/immunity due to repeated snake bites in human beings either accidentally or incidentally. Haast and Winer[11] reported complete recovery of a patient without any specific therapy even after bitten by a deadly snake Bangarus Caeruleus[11] and the authors attributed it to cross protection of existing antibody between species of Bangarus and Indian, African and Egyptian cobras, as he had a history of bites from these snakes earlier.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3883202/

This snake-man got himself bitten over 200 times to become immune to venom

“Bill Haast, a scientist turned snake-man from America, was bitten at least 173 times by poisonous snakes in his life till mid-2008 of which he was fatally injured about 20 times.”

“In the 1950s, he had few ill-effects and didnt need any anti-venom in spite of the fact that he was bitten by the cobras about 20 times as per the report published in Today I Found Out.“

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indiatoday.in/

Man makes deadly snakes bite him 160 times in hunt for human antidote

“An amateur scientist has deliberately endured more than 160 self-inflicted snake bites in a bid to become immune to venom.

Tim Friede is obsessed by finding a human antidote to poisonous snake bites, which kill an estimated 100,000 people every year.

Mr Friede was recently bitten by a taipan and a black mamba, two deadly snakes he keeps at his home in Wisconsin, USA, in addition to his two rattlesnakes and water cobra.

He said he experienced a “real throbbing sensation” but he “felt great” after the bites.

“It really hurts and it swells but that’s it,” he said.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/

Poison pass: the man who became immune to snake venom

“A lot has been written about Steve Ludwin, widely known as the man who injects snake venom, and lately his life has turned into a non-stop frenzy of international journalists and film crews revelling in the seeming sheer insanity of it.”

“He’s been shooting, swallowing and scratching venom into his skin from some of the world’s deadliest snakes for 30 years. “Snakes are fucking everywhere. The symbol for medicine is two snakes. They’re ingrained in our brain and DNA,” he tells me, proudly insisting that he hasn’t been ill for decades and has developed “a superhuman immune system”. And it’s tempting to believe him. He does look undeniably fit.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/

The Photographer Who Was Bitten by a Black Mamba… and Got the Shot
“After several minutes and then hours passed and Laita was still feeling fine — experts recommend heading straight for a hospital, by the way — the crew concluded that Laita didn’t have any venom in his system. The photographer believes that it was either a “dry bite,” when a snake doesn’t release any venom, or that his heavy flow of blood pushed out the venom.”

The Photographer Who Was Bitten By A Black Mamba… And Got The Shot

As can be seen, there are numerous examples of people being deliberately and accidentally bitten by the world’s deadliest snakes who are completely fine and do not require treatment from antivenom whatsoever. Are we to conclude that these people are the lucky few who somehow have amazing super-human “immune” systems that render snake venom ineffective? Or have snake bites and the associated symptoms of venom toxicity been blown out of proportion? Could this be a case where some have had bad reactions to a snake bite just as there are those who have severe allergic reactions to bee stings while the majority of snake bite and bee sting victims come away unscathed? Could this be similar to the supposed rabies cases where the majority of those who were bitten by “rabid” animals actually went on to be just fine without getting the rabies vaccination?

The Treatments Are Worse Than the Disease

It’s very apparent that in the case of monoclonal antibodies and anivenom, the adverse effects of the drugs are actually worse than the supposed diseases they are meant to treat. Could this be due to the fact that, like “viruses,” so-called antibodies have never been properly purified, isolated, and proven to exist? The results of studies using antibodies are regularly unreproducible and irreplicable. It is well-known that antibodies are in fact not as specific as are they are claimed to be and are said to regularly bind to the wrong proteins. Perhaps it is difficult to produce safe and effective products when the entities that are supposed to be produced and supplied in the animal blood are entirely theoretical? Maybe the ridiculous snake venom theory should be viewed in the context that it is a bad idea to be injecting anything, let alone animal blood, into our bodies in an attempt to make ourselves feel better when trusting the body and allowing it to heal is often times the best course of action we can take.

In Summary:

• Dr. Bryan Ardis put forth a theory that snake venom is the cause of “Covid-19” primarily based on fraudulent genomic data
• The snake connection stems from research linking proteins from the fabricated “SARS-COV-2” genome to bat and snake “coronavirus” proteins
• The enzyme phospholipase A2 group IIA or sPLA2-IIA, which Dr. Ardis bases much of his claims on, only has similarities to rattlesnake venom
• These peptides are “almost identical” to the venoms of animals and are regularly found in healthy humans and other mammals
• Dr. Ardis pointed out that, based on a text, he uncovered the connection between antivenom and monoclonal antibodies and stated that they are the same thing
• He wrongly concluded that monoclonal antibodies are an effective treatment for snake poisons that could be in the vaccines, Remdesivir, and water
• According to a Sept 2021 Cochrane Review, their certainty in the evidence for the use of monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of “Covid” for all non-hospitalised individuals was low, and for hospitalised individuals was very low to moderate
• They considered the current evidence insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions regarding treatment with “SARS-CoV-2-neutralising” mAbs
• Monoclonal antibodies are known to cause a range of side effects and reactions, which can be immediate or delayed
• Serious adverse events associated with mAbs include infusion reactions, acute anaphylaxis, and serum sickness, as well as longer-term complications such as infections, cancer, autoimmune disease, and cardiotoxicity
• In February 2022, the FDA revised the authorizations for two monoclonal antibody treatments – bamlanivimab and etesevimab (administered together) and REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) – to limit their use to only when the patient is likely to have been infected with or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments
• The data showed these treatments are highly unlikely to be active against the omicron variant which is circulating at a very high frequency throughout the United States
• These treatments are not authorized for use in any U.S. states, territories, and jurisdictions at this time
• Monoclonal antibodies are laboratory-made proteins that mimic the immune system’s ability to fight off harmful pathogens
• In April 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration revoked the emergency use authorization (EUA) that allowed for the investigational monoclonal antibody therapy bamlanivimab, when administered alone, to be used for the treatment of mild-to-moderate “COVID-19” in adults and certain pediatric patients
• Based on its ongoing analysis of emerging scientific data, specifically the sustained increase of “SARS-CoV-2 viral” variants that are resistant to bamlanivimab alone resulting in the increased risk for treatment failure, the FDA determined that the known and potential benefits of bamlanivimab, when administered alone, no longer outweigh the known and potential risks for its authorized use
• Importantly, although the FDA revoked this EUA, alternative monoclonal antibody therapies remain available under EUA, including REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab, administered together), and bamlanivimab and etesevimab, administered together, for the same uses as previously authorized for bamlanivimab alone
• In other words, the use of Bamlanivimab and Etesevimab was revoked as well as the use of Bamlanivimab but they can still be used together as an alternative to Bamlanivimab alone…
• For the Omicron-specific Bebtelovimab authorized by the FDA in February 2022, possible side effects include
  1. Itching
  2. Rash
  3. Infusion-related reactions
  4. Nausea
  5. Vomiting
• Serious and unexpected adverse events including hypersensitivity, anaphylaxis and infusion-related reactions have been observed with other “SARS-CoV2” monoclonal antibodies and could occur with bebtelovimab
• In addition, clinical worsening following administration of other “SARS-CoV-2” monoclonal antibody treatment has been reported and therefore is possible with bebtelovimab
• The FDA claims that it is not known if these events were related to “SARS-CoV-2” monoclonal antibody use or were due to progression of “COVID-19”
• Signs or symptoms of worsening outcomes include:
  1. Fever
  2. Hypoxia or increased respiratory difficulty
  3. Arrhythmia (e.g., atrial fibrillation, sinus tachycardia, bradycardia)
  4. Fatigue
  5. Altered mental status
• Treatment with Bebtelovimab has not been studied in patients hospitalized due to “COVID-19”
• Monoclonal antibodies, such as Bebtelovimab, may be associated with worse clinical outcomes when administered to hospitalized patients with “COVID-19” requiring high flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation
• Antivenom carries the same risks of severe side effects and worsening condition as monoclonal antibodies
• The listing for common side effects of Rattlesnake Antivenin include allergic reactions such as:
  1. Flushing
  2. Iitching
  3. Hives
  4. Swelling of the face/tongue/throat
  5. Cough
  6. Shortness of breath
  7. Blue color to the skin
  8. Vomiting, and anaphylaxis (severe allergic reaction)
• Immediate systemic reactions (allergic reactions or anaphylaxis) can occur whenever a horse-serum-containing product is administered
• There have been isolated reports of cardiac arrest and death associated with Antivenin (Crotalidae) Polyvalent (equine origin) use
• Serum sickness usually occurs 5 to 24 days after administration and its frequency may be related to the number of Antivenin vials administered
• The usual symptoms and signs are:
  1. Malaise
  2. Fever
  3. Urticaria
  4. Lymphadenopathy
  5. Edema
  6. Arthralgia
  7. Nausea
  8. Vomiting
• Occasionally, neurological manifestations develop, such as meningismus or peripheral neuritis
• Peripheral neuritis usually involves the shoulders and arms and pain and muscle weakness are frequently present, and permanent atrophy may develop
• A 2019 review on antivenom stated that currently, the only accepted treatment for snakebite envenomation involves intravenous administration of conventional antivenoms comprising antibodies or antibody fragments derived from the plasma of large mammals (generally horses, but also sheep, goats, or rabbits) that have been previously immunized with non-lethal venomous doses
• It is known that such therapy can cause problems related to different antivenom characteristics, such as:
  1. Immediate hypersensitivity reaction to the alien immunoglobulins, including anaphylactic and pyrogenic reactions such as chills, rigor, headache, and tachycardia.
  2. Delayed antivenom reactions or serum sickness is observed after 8 to 12 days of treatment; these are characterized by cutaneous eruptions, fever, and allergies, among other effects
  3. Limited efficacy of antivenom therapy to protect the affected organ/s against immediate local tissue damage and low stability
  4. Ineffectiveness of the antivenom due to significant geographic variation in the composition of the venom;
  5. Antigenic reactivity due to the taxonomic diversity of the snakes
  6. Improper use of the antivenom due to incorrect medical management, which contributes to a high incidence of adverse reactions, a low toxin neutralizing potency, or both
• Current antibody production faces challenges during the immunization of the animal (equine or ovine), leading to the production of a huge number of antibodies that are not related to the snake venom
• Around 70% of the immunoglobulins obtained do not act directly against venom toxins
• According to a 2016 study, adverse reactions to snake antivenom that is available are common in many parts of the world where snakebite is prevalent
• The high rate of acute adverse reactions to antivenom is an example of how poor manufacturing and quality control by antivenom producers cause problems for patients and their doctors
• The prevention of reactions will depend mainly on improving the quality of antivenom
• According to their initial applications, antivenoms did not exhibit good safety results and could even cause life-threatening side effects
• Currently, after many improvements, antivenoms exhibit “acceptable” safety profiles yet antivenom quality still varies widely depending on the producer, while some antivenoms exhibit adverse reaction rates of less than 10%, others have values of greater than 50%
• All snake bites are not equal and the quality of venom depends not only on the type of snake but on the season, the geographical region, the age of the snake, and how recently it has released venom previously
• A study led by Dr. Fry found that antivenoms produced using snakes from one region may perform poorly or fail completely against the same species of snakes from other regions
• The results showed that the two African antivenoms were only effective against snakes from restricted ranges
• One antivenom performed well against West African saw-scaled vipers and the other performed best against the East African saw-scaled vipers
• The Indian antivenom only worked against saw-scaled vipers from the region where the antidote was produced and failed against toxins from other Indian region and it failed completely against African saw-scaled vipers
• “These antivenoms are being sold and used interchangeably to treat all saw-scaled viper bites, and in many cases they are not working,” Dr Fry said
• If someone does seek proper medical care but dies because of ineffective antivenom, it will be even harder to convince the next victim to seek out antivenom
• Antivenom is effective and reliable when venom composition does not vary greatly between individual snakes
• Unfortunately, the venom composition from saw-scaled vipers varies between populations and is thought to be partly due to an evolutionary adaptation linked to their diet
• From a medical perspective, this means that the antibodies in an antivenom may not be able to adequately recognise and fight all the harmful toxins in the venom
• There are endless myths about antivenom killing more people than the snake venom itself
• Few snakebite victims are treated with antivenom (less than 20 % of those hospitalised after a snakebite
• Antivenom is relatively scarce, expensive and can have disastrous side-effects
• Snakebite victims are not automatically injected with antivenom as most of them never experience symptoms severe enough to justify its use
• Snakes very often give ‘dry’ bites with no subsequent symptoms of envenomation or the snake might inject a little bit of venom that will cause discomfort or some symptoms but nothing serious
• Such patients are usually hospitalised for a day, carefully monitored and then sent home
• Some snakebite victims quickly have an allergic reaction to antivenom and this happens in more than 40% of all cases where antivenom is used
• This has to do with the fact that antivenom is made from horse blood and the allergy is basically an allergy to horse proteins
• Haast and Winer reported complete recovery of a patient without any specific therapy even after bitten by a deadly snake Bangarus Caeruleus and the authors attributed it to cross protection of existing antibody between species of Bangarus and Indian, African and Egyptian cobras, as he had a history of bites from these snakes earlier
• Bill Haast, a scientist turned snake-man from America, was bitten at least 173 times by poisonous snakes in his life till mid-2008 of which he was seriously injured about 20 times
• In the 1950s, he had few ill-effects and didnt need any anti-venom in spite of the fact that he was bitten by the cobras about 20 times
• An amateur scientist named Tim Friede deliberately endured more than 160 self-inflicted snake bites in a bid to become immune to venom
• Mr Friede was recently bitten by a taipan and a black mamba, two deadly snakes he keeps at his home in Wisconsin, USA, in addition to his two rattlesnakes and water cobra
• He said he experienced a “real throbbing sensation” but he “felt great” after the bites
• Steve Ludwin, widely known as the man who injects snake venom, has been shooting, swallowing and scratching venom into his skin from some of the world’s deadliest snakes for 30 years
• He hasn’t been ill for decades and has developed “a superhuman immune system”
• A photographer was bit by the deadliest snake, a Black Mamba, and after hours passed, he was still feeling fine and needed no treatment

The snake venom theory by Dr. Bryan Ardis is built upon the interpretation of the unpurified fraudulent “SARS-COV-2” genome which is itself built upon references to other fraudulent genomes of human and animal “coronaviruses” created in the very same way. Attempting to claim any connections between the random A,C,T,G’s in a computer database is a useless and pointless exercise as the RNA that was fabricated into the genome of a “virus” was never purified, isolated, and proven to physically exist in the first place. Thus any connections between the protein codes said to belong to a “virus” which are then said to be closely related to supposed snake “coronaviruses” is immediately invalid.

Using this invalid premise to then claim that people have been poisoned by snake venom in the vaccines, the drugs, and the water supply is nothing but unsubstantiated science fiction that seems designed to have a few purposes:

1. To keep people engaged in the lie that a new disease known as “Covid-19” exists and that there is a singular cause.
2. To restore faith in monoclonal antibodies and other toxic alternative treatments.
3. To use the theory to promote and sell anti-venom supplements.
4. To divide and distract those questioning the official narrative.
5. To make the “Truther” community look foolish by falling for loosely tied-together circumstantial evidence that is easily debunked.

If we are to take the claims of Dr. Ardis seriously that the symptoms associated with snake venom is the true cause of a disease known as “Covid-19,” how does his theory explain for the fact that the antivenom and monoclonal antibody treatments cause the exact same symptoms of the disease they are supposed to treat? How would it be determined that the worsening clinical outcomes after injection are from the snake bites/venom rather than the antivenom/monoclonal antibodies given as treatment? How does his theory account for the numerous instances where people have been deliberately bitten by snakes, injected with the venom of snakes, and drank of the venom of the snakes with little to no harmful effects whatsoever? How does his theory account for the fact that the vast majority of “Covid” cases are asymptomatic and the vast majority of snake bite cases need no treatment at all? There are many holes in this theory which will easily be picked apart to make those who follow it look foolish for having done so.

There is no “SARS-COV-2.” There is no “Covid-19.” There is no new disease nor any new symptoms of disease requiring treatment from vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, Remdesivir, Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, NAC, nor any other treatment. There is no need for any anti-venom supplements.

Beware those who will sell you the cause of the disease and the solution.

Connect with Mike Stone

cover image is in the public domain: sourced from Christoph_Braun,   Wikimedia Commons

Here’s What’s Next on the Globalist Calendar

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
April 17, 2022

As you should know by now, the threat facing free humanity is not a secret conspiracy but a perfectly open one. Those seeking to monopolize the resources of the planet and institute a system of perfect technocratic control are, generally speaking, not secretive about their plans. On the contrary. Any number of publicly available records—from books and white papers to blog posts, fora and lectures—give an interested public plenty of lead time to prepare for the next steps in the unfolding globalist agenda.

So, in the grand Corbett Report tradition of Listening to the Enemy, let’s employ one of the simplest methods for understanding what’s coming next in the global plan: let’s consult the would-be world controllers’ own calendar.

JUNE 2022: Stockholm+50

As post-graduate students of The University of Corbett, you will already know about the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden in 1972 . . . but in case you need a refresher, you might want to consult How & Why Big Oil Conquered the World, where you can learn all about that Stockholm summit.

In addition to being Maurice Strong’s entrée into the exciting (and lucrative) world of Big Oil environmentalism, the conference also laid the groundwork for the UN-fronted corporate takeover of the world’s resources under the pretense of “saving Mother Earth.” It served a triple function for the globalists: it launched the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), it provided a template for the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, and it hosted the first talking shop for what would become Agenda 21 and, eventually, Agenda 2030.

Well, guess what? It’s baaaaack.

That’s right, our good, planet-loving overlords at the United Nations are back to the scene of the crime to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Stockholm conference with a new summit in the Swedish capital, this one with the characteristically uninspired name “Stockholm+50: a healthy planet for the prosperity of all – our responsibility, our opportunity.”

Lest you think “Stockholm+50” is simply going to be an excuse for the global jet set to pat themselves on the back with a couple of forgettable political speeches or the unveiling of a new plaque, you should know that a great deal of planning has gone into this:

• The UN General Assembly has passed not one but two resolutions on the establishment of the conference and its agenda;
• A dedicated website for the conference has been created to keep up with the latest developments;
• A “blog by jurists for diplomats” entitled Pathway to the 2022 Declaration has been launched to influence the conversation surrounding the “Political Declaration” (capital letters and all) that “will be adopted” at the conference (emphasis theirs);
• And yet another website has been set up to host the “Declaration for Stockholm+50,” which may or may not be the “Political Declaration” referenced above and which has been endorsed by a gaggle of globalist NGOs.

In addition to all of this, Stockholm will also host “World Environment Day 2022” on June 5th, 2022, the anniversary of the creation of UNEP.

So what is all this hype about, exactly? Oh, just the usual globalist claptrap. By “the usual globalist claptrap” I mean the takeover of the planet and its resources by the predator class, of course. But don’t take my word for that. From the aforementioned Declaration for Stockholm+50:

On October 8, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) recognized the “right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.” For this right to be implemented, structural changes to the legal, economic, social, political, and technological spheres will be required to restore a stable and well-functioning Earth System. A shared consciousness of our global interdependence must give rise to a new common logic, to define and recognize the global commons that support life on Earth — the planetary system that connects us all and on which we all depend. This is a foundational step toward the establishment of a governance system to effectively manage human interactions with the Earth System.

Yes, exactly as one would expect, the “save the planet” slogan is being used as a rallying cry for . . .

( . . . wait for it . . .)

. . . the strengthening of global government! Wow, who would have seen that one coming?

Specifically, after vague and wooly rhetoric about “implementing the right to a healthy environment” and “establishing a regenerative economy,” the declaration ends by imploring the good folks at the United Nations to give themselves more power! Yaaaay!

The long-term governance of the global commons, the delivery of global public goods, and management of global public risks all require a permanent system of effective governance to reliably manage our interactions with the Earth System as a whole. For example, a proposal to repurpose the inactive United Nations Trusteeship Council has been widely discussed, including most recently in the UN Secretary-General’s Our Common Agenda (OCA) report.

Something tells me that in the history-by-the-winners textbook of the future, June 5th, 2022 will be hailed as the day that the brave and benevolent bureaucrats of the UN saved the planet by bestowing their gracious global government on us. (” . . . and the people of the earth commemorate this momentous event in a prayer of thanks to their UN leaders before the intake of their daily ration of bugs and rainwater.”)

But wait! What does it say on the declaration’s “About” page?

This Conference should be used as an “ideas laboratory” to develop innovative solutions for the commons, economy, and governance, which will become the seeds of action at the 2023 Summit of the Future, as foreseen in the UN Secretary General’s Our Common Agenda report.

A 2023 Summit of the Future? Oh yes. Which brings us to the next date on our globalist calendar . . .

September 2023: Summit of the Future

Last September, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres launched an 85-page report entitled “Our Common Agenda.” According to a write-up from Democracy International, the report offers a “roadmap for upgrading the UN” and “calls for reinvigorated multilateralism, renewed solidarity and stronger consideration of future generations.”

Exactly as you would expect, the report’s Summary begins by reminding us of the (globalist-concocted) “existential crises” that (the globalists constantly warn us) are threatening humanity’s existence, such as COVID-19, geopolitical conflict and (of course) climate change. Naturally, this immediately turns into a demand that the peoples of the world:

• “re-embrace global solidarity,” which evidently entails “a global vaccination plan to deliver vaccines against COVID-19 into the arms of the millions of people who are still denied this basic lifesaving measure”;
• “renew the social contract between Governments and their people and within societies,” which evidently entails “updated governance arrangements to deliver better public goods and usher in a new era of universal social protection, health coverage, education, skills, decent work and housing, as well as universal access to the Internet by 2030 as a basic human right”;
• “end the ‘infodemic’ plaguing our world by defending a common, empirically backed consensus around facts, science and knowledge,” which evidently entails adopting “a global code of conduct that promotes integrity in public information”;

. . . and a host of other globalist imperatives, from the creation of a new UN-led “Emergency Platform” that will be “triggered automatically in crises of sufficient scale and magnitude, regardless of the type or nature of the crisis involved,” to the adoption of a new UN-led “Global Digital Compact” for “promoting a trustworthy Internet by introducing accountability criteria for discrimination and misleading content.”

In other words, the usual globalist claptrap.

But embedded in this pean to global government is another idea: the convening of a “Summit of the Future” in conjunction with the meeting of the UN General Assembly in New York in September 2023. Picking up on the current Klaus Schwabian globalese in vogue among the not-so-Superclass these days, Guterres writes that “it will be important to hold a high-level, multi-stakeholder ‘Summit of the Future’ to advance ideas for governance arrangements in the areas of international concern mentioned in this report, and potentially others, where governance arrangements are nascent or require updating.”

If you’ve been keeping up with the MSM lately, you might have noticed that this “Summit of the Future” idea has gained traction with the globalist supergophers, including recently deceased ex-Secretary of State Madeline “The Price Was Worth It” Albright, who penned an editorial last October calling “Our Common Agenda” a “pathbreaking new report” and calling on UN member states to “endorse a follow-on ‘modalities resolution’ supporting Guterres’s call for a Summit of the Future in September 2023.” In order to put teeth into this globalist chinwag, Albright argued that “preparatory committees (PrepComs) should be convened around the world” prior to the summit “to consider and advance global governance innovations in peace, security and humanitarian action; sustainable development and COVID-19 recovery; human rights, inclusive governance, and the rule of law; and climate governance.”

But it isn’t just the Pax Americana old guard who are excited about the prospects of reshaping the world order. As veteran Corbett Reporteers will know, the Chinese overlords, too, are all in on this agenda and excited for the possibility of consolidating their control over their own population and moving to a more important seat at the globalist technocratic table. Accordingly, ChiCom propaganda organ China Daily released a report in January dutifully parroting Guterres’ assessment of the “five-alarm fire” that the world is facing from COVID-19, inequality, the climate crisis, mistrust of government and online misinformation. This was followed last month by a Xinhua report that hails “the establishment of a high-level advisory board on effective multilateralism” and notes that the Summit of the Future will “advance ideas for governance arrangements in certain areas that could be considered global public goods or global commons, including climate and sustainable development beyond 2030, the international financial architecture, peace, outer space, the digital space, major risks, and the interests of future generations.”

The accolades for Guterres’ brilliant report (which he totally wrote all by himself, guys, honest!) and his brilliant idea for a summit (which he is single-handedly organizing all on his lonesome) continue to pour in. The Qatari and Swedish UN ambassadors co-wrote an op ed in Al Jazeera hailing the idea as a chance to “move toward a UN 2.0,” and the World Future Council (yes, there is such a thing) has generously pledged the support of their “50 international change-makers” to prepare the summit.

As the World Future Council notes: “a Summit for the Future will be essential towards accelerating the implementation of the SDGs and ensuring that the talks and discussions finally turn into actions on the ground to truly leave no one behind.”

But wait: it gets worse! The same UN General Assembly meeting that will host the Summit of the Future will also be hosting a “UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development,” which, the SDG Knowledge Hub helpfully informs us, takes place every four years and gives our global overlords yet another opportunity for scheming how best to transform the world into a neofeudal slave plantation!

Consider this upcoming conference a threat, add “Summit of the Future” to whatever rss reader or news alert system you use and circle the date on your calendar. Whatever comes out of this conference, it’s going to be bad news for free humanity.

MAY 2024: WHO Global Pandemic Treaty

Speaking of bad news for free humanity, you’ve probably heard me talking about the upcoming WHO global pandemic treaty by now. But don’t worry if you haven’t heard me talk about it, because you certainly will hear me talk about it more in the future.In case you haven’t heard of it yet, the next big push in global biopolitics is the call for a global pandemic treaty to further abrogate national sovereignty and to hand more power to the WHO to dictate global health policy in the name of stopping the next scamdemic. As I’ve stressed several times now, just as 9/11 was merely the public unveiling of the new “war on terror” governance paradigm, the COVID scamdemic was merely the public unveiling of the new “biosecurity” governance paradigm. It is this proposed global pandemic treaty that will start to hardwire that new governance paradigm into place, much like the PATRIOT Act began to hardwire the terror paradigm in place in the US.

The campaign pushing the formation of this treaty relies on an obvious Problem – Reaction – Solution narrative to nudge the public into accepting the next steps in the biosecurity agenda.

• Problem: The WHO “failed” miserably in stopping the COVID “pandemic” from “ravaging the world.”
• Reaction: We need a global health organization with teeth!
• Solution: A global pandemic treaty must be signed to hand more power to the WHO.

Once you realize that all proposals for giving more power to a small clique of unaccountable bureaucrats is introduced in this way—”you never want a serious crisis go to waste” as Rahm Emmanuel infamously observed—the manipulation becomes obvious. An “independent panel” set up to “review” the “problem” of the WHO’s “failed” response to the scamdemic delivered a report in January that—to the surprise of absolutely no one—concluded that “the WHO’s ability to enforce its advice, or enter countries to investigate the source of disease outbreaks, is severely curtailed” and thus new rules need to be set up at the global level to give the WHO more power to police the world for health threats. They even called it the WHO’s “Chernobyl moment,” implying that it should use this “disaster” as a chance to implement fundamental reforms.

This supposedly “independent” report provides perfect cover for the globalists to conclude a new pandemic treaty that will either expand, reform, revise or override the existing International Health Regulations, the 2005 treaty which itself gave the WHO unprecedented power to declare a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” and to intervene in the affairs of sovereign nations in the name of combating perceived health threats.

Details of precisely what such a treaty will involve—or even what form it will take—are still maddeningly vague. The proposed new treaty would be, in UN jargon, an “instrument,” of which there are three types: recommendations, conventions and regulations. Regulations (like the International Health Regulations of 2005) are automatically legally binding for all 194 WHO member states unless they explicitly object. Measures that could be ontained in such a treaty may include “the sharing of data and genome sequences of emerging viruses and rules on equitable vaccine distribution” and a “One Health approach” that “connects the health of humans, animals and the planet.”

In other words, the usual globalist claptrap.

One hardly needs to be a conspiracy realist to understand how such mushy-sounding goodness and gumdrops from the WHO could be used to implement a very dark biosecurity agenda. Whatever the specifics, you can bet your bottom dollar that all of the worst aspects of biomedical tyranny—from new regulations to rush experimental medical interventions through human trials in the event of a declared emergency to the standardization of vaccine passports—will be topics of discussion when the negotiations on the treaty begin in earnest.

Don’t worry, though, you can still let your voice be heard! The WHO has even opened up a special page on their website to allow public comment on the potential treaty!

. . . Of course, they’re not interested in hearing whether or not people actually want such a treaty in the first place, only what the hoi polloi feel should be included in such a treaty. Specifically, they’re asking:

“What substantive elements do you think should be included in a new international instrument on pandemic preparedness and response?”

And even then, they’re not looking to hear from everyone. In fact, they have an entire page laying out the terms and conditions by which you can submit a comment in the first place, including stipulations that those wishing to comment “Refrain from making any statements unrelated to the topic at hand,” that they present their comments “in a respectful manner, free of any profanity, ad hominem attacks, vulgarity, or other inappropriate language” and that they “declare the entity [they] represent and any other affiliations, engagement, or roles relevant to the public hearings or to WHO, in light of its mandate.” Oh, and please keep in mind “that WHO is not able to ensure that all interested parties will be able to participate in the public hearings, and that thus WHO does not make any commitment or undertaking to allow you to participate in the public hearings.”

But other than that, they totally want to hear from you.

. . . Oh, wait. Scratch that. The deadline for the public to submit their comments has already passed. I guess we’re too late. Hmmm, perhaps we should have consulted the globalist calendar sooner.

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

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

Connect with The Corbett Report

cover image credit:  The Digital Artist / pixabay

Federal Judge Rules Biden Mask Mandate Unlawful; CDC Transportation Mask Mandate Vacated

by Sundance, The Last Refuge
April 18, 2022

A federal judge in Tampa, Florida has vacated the federal transportation mask mandate for planes, trains, buses and public Transportation.  [PDF Ruling Available Here]

In essence, U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle found the CDC exceeded its statutory authority with the mask mandate and violated the rules that guide CDC regulations.   After Joe Biden arbitrarily announced the federal transportation mandate, the CDC triggered enforcement of the mask mandate without any required time for public feedback on a new regulation.

(SEE FULL RULING HERE)

Within the ruling, one of the commonsense arguments against the federal mandate was noted.  Prior to Joe Biden taking office there was no mask mandate.  At the time Joe Biden took office and invoked the mask mandate, there was nothing substantively different in/around the spread of COVID-19 and the mitigation efforts underway.

The federal mask mandate was arbitrary and capricious with no justification from the CDC and no required time for the public to provide feedback.  The government’s legal argument was that public feedback, comments on rulemaking, was irrelevant because the mandate was going to be enforced regardless of public opinion. That argument was summarily dispatched by the judge saying, just because the government has a pre-determined outcome in mind does not relinquish them from the obligation to follow the rules.

Sensing they were going to lose the case, remarkably the government lawyers argued that only the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit should be granted relief.   Meaning, only the two people who filed the lawsuit should be exempt from the federal mask mandate.  That didn’t work.

The federal transportation mask mandate is vacated.

See also:

Health Freedom Defense Fund Wins Lawsuit Against Federal Travel Mask Mandate

Connect with Health Freedom Defense Fund

Connect with The Last Refuge

cover image based on public domain image uploaded by A1Cafel   / Wikimedia Commons

Snake Venom in the Water? Just More Fear Porn Nonsense.

by Catte Black, OffGuardian
April 16, 2022

Over the past week or so many people have sent us links to the documentary Watch the Water, a 50 minute interview with retired chiropractor Dr Bryan Ardis, who details his theory that “Covid” is caused by chemicals extracted from snake venom being added to the water supply.

Further, Dr Ardis claims that the same venom-based chemicals are in the vaccines and the drug remisdevir, and that researching the venom connection has already got one scientist killed.

Some notable names in the alternate media are giving it some air time, even Dr Reiner Fuellmich has said he will look into it.

He shouldn’t. It is pure nonsense.

A ridiculous theory that flies in the face of observed reality, supported only by anecdotal evidence, biblical metaphors and clips from an episode of The Blacklist.

But good news, if there IS snake venom in the water Dr Ardis can cure you – just spend 120 bucks on his antidote through his website. That’ll drive the venom right out of you.

They are literally selling snake oil.

The blurb alone tells you this is manipulation:

The plandemic continues, but its origins are still a nefarious mystery. How did the world get sick, how did Covid really spread, and did the Satanic elite tell the world about this bioweapon ahead of time?

Reality check – “The world” DIDN’T “get sick”. “Covid” was NOT a “bioweapon”. It DIDN’T “spread”.

The Powers That Be (PTB) just want you to think all this is true, and these guys are, knowingly or not, helping that along.

The whole thing looks very much like the latest attempt at introducing mainstream COVID fear porn through an “alternative” back door.

The superficial narrative in these cases may vary, but the underlying message is always the same – “Be afraid of COVID, because it is a real thing”

The PTB don’t really care if you’re afraid of a virus, a MANMADE virus, 5G…or snake venom in the water. Just so long as you believe COVID is real, new and deadly

The only really inadmissible thing has always been the truth – COVID is a scam. A pea-and-thimble game on a massive scale. Because you can’t govern through fear if no one is afraid.

Is someone dumping “snake venom” in the water?

Maybe. Who knows. The world is insane.

But it has ZERO to do with the “COVID pandemic” because the covid pandemic was made up.

Connect with OffGuardian

Elon Musk and the Transhuman Wing of Conservative, Inc

If you take this guy seriously, you’re living in a simulation

by Joe Allen, Singularity Weekly
April 15, 2022

Elon Musk holds out the promise of restoring “free speech” to Twitter. Yesterday the Tesla CEO offered $43 billion dollars to buy the social media platform outright. Conservatives are intoxicated by the idea. If by some miracle the shareholders take the offer, Musk promises to relax speech-policing and make the algorithms open source.

Presumably, he’ll continue shitposting from his toilet.

If we take Musk at his word, his intention is to open real debate and save our democracy. Then again, he’s also told us “China rocks,” robot slaves will replace every worker, universal basic income will soon be necessary, all vehicles will be autonomous, AI will achieve a god-like status, brain implants will connect us to that god, and ultimately, there’s a billion-to-one chance our universe is just a computer simulation.

A cynical listener might suspect this cyborg car-dealer is taking the public for a ride.

Even so, in the case of Twitter, the excitement is understandable. Starting with the Great Meme War that led up to Trump’s 2016 election, the platform laid waste to the funniest dudes on Frog Twitter—from Ricky Vaughn to Kantbot2000—and eventually, the cyber-Stasi banned the sitting President of the United States.

Throughout the pandemic, Twitter squashed valid medical information, promoted lockdown and vaxx propaganda, suppressed Hunter Biden’s laptop from hell, and scrubbed any evidence of election fraud, all while allowing tranny activists to groom children. Their worst offense, though—starting with the first tweet ever sent—was to reduce public discourse to byte-sized quips and goofy memes. (By the way, you can follow me @JOEBOTxyz.)

There was a time, not long ago, when intelligent people understood that social media as a “de facto town square” was a symptom of serious cultural and intellectual decay. Today, they’d do anything for more likes and retweets, even if getting an algo boost means endorsing the world’s wealthiest transhumanist.

So yeah, fuck Twitter—and their little bird, too. They deserve to get crushed. But only a fool would trust Musk, even if he manages to crush the censors.

Yesterday, at the TED 2022 Conference in Vancouver, the interviewer asked Musk why he launched this hostile takeover. Musk told the soy latte elite he’s saving Twitter because:

It’s important to the function of democracy. It’s important to the function of the United States as a free country, and many other countries. And to actually help freedom in the world, more broadly to the US.

How broadly? When Musk was asked about his views on China last December, he told the Wall Street Journal CEO Council Summit:

Now, we’re heading towards a situation where China is going to be probably having an economy two to three times the size of the United States. And so that’s just a different world. … Other countries are not really a threat to you if you’re by far the biggest kid on the block.

Imagine what Chinese dominance means for “freedom in the world.”

Aside from a quick disclaimer that he doesn’t “endorse everything China does”—or, equivocally, “everything the US does”—Musk has less to say about China’s totalitarian lockdowns and re-education camps than an NBA star in a fresh pair of Nikes. If Musk has anything like a moral compass, an attentive listener would be hard-pressed to say which way the needle’s pointing.

At the TED conference yesterday, Musk laughed that it’s “probably inevitable” his Optimus “buddy robot” will be used as a quasi-sentient sex slave. When confronted with the possibility these lanky droids will rapidly replace human labor, he reassured the working class:

I wouldn’t worry about the, sort of, “putting people out of a job” thing. … This really will be a world of abundance. Any goods and services will be available to anyone who wants them. It’ll be so cheap to have goods and services, it’ll be ridiculous.

Indeed, nothing could be more ridiculous. Back in August of 2019, Musk warned the World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai that automation would wipe human labor out of existence:

AI will make jobs kind of pointless. Probably the last jobs that will remain will be writing AI software. Then eventually the AI will just write its own software.

Last summer, at Tesla’s “AI Day” in Texas—where the Optimus design was first unveiled—Musk proposed a socialist solution to his cheering employees:

Essentially, in the future, physical work will be a choice. … This, I think, will be quite profound because if you say, “What is the economy?” It is, at the foundation it’s labor. So—what happens when there is no shortage of labor?

That’s why I think, long-term, there will need to be universal basic income.

Yesterday, when the TED interviewer asked Musk if he really believes in his “heart of hearts” that he’s creating an exciting future for children, Musk switched from robot mode to earnest humanoid mode:

I try my hardest to do so. … I love humanity and I think that we should fight for a good future for humanity and I think we should be optimistic about the future and fight to make that optimistic future happen.

The TED crowd spit out their lattes and erupted in cheers. Either they’re optimistic about a Chinese-led globalist future—which sounds about right—or, like all Musk fanboys, they suffer from selective amnesia.

Musk talks a good game about freedom, and in theory, he may be sincere. But he also signals loyalty to his biggest customer. This time last year, he told the communists at the China Development Forum:

I’m very confident about Tesla’s future in China. The Chinese economy’s going to do extremely well over the next decade and will become the biggest economy in the world. … China, I think long-term, will be our biggest market, but both where we make the most number of vehicles, and where we have the most number of customers.

How does this double-talkin’ jive fly under the radar?

Even our beloved Tucker Carlson—who alone has been rock solid in his opposition to China, Covid hysteria, and the predations of Conservative, Inc—is getting so drunk on liberal tears, he’s staggering a bit. Tucker will sober up, surely, but what about his corporate counterparts?

At least Conservative, Inc is consistent. They’ve overseen the normalization of mass immigration, the sexual revolution, on-demand abortion, gay marriage, trans teens, and now, transhumanism.

They lay spread-eagle athwart history, yelling, “Don’t. Stop!”

Of all the pliable R-droids throwing palm fronds in Musk’s path—and the list is so long now, it’s hard to think of an exception—the most ridiculous is Glenn Beck. One minute, Beck is raising the alarm on evil Great Reset-brand transhumanism. The next, he’s tweeting out, “Elon Musk is the anti-ESG Tony Stark America needs.”

Who the hell is this Tony Stark guy, anyway? Some cartoon character?

You probably wonder what universe these people are living in. Well, according to their cyborg savior, it’s one of a billion computer simulations, most likely programmed by ancient aliens writing code in an extradimensional celestial sphere.

As Musk explained to the Arab royalty at the 2017 World Government Summit in Dubai, chances are life is but a dream:

Now, you can see a video game that’s photo-realistic, and millions of people playing simultaneously. And you see where things are going with virtual reality and augmented reality. And if you extrapolate that out into the future, with any rate of progress at all, then eventually those games will be indistinguishable from reality.

They’ll be so realistic, you will not be able to tell the difference between that game and the reality as we know it.

Well, how do we know that didn’t happen in the past, and that we’re not in one of those games ourselves?

Dunno, bro, but I’ll tell ya what I do know. Simulation theory is a great metaphor for the memetic mind-warp that is social media. If the world’s wealthiest transhumanist succeeds in capturing Twitter, he’ll have a billion minds to play with in his very own simulated reality—not to mention an ocean of data to train his artificial intelligence.

Look, I don’t wanna get too judgy here. My own cosmology is at least as weird as Musk’s.

And I don’t mean to be a buzzkill, either. The prospect of Twitter getting bought out and gutted is hilarious. The rainbow cohort is freaking out, and that should bring joy to every man, woman, and child.

In fact, let’s pause a moment to lap up a few Twitter twink tears.

You taste that? Ahh…

Refreshing.

Now, let me slip this scrawled note into the Conservative, Inc suggestion box. Maybe, just maybe, stubborn reactionaries still have the power and influence to conserve our most precious asset—our humanity.

Let’s say you really do take Musk seriously.

If you’re open to the possibility that tech corporations are creating AI Computer Gods, and that Musk’s brain chips will keep us competitive with these digital deities, and robots are gonna take over every job on Earth, and chipped humans will live on UBI, and we’ll just kick back and spend our brief lives exploring vapid virtual realities, or maybe Mars—and anyway, we all live in a computer simulation, so it hardly matters either way—then for the love of God, come clean with the public about our dire situation so we may proceed accordingly.

Or, if you think Musk is delusional about everything except the things that benefit you, ask yourself why.

Or, if you actually think Musk is just a con artist spinning yarns to play the crowd and pump stocks, then stand up and call him out.

The madness, we can handle. The selective sanctimony? Not so much.



Connect with Joe Allen

cover image based on creative commons work of Placidplace

Socialism: Opiate of the Masses

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
April 15, 2022

Let’s get something straight. There is no pure form of socialism, where “the government owns the means of production.”

The means of production own the government, and vice versa. It’s always collusion. Elite power players stitch themselves together like a walking Frankenstein corpse.

Socialism can be done with a smile or with guns and jails. Styles vary.

For example, the Council on Foreign Relations [CFR] believes an international “joining of hands across the water” would be just dandy.

You could call the CFR’s agenda socialism or Globalism or fascism or dictatorship or the corporate state—it doesn’t matter. For the sake of brevity, call it socialism.

At street level (not within the CFR), every proponent of the socialist “solution” either has no idea who installs it and runs it, or astonishingly believes “the government” can be transformed into a beneficent enterprise and shed its core corruption, as it takes the reins of absolute power.

Meanwhile, the ultra-wealthy elites who use socialism as a weapon, while propagandizing it as our humanitarian future, know full well THEY will run it, and they have no qualms about placing severe limits on the freedom of populations. They want to impose those limits.

Hope and Change, the slogan of the former US president Barack Obama, was perfect for street-level socialists. It was vague enough to be injected with their own vague dreams and fantasies.

Colleges—or as I call them, Academies of Great Generalities—have been turning out these fantasists by the ton. “If I feel it, it must be true and good.”

One such idealist, back in the 1960s, was a young man named James Kunen. But smarter by far than most of his comrades, he wrote a book called The Strawberry Statement: Notes on a College Revolutionary. A member of the Left group, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), Kunen recalled a curious event at the 1968 SDS Convention:

“…at the convention, men from Business International Roundtables—the meetings sponsored by Business International for their client groups and heads of government—tried to buy up a few [Leftist] radicals. These men are the world’s leading industrialists and they convene to decide how our lives are going to go. These are the boys who wrote the Alliance for Progress. They’re the left wing of the ruling class.”

“…They offered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago. We were also offered Esso (Rockefeller) money. They want us to make a lot of radical commotion so they can look more in the center as they move to the left.”

Rockefeller elites moving to the political Left? What?

Look at it this way. If you’re a Rockefeller man, what brand of rhetoric are you going to use to sell your con? The “Utopian-better-world-for-the-people (Leftist)”, or the “we-want-mega-corporations-to-cheat-and-lie-and-steal-the-people-blind-and-co-opt-the-government (Rightist)”?

Since any brand of rhetoric is designed to end up in the same place—global control—you’re going to pick the more attractive-sounding version.

It’s simply a matter of workability and expedience.

That’s why the lingo of Leftist socialism has come to the fore.

That’s the only reason.

If a Rockefeller operative could use, to good effect, tales of enemies invading Earth from a parallel universe, he would.

In 1928, the historian Oswald Spengler wrote: “There is no proletarian, not even a Communist movement, that has not operated in the interests of money, and for the time being permitted by money—and that [operation has continued] without the idealists among its leaders having the slightest suspicion of the fact.”

Is there a college anywhere in the world that acknowledges and teaches this? The insight is not permitted. It would torpedo too many platitudes and reveal too many false trails laid down by elite deceivers.

David Rockefeller, writing his 2003 Memoirs, baldly asserted: “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Of course, Rockefeller stopped short of saying he and his colleagues, in the core of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission, were using socialism and high-flying utopian rhetoric merely to enlist the Left in his “one-world” cause. He never admitted the notions of “social justice” and “equality” were being peddled to the gullible masses for the same reason.

If he had come clean, victims (both real and self-imagined) would understand they were fighting against the very oppressors who were backing, funding, encouraging, and controlling them.

The sought-after global triumph of socialism is a cover for elite global management and tyranny.

“Thanks for your help. Now that we’ve won, you’re under the gun. Our gun.”

Flashing forward to today, one can see this sales job operating in boardrooms of the tech giants (Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) The corporate leaders (the new Rockefellers and Carnegies) claim they’re proponents of “digital socialism,” which they ludicrously define as open access to the wonders of the Internet for all people everywhere, including the poor and bereft. But the last time I looked, those people can’t eat a YouTube video for a breakfast they can’t afford.

This nonsensical fluff hides the same core buried in old-time socialism: the leaders at the top, who have made their mega-fortunes, want to turn around and eliminate competition. Share and care doesn’t apply to the marketplace. The tech CEOs want to collude with government to gain special favors and benefits their lesser rivals can’t obtain.

“We love everyone and care about everyone, but don’t challenge us. We’re the bosses. We own the game.”

The tech giants want much more. They intend to lead the way, with their government partners, into an even tighter control of information (censorship) and a more vast Surveillance State.

They intend to build a technocratic planet, in which planned societies are the foundation. Citizens are “data-points” to be inserted into slots, from cradle to grave, as a worldwide system is constructed.

Notions of fairness, equality, and other terms of socialism are deployed as a front for this massive operation.

Some might say this version of Brave New World/1984 bears no resemblance to socialism.

But they would be wrong. This version is perfect socialism, once you realize the whole socialist “political philosophy” was never anything more than paper-thin propaganda.

It was a nothing made into something.

It falls apart and blows away, and the rictus-grin of control comes into view. The same grin existed in the medieval Roman Church, in the ancient Roman emperorship, in the Egypt of the Pharaohs, in Babylonia, in Sumer, in Mayan and Aztec civilizations, in tribes and clans long buried and forgotten.

Only the language of the sellers to the buyers has changed.

Mao Zedong (aka Mao Tse-tung), founding father and ruler of Communist China, openly declared: “Socialism…must have a dictatorship, it will not work without it.” Mao didn’t beat around the bush. In maintaining his dictatorship, he discovered he might have a problem with between 40 and 70 million of his own people. So, just to make sure, he killed them.

But don’t worry, be happy. Less violent socialisms exist in the world—as long as citizens willingly give up their independence.

For example, you could opt for Tony Blair’s vision. Tony is an accused war criminal (Iraq/2003, between 100,000 and million dead), but on the bright side, he didn’t massacre huge numbers of his own people. In 1983, Tony stated:

“I am a Socialist not through reading a textbook that has caught my intellectual fancy, nor through unthinking tradition, but because I believe that, at its best, Socialism corresponds most closely to an existence that is both rational and moral. It stands for co-operation, not confrontation; for fellowship, not fear. It stands for equality, not because it wants people to be the same but because only through equality in our economic circumstances can our individuality develop properly.”

I’ll let you try to translate that generalized gibberish. Take the words “rational,” “moral,” “co-operation,” “fellowship,” “equality in our economic circumstances,” and run them to ground. Attempt to apply them to actual life. Determine what actual policies and regulations would flow from them.

Tony is one of the deans of the Academy of Great Generalities. He knows how to shovel it on wide and deep. His one skill is appearing earnest and sincere.

He shares that attribute with many of his socialist colleagues. They’ve learned their tricks at the feet of mentors, and you can trace the line all the way back to Plato.

“We’re not Stalin, we’re not Mao. Honest. We want to do good. Help us help you. We’re all in this together. There’s a bright day ahead. Just let us do our work.”

Or as Bill Clinton famously put it, “I feel your pain.”

No one heard him say, under his breath, “Of course, I pay no attention to feelings.”

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image credit: CDD20 

Where Did the Rest of the Internet Go?

by Truthstream Media
April 11, 2022



Video also available at Truthstream Media BitChute channel.

Connect with Truthstream Media

The New Human Created by Technocracy: Bio-Digital Convergence

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
April 13, 2022

We have a stunning February 2020 report, “Exploring Biodigital Convergence,” released by “Policy Horizons Canada… a strategic foresight organization within the Government of Canada…”

The report lays out a pattern of joining biology and digital technology to create new humans.

This IS the planned future.

It doesn’t take a genius to see that this is the far shore of a global control grid.

I’ll start with a sprinkling of quotes from the report; they give you a general notion of what this “revolution” is about:

“Biological and digital systems are converging, and could change the way we work, live, and even evolve as a species.”

“More than a technological change, this biodigital convergence may transform the way we understand ourselves and cause us to redefine what we consider human or natural.”

“Digital technologies and biological systems are beginning to combine and merge in ways that could be profoundly disruptive to our assumptions about society, the economy, and our bodies. We call this the biodigital convergence.”

“Full physical integration of biological and digital identities.”

“Biodigital convergence is opening up striking new ways to: Change human beings – our bodies, minds, and behaviours…Change or create other organisms …”

Now here is a passage that should pull you up short:

“Digital technology can be embedded in organisms, and biological components can exist as parts of digital technologies. The physical meshing, manipulating, and merging of the biological and digital are creating new hybrid forms of life and technology, each functioning in the tangible world, often with heightened capabilities.”

“Robots with biological brains and biological bodies with digital brains already exist, as do human-computer and brain-machine interfaces. The medical use of digital devices in humans, as well as digitally manipulated insects such as drone dragonflies and surveillance locusts, are examples of digital technology being combined with biological entities. By tapping into the nervous system and manipulating neurons, tech can be added to an organism to alter its function and purpose. New human bodies and new senses of identity could arise as the convergence continues.”

That last paragraph has citations referring to published studies. I plowed my way through one, which detailed experiments with rats. The researchers found new ways of embedding many, many “threads” in the rats’ brains. These threads can presumably deliver information/commands to the brain. That would be the goal.

So this report on biodigital convergence is more than theory. It’s more than speculation. It’s extrapolation from current research. And it’s “forward looking.” At times, it barely contains its enthusiasm for a future in which humans aren’t humans anymore. Humans are “more.”

Here are several other quotes from the report:

“…biology is subject to influence and manipulation that was not possible a few years ago.”

“For example, gene sequencing [enabled by digital technology] combined with artificial intelligence (AI) leads to understanding genetic expression, which is then used to alter existing organisms to create organic compounds in new ways or even entirely synthetic organisms.”

“Neural nets – computer systems that are designed based on biological brains – are an example of how biological understanding is shaping digital technology.”

One hand washes the other. The biological and the digital hands collaborate.

But surely, people still understand that biology is fundamentally different from digital technology. Right? Read the next quote from the report:

“As we continue to better understand and control the mechanisms that underlie biology, we could see a shift away from vitalism – the idea that living and nonliving organisms are fundamentally different because they are thought to be governed by different principles. Instead, the idea of biology as having predictable and digitally manageable characteristics may become increasingly common as a result of living in a biodigital age. Any student of biology today will have grown up in a digital world and may consciously or subconsciously apply that [new] frame of reference to bioinformatics and biology generally.”

The report is talking about a cultural shift.

People immersed in “the digital world” will no longer view biology as VITAL AND ALIVE and the digital as MECHANICAL AND DEAD.

Instead, living biology will just be one more territory to be manipulated; like a machine that can be improved.

Therefore, the whole concept that LIFE IS VIOLATED by manipulating it and altering it radically…will fade out and go away.

The idea that biology is one thing and the digital is another will vanish.

Continuing to quote from the report:

“As digital technology became more complex and connected, the system began to mimic the characteristics of the biological world, leading to the notion of technological ecosystems. Biological models are also being used to develop digital tools, such as AI based on neural nets.”

Did you catch that phrase, “technological ecosystems?” Suddenly, the non-living—machines and data—is thought of as living. And many tech oriented people would say, “Well, of course. The systems ARE living. And if you don’t agree, you’re hopelessly old-fashioned and holding on to an irrelevant paradigm.”

The report: “Biodigital convergence is…moving away from the centralized models of pharmaceutical and industrial biotech toward widespread commercial and consumer use. These range from bioprinters that create organic tissue, to synthetic biology machines that can be programmed to create entirely new organisms. For example, Printeria is an all-in-one bioengineering device that automates the process of printing genetic circuits in bacteria. It is intended to be as easy to use as a domestic desktop printer and is projected to cost $1,500.”

Anyone can EXPERIENCE the blending of digital and biological by carrying out experiments at home.

And speaking of home, here from the report is a “possible scenario” occurring in the new biodigital world; up close and personal.

Note: Given what you’ve already read so far, this scenario is a decidedly Lite and cheery version of what it would be like to live in the new world. Further, there are all sorts of pseudoscientific assumptions about medical/health solutions and climate change EMBEDDED PERMANENTLY in the AI programs that govern daily life:

From the report: “I wake up to the sunlight and salty coastal air of the Adriatic sea. I don’t live anywhere near the Mediterranean, but my AI, which is also my health advisor, has prescribed a specific air quality, scent, and solar intensity to manage my energy levels in the morning, and has programmed my bedroom to mimic this climate.”

“I send a brain message [a thought] to open the app that controls my insulin levels and make sure my pancreas is optimally supported.”

“I check my brain’s digital interface to read the dream data that was recorded and processed in real time last night. My therapy app analyzes the emotional responses I expressed while I slept. It suggests I take time to be in nature this week to reflect on my recurring trapped-in-a-box dream and enhance helpful subconscious neural activity. My AI recommends a ‘forest day’. I think ‘okay’, and my AI and neural implant do the rest.”

The neural implant, triggered by a mere thought from the compliant citizen, creates the virtual “forest day.”

“The summary of my bugbot surveillance footage shows that my apartment was safe from intruders (including other bugbots) last night, but it does notify me that my herd of little cyber-dragonflies are hungry. They’ve been working hard collecting data and monitoring the outside environment all night, but the number of mosquitoes and lyme-carrying ticks they normally hunt to replenish their energy was smaller than expected. With a thought, I order some nutrient support for them.”

“Building codes and home energy infrastructure are synchronized, and require all homes be autoregulated for efficiency. Because houses and buildings are biomimetic and incorporate living systems for climate control wherever possible, they are continuously filtering the air and capturing carbon. I check my carbon offset measure to see how much credit I will receive for my home’s contribution to the government’s climate change mitigation program.”

“I replace the smart sticker that monitors my blood chemistry, lymphatic system, and organ function in real time. It’s hard to imagine the costs and suffering that people must have endured before personalized preventative medicine became common.”

“Today’s microbiome breakdown is displayed on the front of my fridge as I enter the kitchen. It’s tracking a steady shift as I approach middle age: today it suggests miso soup as part of my breakfast, because my biome needs more diversity as a result of recent stress and not eating well last night.”

“I take my smart supplement, which just popped out of my bioprinter. The supplement adjusts the additional nutrients and microbes I need, and sends data about my body back to my bioprinter to adjust tomorrow’s supplement. The feedback loop between me and my bioprinter also cloud-stores daily data for future preventive health metrics. The real-time monitoring of my triglycerides is important, given my genetic markers.”

“As my coffee pours, I check my daughter’s latest school project, which has been growing on the counter for the past week. She’s growing a liver for a local puppy in need as part of her empathy initiative at school. More stem cells are on the way to start a kidney too, because she wants to help more animals. I grab my coffee, brewed with a new certified carbon-negative bean variety, and sit on the couch for a minute.”

Many people reading this scenario would jump at the chance to live in that world—blithely assuming all would be well.

They would never guess their neural implants OVERRIDE decisions they themselves make that run counter to government “recommended behavior.”

Nor would they imagine the varieties of strange hybrid creatures that abound in this Brave New World. Animal-human-machine creatures, whose functions are assigned by technocratic rulers.

And the last thing they’d realize is that they could very well BE those animal-human-machine creatures.

Finally, for now; there is one element which keeps people from admitting that “science fiction” can actually come to pass. They believe people living in a dystopian science fiction world would KNOW it was horrible and life-destroying—and would rebel.

But the Canadian report points out that our culture is burying that knowledge. People of the near-future could hold beliefs which affirm the biodigital convergence as a major ADVANCE. As PROGRESS. As an Evolved Reality. As Truth.

With the memory of the past…gone.

CODA: Under several headings, the report lists biodigital strategies. They’re chilling. You can easily discern the implications.

HEADING: “What new capabilities arise from biodigital convergence?”

“Altering the human genome – our core biological attributes and characteristics.”

“Monitoring, altering and manipulating human thoughts and behaviours.”

“Neurotechnologies read brain signals to monitor attention and manage fatigue.”

“New ways to monitor, manage, and influence bodily functions, as well as predict, diagnose, and treat disease.”

“Digital devices can be worn or embedded in the body to treat and monitor functionality.”

“Biohacking with implanted digital devices to enhance bodily functions.”

“Nanobots and nanomaterials can operate and precisely deliver drugs within living creatures.”

HEADING: “New ways to change or create other organisms”

“Changing the type or amount of inputs that organisms need to grow.”

“Synthetic biology draws inspiration from biology, engineering, computer science, and physics for the design and construction of new biological entities.”

HEADING: “new ways to alter ecosystems”

“Changing and eradicating entire species.”

“Altering the natural environment at scale.”

HEADING: “New ways to sense, store, process, and transmit information”

“Turning organisms into biocomputers.”

In the ENDNOTES section of the report, you can find links to published research on biodigital experiments.

Example: “Brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) hold promise for the restoration of sensory and motor function and the treatment of neurological disorders, but clinical BMIs have not yet been widely adopted, in part because modest channel counts have limited their potential. In this white paper, we describe Neuralink’s first steps toward a scalable high-bandwidth BMI system. We have built arrays of small and flexible electrode “threads”, with as many as 3,072 electrodes per array distributed across 96 threads. We have also built a neurosurgical robot capable of inserting six threads (192 electrodes) per minute. Each thread can be individually inserted into the brain with micron precision for avoidance of surface vasculature and targeting specific brain regions.”

Example: “A project called DragonflEye, conducted by the research and development organization Draper in conjunction with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, is turning the insects into hybrid drones. Live dragonflies are equipped with backpacks containing navigation systems, which tap directly into their nervous systems. The dragonflies can then be ‘steered’ to fly in certain directions. The whole thing is powered by miniature solar panels in the backpacks.”

Example: “Scientists have created the world’s first living organism that has a fully synthetic and radically altered DNA code. The lab-made microbe, a strain of bacteria that is normally found in soil and the human gut, is similar to its natural cousins but survives on a smaller set of genetic instructions.”

Example: “…we built a dual-core CPU combining two orthogonal core processors in a single cell. In principle, human cells integrating multiple orthogonal CRISPR/Cas9-based core processors could offer enormous computational capacity.”

Example: “The daring Chinese biophysicist who created the world’s first gene-edited children has been set free after three years in a Chinese prison. He Jiankui created shock waves in 2018 with the stunning claim that he’d altered the genetic makeup of IVF embryos and implanted them into a woman’s uterus, leading to the birth of twin girls. A third child was born the following year.”

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image credit: Placidplace / pixabay

World Council for Health: Urgent Call to Oppose W.H.O. ‘Global Pandemic Agreement’ Which Threatens the Sovereignty of All Humanity #StopTheTreaty



As the World Council for Health (WCH), our partners and allies have already sought to draw attention to, the World Health Organization (WHO) has proposed a global pandemic agreement that will give it undemocratic rights over sovereign people. See the WCH Open Letter in response to this attempted power grab here.

WHO has quietly opened the floor for comments on the agreement but has provided little time to do so ahead of the first round of hearings scheduled for April 12 and 13.

We encourage everyone to share their thoughts with World Health Organization before the deadline.

1. Go to the World Health Organization website to submit a written submission now

Written submissions are short and can be up to 250 words/1250 characters. The deadline for written submissions is 3 pm UTC on Wednesday, April 13.

• Submissions must be in response to the provided guiding question: What substantive elements do you think should be included in a new international instrument on pandemic preparedness and response?

Why do I need to frame my submission using WHO’s provided context?

Because the WHO reserves the right to judge the relevancy of submissions, it is important to respond to the prompt in an appropriate yet constructive manner. As such, the World Council for Health suggests the following elements be addressed:

• National and local leadership retain full autonomy, reserving the right to make decisions based on what is best for their own people.
• The ability of nations and local municipalities to opt out of any and all portions of the agreement as they see fit, without consequence.
• An open and transparent process with the ability for all people of the world to vote on including failsafe measures that will prevent the application of the global agreement in places where a majority of the people do not want it.
• Measures that do not allow for influence in the process by any and all pharmaceutical companies or other global health profiteers.

The hearing will be livestreamed here on Tuesday, April 12.

2. Relay your action on Social Media

The Transgender Culture War Needs Parents Who Are Cowards

by Jon Rappoport, No More Fake News
April 11, 2022

Are you a parent who wants to sacrifice your young child? Sign up today in the culture war. Kneel down before predators and act like the coward you are.

The campaign to turn young children into “gender fluid” creatures isn’t just the goal of groups of schoolteacher-groomers. No. It’s embedded in the curriculum. It’s official.

Read this gobbledygook. Read it like your child’s life is hanging in the balance:

Daily Mail: “First-graders in New Jersey will be learning about gender identity with new sex education curriculum which includes a lesson that teaches children they can have ‘boy parts’ but ‘feel like’ a girl.”

“The new lessons, which are part of a broader, K-12 health and sex education curriculum adopted by the New Jersey Board of Education, are alarming some parents, Asbury Park Press first reported.”

“One of the 30-minute lesson plans, called ‘Pink, Blue and Purple,’ teaches the students to define ‘gender, gender identity and gender role stereotypes”.”

“Another lesson plan, this one for second-graders called ‘Understanding Our Bodies,’ tells teachers to instruct students that ‘being a boy or a girl doesn’t have to mean you have those parts, there are some body parts that mostly just girls have and some parts that mostly just boys have’.”

“‘Most people have a vulva and a vagina or a penis and testicles, but some people’s bodies can be different,’ the plan states. ‘Your body is exactly what is right for you’.”

“The new state sex education guidelines, which go into effect in September, were handed out to parents at the Westfield Board of Education meeting in February, and included instructions for teachers to tell students that their gender identity is up to them.”

“‘You might feel like you’re a boy even if you have body parts that some people might tell you are “girl” parts,’ the lesson plan states.”

“‘You might feel like you’re a girl even if you have body parts that some people might tell you are “boy” parts. And you might not feel like you’re a boy or a girl, but you’re a little bit of both. No matter how you feel, you’re perfectly normal!’”

ALL THIS FOR FIRST AND SECOND GRADERS.

So if you’re a parent, you can bow down and have your little child exposed to this. It’s free. You don’t have to pay for it—unless you’re bright enough to realize your taxes are payments.

Be a coward. Let lunatics teach your children. Be tolerant of all points of view. This is the definition of culture, right?

Face it. YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT TO TEACH YOUR KIDS. You abdicated that responsibility years ago. So let the schools take over for you. It’s easy. You don’t have to speak up. You can stay silent.

If you need to, you can find a study somewhere that concludes children are “already sexual.” This will give you comfort. It’ll prove that…well, who knows what it proves? It doesn’t really prove anything. But it’s a study. So that’s good.

Here’s a question: With the government in charge of education, what did you think schools would eventually turn into?

Factories for destroying minds and bodies. There is a number…nobody knows what it is precisely, but it represents the size of government. When that number is exceeded—and we exceeded it long ago—the government turns on the people and treats them as mortal enemies. It doesn’t matter what kind of government it is. From that point on, the people must be crushed.

But don’t worry, be happy, parent. You can be happy if you back up far enough from your children and let them absorb the brunt of the attack. You can have a proxy victim stand in for you. You can delude yourself into thinking that it’s only your child who’ll pay the price.

I assure you, they’re coming after you, too. You just don’t see it yet. You should see it, because when the government destroys your child, you’re supposed to see it.

You could see it by recognizing that when the Dept. of Homeland Security and the Attorney General start making noises about parents who stand up for their children at school boards—calling the parents domestic terrorists—THAT’S A CLUE.

By my calculation, parents who let their children face destruction should be in prison. The problem is, the government runs the prisons, and the government wants you to give up your children to the State.

Maybe we could open citizen-run prisons for parents who surrender their children to the State. There’s a new idea. A private prison. For cowards.

When I was a kid, if the school system had been teaching gender anything, a whole army of parents would have marched into the principal’s office and read him the riot act. He would have folded and crumbled in a minute. He would have gotten down on his knees and wept and apologized and scrapped that curriculum the same day.

That was the 1940s. It tells you something about what has happened in America since then. Fathers’ balls have turned into jelly.

They’ve become traitors to their own families.

They’re hiding behind a wall of delusions.

They think their primary duty is BEING NICE.

Cowards. Moral cowards.

In any community worth its salt, they would be shunned. Never spoken to. Exiled.

You should pray that if your children make it to adulthood, you won’t be around. Because if you are around, those children are going to look at you with an accusation that sets you on fire and burns you down to the ground.

When they were five and six years old, you let them into a cage with wild animals. And you turned around with a smile on your face and walked away.

Connect with Jon Rappoport

cover image credit: OpenClipart-Vectors

The Ruse of Exemptions: When Government Calls The Shots

by Rosanne Lindsay, Nature of Healing
April 10, 2022

Exemptions are privileges. What the government giveth, the government can taketh away.
Rights are not gifts from government.
– Nature of Healing

The Ruse of Benefits & Privileges

Government laws exist to grant “BENEFITS and PRIVILEGES” to citizens who agree to be governed. Benefits and privileges do not usurp birthrights, rights that are inborn or inherent. Thus, birthrights supersede laws, mandates, and exemptions.

A government exemption is an “opt out.” By asking permission of government to opt out from any government-imposed health mandates, you agree to bypass birthrights.

Under exemptions, you are requesting permission from government to make a choice that you already possess. Remember, bodily autonomy is a BIRTHRIGHT. You come into this world alone. You leave this world alone,  without government approval. Therefore, an exemption or an Exemption Act, is a form of entrapment known as Color of Law.

Color of law refers to an appearance of legal power to act that may operate in violation of law. Since the inception of the United States in 1776, both presidents and governors have been bypassing the laws through illegal Executive Orders (E.O.s) under Color of Law. Even though it might be argued that ALL federal Acts fall under the Color of Law, the chances of adjudicating an equitable solution through the court system is about as likely as isolating the Coronavirus in a lab. The CDC still admits there is no gold standard for the isolation of any virus.

So it is by the will of the people that allows government to usurp its authority and ensure the end of freedom of choice for all. In the near future, in order to attain an education, or maintain a job, to enter a hospital or clinic, to shop or travel, in order to live within any community, or function on any practical level within society, people will be made to get government shots.

The Ruse of Exemption

Have you been told to get a medical or religious exemption by your employer? Think again.

Government-granted exemptions for government-imposed health mandates are strategically designed to fail by entrapping those members of the community who sign onto them. Why?

Because here is no legal defense or enforcement for religious or medical exemptions since businesses have no legal duty of care from imposing mandates in the first place, based on the The Doctrine of Assumption of Risk.

The Doctrine of Assumption of Risk states that no business is liable to protect others from a risk that’s widely known or believed to exist in the community.

An exemption means there has to be a legal duty of care. If there is no legal duty, there is no exemption. A legal duty is a legal obligation, the breach of which can result in liability. Businesses that impose mandates must have an insurance policy. Without one, no court will take jurisdiction. A plaintiff in court will never win. This is another reason you do not have to beg for a right you already possess.

In addition, laws cannot conflict with each other. So, for instance, when mandates, statutes, Acts, or Executive Orders conflict with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), then there is a violation of the legal duty of care.

What about Constitutional protections? New policies appear to obsolete the Constitution by empowering state and local officials to issue vaccine mandates. This begs the questions, 1) Is the Constitution null and void? and 2) was the Constitution merely a contract written and signed by a small group of wealthy men to protect themselves and their interests?

The Ruse of “Public Health”

Federal (statutory) Acts attempt to protect “the public health” with “statutory rights.”  Beware: A “statutory right” is an oxymoron, similar to public health, safe vaccine, and honest thief.  It is meant to confuse.

All federal Acts steer “the public” into a herd by the language of legalease. 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. See how California revoked all vaccine-related exemptions. By taking the Public out of Public Health, we begin to reclaim responsibility for choice and freedom.

The success of any Act depends from which perspective you view its success. From the first Act, passed in 1784, to the latest draft government Acts, ALL Acts appear to be an extension of The CIRCUS Act. From the people’s perspective, success rates are dismal thanks to exemptions and exceptions to exemptions in every Act. A few examples include:

The CLEAN AIR Act of 1970 with exemptions, and The CLEAR SKIES Act of 2019 – serves to create dirty skies with exemptions for oil refineries and power plants and the most toxic bunker fuel operations.

The CLEAN WATER Act of 1972  and its exemptions that serve to pollute the waters.

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 QUARANTINE Acts OF 1710, and 1720, The QUARANTINE Act of 1951 – originally applied to commercial vessels for the separation of infected people, which became the Public Health Act of 1896 in Ireland, The Public Health Act of 1936 in Britain, The Public Health Service Act of 1944 in America, to The CANADA QUARANTINE ACT of 2005 – to quarantine all people, healthy and sick.

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.

See the article Transcending The Hegelian Dialectic for more information.

Note also, that any discussion of science for “public health” purposes is a purposeful distraction away from inherent rights. Do not be distracted by the vaccine debate or by the Vaxxed vs. Unvaxxed study that will never be formally approved by government. The science debate is merely a ruse to eliminate freedom.

Contagions and The American With Disabilities Act

John Jay Singleton, of TheZunga, helps people to exercise their RIGHTS to bodily autonomy under the ADA. TheZunga.com endeavors to extract people caught in the government web of exemptions under COVID19 policies. Singleton writes:

Having a contagious disease is defined as having a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Rehabilitation Act, under the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act, precludes employers from imposing any accommodations upon employees unless they meet the criteria for establishing that the employee is a direct threat following an individualized assessment (diagnosis). Employers are prohibited by law from requiring any medical examination in this process as it is an accommodation for which the employer must advise the employee that he has the right to accept or refuse

Singleton contends that the ADA, a federal law, requires businesses to aid and encourage those with disabilities in the exercise and enjoyment of their rights. This means that not only can a business owner not impose such measures on anyone, he must actively protect everyone from any violation of this law, at least by not imposing them.

To exercise and enjoy your rights doesn’t mean you have to have a disability. It means you’re regarded as having a disability. If you’re regarded as having a disability its because the government announced a public health disaster, so the legal duties come into play with the ADA. And the legal duty of care is on anyone trying to force these measure on you. John Jay Singleton

In summary, exemptions bind people to an arbitrary, and a constantly changing, list of demands. These demands supersede basic freedoms, and thereupon deny people of their inalienable, God/life given rights to self-determination of their bodies. As the government giveth, so, too, can the government taketh away, on a whim.

No Consent

Governments have inverted inherent rights by statutes, policies, Acts, E.O.s and exemptions. In doing so, they have bound freedom, itself, to a contract. All government Acts apply to government entities and persons; not to men and women. Men and women are not subject to Acts, because they are not subjects.

Exemption or no exemptions, the power of NO always applies, as long as you can voice it. One way to say No Thank You is through a Conditional Acceptance, a lawful response to any offer to contract. Can they sign a statement agreeing to your conditions to their offer? If not, there is no contract and you remain in honor. See more at Youarelaw.org.

All Acts attempt do one thing: to allow the government to legislate choice and freedom, that is, if you consent to the offer. However, if offered an experimental product, make sure you are provided with Informed Consent (45 CFR § 46.116) before you consent, because you become a subject taking part in a clinical study.

When it comes to any mandate, it is important to appreciate that all exemptions (medical, religious, or philosophical/personal belief), are fundamentally illegal, because they transpose an inherent human RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE, on the presumption that you acknowledge, and thus sacrifice or forfeit your natural BIRTHRIGHTS to an external authority.

For instance, there is no American authority for compulsory vaccination, in the sense of forcing one to submit even if policies require compliance. When it comes to commerce, everything is an offer to contract. When it comes to Acts, All the world is a stage.

Shakespeare titled his play, As You Like It, as if to say, you always have a choice. There is no law that compels anyone to do anything related to mandated restrictions, whether COVID-related or not. The freedom to choose is non-negotiable. You always have options just like you have opinions. However, in this era, freedom must be defended and claimed as a BIRTHRIGHT.

Do you trust a government calling the shots under the ruse of exemptions? Now is the time to seize your courage, to wake up, to rise up and to find your will to act for yourself. As always, freedom lives in you!

Updated from May 21, 2019.

Related Articles

• Freedom Exists Under Natural Law
• The Ruse of Children’s Rights
• Taking the Public Out of Public Health
• Vaccine Debate: Ruse to Eliminate Freedom
• U.S. Constitution Expired. California Exemptions Revoked. Natural Law Stands.

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

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

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

cover image credit: SantiagoGonzález_ad / pixabay

See also:

The Not-So-NICE ACT

Fmr CDC Director: Bird Flu Is the Real Pandemic – C19 Was Just Practice

by Christian Westbrook, Ice Age Farmer
April 9, 2022

Former CDC Director Robert Redfield has stated that Bird Flu will jump to humans and be highly fatal in the coming “Great Pandemic,” for which C19 was a mere warm-up.



See also:

Fmr CDC Director: Bird Flu is the Real Pandemic – C19 was just practice

Connect with Ice Age Farmer

The Not-So-NICE ACT

by Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath, Nature of Healing
April 7, 2022

A catchy title, The NICE Act, (HR 5816), is a federal Act recently introduced in Congress under the appearance of a Health Freedom Bill.

Look closer. The NICE Act is not what it appears to be. It attempts to do something it is not designed to do. Then again, the rule of law always has exceptions. In this case, it is important to be aware that federal Acts regulate commerce, not people. Note, when federal Acts attempt to regulate people, money is always involved.

Follow the money.

The NAUGHTY but NICE Act?

Where there is government overreach, The NICE Act (HR 5816) becomes The Naughty Act. Let us break it down into 8 proofs:

A BILL…

“To prohibit the federal Government, or State or local government or other entity receiving federal funding, from requiring any citizen to be vaccinated, including federal agencies from requiring its employees to take any vaccination, without the citizen being fully advised in writing of all known potential risks from the vaccine and consultation with a physician followed by the voluntary informed consent of the citizen, and for other purposes.”

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “National Informed Consent Exemption (NICE) Act.”

1.‍ This bill directly affects any entity, or person, receiving federal money.

1. 1. The federal Government, and persons receiving federal funding, are prohibited from requiring any citizen to be vaccinated or tested for an infectious disease without due process of law. Citizens have the fundamental right to decline vaccination for an infectious disease without penalty.

Aha! The beginning of the money trail. This Act attempts to regulate an individual’s choice for healing. Whether a citizen chooses vaccination or not speaks to consent, not Informed Consent. This is a consent bill masquerading as an Informed Consent bill. However, whatever this bill claims to be, the freedom to choose is a Right, far removed from federal commerce and its regulations. How people heal is protected by States and State Constitutions, and should not be redefined by federal Acts that attempt to legislate choice.

2. Informed Consent is Not Consent

Informed Consent already exists in a current law, codified at 45 CFR § 46.116 – General requirements for informed consent. It exists to protect a patient’s right to receive information, including risks, before accepting or declining a medical procedure. No one is required to submit to any procedures without informed consent. Again, informed consent is not to be confused with Consent, meaning the ability for someone to accept or to decline an offer, such a vaccination. This bears repeating.

Informed consent occurs when there is agreement to an interaction or action rendered with knowledge of relevant facts, such as the risks involved or any available alternatives. Informed consent often comes up in the contexts of legal ethics, medical treatment, and waiver of constitutional rights. – Legal Information Institute.

It is important to know that a government-granted exemption is a privilege, not a right. The ability to decline a medical procedure, including vaccination, is, and always has been, a Right. Rights are inborn, granted by the Creator. Rights do not come from government. Governments are established to protect the rights of men and women. See ‘The Declaration of Independence.’

No government has the power to legislate a right, even when naming it as “an exemption,” unless the people sign on, with their signatures.

3. Medical freedom is much broader than vaccines, alone.

This medical freedom bill is limited in scope, focusing on freedom from vaccine mandates only, as if vaccination is a gold standard with few exceptions. What about freedom from coercion, drugging, medical testing, medical tracking, medical chipping, and all forms of medical tyranny inside and outside of “public health emergencies?”

4. Under the NICE Act, citizens would agree that this human right (the right to decline a vaccine) does not apply when:

(3) Federal, State, and local emergencies where the governing authority has first formally applied to the President of the United States of America for a NICE exception, and provided that the President in his discretion formally authorizes the requested exception based on the following criteria proven by the governing authority: (i) compliance with the procedure in section 5(b) would be materially impractical, (ii) the requested NICE exception would not materially interfere with National Security, and (iii) short-term and long-term side effects from the vaccination, including serious injuries and deaths, have been proven to occur in less than 1 in 200,000 individuals.

Did you notice that this bill includes exceptions for the exemption? Would a perceived threat to national security invalidate the NICE exemption? What authority determines the level of security threat that would trigger this revocation? Would government be able to deploy a mass vaccine rollout in public schools, as has happened in the past? The language of this bill attempts to swap a privilege for a privilege, with exemptions for an exemption, but remember, human rights ALWAYS apply.

5. Any medical procedures, drugs, or vaccines are always optional, yet the NICE Act makes the assumption that there is always an exception.

The NICE Act (HR5816) reads:

(b) Vaccination shall henceforth be optional to citizens, except as provided in section 5, for their participation in society, including but not limited to education, travel, employment, government service, housing, social welfare programs, access to courts, and medical care.

6. Americans currently have guardianship laws and power of attorney, yet this Act would not apply to:

(1) lawfully incarcerated and institutionalized individuals lacking the right or ability to meaningfully provide informed consent or informed refusal;

7. The authors of this Act say this law would also not apply to the following:

(2) courts of law issuing individualized court orders specific to one individual, provided the court order applies strict scrutiny following a hearing affording due process of law to the individual affected;

Still, governments have no authority to vaccinate anyone against his will. Even though governments do coerce, they cannot mandate a vaccination.

8. This bill creates victims and subjects of the court system if violations occur under the Act.

(a) Any person who has been the victim of a violation of this Act may bring a civil action for damages against any responsible party.

Legally, a “PERSON” means an individual, a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, association, trust, unincorporated organization, or other legal entity or organization, or a Government Body. Alternatively, if you are not a PERSON, subject to this Act, then you are neither a victim of the Act, nor a subject of the federal judicial system.

Law Basics 101

The United States Congress was established for the purpose of making and enacting laws that protect the rights and freedoms of people. However, people existed before the government existed. Therefore, the rights of people supersede government laws, Acts, statutes, and dictates. Since the

origin of rights and freedom comes from birth, they are known as birth RIGHTS.

Government laws exist as “BENEFITS and PRIVILEGES.” However, since the inception of the United States in 1776, both presidents and governors have been bypassing the laws through illegal Executive Orders (E.O.s) under Color of Law. Even though it might be argued that federal Acts fall under the Color of Law, the chances of finding a solution through the court system is about as likely as isolating the Coronavirus. The CDC still admits there is no gold standard for the isolation of any virus.

Government-granted exemptions for government-imposed health mandates are strategically designed to fail by entrapping those members of the community who sign onto them. Firstly, there is no legal defense or enforcement for religious or medical exemptions because businesses have no legal duty of care from imposing mandates based on the The Doctrine of Assumption of Risk.

The Doctrine of Assumption of Risk states that no business is liable to protect others from a risk that’s widely known or believed to exist in the community.

Secondly, laws cannot conflict with each other. So when mandates or Executive Orders conflict with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), then there is a violation of the legal duty of care. A legal duty is a legal obligation, the breach of which can result in liability. Businesses that impose mandates must have an insurance policy.

John Jay Singleton, of Zunga, says, Federal law, the ADA, requires businesses to aid and encourage those with disabilities in the exercise and enjoyment of their rights. This means that not only can a business owner not impose such measures on anyone, he must actively protect everyone from any violation of this law, at least by not imposing them.

To exercise and enjoy your rights doesn’t mean you have to have a disability. It means you’re regarded as having a disability. If you’re regarded as having a disability its because the government announced a public health disaster, so the legal duties come into play with the ADA. And the legal duty of care is on anyone trying to force these measure on you. John Jay Singleton

An exemption means there has to be a legal duty of care. If there is no legal duty, there is no exemption. So no court will take jurisdiction. A plaintiff in court will never win. This is another reason you do not have to beg for a right you already possess.

Exemptions bind people to an arbitrary, and a constantly changing, list of demands. These demands supersede basic freedoms, and thereupon deny people of their inalienable, God/life given rights to self-determination of their bodies. As the government giveth, so, too, can the government taketh away, on a whim.

It is important to appreciate that all vaccine-related exemptions, whether, medical, religious, moral/philosophical/personal belief, naughty or NICE, are fundamentally illegal, because they transpose an inherent human RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE, on the presumption that you acknowledge, and thus sacrifice, or forfeit, your natural born rights and ‘freedom to choose’ to an external authority.

Not So NICE

Do supporters of this bill suddenly trust a government calling the shots under the ruse of exemptions? Do they support a government morphing into a One World Government?

What if declining to participate in Acts preserves your authenticity and your rights?

All Acts attempt do one thing: to allow the government to legislate choice and freedom, that is …if you consent to the offer. But were you provided Informed Consent?

For instance, there is no American authority for compulsory vaccination, in the sense of forcing one to submit. When it comes to the government, everything is an offer to contract. When it comes to Acts, All the world is a stage.

Science vs. Rights. Why They Must Remain Separate

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

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

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Naturopath

cover image credit: PDPics / pixabay

Beak Masks

by Joel Salatin, The Lunatic Farmer

As avian influenza runs through the nation’s poultry flocks, with the current extermination of about 28 million laying hens and turkeys, I can’t help but wonder why we aren’t putting beak masks on the chickens.

If masks are so effective against viruses in the human population, why don’t we just make a chicken mask to stop this virus?  Seems like a better fix than exterminating all these animals.

The problem is that Dr. Fauci isn’t in the chicken business.  Rats.  What a shame.  If only he were in charge of chickens, he’d have this thing under control in a day.  I think we need to expand his authority to the animals of America so he can take care of them like he’s taken care of the humans of America.

When avian flu broke out in our part of Virginia many years ago, two of the federal veterinarians sent in to exterminate chickens visited me just to chat.  The independent visits shared an identical assessment:  too many chickens crammed in too tight a space in too small a geographic area.  Both said if they mentioned that publicly they would be fired.

Hmmmm, I wonder if decentralization of poultry would be better than centralization.  Notice that on one farm, 5.8 million laying hens were destroyed—ON ONE FARM!

It’s all blamed on wildlife.  Folks, whenever a culture views wildlife as a liability rather than asset, you know everything is wonky.  It’s like blaming babies for drug addiction.  Or blaming churches for drunkards.  When wildlife is the enemy, something is out of whack in the culture’s thinking.

I don’t trust the tests.  I don’t trust the experts.  I don’t trust the bureaucrats.  Isn’t it amazing that as a culture, we’re fixated on prolonging human life for a week or two with ultra-expensive, painful, and invasive intervention but at the first sign of sniffles in a chicken, the “only” cure, according to the experts, is mass extermination.  Perhaps the wrong beings are being exterminated.  Just sayin’.

The biggest tragedy is that these government gumshoes will come onto a property, without a warrant and unannounced, demanding to pull blood from pastured chickens.  They’ll take that sample to a lab driven by political agendas and industrial paradigms (chickens locked in houses are healthier than chickens roaming on a pasture) to determine positive or negative.

Does this sound like incestuous fraternal collusion shenanigans to you?

Connect with The Lunatic Farmer

cover image based on creative commons work of ELG21 & ArtRose

Globalists Spill the Beans at the World Government Summit — Controlled Digital Monetary System & Ongoing ‘WWW III’

Truth Comes to Light editor‘s note: Excerpts from New World Next Week Interview 1720

[Globalist/Elitist] Dr Pippa Malmgren:

“And what we’re seeing in the world today, I think, is we are on the brink of a dramatic change where we are about to, and I’ll say this boldly, we’re about to abandon the traditional system of money and accounting and introduce a new one.

And the new one, the new accounting, is what we call blockchain. It means digital. It means having a almost perfect record of every single transaction that happens in the economy, which will give us far greater clarity over what’s going on.”

James Evan Pilato:

“Like Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum, she sees covid as an opportunity to transform the world. The new money system Malmgren talks about with such enthusiasm will not only be digital, it’ll be centralized and programmable.

As we’ve talked about the Bitcoin psyop now for several years, don’t confuse this with Bitcoin or other actual cryptocurrencies. The only thing it’ll share in common with other crypto is that it will be based on blockchain technology.

So what do they mean by programmable money? This means that central banks will have complete control over your money and can program it so that it can only be spent on certain things, in certain places.”

[Globalist/Elitist] Dr Pippa Malmgren:

“We’re already in World War III. We are already in conflict that extends so far beyond Ukraine actually, even within the context of western Europe. But we’ve clearly been pretty much at war in space, below the surface of the ocean, submarine warfare between superpowers. I would even say that this has been happening for a least four years, and it spilled over into public view on the ground. But we don’t frame it that way.”

James Corbett:

“And then Pippa goes on with that statement, but also she prefaces that statement by saying what underpins a world order is always the financial system. Ding Ding Ding Ding. That is true… What is happening in Ukraine right now fundamentally, at base, is not a geopolitical event. It is a monetary event, a changeover in the monetary paradigm of the world…

This is what it’s about. It’s the change over to the central bank digital currency paradigm. And, as she points out, the Chinese are pioneering it. And they’re the first ones to roll out with the digital yuan. And they’re spearheading this thrust into the digital divide — between pre-digital humanity and trans-humanity…

It’s all about… how we set the rules around this. And who gets to be in charge of the system. Yes, this could be used for bad purposes, this kind of digital ID surveillance tracking control of everything that everyone does. But as long as it’s in the right hands, it’ll be okay. And you will notice that the pimps of the New World order will always frame it this way.”

Globalists Spill the Beans at the World Government Summit

by James Corbett & James Evan Pilato, The Corbett Report
April 7, 2022



Watch on Archive / BitChute / Minds / Odysee or Download the mp4

Story #1: Economist at ‘World Government Summit’ Says New Financial World Order About to Shift In Dramatic New Direction

https://leohohmann.com/2022/03/31/bombshell-video-economist-at-world-government-summit-says-new-financial-world-order-about-to-shift-in-dramatic-new-direction/

Han Solo Pimps World Government – #PropagandaWatch

https://www.corbettreport.com/han-solo-pimps-world-government-propagandawatch/

World Government Summit 2022 Livestream: Day 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTTDzH2A1tM

Biden Said: “There’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it.”

https://archive.ph/F2n49

Story #2: Questions Abound About Bucha Massacre

https://consortiumnews.com/2022/04/04/questions-abound-about-bucha-massacre/

Your Guide to Fifth-Generation Warfare

https://www.corbettreport.com/your-guide-to-fifth-generation-warfare/

Ukraine – The Massacre of Bucha, a Ukrainian Timisoara – Donbass Insider

https://www.donbass-insider.com/2022/04/04/ukraine-the-massacre-of-bucha-a-ukrainian-timisoara/

Misinformation from the Archives: Timisoara’s ‘Mass Graves’

https://archive.ph/JMUMT

Bucha killings: Satellite image of bodies site contradicts Russian claims

https://www.bbc.com/news/60981238

Ukraine War! What Is It Good For? Propaganda (Part 4)

https://in-this-together.com/temp-ukraine-war-part-4/

Are These Satellite Images War Propaganda?

https://newrepublic.com/article/165910/maxar-ukraine-russia-satellite-images-war-propaganda

Pentagon Can’t Independently Confirm Atrocities In Ukraine’s Bucha, Official Says

https://www.reuters.com/world/pentagon-cant-independently-confirm-atrocities-ukraines-bucha-official-says-2022-04-04/

Russia Blames Britain for Blocking UN Meeting to Discuss Alleged War Crimes In Ukraine

https://archive.ph/20hvL

UN Calls for An Independent Investigation on Bucha

https://unric.org/en/un-calls-for-an-independent-investigation-on-bucha/

The US Has No Evidence Russia Was Preparing a Chemical Attack Despite Claims

https://news.antiwar.com/2022/04/06/the-us-has-no-evidence-russia-was-preparing-a-chemical-attack-despite-claims/

In Break With Past, US Using Intel to Fight An Info War With Russia, Even When Intel Isn’t Rock Solid

https://archive.ph/9ORR9

FT: US to Announce New Sanctions Against Russia

https://archive.ph/uZwV4

NYT: What Happened on Day 38 of the War in Ukraine

https://archive.ph/VYErY

Story #3: US National Emergency Extended Due to Elevated Malicious Cyber Activity

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/us-national-emergency-extended-due-to-elevated-malicious-cyber-activity/

National Emergencies Act

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emergencies_Act

List of National Emergencies In the United States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States

Episode 411 – States of Emergency

https://www.corbettreport.com/emergency/

When False Flags Go Virtual

https://www.corbettreport.com/when-false-flags-go-virtual/

NWNW Flashback: Chinese Baby Gene-Editing Scientist Goes Missing (Dec. 6, 2018)

https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1404-new-world-next-week-with-james-evan-pilato/

Creator of CRISPR Babies Has Been Released From Chinese Prison

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/04/1048829/he-jiankui-prison-free-crispr-babies/

The New World Next Week Store

https://newworldnextweek.com/

Connect with The Corbett Report