A Beginner’s Guide to Permaculture, With Jim Gale

by Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare
May 5, 2023

Permaculture is an ecological design system focused on creating sustainable human habitats while promoting the preservation of natural resources.

It’s a philosophy.

The term “permaculture” was coined in the 1970s.

Permaculture has a few design principles that aim to create self-sustaining ecosystems that require minimal human intervention.

Diversity and abundance are key, as Jim Gale often explains.

You don’t have a snail infestation; you have a duck deficiency.

Jim Gale

The system involves creating a network of interconnected components such as plants, animals and structures that work together to produce food.

It’s about mimicking natural ecosystems.

Not only is it pretty, but it is also pretty anti-establishment because it can have a significant impact on mega-farming which relies on large-scale monoculture practices that deplete soil nutrients and harm local ecosystems.

By using permaculture principles, farmers can create diverse ecosystems that produce food while preserving natural resources.

Permaculture can also lead to more resilient farming practices that can withstand droughts, floods, and other extreme weather conditions.

Jim has been on my show before, but this time he gave me a type of beginner’s guide.

I highly recommend listening.

Connect with Jerm Warfare

Cover image credit: RuffnerRobinson

 See related:

Low-Maintenance Forest Garden Offers 500 Edible Plants

Ancient Gardens of North America

How to Save Your Life and Those You Love When Hospitalized

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
May 7, 2023

Story-at-a-Glance

• Laura Bartlett and Greta Crawford have founded an organization to address the forced treatments patients receive when they’re hospitalized for COVID-19, but the same strategy can be used to protect yourself against other medical hazards as well
• The Caregivers and Consent document they created is an “advance decision” document. So, the moment you enter the hospital, the hospital staff know what they can and cannot do to you; they are legally required to respect your current care decisions. And unlike an Advance Directive (which only kicks in when you are incapacitated) the Caregivers and Consent document goes into effect immediately
• It’s important to complete and notarize your Caregivers and Consent document BEFORE you ever need to go to the hospital
• Make sure you send the completed, signed and notarized document to the CEO of the hospital in two ways: (1) via a professional courier (one that specializes in delivering legal documents); and (2) via the Postal system with certified mail, return receipt requested. The CEO is responsible for all legal business relating to the hospital, including the medical records, so the CEO, not your attending physician, is the one whose responsibility it is to get your consent document entered into your electronic medical record
• Make at least 10 copies of the signed, notarized document and keep one copy on your person, in case you ever have an accident or acute illness requiring hospitalization. Also provide copies to the attending physician and nurse once hospitalized
• Also, should you become hospitalized (and therefore unable to personally send the document to the CEO), designate a family member or friend to send your Caregivers and Consent document on your behalf. Additional recommendations to ensure your safety are included

In this interview, Laura Bartlett and Greta Crawford detail how you can protect yourself from one of the top contributors to premature death, namely conventional hospital care. The key here is to understand what the dangers are and take proactive measures to guard yourself and your family from them.

Nearly 10 years ago, I interviewed Dr. Andrew Saul, author of “Hospitals and Health: Your Orthomolecular Guide to a Shorter, Safer Hospital Stay,” in which he details how to minimize your risk of being a victim of a medical error.

First and foremost, Saul recommended making sure you have a patient advocate, someone who can speak on your behalf if you’re incapacitated and make sure you’re receiving the correct medication and treatment. During COVID, however, family or friends were not allowed into the hospital, and patients were routinely bullied into treatments they did not want or consent to.

The good news is, Bartlett and Crawford have developed a legal document that, when served to the hospital in the proper way, can ensure that your medical wishes are honored. By eliminating any confusion about your consent (or denial of consent), this document can literally save your life.

Why ProtocolKills.com Was Created

Bartlett and Crawford have founded an organization to address the lethal and, in many cases, forced treatments patients receive when they’re hospitalized for COVID-19, but the same strategy can be used to protect yourself against other medical hazards as well. Crawford explains:

“I created a website called ProtocolKills.com. This came after I was in the hospital with COVID. In the process of going to the hospital, I was denied informed consent and was completely unaware of some of the things they were doing to me. I was given five rounds of remdesivir, which nearly took my life, and I did not even know that I was being poisoned at the time …

During that time in the hospital, I went from thinking I was going to go home after I got oxygen to actually feeling like that I was going to die. I was almost certain I was going to die after being given just the first dose of remdesivir …

[And then there was] the constant push for the vaccine in the hospital, the harassment for not getting vaxxed, and the fact that I was given medication without my knowledge at all, which led me to start the website to not only inform people about what was going on, but [as] a platform to allow other victims who were not as fortunate as me.

Many of them, the majority of them, did not make it out alive. So, it’s a platform for them to share their story. We have over 250 stories on there about what they faced in the hospital. We really wanted to get this information out there to the public, but we also wanted to give a solution, not just to scare people. And that’s where I ended up meeting Laura.”

National Hospital Hostage Hotline to the Rescue

Bartlett continues:

“Before I met Greta at the beginning of COVID, in early 2020, I started helping my brother, Dr. Richard Bartlett, who had a protocol utilizing inhaled budesonide steroid as part of his protocol to treat COVID early. We also found it very effective once people were in the hospital to help reverse [the infectious process] and also the scarring and the inflammation of the lungs.

There are instances where it even helped people who were on ventilators as long as 30 days come off the ventilator and go home. So, I was helping him get that message out in early 2020. I’m not a doctor. I’m not a nurse. I’m just somebody who could help get that known around the world. My background is in media PR …

In the process, people who knew my brother, knew me, started reaching out to both of us with stories that they were in the hospital and they were having a hard time getting the doctor to respect their right to informed consent. It was an overwhelming number of instances where people just felt like they were being bullied or coerced, that their right to try budesonide, for instance, was just dismissed.

And it was almost as if informed consent didn’t exist. But in fact, it never went away. Even during the COVID shielding for hospitals, informed consent between the doctor and the patient never went away. You always had the right to informed consent.

So that’s where my work started. In the process, since there were so many people reaching out for help, I thought, ‘Well, why doesn’t somebody come up with a way for people to quickly access some information of what their rights are and their patient rights?’

So, I started a nationwide hotline, called the Hospital Hostage Hotline [call or text 888-c19-emergency, or 888-219-3637]. It’s still in effect. I still get calls from all over the country. And I’ve been able to help people who went in even for non-COVID reasons like a urinary tract infection that was [also] diagnosed as COVID, and they were being pushed towards a protocol and told they couldn’t leave the hospital.

They needed to know they could, that they always had the right to leave AMA — Against Medical Advice — if that’s what they chose. They also have the right to either consent or not consent to things and it should be respected. I realized that one of the biggest tools for getting that informed consent notice to the doctor was not to just verbally say it, but to have it in writing. These aren’t my original ideas.

I actually had a hospital insider reach out … somebody who had been in the system and knew how to navigate the system at a high level in administration, give me some tips and tools on how to navigate the hospital system to make sure that informed consent was not only documented and delivered effectively to get into the electronic medical record, but also, what their basic patient rights were and how to advocate for them.”

You Have the Right to Leave

One drawback of signing an AMA is that insurance won’t pay for your treatment. That threat will often keep patients in the hospital because they’ll have to pay out of pocket. So, it can be used against you.

“Profit has been a big factor in a lot of suffering,” Bartlett says. “Patients were afraid to leave because they were told, like in the instance of a gentleman that I was helping in New Jersey who went in for a urinary tract infection.

He was an elderly man. This was early 2020. They quickly tested him for COVID and started him on that road towards a ventilator. And they told him flat out, ‘If you leave, none of this will be covered by insurance.’ So that was a big factor.”

Hospitals may also misinform you about your AMA rights, as we’ve seen repeatedly during COVID. More often than not, the hospital’s reluctance to release a patient has to do with protecting its revenues. Bartlett offers the following story to illustrate:

“Somebody that I was helping advocate for said the doctor actually said to them, ‘You cannot leave.’ This person was 15 or 16 days into their COVID diagnosis and they were feeling better. They were likely not COVID positive …

That’s where the name of the hotline came from. They actually felt like hostages. That’s what they were reporting to me. ‘I feel like I’m held prisoner.’ But in fact, they always had the right to leave a hospital whenever they chose to. It’s not up to the doctor when they can leave. They have to make that medical choice for themselves, whether or not they feel like they can leave.”

A Novel Consent Document That Can Save Your Life

Patients clearly need a way to put themselves back in the driver’s seat, and the novel medical consent document Bartlett and Crawford created, available on OurPatientRights.com, is the most powerful way I’ve seen so far to do that. As explained by Bartlett:

“What we learned from this whole ordeal over the last couple of years is that there was a need for a novel document that did not exist, to our knowledge, that covers your written consent. A document that documents your current consent, not an advance directive that kicks in after you’re incapacitated.

Before you go into the hospital, write down your consent wishes so that everybody involved in your care within the hospital will have eyes on it because it’s put into your electronic medical record. It’s notarized. It’s signed before you go in. That’s the key. So do it while you have full capacity.

It’s a novel strategy. I’m so grateful to the hospital insider who saw the problem and helped us navigate the system, so that we have an insider’s perspective on how to do this to keep people safe.”

As noted by Crawford, while COVID-19 may seem like a distant memory, people are still being hospitalized and diagnosed with COVID, and are being held hostage by a hostile medical system seemingly intent on milking them for all their worth, until death, if need be.

This is where filing a written medical consent form can help save your life. No doctor can override your written decision (consent) declining certain medications or treatments. Verbal communication is not enough. It must be in writing, notarized and delivered in a manner that formally serves the hospital and puts their physicians on notice.

General Consent Vs. Specific Consent

As explained by Bartlett, when you enter a hospital, you must sign a general consent authorization form. This is basically a contract between you and the hospital. Since you have bodily autonomy, they need your consent before they can do anything to you.

Typically, the general consent form authorizes hospital staff to test, treat and care for you in whatever way they see fit — and when a patient signs the general consent authorization, physicians feel justified that they can implement a hospital protocol without further explaining the risks, benefits or alternatives of that protocol to the patient.

Now, if you’re well enough to read the entire document, and see something in there that you don’t agree with, you can strike the sentence or paragraph and initial it, to indicate that you do not consent to that specific detail. However, that still doesn’t offer you much protection.

What you need is a much more specific document where you detail the types of treatments you consent to and the ones you don’t. You need to carve out a niche from the general consent form that specifies exactly what you do (and do not) consent to. And you need to be clear. Fortunately, the Caregivers and Consent document carves out that niche to communicate clearly to all physicians your exact consent wishes.

“You need a written consent document that, in addition to just the general consent, is a contract between you and the doctor, so he knows, he’s put on notice, what it is that you absolutely do not consent to. For instance, a COVID injection, if that’s your wishes,” Bartlett explains.

“They have a code of ethics, the American Medical Association guidance to physicians, per the ethics opinion 2.1.1, that when the patient surrogate has provided specific written consent, the consent form should be included in the record. This is key. Write it down. You don’t need an attorney. You don’t need any fancy training. You don’t need to be a doctor, don’t need to be a nurse.

You can write it down, and then, when you deliver it in our specific way — and it’s very important how you deliver it — it gets put into the electronic medical record for everybody to see. Now you’ve got receipts, that if you do something against consent, it’s intentional. OK?

So, here’s the website you can find a template for that.

It’s called OurPatientRights.com.

What you’ll see there are two PDF documents. [On one of the PDFs there are two pages.] One is the actual template, the other one is instructions on how to deliver it. And you can edit the document by the way. You can write your own. It’s just a template. But there’s also very specific instructions on how you are going to deliver this so it’s not disregarded.

Here’s what you’re going to see in the document. ‘I [your name] advise all physicians, nurses, and other caregivers that this Caregivers and Consent document reflects my current wishes for my care and are carefully planned and intentional wishes.’ That’s very important because it’s current. It’s not going to kick in when I’m incapacitated.”

Your Written Consent Must Be Respected

Advance medical directives don’t kick in until or unless you’re incapacitated, so that’s another completely different kind of document reflecting current consent wishes. What Bartlett and Crawford have created is an “advance decision” document. So, the moment you enter the hospital, they know what they can and cannot do to you. And, they are legally required to respect your written directives. The following section of the document reads:

“Receipt of this Caregivers and Consent document by the hospital serves as notice that I will report to the Medical Board any physician who violates my carefully planned and intentional wishes that are based upon my deeply held religious and spiritual beliefs and are delineated within this Caregivers and Consent document.”

This puts the doctor on notice. This isn’t a threat. It’s merely a factual statement that if anyone goes against your wishes, they’re intentionally disregarding your consent. Once it’s in your electronic medical record, they can’t say they didn’t know that you did not consent to a specific test, drug, vaccine or procedure. So, ignoring your written consent is then actually a criminal offense akin to assault and battery. It’s also medical malpractice.

“Let me tell you, there are good physicians and they are clamoring for something like this,” Bartlett says. “They are thankful there is something they can use to push back against administration and say, ‘I’m not going to violate this person’s written consent. I’m not going to do this to this person …’

With these documents, if you are blatantly refusing to honor a patient’s wishes and religious beliefs, and you’re doing it against these documented legal forms, then you risk losing your license altogether as a physician and never working in medicine again …

But you need it in writing … and it needs to be served in a very specific way. You need to do this before you ever go to the hospital. Have it handy in case you get yourself into a predicament, like a multi-car pileup on the highway and an ambulance transports you to the hospital. The time to have this done is before there’s a problem.”

The document also specifies that “All items in this Caregivers and Consent document shall remain in effect unless I choose to revoke in writing; no one else may alter or amend this Caregivers and Consent document.” So there can be no misunderstanding. Your doctor or nurse cannot claim you gave implied consent because you mumbled something incoherent in your sleep. In other words, if you didn’t change your consent wishes in writing, you didn’t change your consent wishes. Period.

What’s in the Caregivers and Consent Document Template

As mentioned, you can customize your Caregivers and Consent document any way you like. But to give people a starting point, the template, available on OurPatientRights.com, includes things like:

• “I do not consent to the use of medications without my being informed of each medication’s risks, benefits and alternatives before they are ordered. Only after that information is communicated shall I choose to either grant consent or to not grant consent for each and every medication that is ordered.”
• “I do not consent to receiving any vaccine or booster for COVID-19 or COVID-19 variant.”
• “I do not consent to receiving the seasonal flu vaccine.”
• “I request and consent to the use of 1 mg of budesonide via nebulizer every 4 to 6 hours for COVID-19 or COVID-19 variant diagnosis with respiratory issues.”

If you want to, you could change the verbiage to state that you do not consent to ANY vaccine. If you have allergies, add that to the list. Personally, I would recommend adding the following dietary notice:

• “I do not consent to receiving ANY processed food, such as high-fructose corn syrup or seed oils. The only acceptable oil for me is butter, ghee, beef tallow or coconut oil. Acceptable forms of protein would be eggs, lamb, bison, beef or non-farmed seafood; but they must not be prepared with seed oils. If the hospital is unable to provide this food for me, my family or friends will bring it for me.
• Additionally, I do not consent to not being able to take my normal supplements while in the hospital.”

I would strongly recommend that you integrate this additional clause because it’s a stealth form of abuse. These kinds of foods can only impair your effort to get well, no matter what your problem is. You may also want to add a notice saying you do not consent to receive blood donations from COVID-19 vaccinated donors, and that all blood donations must be from donors confirmed to have not received any COVID-19 vaccines.

Important: Follow Proper Procedure!

As mentioned multiple times in this interview, it’s crucial to follow the proper procedure. Here’s a summary of the necessary steps:

1.Complete your customized and personalized Caregivers and Consent form BEFORE you ever need to go to the hospital.

2.Get the form notarized. Make sure you sign the form in front of the notary.

3.Send the completed, signed, notarized form to the CEO of the hospital in two ways: (1) via a professional courier (one that specializes in delivering legal documents); and (2) via the Postal system with certified mail, return receipt requested.

The CEO is responsible for all legal business relating to the hospital, including the medical records, so the CEO, not your attending physician, is the one whose responsibility it is to get your consent forms entered into your electronic medical record.

4.Make at least 10 copies of the signed, notarized form and keep one copy on your person or in your wallet or purse, and another in the glove compartment of your car, in case you ever have an accident. Also provide copies to family or friends. If you happen to be hospitalized before you’ve had the chance to send the documents, have one of them follow the delivery procedure outlined on the General Instructions form.

5.Once you’re hospitalized, you or one of your contacts will give one copy to your attending physician and another to your nurse, and inform them that this document is already in your electronic medical record, or that the hospital will be served the documents shortly. Distribute additional copies to other care providers as needed.

6.Also, upon hospitalization, request to see your electronic medical record to make sure your Caregivers and Consent form has been entered. It is your right to see your electronic medical record, and it’s available through an online portal, so don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

Also routinely check your medical record (or have your patient advocate do it for you) to make sure your wishes are being followed and that you’re not being given something you’ve denied consent for.

Crawford notes:

“What we’ve experienced using these documents is a complete change in the attending physician, from being aggressive and maybe trying to push you, to being very helpful and efficient. Once they receive these documents, they just do a 180. As a matter of fact, one patient’s brother told me he’s getting treated better than he’s ever been treated at a hospital before.”

Again, having this document in your medical record virtually guarantees that they cannot harm you by doing something you don’t agree with. Of course, some psychopath might ignore your directives, but they’ll have to pay a hefty price, as they’re guaranteed to lose a malpractice suit and be stripped of their medical license. The legal consequences are so severe that the person doing it would have to be beyond irrational.

Keep in mind that while you can request and consent to certain treatments, such as ivermectin, for example, this document CANNOT force your doctor or hospital to use that treatment. They can still refuse to administer something you’ve consented to.

They cannot, however, administer something that you’ve declined consent for. The ace up your sleeve at that point is that you can still sign out AMA (against medical advice), get out alive, and seek desired treatment elsewhere. Getting out alive is the key goal.

More Information

Again, here are the three resources created by Bartlett and Crawford:

• ProtocolKills.com — Here you can find a hospital protocol for COVID, information about remdesivir, patient rights information, alternative health care options and patient testimonies
• OurPatientRights.com — Here you can download the template for the Caregivers and Consent document and general instructions
• Hospital Hostage Hotline — Call or text 888-c19-emergency, or 888-219-3637

In closing, please share this information with everyone you know. Bring it to your church, synagogue and local community groups. Everyone needs to know they can secure their patient right to informed consent and how to do it so that their wishes cannot be ignored. This is the most effective way to empower yourself when it comes to your medical care. So please, help spread the word.

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

Cover image credit: fernandozhiminaicela

Biden Admin & WHO Finally Realise Nobody Cares Anymore, Fold Up Last Vestiges of the Covid Circus; Polish Health Minister Denounces Pfizer Vax Profiteering, Amazingly Asks if It Is “Only About Money”

by eugyppius, eugyppius: a plague chronicle
May 7, 2023

The Biden Administration have announced that their insane vaccine requirements for government employees and international travellers will finally end on 11 May, when the American pandemic state of emergency expires. The WHO have likewise declared that Covid-19 “no longer constitutes a public health emergency of international concern.” Three years and two months after it all started, the last remaining participants in the Covid circus are finally folding up their tables and going home.

It’s worth asking why now, because by any objective measure, there has been no virus activity worthy of the words ‘pandemic’ or ‘emergency’ for a very long time. The answer seems to be the failure of Corona to return in the winter, as long-absent influenza succeeded in suppressing Corona infections (in accordance with my prediction), and the increasing disinterest of the public in obtaining official test results has put all virus statistics in the toilet. They’re ending it now, in other words, not because anything on the ground has changed, but because they no longer have any hope of the scary headlines necessary to keep the machine up and running.

As in the beginning, so in the end: The pandemicists will give you always and forever the maximum virus suppression and the maximum vaccination that is politically possible. Not what is prudent, or what has any hope of achieving anything, or what has evidence in its favour, but simply the maximum that they can give you, for as long as they can give it to you. That is a reason in itself, never to let the pandemicists anywhere near the levers of power ever again.

The pandemic may be over, but there is no stopping the vaccines. Thanks to the incredibly stupid contracts that the EU concluded with Pfizer/BioNTech, we are drowning in them, and some of our less prosperous neighbours to the east have had enough:

With the Covid vaccination campaigns concluded, the European Union is sitting on an enormous vaccine surplus – and hundreds of millions more doses are expected to arrive this year and next… Because they are not needed, EU member states have been trying for months to retroactively adjust the contracts, without much success.

One country has now lost patience in the face of the tough negotiations, and is venting its anger. The Polish Health Minister Adam Niedzielski on Tuesday sent a letter to the “shareholders of Pfizer” [which] says that the delivery of hundreds of millions of doses planned by Pfizer despite a “stable epidemic situation” is “completely pointless.”

The excess doses can no longer even be given away; there is no government “interested” in Covid vaccines, said the minister …

Niedzielski also breaks prior agreements on the confidentiality of talks between governments, pharmaceutical companies and the mediating EU Commission … [and] reveals what Pfizer is offering the states: They’ll reduce the total quantity of the outstanding orders, in exchange for half the price of each dose that is not produced: “That’s a charge for literally non-existent doses that were never produced and will never be produced and that don’t cost Pfizer a penny.”

No wonder there has been such urgency to keep these negotiations secret.

Niedzielski writes that he is “extremely” sorry, but he is forced to conclude that the company is not prepared to show “a satisfactory level of flexibility and make any realistic proposals.” … The health minister called on Pfizer to “live up to its responsibility towards EU citizens and member states and work in good faith towards a solution that is fair for everyone.” Poland wants to continue to believe that the pharmaceutical industry is not only about money.

Hahhhahahahahahhhahahhhahahahahhahhahahhahhaha.

Connect with eugyppius

Cover image credit: iXimus & Clker-Free-Vector-Images

The Homage of the Slaves

by Iain Davis
May 4, 2023

As the coronation of Charlie-boy approaches, the Royal household thought it would be nice to offer the British public the opportunity to swear their allegiance to King Charles III and declare themselves his slave. This “homage of the people” has been very popular amongst some. Presumably, they’re dead keen to live a life of slavery.

Apparently, Shabana Mahmood, the Labour Party’s national campaign coordinator, thinks slavery is a “lovely idea” and that involving the people in the coronation, by offering them to opportunity to become slaves, was a “lovely touch.” The UK transport secretary, Mark Harper, thinks that elective slavery represents a “fantastic opportunity.” Although, he didn’t specify for whom.

Harper went on to suggest that enslaving millions of people will provide a “great showcase for Britain around the world.” This doesn’t appear to be necessary. Given its colonial past and current foreign policy, it seems likely that most people are already familiar with the way the British state rolls.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the “homage of the people” has not been pitched by the Establishment as the “homage of the slaves”. It’s an invitation, not a command, and everyone knows that merely attempting to enslave people is a kind of altruism.

Like Shabana and Mark, Vince, the Archbishop of Westminster, described this invitation as “remarkable” and “lovely,” with Sky News reporting:

For the first time in history the public will be given an active role in the coronation, having been invited to say the oath to the King out loud.

Of course, the whole point of his oath is that he, as the head of state, swears his allegiance to us. But let’s not allow our codified constitution to get in the way of a good old, statist hallucination. We haven’t for more than 800 years, so why start now?

That being said, it is not without good reason that an apparent majority of people have decided that they do not want to pay “homage” to an inept toff. This seems reasonable, because it avoids making the bat-shit crazy decision to pledge your “obligation of fidelity and obedience” to some bloke wearing a load of moody gold.

For those who fancy the idea of enslaving themselves to a clueless aristocrat, before you guffaw in scornful rejection of any suggestion that you are, in fact, choosing to be a slave, it is perhaps worth noting what an oath of allegiance actually means:

[. . .] the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individual owes to the government under which he lives, or to his sovereign in return for the protection he receives

Your “allegiance” means you pledge your “obedience” in return for protection. This is commonly known as a “protection racket.”

It get’s worse:

The citizen or subject owes an absolute and permanent allegiance to his government or sovereign, or at least until, by some open and distinct act, he renounces it and becomes a citizen or subject of another government or another sovereign.

You may have noticed your somewhat limited choices if you are ever dumb enough to swear an oath of allegiance to the parasite class. You can’t really get out of it unless you subsequently swear your “absolute and permanent” “fidelity and obedience” to the next parasitic scumbag that elbows their way in to your life.

Still, each to their own. Who am I to put anyone off opting to be a slave?

Nonetheless, before you do, perhaps spare a moment to consider your choices. There are better slave masters laying about, should you want one.

Perhaps you could choose to be Elon Musk’s slave instead? As these things go, choosing Charles as your personal oppressor might be a bit iffy.

Charles was mentored by his father’s uncle, Lord Louis Mountbatten (Prince Louis of Battenberg), who he affectionately called “Uncle Dickie.” A frequent visitor to his “honorary grandpapa’s” Broadlands estate, the young Charles often holidayed with the Mountbattens.

As an adult, Charles was encouraged by “Uncle Dickie” to use Broadlands for any sexual rendezvous that Charles would rather keep quiet. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) described Mountbatten as a paedophile “with a perversion for young boys.”

King Charles’ was extremely close to Jimmy Savile. The necrophiliac paedophile and child pimp was a confidant and adviser to the Royal household, and Charles in particular, for more than 30 years.

When the Bishop and notorious paedophile, Peter Ball, first accepted a caution—prior to his subsequent conviction in 2015—Charles felt that a “monstrous wrong” had been inflicted upon the pederast. Knowing the nature of the allegations, and Ball’s admission of guilt, Charles purchased a property for Ball and his twin brother.

King Charles subsequently denied all knowledge of Ball’s vile crimes in the letter he submitted to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. The explanation he offered was idiotic:

I was certainly not aware at the time of the significance or impact of the caution that Peter Ball has accepted, or indeed sure if I was even told about it. Whilst I note that Peter Ball mentioned the word in a letter to me in October 2009, I was not aware until recently that a caution in fact carries an acceptance of guilt.

This is in keeping with the story we are given about Charles which suggests he is a gullible pillock. Presumably, this naive stupidity extends to the enormous advisory team that surrounds Charles and the Royals.

It seems, no one advised Charles to stop hanging around with nonces. Although, admittedly, in his family, it is hard to avoid them.

Not a single one of his vast array of advisers took the time to explain to Charles what the legal implications of a caution were. Furthermore, all of them were completely unaware that their future, simple-minded King was “accidentally” maintaining a series of close friendships and “special” relationships with child rapists.

Despite all of this, some people really love waving their little flags and remain eager to declare their oath of obedience to this man. Perhaps because they have have no idea what it means or perhaps because they are as thick as he is.

It is good to know that becoming Charles’ slave is not a direct command. Many people would prefer to completely ignore the World Economic Forum (WEF) spokesman and hypocrite, King Charles III. We certainly wouldn’t want to spoil his day by telling him to shove his “invitation” where the sun doesn’t shine.

Connect with Iain Davis

Cover image based on creative commons work of: johnhain & Clker-Free-Vector-Images

Canadians Take a Stand: Ongoing Citizen-Led Inquiry Into Canada’s COVID-19 Response & Crimes Against Humanity

Canada’s Unprecedented Inquiry 5 — Time to Stand Up

by Michelle Leduc Catlin, Gather Your Wits
May 2, 2023

First they came for the unvaccinated, and I did not speak out —

Because I was not unvaccinated.

Then they came for the truckers, and I did not speak out —

Because I was not a trucker.

Then they came for the Christians, and I did not speak out —

Because I was not a Christian.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

~ An homage to Martin Niemöller

When do you stand up?

That was the title of my first blog here, posted exactly 2 years ago this week, which began with the famous Niemöller poem.

I could not have foreseen that I would write 150 more stories about Covid science, anti-science, and the outcomes of policies using words that, before 2020, I did not have in my lexicon.

Social distancing, mask mandates, anti-vaxxer, dis-information, lockdowns (outside of prison) and more.

I could not have imagined that “vaccine” and “passport” were only the first 2 words horrifyingly strung together by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to incite division.

I could never have anticipated that I would become the Spokesperson for one of the most inspiring and empowering movements in Canadian history.

As I type those words, sitting on an airplane headed to the next set of hearings of the National Citizens Inquiry, my eyes fill with tears.

Again.

Those who have been in attendance or viewed online even one full day of testimony in any of the 5 cities we’ve now visited, will have some sense of why I find myself crying so often these days.

We have heard sworn testimony of health ruined, families torn apart, churches targeted, and lives devastated.

We have heard expert after expert speak of the absolute failure of governments and institutions charged with protecting the health and safety of Canadian citizens.

And despite all this (or perhaps because of it), we have been ignored by any authorities and agents responsible for the devastation created over the last 3 years, as well as by the mainstream media whose job it is to question government policy and to accurately inform the people of important events.

And, I’m moved to tears for another reason.

Canadians are coming together to bridge the divides created by those who willfully or through negligence have sewn fear and hatred and suspicion based on superficial differences.

We have heard testimony from citizens across the country and across the political spectrum, from scientists and pastors, from rural people and urban dwellers, from teenagers and the elderly, “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated.”

And we applaud them all.

Literally.

Every witness is accorded the respect they deserve by an audience of fellow citizens acknowledging the courage it takes to stand up and speak out in these grey days of caustic commentary and state-sanctioned censorship.

Because we all understand that telling any truth that defies the mainstream narrative is risky.

Take the well-known case of former RCMP officer and Trudeau sniper guard, Danny Bulford, whose moral code and adherence to duty led to his lawful involvement in the Freedom Convoy last year, for which he was arrested. He now finds himself unable to work in a field to which he dedicated his life.

Then there is the lesser known case of Dr. Justin Chin, an ER doctor who simply and respectfully asked questions about Covid policies on social media, who was fired without trial and threatened with physical harm and death — by fellow healthcare workers. [Red Deer day 2 @ 3:21:26]

“Science isn’t something to be blindly trusted, it’s a process.”
Dr. Justin Chin

Despite these threats, there are more doctors coming forward to give testimony to what has become painfully obvious.

We have failed, miserably.

We heard from dismayed dentist, Dr. Misha Susoeff, who was sure that doctors would never allow “vaccine” mandates to completely contradict the foundational concept of informed consent. [Red Deer day 3 @ 2:12:54]

“The streets of Ottawa should not have been packed with trucks. It should have been the Mercedes and the Escalades. And it should have been the doctors honking and waving flags. They should have been there to protect us.”
Dr. Misha Susoeff

A chiropractor for 26 years, Dr. Curtis Wall found that mask-wearing was interfering with his ability to do his job and stopped wearing it. While none of his patients complained, his governing College found him guilty of professional misconduct, labelling him “ungovernable.” [Red Deer day 2 @ 6:54:48]

Dr. Eric Payne is a brilliant paediatric neurologist who was brought to Alberta from the Mayo Clinic. With 3 other physicians, he filed a lawsuit against Alberta Health Services for defying the medical ethic of informed consent and implementing mandatory “vaccination” — and still has 2 complains against him for spreading “misinformation.” [Red Deer day 3 @ 4:38:13]

Another brave doctor who co-filed in the AHS lawsuit is Dr. Gregory Chan, who has diligently and relentlessly been pursuing justice for the vaccine injured. Of the 56 forms he submitted to the public health authority, nearly 90% were either ignored or rejected. [Red Deer day 1 @ 5:32:03]

We’ve also heard harrowing stories of Christian pastors persecuted for fulfilling their religious duties.

In Red Deer, James Coates relayed how he was jailed, handcuffed and shackled, and how his congregation went underground and were hunted by RCMP — with a canine unit. [Red Deer day 3 @ 3:04:00]

In Canada.

But there are courageous truthtellers that Canadians would never know about without their testimony at the NCI.

Joelle Valliere is a funeral director who spoke up about how her first Pfizer shot caused kidney failure resulting in the need of a transplant — which she cannot get because she doesn’t have the 2nd shot. [Red Deer day 1 @ 1:31:03]

Tracy Walker shared openly about how she lost her house and couldn’t afford food or insulin because lockdowns closed her in-home hairstyling business. [Red Deer day 1 @ 6:58:36]

Dianne Molstad withstood bullying and being fired by her doctor of 30 years to stand up for her right to decide what to do with her own body. [Red Deer day 2 @ 6:41:36]

Sherry Strong used her considerable health expertise to speak out about unhealthy mandates and became a “social pariah,” losing her career as a speaker overnight. [Red Deer day 1 @ 10:22:10]

Angela Tabak recalled the tragic decline of her beautiful son who suffered mental health issues but failed to get much-needed support after mandates led to “extremely compromised” mental healthcare. She testified so that no other mother would have to go through what she has. [Red Deer day 2 @ 7:19:48]

3 days of hearings ended with the testimony of Jennifer Curry, whose mental health injuries from getting the jab against her will are as profound as her physical injuries.She crossed a province to share her story, which has left her counting the days of suffering since she made the decision to take the shot.

119.

“I changed my life because I didn’t stand up.”
Jennifer Curry

As a result of her testimony, Jennifer has the possibility of starting her count over.

She can now begin counting the days since she took a stand for herself, and so many others. [Red Deer day 3 @ 10:13:17]

Her testimony brought us full circle to the day 2 testimony of Regina Goman, a Polish political refugee whose stand during the Solidarity movement in Poland led to 13 months in prison.

When many years later she was awarded with Poland’s Cross of Freedom and Solidarity, she could not leave Canada because of travel restrictions imposed by our government on the unvaccinated.

Having lived through authoritarianism before, Regina pleaded with Canadians to recognize the direction we’re headed.

“Please take advantage of the time we have left….This is the time to speak up.”
Regina Goman

If these stories aren’t enough for everyone around the world who has been subjected to anti-science policies that have caused incalculable damage to stand up, perhaps this will be…

The testimony of expert witness Catherine Christensen.

As a lawyer representing the men and women of the Canadian armed forces who are prohibited from speaking out against the military and the government, she was able to articulate just some of the alarming damage done to both those who serve and the service itself.

“COVID-19 did not decimate the military. The leadership did it from within.”
Catherine Christensen

The injection mandates led to a loss of ~3000 to 5000 service men and women who were forced to leave through vax refusal or vax injury.

But perhaps even worse is the damage to those who have remained.

“The foundation of trust is gone in the Canadian military….Once trust is broken, you can’t have a military.”
Catherine Christensen

Ms. Christensen declared that the military is effectively “out of business.”

All of this was completely avoidable.

With a 27-year career in the military, Lieutenant Colonel David Redman was well equipped for the job of head of Emergency Management Alberta.

Though he retired, his pandemic plan was still in place when the Covid crisis began.

That comprehensive, well-established and researched plan was discarded.

Among the many mistakes and misdeeds perpetrated by the government, the use of fear was perhaps the most destructive.

“You always control fear — never use fear.”
Lieutenant Colonel David Redman

If you want to understand how a pandemic is meant to be handled, you must watch Lieutenant Colonel Redman’s expert testimony.

And share it.

Also watch Dean Beaudry’s expert testimony on Risk Assessment and Mitigation Assessment.

He came to several sobering conclusions, including the idea that the past 3 years were, “a pandemic of loss of values.”

Giving a Chief Medical Officer so much decision-making power, with no inclusion of dissenting opinions or approaches, was a disaster.

“The only reason to [not build consensus] is when control is prioritized over doing what is right.”
Dean Beaudry

We need to share any and all testimony that will have people see with their own eyes, hear with their own ears, and feel with their own hearts, what has happened and what is continuing to happen in this country.

And while I want to leave you on a positive note, I am also in tears because so many still do not see.

“We are at a point of peril.”
Lieutenant Colonel David Redman

As I finish writing my impressions of the latest set of hearings of the National Citizens Inquiry, I know that the vast majority of people who read this are already aware of the collision course we’re on.

You, dear reader, already know that democracy is under siege.

You already know that people are dying for absolutely no good reason.

And so I am asking you the question, what moves you to tears?

What will it take to bring all your skills and talents to bear?

When do you stand up?

Connect with Michelle Leduc Catlin

Connect with National Citizens Inquiry

Cover image based on creative commons work of: fill

You Don’t Like It? Leave! The Telling Sophistry of Tax Apologists

by Jason Montgomery, Mises Institute
May 4, 2023

What better way to “celebrate” tax season than to talk taxes? Stop me if you’ve heard this one: Taxation is not theft. It’s just the law of the land. You want to live in this country, you pay the long-established, constitutional, customary tax. If you’re not okay with that, there are plenty of other countries to choose from whose customs and edicts you may find more agreeable. Just go live there, and best of luck to you! So as long as you have that right of exit, the taxes confiscated from your income do not represent any initiation of force, coercion, or violation whatsoever.

This is a valuable argument, to be sure. Not only is it completely wrong but its underlying premise reveals a certain sensibility that is, at the very least, intriguing. If we peel back the layers of this statement, we can see the speaker’s potential to grasp some sort of entry-level morality and maybe even economics, confirming our suspicions that he knows what’s right and is purposefully evading it. A hint of insight is on display here, if only unconsciously, that liberty itself depends on private property rights as he’s desperately trying to frame this “right of exit” nonsense as a private property argument.

Let’s run through a few scenarios here:

• I’m having a costume party. To attend, you must dress up as something. You will not be admitted otherwise. If you refuse, due to some personal objection to donning a costume, then enjoy your night someplace other than my costume party. No harm, no foul.
• I don’t allow shoes to be worn in my house. If you wish to visit, bare your feet at the door. If you insist on wearing your shoes, then happy walking, but not into my house. No harm, no foul.

Ready for one that’s not so easy to stomach?

• In my restaurant, no one of German descent is allowed to dine. Anyone wishing to eat here must first present genealogical proof of no German ancestry. Any hint of German in your background, or refusal to produce the appropriate documentation, no problem. Just get your corndogs someplace else. No harm, no foul.

So this is what’s presented in the taxation argument:

• In this country, we pay our taxes. You don’t want to pay up? Leave! And if you don’t and you continue to live, work, and trade in this country, you’ve given your tacit consent to abide by the tax code and render unto Caesar accordingly. To stay put, enjoying all of the fruits of taxation and yet continuing to whine about it and alleging some infringement of your “rights” is just a hypocritical childish plea to have your cake and eat it too.

If this is really what’s being put on the table, then let’s look at what they’re saying.

What do each of the above “policies” have in common? They’re enacted by the rightful property owner. What makes them such? They obtained the restaurant/house/party headquarters through purchase, trade, inheritance, gift, original appropriation, or some other VOLUNTARY arrangement. Their possession and ownership came about by the only true measure of legitimacy—absence of coercion, force, or fraud. Their power to set the rules for admittance or exclusion comes from that ownership.

So to buy this “right of exit” premise, one would have to accept the notion that the federal government is the rightful owner of the United States, the entire landmass. Likewise, one would somehow have to surmise that, at the same time, there are overlapping property claims held by the state, city, and local governments of the further subdivided parcels. This is no small matter as it means that we the people, in effect, own nothing. Every house, building, lot of land, business, vehicle, animal, vegetable, and mineral within the national borders (and some without) is the government’s property, which we’re all simply renting from them.

Anything you or I have is at their discretion and whim. They allow us the privilege of possessing these things only as long as they see fit. These are the only terms under which the above reasoning holds. If the government can demand my payment on pain of expulsion from the country, then it all must be theirs.

But what’s the original source of any property claim at all? Technically all land title chains originate with the US government. Things admittedly get a little tricky here, though not on the issue at hand. Was the founding of the USA a legitimate acquisition of property in the first place? If so, did that make the federal government the de facto original owner? If so, then they would have no more continued control over it once it’s left their hands than the previous owner of your house does over your domestic choices.

If not—and the country was stolen by aggressive conquest, thus never properly claimed by any of our ancestral invaders—well, that’s a can of worms beyond this article. But I will ask you this: Would that justify continued payment and deference to the organization that perpetrated the invasion?

One may claim that the government is not acting as a property owner but merely a trading partner. They offer certain benefits and services in this geographical location—namely, the infrastructure that makes the production and earning of your own property possible—so the choice is yours: If you want to take up space here and soak up your share of these benefits, then you have to pony up your fair share. If you don’t, then you’d better remove yourself from the service zone, you freeloader!

This is really the same argument from a different angle. Under what auspices do they offer said benefits and services? By a forceful declaration that they are to be the sole and exclusive proprietors within the demarcated region. The consent of you, the residents, their “customers,” is irrelevant. If you’re caught on their self-proclaimed turf attempting to either provide or receive these services on any other terms, men with guns will come talk to you.

So once again, it’s simply a coercive property grab, this time for more commercial purposes and in no sense a bona fide economic transaction. You can call it many things, but you can’t call it trade, you can’t call it choice, and you can’t call it voluntary.

“But this is a democratic system, where the state is only acting as a proxy of the people, so the government isn’t asserting universal ownership, but merely managing the property of the people at large.” This argument is deluded, evasive, and telling. It provides an interesting study in fallacious reasoning and behavioral science and invokes a whole new way to be divested of your property. The government will only seize it by force once your neighbors and countrymen have voted it away from you. Whatever happens is up to the caprices of the 50.1 percent. Imagine the bizarre, macabre dystopia painted here, where no property, no moral ideology, and indeed no rights exist at all. But once again, it is beyond the scope of this article.

And lastly, I would be remiss not to point out that there is no right of exit. I hate to tell you, but if you show up at the airport with nothing but your luggage and boarding pass in hand, ready to find out if Ukraine is as nice as people say this time of year, you ain’t goin’ nowhere! This should truly be all you need to do to “just leave” if there really were a such an option. But, of course, you’ve got to have that little magic book, the one that’s obtained through the prescribed qualification process of, plus payment to, those on high to be granted their permission to leave the country.

This is the very definition of not a right. Sure, you may say it doesn’t matter that you’re compelled to ask because they almost always say yes, so it’s practically a right. What if I show up with a passport that expired last week? I mean, it’s practically still valid. Amazing how so much semantic leeway is granted to those who allow us none.

So there you have it. If “pay up or get out” is really a legitimate proposition to live under, it must be because nothing is ours. Everything around us, including you and me, belongs to the state. At best we have possession of some of what we earn, produce, or are given, until and unless the supposed rightful owner no longer approves and wishes to reclaim it. So the next time someone poses this slogan to you, be sure to remind them of its full meaning. If they don’t want to accept that reality, they can always “just leave.”

Meet King Charles, The Great Resetter

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
May 5, 2023

While most of the the public’s attention is falling on the obvious issues—the monarchy’s increasing irrelevance to the 21st century, the colossal waste of taxpayer resources that go towards the upkeep of the world’s richest family and their multiple palaces, the dark history of slavery and other colonial abuses for which royals of the far-distant past are responsible—few are aware of just how dark the history of the royal family is, or just how twisted Charles’ vision for the future of the United Kingdom—and, indeed the world—really is.

Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee / Rokfin / Rumble / Substack

Transcript

[Royal fanfare.]

GARTER KING OF ARMS DAVID VINES WHITE: Whereas it has pleased almighty God to call to his mercy our late Sovereign lady Queen Elizabeth II of blessed and glorious memory, by whose decease the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is solely and rightfully come to the Prince Charles Philip Arthur George.

We, therefore, the lords spiritual and temporal of this realm, and members of the House of Commons, together with other members of Her late Majesty’s Privy Council, and representatives of the realms and territories, aldermen, and citizens of London and others, do now hereby, with one voice and consent of tongue and heart, publish and proclaim that the Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, is now, by the death of our late Sovereign of happy memory, become our only lawful and rightful liege lord, Charles III.

SOURCE: Charles III proclaimed king in historic ceremony @BBCNews – BBC

It’s hard to be a human being living on planet Earth in May of 2023 and not be hearing about, reading about or listening to discussions about the pending coronation of King Charles.

Yes, Charles’ big day is dominating news headlines at the moment, and it seems that the glitz and glamour of the upcoming coronation are infecting people around the globe with a case of royal fever.

. . . Well, maybe not everyone.

TC NEWMAN: Republic states on their website: “As we approach Charles’ coronation the country needs an honest, grown-up debate about the monarchy. We need to stop and ask ourselves: Can’t we just choose our next head of state?”

SOURCE: King Charles Heckled by Anti-Monarchy Protestors

PROTESTER: Charles, while we struggle to heat our homes we have to pay for your parade.

CHARLES: Oh.

PROTESTER: The taxpayer pays £100 million for you, and what for? Nid fy brenin! Not my King!

SOURCE: Taxpayers ‘pay for your parade’: Charles heckled in Wales on cost of monarchy

[Protester throws eggs at Charles, gets arrested.]

SOURCE: Watch: Protester throws eggs at King Charles III

No, not everyone is happy about King Charles stepping into his mother’s shoes . . . or diamond-encrusted loafers, or gold-plated clodhoppers, or whatever it is that monarchs wear to prevent their poor, delicate royal feet from touching the earth.

But while most of the public’s attention is falling on the obvious issues—the monarchy’s increasing irrelevance to the 21st century, the colossal waste of taxpayer resources that go towards the upkeep of the world’s richest family and their multiple palaces, the dark history of slavery and other colonial abuses for which royals of the far-distant past are responsible—few are aware of just how dark the history of the royal family is, or just how twisted Charles’ vision for the future of the United Kingdom—and, indeed the world—really is.

I’m James Corbett of The Corbett Report, and today we’re going to look beyond the headlines and talking points so that we can Meet King Charles, The Great Resetter.

Chapter 1 — King Charles

For those who do not consider themselves “royal watchers” and only know the new King of England as that buffoon who spent his entire life waiting for his mother to die, the first sign of what Charles is really like came in a viral video moment captured during the typically pompous ceremony in which he was proclaimed king.

There, in the manic, sausage-fingered, tooth-gritted flailing of the new king, is the perfect encapsulation of Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor, aka “Charles III.”

His life has been an endless series of carefully arranged photo opportunities and ribbon-cutting ceremonies that serve no actual function other than to punctuate the dreary luxury of his royal existence. But it is in moments such as these where we see through the veil of PR and propaganda to the real Charles: a man who treats his retinue of servants like mere objects, only good for slaking his royal desires and fulfilling his regal demands.

And demands there are.

His royal highness’s daily demands begin with the pressing of his royal shoelaces and the requirement that his royal bath plug be placed in precisely the right position and the royal bathtub be exactly half full of precisely tepid water. Charles’ valet must then squeeze precisely one inch of toothpaste onto his royal toothbrush while the royal chefs prepare a series of boiled eggs, which are numbered according to how long they were boiled so that: “If the prince felt that number five was too runny, he could knock the top off number six or seven.”

In fact, wherever Charles travels, he not only takes along a large contingent of his 124 member staff—including his butler, two valets, a private secretary, a typist, a chef, and a handful of bodyguards—he also makes sure to take his own personal food supply, consisting solely of fresh, organic ingredients grown on his own organic farm.

Yes, King Charles is more than happy to put his John Hancock on The Genetic Technology Precision Breeding Act 2023, which (as its supporters will be happy to explain) “remov[es] barriers to research into new gene editing technology” by (as its supporters will never explain) “remov[ing] regulatory safeguards from whole subclasses of genetically modified organisms” at the behest of (surprise, surprise!) the GMO industry.

But don’t expect him to put those gene-edited frankenfoods anywhere near his lips! They are not fit for the royal gullet, don’t you know!

Chapter 2 — The Royal Sickness

In a sense, the royals aren’t wrong when they assert that the blood that flows through their veins is different from the blood that flows through us commoners’ veins. As many know, the royal families of Europe do indeed suffer from a genetic blood disorder, hemophilia, one of the many defects that has resulted from centuries of inbreeding.

But, strangely, they do not see their so-called “blue blood” as a problem. Instead, they hue to a twisted belief system; one that holds that as a result of their special blood, the royals actually deserve to rule over their subjects.

In order to understand this royal worldview, we have to go back to the beginning. No, not the beginning of Elizabeth’s reign in 1952. Not to the beginning of the English branch of the House of “Windsor” to which she belonged. Not even to the beginning of the monarchical system in England.

No, we have to go back to the beginning of monarchy itself.

You see, the ancient Egyptians worshipped the Pharaohs as progeny of the sun god, Ra. The Japanese were told that their Imperial family descended from the sun goddess, Amaterasu, and the sea god, Ryuujin. In Europe, monarchs claimed that God Himself had directly granted them a “Divine Right” to rule over their subjects. In China, they called it the “Mandate of Heaven.”

Yes, the ancients were taught to believe that their emperors were literal gods. The European dynasties, meanwhile, flourished for centuries under the mass delusion that these families were specifically selected by God to rule over their people. Should it come as any surprise that at some point the royals started to believe their own propaganda?

But, as these proto-eugenicists soon figured out, if their blood was too precious to mingle with the commoners’, then that blood must be kept in the family. And so began centuries of royal inbreeding that resulted in the deformities, abnormalities and genetic weirdness that today pervade the royal bloodlines (congenital haemophilia being just one of the most well-known examples). Perhaps the most notable example of intra-family marriage leading to genetic ruin is that of the Spanish Hapsburgs, who, after 500 years of ruling over vast swaths of Europe, managed to inbreed themselves out of existence.

With this understanding of the proto-eugenical philosophy as our background, we can begin to make sense of the millennium-long story of the British monarchy. Alfred the Great yadda yadda yadda Henry beheading wives and starting a church blah blah blah the madness of King George etc. etc. etc. Mrs. John Brown and so on and so forth all the way up to Eddie (VII, for those keeping track at home) and the intrigues that kicked off WWI and birthed the modern world. You know, that story.

To finish making sense of that history, we just need to add one other element to the story: as it turns out, the “British” royal family isn’t very British at all. The House of “Windsor” only became the House of “Windsor” in 1917, after all. Before that, it was Saxe Coburg-Gotha. But the British public were a bit fired up about the Huns because of that whole, you know, WWI thing, so “Windsor” it became.

Noting the true origins of the House of “Windsor” is not just some cheap anti-Germanic slur, of course. It points to something even more fundamental. These royals—connected, as we remember, through inbreeding—had much more in common with their European brothers and sisters, cousins and uncles (but I repeat myself), than they did with the populations they were supposedly ruling over.

With that historical background in place, we can understand, for example, the Windsors’ well-documented fondness for the eugenics-promoting Nazis. Where do you think the Nazis got their eugenical beliefs from, after all? Given the royal pedigree of the eugenic worldview, it is perhaps unsurprising to learn that the pseudoscience of eugenics was pioneered by Royal Medal recipient Francis Galton, himself hailing from the celebrated (and thoroughly inbred) Darwin-Galton line, which boasted many esteemed Fellows of the Royal Society.

The overt ties between the Edwardian (VIII, for those keeping track at home) court and Hitler’s eugenics-obsessed regime are well-documented. The covert ties are even more intriguing. (Hmmm, that gives me an idea for a documentary . . . .) But it isn’t just the home movies showing the future queen giving the Nazi salute or Edward VIII’s hobnobbing with Hitler or King Charles’ lifelong friendship with unreformed SS officer (and Bilderberg co-founder) Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands or Prince Harry’s predilection for Nazi cosplaying. More to the heart of the matter is Prince Philip’s infamous desire to be reincarnated as “a particularly deadly virus” in order to contribute to the depopulation of the planet (a remark that has been fact-checked by Snopes, so you know it’s true!).

FIONA BRUCE: What do you see as the biggest challenges in conservation?

PRINCE PHILIP: The growing human population. From where we are there’s nothing else.

SOURCE: Prince Philip on what should be done about “overpopulation”

You see, the royals’ blue blood pomposity wouldn’t be so bad if they simply felt themselves superior to the commoners in a “What, you groom your own stool?!” kind of way. Sadly, it is not mere snobbery that motivates them, and their great desire is not simply to be kept apart from the commoners. As it turns out, the royal family doesn’t just feel superior to their subjects, they actively dislike them and constantly scheme to subjugate them, rob them, impoverish them and mislead them.

Chapter 3 — Royal False Flags

There’s something quaint about Redditors seemingly discovering for the first time that, far from some nice old man who waves to the crowds and enjoys tea and crumpets in pretty English gardens, King Charles is actually the heir to a fortune amassed via the violent subjugation of much of the world’s populace and the plundering of their wealth and resources. The fact that anyone could be shocked by this historical reality speaks to the naïveté of the masses, who cannot imagine that ruthless psychopaths conspire to amass more wealth by inflicting suffering on the world.

(Just wait until these dear, trusting masses learn about the British East India Company and the opium wars and the Bengal genocide and the Boer concentration camps and the Amritsar Massacre, etc., etc., etc. . . .)

But for a prime example of the perfidy with which the British monarchy has ruled for centuries (and which gave rise to the “Perfidious Albion” moniker), one need only look at the history of their speciality: false flag operations.

Befitting the governing monarchy of a nation that has been known for its treachery for centuries, the British royals’ use of false flag events to gin up public support for the persecution of their enemies likewise goes back centuries. For one prime example of that, we will have to “Remember, remember the fifth of November.”

Outside of Britain, the “gunpowder plot” is known only tangentially through cultural artifacts, like the references to the plot contained in V for Vendetta and the subsequent adoption of the Guy Fawkes mask as the symbol of Anonymous. Even in England, most will only know the official version of the story—the one compiled in the so-called “King’s Book” written by King James I himself.

According to that official account: on the evening of November 4, 1605, Guy Fawkes was discovered with 36 barrels of gunpowder and a pile of wood and coal in the undercroft beneath the House of Lords in Parliament, presumably preparing to blow up the building. After his apprehension, Fawkes was brought before the king and, cracking under the interrogation, eventually led the king’s agents to the other conspirators in the plot.

As it turned out, the whole harebrained scheme to blow up Parliament as it convened on the 5th of November had been hatched by the Jesuits and carried out by a ragtag group of crazed provincial English Catholics! King James then took the sensible precaution of cracking down on Catholics in England, thus ensuring that Catholic treachery would never again threaten the kingdom.

Of course, this story—like so much of the history written by the winners—is total hogwash. Entire books could be written about the plot, what we really know about it, and how the official version was conjured into existence . . . and at least one book has! It’s called The Gunpowder Plot and it was written by Hugh Ross Williamson and published in 1952.

Those who are interested in the full story are highly encouraged to read Williamson’s account. Although the full truth of the plot will likely never be known—buried as it is in a sea of forged documents, tampered evidence and official secrecy—we can say with certainty that the official story was constructed from torture testimony and forged confessions, that the king’s spies were likely involved at every level of the plot, that the band of patsies who were ultimately blamed for the whole affair could not possibly have perpetrated it by themselves and, most importantly, that it provided King James with the perfect excuse to crack down on Catholics in the exact manner he had desired.

In other words, Guy Fawkes was likely neither the radical Catholic terrorist mastermind that the court of King James made him out to be nor the crusading anti-authoritarian hero that V for Vendetta and Anonymous pretend him to be, but, rather, a patsy, a dupe or a mole who was used by the monarchy as a convenient excuse to enact draconian new laws clamping down on the king’s opponents.

Go figure.

But the British monarchy’s false flag hits don’t stop there!

Viewers of my WWI Conspiracy documentary will already know the central role played by King Edward VII and his German-hating wife in forging the so-called “Triple Entente” between Britain, France and Russia that paved the way for the “Great” War against the Huns. You will likely also remember WWI conspirator Edward Mandell House’s own account of his rather remarkable conversation with Edward VII’s successor, King George V, on the morning of May 7, 1915. As House recounts in his Intimate Papers, the two “fell to talking, strangely enough, of the probability of Germany sinking a trans-Atlantic liner.” Even more “coincidentally,” House relates that George specifically inquired what would happen if the Huns “should sink the Lusitania with American passengers on board.” Later that very day, the Lusitania was sunk, and public opinion in America turned decidedly against Germany, preparing the way for US entry into the war on Britain’s side.

Coincidence, surely.

“But that’s ancient history!” some would argue. “I mean, yes, the British were responsible for backing, supporting and enabling the Saudi royal family to begin their brutal rule of the Arabian peninsula and” (as I documented in False Flags: The Secret History of Al Qaeda), “British support and collusion with the Muslim Brotherhood and with Wahabbi radicals gave birth to the modern era of false flag terrorism . . . but what does that have to do with King Charles?”

Good question. Maybe some intrepid reporter will put the question of the million-pound donation he received from the bin Laden family to the new king?

Or maybe they could ask about Princess Diana’s remarkable clairvoyance in warning of her own death at the hands of . . . [name redacted]

NARRATOR: In October 1996, in a letter to her butler, Princess Diana expressed the fear that she would die in a car crash and it wouldn’t be an accident.

ACTOR (AS PRINCESS DIANA): I am sitting here at my desk today in October, longing for someone to hug me and encourage me to keep strong and hold my head up high. This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous. X is planning an accident in my car. Brake failure and serious head injury [. . .].

SOURCE: What Really Happened On The Night Of Diana & Dodi’s Crash? | Diana: The Inquest | Real Royalty

Given the royal family’s participation in false flag events in the past, perhaps it is no surprise that World Economic Forum chairman Klaus Schwab invited His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to inaugurate The Great Reset, the grand global attempt to use the generated crisis of the scamdemic to completely transform the world and institute new paradigms of governance and social control.

CHARLES: We have a golden opportunity to seize something good from this crisis. Its unprecedented shockwaves may well make people more receptive to big visions of change. Our global crises like pandemics and climate change know no borders and highlight just how interdependent we are as one people sharing one planet.

[. . .]

And as we move from rescue to recovery, therefore we have a unique but rapidly shrinking window of opportunity to learn lessons and reset ourselves on a more sustainable path. It is an opportunity we have never had before and may never have again, so we must use all the levers we have at our disposal, knowing that each and every one of us has a vital role to play.”

SOURCE: Prince Charles Says Pandemic a Chance to ‘Think Big and Act Now’

Yes, it is no surprise to find this royal mouthpiece popping up in the defining false flag event of our times, advocating a complete re-envisioning of our economy, our way of life and even the social contract between people and their government on the back of a synthetic and constructed “crisis.”

But if only his involvement in false flag events were the greatest of King Charles’ worries. . .

Chapter 4 — The Windsors’ Pedophile Problem

Oh, if only the new king’s greatest fault were to have been born into a eugenics-obsessed family.

If only he were the guiltless benefactor of the cheating, swindling, extortion, theft and plunder of his forebears.

If only his worst sin were his ridiculous climate hypocrisy or his campaigning for Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset or his attempt to mask cows.

If only he were a regular, run-of-the-mill tyrant, a psychopath who got off on torturing and killing others.

Unfortunately for all of us, it’s much worse than that.

ANCHOR: Reports of Savile’s unusual behavior in royal circles came about as details emerged of a surprise role for him as a counselor for Prince Charles and Princess Diana during their marital difficulties and a request from Prince Charles to help with the image of Sarah Ferguson.

SOURCE: Jimmy Savile: ‘licked young women’s arms’ on Palace visits

The public got a hint of what really goes on behind the royal family’s closed castle gates when the Jimmy Savile scandal first came to light a decade ago. If you are able to cast your mind back to the innocent days of 2012, you might recall that, at the time, the existence of high-level pedophile rings (let alone high-level necrophilic pedophile rings) was considered the stuff of total conspiracy lunacy.

You might also recall that the royal family’s relationship to Savile was certainly “problematic” (to use the kids’ lingo). But, given what the public then knew, not necessarily more problematic than the involvement of any of the other people who had cozied up to the monstrous pedophile during the course of his career.

Sure, the Queen had knighted Savile back in 1990, and any number of photographs could tell you that he was awfully chummy with Charles. Yet perhaps knighthood was to be expected, considering that he had seemingly dedicated much of his life to charity and had made many high-profile friends along the way.

In fact, the first hard questions about who knew what when about Savile were asked of the BBC, which certainly did know about the allegations many decades before the disgusting abuser finally died.

JON SNOW: One of the things that’s really interested me there was your view about Jimmy Savile and your knowledge at the time that it was going on.

JOHN LYDON: Yeah. Unfortunately, I think all of us—what we call “the peoples”—knew what was going on with the BBC.

SNOW: As bad as we now know it was?

LYDON: Yeah, we knew. We all knew.

SOURCE: John Lydon on Jimmy Savile and BBC

But over the years the “who could have known?” routine used by the Windsors’ defenders has become increasingly insupportable. First, there was the revelation that Savile was so close to the royal family that he was almost made Prince Harry’s godfather. Then came the increasingly damning reports on Savile’s close personal friendship with Charles, culminating in the release earlier this year of letters proving that the now-King of England regularly sought Savile’s advice on sensitive political matters

ALISON BELLAMY: It’s not just a couple—you know it’s not just three or four. There’s absolutely loads—there’s files of it!

ALISON BELLAMY [READING LETTER FROM PRINCE CHARLES TO JIMMY SAVILE]: December 22, 1989. I wonder if you would ever be prepared to meet my sister-in-law, the Duchess of York? I can’t help feeling that it would be extremely helpful to her if you could. I feel she could do with some of your straightforward common sense.

NEWS ANCHOR: 54 minutes after they’d taken off without warning or distress signal, the airliner started to disintegrate over Lockerbie.

ALISON BELLAMY: January 27, 1989. A month after the Lockerbie disaster. This is Jimmy giving PR advice to the royal family about how to react publicly when there’s a major incident in Britain.

PRINCE ANDREW: I suppose that, statistically, something like this has got to happen at some stage on a time. But of course, it only affects the community in a very small way.

ALISON BELLAMY [READING LETTER]: Jimmy advises the queen should be informed in advance of any proposed action by family members. Jimmy suggests they should have a coordinator who’s a special person with considerable experience in such matters. There must be an incident room with several independent phone lines, Teletex, etc.

ALISON BELLAMY: I mean, Jimmy is advising them how to do it. What they should do. How they should act. What they should say. Should they say anything.

So Charles says to Jimmy: “I attach a copy of my memo on disasters, which incorporates your points, and I showed it to my father and he showed it to her majesty.”

Jimmy had sent back to Charles a five-part manual titled “Guidelines for members of the Royal Family and their staffs.” Jimmy seems to be a kind of unofficial chief advisor to the Prince of Wales.

SOURCE: Jimmy Savile: A British Horror Story

And on top of all that, there was Savile’s own uncomfortable admission that the knighthood had “let him off the hook” for his past sins.

Unsurprisingly, the royal family has never had to respond in any way to public outrage about these reports. No presstitute who wants to keep his job is ever going to dare press Charles on the issue and, since Savile’s crimes were only brought to light after his death, the royals could always hide behind the “plausible deniability” that they didn’t know what Sir Jimmy was up to. They didn’t even need to launch a formal process to strip Savile of his knighthood because, as it turns out, the honour “automatically expire[s] when a person dies.”

But, as I say, the Savile scandal blew up back in the bygone era of a decade ago, when the concept of political pedophile rings was still in the realm of crazed conspiracy podcasts. That all changed, of course, when the Epstein story finally broke into the public consciousness in 2019.

And who just happened to be in the middle of that scandal?

That’s right, Prince Andrew. The brother of the current king and the eighth in line to the British throne. A man so transparently lecherous that for decades the UK tabloids have mockingly referred to him as “Randy Andy.” A man who literally had to invent a scientifically unknown condition of being “unable to sweat” to try to “prove” that the allegations made against him by Jeffrey Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre were false.

I mean, yes, there’s the photo of him with his arm around an underage Giuffre (with intelligence handler and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell hovering in the background), but he doesn’t sweat so . . . it’s all a lie?

No one buys anything that comes out of the mouth of His Royal Lowness, Prince Andrew, Duke of Dork. After all, you know someone must be a public relations mess when even the royal family is compelled to revoke his titles and royal patronages to keep him out of the spotlight of public scrutiny. As we’ve seen, the royals didn’t even dole out that form of retroactive punishment to Sir Jimmy.

As we all know, the public is no longer as naïve as they were in 2012, and, sadly, the nightmarish reality of protected political pedophile rings is so accepted as documented fact that it is no longer mocked as conspiracy yarn. And, to the surprise of no one who is familiar with the ignoble history of the royal family, the House of Windsor has been implicated in two of the highest profile pedophile scandals in recent memory. . . . Oh wait, make that three.

So here’s a rhetorical question for you: who in the controlled mainstream media do you think will ever dare bring up this topic up again now that Prince Charles is officially King Charles?

Conclusion

Making this video feels like I’m telling a child, all in one sitting, that Santa Claus isn’t real, the Easter Bunny is a hoax and the tooth fairy is just your mom.

But, in reality, it’s worse than that. It’s telling fully grown adults that Santa Claus isn’t real, the Easter Bunny is a hoax and the tooth fairy is just their mom and being ridiculed as a fringe loony for doing so.

This isn’t my first attempt at opening eyes on this subject, either. Back in 2015, I made note of the absolute madness that took hold of the global media surrounding the announcement of the birth of Princess Charlotte, writing:

So who is going so crazy for this royal baby? Surely no one who is familiar with the real history of the reign of the “Windsors,” a reign marked by the tens of millions of lives lost in the First and Second World Wars (in which the royal family had a great degree of culpability), close collaboration with the banksters that have brought us to the edge of the next great depression, the formation of the Anglo-American “special relationship” in common cause with like-minded eugenicists in America like Teddy Roosevelt, the cultivation and protection of pedophiles (of whom Jimmy Savile was just the most noticeable tip of a very large iceberg), the slaying of Diana, and any number of other atrocities that should make this family one of the most reviled in the “commonwealth” they claim to rule over. And yet the media still lauds their every action, sings their praises as a venerable institution at the core of British society, dutifully acts as the royal PR mouthpiece in reporting on their charity work, and marginalizes any talk of doing away with the royal family altogether as “republican rabble-rousing.”

Plus ça change . . .

And now once again we have one of these royal events come along to remind us just how many people are still firmly ensconced in normieland. After all the royals have put us through, it’s flabbergasting that they’re still held in such high regard.

It’s incomprehensible that this royal eugenicist is trotted out to be the face of The Great Reset and to lecture the peasants about how they’ll have to become serfs on the neofeudal plantation for the sake of Mother Earth, but even more disheartening is the fact that there are still vast swaths of people who believe that this family has been chosen by God Himself to rule over an entire nation (or even a “commonwealth”).

Here’s to the day when this type of video is completely unnecessary and the placing of a fancy hat on some pompous British octogenarian’s head was of no significance to anyone whatsoever. One can always dream. . . .

This piece first appeared in The Corbett Report Subscriber newsletter in September 2022. To keep up to date with the newsletter, and to support The Corbett Report, please subscribe today.

Connect with The Corbett Report

Magnetic Rain? [Short Video]: Documenting the Toxic Geoengineering of Our Skies

by Dane Wigington, Geoengineering Watch
May 4, 2023

Is there more in the rain than just rain? Check this 4 minute video.

GeoengineeringWatch.org sincerely thanks Joseph and Patrick for sharing their film footage observations regarding magnetic testing of precipitation particle fallout. Geoengineering Watch also wishes to express our deepest gratitude to each and every activist and individual that is doing their best to expose and halt the ongoing climate intervention operations in our skies.

All are needed in the critical battle to wake populations to what is occurring, we must make every day count.

Connect with Geoengineering Watch

Cover image credit: ELG21

See Related:

Will the Mass Poisoning of Our Skies Cause a Killing Field Effect?

The Dimming, Full Length Climate Engineering Documentary

Why Pathogens Don’t Exist

by Dr. Sam Bailey
April 29, 2023

Many of us who can see that viruses don’t exist, find it easier to do so as virology is an off-shoot of germ theory.

If germ “theory” is wrong, there is no sense in pursuing alleged disease-causing sub-microscopic organisms. That’s why the germ theorists don’t want us scratching beneath the surface of the so-called ‘science‘ involving bacteria either.

Let’s have a look at why the concept of “pathogens” is a complete fail on their own terms from Koch’s Postulates through to some modern day animal experiments.

Connect with Drs. Sam (Samantha) & Mark Bailey

See related:

A Farewell to Virology (Expert Edition)

Drs. Tom Cowan, Mark & Samantha Bailey, Andrew Kaufman: Why Are We Doing This?

Dr. Tom Cowan With Dr. Mark Bailey: “SARS-CoV-2 Virus Could Never Have Been Leaked From a Lab Because No Such Particle Has Been Proven to Exist. Ever.”

Although Scarred by Violence, We Must Not Be Scared Into Silence

by Edward Curtin, Behind the Curtain
May 3, 2023

The world has been haunted by human violence since time immemorial. There are untold millions (billions?) of people all over the world who have been scarred by it in all its forms.  There are two basic responses: one is to try to return that violence with violence and defeat one’s enemy; the other is, in Martin Luther King, Jr.’s words, to “not seek to defeat or humiliate the opponent, but to win his friendship and understanding” through a non-violent response.  Politicians usually embrace the former, while those who are called dreamers advocate the latter.

Between these two, there are various mixed responses, with sane political leaders calling for mutual respect between countries and an end to aggressive provocations leading to warfare, such has occurred with the United States provoking the war in Ukraine.

We have entered the time when the destruction of all life on earth through nuclear war is imminent unless a radical transformation occurs.  If the word imminent sounds extreme, it is worth considering that there will be no announcement.  The time to speak up is now.  It is always now.

Great literature speaks to the issue of violence at the deepest levels.

Homer’s Odyssey is the classic case of violent revenge.  At the end of the story, Odysseus, who was scarred in youth by a wild boar, finally returns home from the Trojan War after ten years of wandering.  Doubly scarred now by the horrors of war with its horrendous slaughters (see The Iliad), he arrives at his home disguised in a beggar’s rags.  His nursemaid from childhood recognizes him from the scar on his thigh.  In his house he finds scores of suitors who are hitting on his wife Penelope.  He is enraged and  steps onto the threshold, rips off his rags, and systematically massacres every last one of them.  Flesh and gore swim in the blood-drenched room, while in the courtyard twelve unfaithful serving maids hang from their necks.  This is the quintessential western story of revenge where the wounded hero kills the bad guys and the violent beat goes on and on.

It appeals to our lesser angels, for while Odysseus’s rage is understandable, its consequences leave a toxic legacy.

But there is another response that draws on another tradition that is symbolized by Jesus on the cross, executed by the Roman state as a subversive criminal. He didn’t die on a private cross, for his crime was public.  Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi are famous exemplars of non-violent resistance in modern times, as they too were executed by the state.  Non-violence seems, on the surface at least, to be less effective than violence and contrary to much of human history.

If it is, however, we are doomed.  For we have nuclear weapons now, not bows and arrows and spears. We have nuclear weapons hitched to computers.  Digital weapons of multiple sorts and mad leaders intent on pushing us to the brink of extinction.

The United States’ instigation of the war in Ukraine against Russia and its push for war with China are current prime examples.  They are part of the continuing vast tapestry of lies that Harold Pinter spoke of in his 2005 Nobel Address.  He said, in part:

The United States supported and in many cases engendered every right wing military dictatorship in the world after the end of the Second World War. I refer to Indonesia, Greece, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay, Haiti, Turkey, the Philippines, Guatemala, El Salvador, and, of course, Chile. The horror the United States inflicted upon Chile in 1973 can never be purged and can never be forgiven. . . . The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them.

This is still true, as John Pilger has just warned us in a powerful article: “There Is A War Coming Shrouded In Propaganda. It Will Involve Us. Speak Up”

The rise of fascism in Europe is uncontroversial. Or ‘neo-Nazism’ or ‘extreme nationalism,’ as you prefer. Ukraine as modern Europe’s fascist beehive has seen the re-emergence of the cult of Stepan Bandera, the passionate anti-Semite and mass murderer who lauded Hitler’s ‘Jewish policy,’ which left 1.5 million Ukrainian Jews slaughtered. ‘We will lay your heads at Hitler’s feet,’ a Banderist pamphlet proclaimed to Ukrainian Jews.

Today, Bandera is hero-worshipped in western Ukraine and scores of statues of him and his fellow-fascists have been paid for by the EU and the U.S., replacing those of Russian cultural giants and others who liberated Ukraine from the original Nazis.

In 2014, neo Nazis played a key role in an American bankrolled coup against the elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, who was accused of being “pro-Moscow.” The coup regime included prominent “extreme nationalists” — Nazis in all but name.

The U.S. led support for this war must stop.  Who will stop it?

Homer told us something quite important once upon a time, as did many poets, artists, and writers in the twentieth-century.  They warned us of the monsters we were spawning, as Pilger says: “Arthur Miller, Myra Page, Lillian Hellman, Dashiell Hammett warned that fascism was rising, often disguised, and the responsibility lay with writers and journalists to speak out.”  He rightly bemoans the absence of such voices now, as writers have disappeared into post-modern silence, a part of the cultural war on dissent.

On a subtler and more personal note than Homer’s tale of revenge, we have the testimony of Albert Camus who was part of the Resistance to the German occupation of France during WW II.   At the beginning of his beautiful, posthumous, and autobiographical novel, The First Man, Camus tells us about Jacques Cormery (Camus), who never knew his father, a French soldier killed in World War I – the misnamed grotesque War to End All Wars – when Jacques was eleven months old.  Years later, when he is forty years old and horrors of WW II have concluded, Jacques visits the cemetery in France where his father is buried.  As he stands over the gravestone in this massive field of the dead, silence engulfs him.  Camus writes:

And the wave of tenderness and pity that at once filled his heart was not the stirring of the soul that leads the son to the memory of the vanished father, but the overwhelming passion that a grown man feels for an unjustly murdered child – something here was not in the natural order and, in truth, there was no order but only madness and chaos when the son was older than the father. The course of time was shattering around him while he remained motionless among those tombs he no longer saw, and the years no longer kept to their places in the great river that flows to its end.

The tale continues, as did Camus’s, who always supported the victims of violence despite harsh criticism from many corners, from the left and from the right.  He wrote a famous essay, “Reflections on the Guillotine,” against capital punishment, based on his father’s nauseating experience of seeing a man executed by the state.  After hearing this story from his grandmother, he would regularly have ”a recurrent nightmare” that “would haunt him, taking many forms, but always having the one theme: they were always coming to take him, Jacques, to be executed.”

Furthermore, Camus warned us not to become murderers and executioners and to create more victims, when he wrote a series of essays shortly after WW II for the French Resistance paper, Combat. – Neither Victims nor Executioners.  He wrote that yes, we must raise our voices:

It demands only that we reflect and then decide, clearly, whether humanity’s lot must be made still more miserable in order to achieve far-off and shadowy ends, whether we should accept a world bristling with arms where brother kills brother; or whether, on the contrary, we should avoid bloodshed and misery as much as possible so that we give a chance for survival to later generations better equipped than we are. 

Which leads me to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and his run for the U.S. presidency in this most dangerous time.  He is a man not scared into silence despite all the efforts to censor him.

From a very tender age he was scarred by death; is surely a wounded warrior, not one of those who went to an actual war, but one who had a different war forced upon him when he was nine and fourteen years-old, when his uncle and father were assassinated by the CIA.   Some repress the implications of such memories; he has faced them and allowed them to spur him to truth and action.

No boar gored him, nor has he slain suitors in his house, because he has taken, not the road of revenge, but that of reconciliation, despite having lost his father and others to demonic government forces.  This is the way of non-violence, a path unfamiliar to most of those seeking political office.

I don’t know his inner thoughts about this, but I read his words and actions to decipher where he is trying to take this very violent country.  He is a non-violent warrior in the spirit of Gandhi’s truth force or satyagraha.  Not a passive non-action, but an active resistance to evil and violence.  Not one seeking revenge on all the warmongers and Covid liars (which does not preclude legal prosecutions for crimes), but one who seeks to reconcile the warring parties.  To appeal to our higher angels and not the demons urging us to renounce the good, but to the love that is our only hope.

I am not saying he is a pacifist.  Such a term muddies the water.  He is clearly committed to the defense of the country if it were ever attacked. But he is emphatically opposed to the endless U.S. attacks on other countries. He knows the vicious history of the CIA.  He is a very rare political candidate committed to reconciliation at home and abroad.  He is waging peace.

Like his father Senator Robert Kennedy and his uncle, President Kennedy, he is anti-war, committed to ending the endless cycle of overseas wars sustained by the military-industrial complex and the corporations who feed at the trough of war spending.  He opposes the policies of those politicians who support such endless carnage, which is most of them, including most emphatically Joe Biden.  He realizes the danger of nuclear war.  He tells us on his website, Kennedy24:

As President, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. will start the process of unwinding empire. We will bring the troops home. We will stop racking up unpayable debt to fight one war after another. The military will return to its proper role of defending our country. We will end the proxy wars, bombing campaigns, covert operations, coups, paramilitaries, and everything else that has become so normal most people don’t know it’s happening. But it is happening, a constant drain on our strength. It’s time to come home and restore this country. . . . We will lead by example. When a warlike imperial nation disarms of its own accord, it sets a template for peace everywhere. It is not too late for us to voluntarily let go of empire and serve peace instead, as a strong and healthy nation.

Those are very strong words and I am sure he means them.  But he is opposed by demonic forces within the U.S., what former CIA analyst Ray McGovern aptly calls the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-MEDIA-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT).  They run the propaganda shit show and will throw lie after lie (have already done so) at Kennedy and exert all their pressure to make sure he can not fulfill his promises.  Their propaganda is endless and aims to hypnotize. Pinter described it thus: “I put to you that the United States is without doubt the greatest show on the road. Brutal, indifferent, scornful and ruthless it may be but it is also very clever. As a salesman it is out on its own and its most saleable commodity is self-love.”

It is this self-love and American exceptionalism that Bobby Kennedy will have to counteract by emphasizing the humanity of all people and their desire to live in peace. He will have to make it very clear that the U.S. government’s involvement in Ukraine was never humanitarian, but from the start was part of a plan to disable Russia.  That is was an effort to continue the Cold War by pushing closer to Russia’s borders.

Only fools think that revenge and violence will lead to a better world.  It may feel good – and I know the feeling – to strike back in anger, but it is only a vicious circle as all history has shown.  Revenge only brings bitterness, a cycle of recriminations and reactions.  Reconciliation is the way forward, but it can only become a reality by an upswelling of resistance of good people everywhere to the lies of the war-loving propagandists who are leading us to annihilation.

RFK, Jr. can not do it alone.  He can lead, but we need a vast chorus of millions of voices to resist, in Pilger’s words, “the all-powerful elite of the corporation merged with the state and the demands of ‘identity’.”  If not, democracy will remain notional.  Kennedy is so right to say that the U.S.A. cannot be an empire abroad and continue to be a democracy at home.  Silence must be replaced with resistance and his words made real by millions of people opposing the killers.

Writing in another time of extremity, but writing truly, Camus, said:

At the end of this tunnel of darkness, however, there is inevitably a light, which we already divine and for which we only have to fight to ensure its coming. All of us, among the ruins, are preparing a renaissance beyond the limits of nihilism. But few of us know it.

So let us fight with words and actions.  As MLK, Jr. told us about the U.S. war against Vietnam: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”

Connect with Edward Curtin

Cover image credit: reneebigelow

Will the Mass Poisoning of Our Skies Cause a Killing Field Effect?

by Gary D. Barnett
May 3, 2023

“When people look up into the sky and see white trails paralleling and crisscrossing high in the sky, little do they know that they are not seeing ‘condensation’, but instead are witnessing a man-made ‘climate engineering CRISIS’ facing all air-breathing humans and animals on planet earth. These white aircraft spray-trails are the result of scientifically verifiable spraying of aluminum particles and other toxic heavy metals, polymers and chemicals. These toxic atmospheric aerosols are used to alter the weather patterns creating droughts in some regions, and deluges and floods in other locations. Even extreme cold can be created by climate engineering under other conditions. Unfortunately, these unfolding catastrophes are not capturing the attention of America’s citizen nor politicians. Weather warfare has already almost reached beyond possibility of devastation of all mankind and animals. It is that serious, and it is time-limiting.”

Signed: General Charles Jones, Brigadier General, U.S. Air Force.

The term Chemtrails, while accurate, is a common term that has been widely mis-used by the general population and media, certainly by design, in order to discredit all efforts against weather and climate geoengineering, cloud-seeding, and the manufacturing and spraying of chemically-based artificial clouds meant to reflect sunlight, by spraying the atmosphere with chemicals, deadly metals, and toxins. This is, and has been done, for a long time in the false name of ‘protecting us’ from the farcical and fraudulent ‘threat’ of manmade ‘climate change.’ Those who expose this fraud are of course, generally called “conspiracy theorists.” This is most always an unwarranted and rhetorical ad hominem attack on character instead of examining substance; all in order to avoid any discussion of what is a valid subject matter concerning the top-down manipulation of weather, and the poisoning of all living things. There is actually manmade weather engineering, and toxic spraying of metals and chemicals, but that has not occurred due to one driving a car, or taking a trip on a plane, but has been affected by government and military operations. In other words, global warming, global cooling, or the benign term, ‘climate change,’ are intentional acts, and not due simply to human existence and the basic daily functions of life.

I will preface the rest of my comments with an anecdotal experience that I personally witnessed over the past two days in the Rocky Mountains here in Montana. What I saw, is almost a daily occurrence here, and most everywhere else as well, but I spent the entirety of both days watching the unfolding of fake chemical cloud seeding, and the resulting atmospheric changes. We had a rare period of total blue skies, although not as blue as in the past. On both days I watched from 9AM until late evening, as jet after jet continued to spray metals and chemicals across the horizon. The patterns were crossing, and at different altitudes, moving from section to section of sky, likely dependent on wind currents. Both days were forecast to be clear, but by afternoon on both days, the unnatural cloud cover was enough to block the sun entirely; at least from partial to heavy.

What began as completely clear skies, changed to a manmade and broad-based cloud cover that hung in the air until I could no longer see the skies. This was obviously the purposeful spraying of toxins in order to block vital sunlight, but much more is going on than just simply blocking the sun, as all these metals and chemicals eventually disperse and fall to earth, harming every single living thing. This very adversely affects all plants and animals, including humans. Given what has been proven to be in these payloads, the risk of agriculture devastation, changing weather patterns, killing bug life and pollinators, weather manipulation, geoengineered weather systems, and cancer-causing toxins made up of nano-particle metals and chemicals, are all threats to all of nature, including to water, soil, insects, animals, birds, fish, and humans.

This has been going on for decades, but at this point in time, it is inundating airspace everywhere in this country and the world. Some of this is being done by commercial aircraft, but most it seems is being done by the military, mainly the Air Force, by and with approval of this government, by NASA, and by others. This is a deliberate and planned attack against mankind and the earth. This is a weaponized form of war against all life domestically and globally. These tactics can be used as war weaponry, for food and agricultural destruction, and for depopulation through bodily system devastation.

Weather phenomena recently have been extreme. While proving without question that these are not normal, but designed events, is certainly difficult, but these anomalies are happening so often and are so far beyond reason, that one cannot ignore that these events are likely engineered. Well above average temperatures in mid-spring have been changing to very cold and heavy snow, and then back to high temperatures in many areas across the country.  Even in my area in just the past two weeks, I saw record temperatures, then very cold and record snow, two feet or more, and now temperatures of close to 80 degrees. This is happening everywhere, and is not due to what is called ‘climate change,’ but in my opinion, it is due to manmade manufactured systems. There are masses of tornadoes, 90 degrees and then snow, unreal flooding, as happened in Florida recently, and many weather events that belie imagination, in that a vast reversal of normalcy is present in most every area at once.

But this is not the only threat concerning the toxic chemical and metals spraying that is continuous across the country and the world. We are literally being poisoned, sickness is expanding greatly, and cancer is advancing in numbers and severity. This is certainly due to this heinous spraying, but it is also evident due to deadly ‘covid’ bioweapon injections, poisoning of food, including plants and animals, destruction of farming and ranching, and land and water poisoning due to very toxic chemicals and metals. This population and others are being attacked from every angle in what appears to be a mass depopulation effort by the State, its controllers, pharmaceutical manufacturers, the CIA and military, NASA, HAARP, the so-called scientific community, and the technological giants. This war against humanity is now seemingly never ending.

Geoengineering, weather engineering, and bogus ‘climate change’ policies, are not meant to help humanity or the earth, they are purposely being used only to harm and control. In addition to what I have mentioned here, there have been an inordinate number of chemical spills, massive explosions and fires of not only toxic materials, but in food production facilities nationwide. At this point, no mass food distribution can be trusted, as it is impossible to know what is being put into our food supply.

Solar geoengineering, high-energy waves, and toxic poisoning of the skies and earth, are causing increased storm activity, droughts, floods, tornados, fires, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, and extreme volcanic activity. In addition, the health of humanity is being systematically destroyed. As I noted last year: “The most major tenet of this grand assault on humanity at the hands of the manipulative state, is advancing the ‘climate change’ agenda, so that total control over all of humanity and all property, can be solidified with very little resistance. It is all based on false fear, as always, but the state players in their haste to complete this takeover coup, have actually through climate and weather manipulation, also placed themselves in harm’s way. The plot was allowed to continue because multiple state agendas were being sought, and it is still in place today, even with the risks to all due to this horrendous plan. Oh, what a tangled web they weave.”

“What’s coming will make post-apocalyptic movies look like a Disney world vacation.”

~ Dane Wigington

Reference and source links:

Chemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earth

Geoengineering Watch

Geoengineering Parts I, II, and III–Congressional Hearings 2009 and 2010

Elana Freeland: Geoengineering Transhumanism

“The Dimming: Exposing the Global Geo-Engineering Cover-Up”

Weather Modification History Timeline

HAARP and the Sky Heaters

Spain Allows Geoengineering as do over 50 Other Countries

Spain Admits to Spraying Chemtrails in Secret U.N. Program

Chemtrail Poisons Are ruining Your Health From Above

Connect with Gary D. Barnett

Cover image credit: Sharon James, contributing writer at TCTL

More photos taken by Sharon James, contributing writer at Truth Comes to Light. All photos were taken during October of 2022 as she drove through American midwest farm land where she lives and farms.

Two Massachusetts Towns Call a Halt to 5G Towers Until FCC Complies With Court Order to Review Science

The residents of two Massachusetts towns on Monday voted to put a hold on 5G cell tower projects until the Federal Communications Commission completes a court-ordered review of the latest science related to the effect of radiofrequency radiation emissions on human health and the environment.

by  Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., The Defender
May 5, 2023

The residents of two Massachusetts towns on Monday voted to put a hold on 5G cell tower projects until the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) completes a court-ordered review of the latest science related to the effect of radiofrequency (RF) radiation emissions on human health and the environment.

The residents in Sheffield and Great Barrington said they will consider all applications from telecommunications companies seeking to build wireless infrastructure in their town as “incomplete” until the FCC reviews “studies from scientists independent from industry” who have “fully investigated” the “safety” of 5G small cell technology and until the agency has updated” its RF radiation regulations based on the review’s findings.

The citizens passed this warrant — listed as article 32 in Sheffield and article 38 in Great Barrington — at their annual town hall meeting.

In the warrant, the residents cited two separate rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that mandated the FCC conduct such a review and noted that the FCC has failed to comply with the court orders.

The District of Columbia Circuit in a 2019 ruling told the FCC it had to follow National Environmental Policy Act guidelines by conducting an environmental impact review for 5G small cell infrastructure projects.

The same court ruled in 2021 that the FCC had not adequately reviewed the scientific evidence regarding the safety of RF radiation and 5G for humans and the environment — and that it must do so.

By failing to comply with the two court orders, the FCC has failed to adequately show that 5G radiation is safe for the environment or humans, according to Cecelia Doucette, a technology safety educator and the director of Massachusetts for Safe Technology.

The agency needs to thoroughly examine the scientific evidence of harm and update its RF exposure guidelines, Doucette told The Defender.

“The harm from wireless radiation is happening right now,” she said. “It’s up to us as citizens to create the change and we are so inspired by the hard work the voters in Sheffield and Great Barrington have put in.”

She added:

“Every citizen should feel empowered to look at the science, work with their neighbors and towns, and put protections in place. It’s just common sense once you know the facts.

“Don’t wait for someone else to fix this for you, electropollution is too dangerous for us, our children and our pollinators.”

Nina Anderson, president of the Scientific Alliance for Education (S.A.F.E.) — a non-profit focused on “educating the public on health issues that may or may not be public knowledge” — called the vote “the first step in trying to protect our towns from intrusion by industry who has not complied with the court order and not proven this technology is safe.”

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) last month petitioned the FCC to “quit stalling” and comply with the District of Columbia Circuit’s 2021 order.

The order stemmed from CHD’s historic win in a case challenging the FCC’s decision not to review its 1996 health and safety guidelines for RF exposure.

The court in its 2021 ruling said, “The FCC completely failed to acknowledge, let alone respond to, comments concerning the impact of RF radiation on the environment … The record contains substantive evidence of potential environmental harms.”

Patricia Burke of Safe Tech International told The Defender:

“When citizens begin to look more deeply at the issues regarding wireless safety, including the conclusions that the Circuit Court reached in its 2021 ruling against the FCC, they realize that there is a problem.”

Burke said she was “so grateful to the sincere individuals who have been working behind the scenes in these towns and in others to facilitate conversations supporting necessary policy changes.”

Vote coincides with 1,000 days of Pittsfield residents’ battle with Verizon

The citizens of Sheffield and Great Barrington — both of which are agricultural communities — wanted “to be convinced that their crops will not suffer if the myriad of 5G transmitters negatively affect the bees,” according to a S.A.F.E press release.

The release stated:

“Their [the citizens’ warrant asks for input from scientists who are independent from the telecom industry who can give an unbiased report.

“The petitioners related telecom’s rollout of 5G without sufficient research as similar to big tobacco’s promotion of cigarettes. It was years later and many cancer deaths before regulations were enacted limiting smoking in public places and adding warning labels to packaging.”

Voters “spoke out” saying they wanted to know that a similar fate would not come to pass for those suffering from electro-hypersensitivity syndrome “with no recourse to remove the transmitters causing the problem,” the release added.

Monday’s vote coincided with residents of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, marking 1,000 days of being driven from their homes by a Verizon cell tower they allege made them sick.

The residents — who live in the “Shacktown” section of Pittsfield and are represented in court by lawyers supported by CHD — want Verizon to remove or relocate the tower and currently await a judge’s ruling on whether to allow their lawsuit to go forward or grant Verizon’s motion to dismiss the suit.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense

Connect with Children’s Health Defense

Florida Passes Bill to Ban use of a CBDC as Money in the State: Bill Now Goes to Governor to Sign

by Mike Maharrey, Tenth Amendment Center
May 2, 2023

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (May 2, 2023) – Today, the Florida House overwhelmingly gave final approval to a bill that would ban the use of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) as money in the state.

Senate Bill 7054 (S7054) was approved for introduction in the Banking and Insurance Committee on April 11. The bill would explicitly exclude a CBDC from the definition of money in Florida, effectively banning its use as such in the state.

The bill defines central bank digital currency as a “digital medium of exchange, or digital monetary unit of account issued by the United States Federal Reserve System, a federal agency, a foreign government, a foreign central bank, or a foreign reserve system that is made directly available to a consumer by such entities” and that is “processed or validated directly by such entities.”

Under the Florida Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), “money” means a medium of exchange that is currently authorized or adopted by a domestic or foreign government. The term includes a monetary unit of account established by an intergovernmental organization or by agreement between two or more countries.”

S7054 would add “the term does not include a central bank digital currency” to that definition.

The UCC is a set of uniformly adopted state laws governing commercial transactions in the U.S. According to the Uniform Law Commission, “Because the UCC has been universally adopted, businesses can enter into contracts with confidence that the terms will be enforced in the same way by the courts of every American jurisdiction. The resulting certainty of business relationships allows businesses to grow and the American economy to thrive. For this reason, the UCC has been called ‘the backbone of American commerce.’”

If Florida enacts S7054, the UCC will no longer be uniform.

Today, the House passed S7054 by a vote of 116-1. The bill previously passed the Senate by a 34-5 vote. The legislation now goes to Gov. Ron DeSantis’s desk for his consideration. He is expected to quickly sign the bill into law.

The legislation is a companion to House Bill 7049 (H7049), sponsored by Rep. Wyman Duggan, who introduced the bill after Gov. DeSantis called for a ban on CBDC as money in the state.

“Today’s announcement will protect Florida consumers and businesses from the reckless adoption of a ‘centralized digital dollar’ which will stifle innovation and promote government-sanctioned surveillance. Florida will not side with economic central planners; we will not adopt policies that threaten personal economic freedom and security,” DeSantis said in an official statement.

Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC)

Digital currencies exist as virtual banknotes or coins held in a digital wallet on your computer or smartphone. The difference between a central bank (government) digital currency and peer-to-peer electronic cash such as bitcoin is that the value of the digital currency is backed and controlled by the government, just like traditional fiat currency.

Government-issued digital currencies are sold on the promise of providing a safe, convenient, and more secure alternative to physical cash. We’re also told it will help stop dangerous criminals who like the intractability of cash. But there is a darker side – the promise of control.

At the root of the move toward government digital currency is “the war on cash.” The elimination of cash creates the potential for the government to track and even control consumer spending.

Imagine if there was no cash. It would be impossible to hide even the smallest transaction from the government’s eyes. Something as simple as your morning trip to Starbucks wouldn’t be a secret from government officials. As Bloomberg put it in an article published when China launched a digital yuan pilot program in 2020, digital currency “offers China’s authorities a degree of control never possible with physical money.”

The government could even “turn off” an individual’s ability to make purchases. Bloomberg described just how much control a digital currency could give Chinese officials.

The PBOC has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are ‘whitelisted’ for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out. ‘China’s goal is not to make payments more convenient but to replace cash, so it can keep closer tabs on people than it already does,’ argues Aaron Brown, a crypto investor who writes for Bloomberg Opinion.”

Economist Thorsten Polleit outlined the potential for Big Brother-like government control with the advent of a digital euro in an article published by the Mises Wire. As he put it, “the path to becoming a surveillance state regime will accelerate considerably” if and when a digital currency is issued.

In 2022, the Federal Reserve released a “discussion paper” examining the pros and cons of a potential US central bank digital dollar. According to the central bank’s website, there has been no decision on implementing a digital currency, but this pilot program reveals the idea is further along than most people realized.

What’s Next

Gov. DeSantis will have 15 days from the date S7054 is sent to his desk to sign or veto the bill.

Connect with Tenth Amendment Center

Cover image credit: geralt

Jeremy Nell With Andrew Kaufman: A Beginner’s Guide to Germ Theory

by Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare
May 1, 2023

I’ve had a number of conversations about viruses.

Some guests have challenged Germ Theory.

Some guests have argued why there is no such thing as an immune system.

Some guests have thought about alternative causes of illness.

The point is that there are good reasons to question the conventional model of “Rockefeller medicine”. Much of it doesn’t make sense and desperately requires critique.

Blindly believing what the pharmaceutical industry, governments and media preach from their pulpits, after observing the Covid™ scam, is utterly ludicrous. I have become an allopathic atheist. An apostate.

Climate science is drowning in pseudoscience and so is virology.

Andrew Kaufman, who has been on my show a few times before, joined me for the following conversation of conversations.

A beginner’s guide to Germ Theory.

He approached important concepts, including

• virus definitions, isolation and fake existence claims;
• understanding contagion and “catching” something from somebody;
• bacteria and germs in general;
• why all vaccines are toxic;
• what is disease, actually;
• shifting paradigms about health and wellbeing and
• the significance of bringing down this house of germs cards.

Connect with Jerm Warfare

Connect with Andrew Kaufman

All images are original artwork of Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare

Chairman of the Board of the UK Council for Psychotherapy: Open Letter Condemning the Use of Unethical Psychological Techniques / Behavioural Science on the Unknowing and Non-Consenting UK Public.

“It is now clear that in 2020 the UK Government deliberately chose to artificially inflate the level of fear within the UK population by exaggerating the risk factors of Covid19…”

sourced from Dr. Mike Yeadon telegram channel
April 28, 2023

Download PDF

Dr Christian Buckland
Esher Groves
13-17 Church Street
Esher
Surrey
KT10 8QS

The Right Honourable Rishi Sunak Prime Minister of the UK
10 Downing Street London
SW1A 2AB

Date: 28 April 2023

Open letter condemning the use of unethical psychological techniques / behavioural science on the unknowing and non-consenting UK public.

Dear Prime Minister,

I am the Chairman of the Board of the UK Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP), one of the UK’s foremost psychological governing bodies. However, I write this open letter in my own capacity. I believe I have a professional obligation to write to you in an attempt to protect the public from any further harm caused by the unethical application of psychological research and practice.

I unreservedly condemn the UK Government’s use of unethical psychological techniques intended to elicit feelings of fear, shame and guilt, under the guise of behavioural science / insights which were designed to change the public’s behaviour without their knowledge and conscious participation. It is now clear that in 2020 the UK Government deliberately chose to artificially inflate the level of fear within the UK population by exaggerating the risk factors of Covid19, and concomitantly downplaying the protective factors. We also witnessed the Government’s promotion of social disapproval and guilt messaging. These techniques were embedded into a multi-channel, co-ordinated public health campaign designed to change the public’s behaviour without their knowledge. Moreover, in tandem with the mainstream media, the Government also proactively suppressed, censored, and ostracised any healthcare professional or scientist who suggested alternative responses to Covid19, or who simply questioned the messaging and measures being implemented by the Government.

Evidence of the recommendation of using unethical psychological techniques to gain behavioural change

The Government document titled ‘Options for increasing adherence to social distancing measures’ (Gov.uk, 2020) was written for the Government by the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours (SPI-B) which is a subgroup of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE).

The premise of the document was to provide options for changing the behaviour of the UK public without their knowledge. A passage within this document states:

“A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened”. It makes certain recommendations including:

• “The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard hitting emotional messaging”.
• “Coercion”
• “Social disapproval”. (Gov.uk, 2020)

The recommendations made by SPI-B included ones intended to elicit feelings of fear, shame and guilt. Psychological practitioners know that deliberately trying to frighten someone into change with erroneous or exaggerated information can easily cause long-term psychological damage. We also know that using social disapproval can create splits and divisions within society, and that inducing feelings of guilt can elevate the risk of suicide.

SPI-B also included a simple risk assessment matrix which acknowledges that the ‘spill over effects’ of using media to increase the sense of personal threat and of using social disapproval ‘could be negative’. There is also a statement demonstrating there was a conversation regarding the spill over effects, although this does not appear to be fully documented. The risk factors and ethics of using fear, shame, guilt, and coercion would almost certainly have been known to the members of SPI-B because several members were British Psychological Society (BPS) registered chartered psychologists. In an interview with one of the members of SPI-B, BPS registered educational psychologist Dr Gavin Morgan, he refers to the use of fear by his SPI-B colleagues and says:

‘Clearly using fear as a means of control is not ethical. What you do as a psychologist is co-construction. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism. It’s not an ethical stance for any modern government.’ . . . Was it unethical to use fear, I asked? ‘Well I didn’t suggest we use fear’ But your colleagues did. What do you think of that? He paused. ‘Oh God’. ‘Another reluctant pause. ‘It’s not ethical,’ he said (Dodsworth, 2021, pp. 262,263).

Like Dr Morgan, any BPS registered psychologists within SPI-B would or should have recognised that recommending the Government uses fear as a means of controlling the public breached their professional code of ethics and conduct. An urgent investigation is required both by the UK Government and the BPS. Two specific points of The British Psychological Society Code of Ethics and Conduct (2021) that may have been broken are (with my underlining):

3.3 Responsibility. Because of their acknowledged expertise, members of the Society often enjoy professional autonomy; responsibility is an essential element of autonomy. Members must accept appropriate responsibility for what is within their power, control or management.  Awareness of responsibility ensures that the trust of others is not abused, the power of influence is properly managed and that duty towards others is always paramount. Statement of values: Members value their responsibilities to persons and peoples, to the general public, and to the profession and science of psychology, including the avoidance of harm and the prevention of misuse or abuse of their contribution to society. In applying these values, psychologists should consider:

• Professional accountability;
• Responsible use of their knowledge and skills;
• Respect for the welfare of humans, non-humans and the living world;
• Potentially competing duties.

3.4 Integrity. Acting with integrity includes being honest, truthful, accurate and consistent in one’s actions, words, decisions, methods and outcomes. It requires setting self-interest to one side and being objective and open to challenge in one’s behaviour in a professional context. Statement of values: Members value honesty, probity, accuracy, clarity and fairness in their interactions with all persons and peoples, and seek to promote integrity in all facets of their scientific and professional endeavours”.

Evidence that psychological techniques to induce fear, shame, guilt and coercion were used on the UK public

The SPI-B document in question (Gov.uk, 2020) demonstrates that the options of eliciting feelings of fear, shame, guilt and the use of coercion was recommended to the UK Government. There is evidence that those options were indeed subsequently deployed on the UK population.

In August 2022, you stated:

“In every brief, we tried to say: let’s stop the ‘fear narrative’. It was always wrong from the beginning. I constantly said it was wrong… It was wrong to scare people like that”. (Sunak, R as quoted in The Spectator, 2022).

Additionally, leaked WhatsApp messages from the former Health Minister at the time, Matt Hancock, published in The Daily Telegraph in March 2023, confirm that fear and guilt were used:

“Hancock: We frighten the pants of everyone with the new strain. But the complications with that Brexit is taking the top line

Poole: Yep that’s what will get proper bahviour (sic) change

Hancock: When do we deploy the new variant”

And,

“Case: Ramping up messaging – the fear /guilt factor vital”
(The Daily Telegraph, 2023a)

The above are just two examples where senior Government Ministers recognised that fear and guilt was used as drivers for behavioural change of the UK population without their knowledge.

The existing literature

It is important to acknowledge that the above-mentioned psychological techniques were used on the UK population without their knowledge or consent, and that this in direct contradiction of long-established and carefully considered behavioural science advice which made clear that, in theory and practice, the consent of the public is paramount.

“The use of MINDSPACE (or other ‘nudge’ type policy tools) may require careful handling – in essence, the public need to give permission and help shape how such tools are used”. (Institute of Government, 2010, p. 10)

Continuing, the report states:

“Policy-makers wishing to use these tools summarised in MINDSPACE need the approval of the public to do so”. (Institute of Government, 2010, p. 74)

Further literature supports that permission from the public is essential:

“If there is one great risk to the application of behavioural insights in policy, it is that the thread of public permission wears too thin. If governments, or indeed communities or companies, wish to use behavioural insights, they must seek and maintain the permission of the public to do so” (Halpern, 2015, p. 365).

As there was no approval obtained, the options recommended and deployed were not in alignment with the principles of behavioural science.

It is important to highlight that the same kinds of techniques were used on children in relation to mask wearing, social distancing and vaccine uptake, with many techniques continuing into 2022. These techniques violated UNICEF’s (2021) recommendations from their ethical tool- kit for behavioural science projects directed at children. The tool-kit states:

“A core idea underlying the applied behavioural science approach is that interventions should not restrict choice and should transparently communicate project goals. When designing an intervention, practitioners should determine how transparent it will be to those affected by it. They should ensure that children and parents can easily opt out, and should design feedback mechanisms so that children and their parents can voice concerns, see the outcomes of their objections, and hold decision-makers to account”. (UNICEF, 2021)

The behavioural science literature also indicates a potential link between the misuse of behavioural psychology and an increased risk of suicide, stemming from an All Party Parliamentary Group Report on the Morse Review into the Loan Charge in 2020. One of the recommendations within the report demands:

“An independent assessment and a suspension of HMRC’s use of behavioural psychology / behavioural insights, in light of the ongoing suicide risk to those impacted by the Loan Charge”. (Loan Charge All-Party Parliamentary Group, 2020)

The literature highlights that approval from the public must be sought and maintained. Additionally, all behavioural science projects directed at children must have effective feedback mechanisms and methods of opting out, with decision makers able to be held accountable. There are also existing potential concerns that behavioural science may increase suicide levels. These important ethical aspects and safety signals appear to have been ignored. The lessons of history warn us that in times of existential crisis, whether real or only perceived, our ethics are at risk of being abandoned, and psychological knowledge can become misused by governments:

“Under some historical conditions or circumstances and contexts, psychologists and psychological knowledge were in danger of being abused by political powers, largely for clandestine purposes, such as conducting torture or the persecution of political opponents.” (Maercker A, Guski-Leinwand S, 2018)

It is of grave concern that the actions of the UK Government during the covid era potentially fit into the category of abusing psychological knowledge and being absent of ethics, thus require serious investigation.

The impact of psychological pressure on informed consent

For the sake of brevity, I will not reiterate the multiple concerns already documented by others surrounding the consequences of the Government’s actions around lockdown, hospital discharges, school closures and mask mandates (Amnesty International, 2020), (Byrne S et al, 2023) (Daily Telegraph, 2023b), (Mail Online, 2022), (Office for National Statistics, 2021), (The Guardian, 2021). I do, however, wish to highlight one extremely serious consequence that I believe has occurred as a direct result of the use of unethical psychological techniques / behavioural insights on the unknowing public: by adopting the techniques used, the Government significantly and materially undermined, if not removed, the UK population’s ability to give valid informed consent to taking a Covid19 vaccine.

According to Public Health England:

“Consent must be obtained before starting any treatment or physical investigation or before providing personal care for a patient. This includes the administration of all vaccines”.

Also,

“It is a legal and ethical principle that valid consent must be obtained before starting personal care, treatment or investigations”.

Also,

“For consent to immunisation to the (sic) valid, it must be given freely, voluntarily and without coercion by an appropriately informed person who has the mental capacity to consent to the administration of the vaccines in question”. (Gov.uk, 2021)

From the above, it is clear that for medical consent to be valid it must be given without coercion. The Encyclopedia Britannica defines coercion as:

“The threat or use of punitive measures against states, groups or individuals in order for them to undertake or desist from specified actions. In addition to the threat of or limited use of force (or both), coercion may entail economic sanctions, psychological pressures, and social ostracism. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2023).

The psychological techniques used by the UK Government fall under that definition of coercion. If follows that according to Public Health England’s statements and for the general public at least, consent to immunisation was, invalidated by the behaviour of the UK Government. It is also important to highlight that there have been serious injuries and death directly linked to the Covid19 vaccine. Many of those injured or who have died would not have taken a vaccine if they had not been psychologically pressured, feared being ostracised socially and / or were given accurate information.

The removal of the general population’s ability to give informed medical consent is of the gravest concern, and a severe and dangerous consequence of using behavioural insights / psychological techniques on an unknowing public.

Conclusion

The need to hold tightly to professional ethics, in particular to the ethical principle of informed consent, is not just an ‘academic’ issue. It is a matter of practical and fundamental importance to responsible government.

According to Halpern (2015, p. 348) “Behavioural insights, like any other form of knowledge, can be used for good or bad”. It is my opinion that the use of behavioural insights and psychological techniques designed to elicit feelings of fear, shame and guilt utilised by the UK Government since March 2020 has been unethical. The consequences are still unravelling but they appear to include serious damage to trust in government and its agencies, the NHS, and the medical and scientific professions.

I propose that there be an immediate cessation of the use of all behavioural science techniques designed to elicit feelings of fear, shame and guilt used by the Government pending an urgent, open and independent inquiry. This inquiry should also have as an objective the re-establishment of ethical frameworks necessary to protect the public and to provide accountability. I would welcome a discussion on this most important of matters.

Most respectfully

Dr Christian Buckland
Doctor of Psychology in Psychotherapy and Counselling

References

Amnesty International. (2020, October 4). UK: Older people in care homes abandoned to die amid government failures during COVID-19 pandemic. Retrieved from Amnesty International:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2020/10/uk-older-people-in-care-homes- abandoned-to-die-amid-government-failures-during-covid-19-pandemic/

The British Psychology Society (2021, December) Code of Ethics and Conduct. Retrieved from BPS.org.uk: https://explore.bps.org.uk/content/report-guideline/bpsrep.2021.inf94

Byrne S., Sledge, H., Franklin, R., Boland F., Murray D., Hourihane, J. (2023). Social communication skill attainment in babies born during the COVID-19 pandemic: a birth cohort study. Arch. Dis. Child.,108: 20–24 (available at https://adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/108/1/20.full.pdf).

The Daily Telegraph. (2023, March 10a). The Lockdown Files. Retrieved from The Daily Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/lockdown-files/

The Daily Telegraph. (2023, March 23b). I lost my daughter to suicide in lockdown – she was failed by the system . Retrieved from The Daily Telegraph:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/24/suicide-rates-mental-health-units-covid-lockdown/

Dodsworth, L. (2021). A State of Fear. How the UK government weaponised fear during the Covid-19 pandemic. London: Pinter and Martin.

Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2022, September 28). Coercion. Retrieved from Encyclopaedia Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/topic/coercion

Gov.uk. (2020, May 5). Options for increasing adherence to social distancing measures, 22 March 2020.

Retrieved from Gov.uk: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/options-for- increasing-adherence-to-social-distancing-measures-22-march-2020

Gov.uk. (2021, June). PHE Greenbook of immunisation chapter 2 Consent. Retrieved from Assests.publishing.service.gov.uk:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9 94850/PHE_Greenbook_of_immunisation_chapter_2_consent_18_June21.pdf

The Guardian. (2021, Feb 13). Fury at ‘do not resuscitate’ notices given to Covid patients with learning disabilities. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/13/new- do-not-resuscitate-orders-imposed-on-covid-19-patients-with-learning-difficulties

Halpern, D. (2015). Inside the nudge unit. London. WH Allen and Co.

Institute for Government. (2010). MINDSPACE: Influencing behaviour for public policy. Retrieved from: Institute for Government.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/MINDSPACE.pdf

Loan Charge All-Party Parliamentary Group. (2020, March). Loan-Charge-APPG-Report-into-the-Morse-Review- FINAL.pdf. Retrieved from Loan Charge APPG.co.uk: http://www.loanchargeappg.co.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2020/03/Loan-Charge-APPG-Report-into-the-Morse-Review-FINAL.pdf

Maercker A, Guski-Leinwand S. (2018). Psychologists’ Involvement in Repressive “Stasi” Secret Police. International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation , 107-119.

Mail Online (2022, October 21). Lockdowns – collateral cancer burden 40 thousand tumours missed year pandemic. Retrieved from Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article- 11335569/Lockdowns-collateral-cancer-burden-40-THOUSAND-tumours-missed-year-pandemic.html

Office for National Statistics. (2021, May 7). Deaths at home increased by a third in 2020, while deaths in hospitals fell except for COVID-19 . Retrieved from ONS.gov.uk:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/ deathsathomeincreasedbyathirdin2020whiledeathsinhospitalsfellexceptforcovid19/2021-05-07

The Spectator. (2022, August 27). The lockdown files: Rishi Sunak on what we weren’t told. Retrieved from The Spectator: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-lockdown-files-rishi-sunak-on-what-we-werent- told/

UNICEF. (2021, October 03). Ethical considerations when applying behavioural science in projects focused on children. Retrieved from unicef.irc.org: https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/1251-ethical-
considerations-when-applying-behavioural-science-in-projects-focused-on-children.html

Cover image credit: MICHOFF

Dangerous Nanoparticles Hidden in Vaccines & Our Environment

“Nanoparticles Are Extremely Reactive, Can Hardly Be Degraded, and Disrupt and Destroy All Tissues They Come in Contact With.”

TCTL editor’s note: As a service to our readers, this article, written in German, has been translated to English with the aid of translation software. Please understand that this is not a perfect translation. I do not speak German. However, the key concepts come through very clearly.

The work of Stefan Lanka and ‘Next Level – Knowledge Reconsidered’ challenges the entire paradigm around western medicine’s understand of biology (and the make-believe “science” of virology).

It is vitally important that we come to understand the danger of this long-planned, destructive transformation and total control of humanity and all living beings. We need to awaken to the truth about our own biology and the totality of our multi-dimensional existence. The quality of life for all who inhabit earth depends on sharing real knowledge, questioning the old paradigms built on lies, and the rise of empowered humanity. ~ Kathleen

Nanoparticles: So Small and Yet So Dangerous

by Next Level – Knowledge Reconsidered

As has already been learned, the new corona vaccines come with accompanying substances declared as “additives”, the so-called nanoparticles.

Although their high risk potential has already been sufficiently investigated in the past, this is accepted with approval. No consideration is given to the health of the individual, and even possible long-term consequences for those affected are accepted.

By means of continuously running the epidemic mind-frame through clever propaganda, expensive advertising and the generation of social pressure, one pulls out all the stops to get each individual to “roll up their sleeves”.

Yes – to indulge in this vaccine!

One protects even scarcity, in order to awaken needs in the people. And all this despite the fact that it cannot be called effective, let alone safe.

In this article, I share with you various information revolving around the issue of nanoparticles, and can only appeal to your sanity to keep your hands (arm 😉 )  off this vaccine and let others know this as well.

In a nutshell:

Real biochemistry: nanoparticles are extremely reactive, can hardly be degraded and disrupt and destroy all tissues they come in contact with. The body reacts to this disruption for repair purposes by forming globulins, which are misinterpreted by conventional medicine as antibodies.

Why do those responsible claim that nanoparticles are necessary as an additive?

Of special importance are the RNA vaccines, which are additionally equipped with nanoparticles.

So it says in Focus-Arztsuche:

Nanoparticles as mini-transporters. But making the right RNA molecule does not mean you have a working vaccine.

” It is difficult to get the RNA into the human body cells,” says Cichutek.

Gene shuttles with nanoparticles are supposed to solve the problem. Measuring only a few millionths of a centimeter, they carry the packaged strands of genetic material through the cell wall and prevent the vaccine from degrading too quickly in the body.

One of the problems in the preparation and administration of mRNA vaccines is the natural instability of mRNA.

In order to prevent, or at least delay, the degradation of mRNA and to deliver the administered (e.g., injected) mRNA to the site of the claimed effect (i.e., into the cells where the ribosomes then carry out the desired protein synthesis), a variety of highly complex additives are used.

So far, meaningful safety studies are available for very few of these additives (Roier S. 2019. Trillium Immunology 3/2019. Retrieved 03.05.2020), and some of the most commonly used adjuvants are related to nanotechnology (e.g., lipid nanoparticles/LNPs), for which in any case only very limited and contradictory experience in human use is available.

The danger of nanoparticles used in food, vaccines and others

The fact that these nanoparticles are extremely controversial and known to pose a high risk is strangely swept under the rug.

But what shocks me personally the most: How can scientists, whose job it is to check how dangerous the use of these nanoparticles and other toxins is in a person’s organism, completely play this down and even endorse it, as if we were dealing with the most normal thing in the world?

-In Der Spiegel it says:

Federal Environment Agency warns against nanotechnology, quote:

“In animal experiments, the particles have migrated right into the nucleus of body cells and damaged the genetic information there,”

or

“Their tininess, however, also poses the risk that they are much more likely to overcome natural barriers in the body – such as the blood-brain barrier.”

-The mdr – Nanoparticles can cause cancer reported:

“It has already been established that when nanoparticles are inhaled, they cause inflammatory reactions in the lungs.”
[Rolf Buschmann, Technical Environmental Protection Officer, BUND]

[…]

“You always have to ask yourself the question: what happens to it in the organism then? That’s why we are particularly skeptical.”
[Rolf Buschmann, Technical Environmental Protection Officer, BUND]

-In a study published in the International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON).

“Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma” states:

“Using transmission electron microscopy, nanoparticles were observed to settle in the cytoplasm and karyoplasm of lung epithelial and mesothelial cells, but were also found in the mammary fluid. These cases raise concerns that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles can cause severe damage to human lungs without protective measures. Pulmonary fibrosis and foreign body granulomas of the pleura.”

The Federal Ministry of Education and Research – BMBF knows about their dangerousness and writes itself:

“Can these substances also make us sick?

“There is increasing evidence that nanoparticles in polluted air can have a negative effect on our brains.

“Observational studies have shown, for example, that people who live near busy roads and breathe this air permanently have an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Toxicological studies must now prove whether there is a direct causal relationship.

“We are currently investigating this at our institute. But we are also wondering whether nanoparticles in products can have harmful effects on our brains.”

[…]

“We have studied several nanomaterials. We were able to detect conspicuous features in nanosilver. This substance is used for detergents or toothbrushes, for example, because it kills bacteria.”

[…]

“Of course, we can’t yet say whether this can lead to illness.”

[…]

“Too little is known yet about whether nanoparticles are toxic to nerve cells and tissue. We would like to help close this knowledge gap.”

[…]

“Toxicological tests unfortunately cannot always provide one hundred percent certainty. We are dealing here with complex mechanisms of action, some of which have not yet been elucidated. So it can’t be ruled out that a new substance comes onto the market that only afterwards proves to be harmful to health.”

This article from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research is dated 04/06/2019.

The Federal Government has knowledge of all this and yet – without regard for just one single life – has approved the new mRNA vaccine and is vaccinating people with it at this very moment and intends to use it on our youngest children as well.

Please forgive me, but the deliberate ignoring of such clear facts, which are known to all involved, can only be glossed over with a heavy heart as an oversight on the part of those responsible.

In this context, I would like to refer to the vaccine Pandemrix, which was used in the so-called “swine flu” pandemic and caused considerable side effects. [Cf. WDR]

Dr. Stefan Lanka (molecular biologist, virologist and winner of the measles trial [See our video]), had already warned in 2009, before the use of the then vaccine Pandemrix, shortly before its market launch:

“The strong destructive power of cells by nanoparticles, such as the so-called “auxiliary substance” (adjuvant) MF59 in the flu vaccine for the elderly, is based on the known fact that transport between cells in organs and tissues occurs with particles of this size and the cell cannot distinguish between ‘foreign’ and ‘own’.

“The penetration of the nanoparticles into the cell envelopes damages them and destroys the cells.

“Due to the fact that these nanoparticles are also very stable in the body, it is known that, for a longer time, cells in the body are destroyed. And this reacts with the formation of globulins as a sealing substance of the cells. And this increase of the globulin concentration is claimed by vaccine [manufacturers], against better knowledge, as antibodies and as protection against freely invented pathogens.

“When globulins are present in greater concentration, their binding to all kinds of proteins is detectable.”

The Paul Ehrlich Institute suppressed as long as possible the devastating and inconceivable fact that nanoparticles were already present in other vaccines. Only after diverse pressure was exerted, the PEI had to admit this fact.

The Paul Ehrlich Institute indirectly admits that this is the case, stating there:

“Even if some of these components are located in a size range that is in the nanometer range, they are not technologically targeted nanoparticles, especially not nanoparticles made of metals or plastics.”

Regulatory agencies, including the German Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI), completely ignore this issue.

Measles vaccine genetically contaminated: PEI refuses to investigate

Note: Amazing that they first denied that nanoparticles were present at all and then, caught, manipulatively tried to wriggle out of it by pretending that they were “not purposefully” manufactured.

Let me tell you something: The task of the Paul Ehrlich Institute is to check from the outset whether harmful substances are present in a vaccination and not to determine only after the child has fallen into the well!

How can we continue to believe such institutions when it comes to our precious health? It is best to leave it alone. I don’t even want to mention the other outrages of the PEI, such as the concealment of the many dead vaccinated babies by the vaccine Hexavac (How safe are vaccines really? – Dr. med [medical doctor] Klaus Hartmann) …

The BioNTech mRNA vaccine is a danger for mankind, for whose side effects including death. Uğur Şahin is personally responsible.

From the point of view of orthodox medicine, the vaccination should not be used.

• Because RNA is transformed into DNA by several mechanisms and damages chromosomes.
• Because it will hit the body’s own enzymes, which are misinterpreted as components of the virus.

Strictly speaking, the BioNTech RNA vaccine is even more dangerous than nanoparticles themselves, because the RNA to be vaccinated is encased in lipid nanoparticles, and here we find a double-reactive mixture that will accumulate mainly in the brain and cause much more narcolepsy than was the case with the swine flu vaccine.

The vaccine from Mainz (mRNA) contains fats in their non-dissolvable and constantly-very-reactive nano-particle form, including the known allergen, the solvent PEG (polyethanol glycol).

In addition, the vaccine will cause chromosome strand breaks in an unknown number of people, resulting in energy depletion, infertility and disability of offspring if the chromosome breaks also happen in the “germ line” of males and females.

This is the shortest possible description of the vaccine damage for which Uğur Şahin is personally responsible. For sure, there will be an observable number of deaths, which will then be said to have happened as a result of the virus.

With the engrained belief in an evil biology (orthodox medicine), coupled with the collective compulsion for return on investment, one might almost assume that medical professionals actually believe that vaccination could help.

Most practicing physicians have never studied this information and trust the responsible scientists themselves and [do so] completely blindly.

So our task should not be to demonize those responsible, but to point out to them their error.

One of the simplest ways is to look to see if any studies at all have been done on the so-called pharmacokinetic properties.

“Pharmacokinetics describes the totality of processes that a drug undergoes in the body. This includes the drug’s uptake (absorption), distribution in the body (distribution), biochemical conversion and degradation (metabolization), and excretion (excretion).”

In short, what happens to all toxins (disguised as additives) within the organism?

We see that a simple “not applicable” was noted in the SUMMARY OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MEDICINE.

These studies are omitted for just about all vaccines. A statement about whether this vaccine potentially harms the body and how the mixture of the injected material behaves in the body is simply left to fate by those responsible!

If this information does not take your breath away, then I suspect you are not taking it very seriously in other respects either :).

New studies confirm: Various vaccines are contaminated by micro- and nanoscale particles and described as non-biodegradable and non-biocompatible.

Unknown to most people is the fact that today’s vaccines are already contaminated with nanoparticles, as random tests have shown:

New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro- and Nanocontamination. [This article was published in English. Download the PDF here.]

Among other things, it states:

“The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration. It is important to remember that particles (crystals and not molecules) are bodies foreign to the organism and they behave as such. More in particular, their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them, adding to that toxicity which, in any case, is still there, that typical of foreign bodies. For that reason, they induce an inflammatory reaction.”

[…]

“After injection, these microparticles, nanoparticles, and aggregates can remain at the injection site and form swellings and granulomas … However, they can also be transported through the bloodstream, eluding any attempt to guess their final destination … As with all foreign bodies, especially those so small, they trigger an inflammatory response that is chronic because most of these particles cannot be broken down. In addition, the protein corona effect can … due to a nano-bio interaction … generate organic/inorganic composite particles that can stimulate the immune system in undesirable ways…It is impossible not to add that particles of the size commonly observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with DNA …”

“After being injected, those microparticles, nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas.17 But they can also be carried by the blood circulation, escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…

“As happens with all foreign bodies, particularly that small, they induce an inflammatory reaction that is chronic because most of those particles cannot be degraded. Furthermore, the protein-corona effect (due to a nanobio-interaction can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable ways.  It is impossible not to add that particles, the size often observed in vaccines, can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA.”

Several important questions arise from the results of this 2017 study that demand answers:

• Are some of these nanoparticles intentionally introduced into vaccines?
• Does the standard manufacturing process for conventional vaccines UNFORTUNATELY lead to dangerous and destructive nano-contamination?
• New nanotechnology is already being used to manufacture several vaccines – ostensibly to “improve efficacy.” In fact, the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine may be a nano-vaccine. Does this manufacturing process bring with it the inevitable effect of a hurricane of nanoparticle contamination?
• How many cases of brain damage and autism in children can open the door to [seeing] nanoparticle contamination?
• Finally, where are these contaminated vaccines being manufactured?
  The above study did not attempt to find out. It was outside the scope of the research. It is common knowledge that, for example, in the case of the U.S., vaccines or their ingredients are not domestically produced in many cases. Where does this lead to control safety? For example, in China, where there have been numerous pharmaceutical scandals related to product contamination?
• The vaccine company is not showing the slightest interest in answering any of these questions. They are busy pretending that the questions do not exist.
• It would be suicidal to trust the establishment.

Even more explosive in connection with RNA and nano-vaccines is the reference to the Gene Drive Files, which the Heinrich Böll Foundation uncovered a few years ago. These show that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation commissioned a PR firm to secretly undermine an important UN process on the subject of synthetic biology.

Although all this is well known, Christian Drosten (Berlin Charité) comes up with the following words: “Gene-based vaccines have potential“.

The only conclusion can be: Prof. Drosten does not know what he is talking about!

The Medical Research Center for Prophylaxis and Health Protection in Industrial Workers confirms “nanotoxicity” on human health

Combined subchronic toxicity of aluminum (III), titanium (IV), and silicon (IV) oxide nanoparticles and their alleviation with a complex of bioprotectors

Summary

“The use of nanoparticles-including metallic nanoparticles-has exploded in industry, commerce, and medicine in recent decades. A Russian research team studied the ‘nanotoxicity’ of three types of metal nanoparticles (titanium, silicon, and aluminum oxide) alone and in combination. Repeated injections in rats showed that all three were “toxic to multiple target organs.”

“For the majority of these effects,” however, the alumina nanoparticles were found to be “most harmful,” even though the aluminum dose was only half that of titanium and silicon. No other publications have reported on the combined toxicity of these metal nanoparticles, despite their ‘potentially hazardous nano-effects on human health’.”

Source: IA Minigalieva, BA Katsnelson, LI Privalova et al. International Journal of Molecular Sciences , March 2018; 19 (3): 837.

The HELMHOLTZ Center for Infection Research has been exploring other avenues for years: Vaccination without a syringe via nanoparticles through creams to be applied to the skin or application via nasal spray.

Quote:

“The nanoparticles penetrate the skin through the hair follicles and trigger an immune response in the body,” says Hanzey Yasar of HIPS. “Such a vaccine would be very easy to administer and would certainly be well received by the population.”

Veteran physician Dr. Larry Palevsky confirmed to Connecticut’s Public Health Committee on Feb. 19, 2020, that the aluminum nanoparticles in vaccines cause massive damage.

In it, he describes not only how the safety claims of pharmaceutical manufacturers are made without any scientific study, but also how they can be completely refuted based on scientific evidence.

It is known from medicine that a high concentration of nanoparticles leads to fibrotic changes in lung tissue.

There is also evidence that these particles are associated with respiratory diseases as well as an increase in inflammatory markers and an increased tendency to blood clotting disorders, which can increase the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias, heart attacks and strokes.

Nanoparticles cross the blood-brain barrier and it is unexplored what may be triggered by this.

With the background knowledge that all vaccines are based on a false foundation and do little harm at best — adding to the fact that the dangers of the nanoparticles used are known to the entire science bench as well as to critical colleagues — these dangers must be addressed and cannot continue to be ignored, or suppressed.

Act. If not for yourself, then for the children!

The entire NEXT LEVEL – Knowledge Reconsidered team will support you and answer your questions.

NEXT LEVEL – Knowledge Reconsidered is present on various social media platforms, including. Telegram, Youtube, Odysee, Twitter and Facebook.

Connect with Next Level (German language)

Cover image credit: waldryano

The Global Pandemic Treaty Is a Threat to Us All

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
April 28, 2023

Today, James delivers a statement for the National Citizens Inquiry in Canada on the WHO, the global pandemic treaty, the amendments to the International Health Regulations, and the formation of the coming technocratic biosecurity control grid.

 Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee / Rokfin / Substack / Download the mp4

Transcript

Hello. I’m James Corbett of The Corbett Report.

For those who don’t know, I’m a Canadian who’s been living and working in Japan for 19 years and founded The Corbett Report in 2007 as a source for news and information about politics, economics, science, philosophy and society, and in that regard I’ve been covering the corruption of the World Health Organization and warning about the dawning biosecurity state for over 15 years now.

So I would like to thank the inquiry for giving me the time to address the extremely important topic of the pending global pandemic treaty, but I know my time is limited today so I’d like to get straight into detailing the relevant background and context for understanding this story.

Firstly, the World Health Organization was established in 1948 to promote “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.” It proposes to achieve this by acting as “the directing and co-ordinating authority on international health work.”

Accordingly, the WHO’s governing body, the World Health Assembly, adopted the International Sanitary Regulations in 1951 to consolidate the multiple, overlapping international agreements then governing quarantine procedures and other international health controls into a single convention.

In 1969, this was superseded by the International Health Regulations, which, as amended in 1973 and 1981, covered six diseases but focused on three: cholera, yellow fever and plague.

Worries about the “emergence, re-emergence and international spread of disease and other threats” concurrent with the surge in international travel in the 1990s gave rise to calls for a substantial revision of the treaty, and, in the wake of the 2003 SARS event and the 2004 avian influenza A epidemic (if you remember that one), a renewed sense of urgency led to the 2005 revision of the IHR.

This revision included the creation of a new category of declaration by the World Health Organization: the Public Health Emergency of International Concern, which is appropriately enough abbreviated as PHEIC.

A PHEIC declaration grants the WHO the power to obtain and share information about any declared health crisis anywhere within the IHR territories with or without the consent of the individual governments involved. And, according to Stephen Morrison—the director of the Global Health Policy Center at the Center for Strategic and International Studies—this potentially allows for “boots-on-the-ground” intervention by the US military or other NATO member countries to operate in these environments in terms of ground transport, supply chain, and distribution of commodities.

The PHEIC was declared for the first time in 2009 during the so-called Swine Flu pandemic, which, as was later shown, was based on severely overestimated case numbers. In fact, the swine flu “pandemic” did not meet the WHO website’s own definition of “an enormous number of deaths and cases of the disease” and, when that was pointed out by a CNN reporter on May 4, 2009, that language was promptly removed.

At the time, Richard Schabas—the former chief medical officer for Canada’s Ontario Province—was quoted as saying: “Sometimes some of us think that WHO stands for World Hysteria Organization.”

Indeed, in 2010, a British Medical Journal investigation and an investigation by the Council of Europe both concluded that the key scientists who advised then-WHO Director Margaret Chan to declare the PHEIC for the swine flu scare “had done paid work for pharmaceutical firms that stood to gain from the guidance they were preparing” and excoriated the WHO for its complete lack of transparency about the process.

PHEICs were subsequently declared for the 2014 polio declaration, the 2013 outbreak of Ebola in Western Africa, the 2015 Zika virus “epidemic,” the 2018–2020 Kivu Ebola epidemic, and, of course, in 2020 for the so-called novel coronavirus pandemic and in 2022 for the monkeypox “pandemic”(?).

Each of these cases similarly resulted in massive paydays for pharmaceutical manufacturers and other beneficiaries of the growing biosecurity complex and massive increases in power for “health authorities” in each country and for the WHO in particular. In fact, we are told that the current WHO Director even ignored the decision of his “expert advisory council” to unilaterally declare last year’s Monkeypox outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern.

Incredibly, the WHO is not satisfied with the remarkable power that it already enjoys. It is currently engaged in a deliberately confusing process to simultaneously do two things:

• Firstly, to once again amend the International Health Regulations to give the WHO even more powers of surveillance and control during any arbitrarily declared health crisis.
• And secondly, to create a global pandemic treaty that would supersede the sovereignty of individual nation-states and cede even more authority to the WHO to monitor and control public health agencies in the name of preventing the next pandemic.

The process for these two separate negotiations are happening simultaneously, and although there is the fig leaf of public input in these processes, in reality only accredited organizations are given time to voice their opinion about the need for such a treaty and even then the WHO is under no obligation to even consider such input.

Instead, actual negotiations are taking place behind closed doors in off-camera sessions, and draft documents and meeting minutes are only occasionally dribbled out for public consumption.

Worse, as the WHO has already demonstrated, their procedure for adoption of these proposed amendments is at best a formality, and, at worst, pure theatrics.

That a completely unelected, unaccountable body that wields so much power over international affairs is meeting behind closed doors to decide the future of humanity under the pretense of the next declared emergency should be worrying enough. But the few details that have leaked out about these negotiations are even more frightening.

These include:

• provisions in the draft of the proposed treaty that would oblige member states to impose online censorship in the event of future crises under the guise of “tackling misinformation;”
• provisions for the creation of a global digital vaccine passport system to stop unvaccinated people from traveling in the event of the next declared crisis;
• and requirements that WHO members “build and reinforce surveillance systems” for future pandemics.

While these ideas may seem benign or even noble to those who do not know the history of the WHO or the erection of the biosecurity grid, to those of us who have lived through three years of unprecedented medical tyranny—from forced quarantines and lockdowns to the attempt to illegally mandate experimental medical interventions—stopping the WHO’s unprecedented power grab must be our greatest priority.

The World Health Organization currently consists of 194 member states, including Canada. In order to become a member of the WHO, a state must ratify the WHO Constitution, which grants the WHO’s governing body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), the power to “adopt conventions or agreements with respect to any matter within the competence of the Organization,” which, when ratified, obliges each member state to adopt those conventions or to notify the WHO’s Director-General of rejection or reservations to that adoption within 18 months.

As a WHO member state, Canada is obligated to abide by World Health Assembly decisions or to provide specific reasons for partial or incomplete compliance with WHA rules and agreements. Accordingly, the Public Health Agency of Canada provides regular “self-assessment reports” regarding its own International Health Regulations compliance.

At an absolute minimum, Canadians must exert whatever power they have in whatever way they are able to reassert Canada’s sovereignty over its public health by registering its reservations about the IHR and the pandemic treaty. That would of course not be a solution to the problem posed by the WHO, but it would be a start. A more thoroughgoing solution would be the withdrawal of Canada from the WHO altogether.

But, as someone who is not just deeply cynical about the ability of the public to influence such affairs, but actually believes the political process itself—with its inherent abrogation of individual sovereignty and thus, by extension, bodily autonomy—to be invalid and immoral, I would suggest that a more radical approach might be appropriate. That is, active and coordinated widescale civil disobedience of medical decrees and mandates, whether federal or provincial, that are not in the interest of individual health, including, if possible, the foundation of private medical organizations with doctors and others of like mind who are willing to disregard the dictates of the WHO, Public Health Canada, and any other self-declared health authority to provide health care regardless of vaccination status or any other unreasonable dictate.

I know that such a movement will not take place without a sea change in public perception, and such a change would have to be predicated on a sea change in public awareness and understanding. That is why I participate in inquiries like this and do the work that I do to help raise awareness of these issues.

I hope you can appreciate that there is much, much more to be said about this problem and its solution than can possibly be done justice in a short presentation like this. If you’re interested in hearing more about this topic, I suggest you follow the hyperlinked transcript of this statement that is available at corbettreport.com/pandemictreaty, as well as check The Corbett Report archives for my previous work on the WHO and the biosecurity state and follow my monthly conversations with Dr. Meryl Nass on Children’s Health Defense as we document the progress of the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty toward their proposed ratification at the 77th World Health Assembly in May of next year.

But in closing, let me just say this: The WHO was established in 1948 to coordinate international efforts to promote public health. But what is health?

That may seem like a trivial question, but as we’ve seen over the last few years, the answer to that question can effect every aspect of our lives, from what medical interventions we are obligated to take to whether or not we are permitted to leave our house.

We cannot afford to let government appointees and unelected technocrats at the WHO answer this incredibly important question for us. It is up to us to answer that question for ourselves and to decide what health precautions we are willing to take and under what circumstances we are willing to take them.

Any treaty, health regulation or other document that would seek to undermine our bodily autonomy is null and void and should be treated as if it never existed.

Thank you for your time.

Connect with James Corbett

Philippines Supreme Court Blocks Commercial Release of GMOs over Ecological Disaster Fears

by Sustainable Pulse
April 28, 2023

Genetically modified Golden Rice and Bt eggplant will remain off the market in the Philippines after the country’s Supreme Court (SC) issued a writ in favor of farmers and scientists who sought to stop the government from commercially releasing the products, Phil Star Global reported.In a session last Tuesday, the SC granted a writ of Kalikasan to MASIPAG and other petitioners against officials of the Departments of Agriculture (DA), Environment and Natural Resources, and Health as well as the Bureau of Plant Industry, Philippine Rice Research Institute and University of the Philippines-Los Baños.

The writ of Kalikasan, a judicial mechanism in the Philippines, provides protection against ecological damage and disasters caused by human activities like mining.

The petitioners sought the issuance of the writ alongside a continuing mandamus before the SC last year for a temporary environmental protection order that mandates the DA to stop the commercial propagation of golden rice and issue biosafety permits for the commercial propagation of Bt Eggplant.

The SC has yet to disclose whether they also granted other requests in the petition including stopping the DA from commercially propagating the Golden Rice and the Bt Eggplant until proof of safety and compliance with legal requirements are presented.

The petitioners want all biosafety permits for Golden Rice and Bt Eggplant nullified and voided. They also sought independent risk and impact assessments, to secure prior and informed consent of farmers and indigenous peoples and to ensure liability mechanisms in case of damage as required by law.

While the SC has yet to release the full decision, a briefer on the case showed that the MASIPAG argued that the Golden Rice, which is patented to transnational agrochemical corporation Syngenta, is a rice variety that has been modified by inserting genes from maize and bacteria found in soil. The bacteria allows the plant to biosynthesize beta-carotene in the edible parts.

“They also argued that Bt Eggplant was designed so the plant would produce its own toxin to kill the fruit and shoot borer, which is one of several common pests that consume and damage eggplants,” the briefer added.

Connect with Sustainable Pulse

Cover image credit: sasint

Philip Zelikow’s Covid Coverup

“The Project for a New American Century was not a plan for a robust American empire. Just the opposite. It was a plan to use the US and its people as pawns in what was really the Project for a New World Order. America’s contribution to that was to let itself be robbed physically, morally, and spiritually by a parasite class whose goals for control of the world can’t even be understood as human. Indeed, transhumanism is a stated goal of these people.”
~ Richard Hugus

by Richard Hugus
April 27, 2023

Last November Philip Zelikow and “the Covid Crisis Group” published a 352 page book, Lessons from a Covid War, An Investigative Report. The book went on sale April 23, 2023 and was launched April 24 in a five hour presentation at the National Academy of Medicine in Washington, DC. The launch of the book has lately gotten attention in the news.

By its emphasis on war, the book inadvertently confirms recent evidence uncovered by Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt that the Covid psy-op was not a supposed public health emergency but a type of 5th generation warfare carried out by the US Department of Defense against US citizens, and much of the rest of the world, in collusion with many other governments.

Who is Philip Zelikow? He was the director of the so-called 9-11 Commission appointed by the G.W. Bush Administration in 2002. He was the editor of the resulting 9-11 Commission Report. He was and still is a University of Virginia history professor said to specialize in public myths and the effect of “catastrophic terrorism” in making abrupt changes in of the course of human history.

As we know, both myth and terror were in full play in the 9-11 and the covid operations. Zelikow was among the neocons of the Project for a New American Century which said in its “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” September 2000, that it would take “a new Pearl Harbor” to motivate the American public to support the militarily aggressive US global hegemony that the Project called for.

Exactly a year later, 9-11 provided the neocon-controlled US government with a pretext for just such aggression against a list of Arab and Muslim countries that did not threaten US hegemony, but did happen to be enemies of the state of Israel, which the neocons happen to adamantly support. So many coincidences!

Twenty years later, Zelikow was called in for another coverup, this time unofficially. Under Zelikow’s guidance 9-11 was painted as a series of tragic failures by the US government, the Pentagon, NORAD, and US intelligence agencies to either predict or prevent the hijacking of four passenger airliners by 19 nefarious hijackers. Using the same formula again, Zelikow assembled a group of 34 academic, medical, and government apologists — the “Covid Crisis Group” — to write the authoritative report on the US handling of the “Covid 19 pandemic.” Once again. the entire US government was totally blindsided. It was found  woefully inept, incompetent, and completely unprepared to deal with this terrible out-of-nowhere attack.

Zelikow and his hand-picked authors leave no stone unturned in pointing out the failures of almost all the measures a helpless Uncle Sam took to deal with the “pandemic.” The problems listed by Zelikow’s mainstream mouthpieces were: “operational challenges,” lack of preparedness, “policy failures,” ignorance of the source of SARS CoV-2, the failure of Trump’s leadership in “Operation Warp Speed,” a ”fragmented health care system,” and “poor communication” which led to poor “vaccine uptake” and a failure to prevent people being led astray by “misinformation.”

The solution offered by the Crisis Group: organize from the top down, globally, with a single authority, for the next predicted “pandemic,” much like what we’re hearing from the World Heath Organization. This is not new thinking. It’s a copy and paste of the globalist agenda.

The strategy for covering up an attack by the US government on US citizens is to make it look like the government was a victim of the attack, not the perpetrator.  That lie is facilitated by what sounds like a tough critique of government incompetence, crafted by the same people who were involved in the crime. This is like letting a murderer off the hook by hearing nothing but his apology for serious and reprehensible failures in stopping the murder, and forgetting that he committed the murder.

Of course, Zelikow’s exhaustive report passed over the pre-planning, the trail of predictive pharma patents, the economic devastation, the gigantic upward transfer of wealth, the government corruption, the psychological harm, the extensive injury to human health, the thousands of deaths caused by the US “response” to C-19 — all of it deliberate.

The report starts with the premise that a never-before-seen virus attacked us all at once and nobody knew what to do about it. This is more or less how Zelikow and his previous stable of authors said 9-11 happened: our innocent nation was attacked from out of the blue; we were caught totally unaware.  It is interesting to see how the public myth and the “catastrophic event” intertwine.

Zelikow is not  just an academic observing that catastrophic terror changes history. He is an advisor to people who want to change history by creating catastrophic terror. He almost certainly advises on how to do it. Not only has he nicely tied his two academic theses together, he has won handsome rewards and respectability, AND completed the major deception of being the one to write the official history of the operations his handlers planned.

Zelikow is the consummate insider. Had he not appeared with this coverup masquerading as an earnest critique, we might have missed seeing that the neocons had to be involved in the covid operation just as they were in 9-11.

The Project for a New American Century was not a plan for a robust American empire. Just the opposite. It was a plan to use the US and its people as pawns in what was really the Project for a New World Order. America’s contribution to that was to let itself be robbed physically, morally, and spiritually by a parasite class whose goals for control of the world can’t even be understood as human. Indeed, transhumanism is a stated goal of these people.

Zelikow has tipped his hat with this monstrosity of establishment lies. His has announced he is involved, despite no one asking, and we can infer from this that the neocons were also involved.

“The wicked run when no one is chasing them,” says the proverb. With all the power the neocons wield, most notable today in the Nuland- and Blinken-led attack on Russia, the neocons must of course be connected with the would-be masters at Davos.

How clever this clique must think they are to have fooled the whole world. With such arrogance, how hard the fall.

Connect with Richard Hugus

Cover image based on creative commons work of:
russavia & GDJ

500 Australians Join World’s First COVID Vaccine Injury Class Action Lawsuit

Dr. Melissa McCann raised more than $110,000 to crowdfund the case, which accuses the Australian government of negligence related to the approval and monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines.

by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., The Defender
April 27, 2023

At least 500 Australians have already joined a “landmark” COVID-19 vaccine injury class action lawsuit filed this week against the Australian government and the medicines regulator seeks redress for those allegedly injured or left bereaved by the COVID-19 vaccines.

The suit accuses the Australian government, the country’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and Department of Health and Aged Care, and a number of senior public servants of negligence related to the approval and monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines, breach of statutory duty and misfeasance in public office.

The action was filed in the Federal Court of Australia, New South Wales Registry.

According to the lawsuit, the respondents approved the vaccines “with no proper or reasonable evidentiary or logical basis to reasonably determine the Vaccines to be safe, effective and possessing a positive risk-benefit profile.”

Natalie Strijland, the litigator who filed the suit, said in a statement:

“The action will argue that the Therapeutic Goods Administration did not fulfil their duty to properly regulate the Covid-19 vaccines, resulting in considerable harm and damage to Australians.”

The suit alleges the government “acted negligently in approving the vaccines and also by failing to withdraw them” based upon the “known evidence” of risk.

“Australians who have experienced a serious adverse event following Covid-19 vaccination are invited to step forward and register for this class action,” Strijland said.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Aged Care said that the department “is aware” of the lawsuit and that “as the matter is before the court it is not appropriate to comment further.

Class actions provide “a path to justice” for people who may not have the resources to file a court claim on their own, said Alison Bevege, a journalist who has written for Reuters and Daily Mail, in an April 26 Substack post.

Those injured by COVID-19 vaccines have been “ignored, denied, belittled and marginalised,” Bevege added.

Australian doctor crowdsourced $110,000 to bring class action suit

Dr. Melissa McCann, a general practioner who also holds a Graduate Certificate of Allergic Diseases, raised more than $110,000 to crowdfund the case.

Commenting on the lawsuit, McCann tweeted:

Thank you for sharing this news @RefugeOfSinner5 These injured and bereaved have suffered immense loss, pain and grief. Just as heartbreaking has been the gaslighting and silence, which has left them feeling abandoned. We cannot simply 'move on' from covid and leave them behind. https://t.co/TSxqYaqtOf

— DrMelissaMcCann (@drmelissamccann) April 26, 2023

According to McCann, the class action suit was necessary because Australia’s federal vaccine injury compensation program — the COVID-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme — was “not fit for purpose” and had left many vaccine-injured Australians “abandoned with no support” after being promised “fair and accessible” compensation.

Services Australia as of April 12 had received 3,501 applications and paid 137 claims totaling more than $7.3 million, with 2,263 claims still in progress and 696 deemed not payable, news.com.au reported.

By comparison, the U.S. government, as of April 1, approved its first three payments to people injured by COVID-19 vaccines — amounting to a total of $4,634.89. Since the start of the pandemic, Americans claiming injuries related to COVID-19 vaccines and other countermeasures submitted 11,425 requests for compensation.

McCann earlier in February told “crowded halls filled with thousands of Australians” of how TGA and its leadership concealed fatal vaccine-induced myocarditis from the public, noted Peter McCullough, M.D., MPH, a board-certified cardiologist and internist.

“TGA had determined that several young previously healthy children died of COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis. Redacted letters from the TGA to McCann indicated these facts and an admission of willful concealment,” McCullough said.

‘I’d never known what a heart attack would feel like’

Among those represented in the lawsuit is Melbourne teacher Gareth O’Gradie, a previously healthy father of two who before he got his first Pfizer shot in July 2021, was into running, footy, cricket and tennis.

“Six days after [the vaccination] I had sudden-onset chest pain, shortness of breath, fever, chills, sweats,” he told World Freedom Alliance. “I’d never known what a heart attack would feel like, but that’s the type of thing I expected.”

O’Gradie, 41, was rushed to the hospital, where he was diagnosed with vaccine-induced pericarditis. He said:

“In the end I had open heart surgery to remove the pericardium, which had become inflamed and stuck to my heart. It’s extreme.

“All the heads of different departments, cardiology, rheumatology, cardiothoracic, all had conferences to say, ‘We’ve tried this, what is the next step for this recurrent pericarditis we can’t control the pain for?’ It wasn’t an easy decision.

“They said, ‘Nothing’s working — this is what we can offer.’”

O’Gradie — who said he is “pro-science” and has never been “anti-vaccine” — believes the government provided “misinformation about the safety” of the vaccines.

“There was a lot of, you know, ‘We need to not scare the public as part of the vaccine rollout, so let’s not publicise these things,” he told news.com.au. “There was a large, intentional withholding of information — that doesn’t give people informed consent.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense

Connect with Children’s Health Defense

Cover image based on creative commons work of:
OpenClipart-Vectors & Clkr-Free-Vector-Images

Canada’s Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms to Testify at The National Citizens Inquiry in Red Deer, Canada

“The Justice Centre was one of the first organizations in Canada to defend civil liberties during the Covid-19 pandemic, and we have lived by the mandate to defend Canadians’ rights and freedoms – and always will.”

TCTL editor’s note:

The press release shared below comes from Canada’s Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. They are participating in the hearings held in Red Deer today and tomorrow.

National Citizens Inquiry is holding a series of inquiries, some of which have already taken place. See the list of The National Citizen’s Inquiry Hearings Event. See the hearings at their Rumble channel: NationalCitizensInquiryCA.

• Truro, Nova Scotia Canada — March 16th to March 18th
• Toronto, Canada — March 30th to April 1st
• Winnipeg, Canada — April 13th to April 15th
• Saskatoon, Canada — April 20 to April 22
• Red Deer, Canada — April 26 to April 28
• Vancouver, Canada (dates still being finalized)
• Ottawa, Canada (dates still being finalized)
• Quebe, Canada (dates still being finalized)

Thanks to TCTL site supporters C&J for the heads up about the importance of these hearings. From their note to me:

“This Canadian undertaking is as monumental as the truckers convoy, perhaps even moreso.  As J— and I have been listening to the testimonies, each has been as illuminating as another, and so I can’t recommend a particular one (one can just pick one randomly, like we’ve been doing, and then feel like one has really learned something new).  They speak to the Canadian experience, but also illuminate what’s been going on worldwide, so they, like the trucker convoy, are a gift to the world.  American expert witnesses have also been testifying at these hearings.”

Also see: James Corbett: On Canada’s National Citizens Inquiry

~ Kathleen

Justice Centre to Be Involved in National Citizens Inquiry’s Red Deer Hearings

News Release — Red Deer Alberta: The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is pleased to announce that President John Carpay and Allison Pejovic, a lawyer working with the organization, will be involved in the National Citizen’s Inquiry (NCI) in Red Deer, Alberta on April 27 and 28, 2023.

Mr. Carpay will be testifying at the Red Deer hearings on Friday April 28. He will submit that protecting human dignity includes respecting and upholding the freedoms of expression, association, conscience, religion, mobility and peaceful assembly set forth in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as the Charter right of every person to accept or reject, without any form of coercion or duress, medical treatments including vaccinations and other injections.

Lawyer Allison Pejovic will be questioning two expert witnesses on Thursday April 27: Dr. Justin Chin, an Emergency and Disaster Medicine Physician, at the University of Alberta Dept of Emergency Medicine, and Scott Crawford, an advanced care paramedic. She will also question two lay witnesses about the impacts that the Covid-19 response had on their lives.

The National Citizen’s Inquiry (NCI) is a citizen-led inquiry into Canada’s response to Covid-19 and was originally launched by the Honourable Preston Manning. Their mandate is clear: “Canadian citizens do not need any government’s permission to hold a public inquiry. [The NCI’s] purpose is to focus and showcase the broad support Canadians have expressed since 2020 for greater transparency and accountability regarding COVID-19 policies,” states the organization’s website.

“To date, no Canadian government has expressed any interest in holding themselves accountable through a public inquiry process and being transparent with Canadians regarding the merits and impacts of their COVID-19 policies.”

“We are pleased to be involved in the efforts of the NCI and think this citizen-led inquiry is critical, so that governments are held to account for their actions and have the necessary policies in place for future responses to public health crises,” said President John Carpay. “The Justice Centre was one of the first organizations in Canada to defend civil liberties during the Covid-19 pandemic, and we have lived by the mandate to defend Canadians’ rights and freedoms – and always will.”

NCI Hearings will take place in nine different locations across five provinces, with prior hearings having commenced in Truro, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Saskatoon.

The National Citizen’s Inquiry Hearings in Red Deer, Alberta takes place Wednesday April 26 to Friday April 27, from 9:00am to 5:00pm MT. The hearings will be held at the Baymont by Wyndham Red Deer and live-streaming is available on NCI’s website.

Connect with National Citizens Inquiry

Connect with Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Cover image credit: jameswheeler

Marvin Haberland Shares Results of His Court Case Against Virology in Germany

TCTL editor’s note: As shared here yesterday, Marvin Haberland went to court in Hamburg, Germany, early today with the intention of challenging the entire basis of virology. See yesterday’s article for understanding the case and the strategy.

Below you will find the announcement following the trial that appeared in German at Next Level telegram channel.  You will also find an interview of Marvin immediately following the trial.

At this point, all information sources are in German. I have used various software tools to create rough transcriptions and translations, which were then edited. Please understand that I do not speak German, so consider these rough translations.

From the gist of it, it seems that the case against Marvin was dismissed and that the state must bear all costs of the trial. Marvin was not allowed to present any information to the court. Yet, this is one of four dismissals that Marvin has witnessed, all using this same strategy.  Clearly, the courts are avoiding admitting the evidence that reveals the fraud of virology into public  record.

The video includes interviews with a few of the attendees who shared their observations and perspectives.  ~ Kathleen

A Small Victory for NEXT LEVEL – A Big One for the People

In short: Our press spokesman Marvin Haberland won the trial as expected, in which the court dropped the case and paid the costs.

The subtleties in this are the big win:

(a) We went into this trial without a lawyer.

No lawyer wanted to defend us by supporting our strategy. Thus, we had no legal fees either. So it can be done without.

b) Our strategy is direct and clear

It aims to clarify the lack of science in virology in court, since Paragraph 1 of the Infection Protection Act requires it.

c) We have thus shown that the measures based on an imaginary virus are not justifiable and not tenable.

d) As has been shown, there is no need for complicated strategies, 400-page justifications or briefs. The only thing that needs to be attacked is the basis.

e) The possible avalanche effect

If many people would follow our argumentation, probably either all fines would be stopped, or someone would go to the next instance, where then the scientificity has to be clarified.

f) Our strategy and our expertise, as well as the evidence requests that could not be refuted, were known to all involved, both to the court apparatus and to the many employees whom we contacted throughout to make it clear that we were looking forward to the trial. Perhaps this was also one of the reasons why our trial was constantly postponed and unclear statements were made by staff.

Especially Important:

If the court, the state and others had known of something that they could have used to make a legal example of us regarding our requests for evidence, they certainly would have done so.

Thus, they obviously used the easiest “escape option” and simply discontinued the proceedings.

Notice:

We will get our chance, we will not let go. Virology will get mighty problems, we are sure.

Virus in Court – Marvin’s Trial

Marvin is interviewed by Jen of Grosse Freiheit TV (found at Odysee & YouTube.)

Jen: [00:00:00]

Hello. Hello and welcome to a new episode of Grosse Freiheit TV. We are in Hamburg at the district court. Here was just the trial of Marvin. You probably know Marvin from my video. We made a video about how he wants to bring down the whole virology in court about five five months ago. And now here was just finally the trial. Marvin, what was it like for you?

Marvin: [00:00:21]

Yeah, so I wasn’t expecting that much of an audience at first. The room was super full. Very thankful for everyone who came. Yes, it was unfortunately only a partial victory, you can say.

As expected, the proceedings were discontinued. So the court costs etc. are borne by the state treasury. One does not have to pay anything, no misdemeanor. But of course, this is not the result one would have wished for now.

I would have liked either to be sentenced or to get an acquittal, so that somehow you have something in writing in your hand. That way, when it’s stopped…

I mean, the judges are also clever, of course. They want to stop it so that they don’t get into trouble, and so that they don’t open up a big can of worms, of course. But that’s not the desired result.

But well, in the end, the judge summoned a witness, a police officer. She couldn’t remember anything and then he stopped the proceedings immediately.

So I had no chance at all to say anything. He then said yes, you have submitted numerous motions for evidence here, but I don’t want to keep you in suspense any longer. I will stop this today, he said, but then I wanted to declare him biased, because this does not meet his responsibility, so to speak. And he didn’t allow that anymore, because he said that the proceedings are over.

So it was obvious to them, to the spectators, of course, that this was just embarrassing. But well, he got quite red in the face, the judge But that’s how it is.

Jen: [00:01:55]

He then also immediately threatened the audience. Then it got a little bit louder, so the people. Yeah, I did too. I thought ‘so, now it’s about to start, now he’s going to be insulted by everybody’. But fortunately the people held back. And then he also said something like, yes, hold back, otherwise I’ll have to have the hall cleared and you’ll be reported to the police. He impressed the people with his authority, so to speak.

Marvin: [00:02:20]

Yes, right, exactly, yes, hides there just a bit behind the barricades, behind this legal facade. But he was visibly uncomfortable. Did you, did you notice? But he probably just has too big problems when he gets involved.

So in my opinion, there were also a lot of people there today. You can then spread this, carry it out, Look here, if you go this way or if you get fines or also with other topics, with vaccinations, if you address the scientificity, so to speak, the virus existence question, which is always played down or ignored by everyone or by many.

That is the only way to lead these things to success, because an attitude is also a success in itself.You just don’t have to pay the money.

If everyone knew that, every citizen would no longer have to abide by these rules, no one would have to follow the vaccinations or other things and would just not have to be afraid of anything, because that only works on this fear basis. Exactly.

Jen: [00:03:25]

Can you report back. You’ve seen other trials in Hamburg. Have they all been stopped?

Marvin: [00:03:30]

Yes, all the trials that used the argumentation with paragraph one, that the scientific nature of virology is not given and therefore the penalty notices are all illegal, they were all dropped.

That was a total of four that I accompanied, including my own proceedings. And they were all simply discontinued, even two of them by the same judge without justification, simply ‘I will discontinue it now. Done.’

Jen: [00:03:56]

And what was your impression here on site?

So you wrote me yesterday evening, you wrote me only then, so about yes, here are security checks and then I have, when I came in here, I have just seen how at the airport you become. You have to leave cell phones there. I had to leave my camera in the car and now someone from the audience, you’re about to see the whole player again. He also said that it seemed to him a bit like sabotage, that the people were left outside, that they didn’t deliberately create a queue, that they deliberately chose a small hall. I also said, I don’t know what it’s like here otherwise, I’m never here otherwise. What is your impression? Do you think it was deliberately done that way, because of course they got it? It gets big media noticed that it gets a big media attention. What is your impression? You have also been standing here in front of the lock.

Marvin: [00:04:49]

Exactly. So I’ve been here a couple of times. So I can’t agree with that. I don’t think that there was blocking, I haven’t been able to determine that now. It was a long queue, because many people were there. But they got in quite quickly. I think the hall is actually the largest one they have here. Well, or there is a bigger one. Okay, but it was definitely big, I think.

Of course, not everybody got in. I didn’t see exactly how many didn’t get in, but I think there were about 40 people sitting in the back of the hall.

Yes, basically you can say that the judge knows from the beginning that he wants to stop it.

It doesn’t matter what I said. It doesn’t matter what the witnesses said or didn’t say, in the case that it is to be stopped. That’s programmed from the beginning. And yes, that is already valuable to know, if you have this strategy, then you are just so strongly right that the legal system cannot help itself any more than to just stop it. That’s their only chance to even cover this thing.

Jen: [00:05:58]

Yes, I say the judge, then his hands were more or less tied. If he had actually said, I’ll invite an expert and that would have come out accordingly, that the whole virology, that this is simply not scientific, then it would probably have been the same for him as for the judge in Weimar. Or what would you say to that?

Marvin: [00:06:15]

Yes, that’s exactly how I see it! So of course the judge is under extreme pressure. I mean, if he had done that, then it would certainly have been similar to the judge in Weimar or it would have had other consequences. He also happened to be ill two weeks earlier in October, when the actual hearing was scheduled. I don’t know whether that was for strategic reasons.

In any case, I can say that ‘I saw you here’ in the building during this time shortly afterwards. He had other OWI proceedings that I was in the room for at the time. So he was, in any case, healthy again shortly afterwards and then it still took half a year until I got the invitation here again.

So you can think about it, was that just to annoy him or to put him on the rack? Well, I mean, in the end it doesn’t matter. I just want to show the public that this kind of thing is simply stopped. Everybody can follow that and that’s good.

Jen: [00:07:14]

So what’s the way forward now? Are you going to pursue further litigation or what is your next course of action now to bring down this viral lie?

Marvin: [00:07:25]

Yes, so I’ve talked to some audience members today who actually still have cases pending, some of them even now in the second instance. So we can certainly support there.

And yes, I will simply continue to get involved in the area and of course by making this so public, that was also my goal, people also see from this. Hey, this will simply be stopped.

These arguments are not discussed at all in court, they are not even taken up, they are simply dropped.

So there’s probably something really hot cooking. So it can’t be completely wrong.

And of course also with friends and family, etc., who have all understood that in the meantime, even those who were super-pro, so to speak, on the subject of vaccination or corona have apologized to me in the meantime and also understood that, so to speak.

And that is actually the only thing that we also want to achieve, which is simply to provide clarification and in what way it is now done, whether with attitudes or with a verdict, it is actually the same for us, because we make it public anyway.

And yes, with the attitude is the thing actually, so to speak. Silence can also be something — can also be a statement in that case.

Jen: [00:08:37]

All right? Yeah, thank you so much for putting yourself out there. And now here are a few more impressions from the hearing here.

Trial Attendee#1: [00:08:43]

Our jurisprudence is totally screwed up, so screwed up. The judge already had his verdict. It was so obvious, because yeah well, there was another policewoman called as a witness, but she couldn’t remember. A subject, that was a joke. So that was to make it appear it was a really good trial. No, it wasn’t. He then also outed himself, after all, by saying, ‘Yes, I don’t want to keep them in suspense for long. I’m going to stop the proceedings.’

Trial Attendee #2: [00:09:11]

And they weren’t up for the expertise thing and that’s why they said okay, let’s shut this thing down before we do any more damage to our already placed ship. That was actually my impression.

And it was also interesting that the judge, when asked why he had made this decision, only referred to his judicial sovereignty. So one cannot say more to it… Now that the fairy tale, the narrative, so to speak, little by little disintegrates, one simply does not want to let in still such long discussions, which could still increase the damage…

Trial Attendee #3: [00:09:45] That happened very quickly. The policewoman couldn’t remember. Right. But when the judge asked again if there was anything with an affidavit or something. then all of a sudden she could remember, but not really. So it seemed to me like it was a little comedy that was being performed. The policewoman then also went out again and then then the judge then stated ‘yes, I’ll put that then’.

Jen: [00:10:10]

On, Have you been in the room?

Trial Attendee #4: [00:10:12]

[This clearly did not translate well.] No, So we were actually, let’s say in a relatively strange way ultra-slow dispatched here I as extra because of the process traveled to and did not know that here somehow so a kind of combination control, courtroom and airport takes place. Was there but male female separated, there it went already. Then was yes the process begins.

Jen: [00:10:33]

Let’s see, it was missing.

Trial Attendee #4: [00:10:35]

Exactly and 10:30 only up. So there was already the smell of sabotage somehow in the air, I say. We were then still upstairs and then Mr. Marvin already came out and announced, the process was stopped. So all in all, half hour wait and one minute information.

Trial Attendee #5: [00:11:02]

I’m not a lawyer. Maybe they have their formal legal reasons, but it makes you wonder if it’s our court and our state.

Trial Attendee#1: [00:11:12]

It is. I would have quite liked to see 100 years of virology just go down the drain. But that’s not going to happen because they’re just too powerful.

For background see:

Marvin Haberland & Katie Sugak: On the Court Case Against Virology — April 26, 2023 in Hamburg, Germany

Perception Can Be Reality, and Reality Can Be Perception: So What Is Real?

by Gary D. Barnett
April 25, 2023

 “Because one believes in oneself, one doesn’t try to convince others. Because one is content with oneself, one doesn’t need others’ approval. Because one accepts oneself, the whole world accepts him or her.”
~ Lao Tzu

A bit of philosophy!

I guess this subject boils down to the obvious truth, that one sees what he wants to see, whether or not reality, logic, and conscience, are in direct contradiction to that perception. This is a natural human reaction, although it is not any preferred method of deduction if honesty and responsibility are desired. In this so-called modern age, it seems that everything has become perception, as most hide from any uncomfortable truth or reality in an effort to shift all responsibility away from themselves in favor of a tyrannical governing system. So long as the compliant dolts of this society believe they are free when they are not, they will take the easy way, accept all government stipends, follow all the ‘rules,’ and pretend that they are happy, because they will not have to make any decision for themselves. Truth and risk, you see, are not accepted by most, and this is a recipe for totalitarian rule to prosper.

Some great philosophers of the past, have posited that there is no truth; that everything is illusion. But we do have this life, and it is as real as is possible, because it is the only thing of which all are certain. The meaning of life is a different story, but then, that is a subject meant to belittle the time we have on this earth, and not in any way something that can be fully understood; at least not in our current state of consciousness. There lies the contradiction. We all know we are alive, if for no other reason than we awaken every morning to the only life we know, so why not accept that knowledge, and make of  it something of value, instead of becoming a cog in the wheel of time without individual worth and purpose. Is this not a truth we can accept?

Since none of us can ‘fix’ or change another to suit our perception of the desirable human, and can only change ourselves, why not concentrate on individual awareness and improvement, instead of wasting our time in any effort to force upon others our perception of reality? Each of us, you see, is unique, so each of us has to come to our conclusions alone, for if worrying about the perceived flaws of others consumes one’s mind, how can one improve self and find happiness in life? Obviously, this would require that no aggression be present, and from what is reality, we all know that non-aggression is not universal in nature, so conflict will arise. The true test of man then, is to learn how to respect the thinking and opinions of all others, unless aggression is at hand.

This attitude of peaceful anarchy allows for a general environment of calm and harmony, so long as aggression is not tolerated. That means first, that rule and governing has to become obsolete for all those who choose that path, and any who choose voluntarily to live under a master or government, may certainly do so, if and only if, their preferred system is not forced on any who do not willingly accept it.

Poppycock you say; humans cannot live without governments. Who would build roads, who would make ‘laws,’ who would give everyone ‘free healthcare,’ who would protect you from harm, who would fight constant wars of aggression, who would lockdown the country when someone got the flu, and who would fill the prisons with those who never harmed another? Who would tax you (steal from you) to supply the things you illegitimately desire that should only be the responsibility of each individual? All aggression is immoral and wrong, so all those sanctioning aggression at the hands of government as proxy, are in essence, committing aggression themselves. This is what is not understood by the collective masses, whose idea of right is doing whatever the majority decides, regardless of the consequences to all who disagree.

There is an old saying, and a correct one I might add, that reads, live and let live, which is now completely ignored by this collective herd of parasites. In today’s world, most have accepted the notion that all should be able to live at the expense, labor, and property of others, in order to suit their wants and needs. This is a case where reality is ignored in favor of the perception that living at the expense of others is legitimate and right due to the asinine assumptions of equity and ‘fairness;’ assumptions that rest on the ideology of communism.

Perception becomes reality in the minds of fools when the majority willingly accepts the premise that they deserve something or anything, due solely to the fact that they exist, the color of their skin, their sexual preference, their laziness, or their greed. This is why most think they deserve freedom, but expect that freedom without any effort on their part to gain or secure it. Most believe that government (rulers) gives (allows) them freedom, and that is why they so blindly expect a piece of paper filled with political language is the foundation of their so-called rights, instead of the fact that their freedom rests only on the natural and inherent right to life of the individual. This society is consumed by perception, because to accept the harsh truth of reality requires thinking, action, and consequences, whereas false perception requires no risk or effort, but only obedience to the god of government.

Reality is not always what we see, but it is what we live. Our lives are real, our families are real, and nature is real. We do not have all the answers of our existence or of the universe or beyond, but that does not change the fact that we have this life on earth. Reality becomes perception when one expects to know all there is to know, and no human has that capability. In fact, we, as individuals, know nothing of all there is to know. The wonder of it all is astounding to be sure, but the reality of this life and all it has to offer, is just as amazing.

Take what is real, and revel in it. Do not allow others to impede on your short time on this earth. Do not allow any other to rule over you, or claim to be your master, regardless if many of your fellow men decide to take that worthless and treacherous path. If each of us accepts his individuality, embraces his unique nature, and lives his life as a free man, what is real will become clearly obvious, and perception will be dreams. Once this state of mind is evident, disobedience will become natural, and disobedience is vital in any effort to secure individual freedom.

Let go of the State, and trust yourself instead.

“No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit.”
~ Ansel Adams

Connect with Gary D. Barnett

Cover image credit: Bessi

Marvin Haberland & Katie Sugak: On the Court Case Against Virology — April 26, 2023 in Hamburg, Germany

by Katie Sugak
April 23, 2023

Dear friends, here is the recording of my very interesting conversation with Marvin Haberland. Marvin is an engineer and he comes from Germany. As a result of a tragedy in his family, he decided to investigate the subject of medicine. This investigation led him to virology, and he eventually discovered that the foundations of virology were based on anti-scientific misconceptions. After realizing this, Marvin decided to act.

Our conversation today will focus on his upcoming trial in Germany on April 26, 2023, in Hamburg. This trial will be the second trial in history designed to disprove virology and demonstrate the lack of real science behind it.

References cited in the interview with Marvin Haberland.

Marvin’s letter to the court and his Freedom of Information request: 

English

https://docs.google.com/document/d/15VkP5pouOE5uQ2c4ivOoRwUf6j4-lFQm17q424Jxn80/edit 

Russian https://docs.google.com/document/d/11ulOf18ZCMgPbkQ1oNpdtzeAUIEGt1EG7Pdjqq2CAbQ/edit 

German
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MKGo6-0ltZ4_1airsQ6eDzkuKmijd0rE/view?usp=drivesdk   

Isolation and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in Australia https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228321/  

Interview with Stefan Lanka from 2022 – Measles virus trial, control experiments and the final exposure of the coronavirus farce https://rumble.com/vmqkff-measles-trial-control-experiments-and-the-final-exposure-of-coronavirus-far.html 

Video on the Measles Virus Trial (2016)
https://rumble.com/vsla5a-stefan-lanka-measles-trial.html 

Other videos, interviews and articles can be found on Kate Sugak’s telegram channel https://t.me/katesugakofficial 

Tehran Next Level channel (German)
https://t.me/NextLevelOriginal   

Next Level website https://www.wissen-neu-gedacht.de/ 

Connect with Kate Sugak

Transcript of first 25 mins. prepared by TCTL editor:

Katie:

Hello everyone. My name is Katie and today my very special guest is Marvin Haberland.

Marvin is an engineer and he comes from Germany.

As a result of a health tragedy in his family, he decided to take a deep look at medicine. That exploration led him eventually to virology and, as a consequence, he discovered that the foundations of virology are based on anti-scientific misconceptions.

Marvin decided to do something about this realization.

Our today’s conversation will revolve around his upcoming court case in Germany, which as far as I am aware, will be the 2nd court case in history that aims to disprove virology and demonstrate the lack of real science behind it.

So, Marvin, I think it would be great to talk about your story.

What got you interested in the subject of virology and how did you start noticing there is something wrong with it?

Marvin:

Yes, thank you for the invitation.

Katie:

You’re welcome. Thank you for coming.

Marvin:

So, like you said, basically due to a tragedy in my family. So my grandmother, she died when I was studying in the US.

And that got me quite interested in the topic; as she, before she was diagnosed with the cancer, she always asked me, ‘Marvin, you’re always so smart. You’re always researching things. Can you help me?’.

And I was always saying, which I now regret, ‘Grandmother, look, I don’t know. I have no knowledge on this topic. Please go consult the doctors.’ And so on.

I was kind of ignorant, which from today’s perspective, of course, I regret. But this is the way it is.

So when she died, this triggered something in me and I started to then really research the topic of chemotherapy. And I found out that basically it’s not really based on evidence. There are very, very low-quality studies without any control groups. There is always comparing chemotherapy to another chemotherapy, or chemotherapy to chemotherapy plus a new drug. But there is never the zero control group, without any therapy, or very rare to find that.

And actually if you research the real figures, the efficiency of the five-year survival rate is about 2.3% only, which is basically zero because the statistical fluctuations.

So when I found this out it was very surprising to me. And then from that point, I also looked right and left of this topic to nutritionist sciences where I found very, very similar results. And also infectious disease and germ theory. And that got me interested in the field.

Katie:

From when you started your research, what was the first thing that you started to research the virology topic?

Marvin:

Yeah. So first was basically chemotherapy/ cancer, then nutritional sciences. And from that I moved on to virology and I found out about Stefan Lanka’s work.

So basically, first was the measles virus and the early scientific practices, or unscientific practices, of Enders and Peebles in 1954. And then I also researched, of course, Pasteur and Robert Koch, from the really early beginnings of germ theory and vaccinations.

And then from there I moved on to HIV.

I bought the book — I have it here — the ‘Virus Mania’ book from Engelbrecht… and other authors, which got me very interested in HIV also.

And then I discovered there is a pattern in virology. It’s always the same.

So, measles, HIV, SARS-CoV-1… These are repeating patterns which I found very interesting.

And then when covid or corona came up, I immediately did the research.

I remember in January 2020 when this came up, I went to GISAID [China National GeneBank] and other platforms where they upload the genomes. And I tried to figure out — OK, maybe this time they did the correct isolation, the correct scientific procedures.

And I figured out, OK, this is the same like with the swine flu, with the bird flu, with the SARS-1.

So from very early on, I was interested again.

I decided to start to be more active in speaking out and do work in this field to spread the misconceptions and the scientific fraud, basically.

I thought this was important because many people don’t know about this and I felt responsible to share.

Katie:

Let’s talk about the court case and what motivated you to go there, to do it. And what did you do?

This is important. What did you do to get there? And why are you doing it? And what is your goal?

Marvin:

First of all, I got motivated to do it, basically, also by Stefan Lanka who had a court case in 2015 about measles virus.

So little different strategy than mine, but pretty similar.

And he was saying in the beginning of covid, ‘OK, people of Germany, if you get these fines because you’re not wearing the mask or because you are meeting with other people during the lockdown, and so on, just…’. He laid out the basic strategy how to go to court.

And what I did is I just didn’t wear the mask. I had a mask zone directly in front of my house, so I couldn’t even exit my door without wearing a mask, which I didn’t want to do.

And after receiving the fine, I just objected it and I sent the court specific abstract from the law, which is basically the first paragraph, in Germany, of the infectious disease law, which says that every virologist, every institutional authority, has to work according to the status quo of science, scientific practice.

And I am basically saying that in virology this is not at all the case. And they are not following the scientific method. And not any sort of scientific method that is required.

And I sent proof to the court from several different Freedom of Information acts…

I sent one to the University of Melbourne in Australia and several others.

So my argumentation is basically the law is is not fulfilled, and these are my proofs. And this is why I am not willing to pay the fine.

Basically this is just the strategy. And we will see how this goes.

It will be on the 26th of April.

After my first invitation got cancelled. It was originally scheduled the 19th of October last year, but then I received a cancellation letter because the judge apparently got sick.

And now I have the second invitation. So we will see.

And there are many others that do this in Germany, so I have already consulted three other people with the same strategy and all three of these cases got closed.

So basically the people didn’t have to pay anything. But the court did not really issue a official statement. They just closed the case.

So what I want to achieve is official statement by the court. Because if they close my case, basically I cannot do anything about it. I have to accept it. But it has not the effect that I would like to have — basically to have an official statement ‘Yes, indeed, paragraph one of the infectious law of diseases is broken. Virologists are not working according to the scientific method.’
This would be my goal.

Or something else they could say, which is also possible, they could say that the law states that they should work according to the scientific method, but they don’t have to, right?

If the court says something like this and I have to pay the fine, it’s OK for me.

But then I have the official statement ‘Virologists are not obliged to work scientifically’. Which would be fine. This is just about our goal to to share the the situation — how it is.

Katie:

So let’s talk a little bit more about the main problem of virology, so people who are completely new to this, they can understand better the lack of scientific method behind it.

Let’s talk about all of this — about controls and about your Freedom of Information requests.

Marvin:

Sure. So basically, in science how it works is, you observe something in nature and then you come up with a hypothesis on how this could work. And then you try to come up with an experiment to test this hypothesis. And if the experiments support the hypothesis, then the hypothesis turns into a theory, and the theory gets tested over and over and over again. And all experiments support it. OK?

But if the experiment, the outcome, is against the hypothesis, then you falsify the hypothesis. This is basically how it works.

And in virology the hypothesis is fair. OK?

You say that you get sick from some viruses infecting you, coming from the outside. Infectious disease are being spread and so on.

And the experiments should be that you bring together sick and healthy animals or people and you show that you can really transmit this.

Or you try to extract these particles, these viruses, and then you take them and put them in the food or you spread them in the air of the animals or of the humans. And you show, by doing that, that you can replicate the symptoms.

That has never been done in virology.

What they are doing instead of doing it in the way I just stated, is they try to come up with some sort of excuse. They say that they cannot really do it in the correct way because the viruses are too small. Or too little in quantity. Or they only can live inside the cell and so on.

So they try to find excuses why they cannot extract the particle. And then they do some experiments in the lab.

So they never do it in a real ‘in vivo’. They only do it ‘in vitro’ in the lab. They take cell cultures and then they mix a lot of different chemicals, antibiotics and other substances together with fetal bovine serum, cell cultures from monkey kidney cells and so on.

They have a big brew of different components and then they observe that this cell culture basically disintegrates or dies. And they say, ‘OK, this is the proof for a virus’.

But this is impossible scientifically because there are so many variables. There are the toxic antibiotics, the fetal bovine serum.

Then they take off the fetal bovine serum so they remove the nutrition.

Then there is different other chemicals involved — trypsin sometimes and several different steps along the way.

So it’s impossible to say that the result is caused by a virus.

And what is on top of that unscientific — and everyone can understand this: They don’t have the control experiment.

So they are just running all these steps and they are doing what is called circular reasoning. And they don’t have any control.

They are trying to find causative results, cause and effect, but it’s impossible to do it. This is just a correlation. They observe that something happens, but they are not really using the scientific method to come up with the cause/effect relation.

The control experiment would be — for the viewers. You do the exact same experiment. You do the cell culture experiment with the chemicals, same antibiotics, same steps, everything the same. But you don’t add the so-called virus. This would be the only variable that should be different from the other experiment.

And the outcome then should be different.

If the virus would exist, and would be the cause of this cell culture disintegration, thy so-called cytopathic effect, then, only then you would prove that this is the determining variable.

But, of course, as they never have isolated the virus in the first place, they cannot even do this control experiment. It’s impossible.

And this is the big scientific problem.

I am willing to say that on some levels this is also fraud because they know. Because we asked them.

The virologists. Most of them know that the control experiments are missing and are important. They are trying to find excuses why they are not doing them, so they know exactly they should do them.

It’s not that they are unconscious. So I can say that this is basically fraud. Maybe not for everyone, but certainly for many virologists. They know exactly about this this issue.

Katie:

So in the court, you are going to point at this exactly — the lack of controls.

Marvin:

The center of the argumentation is the lack of control. And this is the reason why the first paragraph which states that everything should be done according to the scientific method, the recent scientific techniques and so on. And we have the German Association of Science which says that in order to work according to the scientific method, everything has to be controlled, right? Every experimental step has to be controlled and so on.

So this is very easy to then demonstrate to the judge that it has not been done in virology ever.

And I have many proof. Not not only me, many people have done that.

But for my case I have asked the University of Melbourne, in the Doherty Institute, which is their virology institute, basically, and they have published one of the first SARS-Cov-2 isolation publications. And it was the first publication outside of China.

And I asked them very early on if they did the control experiments for every step, including the genome sequencing. And they clearly answered that they did not do it. Very clearly. No excuse. Very, very straightforward. They said no, we didn’t do it for any of the steps.

And then I asked them why did you not perform the controls. And they told me very, very straightforward again. ‘We didn’t have the resources to do it. We were just focusing on the positive culture. And we had to work quickly. And we had no time.’ Basically, this was their answer.

So everyone can see that this is extremely unscientific. And the German Association of Science even clearly states quoting — I’m quoting them basically that they say that nobody should issue any sort of scientific paper, unless they have followed all the scientific steps, even if economic factors, monetary factors or the economic pressure is high. So you should not publish anything before following all the scientific steps.

And I think everyone would agree. So this is, as a proof, is a very good proof. Because usually if you ask virologists around the world, if you ask the official institutions — CDC, RKI, Pasteur Institute and so on — it is very unlikely to to get a straightforward answer like this. It’s very rare to get it. I was very lucky to get this straightforward answer. And this is what I’m using as a main proof. But then I use other proofs as well.

Katie:

Yes. Another question that I had is that there is this group you are working with that is called The Next Level and they help you.

Could you talk a little bit about them, who they are?

Marvin:

So, basically, next level is like a joint venture. We are basically coming out of two different telegram groups or channels that have evolved during covid and we are now working together with different scientists, doctors, engineers (like I am), mathematicians, computer scientists, and so on.

So we are quite a diverse team and what our main focus is basically health topics. So we try to dig deep into virology, germ theory, medications, disease in general, biology and so on. And our focus is the scientific area.

So we try to be very scientific in our articles and our work. And we try to read through papers and explain to the audience why a certain paper, or why a certain scientific document, is methodically not good, or what is the problem with it, why is it not scientific. Or we try to also educate on other health topics. This is what we are doing.

Katie:

This sounds amazing. And I also noticed that Germany specifically, and German-speaking countries are extremely active in this area.

Like there are so many knowledgeable people, a lot of activists, a lot of channels and people talking about it.

I really noticed in Germany, I even had one of my videos, that was translated in German… I think, around 1,000,000 people watched it in German.

I noticed how this topic is really popular and a lot of people are working towards solutions. So we really need to also take example from them.

Marvin:

I’m not really sure why that is in Germany. As in every other country, in Germany you have a lot of people that are just following the western medicine blindly. But you have a lot of people also that are very critical and trying to dig deep into the topics, and educate themselves, and doing the research.

So I think we have just had a history. Many, many scientists — so-called scientists of the past — of these areas came from Germany. Or from Europe basically.

And, we had — with Doctor Stefan Lanka we had a very prominent biologist/virologist who came out to the public and tried to educate and spread the truth basically about the practices, scientific practices, in virology. So that gave the whole movement a boost, I would say, in Germany.

And also he was working together with the Perth Group in Australia, which in the 80s, 90s, were very, very clearly doing a lot of good work in HIV research. So I think this is also part of the reason why, specifically in German-speaking countries, many people are already aware of these topics.

Katie:

So how people can support you and what you are doing this court case and everything that you require to do?

Marvin:

So one support would, of course, to be there at the day. So for everyone maybe who is around Hamburg could come there and just — at the 26th of April — think it’s at 10:45 am. I can share the address later, but that would be great for sure.

And then, of course, you can support our Next Level, so our work what we are doing. We have a website and we also have a magazine that comes out regularly. So you can do any sort of donation.

You can buy the magazine and you can also interact with other critical thinkers in the online forums — telegram — and just support this community. That would be also very great because we are doing a lot of work.

Basically all of us do this in our free time. So we have all our main jobs, and apart from that, we do this in our free time because we are very passionate about this.

We don’t want a future for our families and friends and children and so on that is continuing with this craziness basically. And with these pandemics over and over again, with vaccinations and medical drugs and so on.

It is all going against, basically, our health and is not based on science.

This people really should understand that this is not really scientific.

If you take your time, some hours, weeks, and you really try to figure it out, you will quickly understand that this is not based on science.

This is based on fraud. Sometimes on misinterpretation. OK? Misinterpretation. Very often, due to lacking control experiments, they misinterpreted the results they get. They don’t know what exactly is cause and effect because they don’t have any controls. So they just take it for granted; and this is also unscientific.

See Related:

Dr. Stefan Lanka & Dr. Tom Cowan: How We Got Into This Mess — The History of Virology & Deep Medical Deceptions

The Path Paved by Dr. Lanka: Exposing the Lies of Virology

Part 1: The New Body Soul Biology (English voice over) Dr Stefan Lanka

James Corbett: On Canada’s National Citizens Inquiry

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
April 25, 2023

The National Citizens Inquiry is a citizen-led and citizen-funded initiative that is hearing testimony from Canadians and experts examining the nature, the legality and the effects of the Canadian governments’ COVID mandates and restrictions.  Today James talks to the volunteer-run inquiry’s volunteer communications director, Michelle Leduc Catlin, about the inquiry itself, what it is seeking to accomplish and how Canadians (and people around the world) can support it in its endeavours.

Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee / Rokfin / Rumble / Substack  / Download the mp4

Show Notes:

National Citizens Inquiry homepage

Michelle Catlin’s blog (daily summaries and highlights)

Citizen-led inquiry into Canada’s pandemic response makes stop in Winnipeg

Preston Manning announces ‘citizen-led’ inquiry into Canada’s pandemic response

Brian Peckford on his decision not to participate

One on One with Michelle | Colleen Brandse | Vaccine Injured Nurse | National Citizens Inquiry

Connect with James Corbett

Connect with National Citizens Inquiry

Foraging the Most Inconspicuous Edible Wildflower

“Sometimes the less conspicuous among us have pretty cool names, tiny wildflowers, interesting life strategies, and edible uses. When they do, it’s worth paying attention to them and wondering ‘what else have we been stepping on all these years?’.”

by Adam Haritan, Learn Your Land
sourced from Learn Your Land newsletter
April 25, 2023

A typical walk in nature can be slow.  From an outsider’s perspective, it can be painfully slow.  A 1-mile walk might take a naturalist 4 hours to complete — a pace 12 times slower than the average walking speed.

While it’s true that a turtle could probably outpace a botanist walking through a flowering floodplain, the point of any nature excursion isn’t momentum.

It’s observation, education, and integration.

On several walks this year, I’ve halted my pace in order to observe a particular wildflower.  Known as false mermaidweed, this plant grows in floodplain forests along rivers and streams.

False mermaidweed is unlike other plants for a few reasons, one of which is the size of its flower.  Only a few millimeters wide, this flower is among the smallest of any wildflower in nature.  It’s rarely seen by people walking through the woods, which is why even a slow pace isn’t recommended for proper observation.

Rather, complete stillness is.

Despite its small size, false mermaidweed offers immense value.  Its stems, leaves, and flowers are edible and can be harvested during the spring season.

Connect with Adam Haritan

Reiner Fuellmich: On Standing With the Māori People of New Zealand Who Never Ceded Their Independence

by Reiner Fuellmich
sourced from Reiner Fuellmich Telegram channel
April 23, 2024

Connect with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich at Telegram

Cover image credit: Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo

Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: Below you will find a transcript of the video plus additional information on the history of the Maori tribes of New Zealand

Transcript:

I have an important announcement to make.

I am a free, independent human being free in thought and free in action. I alone decide what I want and what I don’t want. And I want real justice.

The Māori in New Zealand, too, are free, independent human beings.

Unlike all other human beings, though, they have never lost or ceded their independence.

It is enshrined in their Declaration of Independence, “He Whakaputangaa”, which was written in 1835.

Their equally-independent, hundreds of years old lore is called Tikanga. It is designed to restore the peace for the Māori and for the whole world.

The Māori remind us who we are — free and independent people who make their own choices and who will not let anyone tell us what to do and what not to do.

My friend and colleague Dexter Ryneveldt and I, on behalf of the international group of lawyers, for many weeks, have spoken with representatives of the Māori government and others who will support this move.

We, all of us, will restore the peace for the Māori and for the world. Because this is what Tikanga lore is explicitly there for, precisely for this moment.

I am Reiner Fuellmich and I stand with the Māori because we love life.

Background information on on Maori people from Te Wakaminenga o Nga Hapu o Nu Tireni website:

On the Māori Government:

1. What is the Māori Government and what is their role?

The Māori Government is the administrative arm of Te Wakaminenga o Nga Hapu o Nu Tireni. The Māori Government help to operationalise decisions made in the national Te Wakaminenga o Nga Hapu o Nu Tireni, or a hapu wakaminenga.

2. What is a Wakaminenga?

It is a Confederation or general assembly of the United Tribes where they met to make decisions and frame laws according to their national constitution “He Wakaputanga o Tino Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni 1835

(Declaration of Independence o Nu Tireni 1835)

3. What jurisdiction does the Māori Government operate under?

The Maori Government operate under “Native Māori Jurisdiction”. It is the first nation jurisdiction of Nu Tireni (New Zealand). It is also recognised in pre and post-treaty British imperial law.

4. What are Māori?

Māori are the native indigenous people of Nu Tireni. Māori are also the first nations people.

5. Why are Māori allowed their own government?

Maori had their own government before Te Tiriti o Waitangi was signed. The Māori Government was first recognised in 1805 and earlier. It is also recognised in pre and post treaty British imperial law.

A Message From the Māori Government of Aotearoa Nu Tireni

The Māori Government of Aotearoa Nu Tireni is the governing body of the Sovereign Nation of Aotearoa Nu Tireni, which existed prior to 1840 and continues to exist in accordance with the Declaration of Independence of 1835  (He Wakaputanga). 

Based on four [4] pillars

• Self-determination
• Sovereignty
• Framing of laws for trade and justice
• Guarantee by the British Crown of protection and access to the Commonwealth in return for mutually agreeable cooperation on equal standing.

The Sovereign Nation of Aotearoa Nu Tireni welcomes all the living men and women of Aotearoa Nu Tireni to unite under its protection and benevolent adherence to all human rights as described in the Nuremberg Code and The UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, including the freedom to choose, be fully informed and to pursue wellbeing and happiness. We reject all forms of coercion and manipulation.

Together, united as the Sovereign living men and women of Aotearoa Nu Tireni, we reject the rules and control of the current totalitarian NZ Government, a corporation listed on the NYSE.

This corporation does not represent the aspirations and values of the living men and women of this country, ignoring our voices is an insidious attempt to impose a ‘new’ normal without our consent.

Thereby we freely choose to abandon the aforementioned NZ Corporation and give our full support to the sovereign nation of Aotearoa Nu Tireni and its representatives and elected government, Māori Government of Aotearoa Nu Tireni.

Read more…

The Declaration of the Independence of New Zealand, signed by a number of Māori chiefs in 1835, proclaimed the sovereign independence of New Zealand prior to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840.

Here We Go Again: Deranged Voters Looking for a Political Savior

by Gary D. Barnett
April 22, 2023

“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, I’m a moron. Fool me three or more times consecutively, and I’m a voter.”
~ Jarod Kintz

My gracious sakes alive; it is amazing that it is only eighteen months away from yet another mentally deranged presidential ‘election,’ and the insanity circus is already in town. Who will run? Who will be nominated? Who will be your savior this time around? Who will give you a check? Who will ‘fix’ the country? Who will be tasked with continuing the madness? Which trimmer will get called into the game by the ruling ‘elites’ to compete in this selection-based political process? Will it be Biden again, Trump, DeSantis, M. Obama, or the new lauded democrat, RFK, Jr., or any others in the cadre of political scum of wanna-be rulers vying for the selected top spot? It does not matter you see, as so long as this voting insanity continues, this country and world will persist in flushing all freedom down the proverbial toilet bowl of dreams, while the lowly complicit masses cheer on their political gods.

The idiotic notion of the myth of representative government, democracy, and the ludicrous lie of “government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” will once again be shouted from the rooftops by most all involved, including the clueless voters. There have been 59 previous presidential elections since 1789, and things have worsened after every single ‘election’ in the history of this country. In case this fact is still difficult for most to grasp, this next cycle of a staged picking of a master, will culminate by allowing the lowest form of human to be placed in a dominating position of rule and power over the enslaved people. The only result will be more dominance, self-serving tyranny, and a continued democide of this population. As always, this fate of the people at large will have been voluntarily accepted.

What is so unforgettably deficient of mind about this absurdity, is that this will be the 60th time in a row, that the American people have intentionally and with free will, chosen a king and master to rule over them. This will be the 60th time consecutively, that the ‘voting public’ has allowed control of their personal behavior, accepted government theft of their property by forceable taxation, allowed the waging of continuous wars of aggression against innocents, experienced the destruction of their economy and wealth, and has given up freedom. While it is unlikely that Einstein voiced or wrote the quote: ‘insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result,’ that idea when concerning the voluntary approval of totalitarian rule, holds true. How can anyone with even a modicum of intelligence, ever fathom making the same mistake over and over 60 times consecutively? That truly is insanity.

Why does anyone expect this time to be different? How could anything be clearer than the understanding that government brings nothing but tyranny, economic devastation, and the death of liberty, and that accepting a ‘supreme leader’ is nothing more than openly embracing slavery? I wish someone–anyone–could explain this phenomenon to me, as I cannot fathom ignorance at this level.

There will be the Trump faithful, and it seems they will never falter until the last of them have their ‘Trump vaccine,’ are thrown into prison, or are lied to a thousand more times. His so-called party opponent, DeSantis, who cannot make up his mind as to what to say or do, who to support or not, but is the darling of the crossover crowd between the staunch ‘conservatives,’ the ‘libertarians,’ and those who think he is the real deal to save America because he was governor of a state that was slightly better than D.C. during the fraud and deception of fake ‘covid.’ There are many others as well, those like Haley, Hutchinson, Ramaswamy, (?) and Stapleton, on the Republican side, and the ever-braindead Biden, Williamson, and Scott on the Democratic side, at least so far. And then there is the ever-present Kennedy, who will cause all kinds of confusion, as libertarians, Democrats, and Republicans will get an aneurysm attempting to figure out how to handle this contradiction. Maybe they can all holds hands and sing Kumbaya, and all join together to rule the plebes. I am sure many others will throw their hat in the ring,  just as soon as their ruling class masters gives them the green light.

One strives to present a picture of things so that most can at least understand the madness, gain some truth, and sort out the absurdity, but it is impossible to do so in this day and age without extreme sarcasm, and blatant parody. This is truly a circus event if ever one existed on this earth, and many still have the psychotic desire to not only participate and sanction this idiocy, but to expect a different outcome this time around. If Mencken were only alive today, he would likely be forever consumed by either maddening laughter, or deep and delusional schizophrenia. That would be the only saving grace of sanity in such a world consumed by this raving lunacy.

What in the world is to become of us? How can any sit back and watch this game show, and not come away thinking they are in a world of political fanaticism. If it were not so absolutely dangerous, it would be the most profound comedy of all time.

Instead, it is this manufactured and guided realty that has been foisted on this non-thinking society, and accepted by the masses as normal. If this is normal, what defines the ludicrous, and who could even comprehend such a state of confusion and neurotic existence? As Louis-Ferdinand Celine so correctly stated: “I have never voted in my life… I have always known and understood that the idiots are in a majority so it’s certain they will win.” And they have, over and over again, in a system of perpetual stupidity.

“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”
~ H.L. Mencken, On Politics: A Carnival of Buncombe

Connect with Gary D. Barnett

Cover image credit: Dieterich01

In 2021 Interview, RFK Jr. Reveals How Former Pres. Trump, Who Was Very Aware of the Serious Injuries Caused by Vaccines, Asked RFK Jr. to Lead a Commission on Vaccine Safety. Trump Changed His Mind Following Pfizer’s  Million Dollar Contribution to His Inauguration

TCTL editor’s note:  In 2021, Theo Von interviewed Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.  Clips from this interview are found mirrored around the internet. In this interview, RFK Jr. talked about his meetings with Donald Trump wherein Trump asked RFK Jr. to head a vaccine safety commission. Trump was well aware of the serious dangers and great harm caused by vaccines as he personally knew people whose children developed serious health issues following vaccination. However, Trump changed his mind about the vaccine safety commission following a million dollar contribution from Pfizer to Trump’s inauguration. RFK Jr. was pushed aside and Scott Gottlieb, who was a Pfizer consultant, was selected by Trump to run the FDA. ~ Kathleen

Partial transcript:

Theo Von:

…Trump almost gave you a position… Wasn’t there talk of that? And then it kind of went away…

RFK, Jr.

Well, what happened was he … over the Christmas vacation… 2016, he’s elected right? And obviously the election is in November.

So I was skiing and with my kids in Colorado over Christmas vacation and I got a call from his chief of staff saying the president-elect wants to meet and he wants to talk about vaccines.

So, you know, I’ve been an activist on trying to get safer vaccines for a long time. And, of course, I agreed to meet with him.

So…immediately after getting home, I went … to New York and met with him at Trump Tower. It was about a two hour meeting.

Theo Von:

Had you ever met with him before?

RFK Jr.

I had sued him twice before successfully. And I had met him. And, you know, the lawsuit was not something that had hurt our relationship. I stopped him from building two golf courses in the New York City watershed. And those lawsuits were about two or three years apart.

And he knew me, and he knew my family… When my sister ran for governor of Maryland, he made a big contribution to that.

He contributed to my brother, who was then in Congress. And I had a cousin who was a congressman from Rhode Island, and he made a contribution. He was a big democratic donor at that point.

He called me. He asked me to come in. I had, as I said, about a two hour meeting with him. At that meeting, people were coming in and out of that meeting.

So Steve Bannon was there. Reince Priebus. You remember him? Hope Hill was there. Kellyanne Conway. And Jared Kushner. And both the president’s sons at various times were in that meeting.

Theo Von:

A lot of people.

RFK Jr.:

I had a lot of time alone with President Trump too.

He said that he believed that vaccines were making people sick. Specifically, he had three women friends who were mothers, one who was in the building that day, who had perfectly healthy kids who had gotten … their wellness visits. And they were around two years old.

And the children never were the same after those visits. And they all had been subsequently diagnosed with autism. And he believed that it was linked to vaccines.

And… because he had been open about that during the campaign, hundreds of women had — the same thing that happened to me, that got me into this, you know, this career killing advocacy, vaccine safety advocacy…

People start coming up to you and saying… “This happened to me. This happened to my son.”

“I had a perfectly healthy child who exceeded all his milestones. And I took him in at 16 months and he, you know, he was speaking, he was toilet trained, he had social interactions. And I took him in and he had a shot or a series of shots usually — could be up to nine — and that night, he’s like fever 103.”

I mean the stories were usually all identical. They had a seizure. And then over the next three months, they lose all of their capacity to… their social interactions, their eye contact…

I go in there and he tells me these stories. He wants to do something about it.

Theo Von:

And does he seem serious when he’s saying that?…

RFK Jr.:

Yeah, he was dead serious. And he asked… whether I would run a vaccine safety commission. And then he asked what I would do.

And I said, listen, I don’t think you have to do a big political lift. All I think you need to do is open up the databases and allow independent scientists in there to actually look at the science. Because the HMOs have all the vaccine data down to batch for every child in America. And they also have the medical records.

So all you have to do — in fact… AI can do machine counting and you can do cluster analysis.

And you can figure out very, very quickly whether all of these epidemics — not just of neurodevelopmental diseases like all the ADD, the ADHD… Tourette’s syndrome, narcolepsy… Autism. The allergic diseases, food allergies, peanut allergies… Asthma and then all the autoimmune diseases…

And they’re all listed, by the way, on the vaccine inserts, as vaccine side effects.

Because the only way that you can sue — you know, they passed this law in 1986 and made it illegal to sue a vaccine company for injury.

You still can sue them if they know of an injury that’s caused by their vaccine and they don’t list it on the side effects.

So they list 400 injuries…

But they’re not allowed to list it unless there is significant evidence that it is actually being caused by the vaccine.

FDA is not allowed to allow them to list it unless FDA believes it’s being caused by the vaccine.

Theo Von:

So you have this meeting with Trump, just to get back to that… Did you leave out of the meeting kind of hopeful about it?

RFK Jr.:

Well, I said to him, what do you want me to do? And he said we want you to announce it. Jared Kushner escorted me to the press scrum…

So then I went down and announced it. Talked to the press.

And then a week later, Pfizer made a million dollar contribution to Trump’s inaugural.

And then Trump comes in. And we continue to have some meetings with Fauci — that he had set up, were part of this process and we’re rolling, to get this thing started.

Theo Von:

Did Fauci seem legit when you talked to him?…

RFK Jr.:

Oh, he’s very, very charming…

Listen, Fauci — I’m about to publish a book on Fauci [see “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health”, published by Children’s Health Defense in November 2021]… He’s been there for 50 years, so he’s like J. Edgar Hoover.

And the only way that you last at that agency for 50 years is by carrying water for the pharmaceutical industry.

And under his watch, he’s supposed to prevent autoimmune and allergic diseases. Under his watch, chronic disease has gone from affecting 12% of the American population to 54%. And we take more pharmaceutical drugs than anybody in the world. We pay the highest prices.

He’s made this country Pharmaceutical Nation.

Theo Von:

My brother is allergic to sesame seeds.

RFK Jr.:

…And the way that you get allergies is from the aluminum adjuvant in the vaccine, which is meant — is put in that vaccine to initiate an allergic response.

So if you have sesame seed oil as an excipient in the vaccine, or if you’re eating sesame seeds when you have that aluminum adjuvant in you, it can provoke a permanent allergy…

So anybody who was born after 89 — I think it’s one in 12 now. Autism went from one in 10,000, in my generation, to one in every 34 kids. And it’s the same with all these chronic diseases that are all listed as side effects.

Theo Von:

So the proof seems to be right there.

RFK Jr.:

Well, that’s correlation, which isn’t actually proof. But if you actually go into the scientific literature, the proof is there.

Theo Von:

… So whenever you talked to Trump, you said, okay, let’s open up this database, right, this information…

RFK Jr.:

Yeah… I said you don’t have to do any heavy lifting. You don’t have to go to Congress. You don’t have to change regulations. All you have to do is open up the vaccine safety data link, which is the medical records for the top nine HMOs, and allow independent scientists to go in there. And just open it up so they can start publishing.

Theo Von:

And did he do it?

RFK Jr.:

No, he didn’t. It’s still… locked down.

Tony Fauci makes sure nobody can get in there.

And you know, even when Congress ordered these two scientists … to go in there, and they let them into the place, they gave them one study room. They would not allow them near a copy machine. They allowed them pencils and they had to write down the data. And they cranked the heat in the room up to 105…

So anyway, so Big Pharma stepped in and Trump appoints Pfizer’s lobbyist to run FDA (Scott Gottlieb) and Eli Lilly’s lobbyist is Alex Azar to run HHS. And as soon as they came and they shut us down.

Connect with RFK Jr. — substack — telegram — CHD

Connect with Theo Von

Cover image credit: geralt

Music From the Past, When the World Was Young

Brigadoon; Heather on the Hill; a man discovers joy and love

by Jon Rappoport

If you can stand it, you might contrast Brigadoon with “Get rich or die tryin’”, or any sample of hip hop lyrics that have infiltrated what is called The Culture.

Once upon a time, American Broadway musicals took the country by storm. South Pacific, Oklahoma, Finian’s Rainbow, Guys and Dolls…

Many of the musicals were made into films. Like Brigadoon.

Here’s a synopsis of that exhilarating show (1947).

Stageagent.com: —When New Yorkers Tommy Albright and Jeff Douglas get lost on a vacation in the Scottish Highlands, they stumble into Brigadoon. Brigadoon is a mythical village that, they learn, appears for a single day once every hundred years. At first, Tommy and Jeff are mystified by the villagers’ 18th century garb as they go to market, but they are soon charmed by romantic liaisons: Tommy, who is engaged back in New York, falls terribly in love with headstrong Fiona, while Jeff enjoys a harmless flirtation with Meg Brockie. It is only when Harry Beaton, the rejected suitor of Fiona’s sister, Jean, tries to leave Brigadoon that the two men realize the complicated truth: at the end of the day, this town will disappear into the mist for the next hundred years – and if anyone succeeds in leaving Brigadoon, the town and the people in it will be lost, forever. Tommy is forced to choose between returning to the world that he knows and his New York fiancee—or taking a chance on life and love in a mysterious new place. Including such famous hits as “Heather on the Hill” and “Almost Like Being in Love,” Lerner and Loewe’s Brigadoon has music that will sweep you off your feet and a whimsical story that is a tribute to the power of true love.—

Tommy risks everything for true love…and grasps it.

Connect with Jon Rappoport

TCTL editor’s note:

Reading Jon Rappoport’s post (above) inspired me to share the music from Brigadoon here with our readers. The music and the lyrics lifted my heart. I couldn’t help but listen over and over as I prepared the lyrics, and I remember being enchanted by the music when I first heard it so many years ago. 

“There’s a smile on my face for the whole human race. Why, it’s almost like being in love.”

“All the music of life seems to be, like a bell that is ringing for me.”

I hope that as you listen to the videos shared below, that this music will bring a smile to your heart and to your face, and that perhaps you will find yourself swaying with the sounds of joy and the love carried within the music.

The story of Brigadoon is magical in that it reminds us of the many worlds within our world. And that the choice is ours where we hold our attention. Our attention carries our power to create worlds.

I hope you enjoy listening as much as I did while preparing this. I know I’ll be hearing their echo and will be singing these songs for days to come. ~ Kathleen

Music from Brigadoon as performed by Kelli O’Hara and Patrick Wilson, New York City Center in 2017

“Almost Like Being In Love” from Brigadoon 

Lyrics

Maybe the sun gave me the power
For I could swim Loch Lomond
And be home in half an hour
Maybe the air gave me the drive
For I’m all aglow and alive

What a day this has been
What a rare mood I’m in
Why, it’s almost like being in love

There’s a smile on my face
For the whole human race
Why, it’s almost like being in love

All the music of life seems to be
Like a bell that is ringing for me

And from the way that I feel
When that bell starts to peal

I would swear I was falling
I could swear I was falling
It’s almost like being in love

When we walked up the brae
Not a word did we say
It was almost like bein’ in love

But your arm linked in mine
Made the world kind o’ fine
It was almost like being in love

All the music of life seems to be
Like a bell that is ringing for me
And from the way that I feel
When that bell starts to peal

I would swear I was fallin’
I could swear I was falling
It’s almost like being in love

 The Making of Lerner & Loewe’s Brigadoon (New York City Center 2017 Cast Recording)

The Heather on the Hill

Lyrics

Can’t we two go walkin’ together
Out beyond the valley of trees?

Out where there’s a hillside of heather
curtsyin’ gently in the breeze

That’s what I’d like to do
See the heather, but with you

The mist of May is in the gloamin’
And all the clouds are holdin’ still

So take my hand and let’s go roamin’
Through the heather on the hill

The mornin’ dew is blinkin’ yonder
There’s lazy music in the rill

And all I want to do is wander
Through the heather on the hill

There may be other days as rich and rare
There may be other springs as full and fair

But they won’t be the same
They’ll come and go
For this I know

That when the mist is in the gloamin’
And all the clouds are holdin’ still
If you’re not there I won’t go roamin’
Through the heather on the hill

The heather on the hill

~

The mist of May is in the gloamin’
And all the clouds are holdin’ still

So take my hand and we’ll go roamin’
Through the heather on the hill

The mornin’ dew is blinkin’ yonder
There’s lazy music in the rill

And ’tis a lovely time to wander
Through the heather on the hill

There may be other days as rich and rare
There may be other springs as full and fare

But they won’t be the same
They’ll come and go
For this I know

That when the mist is in the gloamin’
And all the clouds are holdin’ still
If you’re not there, I won’t go roamin’
Through the heather on the hill

The heather on the hill

Cover image credit: neelam279

Disinformation and the State: The Aptly Named RESTRICT Act

by Ryan Turnipseed, Mises Institute
April 21, 2023

The RESTRICT Act (Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act) has recently been making the rounds in the media, and rightfully so. The act is truly terrifying, but more than the open tyranny that it would further, the act illustrates a very clear problem from the perspective of the state.

In previous eras, either formally or informally, the state exercised a great deal of control over the information available to the wider population. This is no longer the case in the present day. With the advent of the internet and the resulting decentralization of media and other channels of information, the state has had increasingly fewer options at its disposal to control information. It is very obviously afraid of losing its position as the controller of information, and the RESTRICT Act is a desperate attempt to reassert itself as such.

What’s in the Act?

At this point, most people who have been paying attention should recoil upon seeing a large acronym under the consideration of Congress. After the USA PATRIOT Act, normal people recognized that these bills of massive overreach were, to put it lightly, misnamed. But in a move of honesty, the RESTRICT Act does exactly what it says it will do should it be enacted and enforced. The Senate’s website is remarkably up-front, saying:

Vendors from the U.S. and allied countries have supplied the world’s information communications and technology (ICT) for decades. In recent years, the global ICT supply chain has changed dramatically; a number of prominent foreign vendors—many subject to the control of autocratic and illiberal governments—have gained significant market share in a variety of internet infrastructure, online communications, and networked software markets. . . . The RESTRICT Act comprehensively addresses the ongoing threat posed by technology from foreign adversaries by better empowering the Department of Commerce to review, prevent, and mitigate ICT transactions that pose undue risk, protecting the US supply chain now and into the future.

Thankfully, the state is going to defend us from information and communications technology from “autocratic and illiberal governments,” as if our own states, which locked us in our own homes, were democratic and liberal. What specifically is being targeted in the broad category of information and communications technology?

As the act has been publicly marketed, this is a move against the popular social media platform TikTok. The US government’s reasoning is simple: TikTok, and similar platforms, are owned by foreign states, and these foreign states can distribute or facilitate information that is contrary to the narratives pushed by our state.

This is an existential threat to the US government. Seeing as the goal of a state is to maintain control, as articulated by Marray Rothbard in his book Anatomy of the State, having rival states present alternative narratives to the population harms your legitimacy. This legitimacy is necessary for the state to exist. As Rothbard says of people supporting the state:

This support, it must be noted, need not be active enthusiasm; it may well be passive resignation as if to an inevitable law of nature. But support in the sense of acceptance of some sort it must be; else the minority of state rulers would eventually be outweighed by the active resistance of the majority of the public.

The state, therefore, must maintain its legitimacy to survive, and the US government is attempting just that by trying to retake control over the country’s media. As mentioned earlier, the internet rendered most of the state’s old methods of control obsolete, which is why for the last few years the US government has been on the defensive, using covert means to influence channels of information (as can be seen with the Twitter Files).

The fact that the state has had to openly announce its direct censorship and control signals the state’s weakness. If it were stronger and bolder, as it was in most of the last century, it would have just acted already and passed the action off as a mundane matter of governance. If it were on surer footing, it would have just continued its policy of covert influence. The state is threatened. It’s afraid!

In the media and wider US society, a false debate has arisen. One side is in support, and the other side rejects the RESTRICT Act as terrifyingly evil because it is consolidating power in parts of the executive branch. According to the act, the executive branch will now have the authority to

address any risk arising from any covered transaction arising from any covered transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States that the Secretary determines . . . poses an undue or unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States.

The popular opposition is claiming that this is tyrannical because the secretary of commerce is appointed only by the president and reports only to the president, making the secretary unelected and subject to no congressional oversight. This objection is approaching the truth, but it’s not quite there. This act is not bad because the person who gets to determine what is an “undue or unacceptable risk” is unaccountable and undemocratic.

The act is far worse because the state should not be deciding what is an “undue or unacceptable risk.” Should this go through, the United States will have its own censor under whom no ray of light, from wherever it may come, shall in future go unnoticed and unrecognized by the state or be divested of its possible useful effect, and it will be called the secretary of commerce.

Implications of the Act

As with everything pushed by the state, what will actually happen goes far beyond the written intentions. Just as the act nominally passed to defend our freedoms from terrorism is used to spy on millions of normal Americans, this act will control and censor far more than TikTok (which is obviously not the only foreign-owned media in this country). And this is written into the act itself, which provides, “The Secretary may undertake any other action as necessary to carry out the responsibilities under this Act that is not otherwise prohibited by law.”

Worse than just the focus on “foreign adversaries,” how long until this is applied to any media deemed adversarial? How long until this act, after being passed, is amended to crack down on “domestic adversaries” like conspiracy theorists and spreaders of “disinformation,” all of which, of course, will be determined by the state? We have every reason to believe the state will grab this power, being as these categories, deemed so by the state, threaten its legitimacy. As Rothbard wrote, “A ‘conspiracy theory’ can unsettle the system by causing the public to doubt the state’s ideological propaganda.”

Even though the advances of tyranny are now commonplace, and the continual infringement of our liberties is the norm, this blatant aggression in the form of the RESTRICT Act should not go unnoticed. Moreover, this fight should not happen on the state’s terms. The rhetoric surrounding the act focuses on TikTok and “foreign adversaries,” two subjects that are unpopular and, frankly, difficult to defend. However, defending them, or focusing on them at all, is missing the point. The state was not content with merely spying on you, restricting your commerce and production, drafting you, and forcing your children into state schools and subjecting them to who knows what.

No, the state also needs to control your information, for if the information is free, and people can research and discuss freely, the state’s legitimacy, and therefore its very existence, is threatened. As it has shown us by so openly and disgustingly lashing out, anyone who engages in the spreading of ideas outside the purview of the state, especially of ideas that correctly dismantle the legitimacy of the state, is contributing to the state’s peril. As the US government has just proven by its ugly reaction, the spreading of ideas is how we are to proceed ever more boldly against this evil.

Ryan Turnipseed is an undergraduate in economics and entrepreneurship at Oklahoma State University.

Connect with Mises Institute

Cover image credit: TheDigitalArtist

“Moderna Teams Up With IBM to Put A.I., Quantum Computing to Work on mRNA Technology Used in Vaccines”

Human Product Launch 2.0 is in the works, and it sure is tempting to take a negative view on all new technology when the first product launch in humans fails to a large degree. Isn’t it?

by Sage Hana, Sage’s Newsletter
April 19, 2023

Moderna teams up with IBM to put A.I., quantum computing to work on mRNA technology used in vaccines

Key Points

• Moderna and IBM are teaming up to use generative artificial intelligence and quantum computing to advance mRNA technology, the development at the core of the company’s Covid vaccine.
• The companies said they signed an agreement that would allow Moderna to access IBM’s quantum computing systems and generative AI model.
• The agreement comes as Moderna navigates its post-pandemic boom driven by its mRNA Covid vaccine.

Moderna and IBM are teaming up to use generative artificial intelligence and quantum computing to advance mRNA technology, the development at the core of the company’s blockbuster Covid vaccine, the companies announced Thursday.

“We are excited to partner with IBM to develop novel AI models to advance mRNA science, prepare ourselves for the era of quantum computing, and ready our business for these game-changing technologies,” Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel said in a statement.

Moderna shares dipped slightly Thursday, while IBM’s stock was about flat.

The companies said they signed an agreement for Moderna to access IBM’s quantum computing systems. Those systems could help accelerate Moderna’s discovery and creation of new messenger RNA vaccines and therapies, according to Dr. Dario Gil, director of IBM research.

IBM will also provide experts who can help Moderna scientists explore the use of quantum technologies, the companies added. Unlike traditional computers, which store information as either zeroes or ones, quantum computing hinges on quantum physics. That allows those systems to solve problems too complex for today’s computers.

Under the deal, Moderna’s scientists will also have access to IBM’s generative AI model known as MoLFormer. Generative AI describes algorithms that can be used to create new content based on the data they have been trained on.

The companies said Moderna will use IBM’s model to understand “the characteristics of potential mRNA medicines” and design a new class of vaccines and therapies.

The agreement comes as Moderna navigates its post-pandemic boom driven by its mRNA Covid vaccine.

The Cambridge, Massachusetts-based company became a household name for its messenger RNA technology, which teaches human cells to produce a protein that initiates an immune response against a certain disease.

Moderna is trying to harness that technology to target other diseases as the world emerges from the pandemic and demand for blockbuster Covid vaccines and treatments slows.

The company is already working to develop a vaccine targeting respiratory syncytial virus and a shot that can target different types of cancer when combined with Merck’s immunotherapy Keytruda.

The new agreement also comes as IBM ramps up its investment in AI with new partnerships. Earlier this year, the Armonk, New York-based company announced a deal with NASA to help build AI foundation models to advance climate science.

Those efforts fall in line with a recent boom in AI, largely driven by the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT. The AI-powered chatbot answers questions in clear, concise prose, and immediately caused a sensation after its launch.

ChatGPT kicked off an AI arms race and prompted questions about the full extent of artificial intelligence’s capabilities and risks.

Because this means that the Monster needs Good and Naive people to trust, and in order for this to happen they select photogenic and talented communicators that you inherently LIKE and trust and trot them out as a middle manager layer of sorts.

This middle manager layer of people might be called Heroes in the Comic Book storybook play that has been foisted upon us.

The concept of Hero Ball is that you will find it excruciating to accept that Heroes are still performing tasks at the behest of the Monster. With lots of plausible deniability baked into the Evil Layer Cake.

Connect with Sage Hanna

Cover image credit: TheDigitalArtist

Battling the Hydra of Gender Ideology

by Jennifer Bilek, The 11th Hour
originally published April 9, 2023

Many people have complicated feelings about being human in sexed human bodies. These feelings do not collapse the reality of the sex binary. There are only males and females.

As a species, we are part of, and in relationship with, a complex biological system that is a continuous process of death and regeneration via sexual reproduction. We don’t live in isolated bubbles in space where we can individually opt out of this reality but inside an entire biological community. Our sex is our tether to this natural world. This is true even if we are not having sex. It is true even if some individuals don’t or can’t reproduce. It is true even if some people’s sex characteristics are not biologically ordered as usual for our species. We are still, as a species, sexually dimorphic mammals and are rooted in the material world by this fact. We must hold fast to this root when battling the hydra of gender ideology.

Gender ideology was corporately constructed to break this bond, to introduce us to new ways of reproducing our species. The ideology was seeded everywhere before it was dropped on our societies, promoting a human rights movement. It is deeply entrenched in all our institutions, corporations, media, and the market. More problematic is its solidification in our minds. Even those attempting to resist this anti-human agenda want to hold fast to the concept of beings outside our species’ boundaries.

We are moving out of the digital age and into new realms of technology and biotechnology. Experts in these fields have been reimagining our species’ boundaries toward a complete fusion with AI. This is not something that has been hidden from us. More and more articles, videos, conferences, courses, laws, & politics are focused on this vision, one of transhumanism. Still, this is not generally discussed regarding gender ideology, one crucial area where we are being groomed to accept this fusion and a fundamental impossibility.

When we discuss gender ideology and the myriad ways it plays out in our lives and societies, most of us attempt to argue within the premise of a human rights frame, which has been established for us and is constantly repeated. We must divorce ourselves from this premise because it is wrong. The fundamental premise is not rights but reality vs. anti-reality. I could say virtual reality instead of anti-reality, but “virtual reality” does nothing to reveal the rupture of our social cohesion and sense of ourselves this vision is causing humanity. It does not even hint at the chaos being sowed in society.

Gender ideology is homophobic and misogynistic because it is anti-human. It seeks to take us beyond our human borders, creating a bridge to a technological vision of our species’ formation and existence that goes beyond the boundary of our sex. It does so with deep, fervent, and tyrannical religiosity, as some people are rapidly becoming aware of. The frame of human rights obscures all this and has us boxing ghosts because we argue our case within this framework: Women’s “rights” vs. “tran$” rights; children have a “right” to be free from medical attacks on their sex, but adults have a “right” to choose what they want; everyone has the “right” to express themselves. The deconstruction of sex is not a human right. It is deeply anti-human.

Adapting our societies to this rupture of reality in the material world means solidifying the virtual reality being constructed for us and overlaid on the real world. This is what the gender industry does. This is its objective, above and beyond anything else it does, beyond the fallout from its mission. This is where our arguments must be framed and reframed.

Reality versus anti-reality.

Society is organized around our species’ sex binary because it abides by the order of the physical world where we live. When some adults choose to obscure the sex binary via medical-tech adjustments and demand the rest of the world validate this anti-reality performance, calling for legal rights to maintain this lie, we must return to boundaries. The integrity of our sex binds us to the rest of the natural world. It keeps us whole and tethered to the earth. Without it, we would be lost in space. We are being groomed away from biological reality in favor of virtual reality. This process has been well underway for some time. With the advent of the internet and cell phones, and more recently, lockdown, the process has been accelerated. The kids growing up on tech and being the most removed from the real world are the most susceptible to the prolific indoctrination on their platforms.

If this sounds like tin-foil-hat territory, ask yourself what “men can be women if they say they are” sounds like and why you see so many politicians terrified to say that women are adult human females when the inquiry is made. This terror matters. The financial, political, and institutional pressure to conform to this virtual reality where we can choose our sex is intense.

Gender ideology demands that we order our societies to conform to a lie, and governments worldwide are ceding this ground. What could be more important to address and resist when this lie attempts to sever us from reality?

This is also not the only boundary being deconstructed for profit and human engineering. The boundary between public and private is also being eroded simultaneously. We are being thrust, as adults, into a realm of publicly paraded and corporately sanctioned fetishism promoted as healthy. Children are being inundated with lies about the reality of sex and forced sexual intrusions in the name of their health and sexual education. Teaching children that there is nothing wrong with nakedness is a far cry from dismantling the private sphere and compelling them into private adult human experiences. We can’t opt out of this if we want to participate in society because it is now everywhere. It is traumatizing and is grooming us into further violations of our boundaries. We have no way to evaluate and assess our world and relationships when everything is in public, there is no private realm, and we are forced to adapt. It is like living in a mass sexual psychodrama, a panopticon from which there is no escape.

Discussions of biological boundaries are the way forward in confronting the hydra of gender ideology and the lies it is attempting to solidify in society and our minds. We must hone our message. We can’t get lost in the quagmire of “rights” discussion. This is not an issue of rights for the marginalized versus others’ rights. This is an issue of reality versus anti-reality. We don’t rearrange societies, laws, language & reality to accommodate other people’s subjective identities. Feeling like a cat – whatever that would mean to someone who isn’t a cat – doesn’t dictate that litter boxes are installed in public toilets. We arrange laws & society based on material reality because it respects the integrity of life & people’s boundaries based on real life.

Connect with Jennifer Bilek

Cover image credit: Vizetelly

The Ancient Race of Forest People

by Robert Sepehr
April 19, 2023

The Ramayana is a Sanskrit epic from India in which the Vanara are a forest dwelling race or hominin species used as labor to build a bridge. They are general depicted as simian in appearance, but not specifically as monkeys.

Watch the full episode here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hllWY5BBJOQ

Connect with Robert Sepehr

Transcript prepared by Truth Comes to Light:

Even in the ancient texts of the Indian subcontinent, we have tales of the Vanara, a simian race that lives in the forest, featured in the Hindu epic, the Ramayana.

The word Vanara comes from varna, meaning forest, and nara, meaning man. And although the word vanara has come to mean monkey over the years, and the vanaras are depicted as monkeys in popular art, their exact identity is not clear.

The Ramayana presents them as human-like with reference to their speech and clothing. But also describes them as having monkey-like characteristics.

This Vanara race also appears in other ancient texts, including the Mahabharata. And while some Hindu scholars think of them as strictly mythical, a substantial number of them take the stories to reflect literal history, pointing to examples such as Rama’s Bridge, a 30-mile-long bridge described in the Ramayana as being built by the god Rama with the help of an army of ape men.

Geological evidence suggests that, what appears to be a man-made bridge, was once a former land connection between India and Sri Lanka, and that it was passable on foot until the 15th century, when storms deepened the channel.

A local Hindu temple claims that Rama’s bridge was entirely above the sea level until it broke in a cyclone in 1480.

While this bridge is controversial and there are plenty of skeptics discounting the stories as myth, I bring it up just to demonstrate that the idea of a different hominid species being hybridized and used as a worker or slave race is not exclusive to the Sumerians.

And there are scholars that not only point to archaeological evidence to support the ancient myths, many are now turning to genetics to back up the ancient literature.

Since modern DNA sequencing has unlocked the genomes of not only modern humans, but several archaic species such as Neanderthal, Denisovan and others that have yet to be identified in the fossil record — which are likely homo erectus specimen that can be found in the DNA of various races of modern living human populations today.

Dr Rangan Ramakrishnan, an Indian scholar, said that,

“If one reads the original Ramayana without the influence of succeeding vernacular versions, which emerged at least several centuries later, Vanaras like Hanuman, are referred to as distinct species altogether. Like other human species, they speak fluently and they inhabit a distinctive culture.

“Ramayana is perhaps the only literature to speak about a variety of human species, offering to fill an important gap in human ancestry and evolution through literary support.

“Interestingly, the protagonist Lord Rama corresponds to the sapiens, other ‘Vanaras’ loosely match Homo erectus, [while the villain Ravana and his ‘Rakshasas’ clan are mostly consistent with the description of Homo Neanderthals.]

“Are these striking similarities mere coincidence? Or shouldn’t we take it more seriously?”

 See related images:

 See related article:

Hindu Monkey God Hanuman May Have Been Homo Erectus – Scientist Says 

Jan Bartek – AncientPages.com – Monkey God Hanuman is an important deity in Hindu mythology and one of the central characters of the Indian epic Ramayana. Hanuman is a patron god of martial arts and is sometimes considered a symbol of a symbol of nationalism and resistance to persecution.

Together with Ganesha, the elephant-headed God of knowledge, learning, Literature, and scribe of the Mahabharata, monkey God Hanuman is said to be one of the threshold gods, on the border of the material and spiritual realms.

Hanuman is a beloved Hindu deity, but is there any reason to think the monkey God was a real being or only a mythological creature?

An Indian scientist who examined the Hindu epic Ramayana has presented a rather unusual theory suggesting that Hanuman belonged to an extinct human species. If this assumption is correct, the perception of the monkey god Hanuman would change radically but where does the evidence come from and how is it assessed and used?

Dr. Rangan Ramakrishnan is a scholar of the Ramayana and literary historian who has recently published a book called The Ramayana of Valmiki. The Indian scholar explains that the story of the Ramayana could be of immense importance to our understanding of ancient history and paleontology.

Read full article here…

Graham Hancock with Mauro Biglino: Gods of the Bible — A New Interpretation of the Bible Reveals the Oldest Secret in History

It is our pleasure to welcome Mauro Biglino, author of Gods of the Bible as our featured author for April. Mauro, a biblical scholar and translator, has supervised the translation and publication of 17 books of the Old Testament for Edizioni San Paolo, Italy’s foremost Catholic publisher. In his book, Gods of the Bible, Mauro offers the reader a revolutionary rediscovery of biblical writings and the remarkable insights into the history of humanity these texts contain. In his article here, Mauro explores how his decades-long background as a biblical translator compelled him towards a new interpretation of the Bible, revealing ancient secrets that transform our traditional understanding of the past. ~ Graham Hancock

Gods of the Bible: A New Interpretation of the Bible Reveals the Oldest Secret in History

by Mauro Biglino, GrahamHancock.com
originally published April 5, 2023

I can’t help but think of how it all began. As I write at my desk, I have in front of me the first printed copy of Gods of the Bible, first on top of a tall pile of books, block notes, and paper sheets. Such crumbling towers take up most of the desk. My books and those of others form a chaos of overlapping memories and voices while the rays of the afternoon sun filter through the window and light some of the covers up.

One of these volumes always holds special meaning for me — a pink notebook with my first interlinear translation of the Book of Genesis, written in pencil. Even today, every time I write, I can’t help but think of how it all began. It was more than twenty years ago, twenty-five, almost. I was just a lover of ancient languages, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. At this same desk, much emptier, I translated the Bible day and night. Then, as in all stories, adventure was born of a mistake, a small, insignificant typo. It was a rather trivial typo that I might have discovered in the edition of the Hebrew Interlinear Bible of the most famous Italian religious publisher: Edizioni San Paolo. That’s how it all started — with a mistake.

It’s worth telling the reader that Edizioni San Paolo is Italy’s most prominent Catholic publishing house. Its Vatican-approved publications are used in graduate and post-graduate Biblical Hebrew and Bible studies courses in Catholic universities and departments. I was just a self-taught translator of the Bible. And yet, it was I who caught an error. At first, I questioned my skills. I tend not to jump to conclusions too soon. I have a background in Classics, and my mindset is that of a philologist. I double-checked my grammar books and compared different translations; I read and reread many times the same passage until I was convinced I had found a mistake.

Finding errors, flaws, and typos in books is hardly surprising. In mine, they are there. And in the books of others, too. But we are human beings. The Bible, on the other hand, is a book “inspired by God.” That is what we have been taught. It contains the absolute truth — so say the theologians. More than half of humanity bases its existence and life values directly or indirectly on the Bible. As a result, the Bible has become the basis of an immense power structure. Any mistake could raise the suspicion that this monstrous giant was, in reality, a giant on clay feet.

And yet I was there looking at this mistake, like an engineer who finds a small crack in a dam. Little did I know then that that error was the first of many I was about to discover. But at that moment, I shrugged my shoulders without thinking much about it. I wrote a short note to the publisher saying, “Hey, I think I found a mistake; you might want to fix it.” A few weeks later, out of the blue, they contacted me and said: “May we see some of your translations?”. I sent them my Genesis, a copy of the pink block note I now observe from my chair. It was the turning point. A decade-long collaboration began. Following this partnership, I published seventeen books of the Old Testament in Edizioni San Paolo’s Hebrew Interlinear Bible.¹

Since the beginning of my professional career as a Bible translator, I have never stopped finding errors in the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament. Not just minor typos and mistakes but downright forgeries and tendentious mistranslations. My last work, Gods of the Bible, just came from print and smells of glue and fresh paper. It’s my latest effort in this twenty-five years long research, but I still feel that the fil rouge with that first pink block note was never broken. The same spirit moved me. Understanding how such a fragile text as the biblical one could become the foundation of a monstrous power system and religions followed by billions of people. Few books in the history of humanity have been written, rewritten, added to, corrected, changed, and censored as often as the Bible. The text of the Bible, mainly fixed after the sixth century BC, but based on older oral and written traditions, is one of the most fragile, unreliable texts in human history. What should surprise us is not so much that someone is looking in it for traces of an ancient advanced civilization, but the fact that someone — theologians — could build absolute truths on such text, with a dogmatic approach that has often become in history and often still becomes fanaticism.

I may have anticipated a theme that could frighten more cautious readers. Still, there is no way to prepare a traditional readership for the hypothesis I seek to test in Gods of the Bible, starting precisely from the Hebrew translations and the demystification of theological, spiritualizing readings. But I have to start somewhere, and I have no better option than playing cards face up. Therefore, let me declare right off that the Bible is not a holy book. In antiquity, the term “holy” was understood as everything “reserved” for the deity. This term has by no means the spiritualistic value we ascribe to it today. The protagonists of the biblical accounts all move within a materialistic and immanentist horizon, very concrete and tangible.

The Old Testament is just the story of the alliance/relationship between Yahweh and the family of Jacob-Israel, and such a tale is deprived of any universalistic perspectives (a later invention of Christianity). This alliance, which did not even involve all the descendants of Abraham’s family but only one of its branches, that of Jacob-Israel, is not a universal but a particular account of events that happened at a specific time in history in a specific place: today we would perhaps label it as a local history book. Yahweh, the protagonist of the Old Testament, was just the leader of the family of Jacob.

Other families, peoples, and nations had their leaders; only they did not take the pain to write an accurate account of such relationships. Or maybe they did, and the books went lost. But the question is: who were these “leaders” that the ancient people considered “deities” and referred to by different but equivalent names? The Sumerians called them “Anunnaki,” the Egyptians called them “Neteru,” and the Babylonians called them “Ilanu.” The Bible calls them “Elohim.” Who were the Elohim, then?

Ten or so years ago, when I started voicing my doubts about the correctness of translating the term “Elohim” with “God,” Edizioni San Paolo’s bosses began to worry about my heterodox ideas, and our collaboration came to a halt after seventeen books were published together. What made them so mad? The extraterrestrial hypothesis, to be fair, was not the main problem, as the Catholic Church does admit the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence. Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, ex-Vatican’s chief astronomer, avers that there is no conflict between believing in God and the possibility of “extraterrestrial brothers,” perhaps more evolved than humans.²

The main problem was my methodology and its profound implications. To be clear, I propose a literal interpretation that allows me, and all those who adhere to it, to read the Bible, and particularly the Old Testament, from the advantage point of distancing myself from the theological filters that have buried the “sacred text” for thousands of years, making it unreachable and unusable.

Monotheistic theology has deprived us of the possibility of treating the Bible like any other ancient source to be studied objectively. If treated as any other ancient source, the Bible could say much about the history of humankind before saying anything about God. But here lies the problem. Nobody knows anything about God, yet priests and theologians claim the right to interpret the Bible according to their theological schemes. It is frankly unbelievable that the literal reading of the Bible could represent such a Copernican revolution in biblical and anthropological studies. This circumstance says much about theology’s deforming, obscurantist power when applied to an ancient book.

As is well known, at least until the 16th century, the Catholic Church forbade reading the Bible without the mediation of an official interpreter. The reason behind this prohibition is apparent today to anyone. If you read what is written without interpretative filters, without theological lenses on your nose, the Bible becomes an exciting source of knowledge, not about God, but about human history. The readers of the Bible will experiment with the regenerating feeling of discovering something left unseen in plain sight. This is what I experienced when I started translating the Bible. The literal reading is as subversive as it is simple. A new reality, at the same time revolutionary and familiar, materializes in front of the reader in the same way a small child discovers a unique gelato flavor and realizes that the world is an inexhaustible source of surprises.

I certainly am not the first one to endorse such methods. With appropriate differences, this is the same methodological approach that Heinrich Schliemann (1822-1890) successfully adopted. The history of archeology has taught us that much good can come from questions asked by independent researchers who view reality with a divergent thinking approach. One must ask how Schliemann, who was not a professional archaeologist, succeeded in finding the lost city of Troy, whereas professional archeologists, firmly entrenched in academic circles, failed in the task. Free of preconceived notions, Schliemann believed that the story of the Trojan War, as told in the Iliad, was true, or at least contained much truth, and was not merely a product of Homer’s imagination. Schliemann decided to believe the ancient sources. The groundbreaking premise of his work was to “pretend” that the Iliad contained actual historical events. He took Homer’s account as a starting point for his research. Accompanied by sarcastic ridicule from the academic world, he pursued his research with extraordinary tenacity and eventually found Troy on Hissarlik Hill in western Turkey.³

Using this method, Schliemann made some of the most significant discoveries in the history of archeology. For any unbiased observer, this method is logical; still, the archeologists of his time amazingly could not see its value. Not because their eyesight was weak but because they wore blinders and did not even know it.

I pretend that the Bible is true in its literal sense. I say, “Let us pretend that the Bible is true.” Opinable as it can be, this methodology has the advantage of not arbitrarily resorting to hermeneutical categories (allegories, symbols, metaphors, and so forth) to explain “difficult” passages. The Bible is straightforward and can be understood easily through literal reading. When I see theologians and biblical exegetes swim in a sea of confused and confusing interpretative devices, to which they inevitably must resort to making sense of problematic passages, I wonder how they could reconcile their arbitrary interpretative method with the claim that the Bible is “word of God.” However, I know the answer. How can you explain Yahweh’s craving for the smell of burnt flesh, if not allegorically?

If you read the Bible, literally everything becomes understandable and plain because the biblical authors did not feel the need, as we do, to advocate for a precise monotheistic theological perspective or a moral authority of religious order. The biblical authors wrote what they experienced, saw with their eyes, or heard with their ears, even when the image of Yahweh from those reports was all but flattering. As a theologian of a loving God, how do you explain that Yahweh orders the extermination of men, women, and children and claims for himself 675 sheep, 72 oxen, 61 donkeys, and 32 virgins after a battle against the Midianites (Numbers 31:32-40)? This portion of the spoils was not for the service of the tabernacle, as Numbers 31 explains: it was for Yahweh’s personal use. One only wonders why a spiritual and transcendent “God” would need 32 virgins — or 61 donkeys, for that matter.

Such disturbing passages were not intended as metaphors or allegories to be interpreted 2,000 years later by some theologians in their Vatican libraries but reflected what the writer had heard or seen. Similar examples are found throughout the Bible, and I don’t want to assume that the authors of the biblical text misrepresented their ideas or the facts they wanted to convey and describe. I take the text seriously.

From the necessity of harmonizing the biblical text with the theological and monotheistic conception of God of Western culture arises a whole series of falsifications and mistranslations, in view of which that first innocent printing typo I had discovered twenty-five years ago really seems like a “speck in the eye of the brother.” Instead, here we talk about massive logs that have remained in our eyes for hundreds and thousands of years, so long that we even ignore our blindness. In Gods of the Bible, I have tried to remove at least some of these logs, addressing subjects such as the story of creation, the origins, and evolution of humankind, the existence of angels, the nature of cherubim, the identity of Satan, the meaning of the name of Yahweh and many more.

Mainly I focused on the identity and character of Yahweh and the meaning of the term “Elohim.” To make a long story short, when we read the term “God” in the Bible, this usually comes from the Hebrew term “Elohim.” However, at least when I worked for Edizioni San Paolo, the term “Elohim” was left untranslated into the interlinear edition of the Bible that we prepared for scholars and academia. In the Bibles available to the public, the same term was translated as “God.” Therefore, where people read “God” and believe that the biblical authors wrote the equivalent of the word “God,” scholars read the term “Elohim.” This was to alert them that this word is problematic, to say the least, for the unbiased translator.

Furthermore, Yahweh is just one of the many individuals who comprise the group of the “Elohim.” As shown, this term is the equivalent of the Sumerian “Anunnaki” or the Egyptian “Neteru,” which described a pantheon of a multiplicity of deities. Monotheism arose quite late on the roots of a previously widespread polytheism that affected all the peoples of the ancient Near East, including the Israelites. This fact is now recognized even in Bible study circles. Professor Mark Smith of Princeton Theological Seminary has written extensively on the polytheistic roots of the Bible and the long development of monotheism from an earlier polytheism.⁴

Often, however, these findings remain isolated. They certainly do not penetrate the realm of doctrine, except in a form purified of its most radical consequences, and therefore do not influence popular piety and practiced religion. Scholars in this field tend to defuse their most controversial results to avoid conflicts between theology and biblical scholarship. On the contrary, I think one of the greatest hindrances to reading the Bible is theology. In 2016, I held a conference in Milan with four theologians of different backgrounds: Ariel Di Porto, Chief Rabbi of the Jewish Community of Turin; Mons. Avondios, Archbishop of the Orthodox Church of Milan; Daniele Garrone, Biblical scholar, and Protestant pastor, Old Testament expert; Don Ermis Segatti, priest and professor of Theology and History of Christianity at the Theological Faculty of Northern Italy — this was at times a very heated meeting.⁵

At any rate, nobody who is intellectually honest can be sure of what “Elohim” means, but there is substantial evidence that “Elohim” does not mean “God” at all. Our very idea of God as a transcendental, omniscient, omnipotent being has nothing to do with the idea the ancient Biblical authors had in mind when employing the term “Elohim.” The Bible mentions several other “Elohim” besides Yahweh, of whom we even know the names, such as Chamosh, Milcom, Astarte, Hadad, Melqart, and many others. The “Elohim” was thus a group.

We could also add that the Old Testament tells the story of how Elyon, the most powerful of the Elohim, the commander-in-chief, would divide the lands and peoples of the earth among all the various Elohim leaving some of them satisfied and others dissatisfied.⁶ Yahweh was one of them, and he received only the people of Israel, who were still landless. As the Bible says, “Yahweh alone led him; no foreign El was with him” (Deuteronomy 32:12). In a very significant passage, the Bible also describes an “assembly” of the “Elohim.” To be an assembly, they must have been more than one. Traditional translators argue that “Elohim” here means “judges,” but they are contradicted by the Bible itself, which always uses a different word for “judges.” Also, this is an entirely arbitrary affirmation. I wonder on what ground can we say that “Elohim” at times means “God” and at times mean “judges.” What criteria are we following? In Psalm 82, Elyon rebukes the assembly of the gathered “Elohim” and reminds them that although more powerful than humans, they also “die like Adam,” thus emphasizing a clear distinction between the “Adamites,” the descendants of Adam, and the group of the “Elohim.”

It won’t be surprising that the term “Elohim” has a grammatical plural ending. “Elohim” is a grammatical plural. Translating “Elohim” in the singular as “God” would be nothing more than a simplification of monotheistic theology. Therefore I think it should be left, to be safe, untranslated.

Yahweh’s character is also worth investigating. When not violent, Yahweh’s behavior often seems bizarre, extravagant, and arbitrary. Yahweh’s words demonstrate his eagerness for the smell of the smoke of burnt flesh, prescribing elaborate rituals for the holocausts and commanding that violation of pedantic rules for the sacrifices be punished by death. Yahweh also moves and intervenes in human businesses in peculiar ways; for example, at times, he literally arrives “flying riding on a cherub” (Psalm 18:10) or aboard flying machines called “ruach” or “kavod,” which I discuss extensively in Gods of the Bible. Yahweh destroys cities with terrifying weapons, crushes villages, and demands his share of the spoils.

In my view, biblical scholarship and theology hopelessly oppose each other. However, I don’t deny the existence of God in general; I only say that God is not present in the Bible. Luckily so! This supposedly loving God theologians have come up with shows himself in the Old Testament as a cruel, sadistic, manipulative, and narcissistic individual.

Yahweh was undoubtedly endowed with unique qualities that made him superior to man in power and knowledge, but he was not superior in morals and ethics. It is enough to remember Yahweh’s exterminations, cruel rules, and bizarre behaviors, like sniffing the smoke of burned flesh, which he needed to relax. This matter was so important that any violation of the ritual could result in the death of the sacrificer. I detail this in Gods of the Bible and propose my interpretation of the sacrificial rituals occurring in all ancient religions, including Greek and Roman cults.⁷

The Bible does not speak about the origin of the Elohim. There is no hard evidence about the provenance of this group. Still, the comparison with the Adamites points to their clear and overwhelming biological and technological superiority. I, however, suggest and discuss in my book the possibility that something like the “cargo cults” might have occurred in the ancient past, not only among the people of Israel but among all the peoples of the world, from the Middle East to the Far East and the Americas.

During World War II, the inhabitants of Melanesia in the Pacific Ocean first encountered the white man and saw airplanes. The U.S. Army occupied their islands scattered across the Pacific as logistical bases for war operations. The natives saw the American soldiers coming from the sky and taking off from the ground with their aircraft. They saw them equipped with powerful weapons, high-speed air vehicles, and means of communication that defied understanding. They thus started considering them as deities. The natives began to develop rituals, prayers, and cults in anticipation of the return of the American soldiers.

I use the paradigm of “cargo cults” to speculate on the arrival in antiquity of civilizations that were much more advanced than ours. Our ancestors would then develop rituals, myths, and narratives that today we consider fairy tales but perhaps hide a very different reality, the reality of an extraordinary encounter with a superior civilization.

All the people of the Earth tell us the same thing. They tell us about superior beings who came from the sky, who created humankind and gave them knowledge, teaching them how to grow crops, write, predict the course of the stars, build incredible structures, and work metals. Is it possible that all the peoples of the Earth, independently from each other, developed the same stories, the same narratives about their past?

Gods of the Bible is just my last attempt to bring some light to our ancient past through the narrative found in the Bible. I aim to narrate, understand, and describe in detail the reasons and habits of that group of individuals called “Elohim,” of whom Yahweh was part, one of many. Yahweh was the Elohim of the family of Israel — and only of them and their descendants. I deny the universality of the Bible. The Old Testament records Israel’s covenant and relationship with Yahweh. Other Elohim, as we have seen above, had inherited other peoples, families, and nations.

The Elohim of other peoples are mentioned and addressed several times in the Old Testament. These passages suggest that these “foreign Elohim” were similar to Yahweh and had identical abilities and habits. The Elohim had advanced technology unavailable to our ancestors; lived longer than humans but were mortal; had weapons and tools that could do wonders; they were more powerful and knowledgeable, and yet they could be abandoned, betrayed, and deceived, just like humans, because they knew a lot but were not omniscient.

The space of a short article would only allow for briefly summarizing some of the aspects of the Elohim that I have detailed in this new book and all my previous works.⁸

Still, perhaps it is not superfluous to end by mentioning something about the fascinating biblical term “ruach.” This term has always been translated as “spirit” through the influence of the Greek culture and the so-called Septuagint version of the Bible, which renders it with “pneuma.” The Ancient Hebrew term “ruach” actually had a very definite and concrete meaning as it stood for “wind,” “breath,” “moving air,” “storm wind,” and, in a broader sense, “that which moves quickly through the air space.” In modern biblical translations, the term “ruach” is always rendered as “spirit” because it responds to monotheistic theology’s spiritualist needs.

In the Old Testament, however, this “ruach” appears to be flying through the air, making noise, and taking people from one place to another, with a loud clangor and visible manifestations, taking off and landing in specific geographical locations — in very concrete ways.

The two following passages illustrate what has just been said.

“The [ruach] lifted me and brought me to the gate of the house of Yahweh that faces East. There at the entrance of the gate were twenty-five men, and I saw among them Jaazaniah, son of Azzur, and Pelatiah, son of Benaiah.” (Ezekiel 11:1)

“Look,” they said, “we, your servants, have fifty able men. Let them go and look for your master. Perhaps, the [ruach] of Yahweh has picked him up and set him down on some mountain or valley.” “No,” Elisha replied, “do not send them.” But they persisted until he was too embarrassed to refuse. So he said, “Send them.” And they sent fifty men, who searched for three days but did not find him. (2 Kings 2:16-17)

I left the word “ruach” untranslated, as the reader can see. If you follow monotheistic exegesis and replace “ruach” with “spirit,” the passages become incomprehensible. But it is difficult to interpret the term “ruach” spiritually without distorting the text’s meaning. I give countless similar examples about “ruach” and other words and biblical passages in Gods of the Bible, always underlining the concreteness and realism of the Ancient Hebrew language and the ancient Semitic culture, which was the culture of a pastoral people that Yahweh had found in the desert, landless.

I began and ended Gods of the Bible with the same spirit that moved me twenty-five years ago when I first picked up my pink notebook and then discovered the little mistake that began my professional career as a translator of the Old Testament with Edizioni San Paolo. Since then, I have found many more errors in the Bible — and not all were done in good faith. The list is long and cannot be continued here. But I hope at least to have been able to open a dialog with all those who, with an open mind, are interested in learning more about humankind.

I am not looking for absolute truths but for a glimmer of reality. As I gaze into the impending sunset, the peaks of the Alps, silhouetted against the evening sky, glow pink. A mountain peak is all I hope for. I leave the climb to heaven to others.

I take Gods of the Bible from its stack and open it in the last light of day. I find the best summary of what has been said on the page that opens before me. It is good never to ignore the authoritative voices of the past whose intentions are free from the controversies of the present. I find the voice of a great historian of antiquity who had no reason to lie or embellish. And I realize it is not for heretics like me to explain the meaning of such words, but for the “guardians of the discourse” that exclude apriori hypotheses they cannot accept. I pretend what I read is true.

“Armies clashed in the sky, swords blazed, and the temple shone with sudden flashes. The doors of the sanctuary were suddenly torn open, and a superhuman voice cried out that the gods were fleeing, and at the same time, there was a great uproar as if men were fleeing.” (C. Tacitus, Histories, V 13)

Connect with Graham Hancock

Connect with Mauro Biglino

Pentagon “Leaks”: 5 ways to tell REAL from FAKE

by Kit Knightly, OffGuardian
April 17, 2023

We promised a longer take on the Pentagon “leaks”, and here it goes. Regular readers will probably be familiar with my view on leaked documents in general, but if you’re not allow me to quote my own 2019 article on the (absurd) “Afghanistan papers”:

An awful lot of modern “leaks” are no such thing. They are Orwellian exercises in controlling the conversation […] carefully making sure the “establishment” and the “alternative” are joined in the middle, controlled from the same source.

That’s not to say ALL “leaks” are automatically and ubiquitously narrative control exercises, clearly some are real…but it’s usually pretty easy to tell them apart. In fact here’s a little checklist.

1. If your “leak” tells you stuff you already know, it’s probably a fake leak.

“Leaking” widely known, publicly available information is a very common tactic. In the Pentagon “leaks”, for example, it was “revealed” that the US has been spying on South Korea, Israel and Ukraine. But the US spies on everyone – allies included – and we have all known that for literal decades.

Further, everyone spies on everyone, it’s just the way the game is played. Acting like it’s a big reveal, and the performative outrage of the South Korean government, is a hallmark of a fake leak.

2. If your “leak” reinforces the mainstream narrative, it’s probably a fake leak.

Leaks can be used to manage and/or reinforce the mainstream narrative. The Afghanistan Papers are, again, a prime example of this. The “secret history” which did nothing but repeat myths and lies about the US war.

Or the leaked Fauci emails, which resurrected the lab-leak theory of Covid’s origins, but reinforced that Covid existed and was dangerous.

3. If your “leak” gets MASSES of media coverage, it’s probably a fake leak.

A telltale sign of the fake leak is the mainstream media carefully explaining to everyone how important it is and what it all means. The BBC, Sky News, CNN and others have all put out explainer articles and videos detailing the content of the leaks. US spokespeople, like John Kirby, have said the press shouldn’t report on the leaks, but this has made no difference

We know the corporate media is just an extension of the Establishment, they only report what they’re told to report. They have no duty to the truth, and no ties to reality. If they publicise the leaks, it’s because they’re instructed to, because it serves the greater narrative. Officials criticising the press for publishing the “leak” is just a utilisation of the Streisand affect, textbook “please don’t throw me in the briar patch” stuff.

4. If your “leak” source is revealed immediately and publicly, it’s probably a fake leak.

Within days of the recent leak the press were reporting the name and rank of the alleged leaker, his arrest was filmed and the videos sent to the press, and he was arraigned in public. Is this how covert agencies bent on concealing important information operate?

For comparison’s sake, consider Seth Rich. Mr Rich was alleged to be the source of leaked emails which proved the DNC was rigging votes for Hillary Clinton. He died when he was shot in the back by muggers who didn’t take anything.

5. If your “leak” tells you what you want to hear, it’s probably a fake leak.

Never trust anyone who tells you only what you want to hear, that goes double for media outlets or government agencies.

In the most recent “leaks”, we see how they very conveniently feed both sides of the war narrative.

One of the “revelations” is that the Ukrainian military is running out of anti-air ammunition. Meaning that, in the near future, Russia could potentially flatten Ukraine with its air superiority.

This is, obviously and clearly, propaganda aimed at supporting the “Ukraine needs our help” storyline. It will be used to argue the West “has not done enough” to protect Ukraine and result in demands for more money and/or weapons to be sent over.

On the other hand the “revelations” concerning depleting ammunition stocks and higher-than-reported casualties provide, as well as the presence of NATO special forces in the country, fuel to the Western alternative media pro-Russia position.

“See, Russia is actually winning”, they say, “And NATO forces presence shows Russia was in the right, don’t believe Western misinformation“.

All of it combines to maintain the narrative that the conflict represents vital very real and deep-seated moral and strategic differences and isn’t just a turf war between rival globalist gangsters as valuable for its distraction potential as anything else.

We saw something similar earlier this year, with the release of Sy Hersh’s report on the “truth” behind the Nord Stream 2 sabotage, an anonymous insider claiming the US was responsible. Both sides attributing blame, both sides distracting from the real impact – and probably real purpose – of shutting down the pipeline.

*

Having established how to spot a fake “leak”, we can see that these “highly classified” Pentagon papers fit perfectly into the “fake leak” category.

Now, the question becomes, if the leaks are Deep State psy-op, what is the objective?

Well, we already partly covered that. Ukraine running out of missiles, for example, will be used to justify even more resources and money being sunk into the murky and bottomless pit of “military spending”.

Secondly, we can already see the establishment crosshairs centering on Discord – the platform where the leaks were first published. Not just Discord, but group chat services in general.

As they almost always are, the fake “leak” will fuel calls for more security and greater control of online content, after all these leaks “put US assets in danger”

More broadly, it simply provides fuel for a waning narrative. So many facts to dispute, and so many arguments to be had. What special forces are in the country? What provocations are they carrying out? Who’s “really” winning? Whose casulty figures are reliable? Who staged what atrocities to discredit which side?

Are the Chinese arming Russia in secret? Will South Korea pull out?

What about the leaker – is he an anti-war hero? A narcissist who endangered America? Or a racist traitor? Should he go to prison? How long for?

Watch the Reds and Blues argue over that one.

It’s all content designed, in the parlance of social media, to boost engagement. Because the system has adapted, they don’t manufacture consent anymore – they farm participation. Angry refutation and warm praise record the same in the algorithm. They don’t want your agreement, they want your attention. And when they feel the story is losing the audience, well, here’s some super secret facts you aren’t supposed to know.

Here’s the real story behind the story, why don’t you go on Facebook and tell everyone about it?

What ultimate purpose do these leaks serve? The same purpose as an end-of-season cliffhanger, or killing off a major character. It gets people talking, it pulls people into their story.

They want you to read it, debate it, and live in their created reality.

Connect with OffGuardian

Cover image credit: Clard

Remembering Who We Are

by Paul Cudenec, Winter Oak
April 18, 2023

The other day, as I sat drinking a coffee at the local Sunday morning puces, the flea market, I suddenly noticed how happy everybody seemed to be, despite all that has been going on here in France.

Browsing racks of clothes or crates of second-hand books, bumping into friends with smiles all round, chatting away at the tables in the café, these people were quite obviously pleased to have come together in the gusty spring sunshine.

The same thing is true of the little gatherings of our village pro-freedom group.

Here, we devote our time, in between eating and drinking of course, to discussing the dangers ahead of us and how we can best play our part in countering them, but we have nevertheless noted the pleasure we feel in simply being there with each other.

I experienced an intensified form of this feeling in March 2021, in the heart of the grim Covid clampdown, when I travelled to the small town of Les Vans for a defiant fête de la résistance, featuring rebel musicians HK et les Saltimbanks.

The joy that we all felt at being together again, at walking and dancing and singing as one, unmasked and uncowed by the reign of fear, was of the kind that literally brings tears to the eyes.

What exactly is it, this powerful and primal surge of happiness that courses through our veins when we are united with other people with some kind of common aim, even when this aim is simply to enjoy ourselves?

In the spirit of the terminology that I developed in The Withway, I would say that it is with-energy, the power we find within ourselves when we are aware of our belonging to something greater than our individual being.

The system knows that this with-energy is its greatest foe.

It demonstrated this quite blatantly with its Covid-pretexted demands for “social distancing”, allied with a raft of “emergency” measures aimed at ensuring that we came together with as few people as possible in real life and that all our relationships were mediated by its matrix of control.

But, in truth, it has long been working towards the same aim, destroying living communities everywhere, replacing horizontal relationships with vertical ones, peddling a creed of pseudo-individualism in which each of us is supposed to be at the same time meekly obedient to central power and blindly callous to the needs and wishes of our fellow citizens.

It ever seeks to divide us, into anti-this and pro-that, anti-that and pro-this, into “left” and “right”, into the red team and the blue team, into hundreds of different “genders” and “identities”, into successive generations that reject everything their parents and grandparents ever thought and whose views and tastes have been deliberately manufactured so that they can enjoy no reference to the past and can be guided only by the inverted morality of the system itself.

However, the global gangsters are seriously deluded if they imagine that all this will succeed in eliminating our innate with-energy.

Their plastic excuse for a “philosophy” imagines that people are merely separate individuals, random units that can be brought together or separated from each other by the firm hand of their authority.

And yet this is not so. One of the fundamental insights of the organic radical tradition is that the individual level of being – crucially important as the only direct and unpollutable channel between the collective soul and the physical realm – is not the only one.

The reality, of which we are not always aware because of the practical need to deal with our individual living, is that we are merely temporary flowerings of a greater organic entity, which embraces not just humankind, but the whole of nature and indeed the cosmos.

The tingling with-energy that we feel, when we are reminded of our belonging to an aspect of that greater organism, is a sensation taking place within the body of the Whole, a shared sense of existing on a larger scale than the merely individual.

That belonging is always there, in fact, so these moments of with-pleasure amount to a rediscovery of something of which, deep down in our blood and our bones and our belly, we were already aware.

The joy we gain from coming together with other people is the joy of remembering our belonging to a greater natural entity, the joy of remembering who we are.

The system wants us to forget. It wants us to forget our history, it wants us to forget all the crimes it has committed against us, it wants us to forget that we need love and freedom in order to flourish, it wants us to forget that we belong to something much older and much more powerful than its ephemeral money-based empire.

But ignorance or denial of that belonging does not affect its reality.

When we come together and feel with-energy, we connect to that reality.

When we understand what this with-energy is, we are remembering that reality.

When, together, we consciously use our with-energy to reclaim our belonging to that reality, we will become so strong and so free that no system will be able to hold us down.

[Audio version]

Connect with Paul Cudenec

Cover image credit: Pexels

James Corbett: Your Guide to 5th-Generation Warfare

“A war that is taking place everywhere on the globe, even as I speak, and that involves virtually everyone on the planet, young and old, male and female, military and civilian. It is the war of every government against its own population and every international institution against free humanity.”

~~~

“Neurological Warfare…

“These include (in Giordano’s well-rehearsed patter) the ‘drugs, bugs, toxins and devices’ that can either enhance or disrupt the cognitive functions of their target, like the ‘high CNS aggregation’ nanoparticulates that, according to Giordano, ‘clump in the brain or in the vasculature‘ and ‘create essentially what looks like a hemorrhagic diathesis.'”

~~~

“It is a war for full-spectrum dominance of every battlefield and every terrain, from the farthest reaches of the globe (and beyond) to the inner spaces of your body and even to your innermost thoughts. And it is a war on you.”

~~~

“We must stop playing their game. We must stop fighting their war. We must stop ceding our power, our authority, our time, our attention, our energy and our resources to engaging the enemy in their terms in their battlefield.

“We must create our own parallel society on our own terms.

“And so we rediscover an old piece of wisdom. To paraphrase: ‘Fifth-generation warfare is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.’

“War is over . . . if we want it.”

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
April 18, 2023

We are in the middle of a world-changing war. This is no ordinary war, however. Most of the victims of this warfare aren’t even able to identify it as war, nor do they understand that they are combatants in it. It’s called fifth-generation warfare, and I’m here to tell you all about it.

Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee / Substack / Download the mp4

Transcript & Sources

We are in the middle of a world-changing war right now.

Oh, I don’t mean the war in Ukraine, the one that all the media are asking you to focus your attention on. Yes, that conflict continues to escalate, and every day there are new stories about provocations and threats that could lead to a nuclear exchange . . . but that’s not the war I’m referring to.

No, the war I’m talking about is an even broader war. A war that is taking place everywhere on the globe, even as I speak, and that involves virtually everyone on the planet, young and old, male and female, military and civilian. It is the war of every government against its own population and every international institution against free humanity.

This is no ordinary war, however. Most of the victims of this warfare aren’t even able to identify it as war, nor do they understand that they are combatants in it.

It’s called fifth-generation warfare, and I’m here to tell you all about it.

I am James Corbett of The Corbett Report and this is Your Guide to Fifth-Generation Warfare

What Is Fifth-Generation Warfare?

What is fifth-generation warfare, anyway? And, come to think of it, what were the first four generations of warfare?

Good questions. For an in-depth answer to the latter question, you’ll want to read “The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation“—a 1989 article from the Marine Corps Gazette co-authored by William S. Lind—and you’ll want to watch “William S. Lind & Philip Giraldi – Fourth Generation Warfare & The Deep State.”

WILLIAM S. LIND: This city and every capital in the world is completely oblivious to the fact that it is caught up in a change in warfare so great that it not only makes our current defense and foreign policies obsolete, it essentially makes obsolete the whole framework within which we think about defense and foreign policy.

[. . .]

The change is what I call the rise of fourth generation war and this is specifically the fourth generation of modern war. [. . .] We now think of foreign affairs and defense within the framework of the nation-state. Armed forces are designed to fight other state armed forces. But that reality is changing.

[. . .]

What’s happening around the world today in more and more places is that state armed forces find them find themselves fighting not other state armed forces, but fourth-generation forces. Non-state forces.

SOURCE: The State and Modern War

In a nutshell, Lind et al.’s thesis is that the “modern age” of warfare began with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which, Lind opines, “gave the state a monopoly on war.” From that point on, modern warfare went through three generations, namely:

• First-generation warfare: the tactics of line and column, developed in the era of the smoothbore musket;
• Second-generation warfare: the tactics of indirect fire and mass movement, developed in the era of the rifled musket, breechloaders, barbed wire and the machine gun; and
• Third-generation warfare: the tactics of nonlinear movement, including maneuver and infiltration, developed in response to the increase in battlefield firepower in WWI.

This, according to Lind and his co-authors, brought us to the late-20th century, when the nation-state began to lose its monopoly on war and military combat returned to a decentralized form. In this era—the era of fourth-generation warfare—the line between “civilian” and “military” become blurred, armies tend to engage in counter-insurgency operations rather than military battles, and enemies are often motivated by ideology and religion, making psychological operations more important than ever.

But, some argue, we have now entered a new era of warfare, namely fifth-generation warfare.

There is still much debate about what defines fifth-generation warfare, how we know we’re engaged in it, or even if it exists at all (Lind, for one, rejects the concept). Various scholars have made their own attempts at defining fifth-generation warfare (5GW), like Dr. Waseem Ahmad Qureshi, who identifies it as “the battle of perceptions and information,” or Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui of the People’s Liberation Army, who write of the era of “Unrestricted Warfare” in which “a relative reduction in military violence” has led to “an increase in political, economic, and technological violence.”

If academic debates about the changing nature of warfare are your thing, then there’s plenty of reading for you to do on the subject, from The Handbook of 5GW: A Fifth Generation of War? to a slew of academic articles.

But for the purposes of this editorial, I’m not interested in that debate. In fact, we’re going to use a decidedly non-academic definition of fifth-generation warfare from an Al Jazeera article as our starting point: “The basic idea behind this term [5GW] is that in the modern era, wars are not fought by armies or guerrillas, but in the minds of common citizens.”

There are two important things to note about this definition. The first is that fifth-generation warfare is not waged against either standing armies of nation-states or guerrilla insurgents but against everyday citizens. The second is that this war is not being fought in a battlefield somewhere, but in the mind.

I will expand the definition somewhat to include the fact that this war is being waged at all levels, not just the mental. The gist of it is this: Fifth-generation warfare is an all-out war that is being waged against all of us by our governments and the international organizations to which they belong. It is being waged against each and every one of us right now, and it is a battle for full-spectrum dominance over every single aspect of your life: your movements and interactions, your transactions, even your innermost thoughts and feelings and desires. Governments the world over are working with corporations to leverage technology to control you down to the genomic level, and they will not stop until each and every person who resists them is subdued or eliminated.

The most incredible part of all of this is that so few know that the war is even taking place, let alone that they are a combatant in it.

The best way to understand this war is to look at some of the ways that it is being waged against us.

Part 2: Information Warfare

Stop me if you’ve heard this before, but this is an infowar and the powers-that-shouldn’t-be are engaged in “a war for your mind.”

Of course, you have heard of “Infowars” if you’ve been in the alternative media space for any length of time. And for good reason: information warfare is an absolutely essential part of the war on everyone that defines fifth-generation warfare.

The most obvious way to understand this is to look at the actual military forces that are engaging in psychological operations against their own citizens.

DAN DICKS: It says here:

“A letter from the Nova Scotia government sent out to residents to warn about a pack of wolves on the loose in the province was forged by Canadian military personnel as part of a propaganda training mission that went off the rails.

“The letter told residents to be wary of wolves that had been reintroduced into the area by the provincial and federal governments and warned the animals were now roaming the Annapolis Valley. The letter, which later became public, sparked concern and questions among residents but was later branded as ‘fake’ by the Nova Scotia government which didn’t know the military was behind the deception.

“The training also involved using a loudspeaker to generate wolf sounds, the Canadian Forces confirmed to this newspaper.”

Guys, let let that sink in for a second. They created a fake letter from the government, put it out there saying that there’s dangerous wolves, and they set up loud speakers in the area projecting out wolf noises!

This isn’t just research, you know. This isn’t just a training exercise. They’re actively engaging in this psychological operation to scare people using loudspeakers.

This is unbelievable

SOURCE: Canadian Military Fake Wolves Fear Campaign Exposed! but You Won’T Believe What They Are Doing Next!

But it’s not just out-and-out military operations by soldiers dressed up in camo fatigues that are part of this fifth-generation infowar. In the war on everyone, the establishment uses every means at its disposal to manipulate the public’s perception.

Thus, Richard Stengel—the former editor of Time who bestowed Time‘s person of the year (dis)honour on You! back in 2006—is happy to chair a Council on Foreign Relations conversation in which he defends the US government’s use of propaganda against its own citizens.

RICHARD STENGEL: Basically, every country creates their own narrative story. And, you know, my old job at the state department was what people used to joke as the chief propagandist job.

We haven’t talked about propaganda. I’m not against propaganda. Every country does it and they have to do it to their own population and I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.

SOURCE: Political Disruptions: Combating Disinformation and Fake News

Or take Hill & Knowlton—the PR firm hired by the Kuwaiti government to create the Nayirah deception in the First Gulf War . . .

“NAYIRAH”: They took the babies out of incubators  . . . They took the incubators and left the children to die on the cold floor.

SOURCE: Human Rights Violations in Kuwait

. . . who were retained by the WHO in 2020 to identify celebrity “influencers” who could be used to amplify the scamdemic messaging.

ANNOUNCER: The One World Together At Home event showcased a who’s who of top music stars and celebrities, who came together over the weekend for a special broadcast of music, comedy and personal messages, all in gratitude to those around the world on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic.

MATTHEW MCCONAUGHEY: So what can we do? We’ve got to take care of our healthworkers and we’ve got to buy them time by taking care of ourselves.

ANNOUNCER: The event was led by the World Health Organization and the non-profit group, Global Citizen.

SOURCE: Celebrities Perform Virtual ‘One World’ Concert: ‘A Love Letter to the World’

Or take the UK government’s Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviours, which outright admits that they use psychological techniques to manipulate the public into fearing the scamdemic, a move that some of the panel members called “totalitarian” . . . and no one bats an eyelid.

Perhaps the most insidious part of the fifth-generation infowar is that it has become so normalized that everyone knows it is happening, but no one thinks of it as warfare. Of course everything is “advertising” and “propaganda.” And of course it’s being used to manipulate our behaviour. That’s just how the world works, isn’t it?

But we ignore the real nature of the infowar at our own peril. After all, I have often observed that this is a war for your mind and that the most contested battlespace in the world is the space between your ears. You might have thought I meant that metaphorically, but actually I mean it quite literally. Which brings us to . . .

Neurological Warfare

If you listen to Dr. James Giordano speak without listening to what he’s saying, you get the impression he is merely an articulate, well-informed scientist who is passionate about his research. When you do listen to what he’s saying, however—or even just look at his PowerPoint slides, like the “NeuroS/T for NSID” slide—you realize that he is Dr. Strangelove. Or, if not Dr. Strangelove himself, then at least Dr. Strangelove’s spokesman.

But it’s not nuclear armageddon that motivates Giordano, it’s what he calls “weapons of mass disruption”—the various technologies for neurological intervention that the US military and militaries around the world are developing.

These include (in Giordano’s well-rehearsed patter) the “drugs, bugs, toxins and devices” that can either enhance or disrupt the cognitive functions of their target, like the “high CNS aggregation” nanoparticulates that, according to Giordano, “clump in the brain or in the vasculature” and “create essentially what looks like a hemorrhagic diathesis.” As sci-fi as this sounds, he insists these nanoparticulates (and many, many other horrific neurological weapons) are already being worked on:

JAMES GIORDANO: The idea here is that I can get with something called high CNS aggregation material that is essentially invisible to the naked eye and even to most scanners because it is so small that it selectively goes through most levels of filter porosity. These are then inhaled—either through the nasal mucosa or absorbed through the oral mucosa. They have high CNS affinity. They clump in the brain or in the vasculature and they create essentially what looks like a hemorrhagic diathesis; in other words, a hemorrhage predisposition or a clot predisposition in the brain. What I’ve done is I’ve created a stroking agent and it’s very, very difficult to gain attribution to do that.

I can use that on a variety of levels, from the individual to the group. Highly disruptive. And, in fact, this is one of the things that has been entertained and examined to some extent by my colleagues in NATO and to those who are working on the worst use of neurobiological sciences to create populational disruption. Very, very worried about the potential for these nano particular ages to be CNS aggregating agents to cause neural disruption.

SOURCE: Brain Science from Bench to Battlefield: The Realities – and Risks – of Neuroweapons | CGSR Seminar

And just in case you didn’t get the point, you’ll notice he illustrates his slide with an image of a human brain in the crosshairs of one of these neurological weapons. There’s nothing hard to understand about the picture that is being painted here: we are at war with an enemy who is literally targeting our brains.

And just in case you didn’t get the point, you’ll notice he illustrates his slide with an image of a human brain in the crosshairs of one of these neurological weapons. There’s nothing hard to understand about the picture that is being painted here: we are at war with an enemy who is literally targeting our brains.

But yet again, it isn’t just the literal use of neurological weapons by conventional militaries in conventional warfare settings that we—the largely unwitting combatants of the fifth-generation war on everyone—have to worry about. As my listeners already know, avowed technocrat Elon Musk is trying to sell his Neuralink brain chip technology to the hipster crowd as a cool and sexy way to upgrade your cognition . . . or so that the coming AI godhead will have mercy on us. Or something like that. Anyway, you should totally stick the Neuralink in your head at your earliest opportunity! And definitely don’t ask any questions about why so many of the macaque monkeys and other test animals that Neuralink was using as test animals in their “brain-machine interface” experiment have dropped dead.

To anyone not yet a victim of the information warfare operation designed to prepare humanity for the coming transhuman dystopia, all of this sounds insane. But for those who have fallen for the infowars psyop of the enemy, these types of mind-altering technologies are exactly as advertised: exciting opportunities to “upgrade” the feeble biological wetware we call our brain.

But if you think you can avoid the biological aspect of the fifth-generation war by simply avoiding the brain chip, you’re out of luck. You’re also going to have to deal with . . .

Biological Warfare

The biowarfare narrative is, understandably, back at the forefront of the public consciousness in recent years, not just because of the scamdemic but also because of the questions being raised about the US-backed Ukrainian biolabs and whatever work they may or may not be doing on Russia’s doorstep.

This picture, for example, comes straight from Army.mil, which was only too happy to brag as recently as last July that US soldiers were conducting “hands-on training and field training exercises with Ukrainian troops in laboratory and field environments” that included ensuring the readiness of “deployable mobile laboratories.” Nothing to see here, folks. (Perhaps the only surprising thing about the article is that they haven’t scrubbed it from their website . . . yet.)

Yet, once again, if we are only thinking of biowarfare in conventional military terms, we neglect the much, much wider operation to manipulate, control and weaponize all aspects of our environment, our food supply and even our genome itself for the purposes of the ruling oligarchs. This fifth-generation biological warfare being waged against us includes:

• The mRNA and DNA and genetically-modified adenovirus vector “vaccines” that have been “normalized” over the past two years and which, as the miraculously “lucky” companies that bet it all on this technology like to brag, is re-programming the “software of life.”
• The genetically-modified organisms—both gmo crops and gmo animals—that are now being unleashed upon the world in an uncontrolled experiment that puts our health and the very future of the biosphere in jeopardy.
• The push toward synthetic, lab-based “food” that is being funded by the usual eugenicist billionaires and which threatens to sever humanity from the natural abundance of the earth, make us dependent on an increasingly shrinking number of companies for our food supply, and, ultimately, to drive us toward a Soylent Green-style future.

I’m sure you can fill in the blanks with myriad other examples of the attacks upon the world’s air, water and biome that constitute this unconstrained fifth-generation biological war being waged against us.

When and if you do put the pieces of this puzzle together and seek to warn people en masse that they are under attack, your ability to resist this agenda will be predicated on your ability to use your accumulated resources (your wealth) to foster communities of resistance. Don’t worry, though; the enemy has that domain covered, too. . . .

Economic Warfare

Given the events of recent weeks, even the sleepiest of the sleepy now realize that we are in a period of economic warfare.

This war, too, has its conventional aspects. On the 2D board, we’ve seen the NATO empire launch its Weapons of Financial Destruction at Russia in recent weeks, and, exactly as predicted, it has resulted in the consolidation of a convenient geopolitical bogeyman bloc and a gigantic loss of faith in the international monetary system itself. And, also as predicted, it has supplied the “Problem” and “Reaction” needed for the technocrats to present their pre-determined “Solution” of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). Just ask Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock:

“The war will prompt countries to re-evaluate their currency dependencies. Even before the war, several governments were looking to play a more active role in digital currencies and define the regulatory frameworks under which they operate.”

This is not merely a battle between nation-states or even competing power blocs. This is a battle being waged by every authoritarian power structure and every government (but I repeat myself) against their own citizens for control of the most important resource of all: their wallets.

Yes, we are seeing the beginning of a truly world-historic moment: the collapse of Pax Americana, the death of the dollar reserve system, and the beginning of an entirely new monetary paradigm, the “Central Bank Digital Currency” system of programmable money that will be able to algorithmically control when, how and if you are allowed to transact in the economy at all. We only have to look to recent events in Canada to understand what this will look like.

This perfect control of humanity down to the level of being able to witness and, ultimately, to allow or disallow any transaction between any individuals at any time, represents the apotheosis of technocracy and one of the key objectives of the fifth-generation war itself. As this nightmare comes closer and closer to reality, all seems hopeless.

But then again, that’s exactly the point. . . .

The Real War

I could go on. And on and on and on. But hopefully you get the point by now: There is a world war happening right now. It is a fifth-generation war (or whatever you want to call it). It is being waged across every domain simultaneously. It is a war for full-spectrum dominance of every battlefield and every terrain, from the farthest reaches of the globe (and beyond) to the inner spaces of your body and even to your innermost thoughts. And it is a war on you.

Recognizing this, the task we face seems nearly insurmountable. How are we to fight back in a war that the majority of people don’t even recognize is taking place? How do we fight back against an enemy that has spent decades refining its weapons of economic and military and technological and biological control? How do we fight back in a war that is not taking place on two fronts or even three fronts, but in every domain and battlespace simultaneously?

Framed like this, our prospects do indeed appear hopeless. But therein lies the key: our perception that it is our duty to “fight back” against the enemy in their war on their battlefield on their terms of engagement is itself a narrative frame. And that narrative itself is a weapon that is being wielded against us in the battle for our minds.

You’ll allow me space here to quote myself at length because this is a point I have made many times before, perhaps most notably in my conversation on “The Anatomy of the New World Order” that I had with Julian Charles on The Mind Renewed podcast ten years ago:

I’m intrigued by the idea that we’ve been given false templates to follow in terms of solving our problems—one being to “fight our enemies”—templates provided for us through so much social conditioning and the media. Here, the idea is that we must find the heart or the head of the organization and somehow kill that person or that group, or whatever it is; eliminate that, and everything will magically turn to the better!

Thinking in broad terms, that false template appears in virtually every science fiction dystopia you’ve ever seen: if it turns out well in the end, it’s only because they have managed to decapitate the Head of the Beast, whether it be The Lord of the Rings or Tron, or any such movie. I think that’s fundamentally and completely the wrong way to look at it, because at the end of the day the particular individuals who may or may not be holding the ‘Ring of Power’ are replaceable. Indeed, there are very many people who would be chomping at the bit to get into that position of power should that old guard be swept away for whatever reason.

I think what’s needed is a more fundamental revolution: not of overthrowing a specific instantiation of this idea, but of overthrowing the idea altogether. And that can only come, I think, from building up an alternative system to which people actually want to apply themselves. I think we have to detach ourselves from this system that we’ve been woven into. Unfortunately that’s probably as difficult to do as that analogy would make it sound, because we are so woven into the fabric of society that it’s difficult to imagine extricating ourselves from all these processes.

We rely for so many of our daily needs on this vast, unwieldy corporate system that ties into these very organizations that pull the strings of governmental institutions, that it can seem quite overwhelming. How can a single individual affect this? But I think we have to look for any and every possible point at which we can start to detach ourselves from those systems of control, and to start to reassert some kind of independence. That can be an extremely small thing like, just for example: instead of buying groceries at the grocery store, perhaps buy them at a farmers’ market, or at least some of your groceries. Or perhaps you could grow them yourself in a vegetable garden. Something of that sort is a tiny thing on the individual level, but I think it’s the only thing in the long run that can lead to the type of society we want to bring to fruition. Again, I think it’s small things like that, if we start to apply ourselves with diligence and perseverance, that will eventually be able to overthrow this. But, unfortunately, as I say, we are on the cusp of this scientific revolution which makes scientific dictatorship possible, so unfortunately we don’t necessarily have generations of time. That gives a time perspective to all this—I won’t say it’s a time bomb—but you get the idea. We don’t have a lot of time to waste.

We have a choice. Either we continue going into this technological, corporate matrix—which involves even things like buying the next generation of iPhone, which they’re already saying is going to have its own fingerprint scanning technology, and all of these corporate, military, Big Brother elements to it that we’re willingly signing up to every day of our lives, and actually paying money for—or we start to create alternative structures which don’t rely on that system. It’s a choice that we have to make in our lives, I would say more quickly than has been apparent at any other time in human history.

My regular viewers will understand what I am proposing here: the creation of a parallel society. We will not achieve this by asking for more scraps from the masters table, or by gently complying as we are herded into ever more constrictive technological pens, or by thinking that we can win this war by engaging the enemy in their controlled domain. We can only achieve this by creating our own table, our own economy and our own communities of interest. This will require the long and difficult task of increasing our independence from the authoritarian systems in every domain: the information domain, the food domain, the health domain, the monetary domain, the mental domain and every other contested battlespace in this all-out, fifth-generation war.

Easier said than done, of course. But there is no alternative.

Some will say “But won’t they come after that parallel society?” as if that is a rebuttal to what I have laid out here. The point is that you are already the target of the enemy in a war that most people but dimly understand is happening. Yes, the enemy will come after you. But they are already dominating you in more ways than any one person can fully understand. That does not stop just because you comply with their demands or take part in their system.

We must stop playing their game. We must stop fighting their war. We must stop ceding our power, our authority, our time, our attention, our energy and our resources to engaging the enemy in their terms in their battlefield.

We must create our own parallel society on our own terms.

And so we rediscover an old piece of wisdom. To paraphrase: “Fifth-generation warfare is a strange game. The only winning move is not to play.”

War is over . . . if we want it.

Connect with James Corbett

Dissent Into Madness: Escaping the Madhouse

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report
April 16, 2023

“Only when we step back and interrogate the political system as a whole can we appreciate that the very existence of those seats of power from which a handful of individuals can rule over the masses is itself a construct of the pathocracy. Unless and until those seats of power are eliminated altogether, we will never rid ourselves of the struggle for dominance that rewards the psychopaths with control over others.”

~~~

“It is up to each one of us to model that which we wish to see in the world. Just like the brave dissenter who can break the circuit of tyranny by voicing opposition to the tyrant, we can also become the models of love, understanding and compassion that will motivate others to become the same.”

In the “Dissent Into Madness” series, we have been exploring the nexus of psychology and politics.

In Part 1 of this series, “The Weaponization of Psychology,” I detailed the process by which the psychiatric profession has been turned into an instrument for repressing and marginalizing political dissidents.

In Part 2, “Crazy Conspiracy Theorists,” I documented how this weaponized psychology has been wielded against conspiracy theorists, pathologizing those who seek to point out the obvious truths about world events such as 9/11 and the scamdemic.

In Part 3, “Projections of the Psychopaths,” I documented the psychopathology of those in positions of political power and noted how society itself is being warped to reflect those psychopaths’ own twisted psyche.

Finally, in this week’s conclusion to the series, I will tackle the most important question of all: how do we escape the madhouse constructed by the political psychopaths?

Pathocracy

First, the good news: pathocracies are inherently unstable and they are doomed at some point to topple under their own weight.

Indeed, as Lobaczewski points out in his discussion of the phenomenon, pathocracies by their very nature possess numerous weaknesses that make their downfall inevitable. They require, for instance, that key administrative positions be filled not by finding the most competent men and women in the general public and promoting them based on ability and merit, but by recruiting the most serviceable lackeys from the much narrower pool of psychopaths and sociopaths. This leads to the seemingly endless parade of low-grade morons and feckless, out-of-touch imbeciles who end up in positions of power, greatly degrading the effectiveness and stability of the pathocratic state.

Pathocrats, like all psychopaths, also live in mortal fear of being exposed as pathological. Commenters on psychopathy have long pointed out that the mask of sanity—the psychopath’s ability to hide their moral defect from others—is incredibly important to them. After all, once identified, psychopaths can be effectively shunned and “eliminated” from positions of power, as TruthSeeker suggests above. As Lobaczewski writes:

Normal people slowly learn to perceive the weak spots of such a system and utilize the possibilities of more expedient arrangement of their lives. They begin to give each other advice in these matters, thus slowly regenerating the feelings of social links and reciprocal trust. A new phenomenon occurs: separation between the pathocrats and the society of normal people. The latter have an advantage of talent, professional skills, and healthy common sense.

Next, the even better news: if it is true that psychopaths can fashion a psychopathic society that twists people into sociopthats, then the opposite is true, too. Healthy, non-pathological humans with love, empathy and compassion can fashion a society that brings out the better side of human nature.

This is the real goal of the erstwhile victims of the pathocrats. Not to eliminate the political psychopaths and assume their positions of power in the psychopathic political system that they created, nor even to abolish that system altogether, but to envision a world in which compassion, cooperation, love and empathy are not just encouraged but actively rewarded. A world in which every person is allowed to become their best possible self.

It is up to each one of us to model that which we wish to see in the world. Just like the brave dissenter who can break the circuit of tyranny by voicing opposition to the tyrant, we can also become the models of love, understanding and compassion that will motivate others to become the same.

After all, if the psychopaths have spent centuries weaponizing psychology to more effectively control us, can’t we wield our understanding of human nature for something good? And isn’t that what healthy, non-psychopathic individuals forming a healthy, non-psychopathic society would spend their time and resources doing?

Connect with The Corbett Report

Cover image credit: Bluesnap

Dr. Ana Mihalcea & Clifford Carnicom: What Is Happening to Humanity’s Blood? — On the Loss of Electrical Blood Conductivity in the Post C19 Era

“In our good faith effort to quantify the loss of electrical blood conductivity in the post C19 era and reference this with the extensive previous investigations looking at iron oxidation in blood samples, we have found in our most conservative measures at least a 20% decrease in blood conductivity and in our modest range estimates a decrease of 47%. In our models this correlates with a 10% and 23.5% increase in iron oxidation.”

Evidence of Impaired Electrical Blood Conductivity, Iron Oxidation and Reduced Oxygen Transport Capacity in the Post C19 Injection Era: Ana Mihalcea, MD, PhD in Conjunction With Clifford Carnicom

by Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD, Dr. Ana’s Newsletter
April 16, 2023

Background:

In this report, we present preliminary data on further blood conductivity studies and correlations to iron oxidation of the hemoglobin molecule within the red blood cells. This effort is to answer the question quantitatively and qualitatively of what happened to humanities blood. As a physician, I have seen unprecedented accelerated aging in the unvaccinated over the last two years and the rate of illness is accelerating. In live blood analysis, I have seen Hydrogel/ Graphene Structures, that transform the blood into severe rouleaux formation, making the blood almost unrecognizable and correlating with severity of symptoms. In the last few weeks I have seen this in a more extreme form of toxicity, making the live blood look like sludge. These same structures have been identified by Clifford Carnicom to be filaments growing from the synthetic hydrogel based Cross Domain Bacteria, aka Morgellons. We have shown our work on blood cultures, infrared spectroscopy, and electrical studies which I described in previous posts:

Blood Cultures of Unvaccinated Blood Shows Extensive (CDB) Filament Development After 2 Weeks Incubation- Ana Mihalcea, MD, PhD In Conjunction With Clifford Carnicom 

I have also discussed the chemical analysis similarities between filaments sprayed upon humanity via geoengineering and the ingredients of hydrogel building blocks in the self spreading C19 injections.

Chemical Analysis Comparison of Hydrogel Filaments from C19 Shots and Environmental Geoengineering Sources – Project What Happened to Humanities Blood? 

Our preliminary results showing low electrical blood conductivity has to be understood in the context of Clifford’s work of three decades evaluating the findings of CDB aka as Morgellons. He began studies in 2011 and more intensively in 2015 to quantify changes in blood conductivity and correlating iron oxidation status in hemoglobin molecules of the blood. Historically, the medical profession has dismissed CDB or Morgellons as delusionary parasitosis, marginalizing hundreds of thousands of individuals who had severe systemic symptoms of toxicity. However, CDB disease was not just a skin disease, but affected all human beings in a silent way as these fibers were found in blood and tissue samples of everyone investigated. It is known that the covert biological and geoengineering warfare is the source of these nanotechnological synthetic biology fibers.

All people affected had symptoms of chronic fatigue, which overlaps with current findings of what people call “Long Covid”. This fatigue is a lack of energy, or life force which is obviously hijacked by these nanotechnological weapons, causing all diseases of aging, including cancer by induction of lower tissue oxygenation and hence increased blood acidity.

Therefore, the question of iron oxidation came into the picture for Clifford. Blood requires iron to be in the primary state of Fe2+ to carry and deliver oxygen to tissues. The synthetic nanotechnology biological organism CDB oxidizes iron from its state of Fe2+ to Fe3+, in which state it no longer is able to transport oxygen – and causes rouleaux formation.

He described the biochemistry of Heme, the studies of iron oxidation in this paper:

Morgellons -A Thesis

The loss and transfer of an electron is a transfer of energy. The body’s function of oxygenation does not work when the Iron is in its Fe 3+ state. The state of iron has to be in the Fe2+ state to carry oxygen and in that energy.

Source: Free Iron in Bacteria, Jim Imlay PhD, Department of Microbiology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaing, Society for Radical Biology and Medicine.

In 2015 Clifford asked the question on what does this iron oxidation mean for the energy production of the body. The question was how much energy would we loose in the body in relation to how much oxidation of iron is observed?

In order to answer this, laboratory experiments were performed that show oxidation of iron. This was evaluated via 1. qualitative chemistry ferrous iron 2+ shows green staining, 2. ferric iron 3+ shows yellow staining. It was also evaluated via qualitative reagent based ion testing.

Model calculations on how much energy is lost:

1. How much energy does it take to oxidize iron?
2. How much iron is in the body?
3. How much oxidation is taking place ( it is variable)?
4. How much energy is in a human body in varying states of activity – sitting down, running, weight lifting etc.

The model estimates loss of energy as a function of iron oxidation. If iron oxidizes at a certain percentage, how much energy does the body loose? This energy loss is relative to basal metabolism as a function of oxidation of iron.

The first ionization energy for iron is 7.9 electron volts (eV) (~760 kilojoules (kJ) per mole), the second ionization energy is 16.2 eV (1560 kJ  per mole) and the third ionization energy is 30.6 ev (2960 kJ per mole)51.  What this shows us is that it takes almost twice as much energy to remove the electron to change the iron from the ferrous (Fe2+) state to the ferric (Fe3+) state as it did to remove two electrons to change it from the elemental form to the Fe(2+) state.  From an energy standpoint, therefore, the oxidation of iron referred to in this paper requires a relatively strong energy investment.  

To get some sense of what this energy level actually means, let us translate what is happening in the blood to something more tangible for us to visualize.  If we assume a 5% reduction in oxygenated hemoglobin over a three month period (the approximate life cycle of red blood cells), this will translate to an energy requirement of approximately 3240 joules over this three month period.

[Humans have roughly 2.5E13 red blood cells; 280E6 molecules of hemoglobin in each red bllood cell; 7E21 molecules of hemoglobin in each red blood cell; four heme molecules per red blood cell; approx. 2.8E22 Fe2+ iron atoms in the human body; at 5% oxidation 1.4E21 atoms in the Fe(3+) state ; .0023 moles of iron in the Fe(3+) state, .0023(2960kJ/M – 1560kJ/M) = approx. 3260 joules over a three month period.]

Further calculations and documentation of experimental background can be found here:

Morgellons A Thesis

Extensive studies on iron oxidation were done in culture work and can be found in Carnicom Laboratory Notes

If you would like to support our research Project “ What happened to Humanities Blood? “, please donate to Carnicom Institute. We are a team of scientists dedicated to saving the human species and our planet. Thank you.

Note to scientists and doctors from Ana Mihalcea, MD, PhD: I believe that the current stance of freedom movement doctors to ignore the findings of nanotechnology and synthetic biology causes great harm to humanity, by omitting appropriate treatments. I encourage all scientists and doctors to do their own scientific research and overcome the barrier of hesitancy to address what is so blatantly obvious.

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.
Not to speak is to speak.
Not to act is to act.”

―Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Connect with Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD

Cover image credit: PublicDomainPictures

Are Fibrinolytics Key to Preventing Clogged Arteries?

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
April 15, 2023

Story-at-a-Glance

• Lumbrokinase, serrapeptase and nattokinase are proteolytic enzymes that act as natural anticoagulants by breaking down fibrin that forms blood clots
• Fibrinolytic enzymes are antihypertensive, anti-atherosclerotic, lipid-lowering and anti-platelet agents, which also have neuroprotective effects
• Nattokinase at a dose of 10,800 fibrinolytic units (FU) a day for 12 months “effectively managed the progression of atherosclerosis and hyperlipidemia” in one study
• Just one 2,000 FU dose of nattokinase enhanced fibrinolysis and anti-coagulation, activating multiple fibrinolytic and anti-thrombotic pathways simultaneously
• Lumbrokinase is nearly 30 times stronger than nattokinase and 300 times stronger than serrapeptase; if you are using a fibrinolytic enzyme, my strong personal preference and recommendation is to use lumbrokinase
• Fibrinolytic agents, sometimes referred to as thrombolytic agents, are capable of dissolving blood clots that may block your veins or arteries. In general, cleaner arteries are a benefit to your cardiovascular health, which is one reason why fibrinolytic enzymes like lumbrokinase, nattokinase and serrapeptase should be on your radar.
• In your body, enzymes regulate the rate of numerous biological reactions, speeding them up so necessary functions like digestion, muscle contractions and other aspects of cellular metabolism can occur.¹
• Lumbrokinase, serrapeptase and nattokinase are proteolytic enzymes that act as natural anticoagulants by breaking down fibrin that forms blood clots. Fibrin, a clotting material that restricts blood flow, is found both in your bloodstream and connective tissue such as your muscles. Fibrin accumulation is also responsible for scar tissue.

It is important to understand that when using these enzymes for fibrinolytic therapy they need to be taken on an empty stomach, at least one hour before or two hours after meals containing protein. Otherwise, these enzymes will be wasted in the digestion of the protein in your food and won’t serve their fibrinolytic purpose.

Fibrinolytic Enzymes Help Manage Heart Disease

Fibrinolytic enzymes are antihypertensive, anti-atherosclerotic, lipid-lowering and anti-platelet agents, which also have neuroprotective effects.² Much research into fibrinolytic enzymes has focused on nattokinase (NK), an active ingredient in natto, or fermented soybeans. It’s likely due to its high nattokinase content that natto consumption is linked to a decreased risk of heart disease mortality and increased longevity in the Japanese population.³

Nattokinase, produced by the bacteria Bacillus subtilis during fermentation of soybeans to produce natto,⁴ is a strong thrombolytic,⁵ comparable to aspirin⁶ but without the potential side effects. It is important to note, however, that lumbrokinase is nearly 30 times more potent than nattokinase — and 300 times more potent than serrapeptase.^7,8,9

So, while all of the fibrinolytic enzymes are effective and beneficial, you’ll need much higher doses of nattokinase and, especially, serrapeptase, than lumbrokinase to achieve similar effects. If you are using a fibrinolytic enzyme, my strong personal preference and recommendation is to use lumbrokinase.

That said, you can get an idea of these enzymes’ health potential via studies done on any of the types. One such study involved 1,062 people with mild hyperlipidemia and/or mild atherosclerosis. They took nattokinase at a dose of 10,800 fibrinolytic units (FU) a day for 12 months, which “effectively managed the progression of atherosclerosis and hyperlipidemia with a significant improvement in the lipid profile.”¹⁰

Significant reduction in carotid artery intima-media thickness, a measure of the extent of atherosclerotic vascular disease, was noted, with improvement rates ranging from 66.5% to 95.4%. Those who smoked, drank alcohol or had a higher BMI experienced the greatest lipid-lowering effects. No adverse effects were noted from the nattokinase.

It’s also interesting to note that regular exercise further improved nattokinase’s beneficial effects, and it also worked synergistically with consumption of vitamin K2 and aspirin. At a lower dose of 3,600 FU per day, nattokinase was ineffective at lowering lipids or suppressing the progression of atherosclerosis, highlighting the importance of proper dosing and “challenging the recommended dose of 2,000 FU per day,” the researchers explained. Further:¹¹

“The available data suggest that the antiatherosclerotic effects of NK are due to the collective effects of the combination of the antithrombotic, anticoagulant, antioxidant and lipid lowering properties of NK or the natto extract containing NK … A possible mechanism [for NK’s lipid-lowering effects] is through NK proteolytic activity on certain protein targets involved in lipid metabolism, resulting in changes in lipid metabolism.”

A Single Dose of Fibrinolytics Has Anticoagulant Benefits

A study involving 12 men revealed that just one 2,000 FU dose of nattokinase enhanced fibrinolysis and anticoagulation.¹² It activated multiple fibrinolytic and antithrombotic pathways simultaneously, the researchers explained.¹³ At six and eight hours after the nattokinase was taken, D-dimer concentrations were significantly elevated.

D-dimer is a protein fragment produced by the body when a blood clot dissolves. It’s typically undetectable or present only at very low levels, buts its level may significantly rise when the body is forming and breaking down blood clots,¹⁴ as occurred after one dose of nattokinase in this study. The researchers added:¹⁵

“Based on NK’s unique, comparatively strong fibrinolytic/anticoagulant activity, stability in the gastrointestinal tract and long bioavailability in vivo, NK would appear to offer potential advantages over other currently used agents for treatment and/or prevention of selected diseases processes …

NK might have an impact on not only fibrinolytic/anticoagulant pathways but also other risk factors for thrombosis, which imply as a NK’s possibility for prevention and/or treatment of the diseases.”

As mentioned, fibrinolytic enzymes inhibit platelet aggregation and the formation of blood clots similarly to aspirin. In an animal study, a 500 mg/kg dose of nattokinase fully prevented a blocked artery, as did aspirin at a dose of 30 mg/kg, demonstrating its effectiveness at improving blood flow:¹⁶

“The results indicate that nattokinase extracted from fermented soybean inhibit platelet aggregation by blocking thromboxane [a vasoconstrictor] formation, and thereby delay thrombosis following oxidative arterial wall injury. Therefore, it is suggested that nattokinase could be a good candidate without adverse effects for the improvement of blood flow.”

Brain benefits are also apparent from fibrinolytic enzymes, including nattokinase and serrapeptase (SP). In a study on rats, administering either enzyme for 45 days successfully modulated several markers of Alzheimer’s disease.¹⁷ A significant increase in brain derived neurotropic factor (BDNF) was also noted. BDNF is a member of brain growth factors that contributes to neuroplasticity, which greatly enhances cognitive performance.^18,19

Fibrinolytic Enzymes for COVID-19

Another candidate for application of fibrinolytic therapy is COVID-19, as coagulopathy appears to play a role in severe COVID-19. Researchers wrote in the Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis:²⁰

“There is evidence in both animals and humans that fibrinolytic therapy in acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) improves survival, which also points to fibrin deposition in the pulmonary microvasculature as a contributory cause of ARDS.

This would be expected to be seen in patients with ARDS and concomitant diagnoses of DIC [disseminated intravascular coagulation] on their laboratory values such as what is observed in more than 70% of those who die of COVID‐19.”

The researchers reported three case studies of patients with severe COVID‐19 respiratory failure who were treated with tissue plasminogen activator (TPA), a serine protease enzyme found on endothelial cells that’s involved in fibrinolysis, or the breakdown of blood clots.²¹

All three patients benefited from the treatment, with partial pressure of oxygen/FiO2 (P/F) ratios, a measure of lung function, improving from 38% to 100%.²² An evaluation of organ tissues from people who died from COVID-19 also revealed extensive lung damage, including clotting, and long-term persistence of virus cells in pneumocytes and endothelial cells.²³

The findings indicate that virus-infected cells may persist for long periods inside the lungs, contributing to scar tissue. In an interview with Reuters, study co-author Mauro Giacca, a professor at King’s College London, described “really vast destruction of the architecture of the lungs,” with healthy tissue “almost completely substituted by scar tissue,”²⁴ which could be responsible for cases of “long COVID,” in which symptoms persist for months.

“It could very well be envisaged that one of the reasons why there are cases of long COVID is because there is vast destruction of lung (tissue),” he told Reuters. “Even if someone recovers from COVID, the damage that is done could be massive.”²⁵ Dissolving scar tissue is another area in which enzymes, particularly proteolytic enzymes, may be useful.

The potential for blood clots is one reason why board-certified internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough uses full-dose aspirin — 325 milligrams a day — in almost everyone with long COVID syndrome who doesn’t have a major blood clot, in addition to other medications.²⁶

However, a safer and likely equally effective alternative to aspirin is lumbrokinase and serrapeptase. You can alternate between the two enzymes — one day take lumbrokinase and the next take serrapeptase — because you’ll need to be on it for about three months and you can develop a sensitivity to them over time if you use them daily without interruption.

A Breakdown of the Top Three Fibrinolytics

Fibrinolytic enzymes are ideal for targeted usage; as mentioned, if you intend to use them daily, be sure to alternate through the following types so you don’t develop a sensitivity or allergy to them. Also, remember that they need to be taken on an empty stomach, at least one hour before or two hours after meals containing protein.

• ¹ Britannica, Enzyme
• ^2, 3 Front. Cardiovasc. Med., 22 August 2022, Intro
• ⁴ Int J Mol Sci. 2017 Mar; 18(3): 523
• ^5, 32 Biol Pharm Bull. 1995 Oct;18(10):1387-91
• ⁶ Lab Anim Res December 2013; 29(4): 221-225
• ^7, 27 Townsend Letter May 2018
• ⁸ Enzymatic Activity Comparison of Common Fibrinolytic Enzymes 2011
• ⁹ Lumbrokinase Reference List May 2018
• ^10, 11 Front. Cardiovasc. Med., 22 August 2022
• ^12, 13 Scientific Reports volume 5, Article number: 11601 (2015)
• ¹⁴ Lab Tests Online, D-dimer
• ¹⁵ Scientific Reports volume 5, Article number: 11601 (2015), Discussion
• ¹⁶ Lab Anim Res. 2013 Dec; 29(4): 221–225
• ¹⁷ Hum Exp Toxicol. 2013 Jul;32(7):721-35. doi: 10.1177/0960327112467040
• ¹⁸ Med. Hypotheses. 2017;106:1–5
• ¹⁹ Neurosci. Lett. 2016 Sep 6;630:247-253
• ^20, 22, 34 J Thromb Haemost. 2020 May 11; doi: 10.1111/jth.14828
• ²¹ Diapharma, Tissue Plasminogen Activator
• ²³ EBioMedicine November 3, 2020
• ^24, 25 Reuters November 3, 2020
• ²⁶ The Texan November 3, 2020
• ²⁸ Trials volume 23, Article number: 285 (2022), Introduction
• ²⁹ Respirology 2003 Sep;8(3):316-20
• ³⁰ International Journal of Surgery, 2013 Apr;11(3):209-217
• ³¹ Scientific Reports 2015; 5: 11601
• ³³ Scientific Reports. Article Number 6210. April 18, 2018

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

Cover image credit: envandrare

Tax Day!

by Larken Rose
April 13, 2023

Don’t let me catch any of you being greedy selfish scofflaws when it comes time to pay your fair share of the costs of society!

Connect with Larken Rose

Transcript prepared by Truth Comes to Light: 

In a few days it will be tax day again, and since a lot of people are having a tough time financially these days, myself included, I’m worried that a lot of you may not be in a mood to consider and support the important needs of “Uncle Sam” (which is a strange and creepy propaganda euphemism that we use to describe a bunch of rich and powerful political parasites).

So I’m making this video as a sort of pep talk to encourage you to do your civic duty and honor your obligation to support this great country of ours and and pay your fair share of the costs of society.

Now let’s be clear about our terms here. When I talk about this “country” and “society”, obviously I’m not actually talking about you or your neighbors or all the other taxpayers.
Because if I was, I would be encouraging you to give money to yourself — which would be both schizophrenic and pointless.

When I speak of your obligation to society, in your country, and whenever the media speaks of such things, we’re talking about you, the productive people, giving a hefty chunk of what you earn, what you produce, to a group of a few hundred self-serving, power-happy politicians in DC.

You see, you helping the economy by spending your own money on things you choose to buy, or voluntarily investing your money in various endeavors, or actually helping in your own community, giving to individuals and charities or patronizing local businesses, or running a business yourself and thus creating jobs yourself — none of those make you a good subject, I mean citizen.

No, supporting your country and paying your fair share of the costs of society refers only to all of the productive people, including you, handing over trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars to a tiny group of a few hundred politicians off in some grandiose halls somewhere.

Now you might wonder why that is. It’s because government does glorious, benevolent, essential things with your money, things that you’re far too selfish, stupid and short sighted to do on your own. So your betters, your political masters, need to spend your money for you.

Now maybe you think I’m talking about maintaining the roads or something like that. Well, no, things that might actually benefit you in some way make up only a tiny fraction of what the politicians steal from you.

For example, out of a federal budget pushing $6 trillion, only about 1% has anything to do with maintaining and fixing highways and bridges and so on. So if that’s what this fair share thing was all about — funding things that might actually benefit us mere peasants — then, even with the inefficient, corrupt, mangled government version of those services, we could still start by all getting a 99% tax cut.

So no, the reason you should proudly and faithfully pay your taxes and cough up all that money has nothing to do with benefiting you or the mere peasants. Your duty to society isn’t about enriching and empowering the normal people, it’s about enriching and empowering the ruling class because, duh, if it was about empowering the normal people, the best way to do that is let all the normal people, including you, keep and spend their own money.

But no, all of the actually honest, productive, decent people are morally and legally obligated to hand over trillions and trillions of dollars to a tiny group of political parasites.

For what purpose, you might ask? Well, I don’t want to get bogged down in all the exact numbers. I mean, you can look them up in the federal budget, if you wish.

But I’ll give a few of the important things that need your support, things that should fill you with a deep feeling of obligation, things that you should be happy and eager to fund.

As one example, occasionally the politicians just directly take your money, by way of taxes, and then through bailouts, give incomprehensible sums to the richest individuals and businesses in the world, including gigantic banks and massive corporations — because they’re too big to fail, you see.

You’re not too big to fail, by the way. If you fail, become broke and homeless and whatever, tough luck. But if the politician billionaire buddies and the massive corporations have trouble, even if it’s of their own making, well, then it’s your civic duty to bail them out — whether you want to or not, and whether you can afford to or not.

Now, they used to be a little more subtle about the ways they would take your money and funnel it to the ultra wealthy, but recently they figured out that they can just do it directly, right out in the open, right in front of your face, take it from you and give it to giant banks and corporations, and you’ll just damn well put up with it.

You might threaten to vote for somebody else in a few years, but since Democrats and Republicans are both doing this, that makes no difference.

Next, you should definitely feel an obligation to pay your fair share so that the US government can give what you earn to a bunch of foreign governments too. Billions to Afghanistan, billions to Israel. Now many billions to Ukraine. And so on and so on.

Now, they described this as giving aid to those countries. But of course, what they’re actually doing is giving money to the ruling classes of those countries, not to the rabble over there.

In other words, you’re paying taxes to a bunch of foreign governments by way of the American Government, whether you like it or not. And unless you’re some greedy, selfish creep, you will proudly go along with that and continue to feel a profound duty to have the fruits of your labor funneled off to countless political parasites, not just in the US but all over the world.

There are so many other important things that you should be proud to fund by way of your taxes such as Ponzi schemes disguised as retirement plans, which give absolutely no guarantee that you’ll ever receive a dime no matter how many thousands of dollars you’ve paid into the system over time.

Because the system contains exactly zero dollars of what you were forced to pay before. There is no account with money in it, and there never was. It was just a direct transfer payment taken from you and given to someone else.

And if that pyramid scheme happens to collapse before it’s time for you to receive the loot stolen from the next generation, well, sucks to be you.

But if you are a good, honest American, you better not doubt for a moment your obligation to continue to fund all of that. And if you think for some reason that you should be allowed to just save for your own retirement instead, without paying into or receiving anything out of the political Ponzi schemes, well, obviously you’re just an unpatriotic, criminal terrorist.

Now, one of the other things that should make you feel all warm and fuzzy about paying your taxes is the astronomical sums of money spent on the US war machine to engage in military occupation and blatant war mongering all over the world. Perpetually.

Now, I won’t even begin to try to cover all the ridiculous expenditures that the US military engages in. But you can look them up yourself. And I’ll give one example.

The US military’s involvement in Afghanistan for 20 years cost around $300 million a day. Every day. For 20 years.

$300 million a day. Every day. For 20 years.

And that’s just Afghanistan.

That’s not the whole military budget. Nowhere near.

Now, are you a good American who will gladly forego all the things that you might have been able to provide for your own family in order to fund that, whether you wanted it or not?

Also, you need to pay your fair share so that the Pentagon, basically the clubhouse of the biggest gang of psychotic warmongers in history, can spend a couple trillion dollars on — well, you don’t get to know what they’re spending it on.

Because on top of the massive military spending that we’re allowed to know about, not only is another huge portion of their budget secret, but more than once, the bureaucrats at the Pentagon have just declared that they lost a couple trillion dollars and don’t know where it went.

Among our population in the US of around 330 million people, that averages out to well over $6000 for every man, woman and child in the country that the Pentagon just lost.

Twice.

One of those $2 trillion “oopsies” was announced the day before 9/11, 2001.

Oops, don’t know where it went, but don’t you worry, because wherever that money went, it was definitely, definitely more important than you being able to feed your own family and pay your own bills, obviously.

And this definitely should not make you, for a moment, think that you’re not obligated to hand over promptly and happily whatever amount, whatever chunk of what you earn that the politicians decide they want at any given moment.

And that’s the main message I wanted to impress on you today.

No matter how corrupt and wasteful, no matter how counterproductive, or downright insane, or just flat out evil, the actions of the US government become, never should you doubt your obligation to hand over as much money as the political parasites demand.

Don’t you dare be one of those greedy “tax cheats” who starts to think that maybe handing over the fruits of your labor to the worst people in the world isn’t actually good, isn’t actually useful, doesn’t actually help society or the country — and only serves, enriches and empowers crooks, thieves, warmongers and psychopaths.

No, you just do as you’re told. You give your masters whatever they demand. And you do it with a smile on your face and pride in your heart, knowing that you are among that huge number of loyal, obedient subjects who have, throughout history, faithfully funded and empowered every authoritarian regime and all of the oppression and injustice that they have inflicted upon humanity.

You should wear your unquestioning obedience and eagerness to pay tribute to your political masters as a badge of honor and indication of how morally superior you are, and you should resent and hate anyone who suggests that maybe we don’t have an obligation to fund political lunacy.

That enriching and empowering megalomaniacs and psychopaths maybe is not useful or good for humanity And you should definitely despise anyone who does anything to try to keep what they earn, tries to control their own money and tries to avoid being robbed to support the heinous anti-human abomination that is “government”.

So this tax day, be sure to pay your fair share and do it with pride in your heart and a smile on your face.

Connect with Larken Rose  BitChute | Youtube

Cover image credit: geralt & Clker-Free-Vector-Images

Mike Stone: On the Excuses Virologists Give for Not Being Able to Scientifically Prove the Existence of Viruses

“With hundreds of billions of “viruses” at peak infection, there is absolutely no reason that virologists should not be able to purify and isolate the assumed “viral” particles directly from the fluids of a sick human or animal.”

Just One Particle

No more excuses.

by Mike Stone, ViroLIEgy
originally published April 7, 2023

Last week, I took a look at the very illogical excuse that virologists make in regard to why they are unable to purify and isolate the particles that are claimed to be “viruses” directly from the fluids of a sick human or animal. As a reminder, below is the response I received from biologist Thomas Baldwin, who studies “pathogenic” plant “viruses” and goes by the Twitter handle Sense_Strand:

It is claimed that there are just not enough of these “viral” particles within the fluids and thus, the purification procedures will result in too little of the “virus” remaining after these steps are performed. Due to this lack of particles, it is claimed that the “viruses” can not be found in electron microscopy images, and it is for this very reason that the “virus” particles must be grown in cell culture so that the “virus” can replicate to a large enough number in order to be visualized and studied. While I won’t rehash my counterargument here, I will allow Debunked to help me demonstrate why this is a ridiculous excuse:

When virologists claim incredible numbers like that, it is pretty reasonable to conclude that there should be plenty of “viral” particles within the fluids of a sick animal or human in order to purify, isolate, visualize, characterize, and study. Alas, virologists defiantly cling to their laughable excuse in order to cover up for the fact that they just cannot find the assumed “viral” particles anywhere directly within the fluids. While this statement clearly defies logic, the lack of “virus” is only one aspect of the excuse. There is another component that is used to explain why, even if they could purify and isolate the particles, it wouldn’t ultimately matter. Beyond the lack of enough “viral” particles within the fluids, virologists claim that there are not enough “infectious” particles present after purification in order to be able to “infect” an animal or human on order to prove pathogenicity. It is stated that this purification process damages the “virus” and causes it to lose “infectivity.” This excuse was illustrated in a response interviewer Djamel Tahi received from HIV “discoverer” Luc Montagnier:

“I believe we published in Science (May 1983) a gradient which showed that the RT had exactly the density of 1.16. So one had a ‘peak’ which was RT. So one has fulfilled this criterion for purification. But to pass it on serially is difficult because when you put the material in purification, into a gradient, retroviruses are very fragile, so they break each other and greatly lose their infectivity.”

“I repeat we did not purify. We purified to characterise the density of the RT, which was soundly that of a retrovirus. But we didn’t take the “peak”…or it didn’t work…because if you purify, you damage. So for infectious particles it is better to not touch them too much.”

https://viroliegy.com/2022/02/13/montagniers-monster/

As can be seen, if the particles are purified, it is assumed that they lose their “infectivity.” Thus, virologists must not touch their fragile little “virus” particles too much or they will be damaged and will not work properly. With statements like this, it makes the story about how these non-living entities somehow survive the harsh environmental conditions of the great outdoors in order to invade a body, bypass the hosts “immune system,” and hijack the cells so that it can create more copies of itself, seem rather ridiculous. According to virologists, in order to retain “infectivity,” the “virus” particles must remain unpurified and proceed to be mixed into a foreign animal or cancer cell with toxic antibiotics, antifungaks, fetal calf blood, chemicals and “nutrients,” etc. and incubated for days. However, this is normally not enough to create the necessary “infective” particles, so virologists will remove the top layer of one culture and then add it to another culture with a fresh round of toxic compounds mixed in. This new culture is then incubated further until signs of cell death are observed. Only then can there be enough “infectious viral” particles to visualize and establish pathogenicity.

To the outside observer who looks at this critically and logically, it is clear that all virologists are doing is creating a toxic soup of many foreign and chemical elements in which they get to claim a “virus” resides within. This sludge is then forcefully and unnaturally inoculated into animals in many disgusting ways, either through the nose, the skin, the muscles, the eyes, the throat, the stomach, the brain, or even the testicles. Virologist then determine what is an “infectious” dose based upon how much of this toxic soup is used as an injection into the animal at the time any symptoms appear. Virologists will determine how much “virus” is present in the soup by utilizing either one of two methods: the tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50) and the plaque assay. Let’s examine these methods briefly and then see, according to virology’s own theoretical narrative, how many “viral” particles it takes to cause infection and disease. We can then determine whether or not it is reasonable to believe that there are not enough “infectious” particles present after purification and isolation in order to determine pathogenicity.

Tissue Culture Infectious Dose (TCID50)

Tissue Culture Infectious Dose (TCID50) Assays: How to determine virus infectivity?

“50% Tissue Culture Infectious Dose (TCID₅₀) assays are virus titration experiments which can be used to quantify virus titers by investigating the cytopathic effects of a virus on an inoculated host cell culture⁴. Compared to the widely used plaque assays, which are also used in virus quantification, TCID₅₀ assays offer the advantage that even viruses that do not form plaques or infect cell monolayers can be quantified.

In TCID₅₀ assays, varying virus dilutions are added as an endpoint dilution to host cell populations with the same number of cells and incubated until a cytopathic effect can be seen. Here, the TCID₅₀ value represents the amount of virus dilution required to induce cytopathic effects in 50% of wells containing the inoculated cell culture after a defined period of time.

TCID₅₀ assays assess this threshold either by visually counting the number of affected wells or by using cell viability assays as readout. The TCID₅₀value is determined when the cytopathic effect or cell viability assay read-out appear the same for a dilution in 3 separate readings. An example of the application of cell viability/toxicity assays for the evaluation of viral cytopathic effects can be found in the AN 363: Viral cytopathic effects measured in a drug discovery screen.

TCID₅₀ calculation

The results of 50% Tissue Culture Infectious Dose (TCID₅₀) assays can be analysed by different calculations ⁵. Several mathematical approaches have been developed for this purpose, including the Reed-Muench ⁴, Spearman-Kärber or Weil method. The formula after Reed-Muench is depicted as an example below.

Where I is the interpolated value of the 50% endpoint and h is the dilution factor.

Since most often, the exact 50% endpoint is not observed in TCID₅₀ assays, an approximate value can be obtained factoring in the dilutions closest below and above the 50% threshold. Independent of the method, the dilution at which 50% of the cell cultures are infected is determined and used to mathematically calculate a TCID₅₀ result which is expressed as 50% infectious dose (ID₅₀) per millilitre (ID₅₀/mL) after a defined period of time. For example, if 0.2 mL of a 1:10,000 virus dilution infects 50% of the cells in 2 days the titer is expressed as 10⁴ TCID₅₀/0.2 mL in 2 days.”

https://www.bmglabtech.com/en/blog/tissue-culture-infectious-dose-tcid50-assays-how-to-determine-virus-infectivity/

As can be seen, this method relies on the observation of CPE as evidence of a “virus” and then attempts to calculate how many of these invisible entities reside within the fluids. However, as should be expected when dealing with attempts to count something that can not be seen, this method has its drawbacks. For one, the Poisson distribution that is utilized, which takes the TCID50 value and multiplies it by 0.7, is admittedly only an approximation and is said to not always be true. The serial dilution method itself is also a source of error by its very nature. If any fluid remains at the end of the pipette used to suction out the “virus,” it is said that this can greatly influence the quantification results. Another issue is attempting to keep all of the variables exactly the same across all cultures, which is admitted to not always be the case. Thus, there is a lot of guesswork and assumption involved in calculating the infectious dose of the unseen entity:

Timeless TCID50: One solution to many viruses

“TCID50 values give an indication of how many viruses is needed to have CPE in 50% of the cells. But how to go from this to the actual amount of virus per ml? The formula is quite simple, and it consists in multiplying the TCID50 value by 0.7. This comes from the Poisson distribution applied to viral infection which states that, in a fully permissive cell line, the probability of reaching 50% infection is achieved by a multiplicity of infection of approximately 0.7. This is not always true, but it’s a good approximation for most applications.

The troubles of counting viruses

As accurate as one can be, counting viruses is never easy. First, serial dilutions are -by their own nature- a source of error. Second -and this is particularly relevant for high titres of virus- even the tiniest volume that remains attached to the very end of a pipette tip can carry enough viral particles to make a substantial difference in the quantification. Third, the biological variation of the system is high. Plate the same amount of cells, add the same amount of virus, stop the infection at the same time, and the percentage of infection may be close, but never exactly the same.

Finally, when assessing a treatment that (as you would hope!) decreases virus titres, the amount of virus may fall below the assay detection threshold.”

https://virologyresearchservices.com/2019/03/29/timeless-tcid50-one-solution-to-many-viruses/

Plaque Assays

Measuring infectious virus: the plaque assay

Infection and plaque formation

Plaque assays require cultured cells susceptible to infection by the virus of interest. The cells are first seeded onto a surface they can adhere to and grow on, then left overnight to form a confluent monolayer (a cohesive sheet of cells covering the entire growth surface). A virus sample is then diluted several times, and an aliquot of each dilution is added to a dish or well of cells. An incubation period allows the virus to attach to target cells before removing the inoculum. The culture is then covered with a medium containing nutrients and a substance, such as agarose or methylcellulose, forming a gel or semisolid overlay. Infectious virus particles that enter cells and replicate can then trigger the release of progeny virions. The gel restricts particle movement so that newly produced viruses can only infect neighbouring cells. If the virus kills infected cells, the dead (or dying) cells detach and create a hole in the monolayer through lysis or other means. This space – now devoid of cells –is called a plaque and appears as circular spots on the growth surface.

The plaques are allowed to grow until visible to the naked eye. The cells are then fixed with formaldehyde to lock cellular structures while killing the cells and virus. Dyes that stain cells are added for contrast, making plaques easier to see. Purple violet stains the cells purple, while plaques, lacking cells, remain clear. Cells that remain adhered to the surface are assumed to be uninfected, and apparent plaques are assumed to arise from cell death caused by infection. That is why the virus dilutions must be added to confluent monolayers with no gaps that might later be mistaken for plaques.

Viral titre: PFU/ml

Multiple dilutions of the stock sample are analysed to identify one or more dilutions that give rise to a countable number of plaques. At the lowest dilutions, too many infectious particles will destroy large swaths of the cell monolayer or create plaques too numerous and overlapping to distinguish. At the highest dilutions, there may be no plaques at all. At the optimal dilutions, plaques are counted to determine the titre of the original stock sample, typically reported as the number of plaque-forming units per millilitre (PFU/ml).

For a given plaque count, the stock titre can be calculated by simple arithmetic based on the volume of the aliquot added to the cells and the sample dilution the aliquot was drawn from. As a basic example, if 35 plaques were counted when a 0.1 ml aliquot of the 10^-5 dilution was added to the cells, the titre of the undiluted stock is 3.5×10⁷ PFU/ml. For reliable titres, each sample dilution should be plated multiple times, at least in duplicate and preferably in triplicate. Furthermore, multiple dilutions may result in countable plaques. More elaborate formulas incorporating all relevant plaque counts are typically used to calculate titres.

PFU/ml vs IU/ml

The assay is designed so that each plaque results from infection by multiplying a single infectious virus particle. As such, PFU/ml is considered a measure of the number of infectious units per millilitre (IU/ml), with the caveat that one cannot be certain of a one-to-one ratio of plaques to infectious particles in the applied aliquot. Also, be aware that the titre of a sample is specific to the assay conditions used to determine it, as infectivity is influenced by many factors, such as the type of host cell, pH, and culture medium. Titres can differ by several orders of magnitude by changing key assay parameters.”

https://virologyresearchservices.com/2022/08/10/the-plaque-assay/

As with the TCID50, there are some definite drawbacks when trying to “accurately” estimate how much of an invisible entity can cause infection and disease using the plaque assay. For starters, as noted above, the “infectivity” is said to be influenced by many factors within the culture itself. This includes the type of host cell, the pH level, as well as the culture medium used. Thus, the calculated titres can vary wildly by several orders of magnitude just by changing the assay parameters. The determination of what exactly constitutes a plaque is very subjective as well, which can mislead the results. In other words, plaque counting is prone to human error.

Beyond these issues, as noted before, both TCID50 and plaque assays rely on the observation of a cytopathogenic effect in order to claim the presence and infectivity of any “virus.” However, CPE is not specific to “viruses” as there are many known factors that can result in this effect being observed that do not require the presence of a fictional entity in order to explain, such as:

• Bacteria
• Parasites
• Amoebas
• Chemical Contaminants
• Age of the Cell
• Incubation Temperature
• Length of Incubation
• Antibiotics/Antifungals

It is entirely unscientific to rely on an effect in order to presume a cause. However, this pseudoscientific concept is central to the cell culture method as well as to the processes utilized to guesstimate how many “infectious viruses” are present. In other words, there is no direct evidence any “viruses” are present in any sample used to determine an “infectious” dose. All of these results claiming how much “virus” is present and can ultimately cause an infection are entirely hypothetical and calculated based on the presence of cell death. It is nothing but guesswork.

However, if it wasn’t clear that these numbers are pseudoscientific fraud, a 2003 OSHA White Paper looking at the determination of the infectious dose (ID) may help to sell the fact that virologists honestly have no clue what an infectious dose is. While this refers to calculating ID using animals, the same criticisms can apply to utilizing lab-created cell cultures as a surrogate. The White Paper concluded that there is no clear definition of what an infectious dose is and that there is no single standardized method for determining ID. The extrapolation of data to humans is unreliable and is a poor surrogate for human responses. There are various secondary interactions that can impact the estimates. The “pathogens” vary wildly in “virulence” and data on the ID via route of exposure is unavailable. In other words, virologists just make things up as they go along:

OSHA Infectious Dose White Paper

“In summary, the studies described above support ABSA’s position that attempts to develop quantitative values for human infectious dose are not currently feasible. Infectious dose values developed using past studies would not accurately characterize the relative hazard of pathogenic organisms in humans. The reasons for this conclusion are:

• Lack of a clear and universally acceptable definition of the term “infectious dose.”

• There is no single standardized protocol for testing infectious dose in animals, making legitimate controlled comparisons ofstudy results very difficult.

• Extrapolation of infection and toxicity data among animal species and from animals to humans has proven to be unreliable for most biological (and chemical) agents.

• Inbred animal strains are a poor surrogate for predicting human response, as humans are a highly variable outbred population.

• Infectious dose is affected by numerous, complex secondary interactions to include condition of the host, its genetics, and previous exposure to the biological agent or vaccine. Risk estimates must take these and many other factors into consideration.

• Bacteria of a single species can vary widely in virulence and infectious dose. It is not possible to make a broad or generalized statement about the infectious dose of a species of bacteria.

• Infectious dose in part depends on the route of exposure. A complete picture of a single pathogen’s infectious dose profile requires inhalation, percutaneous, oral, im, ip, iv, etc. data. These data are currently unavailable.”

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/153567600300800401

Now that we know that this process for counting the invisible “viruses” is fraught with drawbacks that leave the “accuracy” of these results extremely questionable, let’s take a look at some of these wildly varying estimates in order to see how many particles are necessary to cause an infection according to virology’s fictional narrative. As “SARS-COV-2” is the soup du jour at the moment, here are a few key highlights from a systematic review of many studies attempting to find the minimal ID for the “novel coronavirus.” What you will see from the August 2022 review is that there is absolutely no experimental data for humans, with one study admittedly presenting a hypothetical estimate (technically, they are all hypothetical). The minimal ID for “SARS-COV-2” is extrapolated from animal studies with estimates that vary wildly between the papers:

Minimum infective dose of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 based on the current evidence: A systematic review

“The main methods for reporting the infective dose were through tissue culture infectious dose (TCID₅₀) and by counting plaque-forming units (PFU).³³

In TCID₅₀, the viral dose in 5% of inoculated tissue culture made pathological changes or cell death. PFU is estimated of viral concentration in plaque-forming units by measuring the number of particles that form a plaque.³⁴ The minimum infective doses have been summarized in Table 2.

Human studies on infective dose of SARS-CoV-2

“We found no experimental studies that assess the infective dose in human, so we included observational human studies.”

“Finding the minimum infective dose of the virus can be extremely useful in determining the transmission pattern. This represents itself in inconsistent results across the included studies; similar viral load did not cause the same outcome. This indicates that despite having a similar minimum infective dose, the infection rate could differ so this minimum is not the same across the same population. On the other hand, there are some human studies which have shown some hypothetical infective viral dosages.”

Conclusion

“The results of this review suggest that one of the key factors to control the pandemic could be the study of virus transmission. The minimum infective dose is one of the main components of virus transmission. In this study, we have presented a range of minimum infective doses in humans and various animal species, yet such numbers can possibly vary between the individuals based on numerous factors. Measuring the minimum infective dose can provide a clearer overall understanding of the disease and its transmissibility and help better halt its spreading.”

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/20503121221115053#table2-20503121221115053

While it is fun to see how much their guesstimates can range between studies, the above paper doesn’t give us a great idea as to what this minimal ID is for “SARS-COV-2” in terms of an actual number of particles it may take in order to cause infection. Let’s see if we can put a number to it based upon what the “experts” are saying:

SARS-CoV-2 Infectious Dose

“Some experts estimate that exposure to as few as 1000 SARS-CoV-2 viral particles can cause an infection. This dose of virus could occur by inhaling 1000 infectious viral particles in a single breath, 100 viral particles in 10 breaths, or 10 viral particles in 100 breaths.”

https://www.clinlabnavigator.com/sars-cov-2-infectious-dose.html

According to the “experts,” as little as 1000 “SARS-COV-2” particles are enough to cause infection. Where did they get this magical number from? Who knows? However, a separate study gave an even smaller estimate of just 100 “viral” particles:

Review of infective dose, routes of transmission and outcome of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-COV-2: comparison with other respiratory viruses

“An accurate quantitative estimate of the infective dose of SARS-CoV-2 in humans is not currently feasible and needs further research. Our review suggests that it is small, perhaps about 100 particles.”

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/review-of-infective-dose-routes-of-transmission-and-outcome-of-covid19-caused-by-the-sarscov2-comparison-with-other-respiratory-viruses/8607769D2983FE35F15CCC328AB8289D

It appears that virologists have the ability to just pull any ID number that they want out of thin air. When we factor in their other imaginary numbers, such as those who are at “peak viral infection” harboring 10 to 100 billion “viral” particles while breathing out 10 million “viruses” per breath, it seems rather illogical to claim that there would not be enough “infectious virus” after purification in order to prove pathogenicity.

Examining the issue a bit further, let’s look at a few other sources and see just how little “virus” is said to actually be necessary in order to cause an infection. According to virology’s pseudoscientific narrative, would you believe that just one airborne particle can cause you to become infected? That is exactly what we are told by this next source which dealt a fatal blow to mask supporters everywhere. The researchers based their claim upon theoretical modeling (aren’t they all), and concluded that only one airborne particle is enough to cause infection and disease:

What if just one airborne particle was enough to infect you?

“For some diseases, exposure to just a single airborne particle containing virus, bacteria or fungi can be infectious. When this happens, understanding and predicting airborne disease spread can be a whole lot easier.

That’s the result of a new study by a Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) scientist who developed a new theory of airborne infectious disease spread. This research, which appears in the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology, demonstrated good agreement with data from Q fever, Legionnaire’s disease and Valley fever outbreaks. The authors hope to use it to understand and mitigate COVID-19 spread.”

https://www.llnl.gov/news/what-if-just-one-airborne-particle-was-enough-infect-you

Unfortunately, the authors did not give us any idea as to how many “viral” particles would be in one airborne particle. Hypothetically, it could be one “virion” or it could be quite a few more. Let’s see if we can get some concrete guesstimates as to how many of the “viral” particles it may take to cause infection and disease. According to the CDC, “norovirus” only requires a few particles in order to cause infection and disease:

About Norovirus

“People with norovirus illness can shed billions of norovirus particles. And only a few virus particles can make other people sick.”

https://www.cdc.gov/norovirus/about/index.html

This works out to as little as 10 “viral” particles per the European CDC:

“Noroviruses are highly contagious and 10-100 viral particles may be sufficient to infect an individual.”

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/norovirus-infection/facts

When looking to insect “viruses,” researchers set up an experiment with two “marked virus variants.” They exposed a population of caterpillars to both variants, and based upon these results, established a probability model to determine that it is theoretically possible for just one “virus” particle to cause infection and disease:

One Virus Particle Is Enough To Cause Infectious Disease

“Can exposure to a single virus particle lead to infection or disease? Until now, solid proof has been lacking. Experimental research with insect larvae has shown that one virus particle is theoretically enough to cause infection and subsequent disease.”

“Based on the assumption that every virus particle operates independently from all other virus particles, the researchers set up a probability model. This model predicts how many virus particles have caused an infection and how many different virus genotypes are present in infected hosts, such as plants, insects or people. The results of the infection experiment with the susceptible insects are in agreement with the model predictions. From this it can be derived that the virus particles have an independent effect, and that a single virus particle can indeed cause infection and/or disease.”

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090313150254.htm

We have now officially gone from 1000 “viral” particles to just one particle. Let’s see if any other sources make such a bold claim. In a CDC study that looked to establish a quantifiable estimation of how many “variola” (a.k.a. smallpox) particles are necessary to cause infection, the researchers concured that only one “virus” particle was sufficient to cause infection and disease:

The infectious dose of variola (smallpox) virus.

“Quantitative estimation of an individual’s risk of infection due to airborne pathogens requires knowledge of the pathogen’s infectious dose, in addition to estimates of the pathogen’s airborne concentration and the person’s exposure duration. Based on our review of the published literature on poxvirus infection, we conclude that the infectious dose of variola (smallpox) virus is likely one virus particle and that infection can be initiated in either the upper respiratory tract or pulmonary region. Studies of airborne transmission of poxvirus in monkeys and rabbits show that primary infection can occur in both regions of the respiratory tract. A quantitative study of poxvirus inhalation transmission in rabbits indicates that the deposition of one pock-forming unit (PFU) carried on respirable particles can cause infection. Findings in both in vitro and in vivo studies of the number of virus particles comprising a PFU are consistent with a “one-hit” phenomenon–namely, the cellular uptake of just one virus particle can lead to infection of a cell or an area of cell growth, creating a pock (an infected area of cells). Variability in virulence among different virus strains may involve differences in the probability of infection per virus particle, where a highly virulent strain has a probability close to one of successful infection for each virus particle.”

“On balance, we believe there is adequate in vitro and in vivo evidence that infection can be produced by a single particle of variola virus. Across different experimental systems the number of poxvirus per infectious unit has been found to vary, but it appears that favorable conditions enable all virus particles to infect (Overman & Tamm, 1956; Parker, Bronson, & Green, 1941; Sprunt & McDearman, 1940).”

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nioshtic-2/20037359.html

The CDC has also stated that only one “viral” particle from rabies is enough to cause infection and disease:

Rabies

“During clinical disease, millions of viral particles may be found intermittently in the saliva. In theory, only a single rabies particle or virion is required to result in a productive infection.”

https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/diagnosis/accuracy.html

This one “viral” particle is supported as well by OSHA in regard to the Ebola “virus:”

Ebola

“In areas of Africa where Ebola viruses are common, suspected reservoirs include primate and bat populations. While there are no known animal reservoirs of the disease in the U.S., there is concern related to possible spread of EVD among human populations due to the availability and reach of global travel. Under certain conditions, exposure to just one viral particle can result in development of EVD. Depending on the strain and the individual infected with the disease, EVD may be fatal in 50-90 percent of cases.^1”

https://www.osha.gov/ebola

And finally, the measles “virus” is also considered so virulent that only one “viral” particle can cause infection and disease:

Measles

https://microbeonline.com/infective-dose-and-lethal-dose/

It is clear that, according to virology’s own pseudoscientific narrative, only one “viral” particle is theoretically necessary in order to cause infection and disease. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to assume that there are not enough infectious “viral” particles remaining after purification and isolation directly from the fluids to be used in order to prove pathogenicity. The reason this excuse is presented is because virologists are unable to recreate disease using just the fluids from a sick host. In order to even attempt to show pathogenicity, they claim that the unpurifued fluids must be added to a foreign animal or cancer cell along with antibiotics, antifungals, fetal calf blood, chemicals, “nutrients,” etc. and then injected unnaturally into an animal either through the nose, the blood, the throat, the skin, the brain, the stomach, the eyes, the feet, and/or the testicles. There is nothing natural or scientific about this process.

However, as virology is pseudoscience, it falls back on unfalsifiable concepts in order to excuse away the lack of scientific evidence. Instead of being able to find the “virus” particles directly in the fluids, they get to claim that there is not enough “virus” there despite their own numbers making this an impossibility. As virologists know that they can not prove pathogenicity using nothing but the assumed “viral” particles, they get to claim that the purification process creates a yield loss and that the “viruses” lose infectivity. Therefore, virologists get to excuse away that they can not show that the particles created after the cell culture experiment ever existed within the fluids of a sick host to begin with. They get to explain away that they can not prove pathogenicity using nothing but the assumed “viral” particles without culturing. Yet, despite their excuses, the numbers supplied by virologys own pseudoscientific narrative fail them. With hundreds of billions of “viruses” at peak infection, there is absolutely no reason that virologists should not be able to purify and isolate the assumed “viral” particles directly from the fluids of a sick human or animal. If only one “viral” particle is necessary theoretically in order to cause infection and disease, there is no reason virologists cannot use a purified sample to prove pathogenicity naturally via the scientific method. By their own admission, all it takes is just one particle to cause infection and disease. One particle from a sea of billions.

Connect with Mike Stone

Cover image credit: ArtTower

A Handful of Companies Control the Global Propaganda

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
April 14, 2023

Story-at-a-Glance

• PR firms and ad agency holding companies are a central cog in global propaganda machine. They make sure the same message is distributed in many different places in a cohesively timed fashion
• An estimated two-thirds to 80% of the content broadcast and published by corporate media comes from public relations firms such as these four. In other words, most so-called mainstream media “news” is propaganda
• The four largest ad holding companies in the world are the Publicis Groupe, WPP, the Omnicom Group and the Interpublic Group, and all are deeply interlocked with the corporate media, the military-industrial complex and the policymakers
• A handful of private investment companies dominate every aspect of our lives and own everything we spend our money on. The two largest ones are Vanguard and BlackRock. Vanguard and/or BlackRock are also among the top 10 shareholders in the four largest ad agency holding companies

The 1% of the world’s wealthiest people provide the ideological justification that is driving the implementation of The Great Reset worldwide. The term academia uses to describe this globalist cabal is “The Transnational Capitalist Class” or TCC

In her book “One Idea to Rule Them All, Reverse Engineering American Propaganda,” Michelle Stiles reveals how the American public (and indeed the global population at large) have been indoctrinated and conned by public relations (PR) companies that run the globalist cabal’s propaganda campaigns. I will be interviewing Michele shortly for this book.

The PR agency creates a global media plan for a given client. It decides the articles to be written and where they’re to appear. It then decides where ads will run and when. So, while drug companies appear to have a rather direct influence over media, it’s really the PR firms that wield the greatest control, especially when it comes to the organization of it all.

They make sure the same message is distributed in many different places in a cohesively timed fashion. As such, PR companies are a central cog in the global propaganda machine and need to be understood as such.

On a side note, there are two designations for PR companies: public relations firms and ad agency holding companies. Ad agency holding companies do public relations but are primarily ad agency based.

A Russian Nesting Doll Model of the World

As detailed in “Who Owns the World?” a handful of private investment companies dominate every aspect of our lives and own everything we spend our money on, from food and beverages to clothing, travel, housing and just about everything else you can think of.

While there appear to be hundreds of competing brands on the market, like Russian nesting dolls, larger parent companies own multiple smaller brands. In reality, all packaged food brands, for example, are owned by a dozen or so larger parent companies.

These parent companies, in turn, are owned by shareholders, and the largest shareholders are the same in all of them: Vanguard and Blackrock. These institutional investors also own each other. They’re shareholders in each other’s companies, which erodes the concept of competition and strengthens the global monopoly even further.

Four Ad Holding Companies Dominate the Media Landscape

The four largest ad holding companies in the world are currently the Publicis Groupe, WPP, the Omnicom Group and the Interpublic Group, and Stiles notes, all are “deeply interlocked with the corporate media, the military-industrial complex, and the policy elites.”

Each agency, in turn, has smaller subsidiaries and affiliates, again giving us the illusion that there are far more players than there really are. And, as with everything else, Vanguard and/or BlackRock are among the top 10 shareholders in these top four ad agency holding companies. They also own major media companies, and the largest drug companies.

An estimated two-thirds to 80% of the content broadcast and published by corporate media comes from public relations firms.

For clarity, in her book, Stiles lists the top three as WPP, Omnicom and Interpublic, but as of November 2021, Publicis surpassed WPP in terms of market value, nabbing the No. 1 spot as the world’s largest ad holding company.1 WPP still has a larger annual revenue, though. That said, all four boast multibillion-dollar annual revenues. In 2022:

• London-based WPP, which has agencies in 112 countries, made $17.847 billion.2 Noteworthy clients include Amazon, Microsoft, NBC, Healthline, the World Economic Forum (WEF) and Pfizer.
• Publicis made $14.957 billion3 serving clients within the technology, pharmaceutical and banking industries.
• New York City-based Omnicom made $14.289 billion4 from its 200+ agencies, which service more than 5,000 corporate brands, universities, nonprofits and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).
• The Interpublic Group’s revenue was $10.928 billion,5 and its clientele include the U.S. Army, ABC, Columbia Records, Unilever, U.S. Bank, Facebook and ExxonMobil, just to name a few.

According to Stiles, an estimated two-thirds to 80% of the content broadcast and published by corporate media comes from public relations firms. In other words, most so-called mainstream media “news” is propaganda.

Remarkably, when you add the revenues of these top four ad holding companies together, it’s still below $60 billion, which seems a modest price to control up to 80% of the global mainstream media landscape. Clearly, it’s money well-spent, from the globalist’s perspective.

The Transnational Capitalist Class

As noted by Stiles, the term academia uses to describe this globalist cabal is “The Transnational Capitalist Class” or TCC. “They are 1% of the world’s wealthiest people who provide the ideological justification driving desired actions to be implemented worldwide in pursuit of their shared interests through transnational governmental organizations,” she writes.

She goes on to cite sociologist Peter Phillips’ book, “Giants: The Global Power Elite,” in which Phillips details:

“… the vast web of interconnectedness of the 17 giant investment firms managing in excess of $43 trillion in capital, who are themselves cross-invested with each other, the near giants … and have ownership stakes in the top 1,500 corporations spanning the globe, giving them enormous power in corporate board rooms across the planet.

Leaders of these firms meet together at various policy-making conferences throughout the year to network, strategize and finalize recommendations in the form of reports and whitepapers that heavily influence worldwide geopolitics …

If you still live in the dark ages thinking there is no intertwined global elite controlling and overpowering the sovereignty of nation-states and dominating the ideological landscape, take the time and read Phillip’s book. It’s a reality check as bracing as a cold shower …

Philips profiles 389 of the world’s most powerful players in capitalism … It’s a very small ecosystem of entwined connections, financial overlap, elite prestige and message control which they inhabit …

There are integrations, cross integrations, partnerships, overlap of leadership and constant networking among the 1%. This is evident. So far, an obvious but overlooked question is: If a deeply complex geo-political and ideological web has already been established, who are the weavers and what are they up to? Who is responsible for the organization on such a grand scale?

People who study these types of things have many names for the weavers: ‘The Deep State,’ ‘The 1%,’ ‘The Elites,’ ‘GloboCap,’ ‘The Powers That Be,’ or simply ‘Globalists.’ It is likely that the true leaders will always remain hidden, and the leaders profiled in Phillips’ book are more or less figureheads fronting for controllers behind the scenes.

Remember, wolves don’t go announcing themselves to the general public. If things go awry, their anonymity protects them. In the end, knowledge of the names is not as important as understanding the systematic game of ‘winner take all’ that they are playing.”

But for all their private meetings, the globalists would not have been able to build this hidden monopoly where they own everything, were it not for their control of the media.

They hid their control of the media pretty well for a long time, but during COVID, the lockstep word-for-word regurgitation of nonsense and easily-confirmed lies revealed there was, without doubt, a top-down organization to the madness.

Here, Publicis appears to be a top candidate as the primary string-puller, seeing how it’s partnered with the World Economic Forum, which is leading the call for a “reset” of the global economy and a complete overhaul of our way of life.

US Government Spends Billions on Propaganda

While private interests are at the center of the globalist cabal or Deep State, it’s a mistake to think that governments aren’t participating in their plans — or their propaganda.

As reported by Stiles, between 2007 and 2015, the U.S. federal government spent more than $4 billion on public relations services, plus another $2.2 billion for polling, research, and market consulting services. Why does a government “of the people, by the people, for the people” need all this PR? In short: to indoctrinate the public with the globalists’ narratives and points of view.

“Building trust takes time because character is only revealed through action,” Stiles notes, and this is well-known to con artists and propagandists alike. Without a certain level of trust, a con won’t work, and we are now discovering that the globalist cabal has spent decades orchestrating a con so big many still cannot believe it. They’ve infiltrated academia, science and just about every branch of government, and not just in the United States.

In a functioning system, mainstream media would have alerted us to the game plan and exposed the liars and the frauds along the way. But they didn’t, and the reason they didn’t is because mainstream media are no longer free to report truth. It’s been captured by the globalist propaganda machine and its primary function is to broadcast the narratives created by PR companies on the cabal’s behalf.

“Propaganda is a rich man’s sport,” Stiles writes. “Imagine with piles of money you can purchase ‘trust,’ enabling you to monopolize ideas. Your ideas at the top of the food chain ensure continued market dominance and financial leverage over a manipulated citizenry.

You are going to do this in various ways; creating foundations that will ‘donate’ large sums of money to organizations you would like to influence, sponsoring organizations that influence national and global leaders and by creating nonprofit organizations that can promote your message while appearing independent.

This takes decades, but you’re a patient person. After all, global ideological dominance shouldn’t happen overnight. When sufficient entities exist or have been captured — the average citizen is subject to the finest pseudo-reality that money can buy.

It’s a diabolical achievement — the corruption and take-over of the ideological free market. Your ideas saturate the landscape, and your helpless victims struggle to triangulate ‘truth,’ trapped in a literal spider’s web of interconnected and well-financed authoritative voices and entities.”

The Creation of an Idea Syndicate

Stiles goes through the various ways in which the globalists technocrats and transhumanists managed to create an “idea syndicate” where their ideas always get top billing. One way has been through the capturing of societal influencers through the lures of “grants and the promise of appointments, publications and prestige.”

This strategy has resulted in people of low integrity and morals taking center stage — most are basically people willing to sell out — while simultaneously throttling the influence of independent thinkers who cannot be bought.

Another highly effective strategy is to “control the realm of ideas by lavishly funding certain themes and narratives while selectively starving others slated for extinction,” Stiles writes. This is routinely done through charitable foundations. Through “charity,” the cabal can fund the ideas that the TCC endorses while simultaneously starving out opposing ideas and ideals. As noted by Stiles:

“The true threat of the foundations lies ‘in their ability to provide war chests in the battle of ideas,’ picking winners and losers and corrupting the free-flowing ideological landscape …

Those ideas that are nonconformist, unconventional or simply do not comport with the dominant ideology espoused by the foundation trustees would be left to wither on the vine, having little reach or power to influence.

Much of what is called ‘truth’ today is supported by ‘research.’ ‘The research says’ is the essence of supposed objectivity and the backbone of a superior argument leaving the fellow without research in the dust. The logic is as follows: All worthy ideas get funding for research; your ideas have no supporting research; therefore, your ideas are inferior.

As you can easily see, all ideas do not have equal opportunity to advance if the control lever of funding is biased. With this scheme in place, entire intellectual flotillas of specialized science could be created and used to commandeer social policy, legislation, and judicial rulings by directing the money spigots flowing into academia …

Foundation control of monies to academia can be thought of as a chokehold on the seedbed or ideological germination centers targeting idea creators and their livelihood.”

The third way to create an idea syndicate is through front groups — third-party organizations that claim to be independent but are really agents of and for a particular agenda.

“With enough money, front groups can afford to scheme up designer truth hot off the assembly line to support literally any platform,” Stiles writes, adding, “Thanks to billions of dollars spent through foundations, public relations firms and the third-party technique, Americans are literally swimming in a sea of manufactured truth …”

Controlling Competing Views

So, to summarize, maintaining control over ideas and prevailing narratives involves both the monopolization of ideas and the simultaneous suppression of competing views, and PR companies and media perform both functions.

As noted by Stiles, even when media present opposing views, they do so very carefully. “Truth that has the power to unseat the illusion of democracy will have a firewall erected against it,” and media simply will not cross that firewall, no matter how “neutral” they pretend to be.

ChatGPT Weighs in on Potential Dangers of PR Firms

In closing, and just for fun, a member of my team recently asked ChatGPT to “write a story about the potential dangers of how the top three ad holding companies, which also act as public relations firms, can influence news coverage about pharmaceutical products, similar to how Bill Gates could use his foundation’s money to influence the World Health Organization and media organizations to influence the coverage of global health, and potentially benefit from his own pharmaceutical investments.”

The carefully engineered prompt for the AI allowed a response that reveals the kernel of truth that even the radicalized programmers at OpenAI could not filter out:

 Sources and References

• ¹ Forbes November 3, 2021
• ² Macrotrends.net WPP Revenue
• ³ Macrotrends Publicis Revenue
• ⁴ Macrotrends.net Omnicom Group Revenue
• ⁵ Macrotrends.net Interpublic Group Revenue

Connect with Dr. Joseph Mercola

Cover image credit: geralt

New World Next Week: Shh! Don’t Report On Pentagon’s Secret Leak!

by James Corbett, The Corbett Report, & James Evan Pilato, Media Monarchy
April 13, 2023

Welcome to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

 Watch on BitChute / Odysee  / Substack / Download the mp4

Story #1: White House Says Don’t Report On Pentagon Leaks
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/04/11/white-house-says-dont-report-on-pentagon-leaks/

Over 100 More Classified Docs Appear Online: US Secrets ‘From Ukraine To Middle East To China’
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/over-100-more-classified-docs-appear-online-us-secrets-ukraine-middle-east-china

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2023/04/10/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-national-security-council-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-10/

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin—Former Member of Raytheon Board of Directors—Has Awarded Over $2.36 Billion in Contracts to Raytheon Since His Confirmation in January
https://covertactionmagazine.com/2021/04/19/defense-secretary-lloyd-austin-former-member-of-raytheon-board-of-directors-has-awarded-over-2-36-billion-in-contracts-to-raytheon-since-his-confirmation-in-january/

Leaks Showing US Spied On South Korea Spark Outrage In Seoul
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/04/11/leaks-showing-us-spied-on-south-korea-spark-outrage-in-seoul/

U.S. Spy Agency Bugged U.N. Headquarters: Germany’s Spiegel (Aug. 25, 2013)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-nsa-un-idUSBRE97O0DD20130825

U.S. Spied On Merkel, Other Europeans Through Danish Cables (May 30, 2021)
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-security-agency-spied-merkel-other-top-european-officials-through-danish-2021-05-30/

Leaked Document Says Ukraine Could Run Out of Air Defense Missiles By Early May
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/04/10/leaked-document-says-ukraine-could-run-out-of-air-defense-missiles-by-early-may/

Why Putin May Have Exposed the US/NATO Ukraine Operations Documents
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2023/april/10/why-putin-may-have-exposed-the-usnato-ukraine-operations-documents/

Leaked Document Appears to Show NATO Special Operations Forces are in Ukraine
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/04/09/leaked-document-appears-to-show-nato-special-operations-forces-are-in-ukraine/

Leak Shows Ukrainian SBU Agents Attacked Russian Surveillance Plane in Belarus
https://news.antiwar.com/2023/04/10/leak-shows-ukrainian-sbu-agents-attacked-russian-surveillance-plane-in-belarus/

Story #2: JP Morgan Chief Says Seize Property To Build Wind, Solar Farms
https://archive.is/eTvgl

Eminent Domain
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/eminent_domain

Eminent Oxford Scientist Says Wind Power “Fails On Every Count”
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/eminent-oxford-scientist-says-wind-power-fails-every-count

JPMorgan Execs Joked About Jeffrey Epstein’s Pedophilia
https://archive.is/jOaK3

Jamie Dimon Will Face Questioning In Lawsuits Over JPMorgan’s Epstein Ties
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2023/03/28/jamie-dimon-will-face-questioning-in-lawsuits-over-jpmorgans-epstein-ties/

Episode 322 – What Is Sustainable Development?
https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-322-what-is-sustainable-development/

Story #3: Trilateral Commission Calls 2023 ‘Year One’ Of New World Order
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/International-relations/Indo-Pacific/Trilateral-Commission-calls-2023-Year-One-of-new-world-order // https://archive.is/WmWhW

James H. Baker (DOD)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_H._Baker_(DOD)
The New World Next Week Store
https://newworldnextweek.com/

Connect with The Corbett Report

Connect with Media Monarchy

The Deeper Reality Revealed by the Invasion of BlackRock HQ in Paris: “All Across the World, People Are Grasping That Their Local Political Chiefs Are Pawns of the WEF.”

Targeting the enemy

by The Acorn
April 11, 2023

The invasion of BlackRock HQ in Paris on April 6 by a crowd of angry protesters and strikers revealed to the world that something very important is happening in France.

From a long distance, it may look like just another trade-union-led fightback against an increase in the retirement age.

From a closer distance, it might be evident that more general grievances against the Macron regime have temporarily amplified that union-led struggle.

But, in reality, it goes a lot deeper than that.

The revolt is a continuation, in fact, of the Gilets Jaunes (Yellow Vests) uprising, which began in November 2018 and only came to an end with the Covid clamp-down.

Many Gilets Jaunes, unlike the top-down sold-out left, were involved in the massive wave of protest against vaccine passports that swept across the country in 2021.

Although the GJ uprising could itself be seen as continuation of previous struggles, such as those against the Loi Travail or in support of the ZAD at Notre-Dame des Landes, it represented a significant shift, which alarmed the authorities.

The movement was essentially uncontrollable, accepting no leadership or centralised structure, and also broke through the usual left-right divide, being a generalised revolt against the system.

The response of the Macron regime to the revolt only deepened the split between government and people.

The contempt, smears and brutal police violence unleashed against the GJs by the ruling clique, together with a refusal to take their demands seriously, shocked a large part of the French public.

This didn’t look like the kind of modern “Western” government that we are all used to, which likes to pretend to represent the people and to respond to their concerns.

Instead, Macron came across as a nasty tin-pot dictator, throwing his weight around with arrogant impunity.

Exactly the same thing has been happening in 2023. The government ignored weeks of massive and peaceful protesting, forced the law through parliament without a vote and then started banning demonstrations and mutilating protesters with military-style repression.

This looks less like a “liberal democracy” than a colonial government of occupation, determined to “put down the natives” at any cost.

And this, of course, is exactly what it is!

France is not run by representatives of the French people, but by representatives of the global money power, the criminal gang which owns pretty much everything, everywhere.

This power has decided to ditch the pretence at democracy so as to accelerate its control, under the pretext of various “emergencies”, whether Covid or climate.

Having bought up the mainstream media, it was confident that the overall picture could never be seen by the ordinary men and women it so despises.

But it is being seen.

All across the world, people are grasping that their local political chiefs are pawns of the WEF.

They know, as well, that the WEF is just one part of a global institutional network including the likes of the UN, the WHO, and Commonwealth.

They are fast finding out that these bodies are entwined with financial organisations such as the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank for International Settlements.

These entities, like pretty much every single multi-national corporation, are controlled by the financial nexus built around BlackRock and Vanguard.

This is the entity that rules France, as it rules almost every other country.

It has managed to grab this chilling and unprecedented degree of global power by stealth, by hiding its existence behind front after front after front.

But now, in its impatience, it has made itself visible to the extent that striking rail workers in Paris know exactly where to find it.

The game has changed. The emperor is known to be naked and the people are turning on him in disgust and in anger.

Connect with The Acorn

Cover image credit: RonaldPlett

Matt Ehret on George Soros, China and Russia

by Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare
April 12, 2023

China is the enemy of the West.

Russia is the enemy of the West.

George Soros is a great philanthropist who believes in democracy and liberty for all.

The West is a bastion of freedom, prosperity and peace.

At least, that’s what the Western establishment (government and media) will have us believe through their propaganda machinery before promoting military invasions (such as Yemen and Syria), proxy wars like Ukraine, mass censorship and surveillance, and the celebration of the destruction of tradition and normality in general.

I’m not saying that the United States is Hell and that China is Heaven.

Far from it.

In fact, I am no fan of China’s technocratic, neo-communist centralised governance, as I noted in my conversation with Pepe Escobar.

But am equally no fan of America’s postmodern degradation of morality and bloodlust for unipolar dominance and imperialism.

Matt Ehret, editor of the Canadian Patriot, has been diving deep into the anti-China (and anti-Russia) narratives and exposing the various psychological operations by Western central intelligence agencies and their lapdogs, the mainstream media.

Hello Project Icebreaker, Goodbye Financial Freedom: “The Orwellian Nature of CBDCs Cannot Be Overstated”

by Brandon Smith, Birch Gold Group
published April 6, 2023

There has been extensive discussion in the past couple of years within alternative media circles about the dangers of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs); a currency framework very similar to blockchain based products like bitcoin but directly controlled by central bankers.

CDBCs are a threat that some analysts including myself have been writing about for more than a decade, so it’s good to finally see the issue being addressed more in the mainstream.

The economics of enslavement

The Orwellian nature of CBDCs cannot be overstated.

In a cashless society people would be dependent on digital products for exchanging goods and labor, and this would of course mean the end of all privacy in trade. Basically, everything you buy or sell or work for in your life would be recorded, and this lack of anonymity could easily be used to stifle your freedoms.

For example, say you like to eat steak regularly, but the “green” government decides to list red meat as a health risk and a “climate change risk,” due to carbon emissions from cows. They determine by your purchase history (which they now have full access to) that you have contributed more carbon pollution than most people by eating red meat often. They declare that you must pay a retroactive carbon tax on your past purchases of red meat. Not only that, but your insurance company sends you a letter indicating that you are now a risk and they cut off your health coverage.

Other products you might consume and services you use can be tracked to create a psychological profile on you, which could then become a factor in determining your social credit score as they do often in China.

Maybe you refuse or forgot to purchase your annual mRNA booster shot, and the tracking algorithm makes a note of this. Now you are under suspicion for being “anti-vax” and your social credit score plummets, cutting you off from various public venues. Maybe you are even fired from your job.

In the worst case scenario, though, economic access is the greatest oppressive tool.

With CBDCs in place and no physical cash in existence, your savings will never truly be yours and you never be able to hold your purchasing power in your hands.

The means of exchange would be firewalled by the banks. Any (or all) government agencies would be able to freeze your ability to transact.

If one day you get angry about a particular government policy or a stupid thing a politician says, and openly call the system “corrupt” in public? The Bureau of Tolerance in Public Discourse could simply suspend your access to your digital money… Temporarily, of course. Only until you submit and change your tune – if it’s your first offense.

Repeat offenders might be required to attend a Sensitivity Training Boot Camp – at your own expense, of course! With CDBCs, any government bureaucrat could not only prevent you from making any purchases, they could also allow you to only make specific purchases, like a train ticket to Sensitivity Training Boot Camp where you’d spend eight to twelve weeks being “reeducated” in order to regain your rights to buy food.

This is every authoritarian’s dream come true.

Imagine this power even in the hands of a benevolent leader! It would be so easy to nudge citizens to live healthier, more productive lives… (In fact, in China, one of the documented uses of their combination “social credit score” and cashless transactions is denying individuals the ability to buy junk food because they’re considered to be overweight.)

In the hands of a callous, ruthless government? Much, much worse.

CBDCs give government bureaucrats the ability to starve their political opponents with algorithmic precision. It would be a new world of technocratic oppression – allowing раскулачивание or “dekulakization” of individuals or entire regions at the push of a button. At any time, for any reason.

Imagine living under the threat of possible “liquidation” every single day for the rest of your life.

This power that Stalin or Hitler or Chairman Mao could only dream of has only become possible relatively recently. Over the past few years, the combination of powerful computing, unimaginably advanced data analysis and extraction techniques and universal spying devices (also known as “smartphones”) have created the opportunity for autocrats to create the ultimate tool of control and oppression.

That “opportunity” is rapidly becoming a reality.

Project Icebreaker

It’s important to understand that central bankers are moving at breakneck speed to develop and introduce digital currencies. It’s not a matter of experimentation, they already have these systems ready to implement. In my investigations of various CBDC programs and how quickly they are progressing I came across an interesting program called Project Icebreaker managed and developed by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).

For those not aware, the BIS is a globalist institution with a clandestine past known as the “central bank of central banks.” It is the policy-making hub for most of the central banks in the world. If you ever wondered how it was possible for so many national central banks to operate in tandem with each other instead of in the interests of their home countries, the BIS is the answer. In other words, organizations like the Federal Reserve are not necessarily loyal to Americans or to American officials, they are loyal to the dictates of the BIS.

The BIS is at the forefront of the CDBC movement. They’ve funded a vast array of projects to test and refine CBDC technologies for some time. Right now, the BIS estimate that at least 81 central banks around the world are in the process of introducing their very own CDBC.

Now, there are only 195 countries in the whole world, and more than 2/3 of them are pursuing this freedom-destroying, autocrat’s-dream-come-true.

Project Icebreaker in particular grabbed my interest for a number of reasons. The BIS describes the project as a foreign exchange clearing house for Retail CBDCs (retail CBDCs are digital currencies used by the regular public and businesses), enabling the currencies to be traded from country to country quickly and efficiently. This is accomplished using the “Icebreaker Hub”, a BIS controlled mechanism which facilitates data transfers for an array of transactions and connects banks to other banks.

Investigating further I realized that the Icebreaker Hub in theory functions almost exactly like the SWIFT payment system used currently by governments and international banks. More than 10,000 financial institutions in 212 different countries use the SWIFT network to transfer funds overseas for their clients; it is an incredible centralized hinge or fulcrum that gives its controllers considerable power.

As a point of reference, after the start of the war between Ukraine and Russia, the expulsion of Russia from the SWIFT network was used as a weapon in an attempt to crash the Russian economy. Russia has found ways around using SWIFT, but some damage has indeed been done to their financial structures. Consider this, however – What if all monetary transactions were centralized through CBDCs and the BIS controlled the hub in which all retail CBDCs are exchanged globally? That’s exactly what Icebreaker is.

Now imagine that you operate a business that relies on international transactions. Say you need to pay manufacturers in Vietnam to produce your products. With CBDCs in place your entire business would be completely dependent on a system like Icebreaker to move than digital money to Vietnamese banks,  into your manufacturer’s account.

Say the BIS, for whatever reason, decides that all Vietnamese manufacturing illegally use child labor. Or the Ngân hàng Nhà nước Việt Nam (State Bank of Vietnam) doesn’t toe the BIS policy line, and BIS technocrats decide to “teach them a lesson.” Or maybe the BIS doesn’t approve of your products – or maybe they just don’t like you…

With Icebreaker, any BIS factotum can implement Russian-style sanctions. Your access to international commerce? Denied. Your business is now functionally dead – at the push of a button.

But Icebreaker isn’t just a reactive system – it can be a proactive system, too…

What if you had to meet certain standards in order to be allowed use of the hub, and the BIS dictates the standards?

What if the BIS decides that your company needs to meet woke ESG requirements before you can get permission for Icebreaker transactions? Insufficiently diverse board of directors? Denied. Using commodities that aren’t ethically, sustainably sourced by war refugees? Denied. Offering a product or service insufficiently aligned with globalist goals? Denied.

The BIS itself can actively manipulate social, cultural and economic decisions –  using millions of businesses as their missionaries.

The entire global economy would, essentially, be held hostage.

For the average American who does most of their shopping locally, this might not seem like a big deal.

For the business world, an economic firewall could easily be used to control all international trade.

Any larger organization or business would require slavishly obeying the whims of the BIS.

It gets worse, though.

Part of the process of the “spoke and wheel” exchange method used by Icebreaker includes the exploitation of a “bridge currency” to fill gaps in exchange rates and liquidity. On the surface this seems like a clever way to speed up transactions by avoiding cross-currency shortages at banks.

That said, I want readers to think about the long-term path that this kind of “bridging” sets in motion in the realm of CBDCs.

Let’s say there is a global scale economic crisis which causes many currencies to fluctuate wildly. We’ve already seen three events that meet this definition in the last 20 years – so they really aren’t that uncommon.

Let’s say, for example, that the U.S. dollar loses its global reserve role (as it’s already lost its petrodollar exclusivity). Or, say, a debt ceiling standoff calls into question the market value of those $7.5 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds owned by global central banks…

This would send the $7.5 trillion/day foreign exchange market into a historic panic.

Price inflation becomes rampant and banking institutions falter under liquidity pressures.

Central bankers, who have a “solution” in search of a crisis to address, push CBDCs as the antidote. The BIS Icebreaker becomes the middleman for every single international transaction.

The populace, terrified by the economic crash, immediately embrace the digital framework. But the BIS claims they can’t find a currency they consider stable enough to act as an intermediary…

Well, “luckily” for all of us the BIS and IMF have been working on their own global CBDC. In the case of the IMF, this one-world currency would be based around the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) basket in use for decades to broker currency transfers between governments.

The BIS now uses this one unified, centrally controlled currency as the linchpin for world trade.

Eventually the BIS, IMF and various central banks will ask the public the inevitable question: “Why are we bothering with these national currencies when we have a perfectly good bridge currency in the form of this one-world CBDC? Why don’t we just get rid of all these superfluous separate CBDCs and have one currency for everyone?”

Thus, total global financial centralization would be achieved. And once you have a one-world currency, a completely centralized and micro-managed global economy and the most vital trade systems in the world controlled by a tiny handful of faceless unelected bureaucracies, why then have nations at all? Global government would be the next and final step.

I can see the nightmare play out when I look at projects like Icebreaker. They are seemingly innocuous, but they act as the DNA for economic tyranny that would make even the worst historic genocides pale in comparison.

What’s the solution? The last bastion of financial privacy, barter. Physical precious metals (gold as a store of value, silver for transacting and trade) would very likely become increasingly the preferred form of money for all truly free individuals for as long as the corrupt globalist regime has its tentacles in everyone’s digital wallets.

Brandon Smith has been an alternative economic and geopolitical analyst since 2006 and is the founder of Alt-Market.com.

Connect with Birch Gold Group

Cover image credit: Leonhard_Niederwimmer

When Does the Narrative Replace Reality?

by Aaron & Melissa Dykes, Truthstream Media
April 9, 2023

Video also available at Truthstream Media YouTube.

Truthstream’s first Film: TheMindsofMen.net

Truthstream’s first Series: Vimeo.com/ondemand/trustgame

Connect with Truthstream Media

Cover image credit: Truthstream Media

Excerpt:

Aaron Dykes:

I generally try to avoid the media storm because it’s just so toxic. It’s counterproductive and it just weighs upon my soul to follow it most of the time.

But you know the stuff with the Twitter files that has come out, the things Matt Taibbi has reported, are astonishing because they’re things that we already knew. And I’m sure many of you already knew.

We’ve seen them happening. We’ve seen the numbers on our own channels. We’ve seen the various clever ways of suppressing messages.

We’ve seen channels deleted, but also just kept under wraps, hidden from their own followers and subscribers. That’s what we’ve experienced. And I’m not even sure who’s hearing this video, but it isn’t everyone who subscribed to our channel.

I don’t know if it’s anyone who didn’t. I don’t know. But it is incredible to see evidence come out showing the way that this censorship and suppression and algorithmic distortion has taken place. How it’s been done consciously.

But it’s just, when I did first see this a few days ago and reacted to it, it just floored me that this could come out the way it does and that there aren’t greater repercussions.

You got private organizations centered around major universities, major media outlets working deliberately to prop up a narrative at the expense of the facts and the truth. There’s just no other way to put it. Collaborating with government agencies in what is surely, what would surely be interpreted as a very clear violation of the 1st Amendment.

Clips from House Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Federal Government Holds Twitter Files Hearing

“We learned Twitter, Facebook, Google and other companies developed a formal system for taking in moderation requests from every corner of government from the FBI, the DHS, the HHS DoD, the Global Engagement Center at state, even the CIA.

For every government agency scanning Twitter, there were perhaps 20 quasi-private entities doing the same thing including Stanford’s Election Integrity Partnership, NewsGuard, the Global Disinformation Index, and many others, many taxpayer funded.”

“In your testimony describing the cooperation between the federal government and tech companies like Twitter, you stated, ‘a focus of this growing network is making lists of people whose opinions, beliefs, associations or sympathies are deemed to be misinformation, disinformation or malinformation’. What’s interesting to me is that what is missing from that list is the word unlawful…

And so it notably seems to be missing from the FBI’s lexicon.”

A Beginner’s Guide to Syria, With Vanessa Beeley

by Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare, with Vanessa Beeley
originally published April 4, 2023

In the following conversation about Syria, Vanessa Beeley dropped so many truth bombs that Joe Biden thought that Olympus Has Fallen is a documentary.

Vanessa lives in Syria’s capital, Damascus, and is one of the few journalists who actually knows what’s going on and experiences, you know, reality rather than Western propaganda via the likes of CNN and The New York Times.

For a conversation surrounding Syria and navigating the fog of information war, I strongly recommend listening to my conversation with Piers Robinson in which he touched on talking points including:

• false narratives published by media across the Western world,
• the role of propaganda to shape public perception, and
• the “chemical weapons” hoax.

Vanessa’s discussion with me is more raw and closer to Syrian reality on the ground, acting as a brilliant beginner’s guide of sorts, including:

• some history leading up to the current war,
• the geopolitical complexities around Syria,
• Western central intelligence agencies’ creation and funding of terrorist groups,
• daily life and struggles in Damascus under severe sanctions,
• allies of Syria and why the Deep State is panicking, and
• why Bashar al-Assad will never bow to Washington.

Her lights went out midway. Thankfully, she had a LED light on hand.

Connect with Jerm Warfare

Connect with Vanessa Beeley

All image sourced from Jerm Warfare

Drs. Tom Cowan, Mark & Samantha Bailey, Andrew Kaufman: Why Are We Doing This?

~~~

“It is also clear that the dramatic events of the past three years, events that have devastated the lives of many people all over the world, are based on this very misconception that so-called pathogenic viruses exist. This misconception has been around for a very long time, and it has led to damaging public health measures, the most notorious being vaccines, which have themselves harmed and killed millions of animals and people during their long and sordid history.

—This carnage needs to stop.”

~~~

TCTL editor’s note:

In the video below, Samantha Bailey reads the written statement “Why Are We Doing This?” which was signed by Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, Mark and Samantha Bailey.

Following that reading, each of the four makes a brief personal statement about why they continue to speak out about lies at the foundation of virology.

The written statement, shared below, can be found at Tom Cowan’s website.

Transcript of the individual statements is provided by Truth Comes to Light.

Why Are We Doing This?: The Written Statement

Sadly, the level of rancor between those in the “freedom” community taking the “no-virus” position and those taking the “pro-virus” position has reached higher and higher levels.

Videos, Instagram posts and tweets are put out by both sides claiming to “debunk’ the other side or sometimes to just call names.

Mikki Willis, the producer and director of the documentary series Plandemic, has created a new video urging unity among those who claim to be on the side of freedom, along with a subtle accusation that dissenters against this unity are classic disinformation agents.

Given this background, we, as some of the recognized leaders of the “no-virus team,” thought it would be a good opportunity to reconnect and even restate why we are doing this.

Why we will not just be good team players and participate in the growing worldwide movement fighting for the universal principles of freedom, bodily autonomy and the ability to guide one’s life based on one’s own beliefs and decisions? Why keep speaking out?

It seems obvious to us and, in fact, has been a guiding principle throughout our entire lives that a life based in freedom and integrity must have a solid, factual foundation. In other words, if the foundation is not based on the truth, as best we can see it, our entire lives are based on mistruths and are in danger of collapse at any moment.

Imagine building a relationship, a family, a homestead based on love between two people when the reality is that, rather than love, there is distrust, suspicion and even ill will. Sooner or later, that life will collapse into ruins.

This is the same with a financial system based on fiat currency, an agricultural system based on inattention to the health of the soil, or a medical system based on anti-scientific medical hypotheses.

After careers of examining medical research and theories and three years of intensive investigation into the question of whether particles or, perhaps better said, entities known as viruses actually exist, it is our clear conclusion that no such particle has ever been shown to exist, let alone cause any disease in plants, animals or people. For us, this conclusion stands as a clear fact.

It is also clear that the dramatic events of the past three years, events that have devastated the lives of many people all over the world, are based on this very misconception that so-called pathogenic viruses exist. This misconception has been around for a very long time, and it has led to damaging public health measures, the most notorious being vaccines, which have themselves harmed and killed millions of animals and people during their long and sordid history.

—This carnage needs to stop.

People need to experience the world with new eyes and with a new concept of life, biology and health. This new conception can begin only when we realize, once and for all, that the idea of contagious, pathogenic viruses, or viral-like entities of any sort — natural, lab created, clones or otherwise —is simply a scientific misconception, or possibly a fraud.

Why we are doing this is straightforward: It’s so that no woman, man, child or animal ever has to be subjected again to abuse based on a long, bankrupt theory of biology and medicine.

We have nothing personally to gain from this quest. No prestigious awards are coming our way, and we likely will get nothing but further scorn and derision from colleagues, public institutions, and the general media.

Yet, when we think of our children, grandchildren, our friends, our families, our beloved animals, and animals in labs who are tortured and killed in this clearly futile effort to demonstrate the “reality” of viruses, everything in our being cries out, “this must stop.”

Therefore, we ask all people of good will to accept the following challenge. Please send us any genuine scientific information that demonstrates that viruses exist and cause disease.

We are not interested in any comments about our motivations or the consequences of our quests for us personally. Absent that evidence, we and our good friends will keep going. We believe that the future for all of us depends on it.

Dr. Thomas Cowan

Dr. Andrew Kaufman

Drs. Samantha & Mark Bailey

Time marker 5:03 — Dr. Tom Cowan:

So we’ve been talking a fair amount about why we’re doing this. The this being talking about the fact that there’s no virus, never had a virus that’s been shown to exist or cause any disease.

So what difference does it make?

So there’s obviously a whole lot of reasons including all the social distancing and the masks and the viral vaccines and the devastation of the adults and the lives of children.

But one thing that we haven’t, unfortunately, talked about much is its effect on the animals and the widespread frank torture and mutilation of millions of animals in labs and so-called science experiments all over the world.

And for whatever reason, I hadn’t appreciated this so much until I actually have animals of my own. And I think you could see our three cats and six chickens and we’re getting three goats this week.

When you realize all the mutilated animals, the ferrets with the cell culture stuffed down their throats, the 15,000 monkeys that were allegedly killed by Sabin to make an ineffective and dangerous polio vaccine.

When you realize all the mutilated dogs that have been left in dumpsters, which I’ve heard from many people who actually witnessed this themselves, the mice who’ve been injected with debris into their brain.

And you realize that all these experiments have no possible benefit. They’re just basically sadistic, torturing of innocent animals.

And at some point in your life, everything cries out to say this has to stop.

Time marker 7:04 — Dr. Andrew Kaufman:

Hello, I’m Dr. Andrew Kaufman. And today I’m here to answer the question why is it important to me to tell the whole truth about viruses? Meaning that they don’t actually exist or cause disease.