Summary On 9/11 And Inconsistencies Regarding The Official Story September 11 2018 | From: MatrixWissen / Various According to the official 9/11 story nineteen Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commerical passenger jet airliners.
They steered two airplanes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, one airplane into the Pentagon and the last airplane crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
And it just goes on and on and on and on. If one has the inclination to look.
The evidenve that what took place in New York City on September 11th 2001 was a 'false-flag' event is by now unchallengeable.
Other than what the remaining cabal-controlled media would have you believe.
Well, they failed. And the truth, inevitabley; will out.
This summary will point out key issues, why the official story has severe flaws which do not add up:
1. World Trade Center 7
World Trade Center 7 was a 47-level building located next to the Twin Towers in New York. During the collapse of the Twin Towers the south face of WTC7 was hit by debris which caused minor fires on selected floors.
On the afternoon of September 11th at 17:20 the entire building collapsed within seconds.The mainstream media never covered this topic except on that day.
Starting September 12th the collapse of WTC7 was not mentioned on mainstream media. When watching the following video footage of the collapse of WTC7 ask yourself the following question:
Is a collapse due to "structural failure caused by small office fires" likely to be perfectly symetrical, occur at nearly free-fall speed and turn the entire building into a dust cloud?
A group of over 1900 architects and engineers researched the video footage and the available evidence (debris and dust samples) and came to the conclusion that office fires could not have caused this form of a symetric collapse at free-fall speed.
The fact that they found thermite - a special form of explosive used for the controlled demolition of buildings - in all dust samples they investigated raises serious questions.
A scientific paper published by several of their researches as well as university professors describes their findings in detail.
Another serious questions concerns the fact that BBC World television "accidentially" announced the collapse of WTC7 20 minutes before it actually happened (check out this footage from BBC World - This recording starts at 5:08pm and ends at 5:15pm - You can see WTC7 directly right of the correspondents head because the building did not collapse until 5 minutes later at 5:20pm).
This leaves any rationally thinking person with a lot of unanswered questions. How could BBC World have known about the collapse in advance ? The explaination from BBC World is that they only picked up on a news report from Reuters and repeated that report on the air. There is no statement from Reuters on their "early reporting" on the collapse of WTC7.
The most significant question probably remains : Why was the collapse of WTC7 not even mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report, which until this day is the official writing of history
2. Damage at the Pentagon Lacking Evidence of an Airplane Crash
Several pictures were taken during the 30 minutes after an airplane allegedly hit the Pentagon and when parts of the wall of the Pentagon collapsed. These pictures only show a hole that is too small for a Boeing 757-200 to fit in. One would also expect two holes nearby where the two Rolls Royce RB-211 engines had to strike the Pentagon.
This pictures shows the size of the airplane in comparison to the size of the Pentagon :
The pictures taken before the collapse, do not show any impact holes for the engines:
The following picture shows a close-up of the hole in which allegedly the entire airplane disappeared.
It is also interesting to see that the windows right above the hole are still intact and show foam from the fire department trying to extinguish nearby fires:
It is also noticeable that almost no traces of any commercial airplane were ever found at the Pentagon, only some minor pieces which were carried away by hand showed up.
Most of the airplane just vanished including its Rolls Royce RB-211 engines.
For further information on this subject it is highly recommended to watch the documentary "National Security Alert" mentioned in the following bulletin point.
3. Flight Path of American Airlines 77 Before Hitting the Pentagon
Concerned US citizens founded the Citizens Investigation Team and started to interview eye witnesses who were located close to the Pentagon on 9/11. Amongst the eye witnesses they interviewed are two police officers and a Pentagon Helicopter Air Traffic Controller.
The key aspect of investigation was the flight path of the airplane. The picture below shows the flight path drawn by the eye witnesses during their interview as yellow lines and the flight path claimed by the government in green.
The yellow dots indicate where one or several witnesses were located:
In order to knock down the 5 light poles (red dots) the airplane had to be on the official (green) flight path given by the government which is inconsistent with the eye witnesses.
Non of the eye witnesses were able to see the airplane actually hit the Pentagon due to a small hill located between them and Pentagon, some were able to see the explosion.
One eye witness located at the other side of the Pentagon saw an airplane at low altitude flying away seconds after he heard the explosion.
The Citizen Investigation Team produced a free documantary called "National Security Alert" to summarize their findings. It includes interviews with the witnesses as well as an analysis of who saw what from which location:
4. No Response From US Military & Strange Orders From Dick Cheney
One of the open questions regarding 9/11 is : Why did the US military not react when the 4 airplanes got off their determined flight path and radio communication was lost.
An investigation regarding this matter showed that in the year 2001 alone this process of "air policing" had happen more than 50 times until 9/11 and every single time jet fighters were in the air within minutes and were then directed to where the suspicious airplane was located.
This is an excerpt from the “official story” of what happened on 9/11:
At 8:14 flight AA11 ignored a command from air traffic control to change altitude, radio contact was lost and shortly thereafter the transponder was turned off. At 8:25 the air traffic controller reported having heard an announcement probably by a hijacker that was broadcasted on the air instead of on the onboard announcement system.
Protocols require air traffic control to inform the military in case of a suspected emergency, this did not happen until 8:40. At 8:46 AA11 crashed into the World Trade Center. By 8:53 two fighter jets started but without any orders on where to fly. By 9:01 air traffic control informed the military about flight UA175 heading for New York. By 9:03 UA175 crashed into the World Trade Center.
By that time AA77 and UA93 both had been hijacked as well and started to deviate from their course. AA77 allegedly crashed in the Pentagon at 9:37, UA93 allegedly crashed in Shanksville at 10:03 The military did not check on both airplanes by fighter jets.
Norman Mineta (Transportations Secretary) gave public testimony in May 2003 about his experiences on 9/11 : He was at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center with Dick Cheney on the morning of 9/11 and gave the following testimony:
How does all this add up to a consistent storyline?
The testimony of Norman Mineta is not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report at all, but even worse : The video of his testimony has been removed from the video archive of the 9/11 Commission. If his testimony was not broadcasted on live television, nobody would have even heard about it.
5. Pentagon Announced 2.3 Trillion Dollars Have Gone Missing on September 10th 2001
The wing of the Pentagon where AA77 allegedly crashed into was the only wing that had been structurally strengthened during a renovation that year. Thus this wing was still almost empty except for parts of the accounting office that just moved in again.
On September 10th 2001 Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense at that time) gave a press conference at the Pentagon where he admitted that 2.3 trillion dollars went missing at the Pentagon.
One day later all evidence that would have allowed to track where this money went conveniently disappeared when the accounting office area was destroyed. Suddenly there were more important issues on the radar than fighting corruption.
Here is a clip from the press conference where Donald Rumsfeld makes the staggering announcement:
6. Official Aircraft Speeds "Technically Impossible"
The National Transportation Safety Board released a report on February 7th 2002 documenting the speed of United Airlines Flight 175 before it hit the World Trade Center.
The following graph is directly taken from this report. The top diagram shows the altitude, the bottom diagram shows air craft speed in knots :
An analysis of the radar data from 9/11 showed that United Airlines Flight 175 was flying at 510 knots when it hit the World Trade Center. This speed equals 944 km/h or 586 mph. UA175 was a Boeing 767-200 which has a maximum operating speed at ground level of 360 knots.
Commercial airplanes are not designed to fly at high speeds at ground level because the air pressure at ground level compared to travel altitude is so high that the created air resistance could destroy the entire airplane.
Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of pilots who have looked into the contradictory evidence for all four airplanes which ranges from too high speed to flight maneuvers which they consider impossible especially if performed by un-experienced pilots.
The US government is unwilling to acknowledge the existence of contradictory evidence and is not making any statements on the subject.
They produced the 45-minute documentary "World Trade Center Attack" to summarize the contradictions they discovered when analyzing the officially available data from their viewpoint of being professionals in aviation:
In the recent years Pilots for 9/11 truth have released several other documentaries all covering different contradictory aspects of the events on that day. You find all of their documentaries in the Resource section.
7. The Shanksville Crash - A Crash Site Lacking Evidence of a Crash
According to the official story passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 tried to enter the cockpit to regain control from terrorists.
This resulted in the airplane to crash at a location near Shanksville. Most of the evidence does not support the official story.
The debris from the crash was found in an area that is 7 miles long.
How could the debris be spread this widely if the airplane crashed in one location?
Hardly any evidence of larger parts from the airplane was found. The “official crash site” is shown in the photos below.
How could the debris be spread this widely if the airplane crashed in one location?
Hardly any evidence of larger parts from the airplane was found. The “official crash site” is shown in the photos below.
Does this look suspicious to you ? Where is the airplane?!?
In the following video from a news broadcast from September 11th you can see video footage taken from a helicopter of the area surrounding the crash site.
There is a lot of miniature debris ("nothing larger than a phone book") spread over an "area of 3-4 miles". How could this be if the airplane crashed in one location?
8. Cell Phone Calls
Immediately after 9/11 happened about 15 cell phone calls were reported from passengers that were on the hijacked airplanes. These calls were essential in shaping the “official story” of hijackers with knives and box cutters by “eye witnesses” onboard the airplanes.
In the aftermath it became apparent that the cell phone calls from airplanes that fly higher than 8000 feet are almost impossible. This was experimentally confirmed by “Project Achilles – Low altitude cell phone call experiments” in 2003 performed by A.K. Dewdney.
Here is a summary of the officially recognized cell phone calls:
Flight UA 175 : Departed 8:14, reached 31.000 feet at 8:33 and maintained altitude until 8:51
First cell phone call by Peter Hanson at 8:52 (caller ID identified his cell)
Flight AA 77 : Departed 8:10, reached 35.000 feet at 8:46 , transponder turned off at 8:56, several cell phone calls starting 9:12, autopilot disengaged at 7000 feet at 9:29
On board was also CNN commentator Barbara Olson. She called her husband between 9:16 and 9:26 (according to 9/11 commission report on an air phone). In 2006 it became apparent that AA77 had no onboard air phones installed at all. So how did she call her husband ?!?
Flight UA93 : Departed 8:42, reached 35.000 feet at 9:02, hijacking at 9:28, cell phone calls start at 9:32, transponder turned off at 9:41, Tom Burnett calls his wife at 9:58 telling her “We are going to do something”, crash in Shanksville at 10:03
Flight AA11 : No cell phone calls reported on this flight, Betty Ong called from an air phone
There has been no official reaction from the US government to the findings of research of the last years which contradict the 9/11 Commission Report released in 2004.
9. The 9/11 Commission Report (And What is NOT in it)
It does not mention the collapse of World Trade Center 7.
It does not mention that if the official “pancake collapse”-theory was true the steel-frame should have remained standing and 110 floors in pancake formation should be found at the bottom after the collapse. Both expectations have turned out untrue.
It does not mention that the entire rubble of 9/11 was shipped to China before any proper examination of the evidence could take place.
It does not mention that several FBI agents have gone on record claiming that they knew about the plans for 9/11 in advance but their warnings remained unheard.
It does not mention the discrepancies of George W. Bush’s statement that he saw the first airplane hit the WTC before entering the school. This impact was not shown on TV on 9/11. (see extra bulletin point further down the list)
To read the report yourself, just click on the image of it, this will open the PDF version of the report.
Three members of the 9/11 commission have recently made interesting public statements:
John Farmer - Senior Council for the 9/11 Commission – wrote a book on his experiences of being a member of the 9/11 Commission. In this book "The Ground Truth - The untold story of America under attack on 9/11" he documents false testimony by the White House, CIA, FBI, and NORAD. The following two quotes are from his book:
“At some level of government, at some point in time, a decision was made not to tell the truth about the national response to the attacks on the morning of 9/11. We owe the truth to the families of the victims of 9/11. We owe it to the American public as well, because only by understanding what has gone wrong in the past can we assure our nation’s safety in the future.”
"A government that conceals the truth puts the nation at risk"
Thomas Kean – Republican governor of New Jersey and head of the 9/11 Commission – has given the following statement :
"We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . "
In January 2008 Kean wrote an article in the New York Times titled "Stonewalled by the CIA" in which he describes how CIA director George Tenet told the 9/11 Commission point blank that certain areas of research were off limits for them.
Max Cleland was US Senator for the State of Georgia from 1997 until 2003. He was appointed to serve on the 9/11 Commission but is the only person who resigned from the commission because the Bush administration was stonewalling and blocking the committee's access to key documents and witnesses.
In November 2003 Cleland said "I cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims and say the commission had full access. This investigation is now compromised"
10. George Bush Saw the First Airplane Hit the World Trade Center "on TV" on 9/11
About 3 months after 9/11 Bush gave a speech, during which he says that before he went to the class room at the school event he was "waiting outside" and while waiting he saw "on TV" how an airplane hit the World Trade Center.
The problem with this statement is that there was no video footage of the first airplane on TV until September 12th. So which "station" was he watching?
When Bush was asked during a press conference if he had "advanced knowledge of 9/11" his reaction is rather odd:
11. The Collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 identified 14 key points regarding the collapse of both towers which raise severe questions :
Constant acceleration through what was the path of greatest resistance — no time for “crushing”
Unnaturally symmetrical debris distribution
Extremely rapid onset of destruction
Over one hundred first responders reported explosions and flashes of light
Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 50 mph
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, metal decking, and floor trusses
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
1200-foot diameter debris fields: no “pancaked” floors found
Isolated explosive ejections seen 20-40 stories below cascadingdemolition canopy
Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
Several tons of molten iron found under all 3 high-rises
Evidence of thermite found in previously molten metal, WTC dust and steel
Sophisticated energetic nano-thermite chips found in WTC dust samples
No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire
A few more details regarding the collapse should be pointed out :
When World Trade Center 1 collapsed the upper section first telescopes in on itself for about half of its size:
This is a significant observation because if the upper section is supposed to perform the "work" of destroying the building section below itself and it vaporizes half of itself at the beginning of the collapse, then it also lost half of its potential energy.
The physical law of conservation of energy says energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only be transformed.
In the case of a collapse of a bulding potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy (for the downward acceleration) and somehow the process of destroying the building structure also has to be energized by the potential energy of the building itself.
Interestingly enough both towers collapsed practically at free-fall speed which can only happen if all potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy.
So where does the energy to destroy the building structure come from?
When World Trade Center 2 collapsed, the upper section tilts while it start moving downwards. A technical analysis of the available video footage calculated the maximum tilt angle before the building disappears in the dust cloud at 25 degrees :
This video shows the tilting quite well:
Also pay attention to the violent lateral ejections of building material uniformly on both fronts of WTC2 as documented in this video:
Even though this tilting occured, the collapse itself was perfectly symetrical as the debris field after the collapse showed.
This is rather strange since theoretically the upper section has to perform the "work" of destroying the building below itself and if it starts tilting it should rather tip over the side where it is tilting towards and fall off the side than to continue through the path of greatest resistence.
Additionally it should be considered that in a structural collapse the upper section of the building should remain at least partly in tact and not pulverize to dust.
It might be interesting to compare a failed building demolition from 1985 to see what happens to the upper part of a building if a controlled demolition goes wrong:
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 have done extensive scientific research into the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7. It is highly recommended to visit their website and on it especially the evidence section.
12. Eye Witnesses of the Events at the World Trade Center
There is a long list of eye witnesses who were in the World Trade Center on September 11th. This section only points out the most important ones.
Barry Jennings was deputy director of emergency services department. When the first airplane hit WTC1 he immediately headed for WTC7 in which the Office of Emergency Management was located on the 23rd floor.
When he arrived, the emergency center was abandoned. Together with a second witness he took the stairway to leave the building.
When they were somewhere between the 6th and 8th floor an explosion happened below them and destroyed the entire stairway.
This happened before WTC1 and WTC2 collapsed. Barry was trapped in WTC7 during the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 and was rescued before WTC7 collapsed.
He witnessed multiple explosions in WTC7.
He also noticed that - when he was rescued around 1 p.m. - the lobby of WTC7 was completely destroyed and he left WTC7 through a "huge hole in the wall". Directly after his rescue Barry was interviewed by ABC7. Barry died in 2008 under mysterious circumstances at age 53.
In this interview he describes his experiences during 9/11 :
William Rodriguez was a janitor in the World Trade Center’s north tower.
He risked his life on 9/11 to help people who could not help themselves by using his masterkey to open locked doors so people could get out of the building.
For his heroic behaviour he received praise by many people including George W. Bush.
On 9/11 William arrived at work around 8:30 and went into the basement level B1 where his office was. While talking to his supervisor a major explosion happened in the basement level below them.
Shortly after this explosion happened he heard the impact of the first airplane hitting the top of the building.
This is his 3-minute eye witness report:
Two firefighters were interviewed in the morning of 9/11.
Both witnessed multiple explosions in the lobby area of the World Trade Center. The explosions were so severe that they were seriously injured. The interview itself starts at 1:30:
Firefighter John Schroder was in the lobby of the World Trade Center when he witnessed that the elevators exploded:
The following video shows a 30 second video clip from the lobby of the World Trade Center before it collapsed.
Several firefighters had already stated on record that the destruction of the lobby looked to them like it was hit by a bomb.
Take a look at the footage yourself:
If you start investigating for yourself you will find tons of additional eye witnesses. Most of them have one thing in common, they report on secondary explosions on different levels of the World Trade Center.
The best available compilation of eye witness reports and media reports is almost 30 minutes long.
The first two minutes are the interview with the two firefighters embedded before so you can start watching at 02:00:
13. Epilogue
You have been presented with 12 different topics regarding 9/11. If you have never researched this kind of information it might be the first time that you heard about any of this.
You have to ask yourself, why the mass media has not covered these kind of topics and you have to decide for yourself, what you are going to do next now that you know.
The best thing to do might be to first start researching the whole topic for yourself.
You will be amazed how many websites have been created and how much information is available if you're only willing to take a look.
The second step might be to tell other people about what you have learned but be aware that the majority of the population does not want to know about any of this and you can not force anybody to face a reality that might shatter their entire world view.
From my personal experience I can only recommend to face the "dark side" of our reality because you can only understand how things add up if you acknowledge the existence of the "dark side" and understand its role in the "big picture".
Doing research on these forces and understanding their influence on our lifes ultimately leads to far deeper questions than "What really happened on 9/11?"
If you took the time to read upto this point, you might want to invest at least four additional minutes and watch the following video.
It summarizes the content of the article with a humerous wink. Even though the topic is actually quite serious, it is sometimes easier to approach the truth through humour:
Detective Publishes Book Exposing High-Level Government Pedophile Ring, Shot In The Head Days Later & NZ Widow Says Her Former Husband's Paedophile Rings Goes To 'Highest Heights' September 10 2018 | From: DCClothesline / NewZealandHerald / Various
A former police detective, and author of a bombshell book that exposed a massive pedophile ring made up of high-level government officials was found shot in the head last month.
While officials are calling it an apparent suicide, his family is claiming that he told them he would never kill himself and that people were after him because he was about to expose even more high-level government pedophilia.
Mark Minne, author of the controversial book ‘The Lost Boys of Bird Island’ devoted his post-police life to exposing the corruption and horrifying pedophilia he discovered while working as a detective.
Minnie and his good friend Chris Steyn, also a former cop turned investigative journalist, worked together on the book to expose a government and business community who took children to Bird Island where they were abused, and some possibly murdered.
The book details the level of their involvement in the pedophile ring, abuse of the children, alleged acts of murder to cover up the crimes, as well as corruption and abuse of high-level state resources by the network’s members.
The book details the corruption within the last Apartheid government of South Africa and implicated officials all the way to the top, including defense minister Magnus Malan and the minister of environmental affairs John Wiley.
Before his death, Minnie announced that he was approached by many more people with even more damning evidence which he planned to reveal in a sequel of the book. However, he died before he could finish it.
The book was published earlier this month on August 5 and only nine days later, Minnie would be found dead. Officials claim they found a suicide note at the scene, but his family says they don’t believe it at all.
Tersia Dodo, a family member of Minnie told reporters that just days before he died that if anything happened to him, they must know he was killed.
“He mentioned to us all the time that his life was in danger and if anything did happen to him we must know that it was done to him not by himself,” she said.
Dodo says Minnie was being watched and feared for his life because he had more information which would’ve exposed even more people.
“I knew about the book for many years and I knew what he had been through, it really played him that he had seen and been involved with the investigation surrounding the book,” Dodo told SABC.
Dodo came forward on her own after she saw the suicide narrative being played out in the media. She said she was compelled to do so, to dispel the myths.
“Mark was not a coward, Mark faced life head on,” she said.
"There is no ways that I or any of us believed that he would have opted out and that is why I agreed to do this interview to dispel any thoughts and rumors of suicide.
He was not the type of man that was cowardly and that would do something like that.”
As for the note police allegedly found next to Minnie’s body, Dodo believes it is either fake, or was written under duress.
“I have said this from the beginning, this supposed suicide note was either written under duress and I would like to see it before I will believe it was written by Mark,” she said.
This case is eerily similar to that of a man who was allegedly murdered in Lithuania after he began exposing high-level government pedophiles.
As TFTP previously reported, teenage refugee from Lithuania came forward last year with a White House petition and a damning testimony showing what happened after his family tried to expose a little girl’s abusers.
When his four-year-old cousin accused two high-level government officials - describing it in heartbreaking detail - Korolis Venckienė learned the hard way how the government protects its vilest members, up to and including using hundreds of militarized police and even murder.
As Venckienė explained in his petition on WhiteHouse.gov, this nightmare started when their family attempted to seek justice for the sick men who allegedly raped his four-year-old cousin.
“In 2008, 4-year-old Deimante Kedyte described her sexual assault by high-level Lithuanian officials. Her testimony was later verified as true by 4 separate commissions. She never had her day in court,” Venckienė wrote.
When the teen’s uncle, Drasius Kedys, Deimante’s father pushed for the men to be prosecuted for what they did to his daughter, he was murdered.
If Minnie was actually murdered, hopefully the information he was planning on releasing still comes forward. The only way to stop these vile actors is to shine light into the darkness. While Minnie has been silenced, his work can live on to be that light.
NZ Widow Says Her Former Husband's Paedophile Rings Goes To 'Highest Heights'
The widow who told the world her politician husband was a paedophile says he was involved in a ring of abusers which goes to "the highest heights you can imagine".
Anihera Zhou Black said 'people in power' had committed immoral acts
In an exclusive interview, Anihera Zhou Black told the Herald: "This goes deep and wide, in terms of the paedophile ring, to the highest heights you can imagine. These people aren't just labourers and workers at fast food restaurants. These people are suits and people in power."
Related:
Community leaders say police must investigate paedophile claims
Awanui Black died aged 48 in 2016. He was a regional councillor, Maori Party political aspirant, a commissioner at the Maori Language Commission, lecturer at Te Wananga o Raukawa and Treaty of Waitangi negotiator for Ngati Pukenga.
He was also a paedophile, according to Zhou Black's gut-wrenching Facebook Live broadcast yesterday.
Zhou Black, 49, with the support of sister Piiata Tiakitai-Turi, 50, said today her decision to denounce her former husband was intended to give strength to victims of abuse.
She told of her belief Black had used their marriage to mask his predatory sexual behaviour towards children and her growing horror as she realised he was not the man she had believed him to be.
The couple had met aged 15 and were in a relationship from 18. He went on to become a highly-regarded pillar of the Bay of Plenty community and someone with the mana required to stand on the national stage.
But for Zhou Black, it was an ascent she had little part in.
“Our relationship is one where I never had a voice through our marriage. I had been conditioned, groomed, to be the quiet wife."
Her Facebook Live post - based on partial admissions from Black and disclosures from others - came after 26 years of silence.
The truth, as she now believes it to be, had to fight against his "grooming" of her to play a role which covered who he really was.
“I had painted a picture of who he was and along with everybody else it was a picture he wanted us to see."
"I had held onto that with everything I had, supported everything he did and let him go off and do kaupapa and I looked after our children and looked after our household and just did what I had to do to support him."
Now, she believed he had used their marriage as a mask for his "private life" - one that included affairs with consenting adults, abuse against children and large amounts of alcohol.
"He did admit to me that he thought he was rangatira and he thought he was entitled to have women wherever he slept for the night. That might have rolled a few hundred years ago but it's not what I signed up for."
"He was never ever faithful. Prostitutes, orgies, group sex - all of it."
And there were children, she said. The youngest victim to have emerged was someone who had said they were aged 8 when sexually abused by Awanui Black.
Zhou Black said the couple separated in 2012, during which time he admitted affairs and using pre-teen pornography. There was a reconciliation a year later but the time away gave Zhou Black a voice she felt she never had and the reunion never worked.
In 2014, they separated again and stayed apart. Zhou Black said during these time she would yearn for him to tell her the truth.
Her sister said it was an impossible request because, once a string of marital infidelities were swept aside, the truth was much darker and far worse.
"The sad thing with Awa is that he knew if he told her the truth, there was no going back from that. He knew what the outcome of that was."
Anihera Zhou Black said in the time which followed there came disclosures, and events which occurred that answered questions in her mind from her years married to Awanui Black.
It had led her to believe there was a "ring" of people who - with her former husband - had preyed on children.
She said she would be speaking with police but believed an independent investigation could be necessary as one of those she believed was involved had been a police officer.
"We don't know where the cover up will begin. There are compromised police here in Tauranga that are part of that ring. I know of one."
She would also not name a number of suspected victims, again because it could jeopardise the police inquiry.
"It's an unknown figure, to be honest. I have knowledge of some but whoever else is out there, we've just had so many people come through our lives."
Zhou Black said Black had been abused as a child and the experience had warped his actions.
She said she believed his actions as a predator drove his alcohol abuse.
A mural of Te Awanui Black behind the Mount Cinema
His cause of death was officially listed as "organ failure", which she said was caused by alcohol abuse.
"He killed himself. It was suicide by alcohol. He did that deliberately. He couldn't live with everything that was going to be exposed. It was just a matter of time."
She had confronted him and he had denied the claims.
"He was very defensive. And he became quite violent with that defensiveness."
She believed her insistence meant that he knew the questions would soon be asked publicly.
"It wasn't something I could condone or keep quiet about. This was a while ago. It's taken me a number of years to get to where I got to yesterday."
"What he knew was that everything was crumbling. The facade he had carefully manicured over the years was coming down and he would be exposed. That's what he knew. That's why he took himself out."
In the days after her former husband's death, Zhou Black had a number of shocks, including childhood friends of her husband's telling her of abuse he had suffered as a boy.
There was also physical evidence left on his mobile phone, which had been passed to her. On it was a photograph of a naked teenage girl - sent by the girl at his encouragement.
Tiakitai-Turi said: "They were communicating and he was grooming her at that stage."
There had already been disclosures which led to this point and overnight had come more.
"Things are tumbling out all over the place. Revelations, and people talking about things. In my mind, retrospectively, you can start to see a pattern."
Prior to his death, there was a genuine fear among victims of stepping forward.
"People were really afraid to talk. Some still are."
Tiakitai-Turi said his mana and standing in the community silenced victims who doubted they would be believed.
"With particular victims, there were things he could do that made those victims not ever want to speak. And part of that was his status. Who would you believe? That (victim) or the guy with the status."
Tiakitai-Turi said many of those who were close to Awanui Black who had expressed anger were struggling with questions over their own friendship and judgment.
She said they would be asking themselves, "How could I get it so wrong?".
But she said everyone - herself included - had made the same mistake. There are now growing calls from Bay of Plenty community leaders for police to investigate the claims.
Bay of Plenty Regional Council chairman Doug Leeder said the allegations were extremely serious in nature.
"I think it is only appropriate that the respective authorities look into what has been alleged, which I am in no doubt they will do," he said.
A police spokesperson said they were aware of the video and would be seeking further information about the allegations.
In Tauranga, artist Graham Hoete, also known as Mr G, started painting over a mural he had made of Black.
Responding To The “Nothing To Hide” Argument In Support Of Mass Surveillance + We Are All Targeted Individuals Now with Dr. Katherine Horton September 9 2018 | From: ActivistPost / Scoop / SolariReport
InternetNZ is calling for debate on Five Eyes recommendation.
InternetNZ is worried the Government may take up recommendations that could sacrifice the online security of all New Zealanders. A broader debate is needed than one led by law enforcement.
The concerns arise after the release of recommendations from the Five Nations conference (known as the Five Eyes) last week.
Law enforcement ministers from the member countries - New Zealand, Canada, Australia, the US and the UK - met to discuss "grave threats" online and ways to tackle illicit material.
InternetNZ Chief Executive, Jordan Carter, agrees that the tech sector, the government and others do need to find solutions to tackle illicit material from appearing online.
“One recommendation the Five Eyes put forward could possibly break end-to-end encryption - and this is really worrying for New Zealanders."
Responding to the “Nothing to Hide” Argument in Support of Mass Surveillance
Whenever I talk about government surveillance, there is always “that guy” who claims if I’m not doing anything illegal I shouldn’t be concerned about it.
Well, I am concerned about it. I explain why in this short video.
"Encryption provides important protection for all of us. We need encryption for things like online banking and booking travel safely. We need it to keep ourselves safe and secure online. Without it no one will have trust in the Internet.
"There are alternative solutions to keeping New Zealanders safe without breaking technologies that do just that. To find these solutions - the right people need to be be in the room.
"It’s vital the government discuss these topics with a wide range of people and organisations - the tech sector, law enforcement, small and medium businesses who depend on safe online services, human rights, privacy advocates and more,"says Carter.
You can read more about the ways New Zealand can enhance public safety while protecting encryption on the InternetNZ website here.
“Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” This ban on torture and other ill-treatment has subsequently been incorporated into the extensive network of international and regional human rights treaties.
It is contained in Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by 153 countries, including the United States in 1992, and in the Convention against Torture or Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Convention against Torture), ratified by 136 countries, including the United States in 1994. It is also codified in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the American Convention on Human Rights.” - Human Rights Watch on the international illegality of torture.
August 1 was Swiss National Day. I celebrated by having a long lunch in my favorite cafe in Zurich with Dr. Katherine Horton – someone I have wanted to meet for quite a while. Then we took a cruise around Lake Zurich, followed by dinner with a colleague. High on our list of topics for the fascinating all-day discussion was how to integrate our knowledge for this presentation for you.
Dr Horton is a particle physicist and systems analyst with a master’s degree in physics and a doctorate in particle physics from the University of Oxford.
Dr. Horton worked as a high energy physicist on the particle collider at the German Electronsynchrotron DESY in Hamburg, Germany, and on the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Geneva Switzerland.
She taught nuclear physics and particle physics at Hertford College, University of Oxford, conducted admissions interviews for undergraduate physics at St Hilda’s College, Oxford, and was a research fellow at St John’s College, Oxford, a position that allowed her to expand her research into medical physics and the physics of complex human systems.
In 2011, during her research fellowship at St John’s College, Oxford, Dr. Horton became the overt target of the intelligence services. What began as overt surveillance became intrusive harassment that morphed into unmistakable crime through related networks.
As a result of her experience as “a targeted individual” or “TI,” Dr. Horton began to organize with other TIs to build a more scientific understanding of the phenomenon, to put a stop to these activities and to warn a wider audience of the covert technologies and networks that significantly threaten the entire population of the world.
You can learn more about and support her work at her website STOP 007 and from her new video-streaming show Global Crime Fighters, which is available in both English and German.
I have dealt with some of these technologies and networks, particularly during the Hamilton Securities litigation with the U.S. Department of Justice from 1996-2006. This litigation happened shortly after the Department had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Defense regarding experimentation and testing of “non-lethal weapons” for domestic application.
Based on my personal experience and research, particularly on how digital surveillance and technology is used to exploit individuals financially, I believe there are 325 million TIs in America divided into two groups – those who know we are targeted and those who do not.
The phenomenon is not limited to America. It is intertwined with organized crime, mercenaries and intelligence services throughout the NATO area and the rest of the world. It goes to the very heart of whether the people who run our society are subject to the law or not.
Targeting forces represent the shock troops that allow those in charge to get away with secrecy and crimes ranging from financial coup d’etat to murder.
The targeting phenomenon goes to the heart of the tactics that have allowed central management and control of financial markets and geopolitics.
Dr. Horton is going to join me for our next interview to discuss the TI phenomenon. Topics on our list to cover include gang-stalking, directed energy weapon attacks, non-consensual implanting, neurotechnology, asset-stripping, intel crime, secret societies, and genocide.
This Solari Report will be excellent background for the report we will publish this fall on privatization and the reengineering of the US government.
In Let’s Go to the Movies, I recommend Truthstream Media’s new blockbuster The Minds of Men. You can buy the DVD or stream on Vimeo. It helps you understand the early history on how many of the targeting technologies in use today were developed.
Dr. Russell Blaylock Explains Why The Masses Are Becoming Cognitively Retarded And Incapable Of Rational Thought September 8 2018 | From: NaturalNews
Is society getting dumber by the day? It may not just be your imagination: As Dr. Russell Blaylock, a retired neurosurgeron, posits, the stupidity of the masses may be by design.
Through a barrage of toxic chemicals and compounds, Blaylock says the government is purposely trying to dumb-down the masses. A dumber society is more easily controlled, after all.
Whether it’s the mercury in vaccines, the fluoride in our water, or the dozens of pesticides applied to our food, it’s hard not to suspect that the government knows exactly what they’re doing.
The toxicity of these chemicals and compounds is well-documented, yet nothing is ever done to reduce the presence of harmful compounds in our environment. Why else would the government willingly pollute the environment, public water supplies and more?
Where Has Intelligence Gone?
Dr. Blaylock explained in a video lecture that we are bombarded with a stream of toxins that are known to disrupt normal brain function.
“We’re seeing a society that not only has a lot more people of lower IQ, but a lot fewer people of higher IQ. In other words, a dumbing down, a chemical dumbing down of society,” he stated.
Blaylock contends that this trend has made people more dependent on the government.
“We have these people of lower IQ, who are totally dependent.
Then we have this mass of people who are going to believe anything they are told because they can’t really think clearly - and very few people of a very high IQ have good cognitive function who can figure this all out,” he explained.
“That’s what they want,” Blaylock said.
As Natural Newswriter S.D. Wells explains, the FDA is easily seen as an edifice of fraud. The federal agency, which is purportedly charged with ensuring food and drugs are safe, actually does neither.
The FDA never conducts their own testing; they rely on “data” cherry-picked for them by manufacturers. The FDA doesn’t test food additives to see if they are safe, or if they will react negatively with other additives.
In short, the FDA knows nothing about what’s in our food or how it might affect humans. The same can be said of prescription drugs.
Depleting Intelligence at Every Turn
There are a bevy of toxins that people are exposed to everyday
Whether its toxic food additives, mercury-laden vaccines, pesticides and herbicides or fluoride, the sad truth is that toxicity has become a part of daily life for many people.
Fluoride is a known neurotoxin, yet it is added to our water supplies in the name of “public health.” Fluoride is not an essential nutrient; it’s not a nutrient at all, actually.
Almost 67 percent of public water in the U.S. is fluoridated, under the erroneous notion that it will protect teeth against tooth decay. Many of our “peer” nations have rejected the idea of water fluoridation, such as Denmark, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden, China and Japan.
But it’s not just what they’re adding to food and water and vaccines that’s making America [the Western world] stupid: Even the education system is complicit in the plan to dumb down the country.
A study by NASA scientists recently confirmed that many people are born “creative geniuses” but their intelligence is ultimately hampered by the U.S. education system. Perhaps calling it the “re-education” system would be more appropriate?
The end-goal of the government is not to have a free and intelligent society; the globalists would rather turn us into a sea of malleable drones that do as they’re told.
See more coverage of stories about society’s agenda at Globalism.news.
Former Secret Service Agent Files RICO Lawsuit Against Clintons, Podesta And Soros September 7 2018 | From: TheGatewayPundit / PhiBetaIota / Various
Gary Byrne, an author and former Secret Service Agent, has filed a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) suit against Bill and Hillary Clinton, George Soros, John Podesta and David Brock, among others.
A summary of the RICO suit says in part: “For the past decade in which relevant predicate acts were corruptly carried out by the named defendants as “payback” for Plaintiff Gary Byrne’s role in the Clinton impeachment and his status as a “Clinton enemy” (for his temerity in telling the truth concerning obstruction of justice and gross abuse of power).
Along with their corrupt surrogates and collaborators (referenced individually and collectively as the “Enterprise”), David Brock and William and Hillary Clinton have been synonymous with criminal behavior, malicious baseless attacks (using mainly the illicit and vicious defamatory tactics against perceived political enemies (like Officer Gary Byrne, the Plaintiff here) of those willing to compensate participants like Brock.)
- And coordinating by mail and wire to violate myriad Federal and State laws in the exploitation of Enterprise nonprofit entities they use for purely partisan purposes.
Related: ‘Hillary Clinton Was And Is Running A Global Financial Criminal Syndicate’
This Enterprise has taken such attacks to an unprecedented and chilling new level – involving illegal domestic human and electronic surveillance, and tradecraft such as “lures” run at Byrne in order to obstruct the Hillary Clinton e-mail and Clinton Foundation Investigations by the agencies of the Obama government, all against private citizens in order to assist Hillary Clinton become the 45th President of the United States, destroy Gary Byrne, and enrich themselves.
The Guy Running Spy Ring on Trump was John Brennan – “He Should be in Front of Grand Jury”
Rudy Giuliani joined Sean Hannity recently to discuss the ongoing Mueller Trump-Russia investigation.
During the discussion Trump’s top attorney told Sean Hannity that the Mueller team committed crimes.
And then Rudy went off on partisan hack and former CIA Chief John Brennan.
Sean Hannity:Do you see crimes?
Rudy Giuliani:Absolutely. I just told you one. The perjury on the affidavit. I was telling you about Hillary crimes a year before Comey outlined them all… She got off in a fixed investigation — run by Peter Strzok! Hah-hah.
The dossier is obtained the day that they dropped the case against Hillary… I’m gonna tell you who orchestrated, who was the quarterback for all of this. It isn’t just Strzok. He’s a bit of a puppet. It’s not just Mueller, he’s a puppet…
Sean Hannity:I have a funny feeling you’re about to drop a bomb on me.
Rudy Giuliani:The guy’s running it was Brennan. And he should be in front of a grand jury.
According to investigations of the United States Congress, and as anticipated to emerge from numerous ongoing government investigations, Hillary Clinton and certain other Enterprise named and unknown named, and high-level surrogates, colluded with Russian intelligence (SVR and FSB) and a disgraced (and according to a referral from the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, a putative criminal) former British intelligence officer (Christopher Steele) to accomplish their illicit and unconstitutional objectives.
These Enterprise defendants, surrogates and participants have their opportunity to properly respond before a court they knowingly misled many times using the most powerful counterintelligence tools available. Let them do so now.” Read More
The suit essentially alleges that the the Clintons and their associates run an organized crime syndicate.
“CLINTON FOUNDATION, CLINTON-GIUSTRA ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP, MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA, CORRECT THE RECORD, AMERICAN BRIDGE 21ST CENTURY, CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON, SHAREBLUE, DAVID BROCK, WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON, HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, GEORGE SOROS, JOHN PODESTA, JONATHAN WACKROW, JAN GILOOLY and CLINTON GLOBAL INITIATIVE.”
Clinton and the other defendants listed in the lawsuit have declined to comment on the case.
Gary Byrne, Author of Crisis, Files 210-Page Racketeering Lawsuit Against Clinton Foundation, William and Hillary Clinton, Media Matters,David Brock, George Soros, and John Podesta Et Al
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GARY J. BYRNE / GJB,LLC
RICO COMPLAINT
(Actual home address withheld due to death threats and related danger to Plaintiff from Enterprise Defendants, Surrogates, Participants and Others– such address can be provided to the District Court under seal)
Plaintiff v.
THE CLINTON FOUNDATION a/k/a Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation
The Clinton Global Initiative
The Clinton Guistra Enterprise Partnership
Media Matters for America c/o David Brock
Correct the Record
American Bridge 21st Century
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW)
ShareBlue c/o David Brock
David Brock
William Jefferson Clinton
Hillary Rodham Clinton
George Soros
John Podesta
Jonathan Wackrow
Jan Gilooly
Numerous Unknown Named
Western Media Finally Investigates Alleged Chemical Attack In Syria And Finds “No Evidence” + There’s A Good Chance We’re Being Lied To About The Chemical Attack In Syria September 6 2018 | From: TheFreeThoughtProject / AntiMedia
Reporters who traveled to Syria to investigate claims of a chemical attack carried out by the Syrian government found that residents believe the event was staged by rebel forces.
Critically acclaimed war reporter Robert Fisk published a stunning account of the alleged chemical attack in the Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7, which included testimony from a doctor who works at the hospital featured in the widely circulated video purported to be the aftermath of a Syrian government chemical strike.
In an exclusive first-hand report for the Independent, Fisk, who has twice won the British Press Awards’ Journalist of the Year prize and is a seven-time winner of the British Press Awards’ Foreign Correspondent of the Year, reported:
"This is the story of a town called Douma, a ravaged, stinking place of smashed apartment blocks - and of an underground clinic whose images of suffering allowed three of the Western world’s most powerful nations to bomb Syria last week.
There’s even a friendly doctor in a green coat who, when I track him down in the very same clinic, cheerfully tells me that the “gas” videotape which horrified the world– despite all the doubters–is perfectly genuine.War stories, however, have a habit of growing darker.
For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm."
Contrary to the narrative faithfully reported by western mass media, the bombshell report from Fisk - who became famous for being among the few reporters in history to conduct face-to-face interviews with Osama bin Laden, which he did on three occasions between 1993 and 1997 - found, after interviewing numerous local Douma residents, there was no evidence to substantiate the reported chemical attack as claimed by Saudi-sponsored jihadist group Jaish al-Islam (Army of Islam).
Fisk reports that the Syrian doctor, Dr Assim Rahaibani, who works at the hospital told him:
"I was with my family in the basement of my home three hundred metres from here on the night but all the doctors know what happened.
There was a lot of shelling [by government forces] and aircraft were always over Douma at night–but on this night, there was wind and huge dust clouds began to come into the basements and cellars where people lived.
People began to arrive here suffering from hypoxia, oxygen loss. Then someone at the door, a ‘White Helmet,’ shouted ‘Gas!’ and a panic began.
People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia–not gas poisoning.”
Witnesses told Fisk that the infamous White Helmets, officially known as Syria Civil Defence, actually operate as a civil defense for the “terrorist” rebel forces.
The White Helmets are largely funded by the U.S. and UK governments and were founded in 2013 by James Le Mesurier, a former British military intelligence officer, and private security specialist.
Providing perhaps additional evidence that the White Helmets operate not a civil defense, but a defense on behalf of the Islamist terrorists, Fisk reports:
"The White Helmets–the medical first responders already legendary in the West but with some interesting corners to their own story–played a familiar role during the battles.
They are partly funded by the Foreign Office and most of the local offices were staffed by Douma men. I found their wrecked offices not far from Dr Rahaibani’s clinic.
A gas mask had been left outside a food container with one eye-piece pierced and a pile of dirty military camouflage uniforms lay inside one room.
Planted, I asked myself? I doubt it. The place was heaped with capsules, broken medical equipment and files, bedding and mattresses.
Of course we must hear their side of the story, but it will not happen here: a woman told us that every member of the White Helmets in Douma abandoned their main headquarters and chose to take the government-organised and Russian-protected buses to the rebel province of Idlib with the armed groups when the final truce was agreed.”
See how that works - the terrorists leave the city and White Helmets are gone.
So, when people perpetuate the lie that the White Helmets are Syrian civil defense, be sure to correct them and note that they are the civil defense for the Islamist jihadi forces that are attempting to overthrow the government and not the Syrian people.
As the U.S. moves closer toward all out war in Syria, a lot of what our government seems to base its intelligence on, especially claims of chemical weapon use by they Syrian government, is an impartial humanitarian group called the White Helmets.
But who are the White Helmets really? Are they a legitimate organization or pawns, funded for the purpose of regime change?
The White Helmets claim to be a neutral entity in Syria. They say they are just helping people caught in the middle of a civil war. But are they?
In regards to purported “moderate rebels” you hear about in the western press, the Syrians that Fisk interviewed had a vastly different outlook on who they were:
"Before we go any further, readers should be aware that this is not the only story in Douma. There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups.
These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other’s people’s homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town.
I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian–yes, Russian–rockets and burned-out cars.
So the story of Douma is thus not just a story of gas–or no gas, as the case may be. It’s about thousands of people who did not opt for evacuation from Douma on buses that left last week, alongside the gunmen with whom they had to live like troglodytes for months in order to survive.
I walked across this town quite freely yesterday without soldier, policeman or minder to haunt my footsteps, just two Syrian friends, a camera and a notebook. I sometimes had to clamber across 20-foot-high ramparts, up and down almost sheer walls of earth.
Happy to see foreigners among them, happier still that the siege is finally over, they are mostly smiling; those whose faces you can see, of course, because a surprising number of Douma’s women wear full-length black hijab."
With a policy platform of destroying ISIS and fighting terrorism, the Trump Administration has seemingly chosen the all too familiar path of the U.S. covertly aligning itself with insurgent groups meant to operate as a proxy army to foment regime change that Washington deems of significant geostrategic importance.
While most Americans understand that Saudi Arabia is the most prolific state sponsor of terrorism in the world, the close relationship being forged between Trump and Mohammed Bin Salman leads one to believe that the perceived financial incentives (Aramaco IPO) of strategic partnering with the Kingdom seems to outweigh Trump’s voiced concerns over Saudi involvement in 9/11 and their funding of global terrorism.
What is irrefutable is that the Saudis have chosen to supply massive amounts of arms and funding to numerous Islamist jihadi groups active in trying to overthrow the Assad government, as evidenced by internal diplomatic cable, released by WikiLeaks in 2015, revealing the Saudi government was set on Assad’s violent ouster “by all means available.”
Noting the rigorous independence of his reporting, Fisk wrote that he came to Douma as part of a convoy of journalists escorted by the Syrian government, but according to Fisk, “once a boring general had announced outside a wrecked council house ‘I have no information’… I just walked away.”
While Fisk is sure to come under attack by critics, the New York Timeshas previously referred to him as “probably the most famous foreign correspondent in Britain” while The Guardian has called him “one of the most famous journalists in the world.”
Additionally, a report from Douma, Syria, by One America’s Pearson Sharp, confirmed Fisk’s reporting, noting that residents there deny an attack happened and instead claim it was staged by rebel forces in an effort to precipitate a response from western forces.
Sharp said that he interviewed between 30 to 40 residents of Douma, and in a series of social media posts, he wrote:
"I just spoke with a Syrian woman who lives in Douma. I asked her about the attack there, and she laughed, and said no! There was no chemical attack or any other kind of attack.
She told me the area in question was in her neighborhood, and that if an attack had happened, she and her family would be dead.
I asked her what did happen, and she said the rebel terrorists lied, created the event from nothing, and used it as a cover to convince America and Europe to attack Assad’s forces.
Not making this up. Just reporting what people who actually live here are telling me."
Sharp emphasized that his reporting was not scripted or staged, but with actual local residents of Douma.
He said that not one person told him that no chemical attack had taken place, but residents confirmed that they believe the alleged attack was staged by “terrorists rebels” so they could escape the oncoming Syrian army.
You can watch Sharp’s full report from Douma below:
There’s A Good Chance We’re Being Lied To About The Chemical Attack In Syria
If you’re feeling an unnerving sense of deja vu amid recent global developments, it’s because we have been here before - many times.
The United States and its allies have been accusing the Syrian government of committing chemical weapons attacks in Syria almost since the conflict began in 2011.
In August 2012, then-President Barack Obama publicly warned the Assad government that the red line for his administration was “a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized,” which would prompt a U.S. intervention.
(Additionally, after Obama successfully had Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi assassinated in 2011, he also indicated to Assad that he would be next.)
Since Obama drew his red line, the official narrative went something along these lines: Assad decided to give Obama the international political middle finger and routinely massacred civilians with banned nerve agents such as sarin gas, even in the face of these warnings and hawkish calls for intervention.
The latest alleged attack took place in a Damascus suburb in Eastern Ghouta known as Douma, just days after Trump called for the withdrawal of U.S. forced from Syria.
But before the powers-that-be drag us all into what could easily spiral into one of the greatest world conflicts of our time, perhaps we should double-check this narrative and examine the available evidence.
A Brief History of Lies
While there have been indications of repeated chemical gas attacks in Syria, the mainstream media has pounced on four major incidents in order to justify military action against the Syrian state.
The first alleged incident, or set of incidents, took place between March and April 2013. Shortly after they occurred, then-U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon announced the United Nations would conduct an investigation into the alleged use of chemical weapons.
While the U.S. continued to use these accusations to put pressure on the Syrian government and garner support for an international intervention, two things happened that quickly unraveled the narrative.
First, at the end of April 2013, the U.S. intelligence community sent a letter to Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich) and John McCain (R-Ariz) saying the Assad government “may” have used the nerve agent sarin on a “small scale” but that the U.S. needed more evidence to provide “some degree of certainty” for taking any action against the Syrian government as “intelligence assessments alone are not sufficient.”
Second - and most important - is that U.N. investigator Carla Del Ponte came out publicly in May 2013 to state that while she could not rule out the possibility that government forces may have used chemical weapons, the evidence actually suggested Syrian rebels had deployed sarin gas.
The allegations of chemical weapons use swiftly disappeared from the mainstream narrative. For her part, Del Ponte later expressed that before resigning in September last year she had collected enough evidence to trial Assad for war crimes, as well as the use of sarin gas at some stage during the conflict, including in April last year. We will turn to this incident further below.
The second major attack took place in August 2013. This incident was given immense media coverage as the Obama administration made plans to prepare for an extensive strike plan to weaken the Syrian government.
However, this was a shoot-first-ask-questions-later approach to the incident considering the evidence regarding Assad’s culpability still had not been established.
In the London Review of Books (LRB), Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh published his own investigation into the incident in which he concluded that the U.S. had deliberately attempted to frame the evidence in order to justify a strike on Assad without even considering that al-Nusra (then Syria’s official al-Qaeda branch) could also have been a prime suspect given its known access to nerve agents and its ability to use them.
Hersh also noted that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) – now referred to as ISIS – also had the scientific knowledge required to produce sarin. ISIS has reportedly used chemical weapons at least 52 times in Iraq and Syria.
Further, both former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Lloyd and Theodore Postol, a former scientific adviser at the Department of Defense and current professor emeritus at MIT, also cast serious doubt on the incident, explaining that the rockets were much too short-range to have been fired from government-controlled areas. U.N. weapons inspector Ake Sellström came to a similar conclusion.
According to phone calls intercepted by German intelligence, Assad did not personally order the August chemical attack. He also blocked numerous requests from his military commanders to use chemical weapons against opposition forces in the months that preceded the incident.
In the years that followed, the United States’ focus turned instead to ISIS, which inevitably gave the U.S. military backdoor access to bomb Syrian territory without resorting to any form of democratic oversight.
It wasn’t until Donald Trump was elected president that the U.S. decided to re-enact Obama’s longstanding hostility to what – on the face of it – appears to be unsubstantiated allegations of chemical weapon usage.
Of course, we were also told that Assad had already destroyed his stockpile of chemical weapons, which was supposedly confirmed by the U.N. in 2014.
In April of last year, Donald Trump ordered a barrage of missiles at a Syrian government airbase in response to what was alleged to have been yet another chemical weapons attack.
Trump ordered the response well before any investigation was even conducted; in fact, by bombing the airbase allegedly responsible for the incident, Trump was effectively bombing the evidence required for such an investigation.
Comment:Read about the Alliance that has been working behind the
scenes for decades to take down the 'Cabal' within the work of David
Wilcock. President Trump is working for the Alliance and this is why he has been under a constant barrage from the mainstream media.
It is important to remember that some of the actions taken by the Alliance are not what they seem - and certainly not how they are portrayed in the still cabal-controlled mainstream media. Apparently the airstrike in question was a strategic move against another cabal target.
This chemical weapons attack was disputed by notable experts, including former weapons inspector Scott Ritter and Theodore Postol, as well as Seymour Hersh, who, again, conducted an investigation of his own.
Postol told the Anti-Media by email last year that after analyzing a New York Times report that sought to bolster the claims against Assad, Postol’s assessment was that:
"There is absolutely no evidence of bomb damage at any of the three alleged sites.”
Then, in February of this year, U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis confirmed that the U.S. government had no evidence that the Syrian government used sarin gas on its own people.
The most recent chemical weapons attack is no different. Reuters already reported that U.S. government officials told the outlet the U.S. had “not yet conclusively determined whether the attack was carried out by President Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian government forces.”
Even the hawkish U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May actually told the U.S. that they would need more evidence before they considered joining in U.S.-led airstrikes on the Syrian government.
And yet, without this evidence, the U.S. government and its allies are already preparing for a military response. On both occasions under the Trump administration, the U.S. was actively discussing leaving Syria alone in the days leading up to the event only for Assad to respond in kind by gassing civilians. Are we to believe he really is a moron or that he really is that evil?
Even if Assad is Responsible for the Chemical Weapons Attacks, What Next?
Unless we are missing something, the available evidence doesn’t even come close to proving the Assad government has used sarin gas in the major incidents referred to above.
Remember, these incidents are the prime focus of the mainstream media and warmongering politicians who capitalize on these incidents to pursue a neoconservative agenda written in stone over a decade ago.
Clearly, there are indications that Assad’s forces may have used chemical weapons at some point in time - but why is it that the media and western governments only seem to advance the claims that have never been proven beyond any reasonable doubt?
All four such over-hyped incidents have been seriously questioned either by the intelligence communities themselves or by experts in the area (and even by James Mattis).
However, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that Syrian government forces were responsible for the heinous attack. What then?
Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned in 2012 that in order to take out Syria’s air defenses successfully, the U.S. would require 70,000 personnel on the ground.
Remember, this was before Russia had intervened in the conflict, meaning the U.S. would now need a larger commitment than to actually defeat the Syrian government in any meaningful way.
"Assad’s monstrous crimes are not in doubt, and I don’t doubt that he’s capable of this,” Professor Noam Chomsky of MIT told Anti-Media via email on Tuesday.
“But I don’t know any more than that. Even if it turns out that Assad was responsible, it’s hard to think of a military response that is not likely to make a horrendous situation even worse – maybe far worse – in contrast to other major atrocities in the region that we can do a great deal about, by withdrawing our participation in them, as in Yemen.”
In other words, even if Assad is guilty of some of the worst crimes imaginable, the U.S. has no standing to criticize or do something about these actions, given its support for ongoing atrocities across the globe.
Israel is currently sniping down unarmed protesters in the Gaza Strip, including journalists. Saudi Arabia continues to obliterate Yemen.
All of these incidents are carried out with the full support of the United States, which is actively bombing and causing widespread civilian suffering in at least seven countries across the region (including and especially in Syria).
As Chomsky explained to Anti-Media:
"To borrow my late friend and collaborator Ed Herman’s typically pithy terms, there are worthy victims (theirs) and unworthy victims (ours), nefarious bloodbaths (theirs) and benign and constructive bloodbaths (ours)…
And the natural corollary is that those who prefer the path that elementary morality dictates tend to be ignored or vilified.”
Trump: Reminder, The Only Evidence Of Russian 'Collusion' Is By Hillary & The DNC
+ The Mechanics Of Democratic Deception September 5 2018 | From: DailyWire / PhiBetaIota / TheMechanicsOfDeception / Various
President Trump's steady stream of anti-"witch hunt" tweets continued recently, but just before once again calling out the "Rigged Witch Hunt," he took a moment to remind his followers that the only solid evidence of "collusion" with any Russian-connected intelligence sources involves the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Quoting conservative Graham Ledger of the Daily Ledger, Trump tweeted:
Ledger is referencing the infamous Steele Dossier, which was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, relied on alleged Russian sources for some of its "still unverified" allegations, and was integral in triggering investigations into Trump's associates and starting the Russian collusion narrative.
Earlier this year, Republican Congressman Devin Nunes (CA) released his declassified intelligence memo that alleges that the FBI used the Steele dossier without fully revealing that it was funded by Democrats in an attempt to spy on people connected to the Trump campaign.
Speaking with Fox News in March, Nunes made the same argument as Ledger.
"We know exactly who was getting information from the Russians," said the congressman.
"It was the Hillary Clinton campaign. They were getting information from the Russians, dirt on Trump to use in a campaign.
That’s the very thing that for a year and a half we’ve been trying to investigate - whether or not the Trump campaign was trying to get dirt against Hillary Clinton from the Russians? We have no evidence of that."
Trump followed his tweeted quote Thursday with some of his own thoughts on the matter:
"This is an illegally brought Rigged Witch Hunt run by people who are totally corrupt and / or conflicted.
It was started and paid for by Crooked Hillary and the Democrats.
Phony Dossier, FISA disgrace and so many lying and dishonest people already fired. 17 Angry Dems? Stay tuned!"
Former New York City Mayor and Trump Attorney Rudy Giuliani joined FOX and Friends on Monday morning to discuss the continued witch hunt against the 45th President of the United States.
Rudy told the FOX and Friends hosts that Trump did nothing wrong and his innocence has been proven.
"It’s wild, crazy and they’re out of their minds. He did not participate in any meeting about the Russian transactions. The president did not…
This is the theater of the absurd. The president’s innocence, having done nothing wrong has been proven over and over and over again.
There’s not a single stitch of evidence of collusion. He had nothing to do with the Russians. They don’t deal with the Russians. He didn’t get elected because of the Russians."
And yet Dirty Cop Robert Mueller and his angry Democrats continue the witch hunt anyway and continue to harass and abuse Trump supporters.
The network graph analysis indicates that the fellowship of the dossier is a close-knit group; everyone knew each other long before embarking on the quest to find the alleged Russian collusion. All of the project key players are related through marriage, family relations, or work affiliations.
Sidney Blumenthal’s network is noteworthy because his email address book contains many of the dossier characters including Jacoby, Simpson, Winer, and others.
A sampling of Blumenthal’s first 20 contacts (out of over 4000) shows an over 96% linkage to anti-Trump publications, most of these are from mainstream media sources.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
So who researched and wrote the core parts of the dossier?
It looks like it was a team effort. Most of the textual evidence points to Glenn Simpson and his wife Mary Jacoby as the architects of the dossier framework.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
Simpson and Steele did far more than simply conduct sordid opposition research for the Clinton campaign.
By various machinations, they successfully reached the most influential people in UK and US politics, the media, and federal government agencies and shaped/influenced the narrative of the 2016 presidential elections.
There is little doubt that Simpson/Jacoby and their US political / media network and Steele with his enablers in Hakluyt, the British media, and the Foreign Office successfully waged a full-scale influence operation against the US and are continuing to do so even now.
The Reality Of War: Memorial Day Normalises Satanic Human Sacrifice September 4 2018 | From: HenryMakow / Various
Memorial Day in the US [as similar to others in the west such as ANZAC day], is dedicated to honouring the war dead.
Cabalist (Masonic) central bankers follow a long-term plan to degrade and enslave humanity.
This is what Communism is really about. They finance both sides of every war to make human sacrifices to their God Satan, to make money and extend their tyranny.
Illuminati insider Ronald Bernard said
that wars are designed to sacrifice humans. (Starting at 18 min) Are we complicit in satanic human sacrifice by pretending they died in a noble cause?
War is a tragic hoax
Wars are the closest thing to hell on earth. What do you expect? They are devised by Satanists. Why do we accept them as natural and inevitable?
Why do we perpetuate the myth that soldiers were "defending our freedom" when in fact wars are designed to sacrifice them to Satan and deprive us of freedom?
"Revolution" really means, "overturning" Western civilization. Replacing God with Lucifer.
"Christianity is our only real enemy since all the political and economic phenomena of the bourgeois states are only its consequences,"Rakovsky, says.
Peace is "counter-revolutionary" since it is war that paves the way for revolution.
Revolution really means, overturning Western civilization. Thus, war is a self-destructive enterprise contrived by folks who want to degrade and enslave us.
Debunking a Century of War Lies
In the modern age of democracy and volunteer armies, a pretense for war is required to rally the nation around the flag and motivate the public to fight.
That is why every major conflict is now accompanied by its own particular bodyguard of lies.
From false flag attacks to dehumanization of the "enemy," here are all the examples you'll need to help debunk a century of war lies.
When the United States and England loaned Mexico money in 1903 using its customs revenue as collateral, Illuminati banker Jacob Schiff cabled his English counterpart, Ernest Cassel:
"If they don't pay, who will collect the customs?" Cassel replied: "Your marines and ours."
Marine General Smedley Butler (1881-1940) confirmed that he was "a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers."
In War is a Racket (1935) he wrote:
“I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in.
I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long.
I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916.
In China, I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested."
Flash forward to 2011 when NATO fomented and led a mission in Libya one of only four countries that didn't have a Rothschild central bank.
Now Libya does have a central bank.
They don't call it imperialism anymore. They call it "Our mission in Libya."
Soldiers aren't mercenaries; they are "missionaries." Now they're after Syria, North Korea, and Iran, three of the four remaining countries without a Rothschild central bank
All wars are organized by the Illuminati bankers to collect or incur debt, kill goyim, plunder or profit, and to advance their program for Masonic Jewish "world government" tyranny.
They appeal to our patriotism to sucker us in. We are told we are fighting to "preserve freedom" when the opposite is actually the case.
I regard their lives as cut short tragically in a bogus cause. They are human sacrifices, dupes and mercenaries.
We have all been duped for a very long time.
That gives Memorial Day a taint of pathos and cynicism.
World War Two
While we were losing fathers and sons, Allied and Nazi central bankers were sitting shoulder to shoulder in Basel at the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) mainly financing the Nazis.
The BIS handed the Nazis the national treasure of Czechoslovakia, Holland, and Belgium to ensure the war could go on. This gold, worth $378 million at the time, was the basis of loans to the Nazis and was never returned.
The BIS accepted and stored Nazi plunder -- art, diamonds and precious metals including dental gold and wedding ring from concentration camp inmates.
The US Federal Reserve, the Banks of England, France, Italy, Japan and the Reichsbank were all members of the BIS.
The Nazi Reichsbank had most seats but the BIS President was a Rockefeller factotum Thomas H. McKittrick (1889-1970). (Significantly he has no Wikipedia entry.)
"Changing the World" Means Having a World War
Questioned by a US Treasury Dept official in March 1945, McKittrick said that the war had been a charade all along, with Germany taking the fall.
Asked why the BIS worked with the Nazis, he replied:
“In the complicated German financial setup, certain men who have their central bankers' point of view, are in very strategic positions and can influence the conduct of the German government..."
Then he spelled it out, albeit in a euphemism. The war's purpose was to reposition Germany in the banker New World Order:
"McKittrick went on to say that there was a little group of financiers who had felt from the beginning that Germany would lose the war; that after defeat they might emerge to shape Germany's destiny.
That they would "maintain their contacts and trust with other important banking elements so that they would be in a stronger position in the postwar world to negotiate loans for the reconstruction of Germany."
This quotation is from Charles Higham's mind-blowing book, Trading With the Enemy, 1983, p. 37. (See excerpts here)
These bankers controlled a Who's Who of corporations which had factories in occupied Europe that underpinned the Nazi war effort and profited handsomely.
Ford, General Motors, Standard Oil and ITT provided the Nazis with essential trucks, airplane engines, materiel, and technology, often giving the Nazis preference during shortages.
In a telling example, the Allies bombed a ball bearing plant in Germany only to have the stock replaced by a factory in Pennsylvania (via Sweden.)
Higham refers to these bankers as "the fraternity." They are the Illuminati.
An earlier set of bankers masterminded World War One and kept it going. But you get the picture. All wars are really waged by the Luciferian central bankers against humanity, i.e "the goyim."
In 1916, almost 1.2 million British, French and German soldiers died or were maimed in the Battle of the Somme alone. They were the cream of their generation. The British national debt multiplied tenfold.
By participating in any war, we are accomplices in our own destruction. They are sacrificing us to their God Satan.
The military is catching on too. A recent poll found that only 34 percent of U.S. veterans of the post-9/11 military believed that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were worth fighting.
US soldiers now generally say they are fighting "for their buddies" not for their country.
We cannot honor the war dead without recognizing that, like us, they have been duped. Otherwise, we perpetuate the sinister power which holds us prisoner.
Ultimately, the New World Order is about replacing the rule of God with the rule of Lucifer.
That's why "God" has become a dirty word. War is the principal means by which Lucifer's disciples, the Cabalist (satanist) central bankers, "change the world."
They have erected a police state behind the facade of freedom. We don't know this because our leaders in government, education, and media are witting or unwitting participants. Treason to God and country is a prerequisite for success in many fields.
If honoring the war dead means perpetuating a cycle of endless war, we must stop. Better to honor the dead by abolishing wars. We can do this by nationalizing private central banks and making the bankers answer for their crimes.
As a former soldier myself, even I cringe when I hear people thanking soldiers for their "service" People wax maudlin over our "heroes" in uniform who are somehow "defending our freedom".
Let me tell you a little secret. Most people join the military because it's a job, not because they have noble visions of getting killed on some battlefield.
When I was in the army a few decades ago, we would go through training exercises and we would drink. That amounted to about all we did. I was certainly no hero, nor was I defending our freedom or providing a sacred service to Canadians.
If I knew what I know today, I wouldn't have even considered signing up back then. I was young and naive. The only way I would muse about joining the military today is if Canada itself were under attack.
I'm not going to be fooled into putting combat boots on so that I can fight a battle on the other side of the globe on behalf on the international moneylenders.
In the 1950s, 60s, 70s, and 80s, a certain percentage of young American men from blue collar families would typically join some branch of the US military to gain employment, free medical and dental care, free meals and housing, technical training, perhaps some college, and above all, have an adventure and see the world.
No one of those decades had any inkling of what the Pentagon was really about and just how rotten are the scoundrels and liars of Washington DC who connive with their pals in banking and the military-industrial complex to create the pretext and excuses to wage war against innocent people in far away lands, so said scoundrels can generate obscene amounts of profit and booty for themselves, and all at taxpayer expense.
Following the treachery leveled against US service men in the first Gulf war (1991) by its own government in which hundreds of thousands of men and women were subjected to vaccinations that caused the intentionally introduced, lab created "Gulf War syndrome (or illness)", you would think that far more young people would think twice about joining a Pentagon killing machine that had all the earmarks of satanic stewardship.
After the traitors in our military and government, working with the Mossad, orchestrated the events of 9/11, they send US military personnel into Iraq and Afghanistan to engage in such depraved levels of barbarity, cruelty, and murderous savagery (mostly against civilians).
That for the first time in the history of the United States, we have scores and scores of returning military men committing suicide because they can no longer take the mental torment that their conscience has forced upon them for their unconscionable conduct in the Middle East.
The only way you can stop this process is to stop cooperating with it and that means to stop enlisting in the military and subject yourself to the Pentagon's sorcerers (and I mean that literally).
In 2005, all the signs were in place for the calling of a draft, but ultimately they decided to not follow through because the war in Iraq, I think, was beginning to lose popular support and the institution of a draft would lead to anti-war protests on campuses across the country and that in turn would lead to an eventual pullout of US troops in the Middle East (as in Vietnam).
So they start sucking up recruits from Mexico, Central America, South America and the Philippines to fill American military boots and make up the shortfall with promises of a fast track to US citzenship and other financial perks and incentives (at taxpayer expense, of course).
In earlier decades, you could believe the party line that we were the Good Guys of the world and that our mission was to 'maintain the peace' and 'provide stability', and all the flag-waving crap that they throw at naive, inexperienced, and trusting young minds. But today there is no excuse.
With the internet, anyone can find out exactly who and what the Pentagon is and understand the price you will pay if you foolishly decide to join that killing machine.
You can't blame the veterans of earlier decades because we thought we were doing the right thing and assumed that the military was on the up and up.
But today, everyone should know the score and we should do nothing to encourage or enable that killing enterprise - including celebrating its 'commemorative' rituals."
Trump On Establishment Media: “Truth Doesn’t Matter To Them” & Leaked 49-Page Memo Documents How George Soros Is Behind Social Media Censorship September 3 2018 | From: NewsWars / TheDuran
President Trump unleashed a tweet salvo directed at the “dishonest” mainstream media, specifically targeting the heads of CNN and NBC News, whom he christened “Little Jeff Z” and “Andy Lack(y),” respectively.
Trump asserted that both men are unfit for their positions, and reiterated his charge on Thursday morning that a large portion of corporate media is an “enemy of the people.”
“The hatred and extreme bias of me by CNN has clouded their thinking and made them unable to function,” Trump wrote in his first tweet of the day.
“But actually, as I have always said, this has been going on for a long time. Little Jeff Z has done a terrible job, his ratings suck, and AT&T should fire him to save credibility!”
“What’s going on at CNN is happening, to different degrees, at other networks – with NBC News being the worst. The good news is that Andy Lack(y) is about to be fired(?) for incompetence, and much worse.
When Lester Holt got caught fudging my tape on Russia, they were hurt badly!”
“I just cannot state strongly enough how totally dishonest much of the media is,” the president wrote at the conclusion of his anti-MSM barrage. “Truth doesn’t matter to them, they only have their hatred & agenda.
This includes fake books, which come out about me all the time, always anonymous sources, and are pure fiction. Enemy of the people!”
Trump’s attack came just hours after he blasted journalist Carl Bernstein, who is currently embroiled in a crisis of credibility over an article he co-authored for CNN that has been roundly attacked as “very fake news” by a politically-diverse group of critics.
“CNN is being torn apart from within based on their being caught in a major lie and refusing to admit the mistake,” Trump tweeted Wednesday night. “Sloppy Carl Bernstein, a man who lives in the past and thinks like a degenerate fool, making up story after story, is being laughed at all over the country! Fake News.”
Glenn Greenwald picked apart Bernstein’s story in a piece at The Intercept titled CNN, Credibly Accused of Lying to its Audience About a Key Claim in its Blockbuster Cohen Story, Refuses to Comment.
“CNN’s blockbuster July 26 story – that Michael Cohen intended to tell Special Counsel Robert Mueller that he was present when Donald Trump was told in advance about his son’s Trump Tower meeting with various Russians – includes a key statement about its sourcing that credible reporting now suggests was designed to have misled its audience,” Greenwald wrote.
“Yet CNN simply refuses to address the serious ethical and journalistic questions raised about its conduct.”
The Washington Post has also cast doubt on Bernstein’s reporting, asking, “. . . Bernstein’s latest blockbuster story has come under heavy fire, beset by a troubling question: Is it accurate?”
Bernstein, who recently asserted that supposed scandals in the Trump presidency are “worse than Watergate,” responded to the President, citing his career record as a journalist and declaring that he stands by his reporting for the questionable CNN story.
MSM Calls Trump A Conspiracy Theorist Over Tech Giant Censorship
Leaked 49-Page Memo Documents How George Soros Is Behind Social Media Censorship
Media Matters founder David Brock is pushing for the destruction of Donald Trump at Soros’ behest.
A new leaked memo obtained by The Free Beacon documents how George Soros funded groups plotted with Google, Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms to eliminate conservative “right wing propaganda.”
The recent wave of censorship of conservative voices on the internet by tech giants Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple mirrors a plan concocted by a coalition of George Soros-funded, progressive groups to take back power in Washington from President Trump’s administration.
The Gateway Pundit reported that in January 2017 after Hillary Clinton was shellacked in the November 2016 election top Democrat operatives at Media Matters, Share Blue, American Bridge, and CREW came together and released their two-year plan to take back power in Washington DC.
The document obtained by The Free Beacon states that Media Matters and other Soros funded groups have “access to raw data from Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites” so they can “systemically monitor and analyze this unfiltered data.”
The Free Beacon obtained a copy of the memo, “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action,”by attending a January 2017 retreat in Florida sponsored by Media Matters founder David Brock and 100 donors.
WND reports that the memo spells out a four-year agenda that deployed Media Matters along with American Bridge, Shareblue and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) to attack Trump and Republicans.
The strategies are impeachment, expanding Media Matters’ mission to combat “government misinformation,” ensuring Democratic control of the Senate in the 2018 midterm elections, filing lawsuits against the Trump administration, monetizing political advocacy, using a “digital attacker” to delegitimize Trump’s presidency and damage Republicans, and partnering with Facebook to combat “fake news."
“The document claims Media Matters and far-left groups have “access to raw data from Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites” so they can “systemically monitor and analyze this unfiltered data.”
“The earlier we can identify a fake news story, the more effectively we can quash it,” the memo states. “With this new technology at our fingertips, researchers monitoring news in real time will be able to identify the origins of a lie with mathematical precision, creating an early warning system for fake news and disinformation.”
Media Matters met with Facebook, which boasts some 2 billion members worldwide, to discuss how to crack down on fake news, according to the memo.
The social media giant was provided with “a detailed map of the constellation of right-wing Facebook pages that had been the biggest purveyors of fake news.”
Brock’s memo also says Media Matters gave Google “the information necessary to identify 40 of the worst fake new sites” so they could be banned from Google’s advertising network.
The Gateway Pundit pointed out that in 2016, Google carried out that plan on the Gateway Pundit blog and other conservative sites, including Breitbart, the Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge and Conservative Treehouse.
Facebook, meanwhile has changed its newsfeed algorithm, ostensibly to combat “fake news,” causing a precipitous decline in traffic for many conservative sites.
President Donald Trump himself was affected, with his engagement on Facebook dropping by 45 percent.
A study in June by Gateway Pundit found Facebook had eliminated 93 percent of the traffic of top conservative news outlets.
Western Journal, in its own study, found that while left-wing publishers saw a roughly 2 percent increase in web traffic from Facebook following the algorithm changes, conservative sites saw a loss of traffic averaging around 14 percent.
On Aug. 6, WND reported, Facebook, YouTube and Apple banned commentator Alex Jones and his Infowars website within hours of each other.
Last month, WND reported moderate Muslims and counter-terrorist activists were increasingly being restricted by Silicon Valley, while terrorist content remains on social-media platforms, according to researchers.
Trump campaign chief Parscale said last week the banning of Jones “will inevitably lead to the silencing of those with far less controversial opinions.”
“What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus,” Parscale said.
To Sell You Happiness, They First Make You Feel Like Shit
September 2 2018 | From: TheUnboundedSpirit
Each and every day we’re bombarded with hundreds, if not thousands of images that are trying to convince us that we’re not good enough as we are.
You guessed right, I’m talking about advertisements.
The advertising industry has one and only mission: to persuade us into buying stuff with the promise that it’ll bring us happiness. But how exactly does it achieve that?
By first making us feel like shit.
“Look, this shiny, attractive and popular actress is sporting this swimsuit and by purchasing it you’ll feel sexy and successful like her.”
“Look, this handsome and confident businessman is driving this luxurious car and all the babes are begging to sleep with him like crazy. Get it and within moments you’ll get laid with more beautiful women that you could have ever imagined.”
The message implied in advertisements is simple: As you are, you suck, and you need to be different to not suck. Here, get this product and you won’t suck anymore.
Once they convince us that we suck, we do as they tell us, because who in the world wants to be a sucker?
No one.
You might be thinking: That’s bullshit! I’m not affected by those stupid ads.
Well, almost everyone I know says the same. I admit, I used to think like that too. But the truth is that we’re all affected, although in most cases we aren’t even aware of it.
Ponder on this: why would companies invest most of their money on advertising, if it wasn’t effective?
Advertising is all about persuasion, and those who are good at it see tremendous financial gains. But for persuasion to work at its best, it needs to happen subconsciously - that is, it needs to bypass conscious reasoning and take place on an emotional level. That’s precisely why we don’t know that it’s influencing us.
Let me offer you an example. When you are exposed to a Coca Cola ad again and again, at some point you become so accustomed to it that you unconsciously associate it with certain positive psychological states (such as love and joy), and so next time you go out to buy a drink, you grab the Coke can without wondering why.
You buy it just because you were persuaded to, while you’re under the impression that you did solely out of our own conscious decision.
‘Yes Girl’ – 1946 Cardboard Coca Cola Poster by Haddon Sundblom
I could go off on a tangent about the different tactics the advertising industry is using to manipulate us, but the point is that, as all big marketers know, great advertising is sneaky and its basic objective is to lower your self-esteem (with its ultimate objective being, of course, to sell you some crap in the name of happiness).
Starving for Connection
If you’re feeling shitty, there might be a good reason to blame it on advertising. Yet the advertising industry itself is nothing but a natural outgrowth of our profoundly sick society, where deception and competition are an everyday reality.
Indeed, advertising would barely be as effective in a society where people were honest and worked together for the common good. In fact, in such a society advertising as we know it wouldn’t exist at all.
Because of the competitive world we were brought up in and have to endure on a daily basis, most of us feel disconnected from our fellow humans. Of course, when others are constantly trying to maximize their personal gain at your expense, how can you feel a loving connection to them?
You can’t. Rather, you feel threatened by their presence. To protect yourself from them, you build big walls around you. And for a while, you feel safe and secure.
But eventually you experience the painful consequences: loneliness, anxiety, depression.
As every psychologist knows, humans are highly social beings - that is, we all have an inherent need to connect and share with others.
Connection is crucial to our emotional health, and when we don’t find it, we suffer.
No wonder in our disconnected society what we deep down crave more than anything else is to open our hearts and connect with other people. We want to feel a sense of belonging to community. We want to feel loved and accepted. We want to feel heard and understood.
Human disconnection is deeply affecting our psyche
Here’s why: The more problems you have, the easier you can be emotionally manipulated and financially exploited.
“Do you feel lonely? Don’t worry. Just pay $2000 for this escort and you’ll be in the company of an affectionate being.”
“Do you feel that your life is lacking adventure? This can easily be fixed. Buy these pair of Jordan sneakers for just $199 and you’ll feel like a basketball superstar.”
“Do you feel worried over the meaninglessness of your life? Let us help you. Get this cheap yet immensely effective pill and your mind will be relieved of distressing thoughts in just a matter of seconds.”
We may not be aware of it, but the main reason we keep on buying stuff is to find connection to those things we’ve lost and we emotionally starve for. The cunning ones in the marketing business know this very well, and are trying to exploit our insecurities through deceitful advertising just so they can empty our pockets and fill in theirs.
By purchasing this or that product, they make us believe that we’ll feel satisfied and content. Yet no matter how many products we manage to acquire, we always end up feeling sad and unfulfilled.
Shopping can never emotionally satisfy us because it provides us only with substitutes of what we’re longing for. And although it can at times bring us a temporary feeling of completeness and euphoria, that is soon followed by disappointment and a sense of inner emptiness.
Acquiring a fancy car may help attract a lot of eyes on you, and for a while this could make you feel like you’re the most important person in the world. You might start thinking that people appreciate you and would love to be in your presence, which in turn might bring you some egotistic gratification.
Yet this won’t be enough to satisfy your psychological need to genuinely connect and intimately bond with people who actually embrace you for who you are and not merely for what you have.
Getting a 14-day return ticket to some exotic part of the world and staying there in a 5-star hotel that provides you with all the luxury you desire can help you to forget the painful reality of everyday life, and might even make you feel like your life is filled with adventure and joy.
Yet before you realize it you’ll be forced to get back from your happy holidays and face the harsh truth that was there awaiting you all along.
Obtaining clothes from expensive fashion brands in an effort to feel beautiful and special might work as long as you’re in the company of individuals who praise you solely based on your appearance.
But when you are on your own or in the presence of people who don’t care about your looks, status and wealth, you won’t help it but feel that old familiar voice creeping in your mind again, whispering that you’re ugly and unworthy of love.
What some call “retail therapy” is actually a symptom of psychological dis-ease
Substitutes offer nothing more than a quick fix - they work for a short while, but eventually they always let us down. Hence, to fill in our emotional void and find lasting contentment, we need to stop foolishly running after things that bring us a fleeting sense of joy, and instead pursue those ones that can truly enrich our lives in the long run.
We need to stop collecting material possessions, and instead collect memories from mind-expanding and heart-touching experiences.
We need to stop showing off how much stuff we own, and instead openly express our truest thoughts and feelings. We need to stop amassing financial wealth, and instead realize our inner yet long-forgotten wealth.
We need to stop searching for the next thing to force us out of our chronic boredom and stress, and instead create a life that’s worth waking up to.
Changing the System
For all the above to happen, it is important that we realize what truly matters to our well-being and act accordingly. However, personal behavioral change alone isn’t enough.
No matter how strong our individual efforts to live meaningfully, purposefully and peacefully are, the external pressures of our competitive, materialistic and consumption-driven society will most likely cancel them out.
Therefore, if we want to see a lasting change happening for the benefit of ourselves and future generations, we need to focus our attention on transforming the very foundation of our socioeconomic system that is at the root of most problems our civilization is currently faced with.
I’ll try to explain what I mean with an example. A few paragraphs above, I wrote: “The cunning ones in the marketing business [ … ] are trying to exploit our insecurities through deceitful advertising just so they can empty our pockets and fill in theirs.”
This might sound as if the professional marketers are some kind of evil people who don’t give a damn about others and care only about their own financial gain.
The truth, however, is that they are people like you and me - people who somehow need to “earn a living” or else starve and live on the street.
They might actually be quite loving and compassionate, but at the same time they need some kind of a job, and because of the market’s immense competition, it’s extremely difficult - if not impossible - to find/create one they like and which aligns with their values.
They do what they got to do to increase their competitive advantage and keep on surviving in a harsh and unforgiving system, and in most cases that requires cunningness and deceit.
You see, our economic system is a scarcity-based system, since money isn’t enough to go around (if you didn’t know, money is created as interest-bearing debt, which means that there’s always more debt than money in existence).
Therefore, we all feel compelled to compete with one another in order to stay in a position of financial security and power, and that feeds the selfish and acquisitive part of our nature.
Yet the reality is that we’re living on a planet of abundance where all people’s needs could be easily met, if only we realized that our monetary system is obsolete, and worked together using our technical know-how to equitably distribute resources, instead of toiling day in and day out so as to outsmart others.
Once we stop fighting against each other and join our efforts in order to turn our world into a more beautiful place for all to enjoy, we’ll begin to feel connected again as well as to carry out work that is meaningful.
Then we will experience such an emotional satisfaction that we won’t be drawn to the momentary pleasure derived from shopping anymore; rather, we’ll be able to direct our attention on those things that actually matter to our happiness and build our lives around them.
“Do Not Resist”: The Police Militarization Documentary Everyone Should See
September 1 2018 | From: TheIntercept
On a sunny afternoon last summer, Craig Atkinson, a New York City-based filmmaker, stood in a front yard in South Carolina surrounded by several heavily armed police officers.
The officers, members of the Richland County Sheriff’s Department tactical team, were descending on a modest one-story house looking for drugs and guns. The team smashed through the windows of the home with iron pikes, then stormed the front door with rifles raised.
Inside, they found a terrified family of four, including an infant. As the family members were pulled outside, Atkinson’s camera captured a scene that plays out with startling regularity in cities and towns across the country, one of many included in his new documentary, “Do Not Resist,” an examination of police militarization in the United States.
And it's not just hapening there.
The police begin rooting through the trash. “Where the fuck is the weed?” one officer asks, as the team ransacks a car parked in the driveway. “Boy that was sweet,” another says, commenting on the speed of the raid. One officer finds a backpack, which yields a bit of marijuana - it’s not enough to roll a joint, but it’s something.
The officer in charge questions the owner of the backpack, a young African-American man. In a conversation captured on Atkinson’s microphone, the young man, a local community college student, tells the officer he runs a small landscaping business.
Knowing he’s being taken into custody, with his hands cuffed in front of him, he asks the officer for a favor: Can he remove the $876 in his pocket set aside for new lawn-care equipment and give it to one of his employees to go to the hardware store? Instead of handing the cash to the arrestee’s co-worker, the tactical team seizes the money.
“I never one time said you’re a bad person,” the officer tells the young man before he’s led off. “I just have a job to do, and you happen to be in the middle of it.”
The pernicious practice of civil asset forfeiture, which allows law enforcement to grab cash or property during the course of raids, then requires people to prove the assets were not related to criminal activity in order to get them back — and allows police to keep the assets if they fail to do so - has been well documented.
What’s less common is to see one of those interactions play out on camera. Capturing those kinds of moments is what “Do Not Resist” is all about.
Trailer for “Do Not Resist,” a New Documentary Examining Police Militarization in the United States:
Atkinson’s directorial debut has already taken home this year’s prize for best documentary at the Tribeca Film Festival and is currently making the rounds in select cities around the country.
Radley Balko, author of “Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces,” has called the film “terrifying,”“powerful,” and “important.”
Based on substantial on-the-ground reporting, “Do Not Resist” is both unsettling to watch and necessary to see.
The film begins in Ferguson, Missouri, on a rainy night of protest in August 2014 that erupted into a melee of tear gas and screaming.
It then quickly moves to a seminar with Dave Grossman, a law enforcement guru who gives trainings on lethal force and the application of a warrior mentality in the name of the law.
“The policeman is the man of the city,” Grossman begins, before explaining that cops he’s spoken to routinely describe their first on-the-job kill as a prelude to the best sex of their lives.
“Both partners are very invested in some very intense sex,” Grossman says.
“There’s not a whole lot of perks that come with this job. You find one, relax and enjoy it.”
Grossman believes that a violent reckoning between law enforcement and critics of police militarization is fast approaching.
“We are at war,” Grossman tells the crowd, “and you are the front-line troops in this war.”
The language reflects a theme that runs throughout “Do Not Resist.”
Atkinson began the project three years ago in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings. The images of armored cars and commando cops in the streets resonated for him on a personal level. Atkinson’s father spent 29 years as a police officer outside Detroit - 13 of them on a SWAT team, where he held the rank of commander.
Atkinson and his brother would take part in their dad’s training, playing the part of hostages when they were little and mock shooters when they were big enough to handle weapons.
Watching the footage from Boston, it was obvious to Atkinson that something profound had shifted since his dad’s days on the force. He set out to create a film that would capture that shift.
The “Do Not Resist” crew attended expos and trade shows, community meetings and federal hearings, training seminars and SWAT contests. All told, the team traveled to 19 states, went on roughly 20 police ride-a-longs, observed half a dozen raids, and interacted with hundreds of police officers.
The hope was to be on-hand for an incident in which a SWAT team’s use of heavy weapons would be unquestionably warranted.
“I thought the whole time I would be able to show something that would kind of reflect the entire scope of what a SWAT officer might go through sometimes, where you actually do need the equipment,” Atkinson explained.
Instead, the filmmaker repeatedly found himself watching police with military-grade weaponry executing dubious search warrants.
The frequency of the raids was particularly shocking, with one of the officers in the film claiming his team does 200 such operations a year.
By comparison, Atkinson notes, his father performed a total of 29 search warrant raids over his entire 13 years in SWAT - according to some estimates, SWAT teams now carry out between 50,000 to 80,000 raids across the country annually.
“The search warrants, we’re told, are always used for massive drug dealers and kingpins, and then we run in these homes and we never found anything,” Atkinson said.
Beyond the day-to-day breaking down of doors, “Do Not Resist” explores the growing role of private surveillance companies in local policing, and law enforcement’s thirst for technology that can predict crimes before they happen.
An analyst inspects video feeds of a wide-scale aerial surveillance system being utilized by local police departments
The film highlights Persistence Surveillance Systems, a company offering low-cost aerial surveillance honed in Fallujah to domestic law enforcement. “We’re not out to watch the whole world, just all the world that’s got crime,” Ross McNutt, the president of the company, insists.
“That’s the next wave in the militarization of police,” Atkinson told The Intercept in an interview.
“What we found was a whole slew of retired military officers now in the private sector now selling the exact same surveillance technology that they just got back from Iraq and Afghanistan with to local law enforcement for small money on the dollar.”
The intent of “Do Not Resist,” Atkinson said, is to provide a glimpse inside the realities of American policing, challenge the policing-for-profit model that has caused departments in economically depressed communities to treat their citizens as walking ATM machines, call out a warrior culture that divides law enforcement from the public they’re sworn to serve, and flag the dangers of war-zone technologies being applied domestically.
For the most part, the reaction from law enforcement has been positive, Atkinson said.
“I’ve had a lot of law enforcement really respond well to the film and say that it reflects these issues that a lot of them have been working on themselves,” he said.
As for his father, Atkinson said, watching the film stirs up uncomfortable feelings.
“His major reaction was just disappointment in seeing how far the mission creep had actually gone,” he said.
“It’s obviously disappointing to see something that you were dedicating your life to so completely, evolve into something that you would never want to be a part of.”
US Attorney General Finally Admits Weed Isn’t A Gateway Drug - Prescription Pills Are + Study Proves Medical Marijuana Can Replace Dangerous Pharmaceuticals August 31 2018 | From: TheAntiMedia / NaturalNews / Various
The National Institute on Drug Abuse is a U.S. federal research institute focused on “[advancing] science on the causes and consequences of drug use and addiction … to apply that knowledge to improve individual and public health. ”
Though it admits “the majority of people who use marijuana do not go on to use other, ‘harder’ substances,” it still describes marijuana as a gateway drug.
While discussing how heroin abuse and how individuals often develop an addiction, Lynch argued:
'“[I]ndividuals [start out] with a prescription drug problem, and then because they need more and more, they turn to heroin. It isn’t so much that marijuana is the step right before using prescription drugs or opioids - it is true that if you tend to experiment with a lot of things in life, you may be inclined to experiment with drugs, as well. But it’s not like we’re seeing that marijuana as a specific gateway.”
Attorney General Lynch added that instead of trafficking rings, what “introduce[s] a person to opioids … [is] the household medicine cabinet.”
The event she attended was part of the Prescription Opioid Heroin Epidemic Awareness Week, a campaign designed by the White House that includes “250 different events highlighting the importance of prevention, enforcement, and treatment.”
As expected, the campaign focused on advertising the official approach to drug abuse, encouraging the public to support the Obama administration’s approach to the opioid crisis.
Measures embraced by the administration include “expanding evidence-based prevention and treatment programs, increasing access to the overdose-reversal medicine naloxone, and supporting targeted enforcement activities.”
In early August, the Obama administration said no to a bid urging the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to reconsider how marijuana is classified under federal drug control laws. Currently, the DEA lists marijuana as a Schedule I drug, along with heroin, the pivot drug of the opioid epidemic.
But as the Attorney General’s comments demonstrate, the federal government fails to take its own classification methodology seriously, choosing instead to contend that prescription drug abuse is a much bigger issue.
Per its federal classification, marijuana should be seen as a threat as dangerous as heroin, and yet Lynch appears to contend the abuse of legal drugs is keeping federal agents busy - not the enforcement of her agency’s own rules.
But as American states begin to shift their approach to some of the targets of this nationwide anti-drug campaign, legalized marijuana is able to accomplish what many drug war apologists claimed criminalization would achieve: bringing down the drug cartels. But as the Washington Postreport demonstrates, legalizing pot is not enough.
While powerful drug cartels have seen legalized marijuana taking a chunk out of their profits, the criminalization of other drugs such as heroin continues to put addicts in harm’s way.
Without legal means to produce the drugs the market demands, these cartels are not concerned with the quality of their product nor the health of their consumer.
Study Proves Medical Marijuana Can Replace Dangerous Pharmaceuticals
Opponents of medical marijuana laws have often claimed that legalizing marijuana use would lead to rampant drug abuse and have an adverse effect on society. Now that these laws have been instituted in some states for a few years, however, evidence is mounting that the opposite is actually true.
In fact, it turns out that medical marijuana is so effective at treating pain that it's keeping many patients off prescription painkillers, which are a bigger threat to society than marijuana use, medical or otherwise, could ever be.
In a recent study, researchers discovered that Medicare reported savings of $165.2 million in 2013 on the prescription medications that are used to treat some of the conditions that can also be treated with marijuana.
These included depression, pain, seizures, nausea, glaucoma, anxiety, spasticity and sleep disorders. You may recall that 2013 was the year that 17 states put medical marijuana laws into place, along with the District of Columbia.
These impressive savings accounted for half a percent of the Medicare Part D budget for that year. In the study, all of the claims for prescriptions filed for the medications in question from 2010 to 2013 by Medicare Part D patients were reviewed.
Decreases were noted in the number of prescriptions that were written for medications other than marijuana for most of the conditions studied. For example, in states with legal medical marijuana, the prescriptions for pain medications were lower by a remarkable 1,826 daily doses compared to the states where medical marijuana is not legal.
The researchers estimate that Medicare could have saved $468 million on prescription drugs if every state had a medical marijuana law in place.
The sole exception was glaucoma, and this could be due to the fact that marijuana's effects on the condition tend to only last for about an hour. Prescriptions for medicines that marijuana is not used for, such as blood thinners, did not drop.
Researcher Ashley Bradford of the University of Georgia, who was the study's lead author, said: "The results suggest people are really using marijuana as medicine and not just using it for recreational purposes."
Medical Marijuana Could Alleviate The Nation's Opioid Crisis
This is good news for those suffering with these ailments, with marijuana proving to be a safer alternative to conventional medicine. Take the example of opioids, a type of painkiller that has been responsible for a slew of deadly overdoses.
A University of Michigan study found that patients with chronic pain who used medical marijuana reported a drop in their use of prescription opioids amounting to 64 percent. They also reported experiencing fewer side effects, and a 45 percent improvement in their quality of life since turning to cannabis for pain management.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 40 people die each day from overdosing on these drugs.
Bad News for Big Pharma
Anything that can steer people away from death-inducing prescription painkillers and other dangerous medications is a very positive step, no matter what your personal feelings are about marijuana.
Of course, Big Pharma does not share this view, as it threatens their profits, which also explains why they are hoping people won't catch on to the benefits of CBD oil from hemp for issues such as epilepsy.
Not only is marijuana very effective for many people, but it carries very few side effects, and is often more affordable than the pills Big Pharma is trying to push on people. This latest study showing that marijuana is replacing dangerous pharmaceuticals for many people might be bad news for Big Pharma, but it's good news for everybody else.
Why the War on Cannabis?
Monsanto May Soon Face A Flood Of Lawsuits From Cancer Victims Of Roundup Herbicide August 30 2018 | From: NaturalNews
Monsanto, the maker of the world’s most popular weed killer Roundup, could soon be facing an unrelenting flood of lawsuits from people who got cancer from their product.
Recently, a federal judge decided to allow three expert witnesses to give their testimony pertaining to Roundup’s carcinogenicity. U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the three experts could testify, and he even went so far as to say that their opinions were not “junk science.” The judge will be residing over more than 400 of the lawsuits against Monsanto.
"So long as an opinion is premised on reliable scientific principles, it should not be excluded by the trial judge; instead the weaknesses in an unpersuasive expert opinion can be exposed at trial, through cross-examination or testimony by opposing experts.”
The firm is currently defending itself in a trial with 46-year-old Dwayne Johnson, who says he became ill with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after he used Roundup for more than two years in his role as a school groundskeeper in California.
The dying man is just the first in a list of around 4,000 people with similar lawsuits.
Johnson’s lawyer, Timothy Litzenburg, and Monsanto have agreed not to talk to the media until a jury is in place, but as the representative of hundreds of other victims, he has spoken in the past about the direct link between the rise in Roundup use and the spike in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Another of his clients, 68-year-old coffee bean farmer Christine Sheppard, likened Monsanto’s antics to those of the tobacco industry. She said: “They hid reports linking its weed killer to cancer.” She’s suing them because she’d like to see the product banned and removed from store shelves so others won’t have to suffer like she did.
Monsanto Knew that Roundup Caused Cancer and Sold it Anyway
It’s important to note that this case is not only about Roundup causing cancer but also the fact that Monsanto has long known these products can be deadly and went out of its way to hide it.
The Scientific Advisory Panel found that they threw out studies that shed the products in a negative light, including one that showed farmers who were exposed to the chemical had a 27 to 50 percent higher risk of cancer than control groups.
Should the jury side with Johnson in his case, Monsanto can expect to be flooded with similar lawsuits, with thousands of plaintiffs waiting to see what happens.
According to investigative journalist Carey Gillam, the litigation could potentially go on for decades and cost billions of dollars to Monsanto and its new owner, Bayer.
Not surprisingly, Monsanto Vice President Scott Partridge said that the opinions of the experts Judge Chhabria is allowing to testify are “shaky.”
He says that “robust” evidence proves glyphosate has “absolutely no” connection to cancer. He’s repeated the lie so often that he might even be starting to believe it.
The real question now is whether or not it will hold up in court. Monsanto doesn’t shy away from using tactics like fabricating and manipulating data, discrediting scientists and other experts who are brave enough to tell the world how dangerous their products are, and mounting deceitful PR campaigns designed to pull the wool over the public’s eyes.
An attorney for the plaintiffs in the upcoming lawsuits, Michael Baum, expressed relief that the judge resisted Monsanto’s efforts to get the suits thrown out, adding that he was looking forward to getting his clients their day in court.
How To Get Rid Of Paranoid Conspiracy Theorists August 29 2018 | From: Medium
Are you as sick and tired as I am of all those tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy nutters who express skepticism whenever the kind and beneficent US intelligence agencies bestow us with urgent information about a new country in need of regime change?
Do you want to get rid of that kooky fringe 74 percent of Americans who believe in a “Deep State” which controls the elected government?
Well you’re in luck, bucko! I happen to have compiled right here a list of six simple steps that our compassionate government and fearless media can take to rid America of these looney toon paranoid conspiracy theorists once and for all:
1. Stop Fucking Lying All the Time
Simple, right? Just stop lying and people will stop wondering how the narrative they’re being spoon fed by their politicians and the media differs from reality!
End the practice of defense and intelligence agencies collaborating with think tanks and unelected insiders to manufacture false narratives which are then promulgated by pundits and politicians of both mainstream parties to advance imperialist agendas.
What will Alex Jones and Sputnik talk about if the voices of power start telling the truth all of a sudden instead of lying about the justifications for imperialist wars, excluding and censoring skeptics of establishment orthodoxies from the mainstream conversation, and being forthright about the massive and ubiquitous problems in America’s democratic system?
That’ll show those crackpots!
2. Try Some Actual Fucking Government Transparency
That’s right! Add government transparency into the mix and what will hostile non-state intelligence operatives like Julian Assange have to publish?
I say we drive the WikiLeaks fake news complex right out of business by eliminating the immense veil of secrecy which shrouds so many levels of US government.
That way when those annoying conspiracy kooks try to say we’re not being given the full story about the behavior of America and its allies, our leaders can just tell them “Uh, yes we are actually” and show unredacted documentation of all their behaviors.
How do you like that, Russian WikiLeaks? We are the WikiLeaks now!
3. Stop Fucking Killing People
Of course, it’s hard to be transparent when you’re conducting countless military operations all over the planet at any given moment, so we’ll probably have to stop that too. We don’t want to give away the secret plans and locations of America’s brave servicemen and women, after all.
Dedicate the US military to defending America’s own shores and close down the hundreds of US military bases which dot the world like freckles on a Scotsman, and the next time those paranoid conspiracy freaks start questioning what they’re being told they can just be shown the truth.
Not as much fun as drone bombing children, I’ll admit, but if we want to get serious about this conspiracy theory epidemic we’ve got to start somewhere.
4. Stop Promoting Fucking Conspiracy Theories
I don’t like to be a Debbie downer, but when we’ve got news stories coming out every few days promoting theories about the US president conspiring with the Russian government, it gets a little difficult to tell people not to indulge in conspiracy theories.
Unproven claims about powerful people conspiring together is the exact thing that a conspiracy theory is, and while I understand that these are authorized conspiracy theories, we can’t rely on these crazy loons to understand the distinction.
Better to lead by example and avoid trafficking in conspiracy theories altogether, in my opinion.
5. Stop Being Such Fucking Assholes
If US intelligence agencies weren’t torturing people, they wouldn’t have to lie about torturing. If US intelligence agencies weren’t surveilling US citizens, they wouldn’t have to lie about their surveillance programs.
If US intelligence agencies weren’t constantly committing horrific atrocities to protect the interests of the powerful from the powerless, everyone would trust them and you’d stop seeing all these ridiculous conspiracy theories about what those agencies have been up to.
Call me crazy, but I’ve got this wild notion that maybe if highly secretive defense and intelligence agencies weren’t inflicting unspeakable acts of depravity and degradation upon humanity all the time from behind the veil of government opacity, humanity would be less paranoid about them.
People are beginning to notice that no matter who they vote for they get the same exploitative neoliberal policies at home and the same murderous neoconservative policies abroad, which doesn’t do much to dispel those wacky notions about a permanent unelected government pulling the strings while the official elected government puts on a pretend democracy show every few years.
It would probably be a good idea to do something about how America has the worst electoral system in the western world, how ordinary Americans have virtually no influence over US policy or behavior compared to wealthy Americans, and the way the rigidly-enforced two-party system necessarily creates an extortion scheme where both parties serve the same plutocratic interests but bully Americans into supporting one or the other under the threat of losing civil liberties.
And again, I hate to be a wet blanket, but those defense and intelligence agencies technically are unelected and technically do wield an immense amount of power, and technically do have an immense amount of influence over Washington, Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, the mainstream media, big oil, plutocratic interests, US allies, world trade, and countless major world events.
By restoring power to the people instead of leaving it all in the hands of an elite class of secretive agencies and their plutocratic allies, people might feel like they have a bit more control over what’s going on in their country and won’t have to make up nonsensical stories about a “deep state”.
If we could pull these steps off, what will these conspiracy-mongering grifters have to sell to the naive populace? If everyone trusts their government and feels confident in the democratic process, who will believe stories about powerful unelected forces ruling over them?
You certainly wouldn’t have 74 percent of them subscribing to this absurd “deep state” conspiracy theory, that’s for sure.
In Private Meeting, Facebook Exec Warns News Outlets To Cooperate Or End Up Dying In 'Hospice' August 28 2018 | From: ComonDreams
"Anyone who does care about news needs to understand Facebook as a fundamental threat."
During a closed-door and off-the-record meeting last week, top Facebook executive Campbell Brown reportedly warned news publishers that refusal to cooperate with the tech behemoth's efforts to "revitalize journalism" will leave media outlets dying "like in a hospice."
Reported first by The Australian under a headline which read "Work With Facebook or Die: Zuckerberg," the social media giant has insisted the comments were taken out of context, even as five individuals who attended the four-hour meeting corroborated what Brown had stated.
"Mark doesn't care about publishers but is giving me a lot of leeway and concessions to make these changes," Brown reportedly said, referring to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
"We will help you revitalize journalism... in a few years the reverse looks like I'll be holding hands with your dying business like in a hospice."
As The Guardian reported on Monday, Facebook is "vehemently" denying the veracity of the comments as reported by The Australian, referring to its own transcript of the meeting. However, Facebook is refusing to release its transcript and tape of the gathering.
Brown's warning about the dire prospects for news outlets that don't get on board with a future in which corporate giants like Facebook are the arbiters of what is and isn't trustworthy news comes as progressives are raising alarm that Facebook's entrance into the world of journalism poses a major threat to non-corporate and left-wing news outlets.
As Common Dreamsreported in July, progressives' fears were partly confirmed after Facebook unveiled its first slate of news "segments" as part of its Facebook Watch initiative.
While Facebook claims its initiative is part of an effort to combat "misinformation," its first series of segments were dominated by such corporate outlets as Fox News and CNN.
Reacting to Brown's reported assertion that Zuckerberg "doesn't care about publishers," Judd Legum, who writes the Popular Information newsletter,argued;
"Anyone who does care about news needs to understand Facebook as a fundamental threat."
"In addition to disputed quote, there are also Facebook's actions, which are fully consistent with the quote," Legum added.
"We desperately need to develop alternative delivery mechanisms to Facebook."
This Is How Your ‘Aura’ Affects Your Health & Those Around You + Magnetic Fields Of The Human Body And Their Functions & 13 Signs You Are Experiencing A Spiritual Awakening August 27 2018 | From: CollectiveEvolution / SitsShow / TheUnboundedSpirit
An ‘aura’ field can be defined as a luminous glow or radiation that surrounds a person’s body, almost like a halo. Ancient depictions of religious and spiritual figures often feature this aura, but today, modern science is discovering that we are all, in fact, surrounded by this type of field, and it can actually affect the way we feel.
We know that energy cannot be seen with the naked human eye, which is why attempts to measure invisible phenomena scientifically are often greeted with harsh criticism, but thanks to the groundbreaking work of dedicated scientists from all over the world, the concept of non-material science is starting to become accepted in the mainstream.
This refers to the idea that the physical material reality we perceive with our senses isn’t the only reality that’s available for us to study in a modern day scientific manner.
“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.”
– Nikola Tesla
Before getting into how our aura can affect us and those around us, I’d like to mention that human thoughts, intentions, feelings and emotions - ‘factors associated with consciousness’ - have been shown to have a direct effect on and correlation to our physical material world.
"The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine.
Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual."
- Sir James Jeans (“The Mental Universe” ; Nature 436:29,2005)
To see a more in-depth explanation of how factors associated with consciousness are intertwined with our physical material reality you can read this article:
Work by the brilliant scientists over at the Institute of HeartMath can perhaps best shed light on one aspect of human aura. A large portion of their research has investigated heart and brain interaction.
Researchers have examined how the heart and brain communicate with each other and how that affects our consciousness and the way in which we perceive our world. For example, when a person is feeling really positive emotions like gratitude, love, or appreciation, the heart beats out a certain message.
Because the heart beats out the largest electromagnetic field produced in the body, researchers are able to gather significant data from it. According to Rolin McCratey, Ph.D, and Director of Research at the Institute:
"Emotional information is actually included and modulated into these fields. By learning to shift our emotions, we are changing the information coded into the magnetic fields that are radiated by the heart, and that can impact those around us.
We are fundamentally and deeply connected with each other and the planet itself, and what we do individually really does count and matters."
Did you know that your heart emits electromagnetic fields which change according to your emotions, or that the human heart has a magnetic field that can be measured up to several feet away from the human body?
Did you know that positive emotions create physiological benefits in your body, or that you can boost your immune system by conjuring up positive emotions?
Did you know that negative emotions can create nervous system chaos, and that positive emotions do the complete opposite?
The bottom line is, feelings of love, gratitude, and compassion – any positive feelings whatsoever – have a larger impact than we could have ever imagined.
The Spiritual Heart - is in a way a little like a smart phone, invisibly connecting us to a large network of information. It is through an unseen energy that the heart emits that humans are profoundly connected to all living things. The energy of the heart literally links us to each other. Every person's heart contributes to a 'collective field environment.' This short video explains the importance of this connection and how we each add to this collective energy field. The energetic field of the heart even connects us with the earth itself.
It’s fascinating to consider how the heart’s magnetic field might be interacting with and affecting other people, and it leads me to wonder if perhaps the electromagnetic fields around our bodies are somehow connected to that of the Earth.
What type of effect, if any, might the information coded into our electromagnetic fields have on the information coded into the Earth’s field? It’s all very exciting, and there are so many questions still left to answer.
Below is a video of Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, a professor of physics at St. Petersburg State Technical University, who believes that our positive and negative thoughts each have a different impact on our surrounding environment.
A Russian scientist is trying to convince people they can change the world simply by using their own energy. He claims that thinking in a certain way can have a positive or negative effect on the surrounding environment. "We are developing the idea that our consciousness is part of the material world and that with our consciousness we can directly influence our world," said Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, a professor of physics at St. Petersburg State Technical University. To bridge our understanding of the unseen world of energy, scientific experiments are being carried out using a technique called bioelectrophotography. The assumption is that we are constantly emitting energy. Bioelectrophotography aims to capture these energy fields seen as a light around the body -- or what some people would call your aura.
He has developed a scientific device based on the ancient Chinese system of energy meridians which measures the bio-energy of living organisms, as well as the environment.
The device, called the GDV, uses a completely painless electrical current applied to the fingertips - taking less than one millisecond to work - to highlight potential health (physiological and psycho-emotional) abnormalities.
The body’s response is measured in the form of an “electron cloud” which is composed of light energy photons. The glow of this discharge is invisible to the human eye (humans can only see one percent of the entire electromagnetic spectrum) and is captured by an optical CCD camera system and then translated into a digital computer.
In the GDV software programs, the glow from the different sectors of the finger images is projected onto the shape of a human body in correspondence with the location of the different organs and systems. As a result, it produces energy field images that allow for intuitive analysis of the physiological level of human body functioning.
It has been approved and received registration as a routine medical diagnostic device by the Russian Ministry of Health upon recommendation of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
According to Eastern metaphysical theories of Ayurvedic Indian medicine, there are seven “Chakras,” or integrated energy centers, correlated with physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well-being.
These energy Chakras are positioned or embedded into the spinal column at various locations beginning with the coccyx, rising all the way to the crown of the head.
Dr. Pradeep B. Deshpande, a Professor Emeritus at the Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of Louisville, explains:
"Each Chakra is considered to resonate at a different frequency level. With new BioWell software, it is now possible to quantitatively estimate the energy of Chakras and graphically display their level of activation, and indicate whether this level of activation is above or below the level found from large numbers of subjects.
The results from a case study he conducted involving over 100 participants in attendance indicate that imbalanced Chakras are easily detectable:
"Each individual sector or portion of the fingertip is connected energetically with specific organs and organ systems such as the respiratory system. When the data of the 10 individual BIO-grams are collated and interpolated, an image of the entire full body energy field is created.
An example of the full body energy field from a healthy and unhealthy/emotionally unbalanced individual are shown above. The gaps and the reduced emissions and out-of-balance Chakras for the unhealthy individual are quite obvious."
Please keep in mind that clinical studies of more than 10,000 patient cases with various health challenges have also been well documented in Russia.
How to See a Human Aura in 5 Minutes
Magnetic Fields Of The Human Body And Their Functions
Manly P. Hall is a philosopher and mystic from the early 20th century. Some view him as a pillar of esoteric knowledge, while others think he was part of a dark cabal that has infiltrated Masonic lodges throughout the globe.
Hall did not work his way up the degrees as most Masons do. Instead, he was given an honorary 33rd degree after establishing himself as a learned scholar in many fields.
While it is all too easy to label someone "evil" purely for an association to a group that has overall been corrupted to a large extent, those who truly seek knowledge and wisdom beyond armchair judgments can see past a book's cover, for the wisdom within its pages.
Those who dismiss what Hall had to say are the ones who miss out on the knowledge he has to offer but if one can look past appearances, then a wealth of information can be claimed.
I think that knowledge is everywhere, even held within the hands of some of the most diabolical people on the planet. But in receiving these gems of wisdom, we need not consider ourselves evil or supporting those who act insidiously.
Knowledge is amoral. When used in the right hands it can be a powerful tool. but in the wrong hands (usually the ignorant), it can be a destructive weapon. But for the one who foolishly dismisses wisdom because of an appearance alone, they will suffer the pitfalls of their own prejudice.
But for the truly discerning, the ability to absorb data from any source is the key to personal growth and evolution. To the discerning mind, wisdom can be found everywhere, but it will remain hidden behind a veil if we never explore it.
As such, if you have prejudices about Manly P. Hall because of his association with Freemasonry, I ask you to set them aside and open your heart and mind to hear what he has to say.
And I will share that the concept of magnetic fields affecting the body is hardly new and has been well established for years. Our energetic body connects directly to the Earth-mother in many ways, earthing and geomagnetic fields are some of them. Both of these play an important role in restoring the health of mind, body, and soul.
Magnetic Fields of the Human Body and Their Functions is the title of an interview with Manly P. Hall, a Freemason who was very knowledgeable in esoteric teachings.
I do not agree with everything that Manly teaches; however, in the interview, he shared a lot of very important information about energy fields and the human body, so if you want to learn some empowering information about energy fields and the human body, I highly encourage you to watch and listen to the interview.
Manly Palmer Hall (March 18, 1901 – August 29, 1990) was a Canadian-born author and mystic. He is perhaps most famous for his work The Secret Teachings of All Ages: An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy, which is widely regarded as his magnum opus, and which he published at the age of 25 (or 27, 1928)
He has been widely recognized as a leading scholar in the fields of religion, mythology, mysticism, and the occult.
Carl Jung, when writing Psychology and Alchemy, borrowed material from Hall’s private collection.
In 1934, Hall founded the Philosophical Research Society (PRS) in Los Angeles, California, dedicating it to an idealistic approach to the solution of human problems.
The PRS claims to be non-sectarian and entirely free from educational, political, or ecclesiastical control, and the Society’s programs stress the need for the integration of philosophy, religion, and science into one system of instruction.
The PRS Library, a public facility devoted to source materials in obscure fields, has many rare and scarce items now impossible to obtain elsewhere.
In 1973 (47 years after writing The Secret Teachings of All Ages), Hall was recognized as a 33º Mason (the highest honor conferred by the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite), at a ceremony held at PRS on December 8th, despite never being initiated into the physical craft.
In his over 70-year career, Hall delivered approximately 8,000 lectures in the United States and abroad, authored over 150 books and essays, and wrote countless magazine articles.
Manly Hall: Magnetic Fields of the Human Body and Their Functions
13 Signs You Are Experiencing A Spiritual Awakening
Here are 13 crystal clear signs that you’re experiencing a spiritual awakening:
1. You desire less stuff and more simplicity. You realize that the less you possess the more unburdened your psyche is, and instead of wanting to acquire material wealth, you are seeking to find your inner wealth.
2. You are drawn to mind-expanding books. You don’t read books anymore just in order to entertain yourself when you feel like having nothing better to do, and choose to read those books that help you to become the greatest version of yourself.
3. You spend more time alone in silence. You go for solitary walks in nature and meditate in silence so as to reconnect and make peace with yourself.
4. You eat healthier and take better care of your body. You start treating your body like it’s sacred, listening to its wisdom, and keeping it as healthy as you can.
5. You feel more connected to nature and all living beings. You recognize the interconnectedness and interdependence of all beings and feel a sense of oneness with everyone and everything.
6. You feel compassion about the suffering in the world. You become aware of how much pain there is all around you and do your best to alleviate it in any way you can.
7. You take responsibility in your hands. You realize that there’s no point in having a victim’s mentality and blaming others for what’s going wrong in your life, and you take conscious action to shape your destiny.
8. You are mindful of your actions. You’ve discovered the tremendous power of your actions and you make sure to act in ways that don’t negatively affect yourself and the world.
9. The past and the future lose control over your life. You understand that the past and future don’t truly exist, and the only moment that was, is, and will ever be is the present.
10. You have a deep yearning for meaning. You comprehend that living a normal life is empty of meaning and purpose, and you seek to create your own path in your life’s journey.
11. You are more creative. You feel an increased desire to creatively express yourself and turn your dreams into reality.
12. You expose your true self to the world. You’ve dropped your social masks of pretense and you are open to communicate your innermost thoughts and feelings with others without feeling guilty or ashamed.
13. You have a loss of interest in competition. You realize that competition brings conflict and suffering, and that the only way to live in harmony with others is by having a loving and compassionate attitude towards them.
The Great Transition: The Shadow Ruling Force Behind The Central Banks Secrecy Is Repugnant In A Free And Open Society August 26 2018 | From: FinalWakeUpCall
Monolithic and Ruthless Conspiracy: The Central Bankers’ crimes are legendary and more than can be listed here.
By providing large-scale loans to practically all countries and people, those have become dependent of the hidden ruling power. Governments that want to remain independent are vigorously addressed and enforced; their leaders are unseated, or murdered
If this is not possible through means of political propaganda, or being economically sanctioned, the CIA, Mossad, or otherwise military force will achieve their objective to submit them to the NWO-regime.
The bloodline Archon families want to control the world, which required the joining of forces of the 13 influential bloodline families.
The ultimate goal was, and still is, to create a world dictatorship with one leader at the top, located in Jerusalem - Israel.
As a matter of fact, even China’s government is ultimately run by a - Nazi-Rothschild- central bank, which dictates and controls the flow of money all over the world in every nation in which central banks are located.
They obtained full control, and have 100% – 5 eyes support that makes their authority unquestioned and unchallenged.
Anyone involved in this buy and bribe scheme knows that it is in their own interest to participate in agreement to the given instructions. It really is a world-wide spread epidemic, and much worse than anyone can imagine.
The structure it is condoned under the current legal system of admiralty law. Defeating the truly evil enemy, should be people’s key priority! Let’s target the shadow controlling forces behind these central banks and put an end to this global corruption once and for all.
The real rulers in Washington DC are the invisible Luciferian Khazarians, they exercise their power from behind the scenes. Today the path to total dictatorship in the Western World can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by Congress or Parliament, even the President, nor the people.
Officially, Constitutional Governments are implemented. But within our governments and political systems, another body is representing another form of these governments, it is the bureaucratic elite which believes that Constitutions are useless, as they are sure being on the winning side of the game.
All the strange developments in policy agreements like the refuge crisis, may be traced back to this group who are going to make us over to suit their desire. The harm done to all people on our planet will take generations to correct. But all will be corrected, if we the people wake up and take back control!
Secrecy is Repugnant in a Free and Open Society
Trump is threatening to disturb the Deep State’s control game as no other modern President before him ever has done, except President John F. Kennedy who was murdered for his opposition against the Deep State. He said on April 27th, 1961 in an address to newspaper publishers;
“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society, and we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, secret oaths, and secret proceedings…
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence. It depends on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice.
It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published, its mistakes are buried, not headlined, its dissenters are silenced, not praised, no expenditure is questioned, no secret is revealed…
I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people… The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American’s freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight.”
Unfortunately, the news media was and still is owned by the very foes President Kennedy was trying to defeat and those foes killed the President two and a half years later.
Unaware of the Risks
Even today, people are so unaware and have no idea of the risks President Trump is taking by challenging the Deep State, specifically the US military industrial complex MIC.
The mainstream media still do their utmost to discredit the President of the United States and try to overthrow him in order that the utterly corrupt elite that rule the western world can continue to hold on to power and to protect the massive budget of the MIC- complex, that along with the Israel Lobby, funds the elections of those who rule us.
They also tried multiple times to start a nuclear world war using Syria, North Korea, Iran, and other hotspots.
It is important to remember and that cannot be repeated often enough: these people try to kill you and your family, and are still doing so.
The Asian secret societies learned of the Deep State Nazi plans to murder 90% of humanity by successfully eavesdropping on their secret meetings. In 2003, the cabal were spreading the engineered SARS disease – a bioweapon designed specifically to target the Asian race, which became their call to arms.
The Europeans, particularly the Germans, are doing some serious chess moves that will make Mr. Trump’s job ahead easier. The powers that are feeling resentful of Mr. Trump are also moving in a healthy direction for all of us.
Mr. Trump is doing a great job that isn’t understood by the public at large and probably not known by himself, as the whole operation is scripted by the Alliance.
Comment:Read about the Alliance that has been working behind the scenes for decades to take
down the 'Cabal' within the work of David Wilcock.
By helping through Q-ANON notifications and observing the skirmishes that are forever going on.
This has become part of the whole scenario: it represents the undercurrent that is behind everything. It’s a crowd together of folks trying to keep this at bay. As, many of us wake-up and join the patriot crowd.
Where we go one, we go all. The Deep State won’t succeed; their turning point may have been passed.
The Central Banking system is currently owned by the Archon bloodline families that control more wealth than the better off 3.5 billion of the world’s population. Inequality is a drastic understatement.
The BIS – Bank for International Settlements – is a privately owned bank that oversights 60 Central banks including: The Bank of England, the Federal Reserve the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan.
The BIS controls 95% of global wealth. The BIS was created as a control bank that would supervise the damage reparation settlements of Germany and its allies after WW1. It then morphed into the demon financial control center that it is today.
The monetary system from its inception till today is privately owned by the Rothschild and a few other families.
The Governments pay Central Banks with taxpayers’ monies to compensate for the interest of their counterfeit debt money, which they could have issued themselves free of any interest charge.
Moreover, taxpayers’ contributions fund the Vatican Bank, Queen’s Bank of England, and all other Central Banks across the globe instead of their own government. People’s energy money makes it possible that Central Banks can charge again interest on the reimbursed tax funds.
Evidently, this corrupt system is also funding international child trafficking, including all black terrorist operations, etc.
No Need for Central Banks
Moreover, there is no need for Central banks, as the people controlled governments can issue the money themselves free of interest, without debt! – There is no anchor against the ever-increasing money supply that is destroying the world’s reserve currency.
New out of air-printed money is constantly created to fight deflation to avoid a depression. The world Central banks cannot accept deflation; they are trying to offset this by printing money to generate inflation. And, so have the populace since 1972 two third of their savings lost.
As there is no velocity in the money circulation, they cannot generate the outcome they want. The Central Bankers have no power to turn this around, but resort to continuously printing money that no one spends, so the money has little effect on the economy.
If they don’t find a way to increase the velocity of money, there will be no inflation and higher prices, if money velocity keeps slowing down, the world will be mired in a deflationary trap that scares the hell out of the central bankers, as debt burdens go up in real terms. Tax revenues decrease. Banks fail. When the role of complication is ignored, they are putting the system at risk of collapse.
It is still an open question whether the world needs a reserve currency and it certainly does not when money is linked to something tangible.
There is no need for central banks to create money without limits either – as has been proven during the era 1870 – 1914 when the gold standard acted independently and effectively.
Unsustainable Debt
IMF says, “debt is unsustainable”, but central banks don’t solve the problem. They like to keep the world in a limbo of debt, so that countries and people need to take on more debt.
The Central Bankers business model is to putcountries and people in more debt, it is a pattern and they know this, but most of the people don’t know that.
The puppet governments and politicians are bought and paid for to do these things. The only way around this is to get rid of the central banks.
Look at Greece, it is in trouble again, the central bank’s fix was not a fix, it was a band aid and it was only meant to last for a couple of years, then the country would need more debt.
Another noticeable aspect is housing appreciation that is beginning to slow, prices are coming down which means those who purchased at the height of the market will be underwater and those who purchased during the last financial crisis will be worse off. Even, the pension systems are in trouble and there are noticeable signs of this. Once the market, real estate, and the rest crashes it will be game over.
And, that is why the economy is rapidly falling apart. And here comes the narrative battle, either Trump or the FED-Central Bank is going to be in charge to tell this story.
What you have to do is to prepare for the transition and make sure you have sufficient food in store as there is a life-size possibility that supplies will be disturbed.
Be assured that this great transition is coming for which most people aren’t prepared; they will go through a very difficult period of time.
The Alliance with the patriots do there best to make the transition easy as possible. Let’s hope that Trump will have the narrative, as the central banks don’t care about the people, the more we suffer the better they like it.
Eventually, the Deep State players and agendas will dissolve under the upcoming transparency with equality for all. Everyone has to know how to fix the system, where the risks are hidden, and how with the least intrusive means possible can be changed.
Amongst others, it will be by asset backed currencies, then everything else could start to be fixed. How and what is explained in the next issue. Stay tuned!
The Secret And Hidden Agenda Of Language: Why Many Words Are Magic Spells August 25 2018 | From: Omnithought
According to research at Cambrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae.
The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
Spelling: We Spell Words to Pronounce a [Prison] Sentence or Term
The first thing you learn when you go to school is how to spell. Words are spelled to create a sentence of terms. Think of a jail sentence or a prison term.
The Wyrd sisters in Greek mythology were Fates or witches who controlled the fates of man. In our language we use curse words and cursive writing. We cuss and dis-cuss. Words have meaning and (are) mean things especially cross words.
They can be used to make a point. We use a “con” verse to converse in order to keep us off course in our dis-course as a phrase frays. We use catch words. A story is a spiel or a spell. It is all part of the gospel of the Godspell or God’s spell.
Cursive (W)Riting
Books contain chapters. What is a chapter? A chapter is a secret society or religious order, like the Knights Templar.
A chapter contains many pages. What is a page? A page is an understudy and in service to the queen and king, as in pages and squires, a knight who is well versed in magic and is more or less a soldier or trained assassin.
To page someone is to summons them. Pages summon demons to enslave or imprison our souls. After all, a page does contain many sentences. A jail sentence is served in a prison ward.
And indeed a sentence is created by words that are spelled out by using letters. A letter is someone who allows something to happen or someone who does something for some one else, like a bloodletter.
Languid Language
We languish in our languid language. Languid means “weak and lacking spirit or void of animation, lifeless” and languish which means “to lose strength or animation; be or become dull, feeble or spiritless; lackadaisical, listless”.
How are we imprisoned by our language? Think about a book. The word book as a verb means to arrest or detain - “book ’em, Danno”.
In fact, the Latin word for book is “liber”, which is where we get our word “library” and also the word “liberty”. You can book a reservation which means you’re paying for the ownership of something in advance. You can book or place a bet on a game or race with your bookie.
Yes, there is a bet being placed on a race - and it is the human race and the game is the game of life. It is the main bet or the alpha bet. In a group of monkeys, the alpha monkey is the primary monkey or the one in control.
There’s a song called Spirits in the Material World from an album named Ghost in the Machine. The lyrics proclaim, “Our so-called leaders speak. With words they try to jail ya.
They subjugate the meek. Where do the answers lie when we live from day to day? We are spirits in a material world.” The song was performed by a group appropriately named, The Police. The song - and an entire album by Sting, the lead singer, entitled The Soul Cages - refers to how we are spirits imprisoned in an earthly body.
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
Words Mean Things
Most words have multiple meanings and synonyms not to mention many anagrams which the subconscious mind can recognize. Factor in its homophones such as “there”, “they’re”, and “their” and it can get quite confusing to keep track.
What effect does that have when words with almost opposite meanings are homophones.
Think about “know” and “no”. Knowledge is considered a very positive word yet it is linked phonetically with the most negative word in our language. So when you say “I know this to be true” are you partiallly negating its reality?
Consider the above statement in which the letters of the words have been rearranged, yet you still should be able to read it without problem.
This means your subconscious mind should also relate multiple meanings to words have many anagrams. So it shouldn’t be any problem to associate God as good, the devil as evil. Now consider the following word relationships: live, evil; god, dog; love, evol.
Pronouncing the words has a pronounced effect. The science of cymatics shows how all spoken sounds take on a vibratory geometry or shape like how you can blow smoke rings by forming your mouth into the shape of the ‘O’. The tibetan monks show how sound can be used to form geometric patterns in a plate of sand particles. So the spoken word can indeed create reality.
Also consider the mind’s ability to combine words and sounds. When someone sneezes you feel customarily obligated to say “Bless you”. But if you sound out the syllables does your subconscious mind also make the connection to the phrase “Be less, you”.
So the very act of blessing someone can also be subconsciously telling them to be less. This is spell casting.
How are we being programmed through our language to go to the sun or hell? Hello?!!!! Helios was the Greek name for the sun. The sun in English as well as other languages such as Latin, is called Sol. We are all said to be souls or to have a soul (Sol). We have a solar plexus and our feet have soles.
Sole is sun in Italian. You are called a person (pertaining to the sun). When a male child is born, he is called a son (sun). The word for sun is sonne in German.
Hu was one of the twelve gods in the Egyptian stellar cult which could explain why we are human. Colors and hues originate from the light of the sun. Politicians encourage soldiers or soldiers to go to war for God and country. Of course, when they die they will go to another dimension (die men sun).
Have you ever wondered why we use the word hello to greet each other? After all, the word can be reduced to hell, the fiery place of eternal punishment and the suffix -o which means “associated with”.
In Greek mythology, Helios, which means “sun”, was the God of the Sun. Is it just a coincidence that you have a soul and that our sun is called Sol?
If so, why do we call those who die in battle soldiers or sol diers? Is that why we say “good morning” when the sun rises - because it is good to see the sun because it gives us life, but we are mourning those who sacrificed their souls to make it possible. Why do we call our male offspring sons? You are called a person. Is it because you pertain to the sun?
Words are defined in a dictionary - dick-shun-nary. Two of the three syllables are negative sounds and theother is a derogative slang term. Synonyms and antonyms are listed in a thesaurus.
‘The’, from the greek ‘theos’, is the root of the-ology, the study of ‘god’ and ‘saurus’ means ‘lizard’. A thesaurus literally means ‘lizard god’. How many names for government entities start with a negative prefix. The word nation is nay-shun. The UN, Un-ited nations, NATO, NASI party, NASA, Norad, Unesco, NASCAR, NATAS, and I’m sure you can come up with others.
How to Ruin a Language with Rune Magic
Do some of the letters or building blocks of our language contain within them a blueprint for the control and possession of our spirits? English has Germanic origins and it is likely that the english letters have their roots in the Germanic runes which were used for magic and casting spells.
From Wikipedia on rune magic: “In 1990, Stephan Grundy, a.k.a. Kveldulf Gundarsson, described runic magic as the active principle as opposed to passive interpretations based on runic divination.
He held that runic magic is more active than the allegedly shamanic practice of seid practiced by the Seiðkona. Runic magic, he states, uses the runes to affect the world outside based on the archetypes they represent.
Most of Gundarsson’s runic magic entails being in possession of a physical entity that is engraved with any or all of the individual runes or “staves”, so as to practically work with their energies.
The individual runes are reddened with either blood, dyes, or paints. The act of possessing the stave in its final form serves the purpose of affecting the world of form with “the rune might” of that particular stave. After use, the staves are discarded or destroyed.
Gundarsson holds that each rune has a certain sound to it, to be chanted or sung; the sound has in common the phonetic value by which it is represented. This act of singing or chanting is supposed to have more or less the same effect of using the staves in their physical form.
Many of the letters of the English alphabet come directly from the Germanic Runes which were used for magic and spell casting and for causing ‘ruin’. Look at how many English letters you can identify from the Elder Futhark rune set.
Grammar or Grimoire? Goetia & Cymantics
The word “grammar” comes from grammars which were old Latin books on syntax and diction. The ancient magic books of Europe which contained instructions to summon demons were known as the Grimoires, French word for “grammar”.
A “grimoire” or spellbook is a derivative of the french word “grammaire”. The pronunciation and sound of words affects the matter around us. The science of cymatics is the study of sound vibration on matter and it has been demonstrated with sand on plates that vibration caan cause geometric patterns.
The ancient Goetia spellbooks were used for conjuring up demons and each demon had its own sigil and name.
“IT” & The Creature from the Subconscious “ID”
Stephen King captured the hearts of America with the release of his blockbuster smash hit book, “It”. The video features the menacing face of a clown while the book reveals the clown’s head as a skull with stars in the eye sockets.
The video jacket reads:
“Your every fear – all in the deadly enemy. It can be anything, a fanged monster that won’t stay on the movie screen, something ominous lurking in the basement or around the next corner. No matter what your biggest fear is, no one knows IT better than Stephen King…
The force takes the shape of a clown, but it isn’t clowning around. Instead, it terrorizes youngsters with their innermost fears, bringing them to untimely doom – until a group of wily neighborhood kids fight back. Thirty years later it resurfaces: meaner, angrier. And the friends who vividly remember the terrors of their youth reunite to make a desperate final stand against it.”
In an interview, King admits he was possessed during the writing of the book.
Let “It”Be & Make “It”So
Sigmund Freud, the father of psychology, invented a model of the psyche which contained three parts to the self: the ego (conscious mind), the superego (superconscious mind) and what he termed the “id” or the subconscious mind. This was the realm of our fears: scary monsters and demons.
This id was considered a sort of third person subsistent to the conscious and superconscious mind. Of course, we use the word “it” as a sort of third “person” as well in our use of speech. And, of course, subconsciously we have been programmed to accept the abbreviated “ID” as our identity.
We unknowingly give power to this creature and help create “it” every day with our thought and speech. We watch the horor movie “It” by Stephen King and associate all our deep dark subconscious fears with “IT”.
Likewise with the word “thing” (‘everything’. ‘anything’, and ‘nothing’ or no thing) and the use of ambiguous words such as ‘they’ (THEY live), ‘them’ (“If you can’t beat ’em join them”).
We chant the chorus to the song Let It Be over and over again. And it’s no coincidence that IT is the acronym that has been curently assigned to the Information Technology field, or computers, for IT very well may be an artificial intelligence or computer.
For a detailed analysis and many more examples of “IT” please reference my page on this phenomenon.
We really need to learn to speak with a more conscious language in mind, ever aware of how we think our thoughts in our minds and how we word our sentences!!
“S”- Lang
Consider the English letter ‘S‘. First of all, it looks like a snake or serpent - one that has risen up and is ready to strike or if viewed from overhead it looks like one that is perhaps crawling along. In two-dimensional space, it looks like a sideways wave and in 3-D space it looks like a spiral, both paths that energy follows.
The letter ‘s’ is used in English to denote “possession”, which is Satan’s specialty, by placing it at the end of a word with an apostrophe. Plurality or the concept of multiplication or creation, is achieved by appending an ‘s’ or ‘es’ to a word.
These two facts, coupled with the sheer number of words in our language means the ‘S’ sound is one of the most, if not single most, frequently uttered sounds in our speech.
Although the vowels are used frequently, they have more than one sound associated with them, a long and short sound.
There are probably more esses used in our speech than any other sound. Virtually every sentence we speak contains one or more of these hissing sounds. It would not be accurate to say we sound like hissing snakes when we speak, but our incessant hissing probably reminds us of it at some level subconsciously.
Not only does the letter ‘S’ physically represent the snake or serpent, phonetically it even sounds like a snake!! It sounds exactly like the hissing sound a snake makes – sssssssss – when it “shakes” its tail. The word hiss even ends in a double-s.
And, of course, the words snake and serpent are both s-words as well as Satan, who the Bible says took the form of a snake. He was said to have told mankind a secret - that man would not die if he ate of the fruit.
Of course, when you want to tell someone a secret you say, “pssssssst, come here…” or if you want to keep a secret you say “Shhhhhhhhhhhhh!!“. The dollar sign, $, is the standard symbol for English currency.
Money is said to be the root of all evil. Not only does the ‘S’ look like a snake (Satan), and sound like a snake, which is known for shedding its skin, but nearly all words that begin with the letter ‘s’ have a negative connotation associated with them. That is why they can be considered s-words, or swords, because they can kill and injure like a sword.
These s-words are a seal or stamp associated with Satan, Satan’s Slang or s-lang. The word lang is defined in the dictionary as an abbreviation for the word “language”.
Satan, the snake or serpent also known as Set, slithers about striving to snatch, steal, or strip us of our souls or spirits and is obsessed with possessing or seizing them.
He, or she, is subtle, sly, sneaky, slick, slippery, scaly, secretive, scary, spins, spirals or screws into your soul and possesses you and seizes your spirit.
Speech is his peach and when we speak, Satan is at his peak as far as deception is concerned. The words “possesses”, “obsesses”, “seizes” contain a multiple s-sound and are words pertaining to control.
The word ess, which is defined as the pronunciation for the letter ‘s’, becomes the word esse when a silent ‘e’ is added. The word esse means “to be” which is where we get the word essence and the word essay which is sort of a written speech and comes from the Old French esai which means “to put to a test” which is what Satan did to Jesus in the wilder-ness.
The suffix “-ness” also means a state of being, like loneliness or business. It’s interesting that the Loch Ness in Scotland is said to contain a serpent creature named “Nessie” which nests there.
Yes, Satan certainly is a “Busy Ness” when it comes to the business world and show business. And he specializes in monkey business. One should keep this in mind before wishing for good-ness.
Shit! I, mean, Sheesh! It is not easy to think of positive s-words and double “ss” words are even worse. The swastika resembles two esses and the word ‘swastika’ has two of them in number.
The Nazis had the “SS” and the ‘ss’ logo which looked like lightening bolts.
The far reaching extent in which the spell our language has cast on us can be seen in the every day usage of cliche. Our languages are saturated with what we like to call killer words and phrases because that’s what they do. Englishmen use the word bloody all the time… bloody well right, they do!!! Some women are considered drop deadgorgeous… and when they are dressed to kill, they are to die for. She was a dead ringer for Marilyn Monroe.
If looks could kill they would because she will take your breath away.
Wouldn’t you just kill for a date with her? Sometimes she really gets under my skin and burns me up, but if anyone tries to hurt her, they would have to go“over my dead body because I will punch their lights out if they get near her. I’m serious as a heart attack. I’m dead serious.
She can be as mean as a snake at times, but she really knew how to kill ‘em with kindness. I was dead set for her. I could have just died right there. I mean, I felt like I had just died and gone to heaven.
Eat your heart out. She was a live wire, but at least I would go out in a blaze of glory.
I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but she really took me for a ride. Of course, I wore my heart on my sleeve the whole time, but I was scared to death I might lose her because you really have to keep your eyes peeled to find a good one. Not to be a killjoy, but I’m dead to the world around most women, dead as a doorknob.
Ok, that was overkill and painful to read, but it did make a point. Think about the terms we use when we wish good luck to others. “Break a leg, kid” or “Knock ‘em dead!” Or if someone borrows something from us we say, “Go ahead, knock yourself out.” Even time is not immune to our sadistic ways…”time to kill”, “just killing time”.
Why do Christians conclude their prayers by invoking the name of an Egyptian deity, Amen, who had the body of a man and a ram’s head when Satan is depicted as a horned god having a goat’s head?
Why does the American dollar bill (known as a buck) have an Egyptian pyramid on its reverse side accompanied by the Latin phrase “Anuuit Coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum” which can be translated “Announcing the Birth of a New World Order”?
Why does the American military wear a chevron as an insignia patch when the word derives from the French word chevre, which means “goat”, and On, the Egyptian City of the Sun?
If the word God traces back to the Indo-European root “ghut-” or the German “gott”, why does the changing of the vowel from a short sound to a long sound render the word “goat”?
Why does Christmas, the birthday of the Son of God, coincide with the birthday of the Sun of God at the winter solstice, the three days when the sun is at its lowest point on the Southern Cross, appears to stand still for three days, and then rises or is born again?
Is this why Easter is celebrated during the Spring Equinox when the East Star, the Sun, has risen? Why is Santa an anagram for Satan? What exactly does Old Nick really mean? And what is a jingle bell?
Why do we have company and product names like Chevron, Capri Sun, Shiner Bock, Star Bucks, and Sears and Roebuck? What is a Sun Kist or a Star Kist? Why are sports contests called ball games and why do we idolize rock stars such as Kid Rock?
The genre of Horror films possesses other “creature features” with “It” in the title. There was “It Lives!”, “It Lives Again”, “It Came From the Sea”, “It Came From Outer Space”, and “It’s Alive!” which is the expression Doctor Frankenstein made famous when he brought his monster to life.
From the time we were young, we have been told over and over again that IT is a scary creature that this association has become deeply embedded within the recesses of our mind.
On the Adamms Family, Cousin Itt was a monster. Itt communicated via a high speed gibberish that only members of the Addams family seemed to understand.
Cousin Itt’s voice was provided by sound-effects engineer Tony Magro, who created Itt’s garbled responses by mouthing gibberish into a tape recorder, with a “ppffft and a thhhhhttt” added for good measure, and then accelerating the tape’s recording speed.
The eyes have it. What do the eyes have? What or who is it? The eyes are the windows to the soul. In Saturday Night Live, Dana Carvey played the Church Lady who asked, “Could IT be… Satan?”
That IT refers to Satan can seen in the phrase “when It rains, It pours.” Satan, the goat God, is also known as Pan, the Piper. The word gote, a variant spelling of goat, means a channel or pipe for water and comes from the Old English word geotan which means “to pour”! So when It reigns, It pours.
When children play hide and seek, someone always has to be “it”. All the other children run and hide from whoever’s “it”. “It” then goes roaming around trying to find and capture whoever’s not “it”. When someone is found they are tagged as the new “it” - “Tag, you’re it!!”
The Beatles’ Paul McCartney said the idea for the song “Let it Be” came to him in a dream. He chants the line over and over and we all sing along almost willing it into existence.
Every time the song is played on the radio, thousands and thousands are sending forth thought and sound vibrations into the air. We use the word “it” in our language over and over all the time. Could it be possible to manifest a creature from the id, or from the subconscious? Think of these songs: Bread’s “Make it with you”,
The Scorpions “Make it Real”:
“…Make it real, not fantasy
Did you ever have a secret yearning?
Don’t you know it could come true?
Now’s the time to set wheels turning
To open up your life for you
As you know there’s always good and evil
Make your choice, Don’t be blind
Open up your mind and don’t be trivial
There’s a whole new world to find
Make it real, not fantasy…”
The Michael Jackson song “Who is it?”
“…(Who is it?)
It is a friend of mine
(Who is it?)
Is it my brother?
(Who is it?)
Somebody hurt my soul
(Who is it?)
I can’t take this stuff no more…”
In this song, Michael explains who IT is:
“Can you feel it in the air
Ghosts be hiding everywhere
I’m gonna be
Exactly what you wanna see
It’s you who’s haunting me
You’re warning me
To be the stranger
In your life
Am I amusing you
Or just confusing you?
Am I the beast
You visualized?
And if you wanna to see
Eccentricities
I’ll be grotesque
Before your eyes
Let them all materialize
Is that scary for you, baby
Am I scary for you, oh
Is it scary for you, baby
Is it scary for you?”
How about songs like Mariah Carey’s Make It Happen or Bread’s Make It with You? Star Trek’s Captain Picard says “Make it so.” Nike inundates us with the “Just Do It” slogan and the swoosh logo.
People do things “just for the hell of it”. Believe it. Keep it real. To hell with it!!! Keep it up. Let it ride. Pass it on. Get with it.
Are you with it? Go for it. Hop to it. Bring it on. Get it together. Play it again, Sam. There’s something to it. Check it out. Figure it out. I love it!! When someone dies, “I guess that was it”. Live it up. Let it go. Do you get it? i get it! How’s it going? It’s going good! How’s it hanging? Don’t let it end. Who can it be now? It’s a wonderful life (the ‘i deal’ life). Let’s make it last. You’ve got it made. Give it a try. Grin and bear it. It just so happens. Leave it alone. Give it a rest. How sweet it is. It’s what you make it. I can see it in your eyes. Get it together. What is it? Get over it. The devil made me do it. Whatever it takes. Now you see it, now you don’t. Cut it out. Whoomp, there it is.
I’m not going to stand for it. Take it away boys. It looks so real. Say it ain’t so. Give it up. It could happen to you. It can’t be true (it always lies). I can feel it in my bones. It’s a mystery. Give it everything you’ve got.
It’s all in your head. I can’t get it out of my head. It’s in the way that you use it. Get it, got it? Good. Could it be? Don’t even try it. Sit on it.
The Energizer bunny took the world by storm in one of the best advertising campaigns in history.
The slogan which was for batteries that create energy was “It keeps going and going…” and became a household phrase for many years. Alka Seltzer encourages us to “Try it, you’ll like it!” Compaq asks the question, “Has it changed your life yet?” And American Express admonishes us to “Don’t Leave Home without It.”
The company Sobe had this ad on their web site encouraging us to “get it up” and to “keep it up”.
The Lexicon of Love
we all “fall” inlove sometimes
blinded by love
from make up to break up
love is the drug
i got a crush on you
i just died in your arms tonight
crazy for you
dying to be with you
hurts so bad
i gave her my heart
smitten
swoon
addicted to love
take my breath away
i’m lost without your love
breaking up is hard to do
you put a spell on me, under her spell, spellbound
love hurts, love bites, love stinks, lovestruck baby
lovefool
lovegame
love is a battlefield
drunk in love
stole/captured my heart/soul
dazed and confused
cupid shoots an arrow through the heart
poison arrow
why do fools fall in love
how can you men a “broken heart”
heartbreak hotel
heartbreaker
unbreak my heart
heart skips a beat
heart attack
killer looks
over the moon
all’s fair in love and war
50% marriages end in divorce
To read more articles on similar and related topics, visit Omnithough.org
Dangerous Products That We’re Unknowingly Using In Our Day-To-Day Life
+ The Cancer Risk To People Who Drink Chlorinated Water Is 93% Higher Than Those Who Don’t August 24 2018 | From: NewEasternOutlook / EnvirowatchRangitikei / Varous
In today’s highly controversial and aggressive world, virtually anything can present a threat to the life of a human being, not just wars, climate change, or short-sighted and often criminal actions of certain politicians.
As it has been shown by a number of scientific studies, the activities of a number of American corporations present a very real threat the well-being of the population mainly due to the use of genetically modified substances in their products while manufacturing substandard health and beauty aids.
The truth is that it’s the people of developing countries that are being affected by these fraudulent business practices the most, since Western corporations try to suppress any information about the health effects of their products to obtain maximum profit.
At the end of the twentieth century British scientists have come to a sensational conclusion that parabens are capable of penetrating the skin barrier and are being accumulated in the tissues of the body, causing cancer, hormone system failures, endocrine system suppression, and skin diseases.
Research made this finding while studying malignant tumors in breast tissue, all of which contained parabens, Later on, these findings were confirmed by Canadian and French scientists.
Parabens are artificial preservatives that are often used in the pharmaceutical and cosmetic industry by a number of Western corporations.
Even though they are effectively increasing the shelf life of a product, while remaining relatively cheap to use, parabens pose a serious threat to human health and well-being.
From time to time one can come across articles on the harmful effects of parabens in Europe and the United States, forcing certain companies to replace parabens with less harmful preservatives. However, the markets of developing countries, especially those with hot and humid climates, are flooded with Western cosmetic products that contain the dangerous substance.
In order to attract international attention to this danger, the French Le Monde went as far as to publish a list of the 400 Western pharmaceutical products containing parabens and that are, therefore, dangerous for use or consumption.
In this list one may find the baby cream Biafine, such cough medicines as Clarix, Codotussyl, Drill, Hexapneumine, Humex, Pectosan, and Rhinathiol, stomach relief medicine such as Maalox, Gaviscon, Josacine, and antibiotic Zinnat, along with a list of other drugs produced by Western corporations and actively advertised for mass consumption.
As it has been pointed out by French journalists, numerous studies have shown that drugs from this list compromise the functioning of the hormone system, especially the reproductive ability of men and women, and may result in cancer.
At the same time, scientists are stressing the danger of hydro-alcoholic gels which were brought to the market in the wake of the artificially created hysteria around the “danger” of the so-called “bird flu,” the H1N1. These gels are advertised as the ultimate solution for sanitizing hands and body in the absence of soap.
A study carried out by the University of Missouri and published in the Plos ONE journal shows that hydro-alcoholic gels make a person more susceptible to Bisphénol-A.
In 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officially recognized that Bisphénol-A is harmful to human health due to the negative effect it has on brain functions and the reproductive system. It also causes a number of cancers (in both women and men) – in particular, prostate cancer, breast cancer as well as autism, depression, reproductive and endocrine systems failure, delays in brain development, diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease.
Yet another study conducted in Argentina showed that 85% of the women’s hygienic pads presented a serious threat to women since they contain the chemically hazardous substance known as glyphosate.
This fact was revealed by researchers of the National Argentine University of La Plata at a recent congress of physicians in Buenos Aires, upon examining sanitary towels and sanitary pads produced with the use of genetically-modified cotton that was grown using Roundup herbicide of the American company Monsanto-Bayer.
As we learn from this study,after the use of this herbicide, all cotton products contain this carcinogenic substance. For this reason, there’s been a massive movement in many countries through the collection of signatures to force such producers as Tampax or Always to state the composition of their products.
The Cancer Risk To People Who Drink Chlorinated Water Is 93% Higher Than Those Who Don’t
This information is from well known Dr Mercola. If you go to the link you can download his free ebook, an excellent resource that will show you how to protect yourself and your loved ones from health risks by choosing the best water to drink and bathe in.
Need I repeat? We need to be vigilant in what we expose ourselves to today because corporate interests are such that they will focus on profits not on your health. Be vigilant and be informed.
What if that clear, clean-looking liquid you use every day – to quench your thirst, to bathe and shower in, and to wash your dishes and laundry in contributed to dozens of everyday ailments, including…heart attacks, tiredness, sinus problems, sperm count, risk of miscarriage, a weakened immune system and many more.
Truth is, the water we use in and around our homes is far from the fresh, pure resource you might assume. And the worst part is…
Americans are ingesting from 300 to 600 times what the Environmental Protection Agency considers a “safe” amount while chlorine itself is relatively benign, and was created to help keep us free from infectious diarrheas, it reacts with organic materials which already dissolve in water, forming chemicals (known as DBP’s) that are over 100 times more toxic than chlorine…
According to the U.S. Council of Environmental Quality, the cancer risk to people who drink chlorinated water is 93 percent higher than among those whose water does not contain chlorine.
The residents of a small town in Pennsylvania who ate diets rich in saturated animal fats and milk had no heart attacks – until they switched from mountain spring water to fluoridated water.
Research from the University of Nijmegen in the Netherlands discovered that people who swam in chlorinated pools or polluted waters as children had 2.2 to 2.4 times the risk of developing melanoma compared to those who did not swim in chlorinated waters.
Male smokers who drank chlorinated tap water for more than 40 years had double the risk of bladder cancer as smoking males who drank non-chlorinated water.
The Three Trigger Terms Being Used To Stop Critical Thinking August 23 2018 | From: WakingTimes
It’s a strange world of newspeak we live in. What was once a society devoted to logic and progress is now being herded in echo chambers of thought control and anti-critical thinking.
Without the ability to examine an issue impartially and completely there is little hope of maintaining liberty and freedom, as history repeatedly demonstrated.
Today, we find that thinking is a diminishing art, and in its place, sound bites and stop-thought terms are used to put the brakes on the mind. These terms are widely used as signals to prevent minds from looking too deeply at a topic or issue.
""Thinking critically means making reasoned judgments that are logical and well thought out. It is a way of thinking in which one doesn’t simply accept all arguments and conclusions to which one is exposed without questioning the arguments and conclusions.
It requires curiosity, skepticism and humility. People who use critical thinking are the ones who say things such as, “How do you know that?”
“Is this conclusion based on evidence or gut feelings?” and “Are there alternative possibilities when given new pieces of information?""
The three terms most widely used today to this avail are detailed below.
1. Conspiracy Theorist
This term is so overused that it really is devoid of any practical meaning.
If you were to examine it at face value, though, it describes a person who is looking to understand injustices in our world and is willing to look at uncomfortable facts in search of negative influence… of which there is plenty in our world today.
However, ‘conspiracy theorist’ has literally become a derogatory term that is attributed to anyone who refuses to accept mainstream narratives at face value.
It doesn’t matter that there is overwhelming evidence to indicate that mainstream media does not value objectivity or report on important issues thoroughly or truthfully.
Now we find this term applied as a prefix to well-known journalists and media personalities, almost as we use the term Doctor.
It’s an adjective that precedes them everywhere, so that before you even know what issue is being discussed, you know that the issue is coming from someone considered to be fringe and unacceptable.
2. Alt
We see the label ‘alt’ being applied more and more frequently as an adjective for sentiments that supposedly do not fit in with the accepted status quo. Ideas outside of the box.
Alt-Media. Alt-Right. Alt-Left. Alt-News. Alt-Health. And so on.
The signal here is that the mainstream is the safe space, and that any segment of ideas or thought given this prefix is outside of that mainstream, and therefore not something ordinary people would want to associate with.
It takes complex ideas and sensitive issues and benches them, so that when the hive mind stumbles upon something ‘alt’ they immediately react with fear, disdain and feigned outrage.
There is no ‘alt’ in our world. We are one, and any faction of ideas is really just a spinoff of the shared reality we all live in.
If segments of this shared space are off-limits and labeled as so, we all lose.
3. Hate Speech
This term is one of the all-time favorites of politicians and tyrants. After all, what could more dangerous than hate?
Newsflash: Hate speech is not the same thing as a hate crime.
Speech is just that, speech. It is literally vibrating air moving through space, and unless we’re talking about and LRAD crowd control cannon, sound really can’t cause people physical harm.
It is fascinating to watch how people use this term so freely as if speech itself can be criminal.
American [Western] society is founded on the idea of freedom of speech and self-expression, which at its core is the recognition that as human beings we do not and never will all see the world in the same way.
It is an acknowledgement of the fact that different people have different ideas about how the world is and should be. That these differences shouldn’t be used as a basis for discrimination.
The term hate speech is one of the most loaded and ambiguous terms in the political lexicon. Beware.
Final Thoughts
Next time you see or hear these terms being used, ask yourself what it is about the story that you’re not supposed to think too deeply about.
Allow both sides of the argument to share equal time in your mind, and honor the independent, sovereign being within yourself that deserves a chance to make up its own mind about how it wishes to view the world.
Remember The Pandemic That Was Going To Wipe Out Humanity? We’re Still Here August 22 2018 | From: JonRappoport
Every few years, a new virus shows up that, experts tell us, can wipe out half the world in six months... and then it doesn’t happen.
I could give you several examples. In this piece, let’s harken back to SARS, the vague flu lookalike that suddenly showed up in 2003 and was going to decimate the Earth.
When SARS hit, the World Health Organization (WHO) put the world on notice not to fly into Toronto. The city lost billions of tourism dollars.
The fabled “coronavirus,” touted as the cause of SARS, was evil and covert and unique. So said ten WHO labs, which took over all official research on the “plague.”
But on May 1, 2003, Dr. Frank Plummer, head of the WHO lab in Winnipeg, issued a blockbuster to a SARS summit in Canada. He was now finding the coronavirus in ZERO percent of SARS cases.
Weeks before, Plummer had said eighty percent of patients showed the virus, then that had dropped to sixty, forty, thirty, and now it was ZERO.
You have to understand that even eighty percent is not sufficient to call the virus the cause of any disease condition.
But ZERO?
Yes, they all have the disease, the same disease, and we have the virus behind it all. The virus is present in ZERO percent of cases.
And the doctor saying this is a consummate insider, the chief honcho at Canada’s WHO lab. WHO being the agency, along with the CDC, that is in charge of all research on SARS.
Understand, given the fact that SARS is supposedly composed of a list of vague symptoms - cough, fever, fatigue, lung infection - the coronavirus is the only thing that is tying these cases together - AND WHEN THAT VIRUS PROVED TO BE MEANINGLESS, all the cases were set adrift, so to speak, joining the ranks of regular old flu and lung infection.
And the SARS death rate was low, so low the whole thing turned out to be a dud. A phony dud.
Of course, no one at the CDC or WHO admitted this. These people are experts at “moving on.” And they’re adept at writing history to revise facts and cover their backsides.
But a whole parade of fake pandemics - and attendant dire warnings - does, over time, achieve one objective: it conditions people to accept the lie that vaccines are the best solution to illness.
And that’s no small feat. It’s especially important when you consider the fact that the CDC, which is tasked with overseeing vaccine safety and efficacy, buys and sells $4 billion worth of vaccines a year. This is BUSINESS we’re talking about, and in order to promote business, PR people cook up all sorts of schemes.
Pandemics, even if they don’t pan out, are clever propaganda.
Also, the horror story of GERMS that can cause plagues anywhere in the world at the drop of a hat - the ceaseless drumbeat of germs, germs, and more germs - obscures all sorts of environmental causes of illness and death.
For example, toxic chemicals produced by major and favored corporations.
“It’s the virus”is the greatest cover story on planet Earth.
Don’t forget that one.
Oh - you want to know the official figures on SARS? 8,000 cases worldwide, 774 deaths, between 2002 and 2003. No cases on the record since 2004.
By any standard, that’s a DUD. But go ahead, read the official accounts and histories. See if you can find one clear admission that the whole thing was nonsense. Good luck.
Remember, it’s not the pandemic that’s important. It’s the warning about the pandemic. That’s what moves product off the shelves…
The Diseased, Lying, Condition Of America’s [The Wests'] ‘News’ Media August 21 2018 | From: GlobalResearch / Various
Both President Trump and former President Obama are commonly said in America’s ‘news’ media to be or to have been “ceding Syria to Russia” or “ceding Syria to Russia and Iran,” or similar allegations. They imply that ‘we’ own (or have some right to control) Syria.
That’s not only a lie; it is a very evil and harmful one, dangerously goading the US President to go even more against Russia (and Iran) (and, of course, against Syria) than has yet been done - but the ‘news’media don’t care about that evil, and that falsehood, and that dangerousness - they do it anyway, and none of them attacks the others for perpetrating this vicious war-mongering lie, that lying provocation to yet more and worse war than already exists there.
And the fact that none is exposing the fraudulence of the others on this important matter, is a yet-bigger additional scandal, beyond and amplifying the media’s common lying itself.
Because they all function here like a mob, goading to more and worse invasions, and doing it on the the basis of dangerous lies - that America, and not the Syrians themselves, own Syria.
These lies simply assume that America (probably referring to the US Government, but whatever) somehow “has” or else “had” Syria (so that America can now ‘cede’ it, to anyone); and this assumption (that the US somehow owns Syria) is not only an imperialistic one (which is bad, and wrong, in itself), but it reduces to nothingness the rights (in the minds of the American public) of the Syrian people, to control their own land.
That lie is what America’s ‘news’ media won’t expose, but instead they all cooperate with it, when they’re not actually participating, themselves, in spreading these lies.
What they are doing is also to slur Russia, and to slur Iran, for having accepted the request from Syria’s Government, for assistance in protecting Syria’s Government, against the tens of thousands of jihadists who had been recruited throughout the world by the Saudi-American alliance, to overthrow and replace Syria’s Government, to replace it with one that would be appointed by the Saud family (’America’s ally’), the fundamentalist-Sunni royal family who (as the absolute monarchy there) do actually own Saudi Arabia - a monarchical dictatorship, which the US Government calls an ‘ally’.
The evilness of this imperialistic assumption, which is being constantly spread by the US-and-allied ‘news’media, is as bad as is its falseness, because “America” (however one wishes to use that term) never had, never possessed, any right whatsoever to control Syria.
Of course, neither does Russia possess such a right, nor does Iran, but neither Russia nor Iran is asserting any such right; both instead are there to protect Syria’s national sovereignty, against the invaders (including the US, and the Sauds’ regime).
But the US-and-allied ‘news’media don’t present it that way - the honest way - not at all. Such truths are instead suppressed.
I was immediately struck by this false and evil assumption that the US owns Syria, when reading the June 15th issue of The Week magazine.
It contained, under its “Best Columns” section, a piece by Matthew Continetti (“Obama Too Good for America”), which says, among other falsehoods,
'"Obama was wrong about a lot of other things, too, like… ceding Syria to Russia.” That phrase, “ceding Syria to Russia” rose straight out from the page to me as being remarkable, stunning, and not only because it suggests that America owns that sovereign nation, Syria.
I was especially struck by it because the CIA has several times attempted Syrian coups and once did briefly, in 1949, overthrow and replace Syria’s democratically elected President.
But is that really something which today’s America’s ‘news’media should encourage the American public to be demanding today’s American politicians to be demanding from today’s American President?
How bizarre, even evil, an idea is that? But it is so normal that it’s a fair indication of how evil and untrustworthy today’s American ‘news’media actually are. I just hadn’t noticed it before.
Publishing such a false and evil idea, without any accompanying commentary that truthfully presents its context and that doesn’t simply let the false and evil allegation stand unchallenged - that instead lets it be unchallenged both factually and morally - is not acceptable either factually or morally, but then I checked and found that it’s the almost universal norm, in today’s US ‘news’media.
Examples follow; On 17 April 2018, CBS News headlined “Lindsey Graham ‘unnerved’ after Syria briefing: ‘Everything in that briefing made me more worried’” and presented that US Senator saying, “It seems to me we are willing to give Syria to Assad, Russia, and Iran.” He was criticizing President Trump as being “all tweet and no action.”
He wanted more war, and more threat of war.
But when President Obama had repeatedly denied in public that only the Syrian people should have any say-so over whom Syria’s leaders ought to be, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon repeatedly contradicted the US President’s viewpoint on this, and he said, “The future of Assad must be determined by the Syrian people.”
If the American people have become so dismissive of international law as this, then is it because the US ‘news’media start with the ridiculously false presumption that “America” (whatever that refers to) is the arbiter of international law, and therefore has the right to dictate to the entire world what that law is, and what it means?
Is America, as being the dictator over the whole planet, supposed to be something that Americans’ tax-dollars ought to be funding - that objective: global dictatorship?
How does that viewpoint differ, then, from perpetual war for perpetual ‘peace’ - a dictum that’s enormously profitable for America’s big ‘Defense’ contractors, such as Lockheed Martin, but that impoverishes the general public, both in America, and especially in the countries (such as Syria) where ‘our’ Government drops bombs in order to enforce its own will and demand, that: “Assad must go!”
In fact, as any journalist who writes or speaks about the Syrian situation and who isn’t a complete ignoramus knows, Bashar al-Assad would easily win any free and fair Presidential election in Syria, against any contender.
His public support, as shown not only in the 2014 Syrian Presidential election, but also in the many Western-sponsored opinion-polls in Syria (since the CIA is always eager to find potential candidates to support against him), show this.
On 17 December 2016, Eric Chenoweth, a typical neocon Democratic Party hack, headlined “Let Hamilton Speak: Recapturing American Democracy”, and he wrote:
“Trump’s statements and appointments make clear he intends to tilt American policy to serve Russian interests: ceding Syria to Russia by ending support to pro-Western rebels; possibly lifting economic sanctions and recognizing the annexation of Crimea; proposing an alliance with Russia in the war on terror while remaining uncommitted to the defense of NATO allies, in particular the Baltic countries vulnerable to Russian aggression. Restoring American Democracy When they meet on December 19, Republican Electors who reflect on their constitutional duty should not then affirm Trump’s election.”
Those “pro-Western rebels” in Syria were actually led by Al Qaeda’s Syrian branch.
Without them, the US regime wouldn’t have had any “boots on the ground” forces to speak of there. In fact, the US regime has actually been fronting for the Saud family to take over control of Syria if and when Syria’s Government falls.
The Saud family even selected the people who in the U.N. peace talks on Syria represent ‘the rebels’ - the Sauds, who have been Syria’s enemy ever since 1950, selected ‘Syria’s opposition’, who were now seeking to take over Syria if and when ‘America’s moderate rebels’ succeed.
Both Al Qaeda and ISIS are actually fundamentalist-Sunnis, like the Saud family are, and Assad’s Government is resolutely non-sectarian.
Assad himself is a non-Islamist Alawite Shiite secularist, which virtually all fundamentalist Sunnis (such as the Sauds are) are taught to despise and to hate - especially because he’s Shiite.
The US regime knows that neither it, which is considered Christian, nor Israel, which is theocratically Jewish, could practically succeed at imposing rule in Syria, but that maybe the Sauds could - so, they are the actual leaders of the ‘pro-Western’ forces, seeking to replace Syria’s secularist Government.
Overthrowing Syria’s Government would be their victory. It would be the Saud family’s victory. But this fact is kept a secret from the American public, by the US ‘news’media.
Back on 17 September 2016, shortly before the change in US Administrations, Obama bombed the Syrian Government’s garrison in Der Zor, or Deir Ezzor, which is the capital of Syria’s oil-producing region.
He did it in order to enable ISIS forces, which surrounded the city, to rush in and conquer it.
Obama did this only eight days after his Secretary of State, John Kerry, had conceded to the demand by Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s Foreign Minister, Russia’s demand that in a cease fire, Russia be allowed to continue bombing not only ISIS there, which Kerry agreed should continue to be bombed by both the US and Russia, but also Al Qaeda’s forces - which until 9 September 2016, Obama refused to allow to be bombed during a cease-fire.
But, finally, after a year of deadlock between Russia and the United States on that crucial issue, Kerry and Lavrov both signed a cease-fire agreement, and it allowed both ISIS and Al Qaeda-led forces to continue being bombed. (Russia had been bombing both, ever since 30 September 2015, when Russia began its bombing campaign in Syria.)
That cease-fire went into effect on September 12th. Then Obama, unannounced - and a great disappointment to his Secretary of State, who wasn’t informed of this in advance - broke the agreement, by bombing the Syrian outpost in Deir Ezzor - and that’s the moment when Vladimir Putin quit his efforts to get agreements from Obama, because Putin now recognized that Obama was totally untrustworthy.
Already by late September of 2015, even prior to Russia’s having been requested by President Assad to enter the war in order to speed up the defeat of what Washington still calls ‘the rebels’, it was clear that Washington (actually Riyadh) wasn’t going to take over Syria; and Americans were - and are - being taught by the ‘news’media, that this was because Obama was ‘weak’ and didn’t care enough about ‘human rights’ in Syria, and about ‘democracy’ in Syria.
So, on 28 September 2015, Matt Purple at the libertarian “Rare Politics” site, headlined “Pentagon admits that the Syrian rebels it trained handed over weapons to al Qaeda”, and he wrote “Neoconservatives wail that President Obama is ceding Syria to Russia - but the reason the Russians are taking the lead is precisely because America has sidelined itself.”
But the US regime hadn’t at all “sidelined itself”; it continued - and it continues to this day - its invasion and occupation of that land. Trump’s policy on Syria is basically a continuation of Obama’s - and it’s not at all “ceding Syria to Russia,” or “ceding Syria to Russia and Iran.” [Uninformed]
Because of America’s ‘news’media, it still isn’t “ceding Syria to the Syrians” - as Ban ki-Moon and international law would. That wouldn’t be profitable for Lockheed Martin etc. (whose biggest customers other than the US Government are the Sauds, and Trump alone sold $400 billion of US weapons to them); so, it’s not done.
Syria’s sovereignty is utterly denied by the US regime, but if the US regime were to succeed, the big winners would actually be the Saud family.
Do the American people have sovereignty, over ‘their’ (our) Government? US ‘news’media effectively ban that question.
Perhaps what controls the US Government is the Saudi-Israeli alliance: the Sauds have the money, and the Israelis have the lobbyists. Of course, the US ‘news’media are obsessed whether Russia controls the US Government.
That diversionary tactic is extremely profitable to companies such as General Dynamics, and America’s other weapons-manufacturers, which thrive on wars - especially by selling to the Sauds, and to their allies (and, obviously, not at all to Russia).
Green Gestapo Says You're Mentally Ill If You Challenge Climate Change + Over 30,000 Scientists Say 'Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming' Is A Complete Hoax And Science Lie August 20 2018 | From: Infowars / NaturalNews
Any opposition to the party line constitutes "culpable insanity."
Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama at Huntsville annoyed the climate-extremist establishment a couple of years ago by describing them as “climate Nazis.”
Related:Climate Swindle - Who wants to be a carbon trillionaire?
Recently several of these creatures wrote a supposedly “learned” paper in an obscure journal, saying that anyone who, like Roy and me, raises legitimate questions about the magnitude of Man’s influence on climate or the disproportionate cost of making largely non-existent global warming go away, must be suffering from a psychiatric disorder.
These climate Nazis said that those who dare to question the Party Line on the weather should be regarded as suffering from “identity-protective cognition” and “conspiracist ideation.” I was among those they named.
In Communist Russia, before its defeat at the hands of the triumvirate of liberty – Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II – opponents of the regime whom the dictators had not executed were instead flung into psychiatric institutions, on the ludicrous ground that any opposition to the Party Line constituted culpable insanity.
Lord Christopher Monckton
(Author if this article)
The intellectual pygmies who are the inheritors of the dictators, conveniently forgetting the 250 million people whom communist and fascist socialism sent to their deaths in the 20th century, are now whining that we who have exposed their climate scam should be locked away in state psychiatric prisons, there to be “re-educated” to cure us of the wicked notion that science, not politics, is the way to determine the magnitude (if any) and cost (if any) of the climate problem (if any).
Well, I’ve had enough.
I’ve written to the editor of the obscure journal, to the president of the editor’s university and to the presidents of the universities that provide nests for two of the paper’s authors, to warn them that in Europe, to ensure that the arrogant and un-self-critical totalitarianism that killed so many in the last century will kill none in this, we now have hate-speech laws that make the publication of the offending paper falsely accusing us of lunacy an imprisonable criminal offense.
One of the co-authors, one Cook, recently appointed to a third-rank university in the United States, falsely stated in an earlier paper that 97% of climate scientists had said recent global warming was mostly man-made, when his own records – now in the hands of the fraud police – show he knew the true figure was not 97% but 0.5%.
Lest you should think that my comparing these wretches with the totalitarians of old is unjust, I have obtained a picture of Cook dressed up in his favorite uniform, a parody of a Nazi SS uniform. The photograph bears the self-describing caption Reichsführer-SS J. Cook.
I have sent copies of this photograph to the president of Cook’s new “university,” together with a request that I should be permitted to set straight the crooked record of poisonous and criminal hate-speech that Cook and his ghastly co-authors have published to my detriment.
Watch this space!
Footnote: My recent speech to the London climate conference exposing a huge error at the heart of the climate models – an error without which no one will ever worry about our effect on the climate – is causing major concern among the ranks of the ungodly. It’s unusual for a mathematical presentation to gather 10,000 hits in a week, but it’s happened. If you haven’t seen it yet:
Don’t miss the speech that makes the climate Nazis squirm.
If you like Classical music, you’ll enjoy a recording of the piece I played onstage in the conference hall during the closing-night party. It’s Schubert’s Sechs Ecossaisen der Ehemaligen, six little Scottish dances played as an oran talaidh or lullaby in the dreamy Highland style. If baby won’t sleep, play this resonant recording and all will be well. Enjoy!
Lord Christopher Monckton is a well-known journalist, public speaker, UKIP activist and “global warming” skeptic who also invented the mathematical puzzle Eternity. You can find him at the Lord Monckton Foundation.
Over 30,000 Scientists Say 'Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming' Is A Complete Hoax And Science Lie
The highly-politicized climate change debate rages on as we approach the crucial 2016 U.S. presidential election, despite an ever-growing body of evidence revealing the fact that "catastrophic man-made global warming" is nothing more than an elaborate hoax.
And the November election may prove to be a victory for the hoaxers, according to experts who happen to be among those who dare to challenge the spurious climate change narrative.
[Note: David Wilcock, within his vast body of research and writings has pointed out that: "[He] used official NASA sources to prove that the Sun, planets, and satellites [moons, asteroids etc.] in our system are becoming brighter, hotter, and more magnetic at a remarkable speed."] Related:When Plutocrats Own The Weather & Nobody Is Buying The “Climate Change” Hoax Anymore
One of these experts is Weather Channel founder John Coleman, who is now warning that the election could prove to be a "tipping point" in favor of people like Al Gore, who continues to amass vast fortunes based on the global warming scam.
In a recent interview with Climate Depot, Coleman said:
“Al Gore may emerge from the shadows to declare victory in the 'global warming' debate if Hillary Clinton moves into the White House. Yes, if that happens and the new climate regulations become the law of the land, they will be next to impossible to overturn for four to eight years."
Climate change proponents remain undeterred in their mission, ignoring numerous recent scientific findings indicating that there has been no warming trend at all for nearly two decades.
Al Gore's dire predictions of the melting of polar ice on a massive scale have proved to be completely false. In fact, in 2014 - a year that was touted as being "the hottest ever" in the Earth's history - there were record amounts of ice reported in Antarctica, an increase in Arctic ice, and record snowfalls across the globe.
Debunking the "97 Percent" Lie
On top of those "inconvenient truths," the White House's assertion that 97 percent of scientists agree that global warming is real has been completely debunked. Several independently-researched examinations of the literature used to support the "97 percent" statement found that the conclusions were cherry-picked and misleading.
More objective surveys have revealed that there is a far greater diversity of opinion among scientists than the global warming crowd would like for you to believe.
From the National Review:
"A 2008 survey by two German scientists, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, found that a significant number of scientists were skeptical of the ability of existing global climate models to accurately predict global temperatures, precipitation, sea-level changes, or extreme weather events even over a decade; they were far more skeptical as the time horizon increased."
Other mainstream news sources besides the National Review have also been courageous enough to speak out against the global warming propaganda - even the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece in 2015 challenging the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) pseudoscience being promulgated by global warming proponents.
And, of course, there are the more than 31,000 American scientists (to date) who have signed a petition challenging the climate change narrative and 9,029 of them hold PhDs in their respective fields. But hey, Al Gore and his cronies have also ignored that inconvenient truth, as well.
Many of those scientists who signed the petition were likely encouraged to speak out in favor of the truth after retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist John L. Casey revealed that solar cycles are largely responsible for warming periods on Earth - not human activity.
Al Gore and Cronies Continue Getting Richer from the Global Warming Hoax
But the global warming crowd continues to push their agenda on the public while lining their pockets in the process. If you're still inclined to believe what Al Gore has to say about global warming, please consider the fact that since he embarked on his crusade, his wealth has grown from $2 million in 2001 to $100 million in 2016 - largely due to investments in fake "green tech" companies and the effective embezzlement of numerous grants and loans.
You might want to take all of this information into serious consideration before casting your vote in the November election.
Nutrition And Mental Health + ADHD Is A Fabricated Disease, Says Reputed Neurologist
August 19 2018 | From: BePure / Sott Last week I attended a conference by Dr Julia Rucklidge from the University of Canterbury where she presented her groundbreaking research on the treatment of mental health disorders such as ADHD, bipolar, depression and anxiety using therapeutic doses of micronutrients.
More and more we are seeing that what we eat, and what we absorb from our food choices, affect more than our physical appearance and physical fitness.
Related: Nutrition And Mental Health
Yes these things are important, but actually there are numerous benefits to eating a nutrient-dense diet with supporting products that don’t get mentioned. And they should. Our mental health is something that affects every interaction we have with ourselves, our families, our work colleagues and our friends.
The takeaway message from this conference is the prevalence of mental health problems in the modern world is concerning. According to Dr Rucklidge:
“There is a very real danger of mental health care bankrupting our society in terms of cost and social implications.”
In this blog I’m going to address the link between nutrition and mental health. There are many other factors involved in the prevention and treatment of mental illness. We are only addressing nutrition in this blog as it is such an important factor to consider.
The Whole Picture
One in ten New Zealanders are on antidepressants. This is an eight-fold increase in total prescription numbers from 1998.
There has been a four-fold increase in claimed disability financial support due to psychiatric disorders in New Zealand from 1991 to now. Both these figures are supplied through Statistics New Zealand’s annual reports.
In a period of time where more “cutting edge medicines” have been researched, developed and trialled on our population, rates of mental health disorders continue to rise.
The long term results from the National Institute of Mental Health’s (NIMH) MTA study found that children taking medication for ADHD for longer than 24 months showed “significant markers not of beneficial outcome, but of deterioration… medicated children were also slightly smaller, and higher delinquency scores.” Source: The MTA cooperative randomised clinical trial.
It’s fair to say our current gold standards are not working, so what else has changed in this time period?
Food And Stress
This increase in mental health conditions follows the same exponential rise of obesity and type two diabetes from the 1970s to now. We know that the rise in medical knowledge and the availability of medications hasn’t resolved the problem, nor has a 300% increase in gym memberships, so what has changed to negatively affect our mental and metabolic health?
I firmly believe, and the evidence supports this idea, that what we are eating and the nutrients we give to our bodies drastically affect our weight, energy, metabolic health AND mental health in both negative and positive ways.
For many people gluten, refined grains and sugar can cause problems affecting everything from digestion, mood, skin disorders like rashes and eczema, to joint pain, weight gain, migraines, thyroid disorders, mental health disorders and behavioural issues such as ADHD.
Gluten is a protein found in wheat, barley, and rye, and is what gives bread its stretch. Many nutritionists now believe many people - not just those with gluten intolerance or Celiac Disease - should avoid gluten as it is a known contributor to leaky gut.
This is problematic for mental health conditions because if serotonin is not kept within your gut and digestive tract, it cannot engage in chemical reactions within your brain to increase your mood.
Refined grains and sugar cause blood sugar spikes and energy crashes as insulin is produced to mitigate the quick rush of glucose and fructose. You can read in length about the problem with refined grains and sugar.
Lastly, the stress of modern living has a huge impact on our mental health. Cortisol is a stress hormone that is activated by everything from traffic, fighting with a loved one, worry, anxiety, excessive caffeine intake and even exercise. Cortisol initiates our fight or flight response in our nervous system. In ancestral times this response was necessary for fleeing from danger.
In the modern world, we perceive danger to be everywhere (i.e we release cortisol) despite the fact we aren’t running away from a lion. This constant flood of cortisol prevents our “rest and digest” nervous system from operating. This prevents recovery from exercise or the day’s stressors, the production of growth hormone and serotonin as well as preventing sleep and digestion.
Managing stress is critical for those people with mental health concerns.
The Brain Gut Connection
Current research in the field of microbiome health and mental health conditions confirms the theory our stomach is our second brain. There are several reasons for this. The first is Serotonin.
Serotonin is your happiness hormone. It is a neurotransmitter that relays messages from all areas of your brain to your cells. An imbalance or deficiency in serotonin is thought to influence the brain in a way that causes depression.
Up to 70% of your bodies total serotonin lives in your digestive tract. If you have leaky gut, a food intolerance or gut dysbiosis through poor diet or antibiotic use, the serotonin can leak out of your gut and is then unable to do its job in your brain.
The second factor has to do with the nutritional and energy demands of our brains. Our brains are approximately 2% of our body weight. However, it consumes 20-40% of our metabolism. In other words, it is constantly and disproportionately demanding nutrients and oxygen. One litre of blood enters your brain every minute, carrying whatever nutrients it has access to.
Giving it nutrient dense food and access to as many nutrients as possible is critical for mental health.
So What Can We Do?
Dr Rucklidge’s research suggests we need to ensure good nutrient-density in our diets and use therapeutic doses of micronutrients to support mental health conditions.
“Micronutrients such as zinc, vitamin D, Essential Fatty Acids and many more have been used in many open label trials across anxiety, sleep issues, bipolar disorder and ADHD.
All have shown significant reductions in psychiatric and psychological symptoms. Response rates range from 50-80% improvements."
Source: Dr Julia Rucklidge at the University of Canterbury.
The current medical model seeks to use medication first before addressing stress, food, sleep and nutrient deficiencies. I would personally love to see this equation flipped. If we can address dietary and lifestyle factors first, along with nutrient support, while using medication sparingly on a case-by-case basis, we can greatly improve the mental health of our nation.
If you or a loved one are currently struggling with depression-like symptoms, bipolar ADHD or anxiety please seek assistance. You can contact your GP or health care provider, the BePure team at info@bepure.co.nz, www.depression.org.nz or the depression helpline at 0800 111 757.
He is well-known for his pioneering work in developmental psychology at Harvard University, where he has spent decades documenting how babies and small children grow, and is an exceptional and highly-regarded researcher.
So it may be surprising to learn that he believes the diagnosis of ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) is an invention - and only benefits the pharmaceutical industry and psychiatrists.
Mislabeling Mental Illness
"That is the history of humanity: Those in authority believe they're doing the right thing, and they harm those who have no power", says Jerome Kagan.
In an interview with Spiegel, Kagan addressed the skyrocketing rates of ADHD in America, which he attributes to "fuzzy diagnostic practices."
He illustrated his point with the following example:
Say fifty years ago you have a 7-year-old who is bored in school and exhibits disruptive behavior. Back then, he would be labeled as lazy. But today, that same child is said to suffer from ADHD. That's why we've seen such a dramatic increase in the disorder.
Every child who is having problems in school is sent to see a pediatrician, who then claims it's ADHD and prescribes Ritalin.
"In fact, 90 percent of these 5.4 million kids don't have an abnormal dopamine metabolism. The problem is, if a drug is available to doctors, they'll make the corresponding diagnosis," he said.
"We could get philosophical and ask ourselves: "What does mental illness mean?"
If you do interviews with children and adolescents aged 12 to 19, then 40 percent can be categorized as anxious or depressed.
But if you take a closer look and ask how many of them are seriously impaired by this, the number shrinks to 8 percent.
Describing every child who is depressed or anxious as being mentally ill is ridiculous.
Adolescents are anxious, that's normal. They don't know what college to go to. Their boyfriend or girlfriend just stood them up. Being sad or anxious is just as much a part of life as anger or sexual frustration," Kagan told Spiegel.
What are the implications for the millions of children who are inaccurately diagnosed as mentally ill? Kagan believes it's devastating because they think there is something fundamentally wrong with them.
He's not the only psychologist to raise the alarm about this trend, but Kagan and others feel they're up against:
"An enormously powerful alliance: pharmaceutical companies that are making billions, and a profession that is self-interested."
Kagan himself suffered from inner restlessness and stuttering as a child, but his mother told him: "There's nothing wrong with you. Your mind is working faster than your tongue." He thought at the time: "Gee, that's great, I'm only stuttering because I'm so smart." If he had been born in the present era, he most likely would have been classified as mentally ill.
Jerome Kagan
ADHD isn't the only mental illness epidemic among children that worries Kagan, depression is another.
In 1987, about one in 400 American teenagers was using an antidepressant. By 2002, the numbers leaped to one in 40.
He feels it's another overused diagnosis, simply because the pills are available.
Instead of immediately resorting to pharmaceutical drugs, he thinks doctors should take more time with the child to find out why they aren't as cheerful, for instance. At the very least, a few tests should be carried out - and an EEG for certain, especially since studies have shown that people who have heightened activity in the right frontal lobe respond poorly to antidepressants.
Kagan remembers going into a textbook-type depression after a major research project he was involved with failed. He had insomnia and met all the other clinical criteria for depression. But since he knew what the cause was, he didn't seek professional help. After six months, the depression was gone.
Under normal circumstances, he would have been diagnosed as mentally ill by a psychiatrist and put on medication.
But here lies an important distinction: when a life event overwhelms us, it's common to fall into a depression for a while. But there are those who have a genetic vulnerability and experience chronic depression; they are mentally ill.
It's crucial to look not only at the symptoms, but the causes.
This is where psychiatry drops the ball, as it's the only medical profession that establishes illness on symptoms alone.
Such a blind spot opens the door for new maladies - like bipolar disorder, which we never used to see in children. As it stands today, nearly a million Americans under the age of 19 are diagnosed with it.
"A group of doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital just started calling kids who had temper tantrums bipolar. They shouldn't have done that. But the drug companies loved it because drugs against bipolar disorders are expensive. That's how the trend was started. It's a little like in the 15th century, when people started thinking someone could be possessed by the devil or hexed by a witch," said Kagan.
When asked if there are alternatives to pharmaceutical drugs for behavioral abnormalities, Kagan said we could look at tutoring, as an example, for kids diagnosed with ADHD. After all, it's never the ones who are doing well in school that are diagnosed, it's always the children who are struggling.
Why Capitalism Creates Useless Jobs
August 18 2018 | From: Strikemag Ever had the feeling that your job might be made up? That the world would keep on turning if you weren’t doing that thing you do 9-5? Anthropology professor and best selling author David Graeber explored the phenomenon of bullshit jobs for our recent summer issue – everyone who’s employed should read carefully
In the year 1930, John Maynard Keynes predicted that technology would have advanced sufficiently by century’s end that countries like Great Britain or the United States would achieve a 15-hour work week.
There’s every reason to believe he was right. In technological terms, we are quite capable of this. And yet it didn’t happen. Instead, technology has been marshaled, if anything, to figure out ways to make us all work more. In order to achieve this, jobs have had to be created that are, effectively, pointless.
Huge swathes of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they secretly believe do not really need to be performed. The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound.
It is a scar across our collective soul. Yet virtually no one talks about it.
Why did Keynes’ promised utopia – still being eagerly awaited in the ‘60s – never materialise? The standard line today is that he didn’t figure in the massive increase in consumerism.
Given the choice between less hours and more toys and pleasures, we’ve collectively chosen the latter. This presents a nice morality tale, but even a moment’s reflection shows it can’t really be true.
Yes, we have witnessed the creation of an endless variety of new jobs and industries since the ‘20s, but very few have anything to do with the production and distribution of sushi, iPhones, or fancy sneakers.
So what are these new jobs, precisely? A recent report comparing employment in the US between 1910 and 2000 gives us a clear picture (and I note, one pretty much exactly echoed in the UK). Over the course of the last century, the number of workers employed as domestic servants, in industry, and in the farm sector has collapsed dramatically.
At the same time, “professional, managerial, clerical, sales, and service workers” tripled, growing “from one-quarter to three-quarters of total employment.” In other words, productive jobs have, just as predicted, been largely automated away (even if you count industrial workers globally, including the toiling masses in India and China, such workers are still not nearly so large a percentage of the world population as they used to be).
But rather than allowing a massive reduction of working hours to free the world’s population to pursue their own projects, pleasures, visions, and ideas, we have seen the ballooning not even so much of the “service” sector as of the administrative sector, up to and including the creation of whole new industries like financial services or telemarketing, or the unprecedented expansion of sectors like corporate law, academic and health administration, human resources, and public relations.
And these numbers do not even reflect on all those people whose job is to provide administrative, technical, or security support for these industries, or for that matter the whole host of ancillary industries (dog-washers, all-night pizza deliverymen) that only exist because everyone else is spending so much of their time working in all the other ones.
These are what I propose to call “bullshit jobs.”
It’s as if someone were out there making up pointless jobs just for the sake of keeping us all working. And here, precisely, lies the mystery.
In capitalism, this is exactly what is not supposed to happen. Sure, in the old inefficient socialist states like the Soviet Union, where employment was considered both a right and a sacred duty, the system made up as many jobs as they had to (this is why in Soviet department stores it took three clerks to sell a piece of meat).
But, of course, this is the very sort of problem market competition is supposed to fix. According to economic theory, at least, the last thing a profit-seeking firm is going to do is shell out money to workers they don’t really need to employ. Still, somehow, it happens.
While corporations may engage in ruthless downsizing, the layoffs and speed-ups invariably fall on that class of people who are actually making, moving, fixing and maintaining things; through some strange alchemy no one can quite explain, the number of salaried paper-pushers ultimately seems to expand, and more and more employees find themselves, not unlike Soviet workers actually, working 40 or even 50 hour weeks on paper, but effectively working 15 hours just as Keynes predicted, since the rest of their time is spent organising or attending motivational seminars, updating their facebook profiles or downloading TV box-sets.
The answer clearly isn’t economic: it’s moral and political. The ruling class has figured out that a happy and productive population with free time on their hands is a mortal danger (think of what started to happen when this even began to be approximated in the ‘60s).
And, on the other hand, the feeling that work is a moral value in itself, and that anyone not willing to submit themselves to some kind of intense work discipline for most of their waking hours deserves nothing, is extraordinarily convenient for them.
Once, when contemplating the apparently endless growth of administrative responsibilities in British academic departments, I came up with one possible vision of hell. Hell is a collection of individuals who are spending the bulk of their time working on a task they don’t like and are not especially good at.
Say they were hired because they were excellent cabinet-makers, and then discover they are expected to spend a great deal of their time frying fish. Neither does the task really need to be done – at least, there’s only a very limited number of fish that need to be fried.
Yet somehow, they all become so obsessed with resentment at the thought that some of their co-workers might be spending more time making cabinets, and not doing their fair share of the fish-frying responsibilities, that before long there’s endless piles of useless badly cooked fish piling up all over the workshop and it’s all that anyone really does.
I think this is actually a pretty accurate description of the moral dynamics of our own economy.
Now, I realise any such argument is going to run into immediate objections:
“Who are you to say what jobs are really ‘necessary’? What’s necessary anyway? You’re an anthropology professor, what’s the ‘need’ for that?”
(And indeed a lot of tabloid readers would take the existence of my job as the very definition of wasteful social expenditure.)
And on one level, this is obviously true. There can be no objective measure of social value.
I would not presume to tell someone who is convinced they are making a meaningful contribution to the world that, really, they are not. But what about those people who are themselves convinced their jobs are meaningless? Not long ago I got back in touch with a school friend who I hadn’t seen since I was 12.
I was amazed to discover that in the interim, he had become first a poet, then the front man in an indie rock band. I’d heard some of his songs on the radio having no idea the singer was someone I actually knew. He was obviously brilliant, innovative, and his work had unquestionably brightened and improved the lives of people all over the world.
Yet, after a couple of unsuccessful albums, he’d lost his contract, and plagued with debts and a newborn daughter, ended up, as he put it, “taking the default choice of so many directionless folk: law school.”
Now he’s a corporate lawyer working in a prominent New York firm. He was the first to admit that his job was utterly meaningless, contributed nothing to the world, and, in his own estimation, should not really exist.
There’s a lot of questions one could ask here, starting with, what does it say about our society that it seems to generate an extremely limited demand for talented poet-musicians, but an apparently infinite demand for specialists in corporate law?
(Answer: if 1% of the population controls most of the disposable wealth, what we call “the market” reflects what they think is useful or important, not anybody else.)
But even more, it shows that most people in these jobs are ultimately aware of it. In fact, I’m not sure I’ve ever met a corporate lawyer who didn’t think their job was bullshit. The same goes for almost all the new industries outlined above.
There is a whole class of salaried professionals that, should you meet them at parties and admit that you do something that might be considered interesting (an anthropologist, for example), will want to avoid even discussing their line of work entirely.
Give them a few drinks, and they will launch into tirades about how pointless and stupid their job really is.
This is a profound psychological violence here. How can one even begin to speak of dignity in labour when one secretly feels one’s job should not exist? How can it not create a sense of deep rage and resentment.
Yet it is the peculiar genius of our society that its rulers have figured out a way, as in the case of the fish-fryers, to ensure that rage is directed precisely against those who actually do get to do meaningful work.
For instance: in our society, there seems a general rule that, the more obviously one’s work benefits other people, the less one is likely to be paid for it.
Again, an objective measure is hard to find, but one easy way to get a sense is to ask: what would happen were this entire class of people to simply disappear?
Say what you like about nurses, garbage collectors, or mechanics, it’s obvious that were they to vanish in a puff of smoke, the results would be immediate and catastrophic.
A world without teachers or dock-workers would soon be in trouble, and even one without science fiction writers or ska musicians would clearly be a lesser place.
It’s not entirely clear how humanity would suffer were all private equity CEOs, lobbyists, PR researchers, actuaries, telemarketers, bailiffs or legal consultants to similarly vanish. (Many suspect it might markedly improve.)
Yet apart from a handful of well-touted exceptions (doctors), the rule holds surprisingly well.
Even more perverse, there seems to be a broad sense that this is the way things should be. This is one of the secret strengths of right-wing populism.
You can see it when tabloids whip up resentment against tube workers for paralysing London during contract disputes: the very fact that tube workers can paralyse London shows that their work is actually necessary, but this seems to be precisely what annoys people.
It’s even clearer in the US, where Republicans have had remarkable success mobilizing resentment against school teachers, or auto workers (and not, significantly, against the school administrators or auto industry managers who actually cause the problems) for their supposedly bloated wages and benefits.
It’s as if they are being told “but you get to teach children! Or make cars! You get to have real jobs! And on top of that you have the nerve to also expect middle-class pensions and health care?”
If someone had designed a work regime perfectly suited to maintaining the power of finance capital, it’s hard to see how they could have done a better job.
Real, productive workers are relentlessly squeezed and exploited.
The remainder are divided between a terrorised stratum of the – universally reviled – unemployed and a larger stratum who are basically paid to do nothing, in positions designed to make them identify with the perspectives and sensibilities of the ruling class (managers, administrators, etc) – and particularly its financial avatars – but, at the same time, foster a simmering resentment against anyone whose work has clear and undeniable social value.
Clearly, the system was never consciously designed [actually you were right up until this statement]. It emerged from almost a century of trial and error. But it is the only explanation for why, despite our technological capacities, we are not all working 3-4 hour days.
Columbus, Ohio, actually won $50 million in DOT grant money to turn their city into a "Smart City" calling it "SmartColumbus." The city of Columbus will receive an additional $90 million in pledges from public and private sector partners.
"Smart PGH's" tag line at the end of the above video is chilling, "If It's Not For All, It's Not For Us". As "Smart PGH's" documents reveal, 'smart city' surveillance spies on All of Us.
The City of Pittsburgh sees the confluence of transportation and energy as the key to U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Smart City Challenge. To meet the challenge, we will develop an open platform and corresponding governance structure to improve the safety, equity, and efficiency of our transportation network and its interaction with the energy and communications networks.
By building on existing technology deployments and increasing fixed and mobile sensors over a number of major “Smart Spine” corridors that connect with primary commercial centers and amenities, Pittsburgh will collect, analyze, visualize, and act on information to improve mobility for residents.
The non-proprietary nature of our platform allows the City of Pittsburgh and its partners to set an open, national standard for a municipal service delivery platform, which enhances industry and supports innovation.
According to the SCC, 'smart spines' use advanced technology like real-time adaptive traffic signals and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication at intersections.
"Smart PGH" is working with Uber to spy on customers. (see page 4)
It appears that "smart cities" are part of the government's "Vision Zero" program, see page 6 of SCC's 'Enabling Hierarchy' diagram. Also on page 6, under the subject 'Data Collection Network' they mention, "Social Media Assets" otherwise known as social media spying. (more on that below)
In addition, we [Smart PGH] would like to work with Pittsburgh Bike Share, Uber, Lyft, and others to move towards more robust V2V communications that allow Port Authority buses, City fleet, bike share bicycles, ride-sharing services, etc. to become safer by sensing one another on Pittsburgh’s streets. Bicycle tracking has already begun, Ford Motor Company has given Palo Alto, $1.1 million to equip bicycles with GPS devices.
Joshuah Mello, the city’s chief transportation official, said the main draw of the new smart-bike system, operated by Motivate and sponsored by Ford, is that it will be part of a network growing in Bay Area cities from San Jose to San Francisco, “making it one of the largest systems in the entire world.”
What he should say is, this makes it one of the largest bicycle surveillance systems in the entire world! What follows, are some of the most chilling intrusions of government spying to date. Govt spying on social media.
To address Vision Element #9, SmartPGH will deploy our “Citizens as Sensors” effort aimed at extracting relevant data from social media. Scrubbing these sites and app will provide information on what people are doing in different places across Pittsburgh, data that can be used to infer behavior and data that can detect changes in behavior due to physical modifications made by SmartPGH and the City of Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh can more easily detect if the modifications it is making are producing the desired changes or if they are leading to unanticipated outcomes or unhappy residents.
For example, changes to the number of check-ins citizens make to restaurants and retail establishments following the parking rate change can provide evidence of how much this change has impacted dining and shopping behaviors, providing valuable feedback not just on residents emotional reactions but also the wider economic impact of such decisions.
"At a different level many users volunteer information to Web 2.0 sites as a convenient way of making it available to friends and relations, irrespective of the fact that it becomes available to all."
Govt to spy on staircases, sidewalks, bicycles, trails, buses and trains.
Moreover, residents utilize the city's unique system of 712 public staircases, 40 miles of on-street bike infrastructure, 31 miles of trails, and numerous sidewalksand on a daily basis.
Companies like Sidewalk Labs, make a profit out of spying on pedestrians.
The Port Authority of Allegheny County operates a comprehensive transit network in the city, which includes 18.4 miles of busway, 26.2 miles of light rail, 72 local bus routes and two funiculars.
Power companies and the govt collaborate to spy on everyone.
The City of Pittsburgh is in conversation with Duquesne Light and partner-company DQE Communications regarding the use of their extensive network of dark fiber. Most of the network capacity is currently “dark” and available for use by partners including the City of Pittsburgh.
To make the most of their network, Duquesne Light recently built a wireless communication infrastructure to support the increased data-flow between their electric meters and the company’s centralized operating center.
This effort has evolved into a high-capacity, resilient, wireless network covering the entirety of the City of Pittsburgh and the surrounding 817-square-mile service territory.
The grid of microgirds will spy on everyone's health, electrical and gas usage.
The grid-of-microgrids is designed to connect critical infrastructure like hospitals, universities, and data and telecommunications centers. Other partners in the effort include the UPMC health system, NRG energy, Duquesne Light and People’s natural gas.
Govt spying on Pittsburgh residents is frightening.
PennDOT’s Western Regional Traffic Management Center includes a fully integrated Centralized Software System, a Media Partner room that broadcasts live on-air reports of traffic conditions, and, a state of the art video wall capable of displaying 160 video images.
The center monitors and/or controls ITS devices on 12 freeway corridors, including many within Pittsburgh's limits.
These devices include: 293 CCTV cameras, 37 Highway Advisory Radio transmitter locations, 86 Highway Advisory Radio signs with beacons, 200 Microwave Traffic Detectors, 24 Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) radios, 93 Digital Wave Radar Vehicular Detector units and many more specific ITS-related items.
List of govt agencies spying on residents:
Allegheny County
Penn DOT and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission
Port Authority of Allegheny County
Pittsburgh Parking Authority
Port of Pittsburgh Commission
Pittsburgh Bike Share
Utilities including energy distribution, water, and natural gas
University Partners, particularly University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University
Major freight operators in Pittsburgh
Representatives of the Business and Philanthropic Communities
Citizens and Community Stakeholders Industry partners
The model for the WPRDC is unique because it is designed to be extensible and inclusive, able to host datasets from any municipality, non-profit, or researcher with data to share. By bringing together various levels of government, civil society, and academia around information resources, we have begun to improve our region’s capacity for innovation and evidence-driven policy-making.
The WPRDC’s web resources provide machine-readable data downloads and APIs of key administrative data on topics such as property assessment, building inspection, public health, crime, and asset management.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Seven companies work with Surtrac to spy on everyone.
Surtracs' Econolite specializes in spying on motor vehicles. They also invented 'autoscope' surveillance cameras in the early 1990's. Fyi, Surtrac's Autoscope Vision (AV) also spies on bicyclists.
AV delivers stop bar vehicle and bicycle detection, advanced vehicle detection, bicycle differentiation, traffic data collection, and HD video surveillance.
Surtrac boasts, about they're newly-developed, full-field-of-view object-feature tracking. In other words, the government can track an individual vehicle or bicyclist throughout an entire city!
There are plans to integrate Surtrac with the Port Authority of Allegheny County bus fleets’ using 'Clever Devices'. (more on that below)
2.Citilog, is a mirror image of Econolite but specializes in spying road sensors that are imbedded in every road, highway tunnel and bridge.
4.Wavetronix, can track an individual vehicles speed, even if they change lanes. Wavertronix also knows the type of vehicle you're driving, watch the video below to find out more.
Weather Weapons Are Real, They Have A Treaty To Regulate Them
August 16 2018 | From: Geopolitics
There is still a sizable portion of our society who cannot grasp the reality of weather altering devices and technologies which have made us all unsure about which weather is real, and which ones are not.
This poses a big problem for those who understand how these weather devices are being used, but want to inform the public about the impending danger of the draconian laws that have been legislated based on the false pretext of global warming.
One of the first glaring claims Gore makes is about Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa. He claims Africa’s tallest peak will be snow-free “within the decade.” Gore shows slides of Kilimanjaro’s peak in the 1970s versus today to conclude the snow is disappearing.
Well, it’s been a decade and, yes, there’s still snow on Kilimanjaro year-round. It doesn’t take a scientist to figure this out.
Climate does change, it’s been that way since the birth of our solar system, but the phrase is now synonymous to abnormal weather patterns, flash flooding, forest wildfires, and to some extent, even earthquakes, all of which could be the handiwork of highly covert government entities trying to justify their subsequent invasive policies.
All of these calamitous events can affect the economic productivity and greatly hamper the development of the targeted regions on the planet. Indeed, weather weapons are a very effective tool for geopolitical coercion.
The nations possessing these weather weapons agreed that they won’t be used in wars and geopolitical conflicts. But who can ever refuse the power to play like the mythical gods of thunder and lightning?
We are not only talking here about “cloud seeding” technologies like Wikipedia would like us to limit our understanding about weather warfare:
With much less success, the United States also dropped salt on the airbase during the siege of Khe Sanh in an attempt to reduce the fog that hindered air operations.
A research paper produced for the United States Air Force written in 1996 speculates about the future use of nanotechnology to produce “artificial weather”, clouds of microscopic computer particles all communicating with each other to form an intelligent fog that could be used for various purposes. “Artificial weather technologies do not currently exist… "
- Wikipedia (the trusted source...)
The above phrase, “Artificial weather technologies do not currently exist…” is in disagreement to the statement made by the US Air Force during a budget hearing for HAARP, like so:
HAARP, or High Altitude Auroral Research Program, is said to be an experimental electromagnetic wave propagator which could deliver radio signals in any desired frequencies with a twist of a button, to strike at any target. But as that US congressional hearing suggest, the Air Force is already using a more advanced version, they are now willing to abandon the existing HAARP site in Alaska.
There are, of course, radar systems mounted on mobile platforms which could emit high powered EM signals, and can be positioned in any of the 1,000 US military bases, for steering “weather disturbance” to any triangulated terrestrial and extraterrestrial targets.
The other side of this all-in-one ultrahigh powered radiobroadcast technology is to foster positive disposition, fry the electronics of an incoming ICBM, or MiRVs simultaneously, and render their thermonuclear/chemical warhead inert, and deliver controlled rainfall on arid deserts of Africa so that food abundance is assured at last.
Yes, the most versatile weather weapon is staring right in plain sight and is using that same technology still being used in the wireless broadcast industry today.
The only notable difference is that the weaponized version is using billion watts of sheer power which is very feasible just by transforming the transmission voltage from a few hundred volts into the range of hundreds of million volts which is what Tesla was actually playing with.
Consider three radar installations firing upward in a triangle configuration, all at the same time. Those three hot nodes will then experience high gas pressures, and as a result, their common center will then become the “low pressure area [LPA],” which will be news broadcasted by your weather channel as where the potential typhoon will come from.
The fact that they can move the three points of attack will make the typhoon steerable to hit at any desired target.
For more in-depth study, the researcher can refer to the US Patent 4686605 by clicking on the image below:
But no, the United Nations, Inc., or any of its subsidiary corporate states, are not capable of providing these commonsensical solutions any time soon. It can only afford to pay lip service to those pressing problems, because the Old Men running the show can’t get over with their myopic appreciation of the power entrusted to them, which they use only to impress young women.
Considering that our body, like everything else in nature, is made up of EM waves propagating at certain frequencies in space, we can also be altered, or our bodily functions can be influence for any desired effect.
If at certain microwave frequencies, a radar system can cook the atmosphere to increase gas pressure, and change the weather, it can also be used to deliver modulated brain wave frequencies to stimulate docility, or hyperactivity to destroy an entire targeted population without firing a single bullet.
This is the reason why the authorities sought to limit, or eradicate, its use in actual conflict scenario.
Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques
The States Parties to this Convention,
Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, and wishing to contribute to the cause of halting the arms race, and of bringing about general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare,
Determined to continue negotiations with a view to achieving effective progress towards further measures in the field of disarmament,
Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities with respect to modification of the environment,
Realizing that the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes could improve the interrelationship of man and nature and contribute to the preservation and improvement of the environment for the benefit of present and future generations,
Recognizing, however, that military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare,
Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such use, and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective,
Desiring also to contribute to the strengthening of trust among nations and to the further improvement of the international situation in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Have agreed as follows:
Article I
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.
Article II
As used in article 1, the term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.
Article III
The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use.
The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information on the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.
Article IV
Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to take any measures it considers necessary in accordance with its constitutional processes to prohibit and prevent any activity in violation of the provisions of the Convention anywhere under its jurisdiction or control. Blah, blah,blah.
In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed this Convention at Geneva, on the 18 day of May 1977.
The reality on the ground is far from being straightforward, i.e. countries possessing weather weaponry may not be actively firing at each other, but that doesn’t mean that the United States government, for example, is not using the same capability against its own people, or its smaller nation allies, you know, to keep them in line.
The chemical based geoengineering, for instance, is being extended to spray harmful chemicals instead of merely “cloud seeding”.
Historical Perspectives
It was Dr. Nikola Tesla who tried to give us wireless power so that global prosperity can be achieved by providing free and unlimited access to energy, for the benefit of all.
He constructed a “magnifying transmitter” which could deliver both power and data wirelessly to far off distances. In the process, he realized the vast potential of his device and the dangers it may pose when the technology falls into the wrong hands.
On April 28, 1997 U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen made the following statement:
'"Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves…
So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations…
It’s real, and that’s the reason why we have to intensify our [counterterrorism] efforts.”
In February 1998, the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held public hearings in Brussels on the U.S based weather warfare facility developed under the HAARP program.
The Committee’s “Motion for Resolution” submitted to the European Parliament:
'Considers HAARP… by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body…; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration… to give evidence to the public hearing …into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP program.”
-
European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99, 14 January 1999
The weapons referred to by Secretary Cohen are longitudinal EM wave interferometers (LWIs). Longitudinal EM waves easily travel through the ocean and earth with very little loss. In a distant interference zone, there appears real EM energy again, of the kind we have in our textbooks.
However, the energy arises from spacetime itself in the interference zone, as proven by M.W. Evans, P.K. Anastasovski, T.E. Bearden et al., “On Whittaker’s Representation of the Electromagnetic Entity in Vacuo: The Production of Transverse Fields and Energy by Scalar Interferometry,” Journal of New Energy, 4(3), Winter 1999, p. 76-78. (That entire issue of JNE contains some 60 papers by the Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS), dealing with the kind of higher symmetry electrodynamics needed to understand such weapons).
Though tested in prototype in the 1950s, the first strategic LWIs were deployed in Russia in April 1963, and were used to kill the U.S.S. Thresher nuclear attack submarine, underwater off the East coast of the United States, in April 1963. The signatures of the kill are 100% decisive.
USS Thresher
One day later, the same weapon placed an enormous electromagnetic burst (explosion) deep underwater, 100 miles north of Puerto Rico. From the surface of the ocean there arose a giant cone of water, rising a half mile into the air, turning into a mushroom, and falling back into the sea.
This was the second test of the new Russian strategic LWIs, under KGB control. By this test and the fact that the West did not even recognize what killed the Thresher, Khrushchev managed to stay in power another two years or so, after his Cuban Crisis fiasco where he lost face in front of the entire world.
World-wide weather engineering started in earnest by the Russians on July 4, 1976 - as a quirky sense of humor and “bicentennial gift” to the United States. The weapons have been used to shoot down aircraft, etc. worldwide also, mostly as tests, and have also destroyed ICBMs shortly after launch.
Related: Eco-Terrorism Correspondence
Both the scientific and political priesthoods are being used by the plutocrats at the highest totem pole of our society to impose upon humanity a world of endless scarcity in all aspects of our existence. They justify this policy by saying that if everything is free and easily accessible, people get lazy and just play around. What’s wrong with that?
We are the only species in the entire solar system that consented to making life very difficult after we have discovered ways and means to make it easier.
"When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).
…The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs.
For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave.
It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.
Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.)
I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it…”
In February 1998, the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held public hearings in Brussels on the U.S based weather warfare facility developed under the HAARP program. The Committee’s “Motion for Resolution” submitted to the European Parliament:
"Considers HAARP… by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body…; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration… to give evidence to the public hearing …into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP program.”
-
European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99, 14 January 1999
The Committee’s request to draw up a “Green Paper” on “the environmental impacts of military activities”, however, was casually dismissed on the grounds that the European Commission lacked the required jurisdiction to delve into “the links between environment and defense”. Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington. (see European Report, 3 February 1999).
The possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military and intelligence agenda, while tacitly acknowledged, has never been considered relevant. Military analysts are mute on the subject.
Meteorologists are not investigating the matter, and environmentalists are strung on global warming and the Kyoto protocol.
Ironically, the Pentagon, while recognizing its ability to modify the World’s climate for military use, has joined the global warming consensus. In a major study (pdf) , the Pentagon has analyzed in detail the implications of various global warming scenarios.
Power is never given, or handed down in a silver platter. It must be taken away from those who are incapable of using it wisely for the good and benefit of all lifeforms everywhere.
In lieu of these deplorables, we must put in management positions the visionaries, engineers and technologists, so that only the progressive use of science and technology is given the light of day.
This is the revolution worth fighting for.
Secret Space Program Disclosure: Founders Of Solar Warden SSP With William Tompkins August 15 2018 | From: SphereBeingAlliance
In this episode, we have deeper insights into the Secret Space Program, with the astonishing disclosures of William Tompkins, our 94-year-old aerospace engineer who is clearly one of the founding fathers of the very Solar Warden program which he named - that same code name - that Corey later worked in.
In this first interview that we're going to show you, Tompkins gets into detail about one of the craft designs that he was working on for the Navy. Let's take a look.
William Tompkins: So we talked before about the different types. And this is a two-kilometer long spacecraft carrier, and it's streamlined to a degree.
And so in one of the big design review meetings, one of the managers said, “Wait a minute, Bill, it's a vacuum out there. You don't have to make it pointed. You don't have to have atmosphere to go working through.”
And so I said, Well, that's true, but the electromagnetic protection system, which we still are not sure how we're going to word, may or may not be capable of handling all of the different types of vehicles or weapons that could be . . . being used on us. And also, under certain conditions, we actually can get into the planet's atmosphere and operate. So anyway, we got around that one.
Now, if you can picture here this area down in here [Bill points to the bottom, center of the craft] . . . I'm going to switch these, and you're going to see the lower part of the hull.
Click on the image above top open a larger version in a new window
And what you see there is the different classes of attack and fighter aircraft returning to the mothership, or the spacecraft carrier, and with a vacuum-controlled entry sections. Actually, they would design to fold down so that you're already in support of making inside landing.
Nobody actually flies in these squadrons controlling any of the vehicles. It's all automatic, so you're not going to be hitting the walls or any of this kind of thing.
But very quickly, you can open these hatches on the side. The hatch then becomes sort of a platform to possibly land on if you're too low. And this answers the question of how do we handle the large spaces aboard the ships that are going to be operating on the missions.
So what we had done then was, using the same type of design concepts, we looked at the Marines' missions. We looked at the communication missions. We actually came up with virtually hundreds, then, of missions and sub-missions that we then in the tank [think tank] made recommendations back to the Navy themselves.
And one admiral, when he saw that first illustration, he made the statement that just the shape of that's going to scare them away. They'll turn around and go back, because it is a pretty hot configuration.
Some of the others are not as good and actually some of them are rectangular, depending on what the mission is required to accomplish.
David: So that's a pretty technically detailed diagram. And it's just one of a variety of things that come from this guy who has no financial interest in this. His book didn't sell very much. He's just living on a fixed income. And yet, that degree of precision in the art doesn't seem like it would be coming from somebody who's trying to make something up.
So I'm curious about how similar that looks to anything that you saw?
Corey Goode: That was most likely one of the concept designs that probably got fine-tuned. But there could be a craft that looks like that out there that I hadn't seen. I didn't see all of our vessels out there.
Now, that looked very similar to longer, wedge-shaped vessels that I saw that had areas coming up off the top almost like you see on a Navy vessel on the ocean.
And also, it had stealth edges. The corners were very much like the stealth ships that you see – how they curve.
David: Well, and something kind of caught my eye, which is that in his discussions with his superiors on the design, they said, “Oh, you don't need to worry about aerodynamics. It's not going through an atmosphere.”
But what I'm thinking of is, “Wait a minute. There's all this charge that you've got to move through even in space. There's inertia and there's electromagnetic fields.
So do you think that part of the reason why everything has an aerodynamic shape is that the basic vacuum energy of space itself has some sort of resistance that you have to cut through when you go through it?
Corey: They don't all have the aerodynamic shape.
David: Oh, Okay.
Corey: And as far as moving through charged particles and all this stuff in space, that's what the material on the outside of the craft and the electromagnetic shielding is for.
David: But in a case like this, for that particular mission, if it's also going to go through a planet's atmosphere, it would be good to have some aerodynamic qualities.
Corey: Right. The vessels that travel inside our atmosphere and out are usually going to be somewhat aerodynamic, even though with the propulsion systems they have they are not traveling through the atmosphere per se. They are in a bubble. And inside that bubble, the bubble is traveling.
David: Is there a reason for why stealth technology seems to involve these different flat panels that are kind of arranged at different angles? What's going on there?
Corey: It deflects radar, lidar, different waves, away from the receiver of the radar or lidar. So how it works is if you send it out and it hits a flat surface that is angled right, it's going to come back and you're going to get a report from that wave bouncing back.
If you have sharp angles, then very little of that wave is going to bounce back. The rest of it's going to be dispersed, and the waves will bounce off, but they're not going to hit the detector.
David: Well, I know that my insider Pete Peterson described that when the stealth was rolled out for Gulf War I, that it had in fact been mothballed for 20 years and was a very archaic and almost useless piece of technology by that time. Here he's [Tompkins] doing something in the 1950s that looks like stealth.
Corey: Yeah.
David: So that's pretty darn interesting.
Corey: Stealth goes way back.
David: Really?
Corey: Right. Stealth was being developed soon after the discovery and invention of the radar.
According to insiders the Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird is an example of vastly outdated technology that had been mothballed - but was later hauled out to give the public a glimpse of what their dollars had been used to develop at drastically overcharged rates (with the bulk of the funds being chanelled into the SSP's). By the time the public got to see this - it had been decomissioned junk for decades.
David: Wow! So I noticed in the second image that he showed that you have these very, very large doors, or hatches, as he was calling them, that open up on the side of the craft, and then a lot of little triangular wedges going in.
So what was your feeling when you saw that part of the illustration?
Corey: Well, as far as the doors opening, I had seen elevators that lift aircraft, move aircraft around. But if you have a door opening out, that can cause a lot of logistical problems if you're in battle or if you are traveling at a high rate of speed.
So usually, they have the doors open like this [side to side], up and down, and not protrude out.
David: Right.
Corey: But if there was another purpose and a need for it, I could see why they would develop it.
David: What about the actual shape of all those craft that were going into the larger craft?
Corey: Yes, that was very familiar. And the fact that he mentioned in these newer vessels or carriers, they do fly drones. They have people all inside [buildings or large craft] sitting in long rows flying drones, and they control a number of drones apiece.
David: Really.
Corey: Yeah. Little constellations of drones.
David: So what would this type of craft that he was designing be used for? Is it an attack craft? Is this a support craft?
Corey: It can be offensive and defensive, but usually these craft are designed to be offensive for attacking an enemy.
David: Does the Space Program have any proclivity towards doing an offensive attack on a civilization that they think they could conquer and overwhelm? Or is there also . . . is it mostly going to be defensive when they're out there trying to see what's around and getting attacked?
Corey: Well, it depends on who is in charge of, I guess, the Navy assets at the time. These people follow orders. So if they have a problem with attacking another species, they have to follow orders.
David: Well, in the case of a movie like “Avatar”, we have a clear example of our own government / military-industrial complex, in what would appear to be the future, having developed a space program, going to another planet with people who are tall and have blue skin, but there was something there that they really wanted, which was this unobtainium.
Do you think “Avatar” is describing something that is actually happening? Are there certain cases where planets are invaded for their materials?
Corey: Well, I do know that certain aspects of the ICC, but especially Dark Fleet, are going out on offensive conquering missions. And they're doing this alongside the Reptilians.
David: Well, and I do also remember Pete Peterson telling me that many of the craft that you see in “Avatar” are exactly identical to stuff that he had actually seen or worked on. I'm wondering if any of them look familiar to you when you saw the movie?
Corey: I didn't witness a whole lot of craft that flew inside of an atmosphere.
David: Ah.
Corey: So all of those craft were clearly designed to fly inside of some sort of a dense atmosphere. The craft that I saw were not built to operate in atmosphere.
David: All right. Well, speaking of James Cameron, not only do we have “Avatar”, he also had that movie “The Abyss”, where he describes extraterrestrials underneath the surface of the ocean.
And here we have William Tompkins in a very interesting discussion about undersea bases. Let's take a look.
Under Sea Bases
Tompkins:I did get hired by General Dynamics for a Navy program. And this program was to locate German submarines – anti-submarine warfare program.
And what's interesting about this is that the Navy selected the Lockheed P-3 patrol bombers to be the air vehicles to locate German ships and submarines.
Lockheed P-3 patrol bomber
German "U-Boat" submarine
This is the Cold War now, and so there was roughly 15 other NATO countries who were using the same aircraft, the same electronics, the same sensing systems and the communication system – all of it engineered and designed in US.
And so the United States had 120 of these, and the NATO countries had like another 60 of them, all out looking for German [and/or Russian] submarines.
But that's not quite the numbers. It's more like we had 2,000 of these and NATO had another 1,000 of these – not quite that high. And remember, there were only 11 Soviet submarines operating at that time. There were many of them that were in training operations, but they weren't tactical.
And so here we've got 2,800 P-3 aircraft flying all around the planet 24 hours a day looking for submarines.
Well, gee whiz, that's not exactly what we were doing either. And there's a title to the program, which is the mission ASW – anti-submarine warfare. But there's also one which is ASUW. And so the “U” is for 'unidentified extraterrestrials'.
And so this was the second-largest amount of military money allocated for a program on the planet. It's peacetime, but it's sort of a war condition. And we have all of these airplanes out, and it became necessary for a group, which I then was manager of, working for Data Graphics, which is a subsidiary of General Dynamics.
And later on, I worked for the corporate office on the red team at the corporate level.
And when we look at the size of this program, the number of personnel that have to be trained to fly these aircraft, the upgrading continually of the sensing systems, the underwater systems of the satellite system programs that were required to be on board these aircraft, it's absolutely unreal.
What we were really doing was looking for extraterrestrial vehicles in the ocean and in the large lakes and their bases on the bottom of the ocean.
People don't realize how much money, how much time, and how many people have to be involved in these programs.
And what are you doing? You're looking for extraterrestrials. Do you realize what we're saying? I mean, you're looking for extraterrestrial vehicles and bases. Your Navy is.
David: Well, the first thing that strikes me about the interview footage that we just saw here is the scope of this classified military operation to try to actually identify who is on our planet, where are they, what is their infrastructure, what is their agenda?
It would have to involve a massive amount of effort. So what were your thoughts on that?
Corey: I have heard of operations similar to what he was talking about, of fleets that were combing the ocean looking for submerged bases, and also USOs – unidentified submersible objects, I believe.
Now, from what I understood, very few people in that fleet would know what they were actually looking for. Everyone would go about doing their normal jobs. It'd just be a normal mission or a training mission, they'd be told. But very few intelligence people in that fleet would know exactly what was going on.
David: Well, to have 2,800 P-3 aircraft airborne at all times – this is obviously before the era of accurate geostationary satellites.
Corey: Right.
David: We're talking about a massive, massive operation here. How long do you think this had to have been done for?
Corey: Until they had strong enough sonar that would penetrate to the deepest parts of the ocean, and until we had the satellite coverage we needed. They had some sort of groups of aircraft or Navy vessels that were combing the ocean looking for non-terrestrials.
David: Do you think that there might have been a temptation at some point to tell the public, “Hey, we're aware of this extraterrestrial presence. We're doing the best we can. We're cataloging it now.”
Or was it just really important the whole thing be secret to avoid a panic of some kind?
Corey: Well, just in general, the Navy . . . I mean, you hear “loose lips sink ships”. Information is very compartmentalized to begin with, but this is not long after World War II, so everybody still had a different mindset than we do today.
If the government told you to stick a lit cigar in your ear, you'd say, “Yes, sir. Give me another.” That's just the way people were programmed.
David: So Tompkins is also discussing another point of corroboration with some things that you've said, which is that there were, in fact, underwater bases to be seen.
So could you review for us what your knowledge is about the existence of these bases, and where are they, what do they look like, who's in them, etc., etc.? Are there different types . . .
Corey: Yeah.
David: . . . that would be underground or underwater?
Corey: And there's a number of different types that are underwater. I even read about large underwater bases that were mobile, that moved along the bottom of the ocean and was doing some sort of core sampling or testing of the material that it was passing over.
And if you located where one of these were, you would then have to track it since they now were moving. So they would have ships that would just track a mobile underwater base.
David: Well, before we taped this segment, we were looking at just something like that on the Internet. Let's take a look right now at that little . . . This is an excerpt from a video describing something very similar to what Corey just described – two-and-a-half-mile wide, round object that seems to be tracing patterns on the sea floor.
Images from video on possible undersea ET exploration craft
So do you think that that is an example of one of these craft?
Corey: That very well could be. I mean, a two-mile-wide object is not going to be pushed in that unusual way under the ocean by a current.
David: So what would they be doing in a case like that? What's the objective?
Corey: From what I was told, these were like bases, but also laboratories. They were going around doing core samples, finding out what was at different depths below the surface, below the floor of the ocean.
David: Why would somebody want to have an undersea base if there's a honeycomb Earth and they could just pop into one of those combs underground?
Corey: There's a lot of different regions inside the honeycomb Earth that belong to different groups that they claim as their territory.
Also, under the ocean . . . There are a lot of different beings coming here that could care less about us, could care less about any animals flying in the sky or running around. All they care about is the life forms in the ocean and the ocean itself. They see the ocean as a life form. And a lot of these are aquatic species.
David: So what do you think was going on when James Cameron made “The Abyss”? It seems a very specific idea was being conveyed. We also have reason to believe that some of his other movies had disclosure in them as well, like “Avatar”. What do you think “The Abyss” was intended to get people ready for?
Corey: It was most likely groups within the military-industrial complex starting to seed our consciousness, which is what they've been doing through movies and television shows for a long time.
David: Yeah. That definitely makes sense, because this is an ongoing effort of four generations now of disclosure to get us ready for the truth.
Corey: Right. And as you've already reported, when Sony got hacked, it was proven that DARPA and these other groups were passing on ideas for movies and television shows.
David: Exactly. All right. Well, we have one more really exciting piece of footage for you to see here with our interview with Tompkins. And this time, he is describing his personal experience with one of the most infamous and legendary events in UFO lore – less known up until recently, a lot less known than Roswell, but several years before Roswell.
We're talking about the Battle of Los Angeles. Let's take a look now.
Battle of Los Angeles
Tompkins: February 1942, we were living in a very large home which had been converted to four apartments – two upstairs, two down.
We had a great big enormous deck that ran all the way across this real high-celinged building. So we were four blocks from the ocean, okay? We can't see the ocean, because it's down low and trees are in the way.
So my brother and I are laying on our floor listening to the radio and looking at some papers, and my dad says, “Get out here – out on the deck. Get out here NOW!” And we got up, and we went out to the back deck.
So right above the horizon of all the trees and stuff and buildings is this dot – a white dot. It's just there. And it's got to be some aircraft flying in to come over and land at the airbase, but it's not moving. It's just a bright dot.
And off of this dot, to the left, is a little beam. It's like a pencil beam, but you can see it.
This is out over the ocean, like maybe inside the breakwater, because we couldn't see the ocean, and we don't know how far out it is. It could have been 10 miles out. What in the world was that?
So we're watching it for about five minutes, and then there was a flash – a brilliant flash into our eyes.
It lit up the trees, the back, the side of – everything got lit up.
And it went out.
And we looked and looked and looked, and everything was gone – nothing else. So we went to bed.
12:30 at night, the anti-aircraft guns started firing. What we're talking about is this fantastic situation, the Los Angeles event – the Battle of Los Angeles, okay?
The anti-aircraft guns all started firing.
We go outside. Here's this massive thing right above us this big [Bill holds his hands about 3-ft. apart] – right above us, maybe 7,000 feet.
The anti-aircraft shells are blowing up on the bottom of it all around it. There's eight searchlights all focused on this as they're shooting at it.
And, of course, nothing is happening. And it parks there for an hour and a half. While it's parked, hundreds of different types of vehicles – most of them circular, but some cigar-shaped, large ones – came in underneath, being fired on where they're still trying to shoot this thing down.
They came around him. They came over him – all night long.
Now, it got boring after awhile, so we went to bed at 3:00 a.m. I don't know how it gets boring, okay? We went to bed at 3:00 a.m.
Now, when it started, everybody came outside. All of us are standing there watching this event.
Now, what was not published was that the breakwater is full of Navy ships who used up all of their ammunition that five-hour period – not just the coastal artillery who used up all of their ammunition, okay?
Your whole two Pacific navies, the Eastern Navy and the Western Navy, used up all their ammunition.
They finally quit, of course, just before daylight, and everybody went back inside.
But from the standpoint of all of us out there watching this, nobody got a heart attack. Nobody got sick. Nobody got scared. Nobody got frightened.
On the other side of the planet, London, was being bombed by the Germans. And they're trying to get into shelters.
We had a five-hour war, except they didn't shoot at us. But nobody got sick. The only persons who were actually wounded was from shrapnel. A couple of guys actually were killed.
Almost a million people in California watched an event for five hours of a massive extraterrestrial battle group that came over California with a mission.
David: Well, this is obviously one of the great classic events in UFO lore, something that just can't be covered up. Did you ever hear about or read about this battle on the smart-glass pads or in any of the briefings that you had on the inside?
Corey: I read that it had occurred. The only thing that I saw that wasn't reported here is that during the same time period, we did recover a non-terrestrial craft from the ocean in that general vicinity.
David: Really?
Corey: Yeah. I don't know if that would have been one of these smaller craft that he saw or the large one. To me, it seemed as though they were unaffected by the anti-aircraft.
David: But it is possible that one of them took a stray hit or something and landed in the ocean.
Corey: It could be. Or the Battle of LA craft and these other craft that sound like came out of it could very well have been searching for . . . It might have been a rescue operation.
You know, there's a number of things it could have been. They could have been probing our defenses, or maybe making a point to some of our leaders after a recent meeting.
David: Well, let me run this idea by you. This is something I discussed on “Wisdom Teachings”. It's worth repeating and getting your thoughts.
If you go back to Fatima, Portugal, right after Portugal enters into World War I, which is this horrible, devastating thing where tens of millions of people are dying, ultimately, you have these kids who start to be in contact with what appear to be spiritual beings that ultimately leads to a mass sighting of a silvery disk in which 90,000 people witnessed this thing.
And then they're soaked in rain, but when the whole thing's over they were miraculously dry. The craft appears to shoot rainbow colors all over the sky. 90,000 witnesses . . . That would have been the end of the cover-up if it had happened in our times.
Corey: Right. And a million people seeing this in Los Angeles, and sounds like Long Beach and other areas – today, with everyone having an iPhone, it would – yeah, it would be over.
David: So do you think it's possible that both the Fatima sightings and the Battle of LA could be benevolent groups that are showing us these things as we enter into war, to try to steer us away from warfare perhaps?
Corey: It very well could be, because with their technology, they could have flattened the whole city with very little effort.
So they were obviously not there for some sort of offensive operation – maybe an intelligence operation, rescue recovery operation, or there to make a point. But I really don't know exactly why this incident occurred.
According to what I've heard, there was some treaty signed that this type of open sighting, open mass sighting, is against a treaty.
David: Right.
Corey: So there had to have been a good reason why it happened.
David: Now, we've heard from guys like Benjamin Fulford in some of his disclosures that he was told by Pentagon insiders that 75% of all production money for Hollywood films is coming from the Pentagon through various backdoor firms.
So let me just ask you first if you have ever heard anything like that?
Corey: Oh, yeah. Yeah. A lot of money from the DoD (Department of Defense) and Pentagon is going in for propaganda.
David: So why do you think the Battle of Los Angeles movie would be made? Do you think maybe they're confusing people's Google search so that they're going to find this movie instead of any real information?
Corey: Well, they know that that was a very significant occurrence UFO-wise in American history. Nearly a million people saw it.
David: Right.
Corey: So it was already in our consciousness. So that's a tool for them. And they – they being different military intelligence groups – are trying to spin the narrative that all of these beings coming in are negative, and that they are here to invade. And this one obviously wasn't, because it didn't attack.
David: Do you think maybe creating a movie with the same title blocks people from finding the original incident at all?
Corey: It could do that, or it could just put the whole sci-fi spin on it to where . . . You know, we're already programmed to roll our eyes any time we hear anything alien or UFO. That's probably part of the effort.
David: I was fortunate enough at one of my conferences to have a woman stand up who was a little girl during the time that this happened and witnessed the entire thing. And it was quite fascinating.
We let her speak for some time to the audience. It was quite spontaneous.
The point is, a million people is a lot of witnesses. It's kind of amazing that we still have a UFO cover-up after something like that.
Corey: Yes, but the propaganda and the programming that has come from these intelligence groups has been very effective. So there's a good chance that if something like that happened today and we didn't get photos, a lot the people that witnessed it themselves would, after a few days, be like, “Oh, that didn't happen.” Or just forget about it and move on.
David: Well, another interesting thing regarding the Battle of Los Angeles is the “War of the Worlds” broadcast. The original broadcast with Orson Welles was in 1939. But then when the movie came out, it was after this had happened.
And we have multiple eyewitnesses saying that the craft that you see in the “War of the Worlds” movie is very similar to the one in the Battle of Los Angeles, except that it has a little periscope on the top.
So why do you think they would actually put the real craft into the movie?
Corey: Well, they're always hiding things in plain sight. So if you were to see something similar to “War of the Worlds”, on some level you might be willing to discount it, thinking, “Oh, that's military, or that's some concept that's being used for a movie”.
You're going to jump to that instead of aliens automatically. That's possible.
David: Well, do you think also that putting those exact same craft into “War of the Worlds” where they become hostile attackers . . .
Corey: Oh, yeah.
David: . . . instead of peaceful demonstrators, could be like a form of mass mind control?
Corey: Well, sure. If you see a certain craft design and see it destroying cities in a movie, well, if you see it in real life, what are you programmed to think?
They could be coming down to say, “Hello”, and maybe give you a ride and show you around the solar system, but you've been programmed to run and hide because you think that it's an invasion.
David: Exactly. Do you think it's possible that we could have another mass demonstration like that at some point that there could be another event like that if, for example, this Mohammad Treaty gets overturned?
Corey: Absolutely. If the treaty that's supposed to prevent that is overturned, there are a lot of non-terrestrials that want to be up in the sky and over populated areas to let us know that they're here.
David: Now, you also mentioned in some of your recent briefings that both the SSP Alliance and the Cabal are concerned about the possibility of wreckage crashing into a major American city.
So just real briefly, since we're talking about these battles in the air, what are they thinking would happen, and how would that play out on the world stage?
Corey: Well, they're afraid that some of their weapons platforms that have been up in orbit, and advanced craft, could possibly fall into a populated urban area with all of the activity that's going on up there. There are shootdowns happening.
So they are ready to pounce on any crash. They have cover stories in place saying, “This was a nuclear-powered satellite that crashed. It's contaminated a large area. So stay in your homes or leave the city.”
And then they will focus on cleaning up the debris.
David: So this is something that they're actually very concerned about.
Corey: Absolutely. That is . . . I've heard a number of times that they're worried.
David: Are there more battles happening in our atmosphere now than there were before between these cloaked craft?
Corey: Yes. It's kind of reached a crescendo in recent times. There are human-piloted craft fighting each other, human-piloted craft fighting non-terrestrials and different non-terrestrial groups that are having skirmishes.
David: So what would we expect if they tried to cover this up? What would be the kind of headlines we'd see or the stories we'd hear?
Corey: Just like the example I just gave, that some sort of secret satellite had crashed or something like that. They're not going to say a UFO crashed.
David: Or a nuclear event . . .
Corey: Right.
David: . . . maybe a nuclear waste dump or spill
Corey: Test craft.
David:. . . chemical emission. Something like that.
Corey: Right. Something that's going to scare people.
David: Right.
Corey: Like some sort of disease or any number of things.
David: All right. Well, you saw it here first. This is “Cosmic Disclosure”. I'm your host, David Wilcock, here with Corey Goode. And we're reviewing footage from William Tompkins – absolutely mind-blowing stuff.
This Is How Your ‘Aura’ Affects Your Health & Those Around You + Magnetic Fields Of The Human Body And Their Functions & 13 Signs You Are Experiencing A Spiritual Awakening August 14 2018 | From: CollectiveEvolution / SitsShow / TheUnboundedSpirit
An ‘aura’ field can be defined as a luminous glow or radiation that surrounds a person’s body, almost like a halo. Ancient depictions of religious and spiritual figures often feature this aura, but today, modern science is discovering that we are all, in fact, surrounded by this type of field, and it can actually affect the way we feel.
We know that energy cannot be seen with the naked human eye, which is why attempts to measure invisible phenomena scientifically are often greeted with harsh criticism, but thanks to the groundbreaking work of dedicated scientists from all over the world, the concept of non-material science is starting to become accepted in the mainstream.
This refers to the idea that the physical material reality we perceive with our senses isn’t the only reality that’s available for us to study in a modern day scientific manner.
“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.”
– Nikola Tesla
Before getting into how our aura can affect us and those around us, I’d like to mention that human thoughts, intentions, feelings and emotions - ‘factors associated with consciousness’ - have been shown to have a direct effect on and correlation to our physical material world.
"The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine.
Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual."
- Sir James Jeans (“The Mental Universe” ; Nature 436:29,2005)
To see a more in-depth explanation of how factors associated with consciousness are intertwined with our physical material reality you can read this article:
Work by the brilliant scientists over at the Institute of HeartMath can perhaps best shed light on one aspect of human aura. A large portion of their research has investigated heart and brain interaction.
Researchers have examined how the heart and brain communicate with each other and how that affects our consciousness and the way in which we perceive our world. For example, when a person is feeling really positive emotions like gratitude, love, or appreciation, the heart beats out a certain message.
Because the heart beats out the largest electromagnetic field produced in the body, researchers are able to gather significant data from it. According to Rolin McCratey, Ph.D, and Director of Research at the Institute:
"Emotional information is actually included and modulated into these fields. By learning to shift our emotions, we are changing the information coded into the magnetic fields that are radiated by the heart, and that can impact those around us.
We are fundamentally and deeply connected with each other and the planet itself, and what we do individually really does count and matters."
Did you know that your heart emits electromagnetic fields which change according to your emotions, or that the human heart has a magnetic field that can be measured up to several feet away from the human body?
Did you know that positive emotions create physiological benefits in your body, or that you can boost your immune system by conjuring up positive emotions?
Did you know that negative emotions can create nervous system chaos, and that positive emotions do the complete opposite?
The bottom line is, feelings of love, gratitude, and compassion – any positive feelings whatsoever – have a larger impact than we could have ever imagined.
The Spiritual Heart - is in a way a little like a smart phone, invisibly connecting us to a large network of information. It is through an unseen energy that the heart emits that humans are profoundly connected to all living things. The energy of the heart literally links us to each other. Every person's heart contributes to a 'collective field environment.' This short video explains the importance of this connection and how we each add to this collective energy field. The energetic field of the heart even connects us with the earth itself.
It’s fascinating to consider how the heart’s magnetic field might be interacting with and affecting other people, and it leads me to wonder if perhaps the electromagnetic fields around our bodies are somehow connected to that of the Earth.
What type of effect, if any, might the information coded into our electromagnetic fields have on the information coded into the Earth’s field? It’s all very exciting, and there are so many questions still left to answer.
Below is a video of Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, a professor of physics at St. Petersburg State Technical University, who believes that our positive and negative thoughts each have a different impact on our surrounding environment.
A Russian scientist is trying to convince people they can change the world simply by using their own energy. He claims that thinking in a certain way can have a positive or negative effect on the surrounding environment. "We are developing the idea that our consciousness is part of the material world and that with our consciousness we can directly influence our world," said Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, a professor of physics at St. Petersburg State Technical University. To bridge our understanding of the unseen world of energy, scientific experiments are being carried out using a technique called bioelectrophotography. The assumption is that we are constantly emitting energy. Bioelectrophotography aims to capture these energy fields seen as a light around the body -- or what some people would call your aura.
He has developed a scientific device based on the ancient Chinese system of energy meridians which measures the bio-energy of living organisms, as well as the environment.
The device, called the GDV, uses a completely painless electrical current applied to the fingertips - taking less than one millisecond to work - to highlight potential health (physiological and psycho-emotional) abnormalities.
The body’s response is measured in the form of an “electron cloud” which is composed of light energy photons. The glow of this discharge is invisible to the human eye (humans can only see one percent of the entire electromagnetic spectrum) and is captured by an optical CCD camera system and then translated into a digital computer.
In the GDV software programs, the glow from the different sectors of the finger images is projected onto the shape of a human body in correspondence with the location of the different organs and systems. As a result, it produces energy field images that allow for intuitive analysis of the physiological level of human body functioning.
It has been approved and received registration as a routine medical diagnostic device by the Russian Ministry of Health upon recommendation of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
According to Eastern metaphysical theories of Ayurvedic Indian medicine, there are seven “Chakras,” or integrated energy centers, correlated with physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well-being.
These energy Chakras are positioned or embedded into the spinal column at various locations beginning with the coccyx, rising all the way to the crown of the head.
Dr. Pradeep B. Deshpande, a Professor Emeritus at the Department of Chemical Engineering at the University of Louisville, explains:
"Each Chakra is considered to resonate at a different frequency level. With new BioWell software, it is now possible to quantitatively estimate the energy of Chakras and graphically display their level of activation, and indicate whether this level of activation is above or below the level found from large numbers of subjects.
The results from a case study he conducted involving over 100 participants in attendance indicate that imbalanced Chakras are easily detectable:
"Each individual sector or portion of the fingertip is connected energetically with specific organs and organ systems such as the respiratory system. When the data of the 10 individual BIO-grams are collated and interpolated, an image of the entire full body energy field is created.
An example of the full body energy field from a healthy and unhealthy/emotionally unbalanced individual are shown above. The gaps and the reduced emissions and out-of-balance Chakras for the unhealthy individual are quite obvious."
Please keep in mind that clinical studies of more than 10,000 patient cases with various health challenges have also been well documented in Russia.
How to See a Human Aura in 5 Minutes
Magnetic Fields Of The Human Body And Their Functions
Manly P. Hall is a philosopher and mystic from the early 20th century. Some view him as a pillar of esoteric knowledge, while others think he was part of a dark cabal that has infiltrated Masonic lodges throughout the globe.
Hall did not work his way up the degrees as most Masons do. Instead, he was given an honorary 33rd degree after establishing himself as a learned scholar in many fields.
While it is all too easy to label someone "evil" purely for an association to a group that has overall been corrupted to a large extent, those who truly seek knowledge and wisdom beyond armchair judgments can see past a book's cover, for the wisdom within its pages.
Those who dismiss what Hall had to say are the ones who miss out on the knowledge he has to offer but if one can look past appearances, then a wealth of information can be claimed.
I think that knowledge is everywhere, even held within the hands of some of the most diabolical people on the planet. But in receiving these gems of wisdom, we need not consider ourselves evil or supporting those who act insidiously.
Knowledge is amoral. When used in the right hands it can be a powerful tool. but in the wrong hands (usually the ignorant), it can be a destructive weapon. But for the one who foolishly dismisses wisdom because of an appearance alone, they will suffer the pitfalls of their own prejudice.
But for the truly discerning, the ability to absorb data from any source is the key to personal growth and evolution. To the discerning mind, wisdom can be found everywhere, but it will remain hidden behind a veil if we never explore it.
As such, if you have prejudices about Manly P. Hall because of his association with Freemasonry, I ask you to set them aside and open your heart and mind to hear what he has to say.
And I will share that the concept of magnetic fields affecting the body is hardly new and has been well established for years. Our energetic body connects directly to the Earth-mother in many ways, earthing and geomagnetic fields are some of them. Both of these play an important role in restoring the health of mind, body, and soul.
Magnetic Fields of the Human Body and Their Functions is the title of an interview with Manly P. Hall, a Freemason who was very knowledgeable in esoteric teachings.
I do not agree with everything that Manly teaches; however, in the interview, he shared a lot of very important information about energy fields and the human body, so if you want to learn some empowering information about energy fields and the human body, I highly encourage you to watch and listen to the interview.
Manly Palmer Hall (March 18, 1901 – August 29, 1990) was a Canadian-born author and mystic. He is perhaps most famous for his work The Secret Teachings of All Ages: An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic and Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy, which is widely regarded as his magnum opus, and which he published at the age of 25 (or 27, 1928)
He has been widely recognized as a leading scholar in the fields of religion, mythology, mysticism, and the occult.
Carl Jung, when writing Psychology and Alchemy, borrowed material from Hall’s private collection.
In 1934, Hall founded the Philosophical Research Society (PRS) in Los Angeles, California, dedicating it to an idealistic approach to the solution of human problems.
The PRS claims to be non-sectarian and entirely free from educational, political, or ecclesiastical control, and the Society’s programs stress the need for the integration of philosophy, religion, and science into one system of instruction.
The PRS Library, a public facility devoted to source materials in obscure fields, has many rare and scarce items now impossible to obtain elsewhere.
In 1973 (47 years after writing The Secret Teachings of All Ages), Hall was recognized as a 33º Mason (the highest honor conferred by the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite), at a ceremony held at PRS on December 8th, despite never being initiated into the physical craft.
In his over 70-year career, Hall delivered approximately 8,000 lectures in the United States and abroad, authored over 150 books and essays, and wrote countless magazine articles.
Manly Hall: Magnetic Fields of the Human Body and Their Functions
13 Signs You Are Experiencing A Spiritual Awakening
Here are 13 crystal clear signs that you’re experiencing a spiritual awakening:
1. You desire less stuff and more simplicity. You realize that the less you possess the more unburdened your psyche is, and instead of wanting to acquire material wealth, you are seeking to find your inner wealth.
2. You are drawn to mind-expanding books. You don’t read books anymore just in order to entertain yourself when you feel like having nothing better to do, and choose to read those books that help you to become the greatest version of yourself.
3. You spend more time alone in silence. You go for solitary walks in nature and meditate in silence so as to reconnect and make peace with yourself.
4. You eat healthier and take better care of your body. You start treating your body like it’s sacred, listening to its wisdom, and keeping it as healthy as you can.
5. You feel more connected to nature and all living beings. You recognize the interconnectedness and interdependence of all beings and feel a sense of oneness with everyone and everything.
6. You feel compassion about the suffering in the world. You become aware of how much pain there is all around you and do your best to alleviate it in any way you can.
7. You take responsibility in your hands. You realize that there’s no point in having a victim’s mentality and blaming others for what’s going wrong in your life, and you take conscious action to shape your destiny.
8. You are mindful of your actions. You’ve discovered the tremendous power of your actions and you make sure to act in ways that don’t negatively affect yourself and the world.
9. The past and the future lose control over your life. You understand that the past and future don’t truly exist, and the only moment that was, is, and will ever be is the present.
10. You have a deep yearning for meaning. You comprehend that living a normal life is empty of meaning and purpose, and you seek to create your own path in your life’s journey.
11. You are more creative. You feel an increased desire to creatively express yourself and turn your dreams into reality.
12. You expose your true self to the world. You’ve dropped your social masks of pretense and you are open to communicate your innermost thoughts and feelings with others without feeling guilty or ashamed.
13. You have a loss of interest in competition. You realize that competition brings conflict and suffering, and that the only way to live in harmony with others is by having a loving and compassionate attitude towards them.
Someone Else’s Country - The Neoliberal Revolution In New Zealand August 13 2018 | From: AlisterBerry
The Globalist's test case trial of Corporatisation: In the early 1980s a group of free market economists came to dominate policy at the New Zealand Treasury.
With the election of the Labour Party in 1984 and the appointment of Roger Douglas as finance minister, the new right elite took power and began relentlessly and ruthlessly turning New Zealand into their vision of the model free market state.
"A coherent and comprehensive account of the years which will define this country for a century to come." - New Zealand Herald.
Many Scientific “Truths” Are, In Fact, False + A Scientist Explains Why "Everything Is Fucked" August 12 2018 | From: QZ / Inverse / Various
In 2005, John Ioannidis, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, published a paper, “Why most published research findings are false,” mathematically showing that a huge number of published papers must be incorrect.
He also looked at a number of well-regarded medical research findings, and found that, of 34 that had been retested, 41% had been contradicted or found to be significantly exaggerated.
Since then, researchers in several scientific areas have consistently struggled to reproduce major results of prominent studies. By some estimates, at least 51% - and as much as 89% - of published papers are based on studies and experiments showing results that cannot be reproduced.
Researchers have recreated prominent studies from several scientific fields and come up with wildly different results.
And psychology has become something of a poster child for the “reproducibility crisis” since Brian Nosek, a psychology professor at the University of Virginia, coordinated a Reproducibility Initiative project to repeat 100 psychological experiments, and could only successfully replicate 40%.
Now, an attempt to replicate another key psychological concept (ego depletion: the idea that willpower is finite and can be worn down with overuse) has come up short.
Martin Hagger, psychology professor at Curtin University in Australia, led researchers from 24 labs in trying to recreate a key effect, but found nothing. Their findings are due to be published in Perspectives on Psychological Science in the coming weeks.
Why Are They Getting it Wrong?
No one is accusing the psychologists behind the initial experiments of intentionally manipulating their results. But some of them may have been tripped up by one or more of the various aspects of academic science that inadvertently encourage bias.
For example, there’s massive academic pressure to publish in journals, and these journals tend to publish exciting studies that show strong results.
"Journals favor novelty, originality, and verification of hypotheses over robustness, stringency of method, reproducibility, and falsifiability,” Hagger tells Quartz.
“Therefore researchers have been driven to finding significant effects, finding things that are novel, testing them on relatively small samples.”
This has created a publication bias, where studies that show strong, positive results get published, while similar studies that come up with no significant effects sit at the bottom of researchers’ drawers.
Meanwhile, in cases where researchers have access to large amounts of data, there’s a dangerous tendency to hunt for significant correlations. Researchers can thus convince themselves that they’ve spotted a meaningful connection, when in fact such connections are totally random.
A Sign of Strength
The idea that papers are publishing false results might sound alarming but the recent crisis doesn’t mean that the entire scientific method is totally wrong. In fact, science’s focus on its own errors is a sign that researchers are on exactly the right path.
Ivan Oransky, producer of the blog Retraction Watch, which tracks retractions printed in journals, tells Quartz that ultimately, the alarm will lead to increased rigor.
"There’s going to be some short-term and maybe mid-term pain as all of this shakes out, but that’s how you move forward,” he says. “It’s like therapy - if you never get angry in therapy, you’re probably not pushing hard enough. If you never find mistakes, or failures to reproduce in your field, you’re probably not asking the right questions.”
For psychologists, who have seen so many results crumble in such a short space of time, the replication crisis could be disheartening. But it also presents a chance to be at the forefront of developing new policies.
Ioannidis tells Quartz that he views the most recent psychology reproducibility failures as a positive.
"It shows how much effort and attention has gone towards improving the accuracy of the knowledge produced,” he says.
“Psychology is a discipline that has always been very strong methodologically and was at the forefront at describing various biases and better methods. Now they are again taking the lead in improving their replication record.”
For example, there’s already widespread discussion within psychology about pre-registering trials (which would prevent researchers from shifting their methods so as to capture more eye-catching results), making data and scientific methods more open, making sample sizes larger and more representative, and promoting collaboration.
Dorothy Bishop, a professor of developmental neuropsychology at Oxford University, tells Quartz that several funding bodies and journals seem to be receptive to these ideas and that, once one or two adopt such policies, she expects them to spread rapidly.
Doing Science on Science
Each scientific field must adopt its own methods of ensuring accuracy. But ultimately, this self-reflection is a key part of the scientific process.
As Bishop notes, “Science has proved itself to be an incredibly powerful method.” And yet there’s always room for further advancement.
"There’s never an end point,” says Bishop. “We’re always groping towards the next thing. Sometimes science does disappear down the wrong path for a bit before it corrects itself.”
For Nosek, who led the re-testing of 100 psychology papers, the current focus on reproducibility is simply part of the scientific process.
"Science isn’t about truth and falsity, it’s about reducing uncertainty,” he says.
“Really this whole project is science on science: Researchers doing what science is supposed to do, which is be skeptical of our own process, procedure, methods, and look for ways to improve.”
A Scientist Explains Why "Everything Is Fucked"
But that doesn't mean we should give up.
Between the duping of the American public from Big Sugar, shocking moral fact-checks on some of history’s most groundbreaking experiments, and failure after failure of science research we’ve accepted as truth, science is teetering on the verge of being, well, fucked.
Those fears drove University of Oregon psychologist Sanjay Srivastava, Ph.D., to design the fictitious course “Everything Is Fucked.” The imagined ten-week seminar, written up as a syllabus on his blog, is Srivastava’s version of a reality check for young scientists:
Do you seriously think you’re going to cure the world’s diseases and elevate humanity through technology? You won’t - because everything is fucked.
But that’s the problem with science, Srivastava argues: We’re so intent on focusing on the results that we don’t see the path toward finding these results, and that’s fucked up. Would CRISPR have become 2015’s biological buzzword if academic journal editors hadn’t decided gene editing papers were worth publishing?
What else did we find out (or not find out) about Mars that wasn’t deemed publishable? Can we even trust the data showing the pandas and whales are thriving? We don’t know, and not only is it fucked up, it raises questions about the foundations of modern science altogether.
The “everything” in “Everything Is Fucked,” Srivastava explains, refers to scientific methods, the ways researchers acquire funding, the universities that support research, and our channels for publishing and disseminating scientific knowledge.
He defines something as fucked if:
"It presents hard conceptual challenges to which implementable, real-world solutions for working scientists are either not available or routinely ignored in practice.”
For Srivastava, the way we discover and share scientific knowledge is so riddled with these problems that there’s no way we can fully trust what we believe to be true.
Take week eight’s theme, “Scientific publishing is fucked.” In the science community, a published paper in an academic journal is professional currency; everyone’s striving to collect them, and anyone who doesn’t have one is professionally broke. Academic journals - big-name, respected publications like Nature, Science, and the New England Journal of Medicine - are academia’s banks.
In Srivastava’s view, this is troublesome, because it means they’re in control. “The problem is, there’s this incentive to find things that meet the publishable standards,” he says, referring to science that shows positive results, like a drug that promises a cure.
If journals only pay attention to the “success” stories, it means they’re ignoring all of the research that doesn’t produce sexy results. In turn, the temptation to falsify results and fudge graphs only grows stronger.
Scientists behind the unsexy studies are screwed: If they don’t get published, they don’t get tenure at research institutions or grants to continue their work, and their scientific pursuits inevitably come to a standstill.
But does their work deserve to come to an end? Most of those studies are not “wrong” or “useless,” because negative results are often just as useful for advancing scientific discovery as positive ones.
But they aren’t treated that way because they don’t make for good publishing.
"That’s really where it starts: Publication decisions becoming hinged, not on whether it’s a good question, but on whether the answer comes out, one way or another,” Srivastava says.
The cycle continues, and fucked-ness persists.
He has other, finer bones to pick. In week six, he discusses the issue of replicability, which is the idea that an experiment needs to be repeatable. If it’s not, the data it produces is, statistically, a one-off, and therefore pretty much useless.
And yet, there are an alarming number of scientific studies out there that are not replicable, cited by everyone from Big Pharma to the federal government.
He claims that the scientific profession as a whole is fucked in week ten because the pressure on scientists to publish more papers, faster, leads to smaller sample sizes, which in turn lead to weaker, less statistically sound results.
The scientists that design better, more thorough experiments may be doing better science, but because they aren’t publishing as many studies, they’re ultimately viewed as less accomplished.
"Where do truth and publishability depart?” Srivastava ponders. “When it comes time to hire people, we’re still going to hire someone with more papers.”
If it sounds like a massive clusterfuck, then Srivastava has made his point. Does that mean the pursuit of science in 2016 is a completely futile endeavor?
No, Srivastava surprisingly argues. Look to week seven - “Interlude” - for a scientific salvation, right about the time when his fictional students consider switching to a liberal arts degree, which can be distilled to this: Sure, everything is fucked, but it’s up to the next generation of scientists to make science less so.
There’s hope, and the replicability crisis might ironically offer that by being a cautionary tale for the arrogance of science.
The rest of us should be at least calmed by the fact that sexy results are garnering more upturned eyebrows and head scratching than ever before.
Social Engineering - The War On The Higher Mind Of Humans: Here’s Why You Should Consider Converting Your Music To A=432 Hz August 12 2018 | From: CollectiveEvolution “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.” - Nikola Tesla
“What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” – Albert Einstein
Related: The A=432 Hz Frequency: DNA Tuning And The Bastardisation Of Music Tesla said it. Einstein agreed. Science proved it. It is a known fact that everything—including our own bodies—is made up of energy vibrating at different frequencies. That being said, it seems logical to wonder, can sound frequencies affect us?
It would appear that this is the case. Frequencies affect frequencies, much like mixing ingredients with other ingredients affects the overall flavour of a meal. The way frequencies affect the physical world has been demonstrated through various experiments, such as the science of Cymatics and water memory.
Cymatics illustrate that when sound frequencies move through a particular medium such as water, air, or sand, they directly alter the vibration of matter. Below are pictures demonstrating how particles adjust to different frequencies. (Click here to watch a video demonstrating the patterns of sound frequencies)
We all hold a certain vibrational frequency, and our bodies are estimated to be about 70% water. Given the above experiments, it stands to reason that musical frequencies could also alter our own vibrational state.
Every expression through sound, emotion, or thought holds a specific frequency which influences everything around it - much like a single drop of water can create a larger ripple effect in a large body of water.
Music Frequency
With this concept in mind, let us bring our attention to the frequency of the music we listen to. Most music worldwide has been tuned to A=440 Hz since the International Standards Organization (ISO) promoted it in 1953.
However, when looking at the vibratory nature of the universe, it’s possible that this pitch is disharmonious with the natural resonance of nature and may generate negative effects on human behaviour and consciousness.
Some theories (although unproven) even suggest that the Nazi regime had been in favor of adopting this pitch as standard after conducting scientific research to determine which range of frequencies best induce fear and aggression.
Whether or not the conspiracy is factual, interesting studies have pointed towards the benefits of tuning music to A=432 Hz instead.
When our atoms and DNA start to resonate in harmony with the spiralling pattern of nature, our sense of connection to nature is said to be magnified. The number 432 is also reflected in ratios of the sun, Earth, and moon, as well as the precession of the equinoxes, the Great Pyramid of Egypt, Stonehenge, and the Sri Yantra, among many other sacred sites.
“From my own observations, some of the harmonic overtone partials of A=432hz 12T5 appear to line up to natural patterns and also the resonance of solitons. Solitons need a specific range to form into the realm of density and span from the micro to the macro cosmos. Solitons are not only found in water mechanics, but also in the ion-acoustic breath between electrons and protons.”
– Brian T. Collins
Color Spectrum Resonance
Another interesting factor to consider is that the A=432 Hz tuning correlates with the color spectrum and chakra system, while the A=440 Hz does not.
“The Solar Spectrum & The Cosmic Keyboard
All of the frequencies in the spectrum are related in octaves, from gamma rays to subharmonics. These colors and notes are also related to our Chakras and other important energy centers. I
f we are to understand that… Chakras are connected to the Seven Rays of the Solar Spectrum, then the notes and frequencies we use for the same should be the same.
A432 Hz is the tuning of the Cosmic Keyboard or Cosmic Pitchfork, as opposed to the A440 Hz modern ‘standard.’ It places C# at 136.10 Hz ‘Om,’ which is the main note of the Sitar in classical Indian music and the pitch of the chants of the Tibetan monks, who tell us, ‘It comes from nature.'”
Let’s explore the experiential difference between A=440 Hz and A=432 Hz. Music lovers and musicians have noticed that music tuned in A=432 Hz is not only more beautiful and harmonious to the ears, but it also induces a more inward experience that is felt inside the body at the spine and heart.
Music tuned in A=440 Hz was felt as a more outward and mental experience, and was felt at the side of the head which projected outwards.
Audiophiles have also stated that A=432hz music seems to be non-local and can fill an entire room, whereas A=440hz can be perceived as directional or linear in sound propagation.
“The ancients tuned their instruments at an A of 432 Hz instead of 440 Hz – and for a good reason. There are plenty of music examples on the internet that you can listen to, in order to establish the difference for yourself. Attuning the instrument to 432 Hz results in a more relaxing sound, while 440 Hz slightly tenses up to body.
This is because 440 Hz is out of tune with both macrocosmos and microcosmos. 432 Hz on the contrary is in tune. To give an example of how this is manifested microcosmically: our breath (0,3 Hz) and our pulse (1,2 Hz) relate to the frequency of the lower octave of an A of 432 Hz (108 Hz) as 1:360 and 1:90.”
“The overall sound difference was noticeable, the 432 version sounding warmer, clearer and instantly sounded more listenable but the 440 version felt tighter, with more aggressive energy.”
– Anonymous guitarist
The video below was created by someone with no opinion on whether A=432 Hz or A=440 Hz is better. Therefore, the way both versions of the melody is played is unbiased. It is up to us to tune in and feel which one feels more harmonious to us!
I personally have enjoyed many bands, artists, and styles of music even though they were tuning in A=440 hz, however, after comparing a few songs in both A=432 hz and A=440 hz I can say I definitely feel and hear the difference.
I wouldn’t say that my experience of 440hz music has turned me into an aggressive person, but I can understand how an entire population being exposed to music that is more mind directed as opposed to heart directed - not to mention all of the materialistic and ego-driven lyrics in most popular music - is a perfect combination to maintain a more discordant frequency and state of consciousness within humanity.
This is, of course, simply my own opinion.
“Music based on C=128hz (C note in concert A=432hz) will support humanity on its way towards spiritual freedom. The inner ear of the human being is built on C=128 hz.” – Rudolph Steiner
I cannot state with complete certainty that every idea suggested in this article is 100% accurate, nor am I an expert on the subject. I simply gathered interesting information from others who researched this issue more deeply.
For this reason, if we are looking for scientific validation for these claims, I suggest that we each do our own research on the matter with an open yet discerning mind. Perhaps more research on this topic will be done in the near future to help explain the phenomenon.
I believe we all possess intuition and the ability to observe without judgment, which can be more useful than resorting to ridicule when exposed to information that has not yet been accepted by the scientific community.
It is therefore up to us to tone down the urge to jump to conclusions and instead EXPERIENCE the difference between A=440 Hz and A=432 Hz. To do so, we need to listen with our entire body and a neutral awareness as opposed to with our mental ideas, judgments, and preconceptions.
If you are interested in changing your music’s pitch to A=432 hz, click here to learn how to do it.
The Truth About Addiction And Recovery August 12 2018 | From: Peele / Various
A radical new approach to recovery - using methods proven more effective than medical treatment or twelve-step programs.
Drawing on the latest research and detailed case studies, the authors expose the best-kept secrets in the recovery field:
Addictions - whether to food, cigarettes, sex, alcohol, or drugs - are not diseases, and they’re not necessarily lifelong problems.
Many more people give up addictions on their own than are helped by medical treatment or twelve-step programs.
Developing values, skills, and life resources enables people to quit addictions - and to shed the addict identity altogether.
In their revolutionary “Life Process Program” for overcoming all kinds of addictions, the authors emphasize self-help and treatment through coping with stress and achieving one’s goals. As helpful as it is controversial, The Truth About Addiction and Recovery will forever change the way we view and treat addiction.
“A classic.” - John Norcross, PhD, ABPP, Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the University of Scranton and author of Changing for Good
Addiction
What causes addiction? Easy, right? Drugs cause addiction. But maybe it is not that simple.
This video is adapted from Johann Hari's New York Times best-selling book 'Chasing The Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs.'
For more information, and to take a quiz to see what you know about addiction, visit chasingthescream.com
Why It Doesn’t Make Sense To Call Addiction A “Disease”
We frequently hear from people who say: “I drink too much sometimes, but I don’t think I’m an alcoholic. And I don’t want to stand up and talk about myself in front of a group. Is there any other way I can change the way I drink?”
“I’m overweight, but I understand that people are born to be fat and there’s not much you can do about it. I know I’ve tried to lose weight a million times and failed. Does this mean I’m doomed to be overweight?”
“I saw an ad saying the only way to lick your addiction to nicotine is by going to a doctor. Is that really true? Don’t people ever quit smoking on their own?”
“My father was an alcoholic. Does that mean I’m likely to become an alcoholic myself? Should I play it safe and quit drinking altogether? A friend of mine joined a ‘Children of Alcoholics’ group, even though she’s never even been drunk. Should I join such a group? And what about my kids?”
“My son was caught smoking marijuana. Now I’m told that, unless I place him in an expensive residential treatment program, he could escalate his drug use and die. I don’t have the money for this but, of course, if I have to save his life I’ll mortgage the house!”
People are much concerned about bad habits (which sometimes reach life-consuming proportions) that they’d like to do something about-drinking, smoking, overeating, taking drugs, gambling, overspending, or even compulsive romancing.
We hear more and more that every one of these things is a disease, and that we must go to treatment centers or join twelve-step support groups like Alcoholics Anonymous in order to change any of these behaviors.
Is there really no other way to change a powerful habit than to enter treatment for a disease? Do personal initiative, willpower, or just maturing and developing a more rewarding life have anything to do with people’s ability to overcome addictive habits?
As children, as spouses, as parents, as employers, as consumers, and as citizens we must struggle to understand and master the destructive potential of drugs, alcohol, and related addictions.
The kinds of questions so many people face today include: What do we do if we discover our children are smoking marijuana, or worse? Should we put them in a treatment center that will teach them they are chemically dependent for life?
How can we tell if co-workers, employees, and friends are secretly addicts or alcoholics? What is the most appropriate way to react to people who drink too much or do anything that harms themselves and others?
Click on the image above to open a larger versioj in a new window
Furthermore, as a society, how should we deal with these problems? Are our incessant wars on drugs really going to have the positive impact the generals in these wars always claim? Or is there some more sensible or direct way to reduce the damage people do to themselves through their uncontrollable habits?
Rather than arrest drug users, can we treat addicts so that they stop using drugs? And if we expand the treatment for all the addictions we have seen - like shopping and smoking and overeating and sexual behavior - who will pay for all this treatment?
Finally, does addiction diminish people’s judgment so that they can’t be held accountable for their behavior, or for crimes and financial excesses they commit while addicted?
This book is for those concerned with such questions. But what you will read here is not the same as what you see and hear in newspapers and magazines, on television, in addiction treatment centers, in twelve-step groups, and in most physicians’ and therapists’ offices or what your children are learning in school.
For in its desperate search for a way out of the convulsions caused by drug abuse and addiction, our society has seized upon a simple, seductive, but false answer that this book disputes. What we say is, indeed, so different from most things you hear that we have provided extensive documentation at the back of the book.
The simple but incorrect answer we constantly hear is expressed by the familiar statement, “Alcoholism is a disease.” In other words, we can treat away these problems in a medical setting.
This viewpoint has proved so appealing that it has been adopted by professional organizations and government agencies as well as by groups like Alcoholics Anonymous. And now the “disease” label is applied not only to alcoholism, drug addiction, cigarette smoking, and overeating, but also to gambling, compulsive shopping, desperate romantic attachments, and even committing rape or killing one’s newborn child!
A.A.’s image of “powerlessness over alcohol” is being extended to everything that people feel they are unable to resist or control.
But what lies behind the claim that alcoholism and other addictions are diseases? How accurate is it? What evidence supports it? Most important, what good does it do us to believe it? Will it really help you or someone you care about to overcome an addiction?
This book will show that the answer is no - that, in fact, it may do more harm than good. What’s wrong with calling a tenacious and destructive habit a disease?
Three things:
1.
It isn’t true.
2.
It doesn’t help most people (even those it does help might succeed just as well in a less costly, less limiting way).
3.
It prevents us from doing things that really would help.
In this chapter we will summarize what the disease model says, why it is wrong, and why it is harmful. As you will see, there is no good reason to label yourself or people you know as forever marked by an addictive “disease.” Challenging this useless folklore is the first step toward understanding addiction and doing something about it.
Then we will present an alternative way of thinking about and dealing with addiction called the Life Process Program. The accompanying table previews the major differences between the Life Process Program and the disease model of addiction.
Myths Versus Reality
To highlight some of the surprising facts we will reveal, here are some common beliefs about various addictions:
A person needs medical treatment or a program like Smokenders to quit smoking.
Attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings is the most effective way for alcoholics to stop drinking.
Nearly all regular cocaine users become addicted.
Very few people who have a drinking problem can ever drink in a normal, controlled manner.
Drunk drivers who undergo treatment for alcoholism are less likely to repeat the offense than those who receive normal judicial penalties such as license suspension.
Most people with an alcoholic parent become alcoholics themselves.
Most people who are binge drinkers in their twenties go on to become alcoholics.
Most of the American soldiers who were addicted to heroin in Vietnam remained addicted or became addicted again after they returned home.
The fact that alcoholism runs in families means that it is an inherited disease.
Fat children, because they have inherited their obesity, are more likely to be fat in later life than are people who become fat as adults.
Actually, the best scientific evidence available today indicates that none of these statements is true. Such specific misconceptions grow out of a foundation of false assumptions about the nature of addiction generally.
Ten Assumptions that Distinguish the Life Process Program from the Disease Model
DISEASE MODEL
LIFE PROCESS PROGRAM
1. Addiction is inbred and biological.
1. Addiction is a way of coping with yourself and your world.
2. The solution is medical treatment and membership in spiritual groups such as A.A.
2. The solution requires self-awareness, new coping skills, and changing your environment.
3. Addiction is all-or-nothing; you are or you aren’t an addict.
3. Addiction is a continuum; your behavior is more or less addicted.
4. Addiction is permanent and you can relapse at any moment.
4. Addiction can be outgrown.
5. Addicts are “in denial” and must be forced to acknowledge they have a disease.
5. You should identify problems and solutions in ways that work for you.
6. The recovering addict / alcoholic is the expert on addiction.
6. Those without an addiction problem are the best models.
7. Addiction is a “primary” disease.
7. Addiction stems from other life problems you have.
8. Your main associates must be other recovering addicts.
8. You should associate with a normal range of people.
9. You must accept the disease philosophy to recover.
9. Getting better is not a matter of believing a dogma.
10. Surrendering to a higher power is the key to recovery.
10. You must develop your own power to get better.
At first, it seems hard to understand what is meant by saying that something a person regularly does (such as· drinking alcohol) is a disease.
Habitual, voluntary behavior of this sort does not resemble what we normally think of as a disease, like cancer or diabetes. What is more, A.A. - and even hospital programs for alcoholism - don’t actually treat any biological causes of alcoholism.
After all the claims we have heard in the past decade about biological discoveries concerning alcoholism, not one of these findings has been translated into a usable treatment. Instead, the same group discussions and exhortations that have been used for the last fifty years are employed in hospital programs.
Nor is any biological method used to determine whether someone is an alcoholic other than by assessing how much that person drinks and the consequences of this drinking.
And if we have no special biological information about treating or identifying alcoholism, we surely know nothing about the biological causes of “diseases” such as compulsive gambling, shopping, and loving, which have nothing to do with drugs or alcohol.
There is, however, a standard way those who claim addiction is a disease describe addictive diseases. This description has been developed by groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous, by the medical profession, and by various popularizers of the idea that alcoholism is a disease.
What they say is in every regard wrong.
When they tell you that you have the “disease” of alcoholism, “chemical dependency,” obesity, compulsive shopping, or whatever, this is what they mean:
The basis of the disease is inbred and/or biological. There is no need to look for the causes of the disease in your personal problems, the people you spend time with, the situations you find yourself in, or your ethnic or cultural background. Addiction is bred into you from birth or early childhood. Your current experience of life has nothing to do with it; nothing you can do makes you either more or less likely to become addicted.
It involves complete loss of control over your behavior. Once involved in your addiction, you are utterly at its mercy. You cannot choose whether, or how much, to lose yourself in the involvement. No matter how costly it may be in a given situation, you will go all the way. You cannot make reasonable, responsible choices about something to which you are addicted.
Addictions are forever. An addictive disease is like diabetes - it stays with you as long as you live. The mysterious bodily or psychic deficiency that lies at the root of addiction can never be remedied, and you can never safely expose yourself to the substance to which you were addicted. Once an addict, always an addict.
It inevitably expands until it takes over and destroys your life. “Irreversible progression” is a hallmark of addictive diseases as they are conceived today. The addiction grows and grows until it devours you, like AIDS or cancer. No rewards, no punishments, not even the most momentous developments in your life can stay its course, unless you completely swear off the addictive substance or activity.
If you say you don’t have it, that’s when they really know you have it. According to this “Catch22” of the disease theory, anyone suspected of having an addictive disease who insists that he or she doesn’t have the disease is guilty of the added offense of “denial.” In this way, the “disease” label is like a web that traps a person more firmly the harder the person fights to get out of it.
It requires medical and/or “spiritual” treatment. Thinking you can cure your addiction through willpower, changes in your life circumstances, or personal growth is a delusion (like denial), according to disease-theory proponents. Addiction is a disease of the body that can be controlled only by never-ending medical treatments.
It is also a disease of the soul requiring lifetime membership in a support group like Alcoholics Anonymous. Why supposed medical treatment consists mainly of going to group meetings and why people can’t develop their own spiritual approaches to life if they choose are questions disease theory adherents ignore.
Your kids are going to get it, too. Since addiction is an inherited disease, the children of addicts are considered at high risk for developing the same disease - no matter what you or they do or how careful you are. Logical deductions from this viewpoint are that you should have your kids tested for their genetic predisposition to alcoholism or addiction before they start school, or that you should simply teach them never to touch a drop of alcohol or expose themselves to whatever your addiction is.
Obviously, this approach presents special difficulties in dealing with addictions to eating, shopping, and making love. Where did these notions come from - notions that, when examined in the clear light of day, often seem quite bizarre and contrary to common experience?
The disease theory takes a set of precepts that were made up by and about a small group of severe, long-term alcoholics in the 1930s and applies them inappropriately to people with a wide range of drinking and other life problems. The original members of Alcoholics Anonymous, realizing they would soon die if they did not give up alcohol, adopted wholesale the dogma of the nineteenth century temperance movement.
The one major difference was that the A.A. members said drinking was a disease only for them, and not for everyone who drank - therefore not everyone needed to eschew “demon rum,” as temperance advocates had insisted.
When he co-founded Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) to offer a support group for those addicted to alcohol, Bill Wilson made the first major advance in addressing alcoholism.
A fact which is less well-known is that Bill Wilson also made the second major advance when he became aware of, and later promoted the use of niacin vitamin B3 as a treatment for chronic drinkers.
Orthomolecular Medicine and Alcoholism
Even as Alcoholics Anonymous slowly expanded, many of Bill Wilson's personal and financial problems lingered, especially his depression.
Canadian biochemist Dr. Abram Hoffer, M.D., Ph.D., a psychiatrist and physician, writes: "I met Bill in New York in 1960. Humphry Osmond and I introduced him to the concept of megavitamin therapy. Bill was very curious about it and began to take niacin, 3,000 mg daily. Within a few weeks fatigue and depression which had plagued him for years were gone."
Dr. Hoffer, in his foreword to the book "Alcoholism: The Cause and The Cure", describes how he and Bill Wilson investigated together the effect of Niacin vitamin B3 on alcoholics.
Dr Hoffer writes: “Bill understood it first hand, for even though he had been abstinent for many years, he was still unwell. He suffered from immense anxiety, tension, and fatigue, but was able to function in spite of what might have been disabling.
After taking 3 grams of niacin daily for two weeks, his symptoms vanished and he remained free of addiction. This was a peak experience that he never forgot. He became determined to give as many AA members as possible the benefit of the same healing vitamin,”.
Dr. Hoffer further writes: “Without telling me that he was doing so, Bill conducted a trial of niacin on 30 friends and colleagues in New York. Most of them were very productive and sober members of AA, but they all suffered from the common mind and mood afflictions that people formerly addicted to alcohol experience, even when they are not drinking.
After three months he showed me his data. After one month, ten of the subjects were well. After the second month another ten had recovered, and the remaining one-third had shown no improvement after the third month. By this time I had also treated a number of people addicted to alcohol and had seen similar recoveries.”
Beyond AA Meetings
Between 1960 and his death in 1971, Bill Wilson shared this information with physician members of AA in a series of 3 brochures, Communications to Alcoholics Anonymous.
Bill’s findings were unfortunately dismissed by the AA’s International Board, because he was not an "M.D." and the fact that Alcoholics Anonymous is a social support structure, not a medical treatment provider.
The A.A. model has struck a responsive chord among Americans. Obviously, with the rejection of Prohibition, the United States had decided against a national policy that everyone should abstain from drinking.
Yet Westernn society continues even today to show a deep unease about alcohol and about intoxication, which many people seek even while fearing its disturbing effects. Given this national ambivalence, we have been drawn to the “old-time religion” of temperance, as represented by A.A., now cloaked in the modern language of medicine and the neurosciences.
But, as this book will make clear, the operative assumptions about addiction have never arisen directly from biological sciences. Rather, they have been superimposed on scientific research, much of which directly contradicts the assumptions of the disease theory.
Why the Disease Model Is Wrong
Every major tenet of the “disease” view of addiction is refuted both by scientific research and by everyday observation. This is true even for alcoholism and drug addiction, let alone the many other behaviors that plainly have little to do with biology and medicine.
No biological or genetic mechanisms have been identified that account for addictive behavior.
Even for alcoholism, as the following chapter will show, the evidence for genetic inheritance is unconvincing. By now, probably every well-informed reader has heard announcements that scientists have discovered a gene that causes alcoholism.
In fact, as one of us wrote in The Atlantic, this is far from the case, and the study that prompted these claims has already been refuted by another study in the same journal. Moreover, if a gene were found to influence alcoholism, would the same gene cause drug addiction?
Would it be related to smoking? Would it also cause compulsive gambling and overeating? If so, this would mean that everyone with any of these addictions has this genetic inheritance. Indeed, given the ubiquity of the problems described, the person without this inheritance would seem to be the notable exception.
How could an addiction like smoking be genetic? Why are some types of people more likely to smoke than others (about half of waitresses and car salesmen smoke, compared with about a tenth of lawyers and doctors)?
And does believing that an addiction like smoking is genetic help the person quit (are all those smokers who quit not “genetically” addicted)?
Returning to alcohol, are people really predestined biologically to become alcoholics and thus to become A.A. members? Think about the rock group Aerosmith: all five members of this group now belong to A.A., just as they once all drank and took drugs together.
How unlikely a coincidence it is that five unrelated people with the alcoholic / addictive inheritance should run into one another and form a band!
The idea that genes make you become alcoholic cannot possibly help us understand how people develop drinking problems over years, why they choose on so many occasions to go out drinking, how they become members of heavy-drinking groups, and how drinkers are so influenced by the circumstances of their lives.
Genes may make a person unusually sensitive to the physiological effects of alcohol; a person can find drinking extremely relaxing or enjoyable; but this says nothing about how the person drinks over the course of a lifetime.
After all, some people say, “I never have more than one or two drinks at a time, because alcohol goes straight to my head.”
As we document here and in the following chapter, we can actually predict the likelihood of people’s becoming addicted far more reliably from their nationality and social class, from the social groups they join, and from their beliefs and expectations about alcohol or drugs (or other activities), than from their biological makeup.
Often, people who become addicted set themselves up by investing a substance or an experience with magical powers to transform their beings (“Getting drunk is great”; “When I drink I’m really at ease”; “Drinking makes me attractive to people of the opposite sex”).
It is simply not within the chemical properties of alcohol or a drug, or the experience of an activity like shopping, to offer people what they want and seek from an addiction.
People find this in an addiction when they believe they can’t achieve the feelings they need in ordinary ways. Clearly, attitudes, values, and the opportunities available in a person’s environment have much to do with whether the person has a significant risk for a particular addiction.
People do not necessarily lose control of themselves whenever they are exposed to the object of their addiction.
On the contrary, many practice their addictions quite selectively. For example, military and religious personnel are often deprived of tobacco during training or on retreats, and business people realize they can’t smoke in certain rooms.
Orthodox Jews who smoke heavily abstain from smoking on the Sabbath, showing that their religious values mean more to them than nicotine does. Alcoholics in experiments routinely control their drinking when it is in their interest to do so - say, when they must leave a cozy room with television and companionship in order to get more to drink.
These variations occur in real life just as they do in the laboratory - for example, when people avoid drugs or cigarettes when they are with people who won’t tolerate those habits. When something they really care about is jeopardized if they continue to drink, smoke, or whatever, most people will stop or cut down accordingly.
Addiction usually does not last a lifetime. “Once an addict, always an addict” is a pessimistic notion that is both wrong and harmful. It leaves people two choices: either you stay constantly addicted and miserable until you die; or you abstain for life while attending group meetings and viewing yourself as the perpetually “recovering” person.
Sadly, a small number of people do die of their addictions; and another group succeeds in quitting drinking, drug taking, or whatever by maintaining the role of the recovering addict.
But most people are more resilient and resourceful than that. Most people who have addictive habits moderate or eliminate these habits over the course of their lives.
And they do it without having to say “I am an alcoholic” or “I am an overeater” or “I am a sex addict” as long as they live.
Remember that, today, a majority of adults who have ever smoked have quit and nearly all did so without treatment.
Progression is not inevitable - it is the exception. If the majority of people give up addictive habits, then the idea of “inevitable progression” doesn’t hold water. Calling addiction a “progressive disease” comes from looking at the few who have progressed to severe addiction and tracing the path by which they got there.
The progression of addictive problems only seems inevitable after the fact. For example, the great majority of college overdrinkers, even those who black out at fraternity parties, become moderate drinkers in middle age.
When you consider that even most of the people who use narcotics and cocaine do not end up addicted, you can see that drug-and-alcohol use patterns are many and varied, even when a person uses a substance abusively for a time.
Treatment is no panacea. Contrary to all the advertising we hear, treatment for addictions is often no more effective than letting addiction and recovery take their natural course.
The vast majority of people who have given up addictions (beginning with more than 90 percent of the forty-four million Americans who have quit smoking have done so on their own.
This does not mean that treatment for addictions cannot work - research has shown that some forms of treatment are effective. But the ones that are more effective are not the ones that have become popular in the United States.
You can outgrow an addictive habit on your own or in therapy, but either way the principles of the Life Process Program are the same.
What about joining support groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous? Here, too, research reveals the opposite of what we have been led to believe. A.A is a valuable community resource for those who find support in a certain type of religiously oriented group ritual.
But the best we can say about A.A is that it works for those for whom it works. Meanwhile, there are plenty for whom it doesn’t work. There is no scientific evidence that A.A. works better than other approaches when randomly selected alcoholics are assigned to A.A. or other treatments.
In fact, the evidence is that the people who are now often compelled to attend A.A - after being arrested for drunk driving or being sent by a company Employee Assistance Program - do worse than those who are left on their own.
How can we reconcile this finding with the glowing testimonials we hear about A.A.? The people we see in A.A. are the ones who like it, find it helpful, and stick it out. But there are many others who don’t go to A.A. or who don’t like it and drop out.
And as we show below, those who seriously try to stop drinking on their own are more likely to maintain their abstinence than those who attend A.A.
In addition, since many more people try to quit on their own than through therapy or joining a group, the number of self-curers is triple or more the number of successful treatment or A.A cases.
But such self-curers are not very visible, because they are individuals without an organized group to publicize their success.
These, then, are the key fallacies of the popularly held view of addiction. Even generally well-informed people may be astonished that we contradict such widely held beliefs. All of our refutations of conventional wisdom are carefully documented in the notes at the back of the book.
But you don’t need to read scholarly articles and scientific reports to test the accuracy of what we say. Just check it out against your own experience and observation. Don’t you know anyone who used to drink excessively, at times uncontrollably, but who no longer drinks at all or now drinks in a normal, appropriate manner?
Obviously, most people who used to drink excessively but who have now cut back (or even quit) do not attend meetings where they must rise and declare, “I am an alcoholic.”
How many people of all ages do you know who quit smoking? How many of them did it by going through a medical program or joining a support group, and how many finally just decided to quit and made good on that resolve? What happened to all the people you knew who used illegal drugs in college, some quite heavily?
How many of them are “chemically dependent” now? If we simply examine the cases of most of those we are close to personally, we will see how addictions usually do not follow the disease course.
Why the Disease Model Doesn’t Work - Why It Even Does More Harm than Good
The assumption that calling addiction a “disease” actually helps people crumbles when subjected to critical scrutiny. Some people feel comfortable thinking of their addiction as a disease and are able to function better on this basis for a time.
But whatever short-term benefits medical, disease-oriented treatment produces are double-edged even for the individuals who claim it has helped them. Many of the most “successful” recipients of disease treatment might achieve a real breakthrough by learning to think about addiction differently.
Meanwhile, for the majority of people, the disadvantages of the disease approach clearly outweigh the advantages from the start.
The disadvantages of the disease approach are that it:
Attacks people’s feelings of personal control and can thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy;
Makes mountains out of molehills, since it fails to differentiate between the worst alcoholics and addicts and those with minor substance-use dependence;
Stigmatizes people - in their own minds - for life
Iinterrupts normal maturation for the young, for whom this approach is completely inappropriate;
Holds up as models for drinking and drug use the people who have shown the least capacity to manage their lives;
Isolates alcoholism and addiction as problems from the rest of the alcoholic’s or addict’s life;
Limits people’s human contacts primarily to other recovering alcoholics or addicts, who only reinforce their preoccupation with drinking and drug use;
Dispenses a rigid program of therapy that is founded - in the words of the director of the government’s National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIA.A.A) - “on hunch, not evidence, and not on science,” while attacking more effective therapies.
How can therapy that so many people believe in and swear by actually do more harm than good? To illustrate this point, consider the case of a famous psychiatrist who evaluated his hospital’s alcoholism program - one he felt was among the most outstanding in the world.
This program first detoxified the alcoholic in the hospital, then mandated A.A. attendance, and finally actively followed patients’ progress with an outreach counseling program.
When the psychiatrist running the program, Dr. George Vaillant, evaluated how well his patients were doing two years and eight years after treatment, however, he found they had fared about as well as comparable alcoholics who received no treatment at all!
How could Vaillant have been so wrong as to think his patients were doing phenomenally well, when actually they were doing no better than if he had left them alone completely?
Naturally, he wanted to think it worked. But his research prevented his rose-colored views from distorting the actual results of his treatment.
When he counted all his patients, not just his successes, when he scrutinized and verified what they were telling him in order to see exactly how well they were doing, and when he compared them with alcoholics out on their own instead of just assuming that all these people died without the help of treatment like his, Vaillant found that his expensive hospital treatment was close to useless.
Very few people in the treatment industry or in A.A. are as scrupulous as is Vaillant. When we hear from A.A. boosters, they tell us only about those who have stuck with the program and are currently sober. The same is true of treatment programs. They parade their best stars up front.
We don’t hear about all their failures. Yet Vaillant, in a book that is cited as the major source of support for the benefits of treating alcoholics according to the disease model, concluded as follows:
“If treatment as we currently understand it does not seem more effective than the natural healing processes, then we need to understand those healing processes better.”
Indeed, Vaillant repeats another researcher’s conclusion that “it may be easier for improper treatment to retard recovery than for proper treatment to hasten it.”major source of support for the benefits of treating alcoholics according to the disease model
What are the dangers of this kind of disease treatment? Here are explanations of the disadvantages listed at the beginning of this section:
It sets people up for failure. All disease treatments emphasize how much out of control “patients” are, and what a delusion it is for them to feel they can exert any control over their addictions. Is it possible that such a message can do more harm than good?
William Miller and Reid Hester, reviewing all the comparative studies on treatment for alcoholism, made a surprising finding: in the only two studies in which alcoholics were randomly assigned either to A.A., to other forms of treatment, or to no treatment, those assigned to A.A. did no better or actually suffered more relapse than those who received other treatment or who weren’t treated at all!
Intrigued by this outcome, one of us wrote George Vaillant and asked him whether subjects he studied who abstained without entering formal treatment did better if they joined A.A. Again, A.A. members were less likely to maintain their abstinence.
Why would people be more likely to relapse if they entered A.A. than if they quit drinking on their own? There are several reasons. For one, people who enter A.A. are told they cannot succeed on their own. Therefore, if they should stop attending A.A., many are convinced that they will soon resume alcoholic drinking.
A.A. and disease treatments are especially defeatist in dealing with relapse. Accepting the disease-oriented philosophy of inevitable loss of control thus makes it more likely that the alcoholic will binge if he or she ever has a drink. Yet, Vaillant found, nearly all alcoholics will drink again at some time.
It makes matters worse than they are. Can attending A.A. or going into addiction treatment really cause people to develop some of their alcoholism symptoms? In his book Becoming Alcoholic, sociologist David Rudy reports on the time he spent observing A.A. meetings.
Rudy found that most people had to learn their role as alcoholics. An important “rite of passage” is the first time members tell their story for the group, beginning by acknowledging, “I am an alcoholic.” In Rudy’s words;
“The alcoholic’s tale “is made up of two parts: a story about how bad it was before A.A. and a story about how good it is now.”
Narcotics anonymous is the drug users version of AA, although is generally accepting of AA members as well
This presentation is warmly greeted by the member’s sponsor in A.A., and the entire membership responds with enthusiastic acceptance of the convert.
When alcoholics introduce their experiences and symptoms in or treatment, the group or therapist homogenizes them through interpretation and clarification. For example, most people who enter have not had blackouts, which are more typical of long-term alcoholics than of the younger drinkers now flooding into treatment and A.A.
But blackouts are taken as the badge of alcoholism, and according to Rudy, “members learn the importance of blackouts as a behavior that verifies their alcoholism, and an indeterminable number of members who may not have had blackouts report them.” Rudy continues:
"When newcomers to A.A. claim that they cannot remember if they had any blackouts or not, other members use this claim as evidence of the event in question. As one member put it to a newcomer:
The reason you can’t remember is because alcohol fogs your brain. If it fogs your brain now after not drinking for a few days it must have fogged your brain before. See, you must have had blackouts then.”
A large part of alcoholism and drug treatment consists of group meetings where alcoholics or addicts “confront” one another and their problems. Newcomers who don’t report the correct symptoms are treated with knowing condescension or are actively hazed - sometimes quite abusively - until they “get” and repeat the party line.
When Dwight Gooden entered the alcoholism-andcocaine program at the Smithers Alcoholism Center, he described being assailed by his fellow residents there during the constant group-therapy sessions. “My stories weren’t as good as theirs. . . . They said, ‘C’mon, man, you’re lying.’ They didn’t believe me. . . . I cried a lot before I went to bed at night.”
After he left the Betty Ford Center, Chevy Chase reported that he had often been angry at the counselors, who heckled the residents mercilessly, constantly denigrating them and claiming they had been living worthless lives.
Does all this sound like good therapy technique? It is simple common sense that belief in your personal value and your own strength is superior to having these things denigrated for getting your life under control.
It stigmatizes people for life. The disease model puts a label on you that you can never outgrow. Once diseased, always diseased. The effects of this defeatist view are especially tragic - and unjust - in the case of people to whom the “disease” label is most inappropriately applied in the first place: teenage binge drinkers, most drunk drivers, “adult children of alcoholics,” recreational drug users discovered through drug tests, and - in areas not involving drugs or alcohol - overweight adolescents or “hyperactive” or “learning-disabled” children.
It brutalizes and brainwashes the young. The largest single age group of people undergoing hospital treatment today for chemical dependency, eating disorders, depression, and so forth is adolescents. A.A. members are also much younger today, on average, than when the fellowship was founded by a group of men with serious, lifelong drinking problems.
Nonetheless, virtually none of these young people meet clinical standards of alcoholism or drug addiction.
Indeed, numerous cases have been identified in which young people have been hospitalized for smoking marijuana or even for being suspected of using drugs.
When one such case was revealed on national television, an unusually forthright consultant for the National Association for Alcoholism Treatment Programs confessed, “I’m afraid this happens far more than people in the field want to admit; it’s something of a scandal.”
Meanwhile, A.A. and Alateen (for teenage children of alcoholics) groups now pervade high-school and college campuses. What is the impact of treatment that forces teenagers to take on the identity of addicts or alcoholics or children of alcoholics?
Young people are warned that their substance abuse is a permanent trait, even though we have seen that a large majority will outgrow substance-abuse problems as they mature.
Presenting this message to the young can only prolong or exacerbate their substance abuse, since it denies their own capacity for change and forces them to believe that any substance use for the rest of their lives will lead them back to excess, addiction, and drunkenness.
Young treatment grads who constantly relapse and return to treatment are the norm, as in the cases of Carrie Hamilton, Erinn Cosby, Drew Barrymore, and other young “patients” whose stories are less well publicized. Of course, the relapses are then attributed to their “disease” and to their failure to heed the treatment’s warning to abstain forever.
These programs fairly frequently involve emotional abuse. Such “treatments” for children include “refusing to allow them to wear street clothes, keeping them in isolation for prolonged periods, or forcing them to wear self-derogatory signs, engage in other humiliation rituals . . . , or submit to intense and prolonged group confrontation” all of which, psychologists believe, “may destroy the youngsters’ already fragile self-esteem.”
When we describe these experiences, treatment specialists often argue in response, “Well, what if the kids would end up dead if we didn’t do this to them?” In other words, to object to these programs is likened to promoting intoxication leading to death.
Certainly, it is crucial to prevent children from harming themselves, and it can be worthwhile to remove children from a problem home, whether through a residential program or a visit to a sympathetic relative.
But brainwashing, emotional blackmail, denigration, and psychological torture never work, except to make people so unsure of who they are or what they value that they will temporarily consent to the demands of those in charge.
Worst of all, therapies that were devised for the most incorrigible children - though they don’t benefit even these unfortunate kids have been spreading down the ladder to more and more children whose behavior represents typical adolescent exploration and insubordination.
Parents are then confronted over whether they want to “save” their kids or allow them to die, as though the latter were the normal outcome of adolescence. The threat of their children’s dying is then used as emotional blackmail to make parents accept the sacrifices necessary to place their children in expensive residential treatment programs.
It presents the alcoholic or addict as someone to emulate. Prominent graduates of treatment programs, like Drew Barrymore, Betty Ford, Kitty Dukakis, and a host of athletes now lecture to others about chemical dependency. If alcoholics and drug abusers suffer from a disease and are now recovering, then they can educate others about the disease and even about how young people should live and behave.
If, on the other hand, we think of them as people who are tremendously poor at self-management, then it is indeed stupid for the rest of us, who have not been seriously addicted, to ask them for advice and information. Someone like former football star Bob Hayes explains that he took and sold drugs as a result of an inherited disease.
One reviewer’s reaction to Hayes’s book, Run, Bullet, Run, could stand for any and all of these confessional tracts: “Aside from a brief closing statement on personal responsibility, he self-servingly portrays himself as a victim throughout the book.”
Alcoholics and addicts like Hayes regularly come into schools to relay their tortured drinking experiences and to reiterate that alcohol is a dangerous drug. But nearly every child in these schools will drink.
It is as though the schools wished to undermine children’s sense of self-control and to attack their chances of becoming normal drinkers, which in most cases their “nonexpert” parents are.
In treatment itself, “recovering” addicts and alcoholics counsel the drug or alcohol abuser - who usually has not drunk as destructively and hurt himself or herself as much as the counselors! In all types of twelve-step groups, the most severely debilitated person tends to become the leader and model for others, so that the most out-of-control shopping addict tells others about the nature of their problems.
Who should be counseling whom? In the case of drug abuse, a number of reviews have found that informational and scare lectures by recovering addicts produce the worst results of all prevention programs. These programs have never yet been found to reduce drug use; on the contrary, several studies have found increased drug use in their aftermath.
It ignores the rest of the person’s problems in favor of blaming them all on the addiction. When someone like Carrie Hamilton lectures about her youthful drug abuse and delinquency (often alongside her mother, Carol Burnett), she makes drug abuse and family failures sound like mysterious, unavoidable illnesses that some people and their parents “have.”
Of course, this excuses her and her mother from dealing with painful problems they would prefer to avoid. But by adopting the disease identity as her protection through the rest of her life, the youthful convert guarantees that she cannot grow beyond the limitations of her adolescent family life. Can people hope for more than this?
When treatment views alcoholics as being victims of a different body chemistry that forces them to become alcoholics, the treatment process ignores the person’s life problems and the functions drinking serves for the alcoholic.
For example, in family therapy where the alcoholic’s drinking is addressed as simply the result of a disease, the therapist and the family are not able to understand that some people use alcohol to air feelings they cannot express when sober.
Ignoring dynamics like these leaves the drinker unable to cope with the things that led him or her to need to drink - such as doubts about self-worth, a difficult relationship with a spouse, roles (such as homosexuality) that create conflict for the person, and so on.
If the labeling of alcoholism as a disease provides welcome relief from the shame of overdrinking. it also prevents people from confronting the emotional tasks they need to accomplish to attain personal wholeness.
It traps people in a world inhabited by fellow disease-sufferers. Many “recovering” people report that they feel comfortable only with others in exactly the same plight. They find they can’t create intimacy outside of treatment and that they are driven constantly to talk about their alcoholism or addiction.
This is a frequent hang-up for recovering alcoholics who attend A.A. meetings so religiously that they can’t maintain a life outside of the group. The phenomenon of compulsive therapy attendance has made many people ask us, “Is there such a thing as addiction to treatment?”
Indeed there is, when people rely on a twelve step group or therapy to the point where it disables them from conducting outside relationships and activities.
One of us has treated a number of A.A. members or treatment graduates who now fear they can’t deal with normal society. One man, who was regularly asked to head his local A.A. group, had dated a series of women he met at A.A. Unfortunately, all of these relationships had ended in bitterness and mutual recriminations.
But when he tried to date outside the group, he discovered that nonalcoholic women found him overbearing and compulsive.
“I don’t want to be limited for the rest of my life to dealing with alkies - I’d like to think I can advance beyond that; “ he plaintively told us.
This man felt that dealing exclusively with alcoholics was debilitating him, and yet he couldn’t escape A.A.
It excludes other approaches, many of which are more successful. Even if one accepts that many A.A. members are happy and successful, it is simply absurd to discourage people from trying to recover without A.A. The National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence (NCADD) frequently announces statistics about the continually rising costs of alcoholism and the increasing number of alcoholics in our society.
But, then, the NCADD is capable only of calling for more of the standard approach to treating alcoholism that has accompanied these increases, while discouraging all alternative approaches.
Why should things improve all of a sudden if we simply do more of the same? The A.A. approach to people’s drinking problems has shown conclusively that it cannot make a decisive difference for most active problem drinkers, since there are very few alcoholics who aren’t already aware of - or who haven’t already attended - A.A.
Meanwhile, greater numbers of people are being forced to enter private treatment centers and A.A. as a result of court orders, Employee Assistance Programs, or school counseling programs.
Despite the almost universal belief that compelling people to attend standard treatment programs is helpful, these programs regularly demonstrate they are no more effective than self-initiated programs for curing addictions.
Psychologists William Miller and Reid Hester, reviewing all the comparative studies on treatment for alcoholism, made a surprising finding:
“Virtually all of them [the standard treatments] lacked adequate scientific evidence of effectiveness.”
At the same time, they discovered, the “treatment approaches most clearly supported as effective... were very rarely used in American treatment programs.”
What don’t really work in the long run are the conversion-experience type treatments; what do work are therapies that teach people skills at self-management and coping.
Nonetheless, most American treatment personnel seem hell-bent on eliminating any other treatment for alcoholism besides twelve-step programs. In the United States, discredited disease-treatment programs - ones that NIAAA Director Enoch Gordis believes may be “frequently useless and wasteful and sometimes dangerous” - proliferate and spread into whole new areas of behavior.
This issue is important because the United States spends more money on health care than any other country - and the percentage of our gross national product that we spend on health care is growing faster than that in any other country.
The fastest-growing component of the health-care system is substance abuse and related mental-health treatments. According to a hospital trade publication;
“Psychiatric, chemical dependency and rehabilitative hospital care - all largely unregulated by government payment mechanisms - are booming.”
This is one reason so many companies are being forced to cut insurance benefits or are asking employees to pay a greater share. What if your insurance rates were raised to pay for a fellow employee who was undergoing a repeat treatment for cocaine addiction, since he had relapsed one or more times?
How would you feel about sharing the bill for a colleague who entered an expensive hospital eating-disorders clinic?
Do you think that smokers who want to quit should enter treatment programs and be excused from work, with pay, while they concentrate on quitting? And, especially, how would you react if you had quit smoking on your own?
It is morally and economically necessary for us to evaluate the effectiveness of alcoholism and other addiction treatments. For we are wasting limited health-care resources to place people in expensive treatments - treatments that have not shown they do more than inexpensive, straightforward skills counseling or than people accomplish on their own—often more reliably!
Kitty Dukakis: “Chemical Dependency” Reduced to Absurdity
Kitty Dukakis became the paradigm of the addicted person of the 1990s. Kitty Dukakis has been eager all along to accept the “disease” and “chemically dependent” labels. Advertisements for her autobiography, Now You Know, trumpet the opening line of the book, “I’m Kitty Dukakis and I’m a drug addict and an alcoholic.”
Mrs. Dukakis seemingly has been either addicted or in treatment throughout her adult life. Shortly before she joined her husband in his 1988 presidential campaign, she revealed that she had been treated for a twenty-six-year reliance on diet pills, which she began before she married Michael Dukakis.
Soon after her husband’s defeat in the election, she began to drink herself unconscious and underwent a series of treatments for her alcoholism and for a variety of emotional problems.
That treatment did not succeed. Mrs. Dukakis only began getting drunk after the election, for which she first entered the Edgehill Newport hospital.
But soon after this treatment experience, she began having explosive relapses in which she drank rubbing alcohol, nail polish remover, hair spray, and other commercial products containing alcohol.
Moreover, she discovered during the course of writing her book that she suffers from another disease - manic-depressive disorder - and as a result she ends the book with the revelation that she is receiving lithium treatment.
Previously, Mrs. Dukakis had been prescribed Prozac, a drug featured on the cover of Newsweek in 1990 as a new miracle in the treatment of depression, to no avail.
Mrs. Dukakis appears, in the book and on television, a forlorn being. Indeed, syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman, who had known Mrs. Dukakis, wrote a column entitled “Do Our Drug Treatment Programs Label Patients as Losers?” Ms. Goodman wondered aloud how labeling oneself as sick and without hope is helpful.
“What happens when those who wrestle with problems of self-esteem are required to wear such a label? . . . Today, Kitty Dukakis describes herself by diagnosis. Drug addict. Alcoholic. Manic-depressive.”
Ms. Goodman ended her column by wishing that Kitty Dukakis might see the brighter qualities that others have seen in her, and which seem entirely to have disappeared thanks to her various diagnoses and cures.
It seems clear that excessive drinking is only the tip of Mrs. Dukakis’s problems, and that medical treatment will never get to the bottom of them. Labeling Kitty Dukakis as a “sick” person who needs medical treatment is a palliative for her uncomfortable marital and personal problems.
Reviewers have commented about how insensitive and unaware of her problems Michael Dukakis appeared to be, yet Kitty never reflects on the limitations of her spouse or their relationship.
Somehow, her never-ending disease-oriented treatment fails to raise crucial issues for Mrs. Dukakis about a life and marriage she seems to have found intolerable.
Will Kitty Dukakis be writing another book in which she reveals she has discovered she is suffering from one more dis-ease that of codependence?
With Kitty Dukakis as a prominent model of the addict/alcoholic, those who look to her life for answers are being fed yet another self-defeating solution. To call Kitty Dukakis’s and her audiences’ problems diseases is to evade reality, much as Mrs. Dukakis used diet pills and alcohol to do.
Whether the pain Mrs. Dukakis and others feel is temporary or persistent, relatively mild or relatively severe, it does not need to rule the rest of their lives. Kitty Dukakis and the rest of us are more than our misery and problems.
Moreover, what troubles her and those like her are life problems, not diseases. And when we have reduced them to life size, we can begin to deal with them reasonably and hopefully.
The Experience of Addiction
The question is: “If addiction isn’t a disease, then what is it?” An addiction is a habitual response and a source of gratification or security.
It is a way of coping with internal feelings and external pressures that provides the addict with predictable gratifications, but that has concomitant costs.
Eventually these costs may outweigh the subjective benefits the addiction offers the individual. Nonetheless, people continue their addictions as long as they believe the addictions continue to do something for them.
It is important to place addictive habits in their proper context, as part of people’s lives, their personalities, their relationships, their environments, their perspectives. The effort to change an addiction will generally affect all these other facets of a person’s life as well.
An addiction may involve any attachment or sensation that grows to such proportions that it damages a person’s life.
Addictions, no matter to what, follow certain common patterns. We first made clear in Love and Addiction that addiction - the single-minded grasping of a magic-seeming object or involvement; the loss of control, perspective, and priorities - is not limited to drug and alcohol addictions.
When a person becomes addicted, it is not to a chemical but to an experience. Anything that a person finds sufficiently consuming and that seems to remedy deficiencies in the person’s life can serve as an addiction.
The addictive potential of a substance or other involvement lies primarily in the meaning it has for a person.
A person is vulnerable to addiction when that person feels a lack of satisfaction in life, an absence of intimacy or strong connections to other people, a lack of self-confidence or compelling interests, or a loss of hope.
Periods such as adolescence, military service, and times of isolation or grief may for a time make people especially susceptible to an addiction.
Under some circumstances, a harmful involvement can become so important to a person that addiction is very likely, as heroin addiction was for many in Vietnam.
Situations in which people are deprived of family and the usual community supports; where they are denied rewarding or constructive activities; where they are afraid, uncomfortable, and under stress; and where they are out of control of their lives - these are situations especially likely to create addiction.
The relationship between hopelessness, lack of opportunity, and persistent addiction is, of course, a template for lives in ghettos. Recognizing the connection between these situational factors and addiction will explain why our wars on drugs, including the latest, never succeed.
The “hook” of the addiction - the thing that keeps people coming back to it - is that it gives people feelings and gratifying sensations that they are not able to get in other ways. It may block out sensations of pain, uncertainty, or discomfort. It may create powerfully distracting sensations that focus and absorb attention. It may enable a person to forget, or feel “okay” about, insurmountable problems.
It may provide artificial, temporary feelings of security or calm, of self-worth or accomplishment, of power or control, of intimacy or belonging.
These benefits explain why a person keeps coming back to the addictive experience - an addiction accomplishes something for that person, or the person anticipates that it will do so, however illusory these benefits may actually be.
Addiction, drug abuse, alcoholism, obesity, and smoking all involve and are fueled by value choices. Think of people whose lives are “together” - who enjoy strong emotional bonds with others, productive work, satisfying feelings of competence and of fun, and a sense of responsibility toward others.
Will they become addicted to drugs or alcohol because of some physiological susceptibility and allow the addiction to undo the fabric of their lives? For you personally, can you imagine getting so drunk that you would abuse your infant child? It just doesn’t happen that way.
If you have better things to do and value other things more than escape into intoxication, then you won’t make intoxication the center of your life. And if you are addicted, you can best overcome it by creating or re-creating those personal strengths and values.
Whatever the subjective benefits of an addiction or the values that drive an addiction, the person pays a price for an addictive involvement. Addictions make people less aware of and less able to respond to other people, events, and activities. Thus, the addictive experience reinforces and exacerbates the problems the person wanted so badly to get away from in the first place.
In the person’s inner, subjective experience, the addiction may make things seem better. But in the real world, it only makes things worse. With the worst addictions, jobs and relationships fall away; health deteriorates; debts increase; opportunities disappear; the business of life is neglected.
The person is increasingly “out of touch” with nourishing contacts and essential responsibilities. This growing disengagement from the realities of life sets the person up for the trauma of withdrawal. When the addictive experience is removed, the person is deprived of what has become his or her primary source of comfort and reassurance.
Simultaneously, the person “crash-lands” back onto an inhospitable world, a world from which the person has been using the addiction to escape. Compared with these existential torments, the purely physical dislocations of withdrawal are, even for most heroin addicts, not particularly debilitating.
After all, nearly everyone who receives powerful narcotics in the hospital gives them up after returning home or when the illness is over. Consider also that drug addicts and alcoholics indicate that the most unbearable drug withdrawal is from cigarettes.
And if one puts all withdrawal on a scale, probably the worst of all occurs in the case of failed love relationships.
The experience of withdrawal, like that of addiction, is shaped by the way a person interprets it. In therapeutic communities like Daytop Village in New York, addicts are not excused from their normal duties when they undergo withdrawal; as a result, withdrawing addicts - even those who have had several withdrawal episodes previously - continue mopping floors and carrying out other duties.
Cultural beliefs also play a crucial role in addiction - for example, beliefs that are widely propagated about the power of a drug to enslave a person and the difficulty of escaping it actually contribute to the difficulties of withdrawal. Equally important are the person’s readiness to confront withdrawal and belief that he or she can manage it.
If you are convinced that withdrawal will be intolerably painful and that you cannot withstand it, or if you don’t have sufficiently powerful reasons to confront withdrawal experiences, you won’t be prepared to withdraw from your addiction.The addict who feels incapable of existing without a drug can never successfully withdraw, and doesn’t want to try.
Ironically, one of the beliefs that most contribute to the susceptibility to addiction is the belief in the power of addiction itself. Believing that drugs are stronger than you are means you will become addicted more easily and stay addicted longer.
But if you recognize that drugs and alcohol never take away your own responsibilities and capacity to control your destiny - even if you have alcoholic relatives or have had addictive problems in the past - you always stand a better chance of avoiding addiction or dealing with it successfully.
A Commonsense Way of Thinking About Overcoming an Addiction
Although the schematic description above is useful for understanding what addiction is and how it comes about, we need not think of all our troublesome habits or fixations in such dire terms.
In fact, when we overdramatize our addictions, we may do ourselves an injustice and make change more difficult. An addiction may be more or less severe - and a person may be more or less able to give it up - depending on the circumstances of the person’s life.
Addiction is more likely in stressful times, times when gratifications are slim, times when a person is less together or secure.
Likewise, one type of excess may be more stubbornly entrenched in a person’s routine, or more closely linked to a person’s self-doubt and insecurity, than another.
Addiction occurs along a continuum - there is no easy test to tell you whether you have an addiction or just a bad habit. For example, by some estimates, half of all Americans are overweight. Are they all addicted overeaters?
Many people encounter significant health risks because of the way they eat (recall that heart disease is America’s major killer). Are these the addicts? Some people are preoccupied day and night with their eating; they are suffused with guilt over eating too much, yet they are unable to change their eating habits.
Surely, these are the addicts, we think. A still more limited group of people encounter major health problems through their overweight, severely restricting their lives, but are unable to modify their eating habits.
At the furthest extreme of addiction are the minuscule number of people who become so fat they are completely immobile - people we sometimes see on television who may not even be able to fit through their doorways.
If we call only these people - people who have given up all effort to control their eating - true addicts, we end up with a fraction of a percentage of addicted overeaters, and books wouldn’t need to be written for millions of people who fear they have food addictions.
Moreover, for this minuscule group, concepts such as “denial” hardly seem to have meaning - does the twelve-hundred-pound man who hasn’t left his house in years really need to be told that he has an addictive eating problem?
For most people, the exercise of drawing the line that divides “addicted” from “normal” is not very helpful. We need to remember that nearly all people cut back and forth across these categories at different points in their lives and in different situations.
Although letting your urges overcome you to gain total control of your life is a relatively rare phenomenon, everyone has addictive urges and sometimes gives in to them. Addiction characterizes some aspect of everyone’s life - this is one reason why it is so ridiculous to think of it as a disease.
Thin people whom we envy for their self-control will tell us there are some treats they can’t keep in the house because otherwise they would eat them all at once. Remember that people whom we admire for having had the strength to quit smoking used to search ashtrays desperately looking for a butt when they ran out of cigarettes!
What we most need to know is not how bad off or how genuinely addicted we are but, rather, how people learn to resist successfully the addictive or unhealthy urges that come with being human.
How do they construct full lives, develop alternatives to addiction, learn the strength to stop after having started or, when necessary, not to start at all?
Let us start, then, with alcoholism, the addiction most commonly referred to as a disease. There must be - there is - a better way to understand and redirect the paths people take into and out of problem drinking.
The Real Reason Why The UN Wants Control Over The Internet August 11 2018 | From: DeWeeseReport
By its very nature, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit organization exclusively run by Technocrats.
As such, it is an apolitical body that is happy to serve whatever form of governance exists as long as funding is received and salaries are paid. To a Technocrat, a world run by science and technology is better than any other form of governance.
Technocrats likewise played a central role in support of Adolph Hitler and National Socialism (See Scientists, Engineers and National Socialism). In both cases, the Technocrat goal was not necessarily Communism or Nazism, but rather the methodical exercise of science according to its Scientific Method.
In other words, the process was more important than the outcome – and in both cases, the outcome was not questioned or resisted, but simply accepted.
Reality Check: Obama Administration Has Handed Over The Internet to a Private Corporation
The reason that ICANN formerly served the interests of the United States was simply that it answered to our government’s judicial, legislative and executive branches. In other words, the U.S. held the umbrella over ICANN and that was enough to keep it working for our national interests and not for someone else’s interests.
Obama changed that when he cut ICANN loose on September 30, 2016 by letting the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) contract expire without being renewed. After expiration, we forever lost the right to renew the contract again.
So, ICANN is now a “free-agent” looking for shelter in the same way that a boll weevil looks for a cotton plant: it needs a host organization in order to practice its craft, and, I dare say, it doesn’t care one whit who that host is.
What does ICANN do?
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
It is no secret that the United Nations is making a play to become host to ICANN. In particular, the UN’s International Telecommunications Union (ITU), run by the Peoples Republic of China, is expected to play the central role in this effort.
However, whether it is the ITU or some other UN agency is immaterial because it will still be the UN in the end.
But, why the UN? Because it is the fountainhead of the plans and operations to establish Technocracy as the sole global economic system while destroying capitalism and free enterprise. Technocracy is the issue here. Others know it as Sustainable Development or Green Economy, but the correct historical term is Technocracy.
In February 2015, the head of climate change at the UN, Christiana Figures, stated,
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution.” [emphasis added]
What is unclear about this? Sustainable Development, or Technocracy, is a resource-driven economic model regulated by energy rather than by supply and demand plus monetary currencies. In 1938, the original Technocrats defined Technocracy as
“The science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.”
To achieve its Utopia goals, the UN must have ICANN’s steering wheel and throttle. But while everyone is stressing over Internet censorship of web sites and the suppression of free speech, the real prize is completely overlooked: The Internet of Things (IoT).
In terms of “follow the money”, IoT is expected to generate upwards of $3 trillion by 2025 and is growing at a rate of at least 30 percent per year. In other words, it is a huge market and money is flying everywhere. If the UN can figure out a way to tax this market, and they will, it will provide a windfall of income and perhaps enough to make it self-perpetuating. Currently, the UN is financed by contributions from member states.
But, what is the IoT and who cares? IoT are the connections between inanimate objects and the humans that depend upon them. The digital Smart Meter on your home communicates energy usage via WiFi to the utility company; but it also communicates with the major appliances in your home and can even control them remotely without your consent or knowledge.
The smart phone that you carry communicates with cell towers and localized signal receptors to create a map of your every movement. Smart home technology lets your stereo send sound to remote wireless speakers and to light bulbs equipped with sensors.
The security camera that you installed to watch your home while you were on vacation can communicate with other cameras, microphones, the police department, etc. Examples go on and on.
ICANN issues the so-called IP addresses that are assigned to all these devices on a global basis. The original addressing scheme, IPV4, was based on four blocks of up to three digits each, punctuated with a period (e.g., 192.168.2.14). This scheme allows for a discrete address for up to 16.8 million devices.
A few years ago, IPV4 ran out of numbers, forcing Internet service providers, corporations and other organizations to improvise internal numbering systems, known as ‘proxy servers’, to issue safe addresses to devices within their own domain. These systems are not only fragile, but they are bloated beyond reason and generally easy to hack.
To fix this, ICANN devised a new IP numbering system called IPV6, which adds two more blocks of numbers (e.g., 192.168.2.14.231.58).
This scheme provides for 3.4×1038 addresses, or 340 trillion, 282 billion, 366 million, 920 thousand, 938 - followed by 24 zeroes. There is probably a way to say this number, but I cannot imagine what it would be. It’s somewhere beyond a trillion trillion unique numbers for every human being on earth!
Thus, IPV6 provides a way to assign a unique and directly addressable number to every electronic device on earth… for centuries to come.
As IPV6 rolls out to the world, the modified mission for ICANN will be to inventory and categorize the device attached to each IP address. For instance, all the air conditioners in the world would be directly addressable from a single list. Likewise for all computers, all automobiles, all cameras, all phones, all refrigerators, all articles of clothing, etc.
Whoever has control over and access to this data will literally be able to control the entire world, down to the last minutiae – and that is the United Nations’ exact mission: inventory, monitor and control.
But, this concept was set in history long before the technology existed. The original bible of Technocracy, the Technocracy Study Course (1934), laid out the hard requirements necessary for its implementation:
1. “Register on a continuous 24 hour-per-day basis the total net conversion of energy.
2. “By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
3. “Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption
4. “Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used
5. “Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.”
- Scott, Howard et al, Technocracy Study Course, p. 232
It seeks to establish a global Scientific Dictatorship where it controls all resources, all production and limits all consumption to its own liking. These Technocrats will dutifully apply their pseudo-scientific methodology to every problem in the world, and simply issue instructions to the net to ‘make it so.’
Yes, free speech will decrease and censorship will increase, but that pales in comparison to the real prize of the IoT that the United Nations desperately wants and needs in order to accomplish its own twisted goals.
Congress never understood this when they passively let Obama fail to renew our contract with ICANN. However, Obama and his globalist handlers understood it perfectly well, which makes the deception and treachery of it even worse.
Thanks to this scurrilous bunch, the world has just been sold into digital slavery, from which there may be no return.
Whose Work Was The Inspiration For The First [Supposedly] Nuke-Free Country? August 11 2018 | From: HelenCaldicott / GregHallett
New Zealand was the first country in the world to pass national nuclear-free legislation. Marilyn Waring reflects on how Dr. Helen Caldicott’s influence culminated in the passage of the cornerstone of New Zealand’s foreign policy.
If you were growing up in New Zealand and Australia post World War II, there’s a chance you knew about the United States using the Marshall Islands as a nuclear testing site from 1947 until 1962.
In an agreement signed with the United Nations, the U.S. government held the Marshall Islands as a “trust territory” and detonated nuclear devices in this pristine area of the Pacific Ocean - leading, in some instances, to huge levels of radiation fall-out, health effects, and the permanent displacement of many island people.
In all, the U.S. government conducted 105 underwater and atmospheric tests. You would have also known that the British conducted seven atmospheric tests between 1956 and 1963 on traditional Aboriginal land, in Maralinga, Australia.
It may be that you read Neville Shute’s 1957 novel On the Beach, in which people in Melbourne, Australia wait for deadly radiation to spread from a Northern Hemisphere nuclear war.
This book made a memorable impact on Helen when she read it as a teenager. When I was a teenager, some years later, I read Bertrand Russell’s 1959 classic, Common Sense and Nuclear Warfare.
Both Helen and I saw Peter Watkin’s The War Game, a BBC documentary drama about nuclear war and the consequences in an English city. In New Zealand the film was restricted for children unless accompanied by an adult, so I had to get my father to take me. The War Game won the Oscar for the best documentary in 1965.
France began its series of over 175 nuclear tests at Mururoa, in the South Pacific, in 1966. At least 140 of these tests were above ground.
In 1973, the New Zealand and Australian governments took France to the World Court for continued atmospheric testing, and forced the last tests underground. The testing finally came to an end in 1976.
In New Zealand the U.S. Navy made regular visits between 1976 and 1983 with nuclear-powered and, most likely, nuclear-armed, ships.
These visits produced spectacular protest fleets in the Auckland and Wellington harbours, when hundreds of New Zealanders - in yachts of all sizes, in motor boats and canoes, even on surf boards - surrounded the vessels and tried to bring them to a complete stop.
By 1978, a campaign began in New Zealand to declare borough and city council areas nuclear-free and, by the early 1980s, this symbolic movement had quickly gained momentum, covering more than two-thirds of the New Zealand population.
Helen Caldicott and I had not met up to this point, but these were shared parts of our history and consciousness when Helen visited New Zealand in 1983.
Helen Caldicott graduated with a medical degree from University of Adelaide Medical School in 1961. She moved to the United States, becoming an Instructor in paediatrics at Harvard Medical School and was on the staff of the Children’s Hospital Medical Centre in Boston, Massachusetts.
In the late 1970s, Helen became the President of Physicians for Social Responsibility. This group was founded when Helen was finishing medical school, quickly making its mark by documenting the presence of Strontium-90, a highly radioactive waste product of atmospheric nuclear testing, in children’s teeth.
The landmark finding eventually led to the Limited Nuclear Test Ban treaty, which ended atmospheric nuclear testing.
But it was the Three Mile Island accident that changed Helen’s life. An equipment failure resulted in a loss of cooling water to the core of a reactor at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station in Pennsylvania, causing a partial meltdown.
Operator failure meant that 700,000 gallons of radioactive cooling water ended up in the basement of the reactor building.
It was the most serious nuclear accident to that date in the U.S. Helen published Nuclear Madness the same year. In it she wrote:
“As a physician, I contend that nuclear technology threatens life on our planet with extinction. If present trends continue, the air we breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink will soon be contaminated with enough radioactive pollutants to pose a potential health hazard far greater than any plague humanity has ever experienced.”
In 1980, Helen resigned from her paid work positions to work full time on the prevention of nuclear war.
In 1982, Canadian director Terre Nash filmed a lecture given by Helen Caldicott to a New York state student audience. Nash’s consequent National Film Board of Canada documentary If You Love this Planet was released during the term of U.S. President Ronald Reagan, at the height of Cold War nuclear tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union.
The U.S. Department of Justice moved quickly to designate the film “foreign propaganda,” bringing a great deal of attention to the film. It went on to win the 1982 Academy Award for Documentary Short Subject. That same year, Helen addressed about 750,000 people in Central Park, New York in the biggest anti-nuke rally in the United States to that date.
In 1983, I was serving as a member of the New Zealand parliament, having been elected eight years earlier at the age of 23.
Our parliament established a Disarmament and Arms Control Select Committee to conduct hearings on the possibility of making New Zealand a nuclear-free zone.
During this critically important time, Helen was invited to New Zealand on a lecture tour. The documentary If You Love This Planet was shown at her speaking engagements. I did not get to meet her, nor hear any of her lectures in person, as I was working in parliament every night. But I did follow the media coverage.
Helen told the magazine the Listener about having observed five-star generals in U.S. congressional and senate committees complaining that the Russian missiles were bigger than the American ones.
“The Russian missiles are very big (and) inaccurate and clumsy. America has very small, very accurate missiles, which are better at killing people and destroying targets,” she explained.
A frequent message in her talks to New Zealand audiences was the redundant overkill capacity of both superpowers. Caldicott noted to her audiences that “[T]he U.S. has 30,000 bombs and Russia 20,000.”
I had sat in a New Zealand parliamentary committee hearing some months earlier, when a government colleague, brandishing a centrefold of a Russian submarine, excitedly called for us to “Look at how big it is.”
I had thought that no one would believe me if I had repeated such an inane banality - when an adult male was more impressed by the size of the submarine than its capacity to destroy life on this planet.
Helen’s public addresses were grounded in the potential impact of nuclear weapons. “Imagine a 20-megaton bomb targeted on Auckland,” she told audiences in New Zealand.
“The explosion, five times the collective energy of all the bombs dropped in the Second World War, digs a hole three-quarters of a mile wide by 800 feet deep and turns people, buildings and dirt into radioactive dust.
Everyone up to six miles will be vaporised, and up to 20 miles they will be dead or lethally injured. People will be instantly blinded looking at the blast within 40 miles. Many will be asphyxiated in the fire storm.”
Helen did not hold back, explaining that nuclear war means “blindness, burning, starvation, disease, lacerations, haemorrhaging, millions of corpses and an epidemic of disease.” Helen’s dramatic and blunt style reduced many in her audiences to tears.
She always ended her talks with a call to action - especially to parents - as she strongly believes that nuclear disarmament is “the ultimate medical and parenting issue of our time.”
To those who would claim New Zealand was not a target she had a short reply:
“Trident submarines in ports are targeted. They are a first strike target. It is much easier to destroy subs when they are in dock than it is when they are submerged in the ocean.”
In 2015, I asked Helen how she managed to deliver such bad news and yet keep her audiences with her. “Being a doctor helps because you have to learn to negotiate with a patient and with language they can understand,” she explained.
“You have to convert the medical diagnosis and treatment to lay language. I also have to keep them awake sometimes by letting them laugh because it relieves their tension and because the stuff I say is pretty awful.” Helen told me that she practices “global preventative medicine.”
Helen’s tour through New Zealand in 1983 had a huge, and lasting, impact. At one stop, Helen addressed over 2,000 people at a public event in Auckland. The librarian with whom I corresponded looking for old newspaper reports of Helen’s visit, wrote to me:
“Her chillingly detailed description of the effects of a nuclear device detonated over the hall in which we were sitting remains rooted in my psyche to this day! …
The other message I most recall is the dichotomy she evoked between the destructive drive of ‘old men’ rulers, the instigators of war, versus the procreative energy of mothers most impelled to oppose them - which, however reductive, retains the compelling logic of a truism!”
Helen’s approach was transformative in New Zealand. Helen’s speaking events packed auditoriums, and overflows of audiences had to be accommodated using loud speaker systems.
People responded strongly to this woman, whose life work involved caring for children, speaking about medical effects of fallout, and speaking without the use of the clichéd military and defence ideological rhetoric that treated people as if they were simpletons who couldn’t understand.
Her speeches inspired people to act. After Helen spoke, the volume of mail delivered to my parliamentary office increased - particularly from women.
On May 24, 1983, 20,000 women wearing white flowers and armbands and holding banners with peace signs marched quietly up a main street in Auckland to hold a huge rally and call for New Zealand to be nuke-free. It was one of the largest women’s demonstrations in New Zealand’s history.
In her book, Peace, Power and Politics – How New Zealand Became Nuclear Free, Maire Leadbetter writes:
“I am one of many activists who think of Helen Caldicott’s visit as the point when the peace movement began to grow exponentially… Helen had a magical ability to motivate previously passive citizens to become activists.”
Shortly after Helen’s visit to New Zealand, in 1984, I advised that I intended to vote for the opposition-sponsored nuclear-free New Zealand legislation. This prompted conservative Prime Minister Rob Muldoon to call a snap election. Muldoon told media that my “feminist anti-nuclear stance” threatened his ability to govern.
The new Labour Government of 1984 passed the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control Act in 1987, the world’s first national nuclear-free legislation. Dr. Helen Caldicott’s influence had culminated in the passage of the cornerstone of New Zealand’s foreign policy.
New Zealand's Nuclear History?
Unfortunately, technically speaking, New Zealand is NOT nuclear free. We have food-irradiating facilities (sounds super healthy) and according to researcher Greg Hallett - a whole lot more in our past...
According to Hallett, "The Wairakei Geothermal Power Station was not for the production of power, but was built by the British Atomic Energy Commission to produce heavy water for the manufacture of nuclear weapons."
“The Wairakei Geothermal Power Station was a front for heavy water production to be used for nuclear power and the production of deuterium and tritium for hydrogen bombs. These were a thousand times more powerful than the first atom bomb and were first tested in at least three different locations."
...
“During the nuclear scare, Kiwis were buying houses in Taupo to be away from a nuclear blast, which they thought would be aimed at Auckland and Wellington.
The funny thing was, Taupo was the only nuclear target the Russians had in New Zealand. At least one nuclear weapon was aimed squarely at the Wairakei Geothermal ‘heavy water’ power station which produced much of the heavy water for the Western world.”
...
“But more importantly, New Zealand took over the production of nuclear detonators from Norway in 1961. Norway was producing detonators for nuclear bombs during and after World War Two and they paid quite a heavy price in casualties. After World War Two the Norwegians said, ‘A plague on both of your houses. Take this shit away’, and they stopped production."
“The Americans didn’t want the job as they’d be under attack, so New Zealand held its hand up highest and produced nuclear detonators in secret.
That’s Walter Nash’s duplicitous Labour government for you [1957–60]. He was charged with sedition while fronting as ‘a man of peace’ and producing nuclear detonators. No doubt he on-sold any secrets gained to the Russians. But this also has a more recent history to it.”
...
“If you went up the hill towards Eastbourne then took the alternative route through the gorse-covered hills to Wainuiomata at the back of Gracefield, there was a sign saying ‘Nuclear Research Facility’. This is where the firing devices for the nuclear blast at Mururoa were made.
New Zealand supplied the nuclear detonation gear to the French via the British. Yes, it was New Zealand that provided the detonation gear for the atmospheric nuclear tests at Mururoa Atoll from July 1966, and for the underground tests from 1975. "
...
“There was a big stink in the armed forces about the anti-nuclear protests because they violated secret military pacts that went back years. Labour wanted the military to act against the pacts and that’s why the military decided to take part in the killing of Prime Minister Norman Kirk."
...
“In 1981, the known gay and child sex abuser Colin Moyle was re-elected to Labour and became the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries from 1984–90. He assisted the Russians in placing submarine locator beacons for Russian nuclear-powered submarines for a nuclear strike against America."
...
“Helen Clark’s anti-nuclear policy only applied to ‘American ships’. Russian nuclear-armed vessels were never questioned. Such duplicity is consistent with those converted to an agenda-driven ideology from a foreign country for non-national purposes, in exchange for hiding their sexuality. This results in treasonous activities tantamount to war – and that’s what we got so very close to – nuclear war from NZ.”
...
"New Zealand is the only ‘Nuclear-Free State’ that fails to put to print it’s history of manufacturing nuclear material. As well as ‘heavy water’, New Zealand also manufactured detonators for nuclear bombs and Prime Minister Muldoon was set on testing a nuclear power station in at least three different locations."
In order to support this contention, which may be seen as alarming and extreme, one must look at the rates of cancer among the general population and compare these to the rates of cancer deaths among world leaders.
And the latter is almost non-existent.
In the US, cancer is the second leading cause of death, exceeded only by heart disease. According to recently breaking news, Australia now lists cancer as its leading cause of death. In the rest of the developed world, cancer is near the top of the list.
Indeed, the list of the fifty countries with the highest cancer rates might lead one to believe that cancer is a disease of prosperity. Conspicuously absent from the list are countries in the Third World - in particular Africa.
Cancer will fell approximately ¼ of all those living in the developed world. However, this particular manifestation of the Grim Reaper gives world leaders a wide berth.
Since 1980, when the exiled Shah of Iran succumbed to lymphatic cancer in Egypt, the deaths by cancer of those leading their nations can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And what is most telling about those on this short list is where they stood on the political spectrum.
Hugo Chavez, the colorful and controversial President of Venezuela between 1999-2013, was a Socialist and prominent adversary of US foreign policy and neo-liberalism. Before succumbing to cancer in 2013, Chavez made a much publicized radio announcement in which he speculated that the US government gave him cancer.
Chavez has been quoted as saying, “Would it be so strange that they’ve invented the technology to spread cancer and we won’t know about it for 50 years?” He is also quoted as saying:
“Fidel [Castro] always told me, ‘Chávez take care. These people have developed technology. You are very careless. Take care what you eat, what they give you to eat... a little needle and they inject you with I don’t know what.’ ”
Since his death Venezuela has crumbled into economic chaos.
Vaclav Havel, who was the last president of Czechoslovakia and the first President of the Czech Republic, is somewhat of a more ambiguous character.
While he is seen as being a pivotal player in breaking up the Soviet bloc, and therefore bringing what is popularly termed “democracy” to a formerly Communist country, he may have also been serving US and CIA interests, either unintentionally or otherwise.
In his period of political dissidence, prior to ascending to power, Havel was imprisoned a number of times, the longest incarceration being four years. As President, Havel was instrumental in dismantling the Warsaw Pact and expanding NATO into Eastern European countries. Havel died of lung cancer in 2011 at the age of 75.
The NDP occupies the furthest left of Canada’s political spectrum. Indeed, there has never been an NDP head of state in Canada.
So when the NDP swept the national parliamentary elections in 2011, winning 103 seats, the NDP became Canada’s Official Opposition. Layton’s tenancy as head of the opposition was short lived, however. Layton succumbed to cancer less than four months later, passing on in August of 2011.
He had been committed to ousting the conservative Harper government. Following Layton’s death, the NDP tumbled from its position and currently occupies third place in Canada’s parliament.
As Prime Minister of the tiny island of Barbados, David Thompson could only marginally have been considered a world leader. The population of Barbados is less than 300,000, mostly black. Barbados, also known as “Little England,” is an independent state with the British monarch as hereditary head of state.
Thompson was in office from 2008 until October of 2010, when he passed away from pancreatic cancer, one of the most deadly forms of the Big C.
Statistically, since cancer is listed as cause of death in roughly ¼ of all deaths, one might logically expect that one quarter of the US Presidents and one quarter of the US Vice Presidents, to pick one example, would have cancer listed as cause of death.
With 44 Presidents and 47 Vice Presidents, one might think that somewhere in the realm of 24 or so might have succumbed to cancer.
However, there are none. Zero. Zilch. A search for cancer as a cause of death for German, French or British leaders in the past forty years produces only one name, that of former French President Francois Mitterrand, who succumbed to prostate cancer in 1996 at the age of 80.
Mitterrand was the first French President who was a Socialist and he led the nation for fourteen years, as its longest serving President.
Since the 1972 throat cancer death of Edward VIII - who abdicated the throne in 1936 - no members of British royalty have died of cancer.
In October of this year, the World Cancer Leaders’ Summit will be convening in Paris, France. The announcement for this Summit states that “The World Cancer Leaders’ Summit brings together global decision makers who can shape the way our generation addresses the task of eliminating cancer as a life threatening disease for future generations.”
Their announcement also states:
“The Summit plays a pivotal role in this portfolio of global events by ensuring that the 2020 targets detailed in the World Cancer Declaration are appropriately recognised and addressed at the highest political levels.”
However, those at the “highest political levels” are often seen as escaping repercussions for criminal behavior and worse. The idea of the “Teflon-coated” political elite is an idea that has now gained general - albeit grim - acceptance.
Given the probability that the cure may already exist, in light of the unusual lack of incidence of fatal cancers afflicting the powerful, one might want to ask the Summit if the world leaders might be willing to share... please?
Trump, The New York Times, And Fake News August 9 2018 | From: JonRappoport
Major newspapers will, now and then, break big stories. But then they’ll walk away from them.
The follow-up leads are obvious. But no. Those leads would result in some SERIOUS revelations about IMPORTANT PEOPLE. So forget it. It’s one and done -
We’re in the middle of an escalating information-war.
Trump and Sulzberger, the NY Times publisher, meet, talk, and then launch charges at each other. Sulzberger claims Trump’s attacks on MSM could result in violence against journalists.
Like him or hate him, Trump is threatening the media monopoly as no other modern president has.
Social media are shadow-banning and censoring voices perceived as pro-Trump.
I thought I’d boil a few things down and simplify them for AG Sulzberger, the 37-year-old publisher of the Times.
He and his paper are fake for several reasons - one is, they don’t follow up on their own best stories. It’s called continuing investigation - and they don’t do it. It’s their duty, and they are grossly derelict.
Two examples, both from the spring of 2015. On April 23, the Times ran a story under the headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.” The piece made an excellent circumstantial case for Hillary and Bill as key players in a criminal scheme to sell 20% of US uranium to Putin.
But... no serious follow up. No deeper investigation. No pressure on the players. Just one and done.
Ditto for a 3/15/15 Times story, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” The article details a revolutionary candidate for next-generation vaccines - injecting synthesized genes into the body to “protect against disease” - and thereby permanently altering the vaccine recipient’s DNA.
The story is nothing less than a revelation about a plan - right out in the open - to do genetic engineering on billions of humans who get vaccinated. No speculation necessary.
And again, no follow up. No deeper digging. No pressure on the vaccine researchers and their funders.
“…The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items… including poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and bubonic plague…”
Mind-boggling. The US government, using a non-profit called the American Type Culture Collection and the US Centers for Disease Control (!), shipped dozens of biowarfare materials to Iraq in the 1980s.
No follow up. No further ongoing investigation. No laying open the corrupt CDC.
“In April 2016, at the height of the deadliest drug epidemic in U.S. history, Congress effectively stripped the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against large drug companies suspected of spilling [trafficking] prescription [opioid] narcotics onto the nation’s streets.”
This piece is a blockbuster.
It indicts virtually every member of Congress, and Obama, for passing a law hamstringing enforcement in the fight against the biggest opioid traffickers, pharmaceutical companies.
But again, no ongoing digging. No pressure on members of Congress to repeal the 2016 law they passed, a law which keeps the DEA from busting Pharma executives and freezing illegal opioid shipments.
Here is where the Post could go with that story (but won’t) in an ongoing way:
“So, Senator, why haven’t you introduced a new bill to cancel the damaging one you helped pass in 2016? In your home state, the latest reports show there are at least 100,000 opioid addicts, 800 of whom have died. Don’t you want to let the DEA do its job? What are you waiting for?”
“This is outrageous. You’re accusing me of - “
“We’ve conducted a poll in your state. Your constituents want to know what you’re doing. So tell them…”
“I’m very active.”
“How? Exactly how are you active? Yesterday, we interviewed the mayor of your home town. He’s a Democrat like you. He says you’ve done nothing to stem the tide. We’ve put together a list of pharmaceutical money you’ve taken over the past ten years…”
This is why the Times and the Post and other similar mainstream outlets are fake.
Outrageously fake. They have the resources and the reporters, but they don’t follow up on the most crucial stories they cover.
If they’ll comment at all on this glaring dereliction of duty, it’s: “Well, we already covered that.” “It’s old news.” “Our readers aren’t interested in that anymore.” “Mounting an ongoing investigation would cross the line into making the news instead of reporting on it.” Etc., etc.
All lies.
Mr. Sulzberger, who was handed the job publishing the NY Times by his family, should stop worrying about the Trump effect and just do journalism.
Of course he won’t, because he’s fake.
He has no intention of getting to the bottom of things in a way that would upset some very powerful apple carts.
The White Tangata Whenua + Maori Legend: Blonde Mummies Of The South Pacific August 8 2018 | From: YourNZ / AtlanteanGardens / Various
Recently the Northern Advocate published some revised history claiming that white people from Europe settled Aotearoa before Maori came here.
Northern Advocate (NZ Herald): Pre-Maori faces created from skulls, says Northland historian:
“A Northland historian has released what he says are forensic reconstructions of pre-Maori Northlanders that support his theory that Chinese and European seafarers came to New Zealand centuries before Polynesians.
Kaipara based historian Noel Hilliam says a forensic expert from Edinburgh University has reconstructed features using skulls retrieved from heaps of ancient human bones that were once piled in caves at several sites around the Kaipara.
The faces depict a blond woman with Celtic characteristics common in Wales and a man of Mediterranean appearance.
Kaipara skeletons were found with strands of red hair and a London pathologist who examined them in 1997 did not consider them Polynesian.
In a message to Mr Hilliam, the Edinburgh pathologist said his examination of skulls and skeletal remains from four sites showed they were from two races.
“People known in your country as Turehu originated from Wales over 3000 years ago and those known as Waitaha originated from the Mediterranean,” the pathologist said.
“The two skulls you randomly uplifted from one site – the female, which I named Henrietta, is Turehu of 23 years of age and 1.3m tall going on the average height of skeletons I examined. She originates from Wales.
“The Waitaha male is 34 years old 1.65m tall, average among the skeletal remains examined, and originates from the Mediterranean.”
The historian has not disclosed the names of the pathologist and forensic expert because he expected controversy over their findings.”
The Mystery of the Kamanawa Wall
A pyramid in New Zealand? or just a pile of very even blocks of stone. If it is a man made structure, we know it is at least 1800 years old. In 186 AD the Taupo eruption covered a vast area in volcanic ash and pumice, including this mound of stone.
These sorts of claims are not new. From Dargaville and Districts News (Stuff) in 2012: `Greeks got here first’
“New Zealand history is going to be turned on its head when the book To the Ends of the Earth is launched next month, co-author Noel Hilliam says.
The controversial book, written by researcher Maxwell C Hill with additional information from Dargaville shipwreck explorer Noel Hilliam, Gary Cook and John Aldworth, looks at what they say is evidence that Greeks, Spanish and Egyptians travelled to New Zealand before Maori.
The 378-page book explores a variety of evidence from ancient maps to ancient rock formations, giant human skeletons, cave drawings, oral history and a multitude of other physical evidence.
“Our contention is that ancient Greek navigators were the first to sail down under, landing in New Zealand before the Christian era began, to become the first inhabitants of the islands,” Mr Hilliam says.”
Now Hilliam claims it was the Welsh who got here first.
“Noel Hilliam told the Northern Advocate he had found skulls that pre-date Māori.
However Mr Hilliam’s research, which has no academic basis, has been widely criticised.
“The statement that the young adult woman is from Wales is ludicrous. There is no way to find that information out from the skull size and shape, nor is it possible to tell that a person has blue eyes and blonde hair from skeletal features,” University of Otago bio-archaeologist Dr Siân Halcrow told Vice.
Worse, his actions have been condemned as racist and illegal.
“It is the violation of a sacred site. Them raiding urupā and acquiring ancestral heads – they haven’t said where from – makes me really concerned,” Auckland University senior lecturer Dr Ngarino Gabriel Ellis told Vice.
“Taking from urupā, just like from anyone’s [grave], is a violation of our funeral practices. These are our ancestors. They were not intended to be removed and distributed.
“It’s also illegal to go and tamper with anyone’s grave – so why aren’t there criminal charges being pressed?”
Mr Hilliam has refused to name the ‘experts’ he talked to, and told Vice that while he knew he was breaking the law, he did it because the law was unjust.
The Northern Advocate has since removed the article.”
I couldn’t find the article yesterday but it is back on the Herald’s beta site.
“Over the past 30 years a growing a minority of New Zealanders has decided that the first inhabitants of their country had white rather than brown skin. They believe that one or more European peoples emigrated to these islands thousands of years ago, and established a populous and technologically sophisticated civilisation here.
This pigmentopia was invaded and conquered by the ancestors of Māori. The warlike Polynesians slew the white men they found, took the women as wives, and appropriated the indigenes’ greenstone carvings.
Mike Barrington’s article may have talked nonsense about New Zealand history, but it did provide a reasonably accurate narrative of the careers of the country’s pseudo-historians.
Hilliam has made other remarkable claims over the years. In 1982 he said he had found the remains of an old Spanish ship on a beach near Dargaville, but the wreck vanished before he could show it to anybody.
In 2008 he told Radio New Zealand that he had found a Nazi submarine off the Northland coast. The submarine had supposedly left Germany in the last days of the Third Reich, loaded with gold. Hilliam never made good on his promise to reveal the location of the submarine wreck.
The notion of a white tangata whenua promised to relieve Pakeha of their status as latecomers to New Zealand, and to counter Māori talk of historical injustice. But the theory had, and still has, a problem: a complete lack of evidence.
In recent years a series of scholars have run DNA tests on Māori, in an effort to trace their ancestry. These tests confirm that Māori are a Polynesian people, and that Polynesians have their origins in coastal Asia thousands of years ago. There is no genetic evidence for ancient contact between Polynesians and Europeans.
The believers in an ancient white civilisation are undeterred by the lack of evidence for their claims. They insist that a conspiracy of Māori leaders, politically correct academics, cowardly Pākehā politicians and sinister international organisations is working to conceal and destroy the physical legacy of New Zealand’s first inhabitants.
They claim that the stone city in Waipoua forest has been closed to visitors by Department of Conservation staff and local Māori. Elsewhere teams of explosives experts are blowing up the stone houses of the first New Zealanders and sealing burial caves.
Ancient European bones and artefacts are being quietly removed from museums, and roads are being built through the sites of Celtic observatories.”
I guess the Herald will remove the article from their beta site as well.
Maori oral traditions state that, upon arrival in New Zealand, Maori found that there was a large, well-established population already living in the country. The inhabitants were described as having skin complexion that was white to light-ruddy, with eye colors from blue to green to darker tints.
Their hair color ranged from white and golden, with red being predominant in the general population.
The Maori term Pakeha, later used to describe white colonial Europeans, was derived from the ancient name Pakepakeha used to describe the former white population.
Pocket groups of these first inhabitants survived into the 20th century and are well-remembered by old-timers as the red headed, freckle-faced Maoris or Waka blondes.
Scholars probing definitions and development of the Maori term "Pakeha" (Maori name for white people) state the following:
The derivation seems to be from ‘Pakepakeha’ mythical people who are mischievous beings, with fair skin and hair who lived deep in the forest, coming out at night.
Who Inhabited New Zealand Before the Polynesian / Melanesian Maori?
This is one of eleven mummified heads repatriated to New Zealand in 1998 of our earliest known inhabitants, who were referred to by the Maori as 'Kiri-Puwhero" (light-complexioned skin) with hair that was "Uru-Keru" (reddish, golden tinged).
These pre-colonial, mummified Europoid heads should be subjected to DNA analysis.
The ‘Pakepakeha’ are also linked to ‘Patupaiarehe’ by their fair skin and hair. The ‘Patupaiarehe’ had fair skin and beautiful voices, and gave people the secret of fishing with nets.
These creatures’ possess canoes made of reeds, which can change magically into sailing vessels. The ‘Patupaiarehe’ can also be linked to Nahe’s version of Pakeha as an abbreviation of ‘Paakehakeha’, gods of the ocean who had the forms of fish and man (Biggs, 1988).
A New Zealand stamp portrays the pre-Maori Patu-paiarehe people, now relegated to the realm of myth and legend
The coffins seen above were photographed in 1919 high up a cliff-face at a very remote part of New Zealand. Each coffin was hewn-out by stone tools from a single log, like a dugout canoe.
These skeletons display recognisable European physiology. They were already very old when found in isolated country, far from the consecrated ground of a churchyard.
The deceased people were, undoubtedly, the white Ngati Hotu, known in local Maori and European folklore to have hidden from the cannibals for centuries in this inhospitable region.
After the coming of the Polynesian-Melanesian cannibals to New Zealand, the earlier people were hunted to extinction as a food source.
Many of the Patu-paiarehe or Turehu women were forcibly absorbed into the Maori tribes as slaves. Fugitives or survivors amongst the earlier people moved to the very rugged and remote interior of the country and lived in the deep forests or dark caves, many succumbing to lung ailments from hiding out by day and foraging by night.
Ancient Bloodlines and Lost Civilizations
Maori oral traditions state that, upon arrival in New Zealand, they found that there was a large, well-established population already living in the country.
Robert Sepehr is an author, producer and anthropologist specializing in linguistics, archeology, and paleobiology (archeogenetics).
Vaccine Authoritarians Try To Censor Billboard That Dares Ask, “Do You Know What’s In A Vaccine?” & Australia Will Now Fine Parents Twice A Month If They Don’t Vaccinate Their Kids August 7 2018 | From: NaturalNews / TheAntiMedia
Do you know what’s in vaccines - or perhaps more importantly, is it “wrong” to ask such a question? Hi Clark.
LearnTheRisk.org, a non-profit organization founded by an ex-Merck employee, put up a billboard in Perth, Australia, which asked one important question: “Do you know what’s in a vaccine?”
It’s a simple question, yet astonishingly few people know the answer to this question.
In response, the Australian Medical Association has demanded that this thought-provoking billboard be removed.
The vaccine propaganda group says that even raising such a simple question is a “public health risk,” “misleading” and “conspiracy theory garbage.”
Demanding transparency in virtually any other arena would not be met with such hostility; in fact you might even get a gold star for demanding to know what’s in your food or your infant’s baby formula.
But when it comes to vaccines, “transparency” is a four-letter word.
Indeed, the fact that simply wanting to know what’s in vaccine is seen as such a despicable, rebellious act that it requires immediate silencing should be alarming enough.
Shutting down dialogue about vaccine safety concerns with insults and censorship is undoubtedly the mark of an industry that can’t afford to be transparent.
Australian Health Minister Roger Cook publicly expressed his displeasure with the billboard, denouncing it as “nasty” and “devious.”
Cook declared, “This devious and nasty billboard behind us would have people believe that a reference to a U.S. website would actually provide useful information about how people can best look after their health care.”
“It’s dangerous and misleading and puts people’s lives at risk,” the Health Minister continued.
Perth MP John Carey has also voiced his discontent about the billboard, claiming it was spreading “a deadly message.”
"We do not want this kind of gutter rubbish being promoted in my community,” he said.
“We know that vaccinations save lives, that is the simple reality,” he added.
Tell that to all the children who’ve been harmed and the families who’ve been torn apart. Children are suffering at the hands of a callous, profit-driven establishment; isn’t that all we really need to know?
Simple Realities Can Handle Transparency
More importantly, however, is the simple fact that denying the reality that vaccines can and do harm an untold number of children everywhere is patently wrong.
To use Carey and Cook’s own words, it’s “misleading” to promote the idea that vaccines are 100 percent safe - and it’s total “gutter rubbish” that government officials are advocating for total compliance among their citizens with zero transparency.
Why are they so afraid of people asking what’s in vaccines?
They probably don’t know what’s in them either - and as long as they remain ignorant, they can try to escape culpability.
When people know what’s in vaccines, and become aware of the damage they can cause, they aren’t going to be happy with their elected officials who’ve done everything in their power to foist inoculations upon their children.
And when the curtain falls on vaccines, their industry masters aren’t going to be happy, either.
Australia Will Now Fine Parents Twice A Month If They Don’t Vaccinate Their Kids
Australia’s “No Jab, No Pay” policy just got a little stronger, or at least more insistent.
Under the previous policy, parents who did not keep their children up to date on vaccinations would miss out on a one-time, end-of-the-year tax benefit called Family Tax Benefit Part A, valued at AU$737. Under the updated policy, those same parents will instead lose AU$28 every two weeks while their child is not up to date.
Australia’s Minister for Social Services, Dan Tehan, said in a statement:
"Immunization is the safest way to protect children from vaccine-preventable diseases. Parents who don’t immunize their children are putting their own kids at risk as well as the children of other people.”
The expanded No Jab, No Pay policy went into effect on July 1, 2018.
While parents will miss out on approximately the same amount of money in the end, the updated policy serves as a more “constant reminder” that the government of Australia wants all children vaccinated, according to Tehan.
The Australian government has been attempting to quell the anti-vaccine movement for years and first introduced the No Jab, No Pay campaign in 2016. Since then, nearly 246,000 families have taken steps to meet the requirements.
Concerns arose after small outbreaks of diseases like measles and whooping cough were blamed on an increase in the percentage of children younger than seven claiming a “conscientious objection” to vaccination.
Between December 1999 and December 2014, the proportion of children under seven with a “conscientious objection” rose from 0.23 to 1.77 percent.
Government vaccination campaigns are nothing new in Australia. Back in 1999, vaccination rates for children between the ages of 24 and 27 months hit the lowest level in 17 years.
After launching an aggressive education campaign, that same rate rose from 73.6 percent in 1999 to 92.2 percent in 2015.
But the Australian government asserted that still wasn’t enough and subsequently launched the No Jab, No Pay policy, spending AU$14 million on free vaccinations in 2017 alone.
Medical exemptions are available both for children at risk of serious harm from vaccines and for children who have natural immunity.
In addition to the No Jab, No Play policy, in some areas of Australia, a “No Jab, No Play” policy has gone into effect.
In Queensland, for example, according to the National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance:
"Child care services can cancel or refuse enrollment or attendance of children if they are not fully immunised, unless they are undergoing a vaccination catch-up program or have a medical reason not to be vaccinated. Vaccination objection is not a valid exemption.
This legislation applies to attendance at long day care, kindergarten, family day care, outside school hours care/vacation care, limited hours care or occasional care.
If an outbreak occurs, unimmunised children may be excluded from child care for a period of time.”
As a result, those abstaining from vaccines in Queensland are reportedly organizing their own childcare services to circumvent the law.
"If the state forced a child to be vaccinated and the child had a significant medical reaction and potentially died as a result of that, that would be a huge burden that the state would have put on those parents.”
Trump Takes On The Federal Reserve August 6 2018 | From: OpEdNews
The president has criticized Federal Reserve policy for undermining his attempts to build the economy. The best way to make the central bank serve the needs of the economy is to make it a public utility.
For nearly half a century, presidents have refrained from criticizing the "independent" Federal Reserve; but that was before Donald Trump.
"I'm not thrilled. Because we go up and every time you go up they want to raise rates again. . . . I am not happy about it. . . . I don't like all of this work that we're putting into the economy and then I see rates going up."
He acknowledged the central bank's independence, but the point was made: the Fed was hurting the economy with its "Quantitative Tightening" policies and needed to watch its step.
In commentary on CNBC.com, Richard Bove contended that the president was positioning himself to take control of the Federal Reserve. Bove said Trump will do it "both because he can and because his broader policies argue that he should do so. . . . By raising interest rates and stopping the growth in the money supply [the Fed] stands in the way of further growth in the American economy."
Bove noted that in the second quarter of 2018, the growth in the money supply (M2) was zero.
Why? He blamed "the tightest monetary policy since Paul Volcker, whose policies in the mid-1980s led to back-to-back recessions." The Fed has raised interest rates seven times, with five more scheduled, while it is shrinking its balance sheet by $40 billion per month, soon to be $50 billion per month.
How could the president take control? Bove explained:
“The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve is required to have seven members. It has three. Two of the current governors were put into their position by President Trump.
Two more have been nominated by the president and are awaiting confirmation by the Senate. After these two are put on the Fed's board, the president will then nominate two more to follow them. In essence, it is possible that six of the seven Board members will be put in place by Trump.”
Those seven, along with five federal district bank presidents, compose the Federal Open Market Committee, which sets monetary policy; and one of those district bank presidents, Minnesota Fed head Neel Kashkari, is already arguing against further rate increases. Bove concluded:
“The president can and will take control of the Fed. It may be recalled when the law was written creating the Federal Reserve the secretary of the Treasury was designated as the head of the Federal Reserve. We are going to return to that era.”
Returning the Fed to Treasury control, however, means more than appointing new Board members. It means "nationalizing" the central bank, making it a public utility responsive to the needs of the public and the economy. And that means modifying the Federal Reserve Act to change the Fed's mandate and tools.
The Controversial History of Central Bank Independence
Ever since the 1970s, the Fed and other central banks have insisted on their independence from political control. But according to Timothy Canova, Professor of Law and Public Finance at Nova Southeastern University, independence has really come to mean a central bank that has been captured by very large banking interests.
It might be independent of oversight by politicians, but it is not a neutral arbiter. This has not always been the case. During the period coming out of the Great Depression, says Canova, the Fed as a practical matter was not independent but took its marching orders from the White House and the Treasury; and that period was the most successful in American economic history.
According to Bernard Lietaer, a former Belgian central banker who has written extensively on monetary innovation, the real job of central bankers today is to serve the banking system by keeping the debt machine going.
He writes:
"[W]e can produce more than enough food to feed everybody, and there is definitely enough work for everybody in the world, but there is clearly not enough money to pay for it all.
The scarcity is in our national currencies. In fact, the job of central banks is to create and maintain that currency scarcity. The direct consequence is that we have to fight with each other in order to survive.”
The rationale for central bank independence dates back to a bout in the 1970s of "stagflation" - rapidly rising prices along with stagnant productivity. The inflation surges were blamed on political pressure put on Fed Chairman Arthur Burns by the Nixon administration to follow easy-money policies.
But the link between easy-money policies and inflation is not at all clear. The Japanese have had near-zero interest rates for two decades and cannot generate price inflation although they are trying to.
An alternative explanation for the rising prices of the 1970s is that producers' costs had gone up, largely from increased labor costs due to the strong bargaining power of unions and the skyrocketing cost of oil from an engineered 1973-74 oil crisis.
Fed policy nevertheless remains stuck on the "Quantity Theory of Money," which says that increasing the money in the system will decrease the value of the currency, driving up prices. The theory omits the supply factor. As long as workers and materials are available, increasing "demand" (money) can generate the supply needed to meet that demand. Supply and demand increase together and prices remain stable. And while the speculative economy may be awash in money, today the local productive economy is suffering from a lack of demand. Consumers are short of funds and heavily in debt.
Moreover, plenty of workers are available to generate the supply needed to meet any new demand (injection of money). According to John Williams at ShadowStats.com, the real unemployment figure as of April 2018, including long-term discouraged workers who were defined out of official existence in 1994, was 21.5 percent.
Beyond that is the expanding labor potential of robots and computers. A vast workforce is thus available to fill the gap between supply and demand, allowing new money to be added to the productive economy.
But the Fed insists on "sterilizing" every purported effort to stimulate demand, by making sure the new money never gets into the real economy.
The money produced through quantitative easing remains trapped on bank balance sheets, where the Fed pays interest on excess reserves, killing any incentive for the banks to lend even to other banks; and the central bank has now begun systematically returning even that money to its own balance sheet.
The High Price of Challenging the Fed
An article in The Economist on July 28, 2018, contends that Nixon was pressuring the Fed to make the economy look good for political purposes, and that Trump is following suit.
But there is more to the Nixon story. In a 2010 book titled The American Caliphate, R. Duane Willing says the Nixon White House had quietly drafted and sponsored a Federal Charter Bill that would have changed U.S. financial history.
Willing worked for the Federal Home Loan Bank Board during the Nixon era and was tasked with defining the system requirements that would make a central computerized checking account and loan system available to the new banking system. He writes:
“Only John Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln and two other assassinated presidents, James Garfield and William McKinley, prior to Nixon, had actively contemplated changes of such magnitude in the U.S. financial system.
President Garfield observed that "whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce . . . and when you realize that the entire money system is very easily controlled, one way or another by a few powerful men, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate."
. . . The hidden secret since the beginning of modern capitalism is that money is created and managed by bank control over checking accounts in the loan-making process.”
Willing says Nixon was preparing the Federal Home Loan Bank Board to change the traditional role of American savings and loan associations, giving them money creation powers like the big Wall Street banks had, providing a full-service nationwide banking system.
The national money supply would thus be regulated according to needs at the local level rather than dictated from the top by the central bank. The proposed legislation provided for a separate central bank to backstop local credit unions and a much greate3r degree of competition for a wide array of financial services.
But Nixon's plan for national finance, along with his plan for healthcare and a guaranteed income, alarmed the Wall Street/Federal Reserve power block, which willing says was about to be challenged like never before.
Nixon was obviously not blameless in the Watergate scandal, but Willing contends it was pushed by "the Wall Street Great Merchants as owners of the Senate," who "were making certain that the money dreams of 'Tricky Dick' and his vision for the Republic protected with a network of converted Savings and Loan associations was doomed.
An "Independent" Central Bank or a Public Central Bank?
Challenging the Fed is thus risky business, and the president should be given credit for taking it on.
But if he is planning to change the makeup of the Federal Reserve Board, he needs to appoint people who understand that the way to jumpstart the economy is to inject new money directly into it, not keep the money "sterilized" in fake injections that trap it on bank balance sheets until it can be reeled back in by the central bank.
Better than changing who is at the helm of the central bank would be to change the rules governing it, something only Congress can do. Putting the needs of the American people first, as Trump promised in his campaign speeches, means making the Fed serve Main Street rather than Wall Street.
What Seven Creepy Patents Reveal About Facebook August 5 2018 | From: NewYorkTimes
Facebook has filed thousands of patent applications since it went public in 2012. One of them describes using forward-facing cameras to analyze your expressions and detect whether you’re bored or surprised by what you see on your feed.
Another contemplates using your phone’s microphone to determine which TV show you’re watching. Others imagine systems to guess whether you’re getting married soon, predict your socioeconomic status and track how much you’re sleeping.
A review of hundreds of Facebook’s patent applications reveals that the company has considered tracking almost every aspect of its users’ lives: where you are, who you spend time with, whether you’re in a romantic relationship, which brands and politicians you’re talking about. The company has even attempted to patent a method for predicting when your friends will die.
Facebook has said repeatedly that its patent applications should not be taken as indications of future product plans.
“Most of the technology outlined in these patents has not been included in any of our products, and never will be,” Allen Lo, a Facebook vice president and deputy general counsel, and the company’s head of intellectual property, said in an email.
Taken together, Facebook’s patents show a commitment to collecting personal information, despite widespread public criticism of the company’s privacy policies and a promise from its chief executive to “do better.”
“A patent portfolio is a map of how a company thinks about where its technology is going,” said Jason M. Schultz, a law professor at New York University.
Here are seven Facebook patent applications that show how the company has contemplated gathering and exploiting your personal information.
Reading Your Relationships
One patent application discusses predicting whether you’re in a romantic relationship using information such as how many times you visit another user’s page, the number of people in your profile picture and the percentage of your friends of a different gender.
Another proposes using your posts and messages to infer personality traits. It describes judging your degree of extroversion, openness or emotional stability, then using those characteristics to select which news stories or ads to display.
U.S. PATENT NO. 9,740,752 Determining user personality characteristics from social networking system communications and characteristics
This patent application describes using your posts and messages, in addition to your credit card transactions and location, to predict when a major life event, such as a birth, death or graduation, is likely to occur.
Another considers analyzing pictures to create a unique camera “signature” using faulty pixels or lens scratches. That signature could be used to figure out that you know someone who uploads pictures taken on your device, even if you weren’t previously connected.
Or it might be used to guess the “affinity” between you and a friend based on how frequently you use the same camera.
This patent application explores using your phone microphone to identify the television shows you watched and whether ads were muted. It also proposes using the electrical interference pattern created by your television power cable to guess which show is playing.
Another patent application discusses tracking your weekly routine and sending notifications to other users of deviations from the routine. In addition, it describes using your phone’s location in the middle of the night to establish where you live.
This patent proposes correlating the location of your phone to locations of your friends’ phones to deduce whom you socialize with most often. It also proposes monitoring when your phone is stationary to track how many hours you sleep.
In some cases, companies file patents defensively, to beat their rivals to a new technology, even if they have no intention of using it.
While that could be the case for some of Facebook’s patents, many of them imagine new ways to collect, analyze and use personal information and package it for advertisers - a process that is essential to the company’s business model. In the first quarter of 2018, almost 99 percent of Facebook’s revenue came from advertising.
As long as Facebook keeps collecting personal information, we should be wary that it could be used for purposes more insidious than targeted advertising, including swaying elections or manipulating users’ emotions, said Jennifer King, the director of consumer privacy at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School.
“There could be real consequences,” she said.
Other technology companies have filed unsettling patent applications, too. They include Amazon’s wristbands for tracking warehouse employees and the Google teddy bear equipped with a camera and a microphone.
But with more than two billion monthly active users, most of whom share their thoughts and feelings on the platform, Facebook is amassing our personal details on an unprecedented scale.
That isn’t likely to change, said Siva Vaidhyanathan, a professor of media studies at the University of Virginia.
“I’ve seen no indication that Facebook has changed its commitment to watch everything we do, record everything we do and exploit everything we do,” he said.
The Globalization Of Media: A Failing Strike Force August 4 2018 | From: JonRappoport
I begin this piece with three quotes from my work-in-progress, The Underground:
“There is a media metaphysics. Its basic principle states that nothing exists until it becomes information. Now we have a new twist: information only becomes real when it reaches a mind already attuned to it. In other words, the tree falling in the forest makes a sound only if a user/consumer who wants a tree to fall receives video and audio of the event…”
“Information can be dressed up a thousand different ways. But it tends to have an ‘elastic’ quality. By that I mean you eventually get to see the person who dressed it up. That’s a problem for chronic liars who inhabit the press. They expose themselves, even though they don’t want to. It takes a surprisingly small push to expose the whole operation. This is happening now, right in front of our eyes.”
“The basis of big media is theater. News is theater. Its directors and producers think they’re doing a first-rate job. But they’re sadly mistaken. Gaps and obfuscations are growing larger. The outright non-sequiturs and gibberish are becoming more apparent. The audience is wising up to the farce. Who are these fools who direct the news?
They’re simply people who want to sell their souls and have found an elite buyer. But that transaction doesn’t contain any guarantees about shelf life. Mainstream news is decaying, and the expiration date is approaching. Like civilizations, the petty princes of information rise and fall…”
Globalized media. It’s nice plan. Let’s examine it.
The new technocratic media is based on profiling users. There is no impactful news unless each member of the audience is surveilled and analyzed on the basis of what he already likes and wants.
Shocking? It’s to be expected. How else would technocrats parlay the untold hours they’ve spent sizing up their consumers/users?
Several years ago, I wrote:
“Tech blather has already begun, since Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, bought the Washington Post at a fire sale. Jeff Genius will invent new ways to transmit the news to ‘people on the go’ and make the Post a smashing success. Mobile devices. Multiple platforms.
Digital taking over from print. Ads customized to fit readers’ interests (profiling). News stories customized to fit readers’ interests (more profiling).”
In other words, non-news. If you thought media were irrelevant and deceptive before, you haven’t seen anything. The “new news” will create millions of virtual bubbles in which profiled users can float contentedly, under the cozy cottage roofs of their favorite little separate paradigms.
The tech giant Apple has waded into this territory with an app that will deliver news to users. Yahoo:
“Apple News, part of the upcoming iOS 9 operating system, aims to be the primary news source for users of the iPhone and iPad… Apple says its news app ‘follows over a million topics and pulls relevant stories based on your specific interests’…
Joshua Benton of the Nieman Journalism Lab said the app will be important because ‘through the awesome power of default, Apple distribution puts it in an entirely other league. This [news] app will be on hundreds of millions of devices within 24 hours of its debut’.”
Translation: Profiling their users down to their toenails, Apple will present them with virtual bubbles of news they want to see and read.
Not just one overall presentation for all; no, different “news outlets” for Apple’s audiences.
This introduces a whole new layer of mind control.
“You’re an Obama fan? Here are stories confirming your belief in the Prophet.”
“You want neo-con on the rocks with a conservative Republican twist? Here’s some war footage that’ll warm your heart.”
“Do you believe ‘government gridlock’ is our biggest concern? Congress can’t get anything done? We’ve got headlines for that from here to the moon.”
“Tuned into celeb gossip? Here’s your world in three minutes.”
The idea: convince users, one day at a time, that what they already believe is important IS the news of the day.
It’s Decentralized Centralization. One media giant carving its global audience up into little pieces and delivering them a whole host of different algorithmically appropriate lies and fluff and no-context psyops.
And for “fringe users?” “You’re doubtful about GMOs? Well, look at what Whole Foods is planning for their healthier produce section. Cheer up.” Nothing about Maui voters declaring a temporary ban on devastatingly toxic Monsanto/Dow experiments or the dangers of Roundup.
“You’re anti-vaccine? Sorry, you don’t count. You’re not a recognized demographic. But here’s a piece about a little unvaccinated boy who was involved in car crash on the I5.”
Does this sound like science fiction? It isn’t. It’s the mainstream look of the near-future. Search engines are already “personalizing” your inquiries. US ABC national news is climbing in the ratings because it’s giving viewers “lighter stories,” and spending less time on thorny issues like the Middle East.
The mainstream news business is desperately looking for audience; and treating every “user” as a profiled social-construct-bundle of superficial preferences is their answer.
“Mr. X, we’ve studied the little virtual bubble you live in, and now we can sell you your own special brand of truth.”
“Hello, audience. We’re going to pitch you on becoming full-fledged obsessed consumers, as if there is no other worthy goal in life - and then we’re going to profile you from top to bottom, to find out exactly what kind of obsessed consumer you are, so we can hit you and trigger you with information that uniquely stimulates your adrenal glands…”
The one-two punch.
Trey Gowdy Joins Trump and Gives a Great Mainstream Media Attack
Any actual event occurring in the world will be pre-digested by robot media editors and profilers, and then split up into variously programmed bits of information for different audiences.
Who cares what really happened? In the new world, there is no ‘what really happened’. That’s a gross misnomer. A faulty idea. A metaphysical error.
No, there is only a multi-forked media tongue that simultaneously spits out a dozen or a hundred variations of the same event…because different viewers want and expect different realities.
In 1984, Orwell’s Big Brother was issuing a single voice into the homes of the population. That was old-school. That was primitive technology. That was achieving unity by hammering unity into people’s skulls. This, now, is the frontier of unity through diversity.
“We want to make all of you into androids, through basic PR and propaganda and a pathetic excuse for education. However, we recognize you’ll become different varieties of androids, and we’ll serve that outcome with technological sophistication. Trust us. We care about what you prefer.”
User A: “Wow, did you see the coverage of the border war in Chula Vista?”
User B: “War? They had a fantastic exhibit of drones down there. At least a hundred different types. And then I watched an old WW2 movie about aerial combat.”
User C: “Chula Vista? They had a great food show. This woman made a lemon pie. I could practically taste it.”
User D: “That wasn’t a border war. It was a drill. And then afterwards, these cops gave a demonstration of all their gear. Vests, shields, communication devices, flash-bangs, auto rifles with silencers, batons. I watch drills all over the country. Love them.”
User E: “Chula Vista? The only thing I saw on the news was ‘sunny and mild’ this week. I watch all the weather channels. I love them.”
BUT when a Big One comes along, like the 2016 national election in the US, the separate tunes come together and ring as one. Then the overriding need to extend Globalism’s goals (in the person of Hillary Clinton) blot out every other priority.
Then the major media twist whatever they need to twist. Then it’s the same bubble for everyone.
One problem, though. Major media have been lanced thousands of times by alt news sites, and by Wikileaks and Project Veritas. This attack has exposed the truth and the Clinton crimes.
And alt news reflects the growing interest of the public in what’s actually happening on many fronts.
The technocratic plan for the news is failing.
It was a nice plan, but… It’s turning out to be a dud.
Alt media are forcing public awareness of one giant scandal after another: Hillary/Obama support for ISIS; pro-vaccine liars; the collapse of Obamacare; the GMO hustle; pesticide damage... on and on and on.
The result? Major media are being backed into a corner, where they must defend lies and build monolithic lies for EVERYONE all the time. The idea of creating separate news for each profiled user is collapsing.
Major media are playing defense against the rest of the world.
It’s quite a party. And it has no expiration date.
A final note: Trump, Wikileaks, Project Veritas, Drudge, and many alt news sites created a perfect storm in 2016, raining down on major media.
It was and is unprecedented.
The mainstream press has been exposed down to its roots, as never before. The lying, the collusion, the arrogant sense of entitlement, the desperation, the corruption - it’s all there to see, for anyone who has eyes and a few working brain cells.
Expect more to come, regardless of the outcome of the election. The train has really left the station…
Dear Mainstream Media…
You f**king suck! You’ve almost succeeded in destroying the 4th estate and you should be ashamed of yourselves.
This is why 94% of the American people don’t trust you. When are you going to get that through your thick skulls?
You lie, you smear, you ingratiate yourselves with wanton abandon.
Dear mainstream media: You’ve betrayed your profession, sacrificed its once sacred principles, and stabbed the American people in the back.
In Harmony with All Life: The Open Source Way + Lifting The Veil: Merging Science And Spirituality August 3 2018 | From: RobertDavidSteele / KosmosJournal
We do not need a new paradigm but rather a return to the original indigenous paradigm that treated the Earth as a sacred Mother and understood that God was all of us, in harmony with one another and the cosmos, living by one principle (do no harm) and one practice (seventh generation thinking).
The Industrial Era has been both a blessing and a curse. It has radically altered the quality and diversity of life for a billion humans but it has also come at a great cost: the repression in extreme poverty of the other five billion; the eradication of thousands of species; and the destruction almost to a tipping point of the Earth.
Changes to the Earth that used to take ten thousand years now take three years or less. In combination, colonialism, militarism, and capitalism have squandered the wealth of the Earth, creating an elite 1% that profits from the misery, enslavement, and deception of the 99%.
A revolution is in the making, aided by the Internet. Pockets of cultural and ecological wisdom, both indigenous and modern, are now connected at the same time that the lies - such as the 935 lies that led us into the elective war on Iraq - more easily detected.
Still absent is a precipitant of revolution - our Tunisian fruit seller - and a groundswell of demand for the fundamentals of conscious evolution, the tools for information-sharing and sense-making as a collective, a new civilization, one without corruption and waste, both made possible by transformative politics, which is to say politics with integrity, based on evidence, and in the public interest.
How are we to achieve this mass elevation of humanity in the face of what some call the looming ‘sixth extinction?’ I offer three visual interventions for reflection.
Electoral Reform
With a humble apology to all of those fighting for climate change and other worthy causes, I will tell you what I told Tom Steyer: no amount of money or protest will lead to an honest hearing for any single issue as long as we continue to have a rigged system in which two parties control the public treasury and 70% percent of all eligible voters are disenfranchised. While I speak of the US in this instance, the same conditions apply in most countries, where virtual dictatorships and virtual fascism (control by banks) is the common standard.
Electoral Reform Act of 2016
I tried eight times over two years to connect with Bernie Sanders. Note that point twelve would have assured him the nomination and he, not Hillary Clinton, would be facing off against Donald Trump today, at the same time that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein would be viable nominees given the Instant Run-Off reform (point ten) as well as all the others.
The current effort to re-ignite a race war in the US, with leftist billionaires funding Black Lives Matter protests and fascist billionaires funding white paramilitary shooters killing cops and seeking to place the blame on blacks, will fail. To their credit, black leaders have identified the twin elements of this strategy.
The race war is intended to distract us from the fact that it is now clear to most that we are in a fight between the 1% who have destroyed the Earth and the hopes of humanity for their own selfish profit, and the 99% capable of creating infinite wealth.
Open Source Everything Engineering (OSEE)
I wrote the book itemizing over sixty opens, The Open Source Everything Manfesto: Transparency, Truth, and Trust, and subsequently developed, with Michel Bauwens and Marcin Jacubowksi, the below starting point for radically expanding public appreciation for what an open source everything mindset can accomplish.
Open Source Everything
Using this approach, I was able to document how one million Somalis could be moved from ghastly United Nations resettlement camps in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Uganda, back to an uncontested portion of Somalia (the northeast) with three things only in abundance: dirt, sunlight, and seawater.
For a one-time cost per person of $500 (i.e., $500 million total), I documented how we could provide them all with free energy, water, housing, food, and communications.
End All Waste
We can not only lift up the five billion poor, we can eradicate waste, now documented at 50% on average across agriculture, energy, housing, health, and security, among the one billion ‘rich.’ The below diagram shows how we do that, with a tip of the hat to co-creator Bojan Radej of Slovania.
The Waste Eradication Tri-Fecto
We do not lack for money on Earth. We lack for applied collective intelligence with integrity. We lack the precipitating event that will spark the revolution in which we all say “ENOUGH!” to predatory capitalism, unilateral militarism, and virtual colonialism.
What we have in abundance, what we have repressed for centuries, is the human imagination. Electoral Reform and Open Source Everything Engineering are the twin pillars of our liberation.
Lifting The Veil: Merging Science And Spirituality
Something miraculous is happening. The invisible is becoming visible. Human consciousness is taking a quantum leap into territory previously unknown as what began with just a few saints, sages, gurus, and a Savior is awakening in the hearts and minds of millions around the globe.
Human evolution is undergoing a profound shift; the proof can be seen with the naked eye. This shift is causing millennia-old beliefs and social structures to be scrutinized like never before - perhaps for the very first time.
Even world-renowned physicist Dr. Stephen Hawking has ditched his prior position in his book, The Grand Design: “belief in a creator was not incompatible with science” and now concludes that the Big Bang was as inevitable as gravity.
As science moves closer toward solving the Unifying Theory of Everything, will Dr. Hawking change his mind one more time?
Unifying Everything
What is presently emerging out of a weary world filled with very little practical value is a new and quantifiable reality being built by those already embodying a more expansive understanding of who we are and why we are here.
Most of us without a doubt have begun to ask questions - perhaps for the first time in our life. Whether you view current events as the end of the world or a new Golden Age is entirely dependent on whether you are bound by separation consciousness or have expanded beyond it into something new.
“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
– Albert Einstein
What is currently crumbling around us is the fruit of humanity’s misguided labor, along with a planet stressed by an outdated and unsustainable human belief system. Most human suffering is self-created and derived out of inherent ignorance and limitation found in separation consciousness.
Separation consciousness is the belief that we are separate from one another, our environment, and even God. Separation consciousness is the veil itself.
Separation Not Real
Just as its definition implies, a veil obfuscates a sun hidden by clouds, yet the sun remains ever present. Until recently, only a small number of people have transcended separation consciousness for humanity’s next stage of evolution: unity consciousness.
Whether you/we destroy ourselves is dependent on our ability to make the evolutionary leap from separation to unity consciousness where human suffering ends.
This is both the warning and reward contained within a universal prophecy spanning many cultures in various forms. The prophecy lends itself to both the physical and metaphysical planes of our lives.
With media focus on humankind’s struggle to emerge out of our collective cocoon of separation, we may be left blind to the miracle that is taking place right under our noses. The biggest story of the millennium is the reality that millions are waking up to the realization that all life is irrevocably interconnected as the One - it always was. Most of humanity was still too unevolved to “get it” until now.
The Veil is Lifting
What unifies us and all of Creation is contained within the very air that we breathe. The all-pervasive answer to the riddle of the mystery of Life is hidden within the question, enigmatically lingering within reach. It is both the tangible and intangible aspects of our world as the scientific and unscientific.
Call it by any name you wish and you’ll find it there. The secret key that unlocks the end of human suffering is contained within you as your desire to know. Have you discovered it yet?
If you believe in a higher power or organizing force - and even if you don’t - when you awaken, you will be struck with the realization that the power that fuels and binds all of the Universe is not an outside intelligence.
What not even famous cosmologist, Dr. Stephen Hawking, biologist, and atheist Richard Dawkins or even Pope Francis have yet grasped (publicly) is that the creative power that unifies us is Creation itself. There is no separation.
'God' is Creation
Creation was not a singular event, but by self-definition, it will continue into perpetuity. What is so shocking is that this means that science and religion are not in opposition of one another, but are simply left- and right-brain interpretations of the One.
Our quest for knowledge of the One is the quest for reunion with and as the One. Joining hands in a way that has been all but forgotten, darkness turns to light. Fear becomes love. Competition changes to cooperation so that lack becomes abundance. Unworthiness becomes value that ends racism, genocide, and slavery. Our planet is restored to good health.
Personal peace and of Peace on Earth depend on a new, more evolved understanding of God. It’s our time to thrive!
Meet The Hedge Funders And Billionaires Who Pillage Under The Shield Of Philanthropy August 2 2018 | From: Alternet
For every dollar they give, they take 44 from the rest of us. America’s parasitical oligarchs are masters of public relations. One of their favorite tactics is to masquerade as defenders of the common folk while neatly arranging things behind the scenes so that they can continue to plunder unimpeded.
Perhaps nowhere is this sleight of hand displayed so artfully as it is at a particular high-profile charity with the nerve to bill itself as itself as “New York's largest poverty-fighting organization.”
British novelist Anthony Trollope once wrote;
“I have sometimes thought that there is no being so venomous, so bloodthirsty as a professed philanthropist.”
Meet the benevolent patrons of the Robin Hood Foundation.
Robin Hood in Reverse
The Robin Hood Foundation, named for that green-jerkined hero of redistribution who stole from the rich to give to the poor, is run, ironically, by some of the most rapacious capitalists the country has ever produced - men who make robber barons of previous generations look like small-time crooks.
Founded by hedge fund mogul Paul Tudor Jones, the foundation boasts 19 billionaires on its leadership boards and committees, the likes of which include this sample of American plutocracy:
- Hedge fund billionaire Steven A. Cohen, who, when he is not being probed for insider trading (his company, SAC Capital Advisors, plead guilty to securities and wire fraud) is busy throwing parties for himself worthy of a Roman emperor at his Hamptons palace and bragging about his $700 million art collection. He suspends a 13-foot shark in formaldehyde from the ceiling his office, perhaps as an avatar of his business practices.
- Billionaire Home Depot founder Ken Langone, who threatened to turn off the charity donations if Pope Francis dared to continue criticizing capitalism and inequality, and also likened the plight of the wealthy in America to Nazi Germany.
The GOP megadonor doesn’t care for bank regulation and it’s no surprise that he is the main booster for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s presidential bid, as his plan to shred Social Security is a fond wish of the tycoon’s.
- Hedge fund billionaire Stanley Druckenmiller, funder of right-wing causes who dedicates himself to spreading deficit hysteria and ginning up generational warfare on college campuses by trying to convince young people that they are being robbed by seniors using Social Security and Medicare.
A long-time anti-tax crusader and supporter of such anti-labor enthusiasts as Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, Druckenmiller warned President Obama that any attempt to tax the rich to pay for social services for the poor would be futile.
By occupation (the more useless and parasitical the better), it comes as no surprise that 12 of the 19 men in leadership positions at the Robin Hood Foundation happen to be hedge fund managers.
A group called Hedge Clippers, supported by a coalition of labor unions and community groups and devoted to exposing how billionaires scheme to inflate their wealth and influence, has pointed out in a scathing report that the Robin Hood Foundation has close ties to an organization called the Managed Funds Association (MFA) that - shocker! - lobbies tirelessly for unjustified tax breaks for hedgies.
Paul Tudor Jones’s top deputy, John Torell, chairs the MFA, and 31 members of Robin Hood’s governing board and leadership committees are executives at firms that belong to the highest membership levels of the organization.
The MFA was relatively small until 2007, when Congress started eyeing the “carried interest” tax loophole. Then it brought out the heavy artillery to protect elites from paying their fair share. The carried interest loophole is the MFA’s top priority.
The King of Scams
The carried interest loophole, as economist Dean Baker put it, is likely the worst of all the:
“Sneaky and squirrelly ways that the rich use to escape their tax liability.”
It goes down like this: Hedge fund managers brazenly claim they deserve to pay a special low tax rate on the money they earn overseeing the funds they manage because, um, it’s not guaranteed. So they pay 20 percent instead of the 39.6 percent they would pay if the money were taxed as ordinary income.
They get very rich from this windfall, just ask Mitt Romney. But you know what? Lots of workers have no guarantee about the money they’ll earn, from people selling cars to the guy who just served you a burger. Do they get a special tax rate? No, they don’t. They pay full freight. In fact, almost nobody’s income is guaranteed.
You could get a pay cut tomorrow. Or a pink slip. Do you still pay regular income tax? Yep, you do.
This unfair tax break basically allows hedge fund managers to screw their fellow Americans out of money that could do things the illustrious patrons of the Robin Hood Foundation claim are so dear to their hearts, like building schools and feeding the poor.
According to a Congressional Research Service cited in the Hedge Clippers report, closing the carried interest loophole would generate $17 billion a year. How many hungry children in New York City could that feed? All of them?
The loophole makes absolutely no economic or social sense, it’s just a way for the rich to say, hey, we’re powerful enough to lobby for this insanity, so you little people just go ahead and pay for that airport where our private jets are about to land and that road where our Porsches and limos cruise. It’s a middle finger held up to every hard-working person in America. Dirt kicked in the face of the poor.
It’s a driver of inequality and encourages risky speculation on Wall Street. Hillary Clinton, perhaps hoping to ward off the threat of Bernie Sanders, has been making noise about closing the carried interest loophole, which many a politician has made before. Given the cultural focus on inequality and the egregiousness of the policy, it may just be vulnerable. Let’s hope so.
Den of Thieves
The mission statement of the Robin Hood Foundation brays about all the funding it provides for school programs, generating:
“Meaningful results for families in New York's poorest neighborhoods.” Soup kitchens! Homeless shelters! Job training! The tuxedoed tycoons throw money at all these causes “to give New York’s neediest citizens the tools they need to build better lives.”
How far does this largesse actually go toward ameliorating New York’s poverty problem? Unsurprisingly, not very far at all. In fact, as Hedge Clippers points out, the poverty rate in the city has grown over the course of the Robin Hood Foundation’s history, from 20 percent in 1990 to 21.2 percent in 2012.
Guess what’s also grown? The bank accounts of 19 billionaires on the Robin Hood Foundation’s boards, which have ballooned 93 percent since 2008.
Hedge Clippers applied a delicious tactic to expose the hypocrisy at the heart of the Robin Hood Foundation with stark mathematical precision - they used the organizations own metrics as an analytical tool. The foundation is famed for using grantee evaluations, cost-benefit analyses, and performance measures, including a metrics system freakishly named “relentless monetization.”
So the Clippers applied these methods to the foundation’s hedge fund backers themselves, systematically exposing the degree to which they increase inequality and poverty.
How bad it is? A chilling ratio summarizes just how bad - 44:1. That is to say, for every dollar the Robin Hood Foundation hedge fund managers studied give to the organization’s antipoverty efforts, they soak up $44 from the public in the form of tax avoidance and anti-tax advocacy. The authors of the report believe that to be a conservative estimate.
Take the case of Steve Cohen, he of the shark in formaldehyde, and board member emeritus of the Robin Hood Foundation.
The tally of his recent donations to the foundation: $4,850,000.
The estimated amount he ripped off the public in 2014 by paying special low tax rates: $1,300,000,000.
Quite a difference.
When they aren’t advocating tax swindles, members of the Robin Hood Foundation put in plenty of time fighting fair wages, trying to shred the social safety net, and killing worker protections through their associations with organizations like the Manhattan Institute, the Partnership for New York City (the voice of big business in NYC and a big foe of paid sick leave), and Fix the Debt (a notorious group devoted to crushing Social Security and Medicare).
When you think about it, it looks as if the Robin Hood Foundation members are actively trying to strip the public and strangle working people to such a degree that poverty and nickels thrown by billionaires will be all that’s left of America.
The rest of us will all be living in Sherwood Forest.
The Robin Hood Foundation’s new motto: Increasing poverty is our business.
Change For The Better Is Coming, If You Fight for It August 1 2018 | From: Geopolitics
There is an ongoing transformational shift underway in the world, as the era of geopolitics, with its destruction of nations through financial manipulations and wars, is being challenged by the emergence of a new era of “win-win” policies of mutual benefit, spearheaded by China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Developments in Asia, with the Trump-Kim summit in Singapore and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Qingdao, China, provide examples which show that peaceful economic cooperation is not only possible, but is already underway.
The benefits of this new era can be seen in new infrastructure projects throughout Eurasia, Africa, and in South and Central America, and the clamor to be included is also heard now in a number of nations in Europe.
The growing likelihood of a Trump-Putin summit is part of this new geometry, an indication that the U.S. President is breaking out of the containment intended by the fraudulent, so-called Russiagate allegations.
For this moment of great opportunity to be realized, there must be an elevation in both the capabilities of creative thinking, and passionate activation, of citizens of all nations. Schiller Institute founder and President Helga Zepp LaRouche’s weekly webcasts are a critical part of elevating populations to the level required by this promising moment of history.
This is the edited transcript of the June 21, 2018 Schiller Institute New Paradigm webcast, an interview with the founder of the Schiller Institutes, Helga Zepp-LaRouche. She was interviewed by Harley Schlanger. A video of the webcast is available.
Harley Schlanger: Hello, I’m Harley Schlanger with the Schiller Institute. Welcome to our webcast this week, featuring our founder, Helga Zepp-LaRouche.
Since our program last week, Helga has drafted a memo that is being circulated widely in government circles and to institutions such as the United Nations, and at events and forums. It should be circulated everywhere. It’s titled “Follow the Example of Singapore!”
This really shapes what we want to start with today. What Helga described is the process that was unleashed, leading into the meeting between President Trump and North Korea’s Chairman Kim Jong-un and its stunning outcome.
So Helga, why don’t we start with the memo that you drafted?
Irish Naval personnel rescuing migrants, June 15, 2015, as part of the EU’s Mediterranean border patrol
Helga Zepp-LaRouche: President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong-un were able to completely transform a very dangerous situation around North Korea within a few months, into the total opposite: from being the potential trigger point of World War III, to being, instead, a hopeful perspective.
North Korea can now be integrated into the Belt and Road Initiative, with the support of the United States, China and Russia.
The promise of security guarantees, eventually lifting sanctions, and complete denuclearization are part of integrating North Korea with the Belt and Road Initiative.
If this works, as it promises to, making North Korea a prosperous country, this will be a really groundbreaking set of developments. As President Trump said at his press conference, “The past does not have to define our future.”
That is obviously proof that you can turn the worst situation around if you have an inspiration, a vision, and the political will to carry it out.
We now have a series of complete destabilizations in the West. The refugee crisis is threatening to completely rip apart the so-called European unity, which is actually nonexistent; it could end the chancellorship of Angela Merkel within less than two weeks.
The border crisis between the United States and Mexico also shows that the immigrant question is out of control and needs to be addressed.
The Singapore Model
The proposals by the European Union and by different factions of the German government, are all completely unworkable. These plans are brutal and barbaric - creating camps outside the borders of the European Union in North African countries, to warehouse refugees and deter them from coming to Europe - this is barbaric.
All the people who were so freaked out about Trump ripping the babies from the breasts of their mothers - these are the same people and the same media who have no problem in proposing camps in countries that have no clear government control.
There are many reports that people in these camps have been sold into slavery, have been raped and tortured. They are subject to absolutely terrible conditions.
But, if the real root causes of why people are coming to Europe are not addressed - the horrible conditions in many parts of Africa, where people face impossible situations, then there will never be a workable solution.
I have proposed in this memorandum, which Harley just mentioned, that the EU follow the example of Singapore. The EU should change the agenda of their upcoming summit, which will take place in a week, and instead put only one issue on the agenda: The real development of Africa.
Invite President Xi Jinping because he has enormous credibility in Africa. The Chinese government has led investment in railways and industrial parks, in hydropower and many, many projects. The EU should invite some of the African heads of state who have already achieved great results by cooperating with China in these projects.
Chinese projects in Africa. Above, the Soubre hydroelectric power station built by China in Ivory Coast. Below, China’s Sinohydro expanded the production of electricity on the Zimbabwe side of the Kariba Dam, to produce an additional 300 MW for the Zimbabwe grid
Xinhua/Chen Yaqin
If the European leaders - plus Xi Jinping and half a dozen African leaders who would speak for the continent - would declare a crash program for the infrastructure development of Africa, not only would such an action have credibility, because of Xi Jinping’s presence, but it would signal to all relevant governments and all young people, that there exists a great opportunity to cooperate in the construction of their own countries.
Many, many people would no longer feel compelled to traverse the Sahara, risking death by thirst, or death by drowning in the Mediterranean, or risk being captured by Frontex (the EU border police) to then be herded into what even the Pope has characterized as “concentration camps.”
I think this positive agenda can be made to happen. Now, it’s not so likely, however, that the EU will be the institution that does this, given the fact that they are what they are, but this is absolutely the correct idea, and if this EU summit misses this opportunity, then one can have a summit at any time, in July or August, or one can even use the UN General Assembly in September to make that issue the only point on the agenda.
The same can be applied to the United States. President Trump should have a summit with Xi Jinping and with leaders of Ibero-America, and there, do the same thing: commit to joint ventures between the United States, China and Latin American countries, to transform the continent and eliminate the poverty, which is the reason why people are now flooding into the United States.
I think this approach is eminently feasible. It is the only way to solve the problem. I’m very happy that my call has found good responses. It has been translated into eight languages already, including the most important European languages, Chinese, Russian, Japanese, and Korean.
I would ask all of you who are watching this program to help us circulate this call, and also the call issued by Kesha Rogers, the Texas congressional candidate who is focusing on the American aspect. Please help us circulate these calls. Get onboard this mobilization because it is extremely urgent that this approach be taken now.
Schlanger: I think it’s most important that your proposal breaks the controlled debate. The reason that we’re in this mess today is that the debate has been phony: Either let the borders be opened and let nations be overrun, or clamp down the borders. Missing from the discussion, as you say, are the generating processes that have been wars and poverty.
In the last few weeks, since the Singapore summit, Trump has been moving toward going ahead with a summit with President Putin of Russia, which again, breaks the controlled environment.
Do you think such a summit would contribute positively to resolving the forced migration crisis? Would you give Trump the advice that he should take up your proposal in his meeting with Putin?
Zepp-LaRouche: I think that a meeting between Putin and Trump is the next important item on the strategic agenda. Active preparations are now being made for such a meeting, possibly taking place in July, possibly in Vienna. I think this is now possible with Russiagate falling apart.
U.S. Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified to a Senate hearing - remember his investigation and report was only on the email scandal around Hillary Clinton - that there was unprecedented bias on the part of all of the people involved in the Clinton investigation, and that Trump was completely justified in firing FBI Director James Comey.
I think this has freed Trump to move forward on this front.
Dangers of Trade War
Let me raise another issue, because there are unfortunate escalations in possible trade war. Trump raised the possibility of imposing tariffs on $450 billion in imports from China, and there are now countermeasures going into effect. Tomorrow the EU will put in countermeasures. Turkey, Canada and Mexico are also putting up new tariffs, and there is a great danger of an ever escalating trade war.
The Chinese are very indignant, saying this is completely counterproductive; this is a lose-lose policy. Many people who voted for Trump - farmers and industrialists - are now being hurt by these tariffs and are in danger of going bankrupt. This is no good.
I have proposed the Singapore approach as a solution. Were the United States and China to engage in joint ventures to develop the countries of Central and South America, trade volume would increase significantly, in a multilateral way. The trade imbalances would be overcome through increased trade.
I would like to get this message out, in particular, to the Trump voters who are affected by these policies - farmers, people and companies that have investments both in China and in the United States, all of whom are now in danger of going bankrupt, putting many jobs at risk.
I ask our listeners to move on our “Singapore solution” proposal and to get the message to President Trump. We have to counter the ideologues in the Trump camp who are so anti-China and who are such extreme neo-liberal free-traders that they are giving him advice that could potentially turn his base away from him.
Trump, while continuing to having his excellent relationship with Xi Jinping, can add to that an excellent relationship with Putin. He can expand on the direction he so courageously accomplished in Singapore with North Korea.
He can take the same approach - the predicates are different, but the approach would be the same - turn a bad policy, a lose-lose policy, into the opposite: go with win-win cooperation.
The world is urgently in need of such a policy change. I think it can be done! The fact that the Singapore summit took place, is the proof that you can completely change a policy when it is leading nowhere.
The West right now is faced with the decision: either change policy, or collapse. That is what is at stake. So I appeal to all Trump supporters; pick up on this proposal and help us turn this around.
Schlanger: On this matter of being able to change relations from the past to a completely new relationship, we’ve seen that starting to take place between India and China, with the Modi meeting with Xi Jinping. There are also some significant developments that just took place between Japan and China.
Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (right front) meets China’s State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Tokyo, Japan, April 16, 2018
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, this is very good. In recent history, there had been deep mistrust between China and Japan. The history between those two countries during the period of World War II left deep scars.
But, this is all now past, starting a year ago last May, when Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sent his number two, the head of the Liberal Democratic Party, Toshiro Nikai, to the Belt and Road Forum in Beijing. From then on, there has been increased cooperation between China and Japan.
Just three days ago, Japan and China signed an agreement to jointly invest in infrastructure projects in third countries. So, if two countries, which were not in a friendly mode, can agree on this higher level of reason of joint mutual interest for the benefit of third countries, I think this is a model for every country in the world.
I hope that the Europeans will look at Japan. If Japan can change in this way, Europe should be able to do it as well.
Schlanger: Speaking of unfriendly nations getting together, look at the potential now between South Korea and North Korea.
I want to come back to Europe and the refugee crisis, because it’s so central to the June 28-29 EU summit coming up. The refugee crisis seems to have hastened the confrontation taking place inside Germany, and I would like you to talk about that.
But also, no one should lose sight of the fact that this isn’t just a refugee crisis. The economic crisis continues; there are stupid and dangerous proposals being put forward by French President Macron and German Chancellor Merkel to increase the power of the Brussels banking bureaucracy.
The EU summit is coming up, Helga. What do you think will happen at the summit? And also, what are the chances that Merkel will survive?
French President Emmanuel Macron (left) visits German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin, May 15, 2017
Zepp-LaRouche: The mood in Germany - and we get this from all sides - is that Merkel should really go. It’s time for her chancellorship to end; she has been there too long. The relationship between Horst Seehofer and Merkel has been poisoned for a very long time.
The background is this: Seehofer, the chairman of the CSU (Christian Social Union) party and the Interior Minister, threatened to unilaterally impose controls at the German border which would mean that the Schengen Agreement [which abolished internal borders among France, Germany, Belgium, Luxemburg, and Netherlands] would be wastepaper, and with that, so would be the basis for the currency union, the euro.
Merkel met with Macron and insisted that she wants to have a European solution to the problem and not a German national solution. Even the mainstream media are mockingly saying that the chances that Merkel will get a European solution are slim.
There are more than eight countries that refuse to accept refugees, and refuse to accept a quota for receiving refugees. Die Zeit, the Hamburg news weekly, wrote that the irony of the matter is that in this upcoming EU summit, Merkel will need the support of Greece and Italy for her European solution.
These are the two countries that have been hit with the greatest amount of refugees.
These two countries are where Merkel is the most unpopular - Merkel and Schäuble treated these countries absolutely brutally during the so-called euro crisis. The anti-Merkel sentiment in Greece and Italy is really quite large.
It’s very difficult to say what will happen. It may be that Merkel will sell whatever result she gets as a European solution. In all likelihood, there will be some kind of bilateral deals that will include the horrible idea that I mentioned earlier - internment camps outside of the EU, which would be barbaric.
If there is no agreement, it is still possible that by the end of the two-week ultimatum, Seehofer would unilaterally impose border controls in his capacity as Minister of the Interior, in which case, this would be insubordination against the Office of the Chancellor.
If Merkel capitulates to that, her power is gone; but if she doesn’t, her only option is to kick out Seehofer, who could then take the entire CSU out of the coalition with him.
There are already polls indicating that the CSU would get 18% of the German vote, should they expand and become a national party.
This is all unworkable. No matter what combination you make - Merkel’s CDU (Christian Democratic Union) party could take the Greens or the FDP (Free Democratic Party) into the government. But if they keep the policy, it will just be a prolongation of the crisis, and it will not solve anything.
Syrian refugees resting on the floor of the Keleti railway station in Budapest, Hungary, Sept. 5, 2015
There has to be deep reflection on the fact that the West is clearly crumbling. There are articles in all kinds of newspapers on this very subject. One article I found quite noteworthy was in the Austrian paper Der Standard, a liberal paper.
The article says that the West completely missed its chance after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The United States was, then, the only superpower.
The West gambled that moment away by plunging into absolutely barbaric wars, in the Middle East, and other places, which wars caused the refugee crisis and many, many other problems, and, now, the West has lost.
There is a very interesting story this brings to mind: It’s called “The man and the wife in the vinegar jug” - it’s the Essig-krug, I don’t know the word in English right now. It’s about a man and a woman who live in an old, horrible house. A little bird comes and tells them to make a wish.
The couple says, “We want a nice, big farmhouse, with many acres of land.” Their wish is granted. However, they’re not satisfied, and they ask for more, “We want a big villa in the city.” They get that. Then their wishes follow quickly one after another: “Oh, that’s not enough, we want to have a big castle, and we want to be King. That’s not enough, we want to be Emperor.” They get all of this.
Then, they say, “That’s not enough: We want to be God.” And then, everything vanishes. They are back in their old, horrible, little house.
The moral of the story goes to the chance missed by Western Europe and the United States: The West had the chance, with the crumbling of the Soviet Union, to change the world for the better. But, because of the limitless greed of that group of nations, and their limitless power-seeking activities, they messed it all up.
So, I find this nice, little fable to the point.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, of the Christian Democratic Union, with Horst Seehofer of the allied Christian Social Union, during the 2017 election campaign
More fundamentally, the West should really reflect on what has been going wrong with the neo-liberal, left-liberal, neo-con, geopolitical model. Why is the Asian model so much more attractive to many countries? Why is the Asian model so much more concerned with the common good of the people?
China is rising because the Belt and Road Initiative is absolutely the biggest infrastructure project in history, with a clear focus on the common good. We must find some thoughtful people in the West, who are willing to enter into dialogue on what is necessary to correct the present policies.
I think there has been much too little reflection and serious thinking about what is going on. If people just insist on keeping the status quo of the neo-liberal establishment, the West will crash against the wall.
Given the fact that the Singapore model exists, I encourage all of our listeners to engage with us, to become members of the Schiller Institute, to participate in our activities, and strengthen such an international dialogue. Such dialogue and debate is extremely necessary, it’s urgent. The potentials in the world situation are also very hopeful, because changes are already happening in a positive direction.
More European Integration Unlikely
Schlanger: Speaking of changes, the fact that the Austrian national daily Der Standard did what it did, even though it’s three decades behind you, Helga, it’s good that it made that comment.
Also, coming up at the EU summit, there’s the question of what will be brought in by the new Italian government and Austria. The leaders of those two countries have been talking about getting rid of the sanctions against Russia, and also favor openness toward China. Do you think they will have much of a voice at the EU summit?
Zepp-LaRouche: The Italians clearly have learned from what happened to Greece. When the Tsipras government was voted in, it went to Brussels and tried to revolutionize the whole process, and got smashed! It got smashed by a combination of the EU, the other European governments, and the European Central Bank.
I think the Italians will probably play it more carefully. I do not think there will be a similar process as there was with Greece.
Remember, Italy is not Greece. Italy is the third largest economy in Europe. There are also all these other governments that want Europe to move in a different direction: Spain, Portugal, the Balkan countries, the East European and Central European countries, Austria, and Switzerland are all on a different trajectory.
I don’t think the policies of Macron and Merkel in favor of a Eurozone budget will find any majority. Söder, the new minister-president of the Bavarian state government, said that he absolutely rejects the idea of a Eurozone budget; it would just means paying more to have another budget, of which Germany would have to pay a large proportion.
I think this idea of imposing more European integration now, at a point when almost all the governments are questioning the merit of the Maastricht Treaty process - I think this will not happen. That’s my modest prediction.
Now We Can Influence History!
Schlanger: Let’s hope some of them will take up your proposal on the Singapore model.
I want to get back to something you brought up earlier: the idea that President Trump has been somewhat freed by the breakdown of the Mueller investigation.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller is moving desperately - jailing former Trump Campaign chairman Paul Manafort, revoking his bail, and moving against Roger Stone, claiming that he was the WikiLeaks Russia connection.
But at the same time, there’s the report of Inspector General Michael Horowitz; there’s more coming out in the Congress. How much longer do you think this dual situation can continue, with the allegations of collusion and obstruction, when all of the allegations are falling apart?
U.S. Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifying on how the FBI and DOJ handled its investigation in 2016 of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails
Zepp-LaRouche: There are signs that some Congressmen are moving forward aggressively. Next week, Peter Strzok will be forced to testify in Congress. I think many of these people connected to the Mueller investigation could face criminal charges, fairly soon.
Unless this happens, and the whole situation gets straightened out, the danger remains very high. It’s not yet time to relax in the certainty that things are going in the right direction.
The same Democrats and the same mainstream media that were silent when Obama (and before him Bush), during his two terms as President, was conducing these so-called “humanitarian wars,” in which the worst kinds of atrocities were condoned - these same Democrats and media are now yelling and screaming against Trump because of this border question and the plight of children and families.
The hypocrisy of these screamers is enormous!
They had called for a national demonstration this coming Sunday. Trump has now issued an order mandating that these families should stay together, with their children.
The border police had questioned if all these children really belonged to these adults, because this had been a longstanding problem which started about four years ago under Obama. The human traffickers had figured out that they could send lots of children, and they did. At that time Obama slammed down as well.
I think this whole situation really needs a grand design. When you have a messy situation - which you now have here - sometimes you have to go to a completely different level - that is exactly what Trump did in Singapore.
Having done that, in his incredibly good level of approach reflected in his statement in Singapore - “The past does not have to define our future,” making clear things can be changed - I think he needs to take that kind of an approach toward this whole situation.
The Muellergate affair should come to the point where the responsible people are brought to justice for their illegal acts.
The even bigger picture is the need for a grand design. Trump really has to move away from this building trade war, and move toward cooperation with Latin America, with China, and with Russia, and bring the United States in, as an integral part of development projects in Africa, Asia, and the Americas.
Were he do that, I think the world would find itself in safe waters in a very short period of time.
Since it is within reach, I can only repeat my appeal: Help us, and move with us, because this is the time we can all influence history, which cannot be done when everything is going along quietly along quiet roads.
But in such times of turmoil, the whole world is changing; at such moments in history, interventions can be made if you have the courage, if you have love for civilization, and if you have a vision of what to do. Join with us, and help us turn this situation around.
Helga, thank you very much for joining us this week, and we’ll be back next week.
Zepp-LaRouche: Yes, till next week.
The Rise And Rise Of Control-Freak Government July 31 2018 | From: BreakingViews
The ancient Greeks left us several words describing various forms of government: Democracy, Autocracy and Oligarchy, to give just three examples.
But there was one omission, probably because it describes a type of administration that the Greeks never envisaged. For want of a better term, I’ll call it control-freak government.
This is a form of government in which policy-makers, politicians and bureaucrats constantly devise new ways of controlling our behaviour on the pretext that they have to protect us from our own foolishness. Perhaps we could call it a bullyocracy.
Control-freak government is based on the supposition that we’re all basically incapable of making our own responsible decisions.
We need paternalistic minders and a suffocating regulatory regime to stop us from getting into trouble.
This busybody culture pervades our lives slowly and insidiously, eventually reaching the point where we become so accustomed to it that we assume it’s the natural order of things and accept restrictions on what we can do without a murmur of complaint.
In the meantime it restricts individual autonomy, erodes personal responsibility and piles needless extra costs on society.
One tiny example: Small-scale cheesemaker Biddy Fraser-Davies recently protested that at least half the $40,000 annual income from her four jersey cows gets swallowed up by government fees.
Fraser-Davies, who farms near Eketahuna, has been hounded for years by food safety officers from the Ministry for Primary Industries. This, incidentally, is the same government department that turns a blind eye to the large-scale, illegal dumping of fish.
Elderly women (Fraser-Davies is 74) are clearly a much more tempting target than big, hairy fishing companies . She says she was recently billed $10,000 for testing 10 of her cheeses and calculates the cost comes to $240 per kilo.
On radio recently, she recalled that after she featured on Country Calendar in 2009, the Food Safety Authority pounced within minutes because it had no record of her having filed a risk management plan. I suppose we should be impressed by the authority’s 24/7 vigilance (it was a Saturday night, after all), but this suggests an almost obsessive level of control-freakery.
To my knowledge no one ever fell sick or died from eating Fraser-Davies’ cheeses, unless she’s buried the bodies somewhere on her farm. Perhaps the MPI should send some men to start digging the place up.
To her credit, she refuses to be cowed by the public-sector commissars. This sets her apart from most timid New Zealand business owners, who keep their heads down and meekly comply. Presumably, getting offside with the enforcers is more trouble than it’s worth.
The MPI justifies its cheese-testing regime because there’s a theoretical risk of harmful pathogens. Eliminating risk can be used to justify all manner of bureaucratic meddling. It’s all part of the grand mission to create a perfect world where Nanny State keeps us all safe.
A priceless example was the edict that went out years ago forbidding brass bands from playing on the backs of trucks. I must have missed the news reports about hapless tuba players toppling from truck decks and being crushed under the wheels while playing God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen in Christmas parades.
Perhaps I also missed hearing the anguished cries of builders and roofers plummeting from house rooftops. There must have been an epidemic of such deaths to justify the requirement that safety scaffolding now be erected around the roofs of houses under construction.
I'm told even chimney sweepers are now saying they can’t work without protective scaffolding, which can bump up the cost of the job from $200 to $1000.
It goes without saying there’s an element of risk in many undertakings. The crucial consideration should surely be whether the action taken to minimise risk is proportionate – or, to put it another way, whether the cost of trying to eliminate risk far outweighs any possible benefit.
Compulsory scaffolding around rooftops may have averted a few broken limbs, but at what cost to house owners and home buyers?
The police, too, have been captured by a control-freak mentality. Just look at their heavy-handed enforcement of liquor controls. Wellington Police have an “alcohol harm reduction officer” (how Big Brother is that?) who gives the impression of being on a moral crusade.
And while police numbers are stretched and burglars are able to strike with apparent impunity, there always seem to be enough officers to operate drink-drive checkpoints in the hope of nabbing some harmless mug who’s unwittingly had one glass of sauvignon blanc too many.
It’s another case of low-hanging fruit. Burglars are hard to catch; women on the way home from bowls, not so much.
Speaking of which, I wrote a column in this space roughly a year ago criticising the lower drink-drive limits introduced in 2014, which I predicted would catch out responsible, otherwise law-abiding people while hard-core recidivist drunk drivers would continue to behave as they always had.
I also said I would quite likely get pinged myself, since the new limits had made it much harder to judge when you were at risk of breaking the law.
My column attracted a pompous response from an overpaid poo-bah in the New Zealand Transport Agency. He wrote that there was no such thing as safe drink-driving, thus confirming what I’d suspected: that the objective of the law change was to deter us from drinking altogether.
But here’s the thing: road deaths have increased since drink-drive limits were lowered, from 293 in 2014 to 319 in 2015 and 263 so far this year compared with 253 at this time last year.
It’s a crude measure, admittedly, but it reminds us of what the economist Milton Friedman said about the folly of judging things by their intentions rather than their results.
Of course a few more country pubs have gone out of business in the meantime, because the people who previously socialised in them are terrified of having one too many and getting caught.
But why should the city-dwelling bureaucrats worry? They never drank in them anyway. And if they go one over the limit at a fashionable Thorndon café, they can just call a cab.
Theirs is a different world from the one inhabited by the people whose lives they seek to control.
Damning Hillary Emails Probe Report
Visiting Douma ‘chemical attack’ site: Witnesses recall how White Helmets shot the video
Substitutes Won’t Help
1. Conspiracy Theorist 
Europe Needs Self-Reflection
CURRENT AFFAIRS
John Farmer - Senior Council for the 9/11 Commission – wrote a book on his experiences of being a member of the 9/11 Commission. In this book "
Former Soldiers Speak Out:
“There is a media metaphysics. Its basic principle states that nothing exists until it becomes information. Now we have a new twist: information only becomes real when it reaches a mind already attuned to it. In other words, the tree falling in the forest makes a sound only if a user/consumer who wants a tree to fall receives video and audio of the event…”
User A: “Wow, did you see the coverage of the border war in Chula Vista?”
