Credit Report Repair NewsUnited States Credit Report Repair News. Top Stories to help consumers fix bad credit, gain higher credit score, remove bankruptcy, free annual Equifax, TransUnion, Experian credit report. Free Credit Repair Counseling | (888) 502-1260
|
Table of Contents
|
Did You Make a Conscious Choice To Be a Liberal, Conservative, or Libertarian?Wednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
For best viewing, re-open your browser and link to this graphic so you can view it side-by-side with my commentary. The above graphic leaves every American with much to think about. If we are to view the world of political thought AS LEFT/ PROGRESSIVE/ LIBERAL vs. RIGHT/ CONSERVATIVE/ TRADITIONALIST, where do we fit in the above chart? More so, writing for a libertarian website as I do, where does libertarianism fit into the American political spectrum? Did you consciously choose which faction you belong to? Standing on two sides of the fence Libertarians aren’t described in the above chart per se, though many libertarian attributes are listed. And what may come as a surprise, wherever an American sees themselves on the above chart, in practice they may mentally embrace one faction in the liberal-conservative spectrum but in practice stand on the other side on many issues. Do libertarian viewpoints have anything to offer in the back-and-forth political theater between so-called liberals that act like conservatives and conservatives that act like liberals? The answer is yes, but more so by not being on the above chart, by not acquiescing to big government, by wisely not filling a void, by intentional inaction. The freedom to choose is the libertarian call. For example, political representatives vote for a COVID-19 stimulus bill, arguing over the amount, not whether it is destructive to make the unemployed population more dependent upon government welfare to the point they won’t return to their lower-paying jobs, and in turn to the destruction of American business enterprises. Which may have been the objective all along. Libertarians may have addressed the problem by delegating it to the States, by recognizing the lockdown was worse than the infectious disease, by literally ignoring the problem which was the historical approach in prior infectious disease outbreaks that produced no more laboratory-confirmed deaths than the current over-hyped COVID-19 pandemic. The God of big government is worshipped daily in America One issue that the above chart appears to presume is that everyone in the political spectrum embraces big government as final arbiter, provider and governor of our lives. This was not quite what was outlined in the US Constitution — checks and balances, local (State) rule, etc. For most clueless Americans, the State is now their God and the US dollar is their faith proposition. Modern Americans have never lived under the limited government spelled out in the Constitution. War vs no more war True libertarians are staunchly anti-war and that is why a libertarian like Ron Paul could win a seat in Congress in Texas because his constituency did not identify as libertarian per se, but abhorred war. Contrarily, libertarians are not both anti-war and passivist. The idea of a strong military defense is embraced in libertarian texts. Protecting fiat money means an aggressive expansionist military In regard to expansionist versus “defend borders” military, where the rubber meets the road is the US has eleven aircraft carriers basically to protect its hegemony over other countries and to intimidate (block trade, etc.) with any country that threatens to create currency that is backed by an asset, like gold or silver. Any asset-backed currency would undo the prevailing fiat paper money system that is not backed by any asset. Countries that think of introducing gold-backed money to compete against the US paper dollar get two US aircraft carriers off their coastline. The fiat paper money system must be protected. Otherwise, everyone will be buying gold-backed money and the value of the dollar would crash. So, the US must be militarily aggressive, not passive. The US is also covertly (CIA) bent on blocking any other country rising up against it, economically or militarily. The US has ~800 overseas military bases. The US says this is to enforce protective treaties. Kids in the US grow up and never learn any of this. The US represents the “good guys,” and the rest of the countries are filled with “the bad guys.” Maintaining the value of money; supply and demand In 1775 the Continental Congress printed paper currency called Continentals which were not backed by gold or silver and quickly lost value because too many were printed. “Not worth a Continental” became a catchphrase as little gold or silver was on hand to pay the troops at the time and cleverly produced counterfeits by the British ruined the value of these certificates. From that day forward, America has yet to learn its monetary lesson. As the value of the Continentals dropped, Congress had to print more of them — and as more money flooded the countryside, its value dropped even more rapidly. In November of 1776, $19 million had been issued and one could still buy$1.00 worth of goods for $1.00 in paper. By November of 1778, $31 million had been issued, and it took $6.00 in paper to buy the same amount. By November, 1779 $226 million was in circulation and it took $40.00 in paper to buy $1.00 in goods. After that, it was all downhill. In April 1779, George Washington complained, “A wagon load of money will scarcely purchase a wagon load of provisions.” Government covertly steals your money by inflation Today the counterfeit money comes from the Federal Reserve Bank itself. Neither the LEFT or RIGHT has the willpower to stop bankers from the continued erosion of American paper money. According to ShadowStats.com $1000 in 1930 requires $15,081.71 in 2020 to equal the same purchasing power. Few understand that government cannot afford to live up to all its political promises and must rely on inflation (erosion of the value of the dollar) in their social contract with the American people. Americans put good money into the Social Security Trust Fund during their working years and get back inflated (diminished value) money in their retirement checks. The average Social Security check was ~$321/month in 1980 and today is around $1543/month, but should have been $7491.71 if properly corrected for inflation (calculation ShadowStats.com). Government must conduct this theft because it is running a Ponzi scheme. The artificially propped American dollar and military expansion Americans don’t realize the American dollar is the world’s predominant reserve currency. This creates an artificial demand for US dollars that other foreign currencies don’t have. So, on a demand basis, this reserve status props the value of the dollar in international trade. US paper money is called fiat money (something never taught in school). It has no asset backing. Most Americans could not tell you what fiat money is. Why Americans make lots of money It is fortunate you are an American. After WWII the world was set up so Americans would make good money ($5-15 an hour) and the rest of the world would make $5/day and produce cheap products to sell to the U.S. The US is the consumer economy of the world. Just jump over the US/Mexican border and you make $5/day. A waitress job in nearby San Diego earns $5+ an hour. Stimulus money failed to increase the velocity of money When American consumers aren’t buying stuff, money isn’t being spread around and the velocity of money comes to a halt. That is the current situation. Stimulus money has largely been used to pay down credit card debts or put into savings. Therefore, it did little to stimulate the consumer economy which represents ~70% of the nation’s economic output. Much of the stimulus money, in the trillions of dollars, went right into the hands of bankers who now use it as reserves. Both conservatives and liberals applied for the government dole. Churches and whore houses, liberal and conservative business entities, applied for the Payroll Protection Plan, in compensation for the destructive State-government-mandated COVID-19 lockdown. Individuality The big divide between LEFT AND RIGHT is INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY versus the STATE IS RESPONSIBLE and even to blame for individual success or failure. Under Society & Culture on the chart, the LEFT is inclusive, the RIGHT is exclusive. The LEFT is portrayed as organizing itself on societal ETHICS while the RIGHT is organized around personal MORALS. On the LEFT, society is to blame for failure and crime; on the RIGHT a person is encouraged to have integrity and personal morals. When did any American ever make a big decision on their own? In pondering the LEFT/RIGHT chart, few if any Americans really consciously think of where they are in the spectrum of political opinions and practices. Extended families as a block often decide together to be LEFT or RIGHT leaning. It usually isn’t a conscious choice. In most elections citizens vote AGAINST THE OPPOSING PARTY rather than FOR ANY CANDIDATE OF THEIR OWN (example: anti-Trump campaign; left with mentally impaired President and goofy obviously-on-pot female Vice President). Nobody in their right mind voted for them, they voted against the incumbent candidate of the other party they abhorred more (if you can imagine). Making independent decisions One of the experiences of growing up in America is the reliance people have on others making decisions for them. People don’t just study for months and then end up being leftists, or conservatives, or even libertarians. Regardless of political persuasion, most big decisions in American life are made by others, except maybe for a life mate. In other countries, your marriage partner is often determined by family. Maybe there is some wisdom in that, but would never be accepted by independent-minded females in the US. Here, in America the in-practice selection of a marriage partner is who made the best pre-marriage bed partner and who is the best friend, not who can be a good provider or who is the best prospective wife/mother or husband/father as in other countries. Because of their nurturing instincts modern American women often tend to pick losers as life partners. This habit is dumbing down the population. Career decisions: follow your heart or go where opportunity prevails Puzzlingly, upon entry to college, students attempt to pick which vocation they might fare well in without ANY input whatsoever as to what is needed in the job market. While young students entering higher education do have opportunity to make an independent career choice, they usually don’t have enough information to do that successfully. And if Americans can’t figure out what to do in life, they can join the army. Individualist, self-driven entrepreneurial students predictably have a difficult time achieving success regardless of their political leanings if they don’t understand supply and demand in the job marketplace. Those who intend to be self-employed must also learn about capital requirements to start a business, which isn’t covered in college. I know of a young woman, an accomplished singer and graduate from a music school, who yearns to be an opera singer. There are only 300 jobs in opera in the US and most are filled by males. There are more graduates in voice from music schools than there are jobs. Not a word is mentioned to these young people that they can follow their heart for career choices, but they won’t likely find employment or be able to pay back their student loans. American college students are largely clueless. For example, there are ~60,000 job openings for auto mechanics annually and auto makers often pay for schooling. But there is no status in being an auto mechanic or a plumber, which pay what college graduates earn. Math for progressives doesn’t add up For grade-school kids, the school system makes decisions about what is taught (the basics of reading, writing, arithmetic), but the LEFT now sees those core subjects as a way to indoctrinate students in its socialist/equity thinking. For example, there is a battle now in California over teaching math, which is now considered to be racist. Because mathematics is a tool of White oppression, blacks should be held to a different competency level, so the story goes. Mathematical approximations rather than correct answers become the measure of competency. Parents are getting mad. They are, without realizing it, beginning to form another political faction. Church membership is a hall pass to heaven The LEFTIST PROGRESSIVES may go to church believing their group membership gets them into heaven, while RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVES are more likely to believe that PERSONAL SUBMISSION to an all-mighty GOD is the right-of-passage to heaven. For example, the current President of the United States is Catholic, but embraces abortion, something anathema to Catholic teaching. Like others, the President doesn’t see himself as making a bad moral choice (dead babies) because he still belongs to the group (Catholics) and chooses to help an unmarried woman who can’t afford to care for a baby, with a covert population control agenda behind his actions. Essentially, the President lives on two sides of the political spectrum. He doesn’t see this as being incongruent. The group that people belong to is all important. The preacher in church appeals for people to let God reform their lives; that there is a God who wants them to lead a holy life and they need to repent of their errant ways and follow God. But for someone whose family is, for example, Catholic, or Lutheran, or Jewish, their family affiliation (where they go to church) is what puts them in favor with God, not their personal decision to follow God or the Bible. Many US citizens believe they are going to go to heaven because they grew up in a Christian country. It has been said, walking into church doesn’t make you into a Christian any more than walking into a garage makes you a car. Health freedom When it comes to healthcare, doctors make most decisions for Americans in need of healthcare. The older generation relies on their doctors to make them well, with little sense of responsibility to care for their own health. Eat a typical unhealthy American diet and take government-paid for pills to erase the problem. In an era of accessibility to online information about health problems and solutions, self-care has yet to take hold. With no approved vaccines at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, initially Americans opted for immune-boosting nutraceuticals and 99.7% of infected individuals got well on their own, mostly taking zinc lozenges and vitamins C and D. Cases of the flu also vanished and heart attacks drastically declined. Was this due to unsupervised vitamin regimens? If so, modern medicine is not letting on. Government pays for needless care because it is good for the economy Most Americans are clueless to the unnecessary care that is being delivered. Root canals, thyroidectomies, cardiac stents, vaccinations, statin drugs are overprescribed. Government sees this as helping the economy, producing jobs. The more autistic kids, the more therapists that are needed. Healthcare is the leading category for job growth. To keep every worker employed, a certain level of disease is needed. Why prevent disease which doesn’t create jobs. This is how government sees things. The coming financial collapse of Medicare will certainly force many to re-think how they choose to maintain their health without doctoring. With millions of unemployed Americans who aren’t having FICA deductions withdrawn from their pay checks for future medical care and pensions, Medicare and Social Security are doomed. Americans don’t realize there will be no returning to normal. America can’t live up to its social contract with its citizens. Suspicion mounts This is when suspicion arises that government is using the COVID-19 vaccination program to cull the population, to reduce its financial obligations, to usher in the Great Reset, which is lowering the bankers and government’s obligations to provide for retirees. The movie Soylent Green was prescient. Given most of Medicare money is spent caring for people in the last six months of their life, suddenly an engineered virus spreads and experimental vaccines are rushed to market that target nursing home populations; 99% of the COVID-19 related deaths were in nursing homes. The very people who cost government the most money, were eradicated. Just get your shots and don’t ask questions. Vaccine compliance in general does not run along political party lines. With an over-95% vaccination rate among school children, essentially there is no effective anti-vax movement in practice in America. Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines does run along political party lines. Conservatives are more likely to hesitate or indefinitely delay vaccination. Many conservatives see the roll out of experimental vaccines as a covert population control strategy. But how can we explain the aggressive vaccination schedule for school children which parallels an otherwise unexplained rise in autism? More than 1 in 4 school-aged children now have a chronic disease. Vaccinated children have more developmental delays, asthma and ear infections. Vaccinated children have a 6.6-fold increase in neuro-developmental disorders compared to unvaccinated children. Yet parents mindlessly have their children vaccinated. Mothers: a new political force Is it un-American not to have your children vaccinated and rely on natural immunity? Mothers of American children, regardless of political affiliation, have now banded together to oppose face masks, social distancing and vaccination. This is a growing unaffiliated political faction. A new ad-hoc political party has arisen – The American Mothers Party that crosses all political, religious and income factors, that is pretty fed up with what is going on with their school children. It is leaderless, but not directionless. It is to be determined just how politicians will begin to deal with this loosely networked political group that now seeks to ouster many politicians. Group-think In reality, most Americans make very few independent decisions. Group-think prevails. Propaganda on television is what unites most Americans in a common experience (think Super Bowl Sunday). Social tactics used to urge Americans to be immunized against COVID-19 include isolation, ostracism, ridicule, social pressure, and even financial incentives. If vaccine compliance numbers are correct, ~7 in 10 Americans intend to yield to social pressure tactics and elect to take experimental vaccines without proven long-term safety data and with side effect ratios far higher than prior licensed vaccines. Self-reliance is an oxymoron There are only 9 million Americans who are self-employed out of a work force of 150+ million. The American way of private enterprise, entrepreneurship, etc. is not cultivated. Most American workers end up being slaves to an employer and credit cards. Financial risk taking is frightening for the masses. However, gambling is part of American life, the rich playing the stock market and the poor buying lottery tickets. For the LEFT, there must be EQUITY… everyone gets rewarded with the same basic pay regardless of talent or skill. With so many Americans out of work, guaranteed income is now the narrative. Americans have no clue their country is handing them stimulus checks on borrowed money. Nobody knows or cares where the money is coming from. Politicians are temporarily buying off the masses. Soon you won’t have to ever sign a mortgage One of the biggest decisions people may make in their lifetime is to buy a house. For that, the wife takes precedence. It’s her dream home with affordability in mind. The house-deprived female will indebt a husband who is attempting to please his wife. Now they will have their own home. But home ownership is an illusion. In reality, it belongs to the bank. The first 15-years of a home mortgage the lender is getting all their principal back. “Homeowners” aren’t gaining much equity till then. A large number of homes sell within 7 years of purchase and little equity is ever built up in the home unless home values are rising. Signing a mortgage document is something most Americans do blindly. They have no idea they will be paying 3 times more for the house over the life of the mortgage than its selling price. New home buyers have no idea that all of the home repairs are being made for the bank. It would be better to rent. Much of the economy spins on home sales. The fallacy is that a couple might as well buy than rent, that way they have some ownership. But that only appears to be wise on a monthly basis. Renting will cost 1/3rd of what it costs to buy over the life of a 30-year mortgage and the owner pays for home maintenance, not the renter. Regardless of these facts, the idea of having your own home predominates, particularly among females. It is the single biggest mistake young couples make financially. Just how American women are going to handle the new globalist idea that people will own nothing, not a car nor a home, is something that will have to be reckoned with in future political fights as the globalists proceed to take over the country. So where did you place your marker on the chart? Well, if you are libertarian, you don’t know where to place your personal marker on the political spectrum graphic. Liberal and conservative perspectives are often the same. They are authoritarian viewpoints. The libertarian view does not mesh with LEFT or RIGHT viewpoints. Remember, I told you Americans are indecisive. They would rather others make decisions for them. Libertarians have “a lot of respect for individual decisions,” says one professor. For example, a true libertarian would be tolerant of, though not necessarily embrace, abortion or gay marriage. Maybe these practices are immoral, but that is the job of the church, not government. However, in the name of independent thinking, a libertarian may establish their own set of rights and wrongs rather than adhere to a standard of behavior set by a higher authority (example: the TEN COMMANDMENTS). Lew Rockwell describes libertarianism as follows: Every defining libertarian principle: self-ownership, the meaning of property titles, and nonaggression. It is much more difficult – thankless, even – to defend the rights of those whom society despises. Let me repeat: the only “privilege” that matters to a libertarian qua libertarian is the kind that comes from the barrel of the state’s gun. Disagree with this statement if you like, but in that case, you will have to substitute some word other than libertarian to describe your philosophy. Libertarianism does not offer a way of life; it offers liberty, so that each person is free to adopt and act upon his own values and moral principles. Libertarians agree with Lord Acton that “liberty is the highest political end” – not necessarily the highest end on everyone’s personal scale of values. Libertarians are unsuited to the thought-control business. Rockwell: “Our position is not merely that the state is a moral evil, but that human liberty is a tremendous moral good.” If you want to hear Lew Rockwell talk about what libertarianism is, you might want to listen to an interview he did online. The most accurate definition of libertarianism is explained by what it isn’t. It isn’t about authoritarianism; it isn’t about being unarmed; it isn’t about war; it isn’t about trust in phony paper money. It isn’t about being moral per se, it is about the freedom to make a moral choice rather than forced into one. What America has become: who is to blame? It is shocking for many Americans who grew up in the 1950s and 1960s what our country has become. But who is to blame? Lew Rockwell: “Well, every government requires at least the tacit consent of the governed. It’s true of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, Obama, and it’s why, by the way, they can actually be battled. If people would withdraw their consent—if they don’t give their consent, as difficult as it may be to believe, they can’t actually do things.” About defunding the police: libertarian view While we live in a confusing time when mayors are asking to defund the police over accusations of racism, this is what Rockwell surprisingly said: I remember when I lived in Oklahoma City in the early 1970s, and it was I think the last time a major city had a police strike. So, all the police went on strike. And the governor, I remember, sent 50 state troopers to patrol Oklahoma City, which is a huge city, and what happened was the crime rate plummeted. And I think, in part, this is because it was Oklahoma, as in every other free area, everybody’s armed. So, my guess is, any criminal thought, if I go in that house, they’re going to be ready to shoot me. When the strike was over, the crime rate went back up. I think partly that’s true because I think the police are criminals. I think police commit crimes, and it’s true that they’re lazy and sleeping and don’t want to work, and that sort of thing—so they don’t have an incentive to do their actual job. But do they have an incentive to take advantage of people if they see a chance to commit a crime and get away with it, or so they think? Should you consider transitioning from REPUBLICAN/DEMOCRAT to LIBERTARIAN, you may want to learn more about what you are getting into first. There is a 1-minute quiz to help you determine where you stand politically. Tom Woods posts THE MAKING OF AN ANTI-WAR LIBERTARIAN, the transformation of a pro-war Republican, at MISES INSTITUTE. Or just dig into Lew Rockwell’s audio library of contrarian/libertarian thought.
The post Did You Make a Conscious Choice To Be a Liberal, Conservative, or Libertarian? appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Insouciance Destroyed AmericaWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Most Americans have no idea how far gone their country is. We not only have the Biden regime announcing solidarity with BLM and flying the BLM flag at US embassies and consular missions, US military recruitment videos stressing recruitment of lesbian females, men dressing as women, and Americans having their genitals removed so they can become “no gender”, we have Democrat school systems teaching white people self-hate and infusing them with guilt and making them effective agents in reconstructing America as a racial caste system favoring blacks.
In the Spring 2021 issue of City Journal published by the Manhattan Institute, Christopher F. Rufo documents with their own words and deeds how the Oregon public school system has abandoned education for cult indoctrination. Rufo focuses on the school systems in Tigard-Tualatin, Beaverton, and Portland where white Americans account for 98-99 percent of the population. Using their own documents and official statements, he shows that the purpose of the education bureaucrats is to destroy the confidence of white students and infuse them with “white guilt,” “white shame,” and self-loathing. A hate speech code is institutionalized, the purpose of which is “to pathologize any political opposition to the new order.” The cause of oppression is “whiteness” and white values of color-blindness, individualism, and meritocracy. In place of advancement by merit there is to be advancement based on “equity,” which means outcomes that favor blacks independently of merit. Color-blindness is denounced as a white trick to uphold a merit-based system. Individualism is to be replaced with group think described by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg as his ideal where everyone complies with group thought controlled by him and a handful of others of the “new order.” https://www.foxnews.com/media/okeefe-project-veritas-hannity-facebook-vaccine-hesitancy The New York Times’ 1619 Project has allied American media with the attack on the United States Constitution. According to the New York Times and the Oregon public school system, the Constitution is a racist document written for the sole purpose of institutionalizing black slavery in the foundation of the American state. As Rufo notices, “We have reached the strange reality in which the state, through the organs of education, agitates for its own destruction. Educators have condemned the entire structure of the social order and celebrated those who would tear it down.” It is clear that white liberals have succeeded in destroying the belief of many Americans in the rule of law and the Constitution by denouncing these historic achievements as “tools of white supremacy.” Some red states have passed laws prohibiting the teaching of the demonization of white Americans in their states. What is likely to happen is that the presstitutes, the intellectuals, and the anti-white US Department of Justice will overthrow the state laws as a form of McCarthyism that prohibits freedom of expression. In other words, freedom of expression is limited to denunciation of the founding values of the United States as white supremacist and white Americans as “systemic racist oppressors.”
The message is clear. From the Democrats the message is that white Americans must submit to blacks whom they have wronged. From the Red States the response is that whites freed the blacks from the slavery that their black brothers sold them into, whites passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution that guarantee blacks equality before the law. The claim that white Americans denied these protections to blacks is a lie by traitors guilty of treason who intend to overthrow the United States of America. The only way out of this is civil war. We will learn if the red states have enough confidence and will to defend the Constitutional rights of white Americans. Otherwise we will have, as was predicted some years ago, a “dispossessed majority.” White Americans could be dispossessed not only of their legal and Constitutional rights, but also of their lives. The post Insouciance Destroyed America appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The Government’s Community Caretaking RuseWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Shop all books by Judge Napolitano Edward and Kim Caniglia had an argument in their Cranston, Rhode Island, home, during which Edward retrieved a lawfully owned unloaded handgun and placed it on their dining room table in front of Kim and said to his wife, “Shoot me now, and get it over with.” Kim did not touch the gun and left the house for the evening. The next day, after she could not reach Edward by phone, Kim returned to the house with four local police officers who met Edward outside on the back porch. The police and Edward chatted, and he confirmed the previous day’s events. The police then called an ambulance and ordered Edward to get into it to be taken to a hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. Edward agreed to go only if the police agreed not to enter his house and not to seize his firearms. The police agreed to both conditions. Yet, as soon as the ambulance and Edward were gone, the police entered the house and seized Edward’s guns. The hospital sent Edward home with a clean bill of mental health. Edward then sued the police for an unlawful arrest, search and seizure. The police claimed that they entered the Caniglia home not to investigate a crime but to engage in “community caretaking.” Can the police enter a private home without a search warrant to protect a resident of the home from himself? In a word: No. Here is the backstory. The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects the quintessentially American right to be left alone. It prohibits all unreasonable searches and seizures. Warrantless searches and seizures are unreasonable — and thus unconstitutional — unless they fall into the “exigent circumstances” exception. An exigent circumstance is one in which reasonable minds believe that a criminal event will occur imminently that cannot be undone — such as murder or destroying evidence. These exceptions are not written into the Fourth Amendment but have been grafted into it by the courts based on reason and common sense. Sometimes, however, the exceptions are based on an ideology that gives primacy to police over individual rights. Such primacy is a manifestation of a police state, not a free society. In a free society, rights are recognized as natural and cannot be subjugated to the needs and wishes of the government without due process — notice of charges, a fair hearing before a neutral jury with constitutional protections at which the government must prove fault, and the right to appeal. In a police state, personal liberty is suppressed immediately in deference to governmental needs. This contradicts the premises and the language of both the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, which is that personal freedom is the default position. In reversing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in the Caniglia case, the Supreme Court did not go as far as Thomas Jefferson or James Madison, both of whom used 18th-century language to argue for liberty-as-the-default position, but it did tell lower federal courts not to expand the exigency exceptions in the home. The exigency exception to the Fourth Amendment that the First Circuit found was “community caretaking.” This ambiguous phrase identifies a doctrine that allows police to perform non-law enforcement duties and, when doing so, to be relieved of the restrictions imposed upon them by the Fourth Amendment. The First Circuit found that the police, by claiming community caretaking, could enter the Caniglia home — without the consent of either of its owners, without a search warrant and without any articulable suspicion about criminal activity in the home — because they were entering to protect Edward from himself, and not for a law enforcement purpose. This is a dangerous theory of constitutional interpretation, and all who believe that the Constitution means what it says should be happy that its wings were clipped by a unanimous Supreme Court last week. The danger in this doctrine is the government’s argument that the Constitution only restrains the police when they are investigating a crime. The FBI has made the same argument to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and to Congress, and successfully persuaded both to permit it to view without a warrant raw intelligence data — transcripts of telephone calls, financial and medical data, emails and text messages — claiming to be looking for foreign national security activities, not evidence of domestic crimes. The community caretaking doctrine is no less dangerous than warrantless electronic surveillance. It is a ruse used by the government and, until the Caniglia decision, has been approved by federal and state courts throughout the United States. These approvals fly in the face of the plain language of the Fourth Amendment, which protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects” without exception based on the reasons for the government’s assault on privacy. Privacy violations by British soldiers — looking ostensibly for stamps on all papers in colonial homes pursuant to the tax imposed by the Stamp Act — arguably triggered the American Revolution and animated Madison and his colleagues to author the Fourth Amendment. Madison knew that the British search for stamps in colonial homes was a subterfuge; but on its face, it was an administrative function — tax collecting — not a law enforcement one. Prosecutors and judges have misread history and rejected the very premise of the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence — that our rights come from our humanity — with their argument that the Fourth Amendment restrains government invasions of privacy only during criminal investigations. The instruction of the Fourth Amendment to the government is clear: Go get a warrant. But if the government can avoid the amendment’s warrant requirement by its choice of words — “law enforcement” or “community caretaking” — then the Fourth Amendment is toothless. And a toothless Fourth Amendment is the gateway to tyranny. Reprinted with the author’s permission. The post The Government’s Community Caretaking Ruse appeared first on LewRockwell. |
9/11 Cover Up Director Appointed To Chair Covid Cover Up GroupWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Arch Deep State fixer and cover-upper, Philip Zelikow, former Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission will be chairing the COVID Commission Planning Group, according to the University of Virginia, whose Miller Center for Public Affairs will serve as the group’s base to “Help America and the world learn from this pandemic and safeguard against future threats.” Zelikow’s “non-partisan” group includes Event 201 participants, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health and it’s being funded by Schmidt Futures, which is Eric Schmidt-Goolag-Alphabet-Bilderberg, the Skoll Foundation, which is the eBay FAANGster insider philanthropy group, the Rockefeller Foundation and Stand Together, which is Charles Koch’s philanthropic organization. Zelikow’s hope is that their work will feed into a future National COVID Commission, set up either by the White House or Congress and what a perfect bookend this would be for this Deep State swamp monster! Besides serving on President George W Bush’s transition team in 2000-2001 and then on his Post-9/11 Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, Zelikow was the author of the Bush administration’s 2002 National Security Strategy, which laid out the case for pre-emptive war, which was used to invade Iraq. For these reasons, his later role as the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission (after Dubya’s first choice, Henry Kissinger was loudly rejected even by The New York Times) led to a general consensus that he is Deep State fixer of the swampiest kind, walking in the footsteps of the likes of Henry Kissinger and John Kerry. As James Corbett says here, “He certainly absolutely fulfilled his role as Executive Director of the 9/11 Cover-Up Commission by facilitating the cover-up. And how did he do that? He directed who the Commission talked to, under what circumstances, what they talked about, what they didn’t talk about and what, ultimately ended up in the final report.” Corbett says perhaps the most egregious example of this was how, before the Commission even had a single internal staff meeting, Zelikow and his professor, Ernest May had co-authored a draft of the 9/11 Commission Final Report, including headings subheadings and sub-sub headings! “It was so ridiculous, that even the 9/11 Commission staff, themselves internally parodied this and started sending around a parody draft outline of the Warren Commission Report called the ‘Pre-Emptive Outline.’” One of the headlines in this parody Warren Commission Report was, “Single Bullet: We Haven’t Seen the Evidence Yet but Really, We’re Sure.” James continues, “So that’s the person that they’re going to put in charge of this preliminary to the National COVID Commission. Uh, yeah. I think we know where this is trending but here’s an important part of this story that might might get excluded, so let’s not exclude it: One of Zelikow’s specialties – his self-professed specialties – is ‘public myth’, the creation and management of public myth. “He, himself brags that this is his specialty and in a 1998 article on public myths, Zelikow identified ‘generational myths that are formed by those pivotal events that become etched in the minds of those who have lived through them.’ “And also in 1998, he was writing about ‘Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the New Danger’, in Foreign Affairs, the publication of the Council on Foreign Relations. “So he was there, steering and shaping the formation of the ‘generational myth’ for the 21st century: the War on Terror; there, as the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission and now, he’s going to shape the ‘generational myth’ for this ‘Biosecurity State’, the next ‘generational myth’. “Absolutely, top-to-bottom, this is outrageous and disgusting! I hope people will actually read through this University of Virginia puff piece to see what he’s talking about, ‘Oh, we’re going to have to get into private firms and non-profit entities and hospitals and pharmaceutical firms. They all have a role to play and they’ve all made responses to this disaster.’ “Yeah, I wonder if we’re really going to get to the bottom of what really happened over the course of the past year or whether it’s all going to be covered-up and the ‘generational myth’ for the foundation of the Biosecurity State and vaccine passports and all of that are going to be hardwired-in, through a National Commission. “This is the way that they form the response to these ‘generation-changing’ kind of events and so this is where the real action of all of this really comes, is when they start hardwiring it in through these types of things. “Absolutely disgusting! Top-to-bottom! That was a mouthful that barely scrapes the surface. If you are interested in more, please type ‘Zelikow’ into the search bar, on corbettreport.com and you’ll find a number of reports, including my 9/11 Suspects piece, all about Philip Zelikow and how he ran the 9/11 Cover-Up Commission and a podcast episode I did, called ‘Learn History with Philip Zelikow… “I think it’s important to put this on the record. This is a cover-up in action. We’re watching it happen, right now.” Reprinted with the author’s permission. The post 9/11 Cover Up Director Appointed To Chair Covid Cover Up Group appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The Road to Forced Covid Vaccinations or ‘How I Learned To Love the Jab’Wednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Like most Americans, I have a high threshold for tyranny. I’m not proud of that, but when the state holds the power to bankrupt, imprison, torture, and kill you, most rebellion stops at the angry tweet. A small disgruntled minority might street protest, but only within the approved parameters of the techno-financial oligarchy. Even those benign First Amendment displays of dissatisfaction are heading the way of the Dodo, courtesy of Big Tech censorship and a militarized security state. Despite the American propensity for obeying Big Brother, there is one government diktat that could push some into Sands of Iwo Jima-Remember the Alamo-Scarface “Say hello to my little friend” territory. Forced COVID-19 vaccinations. To paraphrase Charlton Heston, they’ll have to inject me in my cold dead arm. Bill Gates and his Rothschild-Rockefeller Matrix cohorts understand that some folks object to human guinea pig biochemical rape. Dead-of-night home invasions by black-clad Ministry of Health commandos in balaclavas armed with submachine guns, and syringes of Pfizer mRNA vaccine could face stiff resistance. To mitigate “extreme” cases of vaccine hesitancy, the warders of the global corp insane asylum are using incremental measures to induce stubborn charges to “voluntarily” take their medicine. Google search (aka “Ask the Deep State”) reports that about 40% of the US population is fully vaccinated. It seems some aren’t buying Bill Gates as warm and fuzzy Mr. Rogers philanthropist, although I think Tom Hanks with wig, makeup, and glasses, under Spielberg’s direction, could pull it off. But even a Hollywood-CIA-Mossad blockbuster might not be enough to send everyone skipping off to mass vaccination sites. So what’s a sociopathic oligarch to do?. First, continue to pump out constant COVID-19 fear porn via the MKUltra Mainstream Media. Message repetition works- but not on everyone, otherwise, we’d all dine at McDonald’s. For added traction, play “public service” announcements that show end-of-the rainbow family reunions and similar “life returns to normal” scenes. Want to see grandma again? Just let Big Pharma hijack your immune system. However, living in a society that’s turned our most beautiful songs into laundry soap jingles has inured some to Simulacra and Simulation heartstring tugs. To paraphrase Chief Brody from the movie Jaws, “You’re gonna need a bigger carrot and stick.” Krispy Kreme offered a free donut to get vaccinated. Not exactly a carrot, but studies show that lab rats prefer sugary junk foods. Time Out reports Shake Shack’s donating a burger and fries to the cause. Six Flags in Illinois is dangling free admission to the first 50,000 who show their vax papers (NBC 5 Chicago). But not everyone is willing to participate in a Klaus Schwab transhuman 5G nanotechnology experiment for a ride on the Tilt a Whirl. When junk food and amusement parks fail, try cold hard cash. Want another stimulus check when the next bolt cracks off the wing of our 747 turbulence economy? Not if you’re one of those conspiracy nuts who believe in gravity- or the mendacious evil of the Davos crowd. Want to go out to bars, restaurants, or concerts? No vaccine passport, no service. For younger people and social types, those are painful blows. But if you don’t mind getting drunk at home, for the price of three tequila shots at a chi-chi lounge, you can home chug a bottle of Patron. No more dining out? On the upside, your annual ingestion of rat droppings will dramatically decline. As far as concerts go- boo hoo, we won’t get to see Cardi B or some other corporate dreck act. Although in fairness to Cardi, she’s cute and she’d be perfect to perform the U.S. Collapse national anthem. Still holding out? Forget about drinking a cold beer on a Thai beach, exploring a medieval European castle, or hiking the Machu Picchu trail. (Full disclosure, I took the train up.) You’re not boarding the plane without a vaccine passport. That’s ok. I can’t afford international travel anymore. With 60% of Americans unable to deal with a one thousand dollar emergency (CNBC), I reckon a lot of folks will be visiting Netflix rather than the Eiffel Tower. Wait until we reach “Own Nothing Be Happy” Great Reset paradise. The “new normal” family vacation will likely entail hiking to the town dump to scavenge for bottles, cans, and food scraps. “Are we there yet?” “No son, when the gangrenous blisters on your mother’s unshod feet start exploding, then we’re there.” But what if your job requires travel? How many would choose unemployment in our Running Man dystopia over a vaccination? And that applies to all occupations that mandate the COVID vaccine. Imagine getting fired and trying to sell the wife and kids on a fun-filled indefinite road trip, replete with dumpster diving and gas station restroom bathing, all because Daddy was too much of a scaredy-cat to get his shot. And for future rat race contestants who refuse the vaccine? Forget about college. No injection, no Post-Modern Feminist Gender Identity Intersectional Indegionous Basket Weaving. In all seriousness, that sounds like a fun class- especially after smoking a joint. Once the vaccine is mandated for public school admission, objecting parents will have to homeschool Junior. Test question: “How do you teach Sonny Boy the new math when you can’t remember the old math?” It won’t be all bad. On Prom Night, hang a strobe light in the living room. Mom can go as Junior’s date, as he’ll be an unvaccinated pariah. Dad can DJ. There are a plethora of additional ways to induce vaccine compliance. Dating? Swipe left for unvaccinated. Eating? “No one gets past the supermarket velvet rope without a Covid ID.” “But I’m starving to death!” “Sorry pal, you’re not on the list.” And don’t expect your health insurance to cover your medical bills if you’re reckless enough to refuse the shot. As pandemic death certificates have shown, Covid kills in many ways, including via car crash, drowning, and electrocution. For the 500 trillion dollar (Rothschild Family wealth?) question- why would the ruling elites push so hard for global vaccination, especially with a pathogen that has a 99.8% survival rate? Sadly, I missed the last Bilderberg meeting, but I’d guess that like 9/11, Covid brings us one false flag closer to Brave New World-1984 brain chip neo-feudal technocracy. Once AI and automation can replace human debt slave labor, our overlords will have to decide what they want to do with 8 billion or so useless eaters. I think they’ll opt for the extra legroom. The post The Road to Forced Covid Vaccinations or ‘How I Learned To Love the Jab’ appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Greetings From ‘New Normal’ GermanyWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
On April 1, 1933, shortly after Hitler was appointed chancellor, the Nazis staged a boycott of Jewish businesses in Germany. Members of the Storm Troopers (“die Sturmabteilung,” or the “Storm Department,” as I like to think of them) stood around outside of Jewish-owned stores with Gothic-lettered placards reading “Germans! Defend yourselves! Do not buy from Jews!” The boycott itself was a total disaster — most Germans ignored it and just went on with their lives — but it was the beginning of the official persecution of the Jews and totalitarianism in Nazi Germany. Last week, here in “New Normal” Germany, the government (which, it goes without saying, bears no resemblance to the Nazi regime, or any other totalitarian regime) implemented a social-segregation system that bans anyone who refuses to publicly conform to the official “New Normal” ideology from participating in German society. From now on, only those who have an official “vaccination pass” or proof of a negative PCR test are allowed to sit down and eat at restaurants, shop at “non-essential” stores, or go to bars, or the cinema, or wherever. Here’s a notice from the website of Prater, a popular beer garden in Berlin:
Of course, there is absolutely no valid comparison to be made between these two events, or between Nazi Germany and “New Normal” Germany, nor would I ever imply that there was. That would be illegal in “New Normal” Germany, as it would be considered “relativizing the Holocaust,” not to mention being “anti-democratic and/or delegitimizing the state in a way that endangers security,” or whatever. Plus, it’s not like there are SA goons standing outside shops and restaurants with signs reading “Germans! Defend yourselves! Don’t sell to the Unvaccinated and Untested!” It’s just that it’s now illegal to do that, i.e., sell anything to those of us whom the media and the government have systematically stigmatized as “Covid deniers” because we haven’t converted to the new official ideology and submitted to being “vaccinated” or “tested.” Protesting the new official ideology is also illegal in “New Normal” Germany. OK, I think I should probably rephrase that. I certainly don’t want to misinform anyone. Protesting the “New Normal” isn’t outlawed per se. You’re totally allowed to apply for a permit to protest against the “Covid restrictions” on the condition that everyone taking part in your protest wears a medical-looking N95 mask and maintains a distance of 1.5 meters from every other medical-masked protester … which is kind of like permitting anti-racism protests as long as the protesters all wear Ku Klux Klan robes and perform a choreographed karaoke of Lynyrd Skynyrd’s Sweet Home Alabama. Who says the Germans don’t have a sense of humor? I don’t mean to single out the Germans. There is nothing inherently totalitarian, or fascist, or robotically authoritarian and hyper-conformist about the Germans, as a people. The fact that the vast majority of Germans clicked their heels and started mindlessly following orders, like they did in Nazi Germany, the moment the “New Normal” was introduced last year doesn’t mean that all Germans are fascists by nature. Most Americans did the same thing. So did the British, the Australians, the Spanish, the French, the Canadians, and a long list of others. It’s just that, well, I happen to live here, so I’ve watched as Germany has been transformed into “New Normal Germany” up close and personal, and it has definitely made an impression on me. The post Greetings From ‘New Normal’ Germany appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Why Cause-of-Death Stats Aren’t as Reliable as the CDC Wants You To ThinkWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Historically, the overwhelming majority of Americans have ignored death certificates and the topic of how they are processed, produced, and compiled for purposes of government statistics. During 2020, however, death certificates rose to a level of unprecedented prominence in the United States. This was due to the fact that both state and federal government agencies began using covid death counts as a means to justify a wide variety of radical new government decrees designed to combat disease. Given that governments were leaning so heavily on death counts as an excuse for unprecedented expansions of state power, many observers quite understandably began to question how these deaths were being counted. It turns out that the administration of death certificates is something ripe for some serious skepticism. Even before the panic that ensued over rising reports of covid-19 deaths, the accuracy of death certificates was an ongoing concern. In recent decades, the number of autopsies had declined, meaning that fewer and fewer death certificates are backed up by more thorough investigation. Moreover, studies have shown that nearly half of physicians in some cases “knowingly reported an inaccurate cause of death” on death certificates. Other studies have suggested that a majority of death certificates contained “multiple errors.” The implications of this for government policy are significant, to say the least, and they call into question the accuracy of one of the most basic building blocks underlying today’s public health technocracy. Statistics on causes of death rely heavily on aggregate death certificate data. But if physicians admit to poor training, and to even providing misleading info on causes of death, then attempts to justify government policy with data from death certificates becomes increasingly suspect. Yet, the media and government agencies tend to present this data as if it were unimpeachable and an ever-reliable source of health data. Just as with other types of government data, however, death certificates ought to be viewed with far more skepticism than is presently the case. Problems with Collecting the Data Back in April of 2020, as state and local governments were using official numbers on covid deaths to justify policy changes, public curiosity over death certificates began to rise. The importance of reporting accurate cause-of-death information was highlighted on April 7, 2020, when the Trump administration’s infectious disease advisor, Deborah Birx, discussed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations on reporting deaths. Birx noted:
Moreover, federal policy provided a monetary incentive to report more deaths as covid-19 deaths. According to Factcheck.org:
This doesn’t mean that doctors are putting “covid-19” as the cause of death in many cases when they know something else to be true—all while laughing an evil laugh. Rather, the effect is likely more subtle. In cases where there is ambiguity as to the cause of death, these policies provide a nudge in the direction of including covid-19 as a cause of death, because it unlikely to be questioned and it ensures healthcare providers receive higher levels of reimbursement. Many different factors can go into choosing a cause of death. After all, causes of death don’t just miraculously appear on paperwork. The cause of death must be reported in the paperwork by a human being who uses his or her own judgment as to what the cause of death is. Although the cause of death often seems obvious in the popular culture—such as a bullet wound in the head in a crime drama—the cause of death is often anything by self-evident in real life. But federal policy has made it it very easy for medical personnel to just put “covid” on the death certificate and be done with it. Indeed, it’s unlikely that medical professionals needed more urging than this. As it turns out, the medical profession has been moving away from insisting on thorough investigations in cause-of-death information. In this 2017 article on geriatric medicine and “death certificate accuracy,” the authors report:
As one Washington Post headline put it in 2013: “Nearly One-Third of All Death Certificates Are Wrong.” This is partly due to a paucity of training. In a 2005 article for American Family Physician, Dr. Geoffrey Swain, Gloria K. Ward, and Dr. Paul P. Hartlaub write that “physicians receive inadequate training in this important area, and their performance on this task remains less than ideal…. While the cause of death may be difficult to agree on sometimes, most problems with death certificates stem from failure to complete them correctly.” Another reason for death certificate errors and inaccuracies is the fact that relatively few autopsies are performed anymore, and few resources are apparently dedicated to auditing cause-of-death reporting or confirming the reported causes of death. For example,
Some doctors, researchers, and bureaucrats claim that autopsies are no longer necessary except in a few cases because medical personnel are supposedly so much better at identifying cause of death today. Many others disagree, however, and “[i]n medicine, autopsies remain a critical weapon” in the fight to expand medical knowledge. For example, a meta-analysis comparing clinical diagnoses against autopsy findings states: “At least a third of death certificates are likely to be incorrect and 50% of autopsies produce findings unsuspected before death.” And, an Ohio study of infant death certificates found 56.5 percent of death certificates were discordant with autopsy findings. Moreover, it appears the field of forensic pathology has become rather unpopular. According to Judy Melink, MD, forensic pathologists are getting older on average, and their total numbers are down. This has been encouraged by federal policy. “Hospitals are no longer required to have autopsy programs to qualify for Medicare reimbursement.” Thorough investigation of the cause of death also tends to uncover more evidence of medical errors. Thus, As Lee Goldman, MD, has noted, a lack of autopsy information “represents a huge missed opportunity for understanding how to reduce deaths attributable to medical errors.” In some cases, medical personnel might even avoid autopsies for nefarious reasons. As Melink concludes, the decline in requirements for autopsies can mean that if hospital staff “find themselves motivated to bury their mistakes, they are now free to do so.” In a field where more than one hundred thousand deaths per year may be due to medical errors, this is no small issue. In some cases, there have been bureaucratic obstacles to reporting what doctors believed to be the correct conclusion. The Washington Post reports:
The Politicization of Death Certificates Prior to 2020, the issue of interpreting death certificates usually garnered attention from the general public in cases of criminal justice, as in the George Floyd case, in which the official cause of death became a matter of legal debate. This might occur in some cases at the macro level as well. Police in Japan, for instance, have long been suspected of declaring suspicious deaths to be suicides, and then discouraging autopsies which might uncover homicide. As the Los Angeles Times reported in 2007:
In any case, a situation in which there is motivation to conduct a lackluster investigation into the cause of death can be problematic, and potential problems don’t end with the stage at which death certificates are filled out. Further problems can arise when “public health” officials make decisions about how this data will be compiled, labeled, and used. Like all government data, such as employment data, crime data, or data on homeownership, this data can be used in a variety of ways to justify and craft additional government interventions in the private sector. It’s important to keep in mind that death certificate data, like any other bureaucratic metric, is subject to human errors and human choices, and ought always be regarded as just one fallible factor in political decision-making. — 1.Emily Carter, Christina Holt, and Amy Haskins, “Research Review: Death Certificate Accuracy—Why It Matters and How to Achieve It,” Today’s Geriatric Medicine 10, no. 5: 26 2.Lee Goldman, “Autopsy 2018: Still Necessary, Even If Occasionally Not Sufficient,” Circulation 137, no. 25 (2018): 2686–88. The post Why Cause-of-Death Stats Aren’t as Reliable as the CDC Wants You To Think appeared first on LewRockwell. |
How the Unthinkable Became Thinkable: the Awakening of Sleeping MonstersWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
Will we see biotechnology serve the interests of humanity under a multipolar paradigm that cherishes national sovereignty, human life, family, and faith? As much as it might cause us a fair deal of displeasure and even an upset stomach to consider such ideas as the hold eugenics has on our presently troubled era, I believe that ignoring such a topic really does no one any favors in the long run. This is especially serious, as leading World Economic Forum darlings like Yuval Harari flaunt such concepts as “the new global useless class” which Artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, automation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution is supposedly ushering in. Other Davos creatures like Klaus Schwab call openly for a microchipped global citizenry capable of interfacing with a global web with a single thought while Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg promote ‘neuralinks’ to “keep humanity relevant” by merging with computers in a new epoch of evolutionary biology. Leading Darwinian geneticists like Sir James Watson and Sir Richard Dawkins openly defend eugenics while a technocracy consolidates itself in a governing station using a “Great Reset” as an excuse to usher in a new post-nation state era. If there is something fundamentally evil lurking behind these processes which has any connection to the Anglo-American rise of fascism and eugenics nearly a century ago, then let’s at least have the courage to explore that possibility. It was after all, only by looking at this ugliness 80 years ago, that patriots were able to take appropriate measures to prevent a bankers’ technocratic dictatorship in 1933 and again during WW2.. so perhaps a similar display of courage to think the unthinkable might be worth the effort for those who might find themselves in a similar situation today. What Didn’t Happen at Nuremburg? Seventy six years ago, as the allies were consolidating their victory over the Nazi machine and as the “Nuremburg Tribunals” were quickly being arranged, a new strategy was set into motion by the very same forces that had put vast energy, money and resources into the rise of fascism as “the miracle solution” of post-WWI economic chaos that had spread across Europe and the USA. It is among the greatest scandals of our age that the Wall Street- City of London machine that financed Hitler and Mussolini as battering rams for a new world order were never actually brought to justice. Although Franklin Roosevelt managed to put a leash on Wall Street between 1933-1945, while setting the world stage for a beautiful post-war vision of win-win cooperation, the darker forces of the financier oligarchy who wanted only to establish a global unipolar system of governance not only avoided punishment, but wasted no time to regain their lost hegemony before the war had come to a close. The Role of Sir Julian Huxley One of the conceptual grand strategists of this process was a man named Julian Sorrel Huxley (1887-1975). Celebrated as a biologist, and social reformer, Julian was a devout life-long member of the British Eugenics Society serving alongside John Maynard Keynes as secretary and later as its president. Julian was a busy man, who along with his brother Aldous, worked hard to fill the very large shoes of their grandfather Thomas (aka: Darwin’s bulldog). While simultaneously managing the post-WW2 eugenics movement, Julian found himself setting into motion the modern environmental movement as founder of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature in 1948, co-founding the World Wildlife Fund in 1961, created the term “transhumanism” and also founding an immensely influential United Nations body called UNESCO (abbreviated for the United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization) in 1946 which he ran as Director General from 1946-1948. The mandate for the new organization was set out clearly in Huxley’s 1946 UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy: “The moral for UNESCO is clear. The task laid upon it of promoting peace and security can never be wholly realised through the means assigned to it- education, science and culture. It must envisage some form of world political unity, whether through a single world government or otherwise, as the only certain means of avoiding war… in its educational programme it can stress the ultimate need for a world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization.” To what end would this “world political unity” be aimed? Several pages later, Huxley’s vision is laid out in all of its twisted detail: “At the moment, it is probable that the indirect effect of civilization is dysgenic instead of eugenic, and in any case it seems likely that the dead weight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, mental instability and disease proneness, which already exist in the human species will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved. Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” After the world got the chance to see what a eugenics program looked like under the full support of a fascist social engineer, it would be no exaggeration to say that it lost a good deal of popularity in the eyes of a world population still very much connected to traditional cultural institutions like Christianity, patriotism and respect for sacredness of life. Even though thirty U.S. States and two Canadian provinces had legalized eugenics policies (including forced sterilization of the unfit) between 1907-1945, the statistical science and political application of eugenics ground to a screeching halt by the end of World War 2 and as Huxley iterated in his manifesto, something new had to be done.
A Word on Tavistock Huxley also worked very closely with London’s Tavistock Clinic that received funding from both Rockefeller and Macy Foundations throughout the 1930s-1950s. Led by a psychiatrist named Brigadier General John Rawlings Rees, Tavistock can be best understood as the “psychiatric branch of the British Empire” established in 1921 which innovated psychiatric techniques using mixtures of Pavlovian behaviorism and Freudian theories to influence group behavior in a variety of ways. Early on, the clinic explored the extreme mental conditions of shell shock victims who suffered cases of psychological deconstruction during the terrors of trench warfare recognizing the high degree of malleability in these subjects. As outlined by a brilliant 1996 EIR report by L. Wolfe, the idea behind Tavistock’s was always driven by a goal to figure out how the brain might be “depatterned” and deconstructed in order to be reconstructed anew like a blank slate with the hopes that this insight into individuals might be replicated later among broader social groups, and even whole nations. Many of this research was applied in the form of MK Ultra within the USA and will be the subject of a future report. G. Brock Chrisholm: Tavistockian Czar of World Health One prominent psychiatrist who spent years working with Rees at Tavistock was a Canadian named G. Brock Chrisolm. In 1948, Christolm founded a UN-affiliated body called the World Health Organization (WHO) with the aim of promoting mental and physical health of the world. A noble endeavor carrying much responsibility and power requiring a leader with exceptional insight into the nature of sickness and health. Sadly, based upon his own sick views of the nature of mankind and society, Chrisholm was certainly the wrong man for the job. Among the greatest causes of war and mental sickness in Chrisholm’s mind were not to be found in imperialism or economic injustice, but rather in society’s belief in right and wrong. Writing in 1946 Chrisholm laid out the purpose of “good” psychotherapy and education saying: “the reinterpretation and eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the certainties of old people- these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy”. But it wasn’t simply the “concept of right and wrong” or “faith in the certainties of old people” which had to be eradicated, but monotheistic religion, family, and patriotism. Speaking eight years later, Chrisholm said: “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism and religious dogmas”. The World Goes Mental Once UNESCO and the WHO were firmly in place, a third organization was created to drive the funding, and the practice of global mental health. As outlined by historian Anton Chaitkin, funded primarily by the Macy Foundation, the World Federation of Mental Health (WFMH) was created in 1948. The Macy Foundation itself which was created in 1930 under the leadership of General Marlborough Churchill (cousin to Winston) who had been in charge of covert military intelligence from 1919-1929 in the form of the “Black Chamber“. His new foundation was a part of the Rockefeller machine and used as a conduit to pour money into “health sciences” with a focus on eugenics. The U.S. technical coordinator to the conference that created the WFMH made the new organization’s origins clearly known. Nina Ridnour wrote “the World Federation for Mental Health… had been created upon the recommendation of the United Nations World Health Organization and UNESCO because they needed a non-governmental mental health organization with which they could cooperate.” And just who would become the first Director General of the WFMH? While still acting as the head of London’s Tavistock Clinic, Brigadier General John Rawlings Rees was put in charge of the new body by none other than arch-racist Montagu Norman (head of the Bank of England) who had created the operation out of his National Association for Mental Health run out of his London Thorpe Lodge home. Describing this strategic battle plan to reform society, Rees said: “If we prepare to come out into the open and to attack the social and national problems of our day, then we must have the shock troops, and these cannot be provided by psychiatry based wholly in institutions. We must have mobile teams of psychiatrists who are free to move around and make contacts with the local area.” The idea of mobile teams of psychiatric shock troops was an idea advanced by leading grand strategist Lord Bertrand Russell who had written in 1952’s “Impact of Science on Society”: “I think the subject which will be of most importance politically is mass psychology…. Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called “education.” Religion plays a part, though a diminishing one; the press, the cinema, and the radio play an increasing part…. It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.” The Bi-Polar Cold War and a New Global Paradigm Over the ensuing years, UNESCO, the WHO and WFMH worked in tandem to coordinate hundreds of influential sub organizations, universities, research labs, and covert science including the CIA’s MK Ultra in order to bring about the desired “mentally healthy” society cleansed of its connections to Christianity, faith in truthfulness, national patriotism or family. By 1971, the world was ripe for a big change. The baby boomer targets of this vast social engineering experiment had been inundated by a vast arsenal of cultural warfare on every level. While LSD was spread across campuses of America, and assassinations of western leaders who resisted the new age of wars in Southwest Asia became the norm, the baby boomers watched as their loved ones returned from Vietnam in body bags. “Not trusting anyone over 30” became the new wisdom as love of country was suffocated under the unnatural spread of Anglo-American imperialism abroad and COINTEL PRO-style operations at home. When the CFR and Trilateral Commission unpegged the U.S. dollar from the gold reserve, a new age of deregulation, consumerism and radical materialism was ushered in causing the baby boomer generation to quickly transmogrify into the 1980s hyper-materialist “me” generation. On an ecological level, a new ethic of “conservationism” had begun to move from the fringes into the mainstream replacing the former pro-industrial ethic of the producer-creator society that had historically governed the best of western civilization. Chief among the creators of this new conservation ethic which replaced the idea of “protecting humanity from empire” with “protecting nature from mankind”, was none other than Julian Huxley himself. During the same year that he co-founded the World Wildlife Foundation, Huxley drafted the Morges Manifesto (1961) as the organizing manifesto for the modern ecology movement pitting human civilization in stark contrast to the supposedly closed, mathematical equilibrium of nature. Huxley co-founded the WWF with arch Malthusians Prince Philip “I want to be reincarnated as a deadly virus” Mountbatten and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. Holdren’s Planetary Regime By the mid-1970s, one of the leading neo-Malthusians of that era, Paul Ehrlich mentored a young protégé named John Holdren and together they produced a stomach-turning manual called Ecoscience in 1977 where the pair wrote: “Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all-natural resources, renewable or non-renewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus, the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market. The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.” Considering that these words were written just three years after Henry Kissinger’s NSSM-200 report that transformed U.S. foreign policy doctrine from pro-development to pro-population reduction, Holdren’s 1977 words should not be taken lightly. The Human Genome Project Revives Sleeping Monsters During the ensuing decades Holdren became close friends with a Harvard-based Rhodes Scholar and mathematician named Eric Lander who led the Human Genome Project from 1995-2002. Lander announced the success of the unveiling of the fully sequenced human genome in 2003 saying: “The Human Genome Project represents one of the remarkable achievements in the history of science. Its culmination this month signals the beginning of a new era in biomedical research. Biology is being transformed into an information science”. Commenting on the potential for steering human evolution made possible by Lander’s Human Genome Project and the new developments in mRNA CRISPR technology then unfolding, Sir Richard Dawkins wrote in 2006: “IN THE 1920s and 1930s, scientists from both the political left and right would not have found the idea of designer babies particularly dangerous – though of course they would not have used that phrase. Today, I suspect that the idea is too dangerous for comfortable discussion, and my conjecture is that Adolf Hitler is responsible for the change… I wonder whether, some 60 years after Hitler’s death, we might at least venture to ask what the moral difference is between breeding for musical ability and forcing a child to take music lessons. Or why it is acceptable to train fast runners and high jumpers but not to breed them. I can think of some answers, and they are good ones, which would probably end up persuading me. But hasn’t the time come when we should stop being frightened even to put the question?” It wasn’t long before Holdren found himself enjoying greater power than he had ever imagined as science czar and architect of Obama’s “evidence-based” program of governance which involved maximizing funding for green tech to decarbonize humanity under new systems of global governance. Lander worked closely with Holdren as the co-chair of Obama’s science council and also with Whitehead Institute President David Baltimore on the creation of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. Together Lander and Baltimore oversaw a major 2015 conference on the “new era of biomedical research” that unveiled a new gene modification technology known as CRISPR involving the use of enzymes and RNA found in ecoli which were discovered to have the ability to target DNA sequences and induce various mutations. While it is obvious that this powerful technology offers potential good to humanity as a tool to eliminate hereditary diseases in humans and in crops, CRISPR’s incredible power to fundamentally alter human DNA forever can do unimaginable harm if put into the wrong hands. At the “historic” international summit on human gene editing in December 2015, conference chairman David Baltimore echoed the creepy words of Julian Huxley during his keynote speech: “over the years, the unthinkable has become conceivable. We’re on the cusp of a new era in human history.” In January 2021, John Holdren congratulated Erik Lander for being appointed Joe Biden’s Science Czar (Director of White House Science and Technology Policy)- the position formerly held by Holdren. In this position, Lander has overseen the re-activation of every Obama-era science policy as part of a technocratic overhaul of the U.S. government in conformity with the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset agenda. Using the vast power of the Emergency Authorization Act to bypass the FDA and steamroll gene therapy technologies passing themselves off as “vaccines”, a new social experiment has begun. CRISPR technology is already being hailed as a key to solving the new mutating strains of COVID-19 and is being used as a “vaccine” for certain tropical diseases as of this writing. The obvious connection between eugenics organizations of yesterday and the rise of modern mRNA operations associated with GAVI and Oxford’s Astra Zeneca unveiled by investigative journalist Whitney Webb earlier this year should be kept firmly in mind. Will this technology be used by modern day heirs of Nazi-sponsoring eugenicists in an effort to pick up where Dr. Mengele left off OR will we see this biotechnology serve the interests of humanity under a multipolar paradigm that cherishes national sovereignty, human life, family, and faith? Future installments in this series will explore the eugenic roots of Transhumanism, Artificial Intelligence, and the Great Reset. We will also tackle the Frankfurt School, the rise of Wiener’s Cybernetics and the program outlined by Bertrand Russell and David Hilbert in 1900 to stuff the entire universe into a stagnant dead cage. Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture. The post How the Unthinkable Became Thinkable: the Awakening of Sleeping Monsters appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Bill Gates Wants To Dim the Sun and Cause Global Cooling – Sheer Madness!Wednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
The post Bill Gates Wants To Dim the Sun and Cause Global Cooling – Sheer Madness! appeared first on LewRockwell. |
The Population Dud: Paul Ehrlich, Call Your OfficeWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
There’s an old saying among economists, demographers, actuaries and sociologists: “Demographics is destiny.” If that’s true, and it certainly appears to be, America could be in very big trouble. Back in 1970, leftist Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich warned in his sensationalist book, “The Population Bomb,” that overpopulation would lead to mass starvation and the depletion of our natural resources. As we all know, it didn’t happen. Indeed, natural resources have never been more abundant, based on prices we pay, as the late economist Julian Simon predicted in making a very public1980 wager with Ehrlich about the future. Virtually every measurable form of pollution has fallen sharply in the intervening years. And billions of people were pulled out of poverty, all during a time of strong population growth. In short, Ehrlich and his legions of doomsday followers couldn’t have been more wrong. In fact, the real problem we face today is exactly the opposite: People in the U.S. are no longer having enough babies. That fertility decline shows in a dramatic slowdown in population growth. And no, don’t blame COVID-19 for that. The Centers for Disease Control just this month reported that U.S. birth rates fell in 2020 for the sixth straight year, dropping below the population replacement rate of 2.1 children per woman to just 1.64 children per woman. American women had just 3.6 million babies last year, the fewest since 1979, when we had 110 million fewer people. Over the last decade, the U.S. population grew just 7.4%, the smallest gain since the Great Depression. If current declining fertility trends stay in place, that small gain will soon turn into an actual population loss. Of course, many Americans on the left, in particular global warming extremists and green activists, welcome a shrinking population. They see humanity as a plague, not a gift or a blessing. Typical of this line of thinking is this recent headline from, of all places, Vogue magazine: “Is Having A Baby In 2021 Pure Environmental Vandalism?” The post The Population Dud: Paul Ehrlich, Call Your Office appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Love and Courage Are Greater Than FearWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
“Fear prevents us from thinking. The emotional panic that accompanies fear actually shuts down the prefrontal cortex, or the rational thinking part, of our brains. A populace that stops thinking for itself is a populace that is easily led, easily manipulated, and easily controlled,” writes my friends at Electroverse, a cold climate site. Fear is the mind slayer.The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” said Franklin D. Roosevelt. Fear is the most dangerous virus, and it seems like a good percentage of the population is suffering from COVID fear. The big or most crucial question is how to save yourself from the fear of COVID because no virus is more dangerous than fear. It is easy to avoid or treat this virus, but it is tough to avoid the fear swamping humanity because of the fearmongering press, the preaching of Dr. Fauci, and the pronouncements of the CDC, FDA, and the WHO. A dedicated group has been acting together for almost a century, scaring the living daylights out of us over viruses. The frightening atmosphere we are watching right now is a collective madness that is deliberately imposed on us. We have seen this repeatedly with every virus that shows up and with each bad flu season. Fear is Perfect Vaccine Marketing Fear of the unknown and the panic it generates in the masses is perhaps the most contagious virus of our time, but it has always been with us, for it is the fear of death, which represents the greatest unknown that knocks us off our center. During the pandemic, fear has spread from one to the many on social media almost at the speed of light. Fear today has overtaken reality, overtaken science and the facts. Taking a dangerous experimental vaccine perhaps represents a gold rush of fear. The fearful don’t check out the dangers, the science, the reality that so many are dying or hospitalized from the COVID shots. In 1948, CS Lewis wrote about the atomic bomb in an essay titled “On Living in an Atomic Age.” His words bear relevance to our situation today if you replace the phrase atomic bomb with Covid-19. “This is the first point to be made: and the first action to be taken is to pull ourselves together. If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes to finding us doing sensible and human things—praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing the children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts—not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that), but they need not dominate our minds.” Fear and Courage Courage is not the lack of fear but the ability to face it. There is no courage without fear, so those who tell you not to fear and relax and think positively are the most fearful, but they don’t know it or certainly will not admit it. Fear is a vital response to physical and emotional danger—if we couldn’t feel it, we couldn’t protect ourselves from legitimate threats. So fear is a real thing we feel. However: “Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.” – Frank Herbert, Dune – Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear One of the principal creators of the fear that led to this fraudulent takeover was Anthony Fauci. He doesn’t like the fact that recently people are moving on. He sees people having fun, and it angers him. Fauci is now attempting to inject racism into the scenario. He is a king of fear. He is the king of deception and an enemy of humankind The Mental Universe of Doubt and Fear Doubt is the enemy of love, for it is through the mechanism of doubt that we create the sharpest divisions between head and heart. The second we identify with doubt, the doubt and the doubter become one, and this is who Christ was talking to inside of himself when he said, “get thee behind me.” To get through this level of being, we must find the courage to confront our inner devils directly and cast them out of consciousness. We have to order the doubt away through a pure act of will, just like we would call a small child to put down a knife. The devil is a popular personification of the ego or more shadowy aspect of our minds. When we throw “him” down, we are casting “him” out of our consciousness. The mind destroys the simplicity Fear is even more primary than doubt and operates powerfully to destroy the softer energies of the heart. For many people, fear is the most dominant aspect of life. A feeling of agitation and anxiety is constantly present with or without an apparent cause. Such a person feels the presence or imminence of danger as a background free-floating anxiety. Love is Letting Go of Fear We fear what we are too lazy to know or find out. It would seem more than reasonable to fear discovering that we are a slave race beholding to pharmaceutical and medical terrorism. Reasonable to tremble that the meanest sickest humans that have ever walked the earth are hell-bent on having us roll up our sleeves to take experimental vaccines like Hitler’s doctors did on concentration camp prisoners. Fear prevents us from seeing straight into the mouth of evil. Evil tends to hide behind smiles and white coats in the field of medicine. 1,000 Lawyers and 10,000 Doctors Have Filed a Lawsuit for Violations of the Nuremberg Code. These lawyers and doctors are courageous. They are not bowing to their fears. We cannot fear doing what is right, and the fact that no one is demonstrating in front of the FDA or CDC offices displays both our confusion and fear. We listen too much to the evil men of our age, and it is hard to understand why. Though things are starting to change for Bill Gates in a negative sense, too many still listen to him and men like him in high positions. Conclusion So many things threaten our lives today that we have no choice but to find the courage to live and move forward in life. We have to protect our loved ones with our courage. It helps us when we touch on our love daily and show appreciation for everything we do have. And it helps to fall back on our inner center and identify with our feeling self, with our hearts, being, and souls. It takes courage to listen deeply. We need to learn how to listen deeply, especially to those we love. Listening is a crucial key to life and vital if we do not want to side with evil, for the most apparent characteristic of evil is that it listens to no one. To listen is to suffer because we do not want to listen Special Note One of the greatest fears many people have is cancer. One of the ways out of this fear is to know more about cancer than your oncologist. There are two significant benefits to learning about the real causes of cancer and the nine million deaths worldwide resulting from cancer each year. First, you will understand enough to take evasive preventative actions to avoid cancer in the first place. And second, you will not be hoodwinked by your oncologist into taking tests and doing treatments that primarily increase your chances of eventually dying of cancer. Reprinted with permission from Dr.Sircus.com. The post Love and Courage Are Greater Than Fear appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Leaked Documents Detail How Facebook Censors Vaccine Facts When They Don’t Fit CDC, Big Pharma NarrativeWednesday 26 May 2021 11:01 PM UTC-05
The Defender is experiencing censorship on many social channels. Be sure to stay in touch with the news that matters by subscribing to our top news of the day. It’s free. Investigative journalist James O’Keefe from Project Veritas on Monday released a bombshell video of two Facebook insiders blowing the whistle on the tech giant’s effort to secretly censor — on a global scale — COVID vaccine questions and concerns. The Facebook whistleblowers alleged the company is pushing an initiative to censor vaccine hesitancy on its platform. According to new leaked documents, the social media giant uses algorithms to target users who disseminate messaging that runs counter to the company’s political ideology and vaccine narrative — even if the comments are factually accurate. An internal memo obtained by Project Veritas explained “Vaccine Hesitancy Comment Demotion.” O’Keefe told Sean Hannity on Monday that Facebook initiated a “beta” test for the algorithm that classifies some users under two incremental tiers of what they dub “vaccine hesitancy” or a “VH Score,” and does so without the user’s knowledge. The stated goal of the new feature is to “drastically reduce user exposure” to “VH” comments, O’Keefe’s team reported, and decrease “other engagement of VH comments including create, likes, reports [and] replies.” “Based on that VH score, we will demote or leave the comment alone depending on the content within the comment,” an anonymous whistleblower said. The insider, who is described by O’Keefe as a “data center technician” for Facebook, revealed the tech giant was running the “test” on 1.5% of its 3.8 billion users with the focus on the comments sections on “authoritative health pages.” “They’re trying to control this content before it even makes it onto your page, before you even see it,” the insider told O’Keefe. Another leaked document addressed “Borderline Vaccine Framework,” which classifies content with another expressed “goal” to “identify and tier the categories of non-violating content that could discourage vaccination in certain contexts, thereby contributing to vaccine hesitancy or refusal.” The framework states: “We have tiered these by potential harm and how much context is required in order to evaluate harm.” The ratings are divided into two tiers: “Alarmism & Criticism” and “Indirect Vaccine Discouragement,” which includes celebrating vaccine refusal and “shocking stories” that may deter others from getting vaccinated even if events or facts are potentially or actually true. The algorithm flags key terms in comments to determine whether or not it can remain in place, but allows human “raters” to make a ruling if the algorithm cannot do so itself. “What’s remarkable about these private documents that Facebook has not wanted you to see until tonight is that ‘Tier 2’ [violation] says even if the facts are true that you will be targeted and demoted — your comments will be targeted and demoted,” O’Keefe said. The first whistleblower told O’Keefe that Facebook, led by CEO Mark Zuckerberg, wants to “build a community where everyone complies — not where people can have an open discourse and dialogue about the most personal and private and intimate decisions.” “The narrative [is] get the vaccine, the vaccine is good for you, everyone should get it. If you don’t, you will be singled out as an enemy of society.” In response to the leaked documents, Facebook told Project Veritas, “We proactively announced this policy on our company blog and also updated our help center with this information.” O’Keefe, however, said the change in policy has largely been private while Facebook holds itself out as being a free speech town square. Facebook working with CDC to censor reports of vaccine injury from its own VAERS system Facebook insiders and leaked internal documents allege the company coordinates with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to censor vaccine content, including reports submitted to the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). “So the VAERS is a Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System. It looks like [Facebook] is measuring the comments where they’re mentioning where, you know, that the patient died,” said the Facebook whistleblower. “Really they [the CDC] support all of this because you know they release the standards, the CDC themselves. And that’s really one of, one of the primary things that Facebook is basing their policy off of.” Under Facebook’s Borderline Vaccine Framework, content pointing to VAERS data is censored because it suggests “extreme risk without providing context.” The insider said Facebook is open about the fact they’re coordinating with the CDC. Ultimately, any facts that don’t fit a particular narrative are omitted, demoted, deboosted, banned or considered dangerous to society, said O’Keefe. Children’s Health Defense sues Facebook over censorship In August 2020, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) filed a lawsuit charging Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg and several fact-checking organizations with censoring truthful public health posts and for fraudulently misrepresenting and defaming the children’s health organization. The complaint alleges Facebook has “insidious conflicts” with the pharmaceutical industry and health agencies, and details factual allegations regarding the CDC, CDC Foundation and the World Health Organization’s extensive relationships and collaborations with Facebook and Zuckerberg, calling into question Facebook’s collaboration with the government in a censorship campaign. Facebook censors CHD’s page, targeting factual information about vaccines, 5G and public health agencies. Facebook-owned Instagram deplatformed CHD Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on Feb. 10 without notice or explanation. Lawyers for Children’s Health Defense are awaiting the ruling of Judge Susan Illston after defendants’ filed a motion to dismiss in the CHD lawsuit alleging government-sponsored censorship, false disparagement and wire fraud. Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission. The post Leaked Documents Detail How Facebook Censors Vaccine Facts When They Don’t Fit CDC, Big Pharma Narrative appeared first on LewRockwell. |
Today the states are disunited between blue and red to a far greater extent than they were in 1860. There are two countries today occupying the same geographical location. One, the red states, believe in America and its founding documents. The other, the blue states, believe that America epitomizes white supremacy evil.
from https://youtu.be/V0EQNQssk6U
May 27, 2021
from https://youtu.be/UuC5mCL9HC8
May 27, 2021 at 02:30AM
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.