Tag Archives: Joe Biden

How The US Government Faked A Pandemic In 1976

By Great Game India

In 1976, an outbreak of the swine flu, influenza A virus subtype H1N1 at Fort Dix, New Jersey caused a mass vaccination of Americans. After the program began, the vaccine was associated with an increase in reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome, which can cause paralysis, respiratory arrest, and death. 

This is the story of how in 1976, the US government faked a pandemic.This chronology is heavily influenced by the official history of the affair, published in 1978 by the National Academies Press: The Swine Flu Affair: Decision-Making on a Slippery Disease.

In January 1976, several soldiers at Fort Dix complained of a respiratory illness diagnosed as influenza. The next month, Private David Lewis, who had the symptoms, participated in a five-mile forced march, collapsed and died.\

The New Jersey Department of Health tested samples from the Fort Dix soldiers. While the majority of samples were of the more common A Victoria flu strain, two were not. The atypical samples were sent to the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, which found evidence of swine influenza A related to the 1918 flu pandemic, which killed 50 to 100 million people worldwide.

The Center for Disease Control (now the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) verified the findings and informed both the World Health Organization and the state of New Jersey. On February 13, CDC Director David Sencer completed a memo calling for mass vaccination for the swine flu.

The CDC Assistant Director for Programs of the Center for Disease Control, Bruce Dull, held a press conference on February 19 to discuss the flu outbreak at Fort Dix and, in response to questions from reporters, mentioned the relationship of the flu strain to the 1918 outbreak.

US President Gerald Ford was officially informed of the outbreak memo on March 15 and the suggested vaccination program. He met with a “blue ribbon” panel that included Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin. Ford then made a televised announcement in support of the mass vaccination program.

A hearing was held before the United States Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and C. Joseph Stetler, a drug company spokesman, requested government indemnity for the vaccine manufacturers.

Pharmaceutical companies Sharp & Dohme (Merck & Co.), Merrell, Wyeth, and Parke-Davis also refused to sell doses to the government unless they were guaranteed a profit, a concession that the government also eventually made.

The House Appropriations Committee reported out a special appropriations bill, including $135 million for the swine flu vaccination program, which was approved on April 5. Two days later, the World Health Organization held a conference to discuss the implications of a swine flu outbreak for poorer nations.

On April 8, an official from the Federal Insurance Company informed Merck & Co., a manufacturer of the swine flu vaccine, that it would exclude indemnity on Merck’s product liability for the swine flu vaccine on July 1, 1976.

T. Lawrence Jones, president of the American Insurance Association, informed the Office of Management and Budget that the insurance industry would not cover liability for the vaccine unless the government extended liability protection.

The chairman of Merck wrote a memo a day later, April 13, to various government agencies, including the White House emphasizing the “duty to warn”. In May, other vaccine manufacturers including Marion Merrell Dow, Parke-Davis, and Wyeth, were notified of indemnity problems by their respective insurers.

 Assistant Secretary Theodore Cooper (HEW) informed the White House on June 2 that indemnity legislation would be needed to secure Merrell’s cooperation. In June, other vaccine manufacturers requested the same legislation. A little more than two weeks later, the Ford administration submitted a proposal to Congress that offered indemnity to vaccine manufacturers.

Bruce Dull stated at a flu conference on July 1 that there were no parallels between the 1918 flu pandemic and the current situation.

Later that month, J. Anthony Morris, a researcher in the Food and Drug Administration’s Bureau of Biologics (BoB), was dismissed for insubordination and went public with findings that cast doubt on the safety of the vaccine, which was produced in fertilised hen’s eggs.

Three days later, several manufacturers announced that they had ceased production of the vaccine. Later that month, investigations into alleged swine flu outbreaks in other parts of the world found no cases of the strain. On July 23, the President sent a letter that urged Congress to take action on indemnification.

In early August, an outbreak of illness in Philadelphia was thought to be related to swine flu. It was later found to be an atypical pneumonia that is now called Legionnaires’ disease. On August 6, Ford held a press conference and urged Congress to take action on the indemnification legislation. Four days later, both houses of Congress passed the legislation.

Merrill became the first company to submit samples to the FDA’s Bureau of Biologics for safety testing, which approved it on September 2. Merck made the first shipment of vaccines to state health departments by September 22. The first swine flu inoculations were given at the Indiana State Fair.

In October, three people died of heart attacks after they had received the vaccine at the same Pittsburgh clinic, which sparked an investigation and the recall of that batch of vaccine.

The investigation showed that the deaths were not related to the vaccination. The President and his family received their vaccinations before the television cameras. On November 2, Ford lost the presidential election to Jimmy Carter.

Also in early November, Albert Sabin published a New York Times editorial, “Washington and the Flu.” He agreed with the decision to create the vaccine and to be prepared for an outbreak but criticized the “scare tactics” that had been used by Washington to achieve that. He suggested to stockpile the vaccine and to have a wait-and-see strategy.

By 15 December, cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) affecting vaccinated patients were reported in 10 states, including Minnesota, Maryland, and Alabama. Three more cases of Guillain-Barré were reported in early December, and the investigation into cases of it spread to eleven states.

On December 16, a one-month suspension of the vaccination program was announced by Sencer. William Foege of the CDC estimated that the incidence of GBS was four times higher in vaccinated people than in those not receiving the swine flu vaccine.

Ford told reporters that he agreed with the suspension, but he defended the decision to create the vaccination program. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., was sworn in as Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare on January 20, 1977. On February 4, Sencer was informed that he would be replaced as the head of the CDC. The vaccination program was not reinstated.

Laurence Gostin, in his article “At Law: Swine Flu Vaccine: What Is Fair?”, wrote that “the swine flu affair fails to tell us whether, in the face of scientific uncertainty, it is better to err on the side of caution or aggressive intervention.”

There is not even complete agreement about the causal relationship between the swine flu vaccine and Guillain-Barré syndrome, as noted in Gina Kolata’s book Flu: The Story of the Great Influenza Pandemic of 1918 and the Search for the Virus That Caused It.

She wrote that the CDC did not have a “specific set of tests and symptoms to define Guillain-Barré” and that since doctors who reported cases already knew that a link was suspected, a bias in reporting was introduced.

She quoted Keiji Fukuda: “if a new virus gets identified or reappears, you don’t want to jump the gun and assume a pandemic is happening.”

Advertisement

Medical police state: British government to require covid vaccines everywhere, and for any job

By Lance D Johnson (via Natural News)

The French are gathering in the streets, chanting “liberte!” and the British are marching, demanding the arrest of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson! European governments are rolling out vaccine passports as quickly as possible, forcing people to comply with endless medical experiments, bodily requirements, digital surveillance and tracking, and a two-tiered society that discriminates and segregates the unvaccinated.

The British government is rolling out vaccine passports for clubs, pubs and restaurants now, while demanding vaccine requirements for all workers across all industries. Great Britain’s Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) wants vaccine requirements for everyday workplaces, requiring office workers to use the NHS app to verify their compliance with the new world vaccine order. In order to have a job, the British will have to return to the office showing proof they have been “fully vaccinated.” The app will also be used to enforce all future booster shots required by the Big Pharma-Big Tech-Big Government dictatorship.

Great Britain mocks the principles of liberty and rolls out vaccine passports on “Freedom Day”

So far, the British government has coerced up to 10.4 million people to sign up for the NHS COVID pass, by threatening to take away basic freedoms if Great Britons do not comply. Ever since the vaccine verification requirements were added to the app on May 17, an influx of six million new users appeared in the NHS database.
Introducing a medical apartheid to Europe, Great Britain’s Department for Health and Social Care states, “The app’s COVID-19 vaccine status service allows users easily to show their proof of vaccine, which will help people to travel abroad, start returning to workplaces and attend large-scale events as we cautiously proceed with the roadmap.” Many people would like to believe that the lockdowns are ending, but restrictions are not being lifted. The worst is yet to come. The controls are only becoming more strict, more discriminatory and more Orwellian with each passing month.

According to the DHSC documents, the vaccine passport system will be used as “a means of entry” anywhere where people are “likely to be in close proximity to others outside their household.” This means the vaccine passport will be incorporated into every aspect of society, a permanent fixture of enslavement and discrimination. The guidance threatens all industries to adopt these “sufficient measures” or else the government will “consider mandating the NHS COVID Pass in certain venues at a later date.”

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/23dc8478-25b0-4727-bf21-11390f1665aa

The people are rising up across the UK, as resistance becomes necessary

Disgraced Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, announced July 19 as “Freedom Day” as he announced vaccine requirements throughout society. Thousands of Great Britons have gathered on Parliament Square to protest the new restrictions and upcoming segregation. “Can I clear it up for anyone wondering why thousands have gathered at parliament square freedom protest?” one freedom fighter commented. “Freedom is having the right to choose to wear masks or not without the constant threats of new winter lockdowns and vaccine passports. Today is not true freedom.”

Throughout the covid-19 scandal, governments have used the threat of infection to control entire populations, first telling people to stay locked down in their house. When that wasn’t enough, the police began visiting people any time of the day to make sure people were complying with stay-at-home orders. Government “contact tracers” were deployed to lock people down further and deprive them of their liberty. Basic medical rights and civil liberties were vanquished as forceful mandates were applied.

Today, the population is awarded their freedoms back when they comply with the government’s inoculation requirements. Now people will have to carry “papers” and show digital proof of vaccination if they want to get together with people and engage in activities outside their homes. But it doesn’t even end there. People who don’t comply with this medical apartheid are being threatened to live on the streets, with no job prospects, no career to advance. As the UK perverts the people’s freedom and destroys countless lives, there is nothing left to lose. Resistance is a necessary duty. Every individual must be treated equally under the law.

Kathleen Sebelius wants you to be separated from your children if you refuse to get “vaccinated” for covid

By Ethan Huff (via Pandemic.News)

The former head of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under Barack Hussein Obama is pushing the narrative that parents who refuse Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” should be forcibly separated from their children and denied employment.

Kathleen Sebelius spoke with CNN the other day to explain how she believes that full medical fascism is the only way to bring about a “new normal” in which the only people in America who are afforded rights under the Constitution are those who agree to roll up their sleeves and get injected for Chinese Germs.

“We’re in a situation where we have a wildly effective vaccine, multiple choices, lots available, free of charge, and we have folks who are just saying I won’t do it,” Sebelius complained during the “OutFront” segment.

“I think that it’s time to say to those folks, it’s fine if you don’t choose to get vaccinated. You may not come to work. You may not have access to a situation where you’re going to put my grandchildren in jeopardy. Where you might kill them, or you might put them in a situation where they’re going to carry the virus to someone in a high-risk position.”

Since the vaccines apparently do not work, those who foolishly took them are now living in even more fear over a dreaded “variant” like the “Indian delta” strain taking over their bodies and killing them. This is why they are now lashing out like wild hyenas against other human beings who chose to leave their bodies and immune systems alone.

Sebelius is one such hyena who wants to deny everyone who just said no to experimental drugs from Tony Fauci and the government access to their children, jobs and society in general. Everyone who decides to live their lives as nature intended must be locked away at home forever, Sebelius insists.

“That’s, I think the point where we are, is freedom is one thing, but freedom when you harm others like secondhand smoke and issues that we’ve dealt with very clearly in the past — you can’t drive drunk,” Sebelius further stated, comparing unvaccinated people to drunk drivers.

“You can drink, but you can’t drive drunk because you can injure other people. You can’t smoke inside of a public place where you can give cancer to someone else in spite of their never having been a smoker.”

Democrats like Kathleen Sebelius are chomping at the bit for medical apartheid

Should Sebelius get her way, there will soon be two Americas: One in which all vaccinated people are allowed to live their lives as normal, and another where all unvaccinated people are treated like second-class citizens – a medical apartheid that only deranged fascists like Sebelius could ever think is normal or acceptable.

“So, I think we’re reaching that point in the United States where those of us who are vaccinated, I want to take off my mask,” Sebelius went on to complain.

“I want to be able to live my life with vaccination, and right now, I’m being impinged on by people who say I don’t want to get vaccinated. It’s fine. I want them to maybe have a limitation on where they can go and who they can possibly infect.”

CNN of course closed out the segment by thanking Sebelius for her “wisdom,” apparently endorsing her particular brand of medical fascism. We now know what CNNplans to impose upon us all if it gets its way in the coming months.

The latest news about the hysterics of vaccine-worshipping leftists like Kathleen Sebelius can be found at Libtards.news.

German court orders YouTube to pay “historically high fine” for censoring video of anti-lockdown protest

By Arsenio Toledo (via Natural News)

A court in Germany has ordered YouTube to pay a “historically high fine” of 100,000 euros ($118,000) for removing a video of a protest against restrictive Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) lockdowns.

The video in question was filmed in Switzerland last year and uploaded by a German YouTube user. YouTube said the video violated the platform’s policies against so-called COVID-19 misinformation. The video was deleted in late January.

YouTube was ordered to put the video back online in mid-April but did not do so until several weeks later as the platform attempted to argue that the video violated site policies. The delay in complying with the order to restore the video escalated matters. It prompted the German court to issue YouTube the “historically high fine” for the “deliberate and serious” delay.

The Higher Regional Court of Dresden in the state of Saxony in eastern Germany handed down the sentence against YouTube on July 5. The court ordered the company to pay the 100,000 euro fine more than a year after the violation.

“With the historically high fine, the Higher Regional Court makes it very clear that court decisions must be observed without restriction, regardless of whether YouTube assumes a violation of its guidelines or not,” wrote Joachim Steinhofel, one of the attorneys for the plaintiff, in a statement on Twitter.

Steinhofel added that he believes the court’s decision represents a guideline for how freedom of speech cases in Germany and the rest of the European Union that involves the internet can be handled in the future.

A spokesperson for YouTube told German newspaper Welt am Sonntag that the company has a “responsibility” to provide its users with “authoritative sources” and “trustworthy information” regarding COVID-19 and to fight so-called misinformation regarding the pandemic.

The company spokesperson added that the decision of the Higher Regional Court of Dresden was just an individual case “which we will respect and will review accordingly.” In the future, the company will review individual videos and enforce its misinformation policies on a case-by-case basis.

This means it is unlikely to change any of YouTube’s censorship policies regarding supposed COVID-19 misinformation on its platform. (Related: YouTube silences prominent epidemiologist for opposing coronavirus lockdowns.)

Representatives from the Higher Regional Court of Dresden have not responded to requests for comments from media outlets.

YouTube continues to remove videos that allegedly spread COVID-19 misinformation

The Higher Regional Court of Dresden argued that YouTube did not articulate its policies regarding so-called COVID-19 misinformation clearly enough for the person who uploaded the censored video. YouTube unsuccessfully attempted to argue that the video violated its COVID-19 “misinformation” policies.

Specifically, the court ruled that YouTube’s standard notice that its user policies may change anytime in the future and without warning was insufficient. Users like the German plaintiff should have been given a new notice regarding the platform’s updated policies regarding so-called COVID-19 misinformation.

YouTube’s ever-shifting site policies have allowed it to remove millions of videos since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. The company alleged that these millions of videos violated its misinformation policies.

A recent report from YouTube showed that the company removed more than 11 million videos for supposed COVID-19 misinformation in the second quarter of 2020 alone, nearly doubling the six million it removed in the first quarter.

These kinds of mass censorship operations are widely permissible in the United States, where laws and court rulings protect corporations like YouTube that censor their users.

If the German YouTube user was actually an American, then the company would have been able to take down the anti-lockdown protest video without much trouble, and the user would find it difficult to fight back against the company.

17,503 DEAD, 1.7 million injured (50% SERIOUS) reported in European Union’s database of adverse drug reactions for COVID-19 shots

By News Editors (via Natural News)

The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.”

(Article by Brian Shilhavy republished from HealthImpactNews.com)

Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.

The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50. (There are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.)

So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured due to COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.

The EudraVigilance database reports that through July 3, 2021 there are 17,503 deaths and 1,687,527 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:

From the total of injuries recorded, half of them (837,588 ) are serious injuries.

Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”

As we reported yesterday, tens of thousands of people in the U.S. now regret getting the COVID-19 shots, and are begging for help, because the medical system has turned its back on them and refuses to treat their injuries. See:

Tens of Thousands of COVID-19 “Vaccine” Injured in the U.S. Begging for Help as the Medical Community Turns Their Back on Them

One subscriber from the UK commented on the article and stated that the same thing was happening there:

It is exactly the same in Scotland and England.

My vaccinated friends are not getting appointments with their family doctors who are avoiding them post vaccination even although there are no patients in the GP surgery waiting rooms when they have tried to get appointments. It is utterly cruel given they talked them into getting the vaccinations and accepted 10 UK pounds from the Scottish and English governments per person vaccinated on their patient list and did not disclose the risk of these vaccinations to the patients.

A friend nearly passed out close to the GP surgery, a kind stranger wheeled her up to the GP surgery and she was not allowed to be seen by her GP because she did not have an appointment. The nurse refused to take bloods because they are not allowed to do so until management confirms they can do this so they cannot even do exploratory bloods to investigate what has gone wrong with these patients post vaccination.

Another friend’s hospital consultant phoned a friend’s GP insisting her family doctor see her given she had had heart procedures and no appointments for 2 years. She told me after first Pfizer shot “it was like acid going into my veins” and the queen did not get the same vaccine asshe did which will be completely true. Her GP treated her with disdain and was not pleased to see her and my friend also tells me that every time she walks now post vaccination her heart races and her son has been unwell post vaccination too.

All my friends who got the vaccination have had severe worsening of their pre-existing medical conditions and some have got heart conditions they did not previously have or chronic obstructive airways disease.

I have noticed most have became irritable and short-tempered as they are becoming unwell not realising the vaccine is harming them and they are lashing out at others for no good reason.

In UK, NHS contributions are deducted from people’s salaries and the retired paid these all their working life and now are getting refused service but they will still take these NHS contributions regardless. It is wicked and cruel. Though it is the governments who are instructing the GP and hospital management to treat the patients in this abysmal manner.

I am quite sure this will be happening in most if not all countries.

God be with us all.

Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. This subscriber has volunteered to do this, and it is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.

Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.*

Here is the summary data through July 3, 2021.

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTechPfizer: 8,426 deathand 632,623 injuries to 03/07/2021

  • 17,754   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 99 deaths
  • 14,858   Cardiac disorders incl. 1,165 deaths
  • 126        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 12 deaths
  • 7,951     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 324        Endocrine disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 9,319     Eye disorders incl. 19 deaths
  • 57,599   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 388 deaths
  • 173,572 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 2,510 deaths
  • 558        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 33 deaths
  • 6,948     Immune system disorders incl. 42 deaths
  • 19,780   Infections and infestations incl. 834 deaths
  • 7,204     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 124 deaths
  • 15,281   Investigations incl. 296 deaths
  • 4,721     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 164 deaths
  • 88,638   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 103 deaths
  • 386        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 26 deaths
  • 114,125 Nervous system disorders incl. 902 deaths
  • 478        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 18 deaths
  • 124        Product issues
  • 11,148   Psychiatric disorders incl. 117 deaths
  • 2,005     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 132 deaths
  • 3,597     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 27,121   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 989 deaths
  • 30,404   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 79 deaths
  • 979        Social circumstances incl. 12 deaths
  • 392        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 21 deaths
  • 17,231   Vascular disorders incl. 332 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273(CX-024414) from Moderna: 4,605 deathand 157,802 injuries to 03/07/2021

  • 2,890     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 35 deaths
  • 4,491     Cardiac disorders incl. 503 deaths
  • 66           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 1,972     Ear and labyrinth disorders
  • 110        Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 2,498     Eye disorders incl. 9 deaths
  • 13,626   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 161 deaths
  • 42,716   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,928 deaths
  • 269        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 17 deaths
  • 1,349     Immune system disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 4,793     Infections and infestations incl. 259 deaths
  • 3,378     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 92 deaths
  • 3,359     Investigations incl. 93 deaths
  • 1,616     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 94 deaths
  • 19,416   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 88 deaths
  • 175        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 18 deaths
  • 28,239   Nervous system disorders incl. 465 deaths
  • 338        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 2 deaths
  • 24           Product issues
  • 3,193     Psychiatric disorders incl. 75 deaths
  • 1,061     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 66 deaths
  • 723        Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 death
  • 7,268     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 438 deaths
  • 8,400     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 32 deaths
  • 690        Social circumstances incl. 16 deaths
  • 540        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 42 deaths
  • 4,602     Vascular disorders incl. 160 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/AstraZeneca3,871 deathand 852,616 injuries to 03/07/2021

  • 9,950     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 160 deaths
  • 13,336   Cardiac disorders incl. 454 deaths
  • 115        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 9,712     Ear and labyrinth disorders
  • 355        Endocrine disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 14,641   Eye disorders incl. 15 deaths
  • 86,515   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 184 deaths
  • 227,408 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,009 deaths
  • 607        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 32 deaths
  • 3,359     Immune system disorders incl. 14 deaths
  • 19,508   Infections and infestations incl. 247 deaths
  • 8,912     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 94 deaths
  • 18,352   Investigations incl. 88 deaths
  • 10,315   Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 50 deaths
  • 131,547 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 50 deaths
  • 379        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 9 deaths
  • 180,575 Nervous system disorders incl. 612 deaths
  • 279        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 5 deaths
  • 117        Product issues
  • 16,000   Psychiatric disorders incl. 33 deaths
  • 3,045     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 33 deaths
  • 8,593     Reproductive system and breast disorders
  • 28,994   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 447 deaths
  • 39,173   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 25 deaths
  • 866        Social circumstances incl. 5 deaths
  • 754        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 16 deaths
  • 19,209   Vascular disorders incl. 283 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson601 deaths and 44,486 injuries to 03/07/2021

  • 405        Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 18 deaths
  • 659        Cardiac disorders incl. 73 deaths
  • 16           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
  • 250        Ear and labyrinth disorders
  • 10           Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 518        Eye disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 4,283     Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 25 deaths
  • 11,832   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 150 deaths
  • 58           Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 161        Immune system disorders incl. 1 death
  • 598        Infections and infestations incl. 16 deaths
  • 413        Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 8 deaths
  • 2,420     Investigations incl. 39 deaths
  • 225        Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 7,687     Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 17 deaths
  • 18           Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps)
  • 9,547     Nervous system disorders incl. 76 deaths
  • 15           Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
  • 11           Product issues
  • 459        Psychiatric disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 150        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 8 deaths
  • 166        Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 1 death
  • 1,453     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 47 deaths
  • 1,125     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 91           Social circumstances incl. 3 deaths
  • 393        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 27 deaths
  • 1,523     Vascular disorders incl. 65 deaths

*These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.

UK hospitality industry not sold on government’s plan to require COVID Pass

By Nolan Barton (via Natural News)

Pubs, restaurants and nightclubs operators are not planning to turn into coronavirus (COVID-19) police in the UK.

Hospitality chiefs said they do not have the technology to scan COVID vaccine passports and do not know how to check QR codes produced by the National Health Service (NHS) app as proof of double vaccination, immunity or a recent negative COVID test.

UK’s Health Secretary Sajid Javid announced on July 12 that businesses and large events would be “encouraged” to use the NHS COVID Pass in “high risk settings.”

The COVID Pass is available through the same general NHS app as the travel certificate. It incorporates test results and naturally acquired immunity from COVID infection in the last six months.

The government has not set out exactly which venues will be encouraged to use the COVID Pass, stating only that it will work with venues that operate “large, crowded settings where people are likely to be in close proximity to others outside their household.” This could refer to pubs, restaurants nightclubs and venues of large events. (Related: England now ready to adopt vaccine passports for mass events.)

Business owners said the vaccine passports could be easily faked because they had not been supplied with the technology to check proof of identity.

A government spokesman said an app to allow businesses to scan QR codes would be released on July 17, just two days before the new guidance takes effect. But industry sources pointed out that many restaurants and pubs do not have QR readers and questioned whether staff would need to use their personal phones.

“It’s just another reason why this scheme is totally unworkable,” said Kate Nicholls, chief executive of UKHospitality.

“Without being able to scan the QR code, it makes it very difficult to prove this person’s actual COVID status. It won’t work on the door and I don’t know a single one of my members who will be ready to do this on Monday.”

Similar measure in France met with protests

In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s plan to require a COVID-19 vaccine certificate or negative PCR test to gain entry to bars, restaurants and cinemas beginning next month was met with dozens of protests. France’s new COVID laws will also make vaccination compulsory for healthcare workers beginning September 15.

France’s Ministry of the Interior said that there were 53 different protests throughout the country. (Related: Vaccine passport now MANDATORY in France, following more than a year of corporate media propagandists claiming the idea was a “conspiracy theory.”)

The French authorities put the total number of protesters at 19,000. Some 2,250 people protested in Paris while other demonstrations took place in Lyon, Toulouse, Annecy, Bordeaux, Montpellier, Nantes and elsewhere.

In Lyon, police fired tear gas grenades to try and contain a large demonstration in the city center. At least 1,400 mostly young people had gathered to protests against Macron’s announcement, police estimated. Protesters allegedly threw projectiles at the police before the authorities responded with tear gas.

In Toulouse, a small rally was held by several “Yellow Vests” groups on Wednesday morning, while a small group of people in Annecy forced their way into the local council offices without causing any damage. Between 150 and 200 people remained in the courtyard of the building for over an hour, the Haute-Savoie prefecture said. Hundreds of people also gathered in Montpellier, Marseille, Perpignan and Rouen to protest against the restrictions.

Worse than a lockdown

Some regions in Russia have also announced that people have to present QR codes, vaccination certificates or negative PCR tests to stay in hotels or visit bars and restaurants.

Authorities from the Vladimir region ruled that QR codes were needed to visit restaurants, gyms, beauty parlors, hairdressers, cinemas and to stay in hotels.

The restrictions were criticized by local business operators who said in a statement the measures had been adopted in the middle of the tourist season and threatened the closure of thousands of firms in the service industries. “We have almost zero revenues. We don’t know what we can say tomorrow to staff the landlords, and suppliers,” said Dmitry Bolshakov, owner of the cafe chain Vladim Group.

Three days after the measures came into effect the authorities met business owners and agreed to ease some of the measures.

“It’s worse than a lockdown,” said Marina Zemskova, president of the association of hotels and restaurants in the Vladimir region. “Because if there was one, we would have a complete closure and could count on some kind of government support measures.”

Moscow had also required residents to present a QR code demonstrating they have been vaccinated against COVID-19 or have immunity in order to sit inside cafes, restaurants and bars since June 28.

But Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin recently announced on television that starting July 19 the Russian capital is “canceling mandatory QR codes in catering.”

Cash or Card — Will COVID-19 Kill Cash?

Leaving a Digital Footprint With Every Payment

By Dr. Joseph Mercola (Via Mercola)

The drive toward a cashless society has been in progress for some time, but the COVID-19 pandemic has been used as a pretext to accelerate the process

In the documentary “Cash or Card — Will COVID-19 Kill Cash?” producer Kersten Schüssler asks some important questions, like what’s at stake if society truly goes cashless? The answer is both your privacy and your freedom

The digital footprints or financial data trails that you leave every time you pay by card or mobile app are being watched closely and form an important part of surveillance capitalism

Information like how much alcohol you drink or how much you spend on vacation can all be tracked and “sold to the highest bidder”

As a result of this data, you and your neighbor might end up paying different prices for things like flights and hotels, or you might be refused insurance or be passed over for a job offer

Electronic payments are extremely lucrative for banks and payment service providers, while the data broker industry is also making huge revenues

*

Cash has long been king, but an increasing number of people have ditched cash in favor of credit cards and other contactless, digital payment options. The drive toward a cashless society has been in progress for some time, but the COVID-19 pandemic has been used as a pretext to accelerate the process.

With infectious disease at the top of everyone’s mind, bills and coins suddenly seemed especially filthy, even though they haven’t been linked to disease transmission, while electronic payment was clean, convenient and fast.

But, in the DW documentary “Cash or Card — Will COVID-19 Kill Cash?”1 producer Kersten Schüssler asks some important questions, like what’s at stake if society truly goes cashless? The answer is both your privacy and your freedom.

You Pay for Cashless Payments With Your Privacy

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has been vocal about its agenda of moving away from cash and to a digital currency, including in the U.S., for years.2 But in the last year, the pandemic has led to a drastic acceleration. In Germany, where people have been famously reluctant to embrace payment by card or app, the number of people paying by card increased by 26% since the start of the pandemic.3

Cash is still being widely used there and is even the only currency accepted in many markets and bakeries. This isn’t the case in Denmark, Norway and Sweden, however, where cash has practically become a thing of the past. You won’t find ATMs very often and if you go to a convenience store, you’re likely to be told you have to pay by card.

In Sweden, your cash may be no good at a bakery, and shop employees view this as a good thing. One young bakery clerk interviewed in the film said it’s much safer to not have any cash at the store because it cuts down on robberies.

Till Grune-Yanoff, a professor of philosophy at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, also states that payment apps let him monitor exactly what his two children are buying. And this is a key tenet of the cashless system. While cash is anonymous, paying by card or app leaves a digital trail.

Already in Sweden, most banks no longer give out cash because it’s too much of a hassle, and payment using cellphone apps is booming. You can transfer money from one cellphone to another as easily and quickly as you can send a text message.

“Here, money has become merely digital information,” Schüssler said. But there’s a downside for the convenience. “This also means that Swedish electronic payment systems can track most people’s financial transactions. Big Brother is watching you.”

Is This the End of Cash?

The film questions whether Sweden is the shape of things to come, “a future in which cash is a thing of the past — and every payment for everything we buy can be traced and tracked.”4 Marion Laboure, a Harvard lecturer and research analyst at Deutsche Bank, has stated that COVID-19 could be the catalyst to bring digital payments into the mainstream.5 She told Schüssler:6

“It’s not the end of cash yet. But what we have noticed since the beginning of this year, and especially since the start of the corona crisis, the amount of cash in circulation has definitely increased because it’s considered as safe in terms of holding its value. 

However, if we consider cash as a means of payment, it has definitely decreased. Fewer and fewer people are paying by cash. In December, 30% of people made contactless payments in Germany. And today, it’s almost 50%.”

Laboure described even more striking advances in other countries, such as South Korea and China, which quarantined and destroyed bank notes. In the U.S., “the Fed decided to quarantine banknotes coming from Asia to make sure they were safe,” she said. When asked whether this was a reasonable response to the pandemic, Laboure said, “The risk is very low. But they felt it was necessary.”7Disease, Tax Evasion Used as Impetus to Destroy Cash

Throughout the pandemic, it’s been implied that contactless, cashless payments are the preferred “safer” choice, allowing you to keep your distance and eliminating the need to pass “dirty” cash back and forth. But are you really at greater risk of catching COVID if you pay with cash?

Johannes Beermann, an executive board member of Bundesbank in Berlin, doesn’t think so, and he also doesn’t believe cash will be replaced by apps or cards anytime soon. “I would say that’s been sufficiently disproven,” he said. “If you look at the bank notes, like the five-euro or 10-euro bills here — which are in particularly heavy circulation — they have a special coating. We know from research that bills and coins don’t play any role in the spread of infections.”8

Corruption and money laundering concerns were also cited when banks stopped issuing 500-euro bills in 2019, while the Better Than Cash Alliance, an initiative with 77 members, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Visa and Mastercard,9 that is “committed to digitizing payments,” has also called for cash to be abolished due to “slush funds, dirty money, money laundering and big sums not declared to tax authorities or the state.”10

“Of course, we have to combat money laundering, tax evasion and the financing of terrorism, and I think cash has to be monitored, as should other payment methods,” Beermann said. “We have to ensure that. But I don’t think that this [digitized payments] will vanquish the underground economy.”

Leaving a Digital Footprint With Every Payment

The digital footprints or financial data trails that you leave every time you pay by card or mobile app are being watched closely. Sarah Spiekermann, professor for information systems and society at Vienna’s University of Economics and Business, researches how this data is observed and analyzed, and states that credit card information and electronic payment data are feeding an industry of data brokers:11

“We know that credit card companies pass on this data. In the meantime, they can observe everyone in real time via all the digital media that they use to create large-scale profiles. It’s almost become normal to have 30,000 to 40,000 pieces of data on each person. And with this high-resolution history, they know what you do, the routes you take, what you buy, what you pay for, where you go on vacation, how much you pay. They know it all.”

Information like how much alcohol you drink or how much you spend on vacation can all be tracked and “sold to the highest bidder.” We’re at a point where once fledgling startups have morphed into immense information empires, in control of our information and our privacy is in their hands.

The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear how valuable digital technologies are in acting as a safety net to allow many activities to continue, but because governments haven’t dealt with fundamental issues to protect privacy and digital rights, these information empires continue to own and operate the Internet and global means of communication.

These monopolies lead to uncontrolled power that, in turn, leads people to be even more constrained and living in a society based increasingly on surveillance, and digital payments are a necessary part of this plan and further surveillance capitalism. Spiekermann explained:12

“We’ve analyzed, for example, how Oracle Blue Kai has described collecting 30,000 user attributes from 200 data vendors, which would allow them to create the profiles of 700 million people. That’s probably the entire western world.

And if we look to see who’s providing that data: Visa, Mastercard or Acxiom, Google, Facebook, Twitter interfaces. That’s surveillance capitalism. Surveillance capitalism involves hundreds and thousands of companies with data exchange agreements working together behind the scenes.”

As a result of this data, you and your neighbor might end up paying different prices for things like flights and hotels, or you might be refused insurance or be passed over for a job offer. You might think these things are just bad luck or fate, she said, “when in reality, it’s the result of databases making some sort of prediction about them. And people behind the scenes are earning money to create these profiles of people. It’s disgraceful.”13

There are no laws in place to curtail this brand-new type of surveillance capitalism, and the only reason it has been able to flourish over the past 20 years is because there’s been an absence of laws against it, primarily because it has never previously existed. Surveillance has become the biggest for-profit industry on the planet, and your entire existence is now being targeted for profit.

Payment Technologies Are Rapidly Developing

You’ve probably used one or more types of contactless, digital payments, but this is only the beginning of the payment technologies to come. In China, Chinese and U.S. companies are testing “smile to pay” facial recognition technology, which ties your ability to pay for goods and services with your smile.

But it doesn’t end there. Ultimately, the plan is to use facial scans when you enter a store, which employ artificial intelligence to recognize the person and their credit rating. AI also detects emotions, social affiliations and whether you’re under stress or getting sick.

All of this personal information is the cost of relying on this digitized system, and it could have significant ramifications for both psychology and security. Spiekermann, who wants cash to be retained, said in the film:14

“If I pay with a smile and I start to connect smiling to economic transactions, then this habit will also leave its imprint in my real world. I don’t think we really want those kinds of associations to develop. Our society and social interactions would become subtly commercialized … [also] power can be rapidly knocked out, as can IT systems. It’s a matter of security. We need a concrete backup. We still need cash — for security reasons.”

While all-digital mobile banks are already up and running, alternative options are also emerging. Berlin company Barzahlen.de offers a modern digital-analogue hybrid payment system that uses encrypted barcodes to get money or make a payment.

The barcode stipulates how much is paid in or out. No transfer of account or credit card data is needed, and each transaction gets a new barcode, allowing you to use cash in a digital context but without leaving behind data trails.

In addition, while U.S. federal law does not require businesses to accept cash as payment, cities and states can enact local laws to do so. At least 21 cities and states, including Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Jersey, have passed or are considering laws that prohibit retailers from refusing cash payments.

It’s unclear how strictly such laws are being enforced, but in New York City, for example, businesses can face steep fines for refusing cash or charging higher prices to customers paying cash.15

Former Interpol President Opposes Cash-Free Society

Bjorn Eriksson, former Interpol president, was also interviewed for the film. He’s familiar with cyberattacks and money laundering, and states that cash should be available as an option for people, including those who aren’t tech savvy — a population he estimates to be about 1 million people in Sweden alone.

“They are looked on as unprofitable. Just leave them,” he said. “I don’t like that type of society.” Security is another major concern to leaving cash behind. “What happens if the Russians, Putin or somebody, switches off the system? We have no defense. How do you then defend yourself if you just have this card that doesn’t function? Cash is a perfect option.”16

The interference with your freedom and privacy, however, is what he believes will drive young people to push for cash to be preserved:17

“[What] … attracts a lot of young people is what they see in China and some other nations where you use these to control your citizens. Because if you have a system with card, you’ll have a technology with cameras, you have a technology with artificial intelligence, you’re really going to be checked. Young people don’t like that.”

He also believes the pandemic is being used as pretext to switch to a cashless society even though “there is no proof whatsoever that cash is carrying that type of threat from corona.”

The push to eliminate cash is going to continue, especially since electronic payments are extremely lucrative for banks and payment service providers, while the data broker industry is also making huge revenues, Schüssler said.18 Still, cash represents a form of freedom, one that should be passed on to the next generation to preserve as much autonomy and privacy as possible.

Notes

1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 YouTube November 24, 2020

2 World Economic Forum, January 17, 2017

5 Flow May 29, 2020

9 Better Than Cash Alliance, Member

15 The National Law Review June 5, 2020

18 YouTube November 24, 2020

The Super-Capitalists’ Depopulation Agenda

By Peter Koenig (via Global Research)

The masters behind covid-19 have designed the perfect WWIII scenario. No need for a war that destroys the infrastructure. The fear-mongering and coerced vaxxing apparatus is and will be massively sterilizing as well as resulting in mortality:

“More people, according to VAERS, have died after getting the shot in four months during a single vaccination campaign than from all other vaccines combined over more than a decade and a half.” 

“The U.K.’s government vaccine adverse event system has collected more 2,200 reports of reproductive disorders after coronavirus injections, including excessive or absent menstrual bleeding, delayed menstruation, vaginal hemorrhaging, miscarriages, and stillbirths.” (Quoted in Koenig on Depopulation)

The article below is a followup on a previous article by Peter Koenig entitled:

The Corona Crisis: Has “Depopulation” Already Begun?

*

We are at the cross-roads of falling into the fangs of a diabolical super-capitalist “cult” that wants to decimate massively our world population. In fact, it has already started.

And what these “diabolical elites” usually do, is to announce their “horror plans” in advance in the form of  “scenario planning” and “simulations”. And they did. We cannot say we were not told.

Let me just list a few instances where and when we were told that a “depopulation cum genocide” is part of a planned agenda.

1. The 2o10 Rockefeller Report entitled Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development– pointed already more than 10 years ago to the “Lockstep Scenario” – which we are in right now, plus three more sinister scenarios. Preparation for this report – and the well-laid out plan started decades before. In its introduction, the report says,

“We believe that scenario planning has great potential for use in philanthropy to identify unique interventions, simulate and rehearse important decisions that could have profound implications, and highlight previously undiscovered areas of connection and intersection” …..

“The results of our first scenario planning exercise demonstrate a provocative and engaging exploration of the role of technology and the future of globalization….”

I believe it is not a coincidence that 9 years later, the so-called Event 201, sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – BMGF (a close associate of the Rockefellers), the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine – JHSM (created and funded by The Rockefellers) and the World Economic Forum – WEF (a consortium of neoliberal capitalist entrepreneurs and thinkers), computer-simulated the first scenario outlines by the Rockefeller Report, the “Lockstep Scenario”, a corona virus outbreak creating worldwide havoc, killing 65 million people in 18 months, and destroying / destabilizing a large part of the world economy, creating misery, famine and death.

Although there is no direct reference to the clear eugenics agenda of the R-Report, its focus is on how philanthropy may help shape the future of the poor, of developing countries. There is enough insinuation to conclude that one of the tools to help is population reduction. See the following in the Introduction section:

“The results of our first scenario planning exercise demonstrate a provocative and engaging exploration of the role of technology and the future of globalization ….”

And

“…. how can we best position ourselves not just to identify technologies that improve the lives of poor communities but also to help scale(emphasis by author) and spread those that emerge? And how will the social, technological, economic, environmental, and political conditions of the future enable or inhibit our ability to do so?”

2. Event 201, organized by JHSM, simulated the coming Corona Crisis on 18 October 2019 in New York City.

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/videos.html
https://www.youtube.com/embed/AoLw-Q8X174

The main purpose of Event 201 was computer-simulating precisely what began a few months later in Wuhan, China, and is happening today.

It is what the R-Report referred to as scaling the population? And that in the presence of the famous and powerful, representatives of the highest levels of the UN, WHO, IMF, World Bank UNICEF, CDC, FDA, EU / EC, and many more.

For those who don’t know, the JHSM was created and is funded by the Rockefeller Foundation – a key propagator of eugenics. The Rockefellers already supported Hitler and his eugenics agenda, by supplying the Third Reich with petroleum to sustain its economy and, especially, to invade the Soviet Union, to destroy the capitalist threat of communism. Alas, they failed. (See analysis of historian Dr. Jacques Pauwels, The Myth of a Good War)

3. Henry Kissinger’s 1974  National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM200)– stating population growth as a national security threat. The report is still valid, more than ever – and its implementation in full swing.

While the report does not contain a direct quote of population reduction or otherwise a direct reference to a eugenics agenda, it is multiple times insinuated by referring to population growth being a “National Security Threat”, a State Department lingo for “controlling overpopulation”, i.e., reducing population.

Kissinger’s himself often infamously said:

Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money, controls the world.”

Well, Bill Gates and many of his billionaire cronies are working on food control, world wide, but especially beginning in the US, where Gates has become the largest private landowner of the United States with at least 242,000 acres (about 980 square kilometers) of American farmland, spread over several states.

4. Klaus Schwab’s (WEF founder and CEO for life) “The Great Reset” describes in detail what is to happen to humanity in the coming ten years, also called the UN Agenda 2030, with the infamous concluding quote, by 2030 “You will own nothing, and you will be happy”.

video “You’ll own nothing, And you’ll be happy.”

Again, there is no direct reference to a coming depopulation of the world.

However, in an interesting 2016 interview with Swiss French TV, Klaus Schwab talks about implanting microchips:

“What we see is a kind of fusion of the physical, digital and biological world”.

The referenced section of the interview was summarized in a 2 minutes youtube on 16 May 2021

https://www.youtube.com/embed/dg6BlXuj8cM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dg6BlXuj8cM . 

These statements in 2016 clearly announce The Great Reset, with all its consequences, where Artificial Intelligence (AI) merges with humankind, whereby “human survivors” become fully controlled “transhumans”, responding to outside computer signals.

There is no limit of what such computer signals can do to humans, aka, “transhumans” – a term first invented by Klaus Schwab in his book, “The Fourth Industrial Revolution”. 

Later he refers to covid-19  as “The pandemic [which] represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world”.

In other words, the world that we tirelessly built together for decades is no longer viable and satisfactory. Let’s scrap it and reconstruct it altogether as soon as possible.

What he doesn’t say, but is implicit in his Great Reset, is that his new world, a One World Order, will be reigned by a tyranny of an all-possessing few billionaire oligarchs. The infamous conclusion of the Great Reset is “You will own nothing, and you will be happy.”

5. The Georgia Guidestones,a granite monument,  “anonymously” erected in 1980 in Elbert County, Georgia, in the US of A, speaks for itself.

The monument makes ten predictions, of which the first one is “Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature”.

Given today’s world population of about 7.7 billion (2019), this implies a reduction of almost 95%. We can only hope that this remains but a pipedream. For details on the Guidestones monument see here

Concluding Remarks 

And there are many more signals which we may have heard of, or vaguely perceived, but soon forgotten. Some of them, like the full contents of the WEF’s Great Reset – is so horrifying that many who heard of it, or even read it, simply discard it, as unreal.

That’s a mistake. You should take note and realize this is a diabolical plan. BUT you should not be afraid – NEVER – instead bond together, with our spiritual and human positive-thinking power we can vibrate with the light – and overcome.

The crossroads dilemma is – do we accept this diabolical project, or do we choose the light?

Choosing the light, the truth – might be much more uncomfortable than “sticking with the darkness”, the lies we have been told and tolerated for so many years.

Choosing the light, the truth makes us strong, makes us swing on a high frequency.  But it requires togetherness and perseverance – the reinvention of the term “solidarity” – and spirituality. And we will.

For more details, see:

Agenda ID2020: The Diabolical Agenda within the Agenda. “Genetically Modified Humanity”

The Corona Crisis: Has “Depopulation” Already Begun?

This is NOT a drill: Countdown to mass FAMINE has begun, and people you know will starve

By Mike Adams (via Natural News)

The engineered mass famine in America is now under way, with the deep state sabotage of the Colonial Pipeline already causing trucking to suffer fuel shortages across Southeast states, impairing some food deliveries. If this pipeline is not fully restored in the next 72 hours or so, food shelves in some areas will go empty and panic will take hold across the populations there. Already, over a thousand gas stations have run out of gas, and people are so desperate to stock up on gasoline that the federal government had to issue a warning that tells people it’s unsafe to store gasoline in plastic bags. (Yes, people are pumping gas into plastic bags. Welcome to Third World America.)

Meanwhile, Michigan Governor Whitmer is attempting to close another pipeline that serves Northern states, demonstrating that pipeline shutdowns are part of an engineered collapse of America’s industrial infrastructure.

If this deliberate shutdown plan continues, many people will face famine this summer as America plunges into chaos and desperation. It’s all by design, of course, as the radical Marxists who stole the election are working their way through a checklist to destroy America from within.

As I discuss in today’s Situation Update podcast — which has a particularly doomsday ring to it — after experiencing the supply line shortages of 2020, anyone who isn’t yet a prepper in 2021 is essentially committing themselves to death. I ask the question, “How can everyone NOT be a prepper in 2021 after living through 2020?”

Yet, amazingly, the oblivious masses have zero preparedness and still think, “things will all go back to normal” real soon now, as soon as the vaccines save everybody.

Things will never “go back to normal” … you are living through a WAR being waged against the human race

What they don’t seem to realize is that America has already entered an era of hyperinflation and wholesale currency debasement. The dollar is headed for imminent collapse, meaning a total wipeout of all dollar-denominated assets, including bank deposits and pensions. With a financial collapse under way, the anti-American Marxists (Biden, Whitmer, Newsom, etc.) are tearing down America’s infrastructure, leading to engineered blackouts and grid down failures that you will see more clearly by Summer.

These assaults on America will complete the economic takedown of America, resulting in mass famine / starvation across the vaccine-damaged, zombified population of “oblivions.” Over the next four years, according to the now-defunct Deagel.com website, America’s population will be reduced to around 65 million survivors. Most will die of starvation and disease, augmented by lawless violence and chaos in the cities. The collapse has already begun.

In today’s Situation Update podcast, I express extreme sorrow in advance of the realization that those of us who wish to live are likely going to have to defend ourselves against the desperate, starving masses. While we do our best to help as many people as we can — and I have a plan in place to donate large amounts of food to local churches — in the end we will likely have to kill aggressors in self-defense or be killed ourselves.

As I explain, this is no longer a thought experiment. It’s not entertainment or “fear porn.” It’s the grim reality that we’ve been thrust into because the globalists who stole the election, built the bioweapons and control the media are pursuing a luciferian agenda to exterminate the human race. While I don’t think they will succeed, there’s little question they will kill hundreds of millions — perhaps even a billion — before they are stopped and defeated.

Those who wish to survive this need to mentally and spiritually prepare to live through Hell on Earth, where even the most prepared among us will be hard-pressed to survive the tsunami of violence, lawlessness and desperation that’s being unleashed against us by the day.

Mass death is coming to America. People you know and love will die. Some of those you thought were neighbors and friends will turn against you as extreme hunger kicks in, transforming once-civil people into famished marauders who will use violence to acquire any food they can find.

This is all very real. The doctors who mocked anti-vaxxers are now dying from the vaccines, and those oblivious masses who mocked preppers will soon be silenced, because many of them will be dead.

Even now, it is abundantly obvious that 95% of the American public has no clue whatsoever about what’s happening around them. They have zero supplies, zero knowledge, few skills and no awareness of reality. They will be the “low-hanging fruit” that globalists will be able to easily exterminate with little effort. And the farther away you can get from these oblivious masses, the better your own chances for survival.

You will also need to be very well armed, and highly proficient in the use of firearms for self-defense. I just checked online retailers, and 338 Lapua Magnum rounds are now $10 each. AR-15 rounds are about a dollar each, and I just paid $2 each for Controlled Chaos 7.62×39 rounds for one of my AK rifles. This means even practicing with a firearm now costs a small fortune.

Listen to this podcast if you want to live, and you’ll learn some important facts and skills that can help keep you alive:

Brighteon.com/03677457-5ac3-4f00-ba37-44589e73dc64

Researchers: The real Covid-19 “superspreaders” are the obese

By Ethan Huff (via Natural News)

There is a segment of society you should avoid in order to minimize your risk of “catching” the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19), but it is not anti-maskers or people who say no to Chinese Virus injections. As it turns out, obese people are the true “superspreaders” who are getting the most people sick.

Because overweight and obese people tend to generate upwards of 1,000 times more aerosol particles than their normal-weight counterparts, they put those around them at greater risk of inhaling the virus every time they take a breath, scientists say.

The fatter and older you are, the more likely you are to blast Chinese Germs at people who are in your proximity. Being overweight and old puts you among the 20 percent of people who exhale 80 percent of the world’s human-generated aerosol droplets, a new study suggests.

Published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the paper suggests that simply breathing as a large human is a deadly threat to others, and somehow it has to stop.

“The surface of the mucus can break up like the sea breaks up in a strong wind storm,” says David Edwards, a “scientist” from Harvard University who helped conduct research for the study.

“This, as with the sea, sends up spray, in this case a spray of potentially infectious mucus.”

It is not just any mucus that is a threat, though. In Edwards’ view, the mucus of fat people is particularly offensive, as is the mucus of old people, because it is more likely to spread the Wuhan Flu to other people.

“The point which is commonly made is that super-spreading is an environmental phenomenon,” he adds. “And it clearly is that. But it is also clearly a biological one. We’ve found super-emitters who exhale 50,000 particles and kids who exhale two particles.”

Does Edwards want fat elderly people to be sacrificed for the good of humanity?

The only logical conclusion to go along with Edwards’ line of thinking is that people who are old and fat have to stop breathing if ever we are going to stop the spread of the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19).

This writer is of course being facetious, as this “study” reads like something out of The Babylon Bee. Nevertheless, this is what the latest “science” has to say about how we can “cure” the Chinese Virus once and for all.

While being overweight is certainly unhealthy, putting a person at risk of early death for a variety of reasons, the idea that simply being large makes you a “superspreader” is a bit, well, ridiculous.

Chinese Germs, assuming they are even real and spread the way “science” is telling us they do, would probably not be picky when it comes to the size of their host. Either a virus spreads in human saliva, or it doesn’t. Period.

Even so, we wanted to give you a little insight into just how far they are willing to push this thing, with the evolving “science” behind it becoming exponentially more insane with each passing day.

“Vitamin D is oil soluble and fat tissue soaks it up, making it unavailable for the body,” one of our own commenters wrote about a possible reason why obese people are more susceptible to becoming ill, period.

“The more fat tissue you have, the more vitamin D you need. Anyone who wants to get a healthy level of D, I suggest talk to your doctor and use an online vitamin D calculator. You can quantify age, weight, sun exposure, diet and target a healthy D level.”

Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) hysteria is still going strong after more than a year of plandemic propaganda. You can keep up with the latest at Pandemic.news.

Single-use face masks are a ticking time bomb of global pollution, experts warn

By Divina Ramirez (via Natural News)

Single-use face masks are a ticking plastic bomb for the environment, according to a commentary published in Frontiers of Environmental Science and Engineering. Zhiyong Ren, a professor of civil and environmental engineering from Princeton University, and Elvis Xu, an environmental scientist from the University of Southern Denmark, authored the commentary.

Based on recent studies, the authors estimated that some 129 billion single-use face masks are used per month worldwide. This figure corresponds to three million masks used per minute. Most of these masks are made from plastic microfibers, typically ranging in size from five millimeters (mm) to microscopic lengths.

There have been increasing reports as well of the inappropriate disposal of soiled face masks. The authors said it is urgent to recognize single-use face masks as a potential environmental threat to prevent them from becoming the next big plastic problem.

Face masks could be worse than plastic bottles

More than 300 million tons of plastic were being produced worldwide per year before the pandemic. However, recent estimates show that face masks are now being produced worldwide at an unprecedented rate, with China leading the way.

In fact, China, now the world’s largest face mask producer, increased its face mask production by a factor of 10 last March to meet the surge in demand. That put the production of single-use face masks on a similar scale as plastic bottles. (Related: Plastic BAN List highlights the 9 top sources of plastic pollution.)

But unlike plastic bottles, single-use masks can neither be reused nor recycled. In fact, 25 percent of all bottles produced are recycled thanks to official guidance from local and national governments. On the other hand, there is no official guidance for the recycling of masks. So it’s not surprising that most soiled masks end up polluting both terrestrial and aquatic environments.

Moreover, the masks’ materials make them more likely to persist and accumulate in the environment. A single-use mask typically has three layers: a polyester outer layer, a polypropylene or polystyrene middle layer and an inner layer made of an absorbent material like cotton.

Polypropylene is notorious for being one of the most problematic plastics. It is typically used to produce various plastic products, such as plastic containers, reusable waterbottles, plastic furniture, medical components, luggage and even car parts.

As a ubiquitous material, polypropylene is also typically found accumulating in the environment. According to Xu and Ren, masks are able to resist degradation even when subjected to heat and solar radiation in nature because of polypropylene’s recalcitrant properties.

They also explained that masks can generate large numbers of microscopic polypropylene particles as they become weathered in the environment. These particles can break down further into nanoplastics.

Products like plastic bottles and plastic bags would take centuries to break down into micro- and nanoplastics. But since single-use face masks are already made from micro-sized plastic fibers, they may release those fibers into the environment more readily, explained Xu and Ren.

The authors also pointed out that nanomasks could further compound this problem. Nanomasks are new-generation masks that use nano-sized plastic fibers to protect the wearer from inhaling pathogens. But as is the case with the standard single-use masks, these nanomasks may be another source of plastic pollution.

However, Xu and Ren said they do not know how masks contribute to the large number of plastic particles detected in the environment because no data on mask degradation in nature exists.

That said, it’s safe to assume that, like other plastic waste, masks accumulate in nature. They may even release harmful chemicals and pathogenic microorganisms that threaten plants, animals and humans.

Despite this grim outlook, Xu and Ren said there are several things that citizens, officials and scientists can do to minimize the impact of face masks on the environment. These include:

  • Set up mask-only trash bins for collection and disposal
  • Replace disposable masks with reusable ones
  • Develop biodegradable face masks
  • Consider standardization, guidelines and strict implementation of waste management for mask wastes

Environ.news has more stories about the environmental impacts of single-use face masks.

Large-scale study finds that masking students is ineffective and a form of child abuse

By Ethan Huff (via Natural News)

A dataset called the “COVID dashboard project” has revealed that forcing children to wear a mask all day at school is a pointless exercise in child abuse.

Put together by Brown University professor Emily Oster, the project was designed to fill the gap concerning the “coordinated federal effort to track COVID cases in context.”

“By ‘in context’ I mean with information on how many people were in in-person school and what mitigation factors allowed school to operate safety,” Oster clarified in a March 1 update to the dashboard.

Launched back in early September, the dashboard’s initial announcement included data on roughly 100,000 in-person students. All of it came from schools and districts that opted-in to the study to provide relevant data for research purposes.

“These data provided a first, early look at case rates in schools,” reports explain. “The sample was selected, yes, but it provided a first look at case rates in schools.”

Since that time, a second “wave” of data was received on about 12 million students, roughly six million of whom are taking in-person classes – this is roughly 20 percent of all school enrollment in the United States.

“At this stage of the process, we still collect data from districts and schools who opt-in,” Oster explains. “But we’re also pulling in comprehensive data at either the school or district level from a number of states (New York, Texas, Massachusetts, Florida).”

“The result is data with less geographic balance but significantly more representativeness (and many more observations).”

Masked schools are seeing 37 percent more Chinese Virus infections in students than unmasked schools

While back in March Oster was of the persuasion that masks might be beneficial, the data has since shown that the case rate of Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “infections” is actually 37 percent higher in schools that require masks.

Even worse, masked schools are seeing a case rate that is 84 percent higher in staff compared to unmasked schools. All the way around, masks have proven to be both useless and harmful.

This is the available data in areas that are considered to have “high community transmission.” However, similar disparities were observed in areas with “low community transmission,” where “masks required” districts are seeing noticeably higher rates of infection compared to “no masks required” districts.

All of this is what you call science, by the way – you know, that think the pro-mask, pro-injection crowd is always accusing us of rejecting. It is now clear that they are the ones rejecting science in favor of Faucism and other cult-like belief systems that have no basis in either science or reality.

Wearing a mask has become nothing more than a religious ritual for those who believe themselves to be scientifically superior to everyone else. They wear one – or two, or even three – to virtue signal their ignorance, which they believe shows how “smart” they are.

Well, we now know based on actual science that masks are an emblem of stupidity – and in the case of young children, an act of child abuse that is destroying their mental healthas well as their physical health.

“… it stands to reason that any data collected on such an issue would show at least somewhat less transmission in masked vs unmasked schools, IF masks worked to slow the spread of COVID-19,” writes Scott Morefield for Townhall.

“They don’t, obviously. Meanwhile, some blue state school districts are still forcing tennis players and track runners to wear face muzzles over their breathing holes outside, in the name of ‘science,’ or something.”

More related news about Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) child abuse can be found at Pandemic.news.

Swimming Pool Tells Swimmers to Exhale Underwater, Not Look at or Talk to Others

COVID-19 rules go beyond draconian.

By Paul Joseph Watson (via summit.news)

A lengthy set of COVID-19 rules mandated by the operators of a swimming pool in London include asking swimmers to exhale underwater as well as not to look at or talk to others.

Yes, really.

The rules were posted to Twitter in response to a tweet by rapper Zuby in which he stated, “‘Third world countries’ are now more free than ‘first world countries’.”

“When you need to rest look away from other swimmers and maintain social distancing,” states one of the mandates.

“When swimming, exhale underwater when you can,” states another.

Backstrokes and any other stroke where “social distancing cannot be maintained” are also banned.

Swimmers are also told to avoid talking to each other when social distancing is not possible.

The rules are this strict despite London now recording zero COVID deaths and cases rapidly falling across the country.

Swimmers in Spain were hit with similar draconian mandates after the government passed legislation mandating face masks not just on the beach, but while swimming in the sea.

A bizarre video that emerged earlier this month also showed a man wearing a face mask while swimming underwater.

Covid Has Triggered The Next Great Financial Crisis

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog

What’s left are the ‘fatal synergies’ of soaring debt and leverage, diminishing returns on stimulus, the substitution of credit for savings and the coming deflationary tsunami that pops all the speculative bubbles.

Imagine a once modest but sturdy home built near a cliff to maximize the vistas. Over the decades, the foundation slowly degraded and the house moved imperceptibly closer to the unstable edge of the cliff. Those who observed the slippage and the potential for eventual disaster were either derided as alarmists or ignored. 

Given the enviable location and views, the home rose in value and a series of increasingly gaudy additions were added, completely obscuring the once-modest exterior with cheap imitations of long-lasting, time-tested materials (plastic trim and brittle fake-marble veneers). The foundations of these ostentatious additions were slapdash, shallow and poorly made, as the goal was not durability but appearance. 

The low-quality additions accelerated the slide to the unstable cliff edge, and in 2019 the viewing deck broke away and crashed into the canyon below. The repairs were hasty and the residents were assured all was well–in fact, better than ever. 

In 2020, the weak foundation of the gaudiest, lowest-quality addition crumbled. The response of the owners was to fill the widening crack in the decaying structure and spray on a new coat of paint. There–good as new, the residents were told. 

But this was not true. The house is now teetering on the precariously unstable cliff edge. Ironically, the vast majority of the residents have moved to the game room, which is now cantilevered over thin air. The slightest movement will tip the entire decayed structure over the cliff. 

That decayed, precariously unstable structure is the U.S. economy, and Covid was the catalyst that nudged the economy right to the edge. Gordon Long and I discuss the causes and consequences in our new video program, Covid Has Triggered The Next Great Financial Crisis (34:46). 

Chief among the many causes is a very basic one that’s easy to understand: America has consumed more than it has produced for decades, and filled the gap with imports purchased with borrowed money and currency created out of thin air. 

As Gordon and I explain, this is a very well-worn path to instability and collapse:governments (which now include nominally independent central banks) have always responded to declines in productivity and affordable energy/materials, the expansion of a parasitic elite and excessive spending with the same bag of financial tricks: 

1. They borrow more money, eventually borrowing more to pay interest on existing debts, greasing the slide to default and insolvency. 

2. They defraud the users of their currency by devaluing the currency. In the old days, this was accomplished by substituting base metals for silver or gold in the minting of coinage. Eventually the coins contained only a trace of silver. Users soon caught on and the result was the coinage lost purchasing power, a.k.a. inflation destroyed the value of the officially issued money. 

In today’s fiat currency regime, central banks create trillions of new units of “money” with a few keystrokes, effectively diluting the value of all existing currency. 

3. Desperate for revenues, governments raise taxes, which despite all claims to the contrary by political leaders, fall most heavily on the productive middle class. Since the parasitic elite will never accept any consequential reduction of their wealth or power, the higher taxes and economic stagnation that result from these three policies crush the middle class, which was the engine of productivity and demand that enabled the parasitic elite to live large. 

These are key dynamics in what Gordon calls the killing of the golden goose, theproductive synergies that generate widespread prosperity and opportunity. 

What’s left are the fatal synergies of soaring debt and leverage, diminishing returns on stimulus, the substitution of credit for savings and the coming deflationary tsunami (53 min) that pops all the speculative bubbles, setting up the destabilization and cliff-dive of the entire decayed, flimsy structure–The Next Great Financial Crisis that cannot be papered over with more central bank legerdemain. 

There’s more in our 34-minute video program:

If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

My new book is available! A Hacker’s Teleology: Sharing the Wealth of Our Shrinking Planet20% and 15% discounts (Kindle $7, print $17, audiobook now available $17.46) 

Read excerpts of the book for free (PDF). 

The Story Behind the Book and the Introduction

Recent Podcasts:

Covid Has Triggered The Next Great Financial Crisis

My COVID-19 Pandemic Posts

Brazilian scientists claim they’ve discovered live, replicating adenoviruses in Russia’s covid vaccines

By Lance D Johnson (Natural News)

Brazilian scientists discovered a serious issue with Russia’s Sputnik V covid vaccine. This serious issue could lead to a new public health crisis, which is why Brazilian regulators have banned the import of this vaccine.

The vaccine in question was developed by Russia’s Gamaleya Institute. Like the AstraZeneca and the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, the Sputnik V covid vaccine uses a genetically modified adenovirus to carry genetic instructions into the cells of human recipients. Once inside the cells, these genetic instructions force the cells to develop the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2. If the process goes as planned, immune-responsive cells are supposed to respond to this new influx of spike proteins, which are delivered on the surface of the cells.

In the wild, the adenovirus normally causes mild respiratory illness in humans. The adenovirus used in the vaccine is genetically modified and disabled, so it cannot replicate in human tissues. But this is not always guaranteed. The vector can revert to LIVE form in some people, destroying the vaccine’s methodology, causing new infections, and contributing to community spread.

Adenovirus-vectored vaccines can revert to LIVE form, putting the immunocompromised at risk

Brazil’s drug regulatory agency, Anvisa, tested samples of the Sputnik V covid vaccine. They found that the genetically weakened adenovirus is still “replication-competent” and can rapidly multiply once it’s injected into humans. Once the adenovirus begins to replicate, the DNA code that it was supposed to carry into the cells becomes disabled, rendering the shot ineffective as a covid-19 vaccine.

Top virologist Angela Rasmussen said this finding “raises questions about the integrity of the manufacturing processes.” If the genetically modified adenovirus reverts to a live, infectious form in the human body, it can make people sick, especially those with weaker immune systems. The live virus can then contribute to community spread of new respiratory viruses, creating new public health challenges.

“For most people this probably won’t be a big deal because adenoviruses are generally not thought of as really important human pathogens,” said Rasmussen. “But in people who are immune compromised … there could be a higher rate of adverse effects because of it, including potentially serious ones.”

This unbeknownst adenovirus replication also gives the vaccinated person a false sense of security, because the intended encoding process for spike proteins never occurs and never provokes an immune response.

The fallibility of adenovirus-vector vaccines is well known

At some point in the vaccine manufacturing process, the adenovirus is recouping all the genes it needs to restore its ability to replicate. The Brazilian scientists believe this is occurring during the manufacturing process called “recombination.” When the inactivated adenovirus is grown in aborted fetal cells, it can secretly gain back the genes it needs to continue its replication process. Once inside human test subjects, the adenovirus can begin replicating, leading to adverse events, sickness and community spread of a new respiratory virus. It is also unknown whether the DNA code for the spike protein is being disabled during this manufacturing process. The vaccine might be intended to create herd immunity, but it could inadvertently weaken herd immunity and promote the spread of new infectious virus material in the community.

The Sputnik V vaccine was developed as a two-shot protocol, which isn’t validated in the scientific community. The first shot contains adenovirus type 26 and the second shot contains adenovirus type 5. The immune responsive cells quickly become familiar with adenoviruses. A different adenovirus is used for each shot in an attempt to trick immune responsive cells. This familiarity makes re-vaccination less effective as immune responsive cells disable the adenovirus vector before it can convey genetic instructions to the cells.

The booster shots for adenovirus-vector vaccines are not nearly as effective as the original vaccine and contribute to the mutation of live viruses that cause symptoms of the common cold in healthy people and more serious health issues for people with weak immune systems. If immune responsive cells recognize the vector, the intended process of encoding spike proteins is thwarted, rendering the vaccine protocol ineffective and making the vaccine recipient more susceptible to colds and other coronavirus infections in the future.

Sources include:

France24.com

ClinicalTrialsArena.com

NaturalNews.com

DR. RYAN COLE, CEO AND MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF COLE DIAGNOSTICS ON VITAMIN D, IVERMECTIN, “VACCINES”

By Brian Shilhavy (via Health Impact News)

Dr. Ryan Cole is the CEO and Medical Director of Cole Diagnostics, one of the largest independent labs in the State of Idaho. Dr. Cole is a Mayo Clinic trained Board Certified Pathologist.

He is Board Certified in anatomic and clinical pathology. He has expertise in immunology and virology and also has subspecialty expertise in skin pathology.

He has seen over 350,000 patients in his career, and has done over 100,000 Covid tests in the past year.

He recently was invited to speak at the “Capitol Clarity” event in Idaho, apparently sponsored by the Lt. Governor’s office, where he discussed successful outpatient treatments for COVID, and to offer his views on the new COVID “vaccines.”

Dr. Cole begins by showing statistics that prove Idaho is no longer in a “pandemic,” but an “endemic.” He states that the highest risk factors for contracting COVID are advanced age, obesity, and low Vitamin D levels.

He also explains that coronaviruses have historically always followed a 6-9 month life cycle. He gives previous examples such as SARS-1, MERS, etc.

One very interesting statistic that he pointed out is that in the U.S. the average annual age of death is 78.6 years old, and the average age of death during COVID has also been 78.6 years old.

Dr. Cole is very adamant that proper levels of Vitamin D are essential to fight coronaviruses. He states:

There is no such thing as “flu and cold season,” only low Vitamin D season.

Slide from Dr. Cole’s presentation.

Slide from Dr. Cole’s presentation.

Dr. Cole then goes on to explain that by law, the government cannot use experimental vaccines on the population if there are already effective treatments.

So all of the current experimental COVID “vaccines,” which Dr. Cole himself admits do NOT meet the legal definition of a “vaccine” to begin with, are all illegal because there are therapies, such as Vitamin D, that are effective in treating COVID patients, as well as older already FDA-approved drugs like Ivermectin.

He points out that the NIH (the National Institute of Health), which is a U.S. government agency involved with approving drugs, holds patents on the Moderna experimental COVID “vaccine,” which is like asking the fox to guard the hen house.

This is also the agency that Anthony Fauci works for, and has been employed there for over 30 years and is one the highest paid politicians in the U.S., making more money than even the President of the United States. (Go ahead and fact check this for yourself.)

Watch the entire presentation by Dr. Cole. We have it on our Bitchute Channel, as well as our Rumble Channel.

Message from Great Britain to the United States… Stop killing each other and blowing stuff up – you’re embarrassing yourselves.

By The Tatty Journal

On Saturday the 24th April one million people descended onto London to protest against the mandated lockdown, which has seen countless deaths, job losses and self destructive behaviour sky rocket. That’s even before we get into deaths which are claimed to be because of Coronavirus.

How is it though… one million people can trot on down to London, and not burn a single thing down, shoot one person and literally just end up dancing and hugging each other all day?

What is it America? Or you one spanner short of a tool box? Have you not passed the next level yet? It’s okay to be pissed off, and hate the shit society implements on us mere subjects of existence, but at the end of the day, we are still very much all in this together. Anyway, here you go America, this is how you act when wanting to make a difference in the world… just a heads up like…

Vaccine Passport – The Biggest Attack on Personal Freedom Since the Creation of the EU

By Eric Sorensen (via Free21)

It’s called the ID2020 Agenda, which, according to Peter Koenig constitutes “an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity”. 

“The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity”. 

The founding Partners of ID2020 are Microsoft, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) among others.

ID2020 is part of a “World Governance” project which, if applied, would roll out the contours of what some analysts have described as a Global Police State. 

The EU has adopted the Vaccine Passport.

Read Eric Sorensen‘s incisive analysis

Read the full report here.

So Now ‘COVID Anxiety Syndrome’ Is a Thing?

By Ashley Frawley (via RT News)

Hope is for fools: a new study claims that people are having problems reintegrating into normal life due to compulsive anxiety over the virus. This is what ridiculous campaigns designed to make people overly fearful result in.

A small study claiming that “residual anxiety” over coronavirus may lead people to encounter difficulties reintegrating into society, even after the decline of the virus, has been widely reported this week. The authors, who surveyed 300 individuals in the UK, claim that people are increasingly experiencing what they call “Covid anxiety syndrome,” characterised by “compulsively” checking symptoms, avoiding public spaces, and obsessive cleaning, even as cases are declining in the UK.

Yet this ‘syndrome’ is a peculiar one, as it appears difficult to distinguish between these ‘symptoms’ and those behaviours and attributes that have been expressly promoted as desirable responses to the pandemic. Perhaps dimly aware of this possibility, the study’s authors offer a feeble attempt to distinguish between activities promoted by public health campaigners and those that are “maladaptive.” Anxiety about Covid is a problem, the authors claim, when people act in “overly safe ways.”

However, from the point of view of public health promotion, no amount of risk aversion is too great. Indeed, a level of fear so great that people cannot leave their houses was seen as a desirable outcome of public health policy during the pandemic. Even the pathologization of people continuing to act fearfully in spite of a decline in cases is difficult to sustain. Beliefs that things were getting better and that the virus was ‘under control’ have been widely pointed to as causing its resurgence around the world. Hope is for fools. Those who know, know we should never stop fearing.

Extreme though it is, this is not an entirely new development. For decades, we have seen the decline of explicitly moral exhortations to change behaviours in favour of encouraging and spreading fears about associated health risks. Thus, for example, we are no longer told to avoid alcohol because it is a vice, but rather because it is a risk to our health.

Indeed, a state of constant awareness of potential threats to one’s health, no matter how small, is positively encouraged as a desirable attribute of the modern citizen. It is no surprise then that many people would answer a survey indicating heightened anxiety and fear about coronavirus related phenomena. We are constantly told that this is how the good, responsible citizen should react.

Yet even a heightened level of fear for one’s personal safety is not enough for policymakers. Increasingly, this shift from moral to harm-based behavioural controls has slipped into harms to others. So, claims-makers move from “don’t drink because it harms your health” to “don’t drink because it harms your children’s mental health.” During the pandemic, we saw this emphasis on other directed harms in warnings to young people not to go out, lest they “kill granny.”

Doubtless, each one of us has at some point passed on a virus to another person who was ill as a result. But we lived with this as a normal part of life, partially buffered by our ignorance of this fact. Now, we are encouraged to become hyper aware of how even the act of breathing can be a murderous act, as a series of government ads showing the deadly effects of apparently everyday activities were designed to show.

Thus, risk aversion acquires a moral edge. The good, moral person is the one who shows the most awareness of risk. Indeed, even prior to coronavirus, whole celebrity-backed campaigns have grown up around simply ‘raising awareness’ of new and exotic risks. Risk awareness itself becomes a form of moral goodness.

None of this is encapsulated by making sense of fears about coronavirus through the trend of finding, naming and – potentially lucratively – treating new ‘syndromes’ and anxieties. Indeed, doing so only feeds into these broader trends. Naming new syndromes encourages people to be on the lookout for ever more symptoms. Watch out for a suspicious cough on the one hand, and ‘excessive’ anxiety about that cough on the other. In the end, citizens can’t win. But risk entrepreneurs win in droves.

We can’t find our way out of the never-ending sense of health in crisis by dreaming up new ways to be ill. Instead, we need to refuse to see ourselves as forever patients in waiting.

‘Every Time the US “Saves” a Country, It Converts It Either into a Madhouse or a Cemetery’

By Prof. Vijay Prashad (via Tricontinental)

After twenty years, the United States government – and the forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) – will depart from Afghanistan. They said that they came to do two things: to destroy al-Qaeda, which had launched an attack on the United States on 11 September 2001, and to destroy the Taliban, which had given al-Qaeda a base. After great loss of life and the further destruction of Afghan society, the US departs – as it did from Vietnam in 1975 – in defeat: al-Qaeda [covertly supported by the US] has regrouped in different parts of the world, and the Taliban is set to return to the capital, Kabul.

The speaker of Afghanistan’s parliament, Mir Rahman Rahmani, warns that the country is poised to enter a new period of civil war, a repeat of the terrible civil war that ran from 1992 to 2001. The United Nations calculates that in the first quarter of 2021, civilian casualties rose by 29% compared to last year, while the number of women casualties increased by 37%. It is unclear if there will be further talks between the Taliban, the Afghan government of President Ashraf Ghani, the Turks, the Qataris, the United States, and the United Nations. Afghanistan sits on the brink of further violence, whose impact can so aptly be described by the words of the poet Zarlasht Hafeez:

The sorrow and grief, these black evenings,
Eyes full of tears and times full of sadness,
These burnt hearts, the killing of youths,
These unfulfilled expectations and unmet hopes of brides

‘Saving’ Afghan women, advancing the cause of human rights: these words have lost meaning after two decades. As Eduardo Galeano put it, ‘Every time the US “saves” a country, it converts it either into a madhouse or a cemetery’.

Alicia Leal (Cuba), Un soldado de América, 1997.

Alicia Leal (Cuba), Un soldado de América, 1997.

The US government calculates that this war, which would enter its twentieth year, is the longest US war in the modern period (the US engagement in Vietnam lasted for fourteen years, from 1961 to 1975).

But this war in Afghanistan is not the longest war prosecuted by the United States government. There are two US wars that continue: a war against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea or DPRK (since August 1950) and against Cuba (since September 1959).

Neither of these conflicts have ended, with the US continuing to execute hybrid wars against both the DPRK and Cuba. A hybrid war does not necessarily require the full arsenal of a military to come into force; it is a war fought through the control of information and financial flows as well as the use of economic sanctions and illicit means such as sabotage. There is no question that the longest and unfinished US wars have been against Korea and Cuba.

Sixty years ago, on 17 April 1961, the CIA’s Brigade 2506 landed at Cuba’s Playa Girón (‘Bay of Pigs’). The Cuban people resisted this invasion as they would six decades of hybrid war against their sovereign revolutionary processes. Cuba has never threatened the United States; it never has violated the UN Charter of 1945. The United States, on the other hand, has routinely threatened the Cuban people. In October 1962, when the Soviets sent a missile cover to protect Cuba, General Maxwell Taylor, the head of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, planned for a full-scale invasion. In this now-declassified memorandum, Taylor pointed out that such a military venture might result in 18,500 casualties on the US side because of the determination of the Cubans to protect their land and their political project. The plot was to reinstate the old Cuban oligarchy that had sought refuge in Miami and turn Cuba back into a gangster’s paradise.

After the Cuban government sent troops to assist the national liberation project in Angola in November 1975, US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told his team on 24 March 1976, ‘if we decide to use military power, it must succeed. There should be no halfway measures – we would get no award for using military power in moderation. If we decide on a blockade, it must be ruthless, rapid, and efficient’. The US planned to mine Havana’s harbour and bomb Cuba’s cities. ‘I think we are going to have to smash Castro’, Kissinger told US President Gerald Ford. Ford replied, ‘I agree’. Such is the attitude of the US government, from 1961 to the present.Human Rights Rhetoric at the UN Is Not Enough to Combat the US Blockade on Cuba

Carlos Garaicoa (Cuba), Puzzle la Malenka, 2009.

Carlos Garaicoa (Cuba), Puzzle la Malenka, 2009.

Before he left office in January 2021, US President Donald Trump placed Cuba on the US government’s ‘state sponsors of terrorism’ list. Seventy-five US lawmakers asked his successor, President Joe Biden, to reverse this decision. On 16 April, Biden’s press secretary Jen Psakitold the briefing room that ‘A Cuba policy shift or additional steps is currently not among the President’s top foreign policy priorities’. Biden, in other words, has decided to passively continue Trump’s policy, dictated to him by the likes of Republican Senators Marco Rubio and Rick Scott from Florida and Senator Ted Cruz from Texas (as well as Democratic Senator Robert Menendez from New Jersey). Biden has opted to persist in this cruel six-decade long policy to suffocate the Cuban people.

Just after the 1959 Cuban Revolution, the US government made it clear that it would not tolerate a sovereign Cuba only 145 kilometres from Florida’s coast. Cuba’s commitment to people over profit is a standing rebuke of the hypocrisies of the United States rulers. This has been clarified once more during this pandemic, during which the infection and death rates per million are strikingly higher in the US than in Cuba (recent figures indicate the US has recorded 1,724 deaths per million, whereas Cuba stands at 47 deaths per million). While the US locked itself into vaccine nationalism, Cuba’s Henry Reeve Brigade of doctors continued with their work amongst the world’s poorest people (for this, of course, they deserve the Nobel Prize for Peace).

Unable to successfully invade Cuba, the US has persisted with a tight blockade of the island. After the fall of the USSR, which had provided Cuba with ways to circumvent the blockade, the US attempted to tighten its grip on the island. US lawmakers then attacked Cuba’s economy through the Cuban Democracy Act (1992) and the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act (1996) – both laws with names that demean the words in them. From 1992 onwards, the UN General Assembly has voted overwhelmingly for the United States to end this blockade. A group of UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteurs wrote a statement calling on the US to withdraw these measures, which have only made Cuba’s attempt to fight the pandemic harder.

The Cuban government reported that between April 2019 and March 2020, Cuba lost $5 billion in potential trade due to the blockade; over the past almost six decades, it has lost the equivalent of $144 billion. Now the US government has deepened the sanctions against shipping companies that bring oil to the island. The head of US Southern Command, Admiral Craig Faller, described Cuba’s medical internationalism as a ‘regional corrosive influence’. There is cruelty in Washington.

Far from the bitterness of the US government, the Cuban communists held their eighth Party Congress, where the discussion was on how to improve the state enterprises and how to innovate to meet the aspirations of the Cuban people. Deputy Prime Minister Inés María Chapman said that the party members must be active in their communities to build and defend socialism. Rafael Santiesteban Pozo, president of the National Association of Small Farmers, said that working people must produce more with what resources are available. Minister of Economy and Planning Alejandro Gil pointed to the need for greater efficiency in the state enterprise system, the expansion of self-employment, and the expansion of cooperatives.

These are serious people who recognise the problems but are not overwhelmed by them; they are part of a project that has fought to defend its sovereignty against enormous odds since 1959. Defeat is not in their vocabulary. Their agenda is hopeful, unlike the bilious agenda that comes from the US government and the Miami-based Cuban oligarchy.

At this Congress, Raúl Castro stepped down from his post. Castro, one of the original Cuban revolutionaries, had been imprisoned for his role in the Moncada uprising of 1953. Upon his release, he went to Mexico with his brother Fidel and then returned on the Granma to lead the rebellion against the US-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista. After the victory of the Revolution, Castro served in the government and as a leader in the Communist Party, guiding it alongside Fidel and others through the difficult Special Period (1991-2000) and then continuing to lead it after Fidel’s death in 2016. His quiet role in defending and elaborating the Cuban Revolution has been immense.

José Rodríguez Fuster (Cuba), Granma, 2013.

José Rodríguez Fuster (Cuba), Granma, 2013.

After the Playa Girón attack by the CIA, the Spanish poet Jaime Gil de Biedma wrote a poem about Cuba called ‘During the Invasion’ (collected in Moralidades, 1966). The Venezuelan poet Diego Sequera translated this poem for us as we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the defeat of the US on those beaches:

The morning newspaper is open on
the tablecloth. The sun glows in the glasses.
Lunch at the small restaurant,
a working day.

Most of us remain silent. Someone speaks with an elusive voice;
these are conversations with special sorrow
about the things that always happen and
that never end, or that end in disgrace.

I think that at this time of day, the sun rises in Ciénaga;
nothing is yet decided, combat doesn’t stop,
and I look in the news for some hope
that doesn’t come from Miami.

Oh, Cuba in the distant dawn of the tropics,
when the sun is simmering, and the air is clear:
may your land sow tanks and your broken sky
be grey from the wings of airplanes.

With you are the people of sugar cane,
the man of the streetcar, those from the restaurants,
the thousands of us that today search in the world
for a bit of hope that doesn’t come from Miami.

Hope comes from the warm sun of Cuba.

Warmly,

Vijay Prashad

Four Big Things Cheaper Than America’s COVID Spending

By Anders Koskinen (via Intellectual Takeout)

President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats have successfully passed the American Rescue Plan, with its $1,400 stimulus checks and its $1.9 trillion price tag. In total the federal government has now spent enough on COVID stimulus and relief to fund key moments in American history, such as world wars and moon landings, many times over.

USA Today has compiled an intriguing visualization of exactly how much money has been spent on COVID-19 stimulus programs in the past year. The amounts are astounding.

First came the CARES Act in March 2020, at a cost of $2.2 trillion. This bill and Biden’s latest Contribution account for the majority of federal COVID spending, though the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 tacked on a combined $1.4 trillion in related expenditures.

These four bills saw the federal government shell out a total of more than $5.5 trillion on fighting COVID-19, with much of it going to various stimulus programs ostensibly designed to prop up the American economy even as the country’s various levels of governments continue to keep it shut down in varying degrees.

One can buy quite a lot for $5.5 trillion, as the following events in our nation’s history show. This article passes no judgments on the value of the projects described below, it merely uses them to illustrate the otherwise unimaginable scope of the COVID spending spree.

The New Deal

In the 1930s, the United States was mired in the Great Depression. The country’s GDP fell by more than 45 percent in just four years, not recovering to pre-depression levels until 1941. Unemployment hit 25 percent, housing prices fell by 67 percent, and one third of all banks closed. This years-long collapse, notably not imposed by government shutdowns of the economy, devastated America and the world.

Into this reality, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt inserted the New Deal, a six-year series of programs, public works projects, financial reforms, and regulations designed to stimulate and ostensibly fix the American economy. As an example, the Agricultural Adjustment Act actually saw the federal government pay farmers to reduce their crop yields, thereby raising food prices.

The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis estimated that the New Deal cost $653 billion in 2009 dollars. When aged up to 2021, the total cost is still just over $800 billion, slightly more than one-seventh the cost of COVID stimulus.

The Apollo Program

President John F. Kennedy’s promise to have a man on the moon before the end of the 1960s was indeed realized, and with Neil Armstrong’s “one small step” the United States defeated the Soviet Union in the space race. Yet the entry fee to this race wasn’t exactly cheap.

An analysis conducted by The Planetary Society found the 2020 inflation adjusted cost of the 13-year run of the Apollo Program and associated programs to clock in at $283 billion.

That’s a pittance compared to the rash of COVID spending in the last 12 months. The federal government could have funded the entire Apollo program roughly 19 times over with the stimulus money.

Both World Wars

American involvement in World War I only lasted for two years, so one might expect it to come in cheaper than the COVID response, and at $334 billion in 2020 inflation adjusted dollars, the “War to End All Wars” is only two-thirds the cost of the cheapest bill mentioned above.

World War II comes in much higher with $4.1 trillion spent in 2020 dollars over the course of 1941-1945 in a truly globe-spanning conflict. But even both wars combined total more than $1 trillion less in spending than the Trump and Biden administrations have spent on fighting COVID-19 and its economic impacts.

Every Other Major Pre-21st Century American War

In June 2010, Stephen Daggett compiled a report estimating the costs of major U.S. wars in inflation adjusted numbers. Using his numbers, in 2010 dollars, the combined cost of the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Mexican American War, both sides of the Civil War, the Spanish American War, Korea, Vietnam, and the Persian Gulf War add up to just under $1.28 trillion.

Bringing that up to 2021 dollars results in a total of $1.54 trillion. With the exception of the two World Wars mentioned separately above, 12 months of federal spending on COVID-19 and its associated stimulus would have funded the first 225 years of American warfare.

Regardless of what one thinks of merits of the spending described above, everyone should now be able to appreciate how truly gargantuan the checks the Trump and Biden administrations have been writing truly are. As Jeff Minick wrote recently, there will be a stimulus reckoning ahead for America. All past costly projects amounted to less than our present spending spree, and typically involved far less borrowing against America’s future assets than do the numerous COVID stimulus bills.

Try and remember that when you’re deciding how, or if, to spend that $1,400 from Uncle Joe.

Tom Cotton’s Anti-Chinese Containment Strategy Is Really Cunning

By Andrew Korybko (via One World)

The office of Republican Senator Tom Cotton published a comprehensive containment strategy against China last month that cunningly proposes a series of complementary coalitions aimed towards this end, including in the technological and institutional spheres, which essentially amounts to the creation of a modern-day Iron Curtain if successfully implemented.

Biden’s “Deep State” Balancing Act

President Biden’s strategy towards China increasingly appears to be predicated on expanding his predecessor’s containment policy, albeit in a more multilateral fashion than former President Trump’s mostly unilateral one. This is evidenced by his keynote speech at the State Department last month which led to my conclusion that “Alliances, Democracy, And Values Will Disguise American Aggression”. This was entirely foreseeable too since I earlier predicted that “An ‘Alliance Of Democracies’ Might Be America’s Next Grand Strategic Move”. The behind-the-scenes decision-making basis for this is that Biden must “balance” between competing “deep state” factions in his country’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies that are split between those who embrace Trump’s “America First” international outlook and the liberal-globalists who are more closely connected to former President Obama. I elaborated on the dynamic between them and their possible compromise with respect to more cleverly “containing” China in exchange for cautiously re-engaging with Iran in my related analysis late last year about “Deep State Wars: Trump vs. Biden on China & Iran”. 

Targeted Decoupling And The Long Economic War”

Republican Senator Tom Cotton, a notorious anti-China hawk, published a comprehensive containment strategy against China last month that was written by members of his office. It cunningly proposes a series of complementary coalitions aimed towards this end, including in the technological and institutional spheres, which essentially amounts to the creation of a modern-day Iron Curtain if successfully implemented. This might possibly happen considering that it largely aligns with the Biden Administration’s multilateral plans in this respect. The 84-page document is titled “Beat China: Targeted Decoupling And The Long Economic War”, and a summary of it can be read at Breitbart here. To be sure, it’s not all bad, since many of his proposals about diversifying the US’ economic partners and reshoring its businesses are sound in principle, as are his suggestions for stockpiling rare earth minerals, semiconductor chips, and other materials of national security importance. So too are his ideas about modernizing regulations and the tax code, investing more in research and development, and improving the federal government’s efficiency. They all make logical sense. 

Cotton’s Anti-Chinese Containment Coalition

The problem, however, is that he also basically wants to wage a global Hybrid War on China. His rationale is that this is the only possible recourse for America after its prior policy of attempting to influence domestic political changes there through decades of economic engagement failed to achieve any tangible dividends. In his own words, “this generational effort at engagement was an experiment to see whether greater economic integration would generate political change in China”, which he rightly argues has been unsuccessful. Instead of abandoning that consistently failed policy of meddling in China’s internal affairs, he wants to double down on it but in a craftier way through the establishment of semiconductor, 5G, and data-sharing blocs as crucial pillars of the larger “American-led, China-excluded trading order with trusted nations in the Indo-Pacific” that he proposes. In parallel with that, he advises that “The United States should launch a similar effort with respect to the United Kingdom and the European Union, America’s top export market.” The grand strategic outcome is therefore the creation of a massive anti-Chinese containment coalition along the Eurasian Rimland. 

Color Revolution Catalysts

This isn’t just for prestige’s sake, but is predicated on his expectation that “Chinese citizens willing to accept an increasingly heavy-handed authoritarian state in exchange for a higher standard of living may think twice if growth slows or stagnates. As a result, the CCP fears that declines in exports, growth, and employment could pose political liabilities.” In other words, the interconnected semiconductor, 5G, and data-sharing blocs that he wants to create within his envisioned anti-Chinese Eurasian Rimland containment coalition are supposed to eventually harm China’s economic growth when paired with a more aggression sanctions and tariff policy, which he hopes will in turn create fertile ground for a series of Color Revolutionsthere that could ultimately make the infamous Tiananmen Square Color Revolution attempt look like child’s play in hindsight. The proposed containment coalition would also prospectively expand worldwide all across the Global South according to his vision of the US “leveraging development finance and foreign aid”. Ironically, this is exactly what the US accuses China of doing against its own interests, so it’s curious that Cotton is embracing this same strategy. 

Economic Warfare

According to him, “Mobilizing these powerful institutions can support a U.S. strategy for targeted decoupling by incentivizing foreign countries to resist Chinese entreaties, such as participation in the Belt and Road Initiative, and supporting American companies in strategic sectors.” These efforts will be made all the more effective if US spy agencies follow his advice to expand operations against the People’s Republic. His report importantly suggests that “the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) should expand its collection efforts relating to China’s economy, including IP theft, the corporate and capital structures of Chinese firms, the shareholders of China’s strategic companies, and technological developments within Chinese companies.” Although he claims that this proposal is being made defensively in order to identify possible targets to sanction in response to alleged intellectual property theft, the insight obtained through these operations could very easily be abused for offensive purposes to undercut China’s economic competitiveness and meddle in its many Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) partnerships. 

Institutional Intrigue

The aggressive activities of this global anti-Chinese containment coalition are intended to be upheld by the international institutions that Cotton says that the US should either reclaim or replace if the former isn’t possible. According to his proposal, “America must fight to reverse China’s gains in these institutions and build new, separate organizations of willing and like-minded partners when these organizations cannot be reclaimed. With these organizations out of Beijing’s hands, the United States can ensure that international rules and standards are written to support emerging technologies where America is naturally suited to prevail.” Once again, this is the exact same form of Hybrid Warfare that the US accuses China of waging, making one wonder whether it was ever really guilty as charged or if the US invented those accusations in order to justify itself doing the same thing later. Altogether, Cotton’s grand strategy is one where the US leads a Eurasian Rimland coalition that brings together several China-excluding technology blocs, expands through the strategic leveraging of development finance and foreign aid, and is “legitimized” through reclaimed or replaced international institutions. 

Concluding Thoughts

Skeptics might immediately dismiss Cotton’s global anti-Chinese containment proposal as politically unrealistic to implement under Biden’s Democrat presidency, but such a stance ignores the fact that the incumbent president convincingly intends to build upon his predecessor’s policy in this respect, albeit in a much more multilateral manner. This insight very strongly suggests that Cotton’s proposal might actually be well received by the Biden Administration since its multilateral vision of a series of complementary coalitions closely aligns with the ruling party’s stated policy of relying more on international alliances to advance American interests abroad. For this reason, it would be a major mistake for observers to dismiss Cotton’s suggestions out of hand since there’s a real chance that at least some of them might be implemented by the US across the next four years. Everything is already moving in that direction without any credible evidence that this trajectory will seriously change in the future. With this in mind, China would do well to consider the most effective strategies for responding to this scenario, ideally in a multilateral manner after closely consulting with its partners.

The Emerging Existential Crisis at the Border

By Patrick J. Buchanan (via Intellectual Takeout)

During a Democratic debate in 2020, the candidates were asked if their health care plans would cover “undocumented immigrants.” Each raised his or her hand, including front-runner Joe Biden. From that stage, the message went forth: If the Democrats win this election, then it is amnesty for all and open borders in America. The message was reinforced by repeated Democratic praise for sanctuary cities, by calls to “abolish ICE,” and end deportations, by pledges to stop work on Donald Trump’s wall, if not to tear it down.          

Message sent to Mexico, Central America and the Third World: If the Democrats win and you make it across the border into the United States, under President Joe Biden, you will not be sent back. After only a brief hassle, the economic opportunities and social welfare benefits of the richest country on earth will be open to you and yours. Hence, when Biden won, a new and potentially historic surge to the Southern border began, and the number of illegal arrivals and crossings are in the growing thousands every day.         

According to a White House domestic policy council document, the number of children who, without a parent or guardian, will arrive at the border in 2021 will be about 117,000—50 percent higher than the record number of children who arrived in the 2019 humanitarian crisis. In February, some 100,000 immigrants were apprehended by the Border Patrol for illegal border crossing. “I actually think that’s an undercount,” says Victor Manjarrez Jr., ex-Border Patrol agent who teaches at Texas University.          

The pre-Trump policy of “catch-and-release” has been reinstated. Children and families who cross illegally from Mexico cannot now be held for more than 72 hours. They are being released into the U.S. to await a court date—potentially years off—to hear their claim to a right to be here. Most never show up.       

“We are weeks, maybe even days, away from a crisis on the southern border,” says Rep. Henry Cuellar, a Democrat whose Texas district abuts Mexico. “Our country is currently unprepared to handle a surge in migrants in the middle of the pandemic.”          

Congressional Democrats, following Biden’s lead, have proposed a new citizenship act. “Dreamers,” brought here by their parents as children, would be put on a three-year fast-track to U.S. citizenship. The 11 million to 22 million illegal migrants already in the country—the exact number is unknown—would be put on an eight-year track to citizenship. The Democratic Party is signing on to the largest mass amnesty for illegal immigrants in history—which would produce millions of new voters for the party.          

Among the recent border-crossers, who are transported by bus to detention centers, where they remain for 72 hours and then are released to travel where they wish, many are carrying the coronavirus. Thus, what’s shaping up on the border is not only a national security crisis but a national survival crisis. For it is impossible to see, given the Biden administration policies adopted, how the invasion of America can be halted. And if 2 million or 3 million migrants reach the U.S. border and cross over each year, and we do not send them back, what stops the invasion and remaking America?          

What would blanket amnesty and a renewed invasion portend?       

In a decade, Texas, the Southwest, and much of the South would take on the political aspect of California where the GOP has become a permanent minority party. As many illegal migrants do not read, write, or speak English, and do not bring a unique set of skills, their immense and growing presence can only deepen our national disunity. Almost all of these folks are poor or working-class people who would have to rely on government subsidies for their health care, food support, housing, and the schooling of their children. With the unemployment rate rising again in the black community, which has sustained the heaviest collective hit from the pandemic and economic collapse, the migrants would be competing with them for jobs. And as the illegal migrants are disproportionately young and male, they would add to the surging crime rates in America’s major cities.          

America is headed, seemingly inexorably, to a future where a majority in this country traces its ancestry to Asia, Africa, and Latin America, a future where this already fractionated nation is even more multiracial, multiethnic, multilingual, and multicultural than today.           

With racial conflict as sharp as it has been in decades, with our political parties at swords point, with the culture war raging unabated, as mobs tears down statues and monuments to America’s founders, exactly what national problem will be solved by an unstopping and unrelenting wave of migrants illegally crossing the border into our country year after year?         

One wonders: Is this how the Republic ends?

Why A Green New Deal Is More Expensive Than Joe Biden Realizes

Authored by Charlie Deist via The Mises Institute

One of President Biden’s first executive actions was to declare January 27 “Climate Day.” This ad hoc holiday provided an opportunity for his administration to celebrate the latest rationale for economic central planning.

The day’s festivities began with three executive orders on climate change, science, and technology.

In his remarks, Biden bundled his environmental agenda with a jobs program, along with a broader policy to address social inequality and environmental injustice. Among the ambitious goals of Biden’s $2 trillion Green New Deal are 1 million new high-paying union jobs in the automobile industry, half a million electric car charging stations, and a 100 percent carbon pollution–free electric sector by 2035.

The goal of transitioning the electrical grid to zero carbon emissions in the next fifteen years stands out as a singularly misguided effort. Even granting the nonobvious assumption that we must immediately transition away from fossil fuels, overhauling the American energy infrastructure is a vast and complex calculation problem. To be truly sustainable, individuals and firms would need to act on local knowledge, assessing where and what kinds of renewables might meet their energy needs.

The concept of “net energy” illustrates why replacing fossil fuels with large-scale renewable energy is often counterproductive. In Carbon Shift, a 2009 book discussing peak oil and climate change, David Hughes summarizes it like this:

A two-megawatt windmill contains 260 tonnes of steel requiring 170 tonnes of coking coal and 300 tonnes of iron ore, all mined, transported and produced by hydrocarbons. The question is: how long must a windmill generate energy before it creates more energy than it took to build it? At a good wind site, the energy payback day could be in three years or less; in a poor location, energy payback may be never. That is, a windmill could spin until it falls apart and never generate as much energy as was invested in building it.

This life-cycle accounting of “energy return on energy invested” (EROEI) succinctly describes multiple stages of intermediate capital within a hydrocarbon-based structure of production. Hughes also hints at the basic questions facing all entrepreneurs—namely, where they should place their investments and how they should configure heterogeneous capital to recoup up-front costs plus some profit or “windfall.”

Wind turbines and solar panels do enjoy a wide market in off-grid applications, such as remote farm properties and on oceangoing sailboats, where the abundance of wind and scarcity of petroleum products makes the investment a no-brainer. In sunny parts of the country, solar has reached “grid parity.” States like Texas, however, have failed to heed considerations of both net energy and supply and demand in installing massive wind farms at great taxpayer expense where fossil fuels would be far cheaper and more reliable. Lacking price signals, the central planner is blind to the economic consequences of his grand designs.

The president revealed his ignorance of the technological and economic problem at hand when he stated matter of factly, “We know what to do, we’ve just got to do it.” On the contrary, we have no idea how to create a nonpolluting electrical grid without emitting much more carbon in the process than we otherwise would have.

If the government invests trillions of dollars in energy-intensive capital investments—whether wind farms, solar charging stations, or transformer stations—it will have two primary effects.

  • First, it will frontload carbon emissions into the construction phase. This may offer the illusion of reducing pollution when in fact it merely shuffles emissions to a prior stage of production. California’s high-speed rail, for example, will take an estimated seventy-one years to offset its own construction emissions through the cars it will hypothetically replace (assuming it is ever completed). Furthermore, electric charging stations are typically powered by coal or natural gas—not solar panels.
  • Second, and relatedly, a Green New Deal funded by debt will distort the capital structure, skewing investment toward long-term fixed capital assets at the expense of the intermediate capital maintenance of the overall structure of production. Theoretically we could burn more coal, petroleum, and natural gas today to build a zero-pollution electrical infrastructure for tomorrow. But when it comes time to service offshore wind turbines, will the helicopters and boats used for maintenance be powered by electricity as well? And what kind of energy will power the factories that manufacture the solar panels and wind turbines? Claiming that they will run on renewables is eerily similar to the circular reasoning and magical thinking used by proponents of modern monetary theory to promote the illusion of spending without taxation.

The Green New Deal is, if anything, a formula for a new dark age. Texas’s recent power outages show the difficulty of the task facing grid managers. There, an attempt to prematurely transition to unreliable wind energy exacerbated the strain on the grid when turbines froze at the crucial moment when they were most needed. The grid managers failed to keep a maintain a sufficient buffer, even without the additional mandate of ensuring the creation of new green jobs and mitigating the discriminatory effects of climate change. It is ironic that a state and nation so rich in natural energy resources would be leading the charge to cancel fossil fuels in favor of technology that has never been proven effective, or even environmentally friendly, at a large scale.

The stock of fossil fuels is large but not infinite. Geological surveys indicate that there is plentiful energy in the ground to advance civilization and develop new sources of abundant and nonpolluting energy. However, we must be careful not to squander our petroleum patrimony on unused charging stations, unreliable wind farms, and half-finished trains to nowhere.

“Domestic Terrorism” Goes Transnational: The War on Dissidents Picks Up Momentum

The Biden Administration is now preparing to go after the people that it objects to and will create new laws as necessary to do so.

By Philip Giraldi (via Global Research)

The claim is often made that President George W. Bush’s war on terror, which produced legislation that was employed to attack Iraq in 2003, eventually morphed into the worst foreign policy mistake in U.S. history when that conflict destabilized the entire region and led to an American multifront military engagement that now appears permanent. Few of those in the policymaking business appreciated that by turning “terrorism” into an especially invidious form of evil allowing governments to arrest or even assassinate without due process and bomb civilians if they fit a profile, Pandora’s box was being opened to expand that authority to commit other heinous abuses of authority.

Jim Bovard has described how post 9/11 there were hundreds of arrests for no good reason, in some cases only because someone had a name or countenance that appeared to be “Arabic.” Congressman Ron Paul and a handful of others observed at the time that the legislation would inevitably be used against domestic enemies of the state as well as against foreign or foreign-linked groups, meaning that the real damage done by the Patriot Act, the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) and the Military Commissions Act would be felt somewhere down the road, possibly at a point where the original objective of the legislation would be more or less forgotten.

Now that we have an identified “domestic terror” problem one should expect at a minimum a massive increase in surveillance of innocent citizens couple with arbitrary arrests and incarcerations. Indeed, the process is already well underway with FBI Director Christopher Wray announcing that there are several thousand terror “cases” under development. There will also be increasing calls to take away guns and to control what is allowed to appear on the internet. Soon Americans will have nothing to measure their remaining liberties by and will be less free to exercise rights including free speech, possibly dramatically so.

So now we have reached a point where we have a government that is committed to further reducing one’s rights in order to “keep us safe” from a domestic threat and congress critters are openly speaking of bringing in “war on terror” type expedients to make sure that they have the tools available to do just that. The Joe Biden White House has made clear that it has embraced fighting domestic terrorists as a top priority. Last week, the Administration sought authorization from the Pentagon to keep thousands of national guard troops in the District of Columbia for 60 days more, presumably to protect the government buildings and staff. The pretext for the continued presence was a vaguely described plot constituting a “potential threat” to overrun the Capitol building on March 4th, a day when it was apparently anticipated that Donald Trump would miraculously be returned to office. The House of Representatives even canceled a session over concerns that they were about to be invaded by a hostile “militia.” Just how “real” the threat was has not been made clear beyond suggestions of “chatter” over the internet, nor has there been any explanation of why the 2,200 strong Capitol Police force is unable to deal with the problem.

Be that as it may, the Biden Administration thinks it knows exactly who the enemy is. The government already has a working definition of a domestic terrorist, i.e. “If you advocate violence as a tool to further political ends, and take concrete steps to do that, you’re a terrorist.” But if you thought that included groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) you would be wrong. For the Biden Administration it is the stereotyped right-wing extremist, who, among other attributes, is represented by the media and government as coming from the class that Hillary Clinton once described as “deplorables.”

The accepted definition of the enemy defies logic as the rioting, arson, and killing that has taken place over the past year has generally been inspired by Antifa and BLM, resulting in major damage and destruction in various cities and states. But the mobs who wrecked and looted have been mostly set free by the courts in the Democratic Party dominated cities. In Portland Oregon 90% of the rioters were not prosecuted, presumably because the local judicial system believed that their “cause was just.” Against that is the trauma of the January 6th incident at the Capitol, much smaller in scope and damages but obviously terrifying to the media and Congress. Also what did occur bore a more comfortable theme for the Democrats which they have been beating to death ever since – “insurrection caused by right wing extremists who were overwhelmingly white and support Donald Trump.” That’s apparently all one needs to initiate a campaign to get rid of such dissidents.

For some suggestions about the direction the Biden Administration will be going in to eliminate domestic terrorism, one only has to review the comments of Attorney General nominee Merrick Garland at his Senate confirmation hearing on February 22nd, where he declared that going after domestic terrorists would be a top administration priority. When asked if he regards the numerous attempts by Antifa and BLM rioters to destroy federal courthouses in Portland and Seattle as acts of domestic extremism or terrorism, he hedged on the issue and replied:

“So an attack on a courthouse while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is, uhm, domestic extremism, uhm, domestic terrorism. An attack simply on a government property at night…or any other kind of circumstances, is a clear crime and a serious one and should be punished. I don’t mean…I don’t know enough about the facts of the example you’re talking about, but that’s where I draw the line. One is…both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions.”

According to the man who almost became a Supreme Court Justice and now appears to be on his way to becoming Attorney General if you attack and seek to destroy a government building when there is no one in it is a different level of criminality than seeking to disrupt what is going on inside during business hours. It clearly is a fine line, or at least Garland sees it that way, but in either case you are making the building non-functional in terms of its intended use. Indeed, groups like BLM have regularly condemned the criminal justice system and if you burn the building down it will be unusable for a long, long time. So clearly what makes something “terrorism” as opposed to only “criminality” is the expectation based on the events of 1/6 that it will be right-wing whites who will be doing the disruption. They are the terrorists.

So, it seems pretty clear that the Biden Administration is now preparing to go after the people that it objects to and will create new laws as necessary to do so. Garland will certainly have a hand in that development. And if anyone is thinking of leaving all of this behind by fleeing to another country where there is an actual rule of law, it would be best to consider the matter again. On February 22nd, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that white supremacy right-wing nationalist movements have become a “transnational threat” that has exploited the fear of the coronavirus pandemic to gain support. He said that “White supremacy and neo-Nazi movements are more than domestic terror threats. They are becoming a transnational threat. Today, these extremist movements represent the number one internal security threat in several countries. Far too often, these hate groups are cheered on by people in positions of responsibility in ways that were considered unimaginable not long ago. We need global coordinated action to defeat this grave and growing danger.”

It means you can run but you can’t hide. It looks like there will be a worldwide coalition to extirpate the evils that come automatically with whiteness and, as BLM is now de facto a major constituency of the U.S. Democratic Party, you know that Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi will be leading the charge.

Biden Is Playing A Dangerous Game In The Middle East

Authored by Cyril Widdershoven via OilPrice.com

Washington’s new Middle East policies looks like sandcastle. Targeting MBS means putting region at peril. The new media frenzy about a possible full-out confrontation between the US Biden Administration and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is a sign that Western political leaders are out of touch with reality.

Last week’s revelations published in a declassified report by U.S. security services on the role of MBS in the Khashoggi murder show not only the lack of proof available, but could also lead to a full divorce between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. A growing amount of Western media publications argue that the Saudi Crown Prince should not only be sanctioned, but that Washington also should reconsider its former in-depth cooperation with the Kingdom.

Several U.S. experts have been quoted in international media calling for a clear change in US strategy towards the Kingdom, including a possible removal of MBS as Crown Prince via support of former Saudi Crown Prince Bin Nayef or other Saudi royals. In a clear break with US power politics we’ve seen during the last decades, where the removal of third party power brokers was blocked, a new era seems to be looming on the horizon. 

At the same time, Biden finds himself on a slippery slope regarding the ongoing confrontation with Iran, by putting additional sanctions on Iran but at the same time removing one of the region’s main Iranian backed armed groups, Yemen’s Houthi rebels, from the U.S. terrorism list. The results this policy change have already become very clear. A new aggressive drone and ballistic missile campaign has been started by the Houthis to hit Saudi strategic airports and oil infrastructure targets on the Red Sea and East Coast. The high-profile attack on Aramco oil infrastructure this week shows that the Kingdom is still under threat. Some even state that the attacks on the Eastern Province, Saudi’s main oil and gas production region, could not have been done without the full military and logistical support of Iran.

Still, the military capabilities of Houthi rebels and Iran are at present the least of the kingdom’s concerns. The direct diplomatic fall-out of the publication of an intelligence report by the Biden Administration in which the Saudi Crown Prince, who is expected to become Saudi King in the next few years, is being implicated as potential instigator and backer of the Khashoggi murder, is unprecedented. To have U.S. citizens and politicians call for new inquiries about the role of MBS and his security apparatus in the murder at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul is one thing, but having official documents, declassified by the Biden Administration, directly accusing MBS is calling for potential rifts that could have a fall-out for the whole region. 

The attack on Ras Tanura, which is Saudi Arabia’s main crude oil and petchem products export facility had an impact on the market. Crude oil prices spiked, but the effect was only marginal. Even that the current attack has not received the same attention as the Abqaiq attack in 2019, which had a much larger impact on Saudi oil production, the significance seems to be underestimated. A potential destruction of critical facilities in Ras Tanura would have been a shock to the market, even in the light of still high storage volumes worldwide. No oil flows however seem to have been constrained, so futures relaxed again. Still, the market should keep a wary eye on the area, as possible new attacks or even combined attacks on Abqaiq-Ras Tanura by the Houthis and/or Iran could be an option currently being discussed by Tehran hard-liners.

Until now, the impact has been only superficial, but taking into account the growing capabilities of Houthi drone and missile arsenals, or the vast, almost Russian style, capabilities on the other side of the Gulf, other options are clearly on the table. 

What should markets get worried is the fact that in the eyes of Iran, Biden and Europeans have almost given green light to hardliners in Tehran to show their muscles. The ongoing Houthi operations are a clear sign that Biden’s current soft-power or even appeasement approach is already backfiring.

Washington’s diffuse approach to Iranian sanctions and the JCPOA is another bone of contention. In the first months of his Presidency, Biden has not shown any clear strategy, leaving too much room for interpretation. Whatever people think about former US president Trump’s policies, his Iran policies were clear. It seems that Iran has almost fallen off the Resolute Desk in the White House, no open and clear way-forward is being introduced. The only clear path currently painted is that Riyadh and Washington are on a collision course. The Biden Administration seems to hold the view that the US is still the sole power broker in the region, so soft power or pressure put on Arab regimes will reap the rewards sought for.  This is a clear misconception, partly based on still existing Obama Era assessments, which are no longer valid.

Maybe to the surprise of Washington-based analysts, MBS is not sitting still. The Saudi Crown Prince, is making a lot of headlines with his aggressive economic diversification plans and dreams, and has shown that his international position has not yet diminished. The last days, a flurry of diplomatic and high-level meetings have been held in Riyadh, where Russian Minister Lavrov, Jordan’s King Abdallah, Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and others have been holding meetings to discuss economic and geopolitical issues. Saudi Arabia’s top diplomat Prince Faisal also has been hosted by Qatar’s ruler Emir Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al-Thani on Monday in Doha, showing renewed interest in expanding cooperation.

At the same time, Saudi ministers have been flying to Saudi major clients, such as China. Russia is currently using the cooling Saudi-US relations as a possible wedge. Moscow and Riyadh already are cooperating fully in energy and logistics, as statements today reaffirmed. Both stated that the OPEC+ cooperation is still very strong and will continue. Moscow is very pleased with the Biden Administration’s lack of strategy for the Arab region.

Putin and his emissary Lavrov hope to be able to capitalize on Biden’s ongoing mistakes, not only in Riyadh, but also Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and Egypt. A critical outcome of US pressure on MBS would also be growing fears in Cairo, Abu Dhabi and other places. A possible realignment of these leading Arab countries, leaving the Atlantic sphere of influence while joining the growing Moscow-Beijing axis is not the outcome that Washington or Brussels would like to see. 

Pragmatism is needed and neo-realism also. As Machiavelli and Von Clausewitz clearly stated “to rule or influence a region, one should regard possible strong relationships with the Prince”. If removing the Prince results in a new Prince, instability is the outcome. Stability is needed, Biden’s Gulf strategies are counterproductive, to say the least. By indicating or affronting a “King-to-Be”, enemies are being made. Washington’s culture of backstabbing and rumor carousels are maybe effective in the West, in the Arab world “a man’s word is forever, friendship also”….but this is the same for making enemies.

Joe Biden Drafted the Core of the Patriot Act in 1995 … Before the Oklahoma City Bombing

The Core of the Patriot Act Was Drafted in 1995 … By Joe Biden

By Washington’s Blog (via Global Research)

Everyone knows that the Patriot Act was drafted before 9/11.

But few know that it was Joe Biden who drafted the core provisions which were included in that bill … in 1995.

CNET reported in 2008:

Months before the Oklahoma City bombing took place, Biden introduced another bill called the Omnibus Counterterrorism Act of 1995. It previewed the 2001 Patriot Act by allowing secret evidence to be used in prosecutions, expanding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and wiretap laws, creating a new federal crime of “terrorism” that could be invoked based on political beliefs, permitting the U.S. military to be used in civilian law enforcement, and allowing permanent detention of non-U.S. citizens without judicial review.* The Center for National Security Studies said the bill would erode “constitutional and statutory due process protections” and would “authorize the Justice Department to pick and choose crimes to investigate and prosecute based on political beliefs and associations.”

Biden himself draws parallels between his 1995 bill and its 2001 cousin. “I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill,” he said when the Patriot Act was being debated, according to the New Republic, which described him as “the Democratic Party’s de facto spokesman on the war against terrorism.”

Biden’s proposal probably helped to lay the groundwork for the Bush administration’s Patriot Act.

The Center for National Securities reported in 1995:

On February 10, 1995, a counterterrorism bill drafted by the Clinton
Administration was introduced in the Senate as S. 390 and in the House of
Representatives as H.R. 896.

The Clinton bill is a mixture of: provisions eroding constitutional and
statutory due process protections, selective federalization — on political
grounds — of state crimes (minus state due process rules), discredited
ideas from the Reagan and Bush Administrations, and the extension of some of
the worst elements of crime bills of the recent past.

The legislation would:

1. authorize the Justice Department to pick and choose crimes to
investigate and prosecute based on political beliefs and associations;

2. repeal the ancient provision barring the U.S. military from civilian
law enforcement;

3. expand a pre-trial detention scheme that puts the burden of proof on
the accused;

4. loosen the carefully-crafted rules governing federal wiretaps, in
violation of the Fourth Amendment;

5. establish special courts that would use secret evidence to order the
deportation of persons convicted of no crimes, in violation of basic
principles of due process;

6. permit permanent detention by the Attorney General of aliens convicted
of no crimes, with no judicial review;

7. give the President unreviewable power to criminalize fund-raising for
lawful activities associated with unpopular causes;

8. renege on the Administration’s approval in the last Congress of a
provision to insure that the FBI would not investigate based on First
Amendment activities; and

9. resurrect the discredited ideological visa denial provisions of the
McCarran Walter Act to bar foreign speakers.

* Note: The CNET article contains a typographical error, using the word “detection” instead of “detention” in the sentence: “allowing permanent detection of non-U.S. citizens without judicial review”. Not only does this make no sense, but a review of the bill confirms that it provided for permanent detention.

US-Saudi Relations: Joe Biden Is “Playing Hardball” with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS)

By Andrew Korybko (via Global Research)

The promulgation of the US’ so-called “Khashoggi ban” in response to its intelligence agencies determining that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) was behind that dissident journalist’s brutal killing shows that the Biden Administration is playing hard ball with the Kingdom’s future ruler, though there’s only so far that it’ll go in this respect since it’s still important for America to still retain some degree of regional strategic “balance” despite its newfound willingness to renegotiate the Iranian nuclear deal.

US-Saudi relations are drastically changing under the Biden Administration as evidenced by its promulgation of the so-called “Khashoggi ban” in response to American intelligence agencies determining that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) was behind that dissident journalist’s brutal killing. This shows that the Biden Administration is playing hardball with the Kingdom’s future ruler, though there’s only so far that it’ll go in this respect. As it stands, the pro-Democrat members of the permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) that pull the President’s strings intend to diversify their country’s hitherto regional strategic dependence on Saudi Arabia in line with former President Obama’s vision by improving relations with Iran. Nevertheless, there’s only so far that they’ll go in this respect since it’s still important for them to retain some degree of “balance” so as not to push the Kingdom further into Russia and China’s arms.

On the one hand, the US wants to make it clear that the days of Saudi Arabia calling the shots are over. Washington will no longer allow its regional strategy to be led by Riyadh. This also explains Biden’s pragmatic recalibration of his country’s policy towards Yemen, which was also influenced by the desire to send a goodwill signal to Iran about Washington’s willingness to re-enter into negotiations on the nuclear deal. That arguably went against Saudi regional strategic interests, yet the Kingdom was powerless to stop its patron from implementing this policy reversal, at least for the time being. In parallel with this, American intelligence decided to punish some Saudis for Khashoggi’s murder, which was also intended to further erode the Kingdom’s already damaged reputation, and MBS’ personally. The tangential objective is to put pressure on MBS to comply with the US’ new regional policy instead of opposing it lest he risk the ever-present threat of a palace coup.

On the other hand, however, American strategists are aware that these moves will only encourage the Kingdom to intensify its growing relations with Russia and China. It already cooperates real closely with Moscow on energy issues (OPEC+) and Beijing on military (drones) and investment (Vision 2030) matters. Saudi Arabia also agreed to an arms deal with Russia a few years back during King Salman’s historic visit to Moscow which eventually saw the Eurasian Great Power delivering state-of-the-art rocket launchers to the Kingdom that presumably saw action during the ongoing War on Yemen. The US fears these two Great Power’s multipolar coordination in courting the Kingdom to their side in the New Cold War, especially as it relates to the possibility of Riyadh supporting Beijing’s plans for the “petroyuan”, so it knows that it’ll either have to hold back on playing hardball with MBS or move forward with replacing him in the worst-case scenario.

This “deep state”/geostrategic dynamic explains why American intelligence agencies publicly blamed MBS for Khashoggi’s killing yet Biden backed off from personally punishing him for this. It’s a “good cop/bad cop” type of play, but one which is being made in order to put Saudi Arabia back in place after it ran the former Trump Administration’s regional policy in partnership with its unofficial “Israeli” ally. Those two players stand in the way of the Biden (Obama 2.0) Administration’s risky gambit to restore “balance” to their country’s regional strategy by reaching out to Iran through “nuclear diplomacy” and other means, though all the while retaining pressure on the Islamic Republic as well as can be seen by Biden’s Syria strike last week. If clumsily executed, however, then the US might ultimately end up provoking a so-called “polar reorientation” whereby Saudi Arabia and “Israel” “jump ship” by siding with Russia and China in response to any meaningful US-Iranian rapprochement.

Why Joe Biden Will Continue the US War on Nord Stream 2 till the Bitter End

By Johanna Ross (via Global Research)

Any doubts as to whether Joe Biden will continue Donald Trump’s opposition to Nord Stream 2 should now be laid to rest. With 18 companies quitting the gas pipeline project this week following threats of US sanctions, there has never been so much pressure on Angela Merkel to ditch the scheme, which would see Russian gas transported to Germany direct.

Merkel has done well to stand her ground to date. For even her European partners aren’t backing her. The Director General of the European Commission’s energy department, Ditte Juul Jorgensen saidon Tuesday that ‘For the European Union as a whole, Nord Stream does not contribute to security of supply’, emphasising that it was a decision for the German state, not the EU as to whether the project should be completed.  Given the fact that European demand for Russian gas has increased, not decreased of late, however, one might think that it is in the EU’s interest to support Nord Stream 2.

Not if the US has anything to do with it. Citing concern at Russia’s increased influence over Europe if the pipeline goes ahead, Joe Biden has proclaimed Nord Stream 2 a ‘bad deal’ for Europe, which America will continue to oppose. The US claims that Russia would have more leverage over the EU politically as a result. What it really means, though, is that the US would have less leverage over Europe, and a reduced demand for its fracked gas. EU countries imported as much as 36% of American natural gas in 2019 – an increase of around 5 billion cubic metres from the previous year – a considerable amount given Russia is just on its doorstep, and also bearing in mind the EU’s environmental pledges (fracking produces heavy amounts of methane gas, responsible for global warming).

Source: InfoBrics

Nevertheless, the US is careful to package this as an energy security issue and persuade us that its real concern is the ‘Russian threat’ that comes with the gas pipeline. At the moment the US has some influence over Russian exports to Europe through Ukraine, which as Ukrainian politician Victor Medvedchuk recently emphasised, is merely a ‘colony’ now of the US.  If Ukraine, the middleman, was cut out of the process, America simply wouldn’t have the same leverage over European energy supplies.

Moreover, it is clearly part of the US’ geopolitical strategy to prevent Nord Stream 2 construction. In fact, it has been stated so explicitly in a document published by the US government-affiliated think-tank RAND in 2019, entitled ‘Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground’. This is a revealing paper, as it demonstrates the extent to which the US is stuck in a 19th century-style ‘great power game’ with Russia.  In the 354-page policy document, Russia’s natural gas resources are mentioned in the very first paragraph. Confronting Russia in the energy sector is seen as a priority ‘in a  campaign designed to unbalance the adversary’ as it puts it:

‘…the United States can adopt policies that expand world supply and thus depress global prices, thereby limiting Russian revenue.  Imposing tougher sanctions is also likely to degrade the Russian economy, and could do so to a greater extent and more quickly than maintaining low oil prices, provided the sanctions are comprehensive and  multilateral.’

Hardly surprising, therefore, that ‘stopping Nord Stream 2’ is listed as the first of ‘A variety of options exist for diversifying European gas supplies and extending Russia economically’. Interestingly, in the report, Nord Stream 2 features heavily in terms of, not so much aiding Ukraine as we keep hearing about in the western media, but instead in relation to undermining Russia.  Furthermore, the question of Ukraine losing out on money from transit fees, paid by Russia, which amount to around $3 billion a year, is repeatedly mentioned in the document, which emphasises the extent to which this is an economic issue for the US:

“In terms of extending Russia economically, the main benefit of creating  supply alternatives  to  Russian  gas  is  that  it  would  lower  Russian export revenues. The federal Russian budget is already stressed, leading to planned cuts in defense spending, and lowering gas revenues would stress the budget further.”

The RAND report looks at other ways of undermining Russia in the energy sector, describing the possibility of engineering its own pipeline project involving southern European countries and of course, mentions the development of US fracking schemes across Europe.

Aside from US policy in general towards Russia, Joe Biden has his own personal ties to Ukraine which will influence his attitude towards Nord Stream 2.  One of the largest companies involved in gas exploration and production across Ukraine is Burisma, a company closely tied to Biden, as his son used to be on the board of directors.  Indeed it was widely reported that when the company was involved in a corruption scandal back in 2016, Biden, then US Vice President, incredibly threatened to withhold $1 billion of US aid from Ukraine if it didn’t fire the prosecutor investigating the case.

Joe Biden’s son may no longer be involved in Burisma, but the US President still has considerable influence in Ukraine. Indeed, when Biden’s position as Vice President came to an end, it was speculated that Ukraine wouldn’t manage without him: ‘Ukraine’s government has relied heavily on its direct channel to the U.S. vice president, and Biden’s departure will leave a gaping hole’ said Foreign Policy, adding that ‘No one in the U.S. government has wielded more influence over Ukraine than Vice President Joe Biden’.

Taking both US policy on the whole towards Russia, and Joe Biden’s commitments to Ukraine, it’s therefore likely that we will see this Biden administration only ramp up pressure in the final stages of the Nord Stream 2 project. However unlikely it may seem that the US could stop the pipeline at such a late stage in the game, stranger things have happened. As usual, the US will continue to use both economic pressure in the form of sanctions, and diplomatic pressure to push Germany into a corner. So far, Merkel has been tenacious, but only time will tell if her personal determination is enough to stand up to the might of Uncle Sam.

Joe Biden, Five Years Before Invasion, Said the Only Way of Disarming Iraq Is “Taking Saddam Down”

At a 1998 Senate hearing, Biden argued that “taking this son of a — taking Saddam down” was the only way to guarantee Iraq’s disarmament.

By Ryan Grim (via Global Research)

Former Vice President Joe Biden this week [early January 2020] continued to maintain the fiction that he stood against the war in Iraq “the very moment” it began in 2003. The claim has been easilytaken apart by fact checkers — Biden publicly supported the war before, during, and after the invasion — but a 1998 Senate hearing sheds additional light on his determination to confront Iraq over weapons of mass destruction.

In 1998, U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter resigned in protest and accused the international community of not giving him and his colleagues the support they needed to carry out their job in Iraq, which had agreed in 1991 to destroy its chemical weapons stockpile. He was called to testify before the Senate in September 1998, where Biden, who was then the highest-ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations committee, grilled him. In the course of the questions, Biden made revealing remarks about where he stood on regime change in Iraq.

Biden thanked Ritter for forcing senators to “come to our milk,” by which he meant forcing them to make a decision on what to do about Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his alleged weapons of mass destruction program.

Biden told Ritter that no matter how thorough the inspections, the only way to eliminate the threat was to remove Saddam Hussein.

“The primary policy is to keep sanctions in place to deny Saddam the billions of dollars that would allow him to really crank up his program, which neither you nor I believe he’s ever going to abandon as long as he’s in place,” Biden said, characterizing former President Bill Clinton’s administration’s policy. “You and I believe, and many of us believe here, as long as Saddam is at the helm, there is no reasonable prospect you or any other inspector is ever going to be able to guarantee that we have rooted out, root and branch, the entirety of Saddam’s program relative to weapons of mass destruction. You and I both know, and all of us here really know, and it’s a thing we have to face, that the only way, the only way we’re going to get rid of Saddam Hussein is we’re going to end up having to start it alone — start it alone — and it’s going to require guys like you in uniform to be back on foot in the desert taking this son of a — taking Saddam down,” Biden said. “You know it and I know it.”

Hussein, it turned out, did not have an active WMD program.

During questioning, Biden mocked Ritter as “ol’ Scotty boy” and suggested that his demands — that the international community compel Iraq to cooperate with inspectors — if met, would give Ritter the unilateral authority to start a war in Iraq. Biden argued that such decisions belonged to higher-level officials. “I respectfully suggest they have a responsibility slightly above your pay grade, to decide whether or not to take the nation to war,” Biden said. “That’s a real tough decision. That’s why they get paid the big bucks. That’s why they get the limos and you don’t. I mean this sincerely, I’m not trying to be flip.”

He ended by redeploying his unusual idiom in thanking Ritter.

“The reason why I’m glad you did what you did: We should come to our milk. We should make a decision,” Biden said.

Biden’s earlier suggestion that “taking Saddam down” was the only way to guarantee an end to the WMD program left little doubt where Biden would later come down on the issue.

Biden’s grilling of Ritter is important because it gives context to claims Biden later made: First, that when he voted in favor of the invasion of Iraq as a senator, he did not mean to vote for war, but hoped the resolution would empower inspectors to get back into Iraq and monitor the program. And second, that he never believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

On the first claim, Biden told NPR last year that former President George W. Bush “looked me in the eye in the Oval Office. He said he needed the vote to be able to get inspectors into Iraq to determine whether or not Saddam Hussein was engaged in dealing with a nuclear program. … He got them in and before you know it, we had ‘shock and awe.’”

But according to Biden’s own statements in 1998, he believed that Hussein could never be trusted to eliminate his program, no matter how many inspectors were admitted.

In October 2004, by which time it had become clear there were no WMDs, Biden told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations, “I never believed they had weapons of mass destruction.”

In fact, as Biden had said in 1998, he believed not only that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but no amount of inspections or diplomacy could guarantee their removal. That, he told Ritter, could only be done by “guys like you in uniform to be back on foot in the desert taking this son of a — taking Saddam down.”

Biden’s thought process puts critical hearings he held in 2002 as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee in sharper context. That summer, as the world was focused on the war in Afghanistan, from where the attacks of September 11, 2001, had been launched, Biden sought to begin “a national dialogue” on Iraq. During a series of high-profile hearings, he feigned neutrality, but his earlier questioning of Ritter leaves no doubt where he stood: Iraq had WMDs, and the only way to disarm Iraq with confidence was to depose Saddam Hussein. Biden, given his chairmanship, was a leading voice on foreign policy within the party. He had voted against the first Gulf War, waged by Bush’s father, and wasn’t considered a knee-jerk hawk. His support for the 2003 war made Democratic opposition ultimately untenable — even as Ritter, in the run up to it, loudly made the case against war, arguing that the WMD claims were overhyped.

Biden had reason to disbelieve the WMD claims. In a classified hearing on September 24, 2002, at the urging of a staff member, Biden asked then-CIA Director George Tenet what evidence of WMDs the U.S. had “technically collected.”

“None, Senator,” Tenet said, according to an account in the book “Hubris,” by Michael Isikoff and David Corn. Biden, wondering if there was some highly classified evidence, asked Tenet, “George, do you want me to clear the staff out of the room?” Tenet told him no. “There’s no reason to, Senator.”

“‘None, Senator’ — that answer will ring in my ears as long as I live,” the staffer later told the authors. Later in that same hearing, Biden heard from two government witnesses who rejected the “aluminum tubes” claim that had been circulating, and would later become a centerpiece of Secretary of State Colin Powell’s presentation to the United Nations.

Biden, to be sure, was not a full-throated advocate for the war on Bush’s terms, and throughout the fall, worked with Republican Sens. Richard Lugar and Chuck Hagel to try to build support for a narrower authorization, that would only allow Bush to attack Iraq for the purpose of dismantling a WMD program. But the effort was undercut by House Democratic leaders, and particularly Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., who pushed ahead with Bush’s broader resolution. “I was angry,” Biden later said, according to “Hubris.” “I was frustrated. But I never second-guess another man’s political judgment.”

Biden was also aware of the difficulty of invading and occupying Iraq, unlike some of his Republican colleagues. In February 1998, the News Journal of Wilmington reported that Biden saw invasion as unlikely.

Though some Republicans have urged the military to remove Saddam from power entirely, Biden said there was little will for that in Congress. Such a move would require a bloody ground war, the use of 300,000 to 500,000 ground troops, and some kind of continuing presence in Iraq while a new government is installed, he said.

Yet during the summer 2002 hearings, Biden claimed that “one thing is clear, these weapons must be dislodged from Saddam Hussein, or Saddam Hussein must be dislodged from power.” Given that he was already on record believing that the weapons could never effectively be dislodged from Saddam Hussein, that left only one option: war. Biden voted for the Iraq war resolution on October 11, 2002, three weeks after hearing from Tenet in the classified session.

Joe Biden and the Pentagon’s “Ides of March 2021”: Best Month to Go to War?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky (via Global Research)

Author’s Note 

There are ongoing US-NATO military threats against a large number of countries including, Russia, China, Venezuela, Iran, North Korea. Is a US-NATO sponsored war contemplated for the Ides of March 2021? 

A year ago in March 2020 under the Trump presidency, US-NATO deployed 37,000 troops to the Russian border in the context of their war games entitled “Defender Europe 2020”.

Since his inauguration, President Joe Biden has committed himself to extending the militarization of Eastern Europe, the Balkans, the Black Sea Basin, the broader Middle East as well as the South and East China Sea. 

Let’s not forget that Joe Biden was a firm supporter of the Invasion of Iraq on the grounds that Saddam Hussein “had weapons of mass destruction”. “The American People were deceived into this war”, said Senator Dick Durbin. Do not let yourself be deceived again by Joe Biden.

In the Middle East, Joe Biden is committed to extending US hegemony with the direct participation of Israel in US Central Command (USCENTCOM).

Currently the US military is involved in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen. The illegal war of aggression against Syria is ongoing marked by direct US-Israeli bombing raids.

The next US military target is Iran.

Biden’s “Confront China Agenda” 

Biden’s China Agenda has gone far beyond that of his predecessor:

“We’ll confront China’s economic abuses; counter its aggressive, coercive action; to push back on China’s attack on human rights, intellectual property, and global governance”

Read between the lines of Joe Biden’s “America’s Place in the World” foreign policy statement:

America is back.  America is back.  Diplomacy is back at the center of our foreign policy.

As I said in my inaugural address, we will repair our alliances and engage with the world once again, not to meet yesterday’s challenges, but today’s and tomorrow’s.  American leadership must meet this new moment of advancing authoritarianism, including the growing ambitions of China to rival the United States and the determination of Russia to damage and disrupt our democracy. (Emphasis added)

Building up US military presence in the East and South China seas (ECS and SCS) will be extended to new heights.

The Corona “Blame Game” against China

Yet there is another strategic element which is building up and which might be used as “hybrid weapon” by the Biden-Harris administration against the Chinese leadership.

Who was behind the Economic and Social Crisis spearheaded by the March 11, 2020 lockdown which precipitated the destabilization of the global economy?

Is the Biden administration intent upon launching a Corona blame Game against China seeking billions of dollars of “compensation” from China for the alleged destructive impacts of “V the Virus”.

Already in March 2020, following the lockdown, the US foreign policy establishment was calling for “Yes, Blame China for the Virus”. 

If China had a different government, the world could have been spared this terrible pandemic…  [W]e have to hold accountable the politicians responsible for making it worse, chief among them Chinese President Xi Jinping. He did not create the novel coronavirus, but his government’s missteps are directly responsible for its global transmission and uncontrolled spread.” (Foreign Policy, March report)

What will Happen in the Course of the 2021 Ides of March?

Is Biden committed to waging so-called “forever wars” under a humanitarian label?

As we recall The Project for the New American Century (formulated by the Neocons in the late 1990s, adopted by the GWB administration) had defined “America’s long war”

We will “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars”.

During the so-called Post World war II Era: US led wars have largely been “consecutive”: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen … (all of which were launched during the month of March).

Preemptive nuclear war was first put forward by the Bush administration as a “first strike” means of self defense. And then under Obama, a one 1.2 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program was launched with a means to defending the homeland…

We are at a dangerous crossroads.

The truth is a powerful and peaceful weapon.

No laughing matter. What can we expect during the 2021 “Ides of March”?

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, February 2021

***

Is it a mere coincidence?

In recent history, from the Vietnam war to the present, the month of March has been chosen by the Pentagon and NATO military planners as the “best month” to go to war.

With the exception of the War on Afghanistan (October 2001) and the 1990-91 Gulf War, all major US-NATO and allied led military operations over a period of more than half a century –since the invasion of Vietnam by US ground forces on March 8, 1965– have been initiated in the month of March.

The Ides of March (Idus Martiae) is a day in the Roman calendar which broadly corresponds to March 15. The Ides of March is also known as the date on which Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC.

Lest we forget, the month of March (in the Roman Calendar) is dedicated to Mars (Martius), the Roman God of War.

For the Romans, the month of March (Martius) marked “the time to start new military campaigns.”

As in the heyday of the Roman Empire, the US Department of Defense has a mandate to plan and implement a precise “timeline” of military operations.

Does the month of March –identified by the Romans as a “good time” to initiate new military undertakings–, have a bearing on contemporary military doctrine?

Throughout history, seasons including the transition from Winter to Spring have played a strategic role in the timing of military operations.

Do Pentagon military planners favor the month of March?

Do they also –in some mysterious fashion– “idolize” Mars, the Roman God of War?

March 23 (which coincides with the beginning of Spring) was the day “Romans celebrated the start of the military campaign and war fighting season.”

“Homage was paid to Mars the god of war with festivals and feasting. … For the Romans March 23 was a huge celebration known as Tubilustrium”.

Under these festivities which celebrated the Roman god of war, a large part of the month of March “was dedicated to military celebration and preparedness.”

Timeline of March US Military Interventions (1965- 2020)

Recent history confirms that with the exception of Afghanistan (October 2001) and the 1990-91 Gulf War, all major US-NATO led military operations over a period of more than half a century –since the invasion of Vietnam by US ground forces on March 8, 1965– have been initiated in the month of March.

The Vietnam War

The US Congress adopted the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which authorized President Lyndon Johnson to dispatch ground forces to Vietnam on March 8, 1965.

On 8 March 1965, 3,500 U.S. Marines were dispatched to South Vietnam marking the beginning of “America’s ground war”.

NATO’s War on Yugoslavia

NATO’s war on Yugoslavia was launched on March 24, 1999.

The NATO bombing of Yugoslavia code-named by the US Operation “Noble Anvil”. started on March 24, 1999 and lasted until June 10, 1999.

The Iraq War

The War on Iraq was launched on March 20, 2003. (Baghdad time)

The US-NATO led invasion of Iraq started on 20 March 2003 on the pretext that Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).

(The 1991 Gulf War on Iraq began on 17th January. However, after the 28th February ceasefire was agreed and signed – following the Basra Road massacre of withdrawing soldiers and fleeing civilians on 26th/27th February – the US 24th Mechanised Infantry Division slaughtered thousands on 2nd March.”)

The Covert War on Syria

The US-NATO Covert War on Syria was initiated on March 15, 2011 with the incursion of Al Qaeda affiliated  mercenaries and death squads in the southern city of Daraa on the border with Jordan.

The terrorists were involved in acts of arson as well as the killings of civilians. This incursion of terrorists was from the very outset supported covertly by the US, NATO and its Persian Gulf allies: Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

NATO’s “Humanitarian” R2P War on Libya

NATO commenced its bombing of Libya on March 19, 2011. The United Nations Security Council passed an initial resolution on 26 February 2011 (UNSC Resolution 1970), (adopted unanimously).

A subsequent United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 was adopted on 17 March 2011. It authorized the establishment of “a no-fly zone” over Libya, and the use “all necessary measures” “to protect the lives of civilians”.

Libya was bombed relentlessly by NATO warplanes starting on March 19, 2011 for a period of approximately seven months.

Yemen

On 25 March 2015, an international coalition led by Saudi Arabia and supported by the US launched air strikes against the Huthi armed group in Yemen.

Coincidence; 

The Ides of March, March 15 44 BC, was also the day Emperor Julius Caesar was stabbed to death by the Roman Senate.

Joe Biden’s “Barbarians at the Gates”: “Keep Americans Free”, The US Homeland is Threatened

By Stephen Lendman (via Global Research)

Time and again, both right wings of the US war party unjustifiably justify endless preemptive wars by manufacturing nonexistent threats to US national security.

The Biden regime’s so-called Interim National Security Strategic Guidance (INSSG) maintains the myth of barbarians at the gates.

It falsely claims that US and other democracies — in name only — are threatened, referring to the increasingly totalitarian West and apartheid Israel.

Remarks ghost-written for Biden drip with references to democratic values, fundamental freedoms, prosperity for all, peace and dignity — notions abhorred by US-led Western countries and Israel.

“(B)uild back better” is all about handing the nation’s wealth to privileged interests at the expense of exploiting most others.

It’s about spending unlimited trillions of dollars for militarism and warmaking.

It’s about handing trillions more to Wall Street and other corporate favorites.

It’s about going all-out to prevent peace and stability from ending forever wars.

It’s about subjugating world community nation-states and ordinary people at home and abroad.

It’s about enforcing new world order harshness by police state control.

It’s polar opposite virtually everything just societies hold dear.

There’s nothing remotely benign about hardline US domestic and geopolitical policies.

Media supported mass deception pretends otherwise.

INSSG pretends that the Biden regime like its predecessors aims “to keep Americans safe, prosperous, and free (sic).”

Totalitarian rule — enforced with police state harshness — pursues polar opposite aims.

“Anti-democratic forces” are headquartered in Washington with branch offices in Western European capitals and Tel Aviv.

Enemies mentioned are invented, not real, notably China and Russia, nations prioritizing peace, stability, cooperative relations with other nations, and adherence to international law — notions long ago abandoned by the US-dominated West.

Iran and North Korea are longstanding invented US enemies, nations at war with no others, threatening no one.

Nations reinvented as barbarians at the US gates wage peace, not war, cooperation with other states, not confrontation — in sharp contrast to how the US and its imperial partners operate, an unprecedented threat to humanity’s survival.

Names and faces change in Washington over time. Farcical elections assure continuity.

Imperial rage for dominance through the barrel of a gun remains hard-wired policy.

So does police state harshness to prevent governance of, by, and for everyone equitably from ever breaking out.

Before taking office, Biden assured US privileged interests that nothing will change on his watch.

Governance serving them exclusively at the expense of most others will continue like always before.

Endless wars and occupations will continue.

Public wealth will shift entirely to powerful interests, ordinary Americans impoverished, resistance crushed when surfacing.

The state of the nation and other Western societies will become more unsafe and unfit to live in than already.

The type world US ruling authorities have in mind for ordinary people everywhere is too unacceptable to tolerate.

Invented threats — including barbarians at the gates — aim to cow ordinary people into submission.

They’re manipulated to believe everything is all right so they’ll learn to love their Big Brother oppressor.

Mass resistance is essential to challenge the worst of all possible worlds US dark forces want imposed on humanity.

Otherwise we’re all doomed.

The POTUS calling his soldiers a bunch of stupid bastards…

(Via TruthandAction)

Video has surfaced of former Vice President Joe Biden jokingly calling US military members “stupid bastards” and a “dull bunch” apparently in indignation for not receiving applause during a 2016 trip to the United Arab Emirates. Biden said we don’t need to trust anonymous sources in the Atlantic to believe these labels to believe them.

“Notwithstanding what you may hear about me, I have incredibly good judgment,” Biden said. “One, I married Jill and two, I appointed Johnson to the academy.”

When nobody reacts, Biden added “I just want you to know that, so clap for that you stupid bastards.” Biden then proceeded by saying, “Man, you all are a dull bunch. It must be slow here, man.”

Biden, who was in his final year in office, traveled to the Middle East in March 2016 as part of an effort to shore up the Obama administration’s position in the region. During the trip Biden delivered an address to members of the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing stationed at the Al-Dhafra Air Base near Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates.

As part of the visit, Biden was introduced by 1st Lt. Karen Johnson of the 380th’s Expeditionary Aircraft Maintenance Squadron. Given that Lt. Johnson was a native of Delaware and had secured her appointment to the U.S. Air Force Academy through Biden’s former Senate office, the vice president tried to use that history as a means to break the ice with the more than 1,000 service members present.

While it might be anticipated that President Trump will level Biden in the debates, he might not get the opportunity if Biden takes himself out first.

Joe Biden: “How I Learned to Love the New World Order”

(via TruthandAction)

While the term is often associated with a speech given by George H. W. Bush, Joe Biden is a confirmed believer in a “New World Order.”

On April 23, 1992, the Wall Street Journal published an article by Mr. Biden entitled, “How I Learned to Love the New World Order.”  In it, he speaks of “breathing new life into the U.N. Charter.”  His words, not ours.

joe_biden_love_new_world_order

A classic case of ‘hiding out in the open’. They don’t have much of a choice since it is quite obvious that they would want nothing more than to kill of our nation’s sovereignty and join the elite as ‘rulers of the world’.

Anytime someone calls you a conspiracy theorist because you assert that there is a global elite that wants to dissolve the borders of all nations in an effort to bring the world under one ruling body, show them this:

Here’s Biden’s testament:

Anytime someone calls you a conspiracy theorist because you assert that there is a global elite that wants to dissolve the borders of all nations in an effort to bring the world under one ruling body, show them this:

Here’s Biden’s testament:

How I Learned to Love the New World Order:

Biden, Joseph R Jr.
Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 23, 1992. pg.
A13

Abstract (Summary)
Joseph R. Biden Jr defends his view that the Pentagon’s new strategy which appoints the US as a sort of world monitor could render the US a hollow superpower. Biden explains why he reacted the way he did to the plan.

Counterpoint: How I Learned to Love the New World Order
Biden, Joseph R Jr. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 23, 1992. pg.
A13

Imagine my surprise when a Wall Street Journal editorial appointed me dean of the Pat Buchanan school of neo-isolationism. My credentials? Believing that the Pentagon’s new strategy — America as “Globocop” — could render the United States a hollow superpower. All agree we need the military capacity to defend our vital interests — by ourselves when need be. The question is grand strategy. With the Journal’s endorsement, the Pentagon has called for a Pax Americana: The U.S. should cast so large a military shadow that no rival dare emerge.

American hegemony might be a pleasant idea, but is it economically, politically or even militarily wise? Bristling with weapons, we would continue our economic decline, while rising industrial and financial giants in Europe and Asia viewed our military pretensions with indifference or contempt.

Defense Secretary Dick Cheney outdid even the Journal, dipping deep into the well of Cold War argumentation to accuse Pax Americana critics of thinking “America’s world presence is somehow immoral and dangerous.
” Why doesn’t the Journal stop the namecalling, get its schools sorted out, and court an honest debate over America’s proper role in the new world order?

Pat Buchanan’s “America First” preaches martyrdom: We’ve been suckered into fighting “other” people’s battles and defending “other” people’s interests. With our dismal economy, this siren song holds some appeal.

But most Americans, myself included, reject 1930s-style isolationism. They expect to see the strong hand of American leadership in world affairs, and they know that economic retreat would yield nothing other than a lower standard of living. They understand further that many security threats — the spread of high-tech weapons, environmental degradation, overpopulation, narcotics trafficking, migration — require global solutions.

What about America as globocop? First, our 21st-century strategy has to be a shade more clever than Mao’s axiom that power comes from the barrel of a gun. Power also emanates from a solid bank balance, the ability to dominate and penetrate markets, and the economic leverage to wield diplomatic clout.

Second, the plan is passive where it needs to be aggressive. The Journal endorses a global security system in which we destroy rogue-state threats as they arise. Fine, but let’s prevent such problems early rather than curing them late. Having contained Soviet communism until it dissolved, we need a new strategy of “containment” — based, like NATO, on collective action, but directed against weapons proliferation.

The reality is that we can slow proliferation to a snail’s pace if we stop irresponsible technology transfers. Fortunately, nearly all suppliers are finally showing restraint. The maverick is China, which persists in hawking sensitive weapons and technology to the likes of Syria, Iran, Libya, Algeria and Pakistan — even while pledging otherwise.

The Senate has tried to force China’s leaders to choose between Third World arms sales (1991 profits of $500 million) and open trade with the U.S. (a $12.5 billion annual Chinese surplus). Even though we have convincing intelligence that China’s leaders fear the use of this leverage, the president inexplicably refuses to challenge Beijing.

Weapons containment can’t be foolproof; and against a nuclear-armed North Korea, I would support pre-emptive military action if necessary. But let’s do our best — using supplier restraint and sanctions against outlaw sellers and buyers-to avoid having to round up the posse.
Why not an anti-proliferation “czar” in the cabinet to give this objective the prominence it urgently needs?

Third, Pax Americana is a direct slap at two of our closest allies — Japan and Germany — and a repudiation of one of our panel1. Rather than denigrating collective security, we should regularize the kind of multilateral response we assembled for the Gulf War. Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? great postwar triumphs. For years, American leaders argued that building democracy in Europe and Asia would guarantee stability because democracies don’t start wars. Now the Pentagon says we must keep our military large enough to persuade Japan and Germany “not to aspire to a greater role even to protect their legitimate interests.

How has our success suddenly become a threat? It hasn’t, but the Pentagon plan could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By insulting Tokyo and Berlin, and arrogating to ourselves military stewardship of the world, we may spark the revival no one wants.

Secretary Cheney says he wants the allies to share the burden on defense matters. But Pax Americana puts us on the wrong end of a paradox: Hegemony means that even our allies can force ever greater U.S.
defense spending the more they try to share the burden!

Fourth, collective security doesn’t rule out unilateral action. The Journal says I’m among those who want “Americans . . . to trust their security to a global committee.” But no one advocates that we repeal the “inherent” right of self-defense enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.

Secretary Cheney says his plan wouldn’t undermine support for the U.N. Who would know better than the U.N.’s usually understated secretary general? If implemented, says Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the Pentagon’s strategy would spell “the end of the U.N.” Rather than denigrating collective security, we should regularize the kind of multilateral response we assembled for the Gulf War. Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? It envisages a permanent commitment of forces, for use by the Security Council. That means a presumption of collective action — but with a U.S. veto.

Rather than defending military extravagance, the Bush administration should be reallocating Pentagon funds to meet more urgent security needs: sustaining democracy in the former Soviet empire; supporting U.N. peacekeepers in Yugoslavia, Cambodia and El Salvador; and rebuilding a weakened and debt-burdened America.

If Pentagon strategists and their kneejerk supporters could broaden their horizons, they would see how our superpower status is best assured. We must get lean militarily, revitalize American economic strength, and exercise a diplomatic leadership that puts new muscle into institutions of collective security.

Sen. Biden is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s European Affairs Subcommittee.

A “New World Order?” That’s the ‘globalists’ term — they use it frequently and are proud to do so.

FBI, DHS Officially Classify “Antifa” Activities as “Domestic Terrorist Violence”

By Zero Hedge

President Trump was crucified by the mainstream media a few weeks back after hosting an improvised press conference and saying there was “blame on both sides” for the violence in Charlottesville that resulted in the death of a counterprotester. The comments resulted in most of Trump’s advisory councils being disbanded, as CEO’s around the country pounced on the opportunity to distance themselves from the administration, and heightened calls from CNN for impeachment proceedings.

The problem is that while Trump’s delivery probably could have been a bit more artful, the underlying message seems to be proving more accurate with each passing day and each new outbreak of Antifa violence.

As Politico points out today, previously unreported FBI and Department of Homeland Security studies found that “anarchist extremist” group like Antifa have been the “primary instigators of violence at public rallies” going back to at least April 2016 when the reports were first published.

Federal authorities have been warning state and local officials since early 2016 that leftist extremists known as “antifa” had become increasingly confrontational and dangerous, so much so that the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence,” according to interviews and confidential law enforcement documents obtained by POLITICO.

Since well before the Aug. 12 rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, turned deadly, DHS has been issuing warnings about the growing likelihood of lethal violence between the left-wing anarchists and right-wing white supremacist and nationalist groups.

Previously unreported documents disclose that by April 2016, authorities believed that “anarchist extremists” were the primary instigators of violence at public rallies against a range of targets. They were blamed by authorities for attacks on the police, government and political institutions, along with symbols of “the capitalist system,” racism, social injustice and fascism, according to a confidential 2016 joint intelligence assessment by DHS and the FBI.

Not surprisingly, law enforcement officials noted that the rise in Antifa violence overlapped perfectly with Trump’s campaign as they made appearances at rally after rally to incite chaos…all the while making it seem as if violent, racist Trump supporters were to blame.

“It was in that period [as the Trump campaign emerged] that we really became aware of them,” said one senior law enforcement official tracking domestic extremists in a state that has become a front line in clashes between the groups. “These antifa guys were showing up with weapons, shields and bike helmets and just beating the shit out of people. … They’re using Molotov cocktails, they’re starting fires, they’re throwing bombs and smashing windows.”

Almost immediately, the right-wing targets of the antifa attacks began fighting back, bringing more and larger weapons and launching unprovoked attacks of their own, the documents and interviews show. And the extremists on both sides have been using the confrontations, especially since Charlottesville, to recruit unprecedented numbers of new members, raise money and threaten more confrontations, they say.

“Everybody is wondering, ‘What are we gonna do? How are we gonna deal with this?’” said the senior state law enforcement official. “Every time they have one of these protests where both sides are bringing guns, there are sphincters tightening in my world. Emotions get high, and fingers get twitchy on the trigger.”

As you’ll likely recall, one such event came in June 2016 when Antifa showed up at a rally in Sacramento and began violently attacking protestors with canes and knives.  Of course, with the whole thing caught on video, it’s pretty clear who the instigators of violence were (see our post here).

Some of the DHS and FBI intelligence reports began flagging the antifa protesters before the election. In one from last September, portions of which were read to POLITICO, DHS studied “recent violent clashes … at lawfully organized white supremacist” events including a June 2016 rally at the California Capitol in Sacramento organized by the Traditionalist Workers Party and its affiliate, the Golden State Skinheads.

According to police, counter-protesters linked to antifa and affiliated groups like By Any Means Necessary attacked, causing a riot after which at least 10 people were hospitalized, some with stab wounds.

At the Sacramento rally, antifa protesters came looking for violence, and “engaged in several activities indicating proficiency in pre-operational planning, to include organizing carpools to travel from different locations, raising bail money in preparation for arrests, counter-surveilling law enforcement using three-man scout teams, using handheld radios for communication, and coordinating the event via social media,”the DHS report said.

Of course, it’s not just California. As the FBI and DHS note, the Antifa group operates much like terrorist cells with disconnected groups all over the country.Even before Charlottesville, dozens and, in some cases, hundreds of people on both sides showed up at events in Texas, California, Oregon and elsewhere, carrying weapons and looking for a fight. In the Texas capital of Austin, armed antifa protesters attacked Trump supporters and white groups at several recent rallies, and then swarmed police in a successful effort to stop them from making arrests.

California has become another battleground, with violent confrontations in Berkeley, Sacramento and Orange County leading to numerous injuries. And antifa counter-protesters initiated attacks in two previous clashes in Charlottesville, according to the law enforcement reports and interviews.

More recently, the antifa groups, which some describe as the Anti-Fascist Action Network, have evolved out of the leftist anti-government groups like “Black bloc,” protesters clad in black and wearing masks that caused violence at events like the 1999 Seattle World Trade Organization protests. They claim to have no leader and no hierarchy, but authorities following them believe they are organized via decentralized networks of cells that coordinate with each other. Often, they spend weeks planning for violence at upcoming events, according to the April 2016 DHS and FBI report entitled “Baseline Comparison of US and Foreign Anarchist Extremist Movements.”

Dozens of armed anti-fascist groups have emerged, including Redneck Revolt and the Red Guards, according to the reports and interviews. One report from New Jersey authorities said self-described antifa groups have been established in cities including New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco.

Meanwhile, even by the spring of 2016, the FBI had already grown concerned enough about Antifa that they began investigating overseas trips by activists out of concerns that they were coordinating with European anarchists to stage large bombings in the U.S.

By the spring of 2016, the anarchist groups had become so aggressive, including making armed attacks on individuals and small groups of perceived enemies, that federal officials launched a global investigation with the help of the U.S. intelligence community, according to the DHS and FBI assessment.

The purpose of the investigation, according to the April 2016 assessment: To determine whether the U.S.-based anarchists might start committing terrorist bombings like their counterparts in “foreign anarchist extremist movements” in Greece, Italy and Mexico, possibly at the Republican and Democratic conventions that summer.

Some of the antifa activists have gone overseas to train and fight with fellow anarchist organizations, including two Turkey-based groups fighting the Islamic State, according to interviews and internet postings.

Alas, we suspect you’ll hear precisely nothing about any of this on CNN.

The Media Destroyed America

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts (via Global Research)

It did not take long for the Lie Machine, aka American media, to create the false news and fake narrative of the “storming of the US Capitol” on January 6 by a “white supremacist insurrection.”  

Here is an example from Bloomberg Weekend Reading on January 23, 2021: 

“The scenes from the first day of Joe Biden’s presidency unfolded against the backdrop of a devastated U.S. economy, continuing fallout from a white supremacist insurrection, and a coronavirus death toll surpassing 400,000.”[1]

The fake narrative is accepted everywhere.  It is endemic in the world press.  Even news sources such as RT and Sputnik which endeavor to give us real news instead of presstitute lies have repeated the insurrection story. 

President Trump was impeached by the House on the sole basis of this fake news story, and now stands to be tried in the Senate on the same fake news charges.  

On the basis of the same fake news story, two Florida banks in which Trump had multi-million dollar deposits closed Trump’s accounts. 

Signature Bank in New York also closed Trump’s account.

As did Germany’s Deutsche Bank.

New York mayor Bill de Blasio, who permitted Antifa and BLM to loot and burn Manhattan, has terminated the city’s contracts with Trump businesses that run ice skating rinks and a carousel in Central Park and a golf course in the Bronx.

The PGA of America voted  to take the PGA Championship away from Trump’s New Jersey Golf course.

See this.

Other sources report that conventions are avoiding his hotels and that creditors will not renew loans.

That fake news can have such real world consequences should scare every American to death. 

Notice also how the fake news story worsens with each repeat. On January 6, the alleged insurrection was by “Trump supporters.”  By January 23  Trump supporters had been morphed into “White supremacist insurrectionists.”  

The entire world now believes in something that does not exist.

This is an example of what it means to live in The Matrix.  Everyone lives in a false world created by lies repeated endlessly by pressitutes.

The ruling lies are lies that enable Establishment agendas by getting rid of non-establishment explanations and shutting down non-establishment leaders. Trump had to go because he was in the way of Establishment agendas. An example is being made of Trump as a lesson to others who value service to the people higher than service to the Establishment.

There is no doubt whatsoever that Trump won reelection.  The accumulated evidence of electoral fraud is overwhelming.  Yet the Lie Machine was able to prevent the evidence being presented and examined.  All the presstitutes ever said was that “there is no evidence of fraud,” followed by “all who support examining the evidence are enemies of democracy.”  

In other words, democracy is a stolen election.  If you protest the theft, you are an enemy of democracy. 

On December 29, 2020, almost two months after the November presidential election and after almost two months of demonization of Trump for saying the election was stolen, the Gallup Poll reported that its survey found that Donald Trump had displaced Obama as the man most admired by Americans.  See this. Yet the most admired man lost the election.

The fact that a presidential election could be stolen in plain view, attested to by numerous experts and a thousand signed affidavits, could go unexamined by the media, state and federal attorneys general, courts, and Congress, shows the power of the Establishment and the impotence of the media which, far from free, is in total service to the Establishment. The public never heard about the evidence from TV, newspapers, or NPR.

Clearly, in America there is no such thing as democracy.  An election was stolen and nothing was done about it.  The Establishment was able to eliminate a president who did not serve its purposes and nothing was done about it.  

The people learned that their vote means nothing and, therefore, there is no democracy. A government controlled by the Establishment is unaccountable to the people.

Perhaps there is a silver lining. It has been a long time since government policy served the public.  The public accepted the situation, because most people believed it was in some way a democratic outcome.  Now they know that “American democracy” was nothing but a mask for Establishment self-interests.  Perhaps the stolen election will serve as a wake-up call to bring the population out of its insouciance.  There are signs that the Establishment is concerned that it will, thus the new domestic terrorism bill which will be used to criminalize dissent as terrorism.

For those who are indoctrinated by media repetition that “there is no evidence of electoral fraud,” let’s assume this lie is correct.  The fact remains that the system has failed the people.  Whether the election was stolen or not, 74 million Americans according to the official vote count and 94 million Americans according to expert estimates of Trump’s true vote count believe that the election was stolen.  Yet, the concerns of these millions of Americans were dismissed out of hand as fraudulent claims.  The presstitutes claimed repeatedly that the only fraud was the claim of fraud.

The Democrats, the media, and the institutions put in place to ensure a free society failed totally in their responsibility to address the sincere concerns of half or more of the voting population.  This in itself is a failure of democracy, a failure of the Establishment. 

Those who expressed their concerns were not only dismissed but also demonized, threatened and punished as “enemies of democracy.”  

The lesson cannot be more clear:  An enemy of democracy is all who challenge the controlled explanation.  

The US enters the year 2021 as a country that has moved from the list of democracies to the list of authoritarian governments and is rapidly becoming a totalitarian country in which freedom of speech, freedom of association, and due process are dead letter Constitutional protections. The Gestapo knock at the door, the NKVD knock at the door have come to America.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy.

ZUCKERBERG FORCES INSTAGRAM USERS TO FOLLOW JOE BIDEN ACCOUNT

article – https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/instagram-forcing-users-follow-biden-white-house-account-not-pathetic-even-users-repeatedly-un-follow-page/
Odysee Channel: https://odysee.com/@SaltyCracker:a
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/SaltyCracker
Website: https://saltycrackermerch.com/
Merchandise: https://saltycrackermerch.com/salty-merch/
PayPal: https://tinyurl.com/ycmmuc9z
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SaltyCracker9
SubscribeStar: https://tinyurl.com/tcolt9z
DLive: https://dlive.tv/TheSaltyCracker
Parler: https://parler.com/profile/TheSaltyCracker/ 
Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/s7sIruG9mgWl/

–Disclaimer–
These are the opinions and ramblings of a lunatic. They are for entertainment purposes only and are probably wrong. You listen at your own risk.

JOE BIDEN’S SPEECH INTERRUPTED BY HUNTER BIDEN ACCEPTING PLEA DEAL!

SUBSCRIBE & SHARE MY VIDEOS!
__________________________________________________________________________
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/olin_live/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcqMlNTpaOUj76-8f_c08Hg
https://www.minds.com/thepicts/
https://rumble.com/user/OlinLive
https://ugetube.com/@OlinLive
https://gab.com/OlinLive
https://parler.com/profile/OlinLive/posts
__________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4589&v=Ec3mkoSWf0A&feature=youtu.be
https://streamable.com/wivkpj
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=39&v=vfb9FIpobL4&feature=youtu.be

Trump Says COVID-19 Vaccine Won’t Be Mandatory, Biden Says It Should Be

By Arjun Walia (via Collective Evolution)

IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: It doesn’t seem likely that a COVID vaccine will be mandatory under the Trump administration, but Joe Biden recently shared that he believes it should be.
  • Reflect On: If the vaccine did become mandatory, would you take it? Will there be too much of a backlash if the vaccine is made mandatory, or mandatory to travel for example?

What Happened: US President Donald Trump told Stuart Varney on Fox Business Network’s ‘Varney &Co’ that he doesn’t plan to make the coronavirus vaccine mandatory for American citizens, because “there are some people who feel strongly about the whole situation,’ alluding to the idea that people should still have freedom of choice when it comes to what they choose to do with their own body.

On the other hand, presidential candidate Joe Biden said he would urge all state representatives, governors, mayors and council members to make the vaccine mandatory, just like some have done with masks. He acknowledged that such a mandate would be difficult to enforce, but stated that “we should be thinking about making it mandatory.”

Trump has long been promoting alternative therapies for COVID, many have come under scrutiny by mainstream media. The scientific and medical community have both promoted these therapies as well as criticized them, the only difference seems to be that those who support them don’t seem to receive much media attention, while simultaneously become subjected to a censorship campaign by media and social media outlets.

Scientists who share opinions that contradict the World Health Organization (WHO) have also been heavily censored. Michael Levitt, a Biophysicist and a professor of structural biology at Stanford University is one of many who have criticized the WHO as well as Facebook for censoring different information and informed perspectives regarding the Coronavirus.

The Great Barrington Declaration is experiencing the same thing for questioning lockdown measures, it’s now been signed by nearly 40,000 doctors and scientists.

A paper recently published in Global Advances in Health and Medicine titled Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19—Update From Shanghai and U.S. Medical Institutions points out:

A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.

The paper also promotes the use of alternate therapies like intravenous vitamin C and provides evidence showing its success in COVID patients. It’s one of multiple studies to do so, but vitamin C has been heavily ridiculed and censored by mainstream media and social media for being able to provide any help when it comes to healing from COVID, or to help prevent it.

We are being made to believe that a vaccine is the only answer. No other suggestions seem to be acceptable. Why?

Why This Is Important

Why is there an authoritarian ‘fact-checker’ patrolling the internet and censoring information? Sure, a lot of stories may be completely false and irresponsibly written, especially ones that don’t provide any sources for their claims, but a lot of legitimate information is also being censored. Should people not have the right to examine information and opinions that go against the grain and decide for themselves what is, and what isn’t? Are we not capable of this? Can the mainstream media make the minority feel like the majority and the majority feel like the minority?

I’ve emphasized in many of my articles how vaccine hesitancy continues to grow. That’s no big secret. This is occurring not only with much of the general population, but doctors and scientists as well.

Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project stated at a World Health Organization (WHO) conference that:

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers, we have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen… still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider…

Many people are asking why doesn’t mainstream media or Bill Gates actually addresses the concerns that are being raised by scientists and doctors? Why is ridicule and terms like “conspiracy theory” always used instead?

What are the concerns? Vaccine injury is one of them. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. A 2010 HHS pilot study by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) found that 1 in every 39 vaccines causes injury, a shocking comparison to the claims from the CDC of 1 in every million.

There are several concers.

If you’d like to access more of articles that are properly sourced regarding vaccine concerns, there is a link to a few at the bottom of this article I recently published.

Big Politics: Every single year big politics, in my opinion, continues to be exposed as a system that’s no longer capable of dealing with and appropriately handling big issues our planet faces today. I often ask myself, does voting simply uphold a system that’s no longer capable of creating any meaningful change? Big politics is filled with an enormous amount of corruption, and many would say that corporations now dictate policy, not government.

When it comes to health policy, there are many conflicts of interests to be concerned about, scientists from within federal health regulatory agencies have been bringing awareness to this fact for many years. For example, few years ago more than a dozen scientists from within the CDC put out public statement detailing the influence corporations have within the CDC, how corrupt things are, how it happens in all departments  how many high ranking people within the CDC condone this behaviour. They were referred to as the Spider Papers.

Award winning medical investigator Jeanne Lenzer also made this quite clear in a 2015 paperpublished in the British Medical Journal.

The CDC’s image as an independent watchdog over the public health has given it enormous prestige, and its recommendations are occasionally enforced by law. Despite the agency’s disclaimer, the CDC does receive millions of dollars in industry gifts and funding, both directly and indirectly, and several recent CDC actions and recommendations have raised questions about the science it cites, the clinical guidelines it promotes, and the money it is taking.

This is a huge problem, and it’s one that seems to plague all industries, not just the medical industry.

The Takeaway

We are pitted against each other like never before these days, and it doesn’t seem that politics helps us find common ground. It’s about belittling and ridiculing every move an opponent makes, and does not in any way shape or for represent a system of people who are willing to pool their resources and work together for meaningful change. So why do we continue to be captured by it? Why do we even pay attention? How can we change things and take matters into our own hands? Why do we live the way we do?

Power has corrupted our political process, and decisions today are made for politicians, corporations and those who seem to control these entities in order to gain more power from and profit off of.

Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of today – Theodore Roosevelt

Honesty, morality, empathy, and an overall unawareness regarding the interconnectedness of life is severely lacking, and I do believe human beings are capable of creating a human experience where all life can thrive. We have the solutions, but many of them never see the light of day or receive any attention, so ask yourself, if we have the solutions, what’s preventing them from being implemented?

THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED OCTOBER 18TH 2020 ON COLLECTIVE EVOLUTION

Rudy Giuliani’s Claim of Inappropriate Pics of Children On Hunter Biden’s Laptop Deemed Fake News. Is It?

By Arjun Walia (via Collective Evolution)

IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: Former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani has been outspoken about inappropriate pictures and messages of children that have supposedly been found on Hunter Biden’s laptop. These allegations are being deemed a “conspiracy theory” by mainstream media.
  • Reflect On: Why is there so much censorship of information without appropriate investigation? Should people not have the right to view information openly, freely and transparently?

What Happened: A few days ago, a top Republican senator mentioned the possibility that the Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated whether there was child pornography on a laptop and hard drive that supposedly belonged to Hunter Biden. He did so when Journalist Maria Bartiromo asked Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee about a Business Insider report that described faint handwriting on a subpoena served last year to a Delaware business that was given a water-damaged MacBook Pro to repair but was never retrieved along with a hard drive. The hardware purportedly contained data about foreign business dealings and other matters related to the son of former Vice President Joe Biden. You can watch a clip of that interview here.

On October 16th, American attorney, cybersecurity advisor and politician Rudy Giuliani, who also served as Mayer of New York City from 1994 to 2001 claimed on his Youtube Channel that he has come across evidence that this laptop and hard drive do belong to Hunter Biden, and that there’s a signature to prove it which he has in his possession. He also thoroughly explains the story about Hunter’s supposed laptop and how it came into the possession of the Delaware business. Furthermore, he claimed that there were photos of activity on the laptop that anyone “would have a hard time describing, and really should be left to more private discussion.”

Giuliani has since mentioned that Hunter Biden had numerous pictures of girls, who were just children, on the laptop as well as inappropriate messages, and that he has turned this evidence over the the Delaware State Police. He has expressed that the Chinese government may have access to this kind of thing in order to blackmail the Biden family into doing whatever they want.

Andrii Derkach, a politician the US Treasury believes to be a “Russian agent,” claimed on Friday that another device belonging to Hunter was given to Ukrainian police.

We saw this perspective with Jeffrey Epstein, where multiple sources, including a high ranking intelligence official, claimed that part of his job was to blackmail high level politicians and businessman by having compromising videos and pictures of them with children. Christopher Mason, a  TV host and journalist/reporter who has known Ghislaine Maxwell for decades has gone on record and said he was told that Epstein rigged his multiple homes with cameras and kept tapes of everyone/everything. He says Maxwell has access to this footage. You can read more about that here.

Approximately one month ago Hunter Biden, the son of presidential candidate Joe Biden, apparently sent thousands of dollars to individuals allegedly involved in sex trafficking, according to a report recently released by Senate Republicans. According the report, Biden “has sent funds to non-resident alien women in the United States who are citizens of Russia and Ukraine and who have subsequently wired funds they have received from Hunter Biden to individuals located in Russia and Ukraine…The records also note that some of these transactions are linked to what “appears to be an Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.”

Facebook Fact-Checker Politifact Weighs In: According to Politifact, a Facebook Fact Checker,  “There is no evidence that a laptop previously belonging to Hunter Biden contains child pornography. The allegation originated on an anonymous internet forum that’s a known source of online disinformation.”

They mention that a rumour quickly emerged that “Hunter Biden has 25,000 pics of him torturing and raping children under age 10 in China on his laptop.”

These allegations seems to have stemmed from multiple tweets by radio host Wayne Root claimed ,without evidence, stating that he has that Hunter Biden’s laptop contains videos of him sexually abusing and torturing Chinese children.

CBS News interviewed the owner of the computer store, John Paul MacIsaac, and they state that he was “unable and unwilling to answer key questions about how the laptop supposedly arrived in his store, and eventually, how the data was shared with Giuliani. CBS News interviewed MacIsaac for almost two hours on Wednesday and throughout the interview he contradicted himself about his motivations, raising questions about the truthfulness of one of the central figures in the story.”

The New York Post also interviewed him, you can listen to that entire interview here.

Giuliani claimed “dangerous people” are involved in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal – leaving the Mackbook repairman who leaked it fearing for his life.

According to Politico,

More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden’s son “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The letter, signed on Monday, centers around a batch of documents released by the New York Post last week that purport to tie the Democratic nominee to his son Hunter’s business dealings. Under the banner headline “Biden Secret E-mails,” the Post reported it was given a copy of Hunter Biden’s laptop hard drive by President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who said he got it from a Mac shop owner in Delaware who also alerted the FBI.

Biden has of course denied all allegations.

Regardless of What You Believe About This Story, Child Trafficking and Sexual Abuse in places of power exists, and persists.

There are a number of examples of child sexual abuse in places of power. The Jeffrey Epstein/Ghislaine Maxwell cases are a great example of that, both involved and implicated in trafficking children for sexual purposes, and possible blackmail purposes as well.

Not long ago, As The Hill reports, “The Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service subsequently identified hundreds of DOD-affiliated individuals as suspects involved in accessing child pornography, several of whom used government devices to use and share the images.” You can read more about that here.

There are many credible examples from Royal Families, the Vatican, big finance, big politics, Hollywood and more. If you’d like to go a bit more in depth and see some of this evidence, you can refer to this article I published last year.

Our Interview With A Survivor of Child Sex Trafficking: 

Anneke Lucas is an author, speaker, advocate for child sex trafficking victims, founder of the non-profit organization Liberation Prison Yoga, and creator of the Unconditional Model.

Her work is based off her 30-year journey to restore her mental and physical wellbeing after surviving some of the worst atrocities known to humankind before the age of 12. Sold as a young child into a murderous pedophile network by her family, she was rescued after nearly six years of abuse and torture.

We recently conducted an interview with her. Below is a clip from the four part series, as it was a very long and detailed interview. You can access the full interview and start your free trial HERE on CETV, a platform we created to help combat internet censorship and allow us to continue to do our work and get the word out about various issues and topics.

The Takeaway

Right now the citizenry is completely separated in their beliefs with regard to what’s happening, especially in big politics. Stories today are instantly jumped on and deemed false by ‘fact-checkers’ even when there is legitimate evidence behind the claims. Should people not have the right to examine information, opinions and evidence and decide for themselves what is and what isn’t? The amount of information censorship happening today is truly unprecedented.

This type of states is simply a reflection of an evolving human consciousness. We are becoming more aware, and we are questioning actions taken by governments that do not resonate. We are living in times where truth tellers, like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, are exiled and thrown in jail for simply exposing unethical and immoral actions by powerful governments and corporations. What does it say about our world if we’ve come to the point where activists exposing harmful actions are completely silenced and ridiculed? What’s going on here? How did we get to this point and how do we change it? Why do we continue to rely and ask governments to make meaningful changes on our planet? Does voting simply hold up and perpetuate a system that’s no longer capable of helping the human race and our planet move forward in the direction it needs to take?

THIS ARTICLE WAS FIRST PUBLISHED October 21st 2020 on Collective Evolution

Another Alleged Epstein & Prince Andrew Victim Comes Forward Implicating Joe Biden & “Many Others”

By Richard Enos (via Collective Evolution)


IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: Recent events such as the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein seem to be causing more victims of sex trafficking who had stayed silent for so long to come out and speak.
  • Reflect On: Can we create a safe and open space for alleged victims of sex trafficking to speak out with confidence, and trust that our growing discernment will ensure that the truth rises to the top?

Members of the Awakening Community often wonder, aside from our personal work being done to look inside and heal, forgive, and raise our vibration, if there is a need for external actions in the world that will help move us forward in our collective journey and foster a better and more harmonious world.

Might I suggest that at this precise moment in our history, it is incumbent upon us to come together as a community to provide a safe and sacred space to those who have been victimized by the massive, coordinated global pedophilia and trafficking rings whose full scope and influence on our world we are just starting to fathom. And that means listening to what they have to say, and aspiring to use their testimony to gain a better understanding of our world and what has been happening under the cover of darkness and privilege, difficult as this may be for many of us to accept.

Women and men who have for decades lived silently in fear of being further harmed or even killed if they spoke out, now see a ray of hope in the recent convictions of members of the NXIVM cult and the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein. There is now a sense that the fundamental complicity or at least the willful ignorance about these rings at the highest levels of global law enforcement is changing, and that many of the good people in these organizations are now being empowered to investigate and prosecute such crimes. It has previously been said to me that officers wishing to pursue leads into human trafficking crimes were often dissuaded from further action and told, ‘That’s not what the taxpayers are paying you to do.’

I know of victims who are not ready to come out in public, either because they are not far enough along in their healing journey, or they still cannot fully believe that government, law enforcement, and the judiciary are now on their side. When we consider how much we have uncovered about the far-reaching complicity of powerful institutions to silence victims and protect high-level perpetrators, there is justification for these feelings.

Discernment

For those who are coming out of hiding and providing testimony, heightening our powers of discernment is critical to the process. We will not be creating a safe space if we simply believe anything we hear from anybody, for there are sure to be attempts at disinformation and manipulation for ulterior motives. At the same time, we must withhold snap judgments, and temper the application of our pet conspiracy theories so that we can focus on allowing each person to feel and be heard.

Our discernment will require us to take each testimony word by word, case by case, and ask ourselves about the motivation behind it, if the facts line up and there is consistency, and whether or not there seems to be a hidden agenda. The testimony of Christine Blasey-Ford and her allegations of attempted rape against Brett Kavanaugh in his Supreme Court nomination hearings serve as an example in which red flags were lifting up at every turn, especially in the way mainstream media unequivocally pronounced her to be credible and honest every step of the way. Her testimony could clearly be seen as having a political agenda behind it.

The Testimony Of Jessica Collins

By and large, most cases will be more subtle. One person who has recently come out with a video claiming to be a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and [Prince] Andrew Windsor certainly seems worthy of our attention. Although she does not claim to be a victim of child trafficking (she was first abducted as a student at the Catholic University of America, after she went for what she thought was a legitimate job interview), the testimony of Jessica Collins is compelling. She put a link to the video below multiple times on Twitter on September 3rd:

A look into some earlier tweets and other information reveals that Jessica’s 18-year old daughter died of Opioids in 2017, which Jessica does not believe was a suicide. In a tweet on September 3rd, she discloses that only because she believes her daughter was murdered is she speaking out. And she herself does not believe that the Department of Justice and Law Enforcement are truly attempting to prosecute these crimes at this time:

There is a lot to sift through in the testimony of Jessica Collins. I won’t go over it here but would refer you to this Before It’s News article to examine some of the more salacious claims. My purpose here is to pass on this video to our readers to share and evaluate for themselves, based on the following request made by Jessica in the video itself:

My name is Jessica Collins. I live in Virginia. Today is September 3rd, 2019. If anything happens to me it’s because this information is true and I have a lot more information about who I was trafficked to and the government people who are in the White House today.

If you could redistribute this video please save it and redistribute it. If anything happens to me at least I have this out. I have been threatened. My car was disabled by a government employee when the Jeffrey Epstein news broke.

I have been without a vehicle for 40 days. I don’t know what else to say.

Please save this video. Please redistribute. Please try and spread it. There is no way that this is going to get out there in the media. Must we the American people do the work?

The government is involved and I was trafficked for nearly 17 years. Please try to help by redistributing this, tweeting it, talking about it. I do everything that I can. Thank you for listening. Together we can get to the bottom of this and hold the criminals accountable.

Jessica Collins’ last tweet was on September 6th. There don’t seem to be any communications from her since then. Let us pray that she is safe and finds a way to tell her whole story.

The Takeaway

We have to allow everyone who comes forward as a victim of sex trafficking the chance to speak until they have been fully heard. We must have confidence that the truth will ultimately rise to the top and shine so brightly that attempts at dark deception and manipulation, clever as they may be, will no longer prevail.

THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED 19 SEPTEMBER, 2019