“These are Criminal Companies” RFK Jr. Brilliant Takedown of Big Pharma That Ignited a Media Firestorm | The Wildfire News & Trending Politics

The “Defeat the Mandates” rally in Washington D.C. drew thousands of peaceful protesters in support of the common cause of opposing mask and vaccine mandates. Robert Kennedy Jr., founder and Chairman of Children’s Health Defense delivered a speech to the rally attendees was focused on Big Pharma, which has escaped accountability and demands for transparency despite their core responsibilities during the Covid pandemic. His words were so provocative they ignited a media firestorm.

“You cannot sue that company,” he reiterated. “They have a license…”

“These are criminal companies, by the way,” he proclaimed. “These are serial felons.”

“The four companies that make all four of our U.S. vaccines for the children’s program… have paid $35 billion in criminal penalties for hundreds of violations and damages in the last ten years,” he went on.

“These are the companies that gave us the opioid crisis,” he added. “That kills 56,000 children a year. More American kids every year than the Vietnam War killed in twenty years.”

“These are not good citizens,” he emphasized. “These are criminal enterprises.”

“And now you’re taking away any economic or legal incentive for them to behave?” he asked rhetorically. “What do you think they are going to do?”

“Do you think they’ve found Jesus, suddenly?” he went on. “And they’re going to take care of us and our children, they’re suddenly concerned with public health?”

“No,” he said.

“They took away due process rulemaking, they’ve taken away our right to be free of warrantless searches and seizures, this very intrusive track-and-trace surveillance, etcetera,” he went on.

“We are watching something now that I never believed that I would see in my lifetime,” RFK Jr. said. “I have read Orwell and Kafka and Aldous Huxley, this dystopian science fiction novels that someday the United States would be overtaken by fascism.”

“Fascism, incidentally, is defined… Mussolini defined it as the merger of state and corporate power,’” he added.

“And orchestrated by Tony Fauci,” he went on as the crowd booed loudly.

“What we’re seeing today is what I call ‘turnkey totalitarianism,’” he continued. “They are putting in place all of these technological mechanisms for control we’ve never seen before.”

“It’s been the ambition of every totalitarian state from the beginning of mankind to control every aspect of behavior, of conduct, of thought, and to obliterate dissent. None of them have been able to do it,” he added.

“They didn’t have the technological capacity,” he noted. “Even in Hitler’s Germany you could cross the Alps into Switzerland, you could hide in an attic like Anne Frank did. I visited in 1962 East Germany with my father. And met people who had climbed the wall and escaped. So, it was possible. Many died, surely. But it was possible.”

“Today, the mechanisms are being put in place,” he warned. “That will make it so that none of us can run, and none of us can hide.”

“Within five years, we are going to see 415,000 low orbit satellites,” he claimed. “Bill Gates and his 65,000 satellites alone will be able to look at every square inch of the planet 24 hours a day. They’re putting in 5G to harvest our data and control our behavior. Digital currency that will allow them to punish us from our distance and cut off our food supply. Vaccine passports.”

This part of the speech ignited a media firestorm. They pounced on RFK Jr.’s bit about satellite surveillance and issues with 5G, hardly fringe matters, to lambaste his speech and brandish him a “conspiracy theorist,” which essentially means it is beneath them to address his concerns.

Jake Tapper called him “an ignorant lying menace.” Adam Klasfield of Law Crime News weirdly commented, “The obscene Holocaust invocations and analogies, from RFK Jr. and others at this anti-vaccine rally, sound eerily similar to the rhetoric that appears in legal briefs for indicted Oath Keepers extremists.” Professor Peter Hotez, CNN’s resident vaccine fanatic, opined: “Since June 200,000 unvaccinated Americans lost their lives needlessly to COVID19, victims of antivaccine disinformation, aggression, dog whistles from extremists who compare vaccines to the Holocaust, or promote conspiracies about Bill Gates, Tony Fauci, Me, other US scientists.” Poor guy. It turns out the disinformation has been coming from his side all along.

The reflexive “conspiracy theorist” label was invoked, just as it has countless times in the past before the “theory” actually became the “reality,” such as with “vaccine passports” themselves… which are now being used all over the world to deny people work and access to public spaces.

Even if it is difficult to verify all of RFK Jr.’s claims, the epithet “conspiracy theorist” no longer has the power to unilaterally shut down conversation. It would be remiss not to point out there is no biggest perpetrator of “conspiracy theories” than the mainstream media, which lied for years about Russia collusion, just like it has lied the entire time about the Covid pandemic. We continue.

“You have a series of rights, as flawed as our government is, you can still go out and go to a bar, you can go to a sporting event, you can get on a bus or an airplane and you can travel, you have certain freedoms,” RFK Jr. went on. “You can get educated, etcetera.”

“The minute they hand you that vaccine passport, every right that you have is transformed into a privilege contingent upon your obedience to arbitrary government dictates,” he added.

“It will make you a slave!”

“What do we do?” he asked. “We resist.”

At the end of the day, this is about accountability. It is about accountability for the elected leaders and unelected public health officials who have seized upon a pandemic to wantonly violate every American’s unalienable rights, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, the right to travel, and the right to bodily autonomy.

RFK Jr. has issued a rousing clarion call for all those who believe that the unlawful vaccine and mask mandates are simply “public health issues.” They are much more than that. They are about rights.

Nothing less than the future of Western civilization is on the line. There are dire implications if we fail to resist the authoritarian state’s escalating violations of human rights. No matter what its pretexts.

Source: The Wildfire News & Trending Politics

War Against Humanity | Off-Guardian

By Michael Lesher

Halloween was once a popular holiday in Passaic. Year after year, my neighborhood’s lawns abounded in mock-terrifying October decorations – witches on broomsticks, carved pumpkins on the porches, fantastic spider webs festooning the shrubbery.

This year, though, there were hardly any Halloween decorations on display. And like so many small signs of the way the “pandemic” – in plain language, the deepening police state – is bulldozing away what used to be ordinary expressions of human community, the change troubles me.

I understand it, of course. After all, why should children look forward to an evening’s romp as a witch or goblin while tales of an omnipresent Black Death – exaggerations so wild they once would have made normal people laugh out loud – have become our daily dogma? And if the children aren’t celebrating, why should the rest of us?

But the sense of disquiet remains, unsettling everything I used to hope I knew about the realities of communal life. I cannot get used to the subtle encroachment of fear into every aspect of our collective existence. I cannot accept the slow poisoning of all the interactions between one human being and another by the relentless tide of COVID19 propaganda.

As I walked around an unadorned neighborhood that should have been full of Halloween symbols in that late October season, I began to rage inwardly at the realization that so many parents genuinely believed they were protecting their children when they deprived them of a public celebration, however innocuous.

Trick-or-treating on Halloween? I could see my neighbors shaking their heads and mentally counting up the possibilities of infection. What would have happened if the kids had knocked on someone’s front door and the person who answered it wasn’t wearing a muzzle? Besides, could anyone be absolutely sure that whoever put candy into the kids’ plastic bags had washed his hands before touching the wrappers? Or what if – horror of horrors – he hadn’t even been “vaccinated”?

On a sunny afternoon a few weeks ago, I found myself unexpectedly surrounded by a large crowd of children just released from school. At first it was reassuring to float in an eddy of untroubled human behavior; such moments have become progressively rarer, and therefore more precious, over the last year and a half. 

The kids around me strolled, joked and chattered like schoolchildren everywhere. But wasn’t there something wrong with the picture? So inexorable has been the stealthy advance of the corona coup’s “new normal” – even for someone who has struggled to resist it – that it took me several seconds to realize that these children were masked

Every last one of them had his or her face hidden behind a black muzzle.

Yes, if I closed my eyes, I could almost imagine that things were still as they should be. But opening them again brought back the nightmare reality: here were what should have been children replaced by caricatures – people without faces, conversations without smiles, eyes unaccompanied by mouths.

And the worst of it was that these kids had clearly become so accustomed to this Kafkaesque state of affairs, so indoctrinated in COVID19 hysteria, that they had kept their muzzles on even after leaving the school building where they were required to wear them. For them, terror was now a way of life. The surreal had become normal.

And not only for them. Consider the political reality of the state I live in. For well over a year now, all-cause mortality figures throughout New Jersey have rarely fallen outside ordinary parameters – in other words, there has not been any conceivable grounds for claiming the existence of a medical emergency.

And yet New Jersey’s governor, Phil Murphy, is still ruling as a virtual dictator, wielding “emergency” powers that were legally supposed to expire on April 9 of 2020 – destroying businesses, confining people with illegal quarantines, threatening to muzzle us all (again) at the first sign of resistance – while the state government whose constitution Murphy has pulped for the last 19 months recently mailed out to the citizens, with what I assume was unconscious irony, leaflets explaining how to “vote” for governor on November 2.

Earnest instructions on how to choose a dictator? For anyone who could think clearly, this was a breathtaking insult to every citizen of New Jersey. But as far as I could see, it stimulated no public reaction. How many people here realize, even now, that they’re living under unconstitutional rule? Even Murphy’s Republican challenger did not raise the issue during the campaign.

The same eerie quiet in the face of unprecedented assaults on freedom is the norm almost everywhere. The United States’ Chief Executive has been fuming like a fascist over the latest species of Untermenschen, the I-decline-to-be-a-guinea-pig-for-Big-Pharma variety.

“The unvaccinated,” sneered President Biden barely two months ago,“overcrowd our hospitals, are overrunning the emergency rooms and intensive care units, leaving no room for someone with a heart attack, or [pancreatitis], or cancer.” (Pluck the word “unvaccinated” out of that incendiary lie and insert “Jews” or “immigrants” or “black people,” and imagine how that would have played out at a White House press conference. Alas, no one tried the experiment.) 

And as for people who don’t like being forcibly muzzled, the President had a simple message: “Show some respect!”

Maybe Uncle Joe has forgotten this – along with so many other things – but I can remember when candidate Biden displayed his respect for Americans by promising them that federal vaccine mandates would never happen on his watch. Funny how that sort of “respect” didn’t survive the election. 

Now that he’s President, Biden has no problem claiming quasi-dictatorial powers to force federal contractors and workers at any company with at least 100 employees to submit to injections of untested drugs. 

But liars will be liars, I guess: the same President who assured the public last February that everything would be hunky-dory by Christmas, with “significantly fewer people having to be socially distanced, having to wear a mask,” now boasts of imposing still more restrictions on Americans’ right to breathe.

“One who trades his horse for a promise ends up with tired feet,” Nikita Khrushchev liked to say. By now, every American ought to be walking on crutches.

But one scours the popular press in vain for some trace of indignation at this cavalcade of lies. On the contrary, the COVID propagandists are praising Biden for his “toughness.”

Maybe it’s my age (I’m approaching 64), but in these days of political repression and intellectual cowardice, when health “experts” advocate medical Russian roulette and “liberals” endorse totalitarianism, I feel the need to mention aloud some of the subtler changes that have undermined my own life since war was declared on humanity in early 2020.

Mind you, I don’t claim that these are the worst consequences of the police-state methods we’ve been facing. I don’t even mean that they’re the ones I think about most. Next to the 34 million people worldwidewho have been pushed to the edge of starvation by lockdown policies, they seem positively trivial. 

But to me they are constant reminders of the tide of madness rising around me, everyday measures of the slow derangement of what we used to call “normal life” – and now can only remember and mourn.

PHYSICAL OBSTRUCTIONS BETWEEN PEOPLE

March and April 2020 witnessed a remarkable flurry of activity throughout my area as banks, drug stores, supermarkets, neighborhood groceries and a host of other retail outfits, large and small, installed barriers to impose some physical distance between customers and cashiers. 

Many of those barriers were plastic. A few were plexiglass. But they were all supposed to be temporary; they were there because of what we were told was a medical emergency, not as a permanent means of establishing more separation – and more fear – between people going about their daily lives.

That was a year and a half ago. New Jersey’s unconstitutional “lockdown” ended last summer. Mask “mandates” (also unconstitutional) ended before the beginning of 2021. All the other scare measures promulgated in early 2020 – plastic gloves in stores, constant hand sanitizing, mutual back-turning in elevators – are behind us, at least for the moment.

But those barriers? Every single one of them is still in place. It took mere days to erect them, but now I’m not sure whether I’ll ever see them taken down. What are they for? Clearly they serve no medical purpose. 

But as constant reminders of the danger each human being supposedly represents to every other – and as obstacles to any practical sense of solidarity between customers and workers – they’re hard to beat. So there they remain, daily symbols of a cynical war against human community, another successful trick of the freedom-haters.

SHORTAGES

At first I thought this might be a product of my own impatience – but no, general shortages really have been commonplace for the last year and a half. Consider the case of cleaning fluids. 

We all remember how the store shelves emptied when the first government-inspired panic had people running to buy antiseptic cleansers for their kitchen floors and counters back in March 2020. But manufacturers have had plenty of time since then to increase production. Yet, in defiance of the ordinary dynamics of supply and demand, the public’s appetite for cleansers still hasn’t generated an abundant supply.

And it’s not just cleaning liquids that are comparatively scarce. Many types of chicken (I’m told) have been difficult to obtain for months at a time. So are paper towels. Mung beans, formerly almost a staple of mine, now can’t be found even in health food stores. 

According to press reports, there is a national shortage of cars – for sale and for rent – and of microchips and test kits, among other things. An article in Atlantic, one of the most committed purveyors of COVID propaganda, has even dubbed the situation “the Everything Shortage.”

Unsurprisingly, popular media have attributed all this to the “pandemic” – an explanation so patently absurd that the propagandists have recently begun to recast the question, claiming that what we’re experiencing is actually something called a “supply chain crisis.”

Even if someone had clearly defined that term (and no one has), and even if national distribution systems could actually be brought to a halt by one moderately serious respiratory virus (and they can’t), anyone tempted to believe the new tale would do well to ponder another national “shortage” that has been touted by large retail corporations for nearly a year now, and which seems to be spreading.

I’m referring to claims about a “national coin shortage” I’ve seen for more than six months at several chain stores in Passaic, where placards instruct customers to make their purchases with credit or debit cards instead of cash. According to press reports, the same warnings are showing up in businesses all over the U.S., so there’s nothing eccentric about my own town in this respect.

But what is it all about? Could the United States really be suffering from a “coin shortage”? Has the national mint broken down? Have we run out of nickel or copper? Are all the mint workers on strike?

Well – no, no, and no. In fact, the simple truth is that there isn’t a “coin shortage” at all; instead, according to the usual media suspects, the real trouble is that “the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the U.S. coin supply chain.” 

Ah – there’s that convenient “supply chain” again! 

But what does it mean this time? Well, if you believe the pundits, it seems that lots of people have been keeping much of their change at home – which is probably true, but also irrelevant, since that practice surely started long before 2020. Leaping over the objection, however, the pundits assure us that this is the reason that your local supermarket won’t take your cash nowadays.

Got that? Too many people are keeping change in their houses; the ostensible solution is to prevent them from using cash altogether at large stores, a practice that can only further increase the number of loose coins sitting “idle” at home. In other words: we “solve” the problem by creating more of it.

I hate to sound paranoid, but given the obvious absurdity of the argument, doesn’t it seem a lot more likely that claims about a “coin shortage” represent an early push toward the elimination of cash? And that the real goal of such measures is to funnel our economic life into digital transactions that – through the broad medium of credit or debit cards – can easily be monitored and, in the not very distant future, controlled by governments who have already proved their contempt for democracy at every step of the corona coup? 

I may not be able to prove that this is the real reason for the “national coin shortage” hoopla – but I can certainly see that the stated reason is false. And plenty of credible observers already believe that discouraging cash is a political strategy, not a practical “remedy.”

SNOOPING AND SNITCHING

Informing on one’s neighbor to the thought police is already pretty much the norm on commercial airliners, where passengers are encouraged to report anyone who dares to attempt normal breathing, even while asleep. (“Look! There’s a secret anti-masker dozing in the seat across the aisle!”)

But the snoop-and-snitch craze seems to be spreading. Now, whole school systems are using commercial software to spy on as many as 23 million U.S. children, monitoring their every keystroke and tracking their internet contacts. 

According to a recent press report, while some parents object to this Big Brother-ism, others seem to feel that there’s too little surveillance of their kids, not too much. As for school administrators – many of them see nothing wrong with local bureaucrats doubling as thought police because “I’ve always felt that they [the kids] are already being tracked,” as one school principal phlegmatically put it.

Meanwhile, a recent and typical news story described, without comment, how students and/or parents reported a teacher to the authorities for the crime of being “unvaccinated” – and of having occasionally removed her muzzle while reading aloud to the class.

Sad to say, there was nothing unusual about that

Hollywood snitches have busied themselves in recent months getting actors fired for expressing the wrong thoughts about such things as mandatory muzzling or manipulated elections. And what’s good for celebrities ought to be good for the rest of us, right?

The trend toward the destruction of privacy – which is the death knell for any democratic system of government – is all the more dangerous because it was gaining ground even before coronavirus hysteria created the perfect culture for its expansion.

“Think of our counterinsurgency wars abroad as so many living laboratories for the undermining of a democratic society at home,” wrote Alfred McCoy, the leading U.S. historian of surveillance and its political consequences, as far back as 2009. 

McCoy presciently warned that technology used to repress dissent in, say, Iraq: 

has proven remarkably effective in building a technological template that could be just a few tweaks away from creating a domestic surveillance state – with omnipresent cameras, deep data-mining, nano-second biometric identification, and drone aircraft patrolling ‘the homeland.’”

I think of those words every time I’m urged to install proof-of-“vaccination” software on my cell phone. Am I really supposed to believe that such a potentially powerful surveillance tool won’t be put to more intrusive uses?

It’s worth remembering that President George W. Bush tried to organize ordinary citizens into a massive, informal spy network as part of the “war on terror” nearly 20 years ago, while the federal government was compiling “electronic dossiers” on millions of Americans – a system that only got bigger under Barack Obama. 

With Joe Biden, Obama’s Vice President, at the helm now, there can’t be much question about where we’re heading. Anyone who still believes in privacy is going to have to fight for it.

LYING, LYING EVERYWHERE

I admit there’s nothing new about dishonesty in popular news media. But Marion Renault, writing in The New Republic,  may have reached a new low when she recently portrayed the entire state of Alabama as a convocation of lost souls because fewer than 40% of its inhabitants have submitted to COVID19 “vaccines.” 

Ms. Renault, who made her descent into that conservative Hades last August, was seeking from the damned an answer to a question that literally brought her to tears: how can we go on feeling compassion for people who don’t want untested, potentially lethal chemicals in their bodies?

Unbiased readers might notice that the word “compassion” drops rather oddly from a woman who repeatedly hurls fact-free anathemas at the “unvaccinated,” of which this one is typical: 

By delaying or refusing to get vaccinated against Covid-19, a majority of Alabamians have offered up their bodies to host the virus, spread its disease, and incubate its next, potentially more dangerous variant.”

(Whew! I suppose we should be grateful she hasn’t recommended burning at the stake for such dangerous heretics.)

But what is most striking about her hate piece – the work of an avowed unbeliever – is the fire and brimstone of its sermonizing, which repeatedly reaches its most fervently pious pitch as its logic passeth all understanding:

On its own, Covid-19 vaccination is a shield against individuals’ risk of being hospitalized or dying should they make contact with the virus. But millions of individual doses can coalesce into a congregation of immunity that could push SARS-CoV-2 to the margins. “We are protected not so much by our own skin, but by what is beyond it,” writes the essayist Eula Biss. Immunity, she adds, “is a common trust as much as it is a private account.” Vaccination’s most powerful protection is amassed, not allocated. It is an ideal. And it is achieved only when enough individuals decide it’s worth contributing to. “We give up a little freedom to all be safer,” Craig Klugman, a professor of bioethics at DePaul University, told me. The very roots of the word “immunity” reflect this hopeful collectivism: In Latin, munis means a burden, duty, or obligation.

That final sentence, with its abortive Latin exegesis, is an especially blatant howler: it’s true that munis means a “burden” or “duty,” but im-munity means freedom from such a burden, so that the word actually expresses the exact opposite of the “hopeful collectivism” Ms. Renault claims to find in it.

But getting things upside down isn’t the worst of her sins. In keeping with the most sinister tendencies of crisis propaganda, she manipulates language to give an emotional boost to a piece of dangerously irrational incitement. Look again at the sanctimonious rhetoric she deploys to gloss over the fact that the drugs in question don’t hamper transmission of the virus:

“[M]illions of individual doses can coalesce into a congregation of immunity that could push SARS-CoV-2 to the margins…Vaccination’s most powerful protection…is an ideal.”

“Congregation of immunity”? “Push to the margins”? An “ideal”? If Ms. Renault could claim that COVID19 vaccines protect the public by stopping the spread of a particular pathogen, she would say so – in plain words. But she knows the drugs do no such thing. 

So, instead, we get tendentious pieties about “congregations” (cue the religious music) being energized to force a deadly adversary over the sideline (go, saints, go!), a religious rhetoric that blurs medical realities in the frisson of forging a new Church Militant. (At another point, Ms. Renault actually goes so far as to describe “herd immunity” – which she wrongly assumes can only result from “vaccination” – as “sanctity.”)

Ms. Renault’s crusading metaphor paves the way for the paragraph’s ultimate lie: “We give up a little freedom to all be safer” – a sentiment that can only shed its totalitarian essence in the context of holy war, where individual sacrifices are rewarded with collective salvation. 

Nor does Ms. Renault shrink from still darker ramifications of her holy war analogy. “It’s time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks,” she approvingly quotes from Alabama Governor Kay Ivey. (Ms. Renault calls such bigotry “righteous anger.”) She even finds a“bioethicist at New York University” who insists that “vaccine refusal should be punishable by law.”

First the non-guinea pigs are aliens (not “regular folks”); then they’re literally criminals. Anyone familiar with the logic of holy war can easily imagine the next step. Ms. Renault’s article poses as empirical journalism, but it is really a specimen of jihadist incitement in which the infidels to be eradicated are not Christians or Jews or atheists, but Americans who still value the Bill of Rights.

I’ve singled out this piece not only for its soggy prose – in this respect, it’s no worse than dozens of other COVID diatribes – but to underline the fact that the propagandists’ holy war against anyone who resists coronavirus hysteria is so far advanced that its manifestations seldom even attract notice, let alone public comment. 

If Ms. Renault had called down similar anathemas on Muslim immigrants, the entire liberal media would be in a frenzy of righteous indignation. But she can (and does) excoriate people whose actions are protected by the Nuremberg Code as heretics and public enemies – infidels, in a word, whose right even to be pitied (and, by implication, to live) may freely be called into question.

And such is our overexposure to this sort of scurrility that no one even seems to notice it.

TOTALITARIANISM GOING MAINSTREAM

There have always been people who pine for dictatorship, but before the corona coup such people pullulated mostly at the margins of civilized society. Now they are ubiquitous, expounding their hatred for freedom from liberal media platforms all over the country. At first they attacked people who didn’t cover their faces when illegally ordered to do so. 

It didn’t matter that no scientific evidence supported their position, just as it doesn’t matter now that post facto research shows that all the mandatory muzzling didn’t save any lives. The unobstructed human face was a symbol of liberty – so it had to be purged.

The same totalitarian rage soon focused on doctors who tried to care for their COVID19 patients. To take a single example: Dr. Peter McCullough, a physician with impeccable credentials and an impressive list of academic publications, has testified repeatedly about the excellent results of treatments that, he believes, could have prevented 85 percent of COVID19 deaths worldwide.

He was expunged from social media for his trouble. 

But on a single day, I read three separate articles lionizing a Michigan doctor who boasted of refusing to give his critically ill COVID patients the treatments they begged him for, instead blaming them for not having submitted to the “vaccines.” 

Since when is a doctor who lets his patients die and blames them for their own illness a hero – while another doctor, who is actually saving lives, is rewarded with enforced oblivion? This would have been unthinkable before the corona coup infected the public consciousness. Now it’s hardly worth mentioning.

The totalitarians’ most recent targets are “the unvaccinated.” Along with the exploded myth of “asymptomatic transmission,” the fact-freemantra that COVID19 vaccines are “safe and effective,” and that only moral monsters would dream of refusing them, is perhaps the most palpable single fraud of the whole corona coup.

For one thing, the two professional groups with the most experience of COVID19 – health care professionals and nursing home employees – have consistently been among the most reluctant to be injected with these experimental drugs. For another, the evidence for “vaccination” simply doesn’t add up. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have refused to monitor COVID19 infections in “fully vaccinated” people since May 1 – thus avoiding the exposure of unwelcome facts about the drugs and their effects – but the evidence we have doesn’t demonstrate any significant advantage for the “vaccinated.”

And why would we expect it to, given the figures touted by the propagandists themselves? They once told us that about 345,000 Americans died from COVID19 in all of 2020 – when the “vaccines” were not available to the public. But now they insist that in the first ten months of 2021, while nearly 60% of the U.S. population submitted to the experimental drug regime, a significantly larger number (393,000) succumbed to the same illness.

Yes, the propagandists’ numbers are unreliable to begin with (I’ve stressed that myself in prior articles) – but why can’t they even keep their story straight? They can’t simultaneously hype the Delta-variant-is-killing-us-all fear porn and insist that COVID19 “vaccination” means the end of the outbreak.

Besides, if the totalitarians actually cared about public health, they would be paying at least intermittent attention to the real world that people like me actually inhabit. In fact, they’re too busy poisoning that world to worry about the consequences. 

The CDC already admits that “over 81,000 drug overdose deaths occurred in the U.S. in the 12-month period ending in May 2020” – the “highest number ever recorded by the CDC.” 

And while the U.S. is notoriously laggard in reporting suicide figures, there are already grim adumbrations from other countries about what we can expect. Japan recorded more suicides in a single month – October 2020 – than the official count of COVID19 deaths for the entire calendar year.

For children in Italy, Spain and China, lockdowns have triggered serious increases in the rates of depression and anxiety.

Remember: none of this has been caused by a respiratory virus. It has all been the work of the totalitarians who, while robbing us of a decent human life, are using “vaccines” as an excuse to dehumanize all those who still believe in freedom – and to complete the regimentation and enslavement of all the rest.

Alfred McCoy’s warning about the coming surveillance state, issued more than a decade ago, rings truer now than ever, particularly his suggestion that by 2020, “our America may be unrecognizable – or rather recognizable only as the stuff of dystopian science fiction”:

In a future America, enhanced retinal recognition could be married to omnipresent security cameras as a part of the increasingly routine monitoring of public space…. If that day comes, our cities will be Argus-eyed with countless thousands of digital cameras scanning the faces of passengers at airports, pedestrians on city streets, drivers on highways, ATM customers, mall shoppers, and visitors to any federal facility. One day, hyper-speed software will be able to match those millions upon millions of facial or retinal scans to photos of suspect subversives inside a biometric database…sending anti-subversion SWAT teams scrambling for an arrest or an armed assault.

McCoy wrote all that without even knowing that the corona coup would accelerate the process he feared. Today, a year and a half into the coup, I am living in the first phase of that “future America” – and the experience is bleak.

And it’s personal. I began this essay by remarking on the loss of interest in the Halloween holiday. That’s a small detail in itself. But multiplied by the loss of dozens of holidays and celebrations, by the repeated splintering of family and friends, by the deprivation of embraces or kisses or even friendly handshakes, by the routine covering of our faces, by every instance of fear where there should be comfort, of cruelty where there should be sympathy – multiplied, finally, by the dozens of small insults our spirits must absorb every single day we live in this totalitarian hysteria, even a detail like Halloween trick-or-treating can feel like the difference between sanity and madness.

And if you think the madmen behind this coup intend to spare our children, you’ve got the picture exactly backwards. Children are their primary targets.

As I write this, New York City’s mayor is giving out $100 bribes to any parent willing to have a 5-to-11-year-old son or daughter injected with chemicals whose safety the government specifically refuses to ensure.

Meanwhile, the thousands of babies believed to have been born with congenital syphilis in the US in 2021, and the even larger number expected for 2022 – babies whose suffering and death are entirely preventable – can expect little or no help: the government refuses to appropriate more than a small fraction of the hundreds of millions of dollars it is pouring into COVID19 “vaccine” propaganda for medical outreach programs that could save real children from a genuinely deadly disease.

But nothing can stand in the way of the “vaccines” – not even death. Due to staffing shortages “caused by the city’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate,” 26 fire stations in New York City alone were shut down on October 30.

The next day, a fire in Brooklyn killed a 7-year-old boy. No one in liberal media seemed to mind.

That same day – Halloween – I was invited by my apartment building’s management to participate in “an in-building trick-or-treat event” for children whose parents were too afraid to take them into the street. The last line of the flyer advertising the “event” cautioned, “Masks must be worn when greeting the children and handing out candy.”

Poor kids, I thought.

First, they terrify your parents into keeping you indoors on a night you should be enjoying yourselves outside. Then they see to it that wherever you’re allowed to go, you’ll be met by masks – not playful Halloween masks, but terrifyingly real symbols of the mortal danger the propagandists want you to see in every human being from now on, as you learn to be the frightened slaves of a police state that uses you as pawns in its quest for social atomization and absolute control.

I really wanted to give those victimized children whatever taste of fun it was still in my power to give. But I couldn’t, wouldn’t do that at the price of being an accomplice in their enslavement. Maybe I couldn’t stop the coup. But I could refuse to collaborate.

So I spent Halloween alone in my apartment, mourning for a world in which simple acts of humanity are criminal, and where nothing is safe from the rising tide of oppression that only turns more poisonous as we become desensitized to it.

Source: Off-Guardian


Now is the time to look much more closely at The Great Reset, a fake Utopia being sold to us by charlatans | RT.com

By Brandon Heard

As we exit the pandemic, expect to hear much more about The Great Reset and building back better. Far from resulting in a low-carbon dream life, though, it’s a cartoonish fantasy that will hand the global elite even more power.

‘The Great Reset’ is a term that has been bandied about quite readily by most Western neo-liberal politicians. So often, in fact, and without proper explanation, that it strikes the prudent observer as a kind of paid advertisement.

But what is it exactly? The term rose to prominence at the 50th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in June 2020. It was initially launched by the Prince of Wales, before being absorbed into the philosophy of the sartorially dystopian sci-fi villain Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the WEF.

The Great Reset refers to a plan to rebuild the world’s infrastructure ‘in a sustainable way’ following the economic ravages of the Covid-19 pandemic and to establish a global treaty to prevent future pandemics, or as it is described more formally, to “build a more robust international health architecture that will protect future generations.” If you ever hear people talking about “building back better,” they are referring to The Great Reset.

Probably the most disturbing part of The Great Reset is how much it strongly resembles business-as-usual, only with EXTRA globalism. Most of the plan’s outlines include a further weakening of national boundaries and individual national autonomy, in favour of a more ‘universal governance.’ As usual, it is the rapidly vanishing Western middle class which must shoulder this burden, as their freedoms are further curtailed to meet the quotas of corporate-media-fuelled activism.

Regardless, many world leaders, no doubt charmed into acquiescence by Schwab’s commandingly sinister Blofeld-esque wardrobe, agreed to the Great Reset, including Boris Johnson, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, Mark Rutte, Pedro Sánchez, Erna Solberg and Volodymyr Zelensky. According to John Kerry, Joe Biden’s administration is on board, too.

But the general agreement of the Western leaders is absolutely typical of any agenda which is espoused by NATO, the UN, or the WEF. If an emotionally charged, politically vague and ultimately ineffectual edict or bill is proposed by one of these entities – each resembling a shabby, globe-trotting team of insurance salesmen – our effete politicians line up to show the most fervent compliance.

As a rule, it seems their solutions to specific environmental or scientific problems mysteriously become entwined with LGBTQ+ rights, workplace equity, open borders initiatives and other unrelated social justice causes. It’s as though any goals they have are somehow unilaterally from the same source, or entail the same solution, regardless of causality or consequence. Therefore, a united response to a global pandemic mysteriously also equals trans rights activism.

In their own words“No single government or multilateral agency can address this (pandemic) threat alone. Together, we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly co-ordinated fashion.” 

There are many other sweeping sentiments expressed by Schwab and his acolytes which can seem either trite or threatening. Consider “the gulf between what markets value and what people value will close” and “we want more attention paid to scientific experts. No one can “self-isolate” from climate change so we all need to “act in advance and in solidarity.” There is much talk of the pursuit of “fairer and equitable outcomes.” 

International treaties always tend to be about concentrating power. It’s one of those rules of life, for realists, as there is no escaping power dynamics in human affairs. Real problems don’t often have feel-good solutions. Often, they require ‘solutions that sound mean’, that don’t sound good on a corporate goals bulletin. Initiatives like The Great Reset all entail the gradual loss of the autonomy of individual nations, as their decision-making power is transferred to an international, disembodied rule-maker.

It has been, without a doubt, a globalist fantasy for a long time, but the key question is: do they realise what they are doing or not?

As far as their amazing coordinated pandemic response goes, this appears to be nothing more than forced world-wide vaccinations for EVERYBODY. According to Klaus Schwab himself: “As long as not everybody is vaccinated, nobody will be safe.” To which the attendant neo-liberal world leaders nodded in re-affirming unison, repeating in unison their mantra: “Global public good.”

Schwab, despite appearing like an immortal brothel-keeper at Kublai Khan’s Xanadu, is really cut from the same cloth as your typical EU technocrat. His ideas are not creative, they are quite staid and pedestrian, and research of his career shows they have been unchanged since the 1970s. He has consistently been preaching the very same thing, like a broken record.

Schwab believes we can achieve environmental solutions without altering capitalism in the slightest, by creating treaties of “mutual accountability and shared responsibility, transparency and co-operation within the international system.” His idea involves ‘ethical capitalism’ – where the excesses of capitalism will somehow be held at bay by ‘ethical stakeholders,’ to whom the corporations will be held accountable, while (conveniently) the elites and systems already in place will continue as they are. This is the master plan of the World Economic Forum, largely unchanged for 40 years.

The result? A green technocracy, one assumes, with a WEF-mandated ‘ethical stakeholder’ apparatus, a worldwide spiderweb organisation ruling by the threatened fears of pandemic and carbon doom. No section of society would be exempt from edicts of ‘the new treaty.’

The Great Reset website appears to be little more than an advertisement for modern pod-living. It seems to style itself as a low-carbon dream-life (without loss of modern convenience) to effeminate hipsters. One can see slovenly-looking neo-liberal youths, frequent references to LGBTQ+ values, and an overall urgency about carbon footprints.

There is a hint of Adbusters about the website, creator of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Despite the fact that the WEF and Davos and all associated entities are entirely elite institutions, the website styles itself on grassroots urban activism. There is much cringeworthy symbology in its white papers, such as a green and rainbow flag-combination with fey slogans like ‘we salute you, zoom queen!’

Schwab refers to the aim of The Great Reset as “the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” with the first being powered by water and steam, the second introducing mass production, and the third electronic automation. The fourth will blur the lines between “physical, digital and biological spheres.” 

In this grab-bag of magical advances, he lists, “fields such as artificial intelligence, robotics, the Internet of Things, autonomous vehicles, 3-D printing, nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science, energy storage and quantum computing.” 

This sounds like cartoonish optimism, as many of these technologies are anything but clean and don’t seem to de facto relate to side-stepping out of industrialism or anything else. On top of that, fewer than 9% of companies use the machine learning, robotics, touch screens and other advanced technologies listed as somehow ‘changing everything.’ Stakeholder capitalism, as a concept, does not explain itself as foolproof, and will no doubt be freely interpreted by the likes of Silicon Valley or supply chain conglomerates.

The jewel in the crown of Great Reset optimism has to be the belief that the advent of AI will alter everything positively, again without specifics, to somehow create a low-carbon new world.

It appears at best to be all be smoke and mirrors, a childish corporate fantasy manufactured by isolated bean counters. At worst, it is an intentional power-grab by unaccountable international agencies and hidden oligarchs.

Either way, it is a fake utopia at the price of privacy and autonomy, sold to us by used-car salesmen who think they are princes. 

Source: RT.com

The COVID-19 “Vaccine” and the Nuremberg Code. Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide | Global Research

By Michel Chossudovsky

Introduction

“We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second World  War, feel bound to follow our conscience. … Another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied.” (Rabbi Hillel Handler, Hagar Schafrir, Sorin Shapira, Mascha Orel, Morry Krispijn et alsee complete text here)

The mRNA vaccine is “experimental’ and unapproved. Since December 2020, it has resulted in a worldwide upward trend in deaths and injuries.

Numerous scientific studies confirm the nature of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine which is being imposed on all humanity. 

The stated objective is to enforce the Worldwide vaccination of 7.9 billion people in more than 190 countries, to be followed by the imposition of a digitized “vaccine passport”.  

Needless to say this is a multi-billion dollar operation for Big Pharma. In a bitter irony, Pfizer which is playing a dominant role in marketing the vaccine at the level of the entire planet, has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice (for more details see below). 

The national health authorities cannot say: we did not know. Nor can they say that the objective is “to save lives”. This is a killer vaccine. And they know it. 

The latest official figures (September 15, 2021) point to approximately: 

40,666 mRNA vaccine reported and registered deaths in the EU, UK and US (combined) and 6.6 Million reported “adverse events”.


EU/EEA/Switzerland to 11 September 2021 – 24,528 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 2,292,967 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 1 September 2021 – 1,632 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,186,844 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 3 September 2021 – 14,506 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 3,146,691 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 40,666 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 6,626,502 injuries reported as at 15 September 2021.


But only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities. 

Those death and injury figures (EU, UK, US) SOFAR are at least ten times higher than the official reported cases. 

410,000 deaths, 66 million injuries out of a population of  approximately 850 million. 

Moreover, the health authorities are actively involved in obfuscating the deaths and injuries resulting from the mRNA “vaccine”, while inflating the number of Covid-19 related deaths. (“autopsies not required”). 

Digital Tyranny at a Global Level

The vaccine is being applied and imposed Worldwide. The target population is 7.9 billion. Several doses are contemplated. It is the largest vaccination program in World history.

“Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body”.

The WHO “Guidelines” for establishing a Worldwide Digital Informations System for issuing so-called “Digital Certificates for Covid-19” are generously funded by the Rockefeller and Bill and Melinda Gates foundations.

The mRNA vaccine is not a project of a UN intergovernmental body (WHO) on behalf the member states of the UN: This is a private initiative. The billionaire elites which fund and enforce the Vaccine Project Worldwide are Eugenists committed to Depopulation.

Big Pharma: Pfizer Seeks Worldwide Dominance

The global vaccine project entitled COVAX is coordinated Worldwide by the WHO, GAVI, CEPI, the  Gates Foundation in liaison with the World Economic Forum (WEF),  the Wellcome Trust, DARPA and Big Pharma which is increasingly dominated by the Pfizer-GSK partnership established barely four months before the onset of the Covid-19 crisis in early January 2020.

Pfizer –which has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice– is playing a “near monopoly role” in the marketing of the mRNA “vaccine”. Already in the EU, Pfizer is slated to deliver 1.8 billion doses which is equivalent to four times the population of the European Union.

In a historic US Department of Justice decision in September 2009, Pfizer Inc. pleaded guilty to criminal charges. It was “The Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement” in the History of the U.S. Department of Justice.

In addition to compliance and enforcement, the “vaccine poison” imposed at the level of the entire planet is produced by a pharmaceutical company which has been indicted by the DOJ on charges of “fraudulent marketing”. The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

Compliance: No Jab, No Job

“Fraudulent Marketing” in relation to the mRNA vaccine is a gross understatement. The health authorities as well as Big Pharma not to mention the WHO, the Rockefellers and the Gates foundation are fully aware that the vaccine has resulted in countless deaths and injuries, including blood clots, infertility, brain damage, myocarditis, etc.

And yet the governments (with the 24/7 support of the media) are pressuring people to take the jab. “It will save lives”.

The health risks are known and documented, yet at the same time people are not only misinformed, they are forced into accepting the vaccine. Or else…

No career, no income, no future… It’s an issue of compliance. And no access to education and health services if you are not vaccinated.

If they refuse the jab, they loose their job.

Students are barred from attending schools, colleges and universities, health workers and high school teachers who do not conform are fired, civil society is precipitated into a state of chaos.

Relevance of the Nuremberg Code

Focussing on the experimental nature of the mRNA vaccine and its devastating health impacts, legal analysts have raised the issue of the historic Nuremberg “Nazi Doctors Trial’ (1946-47) in which Nazi doctors were charged for war crimes, specifically in the conduct of medical experiments on both prisoners in the concentration camps and civilians.

The Medical Case, U.S.A. vs. Karl Brandt, et al. (also known as the Doctors’ Trial), was prosecuted in 1946-47 against twenty-three doctors and administrators accused of organizing and participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the form of medical experiments and medical procedures inflicted on prisoners and civilians.

Karl Brandt, the lead defendant, was the senior medical official of the German government during World War II; other defendants included senior doctors and administrators in the armed forces and SS.  See Harvard Documents

Resulting from the verdict on August 19, 1947, the Nuremberg Code was enacted. Reviewed below are the Ten Principles of the Nuremberg Code. Several of these principles –in relation to the mRNA vaccine and the vaccine passport– have been blatantly violated.

The first principle of the “Nuremberg Code.” states that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,” And that is precisely what is being denied in relation to the “vaccine”(see sentences in bold below).

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probably cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Entire populations in a large number of countries are under threat to comply and get vaccinated.

With reference to the Nuremberg Code, they are unable:

to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion” (Nuremberg 1 above).

Amply documented, there is an upward trend in mRNA vaccine deaths and injuries Worldwide and the health authorities are fully aware of the “health risks”, yet they have not informed the public. There is no informed consent. And the media is lying through their teeth:

No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur” (Nuremberg 5 above). 

That “a priori reason” outlined in Nuremberg principle 5, is amply documented: Deaths and disabling injuries are ongoing at the level of the entire planet. They are confirmed by the official statistics of mRNA vaccine mortality and morbidity (EU, US, UK).

Video: The mRNA vaccine was launched in mid to late December 2020. In many countries, there was a significant shift in mortality following the introduction of the mRNA vaccine

Source: HeathData.org

Nazi “Medical Experiments”

Let us recall the categorization of specific crimes pertaining to Nazi “medical experiments” conducted on concentration camp prisoners. These included “the killing of Jews for anatomical research, the killing of tubercular Poles, and the euthanasia of sick and disabled civilians in Germany and occupied territories. …”

Karl Brandt and six other defendants were convicted, sentenced to death, and executed; nine defendants were convicted and sentenced to terms in prison; and seven defendants were acquitted.

The trial documents and evidence are all on file. The defendants were charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. 

Nuremberg Doctors Trial

The Scale and Size of the Worldwide Covid-19 Vaxx Operation

I have not been able to review the relevant documents in detail with a view to establishing the number of victims resulting from the Nazi medical experiments.

While the Nuremberg principles are of utmost relevance to the Covid-19 vaccine project, simplistic comparisons should be avoided. The context, the history and the mechanisms of compliance pertaining to the mRNA “vaccine” are fundamentally different.

The scale and size of the Worldwide Vaxx operation as well as its complex organizational structure (WHO, GAVI, Gates Foundation, Big Pharma) is unprecedented.

Humanity in its entirety is the objective of the Vaxx project. The target population for vaccine experimentation of the Covid-19 vaccine is the entire population of Planet Earth:

7.9 billion people, involving several doses.

Multiply the World’s population by 4 doses (as proposed by Pfizer): the order of magnitude is 30 billion doses Worldwide.

The numbers are in the billions. The likely impacts on mortality and morbidity are beyond description.

Big Money is behind this public-private partnership project.

We are dealing with a Worldwide process of crimes against humanity. Entire populations in a large number of member states of the UN are subject to compliance and enforcement (without the Rule of Law).

If they refuse the vaccine, they are socially marginalized and confined, rejected by their employers, rejected by society: no education, no career, no life. Their lives are destroyed.

If they accept the vaccine, their health and their life are potentially in jeopardy. The evidence of mortality and morbidity resulting from vaccine inoculation both present (official data) and future (e.g. undetected microscopic blood clots) is overwhelming.

And that’s just the beginning.

Extensive crimes against humanity Worldwide are being committed. 

The mRNA “vaccine” modifies the human genome at the level of the entire Planet. It’s Genocide.

It’s  a “Holocaust of Greater Magnitude, Taking Place before our Eyes”. 

***

About the Author

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.

He has undertaken field research in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific and has written extensively on the economies of developing countries with a focus on poverty and social inequality. He has also undertaken research in Health Economics (UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UNFPA, CIDA, WHO, Government of Venezuela, John Hopkins International Journal of Health Services (19791983)

He is the author of twelve books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005),  The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).

He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at crgeditor@yahoo.com

Source: Global Research

Constitution Day 2021: Time to Make America Free Again | Waking Times

“That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn’t even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn’t even an enemy you could put your finger on.”—Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale

By John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead

The Constitution of the United States represents the classic solution to one of humankind’s greatest political problems: that is, how does a small group of states combine into a strong union without the states losing their individual powers and surrendering their control over local affairs?

The fifty-five delegates who convened in Philadelphia during the sweltering summer of 1787 answered this question with a document that called for a federal plan of government, a system of separation of powers with checks and balances, and a procedure for orderly change to meet the needs and exigencies of future generations.

In an ultimate sense, the Constitution confirmed the proposition that original power resided in the people—not, however, in the people as a whole but in their capacity as people of the several states.  To bring forth the requisite union, the people through the states would transfer some of their powers to the new federal government.  All powers not reserved by the people in explicit state constitutional limitations remained in the state governments.

Although the Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787, the fear of the new federal government was so strong that a “bill of rights” was demanded and became an eventuality.

Intended to protect the citizenry’s fundamental rights or “first liberties” against usurpation by the newly created federal government, the Bill of Rights—the first ten amendments of the Constitution—is essentially a list of immunities from interference by the federal government.

Unfortunately, although the Bill of Rights was adopted as a means of protecting the people against government tyranny, in America today, the government does whatever it wants, freedom be damned.

“We the people” have been terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance by a government that cares nothing for our lives or our liberties.

The bogeyman’s names and faces have changed over time (terrorism, the war on drugs, illegal immigration, a viral pandemic, and more to come), but the end result remains the same: in the so-called name of national security, the Constitution has been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts.

A recitation of the Bill of Rights—set against a backdrop of government surveillance, militarized police, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, eminent domain, overcriminalization, armed surveillance drones, whole body scanners, stop and frisk searches, vaccine mandates, travel lockdowns, and the like (all sanctioned by Congress, the White House, and the courts)—would understandably sound more like a eulogy to freedoms lost than an affirmation of rights we truly possess.

What we are left with today is but a shadow of the robust document adopted more than two centuries ago. Sadly, most of the damage has been inflicted upon the Bill of Rights.

Here is what it means to live under the Constitution, post-9/11 and in the midst of a COVID-19 pandemic.

The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom to speak your mind, assemble and protest nonviolently without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. In other words, Americans should not be silenced by the government. To the founders, all of America was a free speech zone.

Despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Increasingly, Americans are being arrested and charged with bogus “contempt of cop” charges such as “disrupting the peace” or “resisting arrest” for daring to film police officers engaged in harassment or abusive practices. Journalists are being prosecuted for reporting on whistleblowers. States are passing legislation to muzzle reporting on cruel and abusive corporate practices. Religious ministries are being fined for attempting to feed and house the homeless. Protesters are being tear-gassed, beaten, arrested and forced into “free speech zones.” And under the guise of “government speech,” the courts have reasoned that the government can discriminate freely against any First Amendment activity that takes place within a so-called government forum.

The Second Amendment was intended to guarantee “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Essentially, this amendment was intended to give the citizenry the means to resist tyrannical government. Yet while gun ownership has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court as an individual citizen right, Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against SWAT team raids and government agents armed to the teeth with military weapons better suited to the battlefield. As such, this amendment has been rendered nearly null and void.

The Third Amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military by prohibiting the military from entering any citizen’s home without “the consent of the owner.” With the police increasingly training like the military, acting like the military, and posing as military forces—complete with heavily armed SWAT teams, military weapons, assault vehicles, etc.—it is clear that we now have what the founders feared most—a standing army on American soil.

The Fourth Amendment prohibits government agents from conducting surveillance on you or touching you or invading you, unless they have some evidence that you’re up to something criminal. In other words, the Fourth Amendment ensures privacy and bodily integrity. Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment has suffered the greatest damage in recent years and has been all but eviscerated by an unwarranted expansion of police powers that include strip searches and even anal and vaginal searches of citizens, surveillance (corporate and otherwise) and intrusions justified in the name of fighting terrorism, as well as the outsourcing of otherwise illegal activities to private contractors.

The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment work in tandem. These amendments supposedly ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without the right to an attorney and a fair trial before a civilian judge. However, in the new suspect society in which we live, where surveillance is the norm, these fundamental principles have been upended. Certainly, if the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights.

The Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial. Yet when the populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution—civic education has virtually disappeared from most school curriculums—that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears. However, as a growing number of citizens are coming to realize, the power of the jury to nullify the government’s actions—and thereby help balance the scales of justice—is not to be underestimated. Jury nullification reminds the government that “we the people” retain the power to ultimately determine what laws are just.

The Eighth Amendment is similar to the Sixth in that it is supposed to protect the rights of the accused and forbid the use of cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Supreme Court’s determination that what constitutes “cruel and unusual” should be dependent on the “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” leaves us with little protection in the face of a society lacking in morals altogether.

The Ninth Amendment provides that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution are nonetheless retained by the people. Popular sovereignty—the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers—is clearly evident in this amendment. However, it has since been turned on its head by a centralized federal government that sees itself as supreme and which continues to pass more and more laws that restrict our freedoms under the pretext that it has an “important government interest” in doing so.

As for the Tenth Amendment’s reminder that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution, that assurance of a system of government in which power is divided among local, state and national entities has long since been rendered moot by the centralized Washington, DC, power elite—the president, Congress and the courts.

If there is any sense to be made from this recitation of freedoms lost, it is simply this: our individual freedoms have been eviscerated so that the government’s powers could be expanded.

Yet those who gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights believed that the government exists at the behest of its citizens. It is there to protect, defend and even enhance our freedoms, not violate them.

It was no idle happenstance that the Constitution opens with these three powerful words: “We the people.” As the Preamble proclaims:

We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.

In other words, we have the power to make and break the government. We are the masters and they are the servants. We the American people—the citizenry—are the arbiters and ultimate guardians of America’s welfare, defense, liberty, laws and prosperity.

Still, it’s hard to be a good citizen if you don’t know anything about your rights or how the government is supposed to operate.

As the National Review rightly asks, “How can Americans possibly make intelligent and informed political choices if they don’t understand the fundamental structure of their government? American citizens have the right to self-government, but it seems that we increasingly lack the capacity for it.”

Americans are constitutionally illiterate.

Most citizens have little, if any, knowledge about their basic rights. And our educational system does a poor job of teaching the basic freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. For instance, a survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center found that a little more than one-third of respondents (36 percent) could name all three branches of the U.S. government, while another one-third (35 percent) could not name a single one.

A survey by the McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum found that only one out of a thousand adults could identify the five rights protected by the First Amendment. On the other hand, more than half (52%) of the respondents could name at least two of the characters in the animated Simpsons television family, and 20% could name all five. And although half could name none of the freedoms in the First Amendment, a majority (54%) could name at least one of the three judges on the TV program American Idol, 41% could name two and one-fourth could name all three.

It gets worse.

Many who responded to the survey had a strange conception of what was in the First Amendment. For example, 21% said the “right to own a pet” was listed someplace between “Congress shall make no law” and “redress of grievances.” Some 17% said that the First Amendment contained the “right to drive a car,” and 38% believed that “taking the Fifth” was part of the First Amendment.

Teachers and school administrators do not fare much better. A study conducted by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis found that one educator in five was unable to name any of the freedoms in the First Amendment.

In fact, while some educators want students to learn about freedom, they do not necessarily want them to exercise their freedoms in school. As the researchers conclude, “Most educators think that students already have enough freedom, and that restrictions on freedom in the school are necessary. Many support filtering the Internet, censoring T-shirts, disallowing student distribution of political or religious material, and conducting prior review of school newspapers.”

Government leaders and politicians are also ill-informed. Although they take an oath to uphold, support and defend the Constitution against “enemies foreign and domestic,” their lack of education about our fundamental rights often causes them to be enemies of the Bill of Rights.

So what’s the solution?

Thomas Jefferson recognized that a citizenry educated on “their rights, interests, and duties”  is the only real assurance that freedom will survive.

As Jefferson wrote in 1820: “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of our society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

From the President on down, anyone taking public office should have a working knowledge of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and should be held accountable for upholding their precepts. One way to ensure this would be to require government leaders to take a course on the Constitution and pass a thorough examination thereof before being allowed to take office.

Some critics are advocating that students pass the United States citizenship exam in order to graduate from high school. Others recommend that it must be a prerequisite for attending college. I’d go so far as to argue that students should have to pass the citizenship exam before graduating from grade school.

Here’s an idea to get educated and take a stand for freedom: anyone who signs up to become a member of The Rutherford Institute gets a wallet-sized Bill of Rights card and a Know Your Rights card. Use this card to teach your children the freedoms found in the Bill of Rights.

If this constitutional illiteracy is not remedied and soon, freedom in America will be doomed.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we have managed to keep the wolf at bay so far. Barely.

Our national priorities need to be re-prioritized. For instance, some argue that we need to make America great again. I, for one, would prefer to make America free again.

About the Author: Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president The Rutherford Institute. His books Battlefield America: The War on the American People and A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State are available at www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

Source: Waking Times

Bayer to Pull Glyphosate Products, Including Roundup, From U.S. Home and Garden Market | AgWeb, EcoWatch & Waking Times

By Olivia Rosane

Bayer will no longer sell glyphosate-containing products to U.S. home gardeners, the company announced on Thursday.

The move comes as the company currently faces around 30,000 legal claims from customers who believe use of these products — including the flagship Roundup — caused them to develop cancer, as AgWeb reported.

“Bayer’s decision to end U.S. residential sale of Roundup is a historic victory for public health and the environment,” Center for Food Safety executive director Andrew Kimbrell said in a statement. “As agricultural, large-scale use of this toxic pesticide continues, our farmworkers remain at risk. It’s time for EPA to act and ban glyphosate for all uses.”

Glyphosate is a controversial ingredient because it has been linked to the development of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, as Cure noted. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer declared that it was “probably carcinogenic to humans,” in 2015. While the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under former President Donald Trump ruled that the chemical did not pose any risk to human health, the Biden Administration later admitted that the review was flawed and needed to be redone, as Common Dreams reported. Still, it refused to take it off the market in the meantime. 

Bayer’s decision comes in response to the many lawsuits related to glyphosate that it inherited when it acquired Monsanto in 2018. Juries sided with the plaintiffs in three highly-watched trials before Bayer settled around 95,000 cases in 2020 to the tune of $10 billion. That settlement, which was one of the largest in U.S. history, allowed Bayer to continue to sell Roundup without any warnings. However, the company still faces further litigation, and said it decided to pull the product from residential use in order to prevent more. More than 90 percent of recent claims come from the residential home and garden market, AgWeb reported.

“This move is being made exclusively to manage litigation risk and not because of any safety concerns,” the company said when it announced its decision. 

The products will be replaced with different active ingredients beginning in 2023, following reviews by the EPA and state regulatory bodies. January 2023 was the earliest the change could reasonably be implemented, Bayer Crop Science Division president Liam Condon told AgWeb.

“This is from a regulatory and logistical point of view (of what’s) possible,” Condon said during a conference call with investors, as AgWeb reported.

Source: AgWeb, Ecowatch & Waking Times

Aldous Huxley, Author of “Brave New World” interviewed by Mike Wallace addresses the “Enemies of Freedom” (1958) | YouTube, THRIVEON & Brain Pickings

Aldous Huxley (July 16, 1894–November 22, 1963) — author of the classic Brave New World, little-known children’s book wordsmith, staple of Carl Sagan’s reading list — would have been 118 today. To celebrate his mind and his legacy, here is a rare 1958 conversation with Mike Wallace — the same masterful interviewer who also offered rare glimpses into the minds of Salvador Dalí and Ayn Rand — in which Huxley predicts the “fictional world of horror” depicted in Brave New World is just around the corner for humanity. He explains how overpopulation is among the greatest threats to our freedom, admonishes against the effects of advertising on children, and, more than half a century before Occupy Wall Street, outlines how global economic destabilization will incite widespread social unrest.

Source: BrainPickings & THRIVEON.com

Who Is A “Terrorist” In Biden’s America? | Greanville Post

Far from being a war against “white supremacy,” the Biden administration’s new “domestic terror” strategy clearly targets primarily those who oppose US government overreach and those who oppose capitalism and/or globalization.

In the latest sign that the US government’s War on Domestic Terror is growing in scope and scale, the White House on Tuesday revealed the nation’s first ever government-wide strategy for confronting domestic terrorism. While cloaked in language about stemming racially motivated violence, the strategy places those deemed “anti-government” or “anti-authority” on a par with racist extremists and charts out policies that could easily be abused to silence or even criminalize online criticism of the government.

Even more disturbing is the call to essentially fuse intelligence agencies, law enforcement, Silicon Valley, and “community” and “faith-based” organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, as well as unspecified foreign governments, as partners in this “war,” which the strategy makes clear will rely heavily on a pre-crime orientation focused largely on what is said on social media and encrypted platforms. Though the strategy claims that the government will “shield free speech and civil liberties” in implementing this policy, its contents reveal that it is poised to gut both.

Indeed, while framed publicly as chiefly targeting “right-wing white supremacists,” the strategy itself makes it clear that the government does not plan to focus on the Right but instead will pursue “domestic terrorists” in “an ideologically neutral, threat-driven manner,” as the law “makes no distinction based on political view—left, right or center.” It also states that a key goal of this strategic framework is to ensure “that there is simply no governmental tolerance . . . of violence as an acceptable mode of seeking political or social change,” regardless of a perpetrator’s political affiliation.

Considering that the main cheerleaders for the War on Domestic Terror exist mainly in establishment left circles, such individuals should rethink their support for this new policy given that the above statements could easily come to encompass Black Lives Matter–related protests, such as those that transpired last summer, depending on which political party is in power.

Once the new infrastructure is in place, it will remain there and will be open to the same abuses perpetrated by both political parties in the US during the lengthy War on Terror following September 11, 2001. The history of this new “domestic terror” policy, including its origins in the Trump administration, makes this clear.

It’s Never Been Easier to Be a “Terrorist”

In introducing the strategy, the Biden administration cites “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists” as a key reason for the new policy and a main justification for the War on Domestic Terror in general. This was most recently demonstrated Tuesday in Attorney General Merrick Garland’s statement announcing this new strategy. However, the document itself puts “anti-government” or “anti-authority” “extremists” in the same category as violent white supremacists in terms of being a threat to the homeland. The strategy’s characterization of such individuals is unsettling.

For instance, those who “violently oppose” “all forms of capitalism” or “corporate globalization” are listed under this less-discussed category of “domestic terrorist.” This highlights how people on the left, many of whom have called for capitalism to be dismantled or replaced in the US in recent years, could easily be targeted in this new “war” that many self-proclaimed leftists are currently supporting. Similarly, “environmentally-motivated extremists,” a category in which groups such as Extinction Rebellion could easily fall, are also included.

In addition, the phrasing indicates that it could easily include as “terrorists” those who oppose the World Economic Forum’s vision for global “stakeholder capitalism,” as that form of “capitalism” involves corporations and their main “stakeholders” creating a new global economic and governance system. The WEF’s stakeholder capitalism thus involves both “capitalism” and “corporate globalization.”

The strategy also includes those who “take steps to violently resist government authority . . . based on perceived overreach.” This, of course, creates a dangerous situation in which the government could, purposely or otherwise, implement a policy that is an obvious overreach and/or blatantly unconstitutional and then label those who resist it “domestic terrorists” and deal with them as such—well before the overreach can be challenged in court.

Another telling addition to this group of potential “terrorists” is “any other individual or group who engages in violence—or incites imminent violence—in opposition to legislative, regulatory or other actions taken by the government.” Thus, if the government implements a policy that a large swath of the population finds abhorrent, such as launching a new, unpopular war abroad, those deemed to be “inciting” resistance to the action online could be considered domestic terrorists.

Such scenarios are not unrealistic, given the loose way in which the government and the media have defined things like “incitement” and even “violence” (e. g., hate speech” is a form of violence) in the recent past. The situation is ripe for manipulation and abuse. To think the federal government (including the Biden administration and subsequent administrations) would not abuse such power reflects an ignorance of US political history, particularly when the main forces behind most terrorist incidents in the nation are actually US government institutions like the FBI (more FBI examples hereherehere, and here).

Furthermore, the original plans for the detention of American dissidents in the event of a national emergency, drawn up during the Reagan era as part of its “continuity of government” contingency, cited popular nonviolent opposition to US intervention in Latin America as a potential “emergency” that could trigger the activation of those plans. Many of those “continuity of government” protocols remain on the books today and can be triggered, depending on the whims of those in power. It is unlikely that this new domestic terror framework will be any different regarding nonviolent protest and demonstrations.

Yet another passage in this section of the strategy states that “domestic terrorists” can, “in some instances, connect and intersect with conspiracy theories and other forms of disinformation and misinformation.” It adds that the proliferation of such “dangerous” information “on Internet-based communications platforms such as social media, file-upload sites and end-to-end encrypted platforms, all of these elements can combine and amplify threats to public safety.”

Thus, the presence of “conspiracy theories” and information deemed by the government to be “misinformation” online is itself framed as threatening public safety, a claim made more than once in this policy document. Given that a major “pillar” of the strategy involves eliminating online material that promotes “domestic terrorist” ideologies, it seems inevitable that such efforts will also “connect and intersect” with the censorship of “conspiracy theories” and narratives that the establishment finds inconvenient or threatening for any reason.

Pillars of Tyranny

The strategy notes in several places that this new domestic-terror policy will involve a variety of public-private partnerships in order to “build a community to address domestic terrorism that extends not only across the Federal Government but also to critical partners.” It adds, “That includes state, local, tribal and territorial governments, as well as foreign allies and partners, civil society, the technology sector, academic, and more.”

The mention of foreign allies and partners is important as it suggests a multinational approach to what is supposedly a US “domestic” issue and is yet another step toward a transnational security-state apparatus. A similar multinational approach was used to devastating effect during the CIA-developed Operation Condor, which was used to target and “disappear” domestic dissidents in South America in the 1970s and 1980s. The foreign allies mentioned in the Biden administration’s strategy are left unspecified, but it seems likely that such allies would include the rest of the Five Eyes alliance (the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand) and Israel, all of which already have well-established information-sharing agreements with the US for signals intelligence.

The new domestic-terror strategy has four main “pillars,” which can be summarized as (1) understanding and sharing domestic terrorism-related information, including with foreign governments and private tech companies; (2) preventing domestic terrorism recruitment and mobilization to violence; (3) disrupting and deterring domestic terrorism activity; and (4) confronting long-term contributors to domestic terrorism.

The first pillar involves the mass accumulation of data through new information-sharing partnerships and the deepening of existing ones. Much of this information sharing will involve increased data mining and analysis of statements made openly on the internet, particularly on social media, something already done by US intelligence contractors such as Palantir. While the gathering of such information has been ongoing for years, this policy allows even more to be shared and legally used to make cases against individuals deemed to have made threats or expressed “dangerous” opinions online.

Included in the first pillar is the need to increase engagement with financial institutions concerning the financing of “domestic terrorists.” US banks, such as Bank of America, have already gone quite far in this regard, leading to accusations that it has begun acting like an intelligence agency. Such claims were made after it was revealed that the BofA had passed to the government the private banking information of over two hundred people that the bank deemed as pointing to involvement in the events of January 6, 2021. It seems likely, given this passage in the strategy, that such behavior by banks will soon become the norm, rather than an outlier, in the United States.

The second pillar is ostensibly focused on preventing the online recruitment of domestic terrorists and online content that leads to the “mobilization of violence.” The strategy notes that this pillar “means reducing both supply and demand of recruitment materials by limiting widespread availability online and bolstering resilience to it by those who nonetheless encounter it.“ The strategy states that such government efforts in the past have a “mixed record,” but it goes on to claim that trampling on civil liberties will be avoided because the government is “consulting extensively” with unspecified “stakeholders” nationwide.

Regarding recruitment, the strategy states that “these activities are increasingly happening on Internet-based communications platforms, including social media, online gaming platforms, file-upload sites and end-to-end encrypted platforms, even as those products and services frequently offer other important benefits.” It adds that “the widespread availability of domestic terrorist recruitment material online is a national security threat whose front lines are overwhelmingly private-sector online platforms.”

The US government plans to provide “information to assist online platforms with their own initiatives to enforce their own terms of service that prohibits the use of their platforms for domestic terrorist activities” as well as to “facilitate more robust efforts outside the government to counter terrorists’ abuse of Internet-based communications platforms.”

Given the wider definition of “domestic terrorist” that now includes those who oppose capitalism and corporate globalization as well as those who resist government overreach, online content discussing these and other “anti-government” and “anti-authority” ideas could soon be treated in the same way as online Al Qaeda or ISIS propaganda. Efforts, however, are unlikely to remain focused on these topics. As Unlimited Hangoutreported last November, both UK intelligence and the US national-security state were developing plans to treat critical reporting on the COVID-19 vaccines as “extremist” propaganda.

Another key part of this pillar is the need to “increase digital literacy” among the American public, while censoring “harmful content” disseminated by “terrorists” as well as by “hostile foreign powers seeking to undermine American democracy.” The latter is a clear reference to the claim that critical reporting of US government policy, particularly its military and intelligence activities abroad, was the product of “Russian disinformation,” a now discredited claim that was used to heavily censor independent media. This new government strategy appears to promise more of this sort of thing.

It also notes that “digital literacy” education for a domestic audience is being developed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Such a policy would have previously violated US law until the Obama administration worked with Congress to repeal the Smith-Mundt Act, thus lifting the ban on the government directing propaganda at domestic audiences.

The third pillar of the strategy seeks to increase the number of federal prosecutors investigating and trying domestic-terror cases. Their numbers are likely to jump as the definition of “domestic terrorist” is expanded. It also seeks to explore whether “legislative reforms could meaningfully and materially increase our ability to protect Americans from acts of domestic terrorism while simultaneously guarding against potential abuse of overreach.” In contrast to past public statements on police reform by those in the Biden administration, the strategy calls to “empower” state and local law enforcement to tackle domestic terrorism, including with increased access to “intelligence” on citizens deemed dangerous or subversive for any number of reasons.

To that effect, the strategy states the following (p. 24):“The Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Department of Homeland Security, with support from the National Counterterrorism Center [part of the intelligence community], are incorporating an increased focus on domestic terrorism into current intelligence products and leveraging current mechanisms of information and intelligence sharing to improve the sharing of domestic terrorism-related content and indicators with non-Federal partners. These agencies are also improving the usability of their existing information-sharing platforms, including through the development of mobile applications designed to provide a broader reach to non-Federal law enforcement partners, while simultaneously refining that support based on partner feedback.”

Such an intelligence tool could easily be, for example, Palantir, which is already used by the intelligence agencies, the DHS, and several US police departments for “predictive policing,” that is, pre-crime actions. Notably, Palantir has long included a “subversive” label for individuals included on government and law enforcement databases, a parallel with the controversial and highly secretive Main Core database of US dissidents.

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas made the “pre-crime” element of the new domestic terror strategy explicit on Tuesday when he said in a statement that DHS would continue “developing key partnerships with local stakeholders through the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3) to identify potential threats and prevent terrorism.” CP3, which replaced DHS’ Office for Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention this past May, officially “supports communities across the United States to prevent individuals from radicalizing to violence and intervene when individuals have already radicalized to violence.”

The fourth pillar of the strategy is by far the most opaque and cryptic, while also the most far-reaching. It aims to address the sources that cause “terrorists” to mobilize “towards violence.” This requires “tackling racism in America,” a lofty goal for an administration headed by the man who controversially eulogized Congress’ most ardent segregationist and who was a key architect of the 1994 crime bill. As well, it provides for “early intervention and appropriate care for those who pose a danger to themselves or others.”

In regard to the latter proposal, the Trump administration, in a bid to “stop mass shootings before they occur,” considered a proposal to create a health DARPA” or “HARPA” that would monitor the online communications of everyday Americans for “neuropsychiatric” warning signs that someone might be “mobilizing towards violence.” While the Trump administration did not create HARPA or adopt this policy, the Biden administration has recently announced plans to do so.

Finally, the strategy indicates that this fourth pillar is part of a “broader priority”: “enhancing faith in government and addressing the extreme polarization, fueled by a crisis of disinformation and misinformation often channeled through social media platforms, which can tear Americans apart and lead some to violence.” In other words, fostering trust in government while simultaneously censoring “polarizing” voices who distrust or criticize the government is a key policy goal behind the Biden administration’s new domestic-terror strategy.

Calling Their Shots?

While this is a new strategy, its origins lie in the Trump administration. In October 2019, Trump’s attorney general William Barr formally announced in a memorandum that a new “national disruption and early engagement program” aimed at detecting those “mobilizing towards violence” before they commit any crime would launch in the coming months. That program, known as DEEP (Disruption and Early Engagement Program), is now active and has involved the Department of Justice, the FBI, and “private sector partners” since its creation.

Barr’s announcement of DEEP followed his unsettling “prediction” in July 2019 that “a major incident may occur at any time that will galvanize public opinion on these issues.” Not long after that speech, a spate of mass shootings occurred, including the El Paso Walmart shooting, which killed twenty-three and about which many questions remain unanswered regarding the FBI’s apparent foreknowledge of the event. After these events took place in 2019, Trump called for the creation of a government backdoor into encryption and the very pre-crime system that Barr announced shortly thereafter in October 2019. The Biden administration, in publishing this strategy, is merely finishing what Barr started.

Indeed, a “prediction” like Barr’s in 2019 was offered by the DHS’ Elizabeth Neumann during a Congressional hearing in late February 2020. That hearing was largely ignored by the media as it coincided with an international rise of concern regarding COVID-19. At the hearing, Neumann, who previously coordinated the development of the government’s post-9/11 terrorism information sharing strategies and policies and worked closely with the intelligence community, gave the following warning about an imminent “domestic terror” event in the United States:“And every counterterrorism professional I speak to in the federal government and overseas feels like we are at the doorstep of another 9/11, maybe not something that catastrophic in terms of the visual or the numbers, but that we can see it building and we don’t quite know how to stop it.”

This “another 9/11” emerged on January 6, 2021, as the events of that day in the Capitol were quickly labeled as such by both the media and prominent politicians, while also inspiring calls from the White House and the Democrats for a “9/11-style commission” to investigate the incident. This event, of course, figures prominently in the justification for the new domestic-terror strategy, despite the considerable video and other evidence that shows that Capitol law enforcement, and potentially the FBI, were directly involved in facilitating the breach of the Capitol. In addition, when one considers that the QAnon movement, which had a clear role in the events of January 6, was itself likely a government-orchestrated psyop, the government hand in creating this situation seems clear.

It goes without saying that the official reasons offered for these militaristic “domestic terror” policies, which the US has already implemented abroad—causing much more terror than it has prevented—does not justify the creation of a massive new national-security infrastructure that aims to criminalize and censor online speech. Yet the admission that this new strategy, as part of a broader effort to “enhance faith in government,” combines domestic propaganda campaigns with the censorship and pursuit of those who distrust government heralds the end of even the illusion of democracy in the United States.

Source: Greanville Post

THRIVE II: This is What it Takes

After watching the film “THRIVE II: This Is What It Takes” twice and taking copious notes throughout, Happy and I have concluded that this is one of the most profound and important documentaries for ushering in a truly sustainable future for life on Earth.

Besides claiming individual sovereignty as the context for taking back ones power from external authority, an enlightened and technologically advanced civilization based on connected resonance with the unified field is not only possible, but absolutely essential for continuing the diversity and health of all life on Earth.

Kudos to Foster and Kimberly Gamble for having the courage and foresight to bring these discoveries to light and sharing them with the rest of us. This film is a must watch for every conscious human being.

Source: ThriveOn.com

A New Zealander’s 9 ‘Starter Steps’ to Save America From Socialism | The Epoch Times

By Trevor Loudon

Though I’m a New Zealander, I know America and its people well. I’ve traveled to every state in the Lower 48 and have addressed more than 500 audiences across this amazing nation. My message has always been the same: The United States is heading toward a brutally tyrannical socialist revolution—and if America goes down, every free country follows.

Well, now it’s here, people, unfolding before our very eyes.

So, what can be done? Can the Republic be saved? Honestly, I don’t know.

However, I can suggest some steps that would at least give this country a fighting chance.

1. Face Reality

Millions of Americans are still in complete denial. Many think the military is secretly in control—that it’s only a matter of time until justice is done and President Donald Trump is restored. There’s a “secret plan”—just “have faith.” The truth is that Trump was outmaneuvered by an alliance of communists, globalists, and even traitors in his own party. The “deep state” is now almost fully in control.

Trump isn’t coming back into office any time before 2024—if we still have meaningful elections by then.

To make sure they can never be voted out of office, the Democrats plan to enfranchise 22 million illegal immigrants, abolish the Electoral College, gain at least four more far-left senators through Puerto Rico and D.C. statehood, and flood the country with tens of millions more refugees and illegal immigrants. They also plan to nationally introduce voting “reforms,” i.e., mass mail-in balloting, abolition of ID requirements, etc., that will guarantee eternal Democratic Party control.

If the Democrats can abolish the Senate filibuster and place at least four more leftist “justices” on the Supreme Court, there’ll be virtually no way to stop any of this if we rely on traditional political methods.

We’re undergoing a Marxist-Leninist revolution driven by China—right now, in real time.

The military can’t save us, nor can Trump. On the contrary, it’s up to patriots to protect Trump and the Armed Services from unrelenting Democrat/communist attacks.

When enough Americans face the unpleasant truth, then, and only then, can we talk about hope.

2. Stop All Violent Rhetoric

Violence will not save America. The harsh reality is that President Barack Obama had eight years to replace patriotic generals with left-leaning political appointees. He did a great job. If violence breaks out (God forbid), the military will stand with the government, not the insurgents.

Does anyone think Russia and China and Cuba and North Korea and Iran would stand idly by while their Democratic friends are being defeated by a patriotic uprising? They would undoubtedly use the opportunity to finish off their “main enemy” once and for all.

Beware of anyone inciting violence online, at a public gathering, or in a private meeting. Distance yourself fast. They will be at best hopelessly naive, at worst government provocateurs.

The left is praying for “right-wing” violence. It will give them an excuse for a massive crackdown on patriotic Americans. This country will be saved peacefully or not at all. If significant violence breaks out, it’s over.

Having said that, the Second Amendment must be preserved at all costs. An armed populace is at least some check on tyranny, even if useless in the face of biological warfare or nuclear attack. Americans should keep their guns and work every day to ensure they never have to use them against their own people.

3. Restore Election Integrity in All Red States

If voter trust isn’t restored within months, the Republican Party is doomed. Democrats will continue to vote. Large numbers of Republican voters will stay home. They won’t trust the elections and will refuse to participate. We’ve already seen this play out in the Georgia Senate elections.

Thirty states are currently led by Republican legislatures. Some are already holding inquiries into fixing deficient electoral procedures. Most will be whitewashes unless the public gets heavily involved. If the resulting recommendations don’t include the elimination of electronic voting machines and heavy penalties for organized voter fraud, it’s likely to be a window-dressing exercise. Be alert.

Patriots must work to restore voting integrity first in the red states, then the red counties of the blue states—then after 2022, the whole nation.

Get involved in this process. It’s a top priority.

4. Close the Republican Primaries Immediately

This should be a no-brainer, but no one is talking about it. Only five U.S. states have truly closed Republican primaries. This means that in most states Democrats and independents (even communists) can vote in Republican primaries—and they do. All over the country, the GOP’s enemies vote in Republican primaries to pick the weakest, most wimpy candidate they can.

That’s why the Republican base is super patriotic but most of their elected representatives in most states vote like “progressive” Democrats.

Close the primaries, Republican patriots. It will transform your party.

5. Organize a Compact of Free States

MAGA folk need to build a “nation within a nation.” This doesn’t mean secession—Russia and China would be quick to exploit such division. What’s needed is a reaffirmation of 10th Amendment rights as already outlined in the U.S. Constitution. The already out-of-control federal government is about to go on a rampage against every form of independence left in the country. Every red state with the courage to do so must immediately begin working toward a formal compact to collectively oppose all forms of federal overreach.

Such a formal alliance should start with Florida and Texas, then grow by inviting Oklahoma, the Plains states, most of the Southern states, New Hampshire, the free Midwestern states, and the Republican-led Northern and Western states.

Such an alliance, stretching from the Florida Keys and the Gulf of Mexico all the way to the Great Lakes and the Canadian border and even Alaska, would bisect the entire country.

Adding the red counties of the blue states such as Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois, Minnesota, New Mexico, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and California, would create a voting and economic bloc that Washington would find exceedingly difficult to challenge.

When the Biden administration recently suggested that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis close all restaurants in his state to slow the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic, the governor politely refused—citingthe ineffectiveness and horrendous economic consequences of mass lockdowns.

Biden then reportedly hinted at an unconstitutional ban on air and road travel to and from Florida. This threat might work against Florida alone. It wouldn’t work against Florida plus Texas and Oklahoma and 10 to 25 other states.

The United States is technically a federation of free and independent states. It’s time to fully realize that ideal.

Southern states will soon be reeling under a massive new wave of illegal immigration. The federal government will do nothing to prevent it. Texas, Florida, Arizona, and the free counties of New Mexico and California need to be preparing to defend their borders now. This isn’t an immigration issue that is the constitutional preserve of the federal government—this is a state public welfare issue.

Of course, the Biden-Harris administration plans to pack the Supreme Court with more left-wing justices to make virtually anything they want “constitutional.” But this shouldn’t even need to go to the courts. State governments already have the power under the 10th Amendment to nullify federal overreach; they simply have to band together to put Washington back into its constitutionally tiny box.

The Republic will be saved through the courageous application of the First Amendment (free speech) and the 10th Amendment (state sovereignty).

6. Republic Review

Every free state should immediately embark on the adoption of the “Republic Review” process. There’s a small but growing movement in some Western and Northern states to review their engagement with the federal government to eliminate or nullify all unconstitutional relationships.

Under the Constitution, the states are technically superior to the federal government. They’re sovereign under the “equal footing” doctrine and have the legal power to refuse to engage in unconstitutional programs.

For instance, most states only get about 10 percent of their education budget from the feds—but are almost completely subservient to Department of Education dictates. Why not forgo the measly 10 percent in exchange for a return to local control over all public education? America is losing its youths in public schools. Every patriotic parent knows that.

This would give parents more control over their children’s education and restore citizens’ control over their own government. Is this worth 10 percent of your state’s education budget?

If the free states are willing to stand against federal overreach, they must also be prepared to forgo unconstitutional federal money.

A thorough Republic Review audit would soon return power to the state legislatures—where it belongs.

7. Form a Multi-State ‘America First’ Popular Alliance

The left has “Our Revolution,” a nationwide alliance of 600 groups operating both inside and outside of the Democratic Party. Operated by Democratic Socialists of America and the Communist Party USA, Our Revolution works in the Democratic primaries to elect far-left candidates such as Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) into office. Our Revolution isn’t subject to Democratic Party discipline, but it does get to choose Democratic candidates.

We need an “America First” umbrella group to operate both outside and inside the Republican Party—even possibly within the Democratic Party in some areas.

This organization should be all about pushing the MAGA/America First agenda at every level of government, in every state of the union.

Such a movement could harness the energy of 70 million to 80 million Trump voters without being under Republican Party control.

America First could unite the Tea Party and MAGA movements, grassroots Republicans, patriotic Democrats, and independents to mobilize tens of millions of voters to transform the GOP into the truly populist, patriotic MAGA party it should always have been.

Take that, Mitch McConnell!

Trump is already vetting candidates to stand against Republican House members and senators who betrayed their own base after the 2020 election.

America Firsters should register Republicans by the millions to primary out dozens of Republican sell-outs in 2022. The America First/MAGA movement could “own” every level of the GOP by 2024. The GOP needs the MAGA movement way more than the MAGA movement needs the Republican brand.

Meanwhile, there are almost 70 far-left Democratic members of Congress in red states. Just restoring voter integrity alone could defeat several of them in 2022.

Running MAGA candidates backed by Trump in every one of those races could flip many more. It would be more than feasible to take back the House in 2022 to make Biden a “lame duck” president.

8. Boycott/Buycott Bigtime

Patriots should be abandoning Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. for more honest platforms. They should also enthusiastically support efforts by DeSantis to heavily fine Big Tech operators who “cancel” patriots. If 25 or 30 free states did the same, Big Tech would soon be little tech.

Patriots need to organize nationwide boycotts of unpatriotic companies and buycotts for loyal American companies like My Pillow and Goya Foods.

Already, local groups are drawing up lists of “unfriendly” local companies and friendly alternatives so patriots can stop supporting their opponents and spend more with their fellow MAGA supporters.

It would also be smart to sequentially target vulnerable unpatriotic companies.

Imagine if 80 million MAGA patriots resolved to begin a nationwide boycott of one such company, starting now. The boycott would go on indefinitely until the target company was broke, or it apologized for “canceling” patriots. If applicable, every MAGA family could simultaneously commit to buying at least one of the canceled person’s products this year.

On April 1, another disloyal company could be targeted, then another on May 1, another on June 1, etc.

After two or three companies had collapsed or apologized, we would soon see large companies start to back away from the “Cancel Culture.”

Patriots have spending power in this country, people. We need to starve our enemies and feed our friends.

Again, patriots need to build a nation within a nation.

It should be also a given that every U.S. patriot boycotts all communist Chinese goods wherever possible. Check those labels! Buying Chinese communist products in 2021 is like buying Nazi products in 1939. It’s immoral and it’s suicidal.

The Chinese Communist Party just crippled the U.S. economy with the CCP virus. Then, pro-China communists instigated mass Black Lives Matter rioting. Then, the same people worked to influence the 2020 election.

It’s about time Americans stop funding their No. 1 enemy—the CCP.

9. Remove Malign Foreign Influence at State Level

DeSantis has announced legislation to massively curtail communist Chinese activity in Florida. The legislation also targets several other enemy states, including Russia, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela—all of which interfere in this country’s internal affairs.

In December 2020, Trump’s Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe revealed that the Chinese Communist Party was conducting a “massive influence campaign” focused on dozens of members of Congress and their aides, including through attempted blackmail and bribery.

Currently, thousands of foreign companies from hostile regimes are buying up land, food production facilities, technical companies, educational facilities, and infrastructure. Tens of thousands of foreign agents are co-opting unpatriotic businessmen, unethical politicians, and sympathetic journalists in the interests of China and other malevolent states.

Under the Biden-Harris administration, nothing will be done to stop these activities at a federal level—but much can still be done by the free states. If every free state cracked down on foreign bribery, corruption, espionage, and subversion, this country would be transformed.

If hundreds of corrupt academics, journalists, businessmen, and politicians (from both parties) were exposed and punished, this country would soon be well on the way to moral, economic, and political recovery.

What Do You Think?

These steps alone won’t save America—but I believe they would be a huge step in the right direction. I will be following up with further suggestions and plans. But for now, I’d love to see your comments, suggestions, and criticisms in the comments section.

Thank you for reading. From a grateful Kiwi, God bless America.

Trevor Loudon is an author, filmmaker, and public speaker from New Zealand. For more than 30 years, he has researched radical left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics. He is best known for his book “Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress” and his similarly themed documentary film “Enemies Within.” His recently published book is “White House Reds: Communists, Socialists & Security Risks Running for U.S. President, 2020.”

Source: The Epoch Times