Great Reset

by

Leaked Document Reveals ‘Shocking’ Terms of Pfizer’s International Vaccine Agreements | Children’s Health Defense & Mercola

By Dr. Joseph Mercola

Story at-a-glance:

  • A leaked document broken down by Twitter user Ehden reveals the shocking terms of Pfizer’s international COVID-19 vaccine agreements.
  • Countries that purchase Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot must acknowledge that “Pfizer’s efforts to develop and manufacture the product” are “subject to significant risks and uncertainties.”
  • In the event that a drug or other treatment comes out that can prevent, treat or cure COVID-19, the agreement stands, and the country must follow through with their vaccine order.
  • While COVID-19 vaccines are “free” to receive in the U.S., they’re being paid for by taxpayer dollars at a rate of $19.50 per dose — Albania, the leaked contract revealed, paid $12 per dose.
  • The purchaser of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine must also acknowledge two facts that have largely been brushed under the rug: both their efficacy and risks are unknown.
  • Purchasers must also “indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer … from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses … arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the Vaccine.”

Vaccine makers have nothing to lose by marketing their experimental COVID-19shots, even if they cause serious injury and death, as they enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from COVID-19 vaccines or any other pandemic vaccine under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, passed in the U.S. in 2005.

The full extent of their COVID-19 vaccine indemnification agreements with countries, however, is a closely guarded secret, one that has remained highly confidential — until now. A leaked document broken down by Twitter user Ehden reveals the shocking terms of Pfizer’s international COVID-19 vaccine agreements.

“These agreements are confidential, but luckily one country did not protect the contract document well enough, so I managed to get a hold of a copy,” he wrote. “As you are about to see, there is a good reason why Pfizer was fighting to hide the details of these contracts.”

An ironclad agreement, all on Pfizer’s terms

The alleged indemnification agreement, reportedly between Pfizer and Albania, was originally posted in snippets on Twitter, but Twitter now has them marked as “unavailable.” Copies of the tweets are available on Treadreader, however.

The Albania agreement appears very similar to another contract, published online, between Pfizer and the Dominican Republic. It covers not only COVID-19 vaccines, but any product that enhances the use or effects of such vaccines.

Countries that purchase Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot must acknowledge that “Pfizer’s efforts to develop and manufacture the Product” are “subject to significant risks and uncertainties.”

And in the event that a drug or other treatment comes out that can prevent, treat or cure COVID-19, the agreement stands, and the country must follow through with their order. Ivermectin, for instance, is not only safe, inexpensive and widely available but has been found to reduce COVID-19 mortality by 81%. Yet, it continues to be ignored in favor of more expensive, and less effective, treatments and mass experimental vaccination.

“If you were wondering why #Ivermectin was suppressed,” Ehden wrote, “well, it is because the agreement that countries had with Pfizer does not allow them to escape their contract, which states that even if a drug will be found to treat COVID19 the contract cannot be voided.”

Even if Pfizer fails to deliver vaccine doses within their estimated delivery period, the purchaser may not cancel the order. Further, Pfizer can make adjustments to the number of contracted doses and their delivery schedule, “based on principles to be determined by Pfizer,” and the country buying the vaccines must “agree to any revision.”

It doesn’t matter if the vaccines are delivered severely late, even at a point when they’re no longer needed, as it’s made clear that “Under no circumstances will Pfizer be subject to or liable for any late delivery penalties.” As you might suspect, the contract also forbids returns “under any circumstances.”Whistleblowers Welcome! Help Humanity – Securely Share COVID-19 Corruption

The big secret: Pfizer charged U.S. More Than Other Countries

While COVID-19 vaccines are “free” to receive in the U.S., they’re being paid for by taxpayer dollars at a rate of $19.5011 per dose. Albania, the leaked contract revealed, paid $12 per dose, while the EU paid $14.70 per shot. While charging different prices to different purchases is common in the drug industry, it’s often frowned upon.

In the case of the price disparity between the U.S. and the EU, Pfizer is said to have given a price break to the EU because it financially supported the development of their COVID-19 vaccine. Still, Ehden noted, “U.S. taxpayers got screwed by Pfizer, probably also Israel.” Also, Pfizer makes a point to note that countries have no right to withhold payment to the company for any reason.

Apparently, this includes in the case of receiving damaged goods. Purchasers of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines are not entitled to reject them “based on service complaints,” unless they do not conform to specifications or the FDA’s Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations. And, Ehden adds, “This agreement is above any local law of the state.”

While the purchaser has virtually no way of canceling the contract, Pfizer can terminate the agreement in the event of a “material breach” of any term in their contract.

Safety and efficacy ‘not currently known’

The purchaser of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine must also acknowledge two facts that have largely been brushed under the rug: Both their efficacy and risks are unknown. According to section 5.5 of the contract:

“Purchaser acknowledges that the Vaccine and materials related to the Vaccine, and their components and constituent materials are being rapidly developed due to the emergency circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and will continue to be studied after provision of the Vaccine to Purchaser under this Agreement.

“Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.”

Indemnification by the purchaser is also explicitly required by the contract, which states, under section 8.1:

“Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer, BioNTech, each of their Affiliates, contractors, sub-contractors, licensors, licensees, sub-licensees, distributors, contract manufacturers, services providers, clinical trial researchers, third parties to whom Pfizer or BioNTech or any of their respective Affiliates may directly or indirectly owe an indemnity based on the research …

“from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses of an investigation or litigation … arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the Vaccine …”

Meanwhile, the purchaser must also keep the terms of the contract confidentialfor a period of 10 years.

Purchasers must protect and defend Pfizer

Not only does Pfizer have total indemnification, but there’s also a section in the contract titled, “Assumption of Defense by Purchaser,” which states that in the event Pfizer suffers losses for which it is seeking indemnification, the purchaser “shall promptly assume conduct and control of the defense of such Indemnified Claims on behalf of the Indemnitee with counsel acceptable to Indemnitee(s), whether or not the Indemnified Claim is rightfully brought.” Ehden notes:

“Pfizer is making sure the country will pay for everything: ‘Costs and expenses, including … fees and disbursements of counsel, incurred by the Indemnitee(s) in connection with any Indemnified Claim shall be reimbursed on a quarterly basis by Purchaser.’”

Buried in the March 17, 2020, Federal Register — the daily journal of the U.S. government — in a document titled, “Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19,” is language that establishes a new COVID-19 vaccine court — similar to the federal vaccine court that already exists.

In the U.S., vaccine makers already enjoy full indemnity against injuries occurring from this or any other pandemic vaccine under the PREP Act. If you’re injured by a COVID vaccine (or a select group of other vaccines designated under the act), you’d have to file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which is funded by U.S. taxpayers via Congressional appropriation to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

While similar to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), which applies to nonpandemic vaccines, the CICP is even less generous when it comes to compensation. As reported by Dr. Meryl Nass,25 the maximum payout you can receive — even in cases of permanent disability or death — is $250,000 per person; however, you’d have to exhaust your private insurance policy before the CICP gives you a dime.

The CICP also has a one-year statute of limitations, so you have to act quickly, which is also difficult since it’s unknown if long-term effects could occur more than a year later.

Pfizer accused of abuse of power

As is apparent in Pfizer’s confidential contract with Albania, the drug giant wants governments to guarantee the company will be compensated for any expenses resulting from injury lawsuits against it. Pfizer has also demanded that countries put up sovereign assets, including bank reserves, military bases and embassy buildings, as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits resulting from its COVID-19 inoculation.

New Delhi-based World Is One News (WION) reported in February 2021 that Brazil rejected Pfizer’s demands, calling them “abusive.” The demands includedthat Brazil:

  1. “Waives sovereignty of its assets abroad in favor of Pfizer.”
  2. Not apply its domestic laws to the company.
  3. Not penalize Pfizer for vaccine delivery delays.
  4. Exempt Pfizer from all civil liability for side effects.

STAT News also referred to concerns by legal experts, who also suggested Pfizer’s demands were an abuse of power. Mark Eccleston-Turner, a lecturer in global health law at Keele University in England, told STAT:

“[Pfizer] is trying to eke out as much profit and minimize its risk at every juncture with this vaccine development then this vaccine rollout. Now, the vaccine development has been heavily subsidized already. So there’s very minimal risk for the manufacturer involved there.”

Signs of COVID vaccine failure, adverse effects rise

Pfizer continues to sign lucrative secret vaccine deals across the globe. In June 2021, they signed one of their biggest contracts to date — with the Philippine government for 40 million doses.

Meanwhile, COVID-19 “breakthrough cases,” which used to be called vaccine failures, are on the rise. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as of July 19, 5,914 people who had been fully vaccinated for COVID-19 were hospitalized or died from COVID-19.

In the U.K., as of July 15, 87.5% of the adult population had received one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 67.1% had received two. Yet, symptomatic cases among partially and fully vaccinated are on the rise, with an average of 15,537 new infections a day being detected, a 40% increase from the week before.

In a July 19 report from the CDC, the agency also reported that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had received 12,313 reports of death among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine — more than doubling from the 6,079 reports of death from the week before.

Soon after the report, however, they reverted the number to the 6,079 from the week before, indicating by default that no deaths from the vaccine had occurred that week,34 raising serious questions about transparency and vaccine safety.

Many other adverse events are also appearing, ranging from risks from the biologically active SARS-CoV-2 spike protein used in the vaccine to blood clots, reproductive toxicity and myocarditis (heart inflammation). As you can see in the confidential indemnification agreements, however, even if the vaccine turns out to be a dismal failure — and a risk to short- and long-term health — countries have no recourse, nor does anyone who received the experimental shots.

One question that we should all be asking is this: If the COVID-19 vaccines are, in fact, as safe and effective as the manufacturers claim, why do they require this level of indemnification?

Source: Children’s Health Defense & Mercola

by

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 here, here, here, 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

by

Three Men Who Own & Control Corporate America | No More Fake News

By Jon Rappoport

Editor’s Note: Let’s say you own a company. You’re public, meaning you issue stock for sale. Suddenly, the fake pandemic hits. The governor of the state issues restrictions, including lockdowns. You have to close your doors. You’re going to take a staggering financial hit. Your first reaction? Anger. Seething anger. You’re determined to fight back. You call your lawyer to work out a plan. “Wait a minute,” he says. “I have some bad news. Do you know who is now the majority shareholder of your company? Bill Gates. And he has voting rights. If you object to the lockdowns, he’ll roast you alive. You’ll be out on your ass.”

In every case, these people completely and utterly support conventional medical reality. They are unshakable. A man like Fauci says jump and they jump. To do otherwise would be unthinkable.

As you read on, you’ll see why this is important…

Airlines, hotel chains—you name it, they all folded when the lockdowns were imposed. They closed up shop, they took a knee, they opted for bailouts. Why?

The CEOs of these corporations are supposed to be hard chargers and ruthless operators. Why didn’t they rebel?

I could cite several reasons. Here I want to focus on a little-known and staggering story.

Imagine an employee of a company is motivated to speak out against the lockdowns and go public. Then he thinks about the owner of the company. That owner happens to sit on the board of a large hospital.

Uh oh. That owner is SOLIDLY WIRED into official medical reality. He isn’t going to appreciate a naysayer who says the lockdowns are a ridiculous and destructive overreach. Better to stay quiet. Better to fit in and go along.

Well, it so happens that three of the most powerful corporate bosses in America DO have deep connections to major hospitals, and these three men run corporations that OWN CORPORATE AMERICA.

What???

The three men are Larry Fink, Joseph Hooley, and Mortimer Buckley.

Buckley is the CEO of the Vanguard Group. Hooley is the CEO of State Street. Fink is the CEO of BlackRock.

These three companies are titanic investment funds. Financial services companies.

Buckley is a board member of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. From 2011 to 2017, he was chairman of the hospital’s board of trustees.

Hooley serves on the president’s council of Massachusetts General Hospital.

Fink is the co-chair of the NYU Langone Medical Center board of trustees.

Let’s look at their investment funds: State Street, BlackRock, and Vanguard—known as The Big Three. The reference is an article at theconversation.com, “These three firms own corporate America,” 5/19/17, by Jan Fichtner, Eelke Heemskerk, and Javier Garcia-Bernardo.

“Together, BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street have nearly US$11 trillion in assets under management.”

“We found that the Big Three, taken together, have become the largest shareholder in 40% of all publicly listed firms in the United States.”

“In 2015, these 1,600 American firms [the 40%] had combined revenues of about US$9.1 trillion, a market capitalisation of more than US$17 trillion, and employed more than 23.5 million people.”

“In the S&P 500 – the benchmark index of America’s largest corporations – the situation is even more extreme. Together, the Big Three are the largest single shareholder in almost 90% of S&P 500 firms, including Apple, Microsoft, ExxonMobil, General Electric and Coca-Cola.”

“What is undeniable is that the Big Three do exert the voting rights attached to these shares. Therefore, they have to be perceived as de facto owners by corporate executives.” (emphasis mine)

“Whether or not they sought to, the Big Three have accumulated extraordinary shareholder power, and they continue to do so…In many respects, the index fund boom is turning BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street into something resembling low-cost public utilities with a quasi-monopolistic position.”

If the CEO of a corporation whose main shareholder is The Big Three thinks about rebelling against the official COVID medical consensus…

And he knows that The Big Three bosses are heavily wired into the US medical complex…

That CEO has a HUGE reason to forget about being an old-time hard charger.

He has a reason to swallow his anger when he’s told to lock down and shut down.

He has a reason to knuckle under and play the game.

He has a reason to surrender to a story about a virus and Fauci and Bill Gates.

He has a reason to stand down and stand aside and watch economic devastation sweep over the land.

HIS CORPORATION IS OWNED BY THE BIG THREE, AND THE OWNERS OF THE BIG THREE ARE LOYAL MEMBERS OF THE MEDICAL COMPLEX…THE COMPLEX THAT FORMS THE CURRENT POLICE STATE THAT HAS SUBDUED THE WORLD, UNDER THE FALSE BANNER OF “SAVING HUMANITY FROM THE VIRUS.”

It’s that stark.

I keep telling you we’re now living in a medical civilization.

From the financial side of things, you’ve just read how that is so.

The three men who own corporate America are also medical denizens.

Think it through.

Source: No More Fake News

by

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

by

The dumbest argument I’ve ever heard against cryptocurrency | Sovereign Man

By Simon Black, Sovereign Man

Two decades ago, General Tommy Franks– commander of the original US invasion of Afghanistan back in 2001– was asked his opinion about a civilian bureaucrat named Doug Feith. Feith was an academic policy wonk who, despite never having served in the military, was a staunch warmonger who was happy for other people to go fight and die in foreign lands.

General Franks was a straight-talking Texan who wasted no words in his opinion that Feith was “the dumbest fucking guy on the planet.” Over the years of this publication, I have, from time to time, submitted some candidates for what I call the ‘Tommy Franks Award’.

As you can imagine there’s pretty stiff competition for the dumbest f’ing person on the planet, especially these days. But I feel especially compelled right now to nominate the World Economic Forum. Traditionally the World Economic Forum’s annual event in Davos, Switzerland has been a pageant of wealth and power.

If you’re there, you’ve made it… at least in the eyes of the global elite; it’s nothing but billionaires and politicians. And in the past, the event was typically just photo ops and pointless speeches.
But lately the World Economic Forum has been much more active in cranking out horrifically stupid policy ideas.

For example, the Forum wants human beings (i.e. us peasants) to be conditioned to eat WEEDS and insects in order to save the planet. The Forum’s founder Klaus Schwab also penned a book last year entitled Covid 19: The Great Reset, which pushes for a radical agenda involving Green New Deals, strict people controls, “solidarity” taxes, debt defaults, and more.

As Schwab announced last year alongside Prince Charles (who is totally relevant with respect to global economic matters), “Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. . . In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.”

They’re not even hiding their agenda– they’re boldly stating that they want to ‘reset’ the economic system that is responsible for the greatest amount of prosperity that has ever existed in the history of the world.
And over the next few days, the World Economic Forum is unveiling more about its Great Reset initiative.

Yesterday they held a live virtual panel entitled “Resetting Digital Currencies”. And, naturally they sought out the finest ‘experts’ in cryptocurrency, including:

• The CEO of Western Union, a company whose last financial innovation was when they put the Pony Express out of business in 1861;
• The Governor of the Bank of England, a central bank whose entire existence is the complete opposite of the decentralized cryptocurrency ethos; and
• Her Majesty Queen Maxima of the Netherlands. Yes I’m serious.

Talk about an EXPERT panel! Honestly it was pretty astonishing to watch. The Queen started off with a completely incomprehensible rant about how the Dutch guilder was the original ‘stablecoin’ because it held its value for so long.

This is just totally inaccurate from a historical perspective; there were plenty of other stable reserve currencies long before Holland even existed. But I’ll let that one slide.

Later, the panel dove into the real meat of their argument: cryptocurrencies are bad because poor people in Africa can’t use them.

The Queen once again piped up, stating that “digital currencies [depend] on smartphones”, and because most people in Africa still have lower grade ‘feature phones’, they don’t have the opportunity to transact with crypto. Wrong again!

Feature phones have been able to store and transact Bitcoin and other currencies for at least SEVEN years.
And open source wallets like Electron Cash have been available for even the most basic feature phones since mid-2018.

The Queen and her friends are totally wrong. Just about everyone in the world can use crypto.
But they continue to repeat these incorrect statements– I believe the technical term is “baseless assertions”. They claim that crypto is not “inclusive”, which is code for ‘social justice’.

That’s total nonsense. Aside from gold and silver, crypto is the most inclusive asset class in world history. Almost anyone can own it.

What’s not inclusive is the traditional financial system; there’s over 1.7 billion people worldwide who can’t access bank accounts or basic financial services– ironically, according to the World Economic Forum!
Furthermore, if they really care about ‘inclusive finance’, traditional currencies are totally not inclusive.
US Dollars, for example, are exclusive to the United States, a handful of dollarized countries, plus governments, wealthy individuals, and big corporations.

It’s not like some poor person in Africa has regular access to dollars. They’re at the mercy of their local currency, and however much the government wants to inflate it. And in addition to manipulation and inflation, traditional currencies can also be subject to capital controls. Nothing about this is ‘inclusive’.

Nevertheless, the World Economic Forum elitists continue to repeat their baseless assertions about cryptocurrency. In reality, they’re terrified of it, because cryptocurrency represents a rejection of the system that they control.

People aren’t stupid, they know they’ve been betrayed.

Corporations have betrayed them by going completely woke. Politicians have betrayed them by abandoning individual liberty and fiscal restraint. The media has betrayed them with its lack of truth and transparency. Tech companies have betrayed them through blatant censorship.Trust is at an all time low. So why should anyone have any trust in the currency or financial system?

Crypto is a natural alternative for anyone who’s fed up with the people who pull the strings. This isn’t about price… or even a single currency; Bitcoin, for example, has a number of flaws, though there are plenty of other promising options that still present substantial upside potential.

This is really about the concept of decentralization: taking power away from people who have constantly abused it, and redistributing that power freely across the market.

Some of the greatest advances in human civilization, from the Reformation in the 1500s, to the early days of the Internet, were based on decentralization. But these people stand for the opposite. They love centralization and concentration of power… especially when they’re the ones in power.

Now they want to tell us what currencies we can/cannot use, which weeds we should be conditioned to eat, and how we should ‘reset’ capitalism. Perhaps it’s the World Economic Forum that requires a Great Reset.

Source: Sovereign Man Newsletter

by

The World Watches While the US Elite Wages War on America | The Epoch Times

US National Guard troops patrol the vicinity of the US Capitol hours before the Inauguration of US President-Elect Joe Biden in Washington, DC, on January 20, 2021. (Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT / AFP) (Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP via Getty Images)

By Lee Smith

On Saturday, Peoples’ Republic of China planes flew into Taiwan’s airspace. Incursions are a normal occurrence but the most recent one represented an escalation. Typically one or two planes will probe Taiwan’s air defenses but in this case it was reportedly eight bombers and four fighter jets. It appears Beijing is eager to test Joe Biden early. It’s likely China won’t be the only one. The more than 20,000 National Guard troops in Washington to last week protect the new president’s nearly unattended inauguration is evidence that the United States is broken.

Observers widely misunderstood the National Guard deployment as a show of force asserting the Biden team’s legitimacy as the elected government of the United States. But the most salient fact of the troop presence is that some who were found to have supported Donald Trump were sent home. And thus the reason for the deployment, which may now continue into March, is that the Biden White House is keen to use the sporadically violent but mostly peaceful Jan. 6 march on the Capitol building as a political pretext to further target Trump supporters.

From the perspective of the administration and its media surrogates, Trump supporters were already deplorable, but now that they have attempted an insurrection, the gloves will come off. The nearly 75 million people who voted for Biden’s opponent deserve whatever is coming to them next—further impoverishment, further collective punishment in the guise of public health (i.e., coronavirus) measures, designation as domestic terrorists, imprisonment, and even death.

Let’s try to imagine how foreigners see our circumstances: Neither traditional U.S. allies nor adversaries can share the new administration’s assessment that the United States government faced an insurrection Jan. 6. In comparison to their own domestic challenges, those protests were plainly mild.

In France, for instance, the Yellow Vests movement has been engaged in protests for more than two years that have frequently devolved into street violence, leaving 11 dead and more than 4000 wounded. From the perspective of the nation that produced the French Revolution, Jan. 6 was nothing like an insurrection. Same for Israel, which has been fighting terrorist attacks plotted by some of the state’s Arab citizens since the country’s founding.

Consider how authoritarian states must see it. Does the Islamic Republic of Iran, periodically engaged in low-level violent conflict with its growing opposition movement, believe that Jan. 6 was an attack on America’s domestic peace? What about Russia, where over the weekend authorities arrested more than 2000 who marched nationwide to demand the release of Vladimir Putin critic Alexander Navalny? Does the Chinese Communist Party, which uses mass detentions and forced sterilizations to eradicate the Muslim minority Uyghur population, believe that American families and seniors marching in the winter cold amounted to an existential threat to the American regime? No, they all see through it—the American political, corporate, cultural, and media elite is waging war on the Americans it despises.

What can foreign powers be thinking when journalists, think-tank experts, and current and former law enforcement officials recommend that the Biden administration deploy the same counterterrorism tactics against Americans that U.S. forces have used to kill Islamic extremists around the globe since the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? Or how can they interpret the heavily guarded inauguration attended by faded pop-stars celebrating a man in a black mask who prophesied a “dark winter,” who for months had been hidden underground by his handlers, and who is unlikely to finish his four-year term under his own power except as a drum circle of celebrity necromancers? If our allies and adversaries see us at all clearly, they are thinking America’s leaders have lost their minds.

It can hardly surprise anyone to see the country gone mad since Biden’s inauguration represented the culmination of the U.S. elite’s four-year-long insurrection against reality.

It began in December 2016 when Barack Obama instructed his director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Brennan to delegitimize his successor by assessing he was helped to the presidency by a foreign power, Russia. Subsequently, with the robust support of prestige media organizations and the rest of the elite’s ideological apparatus—the academy, think tanks, Hollywood, and so on—half the country invested its political convictions and mental health in a conspiracy theory.

It does not require much imagination to see America the way outsiders have for the last several years. The U.S. agency singly responsible for discovering and stopping the efforts of foreign agents to sabotage the American political system, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, was focused instead on sabotaging the American president. Because top officials were not held accountable for their illegal political operation, others were emboldened to join the effort. An official from the Pentagon and another from the CIA led a government-wide campaign that included senior American diplomats to impeach Trump.

With the arrival of COVID-19, the U.S. elite’s increasing use of the phrase “the new normal” to rationalize unconstitutional edicts targeting the businesses, homes, and liberties of Trump supporters was evidence that the country was split not between political parties but between those who saw the light slipping away and those who had willfully migrated to a dark dreamworld.

We will be fortunate if adversaries like the Chinese Communist Party choose to simply stand aside and watch while America’s leadership class consumes itself in madness. But we shouldn’t count on it.

Source:

by

Explosive If True: “I’m a Clinical Lab Scientist, C19 Is Fake, Wake up America” | The Truth Defender

By Derek Knauss

What we found was that all of the 1500 samples were mostly Influenza A and some were influenza B, but not a single case of Covid, and we did not use the B.S. PCR test. We then sent the remainder of the samples to Stanford, Cornell, and a few of the University of California labs and they found the same results as we did, NO COVID. They found influenza A and B. All of us then spoke to the CDC and asked for viable samples of COVID, which CDC said they could not provide as they did not have any samples. We have now come to the firm conclusion through all our research and lab work, that the COVID 19 was imaginary and fictitious.

The flu was called Covid and most of the 225,000 dead were dead through co-morbidities such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, emphysema etc. and they then got the flu which further weakened their immune system and they died. I have yet to find a single viable sample of Covid 19 to work with. We at the 7 universities that did the lab tests on these 1500 samples are now suing the CDC for Covid 19 fraud. the CDC has yet to send us a single viable, isolated and purifed sample of Covid 19. If they can’t or won’t send us a viable sample, I say there is no Covid 19, it is fictitious. The four research papers that do describe the genomic extracts of the Covid 19 virus never were successful in isolating and purifying the samples. All the four papers written on Covid 19 only describe small bits of RNA which were only 37 to 40 base pairs long which is NOT A VIRUS. A viral genome is typically 30,000 to 40,000 base pairs.

With as bad as Covid is supposed to be all over the place, how come no one in any lab world wide has ever isolated and purified this virus in its entirety? That’s because they’ve never really found the virus, all they’ve ever found was small pieces of RNA which were never identified as the virus anyway.

So what we’re dealing with is just another flu strain like every year, COVID 19 does not exist and is fictitious. I believe China and the globalists orchestrated this COVID hoax (the flu disguised as a novel virus) to bring in global tyranny and a worldwide police totalitarian surveillance state, and this plot included massive election fraud to overthrow Trump.

Source: The True Defender

by

Tucker: Our only option is to fix what’s causing this | YouTube

Editor’s Note: Here’s another level of censorship by Google/YouTube whereby they decide what’s appropriate for viewers to watch or not, then label it as such (especially political content they choose not to agree with). Welcome to 1984 today!.

Source: YouTube

by

Catherine Austin Fitts Full Interview Planet Lockdown | YouTube

https://youtu.be/DpVEBlBPvSA

Source: YouTube