GOV/MIL Main "Great Reset" Thread

[marsh]

'Mass Formation Psychosis' — It's Real, and It Was Purposely Caused by Biden and the Democrat Party

redstate.com

'Mass Formation Psychosis' — It's Real, and It Was Purposely Caused by Biden and the Democrat Party

By Mike Miller | Jan 01, 2022 11:15 AM ET

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
“Mass formation psychosis.”

No, it doesn’t refer to a screwed-up flock of geese flying south for the winter.

In a Christmas Day article titled COVID Has Been Overtaken by a Secondary Pandemic—and It’s Real, I discussed Illness Anxiety Disorder, or “health anxiety.”

Specifically COVID-related Illness Anxiety Disorder. As defined by Mayo Clinic, Illness Anxiety, in part, is needlessly worrying about becoming seriously ill.

Illness Anxiety Disorder, sometimes called hypochondriasis or health anxiety, is worrying excessively that you are or may become seriously ill.

You may have no physical symptoms.

Or you may believe that normal body sensations or minor symptoms are signs of severe illness, even though a thorough medical exam doesn’t reveal a serious medical condition.

Mass Formation Psychosis, or “mass hypnosis” or “the madness of crowds,” as noted by TrialSiteNews, occurs when a large fraction of the population is completely unable to process new scientific data and facts, demonstrating that they have been misled or lied to.

In the case of COVID-19, the no-longer-pandemic, Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden, and the Democrat Party, and the Democrat state media — principally CNN and MSNBC — have consistently misled, changed their stories, or outright lied to America about the effectiveness and adverse impacts of mandatory mask use, lockdowns, and genetic vaccines that cause people’s bodies to make large amounts of biologically-active coronavirus spike protein.

Tens of millions of Americans, hypnotized by the left, have been and remain incapable of recognizing the lies and manipulation.

Dr. Robert Malone, a noted virologist and immunologist whose recent work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research, compared mass formation psychosis in pre-World War II Germany to what we are today experiencing in America in response to COVID.

[We had] basically a European intellectual inquiry over what the heck happened in Germany in the 20s and 30s. Very intelligent, highly educated population, and they went barking mad. How did that happen? The answer is mass formation psychosis.

When you have a society that has become decoupled from each other, and has free-floating anxiety, and a sense that things don’t make sense, we can’t understand it. And then their attention gets focused by a leader or series of events on one small point, just like hypnosis. They literally become hypnotized and can be led anywhere.

One of the aspects of [the] phenomenon is the people that they identify as their leaders — the ones typically that come in and say ‘You have this pain and I can solve it for you. I and I alone. Then they will follow that person through hell — it doesn’t matter whether they lie to them or whatever.

But what about “the science,” so touted by Fauci, Biden, and the lapdog media?

It’s become irrelevant, said Malone.

The data are irrelevant. Furthermore, anybody who questions that narrative is to be immediately attacked; they are “the other.” This is central to mass formation psychosis. And this is what has happened. We had all those conditions.

You remember back before — 2019 — everybody was complaining ‘the world doesn’t make sense,’ and we’re all isolated from each other, we’re all on our little tools (iPhones, etc.) we’re not connected socially anymore, except through social media, and then this thing happened and everybody focused on it.

That is how mass formation psychosis happens and that is what’s happened, here.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477091670424526852

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1477091670424526852
1:41 min

As you might have guessed, Malone has been blasted by the left for “promoting misinformation about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”

To that end, Twitter on Wednesday permanently suspended Malone’s Twitter account for spreading “‘misinformation’ about the virus and vaccines.” The ban came just hours after the AP posted a controversial “fact check” report claiming Malone “misled” people by claiming the vaccines are failing against the Omicron variant.



Just one problem.

As noted by The Rio Times, a recent study found that more than 90 percent of Omicron cases in Germany have been “fully vaccinated” (28 percent of those had a “booster), and just 4.42 percent were unvaccinated.

The bottom line:

As RedState reported on Christmas Eve: New studies continue to suggest that the mRNA vaccine actually increases the probability of contracting the Omicron variant after 90 days.

No matter. Experts like Robert Malone continue to be banned on Twitter for speaking truth to power, while Democrat COVID hood ornament Anthony Fauci and Joe “winter of severe illness and death” Biden continue to fearmonger.

The late comedian George Carlin said it best: “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”

Amen.

 

[marsh]

2022 and Beyond: Age Of Reason vs. Age Of AI

The great Joe Allen talks to host Steve Bannon about the technological advances that are hurtling our world closer and

warroom.org

2022 and Beyond: Age Of Reason vs. Age Of AI (Joe Allen)

January 1, 2022
The great Joe Allen talks to host Steve Bannon about the technological advances that are hurtling our world closer and closer to the Singularity, the day when artificial intelligence surpasses human intelligence and essentially becomes the dominant life form.

Rumble video 10:52 min

Part 2: Dangerous Convergence In Five Different Areas

Rumble video 4:40 min

 

[marsh]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixsvy91XJh4
15:24 min

WHY Global Finance Manufactured the CULTURE WAR (Part 1)

Premiere in progress. Started less than 1 minute ago


Felix Rex

213K subscribers

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Reflections On Another Year Of Covidian Lies & How The Truth Will Ultimately Prevail

SUNDAY, JAN 02, 2022 - 07:00 AM
Authored by Rob Slane via TheBlogMire.com,

As we come to the end of the second year in Covidia, I reflect on just how much the instigators of the entire scam have managed to reshape reality in an amazingly short timeframe, such that what was considered normal 12 months ago is now considered abnormal, and what was considered abnormal 12 months ago is now seen as normal.


For instance, had one predicted 12 months ago that after “vaccinating” the elderly and those considered vulnerable, which was the “route back to freedom”, the Johnson Regime and countless others around the world would:

1. Proceed to push the injection onto all adults
2. Move on to getting it into children
3. Make thousands jobless who do not wish to partake in the experiment
4. Begin the introduction of Vaccine Passports
5. Announce that the allegedly 95% effective products wane so quickly they’ll need to be taken every few months
6. Start talking about the possibility of mandatory jabs
7. Reintroduce the restrictions that these injections were supposed to do away with

...why such a person would have been called a Conspiracy Nut. Yet a year later the same person is called a Conspiracy Nut for opposing these very things they got called a Conspiracy Nut for predicting, but which are now reality.

There is something horribly ironic, and also deeply chilling about this. For it shows not only how easily manipulated so many people are, but also just how easy it has been for the Covidian Regimes to reshape reality such that millions have come to accept as normal the very things they would have dismissed just months earlier as the product of deranged minds.

The last two years has felt like people are living in parallel universes, so much so that it’s almost tempting to wonder whether Zuckerberg’s hideous Metaverse is already a thing, with millions having unwittingly entered it in early 2020 without noticing.

In the Metaverse, SARS-CoV-2 is a new Black Death that kills indiscriminately no matter what age. In the real world, it is a virus that has a 99.9% Survivability Rate, and there are effective early treatments available to the 0.1% for whom it might potentially be lethal.

In the Metaverse, Lockdowns of healthy people are how we’ve always dealt with outbreaks of transmissible illnesses. In the real world, other than a hastily ended five-day trial in Mexico during the 2009 Swine Flu outbreak, the quarantining of the healthy was never been done before the Chinese Communist Party implemented it in early 2020, to be copied all over the world by Governments ignoring their own long existing pandemic preparedness plans.

In the Metaverse, masks are about loving your neighbour because wearing them stops you passing on the virus you don’t have to others. In the real world, masks do not and cannot stop viral transmission, and thus they are a not a health aid, but a political and psychological tool of subjugation and dehumanisation, designed to humiliate and perpetuate fear.

In the Metaverse, a public health crisis caused by a virus has zero medical advice given out to people, but just a relentless barrage of talk about cases, hospitalisations and deaths, with all knowledge of effective early treatments ruthlessly suppressed. In the real world, a public health crisis caused by a virus would see Governments, health officials, and doctors recommending cheap and effective ways of boosting one’s immune system, such as Vitamin C and D, Zinc, Quercetin, sunshine and plenty of exercise and fresh air.

In the Metaverse, people who aren’t ill can spread the illness they don’t have, and so must take a test which cannot diagnose illness and which gives huge numbers of false positives, after which they must stay in their house for a prolonged period to stop the virus they don’t have from spreading. In the real world, if you’re well, you go about your daily life; if you have what are called “symptoms”, you stay home and rest.

In the Metaverse, the injection of billions of lipid nanoparticles containing mRNA, which has never been injected into people before, which tricks the cells into allowing it to enter, which then causes billions of cytotoxins to be produced in cells throughout every organ, and which the manufacturers have indemnity but no proper safety data for, is hailed as a saviour. In the real world, this is the most dangerous, reckless medical experiment ever performed on masses of people without their knowledge of what they are being given, and the long-term consequences could be unimaginably disastrous, as Professor Sucharit Bhakdi explains in this horrifying warning.

In the Metaverse, a product which doesn’t prevent infection, doesn’t provide immunity, and which requires top-ups every three months, is a vaccine, even if it needs the dictionary definition of what a vaccine is to be changed to accommodate it. In the real world, the Groucho Marx rule about ducks applies — if it looks, walks, and quacks like a duck then it probably is a duck. Thus if it doesn’t stop infection, doesn’t provide immunity, and wanes after 10 weeks, then it probably isn’t a vaccine.

In the Metaverse, willfully going along with abnormal, illegitimate and authoritarian rules & behaviours is the way back to normality and freedom. In the real world, willfully going along with abnormal, illegitimate and authoritarian rules & behaviours is about conditioning us to accept abnormality, the end of a law based society, and the long term loss of freedom.

In the Metaverse, bringing in Vaccine Passports for nightclubs and other large venues is about keeping people safe, and of course won’t be extended to other venues. In the real world, Vaccine Passports are a Trojan Horse, firstly to be extended into other venues of much smaller size (as has been the case in many European countries), but ultimately to facilitate the creation of a Digital ID Social Credit Hellhole where your every move and transaction can be tracked, you have credits not money, and freedom as we knew it is a thing of the past.

In the Metaverse, people who refuse to submit to the mass medical experiment only have themselves to blame if they find themselves excluded by law from entering certain venues, doing certain jobs, buying certain goods, and even being able to avail themselves of the basic necessities of life. In the real world, this unscientific, unholy, sinister apartheid system shows that we are edging eerily close to repeating the ugliness and depravity of certain 20th century regimes that we smugly told ourselves we were not capable of repeating, due to our apparent goodness.

It is baffling that people can view what’s going on so differently, but I would point out that all the views in the real world are derived from facts, data, reason, logic and historical examples, whereas all the views in the Metaverse are taken from Government and media propaganda.

One of the exasperating things in dealing with this is that whilst there are an endless potential number of lies that can be told, there is only one truth. And what the Government and media are very skillful at doing is layering lies upon lies upon lies, such that whilst the critical thinkers and data analysts are busy trying to debunk lie number one, lies number two, three, four and following are already being laid on that foundation so that by the time the original lie has been shown to be false, things have moved on and hardly anyone can remember, let alone care about the original claim.

However, the good news is that this is also the Achilles Heel of the Globalist’s narrative. Firstly, the more lies that are told, the harder it is to sustain the story because it can only be kept going by more lies, each of which tends to become increasingly blatant and absurd, such that even those who have been slumbering for two years begin to stir. For instance, if you try to assure the huge numbers of people that have had adverse events from the injection, or who know others that have suffered, that they must get the next one and it’s perfectly safe, clearly you are going to have your work cut out as stark reality highlights the lie in what is being told.

But the other part of this Achilles Heel is this: The Truth will win because The Truth must win. It is The Truth. It cannot not win. Attempting to suppress it is like trying to hold a cork under water. It will always be wanting to get to the surface, and as soon as you tire of holding it and release your grip, that’s what it will do. And so although these lies will continue, and although they will appear to prevail for some time to come, there is coming a time when they will be defeated because The Truth, not lies, is the ultimate reality:

“Truthful lips endure forever, but a lying tongue is but for a moment.” (Proverbs 12:19)

As we look forward to 2022, although we do not know the details of what is to come, because it is very clear that the goal of the Covidian Regimes is to get everybody injected with their mRNA witches’ brew over and over again by carrot or by stick, by hook or by crook, we can be absolutely sure there will be many more lies, many more difficulties, and much more wickedness. Yet we can also be equally sure that these lies will ultimately be defeated, because he who is The Truth (John 14:6) is guaranteed the victory (Revelation 17:14), and he will suffer their lies only so far, until such time as he destroys their unholy, totalitarian, anti-human agenda. There will be a Reckoning. Just make sure that you are on the right side when it comes.

 

[marsh]

FDIC Chair Resigns, Warns Democrats Launching 'Hostile Takeover' | The Gateway Pundit | by Cassandra MacDonald

FDIC Chairman Jelena McWilliams announced her resignation on Friday after warning that Democrats had launched a “hostile takeover” of the agency.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

FDIC Chair Resigns, Warns Democrats Launching ‘Hostile Takeover’

By Cassandra Fairbanks
Published January 2, 2022 at 3:00pm

FDIC Chairman Jelena McWilliams announced her resignation on Friday after warning that Democrats had launched a “hostile takeover” of the agency.

McWilliams resigned in an open letter addressed to President Biden.

McWilliams was appointed to the position in 2018 by President Donald Trump.

“When I immigrated to this country 30 years ago, I did so with a firm belief in the American system of government. During my tenure at the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the United States Senate, and the FDIC, I have developed a deep appreciation for these venerable institutions and their traditions. It has been a tremendous honor to serve this nation, and I did not take a single day for granted.

Throughout my public service, I have been constantly reminded how blessed we are to live in the United States of America,” the letter stated.

In December, McWilliams published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal titled, “A Hostile Takeover of the FDIC.”

“Of the 20 chairmen who preceded me at the FDIC, nine faced a majority of the board members from the opposing party, including Mr. Gruenberg as chairman under President Trump until I replaced him as chairman in 2018,” McWilliams wrote. “Never before has a majority of the board attempted to circumvent the chairman to pursue their own agenda.”

“This conflict isn’t about bank mergers. If it were, board members would have been willing to work with me and the FDIC staff rather than attempt a hostile takeover of the FDIC internal processes, staff and board agenda.”

McWilliams’ resignation will go into effect on February 4.

 

[marsh]

https://conservativeplaybook.com/2022/01/02/reverse-the-brainwashing-how-to-end-americas-addiction-to-fear/


Reverse The Brainwashing: How To End America’s Addiction To Fear

by Dr. Joseph Mercola
January 2, 2022


STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• In his book “United States of Fear,” psychiatrist Mark McDonald diagnoses the U.S. as suffering from mass delusional psychosis, driven by an irrational fear of what is now a rather innocuous virus
• The fearful overreaction didn’t have its origin in what happened in 2020. Government, corporations and powerful individuals have engaged in a systematic “grooming” effort toward irrational fear addiction for decades
• Without fear, they cannot rob us of our freedoms
• The underlying motivation of this psychological campaign has been an attack on the core structures, foundations and institutions of society in order to nurture a sense of dependency on government
• To overcome their addiction to fear, a person must still have a sense of curiosity and be willing to look at new information. If they’re not, they’re not treatable and cannot be stopped from trading their (and our) freedom for a false sense of security. So, the key is finding those who are still open and receptive to new information, so that we can reach a tipping point where there are more fearless people than fear addicted ones

Dr. Mark McDonald is a psychiatrist in the Los Angeles, California, area. He’s written a book called “United States of Fear: How America Fell Victim to Mass Delusional Psychosis,” which is the topic of today’s discussion. Around April 2020, McDonald actually made the brave decision to “fire” patients who refused to accept his stand on certain realities and truths.

“LA is a very politically-charged climate,” he says. “A lot of my patients, particularly those who would not identify as either conservative or even sincerely independent, tend to react in a very emotionally-charged way when they work with somebody who does not share their value system, and then it becomes difficult to work with them. I can’t help them …

I noticed that there was something bigger than just politics at play with the whole rise of the pandemic. About 10 to 20% of my patients, they either left abruptly without saying anything … or they argued with me. Some of them actually attacked me personally and condemned me.

A few threatened to report me to the medical board for saying such ‘horrible’ things as children should be able to breathe without a mask on their face. What I concluded after seeing the fallout from this is that those who left, those who attacked me, they really are no longer people that I can help, because really good therapeutic work, at least the work that I do, starts from a position of truth and reality.

Now, I’m not claiming to have the monopoly on truth or reality, but I certainly value it so highly that I’m not willing to sacrifice it for someone else’s emotional comfort or well-being in the moment …

The ones that stayed and those who’ve taken their places have all been far, far more committed to the work and to getting better, to healing themselves emotionally and psychologically, than any of the people that left.

So, I am in no way regretful of that decision. I think it’s made me a better clinician, a better practitioner. And most importantly, it’s enabled me to continue to speak clearly, publicly and honestly about what I think is a much more important problem than just shots and masks, which is the state of our country and how we are being controlled and manipulated by corrupt individuals and corporations.”

The Public Has Been Groomed to Fear
Fear is one of the most powerful motivators of behavior and, clearly, people’s behavior has been massively manipulated through the use of fear these past two years. The motivation behind the book was to provide a retrospective analysis and explanation for how it all happened.

“The wool wasn’t pulled over our eyes on March 15 [2020],” McDonald says. “What I suspected, uncovered and explained in the first third of the book is that this process actually began a long time before that.

What we’ve had, and have been suffering from, is a slow grooming effort by government, by corporations, by wealthy, powerful individuals for a number of decades … I even go back to post-World War II in my book with a very specific example for those who were growing up during those times, of the duck-and-cover exercises to protect against nuclear holocaust.

Obviously, hiding under your desk is not going to protect you from a nuclear bomb. And yet, we were all told to do this … This practice, in my view, instilled in children a sense of fear, a sense of vulnerability and a reliance on a higher power — not God, but a higher human power, usually an authoritarian power, the power of schools or officials to protect you from this very unspecified, vague … threat.”

The fearmongering about climate change and ecosystem collapse also falls under this “grooming.” “I’m not going to say the existence of pollution is not real,” he says. “However, to say that the world will end in 12 years … is not truthful.” The goal is to change people’s behavior, to instill a sense of compliance, so that resources can be reallocated.

“So, at the outset of the book, my goal is to explain: ‘How did we get to be so afraid?’ How did we get to be so capable of being fear-struck so quickly by something that very early on was clearly not a significant threat to most Americans?

Even to those for whom it was a threat … there have been very helpful, successful, cheap, effective treatments that essentially cured nearly 100% of the people who were struck by this virus. So why [the fear]?

In explaining the how and the why of how we got to this point, my hope has been that people who are perhaps not entirely brainwashed, but those who are just somewhat confused, somewhat perplexed, not entirely clear-thinking but certainly want to be, will see their thoughts organized so that they can then move to the more important step, which is what do we do about it?”

Addicted to Fear
One likely reason why outright nonsensical countermeasures have been embraced is because fear paralyzes rational thinking. People who are terrified of dying from COVID cannot comprehend how ridiculous masking is because they cannot reason their way through the problem logically. What’s more, they don’t want to. As explained by McDonald, they’re not curious at all.

“This is my little diagnostic technique: Does the person express curiosity to know something different than what he or she knows right now? If the answer is no, I don’t even go further with that person in conversation. It’s absolutely pointless …

Ambivalence is another word that we use in motivational interviewing. We assess for ambivalence. Is the person trying to hold two different, opposing positions at the same time? Because that leads to a resolution. If there’s no ambivalence at all and there’s no curiosity, I don’t really know where you start. So, I’ll ask, ‘What is it that you understand right now about what’s happening?’

If I sense some ambivalence, if I sense some lack of confidence, then I’ll ask a follow-up question. I’ll say, ‘Are you curious? Are you interested in learning about some other information or some other viewpoints that you might not be aware of right now?’

And often, if I’ve got to that point, the person will say tentatively, ‘Yeah, maybe.’ If I get, on the other hand, ‘Absolutely not,’ or more of a condemnation, ‘What do you mean? Are you one of those anti-vaxxer hoaxers?’ Then I know I’m probably not going to really proceed very successfully, so I let up. I back off … If someone’s addicted to fear, I just wait and see if they’re open and willing and ready to lose their addiction.”

In short, unless a person is open to new information, it doesn’t matter how many peer-reviewed studies you throw before them. Facts and data don’t matter if they don’t have curiosity or this ambivalence. As explained by McDonald, this is not a data war. We won that a long time ago. It’s a psychological war, and it really needs to be thought of that way.

The goal is to take away the interest, the capacity, the comfort, both internally and also on a societal level, of men and women coming together. If men and women stop … speaking to one another, stop dating, getting married, having children, then we no longer have families. If we don’t have families, we don’t have civic organizations, churches and communities. The state then steps in and supplants the role of the father and begins to take over. ~ Dr. Mark McDonald

“You always have to keep in mind that information and data is only as useful as the psychological state of the recipient,” he says. You could actually worsen the situation if they’re not open and receptive.

The Emasculation of Society
Another cultural factor that has played an important role is the emasculation of society. This is problematic, as this also impacts our ability to defend ourselves against the next attack on our liberties and bodily integrity.

“My concern is that the underlying motivation of this psychological campaign has been for a long time, and it is still today, an attack on the core structures, foundations, institutions of our country … Certainly in all the Anglophone countries, there has been an attack for many, many years on the core archetypes of the male and the female, the masculine and the feminine.

The goal is to take away the interest, the capacity, the comfort, both internally and also on a societal level, of men and women coming together. If men and women stop coming together, if they stop desiring one another, if they stop speaking to one another, if they stop dating, getting married, having children, then we no longer have families. We have single parents.

If we don’t have families, we don’t have civic organizations. We don’t have churches. We don’t have communities. All we have are single parents running around with their own children, relying on, most likely, government, to help keep them financially and physically safe. So, the role of the father, the role of the mother is simply eliminated.

The state then steps in and the state supplants the role of the father and begins to take over. There is a young girl who had been sexually abused by her biological father for a number of years, and eventually he impregnated her. He was arrested after a paternity test was performed.

I’ve been reviewing her therapy notes on a legal case recently, and what I’m struck by is that now, two years later, she is still insistent that her father was unjustly taken away from her. He did not deserve to be arrested, should not be in prison and that all she really wants is to be reunited with him.

You’d think this makes no sense. I mean, no sane person would want to reunite with a father who sexually abused her and impregnated her, but she does. I think there’s a psychological reason for it. We only have one father. We only have one mother. If our father or mother is removed, we can’t replace that person. We’re essentially abandoned. We’re lost …

So, what happens if we reject the government? If we don’t want to use the government as a way to keep ourselves safe, to be reliant on government for our money, for our sanctity, [then] we have to rely on each other. We can do that if we have a family, if we have a community, if we have a church, civic organizations and structures.

But what if we’re a single mother with a couple of children living in a Santa Monica apartment that’s being subsidized by the Santa Monica city government, and getting food stamps from the state of California? Well, now we can’t say goodbye to government. We have to keep the government.

So, I really do believe that the attacks on masculinity, on femininity, are specifically designed to end the family unit and to cause all men and women to turn towards government for their security rather than to one another, as has traditionally been the case …”

McDonald stresses that this isn’t really a political issue per se, although the left “seems to have almost a near monopoly on it,” primarily because “the left is inherently a communist or socialist movement. It’s anti-religious, anti-family, anti-individual.”

The problem, of course, is that communist and socialist societies are built on a foundation of corruption, where a small group of elites end up pilfering from everyone else. That’s why communist and socialist regimes don’t last. They always end up collapsing from the rot of corruption.

What’s the Solution?
As for how we are to solve our current problems, McDonald says:

“I have faith and confidence in individuals, but in humanity as a whole, I have lost quite a degree of faith.

Although there have always been corrupt individuals, the fact that humans as a group have allowed them, in the last couple of years, to gain such a foothold through their own voluntary compliance says to me that humanity does not have, at least not now, the inherent capacity to resist true evil to the degree that I believed it had. So, I was mistaken.

This is what’s led me to have some, depending on the day, different feelings and views towards the possibility for a way out. I do not believe right now that the way out is to wait for a messiah … I think the way out is going to be from the grassroots … a rising from the ashes, essentially.

[Take] the public school system in the United States, which I think is unsalvageable; I don’t think it can be fixed. We need to build a new school system. We need to be build a new banking system, a new food system, a new supply delivery system.

We need to build a new political system. All of these systems need to be basically rebuilt. And they’re not going to be rebuilt by a leader, they’re going to be rebuilt by the people, and that’s going to require international cooperation …

It’s so important that the American people actually come together and throw off this corrupt cabal of power and structure so that they can rebuild … If it doesn’t happen, I think we’re going to look forward to a very, very dark period of time that’s going to last … for years or decades. I don’t know if we’ll ever really be able to get out of it.”

Decentralization of Power Is Crucial
As we rebuild, it’s quite clear that decentralization is going to be absolutely essential. As explained by McDonald, one of the reasons for the United States’ success is the Founding Fathers’ foresight to create a system where power is decentralized across the 50 states. The reason the U.S. is on the brink of losing our freedom now is because the power has been reconcentrated through technology and social media.

“The only way for this degree of evil to exist and for it to have such a strong grip over the country, is for the power to be concentrated. If the power were spread out, it would be very difficult for this type of brainwashing to occur because there would be enough counterbalance, there’d be enough dispersion of the corruptive influence, that truth and honesty and the forces for good would actually have a foothold.

I mean, Parler was destroyed a year ago because two men in Silicon Valley flipped a switch and 30 million voices were silenced. I mean, this has never been possible before. Never … I believe right now that … it will take a personal loss, something profound and significant, for those who are still brainwashed to be able to actually start to think clearly again.

Perhaps the loss of a child to a vaccine injury, the loss of a parent who’s denied hospital treatment for heart failure because he decided not to get a vaccine, the complete economic collapse of the home, the community, or perhaps even the country, because we are allowing ourselves to no longer work and believe that somehow productivity will happen somewhere else by some other person.

We may wind up, as is happening in LA, in a state of absolute anarchy, where wealthy people in the Palisades, in Malibu, in Beverly Hills, are now being robbed, raped and murdered by gang members in the same way that they are in the Favelas in Brazil.

This type of crime wave, not just among the poor people out in the ghetto, but among the wealthy class, the ones who are voting in all of the people who are pushing this corruption and this technological brainwashing … has never happened in my lifetime in Los Angeles. [But it] may be requisite that those who are helping support this brainwashing actually suffer significant personal losses before they wake up and pull their support from it.”

Based on what I’ve seen and heard, I suspect even personal losses won’t wake some of them up. I’ve seen cases where a loved one has died within minutes or hours of their COVID shot, and if they’ve lived through it, the person brushes it off as coincidence and schedules their booster. They simply refuse to see the correlation.

This tendency toward blind self-destructiveness is part and parcel of a psychiatric condition known as “mass formation psychosis,” which is the clinical diagnosis proposed by Mattias Desmet, professor of clinical psychology at Ghent University in Belgium.1

Part 1 of 2

 

[marsh]

Part 2 of 2

Is It Just Corruption or Something More Sinister?
Clearly, the concentration of power was not accidental. It’s been planned and executed over decades. Ultimately, technology — which is at the heart of the technocratic world view — was needed to succeed. Today, the technology to manipulate and control the global population exists.

“This gives rise to another question, which I would’ve answered very differently a year ago. I’m asked very frequently, ‘Is this simply corruption?’ Meaning ‘I want more money. I want more power.’ Or is there something more sinister? Is there at least a sociopathy or perhaps even existence of evil behind it?

Two years ago, I would’ve said that’s absurd. Maybe there’s a few sociopathic individuals. Certainly, there’s nothing evil. I don’t believe in the devil. But I’m now starting to wonder whether this goes beyond just simple human corruption. Greed is so banal … That seems like such a relatively innocuous vice given what we’re seeing as the consequences of these decisions.

I am now open, as I never have been before, to the possibility of the existence of evil. Of a force, which is actually at play, driving these individuals to commit such acts of horrible evil. And it is evil. The outcomes are evil. They are not errors, and they are orchestrated. That’s what leads me to being so questioning now of these explanations that involve simply errors or isolated corruption.

There is something so, so beautifully precise and well connected and enduring about how all of these actions have come together in the last couple of years that it leads me to think that there must be some sort of force or power at play that goes beyond simple human frailty.”

Moving Forward
McDonald is currently writing a second book, in which he’ll delve deeper into solutions for overcoming fear on a personal and national level. Some of his ideas and treatment recommendations have grown out of a consolidation and evolution of his viewpoints over the last couple of years.

But before we can do anything, we need to understand which groups of people are amenable to treatment and which are not. Some are so deeply brainwashed, they’re seemingly unreachable. Others are scared, but they would like to not be.

The first is untreatable, while the other is treatable.

“The brainwashed group, in the same way that we would treat a cult, cannot be treated voluntarily,” he says. “I cannot provide information, education, counseling or even a book for them, because they will not listen. They will not read it. They don’t want to, because I am an enemy. Anybody that provides truth and hope and information is the enemy.

The only ally they have is the guru. Just as a cult is closed off, their family members completely separated from them … these people will only listen to and take commands from Anthony Fauci, from Joe Biden, from Don Lemon, people in media, people in politics, people in bureaucratic government, and nothing will change their mind. Absolutely nothing.

They could see people dying around them, their own parents, their own children, and they would still go take another shot. They are lost, unless and until they are physically removed, essentially in the way that we would with a cult, to a remote location where they can be deprogrammed. And I am not in that business. So that’s not the group that I’m speaking to.

I have to be realistic. We have to be practical and efficient with how we use our time. We don’t want to preach to the choir, but we also don’t want to try to go after people who are closed off, lacking curiosity, utterly brainwashed. They’re not going to listen. It’s useless.

So that leaves the other group, which is the open-minded, maybe scared, maybe anxious, curious group. I would call these people the fear addicts who want to lose their addiction … Those are the people that I want to reach out to with the next book.”

Breaking Fear Addiction
The paradigm McDonald proposes is a basic 12-step program to overcoming addiction, in this case the addiction to fear. As in any 12-step program, the first step is to admit you have an addiction. They must admit they’re addicted to fear, because without losing the fear, they cannot move forward.

“Fear is the obstacle to being able to think and act rationally. So, the fear has to be overcome. But in order to overcome fear, you have to admit that you’re addicted to it, that this is not something that you want to hold onto,” McDonald explains.

“From there, there are other things you can do. One of them, which I don’t think anyone has really talked about much, is you need to embrace humor. Humor is what allows us to have a perspective. Without a perspective, we’re like a sailor looking through a monoscope. Everything is just focused on one little target off in the distance.

We lose everything around us. We lose our context. We’re unable to assign value and priority to things. Everything becomes about cases, death, cases, death, shots, masks. One of the best ways to step away from that is to actually develop humor and to embrace it. To start to laugh again, to tell jokes, to see the lighter side of our time here. We’re not here just to exist. We’re here to live. We’re here to live fully …

Developing that sense of perspective allows them to embrace more curiosity. They must also cut themselves off from media, at least temporarily, because media is what’s fueling the addiction … You’ve got to stop going to your dealer …

I’m going to go through a lot of other steps as well as I elucidate them. But these are some of the ones I think are very important for people to consider — admitting that you have a problem and desiring to end it; developing, or at least embracing, humor; and avoiding the dealer of the fear, which is, largely speaking, the media.

Also, return to what’s around you. Stop cutting yourself off from people. You may be embracing people who are also fearful. Hanging out with alcoholics is not the best way to stop drinking. Go to people who are sober.

Build friendships, relationships with people who don’t have the addiction to fear … You’ll discover an entire world that does not revolve around viruses, injections, masks and shutting down schools and businesses.”

Do You Have the Basic Will To Be Free?
According to Robert Malone, Ph.D., in private conversation with Desmet, Desmet suggested that one of the things that can work is to shift the focus from the irrational fear of death from a relatively innocuous virus to the rational fear of global tyranny, the entire human race being subjugated to slavery for the remainder of time.

Desmet claimed he had tested it out and found that, in some cases, people who are afraid of COVID can be steered to a saner frame of mind by, essentially, giving them a greater fear with which to replace their irrational fear of the virus. McDonald doesn’t believe this will work, at least not to any significant degree.

“I wrote about the cultural prerequisites in my book. [Desmet] describes [them] in purely psychological terms, although there’s also cultural overlay [such as] lack of meaning and being disconnected from family. Well, how does that happen?

When you don’t really know what your purpose is as a man, when you don’t have a nuclear family, you lose family relationships. You’re cut off from your friends because of political differences. So, we kind of reached the same end points from different starting points, but I completely agree with him.

The idea of hypnosis is also very interesting. I’ve studied clinical hypnosis. As we all know in stage performances, the hypnotist will bring on a dozen people on the stage, try to suggest different things to 12 people.

And then he’ll gradually pick off 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 of them, send them back to the audience when he diagnoses them as non-suggestible. He keeps two or three who are, and those people usually perform beautifully throughout the hypnosis on stage.

I think that’s also true. I think there are people who are just, for some reason, more easily suggestible. And so, they are more prone to a hypnotic trance. And I think there is a kind of hypnotic trance going on right now in the world. Those people just have an inherent suggestibility.

The idea that we could supplant the fear of death with a fear of totalitarian control is an interesting one, but I’m not sure that I agree with that for the following reason.

I think one of the reasons why people have become so compliant, especially in the Western countries, in the more affluent, the more kind of technologically-connected, interpersonally-disconnected societies, is that we have largely lost the … intrinsic [will to] revolt and push back against being controlled by a higher non-God-like authority.

I think that people today, they do not intrinsically crave freedom. I think they crave being taken care of. And one of the great strengths of totalitarian regimes throughout the 20th century is that they have offered security at the expense of freedom.

And people have largely embraced it, at least at the beginning, before all of the camps started and the executions, because they don’t see the end point of the loss of freedom. They see the immediate benefits of security, of being taken care of. I don’t have to go to work every day … This is such an easier life. This is like going back in time to the day I was born and every need that I had was taken care of …

Now, I had no freedom. I was at the mercy of the mother. But wow, what an easy life. No responsibility … So, there’s something psychologically hardwired into us to want to embrace something simple, something easy, give away our autonomy to a higher authority that is a state that will take care of us.

And, of course, it always turns into a totalitarian system and then the people end up dying, being murdered, we have mass starvation, executions. We’ve seen it time and time again throughout the 20th century.

But from my experience as a clinician, people are actually far more scared of death, of losing security, of losing so-called protection from the state, than they are of losing all of their liberties, their freedoms, and ultimately just being fed into a meat grinder for society’s despots.

At its core, the totalitarian system offers a cheat. It says, ‘Stop believing in a higher power that isn’t real, God, and believe in a higher power which is me and the party. I can offer you the potatoes. I can offer you the guards … I can offer you all of that right now. What can God offer you? … You can’t rely on him. Well, you can rely on me.’ It’s almost like a devilish kind of Faustian play that these totalitarian despots always engage in, but people fall for it.

And this is one of the reasons why every communist system, every dictatorship, essentially attacks all forms of religious worship and organization. They need a secular society, because when there is the higher power, above the state, that people believe in or rely on, it diminishes the absolute power of the state. It brings it into context.

And the context is that it’s flawed, because totalitarian regimes are still run by human beings. They’re not run by angels. They’re not run by God. And if we can remove God from the picture, now suddenly, the whole hierarchy shifts and the top power becomes the state and there’s nothing above the state.

I don’t think there’s any exception to this. And this is another reason why the attack on the church and the attack on Christmas, for example, has been so ongoing in the last couple decades.”

Be Brave, Speak Out, Find Your Tribe
If you haven’t done so already, the first thing you’ll want to do is surround yourself with like-minded people, and be sure to meet in person, whenever possible. Part of finding your “tribe” involves gathering your courage and speaking your mind.

“One of the key things that I discovered personally, which I strongly suggest everyone do, is come out of the closet,” McDonald says.

“I recognize it is far easier to come out of the closet as a transgendered non-binary right now than it is to come out as a conservative, but even if you lose a few friends and colleagues, you will gain far, far more from high-quality, supportive, loving, freedom defending people with integrity than anything that you’ve ever lost.

As Mikki Willis [creator of the Plandemic documentary series] said to me after he filmed his first movie, ‘I didn’t lose a single friend.’ I said, how is that possible? He said, ‘Because all the people that left, they weren’t friends to begin with.’ And I completely agree with him. That has been true in my experience. It will be true in yours.

All you have to do is you have to tolerate and accept the immediate temporary fire-branding that will occur once you put your head up and … start speaking from your heart and being honest, showing your own integrity …

The people that don’t support you, they will leave. They will create space for those who do. Those who hear you and agree with you, they will come to you. They will say, ‘Thank God, another person who shares my views. What’s your name? Can we meet for coffee? Have you heard about this group I organized? We meet on Thursdays over at the coffee shop. I want you to introduce you to my friends.’

That will happen to you. And I think that is the first, most important step that you can take to becoming a stronger, healthier, and more pro-freedom, pro-American individual.”

In closing, be sure to pick up a copy of “United States of Fear: How America Fell Victim to Mass Delusional Psychosis” to learn more.

 

[marsh]

"No One Has Ever Complied Their Way Out of Totalitarianism - This Is the Hill We Need to Die On" - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Releases New Year's Statement | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

Robert F.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

“No One Has Ever Complied Their Way Out of Totalitarianism – This Is the Hill We Need to Die On” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Releases New Year’s Statement

By Jim Hoft
Published January 2, 2022 at 9:30pm

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is quickly becoming one of the most important voices of our time. He continues to fearlessly call out the tyranny that is ripping apart the fabric of our country.

On Sunday Kennedy released a call to action for 2022.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: I’m going to tell you these three things that you need to remember in this critical day and age.

1.) Once government acquires a power, it never lets it go voluntarily.

2.) Every power that government acquires, using this pandemic as a pretense, it will ultimately abuse to the maximum effect possible. This is a rule that is as certain as gravity.

3.) Nobody has ever complied their way out of totalitarianism. Every time you comply the demands will get greater and greater.

We need to resolve here and now that this is the hill we need to die on. They have come for our jobs, they have come for our transport, now they’re coming for our children. We have an obligation as parents to protect them. There has been a government in history that has told its people, we are going to demand children sacrifice and take risks to save old people. It’s always the other way around. The old, the mature, the adults, always put themselves at risk to protect their children. This is an ethical issue. It’s a moral issue. It’s an issue of character for each of us. And it’s an issue about democracy and public health.

Video on website 2:19 min

Children’s Health Defense: https://childrenshealthdefense.org

 

[ghost]

Too many Great Reset posts. Since this is going to be a "thing," I thought we could archive threads into one reference and consolidate any additional posts.

The Beginning of the Great Reset

The Great Reset

John Kerry Says Great Reset is Needed to Stop Rise of Populism

The Great Reset for Dummies

"The Great Reset" Already Happened

The Great Economic Reset & A Canadian Insider

World Economic Forum Davos Switzerland – The Great Reset

‘Great Reset’ in Davos at the forefront of a ‘great deception’ in the free world

NY Times Says “Great Reset” is a “Conspiracy Theory” on Same Day World Economic Forum Celebrates It

"It's coming...the great reset."

Your Guide to the Great Reset (Corbett Report video, RT 1:11:57)

COVID-19: The 4 building blocks of the Great Reset

No longer a conspiracy theory? (The New World Order and the Great Reset)

From Lockdowns to "The Great Reset"

What The Hell Is The Great Reset?

YIKES! The global elite want to forever change the way you live with “The Great Reset” agenda

Now Comes the Davos ‘Great Reset’

Trudeau Gives Away The Game: Says Pandemic Is Opportunity For “Reset”

Sky news Australia have been pretty straight about what’s behind COVID, ClimateChange, WEF and the Great Reset

The Great Reset Seeks To Usher In A World In Which Nobody Will Want To Escape The Gulag

The great reset, is on GODS date and time!

 

[marsh]

The WEF and the Pandemic

How is the Davos World Economic Forum involved in the coronavirus pandemic?

swprs.org

The WEF and the Pandemic

WEF founder Klaus Schwab in 2014 (Alamy)

Published: October 6, 2021 (upd.)

How is the Davos World Economic Forum involved in the coronavirus pandemic?

The Davos World Economic Forum (WEF) is a premier forum for governments, global corporations and international entrepreneurs. Founded in 1971 by engineer and economist Klaus Schwab, the WEF describes its mission as “shaping global, regional and industry agendas” and “improving the state of the world”.

According to its website, “moral and intellectual integrity is at the heart of everything it does.”

The WEF has been involved in the coronavirus pandemic in several ways.

First, the WEF was, together with the Gates Foundation, a sponsor of the prescient “Event 201” coronavirus pandemic simulation exercise, held in New York City on October 18, 2019 – the same day as the opening of the Wuhan Military World Games, seen by some as “ground zero” of the global pandemic.

China itself has argued that US military athletes may have brought the virus to Wuhan.

Second, the WEF has been a leading proponent of digital biometric identity systems, arguing that they will make societies and industries more efficient, more productive and more secure. In July 2019, the WEF started a project to “shape the future of travel with biometric-enabled digital traveler identity management”.

In addition, the WEF collaborates with the ID2020 alliance, which is funded by the Gates and Rockefeller foundations and runs a program to “provide digital ID with vaccines”. In particular, ID2020 sees the vaccination of children as “an entry point for digital identity.”

Third, WEF founder Klaus Schwab is the author of the book COVID-19: The Great Reset, published in July 2020, which argues that the coronavirus pandemic can and should be used for an “economic, societal, geopolitical, environmental and technological reset”, including, in particular, advancing global governance, accelerating digital transformation, and tackling climate change.

Finally, the WEF has been running, since 1993, a program called “Global Leaders for Tomorrow”, rebranded, in 2004, as “Young Global Leaders”. This program aims at identifying, selecting and promoting future global leaders in both business and politics. Indeed, quite a few “Young Global Leaders” have later managed to become Presidents, Prime Ministers, or CEOs (see below).

During the coronavirus pandemic, several WEF Global Leaders and Global Shapers (a junior program of the Global Leaders) have played prominent roles, typically promoting zero-covid strategies, lockdowns, mask mandates, and ‘vaccine passports’. This may have been a (largely failed) attempt to protect public health and the economy, or it may have been an attempt to advance the global transformation agenda outlined above, or perhaps both.

In this regard, some notable Young Leaders include Jeffrey Zients (US White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator), Stéphane Bancel (CEO of Moderna), Jeremy Howard (founder of influential lobby group “Masks for All”), Leana Wen (zero-covid CNN medical analyst), Eric Feigl-Ding (zero-covid Twitter personality), Gavin Newsom (Governor of California, selected in 2005), Devi Sridhar (British zero-covid professor), Jacinda Ardern (Prime Minister of New Zealand), Greg Hunt (Australian Health Minister and former WEF strategy director), French President Emanuel Macron, Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, German Chancellor Angela Merkel (selected in 1993), German Health Minister Jens Spahn, and former British PM Tony Blair (a leading proponent of ‘global vaccine passports’).

To get a full overview of their members, see Global Leaders for Tomorrow and Young Global Leaders on WikiSpooks (a Wiki focusing on covert power structures) as well as the official Young Global Leaders website. For an overview of some notable members in politics and the media, see below.

In conclusion, the Davos World Economic Forum has indeed been involved in the strategic management of the coronavirus pandemic, with a major emphasis on using the pandemic as a catalyst for digital transformation and the global introduction of digital identity systems.

Digital Identity: The 2018 vision of the World Economic Forum



Digital Identity: The vision of the World Economic Forum (WEF, 2018)WEF “Young Global Leaders”

An overview of some WEF Young Global Leaders (2005-2021) and Global Leaders for Tomorrow (1993-2003) in politics and the media. The list is not exhaustive.
Sources: Global Leaders for Tomorrow and Young Global Leaders on WikiSpooks.
United States

Politics and Policy

Jeffrey Zients (White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator since 2021, selected in 2003), Jeremy Howard (co-founder of lobby group “masks for all”, selected in 2013), California Governor Gavin Newsom (selected in 2005), Pete Buttigieg (selected in 2019, candidate for US President in 2020, US secretary of transportation since 2021), Chelsea Clinton (Clinton Foundation board member), Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton aide, selected in 2012), Nikki Haley (US ambassador to the UN, 2017-2018), Samantha Power (US ambassador to the UN, 2013-2017, USAID Administrator since 2021), Ian Bremmer (founder of Eurasia Group), Bill Browder (initiator of the Magnitsky Act), Jonathan Soros (son of George Soros), Kenneth Roth (director of “Human Rights Watch” since 1993), Paul Krugman (economist, selected in 1995), Lawrence Summers (former World Bank Chief Economist, former US Treasury Secretary, former Harvard University President, selected in 1993), Alicia Garza (co-founder of Black Lives Matter, selected in 2020), Stéphane Bancel (Moderna CEO).
Media

CNN medical analyst Leana Wen (selected in 2018), CNN chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta, Covid Twitter personality Eric Feigl-Ding (a ‘WEF Global Shaper‘ since 2013), Andrew Ross Sorkin (New York Times financial columnist), Thomas Friedman (New York Times columnist, selected in 1995), George Stephanopoulos (ABC News, 1993), Lachlan Murdoch (CEO of Fox Corporation).

Technology and Social Media

Microsoft founder Bill Gates (1993), former Microsoft CEO Steven Ballmer (2000-2014, selected in 1995), Amazon founder Jeff Bezos (1998), Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page (2002/2005), former Google CEO Eric Schmidt (2001-2017, selected in 1997), Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales (2007), PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel (2007), eBay co-founder Pierre Omidyar (1999), Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg (2009), Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg (2007).

Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand

Professor Devi Sridhar (a leading ‘zero covid’ proponent, selected in 2020/21), former British Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (both selected in 1993), BBC World Service journalist Dawood Azami, Lynn Forester de Rothschild (co-owner of The Economist), Nathaniel Rothschild (son of Lord Rothschild), historian Niall Ferguson (selected in 2005), William Hague (Foreign Secretary, 2010-2014), Charles Allen (CEO of ITV, 2004-2007; Chairman of EMI, 2008-2010).

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern (since 2017, selected in 2014), Australian Health Minister Greg Hunt (selected in 2003; former WEF strategy director), Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland (selected in 2001; former managing director of Reuters). Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a WEF participant, but is not a confirmed Young Global Leader.

Germany

Chancellor Angela Merkel (selected in 1993, 12 years before becoming Chancellor), current Health Minister Jens Spahn and former Health Ministers Philipp Roesler and Daniel Bahr, current co-chair of the Green Party and failed Chancellor candidate Annalena Baerbock (selected in 2020), former co-chair of the Green Party Cem Özdemir (selected in 2002), media mogul and Axel Springer CEO Mathias Doepfner (selected in 2001), talk show host Sandra Maischberger, late Foreign Minister and Vice Chancellor Guido Westerwelle (1997), former German President Christian Wulff (selected in 1995, 15 years before becoming President), Reto Francioni (former CEO of Deutsche Boerse).
European Union

EU Commission Presidents Jose Manuel Barroso (2004-2014, selected in 1993) and Jean-Claude Juncker (2014-2019, selected in 1995), French President Emanuel Macron (since 2017, selected in 2016), former French President Nicolas Sakozy (2007-2012, selected in 1993), Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, former Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi (2014-2016, selected in 2012), former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar (1996-2004, selected in 1993), Klaus Regling (CEO of the European Financial Stability Mechanism since 2012), Guy Verhofstadt (former Belgian Prime Minister, Chair of the Brexit Steering Group), Danish Minister for the Environment Lea Wermelin, Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin, former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb, and Mark Leonard (founding director of the Soros-funded European Council on Foreign Relations).

Switzerland

Natalie Rickli (Director of Health of the Canton of Zurich, selected in 2012), former Presidents of the Swiss National Council Christa Markwalder (selected in 2011) and Pascale Bruderer-Wyss (selected in 2009), Geneva politician Pierre Maudet (selected in 2013), NZZ media group CEO Felix R. Graf (selected in 2007), former Swiss Justice Minister Ruth Metzler (selected in 2002), former Swiss television CEO Roger de Weck (2011-2017, selected in 1994), former UBS CEOs Peter Wuffli (selected in 1994) and Marcel Rohner (selected in 2003), former Credit Suisse CEO Tidjane Tiam (1998).

2005 YGL Nomination Committee

The 2005 WEF Young Global Leaders Nomination Committee consisted primarily of major media publishers and editors, including Arthur Sulzberger and Steve Forbes (USA); James Murdoch, Jonathan Rothermere and Tom Glocer (UK); Arnaud Lagardère (France); Mathias Doepfner and Hubert Burda (Germany); Michael Ringer (Switzerland); and Carl-Johan Bonnier (Sweden).
Video Annex

1) Bill Gates demanding “digital immunity proof” in March 2020
Video: Bill Gates demanding ‘digital immunity proof’ in March 2020 (source)
https://videos.files.wordpress.com/...tal-immunity-proof-ted-talk-march-2020_hd.mp4 .39 min

2) Edward Snowden warning of the “destruction of rights” (March 2020)

View: https://youtu.be/-pcQFTzck_c
4:51 min

3) The Chinese “social credit” system (May 2019)

View: https://youtu.be/NXyzpMDtpSE
4:37 min

Further reading

• All Roads Lead to Dark Winter (Whitney Webb, April 2020)

See also

• The Covid Vaccine War
• Coronavirus origins
• Covid Vaccine Injuries

 

[marsh]

An interesting echo in history note (via CH)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kq9sbtFCR8
53:20 min

When Medieval Peasants Revolted Against The Establishment | Peasants' Revolt Of 1381 | Timeline

Mar 3, 2018 • Tony Robinson explores the major uprising across large parts of England in 1381; it's origins, motives and aftermath.

 

[von Koehler]

Know your enemy-they won't be satisfied until you are dead.

 

[marsh]

China Deploys 'AI Prosecutor' To Identify Dissenters. - The National Pulse

The Chinese Communist Party has developed an artificial intelligence prosecutor that can identify and suggest charges for alleged crimes including “dissent” and “provoking trouble.”Built by the Shanghai Pudong People’s Procuratorate, the tool can file charges after hearing a verbal description...

thenationalpulse.com

by Natalie Winters
January 2, 2022

The Chinese Communist Party has developed an artificial intelligence prosecutor that can identify and suggest charges for alleged crimes including “dissent” and “provoking trouble.”

Built by the Shanghai Pudong People’s Procuratorate, the tool can file charges after hearing a verbal description of the case. It runs on a standard desktop computer and presses charges based on 1,000 “traits” from the human-generated case description text.

The prosecutor was programmed with information from 17,000 real-life cases ranging from 2015 to 2020 and can identify and, as a result, can press charges for the eight most common crimes in Shanghai.

Among the charges is “provoking trouble” – a term often weaponized by Beijing to stifle political and social dissent and criticism.

Other crimes reportedly recognized by the machine are obstructing official duties, credit card fraud, gambling crimes, dangerous driving, theft, fraud, and intentional injury.

The project’s lead scientist Shi Yong claimed the system had an accuracy rate of 97 percent, adding “the system can replace prosecutors in the decision-making process to a certain extent.”

Chinese prosecutors, however, have concerns over the machine’s purported accuracy.

“The accuracy of 97% may be high from a technological point of view, but there will always be a chance of a mistake,” cautioned a prosecutor from Guangdong Province. “Who will take responsibility when it happens? The prosecutor, the machine or the designer of the algorithm,” they added.

A more advanced version of the prosecutor will eventually be able to eliminate data irrelevant to a case and will be capable of converting spoken words into a standard format computers can understand and act upon.
Amazon Deleted Reviews Critical Of Chinese Communist Party Book.
The Chinese Communist Party has increasingly relied on artificial intelligence to implement its “social credit score” system, using the COVID-19 pandemic as a pretext to implement vaccine passports. The National Pulse revealed that pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. partnered with AliPay – the regime’s premier platform for its social credit scoring system – one year ahead of the onset of the pandemic.

 

[marsh]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_gd83KF2pE
12:51 min

Great Reset Hints at a New Digital, INTERNATIONAL Currency | @Glenn Beck

Jan 3, 2022


BlazeTV

Justin Haskins, Editorial Director of The Heartland Institute, joins Glenn to discuss a recent simulation done by proponents of The Great Reset that may hint at what's to come: an international, digital currency. This time, world elites used the threat of cyber attacks against the global, financial system as reasoning to ‘increase cooperation’ between world markets and big banks. Haskins explains what this means for your financial security and for freedom around the world.

 

[marsh]

Timelapse of Artificial Intelligence

A documentary and journey into the future exploring the possibilities and predictions of artificial intelligence. This timelapse of the future

warroom.org

Timelapse of Artificial Intelligence
@VentureCity/YouTube
January 3, 2022



A documentary and journey into the future exploring the possibilities and predictions of artificial intelligence.

This timelapse of the future explores what is coming, from robots that are too fast for humans to see, to A.I. bots from Microsoft (bringing back loved ones to life) and Google’s laMDA (replacing the need for online searches).

Elon Musk’s Neuralink goes from a medical and healthcare device, to helping people become superhuman – with intelligence amplification, and add-ons that connect to the brain chip. Artificial general intelligence begins to design an A.I. more powerful than itself. People begin to question if humanity has reached the technological singularity.

Artificial Super Intelligence emerges from the AGI. And further into the deep future. Human consciousness becomes digitized and uploaded into a metaverse simulation. It is merged with A.I. creating hybrid consciousness – which spreads across the cosmos. Matrioshka brains and Dyson Spheres host humanity’s consciousness in a cosmic simulation network.

View: https://youtu.be/63yr9dlI0cU
13:35 min

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Governments Admit Using 'Mass Formation Psychosis' As Tool of Population Control

TUESDAY, JAN 04, 2022 - 10:17 AM
Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Dr. Robert Malone’s assertions about “mass formation psychosis” in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are underscored by the fact that authorities in the UK admitted to using “totalitarian” methods of “mind control” to instill fear in the population.



In Canada, the military also admitted launching a psychological operations campaign against their own people in order to manipulate them into compliance with COVID-19 restrictions and mandates.

During his viral podcast with Joe Rogan after he was banned by Twitter, Malone explained how the global population was being manipulated into remaining in a constant state of hysterical anxiety via mass formation psychosis.

“What the heck happened to Germany in the 20s and 30s? Very intelligent, highly educated population, and they went barking mad. And how did that happen?” asked Malone.

“The answer is mass formation psychosis.”

“When you have a society that has become decoupled from each other and has free-floating anxiety in a sense that things don’t make sense, we can’t understand it, and then their attention gets focused by a leader or series of events on one small point just like hypnosis, they literally become hypnotized and can be led anywhere,” he added.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477091670424526852

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1477091670424526852
1:41 min

“And one of the aspects of that phenomenon is that the people that they identify as their leaders, the ones typically that come in and say you have this pain and I can solve it for you. I and I alone,” Malone further explained, “Then they will follow that person. It doesn’t matter whether they lied to them or whatever. The data is irrelevant.”

“We had all those conditions. If you remember back before 2019 everyone was complaining, the world doesn’t make sense and we are all isolated from each other.”

“Then this thing happened, and everyone focused on it,” stated Malone, noting,

“That is how mass formation psychosis happens and that is what has happened here.”

Malone’s summary of how health authorities seized on the unifying threat of the COVID-19 pandemic and exaggerated its thread to create mass hysteria is backed up by leaked details of how the UK government manipulated its population during the early days of the pandemic.

As first revealed by author and journalist Laura Dodsworth, scientists in the UK working as advisors for the government admitted using what they now admit to be “unethical” and “totalitarian” methods of instilling fear in the population in order to control behaviour during the pandemic.



The London Telegraph reported the comments made by Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour (SPI-B), a sub-committee of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) the government’s chief scientific advisory group.

The report quotes a briefing from March 2020, as the first lockdown was decreed, that stated the government should drastically increase “the perceived level of personal threat” that the virus poses because “a substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened”.

One scientist with the SPI-B admits that “In March [2020] the Government was very worried about compliance and they thought people wouldn’t want to be locked down. There were discussions about fear being needed to encourage compliance, and decisions were made about how to ramp up the fear.”

The unnamed scientist adds that “The way we have used fear is dystopian.”

The scientist further confessed that “The use of fear has definitely been ethically questionable. It’s been like a weird experiment. Ultimately, it backfired because people became too scared.”

Another separate scientist on the subcommittee professed “You could call psychology ‘mind control’. That’s what we do… clearly we try and go about it in a positive way, but it has been used nefariously in the past.”

Another scientist warned that “We have to be very careful about the authoritarianism that is creeping in,” adding “people use the pandemic to grab power and drive through things that wouldn’t happen otherwise.”




According to the report, another researcher with the group acknowledged that “Without a vaccine, psychology is your main weapon,” adding that “Psychology has had a really good epidemic, actually.”

Yet another scientist on the subcommittee stated that they have been “stunned by the weaponisation of behavioural psychology” over the past year, and warned that “psychologists didn’t seem to notice when it stopped being altruistic and became manipulative.”

“They have too much power and it intoxicates them”, the scientist further warned.

In addition to the UK government’s response, it was also revealed that the Canadian military launched a psychological operations program against their own citizens in the early days of the pandemic order to amplify government messaging and “head off civil disobedience.”



“Canadian military leaders saw the pandemic as a unique opportunity to test out propaganda techniques on an unsuspecting public,” reported the Ottawa Citizen.

Meanwhile, following early efforts to bury the term altogether, Google is now desperately rigging its search results to return only negative articles about “mass formation psychosis” and Dr. Malone.

Google’s current top search result link for “mass formation psychosis” is a Forbes hit piece that recycles dubious claims Dr. Malone already debunked during his Rogan appearance.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Ron Paul: Taking Back Our Liberty In 2022

TUESDAY, JAN 04, 2022 - 07:25 PM
Authored by Ron Paul,

For those of us who value liberty, these past two years have been a bad dream. It seems like we fell asleep in early 2020 and woke up in 1984! They said that if we just put on a mask and stayed home for two weeks, we’d be able to return to normal. The two weeks came and went and instead of going back to normal they added more restrictions. These past two years have been a story of moving goalposts and “experts” like Anthony Fauci constantly contradicting themselves.



Early on, in April 2020, I warned in an article titled “Next in Coronavirus Tyranny: Forced Vaccinations and 'Digital Certificates,'” that the ultimate goal of the “two weeks” crowd was to force vaccines and a “vaccine passport” on Americans.

My concerns were at the time written off as just another conspiracy theory.

But less than a year later that “conspiracy theory” became conspiracy fact. I am not happy about being right on this. The introduction of vaccine passports was from the beginning my worst nightmare. The idea that you must “show your papers” to participate in society is a concept that is totally opposed to a free society. It is inhuman.

The history of these past two years is that the worst ideas have been adopted by force and anyone questioning those ideas has been suppressed by force. We learned recently that Dr. Fauci and the director of the National Institutes of Health conspired to deliver a “quick and devastating take-down” of the esteemed scientists behind the Great Barrington Declaration. Were the Great Barrington scientists horribly wrong? Fauci and his boss could not have cared less. They were not interested in a debate. Their only goal was to shut down any opposing views. That’s not science. It’s ideology, politics, and probably self-interest.

As my son Rand said on a recent Liberty Report, thousands of people died because Fauci refused to consider the proven effectiveness of natural immunity against Covid. He and his colleagues were determined to deny any outpatient treatments and insisted on vaccines as the only way out.

Now, as we see the vaccines performing so poorly versus natural immunity, their whole strategy lies in tatters. Will anyone apologize to the relatives of all those who died?

When we look back at these two years, hopefully one thing that will be remembered is how the institutions of state power have all lost their credibility.

They have been exposed as frauds and worse.

In a recent massively popular Joe Rogan interview with Dr. Robert Malone – inventor of the mRNA technology that is the backbone of the “vaccines” - Malone discusses the disturbing concept of mass formation psychosis, where fear and manipulation are used to drive a society mad in the service of a group of elites with an agenda. We saw it in Germany in the 1930s.

As Charles Mackay wrote in the 19th century about the madness of crowds, humans go insane in groups but recover one at a time.

What is to be done to defeat tyranny in 2022? We must continue to tell the truth. The truth is winning and the liars are losing. One by one their lies are being exposed. But it is not an easy task. Each of us in 2022 can do a little something to promote truth. Do what you can. The rewards are great!

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Google Manipulates Results As "Mass Formation Psychosis' Searches Explode Due To Collapsing COVID Narrative

TUESDAY, JAN 04, 2022 - 06:05 PM
Authored by Matt Agorist via TheFreeThoughtProject.com,

Those paying attention to the current situation regarding the establishment’s control on the narrative around Covid-19, have watched as anyone — including esteemed experts in the field — are censored into oblivion for attempting to put forth information that challenges the status quo. For the first time in recent American history, merely talking about alternative treatments for a disease is met with mass censorship by big tech. This is diametrically opposed to actual “science” and the opposite direction in which a free society should be moving.



One of the people who has been censored the most is Robert W Malone MD, MS who is one of the inventors of mRNA & DNA vaccines. Dr. Malone has been outspoken about the way the establishment system is handling, or rather mishandling, the covid crisis.

His Twitter account had grown to over a half million followers last week before the platform decided that his alternative views on the pandemic were a danger to the narrative. So they banned him.

Instead of standing up for the free exchange of ideas by experts — which is how science works — the left cheered for Malone’s censorship, calling him a kook while celebrating the tools of tyrants.

Before Donald Trump came into office and caused mass hysteria over Russia, the left used to stand for freedom of speech. However, the flamboyant tyrant in the White House quickly eroded their respect for rights. Then, in 2020, Covid-19 arrived and the censorship campaign switched into overdrive.

The left — armed with their militant “fact checkers” whose opinions are wielded like swords against anyone who challenges the official narrative — became the regime of authoritarian information controllers. After all, if you challenge their messiahs like Dr. Fauci, you challenge science itself — facts be damned.

So what happened? Why did the left go from championing free speech for years — even supporting the speech of neo-nazis — to rabidly demanding the silencing of those who attempt to challenge team doom? Dr. Malone and others have a theory, and it’s called mass formation psychosis.

“When you have a society that has become decoupled from each other and has free-floating anxiety in a sense that things don’t make sense, we can’t understand it, and then their attention gets focused by a leader or series of events on one small point just like hypnosis, they literally become hypnotized and can be led anywhere,” explained Malone on a recent interview with Joe Rogan.

Malone then described how “leaders” can exploit this situation: “And one of the aspects of that phenomenon is that the people that they identify as their leaders, the ones typically that come in and say you have this pain and I can solve it for you. I and I alone. Then they will follow that person. It doesn’t matter whether they lied to them or whatever. The data is irrelevant.”

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477091670424526852

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1477091670424526852
1:41 min

After Dr. Malone explained this concept of mass formation, developed by Dr. Mattias Desmet, professor of clinical psychology at Ghent University in Belgium, internet searches for “mass formation psychosis” began to exponentially increase. It appeared that Google, at one point, even attempted to skew the returned results, and it appears it is still happening.



Now, when you search for the phrase on Google, it returns articles by mainstream media outlets, like Forbes who took to making fun of Malone for even daring to suggest that this was the case. Apparently, large swaths of people calling for the unvaccinated to be put into camps, denied healthcare, and even killed, is not psychosis. It’s normal.

It’s normal to completely dismiss the massive amounts of data in front of us, and instead opt for a fear-driven narrative that has caused suffering of epic proportions in populations whose risk of complications from covid are almost non-existent.

If you search for the term on DuckDuckGo, however, Dr. Malone’s article from last month comes up. Bing, unlike Google, did not manipulate Malone’s article out of the search results either.




Though Google is hiding it and Forbes is downplaying it, mass formation psychosis is a plausible explanation for what is going on right now in Western society.

According to Desmet, there are four basic conditions which need to be met for a society to be vulnerable to mass hypnosis. And we are meeting all of them.

• The first condition is a lack of social bonding. Over the last five years, Americans have been torn in half by the Trump phenomenon and when covid arrived it pushed people into isolation that much further. As fearful individuals pine away in their homes with no social interaction, their lack of community has fallen to a depressing level.
• The second condition for mass psychosis is a lack of meaning or purpose in one’s life. Desmet cites a Gallup poll done with people in 142 countries in which 63% of respondents admitted to being so disengaged at work that they were sleepwalking through their day, putting time but not passion into their work. What’s more, a recent poll of young people in the UK revealed that 89 percent of those aged 16-29, “believe that their lives have no meaning or purpose.”
• Free floating anxiety is the third condition for mass psychosis and one need only look at the millions of prescriptions for anti-anxiety/depression medications in the country to realize that it is rife throughout the west. As Desmet points out, if people feel socially isolated and that their life has no meaning, their anxiety isn’t connected to a mental representation. This free-floating anxiety then creates deep psychological discontent.
• Finally, the fourth condition needed for mass psychosis is prevalent levels of frustration and aggression. A quick stroll down Twitter lane and the amount of overt societal aggression becomes exceedingly clear. It has even manifested countless times in real life as pro-maskers attack anti-maskers and vice versa. The term “covid Karen” exists for a reason.

One can reasonably argue that all four of these condition are easily met currently, which is fomenting a mob psychology. And as Desmet reminds us, this psychological phenomenon explains why so many have bought into a clearly illogical and unscientific narrative, and why they are willing to participate in the prescribed strategy like quadruple masking — “even if it’s utterly absurd,” Desmet says. “The reason they buy into the narrative is because it leads to this new social bond,” he explains. “Science, logic and correctness have nothing to do with it.”

Sound familiar? How many times have people continued to cite the “experts” whose narratives have been proven false over and over again. How many times have wee seen people blindly follow these known liars simply because these liars offer them solidarity in their mutual psychosis.

Even the FDA has fallen into this formation as they push vaccinations for 5-11 year old children despite no clear emergency for children. In spite of the lack of emergency, because these new community bonds have formed and team doom is under mass hypnosis, millions of parents eagerly await to inject their children with a vaccine that hasn’t even been approved for them.

What, besides mass psychosis could explain the mainstream media scoffing at the 400,000 adverse reaction events from the covid vaccine reported to VAERS in the last year? How is it that these reported events, including 20,000 deaths posted to the system are written off as immediately unreliable — despite all previous data showing that it is likely a vast undercount?

How is it that mainstream media and their supporters in team doom can justify myocarditis in children as some preservation of the greater good, without falling victim to mass psychosis? Without mass psychosis, why are people so willing to surrender their freedoms, submit to vaccine passports, and welcome a totalitarian police state with open arms?

This behavior is not “normal.” Those under mass psychosis have simply formed a bond so strong that actual facts no longer matter — for they are now the virtuous ones. Anyone who doesn’t constantly virtue signal to the collective is an enemy. Through fact checkers, social media, and big tech control, this collective focusses their rage and hatred on those who have not fallen victim to the spell.

Those not under the spell are evil, need to be locked up, arrested, and are deemed domestic terrorists by the collective.

Critical thought, logic, and reason rest in their graves as mass psychosis maintains its grip on millions of fearful, anxious, and aggressive loners who have found their place in the virtuous and caring aggregate horde.

While this outlook may seem bleak, the good news is that we can fight this mass psychosis by continuing to counter the narrative which is driving it, thereby shaking others out of their hypnosis by repeatedly exposing them to actual reality.

What’s more, it means these horrific things that many people are saying online, like the unvaccinated should be excluded from society or locked up, isn’t necessarily coming from a place of evil, but it’s more of a psychological process their minds are doing to help them survive their false reality.

 

[marsh]

[Cross post with the Corona thread:]

New Video w Dr. Mattias Desmet, Dr. Robert Malone, and Dr. Peter McCullough - A Must Watch Mass Formation Psychosis

TPC #653: Dr. Mattias Desmet, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough (Mass Formation Psychosis) 1:00:11 min

TPC #653 is with Dr. Mattias Desmet, teacher of Mass Formation Psychosis; Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA vaccine; and Dr. Peter McCullough, the most published cardio-renal physician in world history.

or

Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/TPC

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

The Death Of Truth

TUESDAY, JAN 04, 2022 - 10:45 PM
Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

Over the past several days I have had some time to think, and my thoughts have repeatedly turned to the current state of the Internet. For a couple of decades after it was popularized, the Internet was one of the greatest tools for free speech that the world has ever seen. It allowed ordinary people like me to share truth on a massive scale with other ordinary people all over the planet. I have always been grateful for that opportunity, but now our ability to share truth with one another over the Internet is being systematically eroded.

Nobody can deny that this is taking place, because it is literally happening right in front of our eyes. Over the past decade, control of the Internet has become increasingly centralized.

The big tech companies have become exceptionally powerful, and they have become addicted to using that power to suppress speech that they do not like.



This is an extremely dangerous trend, because the Internet has become the primary way that the vast majority of us communicate with one another. It truly is our modern version of “the marketplace of ideas”, but now the big tech companies are absolutely determined to distort it into something else entirely.

At this point, there are a whole host of ideas that you aren’t allowed to freely discuss on the Internet anymore.

In fact, there are a whole host of questions that you aren’t even allowed to ask.

When a society gets to a point where you aren’t even allowed to ask questions, that is a very clear sign that you are living under a very oppressive authoritarian regime.

Years ago when they started banning various prominent voices we all knew that it wouldn’t end there.

And it hasn’t.

Today, the big tech companies have no problem banning literally anyone.

For example, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene just got permanently banned on Twitter…

Twitter permanently blacklisted the personal account of a sitting member of Congress, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) over the New Year’s weekend. “Twitter is an enemy to America and can’t handle the truth,” Rep. Greene said, in a statement responding to the ban. “That’s fine, I’ll show America we don’t need them and it’s time to defeat our enemies.”

Rep. Greene has one of the largest followings on social media of any Republican member of Congress. Prior to her ban, she had over 465,000 followers on Twitter, meaning the Republican party and conservative movement has lost one of its most influential accounts on the platform.

Five years ago, if you told me that the big tech companies would start banning our politicians in Washington, I would have told you that you were crazy.

But now nobody is safe. Once Twitter and Facebook banned a sitting president, we all knew that there was no going back.

Of course the pandemic has given the big tech companies an excuse to push their levels of censorship to even higher levels. Just a few days ago, Twitter banned Dr. Robert Malone just before he was interviewed by Joe Rogan…

Dr. Robert Malone played a key role in the invention of the mRNA vaccine, the type of vaccine that is being administered to many Americans in an effort to stave off COVID-19. Malone has often been critical of the use of the vaccines, as well those in the media and government who support them.

He shared a great deal of research on his Twitter account, which had more than half a million followers.

“We all knew it would happen eventually,” Malone said on his Substack. “Today it did. Over a half million followers gone in a blink of an eye. That means I must have been on the mark, so to speak. Over the target. It also means we lost a critical component in our fight to stop these vaccines being mandated for children and to stop the corruption in our governments, as well as the medical-industrial complex and pharmaceutical industries.”

So now it appears that Twitter is preemptively banning people.

We truly have entered “Minority Report” territory, and that is extremely chilling.

Considering everything that has been happening with the pandemic, you would think that we would want to hear what one of the inventors of mRNA technology has to say. Dr. Robert Malone has decades of experience, and he had been one of the most respected names in his field.

But because he has viewpoints that don’t align with the official narratives being pushed by the pharmaceutical industry, he is being blacklisted by the big tech companies.

If you think that you can get around all the censorship by simply refusing to use the big tech company platforms, you are wrong.

Just consider this example. Gateway Pundit is reporting that T-Mobile is literally erasing links to their articles from text messages…

Hi Jim. In one of the screenshots you can see where my sister tried to send me your website link four times but I never got it. The other two screenshots it shows me sending a link to one of your articles, that’s the one with the picture of the fox in it. In the other screenshot from my sister it shows that she never received the link. The text message it still has the fox in it. I hope this helps. But what I realized is it’s actually just my boost T-Mobile carrier that’s blocking your links. I have a friend in the 949 area code and he was able to send it to his wife, however, I can only receive it in a group text. Let me know if you have any more questions. Thanks. Mark.

I have had a similar experience with articles written by Mike Adams of Natural News. When I try to send links to Natural News through Facebook Messenger, the links are simply erased from the messages somehow.

That is the level of censorship that we are now facing.

They literally want to control what we see, what we hear and what we think.

And of course this is setting the stage for a level of authoritarianism unlike anything we have ever seen before in all of human history.

Without freedom of speech, all of our other freedoms will rapidly become meaningless.

Sadly, at this point freedom of speech in the United States is getting pretty close to being completely wiped out.

Our Republic is rapidly dying, and millions upon millions of Americans are cheering as it happens.

The big tech companies have become the arbiters of truth, but most of the “truths” that they are relentlessly pushing are actually lies.

I don’t know if there is a way out of this mess, but we must find one, because the future of our society hangs in the balance.

 

[marsh]

Krikorian, Powell, McCullough & Shaffer

Four outstanding leaders in their respective fields: Krikorian, Powell, McCullough & Shaffer... What Just Happened? What Lies Ahead?

www.americaoutloud.com

Krikorian, Powell, McCullough & Shaffer

by Malcolm Out Loud | Jan 2, 2022 |

https://content.blubrry.com/viewpointthissunday/Krikorian_Powell_McCullough_Shaffer.mp3 50:11 min

Four outstanding leaders in their respective fields: Krikorian, Powell, McCullough & Shaffer. It’s been a long two-year journey to get to where we are at this very moment, and it’s safe to say that Americans have jet lag. Great leaders throughout America have been waiting for Americans to awake from their slumber. Is this the year in 2022, when liberty and justice are restored to the shining city on a hill? Over the next hour, you’ll hear from each of these leaders with their heartfelt thoughts, wisdom, and predictions for the new year. What Just Happened? What Lies Ahead?

The Real World Impact of our Immigration | Mark Krikorian has served as Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) since 1995. CIS is an independent, non-partisan research organization in Washington, DC, examining and critiquing the impact of immigration on the US.

Restoring America’s Justice System and Election Year Consequences | Sidney Powell, attorney, and former federal prosecutor. She is well known for her counsel to Gen Michael Flynn and her fight for truth in Election 2020. Author of the bestseller, Licensed to Lie. Find out more about the historic faith-based heritage event called THE RENEWAL: Restoring America’s Founding Covenant, with leaders gathered from across the country.

SARS-CoV-2 – How do we Build Trust back in Healthcare | Dr. Peter McCullough is an academic internist cardiologist, and epidemiologist from Dallas, TX. Dr. McCullough is considered among the world’s top experts on COVID-19 pandemic response. The McCullough Report can be heard right here on America Out Loud Talk Radio on Sat/Sun at 2 PM ET and 7 PM ET Encore.

America’s Foreign Policy and Impact on the 2022 Midterms | Lt Col Tony Shaffer is the President of the London Center for Policy Research, and a CIA-trained intelligence operations officer with 35 years of experience in global and national security. Tony’s book: Operation Dark Heart: Spycraft and Special Ops on the Frontlines of Afghanistan — and The Path to Victory, is in the America Out Loud Bookstore.

 

[marsh]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSPpCvxvnBE
9:53 min

Neil Oliver: From the ESTABLISHMENT's point of view, it seems nothing has changed in 2022

Jan 1, 2022


GBNews

Neil Oliver: 'I have thought from the beginning, that the isolation of people, especially the way elderly people in care homes were isolated from family...was bordering on the criminal'

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Finally, Bloomberg Admits Renewables Mania Caused Energy Shortages

WEDNESDAY, JAN 05, 2022 - 06:40 PM
Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Substack,

Between 2017 and 2021, Environmental Progress and I researched and published dozens of articles, testified before Congress, and authored a book, Apocalypse Never, arguing that weather-dependent renewables were making electricity increasingly unreliable and expensive, and making the United States, Europe, and Asia, dangerously dependent on natural gas.

In response, there was an organized and somewhat successful effort by progressive climate-renewables activists to cut off our funding, censor us on Facebook, and prevent me from testifying before Congress.

But now, one of the biggest boosters of natural gas and renewables, media giant Bloomberg, whose owner, Michael Bloomberg, is directly invested in natural gas and renewables, has published an article conceding and substantiating almost every single point we have made over the years.

“Europe Sleepwalked Into an Energy Crisis That Could Last Years,” screams the headline. The article concludes that the crisis was “years in the making” because Europe is “shutting down coal-fired electricity plants and increasing its reliance on renewables.”



Bloomberg still pulls its punches and misdescribes the situation in some ways. The article, like many other Bloomberg articles, mislabels the deployment of renewables as an “energy transition” similar to past transitions from wood to coal and coal to natural gas, failing to acknowledge that the poor physics of energy-dilute renewables make that impossible. And it suggests that Europe’s energy crisis is the result of ignorance. “The energy crisis hit the bloc,” notes a renewable energy PR person, “when security of supply was not on the menu of EU policymakers,” ignoring the reality that I and others warned EU policymakers of this very crisis.

But, to its credit, the article acknowledges that the energy crisis is a direct result of Europe over-investing in unreliable renewables and under-investing in reliable energy sources. “Wind and solar are cleaner but sometimes fickle,” the authors admit, in the understatement of the year, “as illustrated by the sudden drop in turbine-generated power the continent recorded last year.” (I was the first U.S. journalist to report Germany saw its emissions rise 25% in the first half of 2021 due to lack of wind.)

Now, a new analysis from Environmental Progress finds Germany increased its emissions last year and will likely increase them again this year. This year, German electricity generation coming from fossil fuels will be 44% compared to 39% in 2021 and 37 percent in 2020, assuming weather conditions and electricity demand are similar to 2021. Emissions from Germany’s power sector will rise from 244 million tons in 2021 to 264 million tons in 2022.



And Bloomberg notes that Europe is in a full-blown energy crisis.

“The retired salt caverns, aquifers, and fuel depots that hold Europe’s stockpiles of natural gas have never been so empty at this point in winter,” it notes, and “the continent is grappling with a supply crunch that’s caused benchmark gas prices to more than quadruple from last year’s levels, squeezing businesses and households. The crisis has left the European Union at the mercy of the weather and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s wiles, both notoriously difficult to predict.”

It’s true that American natural gas from fracking, a practice I have defended since 2013, is being shipped to Europe, and will ease Europe’s pain. And it hasn’t helped that France’s leaders have grossly mismanaged their nuclear power plants, resulting in an embarrassing 30% decline in their output during the crisis.

But, notes Bloomberg, the relief provided by American liquified natural gas (LNG) is “temporary at best…. Storage sites [for natural gas] are only 56% full, more than 15 percentage points below the 10-year average… Barring an increase in Russian exports, something that doesn’t appear to be in the cards, levels will be at less than 15% by the end of March, the lowest on record… With the two coldest months of winter still ahead, the fear is that Europe may run out of gas.”

And the lack of nuclear energy underscores the need for more nuclear plants since they are reliable and operate independently of the weather when they are managed well. No matter how well a solar farm is managed, it can’t change the weather.



And now, Russia is massing troops on its border with Ukraine, and may invade.

This is a problem since one-third of Russian gas going into Europe goes through Ukraine. If war breaks out, Europe could suffer serious gas shortages.

Overdependence on natural gas and renewables, and underinvestment in nuclear, has thus undermined the energy security, and thus national security, of Europe, since heads of state dependent on Russian gas will be less likely to speak out against an invasion.

Even longtime natural gas and renewable energy boosters agree there’s a crisis.

“The ability of Europe and the U.S. to respond to a Russian invasion is constrained both by a desire not to exacerbate Europe’s energy crisis by sanctioning Russian energy exports and, more broadly, by the threat that Russia could retaliate to any confrontation by restricting gas flows into Europe, as Russia did in 2006 and 2009,” Jason Bordoff, a former Obama administration official, told Bloomberg.

Covid accelerated many trends and one of them is the recognition that unreliable and weather-dependent renewables cannot power modern economies. Senator Joe Manchin specifically mentioned the role that renewables are playing in making America’s electricity less reliable when he killed Build Back Better legislation in December. The Netherlands mentioned the need for reliable electricity when it announced plans to expand nuclear energy.

Now, with New England at grave risk of energy shortages for the exact same reasons as Europe, it’s time for the American people and their representatives to fully wake up to the reality that modern societies cannot rely on unreliable renewables. It would also help if the renewable energy industry, and its dogmatic supporters, including Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Rep. Sean Casten, and Rep. Jared Huffman, would stop trying to censor and otherwise shut down the people who raised the alarm about the coming crisis in the first place.

 

[marsh]

COVID-1984 Authoritarianism: A Test Run for Greater Tyranny?

One thing about precedents is that, well, they precede. Thus have many have been concerned that the new-found power politicians wield via COVID-19 restrictions will not be relinquished. And now an academic-authored article calling for climate authoritarianism has given people another reason to...

thenewamerican.com

COVID-1984 Authoritarianism: A Test Run for Greater Tyranny?

by Selwyn Duke January 5, 2022

Selwyn Duke

One thing about precedents is that, well, they precede. Thus have many have been concerned that the new-found power politicians wield via COVID-19 restrictions will not be relinquished. And now an academic-authored article calling for climate authoritarianism has given people another reason to worry.

As Powerline’s John Hinderaker wrote Saturday:

The proto-fascists among us have delighted in issuing “emergency” orders relating to the coronavirus. These have included, among others, shutdowns and mask and vaccine mandates. The Governor of Minnesota went so far as to issue an “emergency” order prohibiting all residents of the state from leaving their houses without his permission.

Many have speculated that statists’ overreaction to covid has been a dry run for more “emergencies” to come. Indeed the supply of potential emergencies is large, particularly when “science” can reliably be deployed on behalf of the state.

Support for such speculation comes from an article published by Cambridge University Press under the auspices of the American Political Science Association. The article is titled “Political Legitimacy, Authoritarianism, and Climate Change” and was authored by Ross Mittiga, a young academic who ran unsuccessfully for the Virginia House of Delegates in 2017 as a Democrat.

Mittiga is a quite young man who now is at a university in Chile teaching “classes on environmental political theory, public ethics, and the history of political thought,” his bio informs. He’s also apparently a vegan (but, hey, stereotypes have no validity whatsoever!).

The young “professor” is also a “Climatopian.” As BallotPedia related, providing one of his campaign statements: “As someone who has dedicated his career to studying the politics and ethics of climate change, no issue is more important to me — or central to this campaign — than the need for robust environmental protection and climate action.”

So “Mittiga is a true believer and he believes in the ‘whatever it takes’ approach to stopping the climate from doing what it does naturally,” commentator Andrea Widburg writes. In his “article’s summary, we get Mittiga mournfully concluding that ‘contemporary political theory literature’ would answer ‘no’ to the question ‘Is authoritarian power ever legitimate?’ That, however, does not stop the panicked and intrepid Mittiga.”

As the academic states, “I argue … that there exists another, overlooked aspect of legitimacy concerning a government’s ability to ensure safety and security.

While, under normal conditions, maintaining democracy and rights is typically compatible with guaranteeing safety, in emergency situations, conflicts between these two aspects of legitimacy can and often do arise.”

Hinderaker rightly points out that tyranny is always effected “for our own good.” But what is Mittiga using as a model for his climate-oriented for-our-own-good-ism? The Virus™, of course.

As he explains, “A salient example of this [security-imperative freedom-squelching] is the COVID-19 pandemic, during which severe limitations on free movement and association have become legitimate techniques of government.”

Legitimate? Not morally or constitutionally. Moreover, “Mittiga is unmoved by the fact that it’s becoming increasingly clear that those ‘severe limitations on free movement and association’ did nothing to slow COVID’s spread,” Widburg notes. “He would dismiss claims that, by making the population less healthy, COVID authoritarianism probably increased the number of unnecessary deaths, whether from COVID itself, or from untreated diseases (cancer, heart disease, etc.), suicides, and overdoses.”

No doubt. Roughly speaking, there are two types of people in the world: Those who believe in and seek Truth and make it paramount; and moral relativists, who don’t believe in Truth, put an agenda in its place and, therefore, rationalize away Truth when it conflicts with their worldly agenda-god.

As for Mittiga’s faux devil, he continued, “Climate change poses an even graver threat to public safety” than the coronavirus. “Consequently, I argue, legitimacy may require a similarly authoritarian approach.”

“While unsettling, this suggests the political importance of climate action,” the professor then concludes. “For if we wish to avoid legitimating authoritarian power, we must act to prevent crises from arising that can only be resolved by such means.”

If Mittiga really believes his prescription would forestall authoritarianism and not cement it, he’s profoundly naïve. For while there is some overlap, there are another two types of people in the world: The man-caused climate change thesis true believers — activists, some media and entertainment figures, academics, etc. — and the small group of demagogues who simply leverage the agenda for power. And the latter would end up running the show.

“Climate change” is not a conflict such as WWII or the War Between the States.

The reaction to the latter did help get the big government ball rolling, but it was apparent when those events were over. (Americans were different back then, too.)

It’s much as with the “war on COVID.” When is it over? First it was “just a two-week lockdown to ‘flatten the curve.’” This became, “Can’t reopen without 14 straight days of declining infections.” Then it was, “No return to normal without a ‘vaccine.’” Now it’s, “We must ‘vaccinate’ but maintain other restrictions just to be ‘safe.’”

“Climate change” would be even more open-ended. At least a virus could possibly mutate into a relatively innocuous form, or effective treatment protocols could be widely embraced. But while climate “cures” are administered now, the patient’s (Gaia’s) “recovery” lies decades down the road.

And it always will.

Echoing the novel 1984, they’ll be saying, “Oceania was at war with Climate Change. Oceania had always been at war with Climate Change.”

The kicker is that, as I explained in “Why the Greentopians Would Destroy the Earth,” Mittiga’s machinations would actually lead to environmental destruction. For, as history shows, that’s what authoritarians deliver.

 

[marsh]

In 2021, Freedom and Prosperity Were Hijacked by COVID Hysteria - El American

The world in 2021 has surrendered to panic and thrown itself into the arms of authoritarianism in search of an impossible security

elamerican.com

In 2021, Freedom and Prosperity Were Hijacked by COVID Hysteria
The world in 2021 has surrendered to panic and thrown itself into the arms of authoritarianism in search of an impossible security

GUILLERMO RODRÍGUEZ

The 2014 film Robocop, directed by Jose Padilha from a screenplay by Joshua Zetumer, Nick Schenk, Edward Neumeier and Michael Miner imagines a near future in which the global hegemony of the United States as the sole superpower is reinforced by the overseas military presence of advanced artificially intelligent robotic soldiers.

It was fascinating that the woke mentality of the screenwriters was bent on attributing to caricatures of conservatives the disinformation, agitation and propaganda typical of the liberal media. But what was revealing was that the imaginary Omnicorp corporation, manufacturer of the powerful autonomous artificial intelligence combat systems, was unconcernedly outsourcing the production of such strategic American military equipment to China.

China, in the imagination of American intellectuals and woke businessmen, would be an eternal factory with cheap labor and few environmental regulations in which to subcontract the manufacture of American technology.

They did not understand that they were transferring strategic technological and business know-how to a quietly rising enemy. And so they made Xi Jinping’s new China a totalitarian superpower, far more powerful than the USSR ever was.

And still the neo-Marxist ultra-left, so influential in the Democratic Party, resists in 2021 to admit that Washington is facing the reality of a second Cold War, different and distant from the previous one. Some even view with sympathy the global power aspirations of that communist totalitarianism which through mercantilism employs capitalist tools to make trade another battleground for global hegemony.

We live in a world in which ideological subversion spread through a West that doubted itself, its values and successes. A world in which we have lost to neo-Marxist ideological subversion the bulk of two generations of young people from the freest and most prosperous societies the world has ever known.

Ours is a world in which a pandemic that spread due to the secrecy and irresponsibility of Beijing, and the initial complicity of the WHO. It is a world in which the economic damage caused, less by the pandemic than by the ineffective lockdowns intended to combat it, has brought the economies of the West to the brink of collapse of the complex spontaneous dynamic structure of capital on which free market economies depend.

But it is a world that in 2021 has surrendered to panic and thrown itself into the arms of authoritarianism in search of impossible security. The pandemic showed us that socialized and centralized systems of state medicine are incapable of responding to an emergency. But in democracies as solid as Canada, the health authorities, instead of confronting the long delays in care that in their bureaucratized system of socialized medicine caused thousands of preventable deaths from conditions other than COVID-19, dedicated millions to illegally spy on their population through their smartphones, with the excuse of the pandemic.

Our politicians learned two great authoritarian lessons: on the one hand, that emergency and panic easily justify increasing degrees of unimaginable social control. And more importantly, that all failures, economic and health, can be used to demand more and more of the same.

The two authoritarian lessons of the pandemic boil down to the fact that once governments and media have transformed real fear into irrational panic, the uninformed and fearful majority will unquestioningly accept whatever the powers-that-be present as a failed path to illusory security.

2021 has been a year of global retreat from freedom and prosperity. A year of geopolitical and economic setbacks for the West. A 2021 of Beijing’s rise to power and influence. The year in which increasingly authoritarian powers rule the free world while hiding the fact that the pandemic has caused far less damage than they have caused with their failed social control policies against the pandemic.

 

[marsh]

‘Authoritarianism’ May Be Necessary to Fight Climate Change, Cambridge Study Argues | Jon Miltimore

Did he just say the quiet part out loud? “While, under normal conditions, maintaining democracy and rights is typically compatible with guaranteeing safety, in emergency situations, conflicts between these two aspects of legitimacy can and often do arise. A salient example of this is the...

fee.org

‘Authoritarianism’ May Be Necessary to Fight Climate Change, Cambridge Study Argues

There are many genuine threats facing humanity. None of them require authoritarianism or the infringement of civil liberties.

Wednesday, January 5, 2022

Image Credit: iStock-Mihajlo Maricic

Jon Miltimore

A recent study published in American Political Science Review, a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal published by Cambridge University, begins with a teasing question: “Is authoritarian power ever legitimate?”

For many, the answer is clearly no, concedes the study’s author—Ross Mittiga, an assistant professor of political theory at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile. But Mittiga, in the abstract to the study, suggests otherwise:

“While, under normal conditions, maintaining democracy and rights is typically compatible with guaranteeing safety, in emergency situations, conflicts between these two aspects of legitimacy can and often do arise. A salient example of this is the COVID-19 pandemic, during which severe limitations on free movement and association have become legitimate techniques of government. Climate change poses an even graver threat to public safety. Consequently, I argue, legitimacy may require a similarly authoritarian approach.”

‘Explicitly Argues for Authoritarian Governance’?
The study caught the eye of Alexander Wuttke, a Twitter user who studies political behavior at the University of Mannheim in Germany.

“In my reading, it explicitly argues that we must put climate action over democracy and adopt authoritarian governance if democracies fail to act on climate change,” tweeted Wuttke.

In an extensive thread, Wuttke explained why he disagrees with Mittiga.

“I am genuinely puzzled about the origins of this anti-democratic intuition that seems to give rise to the entire endeavor of exploring whether we should sacrifice democracy for the sake of a higher good,” Wuttke says at one point.

“The article argues that crises not only can legitimize but may require authoritarian governance. This is not true. Democracies have fought the pandemic without giving up being democratic.”



In a rare (and refreshing) display of civility for Twitter, Mittiga said he appreciated Wuttke’s thoughts and thanked him for "his good will in sharing these comments with me before posting.” In his own thread, Mittiga sought to address what he said were “several mischaracterizations or confusions” in Wuttke’s comments.

“The relevant question is *not* whether giving up democracy was somehow necessary for addressing the emergency (in this case, COVID-19). Clearly, it was not, and I certainly never suggest as much in the paper,” Mittiga explains at one point. “Rather, the real question -- the one that gets at what I tried to argue -- is whether democracies have addressed the emergency in purely democratic, rights-respecting ways. The answer is, of course, that they have not.”



‘Less Legitimate’ Nations Shun Authoritarianism?
For those interested in capturing the nuance of the differences in what Mittiga says he meant in the study versus what Wuttke believes he wrote, I suggest a careful review of their threads (and the study itself).

However, Mittiga’s own description speaks for itself. He says that COVID-19 clearly resulted in “severe restrictions on rights of free movement, association, religious practice, and even speech,” all of which “are authoritarian in nature, though, I would argue, they have often been nonetheless legitimate.”

Mittiga then explains that governments that failed to take authoritarian steps to mitigate the threat of COVID are perceived as “less legitimate. (Think here of the Trump or Bolsonaro governments.)”

“I believe the same is true with respect to climate change,” Mittiga explains.

“Those governments which are able but unwilling to confront the climate crisis -- which poses one of the greatest threats to safety and security we have ever faced -- are, for that reason, less legitimate.”

Whatever nuances Wuttke may have missed in Mittiga’s study, it’s clear that Mittiga is in fact arguing that “legitimate” governments should shun democratic principles and civil liberties and embrace authoritarianism to confront challenges such as climate change.

The Lesson of Crises
Say what you will about Mittiga’s proposal—which is myopic and dangerous—his logic is sound. If “legitimate” governments embrace authoritarian measures to combat a deadly pandemic that poses a genuine threat to humans, why should they not embrace authoritarian measures to combat climate change, which many argue poses an even greater threat?

There’s a popular meme among libertarians: “If you allow politicians to break the law during emergencies, they will create an emergency to break the law.”



It’s a cynical take, to be sure, but it contains more than a nugget of truth. Progressives have long been frustrated by the American system, which was designed to disperse centralized power, something they feared above all else.

"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny," James Madison wrote in The Federalist Papers.

For this reason, the Founders created a federalist (decentralized) system with numerous checks and balances. That system endured stubbornly for generations, but over the course of the 20th century the checks and balances eroded—not so much slowly as sporadically.

In his book Crisis and Leviathan, economist Robert Higgs points out that there’s a pattern to the erosion of constitutional limits on power: they happen during crises. In 2020, the crisis was the pandemic, which precipitated lockdowns and the most widespread infringements on economic freedom in US history (which saw the top 1 percent accumulate a record percentage of wealth).

Mittiga is not wrong when he asserts the pandemic resulted in authoritarian “restrictions on rights of free movement, association, religious practice, and even speech.” But he may not realize this is part of a pattern. As Higgs shows, the erosion of civil liberties and the biggest power grabs in history came during periods of crisis.

World War I brought the draft, crackdowns on “disloyal” speech, unprecedented government propaganda, the chilling Palmer Raids, and much more. The Great Depression gave birth to the New Deal. World War II brought (again) the draft and Japanese internment camps, and more. Korea brought the nationalization of steel mills. The 9-11 attacks spawned the War on Terror and the Patriot Act.

These are hardly the only examples. What’s important is that crises have historically served as the catalyst for authoritarianism, and, as Higgs notes, the emergency powers often persist long after the emergency has abated.

Higgs refers to this phenomenon as “the ratchet effect,” which suggests that governments simply lack the will or ability to roll back bureaucratic power strengthened for supposedly temporary needs, giving credence to James Madison's prophetic warning that a free people would be wise to guard against "the old trick of turning every contingency into a resource for accumulating force in government."

None of this is to say climate change does not exist or that the COVID-19 pandemic is not a serious problem, any more than it is to say the Great Depression, World War I, the 9-11 attacks, and World War II were not serious problems.

Each of these events was real and consequential. None of these events, however, justify authoritarianism or the infringement of civil liberties.

A brief reading of history shows that there will always be a crisis, conflict, or catastrophe around the corner that those in power will use as a pretext to violate the very liberties governments are supposed to protect—and if there’s not one, you can bet they’ll find one.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

The Vaccine Is A Dud, But That Won't Stop Push For Digital IDs

THURSDAY, JAN 06, 2022 - 09:00 PM
Authored by Jeffrey Barrett via American Thinker (emphasis ours),

As time goes on, we are learning more and more about Covid 19 and the Covid 19 vaccines. To date, the most important and surprising information about the vaccines is that they do not prevent the vaccinated from contracting or transmitting the virus. The irony is that the CDC, a government agency, readily admits thishttps://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/01/the_vaccine_is_a_dud.html#_edn1 but other sectors of the government are carrying on as if this vitally important new information did not exist at all.



Take for example Biden's OSHA which, before it was temporarily halted by a Circuit Court ruling, ordered the unvaccinated but not the vaccinated employees of private companies to undergo inconvenient weekly Covid tests even though other parts of the government were admitting that the vaccinated transmit the virus as readily as the unvaccinated. The whole moral justification of forcing people to take the vaccine is to protect others even if the "hesitant" don't want to risk taking the jab due to the escalating problem of vaccine-related deaths and serious injuries.[ii] But we now know that the vaccine is a dud. While it can reduce symptoms of Covid, it cannot prevent the vaccinated from catching and transmitting Covid. And yet the government is acting as if none of this matters and is continuing to push harsh mandates upon those who do not want to play vaccine roulette and take the risk of a vaccine injury.

Again as time goes on, it is becoming increasingly evident that the reason why the Biden administration is demonstrably not "following the science"[iii] is that the irrational and probably unconstitutional vaccine mandates are not about public health at all but more likely about the implementation of a universal digital identification program that governments are labeling "vaccine passports."

To understand why the government seems determined to tag every citizen of every age with a digital ID, it is first necessary to understand the attitudinal evolution of political elites in Western countries. These elites appear to be losing their faith in the classical liberal emphasis on individual human freedom that was intellectually nurtured in the West by such thinkers as Kant, Voltaire, Locke, Bastiat, Mill, and Spencer and attained its clearest concrete political expression in the American Constitutional Republic. The essence of this revolution in political thought and practice is that it gave common people protection against the potential abuse of power of their ruling elites. Such protections included political theory that rooted individual rights in natural law and Divine Will as well as practical institutions such as the division of power between the states and central government, the further division of those powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary, the rule of law, courts of law, the Bill of Rights, privacy rights, property rights, elections and so forth.

Despite considerable differences, Western elites used to broadly agree on the moral necessity of protecting the people against the potential abuse of power of those who controlled a society's instruments of coercion such as the police and military. This appears to be no longer case. Western elites from the political, commercial, and media worlds regularly meet in events and "training schools"[iv] sponsored by the World Economic Forum (WEF) to discuss the need for a whole new kind of society where people own no personal property, have little or no personal privacy, are heavily dependent upon their governments for the goods and services they consume, the location of their homes and where and how often they can travel. All this illiberalism is couched in terms of a new kind of "sustainable," "inclusive," "equitable" quasi-utopian society[v] not unlike the vaporous visions that Marx used to conjure up in his early writings.

The reason for this abandonment of traditional Western ideals appears to be their belief that these ideals no longer work in the post-World War II era. At the beginning of that era, Western elites were still largely committed to civil liberties but their commitment to economic liberty and constrained government was considerably less than that of earlier generations of leaders. Then increasingly post-World War II elites began to strive to seek and sustain their power by claiming they could proactively provide their voters with a level of economic wealth, economic security, and an overall social "safety" environment never before seen in human history. The economic justification for these escalating promises was a form of neo- Keynesianism. The economist John Maynard Keynes did not trust the markets to correct themselves during recurring business cycles and so advocated that government go into debt to "stimulate" stagnant economies out of recessions and then pay off that debt during the subsequent booms and budgetary surpluses brought about by the proactive economic managers. Western politicians quickly forgot about the "paying off" part and gradually over the postwar decades increased the public debt to the stupendous levels we see today. Western central banks also suppressed interest rates thereby incentivizing private companies and consumers to heap unprecedented private debt onto the unprecedented public debt.

Today the European and Japanese bond markets are in such shambles that only their central banks will purchase their government debt. And as economists have been pointing out for years, governments cannot possibly pay for all the promises they have made to their voters for future benefits such as pensions, medical care, and other cradle-to-grave comforts. The American federal government alone has, by some measures, a 200 Trillion gap between future expected revenues and future promised benefits.[vi] Little wonder that today's Western elites are giving up on traditional Western liberties because they know that once the hard times hit, the masses will use those liberties such as freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to protest, the courts, and elections as weapons to lash back at the "establishments" in power.

The establishments, of course, do not want to give up their wealth, status, and power, and so must find some way of depriving the masses of these dangerous liberties, exert more authority over them and turn them from free citizens into subjects.

 

[marsh]

The Covid Plandemic - A Ship to Oblivion 1:16:27 min

THE COVID PLANDEMIC - A SHIP TO OBLIVION


TheCrowhouse

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

For Farmers Across America, Solar Power May Spell Trouble

FRIDAY, JAN 07, 2022 - 08:40 PM
Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times,

This article is the first in a series on the underreported costs of solar power. American farmers express concerns about being crowded off of their property, the potentially permanent loss of good agricultural soil, and the feasibility of combining large solar installations with farmland or pollinator habitats, among other topics.

“It’s very frustrating to try to protect your farm,” cotton farmer Nancy Caywood told The Epoch Times.

An aerial view of solar panels at the Sutter Greenworks Solar Site in Calverton, N.Y., on Sept. 19, 2021. (Bruce Bennett/Getty Images)

Caywood and her family manage Caywood Farms in rural Casa Grande, Arizona, south of Phoenix in Pinal County. She said they’re under significant pressure to sell their land to large solar companies, which are buying up parcels near their property.

“It’s eyesores to me,” she said.

Caywood said that surveyors and other people are coming onto her family’s land without their permission.

“They’re very bold,” she said, adding that she’s not sure which companies have been intruding on the Caywood property.

Caywood worries about what could happen to the solar installations near her if their parent companies go under. Abengoa, the Spanish company that built Solana Generating Station near Gila Bend, Arizona, recently filed for bankruptcy.

She is also concerned that the land used for solar farms may never be able to be restored to farmland.

Even now, the land her family owns close to the new solar farm is apparently being affected by the massive installation. Caywood’s son Travis measured ambient temperatures on the east end of the family’s farm that were 10 degrees warmer than the rest of the property.

That portion of the property abuts a solar farm identified as Pinal Central Energy Center, LLC, which was developed by NextEra Energy Resources and was described as one of that company’s “investments in Arizona” according to a 2021 presentation by the firm.

Representatives of NextEra Energy Resources didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment by press time.

Another nearby solar project, the 2,100-acre Eleven Mile Solar Center, is just across the Arizona State Route 287 from Caywood Farms.


Caywood Farms in rural Casa Grande, Arizona. (caywoodfarms.com)
The project’s website claims it will generate more than 900,000 megawatts of electricity per year from 850,000 solar panels.

The Epoch Times also has reached out to Orsted, the Danish multinational power company that is a partner in the project, for comment on Caywood’s remarks as well as the installation’s projected power output, given longstanding concerns about the real-world efficiency of solar panels.

A spokesperson for the Solar Energy Industries Association, an industry trade organization, offered a different perspective.

“Solar projects and agricultural lands are often highly compatible. Farmers and landowners can gain significant revenue for lands they are not actively farming and projects almost always are conducted to the benefit of both parties,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

The spokesperson declined to comment on the specific individual stories described in this article, stating that “we don’t know all the facts.”

Protecting Soil
Caywood isn’t alone in her concerns about the use of good farmland for solar installations.

Annette Smith, executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, told The Epoch Times via email that the protection of prime agricultural soils has been an issue in her New England state.

Vermont law now specifies that primary agricultural soils won’t cease to be defined as such when a solar installation is built on them.

“My goal was to see that using prime ag land for solar should not be an opportunity to have the land ‘switched’ to commercial, industrial, or some other category simply by installing solar panels thereupon,” state Sen. Mark MacDonald, the Democratic lawmaker who drafted the language, told The Epoch Times via email.

In a telephone call, he added that the language was also motivated by prospective improvements in solar panel efficiency.

“In future years, it won’t take as many acres to produce the same amount of electricity,” he said.


Fog settles between hills at daybreak, seen from the Comstock House bed & breakfast/farm in Plainfield, Vt., on Oct. 20, 2007. (STAN HONDA/AFP via Getty Images)
“The dynamic over the years has changed,” Smith told The Epoch Times. She said Vermont’s Republican Gov. Phil Scott has given the state’s scientists more freedom to consider the downsides of solar projects than his predecessor, Democrat Peter Shumlin.

“When Gov. Shumlin was in charge, it was ‘build everything everywhere regardless of impacts,’” Smith said.

In 2014, under Shumlin, one major solar development ended up claiming what Smith called “some of the finest prime agricultural soils in Rutland County, Vermont.”

Despite these concerns, the Public Service Board (PSB) granted the land to Rutland Renewable Energy, LLC, which was owned by the utility-scale solar company groSolar and has since been sold to the French firm EDF Renewables.

In its decision, PSB concluded that the company’s Cold River Project “will not significantly reduce the agricultural potential of the soils found at the Project site.”


An array of 366 solar tracking devices stand in a field in South Burlington, Vt., on Oct. 31, 2014. (Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images)
The case made it to the Vermont Supreme Court, which upheld the PSB’s decision against opposition from the Town of Rutland and several neighbors.

“The project site contains a variety of primary agricultural soils; the standards prohibit siting a ground-mounted solar facility on primary agricultural soils. The site has not, however, been used for agricultural production for 15 to 20 years,” Justice John Dooley noted in his opinion affirming PSB’s ruling.

The power produced at the Cold River site, which includes 8,820 solar panels, is currently being sold to Green Mountain Power under a multidecade agreement, according to AEP OnSite Partners, which built the array.

Green Mountain Power confirmed to The Epoch Times that it’s still under that power purchase agreement. Representatives of EDF Renewables didn’t respond to a request for comment by press time.

Vermont is one of only 15 states with statewide solar decommissioning requirements, as described in a December 2021 report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Despite the state’s relatively stringent regulation of the energy source, Smith believes the status quo still leaves farmland vulnerable.


A flock of sheep run across a field in Plainfield, Vt., on Oct. 19, 2007. (STAN HONDA/AFP via Getty Images)
“The state of Vermont really hasn’t done much to protect prime ag soils from solar development,” Smith said. “It’s a case-by-case basis and so far it has not been an impediment to approval, as long as it is returned to being prime ag after the project is decommissioned.”

An SEIA spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email that the group supports decommissioning standards “to promote transparency and clarity while encouraging responsible development of solar projects.”

“Solar developers are seeking to optimize among numerous factors including both minimizing impacts to local resources (like prime ag lands) and access to the grid. Developers will choose less productive agricultural land to avoid such conflicts,” the spokesperson wrote.

Downsides
Janet Christensen-Lewis, who owns Puck’s Glen Organic Farm on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, thinks the wider public is only just beginning to grasp the downsides of solar power.

“I think the public consciousness may have been what I was about six years ago,” she told The Epoch Times. “I just wanted to flip a light switch, totally oblivious to all of the consequences of energy production. And then when you’re faced with projects that are coming that are actually going to impact your surroundings, you take a closer look at things.”

“I suspect that if you said to people in New York City that we should take Central Park, which is 800 acres, and cover it with solar panels, they would be aghast,” she said. “What they don’t realize is that 800 acres is pretty much nothing for the solar that’s being put in now. And we’re using that land.”

In September 2021, the Biden administration’s Department of Energy released its Solar Futures Study, which envisioned a maximum solar deployment scenario of more than 16,000 square miles—an area slightly smaller than the states of Massachusetts and Connecticut combined.

That report, like some other solar energy research undertaken in recent years, envisions the “co-location of agriculture and solar energy.” But Christensen-Lewis is skeptical that such “agrivoltaic” technology could be realized at a large scale.


Solar panels at a solar farm owned and operated by Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative Solar LLC, in Hughsville, Md., on Aug. 20, 2015. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
“You’re not going to run combines underneath—you’re never going to figure out a way to make that happen underneath solar panels.”

The Solar Futures Study also emphasizes the potential of “solar-pollinator habitats,” which are intended to combine solar panels with pollinator-friendly native plants, ultimately bolstering crop yields while simultaneously producing cleaner energy.

Christensen-Lewis, who already plants wildflowers on her organic farm to encourage pollinators, has her doubts about those habitats as well.

“We always say that when a solar company comes in and puts in their pollinator habitat, it’s three years away from becoming a patch of weeds, and then they’re going to have to use Roundup,” she said. “It’s just a label—it’s just a selling point—and not necessarily a very good one.”

Maryland has set the target of producing 50 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030, increasing the pressure to build more solar in the state’s rural counties. Yet development along the Eastern Shore hasn’t gone without controversy.


A farmer harvests soybeans in Owings, Md., on Oct. 19, 2018. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
The Maryland Department of the Environment ruled that Great Bay Solar I, LLC’s solar plant construction sites in Princess Anne, Maryland, violated multiple titles of the state’s environmental law. The department found that Great Bay Solar had disturbed nontidal wetlands at multiple sites, reaching a settlement whereby the company paid the department a $400,000 civil penalty.

Christensen-Lewis was involved in a successful effort to keep a large solar farm out of Kent County, Maryland, where she believes it threatened prime farmland.

Despite these victories, the outlook for many farmers facing pressure from major solar companies remains uncertain.

Caywood, of Caywood Farms in Casa Grande, worries her fourth-generation farm could become “an island” surrounded by utility-scale solar.

“They’re putting it [solar] out here in the rural areas, on our farmland, and in our forests,” Christensen-Lewis said. “That’s land that we see major other purposes for—for feeding people, for making sure that we have environmental protections in place.”

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Will Artificial Intelligence Create A Socialist Paradise?

FRIDAY, JAN 07, 2022 - 08:00 PM
Authored by Doug French via The Mises Institute,

Relating a quip by Soviet economist Nikolai Fedorenko, Yuri Maltsev illustrated the problem with socialism in his foreword to Ludwig von Mises’s Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth. Fedorenko said, at the time, in Maltsev’s words, “[A] fully balanced, checked, and detailed economic plan for the next year would be ready, with the help of computers, in 30,000 years.”'



Victor Shvets believes computing power has caught up and “technology could soon create an environment where state planning might be able to deliver acceptable economic results while simultaneously suppressing societal and individual freedoms.” Mr. Shvets has worked all over the world as an investment banker and has now put down his dystopian ideas of the future in the book The Great Rupture: Three Empires, Four Turning Points, and the Future of Humanity.

Shvets admits history tells us freedom equals productivity, prosperity, and happiness, while Soviet-style planning creates criminality, corruption, and starvation.

His use of Soviet “good intentions” makes a reader wonder as to his naïveté.

The author believes that by 2030 artificial intelligence (AI) “will replace most research functions and go beyond that by anticipating changes and making discoveries.”

AI will be able to make all those naughty decisions entrepreneurs struggle to make.

Capital will be deployed with perfection.

Consumer needs and wants will be anticipated effortlessly.

Shvets writes, “modern AI is able to manipulate an unheard of amount of information, and hence, arguably it might steer investments in a more productive way than has ever been possible by Adam Smith’s invisible hand.”

Shvets believes Nikolai Bukharin’s scientific planning and state control “might not have been wrong at all but were just a century ahead of their time. Today, the computational power might allow for such planning to occur without creating the stagnation and inefficiency of the Soviet system.”

He goes on to say F.A. Hayek’s ideas may end up on the scrap heap of history and free market capitalism will be viewed the same as the “burning of witches.”

All of this after most of his book was spent chronicling how freedom is the reason the West has prospered and the Ottoman Empire, China, and Russia have been mired in poverty. However, now, Americans are sitting around watching TV and playing on their computers instead of reading. Shvets says the collision of financialization and technology has led to civil disintegration, “all the ingredients of Roman ‘bread and circuses.’ Escapism, stagnating incomes, and rising inequalities characterize most Western societies, with the public sector stepping in to distribute ‘Free bread.’”

Younger people are more in favor than their parents of government solving problems. Baby boomer parents have created kids who are dependent, used to winning “prizes for losers.” Shvets believes this era is more toxic than smoking, with loneliness, increased suicides, declining literacy, digital addictions, and impaired analytical capacity.

The new world, according to Shvets, will be fair, equitable, and beneficial to society, rather than freedom and individualism.

His soothsaying is based on a quarter of millennials believing democracy is bad for society and less than a third believing it essential. Fewer than half of European millennials support democracy despite direct experience with fascism and communism.

Shvets sees a world where AI takes over and only 5 percent of people will work and the remaining 95 percent won’t have to, presumably supported by taxes paid by the 5 percent.

“Karl Marx’s idea of ‘communism’ will be our common future,” Shvets writes.

Society will achieve such a high level of productivity “it will liberate humans from the need to toil in order to survive, and by that stage it is likely that alternative avenues of personal satisfaction will also emerge.”

Mises wouldn’t buy any of this.

“No single man [or machine] can ever master all the possibilities of production, innumerable as they are, as to be in a position to make straightway evident judgments of value without the aid of some system of computation,” Mises wrote.

He continues:

The distribution among a number of individuals of administrative control over economic goods in a community of men who take part in the labor of producing them, and who are economically interested in them, entails a kind of intellectual division of labor, which would not be possible without some system of calculating production and without economy. (emphasis added)

There can be no such thing as a leisurely form of communism.

“This, then, is freedom in the external life of man—that he is independent of the arbitrary power of his fellows,” explained Mises.

“Such freedom is no natural right. It did not exist under primitive conditions. It arose in the process of social development and its final completion is the work of mature Capitalism.”

Mr. Shvets, there is a mature capitalism. And, it’s not communism, Marxian or otherwise.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

The Lesson Of COVID: When People Are Anxious, Isolated, & Hopeless; They're Less Ready To Think Critically

FRIDAY, JAN 07, 2022 - 06:00 PM
Authored by Jonathan Cook via MintPressNews.com,

When I criticize meddling in Syria by Britain and America, or their backing of groups there that elsewhere are considered terrorists, it does not follow that I am, therefore, a cheerleader for the dictatorship of Bashar Assad or that I think that Syrians should be denied a better political system. Similarly, when I criticize Joe Biden or the Democratic party, it does not necessarily follow that I think Donald Trump would have made a better president.

A major goal of critical thinking is to stand outside tribal debates, where people are heavily invested in particular outcomes, and examine the ways debates have been framed. This is important because one of the main ways power expresses itself in our societies is through the construction of official narratives – usually through the billionaire-owned media – and the control and shaping of public debate.

You are being manipulated – propagandized – even before you engage with a topic if you look only at the substance of a debate and not at other issues: such as its timing, why the debate is taking place or why it has been allowed, what is not being mentioned or has been obscured, what is being emphasized, and what is being treated as dangerous or abhorrent.

If you want to be treated like a grown-up, an active and informed participant in your society rather than a blank sheet on which powerful interests are writing their own self-serving narratives, you need to be doing as much critical thinking as possible – and especially on the most important topics of the day.

Learning curve
The opportunity to become more informed and insightful about how debates are being framed, rather than what they are ostensibly about, has never been greater. Over the past decade, social media, even if the window it offered is rapidly shrinking, has allowed large numbers of us to discover for the first time those writers who, through their deeper familiarity with a specific topic and their consequent greater resistance to propaganda, can help us think more critically about all kinds of issues – Russia, Venezuela, Iran, Israel-Palestine, the list is endless.

This has been a steep learning curve for most of us. It has been especially useful in helping us to challenge narratives that vilify “official enemies” of the west or that veil corporate power – which has effectively usurped what was once the more visible and, therefore, accountable political power of western states. In the new, more critical climate, the role of the war industries – bequeathed to us by western colonialism – has become especially visible.

But what has been most disheartening about the past two years of Covid is the rapid reversal of the gains made in critical thinking. Perhaps this should not entirely surprise us. When people are anxious for themselves or their loved ones, when they feel isolated and hopeless, when “normal” has broken down, they are likely to be less ready to think critically.

The battering we have all felt during Covid mirrors the emotional, and psychological assault critical thinking can engender. Thinking critically increases anxiety by uncomfortably exposing us to the often artificial character of official reality. It can leave us feeling isolated and less hopeful, especially when friends and family expect us to be as deeply invested in the substance – the shadow play – of official, tribal debates as they are. And it undermines our sense of what “normal” is by revealing that it is often what is useful to power elites rather than what is beneficial to the public good.



Emotional resilience
There are reasons why people are drawn to critical thinking. Often because they have been exposed in detail to one particular issue that has opened their eyes to wider narrative manipulations on other issues. Because they have the tools and incentives – the education and access to information – to explore some issues more fully. And, perhaps most importantly, because they have the emotional and psychological resilience to cope with stripping away the veneer of official narratives to see the bleaker reality beneath and to grasp the fearsome obstacles to liberating ourselves from the corrupt elites that rule over us and are pushing us towards ecocidal oblivion.

The anxieties produced by critical thinking, the sense of isolation, and the collapse of “normal” is in one sense chosen. They are self-inflicted. We choose to do critical thinking because we feel capable of coping with what it brings to light.

But Covid is different. Our exposure to Covid, unlike critical thinking, has been entirely outside our control. And worse, it has deepened our emotional and psychological insecurities. To do critical thinking in a time of Covid – and most especially about Covid – is to add a big extra layer of anxiety, isolation, and hopelessness.

Covid has highlighted the difficulties of being insecure and vulnerable, thereby underscoring why critical thinking, even in good times, is so difficult. When we are anxious and isolated, we want quick, reassuring solutions, and we want someone to blame. We want authority figures to trust and act in our name.

Complex thinking
It is not hard to understand why the magic bullet of vaccines – to the exclusion of all else – has been so fervently grasped during the pandemic. Exclusive reliance on vaccines has been a great way for our corrupt, incompetent governments to show they know what they are doing. The vaccines have been an ideal way for corrupt medical-industrial corporations – including the biggest offender, Pfizer – to launder their images and make us all feel indebted to them after so many earlier scandals like Oxycontin. And, of course, the vaccines have been a comfort blanket to us, the public, promising to bring ZeroCovid (false), to provide long-term immunity (false), and to end transmission (false).

And as an added bonus, vaccines have allowed both our corrupt leaders to shift the blame away from themselves for their other failed public health policies and our corrupt “health” corporations to shift attention away from their profiteering by encouraging the vaccinated majority to scapegoat an unvaccinated minority. Divide and rule par excellence.

To state all this is not to be against the vaccines or believe the virus should rip through the population, killing the vulnerable, any more than criticizing the US war crime of bombing Syria signifies enthusiastic support for Assad. It is only to recognize that political realities are complex, and our thinking needs to be complex too.



'Herd immunity'
These ruminations were prompted by a post on social media I made the other day referring to the decision of the Guardian – nearly two years into the pandemic – to publish criticisms by an “eminent” epidemiologist, Prof Mark Woolhouse, of the British government’s early lockdown policies. Until now, any questioning of the lockdowns has been one of the great unmentionables of the pandemic outside of right-wing circles.

Let us note another prominent example: the use of the term “herd immunity,” which was until very recently exactly what public health officials aimed for as a means to end contagion. It signified the moment when enough people had acquired immunity, either through being infected or vaccinated, for community transmission to stop occurring. But because the goal during Covid is not communal immunity but universal vaccination, the term “herd immunity” has now been attributed to a sinister political agenda. It is presented as some kind of right-wing plot to let vulnerable people die.



This is not accidental. It is an entirely manufactured, if widely accepted, narrative. Recovery from infection – something now true for many people – is no longer treated by political or medical authorities as conferring immunity. For example, in the UK, those who have recovered from Covid, even recently, are not exempted, as the vaccinated are, from self-isolation if they have been in close contact with someone infected with Covid. Also, of course, those recovered from Covid do not qualify for a vaccine passport. After all, it is not named an immunity passport. It is a vaccine passport.

Emmanuel Macron, the French president, has at least been open about the “reasoning” behind this kind of discrimination. “In a democracy,” he says, apparently unironically, “the worst enemies are lies and stupidity. We are putting pressure on the unvaccinated by limiting, as much as possible, their access to activities in social life. … For the non-vaccinated, I really want to piss them off. And we will continue to do this, to the end. This is the strategy.”

Notice that the lies and stupidity here emanate from Macron: he is not only irresponsibly stoking dangerous divisions within French society, he has also failed to understand that the key distinctions from a public health perspective are between those with immunity to Covid and those without it and those who are vulnerable to hospitalization and those who are not. These are the most meaningful markers of how to treat the pandemic. The obsession with vaccination only serves a divide and rule agenda and bolsters pandemic profiteering.

Crushing hesitancy
The paradox is that these narratives dominate even as the evidence mounts that the vaccines offer very short-term immunity and that, ultimately, as Omicron appears to be underscoring, many people are likely to gain longer-term immunity through Covid infection, even those who have been vaccinated. But the goal of public “debate” on this topic has not been transparency, logic, or informed consent. Instead, it has been the crushing of any possible “vaccine hesitancy.”

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5E6gpPJwYIY
23:21 min

I have repeatedly tried to highlight the lack of critical thinking around the exclusive focus on vaccines rather than immune health, the decision to vaccinate children in the face of strong, if largely downplayed, opposition from experts, and the divisive issue of vaccine mandates. But I have had little to say directly about lockdowns, which have tended to look to me chiefly like desperate stop-gap measures to cover up the failings of our underfunded, cannibalized, and increasingly privatized health services (a more pressing concern). I am also inclined to believe that the balance of benefits from lockdowns, or whether they work, is difficult to weigh without some level of expertise. That is one reason why I have been arguing throughout the pandemic that experts need to be allowed more open, robust, and honest public debate.

It is also why I offered a short comment on Prof Woolhouse’s criticisms, published in the Guardian this week, of national lockdown policies. This evoked a predictably harsh backlash from many followers. They saw it as further proof that the “Covid denialists have captured me,” and I am now little better than a pandemic conspiracy theorist.

Part 1 of 2

 

[marsh]

Part 2 of 2

Framing the debate
That is strange in itself. Prof Woolhouse is a mainstream, reportedly “eminent” epidemiologist. His eminence is such that it also apparently qualifies him to be quoted extensively and uncritically in the Guardian. The followers I antagonize every time I write about the pandemic appear to treat the Guardian as their Covid Bible, as do most liberals. And they regularly castigate me for referring to the kind of experts the Guardian refuses to cite. So how does my retweeting of a Guardian story that uncritically reports on anti-lockdown comments from a respectable, mainstream epidemiologist incur so much wrath – and seemingly directed only against me?

The answer presumably lies in the short appended comment in my retweet, which requires that one disengage from the seemingly substantive debate – lockdowns, good or bad? That conversation is certainly interesting to me, especially if it is an honest one. But the contextual issues around that debate, the ones that require critical thinking, are even more important because they are the best way to evaluate whether an honest debate is actually being fostered.



My comment, intentionally ambiguous, implicitly requires readers to examine wider issues about the Guardian article: the timing of its publication, why a debate about lockdowns has not previously been encouraged in the Guardian but apparently is now possible, how the debate is being framed by Woolhouse and the Guardian, and how we, the readers, may be being manipulated by that framing.

Real, live conspiracy
Interestingly, I was not alone in being struck by how strange the preferred framing was. A second epidemiologist, Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician at Harvard who serves on a scientific committee to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), saw problems with the article too.

Unfortunately, however, Prof Kulldorff appears not to qualify as “eminent” enough for the Guardian to quote him uncritically. That is because he was one of three highly respected academics who brought ignominy down on their heads in October 2020 by authoring the Great Barrington Declaration.

Like Woolhouse, the Declaration offered an alternative to blanket national lockdowns – the official response to rising hospitalizations – but did so when those lockdowns were being aggressively pursued, and no other options were being considered. The Guardian was among those that pilloried the Declaration and its authors, presenting it as an irresponsible right-wing policy and a recipe for Covid to tear through the population, laying waste to significant sections of the population.

My purpose here is not to defend the Great Barrington Declaration. I don’t feel qualified enough to express a concrete, public view one way or another on its merits. And part of the reason for that hesitancy is that any meaningful conversation at the time among experts was ruthlessly suppressed. The costs of lockdowns were largely unmentionable in official circles and the “liberal” media.

It was instantly stigmatized as the policy preference of the “deplorable” right.

This was not accidental. We now know it was a real, live conspiracy. Leaked emails show that Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the president, and his minions used their reliable contacts in prominent liberal media to smear the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. “There needs to be a quick and devastating published takedown of its premises. I don’t see anything like that online yet – is it underway?” a senior official wrote to Fauci. The plan was character assassination, pure and simple—nothing to do with science. And “liberal” media happily and quickly took up that task.

The Guardian, of course, went right along with those smears. This is why Prof Kulldorff has every right to treat with disdain both the Guardian’s decision to now publish Prof Woolhouse’s criticisms – so very belatedly – of lockdown policy and Prof Woolhouse’s public distancing of himself from the now-radioactive Great Barrington Declaration even though his published comments closely echo the policies proposed in the Declaration. As Prof Kulldorff observes:

Hilarious logical somersault. In the Guardian, Mark Woolhouse argues that [the] UK should have used focused protection as defined in the Great Barrington Declaration, while criticizing the Great Barrington Declaration due to its mischaraterization by the Guardian.”

Reputational damage
If we put on our critical thinking hats for a moment, we can deduce a plausible reason for that mischaracterization.

Like the rest of the “liberal” media, the Guardian has been fervently pro-lockdown and an avowed opponent of any meaningful discussion of the Great Barrington Declaration since its publication more than a year ago. Moreover, it has characterized any criticism of lockdowns as an extreme right-wing position. But the paper now wishes to open up a space for a more critical discussion of the merits of lockdown at a time when rampant but milder Omicron threatens to shut down not only the economy but distribution chains and health services.

Demands for lockdowns are returning – premised on the earlier arguments for them – but the formerly obscured costs are much more difficult to ignore now. Even lockdown cheerleaders like the Guardian finally understand some of what was clear 15 months ago to experts like Prof Kulldorff and his fellow authors.

What the Guardian appears to be doing is smuggling the Great Barrington Declaration’s arguments back into the mainstream but trying to do it in a way that won’t damage its credibility and look like an about-face. It is being entirely deceitful. And the vehicle for achieving this end is a fellow critic of lockdowns, Prof Woolhouse, who is not tainted goods like Prof Kulldorff, even though their views appear to overlap considerably. Criticism of lockdowns is being rehabilitated via Prof Woolhouse, even as Prof Kulldorff remains an outcast, a deplorable.

In other words, this is not about any evolution in scientific thinking. It is about the Guardian avoiding reputational damage – and doing so at the cost of continuing to damage Prof Kulldorff’s reputation. Prof Kulldorff and his fellow authors were scapegoated when their expert advice was considered politically inconvenient, while Prof Woolhouse is being celebrated because similar expert advice is now convenient.

This is how much of our public discourse operates. The good guys control the narrative so that they can ensure they continue to look good, while the bad guys are tarred and feathered, even if they are proven right. The only way to really make sense of what is going on is to disengage from this kind of political tribalism, examine contexts, avoid being so invested in outcomes, and work hard to gain more perspective on the anxiety and fear each of us feels.

The corporate media is not our friend. Its coverage of the pandemic is not there to promote the public good. It is there to feed our anxieties, keep us coming back for more, and monetize that distress. The only cure for this sickness? A lot more critical thinking.

 

[marsh]

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Jeff Deist: How We Will Win

FRIDAY, JAN 07, 2022 - 05:20 PM
Authored by Jeff Deist via The Mises Institute,

You do not defend a world that is already lost. When was it lost? That you cannot say precisely. It is a point for the revolutionary historian to ponder. We know only that it was surrendered peacefully, without a struggle, almost unawares. There was no day, no hour, no celebration of the event—and yet definitely, the ultimate power of initiative did pass from the hands of private enterprise to government.

There it is and there it will remain until, if ever, it shall be reconquered. Certainly government will never surrender it without a struggle.

We enter 2022 with the hope and optimism made possible only by the most clear-eyed assessment of reality. Garet Garett's remarkable words, published in 1938, are right at home in the new year. They are also liberating. There is no going back, no restoration, no "reform"—the America we thought we knew is gone. Tens of millions of Americans now believe both the US federal government and the major institutions in this country—from media to big corporations to universities to Hollywood to Big Pharma and the medical establishment—are actively working against their interests. They have no self-interest in defending a world already lost.



We can be melancholy about this or we can be happy and confident about the opportunities presented. Those same millions who no longer believe the system works are eager to build a new one. America is barely a country at this point, beyond a pure economic arrangement. Without material abundance (no small thing, of course), what really connects us? America certainly is not a cohesive nation in any meaningful way—and why should it be, given its vast geography and enormous (real) diversity? This reality, not pining for some fuzzy, long-lost constitutionalism, should inform us, as per Garett's admonition.

A compelling and viable path forward starts with identifying and coalescing around the many de facto smaller nations which already exist within the US.

The covid regime, for starters, has allowed federalism to reassert itself in ways few of us could have imagined two years ago. Even hapless Joe Biden recently admitted there is no federal solution to a virus, that covid must be "solved" by the states. Governors now openly snipe at one another on social media, and encourage competition among businesses and families looking to relocate. The moving company United Van Lines happily provides with its annual survey. Those who can, given their economic and family situations, are voting with their feet.

Regionalism has a new energy not seen for many decades.

Among those nations, two broad paths forward present themselves. One America intends to make 2022 another covid year, complete with business and school lockdowns, mask requirements, and vaccine passports. Another America wants to get back to normal as much as possible, and deal with the virus as a permanent but manageable part of the landscape (like existing flu viruses). This fork in the road forms a flash point simply because the two paths are incompatible, but also because they provide real-time opportunities to apply different policies (often de facto, such as when businesses simply disregard covid rules) in different states and locales. These opportunities in turn provide a blueprint for how intractable issues like abortion and gun control might be addressed more locally, rather than by nine black-robed superlegislators.

These two covid trajectories are almost metapolitical at this point, but they demonstrate the inescapable choice: organize society around the state or organize it around individuals, families, markets, and the institutions of civil society. We can live in a political world or in an economic world. Mixing the two is not working.

Politics won't go away, of course. But it will remain a lagging indicator.

• The Left is hopelessly consumed by hatred and ingratitude, mired in identity, and animated by a desire to hurt and vanquish the Deplorables (Trump voters, antivaxxers, covid deniers, et al.) as an act of revenge.
• The Right is lost in Trumpian dysfunction, moving further and further from any coherent message about economics or opportunity while allowing neoconservatives to regroup and promote bellicosity toward Russia, China, and Iran. Libertarians, too, have lost the plot—navel-gazing over what kind of circumstances would justify lockdowns and mandates, cheering the deplatforming (even the debanking) of alternative and dissident voices by tech companies, and accepting progressive framing of "climate change" and the like, all while failing to focus on the threats of empire and central banking.

Both "sides" are led by deeply unserious people who are congenitally unfit to organize a sandwich shop, much less lord over 330 million people.

But if politics cannot be eliminated, it can be made more tolerable by an aggressive push toward subsidiarity. Americans already sensed this, but covid accelerated it. Giving up on political universalism is a bitter pill for the political class, but one that must be swallowed. It's the pill Mises prescribed a century ago in his radically decentralist calls for "liberal nationalism" and the right of self-determination as the hallmark of a decent society. Does this mean America must break up into new political entities, as the Austro-Hungarian empire did? Not necessarily, but it does mean accepting a far greater degree of federalism and localism and a dramatically diminished national government. The way forward is apart.

"We Will Win" is a ubiquitous hashtag on Twitter lately, code for the sense of change so many Americans feel but can't yet articulate.

• We will win because socialism is incompatible with human nature and a productive material economy.
• We will win because the Fed's crazed monetization of Treasury debt and its maniacal fetish for low interest rates are unsustainable.
• We will win because Uncle Sam will run out of (valuable) money.
• We will win because entitlements ultimately are unpayable, at least in real terms.
• We will win because war, empire, and nation building have exhausted themselves and Americans of all political stripes want us out of the Middle East.
• We will win because woke will fail of its own internal contradictions and infighting.
• And we will win because the digital age is inexorably decentralizing virtually every aspect of human life, and governments cannot escape this forever.

So, We Will Win. But how long will it take, and at what price victory?

No one can know. But great things are happening, and we should take good cheer with us into 2022!

 

[marsh]

[COMMENT: "You will own nothing and you will be happy." ]

'The Mootrix'? Cows wear virtual reality goggles in winter to simulate sunny pastures. It reportedly makes them happier, boosts milk production. | Blaze Media

Virtual reality technology apparently isn't solely for humans. Turns out some folks got the nifty idea to outfit cows with virtual reality goggles in the winter in the hopes of boosting their milk production, the Sun reported. Say what? The goggles were developed with veterinarians and first...

www.theblaze.com

'The Mootrix'? Cows wear virtual reality goggles in winter to simulate sunny pastures. It reportedly makes them happier, boosts milk production.

DAVE URBANSKI
January 07, 2022

Cow grazes with virtual reality goggles in Aksaray, Turkey, on December 26, 2021. Cattle breeder Izzet Kocak tried the goggles, developed in Russia, to increase the cows' milk yield and had positive results. (Photo by Zekeriya Karadavut/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Virtual reality technology apparently isn't solely for humans.

Turns out some folks got the nifty idea to outfit cows with virtual reality goggles in the winter in the hopes of boosting their milk production, the Sun reported.

Say what?
The goggles were developed with veterinarians and first tested on a farm in Moscow, the paper said, adding that cattle breeder Izzet Kocak put them on two cows in Aksaray, Turkey, and results have been favorable.

Photo by Zekeriya Karadavut/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Believe it or not, the cows' milk output has increased from 5.8 gallons to 7 gallons a day, the Sun said.

Instead of looking at a chilly indoor facility, the cows are "watching a green pasture, and it gives them an emotional boost. They are less stressed," Kocak told the paper.

Russia’s agriculture ministry said the system was developed based on the principle that cows perceive shades of red better than shades of blue and green, the Sun said.

“During the first test, experts recorded a decrease in anxiety," the ministry noted to the paper.

Indeed, while previously Kocak played classical music for his 180 animals, presumably as a mood booster, he's so happy with the virtual reality goggles that he plans to buy 10 more sets, the Sun said.

'The Mootrix'?
Images of one cow digging what's likely a sun-drenched pasture while hanging out with other cows indoors has captured the imagination of folks on social media, who are comparing the experiment to the sci-fi classic "The Matrix," the paper said.

As most of you know, "The Matrix" is the tale of the earth as we know it being nothing more than a simulation, while our real bodies are afloat in goo-filled pods as we generate energy for evil machines.

The main character Neo — played by Keanu Reeves — is located by "freed" humans inside the Matrix simulation and given a choice between taking a red pill to escape his pod and begin living in the real world or taking a blue pill to forget the whole thing.

“You take the short grass, the story ends, you wake up in the pasture and believe whatever you want to believe," one witty observer wrote in reference to the cows' VR experience, the Sun reported. "You take the long grass, you stay in wonderland, and I show you how deep the human hole goes.”

Another person offered the following quip, the paper said: “With the sequels The Mootrix Reuddered and The Mootrix Ruminations.”

 

[glennb6]

The WEF and the Pandemic

How is the Davos World Economic Forum involved in the coronavirus pandemic?

swprs.org

The WEF and the Pandemic

WEF founder Klaus Schwab in 2014 (Alamy)

Published: October 6, 2021 (upd.)

How is the Davos World Economic Forum involved in the coronavirus pandemic?

The Davos World Economic Forum (WEF) is a premier forum for governments, global corporations and international entrepreneurs. Founded in 1971 by engineer and economist Klaus Schwab, the WEF describes its mission as “shaping global, regional and industry agendas” and “improving the state of the world”.

According to its website, “moral and intellectual integrity is at the heart of everything it does.”

The WEF has been involved in the coronavirus pandemic in several ways.

First, the WEF was, together with the Gates Foundation, a sponsor of the prescient “Event 201” coronavirus pandemic simulation exercise, held in New York City on October 18, 2019 – the same day as the opening of the Wuhan Military World Games, seen by some as “ground zero” of the global pandemic.

China itself has argued that US military athletes may have brought the virus to Wuhan.

Second, the WEF has been a leading proponent of digital biometric identity systems, arguing that they will make societies and industries more efficient, more productive and more secure. In July 2019, the WEF started a project to “shape the future of travel with biometric-enabled digital traveler identity management”.

In addition, the WEF collaborates with the ID2020 alliance, which is funded by the Gates and Rockefeller foundations and runs a program to “provide digital ID with vaccines”. In particular, ID2020 sees the vaccination of children as “an entry point for digital identity.”

Third, WEF founder Klaus Schwab is the author of the book COVID-19: The Great Reset, published in July 2020, which argues that the coronavirus pandemic can and should be used for an “economic, societal, geopolitical, environmental and technological reset”, including, in particular, advancing global governance, accelerating digital transformation, and tackling climate change.

Finally, the WEF has been running, since 1993, a program called “Global Leaders for Tomorrow”, rebranded, in 2004, as “Young Global Leaders”. This program aims at identifying, selecting and promoting future global leaders in both business and politics. Indeed, quite a few “Young Global Leaders” have later managed to become Presidents, Prime Ministers, or CEOs (see below).

During the coronavirus pandemic, several WEF Global Leaders and Global Shapers (a junior program of the Global Leaders) have played prominent roles, typically promoting zero-covid strategies, lockdowns, mask mandates, and ‘vaccine passports’. This may have been a (largely failed) attempt to protect public health and the economy, or it may have been an attempt to advance the global transformation agenda outlined above, or perhaps both.

In this regard, some notable Young Leaders include Jeffrey Zients (US White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator), Stéphane Bancel (CEO of Moderna), Jeremy Howard (founder of influential lobby group “Masks for All”), Leana Wen (zero-covid CNN medical analyst), Eric Feigl-Ding (zero-covid Twitter personality), Gavin Newsom (Governor of California, selected in 2005), Devi Sridhar (British zero-covid professor), Jacinda Ardern (Prime Minister of New Zealand), Greg Hunt (Australian Health Minister and former WEF strategy director), French President Emanuel Macron, Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, German Chancellor Angela Merkel (selected in 1993), German Health Minister Jens Spahn, and former British PM Tony Blair (a leading proponent of ‘global vaccine passports’).

To get a full overview of their members, see Global Leaders for Tomorrow and Young Global Leaders on WikiSpooks (a Wiki focusing on covert power structures) as well as the official Young Global Leaders website. For an overview of some notable members in politics and the media, see below.

In conclusion, the Davos World Economic Forum has indeed been involved in the strategic management of the coronavirus pandemic, with a major emphasis on using the pandemic as a catalyst for digital transformation and the global introduction of digital identity systems.

Digital Identity: The 2018 vision of the World Economic Forum



Digital Identity: The vision of the World Economic Forum (WEF, 2018)WEF “Young Global Leaders”

An overview of some WEF Young Global Leaders (2005-2021) and Global Leaders for Tomorrow (1993-2003) in politics and the media. The list is not exhaustive.
Sources: Global Leaders for Tomorrow and Young Global Leaders on WikiSpooks.
United States

Politics and Policy

Jeffrey Zients (White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator since 2021, selected in 2003), Jeremy Howard (co-founder of lobby group “masks for all”, selected in 2013), California Governor Gavin Newsom (selected in 2005), Pete Buttigieg (selected in 2019, candidate for US President in 2020, US secretary of transportation since 2021), Chelsea Clinton (Clinton Foundation board member), Huma Abedin (Hillary Clinton aide, selected in 2012), Nikki Haley (US ambassador to the UN, 2017-2018), Samantha Power (US ambassador to the UN, 2013-2017, USAID Administrator since 2021), Ian Bremmer (founder of Eurasia Group), Bill Browder (initiator of the Magnitsky Act), Jonathan Soros (son of George Soros), Kenneth Roth (director of “Human Rights Watch” since 1993), Paul Krugman (economist, selected in 1995), Lawrence Summers (former World Bank Chief Economist, former US Treasury Secretary, former Harvard University President, selected in 1993), Alicia Garza (co-founder of Black Lives Matter, selected in 2020), Stéphane Bancel (Moderna CEO).
Media

CNN medical analyst Leana Wen (selected in 2018), CNN chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta, Covid Twitter personality Eric Feigl-Ding (a ‘WEF Global Shaper‘ since 2013), Andrew Ross Sorkin (New York Times financial columnist), Thomas Friedman (New York Times columnist, selected in 1995), George Stephanopoulos (ABC News, 1993), Lachlan Murdoch (CEO of Fox Corporation).

Technology and Social Media

Microsoft founder Bill Gates (1993), former Microsoft CEO Steven Ballmer (2000-2014, selected in 1995), Amazon founder Jeff Bezos (1998), Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page (2002/2005), former Google CEO Eric Schmidt (2001-2017, selected in 1997), Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales (2007), PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel (2007), eBay co-founder Pierre Omidyar (1999), Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg (2009), Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg (2007).

Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand

Professor Devi Sridhar (a leading ‘zero covid’ proponent, selected in 2020/21), former British Prime Ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (both selected in 1993), BBC World Service journalist Dawood Azami, Lynn Forester de Rothschild (co-owner of The Economist), Nathaniel Rothschild (son of Lord Rothschild), historian Niall Ferguson (selected in 2005), William Hague (Foreign Secretary, 2010-2014), Charles Allen (CEO of ITV, 2004-2007; Chairman of EMI, 2008-2010).

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern (since 2017, selected in 2014), Australian Health Minister Greg Hunt (selected in 2003; former WEF strategy director), Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland (selected in 2001; former managing director of Reuters). Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a WEF participant, but is not a confirmed Young Global Leader.

Germany

Chancellor Angela Merkel (selected in 1993, 12 years before becoming Chancellor), current Health Minister Jens Spahn and former Health Ministers Philipp Roesler and Daniel Bahr, current co-chair of the Green Party and failed Chancellor candidate Annalena Baerbock (selected in 2020), former co-chair of the Green Party Cem Özdemir (selected in 2002), media mogul and Axel Springer CEO Mathias Doepfner (selected in 2001), talk show host Sandra Maischberger, late Foreign Minister and Vice Chancellor Guido Westerwelle (1997), former German President Christian Wulff (selected in 1995, 15 years before becoming President), Reto Francioni (former CEO of Deutsche Boerse).
European Union

EU Commission Presidents Jose Manuel Barroso (2004-2014, selected in 1993) and Jean-Claude Juncker (2014-2019, selected in 1995), French President Emanuel Macron (since 2017, selected in 2016), former French President Nicolas Sakozy (2007-2012, selected in 1993), Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, former Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi (2014-2016, selected in 2012), former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar (1996-2004, selected in 1993), Klaus Regling (CEO of the European Financial Stability Mechanism since 2012), Guy Verhofstadt (former Belgian Prime Minister, Chair of the Brexit Steering Group), Danish Minister for the Environment Lea Wermelin, Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin, former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb, and Mark Leonard (founding director of the Soros-funded European Council on Foreign Relations).

Switzerland

Natalie Rickli (Director of Health of the Canton of Zurich, selected in 2012), former Presidents of the Swiss National Council Christa Markwalder (selected in 2011) and Pascale Bruderer-Wyss (selected in 2009), Geneva politician Pierre Maudet (selected in 2013), NZZ media group CEO Felix R. Graf (selected in 2007), former Swiss Justice Minister Ruth Metzler (selected in 2002), former Swiss television CEO Roger de Weck (2011-2017, selected in 1994), former UBS CEOs Peter Wuffli (selected in 1994) and Marcel Rohner (selected in 2003), former Credit Suisse CEO Tidjane Tiam (1998).

2005 YGL Nomination Committee

The 2005 WEF Young Global Leaders Nomination Committee consisted primarily of major media publishers and editors, including Arthur Sulzberger and Steve Forbes (USA); James Murdoch, Jonathan Rothermere and Tom Glocer (UK); Arnaud Lagardère (France); Mathias Doepfner and Hubert Burda (Germany); Michael Ringer (Switzerland); and Carl-Johan Bonnier (Sweden).
Video Annex

1) Bill Gates demanding “digital immunity proof” in March 2020
Video: Bill Gates demanding ‘digital immunity proof’ in March 2020 (source)
https://videos.files.wordpress.com/...tal-immunity-proof-ted-talk-march-2020_hd.mp4 .39 min

2) Edward Snowden warning of the “destruction of rights” (March 2020)

View: https://youtu.be/-pcQFTzck_c
4:51 min

3) The Chinese “social credit” system (May 2019)

View: https://youtu.be/NXyzpMDtpSE
4:37 min

Further reading

• All Roads Lead to Dark Winter (Whitney Webb, April 2020)

See also

• The Covid Vaccine War
• Coronavirus origins
• Covid Vaccine Injuries

this post showing some of the key figures spawned from the WEF is a perfect list when hunting season begins.

 

[glennb6]

when I need my 5 minutes of hate I read the latest posts in this thread.

This really is looking like a war albeit on that is difficult to get your head around, and that's what makes it so dangerous. The sad part is ALL of the plans of the WEF will come to fruition throughout the world if there is not very serious push back.

What is stopping them? Non-violent protests and marches? Letters and emails to politicians? Bah - this accomplishes nothing of consequence. If a gang or invading army came down your street and demanded you leave your home, or turned over your weapons and supplies, or established freedom killing checkpoints at every traffic light... I think the lead would fly.

When it does, and it should, just don't do it like the 1700/1800s where a squad is formed and set out to fight. That would be a massacre and a perfect trap to call for A2 removal.

Think deer hunting. Think guerrilla fighting tactics. Thing one or two person limits and form no groups. Think grey, think suburban or urban camouflage and blending in. Do your own thing, communicate in ways that the algos will never catch, have multiple digital identities. And be prepared to save the last bullet for yourself unless you want to spend your remaining years in a tiny cold cement cell.

 

[marsh]

The Vaccine Passport Pathway to a Social Credit System

See also: The Vaccine is a Dud Simply put the vaccine programs are really population control programs, because by pushing vaccines the elites are pushing vaccine passports which are the first step to creating digital ID numbers on a software platf...

www.americanthinker.com

January 7, 2022
The Vaccine Passport Pathway to a Social Credit System

By Jeffrey Barrett

Simply put the vaccine programs are really population control programs, because by pushing vaccines the elites are pushing vaccine passports which are the first step to creating digital ID numbers on a software platform where every subject's personal information will eventually end up. Control of information means control of the subjects.

The real-life model for this is the Chinese social credit system. This system is, through the totalitarian perspective, a brilliant combination of national digital identification numbers combined with high surveillance technology all controlled by advanced artificial intelligence. Each Chinese subject is branded with a digital number and the surveillance state can follow his employment, medical, criminal, and schooling records, his online browsing records, his voiced political views, and even the places he visits through GPS positioning technology.

If the subject so much as jaywalks across a street, it will likely be picked up by one of the millions of surveillance cameras installed in Chinese cities and run through face recognition software. All this data is then combined and processed and the subject is given a "social credit score" which is then used to dole out rewards and punishments. Score too low and the subject can be denied access to train and air travel. Score even lower and the subject can be denied a good job, good housing, access to credit, or even access to dating apps so the poor devil might even have a hard time finding a date.The Vaccine Passport Pathway to a Social Credit System

This software-controlled system of meting out incentives and disincentives made possible by modern digital technology has given political authorities a degree of social control over large populations never before seen in human history.

Because Western elites are fully aware that their post-World War II strategy of promising ever-expanding government benefits is not a sustainable way of holding onto permanent power, they are desperate to come up with other means of continuing their lordship over the masses. This explains why they are pushing vaccines and vaccine mandates because the vaccine passport software will be designed to eventually accept all the data relevant to each citizen and once achieved, warns the Chinese defector Li-Meng Yan, the elites will have the vital tool necessary to implement a Chinese style social credit system.[ii]

No citizen can be exempt from this system which is why the estimated 146 million naturally immune[iii] are told to get vaccinated even though their immunity is far superior to that produced by vaccines, and why children have to be vaccinated even though they are 6 times more likely develop serious heart problems from the vaccines than to be hospitalized for Covid.[iv] While the Covid vaccine policies of Western governments make no medical sense, they make perfect political sense once one understands the existential economic crisis Western power elites know they are facing.

An important but scarcely discussed part of this emerging population management system is the gaining of control over the bank accounts of the citizenry. Central banks around the world including the Federal Reserve are rushing to produce their own versions of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).

This is not some far-off futuristic plan as most CBDC currencies will be ready for deployment in three to four years. China claims it will have a digital yuan rollout in time for the 2022 winter Olympics in Beijing.[v] The United States may work its digital dollar through existing banks which are quasi-government agencies anyway, but some, like Biden's Controller of the Currency nominee Saule Omarova, advocate abolishing all private bank accounts and have those accounts all lodged in and managed by the Federal Reserve.[vi]

This system will eventually require abolishing anonymous paper money and abolishing privacy-protecting cryptocurrencies as China has already done.[vii]

The reason why governments including Western governments are so keen on this idea is because, with the help of artificial intelligence software, they will be able to monitor every single transaction of every single bank account holder.

CBCBs can and will undoubtedly also be used as an efficient way to reward good behavior and punish bad behavior as defined by those in power.

The elites can achieve this because CBDCs will be fully programmable, which means that those at the top can program the currency to force people to buy certain items such as fake meat to reduce global warming or to prohibit digital dollars from being used to contribute to critics of the government such as alternative news sites which currently are the only news sources challenging the government-approved narratives of the large corporate media.

If the dream of the WEF is correct and most workers will be replaced by software-driven robots, then governments will have to create subsistence Universal Basic Income programs for the under- and unemployed, and those marginal people will be easily terrified at the prospect of getting any portion of their government subsidies reduced, even for innocent acts like contributing $5 digital dollars to a group that criticizes the government. The larger the number of people either partially or fully dependent upon government subsidies, the easier it will be to control them through programmed CBDC adjustments which will act as automatic preprogrammed fines for a whole array of prohibited behaviors. Modern technology has made life much easier for elites inclined toward totalitarian control over their populations, and of all the tools available in the modern totalitarian tool bag, CBCDs will be among the most potent.

For those who are aware or at least suspect that Western elites are up to something quite drastic, it is fortunate indeed that the available vaccines have turned out to be duds because this strips the elites of their main rationale for vaccine mandates. The vaccines quite possibly offer some temporary symptom suppression for those willing to take the jab, but they are ineffective at preventing the vaccinated from either catching Covid or transmitting it. So without the moral imperative to "protect others" by taking the vaccine, government authorities are deprived of their main argument for vaccine mandates. Indeed, Robert Malone, a key figure in the development of mRNA vaccines, argues the opposite moral case -- that the vaccinated are more likely to be Covid "super spreaders" because if they catch Covid but have suppressed symptoms, they are the ones who are more likely to go out into the community and unknowingly spread the virus to others.[viii] So because the vaccines have turned out to be much less than what the drug companies and the elites hoped for, those who oppose vaccine mandates now command the moral high ground.

Without vaccine mandates, elites are helpless to achieve their goal of universal digital IDs and the power that can be built up with them. We know from the history of war that some battles can be lost and the war still won. We also know that there are certain strategic battles that have to be won or the war will be lost.

In this war of self-interested Western elites against their own people, it is absolutely imperative that the battle against vaccine mandates and vaccine passports be won. For those who actually appreciate the value of liberty and the idea of personal human rights that the wealthy and powerful are obliged to respect, the battle against vaccine mandates and passports is their strategic pass of Thermopylae where they will have no choice but to stand firm and stop the aggressors. Otherwise, those who value human liberty today will have to concede that their grandchildren are destined to encounter the digital version of the same demand constantly heard in 1930s Germany: "Your papers please."

 

[marsh]

Intolerant Of Dissenting Opinions, Tolerant Of Censorship

Dare we ask the question that in this heartbreaking age of censorship in America is likely to be called most outrageous of all?

thebluestateconservative.com

Intolerant Of Dissenting Opinions, Tolerant Of Censorship

• Karen Kataline
• January 7, 2022

How free is our press? How free are we?

Is it still breaking news or is it commonplace that the propaganda media has once again been caught lying and suppressing information and opinion?

One could simply ask what they’re afraid of but let’s delve deeper.

Can a People be free without a free press?

Today, we are encouraged to be intolerant of dissenting opinions and tolerant of censorship.

This is being done by the very people who stand to benefit most: politicians that were supposedly elected to serve us and their enablers in the technocracy and the press.

To that end, they constantly portray words and ideas as violence, and violence as “freedom of expression.”

They make exceptions for people they deem to have the “wrong ideas.” How ironic when they are framed and accused of the violence they condone by their allies as a means of garnering public support for punishing them! This is also done to make their opponents an example to the rest: “You’d better not do that or this will happen to you.”

Would such masters of propaganda and thuggery go so far as to tag parents who oppose the indoctrination of their children as “domestic terrorists?”

Wouldn’t that be too obvious?

The suppression of dissent in the Western Journal article is a good reason to ask some even deeper questions:

Why would the government and its’ media behemoth want so badly to suppress information and opinion that their dictates could be causing great and lasting harm if not to continue causing that harm with impunity? If there’s another explanation, I’m open to hearing it.

Dare we ask the question that in this heartbreaking age of censorship in America is likely to be called most outrageous of all? Why do they want to cause harm?

Which is more outrageous? The question, or the possibility that it’s true?

 

[Tristan]

'Mass Formation Psychosis' — It's Real, and It Was Purposely Caused by Biden and the Democrat Party

redstate.com

'Mass Formation Psychosis' — It's Real, and It Was Purposely Caused by Biden and the Democrat Party

By Mike Miller | Jan 01, 2022 11:15 AM ET

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
“Mass formation psychosis.”

No, it doesn’t refer to a screwed-up flock of geese flying south for the winter.

In a Christmas Day article titled COVID Has Been Overtaken by a Secondary Pandemic—and It’s Real, I discussed Illness Anxiety Disorder, or “health anxiety.”

Specifically COVID-related Illness Anxiety Disorder. As defined by Mayo Clinic, Illness Anxiety, in part, is needlessly worrying about becoming seriously ill.





Mass Formation Psychosis, or “mass hypnosis” or “the madness of crowds,” as noted by TrialSiteNews, occurs when a large fraction of the population is completely unable to process new scientific data and facts, demonstrating that they have been misled or lied to.

In the case of COVID-19, the no-longer-pandemic, Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden, and the Democrat Party, and the Democrat state media — principally CNN and MSNBC — have consistently misled, changed their stories, or outright lied to America about the effectiveness and adverse impacts of mandatory mask use, lockdowns, and genetic vaccines that cause people’s bodies to make large amounts of biologically-active coronavirus spike protein.

Tens of millions of Americans, hypnotized by the left, have been and remain incapable of recognizing the lies and manipulation.

Dr. Robert Malone, a noted virologist and immunologist whose recent work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research, compared mass formation psychosis in pre-World War II Germany to what we are today experiencing in America in response to COVID.






But what about “the science,” so touted by Fauci, Biden, and the lapdog media?

It’s become irrelevant, said Malone.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477091670424526852

View: https://twitter.com/i/status/1477091670424526852
1:41 min

As you might have guessed, Malone has been blasted by the left for “promoting misinformation about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”

To that end, Twitter on Wednesday permanently suspended Malone’s Twitter account for spreading “‘misinformation’ about the virus and vaccines.” The ban came just hours after the AP posted a controversial “fact check” report claiming Malone “misled” people by claiming the vaccines are failing against the Omicron variant.

View attachment 310905

Just one problem.

As noted by The Rio Times, a recent study found that more than 90 percent of Omicron cases in Germany have been “fully vaccinated” (28 percent of those had a “booster), and just 4.42 percent were unvaccinated.

The bottom line:

As RedState reported on Christmas Eve: New studies continue to suggest that the mRNA vaccine actually increases the probability of contracting the Omicron variant after 90 days.

No matter. Experts like Robert Malone continue to be banned on Twitter for speaking truth to power, while Democrat COVID hood ornament Anthony Fauci and Joe “winter of severe illness and death” Biden continue to fearmonger.

The late comedian George Carlin said it best: “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”

Amen.

I seem to recall mentioning the "50 year mind-f**k" several times.

This technique has been operational for quite a while.

 

[marsh]

Long live the Greeks!

Long live the Greeks!
Posted by Kane on January 8, 2022 1:02 pm

View: https://youtu.be/09e-UfEAhUY
1:41 min
Greek Islanders Block Ship Delivering Equipment to Build Migrant Center

Residents of Chios successfully prevented a cargo ship from delivering equipment for the construction of a new migrant center on the Greek island, according to reports.

In a stunning rejection of the Greek government’s agenda, Chios locals and officials gathered at multiple ports on the island to drive off a ship named “Pelagitis” as it attempted to dock and unload heavy machinery and materials for the planned “Closed Controlled Access Center.”

“At the sight of the ship, residents and elected officials stood in front of the mooring ramp, preventing the crew from dropping the ship’s catapult,” Politischios reports.

“The dynamic presence of the people and the immediate response to the call of the Coordinating Committee of Elected and Residents, and also of the local councils of Sykiada and Lagada, resulted in the prevention of the disembarkation of machinery in the port of Mesta,” Politischios reported shortly after the incident.

“After almost an hour of consultations and negotiations between the residents and the police and port authorities, an agreement was finally reached with the result that the machines did not disembark in Mesta and were reloaded on the ship Pelagitis.”

SOURCE