Following a few people that have been removed from FB & Twitter. There is an exodus to alternative sites underway. There also a purge taking place as leftists social media channels are removing any challenges to their ideas and opinions. They simply can not tolerate discussion.
Politics
Dan Bongino (Rumble) (Website) Candace Owens (Bitchute) Barnes Law (locals) Jack Posobiec (Gettr) Mike Cernovich (Rokfin) Scott Adams (Locals) (Rumble) Tulsi Gabbard (Locals) Dave Rubin (Locals) Steve Bannon (Gettr) Rebel Media (Bitchute) Alex Jones (Bitchute) Styxhexeham (Bitchute) Tim Pool (Bitchute) OAN (Rumble) Ben Shapiro
Thinking
Stefan Molnyeux (Bitchute) (Website) (Parler) (Odysee) Dr. Jordan Peterson (Bitchute) (Parler) (ThinkSpot) Adapt2030 (Bitchute) PragerU (Bitchute) Pressed for Truth (Bitchute) Bombards Body Language (Lbry) Computing Forever (Lbry) Dinesh Dsouza (Rumble)
Climate
Tony Heller (NewTube) Alex Epstein (YouTube) 1000Frolly (YouTube) Anthony Watts Dr. Judith Curry Tom Nelson (blogspot)
Bitcoin
Health
Dr. John Bergman (Bitchute) Dr. Eric Berg (YouTube) (Odysee) Dr. Rhonda Patrick (YouTube) Dr. Roger Seheult (YouTube) Ivor Cummins (YouTube) Dr. Sam Bailey (YouTube) (Odysee) Dr Mobeen Syed (Odysee) Dr. Sten Ekberg (rumble)
Homesteading
This video discusses a new surprise discovery (yet to be confirmed by other scientists) that the SARS-CoV-2 full length spike protein can enter human cell nuclei and interfere with the mechanics of fixing of broken DNA damage. The authors of the study propose this might have been evolved in order to prevent the genetic recombination required to produce antibody varieties to successfully attack the virus. If true, then this could have important implications for potential negative health outcomes (another if!) and might require reconfiguration of vaccine design. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Unt03UBhbU
https://merogenomics.ca/en/about/
SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/10/2056
Dr. McCullough has over 500 peer-reviewed publications with over 100,000 (!) citations according to google scholar.
https://rumble.com/vqrqb2-joe-rogan-and-dr-peter-mccullough.html
Dr. Robert Malone - "We have lots of scientific data now that are demonstrating that these vaccines, particularly RNA vaccines, are damaging T cell responses. They're causing a form of Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome....AIDS".
Malone joe rogan interview text https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Witt/status/1477032151493267460
https://dryburgh.com/james-lyons-weiler-coronavirus-vaccine-safety-warning/
October 20, 2020
“it’s a disproportionate response given the rate of mortality. If you’re not over 70 years old, you have less of a chance of dying of coronavirus than you do from influenza, thank goodness”
Dr. James Lyons-Weiler
Research Scientist, President & CEO of IPAK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
Hasty Generalization - Making a generalization from a ridiculous small sample. Requires enough empirical evidence to become warranted and convincing.
Relevance Fallacy - Argument may be sound but misses the point. Red herring – Diverting the argument to unrelated issues
Straw Man – Over simplifying one’s argument
Ad Hominem – Insulting someone’s character
Begging the Question – Assume the conclusion of an argument, a kind of circular reasoning
Non-Sequitur – Making jumps in logic
Bandwagoning – Asserting that everyone agrees
Either/or Fallacy – Creating a “false dilemma” in which the situation is oversimplified
Card-Stacking – Selectively using facts
False Equivalence / False Analogy – Making false or misleading comparisons
Appeal to the Stone – dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity.
Appeal to Ignorance – assuming that a claim is true because it has not been or cannot be proven false, or vice versa.
Appeal to Common Sense – “I cannot imagine how this could be true; therefore, it must be false.”
Argument from Repetition (argumentum ad nauseam, argumentum ad infinitum) – signifies that it has been discussed extensively until nobody cares to discuss it anymore; sometimes confused with proof by assertion
Argument from Silence (argumentum ex silentio) – where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence.
False Compromise, Fallacy of the Mean – assuming that the compromise between two positions is always correct.
Begging the Question (petitio principii) – providing what is essentially the conclusion of the argument as a premise.
Shifting the Burden of Proof – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false.
Circular Reasoning – when the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with; sometimes called assuming the conclusion. Circular cause and consequence – where the consequence of the phenomenon is claimed to be its root cause.
Continuum Fallacy (fallacy of the beard, line-drawing fallacy, bald man fallacy) – improperly rejecting a claim for being imprecise.
Correlation Proves Causation (post hoc ergo propter hoc) – a faulty assumption that because there is a correlation between two variables that one caused the other.
Suppressed Correlative – where a correlative is redefined so that one alternative is made impossible.
Divine Fallacy – arguing that, because something is so incredible, it must be the result of superior, divine, alien or paranormal agency.
Double Counting – counting events or occurrences more than once in probabilistic reasoning, which leads to the sum of the probabilities of all cases exceeding unity.
Equivocation – the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).
Ambiguous Middle Term – a common ambiguity in syllogisms in which the middle term is equivocated.
Definitional Retreat – changing the meaning of a word to deal with an objection raised against the original wording.
Fallacy of Accent – a specific type of ambiguity that arises when the meaning of a sentence is changed by placing an unusual prosodic stress, or when, in a written passage, it’s left unclear which word the emphasis was supposed to fall on.
Fallacy of Composition – assuming that something true of part of a whole must also be true of the whole.
Fallacy of Division – assuming that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its parts.
False Attribution – an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased or fabricated source in support of an argument.
Fallacy of Quoting out of Context – refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original context in a way that distorts the source’s intended meaning.
False Authority – using an expert of dubious credentials or using only one opinion to sell a product or idea. Related to the appeal to authority fallacy.
False Dilemma (false dichotomy, fallacy of bifurcation, black-or-white fallacy) – two alternative statements are held to be the only possible options, when in reality there are more.
False Equivalence – describing a situation of logical and apparent equivalence, when in fact there is none.
Fallacy of Many Questions (complex question, fallacy of presupposition, loaded question, plurium interrogationum) – someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved. This fallacy is often used rhetorically, so that the question limits direct replies to those that serve the questioner’s agenda.
Causal Oversimplification – it is assumed that there is one, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) may not be on many's radar but they have been around a long time and you may have heard them but did not think much of it. But they are a powerful force shaping our planet and we all need to be aware of what is happening around us and where they are taking us.
Stakeholder Capitalism takes over the corporate boards and fill them with political commissars called stakeholders who literally don't hold a stake in the company at all (we call those shareholders).
Leadership Forum
Julian Lincoln Simon, entitled "The Ultimate Resource." refutes the Malthusian lies relentlessly
The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjørn Lomborg (as well as "Cool It" by the same author).
The Malthusian Trap, first proposed by Thomas Robert Malthus, states that the population increases exponentially, while the production of food only grows arithmetically.
chrystia freelands
https://www.beyondthenarrative.ca/canadian-federal-politician-members-of-the-world-economic-forum/
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-next-step-for-the-world-economic-forum/
https://www.weforum.org/people/ivanka-trump
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/people/ivanka-trump/
https://www.postsustainabilityinstitute.org/which-nations-signed-agenda-21.html
WEF world leaders
https://twitter.com/ThreadsIrish/status/1459476288100397060
https://twitter.com/NailHard/status/1491988554569945090
wef in canada
https://twitter.com/NailHard/status/1493739242715025409 https://web.archive.org/web/20210401060525/https://www.weforum.org/people/pierre-poilievre
Swab proud trudeau putin
Malthusian Doctrine Eugenics Birth Control Feminism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUGdL5UXgSY
1806 - Malthus - " To a rational being, the Prudential check to population to be considers as equally natural as the check from poverty and premature mortality" - Publication: Population - A crusade against Poverty
1826 - Malthus - Principle 6th Edition Published
1872 - John Stuart Mill - "Little improvement can be expected in mortality until the production of large families is regarded in light as drunkedness or any other pysical excess"
1879 - Lord Derby - "Surely it is better to have thirty-five millions of human beings leading useful and intelligent lives than forty millions struggling painfully for a bare subsistence"
1877 - Malthusian League Established in London Family planning - voluntary limitiation of family size neo-malthusianism movement started
1880 - Charles Knowlton - Fruits of Philosophy - A treatise on the population question
1877 - The Great Famine affects India
1890 - Social Darwinism - Hubert Spencer Principles of Socialogy eugenics movement started
1889 - Thomas H. Huxley - Darwinism, Agnosticism
1892 - Sierra Club - Conservation in America
1919 - Creation of League of Nations Clash between Nationhood and internationalism
1922 - Karl Saunders - The Population Problem examination of human evolution and questioning genetic quality
1927 League of Nations holds first World Population Conference - Julian Huxley - Margaret Sanger - Birth Control
Timeline https://guides.loc.gov/chronicling-america-margaret-sanger
| Date | Activity |
|---|---|
| March 13, 1915 | William Sanger is arrested for distributing wife’s pamphlets on contraception. Margaret Sanger returns from London to stand trial beside him in New York. |
May 12, 1915 Spurred by the arrest of William Sanger, New Yorkers form the Birth Control League September 10, 1915 William Sanger’s conviction and jail sentence causes a riot in the Court of Special Sessions. November 29, 1915 The widely publicized Bollinger baby case may carry the birth control fight to Congress. January 18, 1916 Margaret Sanger stands trial undefended in federal court for circulating information on birth control, considered obscene matter. April 1, 1916 Margaret Sanger is freed of charge that she circulated obscene matter. She begins to visit and organize birth control societies throughout the US. October 21, 1916 Margaret Sanger establishes semi-secretly in New York the first out-and-out birth control clinic in the United States, and plans on opening many more across the US. December 27, 1916 New York physicians do not suggest a change in the state law favoring birth control, and disapprove of doctors aiding in family limitation. December 29, 1916 Judge John Stelk speaks at the Chicago Woman’s Club, voicing his support of the birth control movement. January 27, 1917 Mrs. Ethel Byrne, following a five day-long hunger strike at Blackwell’s Island prison, is forcibly fed. January 29, 1917 Margaret Sanger and Fania Mondeil are charged with circulating birth control information. Both expect to be convicted, and both have promised to hunger strike. November 14, 1921 Margaret Sanger and Mary Winsor are charged with disorderly conduct for Town Hall meeting on birth control, but they are exonerated. December 2, 1921 Juliet Rublee is arrested for violating a law prohibiting the promulgation of recipes for birth control. February 20, 1922 Margaret Sanger receives permission to land in Japan to speak at “Kaizo” magazine, but only upon the condition that she does not attempt birth control propaganda. May 14, 1922 In Japan, rumors spread that Margaret Sanger and birth control is an American plot to decrease the population of Nippon so the United States can seize the island empire.
"We will soon be asking: is it perfectly okay to eat the bodies of your dead because we’re all so hungry?"
-@PaulREhrlich , 2014
Ehrlich wrote "The Population Bomb" in 1968, and has been the media's leading environmental "expert" for 50+ years.
Final stages of a technocratic global government https://twitter.com/_Escapekey_/status/1752006634069471726
Control the right to emit Carbon Dioxide
Temperatures must not be increased beyond a predetermined threshold (UNFCCC) To stay within said threshold we have to control emissions (CBD Convention on Biological Diversity)
Anyone emitting is considered a Carbon Source, (power generation, farming) Sinks are anything that absorbs (forests) Sources will be required to offset their emissions
Carbon Dioxide emissions are a kind of Ecosystem service rendered by a Natural Asset.
Natural Asset Company holds a lease on a sustainably exploited resource - ecosystem service
Natural Asset Company will be floated on the stock exchange. Exclusive focus on profit generation from a artifically scarce resource - carbon credits. Which push up the price of carbon sources and passing the cost onto the consumer.
UNESCO biosphere Reserve holding nature reserves set aside by many countries.
========================
What you see happening around you has been planned for generations. We’re now in the final stages, and the distractions will become increasingly outrageous.
Rather than get distracted, let me summarise what’s actually taking place, on how they plan to wrap up their multi-generational efforts to impose a technocratic, global government.
It’s about controlling the right to emit carbon dioxide. Because those who do, control economic activity without which you won’t be able to do much. And in this regard - the role of the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 cannot be overstated.
There are two core components to this scam. The UNFCCC and the Convention on Biological Diversity, aka the CBD. The former declares that we must not increase temperatures above a certain - arbitrary - threshold. To stay within said - as claimed by the UNFCCC - we have to control emissions. This creates a scarcity of carbon dioxide emissions, which can then be exploited financially.
When a farmer works his field to produce food, or a power plant generates electricity, both will soon be required to ‘offset’ their carbon dioxide emissions. In this equation, anyone emitting is considered a carbon source, and the flip side of that coin is called a carbon sink. Carbon sinks comprise anything that absorbs carbon dioxide; we here talk about the likes of forests, and wetlands like mangroves.
And while the UNFCCC creates the scarcity, the CBD’s stated aim is to increase the pool of allowable carbon dioxide emissions - ie, alleviate said scarcity - through the restoration of biodiversity. Consequently, when governments set out to spend trillions of your taxes to improve forests, mangroves and so forth, the stated aim is to improve biodiversity, which will lead to an increase in carbon absorbed by said forests, which consequently will increse the pool of (allowable) carbon dioxide emissions.
Carbon dioxide emissions, in this regard, are a type of ‘ecosystem service’. And those are rendered by a ‘natural asset’. You might have heard this expression before, likely due to the NYSE ‘Natural Asset Company’ rule change, temporarily put on ice. These are a type of holding company which has lease on a sustainably exploitable resource, or in their terminology - an ‘ecosystem service’ - which futher count the likes of fresh water (think Nestle), Eco-tourism, or timber from a forest. However, this exploitation is only allowed provided that the ‘natural asset’ rendering said ‘ecosystem service’ is not damaged in the process.
This ‘Natural Asset Company’ will then in turn be floated on a stock exchange. Once floated, the imperative shifts eclusively to profit generation from the artificially scarce resource - carbon credits - translating into far higher prices for ‘carbon sources’ - such as farmers and power plant - who will have no option but to increase prices on the end consumer - and that would be you.
Large corporations and opaque financial constructs were in a rush to buy up aquifers and forests a few decades ago. This is why. Most of those investment opportunities were front-run, because the insiders knew where we’d be some 20 years down the line. However, buying large tracts of land turns expensive, and consequently, under the guise of ‘conservation’, a great many nations set aside ‘nature reserves’, and submitted these to the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve program, which at present holds an area of the world comparable to the size of Australia. And these reserves span a great many forests, and other areas of considerable worth from the perspective of monetising carbon credits.
And that’s where the Global Environment Facility enters the stage. What they do is to structure ‘blended finance’ deals for ‘ecosystem services’, using a ‘landscape approach’. And while you should be aware of the former, the latter - the ‘landscape approach’ is a description of an arbitrary geographic range. This, along with a duration - ie, a number of years - and the ‘ecosystem service’ requested, be presented to the Global Environment Facility, who will structure a such blended finance deal. The outcome is a lease for an ecosystem service, which will promptly be transferred to a holding company, and floated on the stock exchange as a ‘Natural Asset Company’.
Blended finance deals are named as such, because they comprise public (taxpayer), private (billionaire class), and philanthropic capital. Thing is, however, the later contribute virtually nothing. Their inclusion appears entirely motivated around taking credit. The private invests 5-20% depending on interest in offer, also depending on geographical region. In Africa, for instance, they have little to no interest, and consequently, the taxpayer contributes practically all in this regard. Commonly, however, the public puts in around 85-90% of the capital, except this goes through leveraging and consequenly, considerably less. What this does however outline is that there is fundamentally no reason why the private investor should be involved whatsoever, because their meagre contribution could just as well be picked up by the public (taxpayer).
That’s where the structure of these deals enters the stage. Because in spite of being much smaller, the private is ‘senior’ to the public, meaning in the event of bankruptcy, the private is in effect shielded; the public taxpayer will lose their money before the private will lose a penny. Think 2008, and CDOs - but this time, with your taxes as the sitting duck. Typically, this additional level of risk is compensated for through a higher interest rate, but not so in this regard. In fact, per GEF itself, it is not uncommon to find the private investor receiving 2-3x interest rate - while, as said, simultaneously running much less risk. In short - all of this is a colossal public transfer to the priviledged few. It’s a way to continuously squeeze every nation, and every person and business into bankruptcy, one after another, leaving only a few standing at the end. And all of this, under the guise of ‘saving the planet’.
And the central banks are in on this. Those CBDCs they currently seek to push through in an obviously coordinated manner? Yes, an increasing amount of documents outline how these will be coupled with carbon emissions down the road, meaning that almost certainly, you will receive the same ‘carbon credit allowance’ as everyone else, much like how the economy broadly worked - or rather, didn't - in the Soviet Union. This approach is furthermore clearly outlined by One World Trust’s ‘Charter 99’, where said OWT was founded in the wake of WW2, and included the likes of Clement Attlee and Winston Churchill.
Thing is, the whole thing is based on fraud, and that is no exaggeration. There’s a large reliance on the ‘Contingent Valuation Method’, which in no uncertain terms means asking a range of people what they would pay for a given item, and then valuing said on that account. Yes, really. But not only does this ‘ecosystem service valuation’ depend on this utter guesswork, but assigned values include deeply subjective values, such as valuing a stroll in a forest, regardless of how completely absurd that might appear.
The sheer quantities of information, further, is practically unlimited. To solve this problem, they propose a range of 'approximations' in a way comparable to improving neighbouring squares to cities, when playing a game of Civilisation on your PC.
We can then consider assigning carbon credits to a forest in the first place, which is nothing short of pure guesswork, and highly likely to be distorted in the direction of those insiders attempting to push through this system in the first place.
And then there’s the carbon consensus itself. No such existed in 1979, but was the result of a handful of ICSU cherry picked climate scientists, clearly evidenced by the resulting conference proceedings hinting at extraordinary levels of bias, plus the long-term planning of society in general clearly laid out through said proceedings. In fact, the quantity of papers pertaining to exclusively carbon dioxide itself was in a minority, which safe to say is a little odd, given that the event took place just 3 years after Bert Bolin - a primary driver of the narrative - in front of the US Senate unilaterally declared that the only thing they knew for sure, was that an increase in carbon dioxide led to increased plant growth. When asked if this led to global warming, he added this was ‘his personal opinion only’, and he further concluded by stating that professional climate scientists are the least likely to make predictions.
But, of course, as soon as this carbon dioxide narrative was established, annual temperatures suddenly went from being completely unpredictable, to rising in an almost linear fashion. This narrative was fabricated along the way with help from the ICSU and associated scientists, and their committees, which include the likes of SCOPE.
Incidentally, it was also SCOPE which set the course for the global surveillance they have progressively rolled out since 1972. But though that’s a story in itself, it does deserve a mention as this initiative - through GEO BON and GBIOS - will be used to uphold the Convention on Biological Diversity's centrally stated purpose. Restoring biodiversity.
Which private actors then turn around and monetise. 11:31 AM · Jan 29, 2024
A whole lot worse.
I’ve detailed the scam that is the 1979 carbon ‘consensus’, and how this leads into the UNFCCC/CBD ‘control lever’, which will be progressively tightened as we approach 2030 and hence incrementally make carbon emissions far more expensive, translating to a colossal increase in cost in terms of energy, food, and everything else you rely on. Of course, this will drive companies into bankruptcies, ensure a major loss in employment, and this in turn will drive families and individuals into bankruptcy and hence cause more state dependency - which is obviously the plan.
For those few still standing, this will translate into higher taxes. Further, the call for a massive increase in ‘biodiversity restoration’ expenditure which will promptly be seized upon by the billionaire class, who will monetise the ‘carbon credits’ from the forests and mangroves ‘restored’ paid for by your taxes.
In 2021, a little covered report by the Hank Paulson Institute - yes, the guy who demanded $700bn in 2008 for the banks, to fix issue caused by those same banks with absolute impunity - states that practically all farmer subsidies should be eliminated and redirected to ‘biodiversity restoration’. What this of course means is that food prices will again spike, translating to even higher costs, followed by farmers going out of business as well.
Then we have the elimination of wood burners and equivalents in a range of European nations, forcing more people into electric heating to avoid freezing over winter - though naturally, no capacity will be added to the electric grid nor generation. And as coal plants emit carbon dioxide, electricity prices will skyrocket as well as we inch closer to 2030.
But that’s not the end of it. Taxation on land will also increase, ensuring an increasing amount of people will not be able to afford their present house, and will be forced to sell and move into a flat. Which, naturally, will be on a ‘smart meter’ ensuring that you can be cut off as they see fit.
Inflation already started in early 2022. And while Biden and your other crooked politicians went on the television, blaming it on covid, on Russia, on Santa Claus, what should have been given more coverage was Mervyn King - former Bank of England governor - on a morning broadcast admitting that ‘all central banks committed the same error at the same time’. What he referred to, of course, was to support the lockdowns through a colossal amount of money printing.
And let me make clear - without those central banks, those lockdowns would have come to an end almost immediately, as periphery nations, already struggling with large debt loads would have been yields rocket almost immediately, rendering said lockdowns unaffordable. Those were the most costly ‘mistake’ in modern history.
But when all central banks ‘commit the same mistake at the same time’, it’s almost certainly coordinated. And there is a mechanism for coordination; the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland. A hugely controversial bank, that made its name through facilitating Hitler’s war machine.
The BIS in more recent times has through a series of reports starting in 2015 outlined Central Bank Digital Currencies. But as of late, they’ve started discussing using the ‘framework’ to include the likes of carbon trading, and ultimately, carbon allowances. And this is clearly going to happen. Your bank account will be directly coupled with your ‘carbon allowance’ ensuring you won’t be able to do much, while Bill Gates carries on flying his fleet of lear jets, as he can ‘offset’ his carbon emissions vs those forests he had the insider knowledge to buy decades ago.
In 1975, Henry Commager wrote his ‘Declaration of Interdependence’, in which he called for a new world order. I advise you read it. You can find it on the Global Interdependence Center’s website, which by sheer coincidence is hosted… by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. Needless to say, this bank is very much part of the same Federal Reserve, which is part of the Bank for International Settlements.
In 2017, the inaugural ‘One Planet Summit’ was held in France. This initiative was launched by ex-Rothschild banker, Emmanuel Macron, and at this very first conference the Network for Greening the Financial System saw the light of day. Their aim is to turn ‘finance green’, promising to use their financial prowess to push through climate change regulation throughout the part of the financial system which comply with this aim. And how many of the systemically important banks comply? 100%. Yes, 100%.
And I’m yet to work out exactly who broadened their remit beyond setting monetary policy only. And to me, this would appear sufficient reason for the termination of their charters, as this appears a gross violation of their mandate, fundamentally operating explicitly outside of democratic principles. 4:29 PM · Feb 3, 2024 · 20.6K Views
Hybrid war is a theory of military strategy. Which deploys political warfare, fake news, cyber-warfare, diplomacy, foreign electoral interference, defined as the use of gaslighting to conceptualize your enemies desired
Cyber Warfare - by Maajid Namaz
Bots creating headlines, articles. Algorithmic driven. Social media messages. Social media restrictions. Information and misinformation mixed together.The roots for Cyber Warfare are in The Big Lie going back to Germany in the second world war. Similar techniques thare are used in marketing and merchandising.
Russia describes it in a way that they claim we do it to them. So, their activity is defensive against our own hybrid warfare. That we initiated this hybrid war.
How it is done. Russian bot farms to manipulate social media. Masquarade as Twitter accounts, spam to drown out other messages. Repeat russian messages from independant accounts to appear as collective. It is a bottom up process.
Allows them to achieve their goals without fighting conventional warfare. Who really knows - rising mistrust, skepticism, undermines resolve, sap moral unity, can't unite to a singular response. Being used in the Ukraine invasion.
Effect of it is that the feeling of the time for decisive action is actually undermined.
War will expand into Poland, Hungary, Romania. Probably dominate the next 10 years. Will require tremendous military defence spending in the west. Then what about China & Taiwan?
Mass psychosis https://youtu.be/09maaUaRT4M
Dismissing Reality - by David Marks
Deriding Mass Formation and Dismissing its Influence During a Global Crisis – is a Verification of the Phenomenon By Guest Author: David Marks
Historians analyzing the Covid-19 pandemic will one day consider what was going on in the minds of those who supported a narrative that only served profits and power. Looking back, they will greatly appreciate the analysis of contemporary experts, particularly Mattias Desmet, a professor in the Department of Psychology and Educational Sciences at Ghent University in Belgium. He is recognized as a leading thinker in his field, and has written over one hundred peer-reviewed academic papers.
Desmet has presented his understanding of human behavior in response to the pandemic and vaccine policies to forums and international media. His book on the topic, The Psychology of Totalitarianism, will be published in June of 2022. It examines the emotional climate that has allowed a singular, focused, crisis narrative that forbids dissenting views and relies on destructive groupthink.
The central tenet of Desmet’s evaluation of the emotional response to the pandemic rests on the psychological concept of mass formation. It is a general term that applies to individual, group, and crowd behavior as influenced by the manipulations and conduct of dominant social forces. The concept is not new — nor is it in any way a stretch to apply it in analyzing the extensive anxiety driving the attitudes and demeanor of billions of people during the world-wide pandemic.
Mass formation can be associated with mass psychosis, a disturbance in the minds of small or large groups — to the degree where there is a loss of contact with reality — often with an eclipse of morality and objectification of an imagined enemy.
The hostile and dismissive response to Desmet’s perspective on the pandemic’s emotional climate is both fascinating and revelatory.
Enter The Media
Desmet was interviewed by a number of prominent individuals in a variety of media outlets, with his views on the current rise of mass formation taken seriously by some of the public and medical professionals with open minds. Detractors quickly appeared in an attempt to minimize his impact.
When Dr. Robert Malone, respected veteran expert in molecular biology and a pioneer in mRNA research, discussed and amplified Desmet’s theory on the “Joe Rogan Experience,” a threshold seemed to have been crossed. Mainstream media and medical websites went into high gear pronouncing mass formation as discredited and bunk. The distain for anyone invoking the term was overt. Medpage Today reported, “It sounds like the name of your friend's failed high school band.”
The vast majority of criticism had little to say about the reasonable theory that government representatives, a huge portion of the medical profession and at least one-third of the general population had fallen into a trance. And most importantly, there was no willingness to consider that there might be a powerful psychological force skewing judgement and provoking irrational behavior.
In a show of reflexive impulsive bias, media coverage claimed that the concept of mass formation did not exist. This response simply revealed how the process of mass formation blinds the minds of scientists and journalists.
Widely attributed press sources, including Reuters, quickly found experts who said that, “Mass formation psychosis is not an academic term recognized in the field of psychology, nor is there evidence of any such phenomenon occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic.” To ensure readers need not fear they were under any spell, they advised, “numerous psychologists have also told Reuters that such a condition is not officially recognized.”
Mass formation was also dismissed in a number of articles because it is not mentioned in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a simplified clinical guide to individual psychiatric disorders that does not cover crowd psychology.
Not Necessarily The News
The blast of commentary was presented as objective news, yet the press response directly conflicts with the knowledge of prominent psychotherapists, including luminaries who enriched the modern understanding of the human psyche, such as Scipio Sighele, Gustave Le Bon, Elio Cannetti, and Hannah Arendt.
In his 1921 book on Crowd Psychology and Ego Analysis, the founder of psychotherapy, Sigmund Freud, discusses mass formation and its ramifications, saying, “The strangest and at the same time most important phenomenon of mass formation is the increase in affectivity evoked in each individual (as) exaltation or intensification of emotion.”
The preeminent psychiatrist, Carl Jung, highlights mass formation in his prescient 1957 book, The Undiscovered Self, on the state of mankind and the dangers of modern materialism. His perspective is foundational, relative to Desmet’s recent findings:
“Under the influence of scientific assumptions, not only the psyche but the individual man and, indeed, all individual events whatsoever suffer a leveling down and a process of blurring that distorts the picture of reality into a conceptual average. We ought not to underestimate the psychological effect of the statistical world picture: it displaces the individual in favor of anonymous units that pile up into mass formations.”
Despite a wealth of historical precedents, the reaction to Desmet’s ideas was bizarre and unfounded. A renowned and respected psychotherapist had postulated that we might need to reconsider the unconscious response to lockdowns and mandates — and his ideas were summarily dismissed by the voice of the state.
The diagnosis is clear. Deriding mass formation and dismissing its influence during a global crisis is in itself a verification of the phenomenon. Mainstream media demonstrates how it perpetuates mass formation by indulging in another well-accepted psychological phenomenon: denial. Considering the degree of unwillingness to confront the reality of ineffectiveness and dangers of the COVID-19 vaccines, an evaluation of the news media’s response to the current plague can also be deemed delusional.
The Syndrome Persists
In recent decades, studies have shown that psychological problems are increasing geometrically. Rather than attempting to reverse this dysfunction, powerful forces in government and the corporate press continue to mislead and prey on an expanding susceptible population, who in the face of crisis, cling to authority.
It is the vulnerability of dissatisfied populations that allows mass formation.
Desmet suggests that a number of factors, including; isolation, a sense that life is meaningless — and particularly free-floating anxiety, frustration and aggression — independently or in unison, can lead to mass formation and its repercussions.
Jung also viewed precursors to dysfunction in the context of a modern age where the “State” and “Scientific Rationalism” play critical roles in supporting mass formation, saying:
“Science supplies us with, instead of the concrete individual, the names of organizations and, at the highest point, the abstract idea of the State as the principle of political reality. Apart from agglomerations of huge masses of people, in which the individual disappears anyway, one of the chief factors responsible for psychological mass-mindedness is scientific rationalism, which robs the individual of his foundations and his dignity. As a social unit he has lost his individuality and become a mere abstract number in the bureau of statistics. He can only play the role of an interchangeable unit of infinitesimal importance.”
The concept of mass formation and its relevance to the pandemic are undeniable when our current crisis is examined carefully, particularly when the inadequacies and inconsistencies of prevention and treatment are analyzed and understood.
Vaccines were initially presented as the only viable way to stem a deadly disease. A subsequent admission that they did not stop transmission was revealed in the context that they continued to be effective and safe. Any serious analysis of these claims confirms this also is a fabrication.
There is an important and viable inquiry asking how a false and deadly narrative continues to be accepted. Policies supporting repressive controls and ongoing vaccination have no foundation other than nonsensical dictates and support from a public bolstered with questionable data, prodded to near-hysteria.
The very forces that are responsible for the false narrative can only take a defensive position when light is shed on their methodology. The dogmatic negation of the idea that a mass formation is responsible for blind compliance and irrational acceptance of dangerous therapies is striking and revelatory.
As time passes, the induced fear and coerced consent will continue to be exposed as part of a scheme promoting selfish interests, and verifiably nothing to do with good health.
Eventually this epoch will be recognized for its essential impetus; the nefarious entrancement of a vulnerable world.
—
David Marks is a veteran writer and documentary film producer. He was the originator and lead investigator for the BBC/PBS co-production of Nazi Gold – revealing the role of Switzerland in World War II – and one of the most widely viewed documentaries on television. David’s new book, "The Way," is an interpretation of the Chinese classic, the Tao Te Ching, available at LaoTzu-TheWay.org
The World Economic Forum (WEF) is a Globalist organization of elitists: The super-rich families, the Central Banks, The International Monetary Fund, almost all Major Corporations and prominant political individuals from most countries. They are famous for their annual meetings in DAVOS where 600 private planes converge on this small city and hold private meetings amongst it's members for a few days every year. Some of those meetings are held in public and videotaped so we have access to that.davos Their goal is to form a global government in which they are in control. It would suprise most people to learn that this group was formed back in 1970, around the same time the Club of Rome1 was being formed, and they have been working on their plan all this time. For most of us, we are only really noticing them now. There is not secret as to what they are up to, they have a well documented website that you can peruse.wef Pay particular attention to the Governance, Digital Currency and Membership sections.
The World Economic Forum is part of a Network of organizations that are like global think tanks:
- the World Economic Forum
- the Council on foreign relations
- Chatham House in the uk
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
These organizations write policy papers and essentially make policy. In the case of the World Economic Forum, that policy somehow trickles down to become the policy of governments around the world.
The World Economic Forum is run by a board of trustees:
- the head of the IMF
- prominent central bankers
- heads of some of the biggest tech companies of silicon valley
- people like Larry Fink of Blackrock. You know very powerful people
- heads of state or former heads of state
- Al Gore
- At the very top of course you have Klaus Schwab who created it.
The world economic forum was created in the early 70s in close association with the Club of Rome. Another one of these global think tanks, The Club of Rome having long-standing ties to the Rockefeller family.
The Kissinger Continuum: The Unauthorized History of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders Program https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/08/investigative-reports/the-kissinger-continuum-the-unauthorized-history-of-the-wefs-young-global-leaders-program/
Why should we be worried?
They may have created and unleashed the C19 virus. They certainly siezed the opportunity it provided. This is openly admitted to by Klaus Schwab in his book, The Great Reset. There seemed to be a global coordinated response to the virus, led by China, where the outbreak supposedly first occurred.
Their plan is to implement a programmable digital currency and construct a checkpoint society. They also intend to create a communist style takeover of all corporations throughout the world using a concept they call Stakeholder Capitalism.
"ESG (and SDG) are Neo-Socialism: A Party-administered redistributive sham economy led by a group of unaccountable technocrats who have the "right" Leftist ideology to order the world."
Why should we be worried? It is the end of democracy and sovereign rule. The last remaining individual freedoms will vanish.
Event 201
It is not the fact that disaster planning occurred - afterall that is something that needs to be done, it is the coincidence that a Coronavirus outbreak occurred just a couple of months later, exactly as planned. And the fact that the pandemic was used as justification for all the control measures that were put in place and still continue to this day. Looking back, it is their focus on control rather than healthiness that makes it so scary. It was purposeful.
Event 201 simulates an outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic.
https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/scenario.html
https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/events-archive/2001_dark-winter/about.html
Agenda 2030
It is not a conspiracy theory, it exists, and the UN and the WEF openly talk about it.
The UN has defined 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) with 169 Targets and 232 indicators
Not everyone is happy with this project however.
My own opinion is that the goals may be noble but how they achieve them won't be. They are not so much as principles to live by but instead are reasons for doing what they are doing. It is all about power and control.
Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)
Bill C11 to create a digital currency
Checkpoint Society
Social Credit Score
Environmental, Social Governance (ESG)
Changes to Fintrack are permanent. Banks will monitor your social media messages Contributing to a crowd funding can get your accounts frozen. Participating in Trucker convoy. Canadians are divided on opinions
WHO making moves on international vaccine 'passport'
Digital ID
Digital ID determines your access to goods and services. Monitor your online behaviour, purchases and biometrics.
Provinces setup government id that links vaccination to banking, drivers licenses
with shortages comes rationing. Your rations will be controlled by the govt and accessible to you by using an APP that is linked to your digital ID.
The only untrackable currency will be bartering. Learn a skill so you have something to trade.
Some people still believe that good health can be injected.
You now have to formally and digitally file your travel plans in advance, on an app, in order to enter Canada.
Digital ID allows for machine processing.
Amalgamation of so many points of information about each of us that is alarming.
- Canadian Bankers Association teamed with Gates/Rockefeller funded ID2020
- Verified.me developed with 7 banks RBC, BMO, CIBC, Desjardin, National,ScotiaBank, TD
- Interac has acquired SecureKey
- Digital ID & Authentication Council of Canada (DIACC) federal regulatory authority with directors from all major banks.
WEF 2021 How digital Identity can improve lives in a post-Covid-19 world on finacial services, employment, health and travel
- Healthcare - CARIN Alliance
- Employment - Velocity
- Travel - Known Traveller Digital ID (of which Canada was the initial pilot country)
- Partnered with DIACC
These are initially being Funded by:
- World Bank
- Omidyar Network
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
- Rockefeller Foundation
- Open Society Foundation
Bank for International Settlements
Digital ID can work in relation to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) Governments linking Digital ID with biometric data Allowing administrative databases to be linked up Cross border use of account-based CBDCs require international cooperation Super-national digital ID
World Bank openly talking about incorporating digital and biometric ID
"This approach could eventually be extended to capture vaccination status to protect against other diseases."
WEF obsessed wth promoting global digital ID. Your ID will interact with all kinds of things via Internet of Things.
Crucial to the development of digital economy and smart cities
What happens to your ability to access healthcare, bank accounts, validate credentials and licenses and travel which are tied to digital ID and govt databases. when got does no like what you say or do?
China's surveillance and social credit systems are dependent on govt ability to identify citizens at all times.
The 4 main Alliance partners are Gavi - The Vaccine Alliance, Microsoft, Rockefeller Foundation (RF) & Accenture. All 4 are WEF members. Gavi has also been funded millions by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).
vax passport for travel
27 Aug 2021 "The Digital Documentation of Covid-19 Certificates" was launched by the WHO (WEF member). The document was funded by BMGF and RF. The WHO, BMGF & RF were also at Event
Board of Trustees
- Al Gore, Former WP of the US
- Mark Carney, UN Special Envoy for Climate Action
- T. Shanmugaratnam, Seminar Minister Singapore
- Christine Lagarde, President, European Central Bank
- Ngozi Okonja-Iweala, Director General, WTO
- Kristalian Georggieva, Managing Director, IMF
- Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Minister of Canada
- Laurence Fink, CEO, BlackRock
If you want to really see the extent of influence, go to the website and pick out the corporate name of your choice; there are many to choose from: Abbott Laboratories, Astra-Zeneca, Biogen, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Serum Institute of India, BASF, Mayo Clinic, Kaiser Permanente, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Blackrock, CISCO, Dell, Google, Huawei, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Zoom, Yahoo, Amazon, Airbus, Boeing, Honda, Rakuten, Walmart, UPS, Coca-Cola, UBER, Bank of China. Bank of America. Deutsche Bank, State Bank of India, Royal Bank of Canada, Lloyds Banking, JP Morgan-Chase, Equifax, Goldman-Sachs, Hong Kong Exchanges, Bloomberg, VISA, New York Times, Ontario (Canada) Teacher’s Pension Plan
Jeremy Farrar
Director of the Wellcome Trust? Jeremy Farrar, of the United Kingdom SAGE and lockdown fame – arguably the architect of the US-UK lockdowns in 2020 – is closely associated with WEF.
https://www.bcg.com/publications/2022/model-for-tackling-antimicrobial-resistance
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
BMGF awarded the Institute for Health Metric Evaluation (IHME) a ten-year, almost $280 million award. IHME (associated with the University of Washington in Seattle) was at the forefront of the computer modeling that was driving the lockdowns and the nonpharmaceutical Interventions during 2020.
In 2019, IHME awarded the Editor of the Lancet (Dr. Richard Horton) a $100,000 award and described him as an “activist editor.” The Lancet, once considered one of the best medical journals, has been at the forefront of censoring opposing scientific viewpoints since 2020 and publishing “papers” that were not fit to be published. Of course, the Lancet is also heavily funded from pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer (also a member of the WEF).
Bill Gates has also invested heavily in Moderna and his investments have paid out nicely for him. The BMGF has also given close to $100 million to the Clinton Health Access Initiative.
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Grants 2020
| Organization Name | Amount USD |
|---|---|
| Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health | 20+ million |
| World Health Organization (WHO) | 100+ million |
| Oregon Health Sciences Univ. | 15+ million |
| CDC Foundation | 3.5+ million |
| Imperial College of London | 7+ million |
| Chinese CDC | 2+ million |
| Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health | 5+ million |
| Institute of Health Metric Evaluation (IHME) | 28 million (part of a 10 yr/279 million USD grant) |
| Nigeria CDC | 1.1 million |
| Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Z. (Gmbh) | 5+ million |
| Novartis | 7+ million |
| Lumira Dx UK LTD | 37+ million |
| Serum Institute of India | 4+ million |
| Icosavac | 10 million |
| Novavax | 15 million |
| BBC | 2 million |
| CNN | 4 million |
| Guardian | 3+ million |
| NPR | 4 million |
| Financial Times LTD | 0.5 million |
| National Newspaper Publishers Assoc. | 0.75 million |
Bill Gates has also invested heavily in Moderna and his investments have paid out nicely for him. The BMGF has also given close to $100 million to the Clinton Health Access Initiative.
There’s no need to invent conspiracy theories. The attempt by global elites to subvert local democracy is fully on and in plain view. Author: Rupa Subramanya
Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Chrystia Freeland 2012 book, Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else.
Freeland notes “marks an aspiring plutocrat’s arrival on the international scene.”
Since 2019 has sat on the board of trustees of the WEF itself.
Other members include Canada’s own Mark Carney, former governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England; Al Gore, former U.S. vice-president; Mukesh Ambani, India’s richest individual; Larry Fink, head of BlackRock, the world’s largest investment fund; and a slew of other bankers, CEOs, tycoons and celebrities. Notably, Freeland is the only government minister presently on the board.
Freeland also sits on the supervisory board of the Aspen Institute Kyiv, a chapter of another Davos-type exclusive club that holds forth on global issues. That’s quite a journey from her beginnings as a freelance journalist working out of Ukraine.
These board memberships are far from symbolic. According to the WEF, the board of trustees “act as guardians of its mission and values” and are its “highest-level governance body.” Similarly, board members of the Aspen Institute Kyiv are responsible for providing “counsel to the president, as well as governance over the business, affairs, and property” of the institute. What would happen if acting as a “guardian” for the WEF came into conflict with acting as a guardian for Canada’s public finances, which is Freeland’s day job? What would happen if providing “counsel” to the Aspen Institute president came into conflict with providing counsel to Canada’s governor general, which is part of Freeland’s day job as a member of the Privy Council?
Writing in the New York Times in 2011, Freeland described Schwab as a “rather traditional European social democrat who aims to encourage among … participants a kind of noblesse oblige, or its modern equivalent, stakeholder capitalism.” The political tradition that Freeland is describing originated with the reaction of privileged liberal elites rebelling against Europe’s feudal past, a world away from contemporary Canada. Search the 2019 Liberal party’s campaign platform, and you won’t find a single reference to “stakeholder capitalism.” Yet, as a member of the board of trustees of Schwab’s outfit, Freeland is implicitly or explicitly committed to importing this brand of European social democracy into a Canadian ethos originally founded on individual rights and free market capitalism, which in turn is premised on maximizing shareholder value. While Canada has drifted considerably leftward since its founding, a wholesale adoption of a corporatist philosophy and governance ethos imported from an exclusive gathering of the self-loathing rich who espouse these ideas over cocktails in the Swiss Alps would be nothing less than a subversion of Canadian democracy.
Like its first cousin, “The Great Reset,” which bizarrely aims to bring in environmental considerations under the purview of central banks, the innocuous sounding stakeholder capitalism is committed to destroying the foundations of Anglo-American free market capitalism and replacing it with a system where governments and their cronies in Davos tell private businesses what they need to care about. The irony here is that all of those at Davos, including Freeland, got there because of the free market system and shareholder-driven capitalism, which they’re now bent on overthrowing in an unholy alliance of true believers and opportunists.
The WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty will usher in global government by stealth, giving it unconstitutional powers to make rules and regulations in sovereign nation states. It must not be implemented.
https://thecountersignal.com/the-world-together-who-runs-canada/
According to a Government of Canada report published in May 2021, “Canada’s border measures are informed by obligations under the International Health Regulations (IHR). The IHR is an instrument of international law that is legally binding on 196 countries to limit the spread of health risks while preventing unwarranted travel and trade restrictions. Recognizing the IHR, Canada cannot impose health-related travel restrictions except in situations of public health emergencies (such as COVID-19). When doing so, Canada must recognize the rights of travellers concerning treatment of personal data, informed consent and non-discrimination.”
Of course, Canada failed on the non-discrimination front, going above and beyond their obligations.
https://fnih.org/what-we-do/programs/consultations-new-international-pandemic-agreement
As a result of the efforts of the conspiracy newbies, we now know where the virus originated. We know that the vaccines were there before the virus. We know governments lied. Every day. We know that people were not falling over dead from the virus in Wuhan. We know the vaccines don’t work – and were never meant to. We know what is coming next, and why Covid was useful to the pandemic preparedness class. We know – if we didn’t before – that there IS a ruling class. We know what Bill Gates’ funding will buy. We know the models were baloney. We know the PCR tests were never fit-for-purpose. We know who to trust, and who not to. We know that the social contract is broken. We know that our governments do not love us. That they rule without the consent of the governed.