Aletho News


GM Human® — Bill Gates’ Plan For Our Future

Image source:
By Richard Hugus | January 20, 2021

To speak of a “Covid vaccine” is to enter into two falsehoods. As some have argued,1,2 the virus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus two (SARS-CoV-2) has not actually been isolated and therefore cannot be proven to exist. This would  of course be an advantage to those officials who can then blame any number of other illnesses, like influenza, on Covid 19. It is hard to prove something either is or is not there when you don’t know what it is. This is a crucial problem at the center of the “pandemic” narrative.

Dr. David Martin points out that the mRNA injection which is being called a vaccine “is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine.”3 According to a British Health Agency, the active substance in the injection is made up of “RNA-containing lipid nanoparticles.”4 The nanoparticles seem to be a kind of software designed to manipulate human DNA. If the virus it is supposed to target has not itself been identified, this manipulation would have no known purpose. Pfizer/BioNTech claim their product encodes the full length of the viral S protein of SARS-CoV-2, but, according to Iain Davis, “the WHO protocols Pfizer used to produce the mRNA [for the vaccine] do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. When investigator Fran Leader questioned Pfizer they confirmed: ‘The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person’.”5 If the virus has not been isolated, there is no foundation upon which to build a vaccine.

The “pandemic” itself is a house of cards — a disease which appears to have had no effect on all-cause mortality in comparison to other recent years, driven by a mysterious virus which no one can exactly define, a PCR test for the undefined virus which test can be amplified to produce a positive result no matter what it identifies6, and a liability-protected vaccine which has no specific target and which not only provides no immunity but has proven, a month after being rushed into emergency use, to be the cause of many serious adverse health effects, including death.7 As in the long history of conventional vaccine disasters, reported adverse effects of the mRNA injection have been attributed to “coincidence”.8 To complete the absurdity, deaths from the injection have simply been turned around and blamed on Covid.9

There can be no discussion of vaccines without mentioning the powerful and corrupt pharmaceutical industry, and the godfather, Bill Gates, who has been massively funding new entrants into that industry, like Moderna and BioNTech; not to mention UN agencies, government regulators, policy makers, academic institutions, mainstream media, and everyone else involved in the medical tyranny we are now living under. This homely czar of all world health matters is ubiquitous. He seems to be involved in every big money social engineering scheme on the planet. But there is one interesting thread in his story . . .

Gates made his fortune in the software industry with the Microsoft Corporation in the 1990s and 2000s. His expensive proprietary software was a corrupting influence on what could have been a free, cooperative, open source internet, but monopoly capitalism worked to help Gates rise to the top of the list of the world’s billionaires, and gave him the ability to buy influence everywhere he wanted (or was instructed) to go.

In 2003 Gates got involved with genetic modification (GM) research, in a supposed effort to feed the world through better agriculture. He later invested heavily in Monsanto10 and its development of genetically modified foods. Patented seeds — a kind of corollary to proprietary software –would make even more money for Gates via his investments in Monsanto, while small farmers in places like India lost their livelihoods to big business chemical-dependent agriculture totally foreign to them. Control of and patents on seeds, and control of agriculture in general, means control of food. As fellow psychopath Henry Kissinger once said, “control food and you control the people.” Henry Kissinger and Bill Gates are also both fellows in the Rockefeller school of population control, once known as eugenics.

In 2005 the Gates Foundation funded tetanus vaccinations for distribution by UNICEF in Africa. Nine years into this program, doctors and Catholic clergy in Kenya had the vaccine independently tested and found that it contained an antigen called human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) which renders women infertile.11 As the people targeted for the vaccine were exclusively women of child-bearing age, the only possible conclusion is that Gates and UNICEF were conducting a covert and criminal eugenics experiment. The Gates Foundation was also behind a polio vaccine that paralyzed 496,000 children in India. Almost everywhere he has gone with his philanthropy, Gates has ended up hurting people. As Robert Kennedy has pointed out, philanthropy for Gates is a way to donate to humanitarian projects with one hand while collecting a great deal more in business profits with the other, and he does all this even while harming people.12 Where harm is proven, as in these two cases, Gates has been exempt from any consequences, and has continued self-righteously lecturing the world about the benefits of vaccines.13

India has really taken a beating from Gates’ purported attempts to do good. In 2010 Gates got involved in a digital identity program called the Aadhar project, designed to give biometric IDs to no less than the entire population of India. Like all Gates Foundation projects, it was advertised as a philanthropic venture, but the real benefactors were financial institutions and government, not poor people supposedly lacking access to financial services. According to James Corbett,

the ID control grid is an essential part of the digitization of the economy. And although this is being sold as an opportunity for ‘financial inclusion’ of the world’s poorest in the banking system provided by the likes of Gates and his banking and business associates, it is in fact a system for financial exclusion. Exclusion of any person or transaction that does not have the approval of the government or the payment providers.14

There later came a related push to make India a cashless society — the dream of bankers and tyrants, but in practice a disaster for many of India’s poor who depend on cash. Gates went on to fund the ID2020 initiative, which has goals similar to the Aadhar project — namely, government control of peoples’ ability to trade freely and make a living. Through tracking, surveillance, and the power of government to cut off peoples’ money at will, we see once again the agenda of control.

Beside his involvement with (and massive abuse of) conventional vaccines, Gates has been the major funder of the development of a supposed “Covid vaccine” involving never-before-tried genetic manipulation and nano technology. The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine now being rolled out by Pfizer/BioNTech  is not a vaccine; it is the beginning of an experiment on the human race, being openly conducted without informed consent, and in the absence of long-term testing required for conventional vaccines, which themselves have a terrible record of causing, not preventing, harm.

The mRNA injection plan seems to combine all of Gates’s previous pursuits in one — namely, introducing software into the human “operating system” which will eventually make it possible to identify and track entire populations, as in the India biometric project. The mRNA software is also proprietary. Since Gates is recommending that everyone on the planet should receive his “vaccine”, one would think the code should be “open source” — that is, open for all the world to see, since all of us are affected — but the way nanoparticles in the mRNA injection act as a kind of machine to promote self-replication of certain elements within cells is not made public by private, for-profit pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer, nor do the many people now getting the injection have a good idea of exactly what it is that is being put into their bodies. In this area, public health agencies simply pass on the claims made by the manufacturer. What is at stake here? This nanotechnology could end up making human beings a new kind of genetically modified organism, much like Monsanto corn, soybeans, or cotton. With a sufficiently modified genome, the future GMO human may even be patentable, especially if he carries biosensor implants already patented by Microsoft.15 As Catherine Austin Fitts has observed, the plan is that every new virus to come along  will require a software update which would be called a “vaccine”, much like the Microsoft business model where Gates began his empire.16 But now we see that Gates has moved from selling computer software to controlling the world’s population.

The thread running through Bill Gates’ history is that this man isn’t interested in feeding the poor or helping humanity through improvements in medicine and public health. His field is making computers perform tasks through software programs. He sees people as computers to be programmed to meet human behavioral and eugenic goals which he and the global elite find desirable. The software engineer has become a world-scale social engineer, but continues to use his original model. We should keep in mind, however, that within the larger program (post-MS-DOS), Gates has never been acting alone.

The use of  technology to manipulate the human genome could open what Bill Joy, writing twenty years ago, called “Pandora’s boxes of genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics” which could irreversibly change what it means to be a human being.17 Even if its intentions were benevolent, science should know better than to meddle in something it knows so little about, including the human immune system. You can never change just one thing, as everything is connected.

But when it comes to the oligarchs now ruling much of the world, it is hard to escape a picture of not mistaken use of science but actually malevolent use of science, and excessive power reaching into madness. There are other examples of this in history, such as the development of nuclear weapons in the 1940s, but this time many diverse actors are using technology which could be even more harmful and difficult to control. No one should ever have been allowed to amass the power which people like Bill Gates hold, not to mention those who back him. Clearly and urgently, these people must be stopped.


1  “COVID vaccine secret, a stunner” by Jon Rappoport, January 15, 2021.

2  “They Want To Genetically Modify Us With The COVID-19 Vaccine.” Spiro Skouras is joined with Doctor Andrew Kaufman who explains how the SARS COV 2 virus has not actually been isolated.

3  ‘Focus on Fauci. “This is Not A Vaccine”’ By Sacha Stone, Rocco Galati, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Dr. Judy Mikovits, and Dr. David Martin, Global Research, January 11, 2021. Censored by YouTube but text available by using ‘search’ at

4  Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency: “Public Assessment Report Authorisation for Temporary Supply/ COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 (BNT162b2RNA)”, page 7.

5 “What Vaccine Trials? The most important, meaningful phase of CV-19 vaccine trials has barely begun, let alone been completed” by Iain Davis, Off Guardian, Jan 3, 2021.

6 See “External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results.” What other scientists say about the Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction test:

7 “‘We see nothing alarming,’ says Norwegian drugs regulator, after 13 deaths linked to Pfizer vaccine jabs” RT, 15 Jan, 2021.

8 “Death by Coincidence?”  by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., 01/14/21 “Declarations by health officials and vaccine makers that deaths and injuries following COVID vaccinations are unrelated coincidences are becoming a pattern. They’re also depriving people of the information they need to make informed decisions.”

9 “A Nursing Home had Zero Coronavirus Deaths. Then, It Vaccinates Residents for Coronavirus and the Deaths Begin.” by Adam Dick, January 10, 2021.

10 “Behind The Mask Of Altruism: Monsanto And The Gates Foundation In Africa” By Colin Todhunter, 15 October, 2014,

11 “HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World. October 2017”, Researchgate,

12 #RobertFKennedyJr‘s Instagram post April 9th, 2020.

13 “Agenda ID2020: The Diabolical Agenda within the Agenda. “Genetically Modified Humanity” By Peter Koenig, Global Research, August 21, 2020. To access, use ‘search’ at

14 “Who Is Bill Gates?” The Corbett Report, part 4. 05/01/2020.

15 “The Global Takeover Is Underway” by Dr. Joseph Mercola, Global Research, November 24, 2020, Mercola 23 October 2020. Use ‘search’ at

16 “Catherine Austin Fitts | Full Interview | Planet Lockdown”, December 31st, 2020. How the “magic virus” fits into a plan to “dramatically centralize economic and political control.”  48 minute video. Search

17 “Why the future doesn’t need us. Our most powerful 21st-century technologies – robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotech – are threatening to make humans an endangered species” by Bill Joy, WIRED, 04/01/2000.

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Words are violence. Voting is terrorism. Free speech is a threat. Where the media establishment can’t win, they’ll redefine

By Helen Buyniski | RT | January 19, 2021

Determined to stamp out ‘wrongthink’ in all forms, the media establishment has declared a holy war against free speech. Once the bedrock of US society, it faces a redefinition into something more convenient – or oblivion.

If everyone is permitted to speak freely, their reasoning goes, people’s lives will be put at risk. Those whose opinions diverge from the mainstream should not be permitted to voice those opinions, lest their words hurt people – not just people’s feelings. Yet at the same time as this self-styled Ministry of Truth calls for free speech to be swept into the dustbin of history, it insists its victims’ freedom of speech is not under attack at all.

In the past few weeks, establishment outlets from the New York Times to NBC to the Independent have issued calls for the very idea of “freedom of speech” to be rethought – or better yet, scrapped altogether – because it is no longer in harmony with modern society. This is a tacit admission that the media establishment’s own opinions can’t compete in the marketplace of ideas, and that, despite their best efforts, they can’t censor their way out.

But at the same time as they insist this behavior does not curtail the free speech of the tens of thousands of social media users who’ve been given the boot in the past few months, they’ve called for the very idea of free speech to be retired, as it supposedly has no place in the 21st century.

The establishment’s cries for a bigger, better memory hole don’t stop at praising social media censorship, though there’s plenty of that – Twitter and Facebook’s decision to suspend US President Donald Trump’s accounts has been universally praised by the paper(s) of record. Amazon’s decision to kick the entire social media app Parler off its servers is right up there with storming the beaches of Normandy in the fight against fascism, according to these outlets. They’ve even moved on to demanding cable TV providers push conservative networks such as OANN and Newsmax overboard, and alternative platforms from Telegram to Minds are now in their crosshairs.

The media establishment blames “free speech” for the raid on the Capitol earlier this month, with the Hill skewering social media platforms for putting their dependence on “clicks and ratings” above some sort of higher calling – even though the media establishment’s own dependency on clicks and ratings has forced numerous outlets to merge, downsize, or even close offices as Facebook and Google eat their lunch. Even more absurdly, NBC claimed the FBI would have warned about the raid, except they had concerns about the First Amendment – as if the FBI hasn’t at some point designated almost every American as a domestic terror threat.

The entire argument has the air of something cooked up at the last minute to justify a long-desired end, and sure enough, the media have long been frustrated watching alt-media sites and YouTubers in their bedrooms producing quality content that also – in some cases, at least – has the added value of somewhat resembling the world its audience inhabits. Trying to deplatform the most popular content creators while pretending to uphold the noble mantle of the Fourth Estate has never been an easy balance to strike, and it must come as a relief to many establishment figures to finally dispense with the pretense of embracing freedom of speech.

While not everyone in the media establishment is on board with this new direction, many of those opposed are too scared to speak up, lest they lose their job or be shunned by colleagues. But this sort of cowardly behavior is what has turned the establishment into such a monster. In less than a decade, American liberalism was co-opted by a tiny fraction of screeching malcontents who shouted sanity into hiding with their insistence that “words are violence” and strong opinions they disagreed with were the literal equivalent of curb-stomping oppressed minorities.

Because the ‘silent majority’ (who, contrary to what has become the prevailing doctrine, were not all straight white males) were reluctant to go to war with the unhinged barbarians who’d shown up at their gates, “words [that I don’t like] are violence” became the official doctrine of the academy. Most of those who didn’t like it merely gritted their teeth, held their tongues, and groused in private about the excesses of their cultish colleagues while those colleagues indoctrinated class after class of impressionable young people. Their dogma now dominates the media establishment to the point that journalistic awards are given out not for groundbreaking reporting, but for demonstrations of ideological fealty – and indeed, truth just gets in the way. No wonder much of their audience has fled to YouTube and Twitter for their news.

It’s no longer a question of “if you can’t beat them, join them” – the establishment has issued its verdict, and those whose opinions do not fall within the ever-narrowing borders of the mainstream have been declared anathema. The only problem the narrative managers now face is convincing their targets they don’t have the advantage of numbers. Thus, if you can’t beat them, ban them. What’s the point of having absolute power over the media otherwise? However reality-averse their work may be, these zealots are keenly aware that their captive audience despises being lied to, demonized, and told that the most normal behaviors – from studying the classics to voting to gathering with loved ones in their homes – constitute racism, Nazism, and attempted genocide. There is no way to package such outrageous slanders that will convince those thus degraded to swallow them. So, the only option is to ban arguments from the “other side.”

Failure to triumph in the marketplace of ideas – by the topsy-turvy logic of the Words Are Violence crowd – merely means the marketplace needs stricter regulations. If two plus two cannot be persuaded to equal five, that’s only because math is racist.

In designating freedom of speech – once the foundation of American society – as a threat to democracy, the thought police running the media establishment have essentially completed the job of destroying everything that once made the country successful. The only question remaining is whether Americans are going to take this sort of insult sitting down.

Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , | 1 Comment

Biden Institute Refuses To Disclose Donors; Blinken Faces Questions Over $22 Million In Anonymous Chinese Contributions

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | January 20, 2021

The Biden Institute at the University of Delaware has refused to disclose all of its donors now that Joe Biden is President, according to Politico.

The Institute, established in 2017 with a goal of raising $20 million, promises to embody the spirit of “honesty, integrity, compassion and courage” that it claims Biden stands for – yet, as Politico notes, “the Biden Institute continues to engage in a multimillion-dollar fundraising campaign, which could attract donations from those interested in currying favor with the Biden administration.”

Meanwhile, Biden’s pick for Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, is facing calls to explain over $20 million in anonymous Chinese funding of the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement, established in 2018 and run by Blinken since its inception along with former Obama Administration aides.

The National Legal and Policy Center (NPLC) is demanding “that the University of Pennsylvania and its Penn Biden Center disclose the identity of $22 million in anonymous Chinese donations since 2017, including a single eye-popping donation of $14.5 million given on May 29, 2018, shortly after the opening of the Biden Center in Washington, DC. Altogether, China gave $67 million in two years to the University of Pennsylvania.”

Apparently nobody asked Blinken about this during his confirmation hearing on Tuesday.

At least 28 people with ties to Biden nonprofits and academic centers have either advised his transition or are joining the Biden administration.

Tony Blinken, Biden’s pick for secretary of State, worked as a managing director at the Penn Biden Center and was paid nearly $80,000 in the first six months of 2019, according to his personal financial disclosure.

Other Penn Biden Center alumni joining the administration include Steve Ricchetti, who will be a White House counselor to Biden; Brian McKeon, Biden’s choice for a top State Department post; Colin Kahl, Biden’s pick for under secretary of Defense for policy; Jeff Prescott, whom Biden will nominate as deputy ambassador to the United Nations; and Carlyn Reichel, Juan Gonzalez and Ariana Berengaut, all of whom will serve on the National Security Council staff.

Ted Kaufman, who’s running the transition, served as the Biden Foundation’s chair, and Louisa Terrell, who will be Biden’s White House legislative affairs director, drew a salary of more than $220,000 as its executive director, according to a tax filing. – Politico

We’re sure the MSM will get right on that Chinese money trail.

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Corruption | | 5 Comments

What Snowden’s Exile Says About America

By Brian Berletic – New Eastern Outlook – 20.01.2021

Edward Snowden’s 2013 leak of US National Security Agency (NSA) information helped the world see more clearly what the US – in its current manifestation – really is. Its extensive, abusive surveillance network targeted friends and foes alike around the globe but also pointed inward at America’s own population. It provided the clearest picture to date of the methods and means used by what many call the “Deep State” to maintain power internationally as well as domestically.

For America, the fallout from his leaks should have begun a process of intense introspection. Instead, the US sought to punish Snowden – who luckily escaped to Russia.
The US – which prides its self-appointed title of leader of what it calls a “rules based international order” – had broken all the rules.

Instead of celebrating a man who offered a rare opportunity to clean house and begin rebuilding confidence and trust between the US government and the American people as well as between the US and the world abroad – a process of doubling down began instead.

It is a process that continues even to this day.

Clearly, Donald Trump has failed to pardon Snowden and it’s unlikely that his successor would actually do this. Moreover, there are still those in the US media who attempt to build a case against such a pardon nonetheless.

An opinion piece written by Rich Lowry appearing in Politico titled, “Mr. President, Don’t Pardon Edward Snowden,” would claim:

If the former NSA contractor had been a genuine whistle-blower, he could have pursued concerns about the NSA program through lawful avenues, instead of fleeing the country.

But this assumes that in the US there exists such “lawful avenues” in the first place. Snowden himself has claimed that his first course of action was actually attempting to find and travel down such avenues – but found none.

Lowry in Politico also claims:

The Snowden disclosures were much more wide-ranging than the NSA program, in fact so wide-ranging that it’s almost impossible to keep track. As Harvard law professor Jack Goldsmith asked, in a piece at the website Lawfare opposing a Snowden pardon by Barack Obama, why did Snowden’s devotion to the Constitution require him to disclose details of how we spy on other countries, how we cooperate with Sweden and Norway to spy on Russia, or an NSA program called MasterMind to respond to cyberattacks?

Yet US foreign policy toward Russia – for example – is one of belligerence, aggression, subversion, economic warfare, covert terrorism, semi-cover proxy war, and hybrid warfare. These are policies the US wields against many nations around the globe- policies aided by the massive and abusive surveillance methods exposed by Snowden.

These are policies problematic toward the Constitution, the will of the American people who generally seek to avoid wars, and toward international law.

The information Snowden took with him serves to shed much needed light on all aspects of US foreign policy. The term “national security” used by people like Lowry to describe what he claims Snowden’s actions threatened is dishonest. US national security faces very few real threats – surrounded by two oceans on either side of its east and west coasts and with friendly nations to its north and south.

What Lowry is actually most likely referring to is US “interests” which entails the encroachment upon and violation of the national security of other nations – nations like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, and even nations like Iran, Russia, and China who face the constant economic, political, and military pressure of the US.

That not only is a man who held a mirror up to Washington and the policies coming out of it exiled overseas – but that there are those still in the US dedicated to poisoning the world against him – says much about where the US is now. It is a system in irreversible decline. It is a system that refuses to look in the mirror – and as such – is a system unable to assess or rectify any of the ailments that would – if they could – stare back.

Snowden’s exile is one of many metrics we can use to measure America’s decline – and any possible, genuine pardon of Snowden could – if it ever occurred – might signal the emergence of a new, more reasonable America – one that might not only right the wrong that put Snowden in exile in the first place – but one that might be capable of addressing the problems that spurred Snowden to become a whistleblower in the first place.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer.

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , | 1 Comment

Serbian lawyers to file first lawsuits against NATO over use of depleted uranium munitions in 1999

RT | January 20, 2021

A team of legal experts is set to file the first cases against the NATO alliance on behalf of people who developed cancer after being exposed to depleted uranium munitions during the Serbian bombings in 1999.

The first lawsuit is expected to be filed before the Higher Court in Belgrade on Wednesday, following years of extensive work by a team of legal experts led by lawyer Srdjan Aleksic. Dozens of other lawsuits will be filed before other courts across the country as well. The team is seeking to win compensation of at least €300,000 ($363,500) for each Serbian victim who developed cancer.

“We are talking about the highest courts, to which we will file five lawsuits. The victims are natural persons – deceased and sick soldiers and police officers of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, who were in Kosovo in 1999. At the first stage, we want them to be identical cases, as in the Italian military,” Aleksic told Sputnik, referring to hundreds of Italian NATO soldiers who suffered from cancer and other severe conditions after being exposed to depleted uranium (DU) during the alliance’s campaign against Serbia.

The legal team has received support from Angelo Fiore Tartaglia, an Italian lawyer who successfully represented affected solders in court.

“He has 181 court rulings, which have already entered into force in Europe. He will be a member of my legal expert team,” Aleksic stated, expressing optimism over the cases’ prospects, given all the evidence the team has gathered.

“We have more than 3,000 pages of materials, including verdicts, expert opinions, materials of a special Italian government commission. We have collected enough evidence,” he said.

While the use of DU munitions in the Balkans has been openly admitted by NATO, proving a link between them and cancer proved to be an extremely difficult task, with the alliance denying any such correlation.

In its 2000 report on depleted uranium – which is used to make the hardened cores of armor-piercing rounds – NATO acknowledged that it used some 10 metric tons of the material during its Kosovo campaign, and 300 times more during the First Gulf War.

While the report acknowledged that the material poses a threat due to its toxicity in an “aerosol form” – basically, when the armor-piercing core is evaporated during a hit – it maintained that DU is not “particularly highly radioactive” and poses “practically no danger” when ingested or entering body directly through wounds.

At the same time, the alliance admitted that “in the vicinity of the impact point of DU ammunitions, it is not excluded that individuals unaware of the contamination… could have accumulated radiation doses and/or could have incorporated uranium quantities exceeding the internationally recognized limits.”

The use of DU was also acknowledged by the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, but it said that “there is no specific treaty ban on the use of DU projectiles.”

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Environmentalism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | | Leave a comment

Writers, of all people, are now censors

By Jon Rappoport | January 19, 2021

It had to happen.

People who call themselves WRITERS are signing a letter pressuring publishers to ban Trump, and anyone who has worked for him:

Do not publish a Trump memoir. Stay away from him.

The letter was penned by Barry Lyga. Who?

LA Times, January 15 [1]: “More than 250 authors, editors, agents, professors and others in the American literary community signed an open letter this week opposing any publisher that signs book deals with President Donald Trump or members of his administration.”

“Former DC Comics president Paul Levitz, journalist Sarah Weinman and ‘Little Fires Everywhere’ author Celeste Ng are among signatories to the letter, written by novelist Barry Lyga and titled ‘No Book Deals for Traitors’.”

“’We all love book publishing, but we have to be honest — our country is where it is in part because publishing has chased the money and notoriety of some pretty sketchy people, and has granted those same people both the imprimatur of respectability and a lot of money through sweetheart book deals,’ the letter read. ‘We affirm that participation in the administration of Donald Trump must be considered a uniquely mitigating criterion for publishing houses when considering book deals’.”

“’Consequently, we believe: No participant in an administration that caged children, performed involuntary surgeries on captive women, and scoffed at science as millions were infected with a deadly virus should be enriched by the almost rote largesse of a big book deal. And no one who incited, suborned, instigated, or otherwise supported the January 6, 2021 coup attempt should have their philosophies remunerated and disseminated through our beloved publishing houses’.”

Beloved publishing houses? I’m sure no writer, in the last ten thousand years, has ever used that phrase.

Are the author, and the signers of this letter, down on their knees, looking for their own book deals?

Since the invention of language, writers have fought to win the freedom to WRITE without interference. In the process, they’ve been arrested, charged, prosecuted, convicted, imprisoned, tortured, and murdered. That’s the history of the war.

And now this little venal band of scum—writers—wants censorship.

Here’s a chapter from that history; Giordano Bruno, 16th century Dominican friar, poet, and philosopher. For teaching a theory of reincarnation, for stating the universe was infinite, for discussing the possibility of life on other planets, on February 17, 1600 in the Campo de’ Fiori Square, “field of flowers,” the Roman Church burned him at the stake.

Yes, this happened. It wasn’t a Netflix movie. It was one stop along the way in the war for freedom.

But all right. These contemporary buffoons want to cancel Trump. Fine. Who’s next?

What about beloved Obama? I have evidence to support retroactive censorship against him. All his books, wherever they can be found, should be assembled in a great pile, in Freedom Plaza, and burned.

His publishers should demand the return of all advances and royalties, and if Obama can’t come up with the cash, a court should empower the publishers to take over his homes and sell them off.

The evidence?

The Guardian, January 9, 2017, “America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama’s reign,” by Medea Benjamin [2]:

“…in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.”

“While most of these air attacks were in Syria and Iraq, US bombs also rained down on people in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan. That’s seven majority-Muslim countries.”

“One bombing technique that President Obama championed is drone strikes. As drone-warrior-in-chief, he spread the use of drones outside the declared battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, mainly to Pakistan and Yemen. Obama authorized over 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, and automatically painted all males of military age in these regions as combatants, making them fair game for remote controlled killing.”

“President Obama has claimed that his overseas military adventures are legal under the 2001 and 2003 authorizations for the use of military force passed by Congress to go after al-Qaida. But today’s wars have little or nothing to do with those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001.”

“Given that drones account for only a small portion of the munitions dropped in the past eight years, the numbers of civilians killed by Obama’s bombs could be in the thousands. But we can’t know for sure as the administration, and the mainstream media, has been virtually silent about the civilian toll of the administration’s failed interventions.”

“In May 2013, I interrupted President Obama during his foreign policy address at the National Defense University. I had just returned from visiting the families of innocent people killed by US drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan, including the Rehman children who saw their grandmother blown to bits while in the field picking okra.”

“Speaking out on behalf of grieving families whose losses have never been acknowledged by the US government, I asked President Obama to apologize to them. As I was being dragged out, President Obama said: ‘The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to’.”

“Too bad he never did.”

If you petty little band of censors—who call yourselves writers—want to shut down Trump, then you have to go after Obama.

And then GW Bush, and Clinton, and so on. Don’t stop there.

There are lots of American politicians you can assail, going back to the 17th century.

You’re every censor who ever existed. You think you’ve got a special case in Trump. You don’t have a clue.

You don’t know anything about the history of writers.

I wouldn’t trade three dried-out yak turds for one of your books.

But those books won’t be censored. That’s how generous and consoling freedom is. I could say you should try freedom yourselves, but I know better than that.

I see who you are.

Miniature gargoyles, peddling your virtue-signaling inquisition.




Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX.

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | 1 Comment

Democrats and neocons clamor to bring the ‘war on terror’ home, targeting Trump supporters as ‘domestic terrorists’

Biden or Bush?

By Nebojsa Malic | RT | January 20, 2021

Just like that, the Democrats became the party of George W. Bush. You’re either with them, or with Trump supporters who need to be treated just like Al-Qaeda, the media and political paladins of Our Democracy are now declaring.

“The pro-Trump fanatics stormed and trashed the citadel of American democracy, nearly executing what al-Qaeda had failed to do: destroy the US Capitol,” Jeff Stein of the Daily Beast argued on Monday, gushing over a Democrat proposal to empower law enforcement to “prevent violent acts of domestic terrorism.”

Wait, you might say. Al-Qaeda was accused of killing nearly 3,000 Americans at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. How can five deaths that happened during the Capitol unrest compare? Silence, bigot! What are you, a terrorist?

Why yes, you are, according to the same Democrats who spent 2020 endorsing the Black Lives Matter chants of “ACAB” and “defund the police,” and now want to empower the police to go after 74-plus million Trump as “white terrorists” who are basically the same as Osama Bin Laden.

In the same breath as he called for “unity” and “healing,” Joe Biden denounced his opposition as “domestic terrorists” and Nazis. Even before he gets sworn in, his party is using the Capitol unrest to criminalize political dissent in America.

Almost every single mainstream outlet is rushing to interview “national security experts” and “extremism researchers,” who are selling the line that a new War on Terror is needed, right here at home, with fellow Americans as the enemy – and them in charge, obviously.

Joining the Democrats in this crusade are the neocons, from the NeverTrump shriekers Max Boot, Bill Kristol and David Frum – architects and instigators of the original WoT and the Iraq invasion launched under its pretext – to Bush alumni who worked on the inside to sabotage Trump’s agenda until they decided denouncing him would profit them more. One of them is Elizabeth Neumann, a Bush alum embedded in Trump’s Homeland Security department until she resigned in a huff last May, who denounced her former boss in TIME magazine as near enough the equivalent of OBL.

If you thought social media bans, no-fly lists, denials of service by banks and hotels, and mass layoffs were bad, wait till you hear former FBI agent Ali Soufan. Interviewed in the same TIME article, he gushed about the drone strike President Barack Obama ordered against Anwar al-Awlaki in 2011, saying he had it coming because he was “instigating” terrorism. Al-Awlaki also happened to be an American citizen and, therefore, ostensibly entitled to due process, but his extrajudicial execution was conducted with absolute impunity.

Some veterans of the “war on terror” are all too eager to see it happen domestically. General Stanley McChrystal, who oversaw the deaths of more than 1,000 US troops in Afghanistan during the “surge” there, now says the problem with America is white men angry about losing their “privileged position,” and claims Trump supporters are the KKK. Who could’ve guessed that Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota) had won the war for the hearts and minds of the US military?

Then again, McChrystal has already been waging war on Americans, albeit of the psychological kind. Back in May 2020, the Washington Post reported that he was advising a Democrat group called Defeat Disinfo, which was “planning to deploy technology originally developed to counter Islamic State propaganda in service of a domestic political goal,” namely, the election of Joe Biden. The mainstream media saw nothing wrong with this, just as they cheer the calls to outlaw half of America now.

Not that the mainstream media will remind you, but the original War on Terror resulted in mass warrantless spying on Americans – eventually exposed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden – and war crimes in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan, exposed by Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. It also led to the massive expansion of administrative searches and seizures – from airports onward – and encroachment on civil liberties. These were all denounced as a bad thing.

All of that pales in comparison to what has already been done by private companies in the name of “resisting” Trump, and what the incoming government is preparing to do, with zero pushback from civil libertarians such as the American Civil Liberties Union, which is now fully on board.

Well, not exactly zero. The one objection came from a somewhat unexpected quarter: the “Squad” of progressive members of Congress, who wrote a letter opposing any expansion of domestic national security and surveillance powers.

The existing laws, powers and regulations are quite enough to go after “white nationalist and QAnon groups,” they argued, since “increasing the reach and power of our national security apparatus now would only serve to further the oppression of Black, brown, Indigenous, people of color, and leftist groups.” The What is just fine, it’s the Who/Whom that’s the problem, you see.

The pinnacle of irony is that in the very same speech, delivered before Congress, Bush said the  terrorists attacked America because “they hate our freedoms” – specifically citing “our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.” With the notable exception of the Squad’s virtue-signaling – that is unlikely to accomplish much to shift the Democrats leftward – the very same people who once compared George W. Bush to Hitler are now rehabilitating his acolytes and policies, and echo his September 2001 message that “either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.”

With those freedoms now effectively abolished in the name of protecting Our Democracy, does that mean the terrorists have no reason to hate America? That’s one way to win the ‘war on terror’ – just in time to start another, at home.

Nebojsa Malic is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Telegram @TheNebulator and on Twitter @NebojsaMalic

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

DC mayor calls to Terminate National Guardsmen with ‘conflicting views’, requests machine guns for inauguration

RT | January 20, 2021

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser set a chilling standard for what might make someone a terrorist threat, saying soldiers in the US capital must vow “allegiance to their mission” of guarding President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration.

Bowser spoke to reporters on Tuesday regarding the thousands of National Guardsmen being brought to the District of Columbia from all across the nation to help provide beefed-up inauguration security in the wake of the January 6 US Capitol riot.

“It’s prudent to make sure that they’re being vetted and that anybody who cannot pledge allegiance to…,” Bowser said before pausing. Rather than saying “the Constitution” or “the United States,” she continued by saying, “their mission, and may be pulled by other views, needs not only to be removed from this duty; they need to be removed from the Guard.”

Following the Capitol breach by election-fraud protesters, Washington has its largest troop presence since the May 1965 Grand Review of the Armies following the Civil War, with about 25,000 National Guardsmen deployed to the city.

But Democrats, such as US Representatives Jason Crow (D-Colorado) and Steve Cohen (D-Tennessee), have raised concerns that the troops could themselves be a security threat, given the likelihood that many voted for US President Donald Trump. Cohen went so far as to say that those who voted for Trump “might want to do something” during the inauguration, suggesting that mere differences in political affiliation constitute a security threat in today’s America.

The Pentagon and FBI are racing to vet all 25,000 National Guard troops assigned to the inauguration. A dozen Guardsmen were removed from the detail after they were found to have alleged ties to right-wing militia groups or to have shared “extremist” material online, the Associated Press said on Tuesday, citing anonymous officials. But Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller has said that no “insider threat” has been found through the vetting process, and officials confirmed that the 12 troops who were removed from the mission didn’t pose a threat to Biden. Presumably, every major troop deployment in history has involved people of differing political views and affiliations.

Bowser is apparently torn between her desire for strong security firepower and her fears of Republican troops. Fox News reporter John Roberts said the Democrat mayor asked that “crew-served machine guns be included in the National Guard’s arsenal,” but Homeland Security official Ken Cuccinelli denied the request, saying such weapons have no place in securing a civilian event.

Social media users suggested that Bowser’s comments suggested a “witch hunt” and were insulting to the National Guard. Others pointed to the “slippery slope” of questioning whether soldiers can do their jobs based on political affiliations, while still others noted that members of the military swear an oath only to the Constitution, not to a leader or a mission.

“At no time in our history have soldiers been required to swear their allegiance to a single individual,” one observer said on Twitter. “They swear their loyalty to the country, to the Constitution and to their commander-in-chief, not just the commander-in-chief they voted for. This vetting and Joe Biden disgust me.”

Another commenter tweeted, “Surrounded by 23,000 armed troops swearing an oath of allegiance, Biden’s installation looks more like a Banana Republic coup than an inauguration of the most popular president ever.”

January 20, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | 1 Comment