Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Macron said Covid-19 jabs would be optional… so a Europe-wide vaccine passport should be a reason to leave the EU

By Rachel Marsden | RT | March 5, 2021

It’s unacceptable that the EU is pushing big brother authoritarianism on its member states via vaccine passports. French President Emmanuel Macron should stay true to his word and take a stand against this nanny statism.

After all, Macron couldn’t have been more clear when he said in a national address last November that Covid-19 vaccines would not be mandatory. And that’s exactly as it should be.

No one should have the right to dictate what substances you inject into your body – and especially not the state. The rights of the collective end where the rights of the individual begin, and that’s precisely with one’s own physical being. If someone is worried about catching Covid-19, then they have every right to get vaccinated in the interests of self-protection, but no one should have any ability to impose it on anyone else.

Given the debate over the duration of any Covid-19 antibodies, it’s unclear exactly how often people are going to have to pump any vaccine into their body. Will it be every few months? Once a year?

Nor is it clear exactly how the virus will mutate in future, or how fast Covid-19 could become just another banal seasonal virus floating around out there. For those who are in good health, with no pre-existing medical issues, they may consider the injection of a vaccine to be worse than contending with the virus itself. And they should have every right to make that choice.

Yet we’re now being told that the European Commission will table a vaccine passport concept this month, effectively suppressing individual choice over inoculation. It would be required for travel within the European Union or to avoid quarantine upon arrival.

Some countries have already adapted the concept for use on their own territory in the form of a ‘green pass’ required for access to venues such as gyms, theaters, concert venues, movie theaters, and restaurants. The idea seems to have initially taken hold in Israel, where people have to flash a digital pass showing proof of vaccination everywhere they go in order to have any semblance of a normal life.

Now everywhere from Paris to New York, authorities are considering the idea of people having to show that they’ve taken either the vaccine or, alternatively, proof that they’ve had a giant Q-Tip shoved up their nose within the last three days, and have tested negative for Covid.

Any such banalization of Covid PCR testing as a prerequisite for daily living means that every few days, people would have to line up at a testing facility – possibly for hours, given how relatively few PCR testing facilities exist in some countries – all just to prove that they don’t carry this particular virus. The idea is absolutely absurd. Because what about the next virus that overwhelms hospitals, as French newspaper titles suggested already occurred here in France in 2018, in 2017, in 2016 and in 2015? In fact, it seems like there’s barely a flu season that goes by during which French hospitals aren’t overwhelmed.

And yet, the flu shot has always been optional. Every year here in France and in North America, there’s a massive annual push for everyone to run out and get the seasonal flu shot regardless of personal circumstance or susceptibility. The notion of sacrificing domain over one’s own body – which is about the only thing that we ultimately control in our time on this planet – under the pretext of the greater collective has long been the propaganda imposed on society annually for years, even as some doctors privately advise patients who aren’t at risk not to bother with it.

Once freedom is taken away, it’s rarely ever restored – particularly if the populace has grown resigned, complacent, or indifferent. Covid-19 vaccine passports or territorial green passes could very well lead to more impositions that hijack personal autonomy. Because what exactly is stopping any creeping authoritarianism once states accept that they can force individuals into a system whereby everyday life is impossible unless they jump the hoops and tick the boxes dictated by the state?

Covid-19 is just one virus. But what about next year’s flu? Is that going to be added to the vaccine passport, as well, given that every year it seems to overwhelm hospitals? It’s just too tempting for governments not to throw more bricks onto a foundation like a passport or pass that they’ve already created and that citizens have already accepted, lest they find themselves effectively banned from everything that they used to take for granted in their daily life.

In the extreme, such access passes could slide toward something like China’s digital social credit system, introduced in 2014, that pegs everyday access to things like travel and public sector employment to points earned or lost in relation to professional and personal interactions, court records, financial and physical health.

If the European Commission insists on Covid vaccination passes, then it’s up to Macron to keep his promise to voters and safeguard individual French citizens’ right of personal autonomy. Even if that means pulling France out of the European Union.

Rachel Marsden is a columnist, political strategist and host of an independently produced French-language program that airs on Sputnik France. Her website can be found at rachelmarsden.com

March 5, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | Leave a comment

‘For The People Act’ confirms it: Our Democracy has officially replaced the American Republic

By Nebojsa Malic | RT | March 4, 2021

If there were any doubts that a civil war had in fact been waged in the US, and that the side that “fortified” the 2020 election and redefined the republic as “Our Democracy” triumphed, HR1 should dispel the last vestiges of them.

The bill, also named “For The People Act” of 2021, passed in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives in a 220-210 vote on Wednesday. Only one Democrat was opposed.

The 800-page bill basically codifies all the problematic practices of the 2020 election into law. There’s an expansion of mail-in ballots and extended deadlines to count them, but also automatic voter registration, a waiver for voter IDs, and nationwide ballot-harvesting, California-style. It also shifts the authority to draw congressional districts from states, criminalizes broadly defined “interference” in elections, and so much more.

Whatever one may think of the Heritage Foundation, its analysis of the bill is factually accurate. Don’t take my word for it, though, read it and compare it to the actual text.

Naturally, Democrats have denounced any opposition to it as “racist” and “voter suppression.” CNN quickly located and trotted out their vaunted “fact-checker” Daniel Dale to criticize not Heritage’s analysis, but former VP Mike Pence’s op-ed based on it.

Ironically, most of Dale’s fact-check was either Clintonesque quibbles about the meaning of words – which we’ve already established one side can and does change at will – or acknowledgments that Pence was factually correct. The latter was buried at the end and framed otherwise. The Narrative, you see, must be preserved.

Republicans are either whining about how the law is bad, unfair, un-American, what have you – and putting faith in the Senate filibuster to stop it from becoming law. What makes them think the Democrats won’t use this as an excuse to abolish the filibuster, the same way they cited the pandemic to implement the voting changes in 2020?

When Democrats have power they use it, and controlling both legacy and social media means they can easily shape the Narrative. They can just “cancel” and “deplatform” those who disagree.

Nor should anyone put hope in the courts. HR1 has incorporated the same “trick” as Pennsylvania used, narrowly defining how it can be legally challenged to the point of making it almost impossible. If a challenge somehow reaches the US Supreme Court, odds are the Nine will simply wash their hands and look the other way, as they did with the Texas brief.

Meanwhile, thousands of National Guard troops that have been patrolling the Capitol inside a razor-wire perimeter fence are now staying through June, because the Biden administration keeps claiming there is “chatter” from “extremists” online about some kind of insurrection.

When nothing happens, they claim their measures prevented it, of course. That’s how phantom menaces are supposed to work. Feel free to shrug off the ‘Star Wars’ prequels or the ‘Hunger Games’, but there are clearly people in Washington who take their inspiration from them.

Shortly after the January 6 riot at the Capitol, I suggested that a second US civil war has already been fought and won, basing it not on some hard evidence in my possession but simply on the way the Democrats were behaving. Then came the infamous TIME magazine article about how there really was a “conspiracy” by Democrat operatives and neocons to “fortify” the election by changing rules, recruiting poll workers and getting social media companies to ban anything they labeled “disinformation.”

What else does one need to understand that the old America, the Republic defined in the Constitution of 1789, has ceased to exist? It has been replaced by something everyone calls Our Democracy. You can hear the words capitalized when they say it. And in this new society, inspired by the intersectionality of dystopian fiction, the old rules simply no longer apply.

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

March 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

Governor Andrew Cuomo Imposes Vaccination Passports in New York

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | March 4, 2021

Some politicians can’t stop coming up with new ways of bossing people around and preventing the return of normal life, all in the name of countering coronavirus. A prime example of such coronavirus tyrants is New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

This week, Cuomo, who has been imposing on people in New York for a year some of the harshest coronavirus-related restrictions in America, announced he is rolling out yet another rights abuse. Cuomo is requiring in a new “pilot program” that people obtain and present vaccination passports to gain entrance to certain places and take part in various activities that have been curtailed by government over the last year.

Cuomo calls the vaccination passports Excelsior Passes. No matter the name the state’s vaccination passports are marketed under, they are a mechanism for government tracking people’s movements, pressuring people into taking experimental coronavirus vaccines that carry risk of serious injury and death, and implementing a vaccinations-based caste system.

Elizabeth Elizalde writes at the New York Post that in the New York state pilot program people are being required to present their vaccination passports “in order to enter sports arenas, theaters and other businesses.” To receive a vaccination passport, Elizalde writes, a person must prove he has received one of the experimental coronavirus vaccines or that he has recently tested negative for coronavirus.

With time — after the experimental coronavirus vaccines have become more widely available — expect Cuomo to adjust the program so proof of injection with one of the not-really vaccines will be the only means to receive an Excelsior Pass and, thereby, the ability to take part legally in many activities.


Copyright © 2021 by RonPaul Institute

March 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , , | Leave a comment

Lorena Gonzales Versus Frank Wilkinson

How the Democrats Learned to Love Big Brother

By Carl Boggs | Unz Review | March 4, 2021

The mounting Democratic assault on free speech is finally producing blowback – most lately, from a bill proposed by California State Senator Melissa Melendez to protect diversity of political belief and affiliation. Her much-overdue legislation (Senate bills 238 and 249) are together known as the Diversity of Thought Act, which seeks to modify both California Government and Education Codes, ensuring citizens cannot be discriminated against based on political views. That such a bill is needed speaks loudly to the sad deterioration of American political culture. In an age of multiculturalism, wokism, and identity-politics mania it appears that every known human property has been legally protected but one: that of political belief.

In the supposed land of freedom and democracy, Californians – like other Americans – do in 2021 require special legislation to protect free speech. A brief glance at U.S. history reveals a tortured legacy of political repression directed against those daring to hold unpopular beliefs: suffragists, anarchists, socialists, Communists, antiwar and civil rights activists to name some. Now? Well, after years and decades of free-speech activism in defense of First Amendment rights, the country has once again descended into a reign of bigotry and censorship – this time orchestrated by sanctimonious Democratic elites and their shills in the media and Big Tech.

Melendez notes that “it is unfathomable to me that corporations and members of the public would ruin a person’s career, business, and family because of their political ideology. A free society should not allow thoughts and ideas to be censored. Free speech covers all speech –not just that with which you agree.” But thanks to small-minded Democratic politicians, censorship has indeed been the order of the day, and it’s getting steadily worse in schools, on college campuses, in businesses, in the political system, across Silicon Valley and the corporate media. Though scarcely necessary, the Senator added: “A climate of intolerance has been established and has stifled healthy and normal debate.”

As if to immediately validate Melendez’ claims, Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzales, based in San Diego, fired back on Twitter: “I don’t know who needs to hear this today, but your racist, pro-domestic terrorism, xenophobic, misogynist views do not warrant protection from discrimination. Your choice to hate does not make you part of a protected class.” If this crude outburst happened to be directed specifically at Melendez, then charges of racism and misogynism, not to mention “domestic terrorism”, could be nothing more than another mindless episode of hate speech. In fact Gonzales never identified any concrete example related to Melendez, so best to assume she has in mind some larger targeted collective.

Xenophobia? Can Gonzales be taken seriously? She is a fiercely partisan member of a party that has spent five years promoting the nonstop Russiagate hoax – probably the most disgraceful episode of media-fanned xenophobia in American history. Here was an entirely contrived hatred that brought the U.S. and Russia, heavily-armed nuclear states, disturbingly close to military conflict. There is no sign that Gonzales ever spoke out against such national outrage, which continues into the present. Further, if she has condemned the months of ongoing domestic terrorism carried out by Antifa and Black Lives Matter, still visible in a few cities, we have no record of it.

Being free to speak one’s political mind, without fear of retribution, has deep psychological meaning for me. I happened to be one of those students who occupied Sproul Hall to protest crackdowns on free speech at U.C., Berkeley in fall 1964. I still own the original hand-painted button that spells “FSM”. Later, for the crime of political deviance (as a Gramscian Marxist) I was purged from my reputedly safe job as professor at Washington University in St. Louis. Calling the shots for the university were three giant corporations – Monsanto, McDonnell-Douglas, Ralston-Purina. Aside from my activism against the Vietnam War during the early 1970s, I helped organize the infamous McDonnell-Douglas Project as well as the local underground newspaper, The Outlaw. Any right to combat political repression I had was strictly formal – and my fate was hardly unusual.

It turned out that this personal experience would soon intersect with the life and work of Frank Wilkinson – for decades known as “Mr. First Amendment” – lasting more than 30 years. We were close friends. As visiting professor at Carleton University in Ottawa during 1985, I invited Frank (a spellbinding orator on behalf of free speech) for a lecture tour of Ontario. Wilkinson passed away in January 2006 after a prolific career of speaking, writing, and activism dedicated to First Amendment rights. Knowing him as I did, he would be outraged today at the despotic attitude of Lorena Gonzales and other Democratic admirers of Big Brother.

For more than 50 years, Wilkinson was indefatigable and uncompromising: he knew that, without free speech, efforts to challenge any power structure were doomed. So too were any prospects for personal freedom. At the time of his death, ACLU president Nadine Strossen would describe Wilkinson as “a towering and inspiring figure throughout his entire career, starting from when he was a young person advocating for equal rights for the poor and racial minorities.” She added: “He was constantly challenging governmental power to restrict First Amendment freedoms of belief, speech, and association, as well as privacy, which continues to be relevant today.” For his tireless work, Wilkinson was targeted by J. Edgar Hoover, Senator Joe McCarthy, and the same intelligence agencies that Democrats today have come to embrace.

In 1958, during a visit to Atlanta in support of civil-rights activists called before the notorious House Un-American Activities Committee, Wilkinson was subpoenaed and then cited for contempt of Congress when asserting his own First Amendment right to refuse to testify. He was sentenced to one year in federal prison, serving nine months.

Wilkinson helped form the National Committee to Abolish HUAC in 1960, later renamed the National Committee against Repressive Legislation (NCARL) in 1975, when HUAC was finally disbanded. Wilkinson took serious personal risks to ensure political dissent would be protected — the same protection Gonzales and her righteous party hacks now want to destroy. The dark, repressive side of American history associated with Hoover and McCarthy, the FBI and CIA, is now being revived with sanctimonious fury by current defenders of unfettered corporate-state power.

For Wilkinson – in stark contrast to the bigoted, iron-fisted Gonzales – the Bill of Rights was a living document in need of constant renewal. In 1986 he filed a Freedom of Information Act suit against the FBI and eventually was sent 132,000 pages of files spanning 38 years of federal surveillance and espionage. The story of Wilkinson’s ordeal would find its way into Robert Sherrill’s appropriately-titled biography, First Amendment Felon, in 2005.

In the 15 years since Wilkinson’s death, matters have only gotten worse; the Gonzales diatribe, unfortunately, perfectly fits the Democratic modus operandi. Ordinary conservatives are denounced as “white supremacists”, “Nazis”, and “domestic terrorists”, many targeted for personal ruin even where evidence of such transgression is nowhere to be found. Collective guilt is blithely imputed to broad groups of people simply going about their everyday lives. Medical professionals daring to veer from official narratives are smeared and cancelled, their jobs and careers jeopardized. Vaccine doubters can encounter a similar fate. Questionable opinions expressed years in the past nowadays come back to haunt, if not destroy. Anyone brazen enough to criticize the actual domestic terrorism of Antifa and BLM — spanning several months, not a few hours — will be smeared as a vile “white nationalist”.

While Red Scares of earlier years originated from the pathetic schemes of Hoover and McCarthy, today the threats are far more pervasive, cloaked (as before) in the language of moral enlightenment. Dissidents are nowadays savaged as wretched haters, extremists, terrorists – not to mention, in a period of extreme Russiaphobia, as “foreign agents” or “traitors”. CNN pundits, typically at the forefront, routinely parrot blind hate when referring to Russians, oblivious to meaningful facts and context. Centers of power work to impose ideological conformity: corporate media, Wall Street, deep state, Big Tech, academia, military-industrial complex. Stripped of binding protections, individuals and groups targeted are much too weak and isolated to effectively fight back.

In earlier days dissent was said to be the work of “heretics” or “subversives”, marginal Commies readily hunted down by the Feds. (In American society, the CPUSA was always something of a joke, yet still targeted for years as a major threat.) Nowadays the morality police, backed by the usual oligarchs and billionaires, are ready to pounce on sinful transgressions large and small: white supremacy, transphobia, Covid denial, scheming with the Russians. Those stepping outside the ideologically-vetted discourses of CNN, Washington Post, and New York Times will be identified, demeaned, censored, and (where possible) punished. Reality cops guard against the evils of “misinformation”, “disinformation”, and “conspiracy theories” that undermine “our democracy”. In the case of California, the bill proposed by Melendez will be seized upon by Gonzales and identity-politics fanatics as a sign of guilt, of sinful deviance.

Recently two California members of the U.S. Congress, Democrats Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney, sent letters to twelve cable, satellite, and streaming companies – AT&T, Verizon, Apple, Alphabet among them – urging management to shut down centers of “misinformation”, starting with FOX TV. These ideological guardians believe media outlets are contributing to a “polluted environment”, spewing lies that lead to “seditious behavior” and, worse, Covid “science denial”. The problem for Eshoo and McNerney, however, is that pandemic tropes advanced by their favorite corporate-media outlets veer toward fear-rattling propaganda more than established medical science: false computer projections, wildly-inflated death rates, unscientific lockdown orders, needless school closings, mixed signals on facemasks, over-hyping of vaccines. Eshoo and McNerney are best advised to look closer to home, to their own conduits of false information.

Could liberal Democrats, in past years known as champions of free speech and civil rights, have now become so embedded in the power structure that their authoritarian impulses reflect a new-found hubris? Could Gonzales and her anointed elites be imbued with the level of political certitude their censorship zeal seems to imply? Could the party that has carried out years of witch hunts linked to debunked tales of Putin-Trump collusion actually believe in its political integrity? My guess is that Democratic righteousness really masks insecurity and deceit: those responsible for the endless lies and myths must know those lies and myths cannot survive the test of open debate. Easier to denounce your critics as “white nationalists”, cancel their speech platforms, then close off discussion. The shutting down of oppositional speech reflects acute intellectual weakness, not strength.

In the end, the “diversity” and “inclusion” that Gonzales and Democrats piously celebrate is nothing but a sham. Those words have relevance only within a single narrative – a tightly-regulated, fiercely-guarded worldview consistent with elite agendas. Where real diversity should matter most – regarding conflict over how power is exercised, over economic policy and job concerns, over matters of war and peace – genuine debate is largely absent, overridden by an ensemble of authoritarian codes, norms, and practices. Corporate-state rulers manage what is truly important. As with earlier lies and myths about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or “humanitarian crises” in Serbia and Libya, years of Russiagate tales of a stolen election would never be “fact-checked”, but instead repeated monotonously by liberals and their stable of media propagandists. According to Gonzales, all this deceitful manipulation at the hands of Democrats must fall into the category of “protected speech”.

Oligarchical power rules American society more thoroughly than ever, its conformist ideology the true measure of political speech. Identity politics furnishes an opportune facade behind which those in control can expand their power, wealth, and technological advantage never having to worry about anti-system insurgency (keeping mind that January Sixth was no more than a primitive revolt). Supposedly progressive figures like Gonzales, fearing real diversity, serve as valuable instruments of such rule and its legitimation, which those figures always embellish with an ethos of righteous arrogance.

In years past the break with political orthodoxy was denounced as un-American, disloyal, a fifth-column menace, targeted now and then for blacklisting. Nowadays even moderate dissidents are accused of “domestic terrorism” – a charge dutifully repeated by Gonzales. Contemporary dissidents are in fact no better than Nazis, or at least neo-Nazis, meaning they are eligible to be “de-platformed”, sent before a “Reality Czar”. Yet it is Gonzales and her power-mongering ideologues who wind up closer to the monolithic, hateful spirit of fascism than their hapless targets of collective guilt owing to mere association with a political party or outlook. Those ideologues turn out to be the biggest threats to “our democracy”. As Wilkinson had long ago recognized, the struggle against such malevolence is not simply legal but cultural and political – and is never finished.

March 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

The National-Security State Racket

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | March 3, 2021

Some people are criticizing President Biden for the recent U.S. air strikes in Syria as well as his refusal to sanction Saudi dictator Mohammed bin Salman, the man who U.S. officials have concluded orchestrated the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.

Yes, it’s possible that Biden made those decisions. But there is another possibility, one much more likely, one that unfortunately all too many Americans are loath to consider: that it was the U.S. national-security establishment, particularly the Pentagon and the CIA, who made those decisions and that Biden simply deferred to their judgment.

That’s what many people simply cannot bring themselves to consider: that it is the national-security establishment, namely the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, and, to a certain extent, the FBI, that is actually running the federal government, especially in foreign affairs. The other three branches, while permitted to have the veneer of power, are expected to defer to critical judgments made by the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA.

And defer they do. When was the last time that Congress significantly reduced the budget for the national-security establishment? You’ll never see it. That’s because the national-security establishment controls Congress. No member of Congress, especially the military and CIA veterans, would dare to take them on. If he did, he would be toast because the Pentagon would immediately retaliate by threatening to close down military projects or bases in his district. The Pentagon’s and CIA’s assets in the mainstream press would immediately take the offensive and accuse the congressman of being “ineffective.” He would be out in the next election.

The Supreme Court has long deferred to the overwhelming power of the national-security branch of the federal government. The Pentagon’s and CIA’s torture and prison center in Cuba, where people have been denied the right to a speedy trial for more than a decade, is an ongoing testament of that deference to authority. So is the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Pentagon’s and CIA’s power to assassinate people, notwithstanding the express prohibitions on assassination in the Fifth Amendment. Indeed, America’s official secrets act wasn’t a law enacted by Congress; it was a judicial doctrine that the Supreme Court crafted out of whole cloth in deference to a demand by the military.

Trump vs. Biden

With the national-security establishment’s decision that President Kennedy’s policies posed a grave threat to national security and, therefore, that he needed to be removed from office, no president has dared to take these people on. In the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, it appeared that Donald Trump was going to do so. But for some unknown reason, once he entered into office, he crumbled, surrounding himself with military generals and civilian warmongers. He also surrendered to the CIA’s demands to keep its 50-year-old JFK assassination records secret, on grounds of “national security.”

But there is no doubt that Trump was different. He didn’t show the same deference to the authority of the national-security establishment that other presidents since Kennedy have. That was why the deep state went after him from the very beginning, especially with its nonsensical investigation into whether Trump was a Russian agent who was betraying America, just as they said Kennedy was doing with his policies. Perhaps with time, we will learn the full extent of the deep state’s efforts to ensure Joe Biden’s defeat of Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election.

Now they have Biden, which is their notion of an ideal president, one who will defer to the omnipotent power of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA. Did Biden really select military-industrial complex man Lloyd J. Austen III as Secretary of Defense? It’s much more likely that the Pentagon, not wanting to jack with a civilian overseer, chose Austin and that Biden simply deferred to its wishes.

Unheeded warnings

President Eisenhower warned about this type of governmental structure in his Farewell Address in 1961. He pointed out that it constituted a grave threat to the democratic processes and rights and liberties of the American people. That was more than 50 years ago. Since then, the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI, along with their army of contractors and subcontractors feeding at the public trough, have only grown progressively more powerful and rich.

John Kennedy took these people on directly. Kennedy was not a dumb man. He knew precisely the nature of the power structure he was up against. That was why he played an instrumental role in bringing the movie Seven Days in May into production — to serve as a warning to the American people, the same type of warning that Ike issued to Americans in his Farewell Address.

The problem is that Americans have never paid heed to those warnings. They just don’t want to acknowledge that they had any validity. Indeed, many Americans still do not want to confront the fact that this brutal structure within their governmental apparatus ended up turning its omnipotent power inward against a president whose policies they deemed constituted a grave threat to national security.

Milking the rackets

For some 45 years, the national-security establishment milked the “war on communism” for all that it was worth, constantly engendering deep fear with the American people so that they would continue to vest the Pentagon, the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI with ever-increasing power, influence, and money.

It was nothing more than one great big racket, one that continually, year after year, enriched the pockets and expanded the power of those in the military-intelligence establishment.

When Kennedy decided to bring an end to the Cold War racket, he had to be dealt with. And a message needed to be sent to the American people: “We are here, we are in charge, never take us on, and just get used to it.”

When the Cold War ended, their racket quickly morphed into the “war on terrorism.” All the fears about communism that these people engendered in the American people were simply switched to terrorism — or Islam. At first the fear revolved around the notion that foreign terrorists were coming to get us. Now it’s morphed into the notion that domestic terrorists are coming to get us.

They have now come full circle, restoring Russia and China as official enemies who are supposedly coming to get us, just like they supposedly were during the 45 years of the Cold War racket. It’s now a fear-mongering perfect storm — terrorists, Muslims, Russia, and China and, for good measure, Syria, North Korea, ISIS, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, drug dealers, illegal immigrants, and an unsafe world.

An upending of values and morals

Ever since its inception, the deep state has upended America’s morals and values. How many foreign regimes, including democratically elected ones, have these people destroyed in the name of national security? How many brutal military and right-wing dictatorships have they installed into power, trained, supported, and aligned with? How many people, including a democratically elected U.S. president, have they assassinated over the years based on national security?

The obsessive quest to inflict extreme punishment on people like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden says it all. Here are people who have done nothing more than disclose the truth about the national-security establishment’s evil and immoral actions. Yet, it is people like Assange and Snowden who are considered to be the evil, immoral ones. What better evidence of an upending of America’s morals and values than that?

If our American ancestors had been told that the Constitutional Convention was bringing into existence a national-security state type of governmental structure, they never would have approved the deal. The only reason they approved the deal was because they were assured that the Constitution was bringing into existence a limited-government republic.

The national-security state is a root cause of many woes under which America is suffering. To get our nation back on the right road, it is necessary that we dismantle, not reform, the national-security establishment and restore our founding governmental system of a limited-government republic to our land.

March 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Abandon ship! Governors scramble to end lockdowns, mask mandates

16 states are now following the science

By Jordan Schachtel | March 2, 2021

It took an entire year, but lockdowns and mask mandates are officially incredibly unpopular with half of the country, to the point that governors are rapidly making sweeping changes to their year-long COVID-19 policies.

Jumping onto the coattails of pro-individual freedom leaders like governors Ron DeSantis (R-Florida) and Kristi Noem (R-SD), the governors of Mississippi and Texas decided Tuesday to announce an end to business restrictions and statewide mask mandates.

Both Tate Reeves (R-MS) and Greg Abbott (R-TX), who had long taken a nanny state approach to the COVID-19 crisis, acted almost simultaneously to announce the end of statewide restrictions.

The centrally planned solutions to COVID-19 have failed spectacularly, and the American people have taken notice of this reality. Hundreds of millions have now been through a full year of government-imposed tyranny on both a federal and state level. Whether it was a travel ban, an endless series of lockdowns, mask mandates, countless emergency orders, business closures, and the like, not a single top-down order from the federal or state level did anything productive for the wellbeing of Americans.

None of it worked. All of it served as a net negative. The people have noticed.

Now that their constituents have had enough, politicians on the Right are fast departing from the COVID tyranny, and attempting to secure what is left of their political aspirations.

Abbott and Reeves are not the only GOP governors moving fast in ending the restrictions, several other governors have recently acted to roll them back.

On February 12, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte lifted his statewide mask mandate.

On February 8, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds lifted Iowa’s statewide mask mandate along with several other restrictions.

On February 22, North Dakota took it a step further. Its legislative body took the bold step in voting to make mask mandates illegal.

As of March 2, there are now 16 states that no longer have statewide mask orders.

However, across the political divide, there remains no end in sight to the corona madness. Much of the Left continues to embrace and root on endless COVID-19 restrictions, and the hijacking of individual rights in the name of a virus.

Governor Gavin Newsom of California took to Twitter in describing the end of restrictions as “absolutely reckless.”

It took long enough, but it’s now official: Governors who continue to impose lockdowns and mask mandates are fast becoming as popular as Red Sox fans in the Yankee Stadium bleachers, at least in half of the country. The internal polling is out, and the draconian restrictions are being abandoned in droves. History will not be kind to the remaining high-handed holdouts.

March 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Sweden Moves To Protect Academic Freedom After Professor Quits Covid Research Due To Harassment

By Jonathan Turley | March 2, 2021

We have been discussing erosion of free speech and academic freedom protections at colleges and universities around the United States. Most faculty have been conspicuously silent as their colleagues are attacked, suspended, or even fired for taking opposing views on systemic racism, police brutality, or movements like Black Lives Matter. In Sweden, the response has been quite different after Professor Jonas Ludvigsson, announced that he would stop all further research on Covid-19 after a campaign of abuse and harassment following his study on the low threat that the virus poses to children and teachers. The country is ramping up protections for academics to combat such cancelling campaigns.

Ludvigsson researches and teaches clinical epidemiology at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute. His research is consistent with studies that have long found a low risk to students and teachers. This research was highlighted during the Trump Administration in a call for the resumption of classes but largely ignored by the media. The argument for reopening schools, particularly for young children, was portrayed as political and “not following the science.” Commercials ran [stating] that calls to returning to the classroom were tantamount to “murder.” However, the science has been overwhelmingly supportive of such reopening.  Indeed, Catholic and other private schools in many states never closed without surges in the virus.

Ludvigsson looked at children from age 1 to 16 during the first wave of COVID-19 and found that only 15 children went to the ICU, for a rate of 0.77 per 100,000. Moreover, in the 1-16 age group, there was only a slight increase from the four-month period before the pandemic to the four-month period following the period.

Such studies contradict the media narrative and the position of teacher unions, including many which continue to oppose a return to the classroom despite the science. Accordingly, Ludvigsson was attacked and hounded out of further research.

The response of the country however has been different from the response in the United States. Various academic leaders and groups are pushing for legislation designed to protect academic freedom. They are citing a Swedish government study in 2018 found “21 out of 26 universities said that there is a risk that researchers will be exposed to harassment, threats and violence.”

The response in the United States is strikingly different. We have been discussing efforts to fire professors who voice dissenting views on various issues including an effort to oust a leading economist from the University of Chicago as well as a leading linguistics professor at Harvard and a literature professor at Penn. Sites like Lawyers, Guns, and Money feature writers like Colorado Law Professor Paul Campus who call for the firing of those with opposing views (including myself). Such campaigns have targeted teachers and students who contest the evidence of systemic racism in the use of lethal force by police or offer other opposing views in current debates over the pandemic, reparations, electoral fraud, or other issues.

Faculty have largely stayed silent as campaigns targeting these professors and teachers. While some may relish such cleansing of schools of opposing voices, many are likely intimidated by such campaigns and do not want to be the next targeted by such groups. We have often defended the free speech rights of faculty on the left who have made hateful comments about whites, males, and conservatives. Yet, there is an eerie silence when conservatives are targeted for their own views. Sweden has shown how this is a global issue but that the response outside of the United States has been markedly different.

March 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Fact-check FAIL: Newsweek forced to admit Buffalo schools teaching kids to blame ‘all white people’ is true

RT | March 2, 2021

After public schools in Buffalo, New York have been called out for blaming “all white people” for perpetuating systematic racism, “fact-checkers” tried to disprove it – only to be left red-faced when confronted with evidence.

Journalist Chris Rufo has been vindicated after fact-checkers accused him of misreporting the contents of a Black Lives Matter-themed curriculum being employed at Buffalo Public Schools (BPS) last month. The magazine quietly confirmed that BPS was, in fact, teaching its students to blame all white people for the suffering of others.

While Rufo showed the curriculum claimed that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism,” citing lesson plans and teaching materials received from a whistleblower at the Erie County schools, Newsweek argued his claims were only “half true,” because BPS was “not organizing lesson plans around that one phrase, which is for middle school students only, nor are they pushing any of the research as hard and fast facts.”

However, Rufo was quick to respond, presumably supplying more of the lesson material he’d been slipped by his inside contact, and by Monday had “forced” Newsweek’s fact-checkers to retract their judgement and issue his story a ‘true’ rating. Indeed, according to the materials Rufo obtained from the whistleblower, the lessons directed at younger children are even more divisive and controversial.

Students as young as kindergarten were shown a video depicting dead black children, for example, supposedly in an effort to warn four-to-six year olds about “racist police and state-sanctioned violence” and learn about the “sickness” of American society. Students in fourth and fifth grades were also encouraged to embrace “the disruption of Western nuclear family dynamics” in order to “return to the ‘collective village’ that takes care of each other,” and finish the fifth grade with an essay exploring “a society without ‘separate, nuclear family units.’”

Ten-year-olds also learned their country was operating a “school-to-grave pipeline” for black children.

Only once they hit middle and high school were children to be instructed in “systemic racism,” taught the all-important self-flagellatory lesson that American society itself was designed for the “impoverishment of people of color and enrichment of white people.” The very fabric of the US social system is based on “racist economic inequality,” the materials claimed, stating that modern economic inequality is “the result of black slavery, which created unjust wealth for white people.”

And having been thoroughly indoctrinated since the age of four, the high school students were at last presented with the BLM curriculum’s declaration that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism,” a declaration that is accompanied by “often unconsciously, white elites work to perpetuate racism through politics, law, education, and the media.”

Equipped with such ideological bludgeons (which, contrary to BPS’ protestations, seem to be put forward as very much “hard and fast facts”), students are expected to get to work solving the problem they were born guilty of, “confronting whiteness in [their] classrooms,” atoning for their “white privilege,” and “us[ing] their voices” to crusade for anti-racism.

Nor are children the only group to be radically reeducated under the program – one teacher told City Journal that meetings with the curriculum’s author, associate superintendent for Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Initiatives Fatima Morrell, devolved into “scoldings, guilt-trips, and demands to demean oneself simply to make another feel ‘empowered,’” with the teachers forced to play these “manipulative mind games” lest Morrell retaliate against them professionally. The curriculum has only been in place since last year, but news of its contents has traveled far and wide, outraging parents all over the nation.

March 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | | Leave a comment

Wither Cuomo and the GOP Establishment

By William Stroock | March 2, 2021

In November of 2019, several disgruntled GOP operatives launched the anti-Trump Lincoln Project. The organizations’ directors included Steve Schmidt, director of John McCain’s 2008 Presidential Campaign, Reed Galen, another McCain advisor, Rick Wilson, a GOP political consultant, and John Weaver an advisor to former Republican Ohio governor John Kasich. The group has raised more than $90 million, about a third of which they spent on political television and internet ads, with much of the rest going to their own political consulting firms.

The Lincoln Project has long been popular with the Dems and the media; its directors are regulars on powerhouse morning political shows like Morning Joe. Late last January, The American Conservative reported that John Weaver used his position within the organization to sexually harass and groom young men. Further reporting by The Associated Press showed that Weaver’s actions were an open secret within The Lincoln Project. The rest of the Lincoln Project’s leadership had been informed of Weaver’s behavior in writing last June and members knew of the problem as early as March. John Weaver has resigned as has Steve Schmidt. So far, the Lincoln Project is bravely soldiering on.

As is Andrew Cuomo, Governor of New York. Cuomo had once been hailed as ‘America’s Governor’ for his handling of the COVID-19 crisis. He won a television Emmy Award for his daily news conferences and published a book extolling his leadership. But a report issued by State Attorney General Letitia James says Cuomo’s administration misrepresented the number of deaths caused by the governor’s policy of putting COVID-19 patients in nursing homes. The Cuomo Administration claimed 8,711 died in nursing homes. But the Attorney General’s report says the true number is over 13,000. Melissa De Rossa, the governor’s secretary, confirmed on a conference call with state Democrats that Cuomo’s administration covered up the true number of COVID-19 related nursing home deaths.

Conservatives and the bereaved have long slammed Cuomo’s nursing home policy, but the issue did not gain traction in the media until now. Cuomo has attacked and berated his critics. State Assemblyman Ron Kim, long a critic of the governor’s nursing home policy, says Cuomo constantly called and verbally harassed him and promised to destroy him. “You have not seen my wrath”, the governor told Kim, “You will be destroyed.” Kim told Cuomo all further communications had to go through his personal attorney. NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio said that kind of bullying behavior is pretty normal for Governor Cuomo.

Sexual harassment may also be normal for the governor. Two young women have come forward and claimed Cuomo made sexual advances toward them with all the tact and charm of a 15-year-old. More will likely follow. Cuomo has called for an independent review of the allegations, but Attorney General James insists she should oversee any investigation. Late Sunday night, Cuomo issued a statement saying, ‘I now understand that my interactions may have been insensitive or too personal and that some of my comments, given my position, made others feel in ways I never intended.’ Because a 63-year-old man does not understand he should not make clumsy and lewd sexual advances at women the same age as his daughters. These last few days local news is leading off with Cuomo’s twin scandals, so the governor is definitely in trouble.

While the Democrats got the knives out for Cuomo, the American Conservative Union hosted its annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando, Florida. For decades, CPAC has been an important gathering of Republicans and conservatives of all stripes. This year, the GOP Establishment has no place at CPAC. Florida Representative Matt Goetz slammed the establishment and his House colleague and conference chair Liz Cheney, who voted to impeach Donald Trump, ‘Speaking of people who ought to lose primaries… if Liz Cheney were on this stage today, she’d get booed off of it,’ Goetz told the assembled.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is often mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2024. DeSantis is just as combative as Trump, but lower key. Trumpism without Trump, some say of DeSantis. The governor touched on several issues important to conservative voters; COVID-19 lockdowns, school openings, Big Tech censorship and election integrity. He touted the state’s openness in comparison to closed states. ‘Florida got it right, and the lockdown states, got it wrong,’ DeSatnis declared. He slammed the ‘failed’ Republican Establishment, open borders and military adventurism and even paid tribute to the late Rush Limbaugh.

South Dakota governor Kristi Noem is another rising start within the GOP. Last summer she hosted a pro-American rally with President Trump at Mount Rushmore. This year she gave a 20 plus minute speech on conservative principles and her sate’s handling of COVID-19. Noem touted the fact that at no time did she order a quarantine or require masks. Noem related, ‘Now Dr. Faucci, he told me that on my worst day I’d have 10,000 patients in the hospital. On our worst day, we had a little over 600. I don’t know if you agree with me, but Dr. Fauci is wrong a lot.’ The crowd roared.

President Trump’s Sunday afternoon speech was the highlight of the CPAC gathering. He brought red meat for rabid CPAC attendees. Trump slammed Biden, ‘In just one short month we went from America first to America last.’ Trump’s speech was a long stemwinder typical of the man. ‘I am not starting a new party’ he said unequivocally. Who knows? I may even decide to beat them for a third time, ok?’

Last week Senator Rick Scott of Florida, who has won three tough, close races in his home state and chairs the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee said, ‘The Democratic Party, it is a socialist party now, so the Republicans’ civil war is actually cancelled.’ Scott is certainly a member of the loathed Establishment but sees things other members don’t. With the Lincoln Project imploding, calls form the House caucus for Liz Cheney’s resignation renewed, and the Trump wing of the party rocking in Orlando, the Establishment has already lost.

March 2, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption | , | Leave a comment

Legal team wants ‘second Nuremberg tribunal’ to try global lockdown promoters for crimes against humanity

By Leo Hohmann | February 28, 2021

Should the technocrats who pushed governments to lockdown their citizens be tried for crimes against humanity?

One prominent German lawyer, who is also licensed to practice law in America, thinks they should. And he is organizing a team of thousands of participating lawyers who want to prosecute a “second Nuremberg tribunal” against a cadre of international elites responsible for what he calls the “corona fraud scandal.”

Targeting the Davos, Switzerland-based World Economic Forum and its devotees among global political leaders, attorney Reiner Fuellmich says they are guilty of crimes against humanity for their perpetration of COVID-response policies that led to forced shutdowns, destroyed businesses, impoverished families, broken lives and a spike in suicide rates.

He has formed the German Corona Investigative Committee to pursue civil charges against the main perpetrators, among them being the head of the United Nations World Health Organization Dr. Tedros Adhanom. He hopes a successful class-action lawsuit will also lead to criminal charges.

Fuellmich was on the legal team that won a major lawsuit against German automaker Volkswagen in a 2015 case involving tampered catalytic converters in the U.S. He also was involved in a lawsuit that exposed one of Germany’s largest banks, Deutsche Bank, as a criminal enterprise. The bank was recently ordered by the U.S. Justice Department to pay $130 million to resolve corrupt practices that included money laundering, bribery and fraud between the years 2009 and 2016.

Fuellmich is licensed to practice law in Germany and the state of California.

He believes the frauds committed by Volkswagen and Deutsche Bank pale in comparison to the damage wrought by those who sold the Covid-19 crisis as the worst viral outbreak to hit the world in more than a century and used it to cause media-driven panic, government overreach and human suffering on a scale still not fully quantified.

The truth is revealed in the numbers, Fuellmich said, citing figures that show COVID-19 has not caused any statistically significant increase in the 2020 death counts over previous years.

The scam perpetrated on humanity hinged on one dirty little secret, he said – the PCR Test.

Not only are these tests not approved for diagnostic purposes but the inventor of the PCR Test, the late Kary Mullis, explicitly stated in an interview that this was never the purpose of his test.

Fuellmich explains in the video below how the coronavirus response of governments worldwide working in cahoots with the Bill Gates-funded U.N. World Health Organization “are probably the biggest crimes against humanity ever committed.”

[If YouTube removes the above video you can watch the full version here.]

“A number of highly respected scientists [he names several in the video including a Nobel Laurette from Stanford University] have concluded there has never been a coronavirus pandemic but only a PCR test pandemic,” he says.

“If someone tests positive it does not mean they are infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-COV-2 virus,” Fuellmich says in the video.

“Based on the rules of criminal law, asserting false facts concerning the PCR tests, or intentional misrepresentation, that can only be assessed as fraud. Based on the rules of civil tort law, this translates into intentional infliction of damage.”

He said persons harmed by the PCR-induced lockdowns are entitled to full compensation for their losses.

“The crimes committed by Mr. Christian Drosten [an epidemiologist and Germany’s version of Dr. Anthony Fauci] and Mr. Lothar Wieler, a veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, and Tedros Adhanom, head of the WHO, must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity as defined in Section 7 of the International Criminal Code.”

He said the class-action lawsuit is the best avenue to try the case.

In a Feb. 24 article about Fuellmich’s effort, the journal Principia Scientific International quoted him saying “this COVID-19 crisis should be renamed the ‘Covid-19 Scandal,’ and all those responsible should be prosecuted for civil damages due to manipulations and falsified test protocols. Therefore, an international network of business lawyers will plead the biggest tort case of all time, the COVID-19 fraud scandal, which has meanwhile turned into the biggest crime against humanity ever committed.”

Here is a summarized translation of the most-recent update Fuellmich put out on his German website on Feb. 15:

“The hearings of around 100 internationally renowned scientists, doctors, economists and lawyers, which have been conducted by the Berlin Commission of Inquiry into the COVID-19 affair since 10.07.2020, have in the meantime shown with a probability close to certainty that the COVID-19 scandal was at no time a health issue.  Rather, it was about solidifying the illegitimate power (illegitimate because it was obtained by criminal methods) of the corrupt ‘Davos clique’ by transferring the wealth of the people to the members of the Davos clique, destroying, among other things, small and medium-sized enterprises in particular. Platforms such as Amazon, Google, Uber, etc. could thus appropriate their market share and wealth.”

Was the vaccine the reason for the virus?

Perhaps the most egregious outgrowth of the coronavirus scam has been the fear-mongering that not only led to devastating and non-scientific shutdowns but also the rush to market of an unproven, experimental vaccine, which is now making billions of dollars for Big Pharma.

Just like the lockdowns, the vaccine is unnecessary because there are already several well-documented treatments involving long-established drugs that are proven safe and widely available. Also just like the lockdowns, this vaccine carries potentially devastating long-term effects on human health. There are questions about its effects on the fertility of men and women, and it has already led to more than 600 deaths in the U.S. and more than 250 deaths in the U.K.

To make matters worse, it is becoming plainly obvious that the intent is to make this experimental vaccine mandatory for all of humanity. It was billionaire vaccine investor Bill Gates who originally floated the idea, in April 2020, that humanity could never return to “normal” until “we have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out to basically the entire world.”

This reporter predicted last April that the vaccine would eventually be made mandatory, largely by corporations using coercive tactics.

Israel takes the lead in instituting medical tyranny

Among the nations considered to be part of the “free world,” Israel is taking the lead in pushing forward with a new type of society in which corporations and governments work together to coerce and eventually force every human being on the planet to get an injection of experimental vaccine treatments.

Not since the Nazi Third Reich has there been so little respect for citizens’ rights of individual health autonomy in a Western nation.

Whether you live in America, the U.K., Australia or Europe, if you wish to see what your future holds under the “new normal,” just look at Israel.

The Israeli government has announced that people will not be allowed to participate in a host of life functions without showing papers offering proof that they have either been vaccinated or that they have had and recovered from COVID.

A host of Israeli businesses including shops, malls, markets, pubs, gyms, museums, synagogues, hotels and libraries were allowed to reopen Sunday, Feb. 21, the Times of Israel reports. But only those Israelis who have been vaccinated or have recovered from COVID will be able to use gyms and pools, attend synagogues, sporting and culture events, board a flight or stay at hotels.

To be allowed to open their doors, all relevant businesses have been ordered by the government to scan their customers for the so-called “Green Pass,” barring from entry anyone who cannot produce such documentation.

Watch video below of Israel supermarket guard requiring shoppers to show their COVID papers before they can enter the store.

There are three ways for Israelis to get the Green Pass:

  • Downloading the Traffic Light (Ramzor) app on Google Play or the Apple App Store, entering personal details and getting the pass on one’s phone.
  • Signing up on the Health Ministry website and downloading a printable personal document.
  • Calling the Health Ministry’s hotline and having the pass sent by email or fax.

Europe also moving toward vaccine passports

The European Union also appears to be on the cusp of embracing similar draconian measures. German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated this week that the concept of a digital vaccine passport has achieved “unanimous support within the E.U.

“Everyone agreed that we need a digital vaccination certificate,” Merkel said last Wednesday after a meeting with European leaders.

E.U. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen also praised Israel’s new Green Pass system.

The Telegraph reports that the government of the U.K. is nearing an announcement of new rules similar to Israel’s in which no Brit will be allowed to enter pubs, gyms, large-venue events or hotels without showing their special COVID vaccine passport.

Since when do we take away freedom in order to restore it under a new set of terms defined by unelected “experts” at the United Nations World Health Organization? This is the twisted way in which the globalist technocrats think. Always perverting the language to sell their lies and enticing ill-informed masses to walk straight into their devious traps.

Forcing people to accept a medical treatment and to “show your papers” proving they have received the treatment in order to participate in society is a violation of the well-established international norms.

The Nuremberg Code came out of the Nuremberg tribunals that convicted leading German Nazis. The Code states that any experimental medical treatment must not only be voluntary but must include “informed consent,” meaning the person not only volunteered but was informed of exactly what the treatment entailed and the risks involved.

Global power elites have already used COVID as cover to clamp down on free speech, assembly, religious gatherings and small business operations, creating a world of the haves and have-nots. Big-box stores like Walmart and online retailer Amazon have thrived, raking in record profits, while small businesses are dying.

So the class-action lawsuit appears justified, at least in theory. A small cabal of globalist corporations and “experts” at the WHO created the problem, made it impossible for people to live their lives as normal human beings, leading to mass anxiety and huge spikes in suicide.

Now that everyone is miserable and desperate to get back to normal, the technocrats introduce an experimental gene therapy, the mRNA vaccine, and are holding that out as the salvation, making it oh so tempting for many to line up and roll up their sleeve.

Tempting, that is, if you haven’t done your research to find out who is promoting the vaccine, what are their long-held motives and goals, and what their previous track record has been.

Such research would lead you straight to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has invested billions into an ever-growing lineup of vaccines through the GAVI global vaccine alliance and other organizations. Gates has bragged about the tremendous 20-to-1 “return on investment” he has reaped by investing in vaccine therapies. His net worth has increased by $17 billion since making the shift in focus from computers to vaccines.

U.S. companies bribing employees to take the shot

A number of U.S. companies are now bribing their employees, offering cash bonuses of $100 to $150 if they get the shot. Meijer, Kroger, Publix, Dollar General, Aldi, JBS Meat Processing and Trader Joe’s, among others, have all jumped on the bandwagon. They are being highly praised by “health experts” for doing this, so look for more companies to follow suit.

Those who refuse the vaccine, which is their right under the Nuremberg Codes, will become the new untouchables in a caste system that divides people along medical lines. Those getting the shot will be allowed to re-enter something closer to normalcy while those rejecting it will be left behind.

The dots are all there – with the virus, the fear-mongering, the lockdowns and mask mandates, and the coming vaccine mandates. All you have to do is connect them.

Leo Hohmann is an independent journalist whose work is 100 percent reader supported. Contributions of any size are appreciated. Send c/o Leo Hohmann, PO Box 291, Newnan, GA 30264 

March 1, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | | Leave a comment

National Institutes Of Health Say Moist Masks Are Good For You!

By Dr Joseph Mercola | March 1, 2021 

A study from the National Institutes of Health claims wearing a moist mask is actually good for you because inhaling through the wet mask hydrates your lungs and boosts your immune system. However, it’s important to realize that the humidity inside the mask will rapidly allow pathogenic bacteria to grow and multiply. This is a documented fact not addressed by the NIH.

Medical doctors have warned that bacterial pneumonia, facial rashes, fungal infections on the face, “mask mouth” (bad breath, tooth decay and gum inflammation) and candida mouth infections are all on the rise.

By breathing through a bacteria-infested mask, you risk inhaling bacteria deep into your lungs, and according to recent research, the presence of microbes in your lungs can worsen lung cancer pathogenesis and contribute to advanced stage lung cancer.

Face masks can also reduce oxygen intake, leading to hazardous oxygen deficiency (hypoxia), along with rapid accumulation of harmful carbon dioxide, which can have significant cognitive and physical impacts.

Research1 also shows asymptomatic individuals pose virtually no risk, as they rarely ever spread live virus, thereby undermining the idea that everyone must be masked simply because you don’t know who’s infectious and who’s not.

Despite all of that, government officials insist that universal mask wearing is an essential strategy to combat COVID-19, now even recommending wearing two,2 three3,4 or even four5 layers of face masks. And, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci, Americans may have to wear masks all the way through 2022.6

Is Wearing A Wet Mask Good For You?

Just when you thought mainstream propaganda could not propose a greater irrational perversion of the truth, a new study7 from the National Institutes of Health claims wearing a moist mask — which is a breeding ground for harmful bacteria — is actually good for you because inhaling through the wet mask hydrates your lungs and boosts your immune system. As reported by Healthing.ca, February 16, 2021:8

“The study, published in the Biophysical Journal, tested an N95 mask, a three-ply disposable surgical mask, a two-ply cotton-polyester mask and a heavy cotton mask, measuring the level of humidity by having a volunteer breathe into a sealed steel box.

When the person did not wear a mask, the water vapor of the exhaled breath filled the box, leading to a rapid increase in humidity inside the box. When the person wore a mask, the buildup of humidity inside the box greatly decreased as most of the water vapor remained in the mask, became condensed, and was re-inhaled. The researchers conducted the tests at three different temperatures ranging from 7 to 36 degrees Celsius.

‘We found that face masks strongly increase the humidity in inhaled air and propose that the resulting hydration of the respiratory tract could be responsible for the documented finding that links lower COVID-19 disease severity to wearing a mask,’ said Adriaan Bax, Ph.D., a NIH Distinguished Investigator and the study’s lead author.

‘High levels of humidity have been shown to mitigate severity of the flu, and it may be applicable to severity of COVID-19 through a similar mechanism.’”

However, it’s important to realize that the humidity inside the mask will allow pathogenic bacteria to rapidly grow and multiply — a documented fact not addressed by the NIH — and since the mask makes it more difficult to breathe, you’re likely to breathe heavier, thereby risking inhaling the microbes deep inside your lungs. As you’ll see below, this can have significant health risks that vastly outweigh any benefit you might get from breathing more humid air.

Occupational Respirator Testing Expert Speaks Out

In June 2020, Schaefer wrote an open letter9 addressed to the chief medical officer in Alberta, Canada, Dr. Deena Hinshaw, pointing out the errors of recommending universal wearing of N95 masks, surgical masks or nonmedical masks as protection against SARS-CoV-2. In it, he writes:10

“I have been teaching and conducting respirator fit testing for over 20 years and now currently for my company SafeCom Training Services Inc. My clients include many government departments, our military, healthcare providers with Alberta Health Services, educational institutions and private industry. I am a published author and a recognized authority on this subject.

Filter respirator masks, especially N95, surgical and non-medical masks, provide negligible COVID-19 protection for the following reasons:

1. Viruses in the fluid envelopes that surround them can be very small, so small in fact that you would need an electron microscope to see them. N95 masks filter 95% of particles with a diameter of 0.3 microns or larger. COVID-19 particles are .08 – .12 microns.

2. Viruses don’t just enter us through our mouth and nose, but can also enter through our eyes and even the pores of our skin. The only effective barrier one can wear to protect against virus exposure would be a fully encapsulated hazmat suit with cuffs by ankles taped to boots and cuffs by wrists taped to gloves, while receiving breathing air from a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA).

This barrier is standard gear to protect against a biohazard (viruses) and would have to be worn in a possible virus hazard environment 24/7 and you wouldn’t be able to remove any part of it even to have a sip of water, eat or use the washroom while in the virus environment. If you did, you would become exposed and would negate all the prior precautions you had taken.”

Face Masks Pose Several Health Hazards

In his letter, and in the video above, Schaefer also stresses that these kinds of face masks pose “very real risks and possible serious threats to a wearer’s health” for a number of reasons, including the following:

1. Wearing a face mask increases breathing resistance, and since it makes both inhaling and exhaling more difficult, individuals with pre-existing medical conditions need to be screened by a medical professional to make sure they won’t be at risk of a medical emergency if wearing a face mask.

This includes those with shortness of breath, lung disease, panic attacks, breathing difficulties, chest pain on exertion, cardiovascular disease, fainting spells, claustrophobia, chronic bronchitis, heart problems, asthma, allergies, diabetes, seizures, high blood pressure and those with pacemakers. The impact of wearing a face mask during pregnancy is also wholly unknown.

2. Face masks can reduce oxygen intake, leading to potentially hazardous oxygen deficiency (hypoxia).

3. They also cause rapid accumulation of harmful carbon dioxide, which can have significant cognitive and physical impacts. That said, there is some evidence to support that this may be one of the few benefits of mask wearing, as slightly elevated CO2 levels can also contribute to health benefits as per my interview with Patrick McKeown. (We’re not talking about dangerously high levels, however.)

4. Wearing a face mask increases your body temperature and physical stress, which could result in an elevated temperature reading that is not related to infection.

5. All face masks can cause bacterial and fungal infections in the user as warm, moist air accumulates inside the mask. This is the perfect breeding ground for pathogens. “That is why N95 and other disposable masks were only designed to be short duration, specific task use and then immediately discarded,” Schaefer notes.

Medical doctors have warned that bacterial pneumonia, facial rashes, fungal infections on the face,11 “mask mouth” (symptoms of which include bad breath, tooth decay and gum inflammation) and candida mouth infections12 are all on the rise.

What’s worse, a study13,14 published in the February 2021 issue of the journal Cancer Discovery found that the presence of microbes in your lungs can worsen lung cancer pathogenesis and can contribute to advanced stage lung cancer. As reported by Global Research :15

“While analyzing lung microbes of 83 untreated adults with lung cancer, the research team discovered that colonies of Veillonella, Prevotella, and Streptococcus bacteria, which may be cultivated through prolonged mask wearing, are all found in larger quantities in patients with advanced stage lung cancer than in earlier stages.

The presence of these bacterial cultures is also associated with a lower chance of survival and increased tumor growth regardless of the stage.”

6. With extended use, medical masks will begin to break down and release chemicals that are then inhaled. Tiny microfibers are also released, which can cause health problems when inhaled. This hazard was highlighted in a performance study16 being published in the June 2021 issue of Journal of Hazardous Materials.

Schaefer also points out that to provide any benefit whatsoever, users must be fitted with the right type and size of respirator, and must undergo fit testing by a trained professional. However, N95 respirators, even when fitted properly, will not protect against viral exposures but can adequately protect against larger particles.

Surgical masks, which do not seal to your face, “do not filter anything,” Schaefer notes. These types of masks are designed to prevent bacteria from the mouth, nose and face from entering the patient during surgical procedures, and researchers have warned that contaminated surgical masks actually pose an infection risk.17 After just two hours, a significant increase in bacterial load on the mask was observed.

Nonmedical cloth masks are not only ineffective but also particularly dangerous as they’re not engineered for “easy inhalation and effective purging of exhaled carbon dioxide,” making them wholly unsuitable for use.

In the video, Schaefer demonstrates the only type of mask that is actually safe to wear — the gas mask kind of respirator you’d use to protect yourself against painting fumes, organic vapors, smoke and dust.

Real respirators are built to filter the air you breathe in, and get rid of the carbon dioxide and humidity from the air you breathe out, thereby ensuring there’s no dangerous buildup of carbon dioxide or reduction in oxygen inside the mask.

I’ve written many articles detailing the evidence showing that face masks do not prevent viral illnesses. To these we can now add an updated Cochrane review,18 which summarizes randomized trial evidence from studies that looked at face masks, hand-washing and/or physical distancing as prevention against respiratory infections.

There are many limitations to the included studies, including the facts that none was specific to COVID-19 and most had questionable adherence. They did not include the one COVID-19 specific trial that also included adherence parameters. With regard to medical and surgical masks, they found that:

“Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness (9 studies; 3507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 3005 people).”

Four health care studies and one small community study looked at the use of N95/P2 respirators. Here they found that:

“Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (5 studies; 8407 people) or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people).”

COVID-19 Specific Mask Trial Failed To Prove Benefit

Cochrane’s review certainly would have been more complete had they included the only COVID-19-related study to date. Unfortunately, they only included studies published before April 1, 2020. The trial in question, which was done in Denmark, was published November 18, 2020.

This COVID-19-specific randomized controlled surgical mask trial19,20 confirmed and strengthened previous findings, showing that mask wearing may either reduce your risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by as much as 46%, or increase your risk by 23%. Either way, the vast majority — 97.9% of those who didn’t wear masks, and 98.2% of those who did — remained infection free.

The study included 3,030 individuals assigned to wear a surgical face mask and 2,994 unmasked controls. Of them, 80.7% completed the study. Based on the adherence scores reported, 46% of participants always wore the mask as recommended, 47% predominantly as recommended and 7% failed to follow recommendations.

Among mask wearers, 1.8% ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among controls. When they removed those who did not adhere to the recommendations for use, the results remained the same — 1.8%, which suggests adherence makes no difference.

Among those who reported wearing their face mask “exactly as instructed,” 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to 2.1% of the controls. So, essentially, we’re destroying economies and lives around the world to protect a tiny minority from getting a positive PCR test result which, as detailed in “Asymptomatic ‘Casedemic’ Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear,” means little to nothing.


This article was brought to you by Dr. Mercola, a New York Times bestselling author. For more helpful articles, please visit Mercola.com today and receive your FREE Take Control of Your Health E-book!

March 1, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment