Aletho News


The BBC’s “Big Oil vs The World” documentary failed to provide any evidence to support its alarmist claims

The Daily Sceptic | August 7, 2022

The BBC recently broadcast a three part series entitled “Big Oil vs The World“.

The theme of the three hour documentary was that the oil and gas industry discovered over forty years ago that their product produced large amounts of carbon dioxide and methane and that the increase in these greenhouse gases would lead to climate change.

The documentary alleges that the oil and gas industry deliberately disseminated misinformation in order to prevent or slow down any legislation that would hurt its profit margins.

Many interviews are shown of former employees of the oil and gas industry that have had damascene conversions and now see that they were part of a huge crime against humanity or at least humanity yet to come.

I watched all three hours of this documentary on BBC iPlayer. It was very well done with many clips of hurricane damage, floods, wildfires and industry pumping out pollution.

The music reinforced the sense of doom and horror that these oil and gas company executives put profit ahead of saving the planet.

The trouble is that even though so many people consider the subject of climate change ‘settled science’ not one shred of evidence was put forward in the whole three hours.

One of the climate change experts was asked what his reaction to his predictions coming true was. He said he was angry, yet his predictions were not offered and subsequently it was not demonstrated how they were true.

Graphs and documents with certain phrases highlighted were flashed up but there was no time to evaluate them.

A ‘methane hunter’ declared that she had provided overwhelming evidence to the U.S. regulators but to no avail. During this segment images from thermal cameras were shown which looked very scary but there was no explanation as to what to look for to determine that methane was present.

The Attorney General of Massachusetts was interviewed and it was detailed how Exxon Mobile was going to have to answer in court to the allegations. It was detailed exactly what they were going to accuse the company of and footage of the team discussing the wrongdoings was shown.

That segment finished with the fact that the New York State Attorney General had tried the same thing but Exxon Mobil had won that case. Nothing further was said, no reference to the court documents, nothing to suggest that the company had pulled the wool over the court’s eyes. Nothing.

I would imagine that if I had bothered to complain to the BBC I would receive a response along the lines of them not having to provide evidence because the science is settled, but you have to ask the question, why?

If there is so much evidence and they know that the oil and gas giants have had evidence for four decades, why, in a three hour documentary, can they not produce one single piece of evidence?

How many more decades will we have to live with this constant barrage of doom-mongering before they finally see that the climate changes and there isn’t much we can do about it but continue to adapt and mitigate as we have been?

August 8, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Film Review, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Patronising, selective, abusive – the vaccine propaganda machine at its worst

By Laura Perrins | TCW Defending Freedom | July 22, 2022

ONE thing I will say about Wednesday night’s BBC programme Unvaccinated  is that it had to be seen to believed. It managed to be patronising, ignorant, selective and abusive all at the same time. I doubt if even my extraordinary talents can quite convey the level of vaccine propaganda that the national broadcaster engaged in.

If you did not see it, Unvaccinated (available on iPlayer) was a programme whereby the BBC picked a group of people who have exercised their right to medical choice and bodily autonomy and decided not to be injected with an mNRA ‘vaccine’, and got them together, Big Brother-style, in an attempt to change their minds. They were subject to a regime of gaslighting, ‘heated debate’ and an odd jelly-bean experiment. Along the way to help these poor ignoramuses see the error of their ways were a presenter, The Scientists and some bloke from Full Fact, ‘the UK’s independent fact checking organisation’.

The low point was when a young participant explained how a friend started having seizures days after her first jab. This has devastated her life. Unsurprisingly this made the attendee ‘hesitant’ about receiving the Covid vaccine. The response from the presenter was, How can you be sure it was the vaccine that caused the seizures? Maybe it was something else? Just how is a young girl supposed to prove that a serious side-effect such as a seizure was not caused by the vaccine taken only days earlier? As she rightly pointed out, given the age of the victim, it is highly unlikely that this would have occurred naturally. But it’s not impossible, replied the presenter. Sure, it is not impossible, just like pigs might indeed sprout wings and fly.

This gaslighting came after a lengthy session on how mild side-effects are often imagined. Placebo side-effects were real – namely if you thought you would get a side-effect then you were more likely to experience this side-effect. So, you just imagined that blood clot.

Then there was a discussion on myocarditis – this was when the jelly-beans came out to demonstrate how unlikely it is one would suffer such a side-effect after the vaccine. You are more likely to suffer myocarditis from Covid, we were told. The jelly-bean experiment didn’t seem to convince anyone, and positively enraged one attendee.

Then the Unvaccinated met The Scientists, who explained how they were able to develop the mNRA vaccine in an ‘unprecedented’ time scale: ‘The vaccines that we are using in this country at the moment are quite different from vaccines that we have used in the past.’ (They certainly are.)

They were developed at such breakneck, too-good-to-be-true, never-before-done-in-the-history-of-mankind speed because they got critical information from China. The Scientist explains, ‘We were able to get the code for the spike protein on the virus within a matter of weeks from China, and that code was enough to make the spike protein.’ (I am sure you are fully reassured now, dear reader. The code for the spike protein came from China. So you’re all good.) That didn’t really fill me with confidence, I have to say. (For some very real worries about this rushed vaccine, turn to Paula Jardine’s disturbing report for TCW  here.)

The other reason for the high-speed development and rollout was, according to the presenter, who heard it from an academic, good old ‘bureaucracy’, or at least the lack of it.  Allegedly, all The Scientists were able to clear their diaries so they could make meetings immediately instead of three months down the line and, ta-dah – the vaccine appears! ‘They got rid of everything else in their diary and this was the priority.’ Praise be.

The gang at Full Fact got a slot to explain all about the trouble with ‘disinformation’ and ‘misinformation’ and all the rest of it.

The biggest elephant in the room was the fact that the virus presents little if any threat to the attendees, who were all young. If the risk of the virus to the attendees isn’t analysed then there is no point in talking about how likely mild or serious the side-effects of the vaccine are.

Much of the programme came down to emotion v The Science and the manipulation of statistics, in particular confusing causation with correlation. It is right we should always be careful of statistics. Ultimately, however, I believe the attendees’ gut instinct is against this vaccine but these days, emotion or instinct is routinely dismissed. Nothing can come above The Science, and The Charts and The Technocrats and The Experts. Sir Roger Scruton defended instinct as an entirely appropriate way upon which to make a decision. It is another word for wisdom and common sense built up over a lifetime of experience. One can apply common sense and wisdom when considering the advice given by an expert, but that advice should not trump the commonsense decision which has to be made by the ordinary person.

Experience tells me that in the face of a virus which presents a tiny risk to me, or indeed anyone, it is best not to be injected with a vaccine developed in record time using an entirely new method and relying on information from communist-run China.

My life experience tells me I have an immune system and I trust that more that the government, Big Pharma, China or indeed the BBC. In fact, when a jury consider a verdict in a criminal trial they are directed to apply their common sense and life experience when considering the evidence and coming to a verdict. If common sense is good enough to convict someone of a criminal offence, it should be good enough when considering whether to have a vaccine.

One of the attendees observed that you have only one life and one body, so you have to be careful what you put into it. That really sums it up. Despite the BBC’s best efforts, I doubt that they will have changed any minds with this programme.

July 23, 2022 Posted by | Film Review, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

D’Souza’s Mules Left Tracks

By Charlie Johnston | American Thinker | June 20, 2022

Many conservative commentators have noted that Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary, 2000 Mules, offers compelling evidence of large-scale vote fraud. It offers more than this, though.  It provides compelling evidence of a massive, centrally coordinated conspiracy to commit vote fraud. Examining several states with different voter laws while focusing on just one form of fraud, the movie found that the method of fraud was executed identically in each of these states. That is prima facie evidence of central organization and management.

From the moment counting was stopped in the dead of night in five Democrat-run swing states on election night, Democrats and the media have treated anyone who questioned election integrity in 2020 like a mob boss treats anyone who threatens to testify against him: shut up, or we will cancel you.

Democrats and the media routinely smear anyone who questions the election results as a conspiracy theorist. They routinely pronounce any evidence that emerges as “debunked.” For the record, “debunked” does not mean “inconvenient to the leftist narrative.” It means “thoroughly investigated and proven to be false.” Almost none of the evidence has been debunked; very little has been officially examined.  Leftists treat actual evidence like how a vampire treats a crucifix. There is no reasoned discourse, just a lot of hissing and snarling.

From well before he took office, Donald Trump faced an ongoing administrative coup attempt.  First was the long-running Russian collusion hoax, mounted by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee and abetted by the FBI and intelligence agencies. Federal employees who were, theoretically, subordinate to Trump gleefully worked to undermine his administration. Two baseless impeachments were mounted against him by Democrats who know nothing other than shrieking partisanship anymore. The slow-moving coup finally succeeded on the evening of November 3, 2020, when those five states quit counting ballots to give Democrats time to “fortify” the election. The last real hurdle to thwarting election integrity came on December 11, 2020, when the Supreme Court ruled that Texas and 18 other states lacked standing to complain of massive fraud. How states that conduct honest elections lack standing to complain of states that don’t in an election that affects them all is beyond my understanding. It looked like unconditional institutional surrender to massive fraud to me.  All hail the barbarians!

Partisan media outlets began crowing that many courts had “investigated” claims of fraud and found them baseless. Rather, almost all courts refused to even look at any evidence, dismissing almost all claims on procedural, rather than substantive, grounds. Refusing to look at evidence is not an investigation. A trickster can pat mud over a rock to change its shape, but time and tide will wash away the mud, leaving only the rock of truth — and then the fraud is exposed.

D’Souza’s documentary examined only the slice of fraud that involved organized physical ballot-stuffing.  It did not touch on compromised voting machines and systems or unconstitutional, administrative election law changes. If the single slice that 2000 Mules so effectively biopsied is filled with the cancer of fraud, it is willful ignorance to believe that everything else was clean.

If the election of 2020 had been fundamentally clean, Democrats and the media should have been the loudest advocates for a thorough and bipartisan investigation of the election to put widespread doubts to rest and own the conservatives. (By bipartisan, I do not mean like the J6 committee, where the Democrats unilaterally appointed all members, including a couple of Republican chumps for show.) Instead, the left hisses and snarls at every piece of evidence brought forth, no matter how compelling. A guilty man tries to suppress every bit of evidence at his trial, never knowing which piece will seal his conviction, while an innocent man tries to get every piece into evidence he can, never knowing which piece will exonerate him. To assess credibility on this, look who is trying to suppress evidence and who is trying to get evidence into the public record.

At this stage, it is hard to credit Democratic and media intransigence to anything innocent. If they are not just stupid, they have become co-conspirators in the only actual insurrection America has seen over the last six years. Understand, this coup was not primarily aimed at Trump and conservative Republicans; it is a coup against the very idea of self-government. Alas, many Republicans may disagree with elements of Democratic methods but agree with them that a self-serving elite class should rule the citizen-serfs they think constitute the American people.

The relentless smears, the constant howls, and the shrieking rage of the leftists are not because they are so offended that the right would challenge them.  It is because the mud of massive deception is being washed away to reveal the rock of stark fraud the left mounted to steal an American presidential election. That is genuine insurrection.  Confession, repentance, and forfeiture of all offices of public honor or trust by the conspirators could begin to establish American honor and liberty anew. That, of course, will never happen. Power is the left’s only god, and pursuit of it by any means its only liturgy.

Republicans will win by unprecedented margins in November.  If they hold the left to account for its depredations against the American system of law and systemic attack on the Bill of Rights, we can begin to crawl out of this hole of despotism. If, instead, the Republicans largely choose to let bygones be bygones, as they have done with the Russian collusion conspirators, there is little hope that America can long survive as anything the founders would recognize. Renewal will come. Americans will not forever submit to be ruled by any class of people — and certainly not to this degenerate class of aspiring despots.

However it comes, D’Souza’s documentary is the seminal moment the tide washed away enough mud that, despite their shrieks and howls, the left can no longer hide the ugly truth of what it did. Massive election fraud in 2020 is a conspiracy, but it is no longer merely a theory.

June 20, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Film Review | | 1 Comment

BBC joins crusade against dissenting academics via propaganda documentaries

Press TV – June 1, 2022

It seems the nefarious Inquisition in Europe, which brutally sought to rid the world of heresy and political rivalry for centuries, has reignited as its new protagonists in the British national broadcaster BBC strive to silence and delegitimize any dissenting viewpoints held by academics.

In a new documentary on BBC Radio 4’s Facts on File, and also in a report based on the documentary by the BBC News, two academics, namely Tim Hayward and Justin Schlosberg, have been falsely accused of supporting and spreading “Russian propaganda” and “misinformation” about Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine that began on February 24, either through their lectures or on Twitter.

Hayward, a professor of environmental political theory at the University of Edinburgh, had re-tweeted a representative of Russia to the United Nations, who stated that the Russian attack on a maternity hospital in Mariupol on March 9 was “fake news.”

“As long as we’re still able to hear two sides of the story we should continue striving to do so,” Hayward said.

While the West condemned Russia for targeting the hospital several times with airstrikes, the Russian foreign ministry strongly rejected the allegation, branding it as “information terrorism” against Moscow.

A few days later and in the House of Commons, legislator Robert Halfon from the Conservative Party denounced Hayward and also Dr. Tara McCormack, a lecturer in international politics at the University of Leicester, who had spoken about “ludicrous disinformation” of both Kiev and Moscow.

Halfon also urged the parliament to “contact these universities directly to stop them acting as useful idiots for” Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi at the same session of the House of Commons described the said academics and the like as people who are “buying” Moscow’s “false narrative” about the war in Ukraine.

“It is a false and dangerous narrative and we will crack down on it hard,” Zahawi said.

The BBC quotes 21-year-old history and politics student Mariangela Alejandro as saying that things in Hayward’s class got “weird” when the professor stepped in the “realm of conspiracy theories about [Syrian President Bashar al] Assad and Russia.”

The British broadcaster even criticized, though implicitly, Hayward for a lecture in which he outlined an argument that the West-backed White Helmets group might have helped fake a chemical attack in Syria years ago. Russia and the Syrian government have stressed that the attack was “staged.”

The White Helmets group, which claims to be a humanitarian NGO, is known for its coordination with terror outfits in Syria to carry out staged chemical attacks in order to falsely incriminate Syrian government forces and fabricate pretexts for military strikes by a US-led military coalition present in Syria since 2014.

On April 14, 2018, the US, Britain, and France carried out a string of airstrikes against Syria over a suspected chemical weapons attack on the city of Douma, located about 10 kilometers northeast of the capital Damascus.

That alleged attack was reported by the White Helmets group, which published videos showing them purportedly treating survivors. Washington and its allies blamed Damascus for the Douma attack, an allegation strongly rejected by the Syrian government.

Hayward used an argument put forward by members of a collective of academics and bloggers he is a member of, known as the Working Group on Syria Propaganda and the Media (WGSPM).

“One narrative says the White Helmets helped rescue victims, provided evidence and gave witness statements about the chemical attack on Douma on 7 April 2018,” Hayward said during the lecture.

However, he added that “the critics say the White Helmets were responsible for staging a false flag event to spur the West to attack the Syrian government. In fact, dispute about this case is still current.”

Hayward told the BBC that he does not teach about Syria, but simply used an example in his class that he was familiar with.

The BBC, however, seems to be eager to lash out at Hayward when it quoted Dr Nader Hashemi, director of the Centre for Middle East Studies at the University of Denver and a visiting scholar at the University of Cambridge, as describing Hayward’s argument about the White Helmets and the staged chemical attack as “a deeply distorted set of teachings.”

Regarding Hayward’s stance on the purported Russian airstrikes against a maternity hospital in Mariupol that says “we should strive to hear both sides”, the BBC drew in Kvitka Perehinets, a Ukrainian student at the University of Edinburgh, who said “there are no two sides” to the conflict and that “The oppressor – in this case, Russia – should not be given the same kind of platform as those who are being oppressed.”

Although the University of Edinburgh claims that its programs are approved by a board of studies, emphasizing its commitment to “academic freedom”, it also stresses that it takes “a strong view… against the spread of misinformation” and encourages students to report concerns.

The university should be notified that one of the primary jobs of “academic freedom” is paving the way for academic research to distinguish true information from “misinformation” and “disinformation.”

However, the UK’s Department for Education (DfE), which is responsible for education in England, inquisitively controls the flow of research in universities, saying it expected “universities’ due diligence processes to consider the reputational, ethical and security risks of false and dangerous narratives, and ensure that students are not misled by views that are clearly false.”

When the academics’ tweets were raised in the Commons, Zahawi said the minister for Higher and Further Education, Michelle Donelan, was “contacting those universities”, a means of pressure on Hayward and the like who think differently from the mainstream in the West.

Another academic pressured by the BBC and the Education system in the UK is professor Schlosberg, who specializes in media and journalism at Birkbeck, University of London.

He has been lambasted for re-tweeting Russian state media questioning what occurred in the Ukrainian city of Bucha, 37 kilometers northwest of the capital Kiev.

Back on April 2, the mayor of Bucha in a video message claimed that 300 people had been killed by the Russian army with some appearing to have been bound by their hands and feet before being shot.

He also presented footage and photographs showing the dead bodies of those allegedly killed or executed by Russian troops, claiming that 280 bodies had been buried in mass graves while nearly 10 others were either unburied or only partially covered by earth. Later on, Kiev claimed a death toll of more than 1000 in the city.

A day later, the Ukrainian government urged major Western powers, including the United States, to impose crippling fresh sanctions on Moscow over what it called a “massacre” in Bucha, a newly liberated town at the time.

The Kremlin strongly rejected any involvement of Russian troops in the so-called massacre, with Russian President Sergei Lavrov stressing that the killings did not occur while Russian soldiers were in the city.

He added that the so-called dead bodies in footage circulating the internet were “staged” and the images of them plus Ukraine’s false version of events had been spread on social media by Kiev and Western countries.

On April 4, Schlosberg tweeted that “Russian troops left on 30th March. No mention of any ‘massacre’ or bodies lining the streets for 4 days.” He also re-tweeted a video of Bucha’s mayor speaking without mentioning a massacre.

The BBC, however, hurriedly stressed in its report that Russian media has been using the video to bolster the idea that the bodies appeared after the Russians had left the city.

It quoted the academic as saying that he had “no idea” regarding what really happened there.

“My only understanding is that I think no-one else really knows what happened. I think there is a very strong likelihood that there were very serious atrocities, almost certainly the vast majority of which were committed by Russia,” Schlosberg further told the BBC.

However, in a string of tweets on Wednesday, he denounced the broadcaster’s “grossly defamatory allegation.”

“Rather than engage with the actual meaning of my tweets, the BBC chose to uncritically endorse obvious manipulation by people who have been actively trying to silence and delegitimize any dissenting viewpoints since the start of” the current operation by Russia in Ukraine, Schlosberg said.

“The manner in which the program achieved this was so cynical and unguarded it beggars belief, even for those of us increasingly skeptical about the BBC’s commitment to basic journalistic standards, let alone its own lofty public service values,” he stressed.

June 1, 2022 Posted by | Audio program, Civil Liberties, Fake News, Film Review, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

The 10-Year Pandemic Plan

THE PLAN – The WHO plans for 10 years of pandemics from 2020 to 2030

More information, and to see all the documents featured in THE PLAN.

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | May 21, 2022

As the dust begins to settle from the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s easier to look back with clarity on the unprecedented events that have taken place over the last two years. Thousands of medical doctors and scientists now believe that the pandemic was planned and used to install a world dictatorship. Further, it’s unlikely to be the last.

The World Health Organization, in fact, has planned for 10 years of infectious diseases from 2020 to 2030, as revealed by WHO virologist Marion Koopmans in “The Plan,” featured above. When asked whether chances are high that there will be a second pandemic, she responds (translated from Dutch), “Yes, this has been in the WHO’s 10-year plan for some time. That plan says that there will be a major infectious disease crisis. Well, this was year one.”1

How could they know that an infectious disease crisis is imminent in the next decade? A series of shocking evidence reveals that this may have been the plan all along — a plan that hasn’t been hidden. On the contrary, it’s been stated openly for years that a pandemic was coming, setting the stage for widespread acceptance and compliance around the globe.

Proof the Pandemic Was Planned?

The WHO virologist’s acknowledgement that the agency has a plan for 10 years of ongoing pandemics mirrors a statement by Bill Gates that COVID-19 was “pandemic one” and “pandemic two” is coming. “We’ll have to prepare for the next one. That will get attention this time,” he says — while smiling.2

It’s important to understand that Bill Gates is WHO’s No. 1 funder, contributing more to WHO’s $4.84 billion biennial budget3 than any member-state government, via multiple avenues including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as well as GAVI, which was founded by the Gates Foundation in partnership with WHO, the World Bank and various vaccine manufacturers.

In short, Bill Gates is essentially the owner of WHO, and WHO’s 10-year pandemic plan is also Gates’ plan. As noted by Stop World Control:4

“In the globalist view, mankind as a whole must submit to the ‘World’ Health Organization, without them ever asking our opinion or even consulting with other medical experts. In fact, every medical expert speaking out against their decisions is censored.”

Other world leaders are also on board. England’s Prince Charles, for instance, has publicly stated, “There will be more and more pandemics, if we don’t do ‘the great reset’ now.”5

Millions of COVID-19 Test Kits Sold — in 2017 and 2018

It’s difficult to ignore the numerous announcements, both subtle and overt, that a pandemic was coming, which occurred in the years and months leading up to 2020. Data from World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) shows COVID-19 test kits were imported by different countries in 2017 and 2018. “Let this sink in for a second: Literally hundreds of millions of COVID-19 test kits were exported and imported, all over the world, during 2017 and 2018,” Stop World Control explains.6

The data was posted September 5, 2020, on social media and it went viral. The next day, WITS swapped “COVID-19 test kits” with “medical test kits,” but the Internet Archive Wayback Machine still has an image of the original.7 Meanwhile, in 2017, Anthony Fauci somehow knew that an outbreak was coming. In fact, he all but guaranteed it, stating:8

“There is no question there is going to be a challenge for the coming administration in the area of infectious diseases. There will be a surprise outbreak. There’s no doubt in anyone’s mind about this.”

Gates also stated publicly in 2018 that a global pandemic was imminent, likely within the next decade, while Melinda Gates went so far as to state that an engineered virus in the coming years was humanity’s greatest threat.9

Then there’s the often-overlooked fact that the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation sponsored a novel coronavirus pandemic preparedness exercise shortly before the pandemic started.

The event, which took place October 18, 2019, in New York, was called Event 201, and it included a detailed simulation of a coronavirus outbreak with a predicted global death toll of 65 million people within a span of 18 months.10 December 19, 2019, shortly after the event, Gates tweeted, “I’m particularly excited about what the next year could mean for one of the best buys in global health: vaccines.”11

Moderna Had COVID-19 Shots in 2019

Here’s another unsettling fact: December 12, 2019, Moderna, together with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), sent mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill12 — again, that’s before the pandemic started. The confidential documents were revealed by The Daily Expose, which reported:13

“What did Moderna [and NIAID] know that we didn’t? In 2019 there was not any singular coronavirus posing a threat to humanity which would warrant a vaccine, and evidence suggests there hasn’t been a singular coronavirus posing a threat to humanity throughout 2020 and 2021 either.”

Going back further, in 2010, The Rockefeller Foundation released a report titled “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development,” which uses scenario planning to explore ways that technology and growth/development and government might play out over the coming decades. One of the scenarios they detailed was a pandemic with some eerie similarities to COVID-19:14

“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit … The pandemic … had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and of office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.”

The scenario suggests that China fared far better than the U.S., due to its government’s “quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.”

As the pandemic continues, “national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.”

The increased authoritarian control and oversight of citizens continued even after the pandemic ended, and was welcomed at first in exchange for “greater safety and stability.”

Pandemic Propaganda Has Been Ongoing for Years

So-called “predictive programming” prepares the public for future events via entertainment. In the 2003 series “Dead Zone,” a coronavirus pandemic is featured with chloroquine emerging as the cure. “V for Vendetta” is another example. This 2006 movie features the rise of dictatorship and fear-based propaganda due to a virus. Curiously, the film is set in 2020 as “an uncompromising vision of the future.”

In 2012, a comic book titled “Infected,” produced by the European Union for distribution among their employees only, also depicted a virus originating in a Chinese lab that sets stage for worldwide tyranny, described as the “one health approach.”15

Even the Summer Olympics in 2012 included the scenario of a pandemic — complete with nurses and hospital beds — in its opening show.16 Even in the months leading up to the pandemic, additional red flags were raised. Among them:17

  • Months before the pandemic, a panel discussed the need for “a global disruptive event to make the world willing to accept experimental vaccines”
  • In August 2019, Australia published a management plan for a pandemic18
  • Six months before the pandemic, the Global Vaccination Summit prepared to vaccinate the entire world
  • In September 2019, WHO instructed all governments to prepare for an imminent pandemic due to a “rapidly spreading lethal respiratory pathogen”19

And in 2022, a group of international lawyers, experts and scientists is now trying to spread the word that the COVID-19 pandemic is a criminal operation intended to increase control and establish a world dictatorship:20

“The power structures colluded to stage a pandemic that they had been planning for years … To this end, they deliberately created mass panic through false statements of fact and a socially engineered psychological operation whose messages they conveyed through the corporate media.

The purpose of this mass panic was to persuade the population to agree to experimental so-called “vaccinations” (which they are not). These have been proven to be neither effective nor safe, but extremely dangerous and even lethal.”

Thousands Standing Up Against the Tyranny

At this point, signs that an all-encompassing global totalitarian plan is being quietly put together, piece by piece, are all around us. The Rockefeller Foundation released a “National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan” that calls for the use of a digital “patient identification number” to track all Americans after testing them for COVID-19,21 and multibillionaire criminals are working to impose worldwide tyranny. As noted by Stop World Control:22

“Total world domination has been a diabolical desire of many powerful leaders throughout world history. Just think of the notorious world empires of Rome, Great Britain, the Persians, the Russians, and so on.

This perverse passion has never left the corrupt hearts of humanity, but the means to achieve this goal have changed. Instead of invading nations with tanks and bazookas, they now enslave humanity using the force of fear. Once they can create enough panic, they can present the ‘solution’. This solution, however, means removing our freedoms and submitting us to their control.

The main players in globalism are the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and particularly the many private banks that basically control the world already. These visible entities are, however, just a facade that hides the true powers, which are the many ‘Secret Societies.’”

Thousands have opened their eyes to the truth, however, and are making progress in sharing it with the world. This includes, among many others:

  • America’s Frontline Doctors
  • World Doctors Alliance
  • World Freedom Directory
  • Doctors for COVID Ethics
  • Great Barrington Declaration
  • World Freedom Alliance

If you want to be a part of positive change, know that there is hope — and it starts with information. With every fact you share with your inner circle, the knowledge grows and, with it, optimism for the future. A simple yet profound notion to remember is this:23

“The tyranny is 100% dependent on the ignorance of the public. The solution is therefore to inform the people around us. Once people know what is really happening, they will stop complying and start resisting.”

Sources and References

May 23, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Film Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Caught on camera – how Trump was robbed of the 2020 election

By Thomas Lane | TCW Defending Freedom | May 19, 2022

Joe Biden is president of the United States. That is an indisputable fact. But how he got to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is questionable.

The statistical anomalies of the 2020 election alone make Biden’s victory seem dubious. Here are a few, of many, examples:

Donald Trump’s campaign rallies filled stadiums with tens of thousands of supporters; Biden’s campaign events – when he left the basement – hardly attracted a dozen. If these candidates were two musicians, and one was selling out arenas while the other was struggling to fill a little pub, which act would a record company executive bet on becoming a gold-record performer?

For the past ten American presidential elections, 19 counties, often referred to as the ‘bellwether counties’, predicted the outcome of the race. In 2020, Donald Trump won 18 of these counties, but Biden won the presidency.

At midnight on election night, vote counting mysteriously stopped in five states – Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada and North Carolina – where Trump had a significant lead over Biden. The next morning, Biden suddenly had more votes than Trump. One is expected to believe that nearly 100 per cent of the votes which arrived during this suspicious pause were for Biden?

Certain that the election was fraught with fraud, Trump and some of his supporters challenged the results of the 2020 election with dozens of lawsuits. But most of the cases were dismissed by judges due to ‘lack of standing’, which is a legal term that states ‘the party has not alleged a sufficient legal interest and injury to participate in the case’.

However, Dinesh D’Souza’s new political documentary, 2,000 Mules, just might give Trump’s lawsuits a leg to stand on.

Using geotracking, a technology which locates the exact position of a person by obtaining data from his or her smartphone or similar devices, Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips of True the Vote were able to expose a couple of thousand mules (people who illegally collected and deposited voting ballots) travelling between pro-Biden campaign offices and ballot drop boxes during the final month of the election season.

Engelbrecht and Phillips then obtained security camera footage of the mules stuffing the drop boxes with ballots. The mules’ activity ranged from just a few ballots deposited in several boxes throughout the month, to nearly 300 mules visiting one box and depositing 1,900 ballots (10x the average) in a single day.

In the most compelling scene in the documentary, D’Souza multiplies the number of mules by the number of their drop-box visits, then multiplies that number by the number of ballots deposited by each mule to get a total number of illegal votes. He does this calculation for each swing state where Biden won, then subtracts the number of illegal votes from Biden’s total. Spoiler alert: Mules concludes that Trump won the 2020 election.

D’Souza and his team have done their part: they have exposed the criminals and the crime. Between the geotracking data and the surveillance footage, they have evidence of over 2,000 people committing felonies. However, their hands are tied because they are mere citizens. As D’Souza concludes in the film: ‘It is time for law enforcement to step in.’

May 20, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Film Review | , | 2 Comments

The “Israel Lobby”: Facts and Myths

Swiss Policy Research 

Updated: March 2022
LanguagesEnglish / German

High-quality documentaries and reports on the role of the “Israel Lobby” in politics and the media.

Note: This compendium does not advocate anti-Jewish or anti-Israel positions.


  1. 🎥 The Lobby — USA (Investigative documentary, Al Jazeera, 180 min., 2018; more)
  2. 📰 Israel and Internet Censorship (Alison Weir, The Ron Unz Review, 2018; video)
  3. 🎥 Netanyahu at US Congress: 23 standing ovations (The Telegraph, 2015; more)
  4. 📰 The Israel Lobby – A Partial List (The Council For The National Interest, 2012)
  5. 🎥 Defamation: The Movie (Yoav Shamir, First Run Features, 90 min., 2009; Wiki)
  6. 📖 Persecution, Privilege, and Power: 30 Articles (Mark Green, editor, 2007; archive)
  7. 🎥 The Israel Lobby in the United States (VPRO Documentary, 50 minutes, 2007)
  8. 📖 The Israel Lobby (Professors Mearsheimer & Walt, treatise, LRB, 2006; Wiki)
  9. 🎥 “Antisemitism: It’s a trick, we always use it.” (Shulamit Aloni, DN, 2002; more)
  10. 📰 Antisemitism: The IHRA definition controversy (MEE, 2021; moremore)
  11. 📰 AIPAC and the Foreign Agents Registration Act (Forward, 2018; more)
  12. 📖 They Dare to Speak Out (Congressman Paul Findley, 1985/2003; archive)

US Presidents

  1. 📰 Trump as Cyrus (Laurent Guyénot, The Unz Review, 2020; more)
  2. 📰 Trump and Russia: The Countless Israeli Connections (Haaretz, 2018)
  3. 📰 Sheldon Adelson: Top US Political Donor (Whitney Webb, MPN, 2018; more)
  4. 📰 “Meet Joe Biden’s whole big Jewish mishpocha” (Times of Israel, 2020; more)
  5. 📰 “US Jews contribute half of all donations to the Democratic Party” (JPost, 2016)
  6. 📰 “The Jewish billionaire who cost Hillary her presidency” (Haaretz, 2016)
  7. 📰 Obama, the Iran Deal, and the Israel Lobby (Tablet Magazine, 2015; more)
  8. 🎥 Ben Rhodes on the Israel Lobby in the US (Interview, FMEP, 45 min., 2021)
  9. 🎥 Ronald Reagan – A Custom Made President (Wichita Films, 50 min., 2015; more)
  10. 📰 George W. Bush: Who are the Neoconservatives? (Guyénot; VoltaireNet, 2013)
  11. 📰 Israeli Assassinations and American Presidents (Weir, AntiWar, 2012; more)
  12. 📰 “Israel blackmailed Bill Clinton with Monica Tapes” (New York Post, 1999)
  13. 📰 New Tapes Reveal Depth of Nixon’s Anti-Semitism (WaPo, 1999; moremore)

Great Britain

  1. 🎥 The Lobby in Britain (Investigative documentary, Al Jazeera, 90 min., 2017)
  2. 📰 Third of British cabinet funded by Israel or pro-Israel lobby groups (DM, 2021)
  3. 📰 “The Israelis think they control the Foreign Office. And they do!” (DM, 2021)
  4. 📰 “After Corbyn, Israel Lobby Turns Guns on British Academia” (CN, 2021)
  5. 📰 “We ‘slaughtered’ Jeremy Corbyn, says Israel lobbyist” (EI, 2020; more)
  6. 📰 “US pro-Israel groups boosting UK anti-Muslim extremists” (ToI, 2019)


  1. 📰 “Who said Jews run Hollywood?” (Lisa Klug, Times of Israel, 2016)
  2. 📰 “Jews Do Control The Media” (Elad Nehorai, The Times of Israel, 2012)
  3. 📰 Do Jews run Hollywood? (Joel Stein, Los Angeles Times, 2008)
  4. 📰 Do Jews dominate in American Media? (Philip Weiss, Mondoweiss, 2008)
  5. 🎥 Hollywoodism: Jews, Movies, and the American Dream (Jacobovici, 100 min., 1998)
  6. 📰 Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan reveals past as Israeli spy (Guardian, 2013; more)
  7. 🖼 Jewish executives and journalists in US media (Reddit, archived, 2018)
  8. 📰 15 Popular Internet Companies and Their Founders (SML, 2019; Facebook)
  9. 📰 Anti-Defamation League, tech firms team to fight online hate (CNet, 2017)
  10. 🌐 Alleged Jewish ‘Control’ of the American Motion Picture Industry (ADL, 1999)


  1. 📰 America’s Top 20 Billionaires Who Support Israel (Abra Forman, BIN, 2015)
  2. 🖼 America’s Richest Hedge Fund Managers (Jewish Contributions, 2020)
  3. 📰 Jews on the Forbes 200 List (Jewish Virtual Library, 2015; more)
  4. 📰 The World’s 50 Richest Jews (parts twothreefourfive; Jerusalem Post, 2010)
  5. 📰 The Jewish Story Behind the US Federal Reserve (Lowenstein, Forward, 2015)
  6. 📰 “When a Jewish Fed chief was novel” (Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 2013; more)
  7. 🌐 Jewish “Control” of the FED: A Classic Antisemitic Myth (ADL)

Intelligence, Assassinations, Terrorism

  1. 🎥 Israel and the Assassinations of The Kennedy Brothers (Guyénot, 90 min., 2020; more)
  2. 📰 Mossad Assassinations (Ron Unz, book review, The Unz Review, 2020)
  3. 📰 Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad (Whitney Webb, Mint Press, 2019; more)
  4. 📰 Israel’s Role in Global Cyber-Election Meddling (Wayne Madsen, MPN, 2018; more)
  5. 🎥 Solving 9/11 (Christopher Bollyn, presentation, 60 minutes, 2015; book)
  6. 📰 The Israeli Connection to 9/11 (Overview, Biblioteca Pleyades, 2010)
  7. 📰 The 2001 Anthrax Letter Mystery: Solved (Robert Pate, 2009; moremore)
  8. 📰 The SITE Intelligence Group, ISIS and Al Qaeda (James Tracy, 2014; more)
  9. 📰 Israel’s Use of False Flags in Global Terrorism (Michael Piper, AFP, 2013)
  10. 📰 The Anti-Defamation League Spy Scandal (Counterpunch, 2013; more)
  11. 🎥 Israel and the Bomb: A Radioactive Taboo (Pohlmann, Arte, 50 min., 2012)
  12. 📰 The Jonathan Pollard Spy Case (Jeffrey T. Richelson, NSA/GWU, 2012; more)
  13. 🎥 USS Liberty: Dead in the Water (BBC Documentary, 70 min., 2002; more)
  14. 📰 CIA, Mossad links to German La Belle disco bombing (WSWS, 1998; video)
  15. 🎥 A lecture by Mossad whistleblower Victor Ostrovsky (C-SPAN, 60 min., 1995)
  16. 📰 The 1954 Lavon Affair (Leonard Weiss, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 2016)
  17. 📰 Operation Opera (1979): Mossad sabotage in France (Haaretz, 2021; video)
  18. 🎥 The Little Drummer Girl (Film based on novel by John le Carré, 1984; book)

Mafia, Organized Crime

  1. 📖 The Jewish Mafia (Hervé Ryssen, 2008/2018; interview)
  2. 📰 The Judeo-Russian Mafia (Johnson, Barnes Review, 2006)
  3. 📰 Mafia Jews: Inside a Genuine Cabal (Jewish Forward, 2006)
  4. 📖 The Supermob (Gus Russo, Bloomsbury USA, 2006; archive)
  5. 📰 History and origin of Bronfman family wealth (Frank Parlato, 2018)
  6. 🎥 Trump’s Ties to the Russian-Jewish Mafia (Blackstone, 2019; more)
  7. 🎥 Ronald Reagan – A Custom Made President (Wichita Films, 2015; more)

Russia, USSR, Communism

  1. 📰 Russia bows to the ‘rule of the seven bankers’ (Irish Times, 1998; more)
  2. 📰 The Russians Called Them ‘The Oligarch Yids’ (Haaretz, 2002; more)
  3. 📰 From Rags to Riches: Jewish Oligarchs in Russia (Goldman, EEJA, 2000)
  4. 📰 Was the Russian Revolution Jewish? (Jerusalem Post, 2017; more)
  5. 🎥 The Jews, Communism and the Russian Revolution (Ryssen, 80 min., 2017)
  6. 📰 “Stalin’s Jews” (Sever Plocker, YNet News, 2006)
  7. 📰 The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution (Mark Weber, IHR, 1994)
  8. 📰 Solzhenitsyn breaks last taboo of the revolution (Guardian, 2003; more)

World Wars (excl. Holocaust revisionism)

  1. 📰 The Forgotten Truth about the Balfour Declaration (Kramer, Mosaic, 2017)
  2. 🎥 Balfour at 100: Interview with Lord Rothschild (Weizmann Institute, 2017)
  3. 📖 “Against Our Better Judgement” (Alison Weir, CNI, 2014; video/lecture)
  4. 📰 “The Jewish Hand in the World Wars” (Dalton, Unz Review, 2013; part 2)
  5. 📰 “The Jewish Declaration of War on Nazi Germany” (Johnson, TBR, 2001)
  6. 📰 “Too many Jews at Nuremberg” (Ami Eden, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 2007)
  7. 📰 Frankfurt School: The Jewish Intellectuals Who Made the 60’s (ANU, 2019; more)
  8. 📖 “The Holocaust Industry” (Norman Finkelstein, Verso Books, 2000; archive)
  9. 🌐 Holocaust denial: Prosecutions and convictions (Wikipedia)

Migration, Multiculturalism, Nationalism

  1. 📰 “White supremacists and Israeli immigration policy” (Times of Israel, 2021)
  2. 📰 “Domestic Extremism Committee Run By ADL and SPLC” (Unz Review, 2021)
  3. 📰 “DHS installs new leadership at its intelligence arm” (Politico, 2021; more)
  4. 📰 “Critical Race Theory, US Schools, and the Attorney General” (Forbes, 2021)
  5. 📰 “US pro-Israel groups boosting UK anti-Muslim extremists” (ToI, 2019; more)
  6. 📰 The ADL in American Society (Ron Unz, The Unz Review, 2018; more)
  7. 📰 “The Jews Who Run the ‘Alt-Right’ Media” (Jon Swinn, NV, 2018; more)
  8. 📰 “The ‘Alt-Right’, Jews, and Israel.” (The Jewish Forward, 2017; more)
  9. 📖 Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy (MacDonald, 1998)
  10. 📰 “Rabbi Baruch Efrati: Islamization of Europe a good thing” (YNet, 2012)
  11. 🎥 Barbara Lerner Spectre on European multiculturalism  (IBA News, 2010)
  12. 📰 “Sephardi leader Yosef: Non-Jews exist to serve Jews” (JTA, 2010)
  13. 🎥 “Israelis: Do you see non-Jews as equal to you?” (The Ask Project, 2020)
  14. 🌐 Advisory Board on Domestic Terrorism & White Supremacy (AJC)

Historical Aspects

  1. 🎥 The origins of Ashkenazi Jews and Yiddish (Eran Elhaik, 2019; more)
  2. 📖 “The Invention of the Jewish People” (Shlomo Sand, 2009; more)
  3. 📖 The Culture of Critique (Kevin MacDonald, Praeger, 1998/2013)
  4. 📖 Essays on Jewish Power (Laurent Guyénot, 2020; more)
  5. 🌐 Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry (Wikipedia)

Science and Culture

  1. 🌐 Jewish Contributions (
  2. 🌐 Jewish Nobel Prize Laureates (Jewish Virtual Library; more)
  3. 📖 The Super Achievers (Ronald Gerstl, 2020; more)
  4. 📖 The Golden Age of Jewish Achievement (Steven Pease, 2009; more)
  5. 📖 The Jewish Century (Yuri Slezkine, Princeton University Press, 2006)

March 10, 2022 Posted by | Book Review, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Film Review, Timeless or most popular, Video, Wars for Israel | , , | 2 Comments

The Super Hero Film Era: How Political Dissent Is Neutralised

The Dave Cullen Show – Computing Forever | September 23, 2021


January 20, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Film Review, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Christopher Steele, author of the infamous ‘Trump pee-tape’ dossier, stands by his ludicrous claims in a fawning ABC interview

By Michael McCaffrey | RT | October 18, 2021

Former MI6 man Christipher Steele is the subject of an obscenely vapid ABC documentary, with a contemptible interview by George Stephanopoulos that’s so deferential it’s like watching a first date that should be an interrogation.

Just as MI6 super spy James Bond is back in theatres with No Time to Die, former MI6 agent Christopher Steele is back in the spotlight with the story that refuses to die, in an ABC ‘documentary’ titled Out of the Shadows: The Man Behind the Steele Dossier, now streaming on Hulu.

Steele came to fame as the shadowy force behind the Steele Dossier, the document which was the spark that lit the Trump-Russia collusion fire that was doused in gasoline by obsessive partisan media coverage and numerous, spurious government investigations for the last five years. The dossier claimed that then-candidate Trump was “colluding with Moscow” and that those devious Russians had “kompromat” on Trump in the golden form of a “pee tape.”

Steele’s “coming out of the shadows” consists of him sitting down with George Stephanopoulos and having a cuddle session on fancy sofas in a posh apartment.

Stephanopoulos is the perfect choice for the softball interview since he and Steele have a lot in common – they’ve both worked for the Clintons. Stephanopoulos as adviser to President Bill Clinton and Steele as de facto dirt-finder for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

ABC tried to stretch the excruciatingly thin gruel of this supposed ‘interview’ into an hour-long documentary by adding talking heads from their own newsroom. They failed, as the end result is a one-hour show that is hilariously shallow and vapid, even by ABC News standards.

Out of the Shadows spends considerably more time rehashing the “history” of Russia, Vladimir Putin and Trump than it does actually talking to Steele. Russia is deemed “a rogue state virus spreading westward with its villainy,” Putin a “KGB killer,” and Trump a “threat to American democracy.” In other words, it’s standard establishment media talking points.

Steele’s background is somewhat explored, but being the ever-diligent super spy that he is, Steele never explicitly states that he worked for MI6. I guess he doesn’t want to blow his cover.

What Steele actually says in this interview is of strikingly minimal impact. Thanks to Stephanopoulos’ anti-journalistic, anti-adversarial, deferential approach, no new ground is broken.

It’s well-known that Steele didn’t just compile the dossier, he actively pushed it to media outlets, in effect working to try and scupper Trump’s election campaign. The fact that he was ostensibly working for Democrats at the time certainly makes it appear as if he was a part of a wider disinformation/interference operation, but of course that’s a topic Stephanopoulos whistles past in this patty-cake chat.

Steele admits to no wrongdoing or error, despite the U.S. intelligence agencies “eviscerating” his findings after thorough investigation, and the FBI labelling him “untrustworthy.”

The issue of the “sources” Steele uses doesn’t get the attention it deserves either, as it’s reported that he only used one “key collector,” but Steele is quick to make clear it was “one collector” but not “one source.” That seems like a distinction without a difference.

As the documentary reports, that one collector was not a person in Moscow, but actually someone in Washington DC whose name is not revealed. The Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz reported this person claimed that the information being given to Steele was “word of mouth and hearsay.” In other words, Steele was acting less as an intelligence expert seeking truth with his dossier than he was being a gossip columnist spreading rumor and innuendo.

Steele’s declaration, “I stand by the work we did, the sources we had, and the professionalism we applied to it,” is as devoid of substance as the rest of the interview.

The most damning aspect comes toward the end, and even that is soft pedaled, when Stephanopoulos asks Steele about both the dossier’s allegation that Trump counsel Michael Cohen went to Prague to meet with Russian intelligence and about the pee tape.

Cohen denies a Prague meeting ever took place, and since he has now flipped against Trump, one would assume he’s telling the truth. But Steele’s resolve remains, as he conjures up a wild scenario where Cohen is still lying because he wants to avoid being charged with treason.

Stephanopoulos, of course, lets this utter lunacy pass almost without notice. He could’ve asked Steele how exactly Cohen got to Prague, since his passport shows no travel to the Czech Republic. Or pressed Steele to provide details or at least a passable explanation for how that meeting could possibly have taken place? But he didn’t, he just smiled and continued playing footsie with Steele.

The ‘pee tape’ is the most salacious accusation in the dossier, and despite it never surfacing and no evidence it exists, Steele still stands by the claim…sort of. He says that the tape “probably does” exist but that he wouldn’t “put 100% certainty on it.”

When Stephanopoulos asks why the tape hasn’t come out, Steele replies that “it hasn’t needed to be released…because I think the Russians felt they’d got pretty good value out of Donald Trump when he was president.”

Look, I loathe Trump, always have and always will, but this sounds like the ravings of someone deeply infected with a ferocious case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, which is maybe why he is still taken seriously by the equally afflicted establishment media.

The more you know about Steele, the more readily apparent it becomes that he’s an absolute charlatan and bullshit artist masquerading as a serious intelligence expert. He’s no James Bond, he’s not even George Smiley. He’s more like a cross between Mr. Bean and Inspector Clouseau, who should, like this vacant and vacuous interview/documentary, be relentlessly ridiculed and righteously disrespected.

October 20, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Film Review | , , , | Leave a comment

Critics love Fauci’s new documentary, but audience hate it and accuse Rotten Tomatoes of ‘hiding’ low score

RT | October 11, 2021

Critics have almost universally praised the new documentary on Dr. Anthony Fauci, but audiences have seemingly hated it, even accusing review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes of trying to hide the movie’s unpopularity.

National Geographic’s ‘Fauci’ has been playing in select cinemas since September 10 and premiered on the Disney Plus streaming service last week. Trailers for the film focus heavily on Fauci and his work combating Covid-19, during which time he has become one of the more controversial figures in American politics.

The film, however, takes a positive look at Fauci and focuses more on tales about the health figure from his family, as well as public figures the infectious disease expert has worked with in the past, such as U2 frontman Bono and former President George W. Bush.

On Rotten Tomatoes, which aggregates reviews from selected critics and then gives a ‘rotten’ or ‘fresh’ score, the film holds a 91% positive rating, based on 30 positive reviews and three negative. The rating from audience members, however, was conspicuously missing from the website until Monday. As of Sunday, only one review, which was negative, had been posted despite the film being out for weeks.

The site was accused of ‘hiding’ the audience score in an effort to spin the movie’s increasingly negative coverage.

On Monday, an audience score did appear, and it showed valleys of difference in opinion from critics to the audience, with users awarding the film a 2% average from over 250 ratings (though it began with a 4% rating that has continually dropped). Despite the average now showing, there is still a lack of actual user reviews on the site, though many users may have chosen to simply drop a rating instead of writing a review.

“Two Americas,” writer Josh Jordan tweeted, including a screenshot of the ‘Tomatometer’ for ‘Fauci’ along with the recently-released comedy special from Dave Chappelle, which has been labeled transphobic by critics, but has been a popular title on Netflix. Critics on Rotten Tomatoes gave the movie a ‘rotten’ score of 33% while audiences awarded a near perfect score.

Fauci critics were quick to mock the film’s near-universal panning from audience members.

The Rotten Tomatoes score for ‘Fauci’ is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to negative reviews. On IMDB, the movie has a 1.5 rating from over 6000 users.

Trailers for the movie on YouTube haven’t fared much better. One posted by National Geographic has over 100,000 ‘dislikes’ and less than 8000 ‘likes’, as of this writing.

A Disney Plus trailer, on the other hand, has just over 1000 ‘likes’ and over 20,000 ‘dislikes’.

Rotten Tomatoes has been accused of bias in the past, and the company has often chalked up near-universal negative reactions from audiences to trolls’ review-bombing.

In 2019, the company disabled pre-release comments and removed their ‘Want to See’ function – which allowed ratings based on how excited users were for a film – in response to early backlash against franchise pictures accused by critics of going ‘woke’, such as ‘Star Wars: The Last Jedi’ and ‘Captain Marvel’.

Two years before that decision, debate around Rotten Tomatoes and the political influence the audience can have was still a heated debate. Outspoken liberal and comedian Amy Schumer claimed in 2017 that her comedy special ‘The Leather Special’ was review-bombed by the “alt-right” over her comments on Donald Trump and other Republicans (50% critic rating/4% audience). At the time, the site responded again by limiting user functions by removing a five-star system in favor of a positive or negative rating from audiences.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, conservative artists have often pointed to the fact that films aimed at right-leaning audiences often score much lower with critics than audiences as proof the company is more open to ‘certifying’ liberal critics than right-of-center or conservative ones.

Producer John Aglialoro blamed near-universal bad reviews from “hateful” critics  on Rotten Tomatoes for his 2011 film ‘Atlas Shrugged: Part I’ struggling to find an audience in theaters (he would go on to produce two sequels covering the last two thirds of Ayn Rand’s influential novel).

October 12, 2021 Posted by | Film Review, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

A Message To Fauci: You Are In No Position To Dictate The “Greater Good”

By Brandon Smith | Alt-Market | October 6, 2021

How does a fraud like Anthony Fauci find himself in the highest paid position in US bureaucracy? Well, Fauci’s career is a rather shocking testament to the reality of our government and our era – The more corrupt you are the more favors and promotions you will receive.

Fauci is well known as a shameless opportunist among many within the medical research community. For example, the creator of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Test, Kary Mullis, had nothing but disdain for Fauci. Mullis was an interesting figure who valued scientific honesty above all else. He often warned that his PCR test could be exploited to inflate infection numbers by identifying remnants of a virus in a person’s body without distinguishing whether or not they are actually “infected” (sick). Sadly, his test is now being used in this exact manner today to exaggerate infection rates of the covid-19 virus.

In interviews Mullis has referred to Anthony Fauci as a “liar”, arguing that he is a bureaucrat that “doesn’t know anything about anything”. Mullis noted that people like Fauci have an agenda that is outside of the public good, and that they have no problem misrepresenting the science to the populace to achieve their goals. It should also be noted that YouTube has made it their mission to consistently erase any traces of the Mullis interviews mentioning Fauci from their website.

It is also not surprising that Fauci’s rampant fear mongering over AIDS in the 1980’s has gone mostly unmentioned by the mainstream media. His claim that 1 in 5 heterosexual Americans would be dead from AIDS by 1990 has been summarily memory-holed and the guy is treated like a scientific genius by the journalistic community in 2021.

If there is any justice in this world then Fauci should really go down in history as one of the primary initiators of the Covid pandemic, being that he was a director of the NIAD and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) while overseeing the funding of Gain of Function research on corona-viruses at the Wuhan Lab in China. This is the same research that Fauci blatantly lied about to congress on multiple occasions. And, the Wuhan lab is the same lab that evidence suggests was the ground zero source of the Covid-19 outbreak.

It is important to note that it was Fauci and the NIH that LIFTED the ban on gain of function research on deadly viruses in 2017, and it was well known around this time that the Level 4 Wuhan lab in China was not secure.

If anyone is responsible for global covid deaths, it is Fauci, the Chinese government and anyone else involved in that gain of function research which is primarily used to WEAPONIZE viruses under the guise of creating “therapeutics.” Gain of function research was originally banned under the Biological Weapons Convention which went into effect in 1975, unless it was being used for therapeutics. Now ALL gain of function research that is revealed publicly is labeled as therapeutics even if it is actually designed to produce biological weapons. This is sometimes referred to as “dual use research.”

The prevailing narrative continues to be that even if the virus came from the Wuhan lab then it was surely an accident. I continue to believe according to the available evidence that Covid-19 was deliberately released in order to create a global crisis which could then be exploited by the establishment to introduce extreme controls over the populace to the point of medical totalitarianism. But of course, there is no smoking gun to prove this, only common sense.

If we take the notorious Event 201 into account things get a little weird. Event 201 was a war game held by the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Its claimed purpose was to simulate the effects of a deadly coronavirus pandemic “spread by animals” to humans and to develop the policies governments and their corporate partners should employ to deal with it. Interestingly, this simulation was held in October of 2019, only two months before the REAL THING happened. Nearly every policy suggested by the participants of Event 201 has now been adopted by most governments, including the social media censorship campaign against anyone that questions the origins of the virus and the safety of the experimental mRNA vaccines.

Anthony Fauci and friends….

WEF founder Klaus Schwab was quick to announce at the start of the pandemic that Covid-19 was the “perfect opportunity” to launch the “Great Reset”, which is a globalist plan to completely erase free market systems and replace them with a highly centralized socialist framework. The WEF envisions a world in which carbon related power is banned, all financial transactions become digital and are monitored and controlled by central authorities, and they have even suggested that one day people will “own nothing and be happy”. This is a reference to the so-called “shared economy” of the future, where the concept of personal property is abolished and all people will live in communal housing collectives where necessities are rationed or rented out to them by the government.

Something must have went wrong with covid, however, because the Event 201 death estimates for such a virus were around 65 million within the first year of the outbreak. This of course never happened with Covid-19. So, the resistance to the mandates has been high, or much higher apparently than the globalists expected. They have been forced to engage in an endless fear campaign for the past 18 months over a virus with a mere 0.26% median death rate. It is a virus that well over 99.7% of all people will survive and it has an extremely low chance of long term effects on those who do actually end up hospitalized. In the majority of states the hospitalization rates are between 10-35 people for every 100,000 people infected.

These numbers come from the CDC and the medical establishment at large, yet they are ignored by propagandists like Fauci, just as Fauci has continued to ignore natural immunity as a factor in covid mandates. It might seem bizarre to almost any scientist, doctor and virologist not paid by the government, but Fauci has argued that natural immunity should be ignored when compared to vaccination. Multiple studies from around the world now show that natural immunity is up to 27 times more effective at preventing covid infection than the vaccines, but those with natural immunity are considered a threat to others under the new mandates unless they are also vaxxed.

This simply makes no sense from a scientific perspective until you realize that the mandates are not about science, they are about authoritarianism. Fauci is the US front man for a campaign of medical tyranny being imposed in every nation; this is why he does not care about natural immunity. The idea of it is inconvenient to his narrative, so he pretends it is inconsequential.

It is perhaps ironic that Fauci himself is becoming inconsequential as he is slowly fading away from the media limelight. I have noticed that ever since the NIH gain of function information was released to the public Fauci has been in the media less prominently. A documentary produced by National Geographic and soon to be distributed by Disney+ portrays the conman as a misunderstood savior and is sure to be a trash fire. That said, it does represent a clear last-ditch effort to save the man’s false reputation.

There is a good reason for all of this. Fauci’s distaste for personal freedom has been well documented and is making him extremely unpopular. He even recently argued on CNN in favor of vaccine mandates using this perverse position:

“There comes a time when you do have to give up what you consider your individual right of making your own decision for the greater good of society.”

Fauci and his globalist ilk can be distilled down to this single mantra: Do as you are told for the greater good. But who gets to determine what the “greater good” is? Isn’t it disturbing that it’s always the same elitists that end up in that position? I know that leftists in particular love the idea of the vaccine mandates and worship Fauci, and they say we skeptics should “listen to the science”, but Fauci is not a scientist, he’s a door-to-door salesman, and as I’ve noted above the REAL science does not support the arguments for forced vaccinations or lockdowns.

Hell, I keep asking the same questions on the mandates in these articles and not a single leftist or pro-vax proponent has come up with a valid or logical response, but out of morbid curiosity I would love to see Fauci give his answers:

1) Covid has a median death rate of only 0.26%, so why should we take ANY risk on an experimental mRNA vaccine with no long term testing to prove its safety?

2) Why not give support to the 0.26% of people actually at risk from dying due to covid instead of spending billions of dollars on Big Pharma producing a rushed vaccine that you plan to force on the 99.7% of people who are not at risk?

3) In majority vaccinated countries like Israel, over 60% of covid hospitalizations are fully vaccinated people. The exponential rise of fully vaccinated patients in multiple nations suggests that the vaccines do not work. Why should we take a vaccine that has been proven not to be effective?

4) If you believe the vaccines actually do work despite all evidence to the contrary, then why should vaccinated people fear anything from unvaccinated people? How are we a threat to them?

5) If the vaccines don’t work, then doesn’t this mean the mandates are pointless and the people that are most safe are the people with natural immunity? Shouldn’t we be applauding the naturally immune and encouraging treatment instead of useless vaccination?

6) Since the vaccines actually don’t work according to the data, isn’t it time to stop blindly dismissing treatments like Ivermectin and focus on trials and studies that research these alternatives? Why the vitriolic propaganda campaign to label Ivermectin nothing more than “horse paste” when it is actually a long used Nobel Prize winning treatment for human ailments? Is it because the experimental covid vaccines would lose their emergency authorization status under the FDA if effective treatments exist?

7) Why are government funded scientists so keen on defending Big Pharma to the point of ignoring all data that contradicts their claims? Are you just embarrassed of being wrong, or are you corrupt?

8) Who decided you are qualified to determine what constitutes the “greater good?”

Globalists and errand boys like Fauci will never be able to answer these questions without twisting the narrative. They will say “What about the 700,000 dead in the US?” to play on the idea that the freedom minded lack empathy for their fellow man. Of course, around 40% of those deaths are patients from nursing homes with preexisting conditions, so we have no idea if they died from covid or from their previous ailments. Also, millions of people die every year from a plethora of communicable diseases including the flu and pneumonia, and we never tried to lock down the entire country and crush people’s civil rights because of this.

If we maintained a running tally of flu and pneumonia deaths year after year as we are doing with covid, then the ever increasing number of bodies would seem just as forbidding. Society cannot function when it is preoccupied with death.

Yes, around 0.26% of people die from covid, but life goes on for everyone else. Our freedoms are more important than your irrational fears. Our freedoms are more important than globalist agendas for centralization. Our freedoms ARE the greater good. Without them our society dies, and as our society dies millions more people will die from the inevitable collapse and tyranny that will follow; far more than will ever die from covid.

This is why nothing Fauci says has any relevance to us. He is so transparent in his corruption that he might as well be invisible. We will continue to ignore his declarations and admonitions and we will continue to fight back against the vaccine passports and restrictions. When all is said and done, if Fauci, Biden and other globalist puppets try to use force to impose their agenda upon us then there will come a day very soon when they will be held accountable for their crimes against humanity, and then they will wish they were invisible.

You can contact Brandon Smith at:

October 9, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Film Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | 2 Comments

Fauci Flop? New Documentary About COVID Czar Fails To Disclose Box Office Results

BY Tyler Durden – Zero Hedge – September26, 2021

A new documentary called “Fauci,” released by National Geographic Documentary Films two weeks ago, honors Dr. Anthony Fauci’s work to combat the HIV/AIDS epidemic and COVID-19 pandemic. Since the release two weeks ago, there’s been no data on ticket sales by major film sites, according to Just The News.

The new documentary was released in theaters across York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, D.C., and New Orleans on Sept. 10. No major film site, including, Boxoffice Pro,, and, has calculated ticket sales or earnings for the film.

The documentary “follows the renowned infectious disease specialist’s work in two health crises: AIDS and the coronavirus pandemic. Dr. Fauci agreed to participate as long as it didn’t interfere with his work,” NYT tweeted.

Shawn Robbins, the chief analyst with Boxoffice Pro, said it’s “incredibly uncommon” for a major studio not to release box office earnings.

“Niche distributors often lack the proper resources for data reporting. That may or may not be the case with this particular documentary,” said Robbins. He said it’s too early to suggest “Fauci” has become a flop at theaters, but time will tell.

Just The News said the film had one condition before seeing it: patrons of the theater had to show their vaccine cards.

On IMDB, the documentary has a 2.2 rating out of 10. About 80% of the reviews rate it as a 1 star.

IMDB users criticized the documentary as establishment-backed propaganda. Here’s one review:

Hilarious how this movie uses George Bush, and Susan Rice, to ascribe credibility for Dr. Fauci 😂 Bush’s false “Weapons of Mass Destruction” Iraq War, and Susan Rice’s “Benghazi” debacle speak for themselves.

The movie does indeed humanize Fauci with stories about his family. He said they are being harassed because of his work. So what do they do? They put their images and information in the movie….😧

Then along comes Bono’s interview. I’m still trying to figure out what a singer really has to do with any of this.

It has interesting interviews, but is a very one sided movie. It’s mostly politicos trying to dig out poor ole Dr. Fauci from the avalanche of his massive PR nightmare. He’s 80 years old, maybe just maybe it’s time to relax and retire.

The mystery remains why National Geographic continues to withhold the box office earnings of Fauci, but the poor reviews at IMBD suggest the flick might have been a flop, and that is why.

September 26, 2021 Posted by | Film Review | , , | 1 Comment