What appears to be more failed alarmist predictions, the BBC’s 2013 headlines read Alaskan Village Set to Disappear Under Water in A Decade. “Gone, forever. Remembered – if at all – as the birthplace of America’s first climate change refugees. ” (see Willis on “first refugees”) The assumed cause? “Temperature records show the Arctic region of Alaska is warming twice as fast as the rest of the United States. Retreating ice, slowly rising sea levels and increased coastal erosion have left three Inuit settlements facing imminent destruction.” Similarly, in 2017 Huffington Postwrote, “It is disappearing. Fast. As one of the most apparent and shocking examples of coastal erosion, Kivalina could be uninhabitable by 2025, all thanks to climate change.” The Guardian and Mother Jones wrote, “31 Alaskan communities face “imminent” existential threats from coastline erosion, flooding and other consequences of temperatures that are rising twice as quickly in the state as the global average.” Sadly, media outlets and politicians ignored the objective science, but the truth is still out there.
The real problem for Alaska’s native communities has been past governments’ mis-guided attempts to enforce “permanence” in an everchanging landscape. The “settlements facing imminent destruction” are not places native people had freely chosen to settle. With their survival on the line, indigenous people were intimately aware of Alaska’s everchanging environments long before the theory of CO2‑induced‑climate‑change would be proposed. And so, they chose to be semi-nomadic. Kivalina was a good seasonal hunting camp, but never hosted a permanent settlement. Nonetheless the US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) made it permanent in 1905.
As reported by REVEAL, “The Inupiaq used to spend summers in tents along Kivalina’s beach. When winter set in, they’d move inland to hunt caribou for food. They were semi-nomadic but in 1905 the federal government built a school on the island. Parents were threatened with jail time or losing their kids all together if they didn’t send them to school.” Just 6 years after its creation, Kivalina’s schoolteacher Clinton Replogle warned in 1911, Kivalina should be relocated due to flooding from ocean storms.
Consider the way most barrier islands get formed. Kivalina island was formed from a loosely consolidated sand bar and maintained by ample sediments supplied by local rivers. Ocean waves push eroded sand and gravel back towards the coast where it accumulates into a sand bar in shallow waters. On the sand bar’s landward side, river currents erode the sand, maintaining a lagoon and the islands’ narrow width. Islands are then formed where miles-long sand bars are cut into pieces by coastal rivers seeking an outlet to the ocean. The Singauk Entrance (see below) is where the Wulik River flows past Kivalina into the Chukchi Sea and it exemplifies the island’s unstable dynamics. Some years Singauk Entrance is blocked by sand piled up by winter storm waves, but then re-opened later by river erosion. As Tribal Administrator Millie Hawley recently stated, Kivalina was always eroding. We’re on a small spit of land that has diminished in size over the last century.”
Barrier island formation also requires a shallow‑sloping ocean floor that minimizes the irretrievable loss of sand that might wash away into the deeper ocean. However, such shallow ocean floors also amplify wave heights of approaching storms. A barrier island’s ultimate height is determined by the amount of sediments dropped from a storm’s overtopping waves. Kivalina’s highest point is a mere 13 feet, and decades ago the high tide mark came within 1 to 2 feet of the town. But the storms of late summer and ice‑free fall can bring waves 10 feet or higher. No wonder the threat of storm surge flooding was so clear to Clinton Replogle. Indeed, geological surveys have now revealed flooding from waves that had overtopped Kivalina happened at least twice between1905 and 1990.
The island’s sands don’t hold fresh water. So, the town’s water tank must be fed by a 3-mile-long fire hose stretching from the Wulik River. Kivalina’s sewage system consists of individual “honey-buckets” emptied by each resident into two specified “bunkers”. Poor sanitation and overcrowding have always been a problem, causing an extremely high instance of communicable diseases in the City of Kivalina has. In 2021 it suffered a large outbreak of COVID.
With negatives outweighing positives and an annual threat of destruction by storm surge, Inupiaq residents initiated a study in 1994 to relocate, despite a decade of few large storms. Using photographs dating back to 1952, the study surprisingly found no conclusive proof of any erosion occurring on the ocean-side of the island. However, the study did reveal substantial erosion on Kivalina’s lagoon side by the Wulik and Kivalina Rivers. Still the researchers warned, “Although there is very limited information available, it is our opinion that it is only a matter of time until the right combination of natural events occur which will result in over-topping of the City. When this occurs, the wave action will result in damage to the structures and if ice is associated with the storm surge the consequences could be disastrous.”
Still Kivalina’s population grew from 188 to over 400 since 1970. Despite residents voting 5 times to relocate to safety in the past 3 decades, an airplane runway that brings needed supplies and a medical clinic operated by the non-profit Maniilaq Association remained an attraction. Additionally, funding for relocation was scant with an economy based primarily on subsistence harvesting of seals, walrus, whale, salmon, and caribou. Furthermore, state and federal governments offered little support. So, when government reports began blaming global warming, in 2011 the residents opted to file a lawsuit against the major oil companies arguing “Kivalina must be relocated due to global warming” and sought funds to cover an estimated cost of $95 million to $400 million. Although their lawsuit failed, Kivalina’s “David vs Goliath” lawsuit was championed by proponents of catastrophic climate change and opponents of Big Oil, thrusting previously little‑cared‑about Kivalina into the limelight as an icon of the “climate crisis”.
Ignored has been the forcing of the Inupiaq into a permanent settlement on a dynamically changing barrier island. That was the real problem. Similarly, the Bureau of Indian Affairs reprogrammed the seasonally migrating Yupik into residents of a permanent community. Worse, the BIA chose a Ninglick River location in the Yukon Delta to build their school and create the permanent village of Newtok. But river deltas are notoriously unstable (as New Orleans has painfully realized throughout its 300‑year existence). Newtok’s school was built in 1958, but the BIA’s environmental ignorance was again quickly exposed. By the 1980s the US Army Corp of Engineers was spending over a million dollars trying to prevent natural river erosion from destroying Newtok. Just 26 years after its creation, Newtok residents commissioned its first study for re-locating. Costs of Newtok’s ongoing relocation will exceed $100 million. Nonetheless, it’s remained easier to blame climate change, natural or human caused, to cover for the government’s badly conceived “forced permanence”.
In 2005 the Guardian was hyping the United Nation’s outrageous failed prediction there would be “50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade” and the plight of Kivalina was an opportunity to put a face on those imaginary “climate refugees”. If you tell a big lie often enough, the naïve will uncritically believe it. So like-minded media outlets formed “Climate Desk” to push more alarmism (affiliates are shown below). By 2019, the Guardian again amplified the climate hype telling their journalists to no longer refer to weather events as global warming or climate change. Instead, they should weaponize harsh weather as a “climate crisis” or “climate emergency”. Now an unholy alliance (between “if it bleeds it leads” media outlets, scientists from the “chicken little school of thought”, and politicians who use every crisis to gain political control) repeats daily that we are all threatened by an “existential climate crisis.” But for those of us who study the actual science, there is an army of objective climate scientists providing evidence that makes us doubt such climate fearmongering.
Climate Desk major affiliates
In 2013, Climate Desk’s Weather Channel wrote The Sea is Slowly Swallowing Alaskan Towns stating” the cost of climate change is becoming a painful reality for towns in coastal Alaska, as rising sea levels overtake acres and acres of once-dry land. The threat appears immediate in Kivalina.” But objective science shows otherwise. As determined in the peer-reviewed paper Arctic Ocean Sea Level Record from the Complete Radar Altimetry Era: 1991–2018 , sea level across the Arctic varies because winds remove water from one region and pile it up in another. Along the Siberian-Russian coasts and the southern Chukchi Sea bordering Kivalina (green arrow), sea level has not risen, despite sea level strongly rising along the Beaufort Sea (red).
The government’s US Climate Tool Kit-Relocating Kivalina claimed a climate crisis writing, ”temperatures in the Arctic are rising at more than twice the rate of the global average, resulting in violent ocean storms, flooding, and erosion beneath the homes of Kivalina—impacts that have been traumatic to the barrier island’s Alaskan Inupiaq community.” But they didn’t inform the public of all the science involved. For example, many permanent homes, built on permafrost, were sinking into the ground because heating their homes also melted the foundational permafrost below.
Furthermore, it’s summer winds that push warmer Pacific waters through the Bering Strait and initiates sea ice melt and the warming in the frozen Chukchi Sea. During the last few decades, the amount of warm Pacific water passing through the Bering Strait has nearly doubled, melting more sea ice and expanding open waters. Nearly half of that intruding ocean heat gets released to the atmosphere, raising air temperatures. Although more open waters have also enhanced photosynthesis and increased Arctic marine food web by 30%, bewilderingly, the associated rise in temperature is trumpeted as a crisis. It’ true expanding open waters absorb more sunlight, and this feedback raises temperatures even higher, dubbed “Arctic Amplification”. It has indeed raised Arctic air temperatures twice as fast as those in the US lower 48 states. But that rise is misleadingly increasing the global average temperature and has been incorrectly blamed on CO2. But most climate models now agree, it is intruding warm Pacific water pushing through the Bering Strait that forces Arctic Amplification.
Studies show the greatest Chukchi sea ice loss is associated with the 3 major pathways of the intruding warm water. The warmest pathway hugs the coast of western Alaska, affecting Kivalina as illustrated below by Itoh (2015). Importantly, it’s the volume of Bering Strait throughflow that determines the extent of annual open waters, and that throughflow volume is modulated by natural variations in atmospheric circulation. Using the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s general circulation model, researchers determined inflows of warm water through the Bering Strait are controlled primarily by wind stress, with shifting winds explaining 90% or more of the changes. Other factors (precipitation, radiative fluxes [solar or greenhouse], water vapor, and air temperature) had negligible influence. Unfortunately, increased thinning and loss of sea ice has shortened the Inupiaq’s season for hunting seals and whales, forcing them to hunt and fish elsewhere.
The three major paths and temperatures of warmer Pacific water flowing through the Bering Strait into the Arctic. From Itoh 2015
The 2020 scientific study, Mechanisms Driving the Interannual Variability of the Bering Strait Throughflow detailed the causes of those changing winds. On the Arctic Ocean side of the Bering Strait, when the Beaufort High pressure system is stronger, winds transport ocean water offshore and lower sea level along the coast which allows greater Bering Strait throughflow. On the Pacific side of the strait, when the semi‑permanent Aleutian Low‑pressure system is located over the Aleutian Basin, winds pile up water along the eastern Bering Sea shelf. The resulting higher sea level pushes more warm water through the Bering Strait. Conversely, when the Aleutian Low shifts southward over the Gulf of Alaska northeasterly winds prevail, lowering sea level and weakening Bering Strait throughflow. Significantly, the Aleutian Low is affected by natural El Nino events and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). Several studies have shown that a switch to the negative PDO phase also causes the Aleutian Low to pump more warm air from the south into Alaska.
Changing winds and warm water inflows will increase open waters in the Chukchi Sea even during colder climates. Marine geologists examining Chukchi sediments have determined that over the past millennia, an ice‑free Chukchi Sea happened independently of global climate, with ice‑free conditions happening even during the recent Little Ice Age. Based on our current state of scientific knowledge, the changing conditions in the Arctic are best explained by naturally oscillating winds and ocean currents.
In 2015 the Obama/Biden administration sent U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell to Kivalina who, without apologizing for Kivalina’s forced settlement, vowed to work on solutions for the climate‑threatened village. Repeating the Climate Desk “climate refugee” trope Jewell grandstanded her empathy, “Hundreds of villagers in Kivalina face the terrible prospect of losing their land and homes to rising sea levels and coastal erosion, threatening their personal safety and putting them at risk of becoming climate change refugees within a decade”. But it was little more than political posturing.
Kivalina and Newtok don’t exemplify climate crises. Kivalina and Newtok are iconic examples of how the media and governments have ignored the injustices suffered by native peoples, then use their troubles only when it promotes their crises agenda. Kivalina and Newtok are clear examples of government inappropriateness that forced “permanence” on a native culture well adapted to an everchanging natural environment; an environment where regional climates are always changing. I suggest defunding the BIA for its horrible decisions and use the BIA’s 1.9‑billion‑dollar annual budget to safely relocate the people of Kivalina, Newtok and others to a place of their choosing.
In October 1945, 50,000 American Marines invaded northern China. The official reason was to accept the surrender of Japanese troops and evacuate them, but the primary reason was to secure western business interests. Western corporations had billions of dollars invested in China, mostly located in mini colonies called settlements. The Americans allied with the official Chinese government led by Chiang Kai-shek to secure all of China. However, his Kuomintang party, known as the KMT, was corrupt and unpopular. Most Chinese supported the opposition Chinese Communist Party, known as the CCP, led by Mao Zedong. By 1949, the Marines and the KMT had fled China.
This essay goes to the matter of Kosovo; where the Western states (NATO & the EU) have determined Serbia is not fit to govern a minority (of ethnic Albanians) on their own (Serbian) territory but the now purported (by the West) independent Kosovo is fit to govern a minority (of ethnic Serbs.)
The EU position seems to embrace an attitude of ‘never mind the inconvenient fact’ that recent Kosovo ‘leaders’ are being arrested and delivered to international tribunal for crimes against ethnic Serbs (includes organ harvesting), also not to mention what amounts to mere ‘lip service’ (no concrete action or enforcement) concerning the repatriation of 250,000 Serbs driven from Kosovo in an ethnic Albanian engineered cleansing pogrom following the NATO bombing of Serbia.
Insofar as an EU repatriation precedent, Croatia’s ethnic cleansing of Srpska Krajina shows the dishonesty of the EU position; there is no realistic expectation (and never was) by the European Union that the 200,000 Serbs expelled from this (formerly) Serb majority region would be allowed to return to Croatia and their homes. Meanwhile Croatia had been admitted to the European Union.
So, in the context of Serbs are not trustworthy to govern an ethnic minority of Albanians but Albanians are trustworthy to govern a minority of Serbs, the EU de facto embraces (actual outcomes, not political postures) just the sort of ethnic cleansing the NATO bombing was supposed to stop?
NATO ‘just allowed’ another massive pogrom to happen when they’d gained control over Kosovo? Huh. Maybe that Albanian ‘majority’ wasn’t statistically big enough to justify an independent Kosovo (and secure a now ostensibly ‘independent’ Kosovo a ‘right’ to host Camp Bondsteel.)
Now, in these tangled pressures of arbitrary jurisdictions imposed on Serbia by the EU, NATO and the American military occupation of Serbia’s southern-most province of Kosovo (Camp Bondsteel), it should do to breakdown the logistics of the Western democracies dishonest game.
“Camp Bondsteel is the main base of the United States Army under KFOR command in Kosovo. Located near Ferizaj in the eastern part of Kosovo, the base serves as the NATO headquarters for KFOR’s Multinational Battle Group East”
The order is interesting, as well, the nomenclature. The American army figures first (“main base of the United States Army”) ‘under’ (watch how this deceit plays out) KFOR command … serves as NATO’s headquarters for KFOR’s Multinational Battlegroup …” or in the deciphered military ‘Orwellian-speak’ the American dominated NATO (every NATO “Supreme Allied Commander Europe” has been an American general throughout NATO’s history) keeps a “Battle Group” in Kosovo. This language is entirely inconsistent with ‘peace keeping.’ It is worth noting here, it had been when this occupying force had been 50,000 strong and deployed across Kosovo, Kosovo’s ethnic Albanians were ‘somehow’ allowed to push 250,000 Serbian civilians out of Kosovo in a pogrom that can only be defined as ethnic cleansing in violation of international human rights conventions.
In short other words, the KFOR mission established to bring an end to the fighting, between the Serbian army and the Kosovo Liberation Army, after the Serb army was withdrawn, KFOR clearly took the side of the Kosovo Liberation Army and ‘stood guard’ as the KLA (an insurgent army) was allowed to push 250,000 Serb residents out of homes in their own country, an event the Serb army had prevented prior to NATO establishing control.
Now, the preceding evolving into a NATO ‘authority’ had been extrapolated from UN Resolution 1244 which language is quite inconsistent with the historical reality…
“to resolve the grave humanitarian situation in Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and to provide for the safe and free return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes”
… while noting Kosovo is entered into the UN record as territory belonging to Serbia (Yugoslavia being a union of Serbia & Montenegro at this time.)
In short, on the pretext of ‘humanitarian intervention’ via a UN Resolution that NATO had never intended to honor (‘the proof is in the pudding’), an illegal insurgency had been morphed, via geopolitical chicanery, into a rouge ‘state’ governed by KLA war criminals secured by NATO.
“Transcendent Corruption” is the value I have assigned to the parties embracing ‘color of law’ (a veneer of legality masking corruption) wherein law is made to serve the interests of autocrats (e.g. Merkel), plutocrats (e.g. the Clinton & Biden families), & oligarchies (e.g. the European Union) and when taken together amount to rule by the most powerful corporate board personalities (the puppeteers) in the 21st Century model of feudalism manifesting as fascism but is labelled democracy to assuage the peasants (the citizens) sensibilities.
All of this follows on historical facts overlooked by the Western propaganda machine; Eastern Orthodoxy’s majority Serbian population in the region of Srpska Krajina recently (90s Balkan Wars) had been ethnically cleansed from Catholic Croatia by “Operation Storm” (never mind the Serbs have been made the boogeyman for everything that went wrong with the breakup of Yugoslavia), as well the fact unnatural ethnic borders have been enforced in relation to Republik Srpska, ensuring there will be ongoing tensions within Bosnia on the border of Serbia and not least, the remnant Serb majority region in the North of Kosovo is denied their right of self determination to join with Serbia, ensuring perpetual inter-ethnic conflict that serves only to weaken the institutions of state via ongoing radicalization of both populations, Orthodox Christian Serb and Muslim Albanian. And then, we have Metohija or the bona fide historical spiritual center of the Serbian people of the past 1,000 years.
It must be noted that, similar to the Sioux Indians had founded their culture upon a spiritual relationship to the Black Hills of South Dakota from which they had been expelled, Serbia’s relationship to “Old Serbia” (Kosovo) is little different; imperial ambition had seen the Serbs ethnically cleansed by the Albanians on multiple occasions, first under the ‘patronage’ of the Ottoman Turks favoring the Islamic population, then a minority, and after, the Albanians were backed in further pursuing pogroms against Serbs of Kosovo by the fascist Axis powers of World War II (similar to Croatian Ustasha persecution of Serbs during the war) pushing more of the Serb population out, wherein a coup de grace of sorts was delivered by communism under Tito, who forbade ethnic Serbs to return to their homes in Kosovo following 1945. This is a legacy NATO has furthered as ‘enforcers’ of wresting away Kosovo from Serbia. Kosovo is the original “Old Serbia” that continues to hold the center of Serbian cultural identity via the (ongoing) monastic tradition of Orthodoxy in the region of Metohija.
Then, steps into this mess the last people (if they had any sense of shame at all) who should mediate the current tensions, the Germans, Angela Merkel, particularly, and more recently, Ursula von der Leyen, whose family pedigree is a who’s who of empire personalities that cannot help perception in a Serbia whose memories of the NAZI occupation are still sharp.
‘Mediating’ the current controversy where Kosovo’s criminal administration (under the ‘protection’ of NATO) is allowing radical Wahhabism to proselytize the ethnic Albanian population away from the more moderate mainstream of Islam in the cradle of the Orthodox Serb civilization, Europe demanding Serbia recognize and do business with a cabal of criminals couldn’t do a better job of promoting a war of civilizations if it had actually tried; if one were to presume it is mere incompetence derived from ego-narcissism has birthed this circumstance into the present. But maybe it is more than that, a weakened Serbia with artificial borders is ‘low hanging fruit’ with possibility of consolidating control over a region culturally tied to Russia, as well, historically coveted by the Catholic headquarters at Rome.
In the many geopolitical machinations employed by Merkel, von der Leyen, Trump (and now Biden), not to mention the ‘rolling over’ to sound of a dog-whistle by Serbian sell-outs Vucic & Brnabic, there is a canine turd on the table no one dares mention: the Western Christianity’s animus towards Eastern Orthodoxy, particularly Slav Orthodoxy. The smell is in the air.
“… keeping in mind the fact that Bishop Grigorije has a very strong influence among the bishops, the regime has decided to do everything possible to reduce the chances that a man opposed to the government would be elected the new patriarch.
“That is why the confrontation with Grigorije, who has repeatedly said what he thinks about the “golden age of Serbia”, is becoming more and more acute and dangerous. Although the reason for this is his interview given almost a month ago, the fact remains that Grigorije is a threat the regime’s plans on two fronts which is more than enough reason to present this priest from Herzegovina as Serbia’s greatest enemy and a man who “divides the believers”.
“The matrix is always the same – the opponent is first dragged through the mud by the media, with the media, which broadcast on national frequencies, usually discovering “unknown facts”, i.e. false information, about him and his life.
“If this is not enough, they move on to the recording of videos in which “brave”, albeit unknown reporters, question the human characteristics of the victim of persecution, which is also an open invitation to lynch. Those who do not understand this, just think back of how Oliver Ivanović died”
Finally, something a little closer the real reasons behind the invitation to make the assassination manifest:
“… the instigators of the smear campaign against the bishop decided to take advantage of the fact that he does not share the vision of “progressive” Serbia and the Church and thus mark him as a traitor, while creating the impression that it would be a patriotic act to remove [assassinate] such a person” [1]
The lie of the Serbian state (Vucic oligarchy) concerning Bishop Gregorije being in opposition to the church is egregious; the Church position has always been Metohija is, and always will be, Serbia. Insofar as ‘progressive’, the ‘progress’ of the (German controlled) European Union has been little short of demanding an European monoculture derive from the social tensions born of multiculturalism. It is unnatural process, devoid of community spirit, temporally corrupt in the extreme and founded upon geopolitical propaganda lies, as has been the entire business of an independent Kosovo. Post 1945, the Reich is realizing its vision ‘over the long game.’ Recalling Rome’s embrace of Sainthood for the Catholic (Nazi collaborator) Alojzije Stepinac, it is perfectly clarified Slav Orthodoxy has no place in this ‘vision.’
If there were the slightest intention to preserve the integrity of Serb Orthodoxy in the machinations of Western Europe in the Balkans, Vucic would propose, Brnabic would initiate and the European Union would endorse an exclave of Serbian territory in that remaining portion of Metohija that is majority Serb populated. It would have more population than some United Nations states and there is precedence in Azerbaijan’s exclave Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. But, no, this is not on the table, it is intended Slav Orthodoxy will be strangled and made extinct (replaced with ‘Eastern Rite’ Catholicism) in the Balkans.
Populism, and related nationalism, manifest in two forms, the healthy and the unhealthy, the benign and the malignant, the tranquil and the rage. The EU, NATO, and yes, the Church at Rome, all, have a hand in fostering the unhealthy, the malignant, and the rage. The epilogue of this would be the conversion of Serbia to “progressive” European monoculture at the point of a gun.
“There is not the smallest reason for confounding nationalism, which is the desire of a people to be itself, with imperialism, which is the desire of a people to prevent other peoples from being themselves” -Cicily Isabel Fairfield
A former Sergeant of Operations and Intelligence for Special Forces, Ronald Thomas West is a retired investigator (living in exile) whose work focus had been anti-corruption. Ronald had lived over thirty years in close association with Blackfeet Indians (those who still speak their language), and is published in international law as a layman: The Right of Self- Determination of Peoples and It’s Application to Indigenous People in The USA or The Mueller-Wilson Report, co-authored with Dr Mark D Cole. Ronald has been adjunct professor of American Constitutional Law at Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany (for English credit, summer semester 2008.) Ronald’s formal educational background (no degree) is social psychology. His therapeutic device is satire.
Dr. Stella Immanuel, a medical doctor from Houston who has cured hundreds of her patients with COVID symptoms by using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), was one of a group of doctors who went to Washington D.C. last summer to tell the nation that there was a cure for COVID, which included the older, already FDA-approved drug, hydroxychloroquine.
Many other doctors, some with very prestigious credentials, from around the world were seeing the same results with early treatment of COVID patients, and a near 100% success rate with no deaths.
But the FDA and Anthony Fauci refused to endorse an emergency use authorization to let hospitals use the drug, stating that their clinical experiences were not enough, and that there was a lack of peer-reviewed literature.
They allowed this lack of published studies to be used as an excuse to prevent patients from receiving this treatment, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths, while TRILLIONS of dollars were poured into new vaccines and drugs instead. This is one of the real crimes committed during the Plandemic.
Now, at the beginning of 2021, many studies have been published documenting the effectiveness of HCQ, and Facebook has announced they will stop censoring information related to HCQ, and the American Journal of Medicine has also admitted that their stand on HCQ was wrong. (Source.)
Dr. Stella Immanuel is now demanding an apology from the Pharma-controlled media, and the government health agencies who attacked her and her character for recommending HCQ, stating that someone “has to be accountable” for all these needless deaths.
Hundreds of movies are never made but not all of them are nixed by the US government because it disapproves of their message. Here are 10 films that the ‘land of the free’ never let see the light of day.
J. Edgar Hoover wasn’t partial to Federal Dick
The FBI was the first agency to lay the smack down on movies. In the 1930s, J. Edgar Hoover insisted on total control of the FBI’s public image and monitored the development of all movie projects about the Bureau. In February 1935, Hoover wrote a memo decrying Hollywood’s attempts to “make a cheap movie and capitalize on it” and demanded, “We should put a stop to this if it is started in any way.” One project that bit the dust was titled ‘The Federal Dick’, which Hoover considered “a most humiliating and repugnant title.” At his request, the attorney general issued a press statement condemning the proposed movie, and the project died.
The Brain and Birdman of Alcatraz
In the 1930s, Alcatraz developed a reputation as a Gangster Hall of Fame – the one prison where all the most glamorous criminals were housed. Inmates like Al Capone and Machine Gun Kelly granted the island jailhouse an intriguing lustre which captured the attention of the American public.
This upset the director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, James V. Bennett, who wanted to avoid the impression of a celebrity super-prison, so he spent over 20 years either removing references to Alcatraz from movie scripts or killing movies about Alcatraz altogether.
Research by historian David Eldridge found that Bennett enlisted Joseph Breen, the head of the Production Code Administration, to help keep Alcatraz off the cinema screens. They removed dialogue about it from ‘The Last Gangster’, while ‘Escape from Alcatraz’ was rewritten and the main setting changed to a state prison, rather than the infamous federal penitentiary, and the film was renamed ‘Behind Prison Gates’.
In 1948, Cecil Wright, the so-called ‘Brain of Alcatraz’, won an appeal against his conviction for burglary after 18 years in prison. His case was touted by the press as a miscarriage of justice, so when Bennett found out that a biopic of Wright was in development, he agitated against it.
He wrote to the film’s producer insisting that the script was inaccurate and did not meet the Production Code’s requirements for a ‘fair representation’ of federal institutions. He copied in Breen who responded by refusing to approve the movie for release, and the Wright biopic was never made.
Similarly, Bennett prevented multiple attempts to make a film about Robert Stroud, a convicted murderer and respected ornithologist known as the ‘Birdman of Alcatraz’. While a biopic of Stroud was eventually made in 1962, Bennett had successfully kept him off the screen for over a decade.
Giveaway Hill
For decades John Wayne acted as a Hollywood poster boy for the US military, but he didn’t always get its approval. In August 1954, Wayne wrote to the Pentagon asking for help on ‘Giveaway Hill’ – a film he was developing about the Marine Corps during the Korean War.
The Marine Corps reviewed the script and had major objections. Documents record how it felt the story “points up the futility of the fighting” and “would cause an unfavorable public relations reaction.” It had major problems with the racist treatment of a Marine named Jesus Perez, which it predicted, “would provide Communist propaganda with reams of new material.” The documents go on to say that “The bloody carnage … is objectionable from both a recruitment and a public relations standpoint … The complete loss of units can be expected to cause recruiting stations long periods of inactivity.”
The Marine Corps wrote back to Wayne, denying his request for support, and ‘Giveaway Hill’ was never made.
Recovery
A database of Pentagon-Hollywood interactions contains dozens of entries for films that were rejected for military support and are marked “no record that film was ever made”. One such film was 1985’s ‘Recovery’. The database entry comments: “Denied because of violence, strong language, and DOD did not want to cooperate on any story dealing with the USMLM as the primary plot.”
The USMLM was the Cold War Military Liaison Mission, where a small number of military intelligence officials on both sides were allowed access to each other’s territory in Germany. It was a rare case of the two warring blocs putting aside their hostility and finding areas of mutual interest, an image that was unacceptable to the Pentagon’s propaganda offices. Recovery was never made, so this decades-long operation remained outside of public knowledge.
Marlon Brando’s Iran-Contra film
In early 1987, Marlon Brando was attached to a film about Eugene Hasenfus, a cargo handler on a plane supplying the Nicaraguan contras that was shot down by the Sandinista government, leading to Hasenfus being held and interrogated for weeks. A bidding war for the script broke out between two factions – one led by former CIA officer Frank Snepp which included Brando, while the other was headed by former Navy counterinsurgency specialist Larry Spivey.
Brando’s group lost the bidding war, but then the project died. Decades later, an investigation by journalist Nick Schou found that the CIA itself was backing the winning faction and that “It was really [Colonel] Oliver North, who was trying to orchestrate a bidding operation to try to prevent this movie from being made.”
Countermeasures
Iran-Contra reared its ugly head a few years later in ‘Countermeasures’, a thriller set on board an aircraft carrier where a Navy psychiatrist – to be played by Sigourney Weaver – discovers a secret arms smuggling ring.
The US Navy hated the script, objecting to “racist stereotypes” and to almost all the Navy characters being “unapologetically sexist if not guilty of outright sexual harassment or sexual assault”. The smuggling plot was also a showstopper, especially since the script portrayed the White House as “complicit in the intrigue”. The Navy’s 1993 memo states, “There‘s no reason for us to denigrate the White House or remind the public of the Iran-Contra affair.”
The Department of Defense (DOD) didn’t simply reject ‘Countermeasures’, it sabotaged it. After informing the producers that they wouldn’t approve support, Pentagon officials reached out to the Spanish navy to warn them off the project, and so ‘Countermeasures’ was never produced.
Top Gun 2
The original ‘Top Gun’ was one of the US military’s greatest PR wins, with the DOD’s entertainment liaison office saying it “Completed rehabilitation of the military’s image, which had been savaged by the Vietnam war.” It was a huge commercial success, so why did it take so long to get a sequel?
The answer is the Tailhook scandal, where Navy and Marine aviators groped and sexually assaulted dozens of hotel guests at the annual Tailhook conference at the Las Vegas Hilton in 1991. The inspector general’s investigation into the assaults repeatedly cited the effect of ‘Top Gun’ in encouraging and normalising this behaviour.
So when Paramount went to the Navy with plans for ‘Top Gun 2’ they were rejected. As David Georgi, then head of the Army’s Hollywood office, explained, “In Top Gun, Tom Cruise bedded his instructor and drank heavily. The Navy did not need that image portrayed again after Tailhook.”
As a result, that version of ‘Top Gun 2’ was never made, and it would be another 20 years before Jerry Bruckheimer got the project going again, and documents detail how he approached the military before the script for ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ was even written.
Women at War
The Pentagon is still at it. In 2011, Robert Redford’s production company Sundance Productions approached the Marine Corps about interviewing female marines for their film ‘Women at War’.
Reports from the Corps’ Hollywood office show that the official reason given for rejecting the movie was the lack of a distribution deal in place, but in private it was because, “the angle of the production deals with sexual harassment & PTSD.”
‘Women at War’ joined the long list of films that were never made because the US military disapproved of their content.
Dancin’ In Iraq
Another recent film that suffered the same fate was ‘Dancin’ in Iraq’, about a crew of Navy nurses in Iraq who start a dance troupe to stay sane.
The Marine Corps hated the script. Its assessment said, “Script is abysmal. The dance troupe is actually a small, virtually insignificant subplot. The central plot focuses on a romance between a Marine commanding officer of a ‘combat hospital’ in Baghdad and his XO, a Navy Lt. Cmdr. LA PAO advised writer we will not be supporting due to various plot lines.”
Marine Corps documents also detail how the film’s writer-director Mike Rossi was not happy with this rejection, stating, “Mr. Rossi contacted LA PAO by email after the request was declined. His verbal threats were considered unfounded and all other branches were notified accordingly.”
Despite his fiery response there was nothing Rossi could do, and ‘Dancin’ in Iraq’ was consigned to the cutting room floor, courtesy of the US military.
Tom Secker is a British-based investigative journalist, author and podcaster. You can follow his work via his Spy Culture site and his podcast ClandesTime.
The new administration in Washington is pursuing exactly the same approach towards Tehran as its predecessor, only now with added media cover because it’s their guy enforcing civilian-killing sanctions, not the Bad Orange Man.
In a new interview with CBS Evening News, President Biden confirmed that his administration will not be lifting sanctions imposed upon Iran in order to bring Tehran to the negotiating table for the restoration of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal.
“Will the US lift sanctions first in order to get Iran back to the negotiating table?” Biden was asked by CBS’s Norah O’Donnell.
“No,” the president replied.
“They have to stop enriching uranium first,” asked O’Donnell.
Biden nodded in response.
There are a few things that are ridiculous about this, the first being that the JCPOA does not require that Iran “stop enriching uranium” at all. As explained by Al-Monitor‘s Arash Karami, the deal only calls for Iran to “keep its level of uranium enrichment at up to 3.67 percent”, a level it only began exceeding when the Trump administration backed out of the deal and imposed sanctions. The administration later clarified that Biden meant Iran would have to return to its JCPOA levels before negotiations could begin, but the fact that neither the United States president nor the high-profile reporter interviewing him appear to have been clear on this says a lot about the vapid nature of America’s political/media class.
The Iranian government has repeatedly made it abundantly clear that it will not be rejoining the JCPOA until the United States comes back into compliance, since it was the US who first abandoned it. It claims, correctly, that it was in full compliance with the agreement when the Trump administration unilaterally backed out in May 2018. The argument that it is therefore Washington’s responsibility to come back into compliance first is indisputable. Why would it re-enter a deal with a government that is clearly acting in bad faith and could just back out and impose civilian-killing sanctions on the nation again?More importantly, this is confirmation from the horse’s mouth that Biden is in effect continuing Trump’s Iran policy. Trump began strangling Iran with crushing sanctions in an effort to force it to obey US dictates, and Biden is continuing that exact same strangulation while continuing to demand compliance with its dictates. The demands might be a little different, but the effect is identical since Tehran would never bow to either of them.
And that’s just getting back to the negotiating table for reentering the deal as it is written. Gareth Porter reported last month that the Biden administration may plan on using the sanctions regime it inherited from the previous presidency as a ‘Trump card’ to try and coerce Tehran into agreeing to a modified version of the deal.
Neither of these things are going to happen. Iran will not modify the deal, and it will not come back into compliance before the government which first abandoned the deal comes back into compliance. And the Biden administration appears to be perfectly fine with this, reportedly toying with the idea of waiting all the way until after Iran’s presidential elections in June to even begin approaching the deal.
The end result being that we still have a US presidency waging economic warfare upon Iran in exactly the same way it was before the 20th of January. Civilians are still having the life squeezed out of them by a far more powerful nation which does not view them as human beings, and it’s only a matter of time before this administration or a subsequent one causes another flare-up which pushes things to the brink of hot war like we saw a year ago.
Biden’s Iran policy is in effect just a continuation of Trump’s Iran policy that liberals can feel good about. It’s Trump’s Iran policy with gender pronouns in its bio.
Choosing to continue an immoral course of action is just as immoral as choosing to initiate an immoral course of action. If you’re beating someone up and you leave when I get there, and then I choose to continue assaulting that person, I am just as culpable in that assault as you are. Presidents who choose to perpetuate one another’s depraved policies are just as guilty of that depravity as their predecessors.
The mainstream media are fixated on the differences between the Biden administration and the Trump administration, just as they were fixated on the differences between the Trump administration and the Obama administration four years ago. If you can mentally mute that vapid soundtrack and look at the similarities between administrations instead, regardless of party affiliation and campaign platforms, you’ll learn a lot more about what’s really going on in the world.Starvation sanctions are the only type of warfare in which it is considered normal and acceptable to deliberately target a civilian population with deadly force. But it is not normal, and it is not acceptable. Biden and his team of ventriloquists fully own the effects of their warmongering. They don’t get to just scribble ‘TRUMP’S FAULT’ across them in crayon and act like they’re innocent.
Caitlin Johnstone is an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her website is here and you can follow her on Twitter @caitoz
Big Pharma prioritizes maximum profits no matter the cost to human health they’re indifferent toward.
They spend billions of dollars advertising their products annually — heavily on television, influencing naive consumers, unaware of risks to human health powerful drugs pose.
Pharma does what it pleases because lobbyists representing their interests control congressional lawmakers and others abroad.
In the last decade, mergers and acquisitions consolidated the industry from 60 international firms to 10.
Greater consolidation increased Pharma power to raise prices exponentially to gouge consumers unchallenged because governments in Washington and elsewhere in the West do nothing to constrain them.
Greater consolidation also kills innovation. It’s mostly done by smaller firms, international drug companies buying them at favorable prices.
Like other corporate predators, maximum profitmaking is the be all and end all of Pharma’s operating strategy.
According to a report by Rep. Katie Porter, “(i)t’s time that we reevaluate the standards for approving (Pharma) mergers.”
“It’s time we pass legislation to lower drug prices.”
“And it’s time we rethink the structure of leadership at big pharmaceutical companies.”
“In 2018, the year (of) Trump’s tax giveaway to” corporate predators and America’s super-rich, “12 of the biggest pharmaceutical companies spent more money on stock buybacks than on research and development.”
Pharma executives defy reality by falsely claiming that consolidation increases operational efficiency (sic).”
It increases profitability through greater market share and other anti-consumer practices.
Mergers and acquisitions boost stock prices by reducing marketplace competition and acquiring “blockbuster” drugs with enormous “revenue stream” potential.
“Instead of spending on innovation, Big Pharma is hoarding its money for salaries and dividends, all while swallowing smaller companies, thus making the marketplace far less competitive,” Porter explained.
Separately, she tweeted the following:
“For years, Big Pharma has gobbled up small biotech firms that might otherwise force them to compete.”
“As soon as these companies are acquired, innovation stops.”
“The culture of creativity is killed. The small firm’s vision is lost, and the big firm’s profits become priority.”
Longtime biotech/Pharma official Peter O’Brien said that “gobbling up early phase biotechs (enables Pharma to) quash creativity in the discovery space…”
Porter’s report called mergers and acquisitions “the tip of the iceberg of pharmaceutical companies’ anti-competitive, profit-driven” practices.
Big Pharma prioritizes executive pay and bonuses, enriching shareholders, and consolidating to greater size to “eliminate competition.”
These firms “are not responsible for most major breakthroughs in new drugs.”
“Rather, innovation is driven in small firms, which are often spun off of taxpayer-funded academic research.”
“These small labs are then purchased by giant firms after they’ve assumed the risk needed to develop a blockbuster drug.”
Instead of R&D in search of breakthrough drugs for disease fighting, Pharma focuses on “incremental changes to existing drugs in order to kill off generic threats to their government-granted monopoly patents.”
Mergers and acquisitions stifle innovation.
Porter’s report recommended the following:
Remove incentives that benefit investors and Wall Street over patients’ health, lives, and well-being.
Reevaluate and alter Federal Trade Commission standards for approving healthcare mergers.
Halt exponential increases in drug prices. Act to make them more affordable by lowering prices.
Enact consumer-friendly legislation to halt Pharma abuses.
It’s time to rein in predatory practices by which Pharma consolidates market power that enables greater price-gouging of consumers.
A Final Comment
According to Gallup research, Pharma “is now the most poorly regarded industry in Americans’ eyes, ranking last on a list of 25 industries that Gallup tests annually.”
“Americans are more than twice as likely to rate the pharmaceutical industry negatively (58%) as positively (27%), giving it a net-positive score of -31.”
Lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr., son of Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of former U.S. president John F. Kennedy, has penned a comprehensive account of Bill Gates’ attempt to monopolise and dominate global food production, labelling it “a dark form of philanthrocapitalism based on biopiracy and corporate biopiracy.”
Kennedy warns that “To cloak his dystopian plans for humanity in benign intentions, Gates has expropriated the rhetoric of “sustainability,” “biodiversity,” “good stewardship” and “climate.””
Kennedy continues, “These causes are all grim realities that pose existential threats to our children and require urgent attention. However, Gates’ record exposes his benevolent intentions as masquerades for his agenda to maximize personal profit and control.”
Writing for his Childrens Health Defense group, Kennedy notes that “It’s baffling to me how so many of my friends in the environmental movement have swallowed Gates’ chicanery.”
The article contains a raft of links documenting Gates’ “long-term strategy of mastery over agriculture and food production globally”.
Throughout the essay, Kennedy notes how Gates has:
The piece is an extraordinary takedown of Gates, who Kennedy charges has “learned to fatten himself on global crises, whether it’s pandemics, climate, famine or mass extinction.”
In partnering with companies like Monsanto and pushing GMOs, Kennedy charges that Gates is engaging in “Chemical warfare on human health.”
The piece also notes how Gates has pushed ‘faux’ global governmental agencies that he himself created “to push his diabolical chemical, medical and food concoctions,” including insect protein.
“Following Gates’ lead, GAVI is optimistic that bugs will soon be an important food supplement for impoverished and undernourished children,” Kennedy writes.
Kennedy also covers the elite push for a ‘great reset’ “to impose authoritarian controls, pervasive surveillance, oppressive new economic models and one-world government on a beleaguered, terrified and compliant humanity.”
The article is a must read to understand how deeply embedded Bill Gates’ tentacles are in the control structures of the globe, and how every policy and program he is pushing is fundamentally anti-human.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been exposing this anti-human, anti-Earth agenda for some time, which is why he is relentlessly attacked and smeared by elite ‘think tanks’ and globalist organisations.
Calls for Kennedy to be cancelled and erased are sure to increase after this latest important salvo against Gates and his minions.
If you enjoyed the Global War on Terror, you’re going to love the new War on Domestic Terror! It’s just like the original Global War on Terror, except that this time the “Terrorists” are all “Domestic Violent Extremists” (“DVEs”), “Homegrown Violent Extremists” (“HVEs”), “Violent Conspiracy-Theorist Extremists” (“VCTEs”), “Violent Reality Denialist Extremists” (VRDEs”), “Insurrectionary Micro-Aggressionist Extremists” (“IMAEs”), “People Who Make Liberals Feel Uncomfortable” (“PWMLFUs”), and anyone else the Department of Homeland Security wants to label an “extremist” and slap a ridiculous acronym on.
According to a “National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin” issued by the DHS on January 27, these DCEs, HVEs, VCTEs, VRDEs, IMAEs, and PWMLFUs are “ideologically-motivated violent extremists with objections to the exercise of governmental authority” and other “perceived grievances fueled by false narratives.” They are believed to be “motivated by a range of issues, including anger over Covid-19 restrictions, the 2020 election results, police use of force,” and other dangerous “false narratives” (e.g., the existence of the “deep state,” “herd immunity,” “biological sex,” “God,” and so on).
“Inspired by foreign terrorist groups” and “emboldened by the breach of the US Capitol Building,” this diabolical network of “domestic terrorists” is “plotting attacks against government facilities,” “threatening violence against critical infrastructure” and actively “citing misinformation and conspiracy theories about Covid-19.” For all we know, they might be huddled in the “Wolf’s Lair” at Mar-a-Lago right now, plotting a devastating terrorist attack with those WMDs we never found in Iraq, or generating population-adjusted death-rate charts going back 20 years, or posting pictures of “extremist frogs” on the Internet.
The Department of Homeland Security is “concerned,” as are its counterparts throughout the global capitalist empire. The (New Normal) War on Domestic Terror isn’t just a war on American “domestic terror.” The “domestic terror” threat is international. France has just passed a “Global Security Law” banning citizens from filming the police beating the living snot out of people (among other “anti-terrorist” provisions). In Germany, the government is preparing to install an anti-terror moat around the Reichstag. In the Netherlands, the police are cracking down on the VCTEs, VRDEs, and other “angry citizens who hate the system,” who have been protesting over nightly curfews. Suddenly, everywhere you look (or at least if you are looking in the corporate media), “global extremism networks are growing.” It’s time for Globocap to take the gloves off again, root the “terrorists” out of their hidey holes, and roll out a new official narrative.
Actually, there’s not much new about it. When you strip away all the silly new acronyms, the (New Normal) War on Domestic Terror is basically just a combination of the “War on Terror” narrative and the “New Normal” narrative, i.e., a militarization of the so-called “New Normal” and a pathologization of the “War on Terror.” Why would GloboCap want to do that, you ask?
I think you know, but I’ll go ahead and tell you.
See, the problem with the original “Global War on Terror” was that it wasn’t actually all that global. It was basically just a war on Islamic “terrorism” (i.e., resistance to global capitalism and its post-ideological ideology), which was fine as long as GloboCap was just destabilizing and restructuring the Greater Middle East. It was put on hold in 2016, so that GloboCap could focus on defeating “populism” (i.e., resistance to global capitalism and its post-ideological ideology), make an example of Donald Trump, and demonize everyone who voted for him (or just refused to take part in their free and fair elections), which they have just finished doing, in spectacular fashion. So, now it’s back to “War on Terror” business, except with a whole new cast of “terrorists,” or, technically, an expanded cast of “terrorists.” (I rattled off a list in my previous column.)
In short, GloboCap has simply expanded, recontextualized, and pathologized the “War on Terror” (i.e., the war on resistance to global capitalism and its post-ideological ideology). This was always inevitable, of course. A globally-hegemonic system (e.g., global capitalism) has no external enemies, as there is no territory “outside” the system. Its only enemies are within the system, and thus, by definition, are insurgents, also known as “terrorists” and “extremists.” These terms are utterly meaningless, obviously. They are purely strategic, deployed against anyone who deviates from GloboCap’s official ideology … which, in case you were wondering, is called “normality” (or, in our case, currently, “New Normality”).
In earlier times, these “terrorists” and “extremists” were known as “heretics,” “apostates,” and “blasphemers.” Today, they are also known as “deniers,” e.g., “science deniers,” “Covid deniers,” and recently, more disturbingly, “reality deniers.” This is an essential part of the pathologization of the “War on Terror” narrative. The new breed of “terrorists” do not just hate us for our freedom … they hate us because they hate “reality.” They are no longer our political or ideological opponents … they are suffering from a psychiatric disorder. They no longer need to be argued with or listened to … they need to be “treated,” “reeducated,” and “deprogrammed,” until they accept “Reality.” If you think I’m exaggerating the totalitarian nature of the “New Normal/War on Terror” narrative, read this op-ed in The New York Timesexploring the concept of a “Reality Czar” to deal with our “Reality Crisis.”
And this is just the beginning, of course. The consensus (at least in GloboCap circles) is, the (New Normal) War on Domestic Terror will probably continue for the next 10 to 20 years, which should provide the global capitalist ruling classes with more than enough time to carry out the “Great Reset,” destroy what’s left of human society, and condition the public to get used to living like cringing, neo-feudal peasants who have to ask permission to leave their houses. We’re still in the initial “shock and awe” phase (which they will have to scale back a bit eventually), but just look at how much they’ve already accomplished.
The economic damage is literally incalculable … millions have been plunged into desperate poverty, countless independent businesses crushed, whole industries crippled, developing countries rendered economically dependent (i.e., compliant) for the foreseeable future, as billionaires amassed over $1 trillion in wealth and supranational corporate behemoths consolidated their dominance across the planet.
And that’s just the economic damage. The attack on society has been even more dramatic. GloboCap, in the space of a year, has transformed the majority of the global masses into an enormous, paranoid totalitarian cult that is no longer capable of even rudimentary reasoning. (I’m not going to go on about it here … at this point, you either recognize it or you’re in it.) They’re actually lining up in parking lots, the double-masked members of this Covidian cult, to be injected with an experimental “vaccine” that they believe will save the human species from a virus that causes mild to moderate symptoms in roughly 95% of those “infected,” and that over 99% of the “infected” survive.
So, it is no big surprise that these same mindless cultists are gung-ho for the (New Normal) War on Domestic Terror, and the upcoming globally-televised show trial of Donald Trump for “inciting insurrection,” and the ongoing corporate censorship of the Internet, and can’t wait to be issued their “Freedom Passports,” which will allow them to take part in “New Normal” life — double-masked and socially-distanced, naturally — while having their every movement and transaction, and every word they write on Facebook, or in an email, or say to someone on their smartphones, or in the vicinity of their 5G toasters, recorded by GloboCap’s Intelligence Services and their corporate partners, subsidiaries, and assigns. These people have nothing at all to worry about, as they would never dream of disobeying orders, and could not produce an original thought, much less one displeasing to GloboCap, if you held a fake apocalyptic plague to their heads.
As for the rest of us “extremists,” “domestic terrorists,” “heretics,” and “reality deniers,” (i.e., anyone criticizing global capitalism, or challenging its official narratives, and its increasingly totalitarian ideology, regardless of our specific DHS acronyms), I wish I had something hopeful to tell you, but, the truth is, things aren’t looking so good. I guess I’ll see you in a quarantine camp, or in the psych ward, or an offshore detention facility … or, I don’t know, maybe I’ll see you in the streets.
The Biden administration just issued an edict that will spur endless pointless conflicts for Americans seeking to peacefully enjoy hundreds of national parks. On Groundhog Day, the National Park Service (NPS) mandated wearing face masks on all National Park Service lands “when physical distancing cannot be maintained, including “narrow or busy trails, overlooks and historic homes.”
Probably 95% of the Park Service’s 800+ million acres is uncrowded 95% of the time. But the new mandate is an entitlement program for anyone who wants to harass anyone on federal land who is not wearing a mask, regardless of social distancing, wide open spaces, or trails wide enough for 18-wheel trucks.
As the Idaho Statesman noted, “It’s unclear how park officials will enforce Biden’s federal mask mandate.” The Outdoor Society hailed the new regulation: “It is straight forward and very simple to follow, helping to keep everyone safe.” That organization insisted that the policy “is not going to be invasive” but told readers: “If you see violations of the mask requirement: Find the closest ranger or volunteer in the area and let them know.”
Captain Sara Newman, NPS director of Office of Public Health declared, “Getting outside and enjoying our public lands is essential to improving mental and physical health, but we all need to work together to recreate responsibly.” But the latest mask rule will empower legions of zealots to accost, harass, and possibly assault people for failing to obey the latest Pandemic Security Theater mandate.
Mask controversies have already spurred plenty of idiocy in National Parks and other parks:
*At Acadia National Park in Maine, a family complained that a stranger “who may be from Massachusetts intentionally coughed on them for not wearing masks while they were socially distancing during a quaint wedding.”
* In a state park in Massachusetts, at the Hudson Overlook on the Midstate Trail (Ashburnham?), a man spit at two female hikers who were not wearing masks. Police reported: “He explained to them that it was the ‘law’ and that they were selfish. He aggressively turned towards them and stated, ‘I have Covid’ and began spitting at the young females.”
I lead hikes most weekends, usually on the C & O Canal Towpath in Maryland. I tell attendees that masks are optional but kvetching about other hikers wearing or not wearing masks is prohibited. The Towpath – formerly used by mules dragging along barges – is at least 10 feet wide in most places.
Since the hikes are in the Washington area, there is no shortage of people outraged when anyone fails to comply with any government recommendation – even though the trail isn’t narrow. Many zealots follow a simple standard for maskless hikers: “If you see them, scream at them.”
Recently as our hiking group neared a wooden bridge, a 50ish guy coming from the other direction suddenly stopped and looked as horrified as a vampire who had spotted a crucifix.
He lifted his shirt up over his face to provide double protection along with his facial covering, and shouted, “YOU’RE NOT WEARING MASKS!”
“We’re outside. It’s sunny. The wind is blowing,” I replied. The dude was perhaps unaware that Covid transmission hinges on “viral load,” which wasn’t happening on that hike.
“You’re violating the rules!” he proclaimed.
We just kept walking past him.
He turned and shouted at me: “So what—is your beard supposed to be your mask!?!”
I kept going.
And then he hollered: “Your beard is ugly!”
Damn! Me and Rodney Dangerfield – no respect. This learned gentleman was apparently unfamiliar with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration guidance warning that beards make tight masks ineffective. Bummed that the dude didn’t offer me a free razor.
Things got worse after Biden issued an executive order on January 20 that people had to wear masks any time they were on federal property. The edict had an unwritten exemption for Great Leaders – when Biden went to the Lincoln Memorial a few hours after signing the order, he posed by the statue of Abraham Lincoln; neither Lincoln nor Biden were wearing a mask. At a daily press briefing, Biden spokeswoman Jen Psaki scoffed at a reporter’s concern over the apparent crime: “He was celebrating a historic day in our country…. We have bigger things to worry about.”
Regardless, Biden’s order is inflaming legions of junior Stasi across the land. Leading a hike ten days later (and shortly before the NPS mandate), we exited the Towpath and crossed under a bridge where two middle-aged women were standing on an embankment 25 feet away. One of them began shouting and waving her arms.
I looked at her but had no idea what she was saying.
She screamed louder and became even more distraught.
“I can’t understand you,” I hollered at her.
She waved her arms up and down.
I shrugged.
She pulled down her mask: “You’re not wearing masks!”
“We’re outside, it’s windy,” I replied.
“It’s the law! You have to wear a mask on federal property!” she proclaimed.
“It’s an executive order, it’s not a law,” I replied. “Biden didn’t obey it himself.”
When she repeated her denunciation, I refrained from pointing out that she was violating the order because she lowered her mask to berate us.
She tried to buttonhole two other hikers who were bringing up the rear.
“Group? What group? We’re not with a group,” a laggard hiker wisely responded.
Maybe the same woman will be ready with multiple surveillance cameras and a couple of drones to capture video from different angles in case she sees our group again.
Maybe it’s too bad policies for hiking trails on federal land aren’t being set by Rachel Levine, Biden’s designee to be Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services and the first openly transgender federal official to be nominated. Levine made waves when the Pennsylvania Department of Health she headed offered “best practices” advice to people who “attend a large gathering where youmight end up having sex.” Unfortunately, the new NPS rules for hikers are much more restrictive than what Levine recommended for Pennsylvania orgies.
The new mask mandate is sanctified with the usual invocations. NPS Deputy Director Shawn Benge declared, “Working with public health officials and following the latest science and guidance, we can make national parks safer for employees, visitors and partners.” But NPS has no data on how many hikers have contracted Covid from passing within shouting distance of other people. If Covid was so contagious that momentary exposure from passing individuals could spread the virus, then almost all the nation’s grocery store clerks would have been struck down early in the pandemic.
But the only “evidence” necessary for this mandate is that many Biden supporters are frightened when they see anyone outside not wearing a mask. The new regulation encourages viewing people not wearing masks as physical assailants who pose an immediate deadly peril to anyone within eyesight. One Twitter user responded to my article on hysterical Covid complaints by warning: “If you approach me without a mask, I’m free to do whatever I need to do in self defense.” That dude had nothing to fear since I go out of my way to avoid frenzied people.
Where does the mask mania mindset lead? Last month, in Glendale, California, a 38-year-old shirtless jogger was arrested for “spitting on random people outdoors, primarily for not wearing a face mask…. Victims of his assaults ranged in age from 13 to 78 years old. In some incidents, the suspect taunted and used racial slurs towards the victims during the assault,” a police statement said. He was charged with “battery, elder abuse and committing a hate crime.”
If Biden has a right to compel everyone to wear a mask in the National Park Service, he would also have the right to dictate that people wear two masks – a policy endorsed by Covid Czar Anthony Fauci on Tuesdays and Thursdays but not on other days of the week. And if Biden has the right to mandate multiple masks, then would he also have the right to dictate that no one can enter a national park unless they prove they have received a Covid vaccine?
A more likely policy is that national parks could simply be shut down as part of a future lockdown strategy. Parking lots at the C & O Towpath were blocked early in the pandemic and there is no reason to presume that could not happen again. What if the Biden administration chooses to “go big” with a nationwide dictate modeled after the Los Angeles edict that banned almost all walking and bicycling in the city, ordering four million people to “to remain in their homes?” That utterly failed to stop the increase in local Covid cases but the media still cheers dramatic gestures, sort of like how the Italian press treated Mussolini.
Americans hiking in national parks and elsewhere should strive to be courteous and stay as far away as possible from people tormented by Covid dread. There are unseen perils when federal policy seeks to placate mass fears rather than protect public safety. Plenty of Americans need to heed the warning a British publication gave to its readers: “Is constantly monitoring COVID rulebreakers wrecking your mental health?”
As the spirit of patriotism and belief in scientific and technological progress was slowly suffocated throughout the Cold War, the governing class that Russell represented sunk its talons into civilization ever more deeply.
In it, the philosopher and sometimes imperial grand strategist made the point that society has become far too complex to be left to democratic institutions. In the modern age of advanced warfare, only a scientific dictatorship could be trusted to lead society, while the thoughtless masses of human cattle should be given the illusion of democracy and freedom. Sovereign nation states must be superseded by world government and thus two parallel cultures, two educations and two moralities must be shaped.
Russell laid out his grim worldview of a master/slave dominated order in the following terms:
“The scientific rulers will provide one kind of education for ordinary men and women and another for those who are to become holders of scientific power. Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile, industrious, punctual, thoughtless and contented. Of these qualities, probably contentment will be considered the most important. In order to produce it, all the researchers of psycho-analysis, behaviorism and biochemistry will be brought into play… all the boys and girls will learn from an early age to be what is called “cooperative” i.e.: to do exactly what every body else is doing. Initiative will be discouraged in these children, and insubordination, without being punished will be scientifically trained out of them.”
For the elites in Russell’s dystopic world, a different role was envisioned:
“Except for the one matter of loyalty to the world state and to their own order, members of the governing class will be encouraged to be adventurous, and full of initiative. It will be recognized that it is their business to improve scientific techniques and to keep the manual workers contented by means of continual new amusements”.
Twenty three years after writing this, Russell creepily updated his work in the form of a book called The Impact of Science on Society (1953). It was here that the celebrated mathematician and philosopher looked upon the wonderful advances in mass entertainment, psychotropic drugs, and behaviorism saying:
“It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment… This subject will make great strides when it is taken up by scientists under a scientific dictatorship. Anaxagoras maintained that snow is black, but no one believed him. The social psychologists of the future will have a number of classes of school children on whom they will try different methods of producing an unshakable conviction that snow is black. Various results will soon be arrived at. First, that the influence of home is obstructive. Second, that not much can be done unless indoctrination begins before the age of ten. Third, that verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective. Fourth, that the opinion that snow is white must be held to show a morbid taste for eccentricity. It is for future scientists to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it costs per head to make children believe that snow is black, and how much less it would cost to make them believe it is dark gray.”
The challenge faced by Russell and his co-thinkers was not so much found in the realm of ivory tower theorizing, but rather in the practical world. For how would it be possible to induce a society to accept such conditions when their targets had only recently sacrificed so much to stop global fascism and eugenics during WWII?
The Post-War Takeover
As the spirit of patriotism and belief in scientific and technological progress was slowly suffocated throughout the long night of nuclear terror that was the Cold War, the governing class that Russell represented sunk its talons into civilization ever more deeply.
The target? Sovereign nation states and the cultural dynamics that brought these pesky new institutions into being after the 14th Century dark age which enshrined both the general welfare and the sacredness of the individual into statecraft and law. It was this movement that drove the explosion of new discoveries (and population growth) after the 15th century golden renaissance, leading up to the 1648 Peace of Westphalia and later American Revolution. This was a fire that kept oligarchs up at night and which no amount of water could permanently destroy… and they tried.
During the early decades of the post-WWII age, there was resistance of course. Leaders resistant to the renewed emergence of imperialism stood in defense of humanity’s right to access the Four Freedoms made famous by Franklin Roosevelt.
Dag Hammarskjöld, Enrico Mattei, John Kennedy, MLK, Bobby Kennedy and many other moral leaders were quickly snuffed out as the engines of industrial progress were converted into factories for never-ending wars and cheap consumer goods. Large scale infrastructure and programs of scientific exploration into space and the properties of the atom increasingly fell out of practice as society was compelled to adapt to a new paradigm in the early 1970s.
While Russell spoke well of science, it was never the sort of science that would end poverty or war to which he referred, but rather sciences of entertainment, population control, and behaviorism.
The Post-Industrial Technetronic Age: Brzezinski and Holdren
Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote a book in 1970 entitled Between Two Ages which served as a manifesto for the new Trilateral Commission which was created in 1973 under his lead. In this book, Brzezinski restated Russell’s vision in his own words:
“The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”
At this time, a new social order was unleashed as the dollar was floated on the speculative markets killing the gold-reserve industrial era of Bretton Woods in 1971, tying the U.S. dollar to oil prices in 1973 and ushering in a new deregulated epoch of “everything goes” monetarism, and post-industrial consumerism. Foreseeing this emerging unbounded age of unreason, Brzezinski wrote:
“In the technetronic society the trend seems to be toward aggregating the individual support of millions of unorganized citizens, who are easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities, and effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.”
Another figure from this nest of sociopaths emerging onto the scene during these years was a young John Holdren whose 1977 book Ecoscience (co-authored with his mentor Paul Ehrlich) outlined his future dystopia with bone chilling detail saying:
“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all-natural resources, renewable or non-renewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus, the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market. The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”
From 2009-2017 Holdren acted as “science czar” under the Obama administration where the respected climate scientist spearheaded the defunding of NASA space exploration programs, the collapse of nuclear investments, the killing of fusion power and the re-direction of billions of dollars into “sustainable” green energy fiascos such as Solyndra.
Today, Holdren is ecstatic that he might be admitted back into the corridors of power now that the “aberration” of Trump has been removed, and a “scientifically” managed governance agenda is being quickly brought back online.
On January 27, 2021, Biden signed into effect a “Memorandum on Restoring Trust in Government Through Scientific Integrity and Evidence-based Policy Making” which revives the earlier 2009 and 2010 science policy memoranda authored by Holdren. This reform calls for imposing a new Director of the Office of Science and Technology in Policy as a sort of Grand Referee to ensure that “evidence-based” policy making are enforced across all departments and sub-departments of state. Expert councils such as the Chief Data Officers’ Council and Evaluation Officer Councils will be created and empowered to keep all science in alignment with behaviorist operating systems. Biden’s memorandum literally calls for “using behavioral science insights to better service the American people” to define the decision making of the system as a whole.
It is here that the ugliness of Behaviorism and the collapse of real standards of scientific practice show their ugly heads. Many terms and techniques used by Russell’s modern governing class are consciously obscured or sanitized for the lower classes and so I would like to take a bit of time to dwell on two of the most important terms here: 1) Evidence Based Decision making and 2) Economic Behaviorism.
Evidence-Based Lying: Case Study #1
“Evidence-based decision making” may seem harmless on the surface. After all, why would we want to take actions without being informed by “evidence”? However, when one begins to scratch the surface of this term and its real-world applications, a very different picture emerges.
“It has become clear to me that evidence-based medicine either was in its original intent, or has become, a budget cutting and potential population-control measure. Because it is wrapped up in scientific-sounding rhetoric, it has captured the attention of well-meaning physicians who want to incorporate science into their decisions, and has been sold to the public as an advancement in care.”
In her article, Dr. Helgason points out that doctors conditioned to follow such standards lose their fundamentally human ability to judge, diagnose and treat diseases which often lurk below the surface of data which computer models might pick up and transmit as probabilistic “answers” for what may or may not be wrong with a patient.
As one example, take the case of thousands of coronavirus patients whose intubations induced their deaths since “evidence-based” protocols (a LiveScience analysis reported that 9 out of 10 patients intubated on ventilators ended up dying in one major New York hospital). When frontline doctors like Dr. Kyle Sidell began making the case that COVID-19 symptoms are more akin to high altitude sickness (wherein alveoli in the lungs fail) rather than the typical flu-based respiratory problems, he was silenced for his “heresy”, and intubation was continued under the guise of “evidence-based best practice”.
When looking at how COVID-19 mortality statistics are gathered, one should not be surprised to discover that World Health Organization expert councils have mandated that all deaths be labelled “COVID-19” even if the patient died of heart attack, brain hemorrhage or broken neck while having tested positive for COVID-19. How does that affect the reading of the statistics which experts are projecting into the mass psyche?
Evidence-Based Lying: Case Study #2
Another example of the misuse of statistics can be found in large scale energy policy reforms being driven by the apparent need to lower world temperatures by 1.5 degrees in 30 years.
Sounds pretty noble right?
But what if the data sets being used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s computer models are flawed? What if vast swaths of data sets and higher astrophysical variables shaping climate change are being overlooked in the effort to transform mass behavior in accord with a technocratic elite?
What if a closer inspection of CO2:Temperature relationship actually ends up showing that climate change does not follow but is rather followedby CO2 variability? What other factors cause the heating or cooling of the earth other than carbon dioxide? How could we ever find out if we are told the question isn’t worth asking because the scientific debate is over?
While contemplating these matters, the question should always emerge:
Who would benefit by all this sleight of hand? Who would want humanity to falsely adopt fearful and self-loathing states of mind in order to drastically alter its behavior?
Since statistics and evidence-based thinking are the bedrocks of Behaviorism, and since the Behaviorists of the Obama era are consolidating their power under Biden, it is now worth saying a few words about Behaviorism.
Behaviorism: Fascism By Another Name
Ignoring the fact that Behaviorism has gotten a lot of positive press in recent years (one of the leading behaviorists Richard Thaler who co-authored Nudge with fellow behaviorist Cass Sunstein, was even awarded the Nobel Prize in economics in 2017), it isn’t an exaggeration to say that the school of thought is fundamentally fascist in its nature.
Why do I say this?
Well, the easy answer is to re-read Holdren’s own words from 1977 cited above and trace out his life’s policy actions. That’s the sledgehammer answer.
The more subtle but useful answer can be found in Holdren’s recent December 2020 interview on science policy in the upcoming Biden Administration (wherein he most certainly hopes to have a role):
“It is very important that, in talking about these matters, scientists separate what they know or believe as scientists from what they prefer as citizens in terms of public policy. It’s very important to distinguish between issues of fact and issues of values and preferences.”
In Holdren’s eyes, “science” and “values” are two opposing worlds.
The unscientific person might think naively that depopulation is atrocious or that a society run by an unelected master class of technicians is offensive to morality, but that is just our “subjective pollution” talking. The priest of science knows that statistical data sets and computer models are the best and only substitute for 1) mapping out and 2) manipulating reality.
For a behaviourist, subjective phenomena such as Love, Justice, Beauty, Free Will and Intentions are non-scientific pollution.
The educated behaviourist seeks only to find materialistic explanations for measurable behavior without resorting to unscientific concepts like “soul” or “mind” or “God” (these concepts being transcendental, immeasurable, unweighable and thus non-existent).
For similar reasons, concepts like “universals”, “Truth”, “Good”, “Evil” are also considered deplorable non-entities to the “scientific thinker” of Holdren’s calibre. Metaphysical gobbledygook and nothing more.
A Word on B.F. Skinner
The founder of modern radical Behaviorism, B.F. Skinner (1904-1990) was himself very candid about the scientific management of society when he wrote “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” (1971) saying that the behavioral scientist of the new post-industrial age must avoid at all costs concepts like dignity, freedom, good or evil:
“We can follow the path taken by physics and biology by turning directly to the relation between behavior and the environments and neglecting supposed mediating states of mind. We do not need to try to discover what personality, states of mind, feelings, traits of character, plans, purposes, intentions or the other prerequisites of autonomous man really are in order to get on with a scientific analysis of behavior”.
All that exists in this cold soulless world are clusters of ants calling themselves “human”, propelled by electro-neural signals masquerading as free will and urges for sex, dominance over the weak and sensual pleasure.
In a typical case of oligarchical projection, Skinner says clearly:
“we must remember that wars begin in the minds of men, that there is something suicidal in man – a death instinct perhaps – which leads to war, and that man is aggressive by nature”.
And so, you see, in the minds of Skinner, Holdren, Brzezinski, or any of the giddy technocrats managing the Great Reset, it isn’t “empires” or “oligarchs striving to enslave humanity” which are the causes of humanity’s problems.
The enemy of man is in fact man himself.
And for this unfortunate “fact”, it is the duty of the elite to save mankind from himself.
If that means cleansing society of its traditional values that have deluded him into believing that such notions as Family, Nation, God, Progress or Soul are somehow sacred, then so be it. In his vicious tautology, the behaviorist high priest concludes that these ideas must be cleansed- for if they were not destroyed, then humanity would forever resist a return to feudalism under a scientific dictatorship.
Have you ever wondered how a herd of sheep is driven to their slaughterhouse? Manipulation of minds is a well-studied science, has been applied already for centuries, but is getting ever more sophisticated. For example, the many poignant assertions, Joseph Goebbels, Hitlers Minister of Propaganda (1933 to 1945), included, “if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth”; or “if you make people believe in the threat of an enemy, they’ll do your bidding”– and “divide and polarize them, destroy their solidarity, and they follow your command”.
Today we have become more sophisticated. While fear is still the weapon of choice – imagine an invisible enemy that everybody is scared of – we have digitally observant media, algorithms and robots that focus on your thinking, how you react and deal with social media, or what websites you consult, and where and what you shop. This is just to mention a few points of information. Today there are on average about 200 such data to be electronically computed, so as to sway your opinion and to make you believe the most flagrant lies.
You may recognize what covid is doing to you and at what state of manipulation we are – how close to the slaughterhouse are we? The seven stages below synthesize the book ‘Influence, The Power of Persuasion’, by Robert Cialdini.
Hypnotherapists have been noticing blatant hypnosis and Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) techniques being used by the government and state-controlled media. NPL is a psychological approach that involves analyzing strategies used by successful individuals and applying them to reach a personal goal. It relates thoughts, language, and patterns of behavior learned through experience to specific outcomes.
Listen to this:
👉 Fractionation:
You get them to do something not once, but again and again, increasing the level of intensity each time. Usually, you do it 3 times. (At the first lockdown I said – watch out, there’ll be a 2nd and a 3rd) This increases compliance – you’re much more likely to get them to do whatever you want.
👉 A ‘Yes’ set:
Get them to say ‘Yes’ to something small at first (just two weeks to “flatten the curve”) then gradually increase (months of lockdown, Christmas cancelled, socially/economically coerced into vaccines). In this way they’re much more likely to keep saying yes. (There would’ve been riots if they’d said in March lockdowns will carry on through Christmas.)
👉 Confusion:
Keep them in a constant state of uncertainty. The conscious mind responds to this by ‘going offline’ as it searches for the appropriate response for something it has no precedent for. Then it’s much easier for the manipulator to gain access to the unconscious mind and change belief systems. For example, lockdown rules are changing on practically a day-to-day basis; we’re living in a world we’ve never lived in before, everyone’s stumbling about with no idea how to behave. We’ve no energy left to fight our oppressors.
👉 Repetition:
Repeat the same information over and over (see any newspaper / TV news for evidence of this!)
👉 Illusion of Choice
Make them believe they’re in control by giving them 2 choices, both of which lead to the same result. For example, ‘Do you want the Pfeizer or the Oxford?’ or ‘You can choose to be good or bad. Bad = more lockdown. Good = more lockdown.’
👉 “Social Proof”
“Look, all these great celebrities are backing it!”
👉 “Scarcity”
“You’ll have to wait your turn for the vaccine… we might be running out”
And so many more… All classic psychological control techniques. Once you see it, you can’t un-see it.
Check out the book ‘Influence’, The Power of Persuasion’ by Robert Cialdini – all the methods he talks about are being used daily in the news and other media.
—
If we realize in time that this is what is happening to us, that this theory applied is behind covid and using covid for a much more freedom encroaching ulterior goal – total control of humanity, of people’s behavior, of food, of resources – over whether people live or die – and of the world’s riches – then we might have a chance to break out from the herd that storms towards the abyss – or the slaughterhouse.
Waking up – protesting – disobeying – and reconnecting with each other. NOW.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America.
By Christina England – 30 Q&As – Book Review & Summary
Lies are Unbekoming | September 4, 2026
… Gardasil received FDA fast-track approval in 2006, Cervarix followed in 2009, and Gardasil 9 was approved in December 2014 with more than double the aluminium adjuvant content of the original. The commercial context is specific. Merck was about to lose patent protection on Zocor and faced $18 billion in Vioxx injury claims from a cardiovascular drug the company had marketed while suppressing its own data showing a five-times increase in heart attacks. Analysts projected the global HPV vaccine market at $4 billion by 2011, contingent on government-funded national programs for teenage girls. The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act had already granted manufacturers complete liability immunity. By 2013, Japan had withdrawn its HPV vaccine recommendation after cataloguing severe adverse reactions in hundreds of girls. No Western government followed. The establishment position across the UK, US, Australia, and most of Europe held, and still holds, that the vaccines are safe and effective, that reported injuries are coincidental, and that cervical cancer prevention justifies the program. The book was published into this position, not against a vacuum.
Shattered Dreams sits alongside Mary Holland’s The HPV Vaccine On Trial and Viera Scheibner’s foundational vaccination work as part of the documented record on what has been done to a generation of teenage girls under the banner of cancer prevention. The full summary unpacks three specific findings: that Merck used the aluminium adjuvant itself as the “placebo” control in 92.5% of trial subjects, making it structurally impossible to detect excess reactions from the adjuvant; that Dr. Sin Hang Lee found HPV DNA fragments bound to aluminium in every one of sixteen Gardasil samples tested, and in the blood and spleen of a New Zealand girl six months after her third dose; and that in every country with high vaccination coverage, including Australia, the UK, Norway, and Sweden, cervical cancer rates have stopped declining and started rising specifically in the vaccinated cohort. Martínez-Lavín’s 2017 calculation puts the number needed to seriously harm with Gardasil 9 at 140, and the number needed to vaccinate to prevent one case at 1,757. Thirteen young women are seriously harmed for every one who benefits. The vaccine was approved on the basis of trials that could not detect what the trials were supposed to detect, and it is still being given to twelve-year-olds today. … Read full review
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News
