Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

24 World Leaders Openly Call For The Great Reset

By Richie Allen | March 30, 2021

World leaders are calling for an end to nationalism and isolationism in the wake of the covid-19 pandemic. 24 countries have come together to call for a global settlement like the one reached after the second world war to “protect countries” and build cross border co-operation.

The call by the 24 world leaders is made in today’s Daily Telegraph and other newspapers around the world including, Le Monde in France and Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in Germany.

The leaders claim that a new international settlement is necessary ahead of the next international health crisis. They described Covid as the biggest threat to the global community since the 1940’s.

“A treaty on pandemics “should lead to more mutual accountability and shared responsibility, transparency and co-operation within the international system and with its rules and norms”, the leaders said.

According to The Telegraph today;

The 24 world leaders warned that regardless of the origins of the outbreak, a future global pandemic was an inevitability.

The group, also including Charles Michel, the European Council president, Mark Rutte, the Dutch prime minister, and the presidents of South Africa, South Korea, Indonesia, Tunisia and Senegal, said the key question was not “if but when” the next health crisis would strike.

They warned that “no single government or multilateral agency can address this threat alone”, arguing: “Together, we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly co-ordinated fashion.”

Other central aims of a pandemic agreement would be to enhance international co-operation around alert systems, data-sharing and research, as well as the local, regional and global production and distribution of vaccines, medicines, diagnostics and personal protective equipment.

The new treaty would be rooted in the constitution of The World Health Organization. “At a time when Covid-19 has exploited our weaknesses and divisions, we must seize this opportunity and come together as a global community for peaceful cooperation that extends beyond this crisis,” the leaders said.

This is terrifying. For many years, I have been featuring writers, researchers and academics who warned us that this would happen. This is the end game.

International treaties are about one thing and one thing only, that is, concentrating power in the hands of a tiny elite. It’s what globalists have been working towards for decades.

It’s much more convenient for corporations and banks to do business with 24 countries who agree to regulatory alignment, than if those corporations have to deal with 24 individual countries whose rules and regulations are different.

This is what the EU was always about. I’ve been banging that drum for years.

Bill Gates, through his subsidiaries the WHO, CEPI and GAVI, and pharma giants like AstraZeneca, GSK and Pfizer, wants to vaccinate the world’s population against every illness you can name. AZ, GSK and Pfizer have received billions of dollars in grants from Gates.

June Raine, head of the UK’s medicine regulator MHRA, is on the record as saying that countries would be moving away from the traditional approach of treating illnesses when they arise, to a new era where the focus will be on prevention.

It’s claimed that new mRNA technology has opened up a world of possibilities for preventing illness. Vaccines are in development for obesity, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, cancers and allergies. Imagine what the vaccination schedule for children could look like in ten years?

Bill Gates wants these vaccines to be approved and rolled-out quickly. The proposed pandemic treaty, which promises “mutual accountability shared responsibility and co-operation” between 24 countries, will make it easy for him.

French President Emmanuel Macron has been criticised for his government’s failure to approve coronavirus vaccines as quickly as the UK. France is being locked down again. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has faced similar criticism.

A global pandemic treaty would solve that problem. A new vaccine wouldn’t need to be assessed for safety and efficacy by regulators in 24 countries. It would only need to pass one inspection.

There will be alignment on travel and vaccine passports too. The world leaders, in today’s article said;

It (the treaty) would also include recognition of a “One Health” approach that connects the health of humans, animals and our planet. And such a treaty should lead to more mutual accountability and shared responsibility, transparency and co-operation within the international system and with its rules and norms.

Over time, the treaty will inevitably be amended to deal with Climate Change. It will be repeated more frequently, that global warming has an impact on health, and therefore, regulatory alignment to deal with it will be necessary.

The article, published in today’s Daily Telegraph and newspapers around the world, is signed by;

. V. Bainimarama, prime minister of Fiji; António Luís Santos da Costa, prime minister of Portugal; Klaus Iohannis, president of Romania; Boris Johnson, prime minister of the United Kingdom; Paul Kagame, president of Rwanda; Uhuru Kenyatta, president of Kenya; Emmanuel Macron, president of France; Angela Merkel, chancellor of Germany; Charles Michel, president of the European Council; Kyriakos Mitsotakis, prime minister of Greece; Moon Jae-in, president of the Republic of Korea; Sebastián Piñera, president of Chile; Carlos Alvarado Quesada, president of Costa Rica; Edi Rama, prime minister of Albania; Cyril Ramaphosa, president of South Africa; Keith Rowley, prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago; Mark Rutte, prime minister of the Netherlands; Kais Saied, president of Tunisia; Macky Sall, president of Senegal; Pedro Sánchez, Prime Minister of Spain; Erna Solberg, prime minister of Norway; Aleksandar Vučić, president of Serbia; Joko Widodo, president of Indonesia; Volodymyr Zelensky, president of Ukraine; Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organisation

March 30, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

The “Unvaccinated” Question

By CJ Hopkins | Consent Factory | March 29, 2021

So, the New Normals are discussing the Unvaccinated Question. What is to be done with us? No, not those who haven’t been “vaccinated” yet. Us. The “Covidiots.” The “Covid deniers.” The “science deniers.” The “reality deniers.” Those who refuse to get “vaccinated,” ever.

There is no place for us in New Normal society. The New Normals know this and so do we. To them, we are a suspicious, alien tribe of people. We do not share their ideological beliefs. We do not perform their loyalty rituals, or we do so only grudgingly, because they force us to do so. We traffic in arcane “conspiracy theories,” like “pre-March-2020 science,” “natural herd immunity,” “population-adjusted death rates,” “Sweden,” “Florida,” and other heresies.

They do not trust us. We are strangers among them. They suspect we feel superior to them. They believe we are conspiring against them, that we want to deceive them, confuse them, cheat them, pervert their culture, abuse their children, contaminate their precious bodily fluids, and perpetrate God knows what other horrors.

So they are discussing the need to segregate us, how to segregate us, when to segregate us, in order to protect society from us. In their eyes, we are no more than criminals, or, worse, a plague, an infestation. In the words of someone (I can’t quite recall who), “getting rid of the Unvaccinated is not a question of ideology. It is a question of cleanliness,” or something like that. (I’ll have to hunt down and fact-check that quote. I might have taken it out of context.)

In Israel, Estonia, Denmark, Germany, the USA, and other New Normal countries, they have already begun the segregation process. In the UK, it’s just a matter of time. The WEF, WHO, EU, and other transnational entities are helping to streamline the new segregation system, which, according to the WEF, “will need to be harmonized by a normative body, such as the WHO, to ensure that is ethical.”

Here in Germany, the government is considering banning us from working outside our homes. We are already banned from flying on commercial airlines. (We can still use the trains, if we dress up like New Normals.) In the village of Potsdam, just down the road from Wannsee (which name you might recall from your 20th-Century history lessons), we are banned from entering shops and restaurants. (I’m not sure whether we can still use the sidewalks, or whether we have to walk in the gutters.) In Saxony, we are forbidden from attending schools. At the Berliner Ensemble (the theater founded by Bertolt Brecht and Helene Weigel, lifelong opponents of totalitarianism and fascism), we are banned from attending New Normal performances.

In the USA, we are being banned by universities. Our children are being banned from public schools. In New York, the new “Excelsior Pass” will allow New Normals to attend cultural and sports events (and patronize bars and restaurants, eventually) secure in the knowledge that the Unvaccinated have been prevented from entering or segregated in an “Unvaccinated Only” section. The pass system, designed by IBM, which, if history is any guide, is pretty good at designing such systems (OK, technically, it was Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft, IBM’s Nazi-Germany subsidiary), was launched this past weekend to considerable fanfare.

And this is only the very beginning.

Israel’s “Green Pass” is the model for the future, which makes sense, in a sick, fascistic kind of way. When you’re already an apartheid state, what’s a little more apartheid? Here’s a peek at what that looks like …

OK, I know what the New Normals are thinking. They’re thinking I’m “misleading” people again. That I’m exaggerating. That this isn’t really segregation, and certainly nothing like “medical apartheid.”

After all (as the New Normals will sternly remind me), no one is forcing us to get “vaccinated.” If we choose not to, or can’t for medical reasons, all we have to do is submit to a “test” — you know, the one where they ram that 9-inch swab up into your sinus cavities — within 24 hours before we want to go out to dinner, or attend the theater or a sports event, or visit a museum, or attend a university, or take our children to school or a playground, and our test results will serve as our “vaccine passports!” We just present them to the appropriate Covid Compliance Officer, and (assuming the results are negative, of course) we will be allowed to take part in New Normal society just as if we’d been “vaccinated.”

Either way, “vaccine” or “test,” the New Normal officials will be satisfied, because the tests and passes are really just stage props. The point is the display of mindless obedience. Even if you take the New Normals at their word, if you are under 65 and in relatively good health, getting “vaccinated” is more or less pointless, except as a public display of compliance and belief in the official Covid-19 narrative (the foundation stone of the New Normal ideology). Even the high priests of their “Science” confess that it doesn’t prevent you spreading the “plague.” And the PCR tests are virtually meaningless, as even the WHO finally admitted. (You can positive-PCR-test a pawpaw fruit … but you might want to be careful who you tell if you do that.)

In contrast to the “vaccine” and the “test” themselves, the forced choice between them is not at all meaningless. It is no accident that both alternatives involve the violation of our bodies, literally the penetration of our bodies. It doesn’t really matter what is in the “vaccines” or what “results” the “tests” produce. The ritual is a demonstration of power, the power of the New Normals (i.e., global capitalism’s new face) to control our bodies, to dominate them, to violate them, psychologically and physically.

Now, don’t get all excited, my “conspiracy theorist” friends. I haven’t gone full QAnon just yet. Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab are not sitting around together, sipping adrenochrome on George Soros’ yacht, dreaming up ways to rape people’s noses. This stuff is built into the structure of the system. It is a standard feature of totalitarian societies, cults, churches, self-help groups, and … well, human society, generally.

Being forced to repeat a physical action which only makes sense within a specific ideology reifies that ideology within us. There is nothing inherently diabolical about this. It is a basic socialization technology. It is how we socialize our children. It is why we conduct weddings, baptisms, and bar mitzvahs. It is how we turn young men and women into soldiers. It is how actors learn their blocking and their lines. It is why the Nazis held all those rallies. It is why our “democracies” hold elections. It is also basic ceremonial magic … but that’s a topic for a different column.

The issue, at the moment, is the Unvaccinated Question, and the public rituals that are being performed to make the New Normal ideology “reality,” and what to do about those of us who refuse to participate in those rituals, who refuse to forswear “old normal” reality and convert to New Normalism so that we can function in society without being segregated, criminalized, or “diagnosed” as “sociopathic” or otherwise psychiatrically disordered.

For us “conspiracy-theorizing reality deniers,” there is no getting around this dilemma. This isn’t Europe in the 1930s. There isn’t anywhere to emigrate to … OK, there is, temporarily, in some of the US states that have been staging rebellions, and other such “old normal” oases, but how long do you think that will last? They’re already rolling out the “mutant variants,” and God only knows what will happen when the long-term effects of the “vaccines” kick in.

No, for most of us denizens of the global capitalist empire, it looks like the New Normal is here to stay. So, unless we are prepared to become New Normals, we are going to have to stand and fight. It is going to get rather ugly, and personal, but there isn’t any way to avoid that. Given that many New Normals are our friends and colleagues, or even members of our families, it is tempting to believe that they will “come to their senses,” that “this is all just a hysterical overreaction,” and that “everything will go back to normal soon.”

This would be a monumental error on our parts … very possibly a fatal error.

Totalitarian movements, when they reach this stage, do not simply stop on their own. They continue to advance toward their full expressions, ultimately transforming entire societies into monstrous mirror-images of themselves, unless they are opposed by serious resistance. There is a window at the beginning when such resistance has a chance. That window is still open, but it is closing, fast. I can’t tell you how best to resist, but I can tell you it starts with seeing things clearly, and calling things, and people, exactly what they are.

Let’s not make the same mistake that other minorities have made throughout history when confronted with a new totalitarian ideology. See the New Normals for what they are, maybe not deep down in their hearts, but what they have collectively become a part of, because it is the movement that is in control now, not the rational individuals they used to be. Above all, recognize where this is headed, where totalitarian movements are always headed. (See. e.g., Milton Mayer’s They Thought They Were Free: The Germans 1933-45.)

No, the Unvaccinated are not the Jews and the New Normals are not flying big Swastika flags, but totalitarianism is totalitarianism, regardless of which Goebbelsian Big Lies, and ideology, and official enemies it is selling. The historical context and costumes change, but its ruthless trajectory remains the same.

Today, the New Normals are presenting us with a “choice,” (a) conform to their New Normal ideology or (b) social segregation. What do you imagine they have planned for us tomorrow?

#

March 29, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UK Now Considering Digital Face Scanning to Enter Pubs

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | March 29, 2021

The UK government is funding companies that are producing technology which will utilize digital face scans to check people’s vaccination status and allow or block them from entering pubs, stadiums and other venues.

“Britons could have their faces scanned to allow them to access pubs, gigs and sports events under one government-funded plan being drawn up for vaccine passports,” reports the London Times.

Two companies – Mvine and iProov – are working together on the system after being given a £75,000 grant by the government having already worked with the NHS on facial recognition technology in the form of the contact tracing app.

The technology is being proposed as a solution to concerns that presenting vaccination status via an app on a phone will be too slow when multiple people are entering a busy venue.

“Whoever is standing on the door of the pub is going to have to scan the certificate, read the name and date of birth, then ask the person for an ID document, check that the name and date of birth on the ID document are the same, squint at the photograph on the ID document and then make sure that the person in front of them is that person,” iProov CEO Andrew Bud said. “To which the answer is, that’s not going to happen.”

Bud said that the facial recognition system would reduce this process to a matter of seconds, streamlining the system.

“It speeds the process up and it absolves people of what would otherwise be a very heavy responsibility,” he added.

After months of promising that there would be no domestic vaccine passport, every indication is now that the government is going ahead with it.

Millions of Brits will refuse to submit to digital face scans to go about their everyday business, but the vast majority are likely to accept it without question, creating a two tier society where those who resist the biosecurity surveillance state will remain in a de facto permanent state of lockdown.

This again underscores the fact that the ‘vaccine passport’ is a digital identity card that citizens will be expected to carry at all times and use whenever they want to engage in basic commerce or other normal leisure activity.

March 29, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

The Covid-19 pandemic has taken thought policing and wokeness to a whole new level

By Rachel Marsden | RT | March 28, 2021

What’s the link between vaccine militancy, Covid jab passports, and a woke Church of Sweden theologian suggesting Christians should accept Prophet Mohammed out of “respect” for Muslims? Let me tell you.

For years now, Western society has been on a slippery slope towards total rejection of the old philosophy of ‘live and let live’. And that slope is a slip’n’slide with a brick wall at the end of it. It was only a matter of time before society slammed into it. There were many exit ramps and flashing warning signs en route, but, as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

It all seemed to start innocently enough when social justice warriors advocated in favor of tolerance of diversity. Fair enough. What reasonable person would have a problem with people being able to live their own life as they see fit, as long as it didn’t impede on anyone else’s?

The only real confusion was that by focusing on the kind that’s based on appearance or traits that individuals can’t control, these activists limited their mission to increasing only the most superficial kinds of diversity, which is in itself a form of discrimination against the very people for whom they purport to advocate. These militants effectively reduce people to one-dimensional figures by underscoring the kind of traits that are only visible on the most cringeworthy dating hook-up apps while negating the kind of diversity that is unseen and far more deep. But society ultimately conceded to their worldview, which served only to embolden them.

The next step was to advocate beyond simple tolerance in favor of the policing and rejection of any thoughts that diverged from theirs. It was the view of social justice warriors that everyone should be able to call themselves what they wish – he/him, she/her, ve/ver, xe/xem, ze/hir, (f)ae/(f)aer, etc – and have the right to dictate how others view them. Those lacking the bandwidth to wrap their minds around this new language system have been able to sidestep it by simply referring to people by their name, for example. But it was the beginning of the emergence of two parallel languages and cultures, and, ultimately, social segregation, with one for the “woke” and their sympathizers, and the other for the traditionalists.

More recently, the push for diversity has even reached realms that are by definition traditional in the strictest sense. Literally nothing is sacred anymore, not even religion. Earlier this month, a theologian of the Church of Sweden, who may or may not be a woke millennial, suggested that Christians could accept Prophet Mohammed in the interests of greater respect for Muslims, apparently seeking to treat centuries-old institutions like they’re a Marvel/DC crossover akin to having Spider-Man and Superman team up.

So, where is all this leading now? It’s pretty obvious. The Covid-19 pandemic has taken the militant policing of others’ thoughts and behaviour to a whole new level. Anyone making their own decisions about their life amid this global fiasco has been shamed for wrong-think, in a page taken straight from George Orwell’s ‘1984’, written in 1949, in which a character is executed for thoughtcrime. It’s not uncommon for workers nowadays to be fired from their jobs if the company feels the individual has violated what it considers to be proper conduct in the Covid-19 era. It’s not quite the same as Orwell’s imagined punishment by ‘vaporization’, but we seem to be getting there. Woke citizens who are completely intolerant of anyone whose views and behaviour diverges from theirs amid the pandemic are already in hysterics over people choosing not to wear face masks or electing where to wear them, or opting to go about their daily life as normally as possible.

Now we’re starting to see these same militant sanitary authoritarians wanting to dictate to others whether they should be forced to be vaccinated. And governments are playing along, with several nations evoking the notion of vaccine passports for travel or simply to enter certain indoor venues. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, for example, has raised the possibility of British pub owners having the option of reserving the right of access to their establishment to those who have been vaccinated against Covid-19.

Similarly, it appears that even higher education may soon be something reserved for the vaccinated class, with Rutgers University in New Jersey setting the tone for the next school year by requiring that students be vaccinated in order to attend.

Will others follow suit? How about mass transit, gyms, libraries, restaurants, movie theatres, shopping malls, swimming pools? Are we currently witnessing the beginning of the segregation of society based on vaccination? If so, it’ll be to the detriment of anyone skeptical about turning their body over to Big Pharma lest they find themselves barred from what most would consider normal life.

Yet there are people cheering for exactly that. The mere thought of people who think and behave differently to them is intolerable. The authoritarian policing of other people’s lives – the sort of extremism that used to be relegated to science fiction – is now nearly a fait accompli. And authoritarian wokeness disguised as benevolence is exactly how we ended up here.

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

March 29, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

New York’s Covid Vaccine Passport Makes No Sense

By Paul Craig Roberts | Institute For Political Economy | March 29, 2021

NY Governor Cuomo is establishing a Covid passport that will show vaccination or a recent negative test. It will serve as permission to enter events or venues.

Will this passport be efficacious, or is its purpose to get us accustomed to a “your papers please” way of life?

Allegedly, the combination of people with vaccinations and those recovered from infection have, or are, bringing about “herd immunity.” If so, what is the point of a passport?

There are credible reports that some who have been vaccinated have nevertheless come down with Covid, which raises doubt about the efficacy of the vaccine. There are other reports that antibodies produced by the vaccines are not long lasting.

How recent must the Covid test be to make the passport valid. A person could have a negative test and catch Covid on the way home. If the passport relies on a negative test, the passport will have to expire after some designated period unless the passport is renewed with a new test.

There is also the problem that the widely used PCR test produces false negatives and false positives. In other words, is the information on which the passport is issued valid information?

We can laugh at the passport as a silly over-reaction to a virus that in most cases is hardly more dangerous than flu, or we can understand it as a control measure over our freedom of movement and association. We are the safer if we view it as the latter.

Police already have too much power to invade homes without warrants and to stop and search people on the streets without warrants. “Probable cause” has been used to curtail civil liberty.

I am convinced that no health purpose will be served by Covid passports, and that the public should protest the introduction of a Soviet-style internal passport.

Once established, the Covid passport will be a boon for Big Pharma. A yearly booster shot will be decreed, and without it your passport will expire.

Keep in mind that Florida avoided lockdowns and mask mandates and has no worse infection and death rate than lockdown states.

Notice also that many highly qualified experts have criticized the lockdowns, mask mandates, use of untested vaccines, and the prohibition on using safe effective treatments such as HCQ and Ivermectin. Why were their voices censored and the information kept from the public? The only explanation I can think of is that Covid is being used for an unstated agenda. We should not be deceived into cooperating with this unstated agenda.

A democracy that censors expert testimony and prohibits public debate is well on its way to a police state.

A public that can be stampeeded by orchestrated fear into being jabbed with vaccines that could be more dangerous than Covid is not a public that can expect to remain in freedom.

March 29, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Congress, in a Five-Hour Hearing, Demands Tech CEOs Censor the Internet Even More Aggressively

By Glenn Greenwald | March 26, 2021

Over the course of five-plus hours on Thursday, a House Committee along with two subcommittees badgered three tech CEOs, repeatedly demanding that they censor more political content from their platforms and vowing legislative retaliation if they fail to comply. The hearing — convened by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Chair Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), and the two Chairs of its Subcommittees, Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) — was one of the most stunning displays of the growing authoritarian effort in Congress to commandeer the control which these companies wield over political discourse for their own political interests and purposes.

As I noted when I reported last month on the scheduling of this hearing, this was “the third time in less than five months that the U.S. Congress has summoned the CEOs of social media companies to appear before them with the explicit intent to pressure and coerce them to censor more content from their platforms.” The bulk of Thursday’s lengthy hearing consisted of one Democratic member after the next complaining that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Google/Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey have failed in their duties to censor political voices and ideological content that these elected officials regard as adversarial or harmful, accompanied by threats that legislative punishment (including possible revocation of Section 230 immunity) is imminent in order to force compliance (Section 230 is the provision of the 1996 Communications Decency Act that shields internet companies from liability for content posted by their users).

Republican members largely confined their grievances to the opposite concern: that these social media giants were excessively silencing conservative voices in order to promote a liberal political agenda (that complaint is only partially true: a good amount of online censorship, like growing law enforcement domestic monitoring generally, focuses on all anti-establishment ideologies, not just the right-wing variant). This editorial censoring, many Republicans insisted, rendered the tech companies’ Section 230 immunity obsolete, since they are now acting as publishers rather than mere neutral transmitters of information. Some Republicans did join with Democrats in demanding greater censorship, though typically in the name of protecting children from mental health disorders and predators rather than ideological conformity.

As they have done in prior hearings, both Zuckerberg and Pichai spoke like the super-scripted, programmed automatons that they are, eager to please their Congressional overseers (though they did periodically issue what should have been unnecessary warnings that excessive “content moderation” can cripple free political discourse). Dorsey, by contrast, seemed at the end of his line of patience and tolerance for vapid, moronic censorship demands, and — sitting in a kitchen in front of a pile of plates and glasses — he, refreshingly, barely bothered to hide that indifference. At one point, he flatly stated in response to demands that Twitter do more to remove “disinformation”: “I don’t think we should be the arbiters of truth and I don’t think the government should be either.”

Zuckerberg in particular has minimal capacity to communicate the way human beings naturally do. The Facebook CEO was obviously instructed by a team of public speaking consultants that it is customary to address members of the Committee as “Congressman” or “Congresswoman.” He thus began literally every answer he gave — even in rapid back and forth questions — with that word. He just refused to move his mouth without doing that — for five hours (though, in fairness, the questioning of Zuckerberg was often absurd and unreasonable). His brain permits no discretion to deviate from his script no matter how appropriate. For every question directed to him, he paused for several seconds, had his internal algorithms search for the relevant place in the metaphorical cassette inserted in a hidden box in his back, uttered the word “Congressman” or “Congresswoman,” stopped for several more seconds to search for the next applicable spot in the spine-cassette, and then proceeded unblinkingly to recite the words slowly transmitted into his neurons. One could practically see the gears in his head painfully churning as the cassette rewound or fast-forwarded. This tortuous ritual likely consumed roughly thirty percent of the hearing time. I’ve never seen members of Congress from across the ideological spectrum so united as they were by visceral contempt for Zuckerberg’s non-human comportment:


But it is vital not to lose sight of how truly despotic hearings like this are. It is easy to overlook because we have become so accustomed to political leaders successfully demanding that social media companies censor the internet in accordance with their whims. Recall that Parler, at the time it was the most-downloaded app in the country, was removed in January from the Apple and Google Play Stores and then denied internet service by Amazon, only after two very prominent Democratic House members publicly demanded this. At the last pro-censorship hearing convened by Congress, Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) explicitly declared that the Democrats’ grievance is not that these companies are censoring too much but rather not enough. One Democrat after the next at Thursday’s hearing described all the content on the internet they want gone: or else. Many of them said this explicitly.

At one point toward the end of the hearing, Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-TX), in the context of the January 6 riot, actually suggested that the government should create a list of groups they unilaterally deem to be “domestic terror organizations” and then provide it to tech companies as guidance for what discussions they should “track and remove”: in other words, treat these groups the same as ISIS and Al Qaeda.

Words cannot convey how chilling and authoritarian this all is: watching government officials, hour after hour, demand censorship of political speech and threaten punishment for failures to obey. As I detailed last month, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the state violates the First Amendment’s free speech guarantee when they coerce private actors to censor for them — exactly the tyrannical goal to which these hearings are singularly devoted.

There are genuine problems posed by Silicon Valley monopoly power. Monopolies are a threat to both political freedom and competition, which is why economists of most ideological persuasions have long urged the need to prevent them. There is some encouraging legislation pending in Congress with bipartisan support (including in the House Antitrust Subcommittee before which I testified several weeks ago) that would make meaningful and productive strides toward diluting the unaccountable and undemocratic power these monopolies wield over our political and cultural lives. If these hearings were about substantively considering those antitrust measures, they would be meritorious.

But that is hard and difficult work and that is not what these hearings are about. They want the worst of all worlds: to maintain Silicon Valley monopoly power but transfer the immense, menacing power to police our discourse from those companies into the hands of the Democratic-controlled Congress and Executive Branch.

And as I have repeatedly documented, it is not just Democratic politicians agitating for greater political censorship but also their liberal journalistic allies, who cannot tolerate that there may be any places on the internet that they cannot control. That is the petty wannabe-despot mentality that has driven them to police the “unfettered” discussions on the relatively new conversation app Clubhouse, and escalate their attempts to have writers they dislike removed from Substack. Just today, The New York Times warns, on its front page, that there are “unfiltered” discussions taking place on Google-enabled podcasts:

New York Times front page, Mar. 26, 2021

We are taught from childhood that a defining hallmark of repressive regimes is that political officials wield power to silence ideas and people they dislike, and that, conversely, what makes the U.S. a “free” society is the guarantee that American leaders are barred from doing so. It is impossible to reconcile that claim with what happened in that House hearing room over the course of five hours on Thursday.

March 28, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

COVID VACCINE: THE NEW SACRED COW

Computing Forever | March 27, 2021

Source articles:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/anti-vax-email-deluge-hits-european-parliament-1.4519954

https://summit.news/2021/03/22/covid-restrictions-to-remain-in-place-for-years-says-public-health-official/

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-24/when-will-covid-end-we-must-start-planning-for-a-permanent-pandemic

http://www.computingforever.com
KEEP UP ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Gab: https://gab.ai/DaveCullen
Subscribe on Gab TV: https://tv.gab.com/channel/DaveCullen
Minds.com: https://www.minds.com/davecullen
Subscribe on Odysee: https://odysee.com/@ComputingForever

Support my work here: https://computingforever.com/donate/
Support my work on Subscribe Star: https://www.subscribestar.com/dave-cullen
Follow me on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hybM74uIHJKf/
Buy How is This a Thing Mugs here: https://teespring.com/stores/computing-forever-store

March 28, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Inside the Department of Homeland Security’s Plan to Crush Right-Wing Americans

 By Eric Striker | National Justice | March 26, 2021

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing to use mass data collection, interagency prioritization directives, psychological operations and online censorship to crush what its recently confirmed Secretary Alejandro Mayourkas, a Jew from Cuba, has deemed “domestic violent extremism,” National Justice can report.

Who does the DHS consider to be a domestic violent extremist? The March 1st Director of National Intelligence threat assessment ordered by the Biden administration lists anti-abortion activists, environmentalists, members of militias, and advocates for white people as America’s top national security threats.

Besides intensifying police repression and government surveillance, DHS outlined on Wednesday its plan to use grants to fund private, unaccountable organizations that specialize in experimenting on “extremists,” psychological operations and brainwashing, and training teachers to spot and report children engaging in “hate speech.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro, a 77-year-old woman with purple hair, led the House Appropriations Committee discussion on combating “domestic violent extremism” with DHS’ two counter-terrorism department leaders, John Cohen and John Picarelli. Rep. DeLauro is the wife of former Ehud Barak advisor, Stan Greenberg.

Much of the discourse revolved around the frustration officials are having shutting down supposed “extremists” due to the fact that these individuals they claim are posing a national security risk are often not committing any criminal offenses. Rep. DeLauro frantically ranted about the need for legislation that would make membership in a patriotic militia of any kind illegal.

During the hearing, Cohen described how the DHS has been active behind the scenes in pushing social media companies to censor what he vaguely characterized as “toxic narratives,” legally dubious behavior that none of the Republicans — whose party is currently fundraising off opposing tech censorship — showed any interest in pressing him on.

Picarelli later added that his department has also been instructing online gaming and e-sports platforms to examine ways to quickly suppress and prevent what he claimed are “radicalizing” discussions.

The view that young men are “radicalized” by shouting obscenities at one another while playing video games with one another is a narrative made up by the Anti-Defamation League, not something based on sound data. Even more preposterous was Cohen’s assertion that “incels” — men who do not have regular sex — were in and of themselves a category of terrorist.

The most disturbing part of Picarelli’s testimony was when he revealed that DHS has been using NGOs to outsource projects intended to manipulate people and manufacture changes in political beliefs. They admitted that this is being used as a loophole. It would be illegal for the government to directly engage in this CIA-style activity in the homeland.

Historically, the federal government has primarily reserved NGO funding as a tool of war, regime change and influence in foreign lands, but under both the Obama and Trump administrations, and now accelerated under Biden, they have been increasingly utilized against Americans who disagree with the left-liberal Washington/New York/San Francisco consensus.

When asked about the results produced by grant making in recent years, Picarelli cited his favorite development on this front: research and experimentation being done at American University by a far-left activist that seeks to “inoculate” individuals exposed to political, religious or philosophical arguments and ideas the US government believes are undermining its power and credibility.

US Intelligence Cutouts

Some of the NGOs involved in these operations had representatives at the meeting, where they explained to the House their specialties, methods and goals.

They are as follows,

1) Richard Aborn — Citizens Crime Commission of New York City

Richard Aborn was invited to showcase his group’s “counter-terrorism” innovation, DEEP, which stands for Disruption and Early Engagement Program.

According to his description, individuals with radical beliefs are recommended to the program by the NYPD, FBI or other police organizations either before they’re arrested, while they’re in custody, or after they finish their prison sentences.

Once enrolled in the program, the “subject” (how a DHS fact sheet refers to candidates for the program) is subjected to a year or more of undisclosed psychological techniques designed specifically to depoliticize them. The way Aborn represented it sounded like a dystopian brainwashing scheme copied straight from the film A Clockwork Orange.

The ethically dubious program was created and is directed by a self-described counter-terrorism expert named Claire Abrahams.

Abrahams’ LinkedIn shows that she is a Zionist operative who has served on the committee of the Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces, a group of American Jews who provide funding to the Israeli military. While the group is allowed to keep non-profit status, it is for all intents and purposes an instrument of a foreign government.

2) Tyler Cote — Division 250

Another Jewish individual, Tyler Cote, peddled his Massachusetts based program, Division 250, which specializes in warning middle and high school students against accessing “hate speech” on the internet while also training teachers to spot politically problematic students.

Cote, a former math teacher at Fall River Jewish Home, has never attempted to hide his intense personal prejudices or loathing of Trump voters.

His main academic achievement is a 2017 academic paper titled “The Rhetorical Psychology of Trumpism: Threat, Absolutism, and the Absolutist Threat.”

3) Sammy Rangel — Life After Hate/Exit USA

Sammy Rangel’s group, Life After Hate/Exit , is also being utilized by the government.

Rangel, showing off his con, was the least vitriolic of all the people at the hearing.

According to Rangel, the group employs white nationalists who claim to have been “cured” and now see themselves as liberals, leftists, or in Christian Picciolini’s case, Antifa supporters.

In response to an inquiry about what he’s trying to do, Rangel admitted to the Committee that white nationalists often have real, fact based grievances.

His methodology revolves around pretending to befriend nationalists and talking them into channeling their anger at injustice and lack of political representations in an anti-racist direction.

The group is heavily inspired by a German program which shares the same name (EXIT).

The German equivalent is funded by the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, which is led by a Jewish woman who used to work for the infamous East German secret police unit, the Stasi.

Jewish Power Is Bipartisan

The Republicans at the inquiry expressed nothing but support for the malevolent schemes being plotted against their voters.

Only one serious concern about civil liberties was expressed to Cohen and Picarelli. Lauren Underwood, who represents Illinois’s 14th, demanded that DHS take extra care in protecting people’s civil rights and privacy, but only in cases involving minorities. Cohen reassured her that his relatives were “Civil Rights attorneys” and would stop him if they thought he was violating the rights of blacks and non-whites.

Ashley Hinson, Republican from Iowa, asked Cohen about four illegal aliens apprehended at the US border who were listed on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. Cohen responded by saying that being on the list doesn’t mean actually mean you’re a terrorist. Hinson failed to follow up with a logical question: then why does it exist?

Many of the names involved in this COINTELPRO revival are Jewish individuals who seem to lack respect for American civil traditions, and in some cases, basic human rights.

While Cohen — the “good” cop to Picarelli’s bad — paid some lip service to the First Amendment and constitutionally protected speech, the question was largely treated as an afterthought throughout the meeting.

There is no meaningful distinction between what Washington is doing and how political dissidents are treated in so-called authoritarian countries. Between 2018 and 2019, Ken Cuccarelli and Chad Wolf both began aggressively targeting primarily white nationalists. Now the Biden administration is expanding their precedent to politically persecute white Christians, libertarians, veterans and regular conservatives as well.

While this could be construed as him misspeaking, Joe Biden’s comment that the GOP may not exist in 2024 should be read as ominous in light of all that is happening.

At least half of America have been declared enemies of the state. The ruling class’s thirst for vengeance appears insatiable.

March 27, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

Israel detains 3 prominent Hamas leaders in West Bank

MEMO | March 26, 2021

The Israeli army detained three prominent Hamas leaders the occupied West Bank city of Hebron.

Eyewitnesses told Anadolu Agency that an Israeli soldier detained Hatem Qaffeisha, 58, a top Hamas leader in Hebron and a Palestinian lawmaker.

Former Local Governance Minister Isa Al-Jabari, 55, and top Hamas figure Mazen Al-Natsha, 49, were also detained.

The three figures have been jailed several times by the Israeli army.

Hamas has warned of Israeli plans to stage a mass arrest campaign against its members ahead of the Palestinian elections slated for May.

In February, key Hamas members were detained including Mustafa Al-Shannar, Adnan Asfour, Yaser Mansour, Khalid El-Haj, Abdel-Basit El-Haj, Omar Al-Hanbali and Faze’ Sawafteh.

Hamas says the Israeli authorities aim to disrupt the Palestinian elections and affect the results.

Hamas also accused the Israeli authorities of threatening its members with imprisonment if they run in the upcoming elections.

Palestinians are scheduled to vote in the legislative elections on 22 May, presidential polls are to be held on 31 July and the National Council elections on 31 August.

The last legislative elections were held in 2006, with Hamas coming out on top.

March 26, 2021 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rutgers Says Students Must Have Injections Before They Can Come to the Campus in Fall

By Robert Wenzel | Target Liberty | March 26, 2021

COVID authoritarianism has hit the university level.

Rutgers University, in New Jersey, announced Thursday that all students would need to be fully vaccinated against the coronavirus before they would be allowed to return to campus in the fall.

“Adding COVID-19 vaccination to our student immunization requirements will help provide a safer and more robust college experience for our students,” said Jonathan Holloway, the president of Rutgers University, in a statement.

Beginning in the fall, students will have to show “proof of vaccination” before moving into their dorm or attending in-person classes.

According to the university, students may file for an exemption for medical or religious reasons.

According to the New York Times, even with the new requirement, students on the Rutgers campuses will be required to practice social distancing and use face coverings, the university said. How absurd is that. And for a virus that is of no serious consequence to anyone that is likely to be on campus.

Follow the science? It is more like following the madness of crowds.

The university has more than 70,000 students.

March 26, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Professor: Britain Can’t Be Held To Ransom By Vaccine Refuseniks

By Richie Allen | March 24, 2021

Writing in the Daily Mail today, Brendan Wren, Professor of Vaccinology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said that “a third wave caused by vaccine refuseniks would devastate our return to normality.” He also said that “there is no excuse” for not having a vaccine. He writes:

… a worryingly high proportion of British people will continue to refuse the jab — preventing us reaching the crucial ‘herd immunity’, whereby the virus cannot spread because it cannot find enough people to infect.

We know, for example, that more than three million over-55s — including half a million over-65s — have still not been vaccinated, even though all are eligible and could surely have had the vaccine if they wanted it.

In both Britain and Europe, the costs of this vaccine hesitancy are now all too clear. France’s history of ‘anti-vax’ thinking — up to 60 per cent of French people have previously said they wouldn’t take a Covid jab — is now surely playing its part in the country’s third wave.

Here, we know, sadly, that vaccine hesitancy is particularly high in certain sections of the black, Asian and minority ethnic [BAME] communities.

Wren goes on to say that while he “ordinarily baulks” at the idea of compulsory vaccination, he does support making covid jabs mandatory for care workers. He then writes that Britain cannot be held to ransom by refuseniks:

Though I do not believe we are there yet, a third wave caused by vaccine refuseniks would devastate our return to normality. Britain cannot be held to ransom because of a minority who don’t understand the value of the vaccines, risking their own health and that of others in the process.

There it is. We, who will never take their experimental medicines, which are already causing real harm, will be blamed for delaying the exit from lockdown. We’ll be blamed for future lockdowns too. They’ll use every trick in the book, to get us to roll up our sleeves.

We know that Covid Status Certificates or Vaccine Passports are a reality. That’s effectively mandating by coercion.

Now a leading scientist is saying that the country cannot be held to ransom by refuseniks. This will lead to families, friends and neighbours falling out and singling out those of us who won’t have a jab. It’s going to get uglier, that’s for sure.

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Lockdown One Year On – It doesn’t work, it never-worked & it wasn’t supposed to work

Light up the lone candle on the saddest birthday cake in the world! The most destructive public policy of the century is growing up and doesn’t look like slowing down.

By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | March 23, 2021

And so we come to March 23rd, and lockdown’s first birthday. Or, as we call it here, the longest two weeks in history.

1 year. 12 calendar months. 365 increasingly gruelling days.

It’s a long time since “2 weeks to flatten the curve”, became an obvious lie. Sometime in July it turned into a sick joke. The curve was flattened, the NHS protected and the clapping was hearty and meaningful.

… and none of it made any difference.

This was not a sacrifice for the “greater good”. It was not a hard decision with arguments on both sides. It was not a risk-benefit scenario. The “risks” were in fact certainties, and the “benefits” entirely fictional.

Because Lockdowns don’t work. It’s really important to remember that.

Even if you subscribe to the belief that “Sars-Cov-2” is a unique discrete entity (which is far from proven), or that it is incredibly dangerous (which is demonstrably untrue), the lockdown has not worked to, in any way, limit this supposed threat.

Lockdowns. Don’t. Work.

They don’t make any difference, the curves don’t flatten and the R0 number doesn’t drop and the lives aren’t saved (quite the opposite, as we’ve all seen).

Just look at the graphs.

This one, comparing “Covid deaths” in the UK (lockdown) and Sweden (no lockdown):

Or this one, comparing “Covid deaths” in California (lockdown) and Florida (no lockdown):

From Belarus to Sweden to Florida to Nicaragua to Tanzania, the evidence is clear. “Covid”, whatever that means in real terms, is not impacted by lockdowns.

Putting the entire population under house arrest doesn’t benefit public health. In fact, it’s (rather predictably) incredibly counter-productive.

The damage done by shuttering businesses, limiting access to healthcare, postponing treatments and diagnoses, postponed surgeries, increasing depression, soaring unemployment and mass poverty has been discussed to death. The scale of the impact cannot be overstated.

Dr David Nabarro, World Health Organization special envoy for Covid-19, said this of lockdowns back in October:

We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of the virus[…]just look at what’s happened to the tourism industry… look what’s happening to small-holding farmers […] it seems we may have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition […] This is a terrible, ghastly global catastrophe.”

A terrible, global catastrophe. A doubling of childhood malnutrition.

The “pandemic” didn’t do that, lockdowns did that. They were never going to achieve their stated aims. And what’s more, they were never intended to achieve those aims.

Too often soft language in the media talks about “misjudgments” or “mistakes” or “incompetence”. Supposed critics claim the government “panicked” or “over-reacted”. That is nonsense. The easiest, cheesiest excuse that has ever existed.

“Whoops”, they say, with an emphatic shrug and shit-eating grin “I guess we done messed up!”. Unflattering, but better than the truth.

Because the truth is that the government isn’t mistaken or scared or stupid…they are malign. And dishonest. And cruel.

All the suffering of lockdown was entirely predictable and deliberately imposed. For reasons that have nothing to do with helping people and everything to do controlling them.

It’s been more than apparent for most of the last fifty-two weeks that the agenda of lockdown was not public health, but laying the groundwork for the “new normal” and “the great reset”.

A series of programmes designed to completely undercut civil liberties all across the world, reversing decades (if not centuries) of social progress. A re-feudalisation of society, with the 99% cheerfully taking up their peasant smocks “to protect the vulnerable”, whilst the elite proselytise about the worth of rules they happily admit do not apply to them.

And we’ve all had lives ruined and a year of precious time wasted. For nothing. You’ve been locked up for two weeks that lasted 365 days. For nothing.

…or rather, for everything. Because that’s what they are trying to take from us. Everything. And the only way to stop them is not to let them. To simply refuse consent.

Let’s not let lockdown get a second birthday.

March 23, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »