Guardian |For
a story that was first told 2,300 years ago, the myth of Atlantis has
demonstrated a remarkable persistence over the millennia. Originally
outlined by Plato, the tale of the rise of a great, ancient civilisation
followed by its cataclysmic destruction has since generated myriad
interpretations.
Many versions have been intriguing and entertaining – but none have been as controversial as its most recent outing in the Netflix series Ancient Apocalypse.
Presented
by the author Graham Hancock, the programme argues that a once
sophisticated culture was destroyed by floods triggered by a giant comet
which crashed on Earth, a disaster that inspired the legend of
Atlantis, it is claimed.
According
to Hancock, survivors of the calamity spread round the world – which
was then populated by simple hunter-gatherers – bringing them science,
technology, agriculture and monumental architecture. We owe everything
to these near godlike individuals, it is claimed.
For good measure, Hancock – who has been promoting these ideas
in his books for decades – argues that archaeologists have deliberately
covered up this catastrophic vision of civilisation’s spread and
accuses mainstream academia of its “extremely defensive, arrogant and
patronising” attitudes.
These stark claims have
helped the series reach the top of viewing lists on both sides of the
Atlantic, to the chagrin of archaeologists who, for their part, have
denounced Ancient Apocalypse on the grounds that it provides
little evidence to support its grandiose claims and for promoting
conspiracy theories dressed up as science.
Nor is Hancock the first to suggest the
destruction of a once great civilisation led to the flowering of culture
elsewhere. In 1882, the maverick US congressman and popular writer
Ignatius Donnelly published Atlantis: The Antediluvian World
which argued that a highly complex, sophisticated culture had been wiped
out by a flood 10,000 years ago and claimed that its survivors had
spread round the world teaching the rest of humanity the secrets of
farming and architecture. Sounds familiar.
Then
there were the Nazis. Many swore by the idea that a white Nordic
superior race – people of “the purest blood” – had come from Atlantis.
As a result, Himmler set up an SS unit, the Ahnenerbe – or
Bureau of Ancestral Heritage – in 1935 to find out where people from
Atlantis had ended up after the deluge had destroyed their homeland.
And
that, in part, explains why the myth of an ancient, lost civilisation
is so useful. It is a basic tale of a rise and fall that can be
corralled and exploited for all sorts of causes. Plato meant his tale to
be an allegory. Atlantis was destroyed by the gods who had grown angry
with the hubris displayed by its inhabitants and so destroyed it. Don’t
get too big for your boots, in other words.
theconversation | Netflix’s enormously popular
new show, Ancient Apocalypse, is an all out attack on archaeologists.
As an archaeologist committed to public engagement who strongly believes
in the relevance of studying ancient people, I feel a full-throated defence is necessary.
Author Graham Hancock is back, defending his well-trodden theory
about an advanced global ice age civilisation, which he connects in
Ancient Apocalypse to the legend of Atlantis. His argument, as laid out
in this show and in several books, is that this advanced civilisation was destroyed in a cataclysmic flood.
The survivors of this advanced civilisation, according to Hancock,
introduced agriculture, architecture, astronomy, arts, maths and the
knowledge of “civilisation” to “simple” hunter gatherers. The reason
little evidence exists, he says, is because it is under the sea or was
destroyed by the cataclysm.
“Perhaps,” Hancock posits in the first episode, “the extremely
defensive, arrogant, and patronising attitude of mainstream academia is
stopping us from considering that possibility”.
In the opening dialogue of Ancient Apocalypse, Hancock rejects being
identified as an archaeologist or scientist. Instead, he calls himself a
journalist who is “investigating human prehistory”. A canny choice, as
the label “journalist” helps Hancock rebut being characterised as a
“pseudo archaeologist” or “pseudo scientist”, which, as he puts it
himself in episode four, would be like calling a dolphin a “pseudo
fish”.
From my perspective as an archaeologist, the show is surprisingly (or
perhaps unsurprisingly) lacking in evidence to support Hancock’s theory
of an advanced, global ice age civilisation. The only site Hancock
visits that actually dates to near the end of the ice age is Göbekli Tepe in modern Turkey.
stilumcuriae |Medical
Doctors for Covid Ethics International (MD4CE International) is
grateful to His Excellency, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, for speaking
to us and sharing his thoughts on the current global crisis, which began
with the fraudulent concocted Covid-19 pandemic emergency, supported by
and maintained by an evil military grade psychological operation,
complete with the unashamed use of fear and shame propaganda, which was
unleashed in a coordinated manner on the unsuspecting people of the
entire world by their own governments in early 2020, with predictably
cataclysmic results.
MD4CE
International is an international group of medical doctors, scientists,
lawyers, journalists, economists, historians, politicians,
philosophers, data analysts, bankers, military/intelligence experts and
others from all over the world, working determinedly together to expose
the terrible truth of what has happened during the past three years to
the people of the world, their families, their communities, their
countries, and to hold those responsible for the great crimes committed
properly to account.
Dear and distinguished friends,
Allow
me first of all to thank Doctor Stephen Frost for the invitation he has
extended to me to speak to you. Along with Doctor Frost I also thank
all of you: your commitment to fighting the psychopandemic propaganda is
commendable. I am well aware of the difficulties you have had to face
in order to remain consistent with your principles, and I hope that the
damage you have suffered can be adequately repaired by those who have
discriminated against you, depriving you of work and salary and
labelling you as dangerous no-vaxxers.
I
am pleased to be able to speak and share with you my thoughts about the
current global crisis. A crisis that we can consider to have begun with
the pandemic emergency, but that we know has been planned for decades
with very specific purposes by well-known personalities. Stopping at the
pandemic alone would in fact be a serious mistake, because it would not
allow us to consider the events in their full coherence and
inter-connectedness, thus preventing us from understanding them and
above all from identifying the criminal intentions behind them. You too –
each with your own expertise in the medical, scientific, legal or other
fields – will agree with me that limiting yourselves to your own
discipline, which in some cases is extremely specific, does not fully
explain the rationale for certain choices that have been made by
governments, international bodies, and pharmaceutical agencies. For
example, finding “graphene-like” material in the blood of people who
have been inoculated with experimental serums makes no sense for a
virologist, but it does made sense for an expert in nanomaterials and
nanotechnology who understands what graphene can be used for. It also
makes sense for an expert in medical patents, who immediately identifies
the content of the invention and relates it to other similar patents.
It also makes sense for an expert in war technologies who knows about
studies on the enhanced man (a document of the British Ministry of
Defense calls him “augmented man” in transhumanistic terms) and is
therefore able to recognize in graphene nanostructures the technology
that enables the augmentation of the war performance of military
personnel. And a telemedicine expert will be able to recognize in those
nanostructures the indispensable device that sends biomedical parameters
to the patient control server and also receives certain signals from
it.
Once
again: the assessment of events from a medical point of view should
take into account the legal implications of certain choices, such as the
imposition of masks or, even worse, mass “vaccination,” made in
violation of the fundamental rights of citizens. And I am sure that in
the field of health governance the manipulations of the classification
codes of diseases and therapies will also emerge, which have been
designed to make the harmful effects of measures taken against Covid-19
untraceable, from placing people on respirators in intensive care to
watchful waiting protocols, to say nothing of the scandalous violations
of regulations by the European Commission which – as you know – has no
delegation from the European Parliament in the field of Health, and that
is not a public institution but rather a private business consortium.
Just
in the past few days, at the G-20 Bali summit, Klaus Schwab instructed
heads of government – almost all coming from the Young Global Leaders
for Tomorrow program of the World Economic Forum – about the future
steps to be taken in view of establishing a world government. The
president of a very powerful private organization with enormous economic
means exercises undue power over world governments, obtaining their
obedience from political leaders who have no popular mandate to subject
their nations to the delusions of power of the elite: this fact is of
unprecedented gravity. Klaus Schwab said: “In the fourth industrial
revolution the winners will take it all, so if you are a World Economic
Forum first mover, you are the winners” (here).
These very serious statements have two implications: the first is that
“the winners will take it all” and will be “winners” – it is not clear
in what capacity and with whose permission. The second is that those who
do not adapt to this “fourth industrial revolution” will find
themselves ousted and will lose – they will lose everything, including
their freedom. In short, Klaus Schwab is threatening the heads of
government of the twenty most industrialized nations in the world to
carry out the programmatic points of the Great Reset in their nations.
This goes far beyond the pandemic: it is a global coup d’état, against
which it is essential that people rise up and that the still healthy
organs of states start an international juridical process. The threat is
imminent and serious, since the World Economic Forum is capable of
carrying out its subversive project and those who govern nations have
all become either enslaved or blackmailed by this international mafia.
In
light of these statements – and those of others no less delusional than
Yuval Noah Harari, Schwab’s adviser – we understand how the pandemic
farce served as a trial balloon for imposing controls, coercive
measures, curtailing individual freedoms, and increasing unemployment
and poverty. The next steps will have to be carried out by means of
economic and energy crises, which are instrumental to the establishment
of a synarchic government in the hands of the globalist elite.
kunstler | It’s hard to overstate how damaging
Twitter’s dark years of insidiously massaging public opinion have been
to this country. Open debate could have clarified the fog of deliberate
disinformation surrounding everything Covid-19. It would have been much
harder for public health officialdom to gaslight America over the origin
of the disease, and probably impossible to conceal the nefarious
operations behind the Emergency Use Authorization, the suppression of
effective early treatments, and the direct ties to drug companies’
profits. The result of that has been the broad deployment of dangerous
and deadly pseudo-vaccines that have killed millions and disabled many
more. The absence of honest debate has turned doctors into murderers and
accomplices to genocide.
The scope of this bureaucratic crime
is really outside the experience of most Americans, who never imagined
that their elected and appointed leaders would act against them with
such rank dishonesty, cruelty, and bad faith. But there it is. And if
Twitter continues to open up, the more likely that the responsible
parties will be held accountable.
Likewise, the now-pervasive
Kafka-esque program of political persecution carried out against
citizens by government officials, including the many seditious schemes
of RussiaGate; the ongoing, escalating mischief around elections; and
the use of the FBI and DOJ as a combined secret police and kangaroo
court apparatus.
You can add to all that turpitude, the
wild irresponsibility of “Joe Biden’s” open border policy, our idiotic
provocation of Russia in Ukraine, the surrender of America’s national
sovereignty to the globalist Great Re-set cabal and its tools in the
World Health Organization, and the domestic campaign by Woke Jacobins to
sexually disorder the lives of American children.
I think Elon Musk is right: the
Mainstream News Media will now face a venue where its habitual lying is
called out forcefully. You can already see The WashPo and CNN
attempt to make small shifts in their coverage of events, which double
as efforts to cover-up their past lying in the hopes that the public
won’t notice that it happened.
Nothing else so far has confronted the
Left’s crusade to overturn American life so stoutly as Elon Musk’s
reform of Twitter. It seems to be working. The Wokesters are acting like
a gang on-the-run. Pretty soon they’ll be ratting out each other to
save their skins. Reality is a harsh mistress when you’ve spent years
insulting and mistreating her.
amidwesterndoctor | One mission of this Substack has been to bring the concept of zeta
potential to the awareness of the general public as I believe it is
critical for understanding many different diseases including COVID-19
and both spike protein and non-spike protein vaccine injuries. A
detailed summary of the concept can be found here:
In
the first part of this series, I discussed how diseases frequently
emerge that before long affect many people, and how in many cases
conventional medicine cannot acknowledge what happened. Instead, these
diseases will often be labeled as “syndromes…
When
a substance is mixed in water, it has three options, not mix with it
(typically either floating to the top or settling to the bottom),
dissolve like salt, or form a colloidal suspension. Stable colloidal
suspensions are typically finely dispersed microparticles and as that
stability is lost, the particles clump together in larger and larger
agglomerations which eventually will separate out from the surrounding
water.
The colloidal stability of biological solutions
however is mostly overlooked in modern physiology (other systems like
Chinese medicine through blood stasis hold a greater focus to it). When
the colloidal stability of a living organism is sufficiently impaired,
severe diseases, such as those created by blood cells clumping together
and impairing circulatory function can occur (similarly early
researchers showed malaria causes death by creating severe blood clumping in the largest blood vessels, something Pierre Kory has also observed occurs in critically ill patients via IVC ultrasound immediately preceding their deaths).
A
key factor that determines if colloidal solutions clump together or
remain dispersed is the balance of electrical charges present (positive
charges agglomerate, negative charges disperse). Zeta potential provides
a way to model this immensely complex balance and explains why tiny
amounts of positive ions with high charge densities (e.g. aluminum) are
capable of agglomerating colloidal suspensions (e.g. sewage or blood),
and why microstrokes often follow injections of these substances
(similarly, poor zeta potential increases the viscosity of the blood,
and when it is improved, a variety of cardiovascular or circulatory
disorders also improved).
When COVID-19 started, I realize that
many of the unusual symptoms reported by colleagues were identical to
what I would have associated with an agent severely impairing the zeta
potential of the body as so many different fluid circulations appeared
to be impaired or showing signs of agglomeration (e.g. the frequent
blood clots). After some research, I concluded the spike protein had the
most likely electrical composition to account for these facts, at which
point I became extremely apprehensive over vaccine designs which mass
produced spike protein within the body (much of what is now known about
the spike protein’s toxicity was not known then).
In Fleming’s
previously mentioned presentation which discussed the prion domain
within the vaccine spike protein, he also provided one of the best
examples I have seen of how a small amount of a zeta potential reducing
agent can rapidly cause blood cells to clump together. This was done by
showing the immediate effects of each of the spike protein vaccines on
healthy blood.
Blood incubated with spike protein showed erythrocyte agglutination, despite the very low concentration of the spike protein.
An increase in platelet hyperactivation, membrane spreading,
platelet-derived microparticle formation were noted due to spike protein
exposure.
Further as detailed here, this clumping is also consistently seen on the blood smears of vaccinated individuals:
This rapid clumping process is most likely what causes sudden
death immediately following vaccination in susceptible individuals, such
as this recent example where this ardent advocate of vaccination died 7 minutes after receiving the new booster in the pharmacy.
As
we circle back to Died Suddenly and the abridged version presented
here, consider the scenes where the blood of these deceased individuals
is shown (I am putting this video in again here so you don’t need to
scroll up).
NPR | Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee still remembers the first cell he cultured:
It was an immune cell from a mouse, and he had grown it in a petri dish.
As he examined it through a microscope, the cell moved, and Mukherjee
was fascinated.
"I could sense the pulse of life
moving through it," he says. "You suddenly realize that you're looking
at the basic, fundamental unit of life and that this blob that you're
seeing under the microscope — this glimmering, refulgent blob of a cell —
is the basic unit that connects us and plants and bacteria and archaea
and all these other genera and taxa across the entire animal and plant
kingdoms."
As an oncologist, cell biologist and hematologist,
Mukherjee treats cancer patients and conducts research in cellular
engineering. In his new book, The Song of the Cell, he writes
about the emerging field of cell therapy and about how cellular science
could one day lead to breakthroughs in the treatment of cancer, HIV, Type 1 diabetes and sickle cell anemia.
Mukherjee
has a particular interest in T cells — a type of white blood cell and
part of the immune system activated to fight disease. He's been treating
patients in India who have certain types of cancer with genetically
engineered T-cell variants, and the results have been striking: "One day
the cancer's there. The next day the cancer is virtually gone, eaten up
by these T cells," he says.
Genetically engineered T cells, known as CAR [chimeric antigen receptor ] T cells,have
become a staple in the treatment of certain kinds of leukemias,
lymphomas and blood cancers. But, Mukherjee says, the cells have not yet
proven effective in combatting the solid tumors, like those associated
with lung and prostate cancer. His hope is that further research might
change that.
"It's hard for me to convey the excitement that's
sweeping through the whole field of cell biology ... the kind of
headiness, giddiness, the madness, the psychic power that grips you once
you get into the field," Mukherjee says.
Interview highlights
On using CAR-T cell therapy to treat Emily, a child with leukemia
[The treatment is]
we extract the T cells from the from a patient's body. And then we use a
gene therapy to basically weaponize them, to activate them and
weaponize them against the cancer. We grow the T-cells in flasks in a
very, very sterile chamber. And then ultimately when the cells have
grown and activated, we re-infuse them into the patient's body. So it's
sort of gene therapy plus cell therapy — given back to a patient.
In
Emily's case, she was about 7, I think, when she was first treated. She
had a complete response. She also had a very terrifying course. When
the T cells get activated, they release an incredibly inflammatory
cascade, sort of like, as I say in the book, it's sort of like soldiers
on a rampage. And you can get so much of a rampage of T cells killing
cancer that body goes berserk, it can't handle this kind of attack. Now,
Emily, fortunately, was treated with a medicine to dampen down that
attack so that she ultimately survived. She was the first child treated
with this therapy to survive and serves an icon for this kind of
therapy. ... She still is alive today and applying to colleges, I hear.
venturebeat | I’ve been enjoying the peek into our metaverse future that Amazon Prime Video is delivering each week with airings of The Peripheral streaming show.
As I noted when the series debuted, it’s an example of how the world is science fiction is becoming more science and less fiction.
And the recent sixth episode of the show feature the addition of
Alexandra Billings, a trans actress who plays the inspector Ainsley
Lowbeer in the show.
The show is Prime Video’s top show, and, to paraphrase the first line from Herman Narula’s book Virtual Society,
I believe that one day it will be watched by a person without a body.
That’s because The Peripheral depicts what it’s like to move between
different worlds and to inhabit the bodies of others.
And for a trans actress like Billings, this brings to mind the notion
that your physical body may not matter in a future where digital and
physical seamlessly interact. Billings has been a trailblazer for LGBTQ+
representation, and she recently made history when she starred on
Broadway as Madam Morrible in Wicked, the first time a trans actress has
portrayed a traditionally cis female role.
I talked to her about the significance of the role in The Peripheral,
where she plays a trans person in the future. The show is based on a
novel by William Gibson, who coined the term cyberspace, and it was produced by Westworld
creators Lisa Joy and Jonathan Nolan. It’s a complicated story that
moves around in time and explores whether the digital world is real or
not. And the show is different from the book, as it uses Gibson’s story
as a jumping off point for ideas about our future. And that gives
Billings some interesting leeway to play Lowbeer as a trans person in
the show.
Lowbeer is a character who polices the border between a physical
reality and the virtual world. And she is like a messenger from the
future for us. And she can teach us how to think about topics like
transhumanism. Lowbeer’s character is pretty unique, and I think anyone thinking about the metaverse should consider watching The Peripheral.
In case it's not abundantly clear to you why I go hard in the paint against errbody and they cousin cutting the line and displacing negroes from a righteous and legitimate - though STILL legally ignored claim - on that long-overdue 40 acres and a mule.
NYPost | San Francisco’s transgender guaranteed income program application provides over 130 gender, sexuality and pronoun options, and encouraging enrollees to “check all that apply.”
The “Guaranteed Income for Transgender People (G.I.F.T.)” program will provide 55 “economically marginalized transgender people,” who have a monthly income of less than $600 with $1,200 per month for a year-and-a-half. Although, enrollees can make a maximum of $4,000 a month and still be enrolled in the program, according to the program’s website.
Pronoun options on the application include “Zie/zim/zis,” “Fae/faer/faers” and “Tey/ter/ters.”
Under the gender identity category, applicants can choose from options like “Aggressive (AG),” which is an “identity label claimed by some African-American and Latin@ masculine of center lesbians,” according to the University of Florida LGBTQ+ Affairs office.
“Genderf—” is another option in the gender identity category, which is “the idea of playing with ‘gender cues’ to purposely confuse stereotypical gender expressions, usually through clothing.” according to the University of Connecticut Rainbow Center. Another option is “Two-spirit,” which is an “identity label used within many American Indian and Canadian First Nations indigenous groups to describe an individual that possesses both ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ spirits.” according to the University of Florida.
Other gender identity options included “Feminine-of-center,” “Demigirl,” “Boi,” “Tomboy,” “Khanith/Xanith” and “Ninauposkitzipxpe.” Applicants could also choose between sexual orientations like
“BDSM/Kink,” which is defined as a “sexual activity involving such
practices as the use of physical restraints, the granting and
relinquishing of control, and the infliction of pain,” according to the
Merriam-Webster Dictionary, as well as options like “pansexual” and
“skoliosexual.”
dailymail | Childcare experts are expressing alarm over transgender
TikToker Dylan Mulvaney’s popularity bump after her White House debut,
saying social media is driving a spike in teens seeking sex-change
procedures.
Clinicians say Mulvaney’s sit-down time with President Joe Biden
has raised the social media sensation’s profile, extending her reach
and likely influencing teenage fans who may themselves be questioning
their own gender identity.
Mulvaney’s TikTok
following grew to 8.4 million after her White House appearance, and
while she is entitled to share her experiences online, experts told
DailyMail.com that online influencers like her in part drive an alarming
uptick in teen transitioning.
dailymail | 'A lot of the initial deals were tailored to my queerness and to my transness,' she told The Creators newsletter last month.
'For
some of these major corporations, I was actually their first trans
creator. It's exciting to make money to support myself since I lost my
job, and to have my transition surgeries be covered too.'
Her agency, CAA, did not answer DailyMail.com's interview request.
Mulvaney's
ascent has not been without hiccups. Her appearance on Ulta Beauty last
month led to controversy and calls to boycott the cosmetics firm.
Critics called her 'misogynistic' for 'appropriating' womanhood.
Likewise,
a post about Tampax feminine hygiene products left some viewers shocked
and confused. Two replied: 'Is this a joke?' She is frequently bashed
for referring to the vagina as a 'Barbie pouch'.
She
has gained a massive following on TikTok as she documents her
transition to a transgender female — originally identifying as
'nonbinary' but telling followers in March that she was a girl.
Mulvaney
interviewed Biden last month as part of a panel of six progressive
activists for NowThis News. In the interview, the Democrat vowed to
protect 'gender-affirming care,' saying states should not limit access
to transgender treatments.
theatlantic | Everyone I spoke with believes
that the very future of how the internet works is at stake. Accordingly,
this case is likely to head to the Supreme Court. Part of this fiasco
touches on the debate around Section 230 of the Communications Decency
Act, which, despite its political-lightning-rod status, makes it
extremely clear that websites have editorial control. “Section 230 tells
platforms, ‘You’re not the author of what people on your platform put
up, but that doesn’t mean you can’t clean up your own yard and get rid
of stuff you don’t like.’ That has served the internet very
well,” Dan Novack, a First Amendment attorney, told me. In effect, it
allows websites that host third-party content to determine whether they
want a family-friendly community or an edgy and chaotic one. This,
Masnick argued, is what makes the internet useful, and Section 230 has
“set up the ground rules in which all manner of experimentation happens
online,” even if it’s also responsible for quite a bit of the internet’s
toxicity too.
But the full
editorial control that Section 230 protects isn’t just a boon for giants
such as Facebook and YouTube. Take spam: Every online community—from
large platforms to niche forums—has the freedom to build the environment
that makes sense to them, and part of that freedom is deciding how to
deal with bad actors (for example, bot accounts that spam you with
offers for natural male enhancement). Keller suggested that the law may
have a carve-out for spam—which is often filtered because of the way
it’s disseminated, not because of its viewpoint (though this gets
complicated with spammy political emails). But one way to look at
content moderation is as a constant battle for online communities, where
bad actors are always a step ahead. The Texas law would kneecap
platforms’ abilities to respond to a dynamic threat.
“It says, ‘Hey, the government
can decide how you deal with content and how you decide what community
you want to build or who gets to be a part of that community and how you
can deal with your bad actors,’” Masnick said. “Which sounds
fundamentally like a totally different idea of the internet.”
“A
lot of people envision the First Amendment in this affirmative way,
where it is about your right to say what you want to say,” Novack told
me. “But the First Amendment is just as much about protecting your right
to be silent. And it’s not just about speech but things adjacent to
your speech—like what content you want to be associated or not
associated with. This law and the conservative support of it shreds
those notions into ribbons.”
The
implications are terrifying and made all the worse by the language of
Judge Oldham’s ruling. Perhaps the best example of this brazen
obtuseness is Oldham’s argument about “the Platforms’ obsession with
terrorists and Nazis,” concerns that he suggests are “fanciful” and
“hypothetical.” Of course, such concerns are not hypothetical;
they’re a central issue for any large-scale platform’s
content-moderation team. In 2015, for example, the Brookings Institution
issued a 68-page report
titled “The ISIS Twitter census” mapping the network of terrorist
supporters flooding the platform. The report found that in 2014, there
were at least 46,000 ISIS accounts on Twitter posting graphic violent
content and using the platform to recruit and collect intelligence for
the Islamic State.
amidwesterndoctor |One of my favorite fables is The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs,
which concludes with the owner deciding he wants more gold than the
goose can produce by laying eggs and cuts it open to get the rest, only
to discover nothing is there and losing everything as a consequence of
his greed. The nature of many industries are to voraciously expand as
much as possible, and since the pharmaceutical industry has established a
monopoly on the practice of medicine (and thus “life or death”), this
“growth” can be gotten away with to the point the ever-growing
healthcare spending now accounts for one-fifth of our GDP.
My
sincere hope with COVID-19 was that the flagrant greed of the
pharmaceutical companies would finally awaken the populace to their
conduct and end pharma’s Golden Goose (a few signs of which are now
emerging as childhood vaccine uptake has dropped).
A critical reason why this awakening is possible now is because the
traditional form of propaganda, regardless of how much further developed
it becomes, is no longer able to function in the modern environment
created by the internet.
A fascinating article
(by a multidisciplinary collaboration aiming to reform propaganda) I
read on this subject makes the case that since anyone can now create
their own evidence for competing narratives, the vertical advantage
previously held by those with the resources to monopolize the airways
with a tailored message has evaporated. For example, with no cost except
my own time, I can take a day out of my life to put together a
well-thought-out rebuttal to the media’s current propaganda campaign
which is seen and believed by thousands upon thousands of people. If it
was just me, it probably would not matter, but there are many, many,
many, more people doing the exact same thing as we speak and it is my
belief that they have played a large role in shaping the direction of
history over the last seven years.
Because of this, the old
models of propaganda simply don’t work anymore, and each media platform
has been trying to combat this reality with stricter and stricter
censorship (especially online) alongside more and more audacious lies.
Each time they do it, however, it simply leaves the public with the side
effects of excessive propaganda: being more confused, fragmented,
polarized, and less trusting of authoritative sources than they were
before, exactly what every propaganda campaign for a national interest
strives to avoid.
At this point, the article’s authors see three
paths forward. Continue our current path (which will likely prove
disastrous), adopt a Chinese-style system of complete internet
censorship (which many in Big Tech and likely other industries are
pushing for but many are effectively resisting), or adopt the
alternative to mass propaganda originally proposed when all of this
started a century ago (Elon Musk through his conduct at Twitter and
elsewhere appears to endorse this option).
A central debate that
waged since the early days of propaganda was if it was acceptable in a
Democracy. Its proponents argued that society had become too complex for
the average citizen to be able to make decisions of importance, that
propaganda was remarkably effective in meeting the needs of the nation
(e.g. winning the world wars), and if the government did not use it,
others like the Nazis would use it against us and take over the world.
Its opponents however were adamant a Democracy could not exist if it was
run by propaganda and argued the solution to all of this was to improve
the educational standards so the masses could understand and actively
participate in the complex decisions of the modern era.
These
two sides vied for control (e.g. America used propaganda throughout
World War 2 on its citizens, but after the war, doing so was banned by
the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948). In tandem with increasing corruption in our government, in 2012 Obama signed the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act,
essentially repealing the 1948 law under the need to support the war on
terror. This rapidly accelerated the glut of government propaganda
citizens were fed and I suspect that glut played a key role in killing
the government’s Golden Goose of propaganda.
In many ways,
it appears the tables have reversed from how they were a century ago, as
it is now the propagandists rather than the crowds that lack the
sophistication to keep up with the complexity of the current era (e.g.
message boards at the periphery of the internet can produce meme
campaigns that run circles around institutional sources of propaganda
like the CIA or CNN).
For all of these reasons, as the authors of the aforementioned article mentioned it
may be in everyone’s interest, including those in power, to take the
third choice and switch to the model originally advocated for by John Dewey.
Focus on creating an educational system that creates critically
thinking citizens who actively participate in the decision-making
process in order to arrive at the best result for society (e.g. not
sacrificing citizens is secret for the “greater good”) and design
internet platforms that foster an open discourse rather than
aggressively promoting specific narratives while censoring dissenting
opinions or incentivizing inflammatory and polarizing content.
With
everyday citizens empowered by the Internet now seeking and gaining
access to databases for themselves, we face a choice. Either drop the
pretense of being an open society, close off access, and solidify the
gap between “the masses” and the “expert class,” or build the education
and information infrastructure necessary to become a more open society.
I
am very hopeful for this future but simultaneously recognize that power
is one of the hardest things to let go of, so we will likely see a very
rocky transition as we move towards it. In the meantime, I believe one
of the most important things you can do is begin to open your eyes to
the common PR techniques out there. Once you do, it's astounding how
differently everything looks.
orientalreview | Since the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) has made no secret of its goal to expand to the
east, as well as into North and sub-Saharan Africa.After the fall of the
Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet bloc, many observers
believed that NATO’s raison d’etre had ceased to exist and that the
collective “defensive” organization would join the Warsaw Pact in
historical oblivion. However, those Americans, Canadians, and Europeans
who believe in a “new world order,” led politically by the United States
in concert with the European Union and Canada and militarily by NATO,
re-invented NATO as an aggressive military pact with the goal of
enforcing the will of a North American-European “axis” on a expanded
stage far beyond Europe or the North Atlantic.
NATO’s expansion to the east and south has been marked by a number of
NATO-linked “Pentagonese” alphabet soup fast track membership and
associate member programs, including the Partnership for Peace (PfP),
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI), Membership Action Plans (MAPs),
Individual Partnership Plans (IPPs), and the Mediterranean Dialogue
(MD).
NATO’s Nazi-like Drang Nach Osten, or “thrust to the
east,”began in earnest after the Czech-born U.S. Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright pressed hard for NATO membership for the Czech
Republic, Poland, and Hungary, while re-assuring Russia’s leadership in
1997 that such expansion would not result in NATO military bases or
troops in the new NATO nations. Arch-Cold Warrior Zbigniew Brzezinski, a
native of Poland, backed Albright and was a strong force behind what he
called NATO’s “double enlargement.” The influence of Eastern
European émigrés like Albright (née Korbel) and Brzezinski, with their
anti-Russian “baggage,” influenced U.S. foreign policy in a way that was
not in the best national security interests of the United States. As
has been seen with the influence of American Jews on Middle East policy,
Irish-Americans on the problems of Northern Ireland, and Cuban exiles
on Latin American policy, the American “melting pot” usually does not
prevent generational biases against certain nations and regions of the
world from worming their way into American foreign policy.NATO expansion
to the borders of Russia stands as a case in point…
It was also inferred by Clinton administration officials that NATO
would never take in members along the Russian border. Both promises were
hollow. On May 21, 1998, President Bill Clinton signed the NATO
Enlargement Pact admitting the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary to
NATO. The three nations became members of NATO the following year.
Nine years later, the United States announced plans to establish
anti-missile bases in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic.
In 2004, three years following NATO’s invocation for the first time
of Article 5 of its charter after the 9/11 attack on the United States,
stipulating that an attack on one member is an attack on all, NATO
expanded to the Russian border when Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania (in
addition to Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia) were admitted to
membership. In 2009, NATO expanded to Albania and Croatia. That same
year, France rejoined NATO’s military command structure, reversing
Charles de Gaulle’s decision to withdraw from NATO’s military component
in 1967.
Through the MAP, Ukraine and Georgia, deep within the former Soviet
Union, were being actively considered for NATO membership and four
Balkan states, Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and
NATO-occupied Kosovo, were angling for NATO membership. NATO also sent
signals to three other nations that if there was a change in the
political leadership and a subsequent change in foreign policy, Moldova,
Belarus, and Serbia would be considered for NATO membership. Cyprus and
Malta, members of the EU, have been under strong pressure to join NATO,
especially as a result of the Libyan war and the regime changes in Egy
What is not mentioned in those articles is that the target of the
Turkish strike was the US-run center for the training and education of
PKK militants in Rojava. There are rumors that the Turks gave the US
enough warning time to evacuate most of its personnel.
Does that sound familiar?
If it does, it is because it is very similar to what the Iranians did
when they hit US bases in Iraq following the murder of General Solemani
in a US drone strike.
If the above is true, and rumors are very much “if” and cannot be
considered as proven fact, then that means that a NATO member state
(Turkey) just attacked a US base and, like Iran, got away with it: the
“The Finest Fighting Force in the History of the World” just got whacked
hard and humiliated for a second time and could do absolutely nothing
to defend itself or even save face.
Terrorists’ shelters, bunkers, caves, tunnels, and warehouses were successfully destroyed,” Akar said, adding that “the so-called headquarters of the terrorist organization were also hit and destroyed.” Overall, the Defense Ministry claimed that the strikes hit nearly 90 targets, which it said were connected to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Kurdish People’s Defense Units (YPG).
Even allowing for some “patriotic exaggeration”, it is pretty clear
that Ergodan’s revenge strike was both quite substantial and,
apparently, rather effective.
So, what do we have here? A
NATO member state all but accused the US of a major terrorist attack
against its capital city, and then that NATO member state openly
attacked a US-run facility (let’s not call it a base, that would be inaccurate).
Is Erdogan’s claim even credible? Absolutely! Not only has the US
already attempted to overthrow and kill Erdogan, who was saved in extremis
by Russian special forces (same with Ianukovich), but we also know that
the US overthrew General de Gaulle in 1968-1969 and that NATO covert
forces were used to stage false flag attacks against NATO allies
(especially Italy) in the so-called GLADIO operation.
NATO is not a defensive alliance – it never was – but it is a tool of US colonial domination. Fist tap Dale.
sonar21 | Let me state up front that there are many brave, courageous Ukrainian
soldiers fighting for their nation. Unfortunately, many of these
soldiers are irredeemable bigots. It is indisputable that many in the
ranks of the Azov battalion celebrate Nazi “theology” and embrace Adolf
Hitler. No amount of rewriting history can erase the bloody legacy
Hitler carved into the land and peoples of Europe during the Second
World War.
So what are we to make of Justin Banse? You will meet him in the
following video. He does not strike me as a racist or an anti-semite. He
seems like a fairly normal 22 year old who is not a deep thinker and
not well educated. Maybe that explains how he could have joined forces
with some modern day Nazis.
If you take the time to watch the video — warning, it is more than 3
hours long — you will understand my confusion. It is a shame that the
guy conducting the interview is so clueless. He should have pressed
Justin to explain how he could excuse the Nazi beliefs and then fight
along side the Azov guys. But he did not.
In a way, Justin is a victim of his prior military service with the
United States. What he experienced as combat against the Taliban (I’m
assuming that he did), was not real war. His testimony in this video
perfectly illustrates a point that Andrei Martyanov makes repeatedly —
i.e., the United States has not experienced a peer to peer war since
Korea. Justin’s account also confirms a point I have made in previous
posts about the lack of artillery and air support for attacking
Ukrainian units. They are relying solely on ground forces and vehicles
and those are no match for heavy artillery, rockets, missiles and aerial
strafing.
Justin does inadvertently reveal the problems facing the Ukrainian
soldiers. For example, he states that the 200 man company he was
assigned to was ordered to Mariupol. He was left behind and the company
was wiped out. None returned, according to Justin.
I feel sorry for the kid. His very soul was scarred by this
experience and it will haunt him for the rest of his life. He has
discovered the sickening reality of war that combat veterans of World
War I and World War II experienced, regardless of the army they fought
for.
kevinmcdonald | Jews won the culture war without a shot being
fired and without the losing side seeming to realize that it was a war with real
winners and real losers — where the losers have not only given up their cultural
preeminence, but have failed to stand up to the ultimate denouement: demographic
displacement from lands they had controlled for centuries. The new elite retains
its outsider feelings toward their new subjects — a hostile elite in the United
States as
it was in the Soviet Union.
Unlike Weissberg, then, Weiss seems to feel a
twinge of guilt about the role of Jews as victors in the culture war — guilt
stemming from his understanding that the new elite has some very glaring
moral failings of its own, including its own brand of ethnocentrism that
seems far deeper than anything imagined by the WASPs.
The danger for Jews is that non-Jews will come to
realize the deep wellsprings of Jewish ethnocentrism and see Jewish involvement
in the displacement of European-descended peoples as resulting from ethnic
conflict over the construction of culture. Ultimately, Europeans may come to
realize that the conflict is really about the ethnic displacement of themselves
as a people.
Speaking for myself, it would be
difficult for me
not to have developed something of a sense of my peoplehood after
delving into
the 2000-year history of Jews who were intensely concerned about
preserving
their people and their culture. As I’ve come to realize, preserving
one’s people
and culture is a virtual human universal. No one would contend that,
say,
Koreans have a moral obligation to allow millions of other peoples into
Korea so
that what we would call ethnic Koreans become a minority and their
culture put up for grabs. Certainly, the idea that Israel is a Jewish
state is central to
its entire self-concept — so much so that the idea of the Palestinians
who
were basically expelled in 1948 being allowed to return to create a
multi-ethnic,
pluralistic society is a political impossibility. The idea that
European-descended peoples have no right to preserve their peoples and
cultures
while others do is a glaring double standard.
The fact is that the US did have a sense of being
a European, Christian society until very recently. Christianity was an
uncontested part of public culture until large-scale Jewish immigration in the
early 20th century. The immigration laws were biased in favor of
Europeans until 1965 when
the long Jewish campaign to change them finally succeeded. Such laws were no
different from exactly what Israel continues to do with the strong support of
the organized American Jewish community. Nevertheless, my research shows that
the organized American Jewish community has
led the campaign to make assertions of white identity and interests
illegitimate. I see that as hypocritical. The big question is whether the WASPs
will put up a fight.
unz |November
22, 1963 was a coup d’état. That is the premise from which any
discussion about JFK’s assassination should start. The coup was
invisible at the time, because Johnson created an illusion of
continuity. What changed dramatically only became public knowledge in
the 1990s. In the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in 2009, we read that, “Lyndon Johnson Was First to Align U.S. Policy With Israel’s Policies.”
Up to Johnson’s presidency, no administration had been as completely
pro-Israel and anti-Arab as his. … Not only was he personally a strong
supporter of the Jewish state but he had a number of high officials,
advisers and friends who shared his view. … These officials occupied
such high offices as the ambassador to the United Nations, the head of
the National Security Council and the number two post at the State
Department. They were assiduous in putting forward Israel’s interests in
such memoranda as “What We Have Done for Israel” and “New Things We
Might Do in Israel” and “How We Have Helped Israel.” … So pervasive was
the influence of Israel’s supporters during Johnson’s tenure that CIA
Director Richard Helms believed there was no important U.S. secret
affecting Israel that the Israeli government did not know about in this
period.[8]
Although
Dimona was probably the most urgent reason for replacing JFK with LBJ,
as Michael Collins Piper has shown in his groundbreaking book Final Judgment,
it was not the only one. The problem of Dimona cannot be separated from
the wider geopolitical context of the Cold War. For the Soviets were as
worried as Kennedy about nuclear proliferation.[9]
Against Piper’s theory, it has been argued that Kennedy had no power to
stop Israel from getting the Bomb, and that there was therefore no
necessity for Israel to kill him.[10]
That may be true: the real danger for Israel was if both the United
States and the Soviet Union joined their effort to thwart Israel’s
nuclear ambition. When Khrushchev’s minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei
Gromyko visited the White House on October 3, 1963 to discuss ways of
expanding the progress of the Limited Test Ban treaty, Kennedy tasked
his Secretary of State Dean Rusk to bring up the issue of Israel’s
secret nuke program with Gromyko in his evening meeting at the Soviet
Embassy.[11] If Americans and Russians agreed to stop Israel from getting the Bomb, Israel would have had to comply.
But
worst than the risk of being deprived of their “Samson option”, the
nascent cooperation between Kennedy and Khrushchev toward détente
presented an even more distressing danger: their common support of
Israel’s greatest foe, Egypt. This point is well made by author Salvador
Astucia in Opium Lords: Israel, the Golden Triangle, and the Kennedy Assassination (2002, in pdf here)[12]:
Both Kennedy and Khrushchev had stronger ties with Egyptian President
Nasser than with Israel. Their befriending of Nasser, a living icon
symbolizing Arab unity, was a signal to Israel that both superpowers had
more interest in the Arab world than in Israel’s continued existence as
a Jewish homeland, let alone its expansion into neighboring Arab
territories.[13]
“In
short,” writes Astucia, “détente would mark the beginning of the end for
Israel as a world power because neither superpower had a strategic
interest in Israel.”[14] What was urgently needed was to transform Egypt into a ground for confrontation rather than rapprochement.
Astucia
published his book in 2002, and lacked hindsight on 9/11 to draw the
parallel that can now be drawn between President Kennedy’s assassination
and the false flag attacks of September 11th, 2001. The
parallel should be clear to those who now understand that 9/11 was both a
massive psychological operation and a foreign policy coup aimed at
drawing the U.S. on the side of Israel against its Arab enemies (see my previous Unz Review article). As I wrote for the film 9/11 and Israel’s Great Game:
“In 2001, Israel’s reputation had fallen to its lowest level in
international public opinion. Condemnations were voiced from all sides
against its apartheid and colonization policies, and its systematic war
against Palestinian leadership structures. The attacks of 9/11 instantly
reversed this trend. Americans experienced the attacks as an act of
hatred on the part of the Arab world, and thus felt immediate sympathy
for Israel. … Overnight, after the 9/11 attacks, Western opinion had
amalgamated the Arab world and the Palestinian resistance with Islamic
terrorism.”
uwm.edu | That Black antisemitism was frequently motivated by economic oppression is
corroborated by Eddie Ellis who, in 1966, wrote, “The most violent type of oppression of Black
Americans – economic oppression – is waged by solely profit-motivated members of that other
ethnic minority [i.e. Jews]. Hence, it stands to reason the Black man who is constantly under the
heel of economic tyranny lashes out, quite naturally, at the visible tyrant.”15
Ellis’ statement
highlights numerous issues within the Black-Jewish relationship. Jews frequently voiced their
treatment of being an ethnic minority when discussing Black woes. Letters such as those from
Frances Dale, a Jewish teacher in New Jersey, point to some Jews viewing themselves as the
victims of the white-Black racial conflict that was brewing.16
Jews, being the pale-skinned
people that Blacks interacted with most frequently in urban areas since they owned many of the
shops that were in ghettos, were seen as white, rather than Jewish. However, Jews often did not
see this in the same light.
Eddie Ellis wrote in January of 1966 that “America’s Jewish communities have
assimilated themselves into white Protestant America – and done it so damn well – they have
assumed the attitudes and prejudices of this WASP ‘in group’ ….to our sorrow.”17
Ellis’
sentiment was not far from the truth. Many Jews in the inner-city had developed similar racial
prejudices to whites and it was because of this racial discrimination that many Blacks began
viewing Jews as white. This is, perhaps, one of the many great issues surrounding Black-Jewish
tensions; whites often did not view Jews as white and were thus alienated, while Blacks did view
Jews as white and were similarly ostracized. White southerners were outraged that Jews were
helping with the civil rights movement and by the 1950s Jews had become targets of white violence.18
Many Jews found themselves in an uncomfortable position, rejected and even
persecuted by some whites and blacks and caught in the middle the fight for civil rights.
One key aspect of the Black-Jewish relationship, and perhaps the entire reason why the
conflict grew so rapidly, is that the two sides never saw the issue in the same way. Blacks saw
Jews as oppressive white urbanites who were taking advantage of a history of racial oppression,
while Jews thought that Blacks despised Jews for religious reasons. Samuel Lipschitz, a New
York Jew, wrote to Dore Schary, the chairman of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for much
of the 1960s, voicing his concerns on a Black-Jewish coalition. Lipschitz, when stating his belief
about the motivation for the Black-Jewish alliance proposed by Schary stated, “Is it not that the
Jew is using the Negro as a tool to take revenge or to manifest their resentments against the white
Christian who for so long have persecuted the Jews.”19
Rather than seeing the issue as Dore
Schary saw it, i.e. as an issue of racial inequality where both Jews and Blacks were being abused,
many Jews saw it as an issue of religious persecution. An anonymous teacher in New York wrote
to Dore Schary that, “Maybe you should tell your Negro friends that, from 1619 to 1861,
Christian Southerners enslaved them, and that thereafter a vicious discriminatory system has
been perpetrated, largely by southerners? And that when the products of this terrible system
come North, uneducated and unprepared for city life, to eat up our welfare money, even the most
sympathetic becomes angry after a while?”20
Indeed, this sort of misunderstanding made it
difficult for Jews to comprehend why Blacks were displeased, since many viewed Blacks as
being disgruntled over the Jewish religion, rather than their economic situation.
NPR | So there are basically three areas advanced for why Jews would
involve themselves in the struggle for racial equality. All three turn
out to be false. But the first would be the history argument,
that says blacks and Jews share a common history, and therefore Jews
empathize with the historical experience of blacks, and therefore
they're willing to help. Right?
When I talk generally with
white Jews about why Jews are involved in social justice or civil rights
or racial equality, they'll talk about this shared history of
oppression.
And the problem is that American Jewish history and
African-American history are 180 degrees opposite on that question. One
of my African-American colleagues, he said, "If I ever go to a Seder
and the Jews say that they know what it's like because they too were once slaves in Egypt," he's gonna punch 'em.
Because if Jews have to go back to ancient Egypt to get the
slavery metaphor, then they've kind of missed that American Jewish
history is a story of rapid social ascent, and African-American history
is the legacy of slavery. That argument is insulting, and it's very
elementary.
And, of course, I found that the people actually
involved in the movement in the 50s, they knew that. And they were quite
clear that they were not buying into that.
What's the second argument that people draw on?
The
second argument is a sociological one, which is to say Jews experience
social marginalization; blacks experience social marginalization. Since
Jews understand what it is to be on the margins, they help blacks. The
problem with that is that the civil rights movement didn't happen 'til
the 1950s. In the 1950s, Jews were already in the mainstream. So if
marginalization was the motive, then the movement should have started 50
years earlier.
Eric Goldstein at Emory, in his book, The Price of Whiteness,
basically points out that Jews could only cross the racial line after
they achieved whiteness, when they were no longer marginal. So that kind
of undermines the sociology argument.
Last but not least?
The third one, the one we get today, is Judaism: that the religion of the Jews argues for social justice, tikkun olam. Prophetic Judaism, the Reform movement, is involved with all of that.
The
problem is, if one's adherence to Judaism informs social justice, one
would expect the Orthodox, those for whom traditional Judaism is most
present in their everyday life, to be in the lead in racial equality.
And in fact it's the opposite.
The more religiously traditional, the less engaged [Jews are] in
social justice. And the ones that were going to Mississippi getting
killed were [for the most part] on the left, were secular, were not
involved in synagogue life. And socialist and communist Jews were, in
fact, a whole lot more empathetic to the [racial justice] cause than
religious Jews.
A Foundation of Joy
-
Two years and I've lost count of how many times my eye has been operated
on, either beating the fuck out of the tumor, or reattaching that slippery
eel ...
April Three
-
4/3
43
When 1 = A and 26 = Z
March = 43
What day?
4 to the power of 3 is 64
64th day is March 5
My birthday
March also has 5 letters.
4 x 3 = 12
...
Return of the Magi
-
Lately, the Holy Spirit is in the air. Emotional energy is swirling out of
the earth.I can feel it bubbling up, effervescing and evaporating around
us, s...
New Travels
-
Haven’t published on the Blog in quite a while. I at least part have been
immersed in the area of writing books. My focus is on Science Fiction an
Historic...
Covid-19 Preys Upon The Elderly And The Obese
-
sciencemag | This spring, after days of flulike symptoms and fever, a man
arrived at the emergency room at the University of Vermont Medical Center.
He ...
