TIme to Use Cash

CBDCs: Trojan Horse For Total Control?

This is a balanced policy view of Central Bank Digital Currencies. There is no doubt that CBDCs are coming, but how they manifest will be full of twists and turns. Even though central banks are generally shepherded by the Bank for International Settlements, each bank is heavily flavored by national interests of individual states.It should be duly noted that gold is not dead, not will it ever be dead, to the global banking system. All Central Banks hold some amount of physical gold but it is not coupled to their national currencies. If it inevitable that gold will eventually be forced into some coupling with new CBDCs.

For instance, it was reported in November, 2022 that Central banks’ gold demand hits record level:

Central banks’ gold purchases rose dramatically in the third quarter of 2022, according to data from the World Gold Council. Total gold acquisitions reached almost 400 tonnes in the last quarter, the WGC said. This takes total gold purchases to 673 tonnes so far in 2022, which already is the highest level of any full year since 1967. “This is the largest single quarter of demand from this sector in our records back to 2000, and almost double the previous record of 241 tonnes in Q3 2018.”

The date 1967 takes us back to the time period of decoupling gold from the U.S. dollar. This is a seismic tell that gold is not dead, nor is it an outdated store of value. ⁃ TN Editor

People like to remark that governments foster innovation, especially during wartime. They also like to ignore the slaughter of millions which is usually part of this process. That is not to mention the innovators we missed out on as a result.

The latest government “innovation,” which follows in a long tradition of stealing ideas from the private sector designed to improve our lives and using them for other means instead, is central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).

Designed not to exist in any physical form whatsoever, CBDCs would give their central bank issuers entirely new powers. Indeed, much of the manoeuvring that was required in 2008-9 to rescue the financial system with taxpayer-funded bailouts would have been so much easier had CBDCs been in existence. But if easier, is that necessarily a good thing for the economy as a whole?

Nigel Farage doesn’t seem to think so. And he has come up with a plan to counter the government’s efforts.

To answer the question, it is important to differentiate between CBDCs and the concept of private, distributed digital currencies, including those such as bitcoin, that are built using distributed-ledger technology (DLT). In some ways they are opposites.

Rather than offer an alternative currency, CBDCs are mostly aimed at making monetary policy easier to implement and, potentially, more powerful.

As monetary officials have repeatedly made clear, they have no interest in replacing their policy discretion with algorithms, blockchains or any other form of private-sector solution. Recently, Pablo Hernández de Cos, the chairman of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the regulatory branch of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS, the “central bank of central banks” which is based in that Swiss city), made the following comments with respect to DLT:

DLT could, in principle, allow for cheaper, faster and more customised financial intermediation. But, here again, such benefits must be weighed against the risks if not properly regulated and managed. These include potential threats to banks’ operational resilience, a lack of legal clarity with regard to assets transacted on DLTs, and concerns with regard to anti-money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

Financial system regulators have a bad habit of associating everything that is unregulated with money laundering and terrorism, when in fact the vast bulk of such activity takes place within the incumbent banking and payments system. Such invidious associations should be seen as primarily self-serving rather than anything necessarily in the public interest.

The Bank of England appears to share these sentiments. Earlier this month, the Bank published the following note:

In the traditional financial system, critical financial infrastructure is regulated to deliver an appropriate level of responsibility, accountability, and control. In the future, critical third parties providing material services to the UK financial sector (eg cloud service providers) may also be subject to regulatory requirements. So, there is a question as to what appropriate regulatory oversight of a blockchain could entail, were it to become a more critical piece of infrastructure in the financial system.

Blockchains do not constitute critical financial infrastructure (yet). But they could conceivably become so in the future if cryptoasset activity and its interconnectedness with the wider financial system continue to develop. So, it is important that relevant authorities find legal mechanisms and means of co-ordinated action to ensure that an equivalent regulatory outcome is delivered.

Hence CBDCs, once introduced, are not intended to displace, but to migrate existing, centralised, regulated monetary systems from paper based to wholly digital. There will still be legal tender laws requiring their acceptance for payment, and penalties for counterfeiting or other forms of fraud. Money laundering will still be a crime. And central banks will still control monetary policy. Indeed, their control of monetary power will grow.

As it stands today, while central banks set interest rates and conduct open-market operations (e.g. quantitative easing) these actions only have a direct impact on the reserves of the banking system which, for many years now, have been essentially digital.

Yes, banks do hold some physical cash in reserve, but it is such a tiny portion of their overall balance sheet as to be practically irrelevant.

The broader money supply, including the amount of physical cash in circulation, various types and amounts of bank deposits and credit, fluctuates along with economic activity and liquidity preferences. Thus, when the global financial crisis arrived in 2008, central bankers slashed interest rates and created huge amounts of reserves, but this did not prevent a general contraction in credit. Liquidity preferences spiked, including a desire to hold larger amounts of physical cash.

Given that multiple banks failed or had to be rescued, and that interest rates had declined to essentially zero, holding physical cash seemed an entirely reasonable thing to do. But it did have the effect of limiting central banks’ ability to add further monetary stimulus to their economies.

As one central bank after another began to consider lowering interest rates to outright negative levels, one immediate and obvious complication was that savers would seek to avoid negative rates by reducing their bank deposits in favour of physical cash hoards. Such a run on deposits would not only negate the proposed further stimulus, but would have the counterproductive effect of reducing banks’ normally stable depositor base.

CBDCs expand central bank power, for better or worse

CBDCs provide economic officials with a solution to this perceived problem: once introduced, a purely digital currency cannot be physically withdrawn. No matter if central banks cut interest rates to below zero, even dramatically so, in an effort to get savers to spend more. The digital currency must remain in the banking system. It may circulate more as households and businesses seek to pass the depreciating “hot potato” around, but there is no other option. A bank run on the system as a whole becomes impossible.

CBDCs also give central bankers the de facto power to “tax” deposits, or to supplement them with stimulus cash, as they did during the pandemic. But they would also give them the ability to easily track and trace every transaction, no matter how tiny, and perhaps embed some sort of sales, VAT or transactions tax, depending on the type of transaction involved.

To what extent these new powers would be used or abused is unclear, and a merging of monetary and fiscal policy in this way would no doubt be political, but CBDCs would enable a complete fusion of monetary and fiscal policy, if desired, and would make any form of avoidance or evasion on the part of households or businesses all but impossible outside of direct barter.

The end of financial privacy?

Financial privacy, something that has been eroding for many years, would vanish entirely. That is not to say that there could not be safeguards. And there are ways to help protect yourself. But here, too, the extent that individuals’ transaction histories would be visible to the authorities would need to be decided as a political matter.

This latter point helps to explain why there is much public disagreement amongst economic officials about how best to regulate private digital currencies and prevent their use for money laundering, tax evasion or other illicit economic activities. Whether public or private, purely digital currencies leave the ultimate “paper trail” that can be followed back to inception. Yes, individuals can use cryptography to protect their privacy on a public blockchain, hence why bitcoin is frequently referred to as a “cryptocurrency”.

In a 2021 article, the former acting director of the CIA, Mike Morell, made precisely this point, calling bitcoin a “boon for surveillance,” and noting that “concern over bitcoin’s use for illicit finance is significantly overstated.”

He should know. The CIA is known to monitor international financial transactions as it seeks to discover the source of all manner of activity, illicit or otherwise, that is considered a threat – real or potential, distant or immediate – to the national security of the United States, and to draw connections between both state and non-state actors whenever possible.

CBDCs as international reserves

The international arena is an interesting one for CBDCs, not only in that they would facilitate the ability of authorities to monitor cross-border transactions, but also because they could potentially disrupt the existing international monetary order.

The global financial system remains centred around the US dollar: it is worth considering whether another country’s CBDC, once successfully implemented domestically, could displace the dollar and provide the new global reserve.

Given that international reserve balances are already, in effect, digital in nature, the introduction of CBDCs doesn’t fundamentally change the game in this respect. Reserves remain within the banking system and are not “spent” in the way that domestic physical currencies are. Rather, as they are accumulated, they are sometimes sold to purchase securities of some sort, such as government bonds, or they are exchanged for other currencies, or sometimes gold.

Whether or not the dollar eventually loses its exclusive international reserve status will be down to other factors. It could be that China, Russia, Japan, Germany or the big oil exporters eventually tire of accumulating dollars that seem destined to lose value to inflation over time.

The war in Ukraine and associated economic sanctions might also catalyse some changes in international monetary behaviour. Dollar-dependent trade is a relatively easy target for sanctions, but if other currencies are used instead, sanctions become far harder to enforce. It should surprise no one that political leaders from Russia, China, India, Turkey and others have all made recent public statements to the effect that they have been actively seeking alternatives to the dollar even since Washington imposed war-related sanctions.

Were the above and other countries to indeed find a means to avoid the dollar in trade entirely, this would imply a severe reduction in the dollar’s global monetary role. Could the weaponisation of the dollar have, in fact, been counterproductive? Imagine Messrs Putin, Xi, Modi and Erdoğan channelling Napoleon (as discussed in yesterday’s edition of Fortune & Freedom): “Never interrupt the Americans when they are making a mistake!”

Dollar dominance on the wane, but NOT due to CBDCs

Having written extensively on the topic of global monetary regime change, in my opinion there is currently no national currency alternative to the dollar. All of them have problems of their own. Should the primary candidates migrate to CBDCs in future, with the US government opting for whatever reason to be left behind, doesn’t necessarily imply that the dollar would not remain the dominant reserve.

Of course, the US government might opt not to be left behind at all, but rather to place itself in the vanguard of the thrust to introduce a universal CBDC serving all modern monetary roles, including that of provide for the bulk of the international monetary reserve base. In a project of Napoleonic ambition, the US government could simply explain that all existing dollar balances be converted into a purely digital dollar and that, over some period of months, all physical currency would need to be redeemed for digital dollar balances in an account or would simply expire worthless.

However, what if, subsequent to such a move, multiple major countries in the world pushed back? For example, what if they shared some of the concerns mentioned above, including, perhaps, that the US government would abuse its dominant reserve position by not providing for a fair market interest rate or, perhaps, implementing an outright negative dollar interest rate as a de facto tax on foreign-held dollar balances?

In a way not dissimilar to Napoleon’s sense of near invulnerability when he set about invading Russia, the US government might find the rest of the world pursuing a form of defence in depth, finding ways to reduce reliance on the dollar. Perhaps some countries would even engage in a form of “scorched-earth” policy in which they required domestic economic agents to transact internationally in non-dollar currencies only.

Certainly such policies would be disruptive, but perhaps some actors would perceive their cost of their implementation to be less than to remain dependent not only on the dollar, but on a newfangled dollar CBDC which, paradoxically, gave the US Federal Reserve more power over global monetary conditions than it had ever had: nevertheless, this would be at a time when relative US global economic power had slipped to its lowest ebb since the 19th century.

What about digital gold?

If the dollar’s role continues to decline, there is a candidate that is more likely than any particular CBDC to replace it: gold. Gold is the only truly international money, accepted everywhere as a reliable store of value, and one with the strongest possible historical track record providing the de facto global monetary base and, under the classical gold standard, the de jure one. As I argue in my book, The Golden Revolution, Revisited, gold provides the game-theoretic monetary solution to a globalised, multipolar world.

So, while I don’t see CBDCs changing the international monetary regime on their own, it would be a real game-changer indeed if one or more CBDCs were to be linked to gold in some way. That would introduce real, tangible, perhaps irresistible competition for the dollar as the dominant global reserve.

As it stands now, however, it seems a more immediate concern that CBDCs will not only make it easier for central banks to implement negative interest rates, if desired, but that they will acquire a range of new, implied powers. Thus they bring with them broad implications for tax and fiscal policy, financial privacy and the ability for households to preserve their wealth in what has already become a highly challenging economic environment.

Read full story here…

SO Here is Profitability Guarantee a la Pfizer

pfizer new thumb 2023

Pfizer Executive: ‘Mutate’ COVID via ‘Directed Evolution’ for Company to Continue Profiting Off of Vaccines … ‘COVID is Going to be a Cash Cow for Us’ … ‘That is Not What We Say to the Public’ … ‘People Won’t Like That’ … ‘Don’t Tell Anyone’

  • Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner: “One of the things we’re exploring is like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create — preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that though, there’s a risk of like, as you could imagine — no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses.”
  • Walker: “Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”
  • Walker: “You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t.”
  • Walker: “From what I’ve heard is they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it [COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow because everyone is very cautious — obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations.”

[NEW YORK – Jan. 25, 2023] Project Veritas released a new video today exposing a Pfizer executive, Jordon Trishton Walker, who claims that his company is exploring a way to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution” to preempt the development of future vaccines.

Walker says that Directed Evolution is different than Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that confers new or enhanced activity on a protein.” In other words, it means that a virus such as COVID can become more potent depending on the mutation / scientific experiment performed on it.

The Pfizer executive told a Veritas journalist about his company’s plan for COVID vaccines, while acknowledging that people would not like this information if it went public.

“One of the things we [Pfizer] are exploring is like, why don’t we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create — preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we’re gonna do that though, there’s a risk of like, as you could imagine — no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses,” Walker said.

“From what I’ve heard is they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it [COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow because everyone is very cautious — obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations,” he said.

“Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”

Walker drew parallels between this current Pfizer project and what may have happened at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

“You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t,” he said.

“You’re not supposed to do Gain-of-Function research with viruses. Regularly not. We can do these selected structure mutations to make them more potent. There is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that is going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because Jesus Christ,” he said.

Walker also told the Veritas journalist that COVID has been instrumental for Pfizer’s recent business success:

Walker:Part of what they [Pfizer scientists] want to do is, to some extent, to try to figure out, you know, how there are all these new strains and variants that just pop up. So, it’s like trying to catch them before they pop up and we can develop a vaccine prophylactically, like, for new variants. So, that’s why they like, do it controlled in a lab, where they say this is a new epitope, and so if it comes out later on in the public, we already have a vaccine working.

Veritas Journalist:Oh my God. That’s perfect. Isn’t that the best business model though? Just control nature before nature even happens itself? Right?

Walker:Yeah. If it works.

Veritas Journalist:What do you mean if it works?

Walker:Because some of the times there are mutations that pop up that we are not prepared for. Like with Delta and Omicron. And things like that. Who knows? Either way, it’s going to be a cash cow. COVID is going to be a cash cow for us for a while going forward. Like obviously.

Veritas Journalist:Well, I think the whole research of the viruses and mutating it, like, would be the ultimate cash cow.

Walker:Yeah, it’d be perfect.

Walker went on to explain how Big Pharma and government officials, such as at the Food & Drug Administration [FDA], have mutual interests, and how that is not in the best interest of the American people:

Walker:[Big Pharma] is a revolving door for all government officials.

Veritas Journalist:Wow.

Walker:In any industry though. So, in the pharma industry, all the people who review our drugs — eventually most of them will come work for pharma companies. And in the military, defense government officials eventually work for defense companies afterwards.

Veritas Journalist:How do you feel about that revolving door?

Walker:It’s pretty good for the industry to be honest. It’s bad for everybody else in America.

Veritas Journalist:Why is it bad for everybody else?

Walker:Because when the regulators reviewing our drugs know that once they stop regulating, they are going to work for the company, they are not going to be as hard towards the company that’s going to give them a job.

About Project Veritas

James O’Keefe established Project Veritas in 2010 as a non-profit journalism enterprise to continue his undercover reporting work. Today, Project Veritas investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society and to engage in litigation to: protect, defend and expand human and civil rights secured by law, specifically First Amendment rights including promoting the free exchange of ideas in a digital world; combat and defeat censorship of any ideology; promote truthful reporting; and defend freedom of speech and association issues including the right to anonymity. O’Keefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the Board so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well as protect and nurture the Project Veritas culture.

Project Veritas is a registered 501(c)3 organization. Project Veritas does not advocate specific resolutions to the issues raised through its investigations.

from:    https://www.projectveritas.com/news/pfizer-executive-mutate-covid-via-directed-evolution-for-company-to-continue/

Egregore — Is that Mass Psychosis?

Egregore

Egregore (also spelled egregor; from French égrégore, from Ancient Greek ἐγρήγορος, egrēgoros ‘wakeful’) is an occult concept representing a non-physical entity that arises from the collective thoughts of a distinct group of people. Historically, the concept referred to angelic beings, or watchers, and the specific rituals and practices associated with them, namely within Enochian traditions.[1]

In more recent times, the concept has referred to a psychic manifestation, or a thoughtform, which occurs when any group shares a common motivation—being made up of, and influencing, the thoughts of the group.[citation needed]

History

The concept of egregorial powers has its roots in the Book of Enoch.[2]

Later the term and concept found its way into other languages. Manuscrit trouvé à Saragosse, or The Manuscript Found in Saragossa, was a novel written in French by the Polish author Count Jan Potocki (1761–1815) in the Russian Empire in the early 19th century which features the term ‘egregores’,[citation needed] referring to “the most illustrious of fallen angels.”[3]

The term ‘egregore’ was also used by the French author Victor Hugo, in La Légende des siècles (1859) (“The Legend of the Ages”), where he uses the word égrégore first as an adjective, then as a noun, while leaving the meaning obscure.[4][non-primary source needed]

Éliphas Lévi, in Le Grand Arcane (“The Great Secret”, 1868) identifies ‘egregors’ with the tradition concerning the Watchers, the fathers of the nephilim,[5] describing them as “terrible beings” that “crush us without pity because they are unaware of our existence.”[6]

Another concept of the egregore is the GOTOS (Gradus Ordinis Templi Orientis Saturni (33°)) of the Fraternitas Saturni.[7]

Contemporary usage

A 1987 article by Gaetan Delaforge in Gnosis magazine defines an egregore as a kind of group mind that is created when people consciously come together for a common purpose.[8]

Egregore is also used in relation to the Montreal Surrealists, best known as Les Automatistes, in Ray Ellenwood’s Egregore: A History of the Montréal Automatist Movement.[9]

Gary Lachman identifies Pepe the Frog as an egregore in his book Dark Star Rising.[10]

check out here for references and sources:    https://thereaderwiki.com/en/Egregore

Let’s Protect Our Kids

6 ‘Noncompliance’ Strategies for Protecting Kids and Teens in 2023

Since 2020, parents have had to contend with increasingly brazen efforts by governments, schools, foundations, Big Tech, Big Pharma and others to hijack, injure or destroy children’s minds and bodies. Here are some strategies for parents to help kids resist the pressure to comply.

Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender’s Top News of the DayIt’s free.

Since 2020, parents have had to contend with increasingly brazen efforts by governmentsschoolsfoundationsBig TechBig Pharma and others to hijack, injure or destroy children’s minds and bodies.

Far from being piecemeal or merely opportunistic responses to a convenient “pandemic,” these assaults on children — and adults, too — reflect a well-financed, long-term control agenda aimed at implementation of digital identities, social scoring and “full monitoring and tracking of every human being through … mechanisms already in place.”

At the “Defeat the Mandates” rally in January 2022, Children’s Health Defense Chairman and Chief Litigation Counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., asserted, “Nobody in the history of the planet has ever complied their way out of totalitarian control” and reminded the public, “Every time you comply, you get weaker.”

Kennedy also warned, “they’re coming for our children.”

As if in confirmation, infantskindergartners and college students were badgered throughout the year to get — and then suffered atrocious damage from — COVID-19 shots, despite overwhelming evidence that the jabs urgently needed to be withdrawn from the market.

Clued in to these and other dangers crowding around their children, a growing number of parents recognized the need for noncompliance.

Keeping noncompliance as the watchword for 2023, here are some actions that could make a real difference in the coming year.

Choose home schooling

In a nine-part series written earlier this year, journalist Corey Lynn of Corey’s Digs described comprehensive social engineering efforts — “obedience training” — rolling out in coordinated fashion in 110 countries, in part via school-based “Social and Emotional Learning” programs.

Implemented by educators, counselors and other professionals in “public schools, charter schools, after-school programs, summer camps, virtual schools and remote schooling,” the goal is, according to Lynn, “shaping minds, regulating emotions, controlling behaviors, instilling twisted beliefs, and building an obedient workforce.”

As Anna L. Noble put it in an April 2022 article in The Defender, “Schools provide a useful testing ground to experiment with ways to hold the attention of children, develop nudges, and elicit desirable behavioral responses.”

Scathing education whistleblower Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, a now-deceased former senior policy advisor for the U.S. Department of Education, decried the “deliberate dumbing down of America” and traced the education system’s shift “from academics to behavioral modification” back to at least 1965.

Iserbyt observed that the Department of Education did not exist prior to its 1979 creation under the Carter Administration, stating, “There is nowhere in the constitution that calls for a Department of Education.”

Even private schools, under the thumb of the agenda-driven National Association of Independent Schools, appear to have lost any vestiges of “independence,” with enrollment contracts reportedly prohibiting parents “from ‘[voicing] strong disagreement’ with school policy or curricula, under threat of expulsion.”

Instead of continuing to expect something different from an “abusive” educational system, Lynn suggests that home schooling can be a powerful form of noncompliance.

Many parents apparently agree — responding to schools’ disastrous imposition of measures like remote learning and masking in 2020, a record number of households turned to home schooling.

Prior to COVID-19, roughly 3.4% of school-age children were home-schoolers, but by the start of the 2020-2021 school year, the U.S. Census Bureau’s estimate had risen to 11.1%.

Home schooling is now the fastest-growing form of education in the U.S.

Stop the poisoning

Earlier this month, more than a third of parents surveyed (35%) — up from less than one-fourth (23%) in 2019 — questioned school vaccine mandates,

And this was only the latest in a string of reports addressing rising parental ambivalence about “routine” childhood vaccines.

These trends suggest that a critical mass of parents is coming to see vaccines as a “con man trick,” understanding that promises of vaccine safety were false and conflict-of-interest-riddled well before COVID-19 shots came along — and in fact, since the very inception of childhood vaccination programs.

The world’s vaccine experts conceded this point in a roundabout manner at a World Health Organization Global Vaccine Safety Summit in late 2019, as did Danish researcher and long-time vaccine insider Christine Stabell Benn at around the same time.

Benn commented, “Vaccination opponents are justified in being concerned [about safety],” adding:

“No vaccines have been studied for their non-specific effects on overall health, and before we have examined these, we cannot actually determine that the vaccines are safe.”

Benn’s colleague Peter Aaby admitted, also in 2019, “Most of you think that we know what all our vaccines are doing; we don’t.”

In mid-2021, Benn and Aaby cautiously argued against COVID-19 shots for children in the high-status BMJ scientific journal.

Given the shocking odds of vaccine injury that already prevailed prior to COVID-19 — conservatively estimated in a 2010 government-commissioned report at one in every 39 vaccines administered — it is not surprising that the carnage from COVID-19 jabs would now be swelling the ranks of questioners and “ex-vaxxers.”

However, vaccination — even with its payload of known and undisclosed toxic ingredients and apparent batch-to-batch variability — is far from the only vehicle for poisoning our most vulnerable.

Parents willing to do their own research and forge their family’s own nutritional and healthcare path will find that it may be within their reach to lessen, if not entirely eliminate, their children’s exposure to other common poisons such as food additivesglyphosateorganochlorine and organophosphate pesticides and over-the-counter drugs like acetaminophen, all of which come with vastly underreported dangers.

Reduce screen time

In 2006, author Richard Louv coined the term “nature-deficit disorder” in the subtitle to his book “Last Child in the Woods,” suggesting that today’s “wired generation,” with parents’ conscious or unconscious permission, has unwisely prioritized screens over time in nature.

With the worsening of children’s screen habits over the past several years, the nature deficit has become a “hot topic.”

Worried researchers also describe how screens are displacing “developmentally beneficial activities” as basic as sleep, physical activity, family interactions and book reading.

The related problem of screen or social media addiction — linked not just to sleeplessness but to eating disorders and outcomes like suicide — has become the focus of lawsuits alleging that social media companies “aggressively” deploy algorithms designed to addict children and adolescents.

Discovering the major role that “social influencers” seem to play in the exploding phenomenon of “rapid onset gender dysphoria” among girls, author Abigail Shrier’s top recommendation in her book, “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters,” is to not give one’s daughter a smartphone.

As “Financial Rebellion” and the Solari Report’s Catherine Austin Fitts explains, “Children are targets of some of the most powerful people and dangerous technology on the planet,” and it is parents’ job to “understand this and protect them.”

Teach kids to use cash, not plastic

In late 2020, Bank for International Settlements General Manager Augustín Carstens shared central bankers’ unfriendly vision of a monetary system enabling complete control of all transactions through central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) which, ominously, would also allow central banks to turn people’s money on and off at will.

Unfortunately, the younger generations are marching heedlessly toward this dystopian vision, with millennials, according to 2021 research by Capital One, “increasingly moving away from cash spending” in favor of digital payment systems.

Pushing a “convenience” narrative, some banks — seemingly unaware that CBDCs threaten their own future — are promoting the cashless agenda by offering high school debit cards that double as school ID cards, telling parents they’ll no longer have to “worry about lost lunch money.”

Fitts is a strong proponent of revitalizing the use of cash.

Parents can help by not only being cash role models themselves but by having their children “start handling cash when they are young.”

In 2015, Editor-at-Large Janet Bodnar of Kiplinger’s Personal Finance opined that “using cash is the best way to get young minds thinking wisely about money,” including older teens who can benefit from “the discipline of managing a stash of real cash.”

Bodnar dismissed as flawed the parental argument that plastic can teach kids “financial responsibility.”

A British math expert told The Guardian in 2021, “Being able to handle money and buy something yourself is very special: it builds up your confidence with money.”

Don’t fall for mental health traps 

Over the years, many parents have learned to be wary of recommendations coming from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an agency so accustomed to conflicts of interest and fake science that it is not embarrassed to use the same PR firm as Big Pharma.

Thus, calls for more mental health screening and greater access to “care” — from birth through young adulthood — by CDC and CDC/pharma front groups like the American

Academy of Pediatrics deserve careful scrutiny.

As recently outlined in The Defender, cradle-to-grave psychiatric surveillance is a stealth tool for social control, and also risks stigmatizing and potentially life-threatening consequences like overdiagnosis, overmedicalization and overmedication.

Schools increasingly serve as the delivery mechanism for mental health screening and services, but as the Los-Angeles-based Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) — a mental health watchdog group — warned in a fact sheet, the “subjective and unscientific” mental health screening tools that schools are using are “developed by psychiatrists predominantly with financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.”

According to CCHR:

“Mental health screening asks young students embarrassing, personal and potentially upsetting questions that psychiatrists have worded in such a way that no student could escape being labeled mentally ill at some point during their education.”

CCHR adds, “These questionnaires can result in psychological or psychiatric intervention in the lives of a child and his or her family — often against their will or under threat.”

For households that are not home schooling, the watchdog group recommends that parents become aware of what is happening, sign exemption forms prior to mental health screening or counseling and “unite to get psychiatric screening expelled from schools.”

Stop financing the enemy

Author and researcher Dr. Naomi Wolf recently braved the cold in front of her alma mater Yale University to make the case that the university’s COVID-19 vaccine mandates turn students into “medical hostages” and constitute human trafficking.

In her Substack account of the Yale visit, Wolf described conversations with parents, who said “their children had begged them not to speak out, not to call the Dean, not to advocate for them to protect them from these injections, in any way,” due to the fear of reprisal and expulsion.

However, parents have a duty to make sure their young people understand what they are trading off for prestige — including, potentially, their health, their future fertility or their life.

Moreover, even if, as Wolf alleges, universities are now more beholden to government contracts than to those who pay tuition, college students and their parents still represent a powerful economic bloc capable of voting with their feet.

One tool at parents’ disposal, suggests Wolf, is to escrow potential donations to show universities the funds they are missing out on.

But parents who give their current or soon-to-be college students the permission and courage to shun any higher education institution that shows itself willing to poison them and deprive them of their constitutional freedoms can offer their children an even more powerful life lesson.

A high school student who recognized that “mandates will not end as long as we participate” developed a letter for college admissions offices (available as a template for others) that says:

“At this time, I’m only considering schools, colleges or universities that do not require a Covid-19 vaccine and that would mean the initial series, any boosters and including upcoming requirements to be considered ‘up to date.’ Medical freedom and body autonomy are my highest priority.”

Say no to the control grid

Although this article has focused on measures to protect young people, the control grid — in the form of interventions like digital IDsvaccine passports and CBDCs — is also coming after adults.

As Kennedy wrote in the afterword to his bestseller, “The Real Anthony Fauci,” “We can bow down and comply … Or we can say no. We have a choice, and it is not too late.”

CHD.TV’s “Financial Rebellion” offers weekly suggestions on how to not comply.

In Kennedy’s words:

“We can say no to compliance with jabs for work, no to sending children to school with forced testing and masking, no to censored social media platforms, no to buying products from the companies bankrupting and seeking to control us. These actions are not easy, but living with the consequence of inaction would be far harder. By calling on our moral courage, we can stop this march towards a global police state.”

from:    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/protecting-kids-teens-noncompliance/

The Coming Algocracy

Unprecedented, Unholy, Unseen: AI Chatbots Are Colonizing Our Minds

z1b © 123rf.com | (neural network generated art)
AI bots are ubiquitous, yet potentially mind-altering in major ways. From digital assistants like Siri and Alexa to social media to support lines for your appliances, you are interacting with programs every single day. Do they have the collective influence to change your thinking? Or worse, the way you think? This article should be read start to finish. Then read it two more times – Joe Allen is NOT a bot. ⁃ TN Editor

Chatbots are at the front lines of an unrelenting AI invasion. The steady increase of artificial minds in our collective psyche is akin to mass immigration—barely noticed and easily overlooked, until it’s too late. Our cultural landscape is being colonized by bots, and as with illegal aliens, much of our population welcomes this as “progress.”

The bots will keep us company. They will learn and absorb our personalities. And when we die, they will become our digital ghosts. It’s a morbid prospect, but the process is already underway.

E-learning institutions regularly deploy AI teachers. Chatbot companions are seducing lonesome souls by the millions, including religious chatbots who function as spiritual guides. At the end of the road, various start-ups are developing cyber-shrines where families can commune with their departed loved ones and find comfort in the digital undead.

In the minds of tech enthusiasts, AI chatbots of all sorts will be our soulless companions on the trek toward the Future™. These ephemeral “friends” are key psychological components of what many describe as human-AI symbiosis. They will be like artificial guardian angels in our palms—and by extension, in our heads—answering questions and steering decisions.

One thing is certain. Whatever you think about this invasion, AIs are falling to earth like stars from a godless heaven. And with each successive wave, their voices are that much more convincing.

These bots are crafted to push our cognitive buttons, giving the illusion of personhood. Before long, they will come to be widely trusted—even loved. Among early adopters, they already are. Our emotional minds are being hardwired for control.

The recent roll-out of ChatGPT, created by OpenAI, has been heralded as the second coming of the Google God. As with previous GPT programs, the user types in a question and the bot onscreen spits out a reasonably coherent, if occasionally inaccurate answer.

A few days ago, I asked ChatGPT about one of OpenAI’s founding investors: “Will Elon Musk chip our brains?”

“No,” the bot responded, “Elon Musk does not believe in chipping brains. He has said that he believes that ‘abundance is our future’ and that technology should be used to empower people, not replace them.”

Like the slanted Google God before it, ChatGPT may not be entirely truthful, but at least its loyal to political allies. In that sense, it’s quite human.

If you can’t trust a chatbot, who can you trust?

Speaking at “The History of Civil Liberties in Canada Series” on December 13, the weepy maker-of-men, Dr. Jordan Peterson, warned his fellow canucks about ChatGPT’s godlike powers:

So now we have an AI model that can extract a model of the world from the entire corpus of language. Alright. And it’s smarter than you. It’s gonna be a hell of a lot smarter than you in two years. …

Giants are going to walk the earth once more. And we’re gonna live through that. Maybe.

You hear that, human? Prepare to kneel before your digital overlords. For all the public crying Peterson has done, he didn’t shed a single tear about humanity’s displacement by AI. Maybe he believes the Machine will devour all his trolls first.

Peterson did go on to ride Elon Musk’s jock, though, portraying the cyborg car dealer as a some sort of savior—which, to my disgust, is the embarrassing habit of almost every “intellectual dark web” icon these days. What’s odd is that the comparative mythology professor failed to note the archetypal significance of the Baphomet armor Musk still sports in his Twitter profile.

Anyone urging people to trust the world’s wealthiest transhumanist is either fooling themselves, or they’re trying to fool you.

This is not to say Musk and Peterson are entirely wrong about the increasing power of artificial intelligence, even if they’re far too eager to to see us bend the knee. In the unlikely event that progress stalls for decades, leaving us with the tech we have right now, the social and psychological impact of the ongoing AI invasion is still a grave concern.

At the moment, the intellectual prowess of machine intelligence is way over-hyped. If humanity is lucky, that will continue to be the case. But the real advances are impressive nonetheless. AI agents are not “just computer programs.” They’re narrow thinking machines that can scour vast amounts of data, of their own accord, and they do find genuinely meaningful patterns.

large language model (aka, a chatbot) is like a human brain grown in a jar, with a limited selection of sensors plugged into it. First, the programmers decide what parameters the AI will begin with—the sorts of patterns it will search for as it grows. Then, the model is trained on a selection of data, also chosen by the programmer. The heavier the programmer’s hand, the more bias the system will exhibit.

In the case of ChatGPT, the datasets consist of a massive selection of digitized books, all of Wikipedia, and most of the Internet, plus the secondary training of repeated conversations with users. The AI is motivated to learn by Pavlovian “reward models,” like a neural blob receiving hits of dopamine every time it gets the right answer. As with most commercial chatbots, the programmers put up guardrails to keep the AI from saying anything racist, sexist, or homophobic.

When “AI ethicists” talk about “aligning AI with human values,” they mostly mean creating bots that are politically correct. On the one hand, that’s pretty smart, because if we’re moving toward global algocracy—where the multiculti masses are ruled by algorithms—then liberals are wise to make AI as inoffensive as possible. They certainly don’t want another Creature From the 4chan Lagoon, like when Microsoft’s Tay went schizo-nazi, or the Google Image bot kept labeling black people as “gorillas.”

On the other hand, if an AI can’t grasp the basic differences between men and women or understand the significance of continental population clusters—well, I’m sure it’ll still be a useful enforcer in our Rainbow Algocracy.

Once ChatGPT is downloaded to a device, it develops its own flavor. The more interactions an individual user has, the more the bot personalizes its answers for that user. It can produce sentences or whole essays that are somewhat original, even if they’re just a remix of previous human thought. This semi-originality, along with the learned personalization, is what gives the illusion of a unique personality—minus any locker room humor.

Across the board, the answers these AIs provide are getting more accurate and increasingly complex. Another example is Google’s LaMDA, still unreleased, which rocketed to fame last year when an “AI ethicist” informed the public that the bot is “sentient,” claiming it expresses sadness and yearning. Ray Kurzweil predicted this psychological development back in 1999, in his book The Age of Spiritual Machines:

They will increasingly appear to have their own personalities, evidencing reactions that we can only label as emotions and articulating their own goals and purposes. They will appear to have their own free will. They will claim to have spiritual experiences. And people…will believe them.

This says as much about the humans involved as it does about the machines. However, projecting this improvement into the future—at an exponential rate—Kurzweil foresees a coming Singularity in which even the most intelligent humans are truly overtaken by artificial intelligence.

That would be the point of no return. Our destiny would be out of our hands.

My first and only image request to OpenAI’s art generator

In 2021, the tech entrepreneur Sam Altman—who co-founded OpenAI with Musk in 2015—hinted at something like a Singularity in his essay “Moore’s Law of Everything.” Similar to Kurzweil, he promises artificial intelligence will transform every aspect of society, from law and medicine to work and socialization.

Assuming that automation will yield radical abundance—even as it produces widespread unemployment—he argues for taxation of the super rich and an “equity fund” for the rest of us. While I believe such a future would be disastrous, creating vast playgrounds for the elite and algorithmic pod-hives for the rest of us, I think Altman is correct about the coming impact:

In the next five years, computer programs that can think will read legal documents and give medical advice. In the next decade, they will do assembly-line work and maybe even become companions. And in the decades after that, they will do almost everything, including making new scientific discoveries that will expand our concept of “everything.”

This technological revolution is unstoppable.

These superbots would undoubtedly be wonky and inhuman, but at the current pace of improvement, something like Altman’s prediction appears to be happening. Beyond the technical possibilities and limitations, a growing belief in AI personhood is reshaping our culture from the top down—and at an exponential rate.

Our shared vision of who we are, as a species, is being transformed.

“Johnny 5 is alive! More input, MORE INPUT!!”

Bots are invading our minds through our phones, our smart speakers, our educational institutions, our businesses, our government agencies, our intelligence agencies, our religious institutions, and through a growing variety of physical robots meant to accompany us from cradle to grave.

We are being primed for algocracy.

Past generations ignored mass immigration and environmental destruction, both fueled by tech innovations, until it was too late to turn back the tide. Right now, we have a “narrow window of opportunity” to erect cultural and legal barriers—family by family, community by community, and nation by nation.

If this social experiment is “inevitable,” we must insist on being part of the control group.

Ridiculous as it may seem, techno-skeptics are already being labeled as “speciesist”—i.e., racist against robots. We’d better be prepared to wear that as a badge of honor. As our tech oligarchs and their mouthpieces proclaim the rise of digital deities, it should be clear that we’re not the supremacists in this equation.

Read full story here…

from:    https://www.technocracy.news/unprecedented-unholy-unseen-ai-chatbots-are-colonizing-our-minds/

 

And Genetics Are Changing – Vaccines? Japan Asks WTF

“It’s 2030, and We Own Your Money”

How Klaus Schwab’s WEF Is Weaponizing Banking

Over the past two years or so, the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) influence over governments and institutions of sovereign nations has become increasingly apparent.

Founded in 1971 by German economist Klaus Schwab, the WEF has remained fairly under the radar for decades.

However, the organization has been quietly expanding its icy grip around the throats of the world’s population by installing operatives in the upper echelons of governments and corporations.

This influence has expanded so far that Schwab and his allies appear to have given up trying to conceal their agenda and even openly gloat about controlling nations’ leaders.

When the Covid pandemic emerged, it opened the floodgates for the WEF agenda as the public begged their leaders to take away their basic freedoms.bank accounts

Vaccine passportsdigital IDlockdowns, a cashless society, and other such restrictions, all align with the WEF’s “Great Reset” agenda.

It’s not just happenstance that the world’s banks and financial institutions are freezing the accounts of those who do not share the same political ideologies that they choose to live by.

The freezing of bank accounts comes directly from the BIG STEAL promoted by the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” – “You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy.”

In February, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau froze the bank accounts of thousands of truckers in the Freedom Convoy—and their supporters.

As Slay News reported in November, we saw the same tactics used in Brazil when people who questioned the presidential election results had their bank accounts frozen.

In early 2022, Trudeau’s sidekick supporter, Ontario Premier Doug Ford, swooped in to confiscate the millions of dollars the public sent to GoFundMe and GiveSendGo for the protesting truckers.

Three months later, when the World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting took place May 22nd through 26th, in Davos, Switzerland, 50 heads of government and thousands of corporate, philanthropic, and scientific leaders were in attendance. (National Pulse, May 20, 2022)

Twenty-five American officials, including two White House representatives, and an additional 12 Democrat and 10 Republican politicians, accompanied them.

The panel discussions included:

  • Economic Weaponry: Uses and Effectiveness of Sanctions
  • Safeguarding Global Scientific Collaboration
  • Blue Foods for a Sustainable Future
  • The Journey towards Racial Equity

“Economic Weaponry” is the WEF’s latest weapon in the take-down-the-enemy arsenal.

“Candace Owens reported on Wednesday that entertainer Kanye West has been removed as a client from Chase Bank. (Post Millennial, Oct. 12, 2022)

“Owens shared the letter from the multinational banking company, which was headed “Closing of Our Banking Relationship.”

“Addressed to Ye, it read “We are sending this letter to confirm our recent discussion with [redacted] that JPMorgan Chase Bank… has decided to end its banking relationship with Yeezy, LLC and its affiliated entities.”

“The bank gave West until November 21 to move his accounts to another financial institution.

“No reason appears to have been given in the bank’s decision to stop servicing the accounts of the multi-millionaire entertainer and fashion designer.

“This comes after a spate of criticism was heaped on West for an apparent antisemitic post on Twitter which led to West being locked out of the platform. West wrote: “I’m a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I am going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE.”

“In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, West said “When I say Jew, I mean the 12 lost tribes of Judah, the blood of Christ, who the people known as the race black really are. This is who our people are. The blood of Christ. This, as a Christian, is my belief.”

“Owens recently joined West during Paris fashion week, where both of them wore controversial shirts emblazoned with the words “white lives matter.”

“West told Carlson that the reason he had the shirts made is because it was “obvious.” He went on to say that the Black Lives Matter movement is a “sham.”

“West has publicly discussed his mental health struggles and revealed several years ago that he has been diagnosed bipolar disorder.”

PayPal can still steal your $2,500

Then there’s PayPal, which Ken LaCorte points out backtracked on fining people for “misinformation”, but it can still fine users for promoting “intolerance”.(Ken Lacorte, Oct. 12, 2022

“PayPal users rebelled after learning the company’s policy allowed it to fine them $2,500 for spreading “misinformation,” deducting that money directly from user accounts. The company swiftly reversed itself amid the fallout, saying the policy was posted in error.

“While it backtracked from “misinformation” it still maintains that if you promote “intolerance” or “hate” they can steal $2,500 of your money. Per infraction.

“All you need to do is read through the company’s 23,478-word User Agreement, and then click on its Acceptable Use Policy, section 2(f), which makes things clear:

“Prohibited Activities … the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory.”

So who gets to decide what’s hateful or intolerant?

“Violation of this Acceptable Use Policy … may subject you to damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500.00 U.S. dollars per violation, which may be debited directly from your PayPal account(s).”

When the original story broke, the company’s former president called the policy “insanity,” and co-founder Elon Musk agreed.

“The company explained it was all a big mistake: “PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy.” (Notice that they don’t say anything about promoting “hate” or “intolerance.” That can still cost you a lot of dough.)

“Of course, hate is bad, assuming we’re not talking about hating Nazis or Russians or Trump or fundamentalists or Republican candidates or … you get the idea.

“So who gets to decide what’s hateful or intolerant? According to PayPal:

If we believe that you’ve engaged in any of these activities, we may take a number of actions to protect PayPal, its customers and others at any time in our sole discretion.

Why do we call the Great Reset The BIG STEAL?

Meanwhile, the WEF BIG STEAL carries on with their next Davos gathering scheduled for the end of January.

Why do we call the Great Reset The BIG STEAL?

It’s because they will greedily confiscate everything the masses own and tell you that, when you are left with nothing, “you’ll be happy!”

READ MORE: WEF Advisor: ‘We Don’t Need Vast Majority of Population’

from:    https://slaynews.com/opinion/how-klaus-schwabs-wef-weaponizing-banking/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily-newsletter

To Travel on The Moon

NASA Awards $57M Contract to Build Roads on the Moon

NASA awarded a $57.2 million contract to develop construction technologies to build infrastructure on the moon.

NASA awarded a $57.2 million contract to develop construction technologies to build infrastructure on the moon. PHOTO BY CARLOS FERNANDEZ

By Kirsten Errick,

The award will go toward developing technologies to build infrastructure like landing pads and roads on the surface of the moon.

As NASA continues its exploration under Artemis, it needs new technology to improve infrastructure on the moon.

In an effort to meet this need, NASA awarded ICON—an advanced construction technology company best known for 3-D printed homes—a $57.2 million contract to develop construction technologies to build infrastructure on the moon—including landing pads, habitats and roads. The contract goes through 2028.

Tuesday’s contract is under Phase III of NASA’s Small Business Innovation Research program. It is a continuation of a prior SBIR dual-use contract with the Air Force, which NASA partially funded. The award will fund ICON’s Project Olympus to engage in research and development for space-based construction systems to support further space exploration.

“In order to explore other worlds, we need innovative new technologies adapted to those environments and our exploration needs,” Niki Werkheiser, director of technology maturation in NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate, said. “Pushing this development forward with our commercial partners will create the capabilities we need for future missions.”

The new award will help ICON’s Olympus construction system, “which is designed to use local resources on the moon and Mars as building materials,” according to the announcement.

ICON will use a lunar gravity simulation flight to bring its technology into space. The company will also utilize samples of lunar regolith—a layer of debris covering the moon’s surface—to examine their behavior in simulated lunar gravity; this will help inform construction approaches. ICON noted that the technology “will help establish the critical infrastructure necessary for a sustainable lunar economy including, eventually, longer term lunar habitation.”

“To change the space exploration paradigm from ‘there and back again’ to ‘there to stay,’ we’re going to need robust, resilient and broadly capable systems that can use the local resources of the moon and other planetary bodies,” Jason Ballard, ICON co-founder and CEO, said. “The final deliverable of this contract will be humanity’s first construction on another world, and that is going to be a pretty special achievement.”

ICON will work with NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center under NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate’s Moon to Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies project.

The award will expand ICON’s commercial activities and its work with NASA. For example, ICON 3-D printed a 1,700-square-foot Martian habitat simulation—the Mars Dune Alpha—that will be used for NASA’s Crew Health and Performance Analog mission in 2023.

As NASA looks to have astronauts return to the moon and eventually travel to Mars, the agency is also looking at creating a sustainable presence in outer space and establishing a long-term presence on the moon. As a result, building infrastructure on the moon is a necessary component towards that goal.

from:  https://www.nextgov.com/emerging-tech/2022/11/nasa-awards-57m-contract-build-roads-moon/380291/

What is Happening With All the Excess Mortality?

Died Suddenly – Documentary about Vaccine Deaths

by  | Nov 27, 2022 | All itemsCensorshipConspiraciesHealthTechnocracyVaccines | 0 comments

This documentary cuts to the core of the case against so-called Covid vaccines: Instead of protecting against Covid, the injections are injuring and killing so many people that the process has become nothing less than genocide – which is not so surprising when we learn that the masterminds behind these shots are fierce advocates of population reduction. The documentary revolves around a group of embalmers and coroners who independently discovered that, starting precisely at the time the alleged vaccines were introduced, the number of “sudden” deaths began skyrocketing to levels never seen before – and they discovered the cause. You will see them remove long, worm-like fibers from the main arteries and veins of “sudden-death” victims. These grotesque killers are so large, they completely block the flow of blood to vital organs. All of these victims had been vaccinated. 2022 Nov 27 – Source: Stu Peters Productions.

Within hours following the release of this documentary, the so-called fact checkers began flooding the Internet with claims that the program is an absurd conspiracy theory loaded with false claims. Let us hope that someone, soon, will fact-check the fact checkers and, when they do, the first thing they will notice is that the main thrust of the story is centered around a group of embalmers who independently reported finding strange, fibrous blood clots in the arteries and veins of cadavers who had taken the Covid injections – but not in those who had rejected it. Then they will notice that the fact checkers have nothing to say about any of that. Instead, they focus on the claim that some of the video clips showing people suddenly dropping to the floor and convulsing may have been taken before Covid began or that the people may not have died after their collapse. These claims, of course, also need to be checked. If they are true, it would be unfortunate that the video editor failed to be more selective in the choice of images, but it would in no way diminish the importance of the main theme of the film, which is that a never-before-seen type of blood clot started appearing in cadavers a few months following the introduction of the inoculation program and that, during this same period, the death rate from all causes began to skyrocket. Since this is the main message from the documentary and the fact checkers have nothing to say about it, must not be overlooked.

Click on image to play video.

You can view this video from multiple sources. Cached versions are adjusted for optimum quality, if needed, and they provide access if primary sources fail.

Rumble
from:    https://redpilluniversity.org/died-suddenly-a-documentary-about-vaccine-deaths/

More on Agenda 21

(Sorry About the Length, But Mercola’s articles disappear in 48 hours, so for those who want to read the whole thing, it is here:)

We Will Be Sacrificed for Global Standardization of Systems

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PrY7nFbwAY&t=1s

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Agenda 21 (Agenda for the 21st Century) is the inventory and control plan for all land, water, minerals, plants, animals, construction, means of production, food, energy, information, education and all human beings in the world
  • This roadmap for global totalitarianism was agreed to by 179 nations, including the U.S., at the 1992 Sustainable Development conference in Brazil
  • We’ve seen various facets of Agenda 21 being implemented throughout the last three years, under the cover of biosecurity and the global COVID-19 pandemic. The Green New Deal (Green Agenda), “Build Back Better,” the Fourth Industrial Revolution (the transhumanist movement) and The Great Reset all further and facilitate the implementation of Agenda 21
  • Agenda 21 is based on the ideology of “communitarianism,” which argues that “an individual’s rights should be balanced against rights of the community.” Community, however, in the mind of the globalists, is made up of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), corporations and government, which are to dictate what happens around the world. The people are not really part of the equation
  • “Sustainable development” is NOT about recycling or making sure there’s enough food and resources for everyone. It’s about moving populations from rural and suburban areas into concentrated city centers where they and their use of resources can be monitored and controlled

The video above features the late Rosa Koire, former executive director of the Post Sustainability Institute and Democrats Against UN Agenda 21,1 and author of “Behind the Green Mask: UN Agenda 21.” She spent the decade before her untimely death researching and educating people about public policies intended to strip us of our individual rights.

Before taking up that fight, she was a district branch chief at the California Department of Transportation for nearly three decades. Koire passed away from a pulmonary embolism and metastatic lung cancer at the end of May 2021.

In the video above, Koire exposes the real agenda of the United Nations Agenda 21, which was laid out during a Sustainable Development conference in June 1992.

Documentation2,3 from this conference can be downloaded in multiple languages from the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals page4 and the UN’s digital library.5 Koire’s many interviews and lectures on this topic can be found on DemocratsAgainstUNAgenda21.com.6

Agenda 21 Is Globalization on Steroids

Koire was adamant that Agenda 21 (aka Agenda for the 21st Century) was the most crucial topic of our time, as it is:

“The inventory and control plan for all land, water, minerals, plants, animals, construction, means of production, food, energy, information — and all human beings in the world.”

This roadmap for global control and domination — global totalitarianism — was agreed to by 179 nations at the 1992 Sustainable Development conference in Brazil. Were Koire alive today, at the end of 2022, there’s no doubt she would have warned us all that Agenda 21 was now in the final implementation stages.

We’ve seen various facets of Agenda 21 being implemented throughout the last three years, under the cover of biosecurity and the global COVID-19 pandemic. The Green New Deal (Green Agenda), “Build Back Better,” the Fourth Industrial Revolution7 (the transhumanist movement) and The Great Reset, officially introduced by World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab and then-Prince Charles in June 20208 — these all exist to further and facilitate the implementation of Agenda 21.

What Is ‘Sustainable Development’ Really?

As noted by Koire, most people are under the illusion that “sustainable development” is about things like recycling and making sure there’s enough food and resources for an ever-expanding population. But no, that’s NOT what it’s actually about. “It’s about moving populations into concentrated city centers and clearing them out of rural areas,” Koire says.

It’s also a plan for robbing the lower and middle classes of their wealth and turning the global population into slaves under a digital dictatorship where all resources are controlled from the top. It’s globalization on steroids, and the greater the globalization, the fewer individual rights can exist.

Former Prime Minister of England, Margaret Thatcher, once gave the following warning:9 “When the state does everything for you, it will soon take everything from you — you will then have no basis for personal freedom, political freedom, or economic freedom.”

‘Community’ Is Not What You Think It Is

As explained by Koire, Agenda 21 is based on the ideology of “communitarianism,” which argues that “an individual’s rights should be balanced against rights of the community.”

We may agree with this, at least in part, because we think of “community” as something that we’re part of and have a responsibility to. However, “community” in the mind of the globalists is a construct made up of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), corporations and government, which are to dictate what happens around the world.

“We, as individuals, have literally no influence, unless we are in agreement with it,” Koire says. “If you dissent against ‘the community’ [i.e., NGOs, corporations and government], against communitarian law or communitarian social tactics, you are rejected and basically made an outcast.”

So, to be clear, Agenda 21 and The Great Reset are based on an ideology that says individual rights must be balanced against the rights of NGOs, private corporations and governments. The word “balanced” is misleading, however, because “the community” is the decision-maker. Your only option is to submit to their rule or be expunged from society.

Attempt at Preventing Local Agenda 21 Implementation Failed

In 2013, Koire’s organization, the Post Sustainability Institute, sued to stop the Agenda 21 takeover of San Francisco, California. As reported by Off the Grid News at the time:10

“In the United States, more than 500 major- and moderate-sized cities are members of an international sustainability organization that reportedly supports the implementation of Agenda 21. A group known as the Post Sustainability Institute recently filed a lawsuit to stop a project, Plan Bay Area, which is a San Francisco-area long-range transportation and land-use/housing strategy that has a finish target of 2040.

According to the Plan Bay Area website, the goal is to ‘accommodate future population growth and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks.’ That is done by building neighborhoods that are ‘within walking distance of frequent transit service’ and that offer ‘a wide variety of housing options’ and feature grocery stores, community centers, and restaurants.”

In the video, Koire explains what the Bay Area Plan is really trying to achieve. According to that plan, any future development in the San Francisco Bay area will be restricted to just 4% of the available land. All 101 cities and counties will be joined together, and all land use decisions will be made by an unelected board.

The ramifications this will have on land use, property values, businesses and the forced movement of people is “unfathomable,” Koire says. She likens it to a “concentration camp of the future,” where water and energy usage is monitored and restricted, and where access to nature and the land outside the city is denied. Sadly, after three years, they lost the case and the Bay Area Agenda 21 plan is still on track.11

The Importance of Taking Back Control Locally

Stopping the local adoption and implementation of Agenda 21 is a crucial tactic because, as she explains, “regionalization is the stepping stone to globalization, and globalization is the standardization of global systems.”

And again, the global systems we’re talking about include the use of land, water, minerals, plants, animals and humans. It includes all types of construction, means of production, food, energy, information systems and education. ALL systems of the world are to be “harmonized” and brought under the control of a central entity.

Unless systems are synchronized to work together, they cannot be centrally controlled. This is also what The Great Reset is all about — the harmonization and synchronization of systems, globally, to allow for central control of the whole world. The Great Reset is Agenda 21 under a different name.

As noted by Koire, “The goal of Agenda 21 is one world government and total control from a central unit,” and the plan is being rolled out under the false premise that we have to implement all these changes in order to stop climate change.

Agenda 21 Goals Summarized

In summary, the goals of Agenda 21 and The Great Reset are to:

Move ALL people into large cities where they can be easily controlled — The Great Reset plan is more specific, as it calls for people living in smart cities under 24/7 surveillance. The Fourth Industrial revolution adds another layer, as it calls for the merger of man with technology, so surveillance and control will occur down to the biological, mental and emotional levels.

Destroy representative government and instead have unelected boards make all the decisions.

Erase jurisdictional boundaries and national borders through regionalization (the European Union is an example of regionalization), and fascism, i.e., public-private partnerships — Public-private partnerships, or partnerships between corporations and government, cut voters out of the equation.

The “fascist community” (recalling the definition of both terms) want to be able to a) freely move workers across borders, b) freely move goods without regulations, and c) reduce wages. The easiest way to do all of that is to remove national borders.

The Three Pillars of Agenda 21

As explained by Koire, the three pillars of Agenda 21 are the three “E’s”:

  1. Economy
  2. Ecology
  3. Equity (social equity)

As with the term “community,” most imagine they understand what the word “equity” means. They think it means there will be fair distribution of food, water, energy and so on. They think it’s about lessening the disparities between the rich and the poor. But again, they’re wrong.

Social equity involves “impoverishing huge portions of the population and bringing down developed nations,” Koire explains, adding, “Social equity is code for this movement [of people and goods] and reduction of the population.”

The three pillars, viewed as interconnected circles, are presented as the three areas that need to be balanced. But the “balance” spoken of is a communitarian balance. It’s not balance for the well-being of the people. The balanced center point is the area of centralized control, so that corporations and governments can exploit and control the people at will.

How to Fight Back

While we are moving toward a centralized totalitarian one world government, we are not there yet. We still have the ability to push back, by:

  • Refusing to cooperate with the rollout and implementation of Agenda 21 items, tyrannical overreaches and surveillance/control tools such as digital identity and programmable central bank digital currencies (CBDCs)
  • Widely exposing and discussing the totalitarian plan
  • Working together to defund these plans, especially local Agenda 21 plans
  • Helping your children understand that they’re being indoctrinated, from kindergarten through graduate school, to embrace and support their own demise
  • Standing up for personal rights and freedoms

Leadership Are Following a Script

Have you wondered why no one — with very few exceptions — in government, either locally or on the state or federal level, has apologized for any of their pandemic “mistakes”? Time and again, their assertions and promises have been proven wrong, yet no apologies have been forthcoming.12,13

Most are simply continuing as if none of their false statements and poor judgments ever happened. The reason they won’t admit that anything that happened during the pandemic was a mistake is because they knew it was all a lie from the start.

They were given a script and they followed that script. End of story. The script never made sense because it was a made-up narrative. Nothing was based on actual fact or real-world events. The script was created to give the illusion that the measures were necessary. In reality, the pandemic measures were a cover to push us into Agenda 21 and The Great Reset.

As the global systems are now falling apart due to those measures, the same villains are rolling out another narrative, another script, that says they’ll fix it. They’ll “build back better” and make everything equitable and green in the process. COVID was always about ushering in global totalitarianism.

The fly in the ointment was the fact that COVID was never as fatal as they tried to make it out to be and, over time, reality overtook the false narrative. Massive pushback against vaccine passports also hampered the takeover process, and now, Pfizer officials have driven the final nail into the coffin by admitting the COVID shots were never tested to see if they actually stopped infection and transmission, which was the sole basis for the passports.

Without the biosecurity justification, they’re back to pushing for digital identity, which was the next step in the digital enslavement process, but now large swaths of the population have caught on and know what they’re up to.

For example, well before the new Prime Minister of England, Rishi Sunak, took office, The National Pulse was reporting on his direct connections to a World Economic Forum partner company that pushes digital IDs and social credit scores.14 These kinks were perhaps divine intervention to prevent the whole world from falling into the trap.

The Administrative State Is a Major Part of the Problem

While many have hitched their hopes to a political change of guard, what most forget, or fail to understand, is that elected officials have nowhere near the power we expect them to have. As explained by The Epoch Times, the real power actually lies with the unelected administrators. That’s where the real cleanout needs to occur:15

“It’s rather obvious now that we’re dealing with a beast that includes media, technology, nonprofits, and multinational and international government agencies and all the groups they represent.

That said, let’s deal here with the most obvious problem: the administrative state … [E]lected politicians are outnumbered and outwitted on all sides, only pretending to be in charge when, in fact, the actual affairs of state are managed by experienced professionals with permanent positions …

[J]ust as the stakes are high, so, too, the problem of implementing a solution — representative democracy as a means to reobtain liberty itself — is also exceedingly difficult … Indeed, the entire system seems rigged against change.

It starts with the permanent staff on Capitol Hill. It’s a tribe. They move from office to office. They all know each other and also the permanent staff of the bureaucracies who serve Congress, and they, in turn, have close relations with the permanent staff of the executive bureaucracies, who, in turn, have close relationships with the media and the corporate executives lobbying the member of Congress.

The naive people, no matter how well intended, are quickly surrounded. This is essentially what happened to Donald Trump. He figured that as president, he would be like a CEO, not just of all of government, but the whole country. Within months, he was shown otherwise …

This is precisely why there needs to be a focus as never before on the problem of the administrative state. It has to be penetrated and taken apart piece by piece.

That will involve not only constant investigations, but also courageous bills that seek not cuts but full-on defunding of whole agencies, one after another. That’s what it will require to make genuine change …

In the end, what’s more powerful than political changes and even election upheavals, which too often fail through subversion, are dramatic shifts in public opinion.

Every institution ultimately bends to that, which is why research, education, great journalism, and competent media outlets, plus friendship networks and community organizing, might actually be more foundational than elections. All of this has begun and it’s growing. Therein lies the real hope.”

Realize Where Your True Power Lies

Regardless of which party holds the power, please realize that your power as an individual lies in your own personal day-to-day decisions. Politicians say what is necessary to get elected, based on the polling of talking points. A politician’s public talking points constantly “evolve” and are rarely consistent with their actions that benefit their corporate sponsors.

Also realize that creating divisiveness among people is part of a carefully orchestrated plan that works in the oligarchy’s favor, so we really need to get smarter about how we engage in the political process and avoid falling for their carefully constructed and sophisticated strategies that limit us from achieving the changes we want and desperately need.

As long as we’re at each other’s throats, it distracts us from analyzing and addressing the underlying system that is creating the problems in the first place. So, let people have their opinion. Ultimately, controlling interests are writing the laws and paying the politicians to pass them. But knowledge is power, so use your knowledge to take control where it actually matters the most — locally.

The power of the individual is alive and well even in this deeply flawed system. It becomes yours by stepping OUTSIDE of the system with every decision and purchase you make. With every action you take, you also set the example for others to follow, thereby making you a change-agent within your own small circle of family, friends and acquaintances.

In the end, our collective actions will create the changes that are so desperately needed, and thinking locally will eventually have a global effect.

Remember, the industries that are currently buying our politicians and writing their own laws cannot maintain power without your ongoing financial support. While we may not have a significant choice in how our tax contributions are distributed to these industries through subsidies and contracts, we do have a very powerful influence by making responsible purchases each and every day.

Withdraw that support and you automatically redistribute financial power to a benevolent business aligned with your core principles. A perfect example of this is when you buy locally-grown foods from an organic farmer.

You’re empowering that farmer to continue growing foods for the community that support environmental regeneration and human health, and you’re disempowering the big junk food manufacturers that wield undue influence over agricultural policy. This is where your true power lies.

Food Independence Is the Key to Other Forms of Independence

It’s time to dissent, to step out of the globalist and federalist systems, starting with your food. If you cannot grow your own, then get to know the farmer that can. Keep your money in your community; the closer the better. Kissinger said it best:16

“Control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people.”

If you don’t like the state of the nation (or the world), stop eating processed and ultraprocessed junk foods. Some may initially think this decision would have nothing to do with anything that is wrong in the world, but if you really give it some thought, you’ll realize that the more independence you gain with your food, the more independence you will create in other areas as well.

Because food is such a potent form of control, breaking that control mechanism will have a ripple effect that extends outward into many other industries and fields of activity, including the political arena.

As we move into 2023 and beyond, local food security will be more important than ever, as worldwide food shortages and famine are at our doorstep. So, prepare. If you don’t, many of your options will be eliminated, as you’ll be forced to accept the globalists standardization of the food system or starve.

from:    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/11/29/global-standardization-of-systems.aspx?ui=f460707c057231d228aac22d51b97f2a8dcffa7b857ec065e5a5bfbcfab498ac&sd=20211017&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20221129_HL2&cid=DM1295859&bid=1657053565