For the first time ever, scientists have managed to collect environmental DNA (eDNA) from the air. The practice, still at its early stages, could revolutionize forensics, anthropology, and even medicine.
The scientists first took air samples from a room that had housed naked mole-rats and showed that airDNA sampling could successfully detect mole-rat DNA within the animal’s housing. The scientists also spotted human DNA in the air samples.
They initially ventured a guess that this might be due to contamination. However, with further research, they came to the conclusion that the human genetic material was moving away from its original source and spreading throughout the air.
“The use of eDNA (environmental DNA) has become a topic of increasing interest within the scientific community particularly for ecologists or conservationists looking for efficient and non-invasive ways to monitor biological environments. Here we provide the first published evidence to show that animal eDNA can be collected from air, opening up further opportunities for investigating animal communities in hard to reach environments such as caves and burrows,” Dr. Elizabeth Clare, Senior Lecturer at Queen Mary University of London and first author of the study, said.
The researchers are now working with partners in the industry to bring some of the potential applications of this technology to life. Clare added that: “What started off as an attempt to see if this approach could be used for ecological assessments has now become much more.”
Clare further explained that the technique could help researchers to better understand the transmission of airborne diseases such as COVID-19. “At the moment social distancing guidelines are based on physics and estimates of how far away virus particles can move, but with this technique we could actually sample the air and collect real-world evidence to support such guidelines,” Clare explained.
“The freedom of assembly and association are not cultural, or specific to a particular place and time. They are born from our common human heritage. It is human nature—and human necessity—that people come together to collectively pursue their interest.”
By the On-the-Ground Correspondent
The First Amendment in the Constitution is first for a reason. It not only guarantees our right to freedom of speech but also freedom of religion and the freedom to assemble. These rights—the ability to express your thoughts, to practice a faith of your own choosing, and to come together with like-minded people to either stand for or against issues—are a foundation to all human rights.
Taking the idea of freedom of assembly further, there’s something about a collective number of like-minded people coming together to voice an opinion at a specific time and place that has an energetic force to it. Ideally, if a large group of people stands in front of City Hall or Parliament protesting an issue, then politicians elected by the people should pay attention, since it is their job to represent the will of the people.
The Boston Tea Party always comes to mind. That was a protest that triggered a revolution and birthed a new nation. In an ideal world, that’s the way it should be, but sadly, we no longer live in an ideal world. Though the American heritage is steeped with the ideals of freedom, in these Covid/Going Direct Reset times, our ideals are being obfuscated by fear, lockdown restrictions, cancel culture, and divide-and-conquer politics, among many other things. Yet even when freedom is denied to a class of people, that principle is still there for them to claim.
Here we are, post election, post Trump, post Jan. 6th. It seems like every time a group tries to stand up against globalist policies, something crazy happens. Last week was the Worldwide Freedom Rally. While other cities drew large crowds, in New York City, it was a small gathering of 200 people at Union Square Park, with prestigious speakers like Mary Holland from Children’s Health Defense and Vera Sharav; Dolores Cahill was also going to give a speech via telephone, speaking out against vaccines and lockdowns. The rally started with such a positive momentum. People showed up mask-less, everyone was extremely polite, and just happy to not feel alone in their beliefs. At least that’s how I felt. An hour into the rally, it was all going great. The speeches were important and informative.
Then, out of nowhere, an ominous black helicopter flew pretty low over Union Square Park, and I just knew trouble was coming. Next came the Trump flags and MAGA hats in the crowd, and I thought, “What does this have to do with Trump? This is not a Trump rally. Trump was the one who allowed the emergency authorization of the Covid vaccines. Why are these people here?” Within 40-60 minutes, the whole thing snowballed. A large-busted topless woman dressed up like Uncle Sam, along with a barely dressed black girl covered in whiteface and body paint, popped out behind the speaker’s podium. More Trump people showed up, and a BLM group also showed up. The police presence increased out of nowhere. The BLM and Trump people started having a face-off, while a crazy older woman in a Biden shirt started jumping through the crowd. The police came in to break up the “Trump people” vs. the “BLM people,” looking annoyed. Forty minutes later, a large mass of people passed the park, marching on 14th Street and chanting “Stop Asian Hate.” It was as if a director were behind the scenes calling “action” and cuing in each group. Just nuts.
After my experience being in DC on Jan. 6th, I’ve learned to just hang back and watch the mess unfold. But at one point I screamed out to the black girl in whiteface and body paint, “How much are they paying you?” She replied, “NOT ENOUGH!” As a “Trump supporter” was ranting that the Chinese are trying to have a revolution in the U.S., the black girl in whiteface and the crazy Biden shirt lady were standing side by side facing off with the police, and the mass “Stop Asian Hate” march was happening—all at the same time. Clearly, these people were paid to cause this buffoonery…. And to manufacture incoherence.
The organizer of the rally just stood there with her bullhorn dangling from her hand, dumbfounded. I looked at her, and she looked back at me, asking, “What just happened?” So, what did happen? If these people were paid actors or agents provocateurs, who’s doing the paying? It wasn’t the size of the Jan. 6th “insurrection,” but it must have had a healthy budget. Let’s say the Jan. 6th “insurrection debacle” budget might have been $10-$25 million. This little fiasco, including the cost of the black helicopter, probably was $30-$40K…? The actors probably got a day rate payment of $200 bucks. Like the black girl in whiteface said, it’s not enough. Where’s the money coming from? Let’s connect the dots here; who has profited the most from these lockdowns? Who has gained from the vaccine rollouts? Why are governments and our elected officials not only allowing everything to happen but participating in all these events? Which signals to me another question; do governments work not for us but for someone else? And, who’s the “someone else”?
That’s the question we all need to start asking ourselves. Is our government working for us or someone else? Once we all can face that question and honestly accept the answer, we can act accordingly. I hate to say this, but America is no longer a republic by the people and for the people. The same goes for the democracies of Europe. Followers of Solari know that sovereign nations are being undermined by central banks. As Klaus Schwab puts it, “you’ll own nothing and be happy.” Are you ready to own nothing and be happy, including your own bodily sovereignty?
So, now that we have more facts, do rallies even work? As Catherine has said many times, if your money is in a large bank and you have a large-bank credit card in your pocket, you are financing your own servitude. I am no position to give financial advice, but I am in a position to ask questions. As the “Going Direct Reset” is rapidly bopping us on the head, are we willing to pay for our own enslavement? If you’re not willing to finance it, then the next question you should be asking is, “What do I do to stop contributing to it?” Do rallies matter when elected officials no longer represent the will of the people? Thinking more on the Boston Tea Party, that was a revolt against the British tax on tea to the colonies. So, maybe the new Boston Tea Party should be a revolt against the taxing and inflation of our money? Where and how we use our money matters. If we want out of this Great Reset/Slave System, maybe it’s time to start thinking more about how our money works versus going to rallies. Just something to think about.
Introduction—A Very General Overview of Legal Property Confiscation in the U.S.
The issue of property confiscation has become tied into both “the Great Reset” and the COVID-19 pandemic. There are several ways in which people lose their private property, which can either be through government action or through non-government actions. The mechanisms for the United States Government or individual state and local governments to take property have been in place for a very long time.
In the United States, the government has the power of Eminent Domain, which means that it can take property but must pay reasonable compensation for the use of the property. State and local governments have similar eminent domain powers. These powers are enshrined in the Constitution and essentially only require government to pay reasonable compensation for the property it takes.
Beyond eminent domain, the government has “criminal” and “civil” legal means of taking property. For example, most people are familiar with drug seizure laws that allow local and federal law enforcement to seize property used in the illegal drug business. This is called “asset forfeiture” and allows the government to seize assets of criminal suspects. The FBI has a webpage dedicated to explaining the various ways it can seize property.1
Additionally, your property can be seized through a civil legal process. If you owe taxes or a government fine, government lawyers can pursue and obtain orders from courts confiscating your property and selling it. Taxing authorities can seize property for unpaid taxes. Likewise, certain fines can lead to asset seizures and liens being filed on your property.
Government actions are not the only way in which people lose their property. This was never more apparent than during the aftermath of the 2008 housing crash. People, suffering a hiccup in their incomes, who had spent years paying on mortgages and other debts, learned quickly that penalties, late fees, attorney’s fees, and other provisions in their security agreements obliterated any perceived equity in their homes. Many were left without anything after spending months to years trying to go through a horrific loan modification process. Furthermore, people suffering from large medical debts or other debts can either be forced into bankruptcy or have civil judgments entered against them and their property. While there are certain protections in place, most of the time people are left with very little.
This article focuses on two narrow areas where people may lose their property due to government action because of “health emergencies” and “domestic terrorism.”
Laws Related to Health Emergencies
In 2008, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988 was codified as 42 U.S.C. sections 5121–5207. The Stafford Act authorized the use of federal technical, financial, logistical, and other assistance to states and localities declared major disasters or emergencies. This law is now playing a pivotal role in the Covid-19 response.2 It was the Stafford Act that President Trump used as the basis to declare a disaster due to Covid-19.
On April 20, 2020, the National Governors Association issued a memorandum entitled “Overview of State Actions to Commandeer and Inventory Private Property.”3 The memo explains that although the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution limits the government’s broad powers of eminent domain, by requiring “just compensation” for property taken for public use, the Stafford Act allows for the immediate commandeering of private property.4 In other words, the government can take the property now and settle up later.
Individual states have laws that are similar to the Stafford Act, laws that give emergency powers to governors and health department officials. This justified state executive orders such as California’s N-25-20, which allowed health officers to determine how property was used (closing restaurants) and allowed the state to secure for use “numerous facilities to accommodate quarantine, isolation, or medical treatment of individuals.”5 California is just one example, as all states issued emergency declarations issued by governors or departments of health.6 These powers are largely based upon laws enacted long before the current pandemic. It is advisable to get to know your local state and county laws and executive orders as these states of emergency will likely last long into the future.
As stated above, the Constitution’s “Takings Clause” recognizes the power of Eminent Domain of the Federal and state governments. This gives government the ability to take property and provide “just compensation” in return. The classic example is when the government takes someone’s property to build a highway. The state (or local) government has the right to take the property but must pay “just compensation.” The issue of “just compensation” is often a hard-fought battle.
There is a long and complex history of types of takings defined by the United States Supreme Court that has developed a complex area of laws in regard to takings. There are books written on this subject, and it is too much to tackle for the purposes of this article. Suffice to say, we will see litigation related to the regulatory takings of people’s businesses under the pandemic. This would fall under a “regulatory taking” of someone’s property. For a more complete discussion of this issue, see: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10434.
Asset Forfeiture and Domestic Terrorism
There are many legal mechanisms for the United States and state and local governments to seize property. In light of recent events, the most relevant of these ways is asset forfeiture as it relates to “domestic terrorism.” Under the Patriot Act, asset forfeiture was extended to “domestic terrorism.”7 The ACLU explains the definition of domestic terrorist: “A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act ‘dangerous to human life’ that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or of the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.”8 This definition is broad enough to encompass many groups, and activities of groups such as Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, World Trade Organization (WTO) protestors, and protestors recently at the Capital Protests.
The ACLU further states that, “Section 806 of the Act could result in the civil seizure of their assets without a prior hearing.”9 Section 806 of the Patriot Act amended the civil asset forfeiture statute to authorize the government to seize and forfeit: “all assets foreign or domestic (i) of any individual, entity, or organization engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic or international terrorism against the United States, or their property, and all assets, foreign or domestic, affording any person a source of influence over any such entity or organization or (ii) acquired or maintained by any person with the intent and for the purpose of supporting, planning, conducting, or concealing an act of domestic or international terrorism against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property or (iii) derived from, involved in, or used or intended to be used to commit an act of domestic or international terrorism against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property.”10
Once the property is seized, a hearing is conducted and the United States has only to prove by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) that the person was engaged in domestic terrorism.11 This means that the people whose assets have been seized have to get by without those assets until the hearing takes place.
In February of 2021, President Biden stated that “domestic terrorism” was the greatest threat in America and that white supremacists are the “most dangerous people.”12 He is quoted as saying, “That is the greatest threat to terror in America, domestic terror. And so I would make sure that my Justice Department and the civil rights division is focused heavily on those very folks, and I would make sure that we, in fact, focus on how to deal with the rise of white supremacy.”13 You can draw your own conclusions from this.
Suffice it to say that these legal means for confiscating property are not going away any time soon. It is especially important now to understand the government’s power to take property and the limitations on those powers. This often requires a very state-specific analysis. It is also important to understand and be aware of the laws in order to not accidentally become a victim of them.
It’s interesting how BIG CORPORATIONS are pushing for the people of the United States to get the COVID VACCINE that is EXPERIMENTAL. There is a motivating factor for that. Actually there are a few.
Firstly, by “mandating it” they are able to collect health data, genetic data and well — oodles of data. Data is this century’s GOLD. The flip side. Isn’t it interesting how all the OLD people got the vaccine first? Turns out – LIFE INSURANCE policies WON’T PAY OUT on death either because of the vaccine or later in life.
YES. Millions of Americans just got shafted out of their life insurance policies.
This discussion began a few weeks ago and it’s taken us that long to determine that SNOPES is full of it. After all we know they “Fact Checking” they do. In fact they quoted a Canadian Company (this is the United State of America … we have no Queen) and a lame response from a LOBBYIST who in essence has ZERO authority to speak for MetLife, State Farm etc..
We actually called around asked for life insurance policy documents and none would provide them unless we were purchasing life insurance. After providing our information to various agents and being spammed we later found out the FULL policy with all the fine print is sent to you ONCE you are approved and arranged a payment. It is at that time you have anything between 7 -15 days to cancel the policy without a “penalty” or something like that. Therefore, we sought out the internet to find such underwriting far and wide and the majority that came back was that of STATE FARM. Citizens from around the USA concerned of the Vaccine push checked their policies and called their life insurance companies. Here is what they were told.
Mutual Omaha We cannot answer that question as a hypothetical. As you mentioned in your policy any treatment or medication our insured customers take must be FDA approved. Denial of benefits may occur if our policy holders engage in any investigational or unproved treatments.
Policy Holder The COVID vaccine is experimental it’s not FDA approved so now that the nursing home gave it to me I lose my insurance?
Mutual Omaha If it’s not FDA approved ma’am it may invalidate your insurance. I can check that for you.
Mutual Omaha Ma’am I would have to refer you to your local agent to have these questions documented and your policy revised.
Policy Holder I don’t understand why?
Mutual Omaha Ma’am you signed your policy over 10 yrs ago. It’s not been updated. I have to terminate this call please contact your local agent.
It’s been three weeks and the policy holder has not been able to get Mutual of Omaha to provide a written statement saying that they will pay her Whole Life policy.
The same “THEME” of run around was given to all five persons that communicated concerns to me.
It’s incredible how MAJOR LIFE INSURANCE companies REFUSE to provide in WRITING that the COVID VACCINES will not disqualify their policy holders. One company, specifically MetLife provided a little bit of insight to a policy holder than expected.
MetLife : We cannot say what we exclude or don’t exclude so definitively. What you are asking me to do is adjudicate your future death. I appreciate your concerns that we do don’t cover non-FDA approved treatments, drugs and vaccines but we will have someone adjudicate it so something might be paid out to your loved ones.
Policy Holder : Might? So China releases a virus, topples our economy and pushes us to experimental medications to make sure we live and you tell me my family might get money from a policy that I have been paying into for over 30 years. This was an act of war.
MetLife: If you put it that way. We may not pay anything if it is determined to be an ACT of War and considering the medications were developed under EUA it may be considered as such. I dunno. I think you need to speak with your local agent.
Policy Holder: Basically, my money is gone because Act of War.
MetLife: It does state in the policy that an Act of War invalidates your policy but I would speak with your local agent.
What you should be concerned about is that NO MAJOR INSURANCE COMPANY will put in writing that POLICY HOLDERS who get a COVID VACCINE will have no negative impact on their death policy settlements. NONE.
Did you know that HEALTH CARE POLICIES also do that. For example even though PROTON BEAM therapy has been found to be effective in prostate cancer the Unproven definition, excludes treatments because they ARE NON-FDA approved. In fact they claim that because they are not FDA approved that means they are not determined effective for treatment. This is because they claim there are insufficient and inadequate clinical evidences from well-conducted randomized controlled trials or cohort studies in the prevailing published peer-reviewed medical literature.
Sounds like the people are getting the short end of the stick. The question is – mortgages require life insurance. Does that mean we will see an increased amount of ESTATE RECOVERY from insurance companies taking money out of widowed persons’ pockets.
Don’t take my word for it. Call your LIFE INSURANCE company and ask them to put it in writing. You obviously can’t trust the media – so don’t even trust me. Don’t rely on your local agent telling you it will be fine. GET IT IN WRITING from THE CORPORATE OFFICE. I would make sure to get them to commit in writing that if COVID is considered an ACT OF WAR in the future, that they will STILL COVER that.
This remarkable article was spotted and shared by E.V.H., but before we get to it, a little background. Regular readers here may recall that some weeks ago I blogged about Klaus Schwab, the perpetually scowling figure who heads the World Economic Forum. I noted at the time that Schwab seemed very much like the character of Dr. Ernst Stavro Blohfeld, the fictitious villain and head of SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) from the James Bond films. I wasn’t the only one who noticed, apparently, because shortly after that, pictures of Schwab in a gray uniform, holding a white cat ala SPECTRE’s Blohfeld, began to appear on the internet. But on a more serious note, I also observed in that blog that little to nothing appeared to have been known about Schwab’s family, and there was a curious lacuna in his biography at that time from when he completed his degrees to his emergence on the world stage as the spokesman for Mr. Globaloney and The Great Financial Reset.
Apparently, others observed this curious lack of details about Schwab, and set out to remedy that situation in the very lengthy article below, which appeared just last February along with a rather flattering picture illustration of Schwab himself:
We pick up the story with Schwab’s father Eugen, a manager for a Swiss-German company, Escher-Wyss in Schwab’s home town of Ravensburg. The allegations are revealing:
In the pre-war years of the 1930s leading up to the German annexation of Poland, Ravensburg’s Escher-Wyss factory, now managed directly by Klaus Schwab’s father, Eugen Schwab, continued to be the biggest employer in Ravensburg. Not only was the factory a major employer in the town, but Hitler’s own Nazi party awarded the Escher-Wyss Ravensburg branch the title of “National Socialist Model Company” while Schwab was at the helm. The Nazis were potentially wooing the Swiss company for cooperation in the coming war, and their advances were eventually reciprocated.
Ravensburg was an anomaly in wartime Germany, as it was never targeted by any Allied airstrikes. The presence of the Red Cross, and a rumoured agreement with various companies including Escher-Wyss, saw the allied forces publicly agree to not target the Southern German town. It was not classified as a significant military target throughout the war and, for that reason, the town still maintains many of its original features. However, much darker things were afoot in Ravensburg once the war began.
Eugen Schwab continued to manage the “National Socialist Model Company” for Escher-Wyss, and the Swiss company would aid the Nazi Wermacht produce significant weapons of war as well as more basic armaments. The Escher-Wyss company was a leader in large turbine technology for hydroelectric dams and power plants, but they also manufactured parts for German fighter planes. They were also intimately involved in much more sinister projects happening behind the scenes which, if completed, could have changed the outcome of World War II.
From this point, the article traces how some of Escher-Wyss’s hydro-turbine technology made it into the Nazi atom-bomb project via the Norsk heavy water production plant in Norway. Here the article goes a bit awry claiming that heavy water was vital for the production of plutonium for that project. As I’ve outlined in my book Reich of the Black Sun, the German project, while it knew of the possibility of plutonium, also knew that its production could only be accomplished in a reactor, and that it would be a long and difficult project. It thus concentrated on the less complicated project of uranium isotope separation and enrichment for a uranium-fueled bomb. But in either case heavy water could be used both as a neutron moderator in a reactor, and more importantly, as a source of deuterium fuel for a “boosted fission” bomb, which is what I’ve been arguing in my various books about the Nazi atom bomb project.
And Schwab’s father headed a firm in Ravensbruck with ties to that project. Let that sink in a moment. As such, Schwab’s father was also allegedly involved in another infamous Nazi practice:
Back in the Escher-Wyss factory in Ravensburg, Eugen Schwab had been busy putting forced labourers to work at his model Nazi company. During the years of World War II, nearly 3,600 forced labourers worked in Ravensburg, including at Escher Wyss. According to the city archivist in Ravensburg, Andrea Schmuder, the Escher-Wyss machine factory in Ravensburg employed between 198 and 203 civil workers and POWs during the war. Karl Schweizer, a local Lindau historian, states that Escher-Wyss maintained a small special camp for forced labourers on the factory premises.
The use of masses of forced labourers in Ravensburg made it necessary to setup one of the largest recorded Nazi forced labour camps in the workshop of a former carpenter’s at Ziegelstrasse 16. At one time, the camp in question accommodated 125 French prisoners of war who were later redistributed to other camps in 1942. The French workers were replaced by 150 Russian prisoners of war who, it was rumoured, were treated the worst out of all the POWs. One such prisoner was Zina Jakuschewa, whose work card and work book are held by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Those documents identify her as a non-Jewish forced labourer assigned to Ravensburg, Germany, during 1943 and 1944.
This of course does not implicate Klaus Schwab himself in any of these practices nor does it implicate him in any way with sympathy for the practice nor the ideology behind it. It does, however, raise a yellow flag of caution, and perhaps should provide a context in which to view his own statements to the effect that “you vill not own property und you vill be happy!” This, plus the fact that Schwab seems to have pursued academic studies of mechanical engineering in relationship to macroeconomics of credit and export, might indicate at least some filial interest in his father’s wartime experiences, since after his studies and a stint in the USA at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, he went to work for his father’s old company.
The atom bomb connection would continue at Escher-Wyss (now Sulzer-Escher-Wyss) after the war, as it became involved in South Africa’s effort to acquire the bomb:
Escher-Wyss had been involved with manufacturing and installing nuclear technology at least as early as 1962, as shown by this patent for a “heat exchange arrangement for a nuclear power plant” and this patent from 1966 for a “nuclear reactor gas-turbine plant with emergency cooling”. After Schwab left Sulzer Escher-Wyss, Sulzer would also help to develop special turbocompressors for uranium enrichment to yield reactor fuels.
When Klaus Schwab joined Sulzer Escher-Wyss in 1967 and started the reorganisation of the company to be a technology corporation, the involvement of Sulzer Escher-Wyss in the darker aspects of the global nuclear arms race became immediately more pronounced. Before Klaus became involved, Escher-Wyss had often concentrated on helping design and build parts for civilian uses of nuclear technology, e.g. nuclear power generation. Yet, with the arrival of the eager Mr. Schwab also came the company’s participation in the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. By 1969, the incorporation of Escher Wyss into Sulzer was fully completed and they would be rebranded into Sulzer AG, dropping the historic name Escher-Wyss from their name.
It was eventually revealed, thanks to a review and report carried out by the Swiss authorities and a man named Peter Hug, that Sulzer Escher-Wyss began secretly procuring and building key parts for nuclear weapons during the 1960s. The company, while Schwab was on the board, also began playing a critical key role in the development of South Africa’s illegal nuclear weapons programme during the darkest years of the apartheid regime. Klaus Schwab was a leading figure in the founding of a company culture which helped Pretoria build six nuclear weapons and partially assemble a seventh. (Boldface emphasis added)
This now ratchets up the suspicion meter considerably, when placed into context of what else is known about the South African project. In 1973 the New York Times book division published a book by Barbara Rogers and Zdenek Cervenka titled The Nuclear Axis: The Secret Collaboration between West Germany and South Africa, a title which says it all… almost. The authors detail how a Luftwaffe general in the Bundeswehr, himself a holdover from World War II, and several German firms including Degussa(which was also involved in the wartime Nazi atom bomb effort), were involved in aiding South Africa to acquire the atom bomb, which in the opinion of many (including this author) it did. The arrangement was a “tidy” one: in exchange for South African uranium, Germany would supply the technology to enrich it and the engineering to turn it into a bomb. South Africa became the front behind which postwar Germany acquired nuclear weapons technology, for the South African bomb was in effect a German one…
… and an Israeli one, because the third partner in this picture was Israel itself, lending technical assistance as well in return for a steady supply of uranium from the project. The arrangement was a rather nifty one, given that all three states were in some measure and for very different reasons each a pariah state, and each viewed its national security was being jeopardized without nuclear weapons.
But now we find Schwab himself – Dr. Ernst Stavro Blohfeld and SPECTRE – squatting in the middle of that West German-South African atom bomb effort.
The implications here are inescapable, and the article’s author, Johnny Vedmore, doesn’t shrink from mentioning them:
In the case of Klaus Schwab himself, it appears that he has helped to launder relics of the Nazi era, i.e. its nuclear ambitions and its population control ambitions, so as to ensure the continuity of a deeper agenda. While serving in a leadership capacity at Sulzer Escher Wyss, the company sought to aid the nuclear ambitions of the South African regime, then the most Nazi adjacent government in the world, preserving Escher Wyss’ own Nazi era legacy. Then, through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute. Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in anyway? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?
The last question that should be asked about the real motivations behind the actions of Herr Schwab, may be the most important for the future of humanity: Is Klaus Schwab trying to create the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or is he trying to create the Fourth Reich?
For my part, readers can already guess the answer, for I’ve been trying for years to warn people about a post-war “Nazi International,” an “extra-territorial state” hiding behind a complex tapestry of corporations, funds, foundations, think tanks, and a bewildering labyrinth of interconnections, all still firmly in the grasp of a hideous ideology.
New Document Exposes How This Company Tracks Car Locations In Real-Time
According to a document obtained by Motherboard, a tiny surveillance contractor based in Charleston, South Carolina, can locate and track newer model cars in any country. This data is being packaged up into a new service and pitched to the US government as a powerful surveillance technology.
“Ulysses can provide our clients with the ability to remotely geo-locate vehicles in nearly every country except for North Korea and Cuba on a near real-time basis,” the document written by The Ulysses Group, reads. “Currently, we can access over 15 billion vehicle locations around the world every month,” the document adds.
In new automobiles, intelligent sensors transmit an array of data (even including location) to the automaker or third parties. Aggregator companies then take this data and integrate them into packages based on the needs of their clients.
“Vehicle telematics is data transmitted from the vehicle to the automaker or OEM through embedded communications systems in the car,” the Ulysses document continues. “Among the thousands of other data points, vehicle location data is transmitted on a constant and near real-time basis while the vehicle is operating.”
The document suggests Ulysses’ tracking service could be used for military surveillance operations:
“We believe that this one attribute will dramatically enhance military intelligence and operational capabilities, as well as reduce the costs and risk footprint of ISR [intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance] assets currently used to search for and acquire mobile targets of interest.”
“Whether you want to geo-locate one vehicle or 25.000.000 as shown here. Currently, we can access over 15 billion vehicle locations around the world every month,” the document concludes.
Motherboard sent the document to Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon). Wyden spokesperson Keith Chu responded in an email statement:
“Far too little is known about how private information is being bought and sold. Senator Wyden is conducting an ongoing investigation into the sale of personal data, particularly via data brokers, to put some sunlight on this shady industry. Our office is continuing to perform oversight into where data brokers are acquiring Americans’ information, and who they’re selling it to.”
Motherboard noted Ulysses previously worked with US Special Operations Command on a different piece of technology to “analyze how peer and near-peer competitor countries were making economic and financial investments in Africa and Central and South America.”
President of The Ulysses Group, Andrew Lewis, told Motherboard in an email that “any proprietary promotional material we may have produced is aspirational and developed based on publicly available information about modern telematics equipment.”
“We do not have any contracts with the government or any of its agencies related to our work in the field and we have never received any funding whatsoever from the government related to telematics,” Lewis added.
Here’s the full document:
While the document does not specify how the surveillance firm procures its data, the luxuries of owning a modern car tied to the “internet of things” appear to have their downfalls as car companies or third parties, or even the government can track these vehicles in real-time.
In a world where COVID has accelerated the surveillance state, many people are wondering how to escape the Orwellian grid of surveillance and social control, well, first, own a car with limited technology embedded within – also we offer some simple steps to disappear from the surveillance matrix.
Whopper-doozie alert! This one is so over the top that I simply had to blog about it. It was shared by W.G., whom I thank for bringing to my attention. To be honest, this is such a whopper-doozie that I don’t even know where to start with respect to today’s high octane speculation, and I rather suspect – once readers dive into the article – that it will stimulate your own speculations. I’m presenting three different sources or versions of this story, because it is so unbelievably breathtaking in its implications:
Let’s look at the second article linked above. Consider these breathtaking paragraphs:
Pfizer has been accused of “bullying” Latin American governments in Covid vaccine negotiations and has asked some countries to put up sovereign assets, such as embassy buildings and military bases, as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal cases, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal.
In the case of one country, demands made by the pharmaceutical giant led to a three-month delay in a vaccine deal being agreed. For Argentina and Brazil, no national deals were agreed at all. Any hold-up in countries receiving vaccines means more people contracting Covid-19 and potentially dying.
Officials from Argentina and the other Latin American country, which cannot be named as it has signed a confidentiality agreement with Pfizer, said the company’s negotiators demanded additional indemnity against any civil claims citizens might file if they experienced adverse effects after being inoculated. In Argentina and Brazil, Pfizer asked for sovereign assets to be put up as collateral for any future legal costs.
One official who was present in the unnamed country’s negotiations described Pfizer’s demands as “high-level bullying” and said the government felt like it was being “held to ransom” in order to access life-saving vaccines. (Boldface emphasis added)
That pretty much sums it up; “Muck Pharmaceuticals” as we like to call Big Pharma here, in the form of Pfizer, is allegedly demanding collateral against potential lawsuits against its “vaccine.” Now my high octane speculation of the day comes in the form of three questions: (1) Why would Pfizer be so concerned about potential lawsuits if it was confident its “vaccine” was safe? (2) why would it ask nations for embassies and military bases? And (3) was the idea of collateralizing embassies and military bases the objective of the planscamdemic/”vaccine” operation one of the goals at the outset of the whole planscamdemic to begin with?
In looking at question one, we gain a bit of a speculative clue: seizing a nation’s embassies and military bases is, from one point of view, a real estate scam, one which anticipates that lawsuits are likely to be both many and costly, which is in its way a tacit admission that there are “problems” with the “vaccines.” The amounts of money are likely to be vast, and thus, hard assets are required in order to minimize Muck Pharmaceutical’s exposure to the risk.
But that brings us to question two: why ask for embassies and military bases? This, in my opinion, means one of two things, and possibly both together: either Pfizer’s action is on behalf of someone else whom it anticipates can buy those assets – and has the money to do so – should lawsuits ensue, or Pfizer itself views itself as a sovereign entity, in need of embassies and military bases to enforce its corporate will, which implies its having plans for a professional corporate military, or its has already developed one. Or, as I already stated, it is some combination of these two. With regard to the first prospect, there are few actors on the world stage that would have the liquidity to buy such hard assets, and use them for their original intended purpose. China would certainly be one primary suspect, and after all, the planscamdemic did originate there in a certain sense. But there could be others as well, including extra-territorial actors.
And that leads us to question three: was this one of the goals (among many others) that Mr. Globaloney wanted to accomplish through the planscamdemic? I suspect it’s a strong possibility, since it is clear that Mr. Globaloney is using the whole farce to further his agenda of control. And control doesn’t work unless one has centers for intelligence operations that are “sovereign territory” (embassies) and a means to enforce its dictates (military bases).
When one considers that there are other effective methods of covid treatment, this draconian effort regarding vaccines seems to make the agenda all too obvious.
Instagram’s New Shopping Feature Exploits Users, Promotes Surveillance Capitalism
Instagram claims its new redesign will support small businesses and connect users with their favorite brands. But researchers warn the new “Shop” tab is more about collecting data and exploiting users’ emotions.
By Nazanin Andalibi
Recently, when I opened Instagram, I noticed that the usual spot for checking notifications is now a “Shop” tab. The Instagram blog post announcing the redesign said that the change will support small businesses and connect people with their favorite brands and creators.
Features like Instagram’s “Shop” tab facilitate surveillance capitalism, so it’s important to look at their consequences. Many people use Instagram to share their lives with other people, but the redesign is shifting the nature of the social media platform toward online commerce. This shift opens people to highly targeted advertising and makes them vulnerable to advertising that exploits their emotional experiences.
Shift to shopping
Research, including my own, shows that people use Instagram to record their big and mundane moments, find community, exchange social support, express identities and keep in touch with friends.
In 2017, colleagues and I showed how ad hoc communities form around the tag #depression on the platform, and how much of the discourse is to make sense of the experience of depression, record it, share it with others and exchange support with other people dealing with depression. I argued that it is important for the platform to recognize the value users find in these communities and support them, rather than ban or nudge them to go elsewhere, when they come to the platform to express themselves and build solidarity.
The notification button, represented as a heart icon, brings up a screen that indicates the interactions people have had with your Instagram presence — for example, who has liked your posts and comments. It’s likely that the notification button was the most frequently clicked tab.
When people interact with technology, they form habits. I am probably not the only one clicking the new “Shop” tab when I mean to click the notification button. It’s possible that the company did this simply to ensure that Instagram users encounter the new feature, but there are other ways to accomplish that.
By choosing to make the “Shop” tab central to its platform, Instagram is sending its users a message: This platform is a business, and interactions on this platform are going to be commodified.
Though some people may come to Instagram to find things to buy, many don’t. App designers can provide an unneeded feature and create a need for it over time. This is not without precedence in the context of social media and shopping. For example, when Facebook, which owns Instagram, relaunched Facebook Marketplace in 2016, the Marketplace product manager, Bowen Pan, said: “We show you the most relevant items for you, even if you don’t know what you want.”
People share all kinds of personal information on Instagram, such as mental health, physical health, traumatic events, pregnancy, loss, infertility, becoming new parents and getting married. Social media companies’ access to such sensitive information is a concern, for how the companies could exploit the information and the risk of third-party access to the data.
Instagram can use computational techniques to infer people’s affective states — their emotions and moods — based on many signals available to the platform. These include what content users view and post. There is substantial evidence that emotions and affective states play a key role in advertising. While capitalizing on emotions and emotional personal experiences for profit is not unique to social media or algorithms, the data-driven, opaque and hyper-personalized approaches boost the scale of potential harm.
Presumably, what people see in Instagram’s “Shop” is personalized based on what the platform’s recommendation algorithm determines they would like and be inclined to purchase. How does the inferred socioeconomic, gender, age, race and other attributes shape what the platform recommends to users in the “Shop” tab? What shops get to be recommended and visible?
Instagram users can be as young as 13, the age required to open an account. How does personalization work for children? How does this feature affect the experience of individuals with low socioeconomic status? What principles and values is the platform adhering to in designing these recommendation algorithms, “Staff Picks” and other means of presenting products?
A major consideration is when people get recommendations to purchase items during vulnerable moments. Sharing or seeking information about a difficult, personal experience on a social media platform and then having the platform capitalize on an algorithmic understanding of the experience — which might or might not be accurate — is problematic.
What are the implications for impulsive buyers who may turn to Instagram as a space for community and peer support to resist impulsive purchasing, but who are instead confronted with things to purchase and have no way of opting out? How about for someone who is on the platform to find support while coping with a substance use disorder, but instead encounters recommendations to purchase items related to drinking? What happens if a person posting about experiences with pregnancy loss begins seeing ads for baby clothes? This last scenario has happened.
In recent and upcoming studies, I observed that, to varying degrees, people find social media platforms capitalizing on their personal, intimate experiences — especially those associated with negative emotions — manipulative and harmful. Social media platform designers and decision-makers should consider ways to address potential harms preemptively rather than retroactively.
The Instagram blog post announcing the “Shop” feature states that there are marketers and influencers on the platform and young people who want to purchase the same products their favorite creators use. This might be a need for some Instagram users, but not all. If Instagram is determined to emphasize shopping, and if opting in is not possible, I believe the company should allow users to opt out of the “Shop” feature.
Losing personal connections
Recent research has shown that people share less and less personal information on Facebook, which has had its Marketplace feature since 2016, and use platforms like Instagram to engage in more personal, intimate discourse. This is due in part to site features and whom people are connected to on each platform. By moving away from a focus on people and their connections, and by commodifying and potentially manipulating users to purchase items on the platform, Instagram could go down the road that Facebook did — fewer personal connections and less personal, meaningful content.
Instagram’s website states that it is “bringing you closer to the people and things you love.” But people and things are different phenomena, and the ways people feel closer to each other are different from the ways they are drawn to things, businesses and brands. By wanting to do both, or perhaps by using the former to benefit the latter, the company may be missing the mark on how to bring people closer together.
Security camera video from Nashville, TN shows what appears to be a Directed Energy Weapon coming down out of the sky and burning the AT&T Data Center location just seconds BEFORE a massive explosion erupted. We have the video!
Before we go farther, you need to understand that the AT&T data center in Nashville, TN, which is where this explosion took place, is an absolutely CRITICAL piece of United States communications infrastructure. It is a primary hub for VoIP traffic (Voice Over Internet Protocol) and is a primary data collection center used by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) to intercept telephone calls and keep stored copies of those phone calls.
The map below shows how few such centers exist, and the critical location of the Nashville Center relative to the rest of the system:
The damage done to this AT&T facility knocked out 911 Emergency call centers in most of Tennesee, parts of kentuck and even parts of Alabama. It also knocked out AT&T cellular services in much of Tennessee, knocked out airport Control Tower radio communications with aircraft, and completely cut off most Internet services in much of Tennessee. Big impact on communications.
DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPON ATTACK
The video below aired on local television in Nashville and the news reporter whose voice can be heard, describes what he is seeing as “something coming up off the ground into the sky . . .” as giant flames from an explosion rise up into the air. Here, pay VERY close attention to the first five seconds:
But a closer look at what the reporter describes as “goes up into the sky” reveals that what is seen is a directed energy weapon fired FROM the sky, and whose beam is obstructed by the low level cloud cover as the beam moves with the satellite.
What makes it clear this is an energy beam is that it TRAVELS to the right IN COMPLETE UNIFORMITY at significantly high speed . . . thus proving it is NOT something “coming up from the ground” but rather a beam moving at high speed because a space satellite in orbit, WHICH FIRED THE BEAM, is moving at such a high speed relative to the ground!
Very shortly after the beam is visible, gigantic flames from a ground explosion rise up from the ground below.
If this was something shooting up from the ground, them it would have a smoke/debris trail which would LINGER, being gently pushed by winds. But that’s NOT what we see. We see the “smoke trail” moving at high speed, and very uniformly toward the right . . . which is NOT a characteristic of a smoke/debris trail.
NO BLAST CRATER
There is NO BLAST CRATER on the ground where the Recreational Vehicle (RV) allegedly exploded.
In countless images from countless other truck bombings, a large blast crater is always clearly visible in the aftermath. Not in Nashville! NO BLAST CRATER exists on the public street where this RV exploded.
Here’s a few images, see any crater?
MORE . . .
Debris on the ground outside the AT&T data center shows al long, stainless steel, ELEVATOR PISTON from an underground hydraulic elevator inside the AT&T data center, laying outside on the sidewalk.
In the images below show images of the debris in the top photo, and how the street looked BEFORE the explosion, in the bottom photo.
In the top photo, the steel elevator piston is contained within the red outlined area and the street elevator shaft it came out of is shown in the green outlined area. Here, look:
The condo complex where I reside has this exact type of elevator piston.
The piston was installed before the condo complex roof was put on. It is a long piston that allows an elevator in our building to service the ground level and the three residential levels above it (about 40 feet long. The piston has to be installed from the roof because it is NOT a telescoping piston; it is one, long, piece of steel, lowered into place by crane during construction.
At the bottom end of the piston is a flexible connection segment, as is clearly visible in the photo from Nashville.
If the explosion that took place was solely from an RV on the street, there is no physical way possible for the underground elevator piston to have been hurled upward toward the explosion from underground. The explosion HAD to take place inside the AT&T data center in order to hurl that elevator piston upwards out of the ground and on to the street!
Video showing a blast on the street are actually showing the blast which began inside the AT&T data center, finally breaking through the foundation of the building and erupting onto the street, enveloping the RV.
The investigation by law enforcement is ongoing. But there are serious questions arising about this incident, and there is already empirical physical evidence proving something much bigger took place in this situation than we’re being told.
It seems clear the AT&T data center was the target of this attack. It seems whoever attacked the data center WANTED to disrupt communications in the US. They also WANTED to do something to the NSA telephone recording and data collection abilities.
But police report that the RV had a loudspeaker and a recorded message telling people to evacuate. I know of no bomber who ever did that.
One possibility is maybe a “deep state” perpetrator needed to do this, but was warned not to cause innocent casualties????? Who ELSE has access to directed energy weapons and would also NEED to destroy evidence in a data collection facility?
Another possibility is that a foreign nation attacked us. Again. With the same weaponry repeatedly seen used to start wildfires in California, Oregon and Washington State.
GEORGIA RUNOFF ELECTION – Jan. 5
I’m going to reveal something now that will make a lot of people angry. Inside Nashville AT&T Data Center, Room 641A is the specific data collection point operated by AT&T for the National Security Agency (NSA). It is part of the Warrantless interception perpetrated by government under the PATRIOT ACT.
What part of the United States does this particular room cover? Georgia.
By damaging this data center, it will make it almost impossible to monitor the upcoming Runoff Election for US Senate within the State of Georgia scheduled for January 5.
Whoever did this may have wanted to prevent anyone from repeating the capture of phony voting tabulation which was caught during the November 3 Presidential election. As most rational people already realize, that November 3 election was stolen by Democrats to illegitimately claim the Presidency for Joe Biden. Now they seem to want to steal the US Senate too.
So either the “Deep State” is trying to hide their upcoming theft of the Georgia US Senate runoff election, or perhaps they’re on the run, trying to destroy evidence? The other possibility is that a foreign power is attacking US infrastructure to hamper communications before they . . . . what . . . . attack?
Either way, this Nashville incident has trouble written all over it, either from a Deep State, false flag or from a foreign power trying to weaken the nation and hamper communications.