Yesterday, you might recall, I blogged an article where gamma wave patterns on electroencephalographs record peculiar patterns when false memories are recalled, and about the potential implications of this research both for the “metaphysics of the mind” so to speak, but also for the possibility of remotely influencing or even remotely causing memory creation or alteration. Along those lines, K.S. shared another article from RT about similar research being conducted in Germany:
There’s quite a few things that caught my eye in this article, and they’re the subject of today’s high octane speculation. It is to be noted that unlike the research referred to in yesterday’s blog, the techniques involved here do not include any hard technologies, but rather are based entirely on “soft” techniques. Consider the following statements which form the core of today’s speculations:
A team of researchers in Germany has completed successful experiments in which they showcased how false memories can easily be planted and, more importantly, erased, with potentially serious implications for the justice system.
The team, from the University of Hagen, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Johannes Gutenberg Universität Mainz, and the University of Portsmouth conducted a series of memory experiments on volunteers over the course of several sessions.
They wanted to both confirm that it is possible to implant (or incept, if you will) false memories in the mind of a subject using certain psychological techniques and tricks that rely heavily on the power of suggestion through repetition, while also discovering to what extent these memories can be erased.
…
The researchers then reinforced these false memories in the minds of the participants by asking the volunteers’ parents to play along and claim things happened exactly as described, including the additional, fictional elements.
This process was repeated over the course of multiple sessions to such a degree that many of the participants became convinced the accounts were, in fact, true and thus, a false memory was born.
Now all that remained was to extricate these false memories from the minds of the volunteers, which turned out to be almost as easy as implanting them had been.
They merely asked the volunteers to identify the source of the memory while highlighting the fact that false memories can be created through a process of repeated, elicited recall that itself can become a form of conditioning. (Boldface emphases added)
Note the following implications: (1) repetition, (2) reinforcement of the memory by creation of a false context that include supposedly confirmatory elements or testimonies, and (3) the ability to remove such memories by focusing the victim’s intelligence on the source of the false memories. All of this implies something else, namely (4) the ability to erase real memories using all of the same techniques. Some people may recognize echoes of the strategies and tactics of Gnosticism that I outlined in my four volume work God, History, and Dialectic (available on Lulu), specifically with respect to the second of the elements mentioned: the creation of false contexts or testimonies giving confirmatory elements.
But what I want to focus upon here for the sake of our high octane speculation are precisely those first two elements, and their fusion with two other elements: mass media, and neuro-linguistic programming. For those familiar with the latter, it is possible to implant behavior patterns or memories by clever manipulation of what we’ll call, for the sake of this speculation, a “deep text”, that is to say, words occurring in a “surface text” that are weighted by reinforcement by some other means, such as a touch or other physical stimulation like a specific sound or tone, and so on. Thus weighted, these words become part of a “deep text” having little connection to the surface textual context in which they occur, and bearing an entirely different meaning. The ultimate expression of such a technique’s success is to get the victim of the process to start using the same language. Coupled with the use of such techniques in mass media, it would be possible to create false memories or to erase real ones or otherwise manipulate the mood of individuals. To draw an analogy, it’s like removing an inconvenient picture from the Soviet encyclopedia, not by actually removing the offending picture in the work itself, but rather, in the mind of the reader.
Which brings me to a final implication of this article, namely, the way to counter such manipulation is simply to make the victim aware of the process, and to drive the process back to sources themselves.
Rejecting Rockefeller Germ Theory once and for all
by Jon Rappoport March 25, 2021
Note: In a number of articles, I’ve offered compelling evidence that the deaths attributed to COVID-19 can be explained without reference to a virus. Furthermore, whatever merits “alternative treatments” may have, I see no convincing evidence their action has anything to do with “neutralizing a virus.”
The entire tragic, criminal, murderous, stupid, farcical COVID fraud is based on a hundred years of Rockefeller medicine—a pharmaceutical tyranny in which the enduring headline is:
ONE DISEASE, ONE GERM.
That’s the motto engraved on the gate of the medical cartel.
—Thousands of so-called separate diseases, each caused by an individual germ.
“Kill each germ with a toxic drug, prevent each germ with a toxic vaccine.”
In the absence of those hundred years of false science and propaganda, COVID-19 promotion would have gone over like a bad joke. A few sour laughs, and then nothing, except people going on with their lives.
The overall health of an individual human being has to do with factors entirely unrelated to “one disease, one germ.”
As I quoted, for example, at the end of a recent article—
“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977
And Robert F Kennedy, Jr.: “After extensively studying a century of recorded data, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Johns Hopkins researchers concluded: ‘Thus vaccinations does not account for the impressive declines in mortality from infectious diseases seen in the first half of the twentieth century’.”
“Similarly, in 1977, Boston University epidemiologists (and husband and wife) John and Sonja McKinlay published their seminal work in the Millbank Memorial Fund Quarterly on the role that vaccines (and other medical interventions) played in the massive 74% decline in mortality seen in the twentieth century: ‘The Questionable Contribution of Medical Measures to the Decline of Mortality in the United States in the Twentieth Century’.”
“In this article, which was formerly required reading in U.S. medical schools, the McKinlays pointed out that 92.3% of the mortality rate decline happened between 1900 and 1950, before most vaccines existed, and that all medical measures, including antibiotics and surgeries, ‘appear to have contributed little to the overall decline in mortality in the United States since about 1900 — having in many instances been introduced several decades after a marked decline had already set in and having no detectable influence in most instances’.”
How the immune system (if it is a system) actually operates is beyond current medical hypotheses.
“T-cells, B-cells, neutrophils, monocytes, natural killer cells, proteins,” are welded into a breathless story about a military machine that attacks germ invaders. Push-pull. Search and destroy.
The notion that THIS is what creates health is fatuous.
Positive vitality is what keeps us healthy.
A few factors of positive vitality are on the tyrannical COVID list of what-should-be-squashed: financial survival; open mingling of friends and family; people looking (unmasked) at people; open communication without fear of censorship.
Nutrition and basic sanitation are key vitality factors, of course.
And then we have Purpose in Life: where are people pouring their creative energies?
Obviously, freedom from harmful medical treatment is necessary for vitality to flourish.
Suppression of LIFE, in order to stop a purported germ, is institutionalized death.
Modern medicine is sensationally exposed in a review I’ve mentioned dozens of time over the past 10 years: Authored by the late famous public health doctor at Johns Hopkins, Barbara Starfield, it is titled, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?” It was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association on July 26, 2000.
It found that, every year in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people.
Per decade, the death toll would come to 2.25 million people.
You won’t find that in CDC reports.
In 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield. I asked her whether the federal government had undertaken a major effort to remedy medically caused death in America, and whether she had been sought to consult with the government in such an effort.
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.
Conclusion
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.
When you look at the ingredients on most sparkling water, like Perrier or Topo Chico, the ingredient list is pretty simple. It’s just carbonated water. So what could possibly be unhealthy about that?
A year and half ago, I found Topo Chico and it was the best thing ever. There’s was something that I loved about the bubbles way more than any other sparkling water I had tried, it was downright addictive! I was drinking one or two bottles every night after my daughter would go to bed, it was my “night cap”… and around the same time, I started developing pesky eczema around my eyes.
I didn’t think they were related at all, until I went on a massive elimination diet to try to figure out what it was…
I eliminated a lot and tried everything, and never suspected Topo Chico, until I had exhausted all my options.
I talked to my integrative doctor about it, my dermatologist, and even went to my acupuncturist and asked him, do you think my eczema could be related to sparkling water? He was dumbfounded – and said, no I’ve never heard of that.
I told him something just isn’t right about this and so I stopped Topo Chico cold turkey for a while, and long and behold, my eczema cleared up.
But I still on occasion would drink it here and there.. because I wasn’t quite sure.
Until now. Fast forward to late 2020.
Consumer Reports came out with a new report about sparkling water that left me stunned that several of the doctors I follow online (like Dr. Christian Gonzalez and Dr. Ana Marie Temple) started to share.
They tested 45 brands of bottled water (including 12 sparkling waters) and found “PFAS” chemicals in several of them – including the Topo Chico I was personally buying!
Consumer Reports found the most PFAS in Topo Chico.
They also found levels over the 1 ppt recommended limit in other popular sparkling waters, like Polar, Bubly, Poland Spring, Canada Dry, LaCroix, and Perrier. To make sure they got reliable results, they independently tested 2-4 unopened samples of each variety, which were blind-coded to preserve their identities.
Here are the worst offenders:
Topo Chico (now owned by Coca-Cola) (9.76 ppt)
Polar Natural Seltzer Water (6.41 ppt)
Bubly Blackberry Sparkling Water (2.24 ppt)
Poland Spring Zesty Lime Sparkling Water (1.66 ppt)
Canada Dry Lemon Lime Sparkling Seltzer Water (1.24 ppt)
LaCroix Natural Sparkling Water (1.16 ppt)
Perrier Natural Sparkling Mineral Water (1.1 ppt)
What are PFAS chemicals contaminating our water and how do they harm our health?
PFAS stands for a group of over 5,000 toxic fluorinated chemicals that have been used in manufacturing by big corporations (and by governments) for decades. These have now contaminated our environment and drinking water.
Exposure to PFAS are linked to all kinds of tragic health issues:
Atopic Dermatitis (15) (Ahhhh – this was why I had ECZEMA!!!!)
PFAS chemicals stick around forever…
For decades, the chemical company DuPont used “PFOA” (perfluorooctanoic acid) to make non-stick Teflon and 3M used “PFOS” (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid) to make Scotchgard and firefighting foam. These chemicals escaped from their factories, poisoning our drinking water. Even though companies no longer use these two substances, we are still paying the price.
PFAS substances are persistent – and don’t just disappear. They stick around in our environment and in our bodies when we consume them. That is why they are called “Forever Chemicals”.
You’ll now find PFAS in all major water supplies in the U.S., but some areas are worse than others. (9)
PFAS are not regulated by the government. It’s a free for all.
PFAS chemicals are found in all kinds of products – like nonstick pans, food packaging, cleaning products, carpets, clothing, and more.
Instead of creating strict limits, the EPA issued “voluntary” guidance that allows 70ppt (parts per trillion) of two of the most dangerous PFAS chemicals (PFOS and PFOA) in drinking water.
This is WAY TOO MUCH according to many natural health experts. The consumer advocacy group, Environmental Working Group, says the limit should be 1ppt. (10)
And, other advocacy groups like the NRDC say that 1ppt is even too high! (11)
The FDA has no regulations either, so if PFAS chemicals end up in bottled water no one will be held accountable. The FDA can’t even act until after the EPA sets a standard for drinking water, and it’s anyone’s guess how long that will take.
This is what makes the testing done by Consumer Reports so concerning.
Most of the non-carbonated bottled waters they tested had low levels of PFAS, except for two:
Tourmaline Spring Sacred Living Water (4.64 ppt.)
Deer Park Natural Spring Water (1.21 ppt)
What about heavy metals in bottled water?
Consumer Reports only found heavy metals in one brand of water: Starkey Spring Water, which is owned by Whole Foods. (13) It contained arsenic (a known carcinogen) nearly at 10 ppb, which is 3 times what Consumer Reports advises as safe: 3 ppb.
James Dickerson, Ph.D., chief scientific officer at Consumer Reports says a single bottle won’t harm you, “But regular consumption of even small amounts of the heavy metal over extended periods increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, certain cancers, and lower IQ scores in children, and poses other health issues as well.” (13)
The least contaminated brands…
The sparkling waters with the least amount of PFAS detected included San Pellegrino Natural Sparkling Mineral Water (0.31) and Spindrift Raspberry Lime Sparkling Water (0.19 ppt). Although I don’t like Spindrift, since it’s in an aluminum can.
As always, I highly recommend choosing bottled water that is packaged in glass, to avoid chemicals that are used in plastics and cans from leaching into your water.
One of my favorite bottled water brands, Mountain Valley Spring Water in the green glass bottles wasn’t tested by Consumer Reports. However, the water quality report on their website shows it is tested for Arsenic, PFOA, PFOS, and other PFAS substances, and none were detected in their water. (14)
Make sure you spread the word about this very important investigation!
Since our governmental agencies are doing absolutely nothing about PFAS in our water, I’m so thankful for advocacy groups like Consumer Reports who are doing the work in testing products for harmful substances and raising awareness.
Please share this post to warn your friends about sparkling water brands contaminated with health-wrecking chemicals.
And, stop buying bottled water from brands that are allowing these harmful chemicals in their water. They won’t change until they get enough public pressure to do so, and their bottom line is affected. We can make a difference together
Teachers Sue LA School District Over COVID Vaccine Mandate
Groups representing teachers, counselors and employees say the Los Angeles Unified School District’s vaccine mandate violates federal law and basic human rights.
Employees of the second-largest school district in the U.S. filed suit last week to prevent the district from mandating COVID-19 vaccines as a condition of employment.
In a press release, HFDF said LAUSD’s vaccine mandate violates federal law and basic human rights by requiring employees to take an experimental vaccine in order to remain employed.
All COVID vaccines available in the U.S. — Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson — are approved under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). By the FDA’s own definition, that makes the vaccines “experimental” until or unless the FDA licenses them.
School employees alleged in their complaint that the statute granting the FDA power to authorize a medical product for emergency use, 21 U.S.C. § Section 360bbb-3, requires that the person being administered the unapproved product be advised of the benefits and risks, and of his or her right to refuse the product.
In their lawsuit, employees allege that Section 360bbb-3 recognizes the “well-settled doctrine” that medical experiments, or “clinical research,” may not be performed on human subjects without the express, informed consent of the individual receiving treatment.
According to HFDF, the fundamental right to avoid imposed human experimentation has its roots in the Nuremberg Code of 1947, which was later ratified by the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, further codified in the United States Code of Federal Regulations and adopted by the California Legislature. It says that “no person subject to this state’s jurisdiction may be forced to undergo the administration of experimental medicine without that person’s informed consent.”
Since adoption of the Nuremberg Code, free nations have recognized that forced medical experimentation of any kind is both inhumane and unethical. “There is no “pandemic exception” to the law or the Constitution,” plaintiffs stated in their complaint.
“This is a very important case for educators all across America and is likely to set a precedent for all of us,” said Michael Kane, New York City teacher and founder of NY Teachers for Choice.
“Sometimes all you need is someone to stand up and say ‘No’ to remind everyone that we are completely within our rights to resist government overreach. And that is what this is — government overreach.”
Kane said the LAUSD teacher’s union “definitely plays a role in all of this” and that LA teachers need to lobby their union and threaten to pull their money from supporting the union if it doesn’t support their right to choice. “Rank-and-file union members must hold their union leadership accountable and force them to represent those who are pro-choice for all medical procedures,” Kane said.
The complaint states that employees of LAUSD last month began to receive communications from Superintendent Austin Beutner and other representatives of LAUSD instructing them to make appointments to get vaccinated.
None of the communications to employees included the information from the fact sheet required by the FDA to be given to vaccine recipients under EAU.
On March 4, guidance from LAUSD human resources was given to employees that stated: “The Moderna vaccine is currently being administered by Los Angeles Unified nurses and other licensed healthcare professionals to Los Angeles Unified employees. You will schedule your appointment […]. You will provide proof of vaccination via the DailyPass for time reporting purposes.”
As The Defender reported March 10, Daily Pass is a COVID tracking system developed by Microsoft that will scan employees and students using a barcode before they can enter school each day. LAUSD is the first school district to announce that it will require every student and employee to get the Daily Pass, which school officials said will coordinate health checks, COVID tests and vaccinations. Data collected will be reported to public health authorities and other LAUSD healthcare collaborators.
According to the employees’ lawsuit, the process for developing a vaccine normally takes place over a period of years with many different stages of testing, as it may take years for the side effects of a new vaccine to manifest themselves. “No one knows the short, medium or long-term effects of this medical intervention over 1, 5, 10 or 50 years,” HFDF said.
By mandating experimental COVID vaccines, LAUSD is “forcing employees to choose between providing for their families and being the victim of human experimentation,” said HFDF. “Forced vaccination is not only unethical, it violates the tenets fundamental to a free society and must stop.”
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.
comes back
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.
State Farm
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.
I suspect a large portion of the public is at least partially aware when they are being pushed or lured into a specific way of thinking. We have certainly had enough experience with institutions trying to manage our thoughts over the years. Governments and mainstream media outlets in particular have made the manufacture of public consent their top priority. This is what they spend most of their time, money and energy on. All other issues are secondary.
The media does not objectively report facts and evidence, it spins information to plant an engineered narrative in the minds of its viewers. But the public is not as stupid as they seem to think. This is probably why trust in the media has plunged by 46% in the past ten years, hitting an all time low this year of 27%.
Except for pre-election season spikes, mainstream outlets from CNN to Fox to CBS to MSNBC are facing dismal audience numbers, with only around 2 million to 3 million prime time viewers. There are numerous YouTube commentators with bigger audiences than this. And, if you sift through the debris of MSM videos on YouTube, you’ll find low hits and a majority of people that are visiting their channels just to make fun of them.
The MSM is now scrambling to explain their crumbling empire, as well as debating on ways to save it from oblivion. The power of the “Fourth Estate” is a facade, an illusion given form by smoke and mirrors. Bottom line: Nobody (except perhaps extreme leftists) likes the corporate media or activist journalists and propagandists.
One would think that media moguls and journos would have realized this by now. I mean, if they accepted this reality, they would not be struggling so much with the notion that no one is listening to them when it comes to pandemic mandates and the covid vaccines. Yet, journalists complain about it incessantly lately.
In fact, half the media reports I see these days are not fact based analysis of events, but corporate journalists interviewing OTHER corporate journalists and bitching to each other about how Americans are “too ignorant” or “too conspiratorial” to grasp that journos are the anointed high priests of information.
I actually find this situation fascinating as an observer of oligarchy and being well versed in the mechanics of propaganda. The fundamental narrative of control-culture is that there are “experts” that the establishment chooses, and then there is everyone else. The “experts” are supposed to pontificate and dictate while everyone else is supposed to shut up, listen and obey.
Media elitists see themselves in the role of “the experts” and the public as devout acolytes; a faithful flock of sheep.
But what happens when everyone starts ignoring the sheep herders?
The other day I came across this revealing interview on CBS news about a poll of Americans showing at least 30% will refuse to take the covid vaccine outright. The interview is, for some reason, with another journalist from The Atlantic with no apparent medical credentials and no insight into the data surrounding covid.
One thing to note right away is that the discussion itself never addresses any actual facts about the virus, the pandemic, the lockdowns, the mandates, or the vaccines. The establishment keeps telling us to “listen to the science”, but then they dismiss the science when it doesn’t agree with their agenda. When is the the mainstream going to finally acknowledge facts like these:
1) According to multiple official studies, including a study from American College of Physicians, the Infection Fatality Ratio (or death rate) of Covid-19 is only 0.26% for anyone outside of a nursing home. This means that 99.7% of people not in nursing homes will survive the virus if they contract it.
2) Nursing home patients account for over 40% of all Covid deaths across the US. These are mostly people who were already sick with multiple preexisting conditions when they contracted covid.
3) The Federal Government’s own hospital data from the Department of Health and Human Services indicates that capacity for hospital beds is ample in the US and that this has been the case for the past year. Covid patients only take up around 13% of inpatient beds nationally. The stories in the media of hospitals at overcapacity due to covid are therefore inaccurate or they are outright lies.
4) International studies including a Danish study published by the American College of Physicians have proven that wearing masks makes NO significant difference in the spread or infection rate of Covid-19. Interestingly, the states in the US with the most heavily enforced mask mandates have also had the highest infection rates.
“Right now, in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks….there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is, and often there are unintended consequences – people keep fiddling with the masks and they’re touching their face.”
“Seriously people – STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!”
Both the Surgeon General and Fauci later reversed their stance on mask wearing when it no longer suited the control narrative, and are now fervent supporters of enforcing mask mandates. Scientific data continues to show that mask wearing does nothing to stop the spread of Covid.
7) The Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines are made with a brand new technology that has had limited testing. The NIAID used minimal animal testing on mice, but these mice were NOT a type that is normally susceptible to contracting covid the way humans are. These tests were completely inadequate, yet the mRNA vaccines were released for human use anyway.
8) The new vaccines do not contain the virus that triggers COVID-19, as a conventional vaccine might. Instead, Moderna and Pfizer researchers used a new technique to make messenger RNA (mRNA), which is similar to mRNA found in SARS-CoV-2. In theory, the artificial mRNA will act as instructions that prompt human cells to build a protein found on the surface of the virus. That protein would theoretically trigger a protective immune response. The entire Covid vaccine effort was essentially a giant shortcut. This is not an advantage, as the long term effects of any vaccine from 1 year to 5 years to 10 years should be understood before it is injected into human beings.
9) Multiple medical industry professional including the former VP of Pfizer have signed a petition warning about the new mRNA vaccinations. They say far more testing is needed before humans are exposed, and they warned that the vaccines may cause severe autoimmune responses or even infertility.
10)Numerous polls also show that at least 30% to 50% of medical professionals including nurses and doctors plan to refuse the vaccines as well. These people are facing the risk of losing their jobs, but they are still not going to accept the shot. That is how potentially volatile the mRNA vaccines could be; long term health is more important than short term risk.
When all of these facts are taken into account, along with numerous others that I do not have space to mention here, it is not so outlandish for millions of Americans to be skeptical of medical mandates and vaccination over covid.
Why should we worry about getting vaccinated over a virus that 99.7% of the population will survive without difficulty? Why should we allow economic shutdowns, medical passports or invasive contact tracing at all, let alone over a pandemic that less than 0.3% of the population is susceptible to? Beyond that, why should we volunteer to be guinea pigs for a new vaccine technology without knowing what the long term consequences might be?
Even if covid was a legitimate danger, no crisis justifies handing over our civil liberties in response.
The basic establishment narrative is this: “Covid is an existential threat to the public, therefore, we are justified in taking away people’s freedoms, their economy and their privacy. It is for the “greater good of the greater number”. Vaccination is infallible and cannot be questioned. The “experts” are infallible and cannot be questioned. It’s not your body and it is not your choice. Your body is property of the government and if you do not voluntarily take injections of whatever experimental cocktail we give you, then we will continue to erode your freedoms until you give in and submit. Then, once you have submitted, your freedoms will still never be given back.”
It’s not really a persuasive argument for lot of people.
Media outlets like CBS will rarely mention the overall issue of control and oppression tied to the pandemic response, just as they will never address any facts that run contrary to their message. What they will do is misrepresent the situation in order to gain compliance. The Atlantic journo basically admits this in the interview above, arguing that the media in particular needs to change the message to better attach incentive to vaccine compliance. In other words, people are easier to manipulate when they are tricked into thinking there is more to gain by submission rather than rebellion.
The medical passport system is the personification of false incentive. The media presents the notion that no one will be “forced” to take the vaccines; but what they don’t mention is that without the vaccine they will not get a medical passport, and without a medical passport they will be cut off from the normal economy. You can be vax free, but you will be punished through poverty and zero access until you give in.
My question is, why do they care so much if people don’t want or trust the vaccine? Why are they so obsessed? If the mRNA cocktail actually works and is not a health hazard, then they should be perfectly safe from infection. The idea that people who refuse are a danger to others is nonsense.
If we are going to start talking about potential “mutations” that bypass vaccine protections, then why take any vaccine? If mutations are really a threat and are not obstructed by current vaccines, then taking a vaccine now is useless.
And, why the constant attempts at public division? CBS and The Atlantic use an obvious ploy to assert that black and brown Americans have different reasons for refusing to comply when compared to apparently white conservatives. Why do they assume that black and brown people are not conservative or that we do not have ample reasons in common? This is never explained or supported.
Finally, as always the media seeks to gaslight anyone that disagree with the prevailing agenda as “conspiracy nuts”, presenting strawman arguments while ignoring all legitimate arguments on the side of liberty. There is such a thing as conspiracy REALITY, and none of these journos would survive a debate on a level playing field against those of us in the alternative media when it comes to covid and the vaccines.
The media and the government’s stalker mentality when it comes to people skeptical of covid restrictions and vaccines is unsettling. They act more like a jilted psychopathic ex-girlfriends rather than people concerned with saving lives. This tells me they are afraid. Their agenda is uncertain, and they have doubts. This is a good thing.
At bottom, covid is a non-issue that has been inflated into a crisis of epic proportions through storytelling and selective fact checking. Millions of people around the world die every year from a myriad of illnesses, some of them as infectious as covid. We don’t shut down our lives, wear diapers on our faces, inject ourselves with untested cell altering cocktails or sacrifice our freedoms because of this. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness continues. Those who wish to take away our self determination in these matters are the real threat; covid is not.
