fox files

The case for contraception is a non-starter . . . even if a high-ranking Roman Catholic Church official is making it.

Recently, the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) ran an article on the morality of contraception. The article was occasioned by a conference held in Rome this past December that offered a critical response to the Pontifical Academy for Life’s publication last summer of its base text, Theological Ethics of Life (TEL).

In his presentation of TEL, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia called for a “radical paradigm change” in the Church’s moral teaching, especially as it bears on contraception. Feigning fairness in its reporting on TEL and on the criticism it received by the Rome conference, the NCR article offers what could aptly be described as a hit piece on Humanae Vitae (HV) and the pontificate of John Paul II. In the NCR article’s presentation of the issue, we find something old—a rehash of the “same old, same old”—and something new.

The new is the attempt to turn the dissent argument (dissent against Church teaching on contraception) on its head, and instead recast the rejection of HV as—wait for it—representing the real infallible teaching of the Church’s ordinary universal magisterium. (Note that this latter refers to the longstanding teaching of the bishops around the world in union with the supreme pontiff. Catholic doctrine holds this teaching to be infallible and thus irreformable.) To pull off this quixotic feat, the authors resort to sophistry and a highly flawed view of magisterial teaching.

The key move centers on how the authors interpret the vote of the papal commission of Paul VI that was tasked with considering the issue of birth control; here nine bishops voted against the view that contraception constitutes an intrinsic evil, whereas three bishops voted for it and three others abstained. The same nine bishops voted in favor of the commission’s majority report favoring the moral permissibility of contraception (the commission comprised seventy-one members).

“Given the votes of the commission’s bishops,” the NCR article concludes, “it is an incredible stretch of the imagination and dishonors the consciences of the bishops to claim that the ordinary universal Magisterium declares this teaching irreformable.”

Wow. Never mind that for bishops to partake in the infallibility of the Church’s ordinary universal Magisterium, they must teach in union with the bishop of Rome. And never mind that not one, but two bishops of Rome—in two encyclicals and not merely by way of approbation of the vote of a papal commission—have expressly condemned contraception as an intrinsic evil: Paul VI in HV and John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor (80). And never mind the biblical foundation of the Church’s teaching, as Genesis 38:9-10 provides a manifest condemnation of unnatural contraception—which thereby attests to the truly longstanding nature of the Church’s traditional position. Instead, the NCR article would have us believe that the opinion—framed as the sacrosanct “consciences”—of nine out of fifteen bishops on a papal commission suffice to represent the “ordinary universal Magisterium.”  Now, that marks an incredible stretch of the imagination.

Furthermore, few know that the “consciences”—and subsequently the votes—of the nine bishops labored under an erroneous understanding of the science of contraception. They believed that the birth control pill acted not as a block or inhibition of the natural procreative process, but as a kind of medication that “helped nature” by prolonging the woman’s natural period of infertility. (We know this from the testimony of Georges Cardinal Cottier, a close friend of the Swiss Dominican who served as the secretary of the papal commission.) It goes without saying that a proper judgment of conscience requires that it be rightly informed.

What is not new in this article, despite its attempt to dress it differently, is the tired and worn-out framing of the moral terms of the debate. The key line runs thus: “The two positions [on contraception] reflect two different models of marriage: the traditional procreative model [enshrined in HV] focused on the ‘natural’ outcome of the act of sexual intercourse; the majority report [of the Paul VI commission] was based on the new interpersonal union model that emerged from the council that focused on the total meaning of marriage and of sexual intercourse within the marriage relationship” (emphasis original). The interpersonal union model, we are further told, gives priority to “pastoral guidance and subjective conscience” and is “principle-oriented, relational-focused, dynamic, developmental, and inductive.” Proponents of this model include “the majority [of] faithful” and “credible, mature, and adult Catholic theologians” along with “most Catholic couples [whose] faith and practice” rest on “practical judgment” and on “conscience before God.”

Opposed to this, the procreative model gives priority to “objective norms” and to “absolutist” magisterial pronouncements and is “largely law-oriented, legalistic, act-focused, static, and deductive.” Adherents of this model constitute a “concerted minority” of “conservative” theologians who are “scathingly critical” of the interpersonal union model and of Archbishop Paglia’s call for a paradigm shift in the Church’s moral teaching. More fundamentally, the procreative model, we are assured, has been “thoroughly deconstructed,” since the evident “flaws” in its “foundational principle” have been exposed for all to see—so much so that the “entire edifice” of Catholic teaching that stands on this model “crumbles.”

You get the idea. Ogres, those pesky “conservative” theologians.

As one of the presenters at the Rome conference that the NCR article seeks to discredit, I reject this article’s caricature of the so-called “procreative model.” The article falls prey to a specious definition of marriage and to an underlying reductive and fragmented anthropology.

Catholic moral teaching defines marriage as a procreative-unitive institution. This follows upon the way our sexuality participates in the nature of the human person as a body-soul composite unity. Because our bodies are of an animal-like sort, they are sexually (biologically) differentiated. From this perspective, human sexuality is for the obvious purpose of procreation. Yet, as we are not pure bodies, but incarnate (rational) spirits with an ordering to interpersonal love, human sexuality also owns an essential ordering to interpersonal unitive love. In brief, God has endowed us with a sexed design for the joint purpose of procreation and unitive love, as HV makes plain.

The NCR article gets it flatly wrong, then, when it holds that the so-called procreative model “focuses”—exclusively, it seems—“on the natural outcome of the act of sexual intercourse.” By focusing on human sexuality as both procreative and unitive in design, this model—let us call it instead the Humanae Vitae model—focuses more fundamentally on the truth of the human person (the entire person) as a body-soul unity. Because body and soul are inseparable in the human person, so are the procreative and unitive orderings. In truth, then, it is the HV model that focuses on “the total meaning of marriage,” a meaning that includes—indeed, unites—the procreative and unitive dimensions of sex.

But the NCR article insists that it is the so-called interpersonal union model that focuses on “the total meaning of marriage”—a total meaning that can, in the name of “interpersonal union,” embrace the direct suppression of procreation by sterilizing the sexual act . The problem here is obvious: the interpersonal union model implies not a total, but a partial meaning of marriage—namely, as unitive. Even if the article acknowledges that the total meaning of marriage encompasses the “act of sexual intercourse” and its “natural outcome,” it is only as a lower, secondary or accidental good, one that remains at all points subordinate to, and thus governed by, the unitive dimension. That the article reduces the procreative dimension to a mere “act” (no doubt similar to other acts, like paying the bills) underscores this.

Marriage, on this view, is essentially a unitive bond, an interpersonal union in love. Only accidentally is it procreative.

The anthropology on which this view of sex and marriage stands clearly emerges. By elevating the unitive dimension (“interpersonal union”) to a rank above the “act” of sexual intercourse, to the extent that this dimension captures “the total meaning of marriage,” the authors of this article disconnect the act of sexual intercourse from the proper human meaning of marriage. This could be only if the body were not integral to the essential identity of the human person, and thus to the moral agency of the acting person. In other words, we are confronted here with a reductive and fragmented view of the human person, where the body in its biological structuring, inclusive of sex, becomes relegated to a sub-human sphere, detached from the rational dimension of human life and operating with its own processes and laws. (We witness the same approach in the wider educational field, where sex education is typically offered in a “health” class rather than in a morality class.)

Objections to HV and to the Church’s moral condemnation of contraception always run along these anthropological lines. Always. And it is high time we tag this for what it is: a derisive, dismissive disdain for the body, especially in its biological structuring. We can attach many labels to this view of the human person—gnostic, angelistic, dualistic, Cartesian—but one designation that such a view, and the moral position that follows, cannot lay claim to is “interpersonal.” Since the human person is his body and his soul, interpersonal action is always embodied, biologically structured action, particularly when it involves sex. Period. Full stop.

There are numerous other errors in the NCR article. I will mention here only the most egregious: that the moral difference between natural family planning (NFP) and artificial contraception is supposedly contrived and “morally unjustifiable.” This issue has been treated thoroughly many times, but for the present, suffice it to say that the authors fail to distinguish between the act considered objectively in itself and the subjective intention of those committing the act. The moral difference between NFP and contraception arises from the former, not the latter.

In sum, despite what the NCR puts forth, the Church’s moral teaching on contraception has not been “thoroughly deconstructed.” It has not “crumbled.” And the “inseparability principle” on which it stands (the inseparability of the procreative and unitive dimensions of marriage) has hardly been “demonstrated to be false.” To suggest as much is illusory. Worse, it is a ruse masking a disdain for the human body, as if it were an object to be manipulated and hygienically controlled in a purely utilitarian manner, like a specimen in a lab.

At its core, the Church’s teaching on contraception champions the nobility and sacred dignity of the body. This it does by insisting that moral meaning and purpose suffuse the procreative (biological) ordering of sex (to the extent that we can never impede this ordering), just as the body is suffused with moral meaning and purpose. Church teaching on contraception remains true because the human person as a body-soul unity—the foundation of this teaching—remains true. This the Church will never forsake.

According to new provisional data from the Scottish government, there were 7,314 deaths registered in January 2023, an increase of 17.7% compared to the average of 6,212. For the second week of January, there were more deaths in Scotland than ever before, including during the peak of the pandemic. Concurrently, there were 4,159 births registered in January 2023, a decrease of 6.8% compared to the average of 4,463. In other words, between a dearth of births and a plethora of deaths, there were roughly 1,400 fewer souls, the equivalent of roughly 86,000 in the United States. This is long after COVID. Why is there zero concern?

What on earth will it take to pull these death shots from the market?

Die Welt, a paper based in the home country of Pfizer partner BioNTech, revealed last week in a long expose what many of us have long known. All those sudden deaths, heart attacks, and strokes we’ve been witnessing over the past two years were indeed observed during the Pfizer clinical trial that supposedly showed the shots to be 100% safe and effective. The company simply covered up the severe adverse events by kicking those participants out of the trial and/or suggesting without evidence that the deaths had nothing to do with the experiment.

Remember, the CDC announced a few weeks ago that it had finally study a potential association between the COVID shots and strokes. Well, it turns out the agency had the opportunity to study it already in 2020 before a single human being outside the trial was injected. “Patient no. 11621327” was more than a mere number. He was a human being found dead from a stroke in his apartment just three days after the second dose. Typically, with a novel product in trial, any death – even one not so sudden – makes the product suspect until it is proven innocent. Yet in this case, Pfizer simply dismissed the death as not related to the vaccine, just as the company did with Patient #11521497, who died 20 days later from cardiac arrest.

The article also provides more details on the Buenos Aires trial site, the largest one in the world, in which attorney Augusto Roux was severely injured with pericarditis and liver damage. Instead of being recorded as a severe adverse event, he was marked as having had COVID (even though he tested negative) and was summarily removed from the trial. Roux was on my podcast last July and told me Pfizer refused to help treat his injury because officials felt it had nothing to do with the vaccine, and insurance also refused to pay for treatment because the insurance company blamed it on him willingly joining the trial.

Die Welt reports that on Aug. 31, 2020, 53 of those in the trial in Buenos Aires were unblinded and removed from the trial against the protocol, which calls for this only “in emergencies” (unless this was indeed an emergency!). By the end of the second dose, a further 200 individuals were removed from the trial, meaning that overall, more than 250 of the original 1231 participants were terminated, thereby making the entirety of the data from the largest trial site irrelevant to use in the final trial results.

Overall, 21 participants in Pfizer’s phase 3 trial died, as compared to 17 in the control group before they were unblinded, which should have been a red flag before the shot ever took off. Pfizer claimed there was no evidence anyone died from the vaccine, but after it’s been revealed that a number of people in the trial suffered heart ailments and strokes, the company’s defense holds no water. Yet here we are, over two years later, and the shots are still on the market, promoted like manna from heaven, and even mandated in most hospitals and universities, including in red states. How is this not the top public policy issue of our day?

Consider the following from a public policy standpoint. Pfizer gets the government to pony up billions in taxpayer dollars for the shots, several billion more to promote, advertise, distribute, and mandate them on every human being alive – all while absolving Pfizer of liability. So how do we know the shots are safe? Who gets to monitor the clinical trial? The very manufacturer that was absolved of liability by the government! The Die Welt article even mentions that Pfizer pushed through a liability waiver on its contract not just for negligence, but also for “fraud or bad faith on the part of Pfizer itself.”

Pfizer responded to the Die Welt reporter by asserting that, “Regulatory authorities around the world have approved our Covid-19 vaccine. These approvals are based on a robust and independent assessment of the scientific data on quality, safety, and efficacy, including the phase 3 clinical trial.” Sure, authorities guaranteed the company endless funding, marketing, mandates, and indemnity so that Pfizer would have no incentive to even release the true results of its trial, much less make the product better.

How can this continue to go on after all we know?

Yet in all honesty, this year’s legislative sessions in red states have been an utter disgrace – with medical freedom not even being on the back burner of policy issues. The few brave legislators who seek to impose some sort of accountability on the state departments of health for promoting and mandating these shots are summarily shouted down. Florida is the only state where officials are holding Pfizer accountable with the convening of a grand jury. Just last week, the Florida Department of Health sent an alert to doctors warning them to inform anyone inquiring about the COVID shots about the adverse events reported to the CDC’s VAERS. Where are the other red states? Why is Ron DeSantis the only governor who values the Nuremberg Code?

What is it going to take to give this issue the prominence it deserves so that the policies and laws reflect the human toll these odious policies have taken on humanity? How many more people need to die for a lie? Remember, a study from Thailand showed that 29% of young males in the study sample suffered some form of subclinical heart damage whether they experienced symptoms or not. We have potentially hundreds of millions of people in the world who are ticking time bombs and in need of the best research, diagnostics, and treatment.

Amid all the existential threats to our security, civilization, culture, and economy – and there are certainly many – can you think of anything that matches the severity of this issue? From died suddenly to plummeting birth rates, how is the vaccine issue not the top concern of all public policy, given that it was injected in 5.5 billion people and officials are on the cusp of approving more mRNAs? So we’re now supposed to believe Moderna’s own published phase 3 trial results of its RSV shot that it’s 84% effective and absolutely no serious adverse events occurred? Within months, if we don’t stop it, this shot will be in the arms of every senior and then, eventually, in the arms of every newborn baby.

After Pfizer purposely fabricated its clinical trial, the company must now be on the hook for a different sort of trial – one Steve Deace and Daniel Horowitz layed out in “Rise of the Fourth Reich.” Unless we begin holding pharma companies accountable and erecting legal firewalls to protect the people from their endless experimentation, they will do this again and again.

A majority of Americans now believe that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is acting as the Democrat Party’s secret police. They’re not wrong. In its most recent public embarrassment, the FBI was caught circulating a document that declares traditional Catholics to be domestic terrorists that the feds should keep an eye on. The document stated that Catholics are tied to the “far-right white nationalist movement that the Biden regime made up out of thin air. Once they got caught, the FBI retracted the document.

An FBI whistleblower leaked the document last week to Kyle Seraphin, a former FBI special agent who was suspended without pay last June for complaining internally about the FBI’s corruption. Seraphin then published the anti-Catholic document online and talked about it on Tucker Carlson Tonight.

According to Seraphin, having a preference for listening to the Catholic Mass in Latin is being equated by the FBI to “adherence to anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBTQ and white supremacist ideology.”

Even if that were true of Catholics – which it’s not – none of those things are crimes. You’re allowed to dislike gay people or illegal aliens if you want because those are thoughts in your head. The FBI under the Biden regime, however, is now claiming to have mind-reading capabilities and declaring people to be thought criminals based on the likelihood that they’ll vote against Democrats.

Once it was confronted with this outlandish violation of the First Amendment, the FBI retracted the document, stating that it didn’t meet their exacting standards. But doesn’t it? What has the FBI done since 2015 to give us any reason to trust the bureau, its agents, or its actions against conservative and traditionalist Americans?

Let’s take a quick trip down memory lane to examine just a few of the many scandals the FBI has been embroiled in since partisan hack Merrick Garland became the head of the Department of Justice.

One of the very first acts of the FBI under Garland and the Biden regime was to begin arresting Americans who had peacefully protested on January 6th. Dozens of those people, who participated in a First Amendment-protected protest, are being held without bail to this day, and are still awaiting trial. They’re political prisoners who are guilty of – at most – misdemeanor trespassing. Merrick Garland has vowed to arrest another 1,000 of the J6 protesters in 2023.

Just last week, we learned that the Washington field office of the FBI had pressured the Boston office to open criminal investigations into 140 people who rode the bus from Boston to DC on January 6th. The Boston field office agents refused because riding the bus is not an actionable crime.

The Biden regime then set about spying on parents who protested transgender and gay propaganda at local school board meetings. The FBI has also been viciously arresting pro-life Christians for silently praying near abortion clinics.

When New York City fired thousands of teachers who refused to take the dangerous experimental COVID vaccines, the city sent the teachers’ fingerprints and personnel files to the FBI. We don’t know what the FBI did with all those files, because we only found out about it from the teachers’ lawsuit against the city.

They raided President Trump’s house at Mar-a-Lago and rifled through Melania’s wardrobe before suddenly deciding that classified docs were okey-doke after a tractor-trailer load of stolen classified documents was found in Joe Biden’s offices and mansions.

Just last week, we learned that the FBI was paying professional agitators and informants to start fires and break things during the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020.

And that only scratches the surface of what the FBI has been up to – none of which by the way was legal. The House Committee on Weaponization of Government just kicked off last week. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) is the committee chair, and he says he’s “never seen anything like it” when it comes to the droves of rank-and-file FBI agents who are suddenly coming forward as whistleblowers.

So, can we trust the FBI? Not as far as we can throw them. Catholics and Christians across America need to understand that they are all in the crosshairs of this criminal regime and its secret police force in the FBI.

It is clear to me that we have been more or less asleep as a civilization, and for a good long while, having been at first intoxicated and then addicted to the technologies that have come so insidiously to characterize our lives. That is to say that we have bought into the myth that technology is neutral. And now we seem to have no power to resist it.

The Shape We Take

This technological totalization, it appears to me, is now manifesting in two very discrete but nevertheless related developments: 1) in the rise of AI expertise to replace that of the human; and 2) the transhumanist project that not only has achieved almost universal adulation and acceptance by the World Archons (I use the Gnostic term deliberately) but has accelerated over the past three years at an astonishing rate. This leads to the following inference: as AI becomes more human-like, humans become more machine-like. It is in inverse ratio, and indeed a nearly perfect one. I don’t think it is an accident or in any way an organic development.

The advent of ChatGPT technology, for a very mild example, renders much of human endeavor redundant—at least for the unimaginative. And, trust me, the last thing the World Archons want around the joint is imaginative humans. I am already wondering how many of the student papers I receive are generated by this technology. It is certainly a step up from the reams of bad papers available on various internet college paper websites (aka, “McPaper”), but no less demeaning to the cultivation of a free-thinking and self-directed citizenry. And I’m sure you’ve already heard about various forays into Robot Lawyer and Robot Doctor AI. The rise and implementation of AI teachers and professors, I’d say, is only a matter of time. Some “experts,” of course, say such technology will never replace human beings. These are probably the same people who said the Internet would never be used for porn or surveillance.

As Heidegger warned us, the technologies we use don’t only change our relationship to things-in-the-world; more importantly they change our relationships to ourselves and to the very enterprise of being human. Heidegger’s contemporary, the undeniably prophetic Russian philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev, saw the proverbial handwriting on the wall as well. In 1947, a year before his death, he wrote: “the growing power of technological knowledge in the social life of men means the ever greater and greater objectification of human existence; it inflicts injury upon the souls, and it weighs heavily upon the lives of men. Man is all the while more and more thrown out into the external, always becoming more and more externalized, more and more losing his spiritual center and integral nature. The life of man is ceasing to be organic and is becoming organized; it is being rationalized and mechanized.”

This objectification has jumped into hyperdrive, certainly over the past three years, as bodies (a curious metaphor) like the World Economic Forum have been pushing for increased use of technology and the surveillance it assures, while at the same time promoting a kinder, gentler face of transhumanism. They look forward to the day of microchipping children, for example, in therapeutic and evolutionary terms under the pathetic appeal of “increased safety,” a term employed to further all manners of social engineering and totalitarianism, past and present. Theirs is not a convincing performance.

Interestingly, the recent cultural phenomenon of celebrating anything and everything “trans” functions as a kind of advance guard, whether or not by design, in the transhumanist project. This advanced guard is normalizing the idea that human bodies are ontologically and epistemologically contingent while at the same time implying that a lifetime subscription to hormone treatments and surgeries is part of a “new normal.” And one can only marvel at the marketing success of this experiment in social engineering—which has now become very real biological engineering. Even on children.

But the transhumanist project is nothing new. As Mary Harrington has recently argued in a stunning lecture, the promotion of hormonal birth control (“the pill”) has been modifying human females for decades; it has changed what it is to be a woman and even changed the interior lives and biological drives of the women who take it. The trans phenomenon, then, is simply part of the (un)natural progression of the transhumanist project begun with modifying women’s bodies via the pill.

Carnival or Capitulation?

As a sophiologist, I am keenly interested in questions of the feminine in general and of the Divine Feminine in particular, and, as we have seen from its very beginning, the transhumanist project is nothing if not a direct assault on both, even as early as Donna Jean Haraway’s cartoonish proposition almost 40 years ago. Certainly, women are the ones bearing the cost of the transhumanist project in, for instance, college sports, not to mention public restrooms, and this assault is at heart an assault on the divinely creative act of conception and bearing children, that is, on the feminine itself. Is it any wonder that the production of artificial wombs as a “more evolved way” of fetal incubation is being floated as a societal good? On the other hand, at least one academic recently proposed using the wombs of brain-dead women as fetal incubators. What, then, is a woman? Even a Supreme Court justice can no longer answer this question.

As sports, fertility, and motherhood are incrementally taken from women, what’s left? Becoming productive (again, note the metaphor) feeders for the socialist-capitalist food chain? OnlyFans? Clearly, the explosion of that site’s popularity, not to mention the use of AI to alter the appearance of “talent,” is tout court evidence of the absolute commodification of the female body as production venue for male consumption. Of course, Aldous Huxley called all of this nearly 100 years ago.

My suspicion is that the current propaganda about climate and overpopulation are likewise props of the transhumanist project and the AI revolution that accompanies it. Because, let’s face it, the transhumanist revolution is the old story of power v. the masses, and AI is the key to ensuring there will be no democratizing going on in the world of the tech titans. For one thing, democracy is not possible in a world of brain transparency. Ask Winston Smith. And “fifteen-minute cities” have nothing to do with the environment. It is clear that the Archons are actively promoting the idea of culling the human herd, though they are reluctant to describe exactly how this might be achieved. The techno-evolutionary advances promised by the high priests of transhumanism, however, will not be made available to everyone, though the enticement of acquiring “freedom” from biology is certainly the bait used to gain popular acceptance for the project.

The fact is, with AI taking over more and more responsibilities from human beings, humans themselves are in danger of becoming superfluous. As Noah Yuval Harari has observed, “fast forward to the early 21st century when we just don’t need the vast majority of the population because the future is about developing more and more sophisticated technology, like artificial intelligence [and] bioengineering. Most people don’t contribute anything to that, except perhaps for their data, and whatever people are still doing which is useful, these technologies increasingly will make redundant and will make it possible to replace the people.” I can assure you: Harari is not the only one who has come to this conclusion.

It is for these and other reasons that the Dune saga includes in its mythos the tale of the Butlerian Jihad, a human holy war against thinking/sentient machines. I admit, I kind of like the idea, and I wonder if such a thing might actually come to pass at some point. John Michael Greer, a man I deeply respect, suggests in his book The Retro Future that we might instead be in for a “Butlerian Carnival,” a “sensuous celebration of the world outside the cubicle farms and the glass screens” that situates the technologies we use to a human scale—and not the other way around, which is what we see in the transhumanist/AI revolution. I hope he’s right. But one thing I do know: the Archons won’t let that happen without a fight.

In truth, in the face of the transhumanist/AI revolution, we find ourselves once again confronted with the question posed by the psalmist, “What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?” Are we nothing but data sets to be instrumentalized by technocratic overseers, or are we indeed a little lower than angels and crowned with glory and honor?

How we answer these questions will have tremendous bearing on the future now rushing toward us.

A bombshell report from independent journalist Seymour Hersh — published on Substack — reveals and confirms exactly what we reported last year: That the US Dept. of Defense covertly blew up the Nordstream pipelines, carrying out an act of terrorism against its own western allies in an insanely dangerous effort to harm Russia’s energy exports.

The destruction of the Nordstream pipelines (also printed as Nord Stream) was reportedly carried out with the help of the government of Norway, and the planting of explosives used the cover of the BALTOPS 22 US Navy exercise in June of 2022, during which US Navy divers planted explosives that were, three months later, remotely detonated by a sonar buoy dropped into the Baltic Sea with a Norwegian Air Force P8 Poseidon patrol plane.

As Hersh writes:

The C4 attached to the pipelines would be triggered by a sonar buoy dropped by a plane on short notice, but the procedure involved the most advanced signal processing technology. Once in place, the delayed timing devices attached to any of the four pipelines could be accidentally triggered by the complex mix of ocean background noises throughout the heavily trafficked Baltic Sea—from near and distant ships, underwater drilling, seismic events, waves and even sea creatures. To avoid this, the sonar buoy, once in place, would emit a sequence of unique low frequency tonal sounds—much like those emitted by a flute or a piano—that would be recognized by the timing device and, after a pre-set hours of delay, trigger the explosives.

CIA, Air Force, Navy, State Dept and Biden leaders were all in on it

The CIA, US Air Force, US Navy, US State Dept. and the Biden administration were all in on the planning, which of course makes them all war criminals for blowing up civilian infrastructure that has caused unprecedented economic destruction and human suffering across all of Western Europe.

Widespread shutdowns of industry, metals smelting operations, fertilizer production and even the entire BASF manufacturing facility in Germany soon followed the loss of Nordstream. Cutting off affordable, abundant energy to Europe was the last straw, and it is already beginning to plunge Europe into a new era of poverty and deindustrialization from which Western European civilization will likely never recover. The 2023 and 2024 crop harvests will also be devastated due to the lack of fertilizer, as nitrogen-based fertilizers are produced from the hydrocarbons that came from Russia via the Nordstream pipelines. This means many Europeans will starve due to the terrorism acts of the US and Norway.

Also thanks to the greenie climate cultists, European countries are generally unwilling to tap their own energy resources, which made them almost entirely dependent on Russia. Norway was one exception to that, as the country is eager to export energy to other European nations, which also explains why Norway was apparently happy to go along with the unlawful destruction of the Nordstream pipeline.

US officials cheered this act of terrorism against its own allies, including Germany

US officials were thrilled to see the pipeline destroyed, even though the loss of affordable energy is currently devastating the economies of European countries. From the Hersh article:

Asked at a press conference last September about the consequences of the worsening energy crisis in Western Europe, Blinken described the moment as a potentially good one:

“It’s a tremendous opportunity to once and for all remove the dependence on Russian energy and thus to take away from Vladimir Putin the weaponization of energy as a means of advancing his imperial designs. That’s very significant and that offers tremendous strategic opportunity for the years to come, but meanwhile we’re determined to do everything we possibly can to make sure the consequences of all of this are not borne by citizens in our countries or, for that matter, around the world.”

More recently, Victoria Nuland expressed satisfaction at the demise of the newest of the pipelines. Testifying at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in late January she told Senator Ted Cruz, “?Like you, I am, and I think the Administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now, as you like to say, a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea.”

On February 7, less than three weeks before the seemingly inevitable Russian invasion of Ukraine, Biden met in his White House office with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who, after some wobbling, was now firmly on the American team. At the press briefing that followed, Biden defiantly said, “If Russia invades . . . there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”

Twenty days earlier, Undersecretary Nuland had delivered essentially the same message at a State Department briefing, with little press coverage. “I want to be very clear to you today,” she said in response to a question. “If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.”

Thus, Joe Biden, Victoria Nuland, Jake Sullivan, Tony Blinken and other US officials were all-in on the US committing this act of terrorism against civilian infrastructure, impacting the lives of literally hundreds of millions of Europeans. This is the perfect demonstration of the real “values” of the West: Sacrifice the economies of your own allies to try to hurt your geopolitical enemies, no matter how many lives are destroyed in the process.

Putin demands punishment of those responsible

Validimir Putin is already demanding that those responsible for this act of terrorism against civilian infrastructure be named and punished. From the UK Daily Mail:

The Kremlin said on Thursday the world should know the truth about who sabotaged the Nord Stream gas pipelines and that those responsible should be punished after an investigative journalist said U.S. divers blew them up at the behest of the White House.

In a blog post, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh cited an unidentified source as saying that U.S. navy divers had destroyed the pipelines with explosives on the orders of President Joe Biden.

Importantly, all the war criminals who carried out this heinous act against Western Europe are, of course, denying any involvement. We’re supposed to believe the pipelines just spontaneously blew up for no reason. It’s a “mystery” that the media and the White House don’t ever want solved.

Go figure.

We know that no product in the history of the world has been promoted with as much force as the COVID shots. We also know that no group of people has been more maligned, discriminated against, and punished than those who rightfully chose not to get those shots. And we know the government badly wants to track your vaccination status across a spectrum of health care and governmental databases. What exactly do you think the feds will do with that information and why do they want it – if not to discriminate against and punish those who don’t comply? The latest news of the CDC tracking immunization status with new ICD codes should spawn a torrent of ironclad legislation in red states to prohibit such tracking.

Recently, the National File uncovered audio from a September 2021 CMS meeting in which medical officer David Berglund expressed an interest in the feds using new ICD-10 codes to track those who are unvaccinated or partially vaccinated. “We have had interest in coding people who are not immunized for COVID-19,” said Berglund in his presentation. Well, it turns out that in April 2022, CMS implemented the following codes in the subcategory of “underimmunization status”:

• Z28.310 Unvaccinated for COVID-19
• Z28.311 Partially vaccinated for COVID-19
• Z28.39 Other under-immunization status

But the most jarring point is the note placed at the bottom of these new codes on page 1915 of the new ICD catalogue. “Note: These codes should not be used for individuals who are not eligible for the COVID-19 vaccines, as determined by the healthcare provider.”

Now, according to this perverted logic, not getting the gene therapy is somehow synonymous with an illness, disease, or diagnosis that would make the status eligible for an ICD code. That in itself is very disturbing. But what this note reveals is that they are only using the codes for those who refused to get the shots, not for those who were somehow ineligible. But why? If they believe that someone remaining unvaccinated is tantamount to having a vulnerable condition, then the important fact is just that they are not vaccinated, not why they are unvaccinated.

What this clearly demonstrates is that they want to track those who refused to get the shots. What do you think they will do with that information? It’s quite evident that they want the ability to identify the critical thinkers in this country and retaliate against them by engaging in medical apartheid. We need not imagine that. We already have the warning of the nightmare from the past two years of denying travel rights, entry into stores, and even organ transplants based on this personal decision.

What is also peculiar is that they rushed to get codes for the mythical disease of “unvaccinated,” but despite 1.5 million VAERS reports of COVID jab injuries, there is still no special ICD for COVID-19 vaccine injury. As Dr. Jessica Rose points out, there are now injuries associated with 14,000 of the 24,289 Preferred Term (PT) MedDRA codes reported to VAERS, yet they still refuse to code one generically for the shot itself.

As an aside, if you add up all the vaccine injuries reported to VAERS for all the shots for three decades combined, they only account for 21% of the total MedDRA codes. The COVID shots chewed up 58% of all medical diagnosis codes in just two years! So clearly the fact that they are diagnosing under-immunization but not vaccine injury demonstrates this is not about medical billing or academic research, but the imposition of a biomedical tyranny.

It’s therefore quite evident that there is an urgent need for red states to block the transmission of private immunization information to the federal government. Consider the fact that states like New York passed laws making it a felony for state agencies to pass along information about criminal alien sex offenders to federal immigration officials. The Second Circuit even upheld the constitutionality of the bill, even though immigration enforcement is a legitimate purview of the federal government and immigrating and remaining here illegally are not constitutional rights. If blue states can protect criminal aliens from the feds, shouldn’t red states be able to protect Americans from medical apartheid facilitated by spying on vaccination status?

At a minimum, all red states should:

• Abolish their state immunization registries or at least require consent to be placed in them.
• Ban all immunization tracking.
• Preclude the health departments and medical professionals from including a person’s immunization records in any interstate or federal immunization tracking system without obtaining consent from the patient. Specifically, the ICD codes used for vaccine reluctance should not be included without the consent of the patient.
• Notify the citizen immediately if any federal agency pings a state or local office about an individual’s immunization status.
• Codify immunization status into state civil rights anti-discrimination statutes.

There has never been an issue that is a bigger direct threat to our existence than the biomedical security state. We already know what the feds have done to us and what they are planning. Maria Van Kerkhove, the lead author of the WHO plan to copy China’s lockdowns, recently warned, “We need to strengthen the systems within countries around surveillance.” We are forewarned. Now it’s our time to plan and fight back against this tyranny. This time, we won’t be able to contend that we didn’t see this unimaginable degree of tyranny coming.

Be very afraid. It just keeps getting worse. Under Joe Biden, the FBI is daily being further weaponized against its critics and critics of the administration’s chosen narratives.

Following the disclosures that the FBI was in regular contact with Twitter employees to ensure they censored speech they designated ‘misinformation,’ the Bureau attacked anyone who criticized them by, you guessed it – calling it ‘misinformation.’

It also called these FBI critics – ‘conspiracy theorists.’

This is a favorite leftwing buzz phrase often used to smear conservatives. 

The most recent outrage came when the FBI made a statement to FOX News this week after journalists posted screenshots of messages showing how FBI agents communicated with top Twitter officials relating to reports and potential posts about Hunter Biden.

In its response statement, rather than addressing those valid concerns, the Bureau slammed its critics as ‘conspiracy theorists’ spreading misinformation.’

And one legal expert, constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley, is sounding the alarm.

He told FOX News that it is a “menacing thing” for the nation’s largest law enforcement agency to declare that “combatting disinformation” is one of its top priorities, and then attacking free speech advocates for criticizing them.

The Epoch Times reports:

A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE FBI TOLD FOX NEWS, IN RESPONSE TO SEVERAL “TWITTER FILES” INSTALLMENTS, THAT “CONSPIRACY THEORISTS” ARE “FEEDING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC MISINFORMATION” AND SAID THEY ARE TRYING TO DISCREDIT THE BUREAU AND ITS AGENTS.

THAT STATEMENT, TURLEY TOLD FOX NEWS, IS “DISTURBING” BECAUSE THE FBI HAS ALLEGEDLY “ATTACKED MANY OF US WHO WERE RAISING FREE SPEECH CONCERNS AND CALLED ALL OF US COLLECTIVELY ‘CONSPIRACY THEORISTS SPREADING DISINFORMATION.’

“IT WAS HIGHLY INAPPROPRIATE, BECAUSE THE FBI HAS SAID THAT COMBATTING DISINFORMATION IS ONE OF ITS PRIORITIES. SO, IT IS A VERY MENACING THING WHEN YOU HAVE THE LARGEST LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY ATTACKING FREE SPEECH ADVOCATES,” TURLEY, A PROFESSOR OF LAW AT GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY WHO SERVED AS AN EXPERT WITNESS DURING FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP’S FIRST IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, TOLD THE OUTLET.

The FBI’s outrageous response comes after journalist Michael Shellenberger wrote about the outrageous FBI-Twitter collusion:

“What I quickly put together is a pattern where it appears that FBI agents, along with former FBI agents within the company [Twitter], were engaged in a disinformation campaign aimed at top Twitter and Facebook executives, as well as at top news organization executives to basically prepare them, prime them and then get them set up to dismiss Hunter Biden information when it would be released.”

Turley noted that Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk “has confirmed that the FBI paid social media companies to help them deal with what they called disinformation, which sensible and the intelligent of us call censorship.”

Turley added to FOX that the FBI “were in continuous communication [with Twitter], as were other agencies, targeting specific citizens and specific posters to be banned or suspended.”

“That really does smack of an agency relationship and that could violate the first amendment,” he warned.

But be very afraid, because things are now getting worse.

Now the FBI may also be coming after anyone who points out this clear and demonstrated FBI-Big Tech collusion for being a “conspiracy theorist” spreading “misinformation.”

I’ve now got all of my senses on high alert!

BY TYLER DURDEN

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, claimed on Dec. 24 that nearly every conspiracy theory about the social media platform has turned out to be true.

Elon Musk
“To be totally frank, almost every conspiracy theory that people had about Twitter turned out to be true.” pic.twitter.com/zBDY3AcrRq— Gretchen 🇺🇸 (@GretchenOO8) December 25, 2022

Musk made the comments during an interview on the “All-In” podcast, where he also discussed the so-called “Twitter files” that were initially released earlier this month via independent journalists Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss.

“To be totally frank, almost every conspiracy theory that people had about Twitter turned out to be true,” Musk said.

“Is there a conspiracy theory about Twitter that didn’t turn out to be true? So far, they’ve all turned out to be true. If not more true than people thought.”

While speaking of the Twitter files, the Tesla CEO was asked if there is “a part of the files that really shocked you,” to which he responded that the “FBI stuff is pretty intense.”

The Twitter files contain multiple documents, including internal conversations among employees at the social media platform, detailing the company’s attempts to censor tweets from conservative commentators and suppress a New York Post article about Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election.

President Joe Biden waves alongside his son Hunter Biden after attending mass at Holy Spirit Catholic Church in Johns Island, South Carolina, on Aug. 13, 2022. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images)

Twitter ‘Worked With Pentagon’

Files released earlier this month showed how the FBI worked to discredit the Biden laptop report and prevent it from spreading on the platform in October 2020, just weeks ahead of the general election that year.

Others showed how the FBI pressured Twitter to find evidence of foreign influence and sources of disinformation and to take action against specific accounts.

Files released on Dec. 21 and reported on by journalist Lee Fang detailed how Twitter had “quietly aided the Pentagon’s covert online psyop campaign” aimed at swaying opinion in the Middle East, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.

According to those files, Twitter worked with the Pentagon despite claiming that it makes “concerted efforts to detect and thwart government-backed platform manipulation.”

“Despite promises to shut down covert state-run propaganda networks, Twitter docs show that the social media giant directly assisted the U.S. military’s influence operations,” wrote investigative journalist Fang of The Intercept.

“Behind the scenes, Twitter gave approval and special protection to the U.S. military’s online psychological influence ops,” Fang continued, pointing to social media accounts and online personas created by the U.S. military.

Twitter’s headquarters in San Francisco, Calif., on April 27, 2022. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

FBI Weighs in on Twitter Files

In a statement following the release of the Twitter files, the FBI said: “The correspondence between the FBI and Twitter show nothing more than examples of our traditional, longstanding, and ongoing federal government and private sector engagements, which involve numerous companies over multiple sectors and industries. As evidenced in the correspondence, the FBI provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers.”

“The men and women of the FBI work every day to protect the American public,” the statement continued. “It is unfortunate that conspiracy theorists and others are feeding the American public misinformation with the sole purpose of attempting to discredit the agency.”

Further files were published on Dec. 25 by Taibbi detailing how the FBI allegedly acted “as doorman to a vast program of social media surveillance and censorship, encompassing agencies across the federal government—from the State Department to the Pentagon to the CIA.”

Taibbi explained that Twitter had “so much contact with so many agencies” that executives lost track of the communications. The meetings usually centered on “foreign matters,” according to Tabbi, including topics such as misinformation regarding Ukraine and COVID-19 vaccines.

“Despite its official remit being ‘Foreign Influence,’ the FITF [the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force] and the [San Francisco] FBI office became a conduit for mountains of domestic moderation requests, from state governments, even local police,” Taibbi said.

House Republicans have since suggested they will launch an investigation into the FBI’s interactions with Twitter.

When Musk was asked on Saturday if he suspected that the FBI played a role in flagging content for companies to take down, he noted that the content that was being flagged had “nothing to do with like, terrorism,” adding that “they literally flagged satire.”

It’s all over. The Liz Cheney January 6 Committee has referred criminal charges to the Department of Justice because President Trump did an insurrection. (Full disclosure: We didn’t even read the list of recommended charges, because we know it’s all fake.) So, that’s it. Donald Trump will Never Be President. Again.

If it feels like you’ve heard someone mention that before in the past, you have. Many times. Which probably means it’s only a matter of time before we start hearing that “the walls are closing in” and that it is “the beginning of the end” for Donald Trump.

The Conservative Treehouse had a very good take on this when the news from Liz Cheney’s soon-to-be-defunct committee. The entire mainstream media and the Democrat Party already declared Donald Trump to be an enemy of the state. And that’s why we elected him!

Most Americans have already shrugged and moved on from this latest fake news about the most popular American president since Teddy Roosevelt. We already know that Merrick Garland – a partisan hack who was thankfully kept off the Supreme Court – is going to arrest President Trump at some point in 2023. This will happen live and on camera, with CNN broadcasting it to the world.

On the one hand, this will further cement America’s descent into Third World banana republic territory. On the other – and it always amazes us that the Democrats don’t see this coming – it will make a martyr of President Trump and only increase his chances of reelection in 2024. If anyone thinks that this fake news is going to be the end of Donald Trump, let’s review some of the previous ridiculous attempts to get rid of him.

Trump was impeached for a phone call with the president of Ukraine. There was nothing wrong with that phone call, obviously. The shocking part was that the Deep State spied on Trump’s phone call and released it to the world. That attempt was a failure.

Trump was impeached again for supposedly fomenting an “insurrection” with no firearms. Mitch McConnell repeated this lie again this week, stating, “We all know who was responsible for January 6th.” That attempt was also a failure. (Oddly, McConnell voted against that impeachment when he thought the political winds were in his favor.)

But even prior to that, there were just so many fake news “scandals” that were supposed to be the beginning of the end for Trump.

After his first state dinner, CNN breathlessly reported that all the dinner guests got one scoop of ice cream for dessert. But President Trump got TWO SCOOPS. He was lucky to dodge another impeachment there.
When the president bragged that his 5-year-old grandson Jacob had assembled a LEGO White House replica all by himself, The Atlantic magazine dispatched a team – a team! – of reporters to see whether Trump was lying. “Did 5-year-old Jacob Trump REALLY assemble that LEGO White House replica by himself? Did he?!” Somehow, Trump’s political career survived that scandal.

How about Stormy Daniels, the porn starlet who claimed she had successfully extorted money from Trump ahead of the 2016 election? In 2022, Stormy finally admitted in court and under oath that she never slept with Donald Trump back in 2006 like she had claimed all along. (How stupid was Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen to pay her off in the first place?) Not even Stormy’s fake allegations were able to stop the Trump Train back in 2016.

This is why most Trump supporters didn’t even take the time to yawn or blink after the Liz Cheney Committee made its big announcement. We can already write the script. Trump’s enemies lied and the whole case will fall apart, and then we’ll elect Trump for a third time in a landslide in 2024.

Would you continue to watch our nation’s favorite pastime baseball if you knew every call by the umpires was only going to favor one team? Of course not. Nobody wants to watch a fixed game when they know the result has already been determined before the game was played.

But that’s how it is with the nation’s news media. It is one of the numerous reasons no one is watching the news anymore and it is also the cause behind the rising national discord.  Viewers know the stories are rigged for a liberal point of view. So, regardless if a news story is true, the information is not being trusted. With the press putting not only their thumb, but their entire body weight on the scale in favor of the far-left Democrats, there are no more umpires holding both teams accountable. That was the traditional role of the media and why both parties hated the media. But, not any longer. There stems the growing anger and vitriol we see daily.

Long gone are the days of news anchors like Walter Cronkite being called the “most trusted man in America.” With no umpires calling balls and strikes fairly, Democrats are allowed to get away with anything and everything while Republicans are tarred and feathered for jaywalking. There is no way to return to a civil debate over policy differences when one side is always favored and supported by the media, who are supposed to be our political umpires and be totally neutral.

The media has always had a left-leaning tilt, but now reporters have become Democrat operatives with absolutely no journalistic integrity. Since the days of Bill Clinton’s presidency, this problem has mainly been with the major media outlets and daily newspapers. But now, even the local media outlets are in the tank for the Democrats. For example, last fall in the Massachusetts’ Bristol County sheriff’s race, George Soros and his allies pumped in hundreds of thousands of dollars to defeat a pro-borders and pro-law and order sheriff. They worked hard to circumvent the Commonwealth’s financial disclosure laws. But when the dots were connected, the media turned a blind eye. Can you imagine if the Trump PAC had targeted the Democrat and funneled the money through four different organizations to avoid the exposure? We all know too well the media wrath the Republican would have faced. In response to the dead silence from the media on the Soros funding, the sheriff’s campaign launched ads exposing it. Liberals like Senators Ed Markey and Elizabeth Warren, who have a major problem telling the truth, called it a “dog whistle” ad.  What was the dog whistle? According to Democrats mentioning George Soros’ name is now considered anti-Semitic. With Warren and Markey making their phony allegations, of course, The Boston Globe jumped all over the story of antisemitism going even so far as to refer to Soros as a “Jewish philanthropist” as if he has had nothing to do with funding the progressive political movement here in the United States and abroad. They never mention his far-left activities are considered so extreme that both Poland and Hungary outlawed his ability to make donations in those nations or that many of his candidates here face recalls.

While the Globe’s leanings are well known, calling Soros a “Jewish philanthropist” really took the cake. They proved once and for all, there is absolutely no glimmer of hope of ever having a rational conversation or a reasonable story from that paper.

But the problem did not end with the Globe. The left-leaning has now infiltrated small-town papers where they hide stories from the public like it is Hunter Biden’s laptop. In that same sheriff’s race, his Democrat challenger was found by the Massachusetts Labor Board to have harassed a firefighter’s wife as mayor. The decision against the Democrat mayor arrived 15 days before the election and during the middle of early voting, so it should have been front-page news. Rather than the media doing their jobs, the local papers ignored the story! Now had that been a Republican, what do you think would have happened? Wall-to-wall coverage of course. Fortunately, one radio station ran with the news. When it was brought to the attention to the local papers, they still did not cover it. We are left to conclude the media is only concerned when a woman says a Republican harassed her. It is OK when a Democrat does it. Being persistent, the campaign called the papers asking why no coverage? One of the reporters said they had no clue about the ruling despite it being on the radio. That reporter is sure to win a Pulitzer. However, that same paper picked up Warren’s and Markey’s dog whistle allegations about George Soros on Twitter within 30 minutes. So, the sheriff was falsely labeled anti-Semitic for exposing the truth on Soros while the Democrat mayor was given a free pass on threatening a woman.

Unfortunately, the heavy slant doesn’t end in the news department for the local papers. In another race, Democrats were allowed to run attack ads while the Republicans were only allowed to run positive ads. That’s right, GOP candidates were not allowed to attack their Democrat opponents even with paid advertising. How is that for freedom of speech? And being unbiased?

We all know the media bias, but we can no longer just say that’s the way it is. We need to take action on many different fronts to level the playing field with earned media.

They told me that if I took the red pill I would be able to see reality – the truth of what is really going on around us. Well, I just happened to have a red pill and I took it. Like traveling through time, things rushed forward, I grew dizzy, and then I saw things around me become crystal clear!

Suddenly, I could see that the American people, and their every action, are being ruled, regulated, restricted, licensed, registered, directed, checked, inspected, measured, numbered, counted, rated, stamped, censured, authorized, admonished, refused, prevented, drilled, indoctrinated, monopolized, extorted, robbed, hoaxed, fined, harassed, disarmed, dishonored, fleeced, exploited, assessed, and taxed to the point of suffocation and desperation.

And then, more details started shooting out like fireworks! Policies. Politicians. Pronouncements. Power grabs. Everyday governments, at all levels, grows more out of control, more intrusive in our personal lives, more of a threat to private property – all in total and flagrant disregard of the expressed will of the electorate.

Al Gore warned of a “wrenching transformation of society.” That transformation just happens to be a clever mix of fascism, socialism and corporatism. It’s not communism. Perhaps a better term would be “common-ism.” Common borders; common currencies; common property – Common-ism.

The process by which it’s implemented creates a matrix of locked away land — or severe land use controls; control of energy and energy production; control of transportation; control of industry; control of food production; control of development; control of water availability; and control of population size and growth.

Always in the past there have been forces seeking domination over others. Kings saw it as their duty. Megalomaniacs like Napoleon, Hitler, and Stalin lusted for the control and power to satisfy their hatred, mistrust, and insecurities. They sent armies. They tortured, killed, and subjugated their enemies through force.

However, today, as I can now clearly see through my improved red pill vision, the forces we face are much more diabolical. These modern-day power mongers have found a way to keep their aggression under wraps, out of sight from those they intend to conquer, until it is too late. No armies in the field. No shots fired. Instead, the intended victims quietly pull in the Trojan Horse and celebrate its arrival.

The plan is to organize the world under a single unifying plan, accepted by nearly everyone as fact and necessary. Acceptance of that plan has nearly every nation voluntarily surrendering independence and sovereignty to the global aggressors. Most are even raising money to help pay for the aggressor’s system of control. These new rulers issue exact orders to be followed by all, gaining more and more power with each dictate. People now are voluntarily forgetting their history and rejecting their culture. “Was it not always so?” they will later ask.

What could be such a threat, so powerful that the entire world would lie down to accept such global servitude? How about the threat of Environmental Armageddon! We must save the planet!

What if you dared to oppose such a plan? “I’m free! I’m independent! I have rights,” you would claim as you held up your copy of the Constitution.

Of course, to oppose such a plan is a direct threat to humanity. The mob, fearing such dangerous thoughts, would surround you and rip up your Constitution as it shouted, “It doesn’t matter how many rights you think you have if you don’t have a planet to stand on! Only selfish zealots who refuse to give up their creature comforts would oppose efforts to save Mother Earth!”

Well, I’ve taken the red pill and I can now tell you that it’s no secret. The aggressors have written down every detail of their plan and have told us in their own words how it’s to work. But those who have taken the blue pill refuse to see its threat. Let me pull back the curtain for those who don’t/won’t see.

What do they call this new diabolical tool that now leads the forces of global control over all humanity which is quickly invading every single level of our government, our communities, and our neighborhoods? Its name is Sustainable Development.

Sustainable Development involves a progressive transformation of the economy and society. It is based on international interdependence and redistribution of wealth. It demands that we all live on less. It opposes free enterprise and demands its destruction. Instead it merges environmental policy with economics in decision making — with nature always overriding man.

David Brower of the Sierra Club made it all pretty clear when he said, “The goal now is a socialist redistributionist society, which is nature’s proper steward and society’s only hope.”

Maurice Strong, the Chairman of the 1992 Earth Summit left no doubt of the Sustainable Development goal when he said “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrial nations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” At that Earth Summit, 50,000 delegates agreed to support the agenda to achieve the goal – it was called Agenda 21 – the “Comprehensive Blueprint for the Reorganization of Human Society.” Since then, it has been updated and detailed, first under Agendas 2030 and then the Green New Deal. Today, they are aggressively moving under the banner of the Great Reset.

Sustainable Development is the policy for achieving that agenda. It calls for the elimination of free markets, national sovereignty and independence, and the elimination of private property ownership. It certainly calls for redistribution of wealth and a huge reduction of human populations. Some have called for reductions as high as six billion people.

The Sustainable shock troops – private, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have flooded governments at every level pushing their unending flow of legislation – all designed to regulate nearly every human action. They put controls on how and where we can build our homes. Controls on small farmers over what crops they can grow and how they will grow them; and they imposed controls on our own private transportation decisions. Cars are their enemy because it gives us freedom of movement.

As property rights are being destroyed the wealth of our nation has begun to diminish. There is no doubt that Maurice Strong’s goal of collapsing our nation is well underway.

The issue is so vast and overwhelming that people rightfully have trouble wrapping their heads around it. It encompasses every aspect of our lives, from housing, to jobs, to education, to healthcare, to gun control, and even if we are allowed to keep living.

Specifically, Sustainable Development is an all-out attack on private property. Private property is in their way as they sit behind closed doors to make plans for your future.

A few years ago, former New York mayor Bill DeBlasio openly revealed their goal when he said this in an interview in New York Magazine: “What’s been hardest is the way our legal system is structured to favor private property. I think people all over the city, of every background, would like to have the city government be able to determine which building goes where, how high it will be, who gets to live in it, and what the rent will be.” That’s a pretty raw look behind the scenes. He is telling you exactly what they want. Total control over how and where you will live.

In every community today, planners and independent NGO groups have surrounded your local governments to enforce such plans. You will hear them speak of the need for well controlled planning for your community’s future. It’s necessary, they say, to make sure everything is well ordered. Otherwise, they warn – we will have “chaotic growth.”

If you are one of the dedicated activists who have actually attended local planning meetings – see if this quote sounds familiar to what you have heard there: “The chaotic growth of cities will be replaced by a dynamic system of urban settlement…The region is formed by the economic interdependence of its development. The region has a single system of transportation, a centralized administration, and a united system of education and research.” This quote was written by a Soviet Russian architect named Alexei Gutnov, published in a 1968 book entitled, “The Ideal Communist City.” Could it be that Sustainable Development really is an extension of the master plan for the ideal communist city?

Make no mistake, Sustainable Development, using the threat of Environmental Armageddon as its rallying cry – is the totalitarian’s dream weapon to conquer the world’s freest society. It is an international scheme disguised as national and local policy, created to reign in the radical ideas of individualism, and personal property ownership, as well as to “harmonize” all nations under a central, global control.

The main question of the day – as our eyes are opened to the problem – What do we do about it? So many don’t know where to even start to fight back. The issue is massive. People get overwhelmed – where to start?

Let me make it as simple as possible. There are three basic tactics that have been used to enforce it:

1. Destroy private property ownership and control.
2. Impose non-elected regional councils, taking government further away from the people.
3. Feed the plan with federal grant money.

The truth is Sustainable Development cannot be enforced without destroying property rights. So that’s the place to start pushing back. Stand up for property rights and we can stop sustainable development and put the cork back in government growth.

You must understand – your fight must start on the local level – not in Washington, DC. At the local level is where we can have the biggest impact. Succeed there and then the issue will rise to the state level and then eventually to the national level. But it will take trench warfare in every city council meeting and in every county commission meeting.

Number one goal – stop your officials from taking the grants! Grants from federal agencies, including EPA, HUD, and Department of Transportation are not free money. They come with very specific strings attached for compliance. Those strings are tied to creating the regulations that enforce Sustainable Development. Many of those grants were actually written by the NGOs and they know exactly which grant to apply for to impose such policies. Most local elected representatives are unaware of these hidden strings. To cut federal control in your city – don’t take the grants!

Number two – get a clear definition of property rights so you have a platform to stand on. Here it is: “Property in a thing consists not merely in its ownership and possession, but in the unrestricted right of use, enjoyment, and disposal. Anything which destroys any of the elements of property, to that extent, destroys the property itself. The substantial value of property lies in its use. If the right of use be denied, the value of the property is annihilated and ownership is rendered a barren right.” Washington State Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Sanders. Private property ownership and its unrestricted use is the foundation for a nationwide revolution of Freedom. Demand it!

Meanwhile, we have many wonderful elected officials in city councils, county commissions, and state legislatures. But here again, usually they are outnumbered and unable to be effective. There is a way for them, even in a minority, to make a difference.

In your state legislature, imagine if you had ten good members who wanted to fight to protect property rights, but they are outnumbered and shut down at every turn. Here are some ideas on how they can turn that around.

First, those in the minority (meaning they actually support the ideas of limited government and personal freedom) can form a freedom coalition among them, pledging to support limited government, free enterprise, property rights and personal freedom (the three pillars of freedom).

Next, those in the Freedom Coalition can reach out to like minded legislators in neighboring states and encourage them to create their own Freedom Coalition in their state. Let us say they are successful in organizing freedom Coalition in ten states.

Then, on the exact same day, at the exact same time, all of these legislators introduced the exact same bill, or set of bills, into their respective state legislative hoppers that call for limited government and property rights protection. Then, the Freedom Coalition members all hold a news conference at the exact same time in each of their ten states, announcing their actions.

Meanwhile, we have local activists in each of those states ready to support that legislation – plus we also have a network of patriot radio shows and social media ready to launch support.

These actions would gain national, if not international, media coverage. It would succeed in changing the national debate and start a serious movement demanding limited government and property rights protection. It would lead millions to take the red pill!

Most important to our movement is to know that these exact tactics can also work in city councils and state legislatures, and, in some cases, local school boards.

We have to start putting elected officials’ feet to the fire. Do they or do they not support your right to be secure in your home, free of the fear that private developers and greedy politicians are going to take it at their whim?

The bottom line is this. If we can protect private property in your community, then we can preserve freedom in our nation. Obviously this is a huge job. It will not be settled nor won over night. It will be hard. But is there anything more precious than your freedom?

Imagine those who fought in the American Revolution and the incredible odds they faced as they took on the most powerful army in the world. So great was the challenge and the danger of total destruction of their lives that it caused Thomas Paine to write these words: “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will in this crisis shrink from the service of their country, but he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have the consolation with us that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheaply, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives anything its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its good; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated.”

General George Washington ordered that Paine’s words be read aloud to the entire Continental Army. He wanted them all to hear what was truly at stake. He wanted them to see what would happen if they didn’t take the fight seriously. He wanted them to know the difference between the sunshine patriot and the dedicated freedom fighter.

On that day, when Washington had those precious words read to his army – they all took the red pill. And from that day forward the Continental Army would fight on to the shocking victory that all the experts insisted couldn’t be won. Now I have given you the red pill. Now you know what must be done to take back our property and restore our Republic.

Sam Adams told us how to win with our small band of patriots. He said “It does not take a majority to prevail. But rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires of Freedom in the minds of men.”

In the 1980s Ronald Reagan was about the only person in government who refused to accept the idea that communism and the Soviet Union were permanent and inevitable. He stood up to it and shocked the world when the Berlin Wall came crashing down – along with the Soviet Union. He knew the truth and he fought until he won.

Today, you and I need to know that the tyranny of Sustainable Development is not inevitable. It can and it will be stopped. Ignore your nay-saying neighbor – the sunshine patriot. The one who only gets into the battle when it is already won – when it’s become fashionable. The one who laughed at you for fighting when there seemed to be no hope. They will not help you win. They will only gladly demand their share of the spoils afterwards.

Now, today, dedicate yourself to the fight – regardless of what others say or think. Understand that the perpetrators of the radical environmental movement are not protectors of the planet, they are destroyers of human society. We are fighting for our right to exist.

Several countries around the world have already banned the Covid shots for citizens in certain age groups. They’re not admitting the reason why (which is because all-cause mortality has shot through the roof), but at least they’re banning the mRNA technology from Pfizer and Moderna.

The Biden regime is now quadrupling down on urging everyone of all ages to take as many shots as possible. It’s beyond parody at this point. Biden’s Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary is now urging people to get booster shots every two months!

Here’s what HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said this week: “An updated COVID vaccine can help protect you from the worst outcomes of COVID. If it’s been over 2 months since your last dose, make a plan to get one now.”

Two months since your last dose? So… people now have to get six shots per year in order to be “protected” from Covid, which is really no protection at all? CDC Director Rochelle Walensky is now double vaxed and double boosted, and she caught Covid within 30 days of her most recent booster shot. Maybe she should get 12 shots per year!

The vaccine fanatics in the US government just can’t seem to get their story straight. Here’s what Kamala Harris tweeted just one day before the HHS Secretary announced that people now need 6 shots per year to protect against Covid: “One shot, once a year—that’s all most people will need to stay protected from COVID year-long.”

So, how did the science change in literally one day? Harris tweets that people need one shot per year, and the very next day, Becerra announces that people need six shots per year.

If you missed the news earlier this year, the UK banned the shots for everyone under the age of 12. Denmark banned the shots for everyone under 50. And Australia banned them for basically everyone under 65.

None of these countries are calling it a ban, but it’s a ban. They’re all saying, “We don’t recommend these shots for people in these age groups, and therefore we will no longer allow your doctor to give you the shots or a booster shot if you’re in these groups.” That’s still a ban.

The reasons for these bans, which more countries will likely start implementing soon, are three-fold.

1. The shots are making a tremendous amount of people sick.
2. There has been a worldwide fertility crisis since the shots were rolled out in 2021; birth rates have plummeted by an average of 15% in countries with high vaccination rates.
3. All-cause mortality has shot through the roof in every country with high vaccination rates – including the US.

Here are a few of the prominent deaths of relatively young and healthy people we’ve seen just in recent days: 53-year-old celebrity personal trainer Eric Fleischman, dead at 53. Country music singer Jake Flynt, dead at 37. South Korean comic book illustrator Kim Jung Gi, dead at 47. Tiantian Kullander, founder of the cryptocurrency Amber Group, dead at 30. John Meringolo, the attorney who represented We Build the Wall in court, dead at 48. Philadelphia filmmaker Frank Tartaglia, dead at 45 on Thanksgiving. St. Ambrose University basketball player Patrick Torrey, dead at 22.

I could keep going, but you get the point. All of these young, working-aged people “died suddenly,” usually from heart problems.

This was not happening prior to the rollout of the Covid shots, which the Biden regime now wants everyone to take six times per year. The good news is that as we keep getting the word out about how dangerous these shots really are, fewer and fewer people are willing to keep getting themselves injected with them.