1

Contact Tracing in the Circus of Robots

By Jon  Rappoport | No More Fake News

“Hi Hank. So glad your deli is finally open. I’ll have the Fauci baloney on rye with apocalypse sauce and extra Birx pickles on the side…you know, the sandwich with the tiny microchip in it…”

So I chose a state at random and started to look at their rollout of contact tracing. The first group I found—what were they? A non-profit, a government agency, a bunch of nameless robots with cushy jobs pulling down secure paychecks for the rest of their lives?

Finally, on their site, way down on a page, I saw references to a CEO. They’re a company. A business. Their new money maker is hiring, training, and launching contact tracers.

They’re collaborating with two other groups I’ve never heard of, and all three groups are plugged into state public health officials.

It’s as if these people want to conceal themselves, or perhaps more accurately, distance themselves from the population, in their “vital work.”

“Thanks for getting in touch with your question, Mr. Citizen. Actually, that contact tracing issue comes under the CVDR. You can contact them at their office. They may in turn refer you to the BGTD or the GKTH2V…”

Vagueness is the cardinal feature of the whole contact tracing program. Intentionally so. Words like “could” and “may” show up at key junctures. We could do this, we may do that.

For example, when some pleasant android of the State shows up at your home and knocks on the door, because you shopped at a hole-in- the-wall hardware store where an employee was later found to be “positive for,” or “infected by,” or “sick from” (which one is it?) the virus, and this contact tracer asks you about your health, and asks you to get tested, what happens if you say NO?

Are you put into isolation in your home, alone? For 10 days? Fourteen days? Do other people in the home have to leave? Do you have to leave? Do they take you to some fleabag hotel prison and put you in a room and deny you visitors? If so, for how long? Suppose, while in the fleabag, you still refuse to get tested? Do they keep you there for a year? The rest of your life? Suppose you start coughing in the middle of the night because the room is full of mold? Do they break in and hold you down and take a swab and test it and then ship you with your brand new false-positive result to a hospital and put you on a ventilator? Meanwhile, are your children sent to live with relatives, or are they hustled into foster care? And if the vaccine has been approved, do they shoot you with it whether you consent or refuse? If they let you refuse, do they extend your stay at the fleabag hotel? For how long?

State governors are running the following psyop: “Yes, we’re opening up the economy, but this is CONTINGENT on doing more and more contact tracing and testing.” On a national level, Pelosi tried to make that point the other day, but her Thorazine kept kicking in and caused gaps in her speech. Finally, she managed to remember—“It’s the three t’s; tracing, testing, and treatment.” Really. She and Joe Biden should run together on the Mental Lapse ticket in the fall.

Go ahead. Read the CDC guidelines on contact tracing. Read HR 6666 and the new Hero Bill. Try to figure out EXACTLY how the tracing program works. Count how many holes there are in the Swiss Cheese.

The bottom line is: they’ll do what they can get away with. They’ll make up reasons for doing it.

They’ll tap into every latent little fascist in your community and put them to work tracing and snitching and testing and shooting up as many people as possible. Including you.

“Hi, Jolene. What are you doing here? I thought you were cleaning teeth at Dr. Homunculus’ office? What? You’re a contact tracer now? It’s not enough to pretend you’re a Hell’s Angel chick on weekends? You’re now an agent of the State? What’s that patch on your sleeve? Didn’t the Stasi wear that in East Germany?”

In India, the government has released a contact tracing app. It’s voluntary and mandatory. In “containment areas,” you have to have it. Apparently, it’s been accepted on a hundred million cell phones so far. Well, it would be. Don’t leave home without it. Otherwise, you can’t gain access to work, or stores. India is chasing China for most-repressive-government awards.

Of course, it’s happening in America, too. “We’d love to get you on board. Install our new app and let us spy on you 24/7. It’s fun. We’re all in this spying together. It’s Heaven on Earth. By the way, your employer won’t let you work at the office without the app.”

Here, from the CDC, are a few statements about contact tracing.

“Based on our current knowledge, a close contact is someone who was within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes starting from 48 hours before illness onset until the time the patient is isolated. They should stay home, maintain social distancing, and self-monitor until 14 days from the last date of exposure.”

The precision is breathtaking, isn’t it? And they’re talking about “close contacts.” Do the same rules apply to “ordinary contacts?” They’re really going to try to estimate the “48 hours before” and the “15 minutes?” Does the contact who maintains social distancing at home stay at least six feet away from other family members at all times for 14 days? The answer: yes. Are you kidding?

“Contacts are encouraged to stay home and maintain social distance from others (at least 6 feet) until 14 days after their last exposure, in case they also become ill. They should monitor themselves by checking their temperature twice daily and watching for cough or shortness of breath [hopefully inducing fear and consequent illness]. To the extent possible, public health staff should check in with contacts to make sure they are self-monitoring and have not developed symptoms. Contacts who develop symptoms should promptly isolate themselves and notify public health staff. They should be promptly evaluated for infection and for the need for medical care.”

So, again…just because you came in contact with someone who is “infected,” you need to self-isolate at home, more than six feet apart from family members, for 14 days? Yes.

“If possible, contacts should be asked to voluntarily stay home, monitor themselves, and maintain social distancing from others. However, health departments have the authority to issue legal orders of quarantine, should the situation warrant that measure.”

Wait. What’s the difference between self-isolating at home and quarantine? Well, quarantine must mean everyone except “the contact” clears out of the house and stays elsewhere; or the contact is taken from the house and put in a “facility.”

And under what circumstances would quarantine be ordered? Let’s see. Refusal to get tested. Refusal to maintain the six-feet rule. Refusal to stay home. Refusal to have a cell phone with the tracing app installed. Refusal to take the vaccine. That would be my surmise.

Frankly, I prefer a Mussolini approach, if you’re going to install contact tracing:

“Listen up, everyone. The researchers never used proper procedures to prove a new virus existed in the first place. That, and the fact that the diagnostic tests churn out false positives like Niagara Falls in the rainy season, make all case numbers and death numbers meaningless. The whole COVID narrative is a fairy tale. No need for masks, gloves, social distancing, or lockdowns. Get it? But we want to know everything about you 24/7, so we’re doing contact tracing. This is a police state. Cooperate, or pay the price.”

Contact tracing is just the forward edge of a MUCH larger program of surveillance.

In his devastating article, “The Brave New World of Bill Gates and Big Telecom,” May 8, 2020, Robert F Kennedy, Jr. writes: “Suppose that computers discover your [anti-lockdown] beach trip by tracking your movements using a stream of information from your cell phone, your car, your GPS, facial recognition technology integrated with real-time surveillance from satellites, mounted cameras, and implanted chips. Desk-bound prosecutors or robots will notify you of your violation by text while simultaneously withdrawing your $1,000 penalty in cryptocurrency from your payroll account. Welcome to Bill Gates’ America. It’s right around the corner.”

“Recently, Bill Gates announced his financial support for a $1 billion plan to blanket Earth in video surveillance satellites. The company, EarthNow, will launch 500 satellites to live-stream monitor almost every ‘corner’ of the Earth, providing instantaneous video feedback with only a one-second delay. According to Wikipedia, the company expects its customers to include ‘governments and large enterprises.’ 5G Antennas¬¬¬ deploying a vast array of ground-based 5G spy antennas. Through his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Gates purchased 5.3 million Crown Castle shares currently worth a billion dollars. The Foundation’s second-largest tech holding after Microsoft, Crown Castle owns 5G infrastructure in every major U.S. market. It operates and leases more than 40,000 cell towers, 65,000 small cell nodes which are the central infrastructure for 5G and 75,000 route miles of fiber to every major U.S. market that, instead of going to your home, providing you safe, fast, wired internet, has been confiscated to connect 5G cell towers.”

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




Krystal and Saagar React: MSNBC Presses Biden on Allegation, Misses the Mark

By Krystal and Saagar | The Hill

Editor’s Note: Here is another video about the sexual allegations against Joe Biden. The video highlights the differential treatment given to a Republican Supreme Court candidate and an establishment Democratic Candidate for the presidency. The video points out how the media has given little attention to this story, how #MeToo advocates have given Biden a pass without any appreciable investigation or inquiry. Even if the media wants to let this story go, on Biden’s word alone, you can be sure President Trump will not do so. We will be hearing much more about this story as the election season moves forward. 

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




Sign to Join CHD’s Submission to Stop FCC Rule Allowing 5G & Satellites Antennas on Homes

CLN Editor’s note: Just when some of us thought 5G mania had already gotten out of control, not only for its tremendous health concerns and cluttering of our roads and streets (with many 5G boxes), we now find out the FCC wants to make matters worse by incentivizing our neighbors to put installations on their homes. You wouldn’t tolerate your neighbor throwing garbage into your yard; if approved, those same neighbors can send additional dangerous waves into your and your families living areas, compounding the harmful effects of this scary technology. Please check out the article below, and take action on this important issue.

What is OTARD and Why We Must Take Action

The FCC is about to expand its ‘Over The Air Reception Devices’ (OTARD) rule (WT 19-71), to allow wireless companies to install 5G and other cell towers and transmitting devices (not only receiving devices as the name suggests) on homes. The wireless companies will be allowed to enter into a contract with your neighbor to install a cell tower on their home, without the need for a permit, without asking for neighbors’ input or permission and without any considerations to a neighbor’s disability, property values or other needs.

The OTARD rule expansion will allow a “Wireless Wild West” for 5G infrastructure and antenna deployment which will include the 1,000,000 antennas to provide the ground infrastructure for the satellites. The expansion of the OTARD rule will violate the Constitution and upend long-standing common law personal and property rights. The FCC  does not have the authority to override people’s rights to bodily autonomy and their property-based rights to “exclude” the wireless radiation emitted by third parties from their home.

CHD’s Action – Ex-Parte Submission to the FCC

To stop the FCC’s OTARD rule change and make it clear that We Do Not Consent to this rule and do not consent to be radiated in our homes, on April 16, 2020, the Children’s Health Defense submitted an “Ex-Parte” objection to the FCC. The Ex-Parte submission attacks the legality of the OTARD rule change and explains the legal ramifications should the FCC adopt the rule. It is time to put a stop to the FCC’s taking of our basic civil and human rights.

Press HERE to read CHD’s Ex-Parte Submission to the FCC.

Take Action – Join CHD’s Action By Simply Signing Your Name

We want to maximize both the impact of CHD’s Ex-Parte submission and the chance that the FCC will decide not to move forward with the OTARD rule change without further legal action on our part. Therefore, we need YOU and others to join this submission and tell the FCC “I Do Not Consent”. For too long we have allowed the FCC and the Telecom companies to take our rights and harm us. No more. We want the FCC to realize that its actions and abuse of power will meet strong and effective resistance and that we are going to be proactive in protecting and enforcing our civil and human rights. By signing the declaration below, you will be preserving your right to sue the FCC for its action or to join a legal action by CHD.

Help Us Stop The FCC’s OTARD Rule And The Wireless Wild West!

Declaration of NO Consent to be Exposed to Wireless radiation in Your Home on General Grounds and/or by reason of being injured from Wireless Radiation

I, the undersigned, do not consent to be exposed to wireless radiation and join the 4/16/2020 Ex-Parte submission of the Children’s Health Defense in WT 19-71. I declare as follows:

Objection on general grounds – I do not consent to radiation crossing my property boundaries and entering my home. I am asserting my Constitutional rights to privacy and bodily autonomy and my property- based right to exclude others. I consider RF emissions to be a noxious nuisance. I will consider non-consensual exposure in my home to be a battery. I assert all my rights under law, and demand that the Commission not amend its rules to allow people to place antennas on their property and extend emissions onto my property and into my body. If the Commission does so, I reserve my right to take legal action against the service provider, the Commission and each individual Commissioner.

And / Or,

Objection by reason of being injured – I do not consent to radiation crossing my property boundaries and entering my home as I and/or my child have been injured from wireless radiation and/or exposure to this radiation is aggravating my and/or my child’s medical condition. My and/or my child’s sickness is impairing my and/or my child’s ability to function and I and/or my child are therefore entitled to accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and/or under the Fair Housing Act. Anyone who irradiates my home and my body and/or my child’s body against our will is violating my and/or my child’s rights under the Constitution, the ADA and the FHA.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.

 




The Coronavirus Conspiracy: How COVID-19 Will Seize Your Rights & Destroy Our Economy

By Brian Rose & David Icke | London Real TV

Editor’s Note: Below is one of the most popular videos out today. The current pandemic and the unprecedented shutdown of most of the world leaves us with many questions – most of them beginning with “Why…?” David Icke has a perspective, especially considering that he has been talking about things like this, and the people at the top making decisions about our lives and livelihoods, for about 30 years. You may not agree with everything he says, but he gives us some answers and food for thought and discussion during these trying times.

The video is at the below web address:

https://londonreal.tv/the-coronavirus-conspiracy-how-covid-19-will-seize-your-rights-destroy-our-economy-david-icke/

Below is the interview transcript, courtesy of www.medium.com

Brian: The world is changing. Inspiration is everywhere. It has never been so easy to connect, share, and bring people together. We’re learning from others and finding the best in ourselves, challenging our beliefs, sharing our vulnerability, overcoming our fears, transforming ourselves so we can transform the world. How far can we go?

This is London Real. I am Brian Rose. My guest today is David Icke, the English writer and public speaker, known since the 1990s as a professional conspiracy researcher, calling yourself a full-time investigator into who and what is really controlling the world. You are the author of 21 books and 10 DVDs and have lectured in over 25 countries, speaking live for up to 10 hours to huge audiences, filling stadiums like Wembley Arena.

You are here for the second occasion today to talk about the COVID-19 pandemic and global lockdown, the looming economic recession, the impact of 5G technology, and the violations of our rights and freedoms of speech. David, welcome back to London Real.

David: Thank you, Brian.

Brian: It’s been 19 days since you last came on the show. Since then, we are told that millions of people have been infected worldwide with this disease, with deaths now approaching 100,000. Nearly three billion people are locked down in their homes. Markets are off 30%. And a global recession is pending.

Our last conversation went, quite frankly, viral, David — over seven million views that I can count, the most comments of any episode in London Real history. Which tells me one thing, the people wanna hear your opinion, and people wanna hear the truth.

David, as you know, I don’t agree with everything you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. And at a time in this country when the regulator Ofcom is banning media outlets from talking about the, quote-unquote, 5G-coronavirus conspiracy theories, I get very concerned.

A lot of people told me not to do this interview today, again. But in America, where I’m from, the First Amendment of the Constitution is the right to free speech and freedom of the press. And that right is being violated right now as we speak. George Orwell, in his famous book 1984, said, “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” And, David, that’s what we’re gonna do today.

Honestly, I didn’t even know if we’d make it to this moment. I thought we might be shut down today. Where do we start? Is there a virus?

David: Since we last spoke, Brian, I’ve spent every waking moment, which has been most of every 24 hours, devouring information from virologists, specialists, doctors all around the world, in America, in Germany, in Austria, Italy, who would never be allowed to get near the BBC or CNN because they are demolishing the official story of this hoax.

And if people go to davidicke.com when this interview is over, I’ve put a special posting of a series of videos. It says, “For viewers to London Real” — a series of videos by these doctors and others, who in their various ways support all the elements of what I’m gonna say today. So, this is not me pulling it out the ether. There’s no point in that. What’s the point? You either deal with facts and what people who should know say, or you don’t.

So, this is the headline to start with, which will shock a lot of people, I’m sure. There is no COVID-19. It doesn’t exist. And I’m going to explain today why that is and how therefore a pandemic perception could be pulled off.

Now, one of the doctors that I’ve been looking at is called Andrew Kaufman. He is a medical doctor in America. He works in psychiatry now.

[00:05:05] And he, like a lot of these doctors you’ll never see on the BBC, started looking at the sequence of events that’s led us to where we are now. And this is how it went.

People started getting ill for whatever reason in China. And the Chinese authorities took genetic material from the fluid in the lungs of people who got ill, only a few, a very small number. And they found what they — what we would call genetic material. It wasn’t an isolated virus. It was genetic material, which can be there from a long list of causes, including lung cancer, by the way. And they decided that what was causing the illness was a various which has got the name COVID-19. But at no time did they isolate that so-called virus from the rest of the genetic material, much of which will be found in the bodies of most people.

So, they start out, before they started testing, diagnosing people in China from symptoms. And you will have heard this constantly recurring theme about coronavirus or COVID-19 — because there’s lost of coronaviruses — COVID-19 symptoms. And you’ll hear this recurring line, “Flu-like symptoms.”

Now, these flu-like symptoms can be caused by a great range of different causes, but they decided on symptoms, which could come from many different causes. But those symptoms were now COVID-19. So, you had flu-like symptoms, COVID-19. [Fake cough], COVID-19! And so, the numbers got bigger and bigger. And when we get to 5G, there is another element to this which I also want to talk about in relation to China and in relation to the West as well.

But they then develop this test or start using this test to test for COVID-19, and it’s called an RT-PCR test. And, wait for it, it doesn’t test for COVID-19. It tests for the genetic material, which has loads of different content caused by many, many, many different possible causes. And if you test positive for the genetic material, not COVID-19, you are diagnosed to have COVID-19. And if you die, to have died from it. Now, let’s look at this RT-PCR test.

It was developed, invented by a guy called Kary Mullis, a biochemist in America, in 1984. And it’s used to try to diagnose many things. The same test has been used to try to diagnose lung cancer. The same test of genetic material that they are saying, “You test positive, you’ve got COVID-19.”

Now, what did this Kary Mullis say, the inventor of the test? Oh, we must get more people tested of COVID-19! The inventor of the test, what did he say? “This test should not be used to diagnose infectious disease.” The inventor of it said that. What are they doing to tell us who has and has not got this so-called COVID-19? The test that he said shouldn’t be used for that very thing. So, you test for this genetic material, and you’ve got COVID-19. But there’s another part of this.

[00:10:10] What this test does is it amplifies the material. In other words, it makes it larger — keep it simple. And as it gets larger in the cycles of amplification, what you say is causing the disease gets bigger, and you can see it more. Or say you can. I’m gonna come to that in a second. But all the other content of the genetic material also gets amplified. And loads of this genetic material is already in the body of virtually everybody. And this is how the test works. You can fix the figures so easy like this.

You do, say, 30, 35 cycles of amplifications, you’re going to bring into the test positive a series of things within that genetic material that become there to be seen at that level. So, you’re going to get some positives, which you’re gonna call COVID-19, but you’re gonna get some negatives because you haven’t brought all that material into the testing process.

But you amplify the genetic material, say — I don’t know — 60 times, you have brought so much of the content of the genetic material to be entering the test process that, at that level of amplification, virtually everybody will test positive because all the genetic material that’s in most people’s body will now be testing positive in the test through this greater amplification.

This means that the number of cycles of amplification you use, say in different countries, dictates how many positive tests you get. And therefore, all you’ve gotta do is increase the amplification. You’re gonna get more and more positives. And you’re gonna call them COVID-19.

Brian: And amplification is how sensitive that test is.

David: Imagine you’ve got something the size of a pin, symbolically, pin head. You can’t really understand it because it’s so small. You amplify it, and it becomes much greater. And you can now start looking at different elements of it.

Brian: And that’s what the test does. It amplifies that.

David: It amplifies. Amplification.

Brian: Okay.

David: And another thing is that, in 1890, a guy called Robert Koch, who was a bacteriologist and a physician, he developed something called the Koch postulate. And these were four criteria for proving that an agent, a so-called infectious agent, is the cause of what you say it is.

This includes everyone who is subject to this agent has the same symptoms. Two, that you have isolated this agent, call it a virus, bacteria, whatever. You’ve isolated it, so there’s no other material, only that. So, there’s no contamination. There’s no false positives in the way I’ve described. You are only isolating that. But when you take that, and you, say, inject it into a living host, that host will get what you say that is causing. And when you’ve got that host, you are able, number four, to take that material you say is causing the illness, the infectious illness, out of the person and again inject it into someone else, and they will get it.

In terms of COVID-19, not one single one of those four Koch postulates — which have been used since 1890 by mainstream medicine the world over to prove that this is infecting and causing that — not one of them have been used and fulfilled, none of them.

[00:15:00] So, then we come to something else that Andrew Kaufman identified, which was a tremendous piece of observation and research. You can see it in his video on davidicke.com when this is over.

What happens when a cell gets poisoned is it secretes something called exosomes. This is part of the natural, everyday immune system response to poisoned cells. And these exosomes, as they are released — and they’re only released when the cell is poisoned. And it can be poisoned through many, many reasons. It can be toxicity. Wait for this one. It can be poisoned through stress and fear. Can you imagine the stress and fear that’s going on in the world now during this lockdown? It can be caused by disease, infection. And it can be caused by electromagnetic fields, which will become very relevant when we get into 5G.

So, these exosomes are released. And one of the roles of exosomes is poisoned cells warning other cells as they travel around, “There’s a problem. Get ready. Look, there’s a problem here.” So, all you have to do to get exosomes released is to have poisoned cells by these various reasons.

What Kaufman started looking at was — under the microscope — pictures of exosomes, what they look like. And then, he looked at an under-the-microscope picture of what is claimed to be COVID-19. These two were exactly the same. He then starts looking at the genetic makeup of the exosomes, which you will find in the lung fluid of people who have problems with their lungs because the problems are generating the release of exosomes. And he looked at the genetic makeup claimed for COVID-19. They are exactly the same in every relevant way. An exosome and so-called COVID-19 even lock into the same cell receptors as each other. They are, as Kaufman has clearly shown, the same thing.

So, what’s going on here is they’ve taken a natural response mechanism of the body, immune system, to poisonous cells and they’ve renamed it COVID-19. Now, this genetic material they’ve taken from the lungs of people and what is the basis of this test will contain, by its very nature, these exosomes. So, they’re finding a natural human immune system response mechanism, this secretion from poisoned cells, and they’re calling it COVID-19. And because anyone who has any level of cellular toxicity is going to produce these exosomes, then the potential for positive tests — yes, COVID-19, it’s a pandemic — is endless.

So, what has happened is it was decided in China — and by the way, if you get deeper into this — and I hope we will later about why this is being done. This global cult that I have been exposing for 30 years, that is pushing the world towards this global, fascist, Orwellian state, which I’ve been saying was coming for 30 years — hello, we’re here — has no borders.

[00:20:10] It operates in every country in the shadows. Politicians are just here today, gone tomorrow. That’s always there. China is one of its biggest centers, along with America, Israel, Britain, Germany, Italy. And so, just follow this sequence through.

They decide in China early on — and there’s a 5G element to this which we’ll get into later — that it’s a virus. They don’t isolate the virus. They test it. Or they diagnose it, first of all, only on symptoms. But then they start testing, and they use this test which is testing for genetic material, not COVID-19. And then, it starts moving out into the West.

And Western doctors, nurses, medical professionals, etc. are told this COVID-19 is moving out. World Health Organization, “It’s a pandemic!” And we’ll get into who owns the World Health Organization later. “And these are the symptoms.” So, what do they start doing? Anyone with flu-like symptoms now gets diagnosed COVID-19 purely on freaking symptoms. And so, the numbers start to go up.

The problem is that this is supposed to be a deadly virus, but there’s not enough people dying to justify that description. So, this is what they start doing. Anyone who gets ill for any reason whatsoever — by the way, even falling down the freaking stairs — and goes to hospital, they now get tested for COVID-19. Now, because they’re testing for genetic material, which is in lots of people’s bodies, they get lots of positives.

And although they’re in hospital for late-stage cancer, for heart disease and heart failure, and for other caused flu-like symptoms, if they’ve tested positive for COVID-19, when they die, they are diagnosed as having died officially from COVID-19. This is why you are having more and more people, families, loved ones saying, “My family member,” whatever, “has been diagnosed as having COVID-19, and they didn’t! They died from this. They died from that. They’ve had it for ages.”

Great example. For people around the world watching this, there was one time a famous comedian called Eddie Large in a comedy duo called Little and Large. And Eddie Large has had a heart problem for a while it seems. And he goes into hospital with heart failure. While he’s in hospital, he gets diagnosed with COVID-19 because they tested him. And when he died, the wording in the paper, papers, in the media was that Eddie Large died in hospital after testing positive for COVID-19. He died of a failing heart, but COVID-19 will be the diagnosis. And the numbers keep going up.

Brian: And you’re saying the total numbers of deaths in the world has not changed anomalously. But we’ve reclassified them as COVID-19 because they tested positive. And you said the language is interesting because they don’t say they died from COVID-19. They died after testing positive to COVID-19.

David: This is interesting. I’ve been making this point now for some many days. Watch the media language as they used with Eddie Large. Overwhelmingly, they’re not saying that this person or this number have died from COVID-19.Very difficult to die from something you can’t even prove exists.

[00:25:00] They say — this is the wording, and you see it repeated all the time — “This person or this number died after testing positive for COVID-19,” not that they died from it. But look at the implication. Oh, Eddie Large, he died from COVID-19. Oh, everyone’s getting it.

And so, you have control of the figures by the way you transfer symptoms from other causes to you’ve got COVID-19. You control the figures by the way you test, not for COVID-19, but for a genetic material. And you control the death figures by who you designate as died from COVID-19 when they’ve died from other things.

People are being designated to have died from COVID-19 who have late-stage cancer. And here’s a figure for you, Brian. This is official figures from the Italian medical establishment, what we would call in Britain the National Health Service. Ninety-nine percent of people who have died from COVID-19 in Italy — 99% — have had one, two, three, or more other health problems for which they were in hospital or for which they were suffering.

And so, it’s so easy to take people dying of other things and to then designate them COVID-19. This is not to say all the nurses and all the doctors are in on it. You only need a hierarchy to say this is what you have to do, and they do it. This is how it works. And you mentioned something very important.

The last time I looked. The death figures from all causes in Europe overall and in the United Kingdom had not risen compared with last year, etc., to the extent that even begins to encompass all the people we are told are dying from COVID-19. And the reason that is — but that could change for reasons I’ll come to when we get to 5G — the reason that is is vastly more people are not dying. They’re being redesignated to have died from COVID-19 when they’ve died from other things.

Now, let’s look at Lombardy, which is the center of the Italian outbreak, which has been such a focus of attention. And the rest of Europe in the Western world has been frightened to death. Oh, we could be Italy next.

Lombardy, which includes Milan, is notorious globally for its toxic, polluted air, just as Wuhan is and China is. And therefore, vastly more people die every year in Lombardy, not least from lung problems, than do in the rest of Italy. The last figures I saw, just a small few hundred under 100,000 people died in a year in Lombardy. The next second place Italian region, Lazio, was 57,000.

So, you have an area of Italy where loads of people die, not least from lung disease. And you have tremendous potential therefore to make this diagnostic leap which takes people dying of other things and makes it seem as if they’ve died from COVID-19. And therefore, you control the figures. And what you can do, you can test in a certain way. And you can diagnose in a certain way. And the figures go up. And then, when you diagnose and test in a different way — maybe you reduce the number of cycles of amplification of this genetic material that you’re using in the test — the figures go down.

[00:30:00] Have you noticed something, mate? We had in China this extraordinary reaction, the lockdown. They were building new hospitals in a week to 10 days to meet the absolute devastating crisis of this virus, right. In next to no time by comparison with where they were, those hospitals are closed.

The numbers have plummeted, they say. They’re now starting flights. The economy is reopening. People are going back out on the streets. What? What happened suddenly to change all that because it was suddenly?

But if you are testing people in a certain way, and you’re diagnosing people in a certain way — and we’re gonna bring 5G into this later on as well — then you change the diagnosis, and you change the way you’re testing, what happens to the numbers? They freaking plummet.

Now, another aspect of this, Brian, which is sickening beyond belief, but I’ve seen enough evidence that it’s true, from people that have contacted me. And people have even said things on social media about what’s happened to their loved ones. They want — I wanna say “they.” I mean this cult, which controls the pyramid of reaction. They obviously want as many dead people as possible that can be designated COVID-19 because that adds to this whole pandemic.

Brian: And we’re gonna talk about why later.

David: We are gonna talk about why because it’s very big and simple reason why. And it relates to why there’s a lockdown at all. But what’s clearly happening is that old people in hospital for anything — first of all, they’re being tested for COVID-19, this genetic material. And for reasons I’ve explained, they’re going to — a lot of them are gonna test positive, not for the virus, for the genetic material.

They’re going to them — and according to loved ones and families, the people on the ward, etc., have said to them it’s government policy — and they’re trying to get these old people — you know the old people that the lockdown was to protect? Yeah, right. They’re get them to sign do not resuscitate forms, which means they can be allowed to die and not resuscitated. And when they die without resuscitation, they will be called COVID-19.

Have you noticed how this is now starting to seep out? “Oh, we may have to make choices about –

Brian: Yeah. The triage.

David: — who we treat. And the older people, well, we’re gonna to make some hard choices.” Old people that you’re telling not to — to sign non-resuscitation forms, right? So, they are despicably abusing the very old people that they say this lockdown is to protect.

One of the family members that contacted me talked about her 83-year-old mother who was in hospital for an orthopedic reason, not some bloody virus. And the doctors came along to her and tried to get her to sign a do not resuscitate form. She’s got an orthopedic problem. And she had her faculties about her, and she refused. But a lot of people won’t — a lot of old people won’t. They won’t know what’s going on.

Brian: And they’re trying to get them to sign so they can save the other people. Is that it?

David: That’s what they say.

Brian: That’s what they say.

David: Orwellian language, Brian, you have to invert everything. They’re getting them to sign it so they can let them die. And everyone who dies is a COVID-19 because they’re tested. This is the scam that’s going on. And what it means is that they control the figures, by the way that they test, by the way they diagnose, and they way they count them. And thus, the figures can be allowed to go up, and up, and up to justify further lockdown.

And then, when they think — because I said towards the end of our last interview a couple weeks ago, “When will it be over?” It will be over actually temporarily — we can come to that later — when they think they have reached the point where everything they want from this — which is a completely destroyed economy.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




‘Finally’: Judge Orders Chelsea Manning’s Immediate Release After a Year in Jail and Suicide Attempt

A judge ordered Chelsea Manning incarcerated until she agrees to testify or until the jury is done, which might be 18 months. (Photo: Screenshot)

By Jessica Corbett | Common Dreams

This is a developing story and may be updated…

Federal Judge Anthony Trenga on Thursday ordered the immediate release of U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning less than 24 hours after Manning’s legal team disclosed that she was recovering in the hospital after attempting suicide in jail.

Multiple human rights advocates and supporters responded to Trenga’s order with one word: “Finally.” Manning has spent the majority of the past year at the William G. Truesdale Adult Detention Center in Alexandria, Virginia for her refusal to testify to a grand jury about WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange.

Manning’s legal team had filed a motion last month demanding her release and said late Wednesday that despite attempting to end her own life, the whistleblower still planned to attend a related court hearing scheduled for Friday.

Trenga, with his order (pdf) Thursday, canceled that hearing and ordered her release, writing that “Manning’s appearance before the grand jury is no longer needed, in light of which her detention no longer serves any coercive purpose.”

In a statement about Trenga’s ruling Thursday evening, Manning’s legal team said, “Needless to say we are relieved and ask that you respect her privacy while she gets on her feet.”

Supporters of Manning welcomed the order for her release; they also continued to charge that she should have never been jailed in the first place and wish her well in her recovery:

https://twitter.com/jaredlholt/status/1238225470359048192?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1238225470359048192&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2F2020%2F03%2F12%2Ffinally-judge-orders-chelsea-mannings-immediate-release-after-year-jail-and-suicide

Some of Manning’s supporters and journalists pointed out that the Eastern District of Virginia judge also ordered Manning to pay the $256,000 in fines she has accrued for her refusal to testify.

“She will now struggle with destitution and poverty, but at least she will no longer be in a jail cell,” tweeted Kevin Gosztola, managing editor of Shadowproof. “This is a victory against abusive grand jury process. She stood on her principles and remained unwavering, even when her own mental and physical health was at risk. She resisted in order to defend press freedom. And she ultimately won, though it exacted a traumatic toll on her.”

“The U.S. government lost,” Gosztola added. “They wanted nothing more than to haul before a grand jury and force her to say words that could be used against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Prosecutors will have to wait to call her as a prosecution witness if Assange is brought to the U.S. for trial.” Assange is currently detained in London, battling the U.S. government’s attempt to extradite him.

United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer has condemned the conditions under which both Assange and Manning have been imprisoned. In a letter to the U.S. government last year, Melzer wrote that Manning’s detention was “an open-ended, progressively severe coercive measure amounting to torture.”

The Washington Post reported that “hacker Jeremy Hammond, who was also being held in civil contempt for refusing to testify before the WikiLeaks grand jury, was also ordered released by Trenga after five months of civil contempt. But he is still serving a ten-year prison sentence for cyberattacks on various government agencies and businesses.”

The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-TALK (8255) and the Crisis Text Line is 741741. Both offer 24/7, free, and confidential support.




Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning Nominated for 2020 Nobel Peace Prize

By  Aaron Kesel | Activist Post

Two whistleblowers—Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden—were nominated alongside WikiLeaks journalist and former editor-in-chief Julian Assange for the Nobel Peace Prize of 2020 by 17 members of a German parliamentary group.

Żaklin Nastić (MdB) writes:

I am one of a total of 17 members of our parliamentary group who have nominated Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden for the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize. These brave people should not be criminalized but should be recognized and honored. The war criminals and their henchmen must be held accountable.

We feel that Assange, Manning and Snowden have to be recognized for their ‘unprecedented contributions to the pursuit of peace and their immense personal sacrifices to promote peace for all.’ With the unveiling of US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq and the global surveillance program of the US secret services, the three have ‘exposed the architecture of war and strengthened the architecture of peace’.

The full letter was published on the Courage Foundation’s website and reads:

Dear Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee,

We wish to nominate Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden for the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize, in honour of their unparalleled contributions to the pursuit of peace, and their immense personal sacrifices to promote peace for all.

The year 2020 began with Julian Assange arbitrarily detained and tortured, at risk of death according to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and over 100 medical doctors, for revealing the extent of harm and illegality behind the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. 2020 began with Chelsea Manning in her secound year of renewed imprisonment for resisting to testify to a Grand Jury empaneled against Wikileaks, after having also been imprisoned seven years previously and tortured, following her disclosures that were published by Julian Assange. 2020 began with Edward Snowden in his 7th year of asylum for revealing illegal mass surveillance, in defence of the liberties underpinning revelations such as those made by Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange.

The Collateral Murder video, provided by Chelsea Manning in 2010 and published by Wikileaks, honoured the dignity of those slain needlessly in war. It gave names and identities to victims whose humanity had been kept from public view, capturing the last moments of life for a young Reuters photojournalist, Namir Noor-Eldeen. Namir, who was killed in cold blood while on assignment in Baghdad, was described by his colleagues as among “the pre-eminent war photographers in Iraq” with “a tender eye that brought humanity via quiet moments to a vicious war”.

For humanising Namir and his driver Saeed Chmagh, a father of four, slain in front of two children who sat strafed with bullets in a van, Julian Assange faces 175 years in a US prison under the 1917 Espionage Act, and Chelsea Manning is currently detained without charge.

As well as humanising innocent victims of war, in 2010 Julian Assange and Wikileaks exposed the means by which public abhorrence of killing is overcome, and peace subverted, by psychological manipulation and strategic messaging.

In March 2010 the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) produced a memorandum, subsequently published by Wikileaks, entitled, Afghanistan: Sustaining West European Support for the NATO-led Mission-Why Counting on Apathy Might Not Be Enough.

At the time of the memorandum, 80 percent of French and German publics opposed greater troop deployment to Afghanistan. The memo expressed concern that public “indifference might turn into active hostility if spring and summer fighting results in an upsurge in military or Afghan civilian casualties.” To overcome public opposition to the “bloody summer” ahead, the memorandum advised tailoring messages for French audiences that “could tap into acute French concern for civilians and refugees,” given that French “opponents most commonly argued that the mission hurts civilians.”

“Appeals by President Obama and Afghan women might gain traction” the memorandum added.

With respect to the legalities of peace, Julian Assange and Wikileaks have contributed to the historical record on the International Criminal Court (ICC), established in 2002 under the Rome Statute of 1998, to promote the “peace, security and well-being of the world.” The ICC’s mission was to end impunity by prosecuting “the worst atrocities known to mankind”: war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide.

When the ICC’s enforcement capabilities were taking shape in the years following its inception, cables published by WikiLeaks exposed bilateral deals between nations under Article 98 of the Rome Statute, in which states placed themselves outside the ICC’s jurisdiction. The Article 98 deals undercut the ICC’s power to prosecute war crimes and other internationally illegal obstacles to a peaceful world order.

Later, in 2013, when Edward Snowden revealed the warrantless masssurveillance of citizens and officials worldwide, he exposed an immense global network with the capability to intercept and obstruct peace proponents such as Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange. Edward Snowden’s revelations have contributed to international investigations, transparency initiatives and legislative reforms around the globe.

These are but a selection of the contributions that Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden have made towards pursuing and defending lasting peace.

Together, their actions have exposed the architecture of abuse and war, and fortified the architecture of peace. In return, all three individuals have been forced to sacrifice the very liberties, rights and human welfare that they worked so hard to defend.

A Nobel Peace Prize for Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden would do more than honour their actions as individuals. It would ennoble the risks and sacrifices that those pursuing peace so often undertake, to secure the peace and freedom for all.

Sincerely,

Sevim Dağdelen Member of the German Bundestag

Doris Achelwilm Member of the German Bundestag

Diether Dehm Member of the German Bundestag

Sylvia Gabelmann Member of the German Bundestag

Heike Hänsel Member of the German Bundestag

Andrej Hunko Member of the German Bundestag

Ulla Jelpke Member of the German Bundestag

Jutta Krellmann Member of the German Bundestag

Fabio De Masi Member of the German Bundestag

Żaklin Nastić Member of the German Bundestag

Dr. Alexander S. Neu Member of the German Bundestag

Eva-Maria Schreiber Member of the German Bundestag

Alexander Ulrich Member of the German Bundestag

Kathrin Vogler Member of the German Bundestag

Andreas Wagner Member of the German Bundestag

Pia Zimmermann Member of the German Bundestag

Sabine Zimmermann Member of the German Bundestag.

It is worth noting that Bundestag Die Linke member Pascal Meiser called for the asylum of the publisher and whistleblower in Germany last year. According to the letter, Meiser didn’t sign the nomination appeal for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Earlier this month, more than 130 prominent figures in Germany from the world of art, politics, and the media signed an appeal for the release of Julian Assange, including former German vice-chancellor Sigmar Gabriel and Nobel Prize winner Elfriede Jelinek, DW reported.

Assange has won a total of twenty awards, Manning has won eleven, and Snowden has won nine for their individual bravery helping to shed light on the truth. Last year, Assange’s friend Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Maguire accepted the joint GUE/NGL prize for Journalists, Whistleblowers, and Defenders of the Right to Information.

For that award, Assange was nominated by Courage Foundation “based on his contributions to journalism and whistleblower protections, his dire circumstances and need for public support, and what his case means for journalists and whistleblowers around the world,” the Courage Foundation wrote.

Maguire gave an incredible heart-wrenching speech in support of her friend Julian Assange during the acceptance speech stressing he exposed corruption and the war empire.

Assange is set to face trial for extradition on February 24 for publishing documents that exposed corruption and U.S. war crimes. Protests are planned all over the world as the future of press freedom lies in the outcome of just one man’s case.

Last year in April, Assange was dragged out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in violation of 2 UN rulings following the withdrawal of his asylum status by the Ecuadorian government.

Assange faces 175 years in the United States if convicted of exposing war crimes and various corruption within the United States, 17 charges of which are under the Espionage Act. In total, Assange faces 18 charges including an absurd charge under the CFAA for “computer hacking” by helping his source, Chelsea Manning, protect herself against being discovered to leak him information.

By Aaron Kesel | Creative Commons | TheMindUnleashed.com




When Computer Crimes Are Used to Silence Journalists

Glenn Greenwald’s prosecution is an attempt to use computer crime law to silence an investigative reporter who exposed deep-seated government corruption. (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

By Rainey Reitman | Common Dreams

This week, prosecutors in Brazil filed a criminal complaint against Glenn Greenwald, an internationally lauded journalist best known for publishing leaked documents detailing the NSA’s mass surveillance. Greenwald’s prosecution is an attempt to use computer crime law to silence an investigative reporter who exposed deep-seated government corruption. Sadly, this isn’t the first such effort and, unless we stop this drift to criminalizing journalism, it likely won’t be the last.

Legal prosecution and character attacks are familiar tools used to silence investigative journalists who expose corruption. The use of cybercrime laws to do so, however, is relatively new. Greenwald has faced a prolonged and complicated legal standoff in Brazil since he published documents showing that a federal judge in Brazil colluded with prosecutors to convict former leftist president Lula da Silva. That conviction was crucial to preventing da Silva from running in the last election, which was instrumental in Brazil’s far-right president Jair Bolsonaro successfully ascending to power. Greenwald published private chat conversations, audio recordings, videos, photos, court proceedings, and other documentation provided by an anonymous source showing, among other things, the collusion between prosecutors and the judge, who has since been appointed as Brazil’s top judicial minister.

Since those articles were published, Greenwald and his family have dealt with legal threats (including a statement from President Bolsonaro that Greenwald could “do jail time”), death threats, and homophobic persecution.

Unfortunately, legal prosecution and character attacks are familiar tools used to silence investigative journalists who expose corruption. The use of cybercrime laws to do so, however, is relatively new.  This case is garnering special international attention in part because the current charges fly in the face of a decision by the Supreme Court of Brazil last year, in which the Court preemptively halted investigations against Greenwald. That decision upheld the rights of journalists to communicate directly with their sources and stated that Greenwald’s acts deserved constitutional protection—regardless of the content published, or its impact on government interests.

In an apparent attempt to circumvent the ruling, the charges now include “intruding computer devices.”

Around the world, cybercrime laws are notoriously hazy.  This is in part because it’s challenging to write good cybercrime laws: technology evolves quickly, our language for describing certain digital actions may be imprecise, and lawmakers may not always imagine how laws will later be interpreted. And while the laws are hazy, the penalties are often severe, which makes them a dangerously big stick in the hands of prosecutors.  Prosecutors can and do take advantage of this disconnection, abusing laws designed to target criminals who break into computers for extortion or theft to prosecute those engaged in harmless activities, or research—or, in this case, journalists communicating with their sources.

In 2018, EFF published an extensive report on the use of computer crime law to criminalize security research across the Americas. We offered guidance on how cybercrime laws could better adhere to human rights standards. That includes ensuring that malicious intent is baked into laws from the beginning (“Criminal laws should clarify the definition of malicious intent or mens rea, and avoid turning general behaviors into strict liability crimes.”). Our analysis of numerous computer crime laws in North and South America made clear that many of the current laws were dangerously vague, subject to misuse and over-prosecution of harmless acts, and could have a chilling effect on security research.

With the prosecution of Greenwald, we see how the misapplication of computer crime law can also have a chilling effect on journalism and harm the public’s right to know. Coupling the vague law with the severe penalties it contains,  charging journalists as hackers may become a uniquely powerful tool for silencing those who seek to keep the rest of us informed.

While we don’t yet know all the details of the case against Greenwald, we see no actions detailed in the criminal complaint that violate Brazilian law. Journalists routinely communicate at length with sources, and in fact, must do so to ascertain the veracity of any documents. Furthermore, a Brazilian Supreme Court Justice has already declared that Greenwald’s publication of leaked messages was protected under the Brazilian Constitution.

It’s a mark of tyranny to prosecute reporters who truthfully report on government corruption. Investigative reporters are supposed to reveal corruption and wrongdoing, even when doing so draws the ire of those in power. Few journalists in our lifetime can match Greenwald’s record for fearless reporting about government abuses of power. A free society can not only tolerate the confrontational reporting of talented journalists but will thrive when articles that reveal and challenge those in power are regularly provided to the public. It’s a mark of tyranny to prosecute reporters who truthfully report on government corruption.

EFF stands with dozens of other civil society organizations in Brazil and across the world in calling on Brazil to uphold the rule of law and drop this political prosecution of Glenn Greenwald.

Note: Both Greenwald and I serve on the board of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, and EFF serves as counsel to the organization. Greenwald was also the recipient of EFF’s Pioneer Award in 2013.

Rainey Reitman

Rainey Reitman leads the activism team at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Read more great articles at Common Dreams




Chelsea Manning Says She Is ‘Never Backing Down’ in Face of US Detention Meant to Break Her

Whistleblower Chelsea Manning is remaining defiant in the face of months of imprisonment. (Photo: xychelsea/Twitter)

By Eoin Higgins | Common Dreams

Two days after the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer published a letter he sent to the U.S. government urging her release from federal prison, whistleblower Chelsea Manning issued a response welcoming the support and promising to stay resolute in the face of her prolonged detention.

“My long-standing objection to the immoral practice of throwing people in jail without charge or trial, for the sole purpose of forcing them to testify before a secret, government-run investigative panel, remains strong,” said Manning.

Manning was imprisoned on March 8, 2019, for refusing to take part in a grand jury investigation on WikiLeaks and the group’s founder, Julian Assange. Manning and her supporters have alleged that the real purpose of her testimony would be to set perjury traps that could eventually land the former Army private in prison.

As Common Dreams reported, Melzer’s letter expressed the rapporteur’s “serious concern at the reported use of coercive measures against Ms. Manning, particularly given the history of her previous conviction and ill-treatment in detention” and requested more information on Manning’s detention.

“I recommend that Ms. Manning’s current deprivation of liberty be promptly reviewed in light of the United States’ international human rights obligations,” Melzer wrote. “Should my assessment regarding its purely coercive purpose be accurate, I recommend that Ms. Manning be released without further delay and that any fines disproportionate to the gravity of any offense she may have committed be canceled or reimbursed.”

Manning’s attorney Moira Meltzer-Cohen in a statement said that Melzer’s letter made clear that Manning’s detention is in violation of international norms and for the sole purpose of torturing the whistleblower.

“Special Rapporteur Melzer has issued a legally rigorous condemnation of the practice of coercive confinement, and of Ms. Manning’s confinement in particular,” said Meltzer-Cohen. “While the United States has so far failed to live up to its human rights obligations, I remain hopeful that the government will reconsider its policies in light of the U.N.’s admonition.”

“In any case,” Meltzer-Cohen added, “there can be no further doubt that Ms. Manning has the courage of her convictions, and will never agree to testify before a grand jury, even at great personal cost.”

Manning echoed that sentiment in her statement.

“Even knowing I am very likely to stay in jail for an even longer time,” said Manning, “I’m never backing down.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share it widely.

Read more great articles at Common Dreams




A New Kind of Tyranny: The Global State’s War on Those Who Speak Truth to Power

By John W. Whitehead | Rutherford

“What happens to Julian Assange and to Chelsea Manning is meant to intimidate us, to frighten us into silence. By defending Julian Assange, we defend our most sacred rights. Speak up now or wake up one morning to the silence of a new kind of tyranny. The choice is ours.”—John Pilger, investigative journalist

All of us are in danger.

In an age of prosecutions for thought crimes, pre-crime deterrence programs, and government agencies that operate like organized crime syndicates, there is a new kind of tyranny being imposed on those who dare to expose the crimes of the Deep State, whose reach has gone global.

The Deep State has embarked on a ruthless, take-no-prisoners, all-out assault on truth-tellers.

Activists, journalists and whistleblowers alike are being terrorized, traumatized, tortured and subjected to the fear-inducing, mind-altering, soul-destroying, smash-your-face-in tactics employed by the superpowers-that-be.

Take Julian Assange, for example.

Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks—a website that published secret information, news leaks, and classified media from anonymous sources—was arrested on April 11, 2019, on charges of helping U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning access and leak more than 700,000 classified military documents that portray the U.S. government and its military as reckless, irresponsible and responsible for thousands of civilian deaths.

Included among the leaked Manning material were the Collateral Murder video (April 2010), the Afghanistan war logs (July 2010), the Iraq war logs (October 2010), a quarter of a million diplomatic cables (November 2010), and the Guantánamo files (April 2011).

The Collateral Murder leak included gunsight video footage from two U.S. AH-64 Apache helicopters engaged in a series of air-to-ground attacks while air crew laughed at some of the casualties. Among the casualties were two Reuters correspondents who were gunned down after their cameras were mistaken for weapons and a driver who stopped to help one of the journalists. The driver’s two children, who happened to be in the van at the time it was fired upon by U.S. forces, suffered serious injuries.

This is morally wrong.

It shouldn’t matter which nation is responsible for these atrocities: there is no defense for such evil perpetrated in the name of profit margins and war profiteering.

In true Orwellian fashion, however, the government would have us believe that it is Assange and Manning who are the real criminals for daring to expose the war machine’s seedy underbelly.

Since his April 2019 arrest, Assange has been locked up in a maximum-security British prison—in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day—pending extradition to the U.S., where if convicted, he could be sentenced to 175 years in prison.

Whatever is being done to Assange behind those prison walls—psychological torture, forced drugging, prolonged isolation, intimidation, surveillance—it’s wearing him down.

In court appearances, the 48-year-old Assange appears disoriented, haggard and zombie-like.

“In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law,” declared Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur on torture.

It’s not just Assange who is being made to suffer, however.

Manning, who was jailed for seven years from 2010 to 2017 for leaking classified documents to Wikileaks, was arrested in March 2019 for refusing to testify before a grand jury about Assange, placed in solitary confinement for almost a month, and then sentenced to remain in jail either until she agrees to testify or until the grand jury’s 18-month term expires.

Federal judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia also fined Manning $500 for every day she remained in custody after 30 days, and $1,000 for every day she remains in custody after 60 days, a chilling—and financially crippling—example of the government’s heavy-handed efforts to weaponize fines and jail terms as a means of forcing dissidents to fall in line.

This is how the police state deals with those who challenge its chokehold on power.

Make no mistake: the government is waging war on journalists and whistleblowers for disclosing information relating to government misconduct that is within the public’s right to know.

Yet while this targeted campaign—aided, abetted and advanced by the Deep State’s international alliances—is unfolding during President Trump’s watch, it began with the Obama Administration’s decision to revive the antiquated, hundred-year-old Espionage Act, which was intended to punish government spies, and instead use it to prosecute government whistleblowers.

Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has not merely continued the Obama Administration’s attack on whistleblowers. It has injected this war on truth-tellers and truth-seekers with steroids and let it loose on the First Amendment.

In May 2019, Trump’s Justice Department issued a sweeping new “superseding” secret indictment of Assange—hinged on the Espionage Act—that empowers the government to determine what counts as legitimate journalism and criminalize the rest, not to mention giving “the government license to criminally punish journalists it does not like, based on antipathy, vague standards, and subjective judgments.”

Noting that the indictment signaled grave dangers for freedom of the press in general, media lawyer Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., warned, “The indictment would criminalize the encouragement of leaks of newsworthy classified information, criminalize the acceptance of such information, and criminalize publication of it.”

Boutrous continues:

[I]t doesn’t matter whether you think Assange is a journalist, or whether WikiLeaks is a news organization. The theory that animates the indictment targets the very essence of journalistic activity: the gathering and dissemination of information that the government wants to keep secret. You don’t have to like Assange or endorse what he and WikiLeaks have done over the years to recognize that this indictment sets an ominous precedent and threatens basic First Amendment values…. With only modest tweaking, the very same theory could be invoked to prosecute journalists for the very same crimes being alleged against Assange, simply for doing their jobs of scrutinizing the government and reporting the news to the American people.

We desperately need greater scrutiny and transparency, not less.

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE……




Killing Julian Assange: Justice Denied When Exposing Official Wrongdoing

Image Credit: The Mind Unleashed

By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture

The hideous treatment of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange continues and many observers are citing his case as being symptomatic of developing “police state” tendencies in both the United States and in Europe, where rule of law is being subordinated to political expediency.

Julian Assange was the founder and editor-in-chief of the controversial news and information site WikiLeaks. As the name implies, after 2006 the site became famous, or perhaps notorious, for its publication of materials that have been leaked to it by government officials and other sources who consider the information to be of value to the public but unlikely to be accepted by the mainstream media, which has become increasingly corporatized and timid.

WikiLeaks became known to a global audience back in 2010 when it obtained from US Army enlisted soldier Bradley Manning a large quantity of classified documents relating to the various wars that the United States was fighting in Asia. Some of the material included what might be regarded as war crimes.

WikiLeaks again became front page news over the 2016 presidential election, when the website released the emails of candidate Hillary Clinton and her campaign manager John Podesta. The emails revealed how Clinton and her team collaborated with the Democratic National Committee to ensure that she would be nominated rather that Bernie Sanders. It should be noted that the material released by WikiLeaks was largely documentary and factual in nature, i.e. it was not “fake news.”

Because he is a journalist ostensibly protected by the First Amendment guarantee of free speech, the handling of the “threat” posed by journalist Assange is inevitably somewhat different than a leak by a government official, referred to as a whistleblower. Assange has been vilified as an “enemy of the state,” likely even a Russian agent, and was initially pursued by the Swedish authorities after claims of a rape, later withdrawn, were made against him. To avoid arrest, he was given asylum by a friendly Ecuadorean government seven years ago in London. The British police had an active warrant to arrest him immediately as he had failed to make a bail hearing after he obtained asylum, which is indeed what took place when Quito revoked his protected status in April.

As it turned out, Julian Assange was not exactly alone when he was in the Ecuadorean Embassy. All of his communications, including with his lawyers, were being intercepted by a Spanish security company hired for the purpose allegedly by the CIA. There apparently was also a CIA plan to kidnap Assange. In a normal court in a normal country, the government case would have been thrown out on constitutional and legal grounds, but that was not so in this instance. The United States has persisted in its demands to obtain the extradition of Assange from Britain and London seems to be more than willing to play along. Assange is undeniably hated by the American political Establishment and even much of the media in bipartisan fashion, with the Democrats blaming him for Hillary Clinton’s loss while Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has labeled him a “fraud, a coward and an enemy.” WikiLeaks itself is regarded by the White House as a “hostile non-government intelligence service.” Sending Julian Assange to prison for the rest of his life may be called justice, but it is really revenge against someone who has exposed government lies. Some American politicians have even asserted that jail is too good for Assange, insisting that he should instead be executed.

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE……




Julian Assange Tortured with Psychotropic Drug According To EX USAF Lieutenant Colonel

By Arjun Walia | Collective Evolution

In Brief

  • The Facts:Retired USAF lieutenant colonel Karen Kwiatkowski writes in an article posted at Lew Rockwell’s website that Julian Assange is receiving the same treatment as suspected terrorists while in captivity at “Her Majesty’s Prison Service” at Belmarsh.
  • Reflect On:Why has the mainstream media been silent regarding the treatment of Julian Assange? Why do they just slander him and not tell the truth about what’s really happening, and why he was taken?

JFK warned the citizenry about “an announced need for increased security” that would be “seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.” Today, this is known as “national security,” and it’s a term used to justify unethical and enormous amounts of secrecy that do not protect the public, but protect those in power and their corporate, financial and political interests. Theodor Roosevelt said that, “JFK warned the citizenry about “an announced need for increased security” that would be “seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.” Today, this is known as “national security,” and it’s a term used to justify unethical and enormous amounts of secrecy that do not protect the public, but protect those in power and their corporate, financial and political interests.”

This is exactly what Julian Assange did, and many others have and are doing, like independent alternative media outlets.

Transparency is what Julian Assange was all about, and the American empire, or more so the global empire, has been desperate to keep its secrets and prosecute anyone or anything that threatens their secrecy. That’s what this is all about. And they proved that with Chelsea Manning.

It’s not just people like Assange who are being demonized and hunted, it’s alternative media as well. The war on ‘fake news’ that’s been happening for the last little while has forced alternative media outlets that are presenting credible information to be deemed as ‘fake.’ Any media outlet who even questions a controversial issue has been made out to be ‘wrong’ or ‘fake.’ Who has been hired to do this work? One example is news browser extension NewsGuard, which promises to help readers pick out fake news. However, NewsGuard is funded and run by individuals tied to the CFR, Atlantic Council, and other prominent elite figures.

Below is a tweet from Australian journalist and BAFTA award-winning documentary filmmaker John Pilger, who made comments last month that shed some light on how Assange is being treated.

Assange Tortured with Psychotropic Drug?

I recently came across a post written a few months ago by Karen Kwiatkowski.

The FBI, Pentagon, and CIA are “interviewing” Assange. Kwiatkowski writes:

Interviewing is the wrong word.I’d like to say doctoring him, because it would be more accurate, except that word implies some care for a positive outcome.Chemical Gina has her hands in this one, and we are being told that Assange is being “treated” with 3-quinuclidinyl benzilate, known as BZ.

BZ is a powerful drug that produces hallucinations.

“Soldiers on BZ could remember only fragments of the experience afterward. As the drug wore off, and the subjects had trouble discerning what was real, many experienced anxiety, aggression, even terror,” the New Yorker reported. “…The drug’s effect lasted for days. At its peak, volunteers were totally cut off in their own minds, jolting from one fragmented existence to the next. They saw visions: Lilliputian baseball players competing on a tabletop diamond; animals or people or objects that materialized and vanished.”

She goes on:

It is difficult to know if the state is more sociopathic or more psychopathic.  What US government employees and/or contractors are currently doing to Julian Assange, and those who may have used Wikileaks as a journalistic avenue, may indicate it is the latter.  Torture, isolation, brutality, and the use of psychotropic drugs during interrogations and hiding this from the defendant’s own lawyers by denying them access — this is Lubyanka in the 1950s, not London and DC in 2019.

Allow me to get to the point.  The latest word I have received from England is as follows:

“[Julian Assange] is presently under close observation in prison hospital because he has suffered ‘severe transient psychotic episodes.’ My source(s) indicate these episodes occurred after two sessions of coercive interrogation at the hands of UK and US officials. The source(s) stated the HUMINT interrogators used psychotropic drugs in the course of the sessions.”

There are no words.  Nothing can be said.  2 plus 2 does equal 5.  The FBI is our own special Cheka.  The CIA Director’s hands are wet and her organization does not serve American values.  Rather than choosing to stay secretive for national security, the modern CIA must stay secretive in order to survive, because it has become functionally illegal.  Our president, who puts America first, is putting American values last, even as he tweets his concern for freedom of speech.

The agenda is to destroy Assange as a human being, and they may well succeed.  In doing this evil deed, in all of our names, America herself – whether we put her first, last, or somewhere in the middle – will have dug her own grave.

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.

 




The American Gulag: Brick by Brick, Our Prison Walls Get More Oppressive by the Day

John W. Whitehead | The Rutherford

The exile of prisoners to a distant place, where they can ‘pay their debt to society,’ make themselves useful, and not contaminate others with their ideas or their criminal acts, is a practice as old as civilization itself. The rulers of ancient Rome and Greece sent their dissidents off to distant colonies. Socrates chose death over the torment of exile from Athens. The poet Ovid was exiled to a fetid port on the Black Sea.”— Anne Applebaum, Gulag: A History

This is how freedom dies.

This is how you condition a populace to life as prisoners in a police state: by brainwashing them into believing they are free so that they will march in lockstep with the state and be incapable of recognizing the prison walls that surround them.

Face the facts: we are no longer free.

We in the American Police State may enjoy the illusion of freedom, but that is all it is: an elaborate deception, rooted in denial and delusion, that hides the grasping, greedy, power-hungry, megalomaniacal force that lurks beneath the surface.

Brick by brick, the prison walls being erected around us by the government and its corporate partners-in-crime grow more oppressive and more pervasive by the day.

Brick by brick, we are finding there is nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.

Brick by brick, we are being walled in, locked down and locked up.

That’s the curious thing about walls: they not only keep those on the outside from getting in, they also keep those on the inside from getting out.

Consider, if you will, some of the “bricks” in the police state’s wall that serve to imprison the citizenry: Red flag gun laws that strip citizens of their rights based on the flimsiest of pretexts concocted by self-serving politicians. Overcriminalization resulting in jail time for nonviolent offenses such as feeding stray cats and buying foreign honey. Military training drills—showy exercises in armed intimidation—and live action “role playing” between soldiers and “freedom fighters” staged in small rural communities throughout the country. Profit-driven speed and red light cameras that do little for safety while padding the pockets of government agencies. Overt surveillance that turns citizens into suspects.

Police-run facial recognition software that mistakenly labels law-abiding citizens as criminals. Punitive programs that strip citizens of their passports and right to travel over unpaid taxes. Government agents that view segments of the populace as “subhuman” and treat them accordingly. A social credit system (similar to China’s) that rewards behavior deemed “acceptable” and punishes behavior the government and its corporate allies find offensive, illegal or inappropriate.

These are just a small sampling of the oppressive measures used by the government to control and constrict the American people.

What these despotic tactics add up to is an authoritarian prison in every sense of the word.

Granted this prison may not appear as overtly bleak as the soul-destroying gulags described by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in his masterpiece The Gulag Archipelago, but that’s just a matter of aesthetics.

Strip away the surface embellishments and you’ll find the core is no less sinister than that of the gulags of the Cold War-era Soviet Union.

Those gulags, according to historian Anne Applebaum, used as a form of “administrative exile—which required no trial and no sentencing procedure—was an ideal punishment not only for troublemakers as such, but also for political opponents of the regime.”

The word “gulag” refers to a labor or concentration camp where prisoners (oftentimes political prisoners or so-called “enemies of the state,” real or imagined) were imprisoned as punishment for their crimes against the state. As Applebaum explains:

Over time, the word “Gulag” has also come to signify not only the administration of the concentration camps but also the system of Soviet slave labor itself, in all its forms and varieties: labor camps, punishment camps, criminal and political camps, women’s camps, children’s camps, transit camps. Even more broadly, “Gulag” has come to mean the Soviet repressive system itself, the set of procedures that prisoners once called the “meat-grinder”: the arrests, the interrogations, the transport in unheated cattle cars, the forced labor, the destruction of families, the years spent in exile, the early and unnecessary deaths.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was such a political prisoner.

For the crime of daring to criticize Stalin in a private letter to a school friend, Solzhenitsyn was arrested and sentenced to eight years in exile in a labor camp.

That was before psychiatry paved the way for totalitarian regimes such as the Soviet Union to declare dissidents mentally ill and consign political prisoners to prisons disguised as psychiatric hospitals, where they could be isolated from the rest of society, their ideas discredited, and subjected to electric shocks, drugs and various medical procedures to break them physically and mentally.

In addition to declaring political dissidents mentally unsound, government officials in the Cold War-era Soviet Union also made use of an administrative process for dealing with individuals who were considered a bad influence on others or troublemakers. Author George Kennan describes a process in which:

The obnoxious person may not be guilty of any crime . . . but if, in the opinion of the local authorities, his presence in a particular place is “prejudicial to public order” or “incompatible with public tranquility,” he may be arrested without warrant, may be held from two weeks to two years in prison, and may then be removed by force to any other place within the limits of the empire and there be put under police surveillance for a period of from one to ten years.

Warrantless seizures, surveillance, indefinite detention, isolation, exile… sound familiar?

It should.

The age-old practice by which despotic regimes eliminate their critics or potential adversaries by making them disappear—or forcing them to flee—or exiling them literally or figuratively or virtually from their fellow citizens—is happening with increasing frequency in America.

We saw it happen with Julian Assange. With Edward Snowden. With Bradley Manning.

They, too, were exiled for daring to challenge the powers-that-be.

It happened to 26-year-old decorated Marine Brandon Raub, who was targeted because of his Facebook posts, interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for standing by his views, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys.

Raub’s case exposed the seedy underbelly of a governmental system that is targeting Americans—especially military veterans—for expressing their discontent over America’s rapid transition to a police state.

Now, through the use of red flag laws, behavioral threat assessments, and pre-crime policing prevention programs, the government is laying the groundwork that would allow it to weaponize the label of mental illness as a means of exiling those whistleblowers, dissidents and freedom fighters who refuse to march in lockstep with its dictates.

That the government is using the charge of mental illness as the means by which to immobilize (and disarm) its critics is diabolically brilliant. With one stroke of a magistrate’s pen, these individuals are declared mentally ill, locked away against their will, and stripped of their constitutional rights.

These developments are merely the realization of various U.S. government initiatives dating back to 2009, including one dubbed Operation Vigilant Eagle which calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE….




Why The August 29th Global ‘Targeted Individuals’ Rallies Deserve Our Attention

By Richard Enos | Collective-Evolution

In Brief

  • The Facts:’Targeted Individual’ activists are holding concurrent rallies in 21 different locations all over the world on August 29th, 2019. This will be the largest gathering of TIs and their supporters in the history of the movement.
  • Reflect On:Can we see how our intentional awareness of matters like the ‘Targeted Individuals’ phenomenon helps us all move towards creating the world that we all want?

Since I began writing about the ‘Targeted Individual’ phenomenon last year, I have received dozens of independent emails from people who identify themselves as Targeted Individuals, either thanking me for covering the issue or wanting to tell their stories, which consist of a whole range of invasive attacks from stalking and surveillance to EMF weapons torture. Not the largest sample size, to be sure, but certainly significant enough for me to think that we should take notice, especially since the reach of CE’s articles has been so drastically reduced of late. One or two among them, perhaps, are imagining some of the things happening to them, but there is no way to discredit this many people, especially when their stories have so many similarities.

And many of them express themselves very clearly and even eloquently about a problem that is among the most mysterious and baffling covert activities going on today. One of the people who contacted me is Thomas McFarlan, who is both a TI and an activist who has been writing about the Targeted Individuals phenomenon for years. His article “Targeted Individuals Plan Worldwide Protests in 21 Global Locations for ‘TI-Day’ 2019” not only provides information about the largest worldwide TI rallies ever, it also helps to give credence to the claims of those who feel they are being surveilled, stalked, and attacked by Directed Energy Weapons (DEWs).

Credibility Problem

For one to believe that ‘Targeted Individuals’ programs exist, one must first be able to make the leap above mainstream perception to the realization that some elements of government, intelligence, military, law enforcement, media, and even so-called human rights organizations are working together to perpetrate these experimental crimes. For this reason, activists like McFarlan have to first create the context within which these victims can be believed:

For individuals subjected to organized stalking crimes, TI-Day 2019 is an unique opportunity to work in concert with other victims around the world, to alert the public and honest lawmakers about these crimes, in a global demonstration that clearly shows these crimes are in fact occurring on an international scale. Although this demonstration of a global “concurrence of claim”, of organized stalking crimes, will of course be slandered by the powers-that-shouldn’t-be that operate these stalking campaigns, a demonstration of a “concurrence of claim” does have actual legal weight, no matter how much slander is thrown at the blatant reality of the evidence at hand.

The claims from bad actors within the media, human rights organizations, transnational organizations, and governments, that the people who report these crimes are delusional, fall flat on their face, when one simply reviews the hard evidence that proves these crimes are now occurring to millions of innocent people all around the world — evidence that includes very articulate accounts of these crimes from highly educated and professionally accomplished victims… Victims like Dr. Kauni Kilde: Surgeon General of the nation of Finland, Medical Doctor, and best selling Author; Cheryl Welsh: Lawyer, groundbreaking Activist, and Researcher; Ted Gunderson: Chief of the Los Angeles FBI office, 25+ year veteran of the FBI, and groundbreaking independent Researcher; Ramola D: Award winning Author, George Washington University Professor, and groundbreaking Journalist; Randy Quaid: Legendary Academy Award nominated Actor; Dr. Eric T. Karlstrom: California State University Stanislaus University Professor for 30 years, and groundbreaking Researcher; Geral W. Sosbee: Lawyer, FBI Agent, and Activist; Gloria Naylor: Legendary award winning and best-selling Author; Stephen Shellen: Hollywood Actor, Artist and independent Filmmaker.

The “concurrence of claim” is important because unlike most crime victims, who are believed by the public when they sustain assaults, invasions, or other criminal activities, it seems to be inherent in ‘Targeted Individual’ crimes that the victims are left to doubt themselves, and where there tends to be difficulty gathering compelling objective evidence of the crimes being perpetrated. Having people looking at you or following you in public, being made to feel your privacy is completely invaded, and being subjected to electromagnetic weapons which have various levels of mind-influencing power or infliction of physical pain, cannot help but lead to a state of suicidal hopelessness for all but the strongest-willed individuals.

In relation to all the other things we report on here at CE in terms of the activities of what we have called the shadow government, Deep State, Military-Industrial Complex or Global Elite, these types of experimental efforts to test out different mind-control, torture and crowd-control strategies against unsuspecting victims fits right in. These are the kinds of activities that would be conducted by powers that sought to create a global surveillance state, by instituting a political, economic and technological grid designed to secure the complete enslavement of humanity.

Why This Cause Needs Our Attention

McFarlan cites an official 2009 U.S. Department of Justice document release on stalking crimes in America which denoted that ‘13.1% of the 3,398,630 U.S. citizens that reported stalking crimes to the U.S. Department of Justice “Stalking Victimization Survey”, in the year 2006 alone, reported that they were stalked by a group of 3 or more people. So that amounts to well over 441,800 people who reported being subject to organized stalking, to the DOJ survey alone.’

[Read more here]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




US House of Representatives Investigating if the Government Created Lyme Disease As A Bioweapon

By Arjun Walia | Collective-Evolution

In Brief

  • The Facts:A New Jersey lawmaker suggests the government turned ticks and insects into bioweapons to spread disease, and possibly released them. He is not the only one who believes so.
  • Reflect On:This is not the only example of supposed human experimentation on mass populations by the government

There are a number of subjects that were once considered ‘conspiracy theories,’ which are now no longer in that realm. ‘Conspiracy theories’ usually, in my opinion, arise from credible evidence. The implications, however, are so grand and so mind-altering that many may experience some sort of cognitive dissonance as a result. One of the topics often deemed a ‘conspiracy theory’ is weaponized diseases, and the latest example comes from an approved amendment that was proposed by a Republican congressman from New Jersey. His name is Chris Smith, and he instructed the Department of Defence’s Inspector General to conduct a review on whether or not the US “experimented with ticks and insects regarding use as a biological weapon between the years of 1950 and 1975” and “whether any ticks or insects used in such experiment were released outside of any laboratory by accident or experiment design.”

The fact that Smith brought this up shows that any intelligent person who actually looks into this has reason to believe it’s a possibility, yet mainstream media outlets are ridiculing the idea, calling it a conspiracy instead of actually bringing up the points that caused Smith to demand the review.

The fact that the amendment was approved by a vote in the House speaks volumes. Smith said that the amendment was inspired by “a number of books and articles suggesting that significant research had been done at US government facilities including Fort Detrick, Maryland, and Plum Island, New York, to turn ticks and insects into bioweapons”.

Most people don’t know that the US government has experimented on its own citizens a number of times. All of this is justified for “national security” purposes. National security has always been a term used as an excuse to prolong secrecy, justify the government’s lack of transparency, and create black budget programs that have absolutely no oversight from Congress.

For example, on September 20, 1950, a US Navy ship just off the coast of San Francisco used a giant hose to spray a cloud of microbes into the air and into the city’s famous fog. The military was apparently testing how a biological weapon attack would affect the 800,000 residents of the city.The people of San Francisco had absolutely no idea. The Navy continued the tests for seven days, and multiple people died as a result. It was apparently one of the first large-scale biological weapon trials that would be conducted under a “germ warfare testing program” that went on for 20 years from 1949 to 1969. The goal “was to deter [the use of biological weapons] against the United States and its allies and to retaliate if deterrence failed,” the government later explained. Then again, that’s if you trust the explanation coming from the government.

This could fall under the category of human subject research. It’s still happening! A dozen classified programs that involved research on human subjects were underway last year at the Department of Energy. Human subject research refers broadly to the collection of scientific data from human subjects. This could involve performing physical procedures on the subjects or simply conducting interviews and having other forms of interaction with them. It could even involve procedures performed on entire populations, apparently without their consent.

Human subjects research erupted into national controversy 25 years ago with reporting by Eileen Welsome of the Albuquerque Tribune on human radiation experiments that had been conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission, many of which were performed without the consent of the subjects. A presidential advisory committee was convened to document the record and to recommend appropriate policy responses.

When it comes to Lyme disease, the Guardian points out that:

A new book published in May by a Stanford University science writer and former Lyme sufferer, Kris Newby, has raised questions about the origins of the disease, which affects 400,000 Americans each year.

Bitten: The Secret History of Lyme Disease and Biological Weapons, cites the Swiss-born discoverer of the Lyme pathogen, Willy Burgdorfer, as saying that the Lyme epidemic was a military experiment that had gone wrong.

Burgdorfer, who died in 2014, worked as a bioweapons researcher for the US military and said he was tasked with breeding fleas, ticks, mosquitoes and other blood-sucking insects, and infecting them with pathogens that cause human diseases.

According to the book, there were programs to drop “weaponised” ticks and other bugs from the air, and that uninfected bugs were released in residential areas in the US to trace how they spread. It suggests that such a scheme could have gone awry and led to the eruption of Lyme disease in the US in the 1960s.

[Read more there]

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.

 




David Wilcock Releases Important New Ebook About Attacks on Alternative Media

By Robert G. O’Leary

David Wilcock’s new release, entitled Declas: Social Media Nukes an Entire Generation … But Why is big – in terms of its number of pages and in terms of the breadth, depth and importance of its subject matter. It is a 258-page EBook which has just been made available online.

We are living through amazing times right now – full of great uncertainty and great promise. These are days of double-speak and double-crosses – liars spend a great deal of money hiding their mendacity by controlling and paying off social media organizations to demonetized and demonize truth-tellers. These paid-off social media organizations, such as Google, made part of their reputation as purported champions of net neutrality and free speech.

David Wilcock provides us with some insights into why social media giants are turning their backs on their customers (and in some cases even their profitability and long-term viability). He describes how organizations, like Google and Facebook, are controlled in part by some of the same people who co-own prisons, weapons manufacturers, and parts of the recording industry.

David discusses his own nightmarish experience with YouTube (a subsidiary of Google). He describes how other YouTubers would take his relatively small number of YouTube videos (30 or less in number) and “repackage” them with different names and recent dates and put them out as supposedly new videos. This was done without his permission and contrary to any copyright or other protections which he has over that content. He goes on to describe how YouTube proved to be a faceless, non-transparent, and unresponsive monolith – all despite hiring numerous lawyers to assist him.

Many of us have grown up on YouTube or have grown to like it as a replacement of sorts for the heyday of MTV and VH-1 –times when they aired music videos instead of endless (mostly sub-par shows). We fell in love with it, like the music stars that appeared on it. We found new musical acts on YouTube. We found obscure cuts from our favorite artists. We even found that we could listen to new releases of music, from our old favorites, on YouTube.

This channel was so cool, and helped us to cope with the irony of seeing classic rock stations refuse to play new music from the very musical acts that were indirectly paying their paychecks. For me, personally, Steve Perry released a great new album late last year, called Traces, after 24 years of silence in terms of any new recordings. He appeared on some of the TV interview shows and on some radio stations, but rock stations generally would not play his music. He was a big hit in places, like ITunes and on some of the charts, but in spite of (not because of) mainstream radio. And he was played by certain YouTubers. In fact, that is how I found out that he had released an album.

Yet YouTube has changed. The alternative media website, “We Are Change,” discussed this a couple of months ago, with its video, “Its OVER For Us and Independent Media HERE”:

Another video that discussed these developments was “The Golden Age of YouTube is Over”, on the website, www.theverge.com.

This new phenomenon at YouTube is monumental. Yet, many people may not really comprehend its magnitude. David Wilcock uses a “What if” scenario to help to bring it home for his readers. He asks us to imagine what would have happened if musical artists of the 1960’s and 1970’s had been suddenly de-funded, left to pay for their musical production, and development on their own.

Imagine a world in which John Lennon made a career of working in a local music store in Liverpool, Michael Jackson was a teacher in Detroit, and Pete Townshend ran a bookstore after his efforts at writing fiction and poetry never panned out.

Imagine they all did music on the weekend, and had fans regularly ask them, “Dude, why aren’t you famous, your music is amazing. To be sure, many talented musicians out there have had the talent to make it big, but never got the opportunity to do so, or blew any opportunity they were given.

The artists who did “make it,” have had tremendous impact upon our culture, inspired us, empowered us, brought us through depression, and even saved our lives. Some music has taught us to look at our world in a different way, and even to work to make it a better place to live.

Alternative media has made its own mark on our culture and is perhaps more homegrown and  unprocessed than even the music of the 60s and 70s, since we must keep in mind that only some artists were allowed through the gatekeepers of artist and repertoire for each of the music companies. David Wilcock shares insights about these subjects, and do much more, in this release. I urge you to check it out in its entirety, at the following link: Declas: Social Media Nukes an Entire Generation … But Why

David Wilcock also gives his take on why YouTube would be seemingly undermining its own interest by attacking some of its stars, and potentially losing out on its own revenues. His is a compelling explanation that suggests very nefarious and surreptitious actions are going on behind the scenes to support the status quo and the so-called Deep State’s interests.

Please let us know what you think of this important release in out comments section below.

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.