Aggregatore di feed

It seems damn obvious that neither Jay Powell, Donald Trump, the 12 geniuses on the FOMC, nor any other set of Washington apparatchiks should be setting interest rates. That’s a job tailor-made for millions of players on the free market without any help, nudges, guidance, or big fat thumb on the supply/demand scale by the central bank.

It also seems equally obvious that under the current post-1987 regime of Keynesian activism at the Fed that interest rates have been way too low for most of the past four decades. Indeed, the very idea that interest rates on the money market should be negative or even close to zero in real terms is an out-and-out recipe for inflation, both with respect to goods and services prices on Main Street and also, most especially, with respect to financial asset prices on Wall Street.

Yet here is what we have had since Alan Greenspan and his heirs and assigns embarked upon the path of heavy-duty Keynesian macro-management of the US economy. Since the year 2000, the inflation-adjusted money-market rate (i.e., Fed funds) has been negative—often deeply so—more than 80% of the time.

Accordingly, the implicit thrust of Fed policy has been to severely punish savers, who, after taxes and inflation, have been badly crushed, and reward borrowers and speculators. The latter have essentially been offered free money on a short-term basis to fund their leveraged speculations via rolling over the Fed’s cheap overnight money day after day for years running.

Indeed, Wall Street speculators literally loved the negative carry pictured in the graph below: It became the foundation for trillions upon trillions of easy, arbitrage profits in the futures and options market and via an endless variety of highly leveraged bespoke trading schemes.

Needless to say, the politicians on the banks of the Potomac were also enthusiastic about their resulting ability to borrow on a massive scale while still paying diminutive levels of annual interest on the soaring public debt. In fiscal terms, the Fed’s negative real rates were the equivalent of a free lunch.

Still, the opposite ends of this 40-year chart tell you all you need to know about why central bank interest rate pegging is both counter-productive and unnecessary. Thus, back in 1984-1987, the real Fed funds rate was clearly not too high at positive 3-5%. That’s because it was exactly during this five-year period that the ballyhooed “Morning in America” Reagan Boom occurred. Real growth averaged 4.8% per annum between 1983 and 1987.

Now, according to GOP orators, the Reagan Boom of 1983-1987 was the be-all-and-end-all of spectacular economic performance. So why in the hell did Jay Powell and his merry band of money-printers insist that the real Fed funds rate in Q3 2024 was too high at barely +2.0% and therefore warranted the 100 basis point rate cut it administered on the eve of the November election?

Moreover, at the present moment, the story is even worse. The Donald was pounding the table for a 300 basis point cut a few weeks ago when, during Q2 2025, the inflation-adjusted Fed funds rate had posted at just +1.27%. So what he apparently wants is a return to the inflationary Fed print-a-thons of the last several decades and to an implied inflation-adjusted Fed funds rate of, well, -2.27%.

That’s right. After more than two decades of inflationary money-printing, the real money market rate has barely peeked its nose above the zero bound per the graph above. Yet we have both of our wanna-be monetary central planners—Powell and Trump—in a public shouting match about how much to cut, how soon to cut, and what flakey excuse should be offered to justify it.

Well, the hell with both of them!

Neither can possibly know the “correct” overnight interest rate (i.e., Fed funds), to say nothing of the level and shape of the entire yield curve all the way out to 30-year bonds or even 50-year loan maturities. The right levels for all the interest rates along the entire yield curve are constantly on the move and shape-shifting at any moment in time owing to a blizzard of changing real-world conditions with respect to the supply and demand for funds, and the undulations of the underlying macro-economy.

Indeed, the very idea of administered or state-pegged interest rates is as unworkable, counter-productive, and absurd as each and every failed past experiment in wage, price, profit, and rent controls with respect to Main Street commerce in daily bread, shelter, clothing, and transit has shown. And most especially so when the far superior alternative of a vast, liquid free market in debt and all other forms of financial assets is readily available.

The reason we have administered interest rates rather than free market rates, of course, is due to the great big Keynesian bugaboo about financial instability, the oscillations of the business cycle, and the alleged grand collapse of capitalism during the Great Depression.

That is, the implicit claim is that unless we have an all-powerful interest rate Sherpa managing debt yields and the related economic activity, a free market in money, debt, real estate, and other financial assets will inexorably tumble into thundering instability and ultimately send the main street economy into depressionary collapse.

The truth is, this is unmitigated humbug. In the first place, it is obvious that the financial and economic instability we have had during the half-century since the dollar was unshackled from its anchor in gold in 1971 has been caused by the “start and stop” policy interventions and interest rate pegging cycles of the Fed itself, not the free market.

As shown in the graph below, once the 12-person FOMC took lock, stock, and barrel control of the nerve center of capitalism—the financial markets and asset prices— after August 1971, there have been eight recessions and short-run volatility of economic activity that has ranged from +35% to -35% on an annualized basis.

If we were in the betting business, we’d wager that left to his own devices, Mr. Market would likely generate less instability than the Fed-controlled economy has displayed since 1971.

If the volatility reduction and business cycle flattening canard doesn’t cut the mustard in terms of justifying the Fed’s interest rate-pegging regime, neither does the claim that it enhances the trend rate of real economic growth and living standard gains. The underlying presumption is that the free market is too stupid to discover the rate of interest that induces optimum growth, so a monetary politburo known as the FOMC needs to take control of the rate-setting process.

Well, here’s an empirical test that can’t be gainsaid. To wit, between the so-called Fed-Treasury agreement in March 1951 and August 1971, we had a gold-anchored monetary system and a Federal Reserve run with an exceedingly “light touch” by William McChesney Martin. By contrast, after the gamblers of Wall Street brought the credit, housing, and equity markets down with the thundering crash in the fall of 2008, we had a rogue regime of massive money-printing and incessant, heavy financial market intervention by the Fed under Bernanke and his successors.

There is no contest on the growth and prosperity front, however, between the two periods. Real growth as measured by real final sales of domestic product rose at a 3.83% annual rate during the “light touch” era of Q2 1951 to Q2 1971, while the growth rate was barely half of that level at 1.94% between Q4 2007 and Q2 2025. Q.E.D.

Reprinted with permission from David Stockman’s Contra Corner.

The post Central Planning Is the Problem appeared first on LewRockwell.

Donald Trump, recently sporting his red ballcap modestly featuring the words “Trump Was Right About Everything,” is apparently in regular contact with Israel’s genocidal Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Per Netanyahu, the most recent telephonic exchange had Trump expressing full support for the establishment of control over all of Gaza and the West Bank by the Israeli Army. Trump observed that Israel has been losing the “PR” (Public Relations) war over the carnage and must push ahead “with full force” to “finish the job” as quickly as possible.

There are also reports of a scheme perhaps launched during a White House meeting including Trump, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner which would give Palestinians willing to be ethnically cleansed a “relocation package” of $5000 and some other benefits to get the hell out. Where exactly they would go to is not very clear but it would eliminate the bad publicity if the Israeli army’s has to kill all of them. Gaza would then be freed up to develop the long-sought Trump Gaza Riviera under US trusteeship over the ruins and the tens of thousands of unburied bodies.

As the slaughter of mostly women and children in Gaza continues, the American public as well as voters in many European nations have turned sharply against Israel, presumably a manifestation of Trump’s “PR problem” for the Jewish state. But Israel is striking back with its own weapons, namely the tools that it has used to corrupt the government and media in the United States and all across Europe. There are numerous Jewish organizations as well as Christian Zionist churches backed by the ample funds contributed by Jewish billionaires that make sure that politicians and journalists know which side their bread is buttered on. But it is generally conceded that the most powerful component of the Israel Lobby is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC openly declares that its principal purpose is to strengthen the relationship between Israel and the United States. That actually in practice means subordinating US interests to those of the Jewish state but no politician or journalist on the make is going to defy AIPAC and cut off both the largesse and the political support. AIPAC says it has five million members, 17 regional offices, and “a vast pool of donors.” In 2022, it had 376 employees, an endowment of more than $10 million plus more than $79 million in revenue. AIPAC’s claims to be bipartisan – at its yearly policy conference in 2016 it featured both major parties’ nominees: Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump.

One of AIPAC’s most prized initiatives is the arranging fully paid for trips by Congressmen and other prominent influencers to Israel, where they are wined and dined and fed the full panoply of lies that the Israelis use to justify their horrific agenda. The trips are in full violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA) rules that organizations that operate on behalf of foreign governments must register and provide full information providing transparency both on their funding and their meeting with foreign government officials. As the last president to actually seek to have an Israel Lobby entity register was John F Kennedy, his fate might explain why none of the presidents since that time have attempted to do the same.

AIPAC’s latest trick was to send 22 House of Representative Republicans to Israel over the Congressional recess in August where they were hosted by Benjamin Netanyahu himself during what was dubbed a “week long educational seminar”. Netanyahu’s office said in a statement. “The Prime Minister briefed the members of Congress on the war in the Gaza Strip and commented on the issue of the humanitarian assistance and the mendacious campaign being waged by Hamas against the State of Israel.” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, a Christian Zionist know nothing, was leading a separate delegation of five leading Republicans. He was treated to a private dinner with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Meanwhile, waiting in the wings was a group of 23 Democratic Party congressmen who descended on Israel after the Republicans departed, also funded by AIPAC. The Democrat delegation was led by House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar of California and Representative Steny Hoyer of Maryland. Steny Hoyer has led 20 Congressional trips to Israel.

Journalist Glenn Greenwald has observed how members of the US Congress travel to Israel more than any other country by a large margin. In fact, they make “more trips to Israel than to the entire Western Hemisphere and the continent of Africa combined.” That fact added to the other blandishments offered by the Israel Lobby to “opinion makers” means that Congress and the Media are dramatically pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian to an extent which the American public does not share. In Israel there is no such problem, with a recent poll indicating that a majority of the Jewish Israeli public believing that Palestinians are little more than animals and “should be killed.”

The non-existence status of Palestinians has in fact been a hallmark of the Trump Administration’s foreign policy. The latest move to place the Palestinians in a separate category when it comes to their being allowed to exist at all has come from the US State Department, which has blocked the issuance of visas for the Palestinian delegation which was expected to attend the opening of the United Nations General Assembly session later this month in New York. The State Department said it was doing this to hold the Palestinian Authority and the PLO “accountable for not complying with their commitments, and for undermining the prospects for peace” and there were also evidence-free claims that some of the delegation might have terrorist connections with Hamas. This was followed a few days later by a decision by the State Department to block the issuance of visas to any holder of a Palestinian Authority passport, even including Palestinians who have family in the United States. The new measures will affect visas for medical treatment, university studies, visits to friends or relatives and business travel.

The visa moves come on top of the ghastly tale regarding the fate of a number of Gazan children who were badly injured or wounded by the Israelis and who had the good fortune to fall into the hands of a US-based charity called HEAL PALESTINE that was able to get them out of the Strip for medical treatment in the United States and elsewhere. The children were in need of major surgery and other complicated treatment and were accompanied by at least one of their parents in most cases as they were unable to function independently. The blocking of the children came soon after a right-wing American Zionist extremist, Laura Loomer, described Palestinians from Gaza being brought to the United States for treatment as “jihadis” and “a national security threat.” Inevitably, after America’s Zionist cheering section learned of the arrival of the sixty or so children in the US and went to work, the US State Department, blocked the issuance of any more visas and is now engaged in a “full and thorough investigation” into how the travel was approved and arranged in the first place.

The moves against Palestinian travelers apparently came after a Netanyahu request to Secretary of State Marco Rubio to lower the profile of Palestinians who are likely to be in a position to protest publicly against behavior of Israel in Gaza and on the West Bank. The visa and travel curbs also follow declarations by a number of US allies, including France, the United Kingdom and Canada, that they plan to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN in the coming weeks. Some Trump officials, including the president himself, have strongly opposed this drive for international recognition, which Israel has condemned.

Palestinian officials have inevitably denounced the US action as a deliberate attempt to silence them at a time when Gaza faces mass displacement, starvation, and what UN and International courts have described as a genocide. The US move has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts and international diplomats, who say it violates the 1947 UN Headquarters Agreement, which obligates the United States in its role as the host country to facilitate access for all accredited delegations.

This has led to pushback by the United Nations itself, which reportedly has decided to stage the opening session of the General Assembly in Geneva instead of New York. In fact, in 1988, the UN similarly relocated to Geneva because the US denied a visa to Yasser Arafat, then head of the PLO. The current relocation is similarly intended to insure full Palestinian participation, particularly in a scheduled September 22nd segment which will be dedicated to Palestinian rights. President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to address the Assembly in Geneva, where he will call for international protection, recognition of Palestinian sovereignty, and accountability for Israeli war crimes.

The Geneva session is also expected to increase calls for action under the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, which empowers the General Assembly to recommend steps to take when the Security Council is unable to act due to political obstruction through exercise of vetos or lack of consensus. Advocacy groups are urging the UN to consider deploying an international protection force to Gaza and to suspend Israel’s privileges within the UN system until full humanitarian access is restored. It might also be useful to suspend the United States’ privileges, most particularly including its permanent veto rights on the Security Council, but, alas, that is perhaps asking for way too much!

Reprinted with permission from Unz Review.

The post Making Palestinians Go Away appeared first on LewRockwell.

Apparently taking a page out of former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte’s drug-war playbook, President Trump is taking credit for the intentional military killings of eleven people in international waters near Venezuela.

Duterte is on trial right now before the International Criminal Court for allegedly ordering his drug-war goons to kill accused drug-war offenders on sight — that is, without arrest, prosecution, trial, and due process of law.

That’s what Trump just did. He ordered his military drug-war goons to blow a boat out of the water that was traveling in international waters near Venezuela, killing, Trump proudly claimed, eleven people in the process.

No stopping of the boat to search it. No arrests. No grand-jury indictments. No trials in federal district court. None of that. On Trump’s orders, his military drug-war goons dutifully, loyally, and obediently fired military projectiles at the boat knowing full well that they would be killing all of the boat’s occupants.

In my opinion, that’s just murder, pure and simple. Sure, it’s legalized murder. After all, there is no chance whatsoever that Trump’s Justice Department will seek criminal charges against Trump and his military killers. Even if it did, there is no possibility whatsoever that the U.S. Supreme Court would permit the charges to stand, given the extreme deference that the Court has always paid to the U.S. national-security establishment. The International Criminal Court has no jurisdiction over U.S. officials and even if it did, there is no doubt that Trump and his military drug-war goons would ignore any criminal proceeding against them anyway.

Let’s keep in mind something important: Drug-war offenses are criminal offenses. Even though we all call it a “war on drugs,” it is not a war in the true sense of the term. That is, we are not talking about a war like World War I or World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or the U.S. undeclared wars of aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan. We are talking about federal criminal offenses, not acts of war.

That means that under our system of constitutional government, people are presumed to be innocent of criminal offenses until proven guilty in a court of law. Under the U.S. Constitution, which is supposed to control the actions of federal officials, U.S. officials are prohibited from simply killing people who they suspect have committed a crime, especially because everyone is innocent under the law until proven guilty in a court of law. As the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, federal officials, including the president, the military, the CIA, DEA, and ICE, are expressly prohibited from depriving anyone of life without due process of law, which means, at a minimum, formal notice of criminal charges and a trial.

None of those eleven people who Trump and his military drug-war goons just killed was ever convicted of anything in a court of law. Nonetheless, Trump and his military drug-war goons knowingly, intentionally, and deliberately deprived them of life by shooting them dead, simply because Trump and his military drug-war goons were convinced that their victims were committing drug-related offenses.

Prior to Trump, U.S. drug-war policy in international waters has been consistent with the principles of American criminal jurisprudence (even though one could be forgiven for wondering why U.S. officials have the legal authority to enforce their drug war in international waters). If the U.S. Coast Guard, for example, suspects a boat traveling in international waters of carrying illegal drugs, Coast Guard officials stop it, board it, and search it. If illegal drugs are found, the occupants of the boat are transported to the United States, indicted, and tried for drug-related offenses in U.S. District Court.

That’s obviously not what Trump and his military drug-war goons did. They just blew that boat out of the water with the obvious intent to kill all of its occupants. Who needs a stinking trial, due process, and pesky criminal defense attorneys? Much easier to simply murder those drug-war suspects and save the taxpayers a lot of money.

What are those deadly U.S. military warships doing off Venezuelan waters anyway? Enforcing the drug war? Don’t make me laugh. Does anyone really believe that blowing up that boat and killing those eleven people will help bring “victory” in the decades-old, ongoing, never-ending, perpetual war on drugs? If you believe that, I’ve got a really nice bridge in the Sahara desert I’d like to sell you. Nothing — repeat nothing! — will ever win the war on drugs, except drug legalization. In fact, not even Rodrigo Duterte won the war on drugs in the Philippines. The war on drugs is a perpetual racket that will go on forever because there are too many people dependent on it, including both drug cartels and the vast U.S. drug-war governmental bureaucracy.

As James Madison once observed, in Roman times whenever there were signs of rebellion among the people, Roman emperors would start a foreign war, which would cause everyone to rally to the empire and forget what they were rebelling against. As I wrote in my July 22, 2025, article “Get Ready for a Big Foreign Crisis,” don’t be surprised if Trump does the same to suppress the rebellion relating to the continued secrecy of the Jeffrey Epstein files.

And so here we are, with U.S. warships off Venezuelan shores. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if those warships suddenly encountered a Gulf of Tonkin-like “attack,” after which Trump dramatically announces, “We’ve been attacked! Today a couple of Venezuelan rowboats initiated a surprise attack against our powerful warships that were just minding their own business off Venezuelan shores. We now have no choice but to defend ourselves. I have ordered our brave troops to invade Venezuela and effect a regime-change operation by capturing Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro, who we all know is an illegitimate drug lord president, and to bring him back to the United States in chains, where we will parade him down the streets of Washington, D.C., before incarcerating him for the rest of his life in one of our high-security prisons or maybe even just execute him. God bless America.”

In the process, millions of American “patriots” will hop to, click their heels, support the troops, recite the Pledge of Allegiance, sing the Star Spangled Banner, and quickly forget the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

For many years, I have warned against the dangers of combining the war-on-terrorism racket with the drug-war racket, which is precisely what Trump is doing to justify his killing of those eleven individuals. But every American should keep two important things in mind: One, like drug offenses, terrorism itself is a federal criminal offense, not an act of war; and, two, the omnipotent power to kill drug-war suspects in international waters under the rubric of waging the “war on terrorism” can easily be extended to the United States and thereby help destroy the little that is left of American liberty.

Reprinted with permission from The Future of Freedom Foundation.

The post Trump’s Drug-War Murders in the Caribbean appeared first on LewRockwell.

Medicine is built around memorizing foundational axioms from which all other medical decisions and policies are made and any dissenting perspective is relentlessly ridiculed—despite the fact these axioms aren’t always correct. In the case of vaccines, to sustain their market, they have been presented as both “safe and effective,” leading to doctors frequently assuming anyone vaccinated for a disease cannot catch it and that any injuries occurring immediately after vaccination are unrelated coincidence—resulting in a frequent failure by physicians to diagnose either of these.

In turn, throughout my life, I have noticed more people than I can count (including groups of people) come down with the flu after they receive the flu vaccine. Whenever this is brought up in medical circles, the response typically is “correlation is not causation” and being lectured on the fact the injected influenza vaccine does not contain any live viruses so it can’t give you the flu.

More recently, I (and quite a few of my colleagues) noticed that this also happened with the COVID vaccine and more concerningly, we would come across cases where the person we knew not only got COVID but in some cases became severely ill, had to be hospitalized and then died. While this was understandably “denied,” I soon came across research from the adverse event reporting databases which showed that the two most common causes of death seen in association with the COVID-19 vaccines were heart issues (e.g., dying suddenly) and COVID-19, with the heart issues typically being clustering near the time of vaccination, while after a few weeks, the most commonly reported cause of death following a COVID-19 vaccine was…COVID-19.
Note: this is also shown in national trends of COVID-19 cases and deaths, as they tended to spike after vaccination campaigns were conducted.

Since I saw this so frequently, it left me wondering exactly what was happening.
Note: one of the most convincing cases I saw came from a response submitted to a survey (Steve Kirsch had me analyze) where a man reported having a PCR confirmed (a-symptomatic) COVID-19 infection which immediately progressed to a severe infection after vaccination.

Initially, I suspected this was due to a hyper-inflammatory process. This was because many of the complications of COVID-19 are due to the immune system’s response to the virus rather than the virus itself (e.g., in hospitalized patients, as the disease progresses, the viral load often drops, but despite the virus being eliminated, the patients become more ill and the illness becomes more fibrotic in nature).
Note: one of the most interesting models I came across to treat COVID-19 came from Shankara Chetty, a South African doctor who concluded the body was forming an allergic response to the spike protein, which in turn necessitated either eliminating the virus early on (so this would not happen) or treating it as an allergy once the second phase began. Given that this worked for 7,000 people and his model matched what many of us observed, I found this theory quite compelling.

Since vaccines excessively stimulate the immune system, I theorized that the inflammatory response the vaccines create are tipping an already stressed system over the edge into a dangerous hyperinflammatory state.
Note: this is a common component of the Cell Danger Response, a chronic dysfunctional mitochondrial process which underlies many chronic conditions including chronic fatigue, long COVID and vaccine injuries.

This hypothesis in turn was reinforced by an inconvenient discovery with the HPV vaccine. For reference, the HPV vaccine was pushed upon the world under the theory that a chronic HPV infection could transform cervical tissue into cancerous tissue, and that since HPV was thus the cause of cervical cancer, preventing women from getting HPV through a vaccine could hence prevent women from getting cervical cancer.

Unfortunately, there were a lot of holes in that chain of logic. One of these was the discovery that if someone was vaccinated for a strain of HPV they already had, it significantly increased their risk of getting cervical cancer.

Note: an identical effect was also found with GlaxoSmithKline’s competing HPV vaccine Cervarix. In a previous article on the subject of disease provocation, I took a deeper dive on the HPV vaccine provocation data and the other immense dangers of the vaccine.

However, requiring women to be tested for HPV prior to getting the vaccine would have significantly reduced vaccine sales (e.g., those who had already been infected wouldn’t vaccinate and many patients wouldn’t return for a follow-up visit once their negative test results had come in). This I believe explains why a decision was made to ignore this glaring problem and instead simply recommend beginning HPV vaccination at a much younger age (at 9-12) under the hope this would precede their first sexual exposure to the virus—which was unfortunate because the HPV vaccine had a very high rate of severe side effects, and it was not dosed at a lower amount for younger (and hence smaller) children.
Note: similarly, while individuals acutely ill with COVID were encouraged to wait a few days before vaccinating, the current guidelines do not advocate for having PCR test for COVID prior to vaccination (despite the fact so many were given that many Americans were receiving them on a weekly basis).

Like the COVID-19 example, I assumed “negative vaccine efficacy” had to be due to a hyperinflammatory response from vaccination (as the reason HPV created cervical cancer was due to the chronic inflammation it created in the cervical tissue).

Recently, as I began reviewing a remarkable collection of literature on the forgotten dangers of vaccination, I discovered that what I had observed with these vaccines was actually a longstanding problem that had been seen in the past with many other vaccinations, but sadly, again and again, that lesson was forgotten. Because of this data, I now believe this primary issue is not excessive inflammation but rather vaccine-induced immune suppression.

Note: a variety of mechanisms have been proposed to explain the significant immune suppression observed following COVID-19 vaccination (e.g., the COVID vaccine being shown to destroy of the hematopoietic stem cells which create a pivotal part of the immune system or antibody dependent enhancement—something known to observe with various vaccines including influenza and SARS). In this article I will primarily focus on one mechanism.

Original Antigenic Sin

Original Antigenic Sin (OAS) refers to the observation that if someone is vaccinated for a different strain than what is currently circulating (e.g., of the flu) they tend to have a worse immune response than those who were never vaccinated. Furthermore, multiple studies have shown that OAS affects completely different species (e.g., if you receive an influenza vaccine, you are less able to mount a response to “flus” caused by other respiratory viruses) and that OAS can persist for at least a year after vaccination.

Note: in a previous article, I discussed a 2009 article, a 2009 study, a 2010 review, a 2010 study, and a 2013 study (published in peer-reviewed journals such as the Lancet), which collectively found a 40-166% increase in the likelihood of getting infected with a virus which differed from the strain you were vaccinated against (e.g., a pandemic influenza strain which had a greater risk of hospitalization) and up to a 100 fold increase in one’s viral load (which increases transmission). Additionally, in children who received a non-matching influenza vaccine, a 2012 study found they were 267% more likely to be hospitalized for influenza and another 2012 study found that 29.0% developed an infection with a non-influenza upper respiratory virus (compared to 3.4% of the unvaccinated). Finally, a 2023 study inadvertently showed influenza vaccination significantly increased one’s risk of being hospitalized for the flu.

OAS is thought to be a result of off-target immunity leading to partial immune suppression. Specifically, since the immune system has a finite ability to respond to threats, if it becomes hyper-primed to target one antigen (e.g., the vaccine antigen it is continually provoked to target), its focus is diverted away from other antigens it needs to respond to. This in turn makes sense since the immune system (which does not have an infinite number of immune cells) has to prioritize targeting life threatening infections, but unfortunately, since it did not evolve in tandem with the era of vaccination, it is not always prepared to appropriately to respond to the artificial immune stimulation vaccinations create.
Note: typically speaking, vaccine components persist in the body for a prolonged period (as the immune system cannot break down the immunostimulatory aluminum adjuvant they contain). This issue became a much greater problem with the COVID vaccines because the body has difficulty breaking down the synthetic mRNA they contain, which in many cases has led to the (immunostimulating) vaccine spike protein still being produced more than a year after vaccination.

In the case of influenza vaccinations, since the vaccines require months to produce and hence need to be made before the seasonal circulating strain is known, the wrong strain is frequently chosen. This leads to the annual vaccine often being ineffective, and worse still, frequently leading to OAS and exacerbating the existing flu season.
Note: in most “bad” influenza years, I typically hear colleagues argue that it’s a bad season because the wrong vaccine was chosen, but it’s still essential to vaccinate because had lots of people not vaccinated, that year’s flu would have been even worse (an effective marketing slogan which was repurposed throughout COVID). However, my own experience has been that whenever I saw someone in the ICU for an influenza infection during one of those “bad” seasons, their chart always showed they were vaccinated—an observation directly supported by some of the studies I linked to above.

Disease enhancement from a mismatching vaccine is a rarely discussed but well-known problem. For example, a reader and physician who worked in the NIH was assigned to study this issue from 2009-2011 and followed a cohort of vaccinated children and pregnant months over 3 flu seasons also discovered a clear trend of negative vaccine efficacy. When she submitted her analysis, however, she was removed from the NIH and blacklisted from future employment (and as a result, she understandably harbors great disdain for Anthony Fauci).

The solution Fauci and the NIH in turn pushed for was to utilize mRNA technology to produce seasonal influenza vaccines since the production time for them was much shorter (so they could begin being produced once the circulating flu strains were essentially known). Unfortunately, since SARS-CoV-2 mutated much faster than a typical influenza virus, even with this shortened production time, it was still not quick enough to match the circulating variants (even when now boosters were rolled out multiple times each year).

In turn, because of the focus over the last few years on studying everything related to COVID, a study of 51011 people at the Cleveland Clinic gave the most overt proof of OAS I have seen in the scientific literature as more vaccinations were directly correlated to one’s susceptibility to repeating COVID infections:

Note: there are many cases you can read online of individuals who have received multiple COVID boosters continually getting COVID (e.g., Igor Chudov periodically compiles them).

More recently, the Cleveland clinic published another dataset of 53,402 employees showing that the influenza vaccine actually increased ones likelihood of getting the flu.

One of the most tragic examples of OAS immunosuppression was Peter Aaby’s WHO studies which found childhood DTwP vaccination in Guinea-Bissau (a vaccine which is no longer used in the United States due to its toxicity) caused children to be 5 times more likely to die (3.93 for boys and 9.98 for girls)—something, which in most cases, was due to them succumbing from one of the many lethal infectious diseases circulating in Subsaharan Africa. Sadly, while his data was published, it was largely ignored by the global public health apparatus since it would have required abandoning a practice they were deeply invested in.

Read the Whole Article

The post Why Do Vaccines Cause the Illnesses They Prevent appeared first on LewRockwell.

Contrary to the assertions of Scofield-duped Christian Zionist evangelicals, God gave NO everlasting unconditional promise of national perpetuity to the Old Covenant nation of Israel. God’s promises of blessings to Old Covenant Israel were conditional to Israel’s obedience to God.

An unconditional everlasting promise was given to the man Abraham. And this promise was fulfilled in the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ. (Galatians 3:16, 28, 29) But to the nation of Old Covenant Israel was no such promise given.

In my third Prophecy Message from Romans 11, I provided much Scripture that delineated the differences between the unconditional everlasting seed promise given to Abraham (fulfilled in Christ) and the conditional land promise given to the Old Covenant nation of Israel—a covenant that Israel broke—and God then cursed Israel and took the land away from them forever.

Prophecy Message Three is entitled God’s Chosen People, and we have that message in both a DVD and PDF format.

Moses, the man through whom God gave Israel its conditional covenant, made it crystal clear to the nation just how conditional God’s covenant was to them.

But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:

The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.

The LORD shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies: and shalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth.

Thy sons and thy daughters shall be given unto another people.

And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither the LORD shall lead thee.

Thou shalt beget sons and daughters, but thou shalt not enjoy them; for they shall go into captivity.

Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee:

And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed for ever.

Because thou servedst not the LORD thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, for the abundance of all things;

Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which the LORD shall send against thee, in hunger, and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things: and he shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee.

And it shall come to pass, that as the LORD rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the LORD will rejoice over you to destroy you, and to bring you to nought; and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it.

(See Deuteronomy 28:15 – 68)

In these and many other passages of Scripture, God promised to remove the children of Israel from the promised land (Canaan) forever, because of their disobedience. In this chapter in Deuteronomy, Moses predicted the destruction of Israel by the Assyrians, the destruction of Judah by the Babylonians and the destruction of the Judahite remnant by the Romans.

In short, Old Covenant Israel violated its covenant with God, and God did what Moses declared He would do: He expelled them from the promised land and destroyed their nation forever. The Israelis in Palestine today are NOT Biblical Israelites; they are NOT the biological descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; and they are NOT God’s chosen people.

The Israelis are the children of Japheth, not Shem, as are the rest of the Eastern Europeans from which they descended. They have ZERO God-given land covenant in Palestine. They have ZERO promise of national perpetuity from God; there is ZERO promise from God for anyone who attempts to bless, assist, aid or support the Zionist state.

In truth, from its very inception in 1948, the State of Israel has proven itself to be a devilish, murderous, barbaric people—a plague of racism, hatred, ethnic cleansing, war and genocide upon the world. And the more the United States has entangled itself economically, militarily, morally and spiritually with Israel, the more America has invoked the curse of God upon it to the point that today America is little more than a vassal state of the most vile, wicked and bloodthirsty country on the planet.

And after two years of supporting Israel’s maniacal genocide in Gaza, the people of the entire world hold both Israel and the United States in utter contempt. And for good reason. America’s financial and military support for Israel’s crimes against humanity in Palestine are contemptible.

Donald Trump has proven himself to be as much or more of a lackey for Israel as Joe Biden. He is the one man in the world that has the capability to put an end to Israel’s slaughter of innocents in Gaza and the West Bank, but he refuses to do it. As with almost the entire Congress in Washington, D.C., Trump is nothing more than a pimp for Israel. They are all bought and paid for by the Israel lobby. They are the worst kind of prostitutes. They make street walkers look like Sunday School teachers by comparison.

But, ladies and gentlemen, Israel is doing more than murdering hundreds of thousands of innocents; it is expediting its own destruction. Israel has passed the point of no return. Its collapse is certain—and probably imminent.

As it always does, the Western media ignored it, but Yemen’s Houthis delivered a devastating missile attack against Israel, after Israel assassinated Yemen’s civilian prime minister and 12 of his cabinet members.

Here is a YouTube technical analysis from Conflict Skies & Steel of the attack:

Today we are witnessing a historic escalation in the Middle East that is shaking the foundations of regional security. Yemen’s Houthis have launched a daring strike against Israel, targeting the heart of Tel Aviv with a combination of long-range missiles and advanced drones.

This is not just a headline, it is a demonstration of reach, precision and the growing boldness of non-state actors in the modern battlefield. The world is now watching closely as the Houthis challenge one of the most technologically advanced nations in the region, sending a clear and shocking message to Israel and its allies.

Tel Aviv, a city known for its bustling economy and dense population, is now under fire with emergency sirens blaring and streets evacuated in panic. Smoke rises from multiple districts, while Israel’s air defense systems scramble to intercept incoming threats.

The scale of this attack is unlike anything seen in recent years, highlighting a new phase in asymmetric warfare, where precision and surprise trump sheer size and firepower. Citizens report sudden explosions, shaking windows and streets filled with confusion, a stark reminder that modern conflict can reach civilian centers with devastating speed.

The Iron Dome has successfully neutralized a large portion of the attack, but gaps in coverage were exposed, demonstrating that even the most sophisticated defense networks are not infallible.

Streets once crowded with civilians now appear deserted, as emergency sirens and warnings drive people into shelters. This attack is remarkable for its precision, with missiles targeting strategic locations rather than random destruction, showcasing the Houthis’ intelligence and tactical planning.

For Israel, this is a psychological blow as much as a physical one. The population’s sense of security is shaken, and the government must quickly reassess its defensive posture.

Conflict Skies and Steel [YouTube Channel] has been closely analyzing the data, and what stands out is the speed, coordination and audacity of this operation, reflecting a level of sophistication that goes far beyond what many had expected from Houthi capabilities.

The interior of this operation, though brief in visible details, tells a story of meticulous planning and technological evolution. The Houthi appear to have synchronized multiple missile launches with drone operations to overwhelm Israel’s defenses. Open-source satellite imagery suggests that launch sites were strategically positioned and camouflaged deep inside Yemeni territory. Real-time intelligence likely guided the drones to ensure maximum accuracy. The operation reflects a calculated approach, balancing the need for impact with operational security to avoid exposing critical assets.

Even with limited resources compared to a conventional army, the Houthis demonstrated that precision, timing and adaptability are force multipliers capable of challenging the world’s strongest defenses.

Performance of the strike has been extraordinary. Missiles reportedly traveled over 100 to 200 kilometers, demonstrating a significant extension of Houthi range capabilities. The simultaneous use of drones adds an unpredictable element, complicating interception strategies.

The attack successfully stressed Israel’s air defense systems, creating gaps that allowed some missiles to reach their targets. Analysts are evaluating the types of missiles used, with indications of modified scud variants and precision-guided munitions.

Drones provided real-time reconnaissance, potentially allowing operators to adjust trajectories mid-flight. This combination of missiles and UOV highlights the Houthis’ ingenuity, blending traditional long-range attacks with modern drone technology to create a complex battlefield problem.

The unique selling points of this Houthi operation are clear and remarkable.

First, the ability to strike Tel Aviv from Yemen demonstrates a significant leap in operational reach and capability.

Second, the synchronized use of multiple weapons systems, including missiles and drones, showcases an integrated approach rarely seen from non-state actors.

Third, the psychological impact on both Israel and the international community is immense, sending a signal that the Houthis can operate far beyond their traditional theater of conflict.

In conclusion, Yemen’s Houthi strike on Tel Aviv is both shocking and strategically significant. It exposes vulnerabilities in advanced air defense systems, demonstrates the evolution of non-state actors into formidable military threats and emphasizes the psychological and political dimensions of modern warfare.

Civilians are facing unprecedented threats, militaries are forced to reconsider their strategies and analysts are left re-evaluating the assumptions of regional power dynamics.

Israel is hemorrhaging economically, militarily, culturally, politically, psychologically, emotionally and internationally.

The Zionist experiment is over.

Almost every country in the world sees Israel for the satanic monster that it is, and they are enraged. The only major government in the world that remains unconditionally supportive of Israel is the United States—and among the population of the U.S., opposition to Israel is two to one. And Donald Trump’s favorability rating is now worse than was Joe Biden’s—mainly due to his sycophantic support for Israel.

Geopolitical, academic, military and intelligence experts such as Col. Douglas Macgregor, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Major Scott Ritter, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Professor John Mearsheimer, intelligence officers Larry Johnson, Ray McGovern and Phil Giraldi are unanimous in the opinion that Israel’s collapse will come sooner than later.

Netanyahu and his fellow fascists in Israel are possessed with the intention of slaughtering or removing all 2 million Palestinians in Gaza. They really do intend to turn Gaza into Trump’s Riviera of the Middle East. Then, they fully intend to ethnically cleanse the West Bank. Then, they intend to conquer Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Then, they intend to liquidate the Palestinians and Arabs in Jordan and Eastern Egypt (including Cairo) and seize those land areas, including a large segment of Saudi Arabia.

But their devilish designs for a Greater Israel are falling apart. The little country of Yemen is showing the world that Israel—even with the military support of the United States—is ripe for destruction. After decades of missile attacks from Saudi Arabia and the United States (under both Biden and Trump) the Houthis are still standing toe-to-toe against Israel with much mental acumen and military aptitude.

If Israel is stunned and frightened by Yemen, wait until they attack Iran again and see what happens. Plus, the money-worshipping Arab states in the Persian Gulf that have sat back like scared little pussycats and done NOTHING to help their Arab brethren in Palestine know that history is going to forever shine the light of truth on the Arab monarchies for the moneygrubbing cowards they are, while the Houthis will go down in history as the brave little David who stood courageously against the Zionist Goliath—and won.

Israelis by the thousands are fleeing the country. They know the nation is on its last legs. Netanyahu knows his only hope for staying out of prison (or maybe even staying alive) is to keep Israel at war. He doesn’t care one whit how many innocent people he kills, as long as it keeps him in power. He is a demon-possessed madman. And he is trying his best to drag the United States into all-out war along with him.

And given Trump’s slavish devotion to the Jewish billionaires that have been his financial benefactors throughout his entire life, he is proving to be in no mood to put America first, all of his campaign rhetoric notwithstanding. After all, Trump started seven businesses, and all seven went bankrupt. And all seven times the Zionist billionaires bailed him out. It is a fantasy to think that Trump would put the interests of the United States above those of Israel. Trump is Zionist-owned lock, stock and barrel.

But the question might be: Who will die first, Donald Trump or Israel? Because both are on life support.

Reprinted with permission from Chuck Baldwin Live.

The post The Zionist Experiment Is Over appeared first on LewRockwell.

Publix’s latest back-to-back price rises have raised 12 ounces of Community coffee to $13.60 from $11, 12 ounces of Greenfield uncured bacon to $9.19 from $7.99.  Seattle’s Best coffee held its price by reducing its offering from 12 ounces to 10.  Just to fix a sandwich lunch at home today costs as much as to eat a gourmet evening meal at Claridges in London in 1963.  

Today the nightly price of a room at Claridges is $2,258.  On November 19 the price drops to $1,874.  Today traditional afternoon tea at Claridges is priced from 95 British pounds ($128 dollars) and up per person.  In 1963 the price of a full course evening meal at Claridges for two couples (4 people), with chocolate mousse and vintage port totaled 20 British pounds which was $56.  So, in 1963 four persons could enjoy a full course meal at one of the finest restaurants in the world for half the price one person pays for an afternoon tea today. 

I can’t imagine the price of the 1963 dinner meal for four that I participated in today.  Looking at the restaurants bar prices, one fluffy margarita royal cost 2 British pounds more than our gourmet dinner for four.

The cheapest dinner menu today for four is 360 British pounds.  Compared to the 20 pounds of my day, it is devoid of exotic offerings.  No chocolate mousse.  No vintage port. Today even Claridges offers a Signature Burger at 32 British pounds. A hamburger on Claridges’s dinner menu was an impossibility in 1963-64.

 If you go to the a la cart menu, you can get a selection of oysters, tuna curdo, scallop ceviche, Cornish crab and a whole lobster for 185 British pounds, which is $250. If we add a starter of a half dozen raw oysters on the half shell at 32 British pounds and an iceberg lettuce and avocado salad at 22 pounds, and some miso glazed carrots at 8 pounds, we have a dinner for one priced at 247 British pounds or $336. For four people the bill today would be $1,344 compared to $56 in 1963, and the present day dinner doesn’t reach the level on the one I had in 1963, which came to 5 British pounds per person.  There is no vintage port and no chocolate mousse.

I turned to Claridges’ current wine menu. There is no vintage port on the menu.  There is no Veuve Clicquot champagne on the menu and no Dom Perignon. A bottle of Krug, Grande Cure is 450 pounds or $605.  Apparently, not even oil sheiks and narcotics barons can afford vintage port.

I have used restaurant prices as an example of inflation, about which more I will write in a moment. It is not the British who sustain these prices.  It is Arab oil barons and Afghan drug cartels, and perhaps CIA  and MI6 agents on expense accounts hoping to infiltrate these organizations.  The example shows not only a decline the quality of an evening meal that even Claridges can offer, but its inaccessibility to any but the rich. In 1963-64 when I enjoyed Claridges I was a graduate student on scholarship with wife at Oxford University.  Imagine that today.

I used to write more about economics and inflation.  But I found that economics was not a popular subject with my audience.  As best as I could figure, the reason is that most thought economics was too difficult to understand.  Moreover, they thought they knew enough.  For Republicans the problem was the government spent too much and burdened the economy with too much debt.  For Democrats the problem was that the rich had too much money, saved too much of it, and left the economy with insufficient consumer demand to maintain full employment. For one party the solution was to cut government; for the other party the solution was to increase it.

My economic lesson for today is that having lived for decades with economists’ explanations of inflation, there is one that they have overlooked.  Inflation is caused by Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, and the media declaring its presence.  Once inflation is declared, everyone has cover to raise his prices.  This is our present cause of inflation.  It is a way of boosting profits.  Inflation is declared, using for example, Trump’s might be tariffs,  and Community Coffee jumps from $11 to $13.60, bacon from $8 to $10.  Organic eggs never came down from the virus that resulted in the slaughter, for some reason, only of egg laying chickens.  Organic eggs are approaching one dollar per egg.  I can remember when a dozen eggs cost 69 cents.

In past writings I have pointed out that the Bureau of Labor Statistics measures inflation in a manner than minimizes it.  The same for unemployment.  The numbers have little, if any, reliability. Yet markets are moved by the announcement of fake numbers.  

This is endemic.  What controls stock prices more than speculation about the Fed’s next move on interest rates?  If the Fed is expected to lower interest rates, up goes stock prices.  If the Fed is expected to raise interest rates, down go stock prices.  Equity prices are determined by the amount of money chasing them, not by the soundness of the company’s position and earnings record.

How is it that despite what we constantly hear about the growth in knowledge and education, increasingly unreality is taking the place of reality?  

Recently I read a scary article that children who spend their time in video games have difficulty in transitioning from virtual reality into real reality, which is perhaps a development that our masters intend.

The post Inflation Is Caused by the Announcement of Its Arrival appeared first on LewRockwell.

I don’t even know where to start with Lex Fridman’s 10 hour interview with Scott Horton. All I can really say is that if you’re a foreign policy geek and you have followed or been aware of U.S. military interventions since the end of the cold war, you honestly have to listen to this. Scott rambles off the top of his head the whole time. It’s absolutely incredible! I can honestly say that he is the most underrated policy wonk in probably the history of our country.

From Neocons to Afghanistan, to Israel, Syria, Iraq, Iran and everything in between, Scott just runs wild with it all.

I frequently talk about the Wolfowitz Doctrine — the Neocon “new world order” US-is-the-king-of-the-world policy since the end of the cold war. What I didn’t know is that the Neocons were also helping to implement Israel’s own Yinon Plan. Just from the standpoint of the Neocon to Israel connection, Scott’s take on why we always do Israel’s bidding even though it isn’t in our country’s interests to do so comes full circle.

He has every footnote, every article, and every source to back it all up. He’s literally a walking encyclopedia and we’re all not worthy.

I get it. This isn’t a 5 minute easily consumable 3×5 card. It’s not for everyone. But damn, this is THE rabbit hole! This is the “red pill.” It is time well spent.

The post Scott Horton Brain Dump on Lex Fridman appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

Real Raw News

The post JAG Arrests Former Deputy AG Sally Yates for TREASON appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

John Leake

The post Interview with Jenny McCarthy appeared first on LewRockwell.

The real Soviet story is brutal. This documentary, based on released KGB files, is uncompromising. Though it starts by telling the story of the murder of millions of Ukrainians in the “Holodomor” in 1933, the 2008 documentary film goes far beyond merely exposing Soviet atrocities.

The film shows the close connections – philosophical, political and organizational – between the Nazi and Soviet systems. Russians, who have spent decades whitewashing their own history and making Soviet communism palatable, protested the film.

The Soviet Story offers an alternative history of an Allied power which helped the Nazis to fight Jews and which slaughtered its own people on an industrial scale. The Soviet Story’ also discusses the impact of the Soviet legacy on modern day Europe and helps us understand Vladimir Putin’s attack on Ukraine.

The post The Real Historical Story of the Soviet Union, Unvarnished and Pulling No Punches appeared first on LewRockwell.

Throughout all of human history, central planning has a perfect 100% failure rate. Yet, there is never a shortage of central planners. Even America, which began with a very limited government, has morphed into a web of planners, and agencies, and red tape, and unelected bureaucrats galore. Prices are manipulated to such an extreme degree that rational decision-making and investment become near impossible. Forget consumers. The goal is to get in charge of the state, and force your will onto everyone else. Eventually, this all falls to pieces; and everyone is forced to re-learn what freedom and limited government means again … That is, until the next batch of central planners arrive on the scene.

The post Stagflation Arrives — Unemployment & Inflation Are Rising Together appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Bill Madden:

The video below, like most communications these days, is entirely too long.  But, you might want to watch about 10 minutes of the video as I feel the warning is legitimate and totally opposite of the feel good B.S. being fed to us every day by the mainstream media.  More people are not concerned because most people are ignorant and apathetic

Also, I don’t feel comfortable having a political leader like Donald Trump who was elected because he wasn’t Kamala.  If overly large egos equated to effective governance, we’d be in good shape but overly large egos are a detriment to effectiveness in any endeavor.

Trump is upset with Putin because he won’t stop the war in Ukraine that we started and funded with over $200 billion of taxpayer money.  Putin doesn’t work for Trump.  Trump is upset with Fed Chairman Powell because he won’t lower interest rates when real inflation: www.shadowstats.com is soaring.  Try reducing spending Mr. President and interest rates will eventually come down.  You might begin with the military aid going to Israel and Ukraine.

The post Reality appeared first on LewRockwell.

The History Channel’s Mendacious Propaganda Concerning the World Wars, by Charles Burris

The post Why, as a Former History Teacher, I Never Watch (or Recommend Others to View) the History Channel appeared first on LewRockwell.

Some 1,000 CDC bureaucrats have reportedly signed a letter demanding that RFK, Jr. resign.  What a great gift to RFK, Jr. — and the nation.  Now he knows exactly who to fire immediately.

The post What a Great Gift to RFK, Jr. (and American Taxpayers) appeared first on LewRockwell.

Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato fuori controllo negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa una storia di cartelli, a livello sovrastatale e sovranazionale, la cui pianificazione centrale ha raggiunto un punto in cui deve essere riformata radicalmente e questa riforma radicale non può avvenire senza una dose di dolore economico che potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la loro autorità. Da qui la risposta al Grande Default attraverso il Grande Reset. Questa la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/il-modello-sottostante)

L'Agenzia degli Stati Uniti per lo Sviluppo Internazionale (USAID) si è a lungo presentata come l'organizzazione umanitaria americana che forniva assistenza ai Paesi in via di sviluppo. Con un budget annuale di quasi $40 miliardi e operazioni in oltre 100 Paesi, rappresenta una delle più grandi istituzioni di aiuti umanitari al mondo. Recenti rivelazioni ne svelano la vera natura, qualcosa di molto più sistematico: un architetto della coscienza globale. Basti pensare che Reuters, una delle fonti di informazione più affidabili al mondo, ha ricevuto finanziamenti dalla USAID per i programmi “Inganno sociale su larga scala” e “Difesa contro l'ingegneria sociale”. Sebbene vi sia dibattito sull'esatta portata di questi programmi, le implicazioni sono sconcertanti: una divisione di una delle fonti più affidabili al mondo per un'informazione oggettiva è stata pagata da un'agenzia governativa statunitense per la costruzione di una realtà sistemica. Questo finanziamento va oltre il tradizionale supporto ai media, rappresentando un'infrastruttura deliberata per l'inquadramento del discorso che sfida fondamentalmente il concetto di informazione “oggettiva”.

Ma c'è di più. In quello che sembra un complotto alla Michael Crichton nella vita reale però, le recenti rivelazioni sulla USAID mostrano una portata sbalorditiva di controllo delle narrazioni. Prendiamo Internews Network, una ONG finanziata dall'USAID che ha investito quasi mezzo miliardo di dollari ($472,6 milioni) attraverso una rete segreta, “collaborando” con 4.291 testate giornalistiche. In un solo anno hanno prodotto 4.799 ore di trasmissioni che hanno raggiunto fino a 778 milioni di persone e “formato” oltre 9.000 giornalisti. Non si tratta solo di finanziamenti: è un'infrastruttura sistematica di manipolazione della coscienza.

Le rivelazioni mostrano che la USAID finanzia sia la ricerca “guadagno di funzione” del laboratorio di Wuhan, sia i media che avrebbero modellato la storia attorno a ciò che ne sarebbe emerso; sostenendo organizzazioni che avrebbero fabbricato prove per l'impeachment; finanziando sia i sistemi elettorali che facilitano i risultati, sia i fact-checker che determinano quali discussioni su quali risultati siano consentiti. Ma queste rivelazioni indicano qualcosa di molto più significativo della semplice corruzione.

Non sono emerse dal nulla: provengono da dichiarazioni di sovvenzioni governative, richieste FOIA e documenti ufficiali che non vengono nemmeno nascosti, ma semplicemente ignorati. Come ha osservato il mio vecchio amico Mark Schiffer: “Le verità più importanti oggi non possono essere dibattute: devono essere percepite come totalità”. Il modello, una volta visto, non può essere ignorato. Alcuni potrebbero mettere in discussione i metodi del DOGE, o il ritmo rapido di queste rivelazioni, e queste preoccupazioni costituzionali meritano una discussione seria. Ma questo è un discorso a parte rispetto a ciò che questi documenti rivelano. Le rivelazioni stesse, documentate in documenti ufficiali e dichiarazioni di sovvenzioni, sono innegabili e dovrebbero sconvolgere chiunque tenga alla verità. I ​​mezzi con cui vengono rivelate contano molto meno di ciò che viene rivelato: una delle più grandi operazioni di controllo della narrazione ufficiale della storia.

Nessun ambito è immune – mercati, tecnologia, cultura, salute e, ovviamente, media – e troverete lo stesso schema. Le agenzie di intelligence sono profondamente radicate in ogni ambito, perché plasmare il modo in cui percepiamo la realtà è più potente che controllare la realtà stessa.

Proprio come la moneta fiat ha sostituito il valore reale con il valore dichiarato, ora vediamo lo stesso schema ovunque: la scienza fiat sostituisce l'indagine scientifica con conclusioni predeterminate, la cultura fiat sostituisce lo sviluppo organico con un'influenza gestita, la storia fiat sostituisce l'esperienza vissuta con narrazioni costruite. Viviamo in un'era in cui tutto è fiat – dove la realtà stessa viene dichiarata, non scoperta. E proprio come si crea scarsità artificiale nei sistemi monetari, vengono fabbricate false scelte ovunque, presentandoci binari artificiali che oscurano la vera complessità del nostro mondo. Come ha scritto Schiffer, la realtà non richiede più consenso, solo coerenza. Ma c'è una distinzione cruciale: la vera coerenza emerge naturalmente in più ambiti, riflettendo verità più profonde che non possono essere fabbricate. La coerenza imposta dalla gestione della percezione non è la verità: è un discorso controllato progettato per la coerenza, non per la scoperta. I conti della USAID forniscono ora una prova concreta di come si costruisce questa coerenza artificiale: una realtà programmata in cui l'apparenza della logica è più importante della sostanza effettiva.

Non si tratta solo di abbinamento di schemi, ma di previsione di schemi. Proprio come gli algoritmi imparano a riconoscere e anticipare schemi comportamentali, coloro che comprendono l'architettura di questo sistema possono prevederne le mosse successive prima che vengano eseguite. La questione non è se qualcosa sia “vero” o “falso”, ma capire come i flussi di informazioni plasmano la coscienza stessa.

Per comprendere quanto tutto questo vada in profondità, esaminiamone la metodologia. Come la Dott.ssa Sherri Tenpenny e altri hanno meticolosamente documentato attraverso richieste FOIA e divulgazioni di sovvenzioni governative, lo schema emerge attraverso due vettori di controllo principali:

Controllo delle informazioni

• Da $20.000 a $24.000 all'anno a Politico per gli abbonamenti a E&E News (che, come nota la Tenpenny, faticava a pagare gli stipendi senza questo finanziamento);

• Pagamenti consistenti al New York Times;

• Finanziamenti diretti a BBC Media Action;

• $4,5 milioni al Kazakistan per combattere la “disinformazione”.

Salute e sviluppo sociale

• $84 milioni alle iniziative sanitarie della Clinton Foundation;

• $100 milioni per la cura dell'AIDS in Ucraina;

• Finanziamenti per programmi contraccettivi nei Paesi in via di sviluppo.

Programmazione culturale

• $20 milioni a Sesame Street in Iraq;

• $68 milioni al World Economic Forum;

• $2 milioni per il cambio di sesso e l'attivismo LGBT in Guatemala;

• Iniziative culturali globali (milioni di dollari distribuiti tra programmi LGBTQ in Serbia, progetti su criteri DEI in Irlanda, arti transgender in Colombia e Perù, e promozione del turismo in Egitto).

Ciò che emerge non è solo un elenco di spese, ma un modello per l'architettura della realtà globale: dal Kazakistan all'Irlanda, dalla Serbia al Perù, dal Vietnam all'Egitto, non c'è un angolo del mondo che non sia toccato da questo sistema. Non si tratta semplicemente di una distribuzione di risorse, ma di un'infrastruttura strategica di influenza globale. Ogni allocazione, che si tratti di organi di informazione, iniziative sanitarie, o programmi culturali, rappresenta un nodo attentamente posizionato in una rete progettata per plasmare la percezione in molteplici ambiti. Innanzitutto controllare il flusso di informazioni attraverso i finanziamenti ai media, poi stabilire la legittimità attraverso programmi sanitari e di sviluppo sociale, infine rimodellare le strutture sociali attraverso la programmazione culturale. L'obiettivo finale non è solo influenzare ciò che le persone pensano, ma determinare i confini di ciò che può essere pensato, e farlo su scala planetaria.

Per coloro che studiano l'architettura della censura, come Mike Benz documenta da anni, nulla di tutto ciò è una sorpresa. È una simmetria perfetta: sapevamo della censura, ora ne vediamo i confini. Una mano imbocca con gli argomenti di discussione, l'altra con i soldi dei contribuenti. Queste non sono ipotesi; sono fatti documentati. Persino il database dei finanziamenti di Wikipedia contiene oltre 45.000 segnalazioni legate alla USAID, molte delle quali descrivono dettagliatamente corruzione, influenza mediatica e manipolazione finanziaria. Le prove sono sempre state lì, ma sono state ignorate, respinte o sepolte sotto lo stesso apparato di fact-checking che la USAID finanzia. Non si trattava di teorie assurde, erano avvertimenti, e ora finalmente abbiamo i numeri.

E non si limita a controllare le informazioni, la USAID non si limita a plasmare le rappresentazioni mediatiche, ma finanzia anche i sistemi che le applicano. Benz ha lanciato una notizia bomba: la USAID eroga allo sponsor del gruppo che controlla i procuratori finanziati da Soros il doppio ($27 milioni) di quanto eroga Soros stesso ($14 milioni). Non si tratta dell'influenza di un miliardario, ma dell'applicazione, sostenuta dallo stato, di resoconti falsi. La stessa rete che determina cosa si può pensare, determina anche chi persegue i reati, quali leggi vengono applicate e chi ne subisce le conseguenze.

L'influenza della USAID non si limita al finanziamento del controllo dei media, ma si estende anche all'interferenza politica diretta. Non si è limitata a inviare aiuti al Brasile: ha finanziato la censura, sostenuto attivisti di sinistra e contribuito a truccare le elezioni del 2022 contro Bolsonaro.

Benz ha rivelato che l'agenzia ha condotto una “guerra santa per la censura”, sopprimendo sistematicamente i sostenitori di Bolsonaro online e rafforzando al contempo le voci dell'opposizione. Milioni di dollari sono confluiti in ONG che promuovevano la propaganda di sinistra, tra cui il Felipe Neto Institute, che ha ricevuto finanziamenti dagli Stati Uniti mentre gli alleati di Bolsonaro venivano rimossi dalle piattaforme social. La USAID ha anche finanziato gruppi di attivisti in Amazzonia, ha finanziato campagne mediatiche volte a manipolare l'opinione pubblica e ha convogliato denaro in organizzazioni brasiliane che spingevano per una regolamentazione più severa di Internet.

Non si è trattato di aiuti, ma di interferenza elettorale mascherata da promozione della democrazia. La USAID ha utilizzato i soldi delle tasse americane per decidere il futuro del Brasile, e probabilmente ha utilizzato tattiche simili in molti altri Paesi, il tutto sotto le mentite spoglie dell'assistenza umanitaria.

E non solo all'estero. Mentre i difensori della USAID sostengono che sia uno strumento di beneficenza e sviluppo nelle nazioni povere, le prove suggeriscono qualcosa di molto più insidioso: è un motore da $40 miliardi per un cambio di governo all'estero, e ora le prove indicano il suo coinvolgimento nella stessa azione in patria. Insieme alla CIA la USAID ha avuto un ruolo nell'impeachment di Trump del 2019, un tentativo illegale di ribaltare un'elezione statunitense utilizzando gli stessi strumenti di manipolazione della percezione e ingegneria politica che impiega all'estero.

Sinistra contro destra, vaccinati contro non vaccinati, Russia contro Ucraina, credenti contro scettici (su qualsiasi argomento): queste false dicotomie servono a frammentare la nostra comprensione, mentre la realtà stessa è molto più sfumata e multidimensionale. Ogni crisi artificiale genera non solo reazioni, ma reazioni a quelle reazioni, creando infiniti strati derivativi costruiti su fondamenta artificiali.

Il vero potere non sta nel fabbricare singoli fatti, ma nel creare sistemi in cui i falsi fatti si autoalimentano. Quando un fact-checker cita un altro fact-checker che cita una “fonte attendibile” finanziata dalle stesse entità che finanziano i fact-checker, lo schema diventa chiaro. La verità non sta in una singola affermazione, ma nel riconoscere come le affermazioni interagiscono per creare un sistema chiuso di realtà artificiale.

Prendiamo ad esempio il dibattito sui vaccini a mRNA: lo schema si manifesta prima della spiegazione, ovvero le persone discutono appassionatamente dell'efficacia senza rendersi conto che l'intero quadro è stato costruito ad hoc. Prima si finanzia la ricerca, poi si finanziano i media per dare forma alla narrazione. Anche gli scettici spesso cadono nella trappola, discutendo sui tassi di efficacia pur accettandone la premessa di base. Nel momento in cui si discute di “efficacia di un vaccino”, si è già perso: si sta usando il loro quadro di riferimento per discutere di quella che è, in realtà, una terapia genica sperimentale. Accettando la loro terminologia, i loro parametri, la loro impostazione della discussione stessa, si sta giocando nella loro realtà costruita. Ogni livello di controllo è progettato non solo per influenzare le opinioni, ma per strutturare preventivamente il modo in cui tali opinioni possono essere formate.

Come imparare a riconoscere una foto truccata o a percepire una nota stonata in una musica, sviluppare un rilevatore di sciocchezze affidabile richiede il riconoscimento di schemi. Una volta che si inizia a vedere come vengono costruite le narrazioni – come il linguaggio viene usato come arma, come vengono costruiti i quadri di riferimento – cambia la lente con cui si guarda il mondo intero. Le stesse agenzie di intelligence che si insinuano in ogni ambito che plasma la nostra comprensione non solo controllano il flusso di informazioni, ma programmano anche il modo in cui elaboriamo quelle informazioni stesse.

Il teatro ricorsivo si svolge in tempo reale. Quando la USAID ha annunciato tagli ai finanziamenti, BBC News si è affrettata ad amplificare le preoccupazioni umanitarie con titoli drammatici su pazienti affetti da HIV e vite in pericolo. Cosa non ha menzionato nei suoi reportage? La USAID è il loro principale finanziatore: finanzia BBC Media Action con milioni di dollari in pagamenti diretti. Guardate come il sistema si protegge: il principale beneficiario dei finanziamenti mediatici della USAID crea propaganda emotiva sull'importanza di quest'ultima, offuscando al contempo il suo rapporto finanziario nei suoi reportage.

Questa autodifesa istituzionale illustra uno schema ricorrente: le organizzazioni finanziate per la costruzione della realtà si proteggono attraverso strati di depistaggio. Quando vengono presentate prove, l'apparato di fact-checking finanziato da questi stessi sistemi entra in azione. Vi diranno che questi pagamenti erano per “abbonamenti” standard, che i programmi che promuovono l'ideologia di genere riguardano in realtà solo “uguaglianza e diritti”. Ma quando la USAID assegna $2 milioni all'Asociación Lambda in Guatemala per “assistenza sanitaria all'affermazione di genere” – soldi spesi per interventi chirurgici, terapia ormonale e consulenza – quegli stessi difensori omettono opportunamente i dettagli, confondendo il confine tra advocacy e intervento diretto. Le stesse organizzazioni finanziate per l'architettura sociale sono quelle che vi dicono che non esiste alcuna architettura sociale. È come chiedere all'incendiario di indagare sull'incendio.

Come personaggi di una grande produzione cinematografica, vedo vecchi amici che ancora si fidano di istituzioni come il New York Times. Anche questa esposizione diventa un potenziale nodo del sistema: l'atto stesso di rivelare i meccanismi del controllo potrebbe essere anticipato, un altro strato del teatro ricorsivo. Nei miei precedenti lavori sulla tecnocrazia, ho esplorato come il nostro mondo digitale si sia evoluto ben oltre la cupola fisica di Truman Burbank. Il suo mondo aveva muri visibili, telecamere e incontri programmati: una realtà costruita da cui poteva teoricamente fuggire raggiungendone i confini. La nostra prigione è più sofisticata: niente muri, niente limiti visibili, solo un contenimento algoritmico che plasma il pensiero stesso. Truman doveva solo navigare abbastanza lontano per trovare la verità. Ma come si fa a navigare oltre i confini della percezione quando l'oceano stesso è programmato?

Certo, la USAID ha fatto del buon lavoro, ma lo ha fatto anche Al Capone con le sue mense popolari. Proprio come l'opera di beneficenza del famigerato gangster lo ha reso intoccabile nella sua comunità, i programmi di aiuto della USAID creano una parvenza di benevolenza che rende politicamente impossibile mettere in discussione la loro agenda. La filantropia di facciata è da tempo uno strumento utilizzato dai potenti per proteggersi dallo scrutinio. Prendiamo in considerazione Jimmy Savile: un celebre filantropo il cui impegno caritatevole gli ha garantito l'accesso a ospedali e bambini vulnerabili, mentre commetteva crimini indicibili in piena vista. La sua immagine, attentamente costruita, lo ha reso irreprensibile per decenni, proprio come la benevolenza istituzionale ora funge da strato protettivo per le operazioni di influenza globale. La vera funzione di organizzazioni come la USAID non è solo l'assistenza: è l'architettura sociale, la formazione della mente e il riciclaggio di denaro dei contribuenti attraverso una rete intricata di ONG e fondazioni.

Questo inganno stratificato si autoalimenta: ogni livello di realtà artificiale è protetto da un altro livello di autorità istituzionale. Queste istituzioni non si limitano a raccontare storie; plasmano l'infrastruttura attraverso la quale le narrazioni vengono diffuse. Per quel che vale, credo che la maggior parte degli strumenti siano di per sé neutrali. Gli stessi sistemi digitali che consentono la sorveglianza di massa potrebbero rafforzare la sovranità individuale. Le stesse reti che centralizzano il controllo potrebbero facilitare la cooperazione decentralizzata. La questione non è la tecnologia in sé, ma se venga impiegata per concentrare o distribuire il potere.

Questa consapevolezza non è nata dal nulla. Coloro che per primi hanno intuito questa artificialità sono stati liquidati come complottisti. Abbiamo notato il coordinamento tra i canali, la strana sincronicità dei messaggi, il modo in cui alcune storie venivano amplificate mentre altre sparivano. Ora abbiamo le prove che mostrano esattamente come quella manipolazione era finanziata e orchestrata.

Conosco intimamente questo viaggio di scoperta. Quando ho iniziato a comprendere i pericoli della tecnologia mRNA, ci ho messo tutto il mio impegno: ho contattato la talentuosissima regista Jennifer Sharp e l'ho aiutata con Anecdotals, il suo documentario sui danni da vaccino. Ero pronto a dare tutto per questa causa, ma poi ho iniziato a guardare oltre. Ho iniziato a vedere come il COVID potesse essere stato un crimine progettato per introdurre le valute digitali delle banche centrali. Più approfondivo l'analisi, più mi rendevo conto che non si trattava di inganni isolati, ma facevano parte di un sistema di controllo più ampio. Il tessuto stesso di ciò che pensavo fosse reale ha iniziato a dissolversi.

Ciò che mi ha turbato di più è stato vedere quanto profondamente la programmazione si basi sull'imitazione. Gli esseri umani sono creature imitative per natura: è così che impariamo, è così che costruiamo la cultura. Ma questa tendenza naturale è stata trasformata in un'arma. Presentavo agli amici studi sottoposti a revisione paritaria, prove documentate, connessioni storiche, solo per vederli rispondere con punti di vista tratti dai media aziendali. Non che non fossero d'accordo, ma non elaboravano nemmeno le informazioni. Stavano confrontando modelli con cronache pre-approvate, esternalizzando il loro pensiero a “esperti fidati” che erano a loro volta intrappolati nella stessa rete di percezioni artificiali. In quel momento ho capito: nessuno di noi sa nulla di certo, stiamo tutti imitando ciò per cui siamo stati programmati. Credere è conoscenza autorevole.

La sfida non è solo smascherare un singolo inganno, ma comprendere come questi sistemi funzionino insieme in modi complessi e non lineari. Quando ci concentriamo sui singoli fili, ci sfugge il disegno più ampio. Come tirare un filo da un maglione e vederlo sfilacciarsi, alla fine ci rendiamo conto che non c'era nessun maglione in primo luogo, ma solo un'illusione intricata. Proprio come un ologramma contiene l'immagine completa in ogni frammento, ogni pezzo di questo sistema riflette il progetto più ampio per la costruzione della realtà.

Pensate ai $34 milioni a Politico: non si tratta solo di un flusso di finanziamenti, ma di una rivelazione olografica dell'intero sistema. Non si tratta solo del fatto che Politico abbia ricevuto denaro; è che questa singola transazione contiene l'intero progetto di gestione della percezione. Il pagamento stesso è un microcosmo: un'agenzia di stampa in difficoltà, finanziamenti governativi, controllo narrativo... ogni elemento riflette il tutto. Questo sistema ricorsivo si protegge attraverso strati di auto-validazione. Quando i critici sottolineano la parzialità dei media, i fact-checker finanziati dallo stesso sistema la etichettano come “già confutata”. Quando i ricercatori mettono in discussione i resoconti ufficiali, le riviste finanziate dagli stessi interessi ne respingono il lavoro. Persino il linguaggio della resistenza – “dire la verità al potere”, “combattere la disinformazione”, “proteggere la democrazia” – è stato cooptato e trasformato in un'arma dallo stesso sistema che avrebbe dovuto sfidare.

La storia del COVID incarna questa manipolazione sistemica. Quella che era iniziata come una crisi di salute pubblica si è trasformata in un esperimento globale di controllo narrativo, dimostrando quanto rapidamente le popolazioni potessero essere rimodellate attraverso messaggi coordinati, autorità istituzionale e paura trasformata in un'arma. La pandemia non riguardava solo un virus; era una dimostrazione di come la cognizione umana potesse essere progettata in modo completo: un singolo nodo che rivelava la vera portata e ambizione della manipolazione del dibattito pubblico.

Pensate al ciclo: i contribuenti americani hanno inconsapevolmente finanziato la crisi stessa, poi hanno pagato di nuovo per essere ingannati al riguardo. Hanno pagato per lo sviluppo della ricerca sul “Guadagno di funzione”, poi hanno pagato di nuovo per la comunicazione che li avrebbe convinti ad accettare mascherine, lockdown e interventi sperimentali. Il sistema è così sicuro del suo controllo psicologico che non si preoccupa nemmeno più di nascondere le prove.

Come ho documentato nella serie Ingegnerizzare la realtà, questo quadro per la gestione della coscienza è molto più profondo di quanto la maggior parte delle persone possa immaginare. Le rivelazioni della USAID non sono episodi isolati: sono scorci di un vasto sistema di progettazione sociale in funzione da decenni. Quando la stessa agenzia che finanzia i fact-checker paga apertamente per “l'inganno sociale”, quando le vostre fonti di informazione fidate ricevono pagamenti diretti per “l'architettura sociale”, il quadro stesso di ciò che consideriamo “reale” inizia a sgretolarsi.

Non stiamo solo osservando lo svolgersi degli eventi: stiamo osservando le reazioni agli eventi artificiali, e poi le reazioni a quelle reazioni, creando una regressione infinita di significati derivati. Le persone formano posizioni appassionate su questioni che sono state costruite, poi altri si definiscono in opposizione a quelle posizioni. Ogni livello di reazione alimenta la fase successiva di consenso orientato. Ciò a cui stiamo assistendo non è solo la diffusione di realtà costruite, ma l'architettura stessa delle tendenze culturali e geopolitiche. Le tendenze artificiali generano reazioni autentiche, che a loro volta generano controreazioni, finché non avremo costruito intere società che rispondono a un teatro attentamente orchestrato. Gli ingegneri sociali non stanno solo orientando le convinzioni individuali, ma stanno rimodellando le fondamenta stesse del modo in cui gli esseri umani danno un senso al mondo.

Queste rivelazioni sono solo la punta dell'iceberg. Chiunque presti attenzione alla profondità e alla depravazione della corruzione sa che questo è solo l'inizio. Con l'emergere di ulteriori informazioni, l'illusione di neutralità, di benevolenza, di istituzioni che agiscono nell'interesse pubblico, crollerà. Nessuno che si impegni veramente con queste informazioni se ne va con una rinnovata fiducia nel sistema. Il cambiamento sta avvenendo solo in una direzione: alcuni più velocemente di altri, ma nessuno in senso inverso. La vera domanda è: cosa succede quando una massa critica raggiunge il punto in cui la sua comprensione del mondo crolla? Quando si renderanno conto che i documenti che plasmano la loro percezione non sono mai stati organici, ma costruiti? Alcuni si rifiuteranno di guardare, preferendo la comodità al confronto, ma per coloro che sono disposti ad affrontarlo, non si tratta solo di corruzione: riguarda la natura stessa della realtà che pensavano di abitare.

Le implicazioni sono sconcertanti non solo per la consapevolezza individuale, ma per la nostra stessa capacità di funzionare come repubblica. Come possono i cittadini prendere decisioni informate quando la realtà stessa è stata frammentata in storie costruite in competizione tra loro? Quando le persone scopriranno che le loro convinzioni più profonde sono state plasmate, che le loro cause appassionate sono state scritte, che persino i loro interessi e gusti culturali sono stati curati, che le loro opposizioni a certi sistemi erano state previste e progettate... cosa rimane dell'esperienza umana autentica?

Ciò che sta per accadere ci porrà di fronte a una scelta: o ritirarci in una comoda negazione, liquidando le prove come “complotti della destra”, o affrontare la sconvolgente consapevolezza che il mondo che pensavamo di abitare non è mai esistito. La mia ricerca degli ultimi anni indica attività ben più nefaste che devono ancora essere svelate: operazioni così atroci che molti si rifiuteranno di elaborarle.

Come ho scritto nell'articolo La seconda Matrix, c'è sempre il rischio di cadere in un altro strato di risveglio controllato. Ma il rischio maggiore sta nel pensare troppo in piccolo, nell'ancorarci a un singolo filo di comprensione. Le rivelazioni della USAID non riguardano solo la rivelazione del ruolo di un'agenzia nel plasmare la realtà, ma anche il riconoscimento di come i nostri stessi schemi di pensiero siano stati colonizzati da strati ricorsivi di realtà artificiale.

Questa è la vera crisi del nostro tempo: non solo la manipolazione della realtà, ma la frammentazione della coscienza umana stessa. Quando le persone comprendono che le loro convinzioni, le loro cause e persino le loro resistenze sono state plasmate all'interno di questo sistema, sono costrette ad affrontare la domanda più profonda: cosa significa riappropriarsi della propria mente?

Ma ecco cosa non vogliono che voi capiate: vedere attraverso questi sistemi è profondamente liberatorio. Quando capite come è costruita la realtà, non siete più vincolati dai suoi confini artificiali. Non si tratta solo di smascherare l'inganno, ma di liberare la coscienza stessa da limitazioni artificiali.

Il gioco potrebbe essere finito nell'operazione di architettura della realtà della USAID, ma la sfida più profonda sta nel ricostruire il significato in un mondo in cui il tessuto stesso della realtà è stato intrecciato con fili artificiali. La scelta che ci troviamo di fronte non è solo tra una comoda illusione e una scomoda verità. Il vecchio sistema richiedeva la convalida prima della fede. La nuova realtà richiede qualcosa di completamente diverso: la capacità di riconoscere gli schemi prima che siano ufficialmente confermati, di percepire coerenza in più ambiti, di uscire completamente dal gioco creato. Non si tratta di schierarsi nei loro binari costruiti, ma di vedere l'architettura stessa del modello.

Come si manifesta questa liberazione in pratica? Significa cogliere il modello di una crisi costruita prima che si manifesti completamente; significa riconoscere come eventi apparentemente non correlati – un crollo bancario, un'emergenza sanitaria, un movimento sociale – siano in realtà nodi della stessa rete di controllo; significa comprendere che la vera sovranità non consiste nell'avere tutte le risposte, ma nello sviluppare la capacità di percepire la rete di inganni prima che si consolidi in una realtà apparente. Perché il potere supremo non sta nel conoscere ogni risposta, ma nel rendersi conto quando la domanda stessa è stata progettata per intrappolarci all'interno del paradigma costruito.

Man mano che sviluppiamo questa capacità di riconoscimento dei modelli – questa capacità di vedere attraverso la manipolazione algoritmica – il significato stesso dell'essere umano si evolve. Mentre questi sistemi di infrastrutture ideologiche crollano, il nostro compito non è solo preservare il risveglio individuale, ma proteggere e nutrire gli elementi più consapevoli dell'umanità. La liberazione definitiva non consiste solo nel vedere attraverso l'inganno, ma nel preservare la nostra umanità in un mondo di percezione strettamente controllata.

Mentre questi sistemi di modellazione della realtà crollano, abbiamo un'opportunità senza precedenti di riscoprire ciò che è reale, non attraverso le loro strutture artificiali, ma attraverso la nostra esperienza diretta della verità. Ciò che è autentico non è sempre ciò che è organico: in un mondo mediato, autenticità significa scelta consapevole piuttosto che reazione inconscia; significa comprendere come si plasmano le nostre menti, mantenendo al contempo la nostra capacità di connessione autentica, espressione creativa ed esperienza diretta. Gli elementi più umani – amore, creatività, intuizione, scoperta autentica – diventano più preziosi proprio perché sfidano il controllo algoritmico. Queste sono le ultime frontiere della libertà umana: le forze imprevedibili e non quantificabili che non possono essere ridotte a dati o modelli comportamentali.

La battaglia finale non è solo per la verità, ma per lo spirito umano stesso. Un sistema in grado di progettare la percezione può progettare la sottomissione, ma c'è una bella ironia in tutto questo: il semplice atto di riconoscere questi sistemi di costruzione della realtà è di per sé un'espressione di autentica consapevolezza, una scelta che dimostra che non hanno conquistato completamente la percezione umana. Il libero arbitrio non può essere ingegnerizzato, proprio perché la capacità di vedere attraverso la realtà ingegnerizzata rimane nostra. Alla fine la loro più grande paura non è che rifiuteremo il loro mondo artificiale, ma che ricorderemo come vedere oltre.

Una domanda pertinente potrebbe essere: perché queste rivelazioni emergano proprio in questo momento? Cui bono? Il momento stesso potrebbe essere lo schema più importante da riconoscere. Nel corso della storia le rivelazioni strategiche sono spesso servite a reindirizzare, o placare, la resistenza piuttosto che a smantellare realmente i sistemi di controllo. Smascherando selettivamente determinati crimini, il sistema permette alla pressione di sfogarsi, garantendo al contempo l'integrità dell'architettura più profonda del controllo. Le rivelazioni diventano parte del meccanismo di controllo stesso. Sebbene sia incoraggiato nel vedere smascherate reti criminali a lungo nascoste, non attendo con ansia la cavalleria. La speranza senza vigilanza è solo l'ennesima forma di cattura del pensiero. Il sistema spesso rivela certe verità in modo strategico, sia per normalizzarle, sia per indirizzare la resistenza verso canali prestabiliti. Alcuni la chiamerebbero l'essenza dell'inganno luciferino: presentare verità accuratamente selezionate in momenti calcolati con precisione per ottenere il massimo effetto. Sebbene queste rivelazioni sembrino autentiche – e voglio credere che stiamo assistendo a un vero cambiamento – la storia ci insegna a conservare il nostro discernimento. L'ottimismo non dovrebbe accecarci di fronte agli schemi. Che si tratti di un'antica guerra spirituale, o di una semplice manipolazione psicologica, il modello è chiaro: la verità stessa diventa uno strumento quando i suoi tempi e il suo contesto sono controllati.

Prendete in considerazione la rapidità con cui si sono formati gli “scontri”: l'iniziativa Stargate di Larry Ellison, costruita sulle fondamenta di Oracle come progetto della CIA, è ora accolta con favore dalle stesse persone che, non molto tempo fa, si opponevano con veemenza al controllo digitale centralizzato. Se venisse lanciata con un marchio diverso, il cosiddetto movimento per la libertà andrebbe in tilt. Perché questo doppio standard? Si tratta dello stesso Larry Ellison che, dopo l'11 settembre, si è offerto di creare un database per la sicurezza nazionale e tracciare ogni americano, completo di identificatori biometrici. Se Joe Biden avesse ospitato Bill Gates nel suo ufficio per annunciare partnership con Microsoft, Google e Facebook, il cosiddetto movimento per la libertà sarebbe andato in tilt. Mi sono opposto alla tecnocrazia imposta dalle élite quando l'amministrazione di sinistra la stava implementando; non sono particolarmente interessato nemmeno al suo lato destro.

E che dire dell'approvazione condizionata dei vaccini per il pollame contro l'influenza aviaria? Dov'è il movimento per la libertà medica che ha superato gli obblighi sul COVID-19 e ha formato la coalizione MAHA che ha contribuito all'elezione di questa amministrazione? La stessa coalizione che si è schierata contro le tecnologie sperimentali a mRNA ora è in gran parte silente, mentre interventi simili minacciano le nostre riserve alimentari. Presto dovremo preoccuparci dei residui di vaccino nelle uova al mattino? L'indignazione selettiva è lampante.

Questa stessa applicazione selettiva è perfettamente illustrata dal recente ordine esecutivo sull'antisemitismo e dalla sua task force attuativa. Oltre al nobile obiettivo di combattere l'odio, guardiamo a ciò che sta realmente accadendo: un apparato governativo con un potere senza precedenti per “sradicare” le “molestie antisemite” nei campus universitari. Chi definisce cosa costituisce antisemitismo? Dove sono i confini chiari che proteggono la libertà di parola tutelata dalla Costituzione? Queste non sono domande di parte: sono fondamentali per la libertà. Il silenzio degli ex-difensori del Primo Emendamento è assordante. Gli stessi guerrieri che ieri hanno combattuto la censura governativa applaudono oggi di fronte alla regolamentazione della libertà di parola. È ipocrisia, pura e semplice. La libertà di parola o è sempre importante, o non lo è affatto.

Parafrasando Groucho Marx, diffido di qualsiasi club ideologico che mi voglia come membro. Non si tratta di scegliere squadre, ma di riconoscere schemi. La forma di controllo definitiva non è nascondere la verità, ma plasmare il modo in cui la elaboriamo quando emerge. Ecco perché riconoscere schemi è più importante che mai. Dobbiamo essere in grado di gestire più realtà contemporaneamente: queste rivelazioni sono significative E il loro momento potrebbe essere strategico. Il potere viene svelato E nuove forme di controllo potrebbero emergere. Gli aiuti umanitari sono importanti: il loro scopo principale è aiutare le persone bisognose e, se impiegati correttamente, possono servire a questa missione cruciale. Possono anche costruire partnership economiche e mantenere la pace, soprattutto se avremo una leadership interessata alla diplomazia piuttosto che a guerre infinite. Ma alcuni programmi della USAID chiaramente non riguardano affatto gli aiuti o lo sviluppo, ma l'ingegneria culturale e la divisione. Un'iniziativa di drag show da $2 milioni in Guatemala non è un aiuto umanitario; è un tentativo di plasmare i valori sociali sotto le mentite spoglie dell'inclusione. La componente di aiuto potrebbe essere reale o meno in ogni caso specifico, ma l'agenda è innegabile.

Possiamo simultaneamente:

• Accogliere con favore la verità che viene alla luce;

• Mettere in discussione i tempi e il meccanismo di divulgazione;

• Mantenere la consapevolezza dei nuovi sistemi di controllo;

• Chiedere conto al potere, indipendentemente da chi lo esercita.

Sono profondamente preoccupato che alcuni nella resistenza stiano diventando compiacenti, credendo che “i buoni siano ora al potere”. Niente potrebbe essere più pericoloso. Sì, possiamo accogliere con favore la corruzione che viene denunciata, pur rimanendo vigili su ciò che ne consegue, in particolare sui rischi delineati da giornalisti come Catherine Austin Fitts, Naomi Wolf e Whitney Webb. Hanno messo in guardia contro l'emergere della rete di controllo, il potere incontrollato degli oligarchi della tecnologia e come i sistemi finanziari e digitali vengano silenziosamente ristrutturati sotto traccia. Questi avvertimenti meritano la stessa attenzione della corruzione che ora viene smantellata.

Ho notato che i recenti critici di ricercatori come la Fitts, la Wolf e la Webb – in particolare quelli che seguono i venti politici – raramente si confrontano con le loro argomentazioni concrete. Ricorrono invece a etichette come “opposizione controllata”, o “blackpilled”. Questo schema merita di essere analizzato: la cabala è riuscita a creare la propria resistenza, o a catturare movimenti esistenti da più tempo di quanto io sia vivo. Dovremmo seguire i fatti e poi determinare cosa pensiamo di essi, non il contrario. E non possiamo avere doppi standard basati sulle nostre versioni preconcette del bene e del male.

La Costituzione rimane il miglior quadro di riferimento per la libertà individuale dell'umanità: rendiamola concreta attraverso una trasparenza radicale e principi coerenti. Ma se la storia ci insegna qualcosa, è che il potere non si dissolve, cambia forma. Il che mi porta a una curiosità, una coincidenza: DOGE (Dipartimento per l'Efficienza Governativa, un omaggio anche alla memecoin preferita di Elon) condivide il nome con il Doge di Venezia, un sovrano che operava all'intersezione tra potere militare e controllo finanziario. Che si tratti solo di un divertente parallelismo storico, o di qualcosa di più significativo, vale la pena chiedersi: i tecnocrati di oggi stanno davvero smantellando i sistemi di controllo, o li stanno perfezionando in qualcosa di molto più sofisticato?

Le élite veneziane governavano non solo attraverso il potere diretto, ma padroneggiando la leva finanziaria e militare – un modello che non è scomparso, ma si è semplicemente adattato, operando ora attraverso strutture moderne come il sistema bancario centrale e la governance dell'intelligenza artificiale. La maggior parte delle persone, intrappolate nei cicli di notizie e nei feed dei social media odierni, raramente si sofferma a riflettere se questi parallelismi suggeriscano echi storici più profondi, forse persino antiche dinastie bancarie con una conoscenza occulta di lunga data. Che tali teorie vi incuriosiscano o vi ripugnino, ampliare la nostra portata oltre il momento immediato è necessario per comprendere il quadro completo. Gli schemi si ripetono e il potere raramente cede il controllo: cambia forma.

Sebbene mi piaccia vedere il DOGE rovesciare lo stato amministrativo e denunciare sia gli sprechi di denaro che le efferate operazioni criminali mascherate da burocrazia, non possiamo abbassare la guardia. Capisco perché i metodi tradizionali non funzionino: lo Stato profondo ha i suoi artigli ovunque. Basta guardare i membri del Congresso sponsorizzati dall'industria farmaceutica che si oppongono sfacciatamente a RFK: come disse una volta Robin Williams, dovrebbero indossare marchi come nella NASCAR che mostrano i loro sponsor. Ma la domanda cruciale non è solo cosa viene demolito, ma cosa viene costruito al suo posto.

I metodi di controllo possono essersi evoluti dal sistema bancario veneziano alla governance digitale, ma i principi di base rimangono straordinariamente coerenti. Laddove un tempo le dinastie bancarie controllavano le società attraverso il debito sovrano e le rotte commerciali, i sistemi odierni basati sull'intelligenza artificiale vanno oltre, ottenendo un controllo comportamentale granulare attraverso modelli predittivi, algoritmi e una sorveglianza onnipresente. I metodi si evolvono, ma i meccanismi di influenza – che plasmano il comportamento umano attraverso sottili vincoli e incentivi ingegnerizzati – rimangono sorprendentemente familiari. Se la storia ci insegna qualcosa, è che il potere non svanisce, si reinventa con nuovi nomi, utilizzando nuovi strumenti. Due cose possono essere vere contemporaneamente: questo significa riconoscere gli schemi, assistere a rivelazioni di orrori finanziati dai contribuenti e rimanere vigili su quale sistema sostituirà quello che viene smantellato. La chiave non è schierarsi, ma sviluppare la capacità di riconoscere e resistere a tutte le forme di manipolazione, anche quelle che appaiono come una liberazione.

La mia lealtà è verso la mia famiglia, il mio onore, la mia comunità e l'umanità, ma soprattutto verso la verità stessa. Se lasciamo che il dogma prevalga sul giudizio, diventiamo esattamente ciò di cui molti di noi si fanno beffe: caricature del pensiero di parte.

Il vero cambiamento non verrà dall'alto verso il basso, non è mai avvenuto. Verrà dall'interno delle comunità, dalle persone che riconoscono gli schemi e si rifiutano di partecipare a realtà precostituite. Verrà dagli individui che scelgono la verità al posto della comodità, dalle reti locali che costruiscono resilienza contro il controllo centralizzato, dal basso verso l'alto piuttosto che dall'alto verso il basso. Il potere al popolo non è solo uno slogan: è l'unica via da seguire.

In questo momento dobbiamo tutti stare in guardia, non abboccare all'amo delle lotte intestine e invece continuare a cercare verità, amore e concretezza. La guerra non è tra destra e sinistra, ma per preservare la sovranità umana in un'epoca di realtà artificiale.

Una cosa che continuo a notare: le persone bramano risposte assolute... eroi, cattivi, conclusioni chiare. Ma se la vera trappola non fosse solo l'inganno, ma il nostro stesso bisogno di certezza? Forse la posizione più radicale è quella di resistere alla tentazione di rinchiudersi in una narrazione fissa e di restare aperti all'emergere di nuovi modelli.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una mancia in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.

You may have heard about the recent arrest of comedian Graham Linehan at Heathrow airport for three tweets he wrote while in the United States.

Linehan created or co-created the sitcoms Father Ted, Black Books, and The IT Crowd (that last one is a favorite of my wife’s).

Linehan describes the scene:

The moment I stepped off the plane at Heathrow, five armed police officers were waiting. Not one, not two—five. They escorted me to a private area and told me I was under arrest for three tweets….

When I first saw the cops, I actually laughed. I couldn’t help myself. “Don’t tell me! You’ve been sent by trans activists.”

Linehan reports that the officers themselves were generally kind, and in general seemed sympathetic. Commentators have been saying that crazy, open-ended UK laws have put officers in crazy situations, in which they are expected to arrest people like Linehan. I myself would say: at that point, if you haven’t started questioning your career choice, there’s something wrong upstairs.

Linehan continues:

The civility of individual officers doesn’t alter the fundamental reality of what happened. I was arrested at an airport like a terrorist, locked in a cell like a criminal, taken to hospital because the stress nearly killed me, and banned from speaking online — all because I made jokes that upset some psychotic crossdressers.

To me, this proves one thing beyond doubt: the UK has become a country that is hostile to freedom of speech, hostile to women, and far too accommodating to the demands of violent, entitled, abusive men who have turned the police into their personal goon squad.

(If you’d like to see the Tweets that got him arrested, you’ll find them here.)

There are in fact people defending the arrest of a man for tweets.

Green Party leader Zack Polanski, for example, described the posts as “totally unacceptable” and the arrest as “proportionate.”

(Whenever you’re tempted to say, “At least these lefties aren’t Hillary Clintonites who would start a war over a cup of coffee,” remember this incident: these are not our friends.)

Another Twitterite, a “Richard Angwin” with over 200,000 followers, unbosomed this gem: “Linehan’s arrest for hate-mongering tweets is a fitting cap to his obsessive transphobia, proving that even ‘free speech’ warriors can’t escape accountability for their toxic rants.”

So he boasts about wanting to live in a country in which a monopoly enforcement institution will decide what constitutes “hate” (he’s sure “hate” will be defined so as to target his enemies), and then arrest people for statements that he dislikes. (We can dismiss the idea that anyone was “threatened” by these three silly tweets.)

(Here’s another thing that grinds the old man’s gears, by the way. Disagreeing with the left can’t just be a difference of opinion: it has to be a clinical diagnosis with “phobia” in the name. This is how it’s been since at least the Soviets. Hence the absurd neologism “transphobia.”)

On Twitter I likewise came across a British lawyer, Stephanie Hayden, who insisted there was nothing amiss in what had happened to Linehan.

I looked more closely and discovered that this very same woman had posted just days before that she’d run into Iraq war supporter John Kerry at the airport and had excitedly gotten a selfie with him.

Linehan harmed no one. Kerry shares responsibility for pointless and catastrophic misery and loss of life. Iraqis, however, do not matter to progressives, who squeal with delight to get selfies with murderers.

In the UK the arrest has even mainstream outlets discussing the absurdity of the free-speech situation over there and calling for change.

Well, that’s about the least one can say about it.

Never pay for a book again: TomsFreeBooks.com

The post Arrested appeared first on LewRockwell.

Israel, with US complicity, is committing genocide in Gaza through the mass starvation of the population as well as direct mass murders and the physical destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure. Israel does the dirty work.  The US Government funds it and provides diplomatic cover through its UN veto.  Palantir, through “Lavendar,” provides the AI for efficient mass murder. Microsoft, through Azure cloud services, and Google and Amazon  through the “Nimbus” initiative, supply core tech infrastructure for the Israeli army.

This marks 21st-century war crimes as an Israel-US public-private partnership.  Israel’s mass starvation of the people of Gaza has been confirmed by the United Nations, Amnesty International, Red Cross, Save the Children and many others. The Norwegian Refugee Council, along with 100 organizations, have been calling for an end to Israel’s weaponization of food relief.  This is the first time that mass starvation has been officially confirmed in the Middle East.

The scale of the starvation is staggering. Israel is systematically depriving food to more than 2 million people. Over half a million Palestinians face catastrophic hunger and at least 132,000 children aged under five are at risk of death from acute malnutrition. The scale of the horror is thoroughly documented by Haaretz in a recent article entitled “Starvation is Everywhere.” Those who are able to somehow access food distribution sites are routinely fired on by the Israeli army.

As a former US ambassador to Israel has recently explained, the intention to starve the population has been present from the start.  Israel’s Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu recently declared, “there is no nation that feeds its enemies.”  Minister Bezalel Smotrich recently stated, “whoever doesn’t evacuate, don’t let them. No water, no electricity; they can die of hunger or surrender. This is what we want.”

Yet despite these glaring declarations of genocide, US representatives at the UN repeatedly deny the facts and cover for Israel’s war crimes. The US alone vetoed Palestine’s admission to the UN in 2024.  The US now denies visas to Palestinian leaders to come to the UN in September, yet another violation of international law.

The US has used its power and especially its veto in the UN Security Council to abet Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians and to block even the most basic humanitarian responses.  The world is aghast but seems paralyzed before the the Israel-US murder machine.  Yet the world can act, even in the face of US intransigence.  The US will stand naked and alone in its criminal complicity with Israel.

Let’s be clear.  The overwhelming voice of humanity is on the side of the people of Palestine.  Last December, 172 countries, with more than 90 percent of the world population, voted to support Palestine’s right to self-determination.  Israel and the US were essentially isolated in their opposition.  Similar overwhelming majorities are repeatedly expressed on behalf of Palestine and against the actions of Israel.
Israel’s thuggish government now counts solely on US support, but even that may not be there for long.  Despite Trump’s intransigence and US government attempts to stifle pro-Palestinian voices, 58% of Americans want the UN to recognize the State of Palestine, compared to only 33% who do not. Moreover, 60% of Americans oppose Israel’s actions in Gaza.

Here are practical steps that the world can take.

First, Türkiye has set the correct course by ending all economic, trade, shipping, and air links with Israel. Israel is currently a rogue state, and Türkiye is right to treat it as such until Israeli-created mass starvation ends, and a State of Palestine is admitted to the UN as the 194th member, with the borders of June 4, 1967.  Other states should immediately follow Türkiye’s lead.

Second, all UN member states that have not yet done so should recognize the State of Palestine.  So far, 147 countries recognize Palestine.  Dozens more should do so at the UN Summit on Palestine on September 22, even over the vociferous objections of the US.

Third, the Arab signatories to the Abraham Accords, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan, and the UAE, should suspend their diplomatic relations with Israel until the Gaza siege ends and the State of Palestine is admitted to the UN.

Fourth, the UN General Assembly, by a vote of two-thirds present and voting, should suspend Israel from the UN General Assembly until it lifts its murderous siege on Gaza, based on the precedent of suspending South Africa during its Apartheid regime.  The US has no veto in the UN General Assembly.

Fifth, UN member states should stop the export of all technology services that support the war, until the siege of Gaza ends and Palestine’s membership in the UN is adopted by the UN Security Council.  Consumer companies such as Amazon and Microsoft that persist in aiding the Israel Defence Forces in the context of a genocide should face the wrath of consumers worldwide.

Seventh, the UN General Assembly should dispatch a UN Protection Force to Gaza and the West Bank. Typically, it would be the UN Security Council that mandates a protection force, but in this case, the US will block the Security Council with its veto.  There is another way.

Under the “Uniting for Peace” mechanism, when the Security Council is deadlocked, the authority to act passes to the General Assembly. After a Security Council session and the almost inevitable US veto, the issue would be brought before the UNGA in a resumed 10th emergency special session on the Israel-Palestine conflict.  There, the General Assembly can, by a two-thirds majority not subject to US veto, authorize a protection force in response to an urgent request from the State of Palestine.  There is a precedent: in 1956, the General Assembly authorized the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) to enter Egypt and protect it from the ongoing invasion by Israel, France, and the United Kingdom.

At the invitation of Palestine, the protection force would enter Gaza to secure emergency humanitarian aid for the starving population. If Israel were to attack the UN protection force, the force would be authorized to defend itself and the Gazans. Whether Israel and the US would dare to fight a UNGA-mandated force protecting the starving Gazans remains to be seen.

Israel has crossed the clear line into the darkest crimes — starving civilians to death and shooting them as they line up, emaciated, for food. There is no further line to cross, nor time to lose. The family of nations is being tested and summoned to action as it has not been in decades.

This article was originally published on Other News.

The post How To Stop Israel From Starving Gaza appeared first on LewRockwell.

Since we didn’t need relationships in a transactional system, we no longer have any.

To connect multiple threads into a coherent understanding, let’s start with a real-life story. We’re handy but some breakdowns require outside assistance. The fridge failed (GE brand, less than two years old) and it turned out to be difficult to find a repair tech. One had retired, others were swamped, one didn’t return multiple calls, another had left the trade for another trade, and GE’s own service only covers repairs under warranty (i.e. one year).

One of my wife’s cousins had spoken highly of an experienced repair guy, and in leaving the gent a message my wife mentioned her cousin as the source of the recommendation. He had no business listing online; everything was word of mouth.

The gent eventually returned her call, asked for the model/make information, and agreed to swing by to diagnose the problem.

During their conversation the gent mentioned his 40+ years in the appliance / repair business, and that he only does work for people he knows. He no longer responds to strangers recommended by people he knows, as he’s had bad experiences with newcomers and will have nothing to do with them. He only returned our call because we were family members of someone he knows.

His list of previous customers numbers in the hundreds, and these trustworthy, respectful people keep him as busy as he wants.

My shorthand for his bad experiences with strangers: they’re entitled, demanding, discourteous, and find excuses not to pay him. His response is to shun those customers he doesn’t already know, or in our case, family members of people he does know. (He knew two of my wife’s cousins.)

Now let’s connect a few more threads. Ours is an advocacy system. You want something, you have to advocate for it, often persistently, as “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” Customer service had degraded to the point where the system seeks to reduce costs by grinding down customers so they give up.

Advocacy merges easily into threats. After a trip in Asia, I knew I was on a US-flagged airline when a passenger who’d been accidentally jostled by another passenger snapped, “I’ll sue you!” (This is one of those “only in America” things: “I’ll sue you!”)

The appliance tech mentioned that when a stranger outright refused to pay him and he said he would remove the part he’d just installed, the customer threatened to “call the police.”

Threats are tactics, of course, to bulldoze your opponent, but they can also be the emotional response of those who grasp their powerlessness in the system.

Americans confuse rights, entitlements and advocacy. Our rights are rather limited, and are defined by an enormous body of legal rulings. Our entitlements–for example, to receive medical care under the Medicare or Medicaid programs–are often taken as rights, but they’re not the same: we may be entitled to care but that isn’t a guarantee we’ll receive the care, as that depends on the local availability of enterprises who accept Medicare / Medicaid patients.

Providers can bail out of these programs, and those mandated to provide coverage (emergency rooms for example) can close down.

Entitlement leads to demands presented as advocacy which morphs into “it’s my right.” Well, actually, it’s rarely our “right,” beyond advocating our position via free speech, filing complaints with regulatory authorities or legal proceedings.

Now let’s connect the final set of threads: the difference between transactions and relationships, systems that are based on transactions and systems that are based on relationships–not just immediate family and friends, but extended family ties and reciprocal-help relationships that are the core of community–a much used and abused term for what is largely a hollow slogan.

Ours is a transactional system: everything you need or want is for sale via a financial transaction. nobody needs a relationship to buy whatever they want; they just need money or credit. We approach a complete stranger who is employed by Corporate America or the government, and complete a financial transaction.

In a transactional system, we don’t do anything for anyone unless we’re paid. OK, help a stranger with a flat tire maybe, but develop reciprocal-aid ties with neighbors and others? We don’t have time for those kinds of “investments” that “don’t pay off.”

Consider the difference between an appliance repair conducted as a transaction and one based on relationships. If the appliance is under warranty, the issuer of the warranty is obligated to arrange a repair by the contractual stipulations of the warranty. (“Some conditions apply,” of course, meaning there may be exclusions, limits of liability, etc. Sorry about that, you should have read the fine print.)

The customer and the repair tech are strangers. The transaction is arranged by strangers in a corporate office. This transaction is lauded in the abstract as proof of the “trustworthiness” of the system.

A transactional system works marvelously until it breaks down. For example, the hospital closes due to financial losses, and so the ER is closed, too. We can demand our right to medical care but it’s no longer available in our area. Or the warranty repair service is no longer available in our area, sorry.

The fragility of these transactional systems is hidden until they break down. And when they degrade and break down, then we’re left with systems based on relationships–systems which have largely vanished in a highly mobile, rootless culture that’s distilled everything down to “trustworthy” transactions.

If everyone is constantly moving, there is no way anyone can know members of your extended family because they’re scattered thousands of miles apart.

In a transaction-based culture, relationships have little value, so they’re depreciated. Why bother maintaining or forming relationships when you can get everything you want or need by staring at a screen?

Until all those hyper-optimized transactional systems start breaking down. Then the value of relationships is suddenly revalued–but few have any reciprocal-aid relationships with practical value. Networking is a superficial, shallow simulacrum of actual relationships, and that’s all we have left.

Read the Whole Article

The post Entitled, Demanding–and Shunned appeared first on LewRockwell.

The co-sponsors of a bill that would force the government to release all available Jeffrey Epstein documents held an hour-long press conference Wednesday that included statements from Epstein’s victims. One said that she and others were considering releasing their own list.

“[We] Epstein survivors have been discussing creating our own list,” Lisa Phillips said. “We know the names. Many of us were abused by them. Now, together as survivors, we will confidentially compile the names we all know, who are regularly in the Epstein world. It will be done by survivors, and for survivors. No one else is involved. Stay tuned for more details.”

Lisa Phillips: “Us Epstein survivors have been discussing creating our own list… We will confidentially compile the names we all know who were regularly in the Epstein world.”pic.twitter.com/gtAUGk6slc

— Thomas Sowell Quotes (@ThomasSowell) September 3, 2025

Phillips spoke near the end of the conference. She was one of eight victims (nine if you count deceased victim Virginia Giuffre’s family) to make statements in support of the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), which would force the House of Representatives to vote on the complete release of everything the government has related to Jeffrey Epstein (with the exception of victim-related redactions).

The Discharge Petition

Since Republican leadership has been unwilling to bring the bill up for a vote, EFTA co-sponsors Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) are circulating a discharge petition to circumvent the House speaker. If they get 218 signatures, they can force a vote. Right now, they are just two shy. The petition has signatures from 212 Democrats, but only four Republicans. In addition to Massie, the other Republicans are Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina, and Lauren Boebert of Colorado.

Massie argued that despite various Epstein files being released by the government, “that does absolutely nothing.” He said the public receives some information, but it’s information curated by the government. On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee released more than 33,000 pages of documents related to the Epstein investigation. Massie pointed out that everything the DOJ has released so far is either heavily redacted or information that’s already been made available to the public, which, he says, accounts for 70 percent. The White House is calling Massie’s attempt to have all the Epstein information released a “hostile act,” an indication that it opposes full transparency.

One of the victims’ lawyers, Bradley Edwards, elaborated on why it’s so important that EFTA go through. He said all the documents and evidence they’ve worked so hard to gather “hide behind protective orders, confidentiality agreements, and bank secrecy laws,” adding:

That is why this discharge petition is so important. While we have seen the documents, you haven’t. And when you see the documents, you’re going to be appalled.

The discharge petition, Edwards added, means that “nothing is off-limits” — from CIA documents, to FBI documents, to financial records. “Everybody knows that … corruption flourishes in secrecy.” He also said that he had filed lawsuits against JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank proving that they “knowingly provided the financial infrastructure for a sex trafficking operation.”

A Nonpartisan Issue

Both the politicians and the victims — or survivors, as they prefer to be called — stressed that this was a nonpartisan issue. Greene said this was something that “Republicans and Democrats should never fight about,” but that it instead “should bring us all together.”

“The only motive for opposing this bill would be to conceal wrongdoing,” one of the victims observed.

Massie, who is being targeted by President Donald Trump in the 2026 primary, took issue with the president calling the Epstein saga a hoax. “This is not a hoax,” he said. “This is real. There are real survivors. There are real victims to this criminal enterprise. And the perpetrators are being protected because they’re rich and powerful and political donors to the Establishment here in Washington, D.C.”

Everyone at the press conference agreed that Epstein was a monster who played a role in the assault of hundreds, if not thousands, of underage girls, and that the only reason there is not more known about him is because he was rich and well connected. Khanna put it this way:

Americans are asking a very simple question: How is it possible that in the richest, most powerful country in the world there are corrupt special-interest forces, both foreign [and] domestic, that are preventing the release — that have a stranglehold on our government and are preventing the release of the full Epstein files. There is something that is rotten in Washington…. Today we stand with survivors, we stand against Big Money, we stand to protect America’s children. That is really what this is about.

Greene said that she had recently heard that Epstein had ties to other countries, including Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Israel.

Victim Testimonies

The victims’ testimonies were similar. They were approached when they were between 14 and 16 years old. Someone they knew asked if they wanted to make $200 to massage “an old rich guy.” However, they soon found out that they were obligated to give more than a massage. Plus, they were asked to recruit other girls as they had been recruited. Another similarity is that none of those who went to the authorities had success — until attorneys like Edwards took on their case.

Perhaps alleged victim Courtney Wild summed it up best as to what this is about:

We need transparency. It’s time for us to see beyond the curtain — Why was Jeffrey Epstein so protected? Who is still being protected? And who protected them all? — so the world can understand how Jeffrey was able to abuse so many of us for so long.

This article was originally published on The New American.

The post Epstein Victims Consider Releasing Their Own List appeared first on LewRockwell.

Cardinal Robert McElroy of Washington, D.C., is seeking to laicize Father Michael Briese, a whistleblower archdiocesan priest, for refusing to take down blog posts detailing allegations that two priests who remain in good standing with the archdiocese, Father Adam Park and Father Carter Griffin, had sexually abused seminarians as well as allegations of a cover-up of the allegations by both McElroy and his predecessor, Cardinal Wilton Gregory.

In an August 12 letter, McElroy informed Briese that he was requesting his laicization with the Dicastery for the Clergy in response to his supposed “defamatory” claims on his personal Substack against himself, Gregory, the two accused priests, and the archdiocesan curia; however, he notably did not refute any of the charges.

In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews, Briese rebutted McElroy’s charge that his claims were defamatory, detailed McElroy’s and Gregory’s alleged years-long cover-up of abuse, the prelate’s efforts to have him silenced, their alleged homosexuality, and more.

McElroy’s letter informing Briese of his impending laicization

In his letter to Briese, McElroy emphasized his hope that, during a July 30 meeting, Briese would agree to take down his “defamatory” articles in exchange for continuing a limited priestly ministry for the poor. However, because the priest refused this offer and continued to push McElroy on his, Cardinal Gregory’s, and the archdiocese’s alleged cover-up of sexual abuse, the cardinal said the laicization process will continue.

“I was particularly hoping that such an avenue might emerge because it would allow you to pursue some initiatives in your own priesthood that would serve the poor, that have been so much at the heart of your service in the Church,” McElroy wrote. “But even as we discussed such an approach, you threatened on two separate occasions in our conversation to bring down the Church and me personally, as well as Cardinal Gregory.”

“For these reasons, I must continue the process that has begun to dismiss you from the clerical state,” he added. “It is inconsistent with your identity as a priest to continue the pattern of character assassination that has wounded so many without justification, and as the pastor of this local church, I cannot stand (by) while you do so.”

Briese stressed to LifeSiteNews that McElroy did not once refute any of the allegations of abuse by the priests or the cover-up by him, Gregory, and the archdiocese.

“(McElroy) hangs himself here because he’s trying to throw everything on me as disobedience. But he never says that I falsely accused (my) archbishop, he doesn’t say it’s a lie,” the priest said. “He’s just not holding himself accountable.”

“I’ve been obedient for seven years. I have followed the orders by Gregory (and McElroy), but I’m not going to pretend that the homosexual promiscuity in our priesthood today is acceptable,” he added.

Alleged DC clerical abuse

In 2021, Father Adam Park, the former vice rector for seminary life at the Pontifical North American College (NAC) in Rome, was accused in a lawsuit by a former seminarian of harassing and preying upon him. Park then quietly stepped down from his position at the NAC but remained in good standing within the archdiocese.

As Briese noted in his August 22 letter to McElroy and on his Substack, a former NAC seminarian came forward and not only corroborated the first seminarian’s story but also alleged that Park had pushed other seminarians to “pleasure him,” once had a “sexual encounter” with a male flight attendant, and has lived as an active homosexual throughout his priesthood.

According to rumors, Park is currently back in Rome pursuing a doctorate in sacred theology, but LifeSiteNews was unable to corroborate this information.

Another former seminarian from the Saint John Paul II Seminary came forward, accusing Father Carter Griffin, then the seminary’s vice rector, among other clergy, of sexually harassing him. Griffin has since been promoted to rector of the seminary.

Griffin had defended himself by stating that “people in my position don’t do things like that,” per a 2019 letter from the seminarian and his family to then-Archbishop Christophe Pierre, detailing the accusations against the priest.

Briese’s letter in response to McElroy

Ten days after McElroy sent his letter, Briese responded with a letter of his own, noting that the cardinal had failed to answer any of his allegations, and underscored that he wasn’t trying to defame anyone but rather was informing the faithful of the serious allegations against two archdiocesan clergy after they failed to act.

“Before I wrote about the sexual allegations … against Father Park, I attempted – on several occasions without success – to discuss them with Cardinal Wilton Gregory,” the priest wrote.  “His refusal to meet with me led me to believe that he was covering up the abuse allegations made against Father Park, as well as abuse allegations (from) the family of former Baltimore seminarian … made against Father Carter Griffin.”

This is what happens when real men have had enough of covering for corrupt criminals who are destroying the Catholic faith pic.twitter.com/LEG0ISKEDe

— Mark Lambert (@sitsio) August 30, 2025

“Because of the plethora of evidence and sworn testimony against Father Park, I would be in violation of the Safe Environment Polices of the Washington Archdiocese and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops if I obeyed you and Cardinal Gregory by covering up and retracting what I reported about Father Park,” he added.

Briese also sent a copy of the letter to Pope Leo XIV through Cardinal Christophe Pierre, allowing the Vatican to decide whether the allegations were unfounded and if the attempted laicization was justified. While the priest stressed to LifeSiteNews that he is not optimistic the Vatican will ultimately side with him, the priest felt it was important that they have a record of his accusations.

Read the Whole Article

The post Cardinal McElroy Asks Vatican To Laicize Whistleblower Priest Claiming DC Sex Abuse Cover-up appeared first on LewRockwell.