domingo, 10 de dezembro de 2023

Why must Amalek be exterminated? A Short Biblical lesson

 


Laurent Guyénot
November 4th  

This October 28th, in a speech given in Hebrew, Netanyahu justified the massacre of the civilian population of Gaza using the Bible.

“You must remember what Amalek did to you,” says our Holy Bible. And we do remember it. And we fight. Our brave soldiers and fighters who are now in Gaza and all other parts of Israel, join the chain of Jewish heroes, a chain that began 3,000 years ago, from Joshua ben Nun, to the heroes of 1948, the Six Day War, the October War of 73 and all the other wars in this country. Our heroic troops have one supreme goal: to completely defeat the murderous enemy and secure our existence in this country. We always said never again. And never again, it’s now.”

In the Holy Bible, which serves as the basis of Israel's national romance, there is the promise of the Promised Land, and there is the commandment for the genocide of Amalek, their women, children, infants and livestock included (for Israel does not not distinguish between their enemy and their enemy's cattle). It is indeed the same God who speaks. Conquering Canaan and exterminating Amalek are one and the same thing, because to conquer Canaan, it was necessary to cross the territory of Amalek, and that nation opposed this.

The Bible presents the Amalekites as an Arab people descended from Abraham. They are the first hostile people that the Hebrews encounter during their journey between Egypt and Canaan. In a cynically paradoxical formulation, Yahweh asks Moses to remember that Amalek is not to be remembered: “Write this in a book for remembrance, and declare to Joshua that I will blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven” (Exodus 17:14). The idea is repeated in Deuteronomy 25:19: “When Yahweh your God has made you safe from all your surrounding enemies, in the land which Yahweh your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess, you will erase the memory of Amalek from under the heavens. Do not forget !"

Mysteriously, Amalek survives the genocide the first time around, and we find him in the first Book of Samuel, when Yahweh orders King Saul: “I have resolved to punish what Amalek did to Israel, by cutting off his path when he came up from Egypt. Now go, strike Amalek, condemn him to anathema with all that he possesses, have no pity on him, kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and donkeys.” (1Samuel 15,8). Now Saul spares “King Agag and the best of the flocks and herds, the fatlings and the lambs”. He therefore disobeyed Yahweh by showing mercy, and will lose the kingship for this, because Yahweh has no pity for the non-Jews: “I repent of having given the kingship to Saul, because he turned away from me and did not carry out my orders” (15.11). Yahweh removes Saul's kingship and Samuel "slaughters" Agag (the meaning of the Hebrew verb, shsf, is open to debate, with some translations suggesting that he cut him into pieces or quartered him). Despite this theoretically perfect biblical genocide, Amalek remains Israel's eternal nightmare. 

Like his grandfather Esau, Amalek is often associated with Rome and therefore, from the 4th century onwards, with Christianity. Amalek is also sometimes associated with Iran, because the villain of the Book of Esther, Haman, is specifically referred to as an Agagite, that is, a descendant of the Amalekite king Agag. This is why the hanging of Haman with his ten sons and the massacre of 75,000 Persians, celebrated annually at the festival of Purim, are associated in Jewish tradition with the extermination of the Amalekites and the execution of their king Agag. The episode of the Exodus, which concludes with “Yahweh is at war against Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17.16), constitutes the biblical reading for the morning of Purim.1

“Tradition says that the Amalekites are the eternal enemy of the Jews,”
explained Jeffrey Goldberg in 2009 in a New York Times article entitled “Israel’s Fears, Amalek’s Arsenal.” He reports that, having asked a close adviser to the Prime Minister how to assess “the depth of Mr. Netanyahu’s concern regarding Iran,” he was told: “Think Amalek.”
2

Netanyahu seems more than ever obsessed with Amalek, which for him is simultaneously Iran and Hamas. But by now calling on Israelis to remember Amalek while their army shells Gaza, men, women, children, infants and livestock included, Netanyahu is only trying to unite his country around a war cry very familiar to more and more pious Jews in Israel and around the world. Let's listen, for example, to this sermon by Rabbi Eliyahu Kin, the last in his series on "the 70 most difficult questions in Judaism." Here, the question of the day is: “Why does God ask the Jews to destroy Amalek?” 

To summarise: The Amalekites deserved their fate, explains Rabbi Kin, because they wanted to prevent the Jews from crossing their lands to invade Palestine. However, God's will was for the Jews to cross their land. And the will of God is Good, while opposing the will of God is Evil (“evil being the opposite of good”, is the necessary clarification from the Rabbi). It’s not complicated: “ultimate good is that which accomplishes God’s will in this world,” while evil is “whatever opposes the accomplishment of God’s will” (5:26 -45). So exterminating Amalek is Good, while not exterminating Amalek is Evil.

This is why Saul did evil by sparing the king and the livestock of the Amalekites. To punish him, God made him mad and took back the kingship from him to give it to David, who was a better exterminator (for example for the inhabitants of Rabba, whom he “tore to pieces with saws, harrows of iron and axes, and passed them through brick kilns” (2 Samuel 12:31 and 1 Chronicles 20:3).

Let us remember that before the Amalekites, there were the Midianites. They too deserved to be exterminated, because they encouraged Jews to marry non-Jews. But God's will is that Jews marry exclusively among themselves. God therefore orders Moses to carry out a complete genocide. But now his people are reluctant to do the task and spare, among the Midianites, the women and their little children. Moses is not happy. “Why did you let all the women live? They are the ones who (…) were for the Israelites a cause of infidelity to Yahweh.” The Jews must therefore massacre these women and their male children, but Moses, in his leniency, still authorises them to keep “the little girls who have not shared a man's bed, and let them be yours ". The loot amounts to “675,000 head of small cattle, 72,000 head of herd, 61,000 donkeys, and, in terms of people, women who have not shared a man's bed, 32,000 people in total” (Numbers 31,1-47). It was kind of Yahweh to spare the livestock. Normally, for cities that resist it, it is necessary to kill "everything that breathes", men and beasts indiscriminately (Deuteronomy 20,13-18), as for example in Jericho, where "everything that breathes" was put to the sword:
“everything that was in the city, men and women, young and old, even the bulls, sheep and donkeys (Joshua 6:21).

If God ordered the extermination of all these peoples, explains our good rabbi, it is because these massacres are the expression of his goodness. This is why, “the best way to love what God loves is to hate what God hates. If you hate what God hates, you will love what God loves. That's how it works. To truly love what God loves, you must hate what He truly hates. And God hates Amalek.

Be careful, there is a subtlety, which the rabbi does not evade: Amalek does not always want to eliminate the Jews. Sometimes he just wants to assimilate them, which is almost worse. “So if you don’t defeat him, if you don’t wage war against him, you run the risk of being assimilated.”

If the Amalekites are so dangerous, it is because they received “a concentration of impure souls”, while the Jews, it is well known, received “a concentration of divine souls”. “According to the Torah, the Jew is the most capable of doing good.” As, for example, in exterminating Amalek.

This explains why Amalek does not like the Jews. “What bothers Amalek is that the Jew believes in mussar, or morality. He doesn’t like it when we show goodness and kindness. He does not like our Torah, because he believes in its exact opposite.” Indeed, the Amalekites reject the Torah which orders them to be exterminated, so they reject good and do evil. T
herefore, they must be exterminated.

Ultimately, Rabbi Kin sums it up thus: “We are cruel to Amalek because we have to be. Because that's exactly what they would do to us if they had the chance. If they could, they would destroy the Jewish people.” Hence the parable of the Jewish doctor who, if he had been a prophet, would have cut up and filleted Hitler at birth. Because it must be said: “Amalek is the concentration of hatred”. Now, we must hate hatred – except the hatred of God for Amalek, whom we must love – therefore we must hate Amalek with all the hatred of Yahweh, who is love. This is not complicated !

But, asks the Rabbi, why exterminate the animals too? “Well, animals can easily steer our feelings... Look at all these animal lovers, running all over the world to save the whales !” Another explanation for your menu: “So why get rid of these poor animals? Because [God] did not want to leave any opening whatsoever for pity on anything that belongs to, or is associated with, Amalek.
When you are God, you don't do things by halves.

In summary, Amalek must be exterminated because God ordered it, and his command is eternal. Exterminating Amalek is good, because it is the will of God. When Amalek is completely exterminated, then “all evil will cease to exist. All evil will disappear. There will be no more harm.” Good will triumph, “God will be king of the entire universe”. It will be the reign of the Torah. For this, it is up to the Jews to exterminate Amalek, again and again until not a single one remains. God doesn't want to do it himself. “It is the job of the Jews to repair the world and bring the coming of God into our world.” “Who can make a difference and repair the world? The Jewish people. How ? Through the Torah, which gives us the strength to overcome the heart of evil.
By annihilating Amalek.

But then, who was Amalek in 2009? “The answer is very clear: it was Germany.” Indeed, the Germans caused the eternal Holocaust. Hitler, who called himself a prophet, believed that God wanted to exterminate the Jews. But he was wrong. It is the opposite: God wants to exterminate the Amalekites, who sometimes disguise themselves as Germans, and sometimes as Iranians or Arabs.

In conclusion: if an Amalekite declares that God commands the extermination of the Jews, it is absolute Evil. But if Netanyahu reminds us that God wants the Jews to exterminate the Amalekites, who are the Gazans, then all is well, and the heads of state of the Christian world respond to the call.

For we, Christianised peoples, have been taught that in ancient times, God chose the Jews, gave them Palestine, and ordered them to exterminate the Amalekites. What could we possibly object to the rabbi? That God, in his youth, had let himself be carried away a little, but that he has changed? That God didn't mean what he said, or that he was speaking allegorically? That the Amalekites are no longer what they were, and that they now have the right to oppose the biblical project? All this squirming is ridiculous. After all, God, the creator of the universe, does indeed order, in the Christian Bible, to exterminate Amalek. It is undeniable, indisputable, and irrefutable. And God is God, 
goddammit.

Unless the devil has been pretending to be God for two thousand years. It is true that, if you look closely, Yahweh looks like a dragon, with the smoke that comes out of his nostrils and the devouring fire that comes out of his mouth (Psalm 18:8-9 and 2 Samuel 22:9), his wings (Psalms 17.8; 36.8; 91.4), and his taste for the smell of well-burned burnt offerings (Genesis 8.21).

                                                           ***

1. Elliott Horowitz, «Reckless Rites : Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence», 

2. Princeton University Press, 2006, p. 122-125, 4.Jeffrey Goldberg, «Israel’s Fears, Amalek’s Arsenal», New York Times, May 16, 2009

 


Related: Violence and Monotheism

Source: https://reseauinternational.net/pourquoi-faut-il-exterminer-amalek-petite-lecon-biblique/

Gaza: “Our Political Class Only Pays Lip Service to Human Rights’

 

 

Jeremy Corbyn
December 10th 

Today is the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Adopted out of the scars of the Second World War, the UDHR outlined 30 inalienable rights and freedoms that belong to us all, regardless of sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, creed, language, religion or background. Rights to life, liberty, and privacy. Freedom of expression, assembly, and movement. Freedom from torture, arbitrary arrest or exile. Rights to social security, education, equal pay and a decent standard of living, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care. The right to seek asylum.

The magnitude of this achievement should not be underestimated. This document, for the first time, enshrined the fundamental human rights of individuals everywhere. Since then, it has served as a foundation for human rights campaigners to defend the dignity and equality of people across the globe. 

Today, however, is not a time for celebration. It is a time for reflection. 

75 years on from this landmark document, millions of people are still denied the fundamental rights and freedoms it was meant to enshrine. Right now, 700 million people are living in extreme poverty, subsisting on less than $2.15 a day. Two-thirds are children. In 2022, more than 238,000 people were killed in conflict — that’s the highest death toll since the beginning of the century. Refugees – fleeing war, persecution, human rights abuses and climate catastrophe – are drowning at sea.

These grotesque levels of poverty, violence and desperation are not the fault or failure of the UDHR. They are the fault and failure of governments who give lip service to a document whose founding principles they continue to desecrate. 

On Monday, MPs will mark the UDHR’s anniversary by gathering for a candlelight vigil, under the title ‘Parliamentarians for Peace.’ How ironic that the majority have given the green light to some of the most appalling levels of death and destruction we have witnessed in decades. 

Over the past two months, 1,200 people in Israel and 17,700 people in Gaza have been killed. 1.8 million people in Gaza have been displaced. Half of all housing units have been destroyed. More people could die from disease than from bombings if the health system is not restored. Last month, Parliament voted on the call for a ceasefire. MPs faced a simple moral choice: do you support the indiscriminate killing of human beings, or do you want to stop the further loss of human life? Shamefully, the majority of MPs voted against a ceasefire. Today, people in Gaza are living with the consequences.

Do Palestinians not qualify for the inalienable right to life that the UDHR enshrines? Do Palestinian children not deserve to laugh and play with their friends at school too? People in Gaza are paying the price for a horrific crime they did not commit. It is a form of collective punishment that stands in direct contradiction to the UDHR’s central mantra: that human beings should not be discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity or background. The UDHR is being buried under the rubble, along with the human beings whose rights this document was written to protect. 

Across the board, our political representatives are showing monstrous hypocrisy in their commitment to a document they show no signs of respecting. As we speak, our government is attempting to circumvent international law in order to implement its assault on the rights of refugees. And they are emboldened by an opposition front bench that refuses to make the moral case for the right to asylum. The Tories have not ‘failed’ on immigration because they have ‘lost control of the borders’. They have failed because they have proven incapable of protecting the human rights of those seeking a place of safety. Refugees are not political pawns to be debated and disempowered. They are human beings, whose hopes and dreams should not be sacrificed to appease the right-wing press. 

The creation of the UDHR was meant to be a landmark moment. All the more disgraceful, then, that many of its loudest celebrants continue to betray the very basis for the document’s existence. Today, we must renew our commitment to universal human rights. That commitment rings hollow unless we are prepared to organise for those demands that are essential to the UDHR’s realisation. 

We will carry on demonstrating for a permanent ceasefire, the release of all hostages, the end to the siege of Gaza, and the only path to a just and lasting peace: the end to the occupation of Palestine.

We will carry on campaigning for a humane asylum system, for safe routes, and for a society where everyone is treated with dignity and care, no matter their background.

We will carry on mobilising for a more equal world. A world in which wealth is shared, not hoarded. A world that prioritises human need, not corporate greed. A world that recognises the violation of human rights anywhere, is a violation of human rights everywhere. A world that recognises, as the UDHR does, that ‘the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’

Source: Tribune Magazine

Carbon Passports: the US promotes the latest control mechanism

 

 

KontraInfo
December 7th  

According to a report recently written by the consulting firm The Future Laboratory and published by the company Intrepid, the “solution” that would limit the amount of carbon that travelers emit each year would be a “carbon passport.” From CNN to Business Insider, North American media are starting to promote this idea, in order to familiarise an initially hostile population, and gradually normalise their proposal, following the principle known as the Overton Window.


The company Intrepid assures that “reducing personal carbon emissions could help prevent pollution and the 'extinction' of vacation destinations in the world, therefore it considers that “if each individual supported the tax on their trips, it would become more egalitarian and regenerative.”

The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) and other global organisations such as the WHO, affirm that 29% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2021 “came from transportation, including flights, trains and cars,” and maintain that neither Governments of the world nor travel agencies “are yet close to complying with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, together with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)”, which sets the criteria to achieve the objectives that “reduce Climate Change” and “Carbon Emissions”.



Alex Hawkins, the strategic foresight editor at The Future Laboratory (the consultancy firm that wrote the aforementioned report), said such a “carbon passport” could be “necessary eventually.”
 

The idea of carbon passports is based on the idea of personal carbon allowances”, adding that it would impose a cap on how much carbon people are allowed to emit over a certain period of time.

It should be noted that the UK Parliament designed a similar idea in a 2008 report titled: “Personal Carbon Trading.” “
Carbon passports have taken that idea one step further" because they would involve tracking and limiting travel carbon emissions,specifically, Hawkins added.

If we were to put certain limits on our individual carbon emissions, that would have different ramifications for all of us,” Hawkins added.

Furthermore, he warned: “
if we aren't taking decisive action against the climate crisis, we are going to potentially see our freedoms curbed in different ways.

Hawkins believes that for it to work, such a passport would have to be created along with new legislation and technological innovations.

The idea is good in theory, but in terms of logistics, I don't see how it could come together,” Anna Abelson, an associate professor at New York University's Jonathan M. Tisch Hospitality Center, said of how tracking would work.

Another problem that promoters of the carbon passport idea highlight is that not all travel emissions come from transportation, emphasizing that it must also be resolved how the passenger travels when they arrive at their destination, how they spend their money and where you stay

Since 2021, the Google Flights site has a “carbon emissions meter – or calculator” – which, according to the company, is based on estimates from the European Environment Agency.

 

Source: https://noticiasholisticas.com.ar/pasaportes-de-carbono-la-nueva-agenda-de-control-que-empiezan-a-promocionar-en-eeuu/

Denis Rancourt: Vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere

 


Denis G. Rancourt, Marine Baudin, Joseph Hickey, and Jérémie Mercier

Citation: Rancourt, D.G., Baudin, M., Hickey, J., Mercier, J. “COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere”. CORRELATION Research in the Public Interest, Report, 17 September 2023. https://correlation-canada.org/covid-19-vaccine-associated-mortality-in-the-Southern-Hemisphere/

Abstract

Seventeen equatorial and Southern-Hemisphere countries were studied (Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Suriname, Thailand, Uruguay), which comprise 9.10 % of worldwide population, 10.3 % of worldwide COVID-19 injections (vaccination rate of 1.91 injections per person, all ages), virtually every COVID-19 vaccine type and manufacturer, and span 4 continents.

In the 17 countries, there is no evidence in all-cause mortality (ACM) by time data of any beneficial effect of COVID-19 vaccines. There is no association in time between COVID-19 vaccination and any proportionate reduction in ACM. The opposite occurs.

All 17 countries have transitions to regimes of high ACM, which occur when the COVID‑19 vaccines are deployed and administered. Nine of the 17 countries have no detectable excess ACM in the period of approximately one year after a pandemic was declared on 11 March 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO), until the vaccines are rolled out (Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Philippines, Singapore, Suriname, Thailand, Uruguay).

Unprecedented peaks in ACM occur in the summer (January-February) of 2022 in the Southern Hemisphere, and in equatorial-latitude countries, which are synchronous with or immediately preceded by rapid COVID-19-vaccine-booster-dose rollouts (3rd or 4th doses). This phenomenon is present in every case with sufficient mortality data (15 countries). Two of the countries studied have insufficient mortality data in January-February 2022 (Argentina and Suriname).

 


Detailed mortality and vaccination data for Chile and Peru allow resolution by age and by dose number. It is unlikely that the observed peaks in all-cause mortality in January-February 2022 (and additionally in: July-August 2021, Chile; July-August 2022, Peru), in each of both countries and in each elderly age group, could be due to any cause other than the temporally associated rapid COVID-19-vaccine-booster-dose rollouts. Likewise, it is unlikely that the transitions to regimes of high ACM, coincident with the rollout and sustained administration of COVID‑19 vaccines, in all 17 Southern-Hemisphere and equatorial-latitude countries, could be due to any cause other than the vaccines.

Synchronicity between the many peaks in ACM (in 17 countries, on 4 continents, in all elderly age groups, at different times) and associated rapid booster rollouts allows this firm conclusion regarding causality, and accurate quantification of COVID-19-vaccine toxicity.

The all-ages vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR), which is the ratio of inferred vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses delivered in a population, is quantified for the January-February 2022 ACM peak to fall in the range 0.02 % (New Zealand) to 0.20 % (Uruguay). In Chile and Peru, the vDFR increases exponentially with age (doubling approximately every 4 years of age), and is largest for the latest booster doses, reaching approximately 5 % in the 90+ years age groups (1 death per 20 injections of dose 4). Comparable results occur for the Northern Hemisphere, as found in previous articles (India, Israel, USA).

We quantify the overall all-ages vDFR for the 17 countries to be (0.126 ± 0.004) %, which would imply 17.0 ± 0.5 million COVID-19 vaccine deaths worldwide, from 13.50 billion injections up to 2 September 2023. This would correspond to a mass iatrogenic event that killed (0.213 ± 0.006) % of the world population (1 death per 470 living persons, in less than 3 years), and did not measurably prevent any deaths.

The overall risk of death induced by injection with the COVID-19 vaccines in actual populations, inferred from excess all‑cause mortality and its synchronicity with rollouts, is globally pervasive and much larger than reported in clinical trials, adverse effect monitoring, and cause-of-death statistics from death certificates, by 3 orders of magnitude (1,000‑fold greater).

The large age dependence and large values of vDFR quantified in this study of 17 countries on 4 continents, using all the main COVID-19 vaccine types and manufacturers, should induce governments to immediately end the baseless public health policy of prioritizing elderly residents for injection with COVID-19 vaccines, until valid risk-benefit analyses are made.


Downloads:

Denis Rancourt at ICS4 - All-cause mortality woldwide and Romania (18 NOV 2023)

Source: https://denisrancourt.ca/entries.php?id=133&name=2023_09_17_covid_19_vaccine_associated_mortality_in_the_southern_hemisphere

sábado, 9 de dezembro de 2023

Moderna Ran Covert Operation to Shut Down Online Vaccine Critics

 

 

Pharmaceutical giant Moderna engaged in a widespread operation that sought to covertly shut down critics of the company’s experimental Covid mRNA shots.

According to a new report, the vaccine maker reportedly engaged in extensive surveillance and influence operations.

Moderna sought to remove criticism or pushback against its vaccine from online discourse, the new report from UnHerd reveals.

The biotech firm was raised to prominence for its mRNA Covid vaccine.

The injections were the first and only product the company has released to the public.

Nevertheless, the mRNA shots were enough to propel Moderna to a $100 billion valuation during the pandemic.

However, UnHerd is now reporting that the company ventured beyond pharmaceutical innovation and into the murky world of surveillance, propaganda, censorship, and public influence.

According to the report, Moderna developed an intricate network of monitoring.

The company used the network to influence the public discourse on vaccines.

Central to this operation is a collaboration with Public Good Projects (PGP) and former law enforcement officials.

PGP is a drug industry-funded NGO.

The operation aimed to combat what the company considers to be vaccine “misinformation.”

However, this initiative’s scope and methods have sparked significant concerns.

The effort was blurring lines between public health advocacy and corporate surveillance.

During the pandemic, Moderna transformed almost overnight from a fledgling biotech firm to a household name.

Moderna’s sudden success was thanks to the widespread use of its mRNA vaccine.

However, as the demand for vaccinations waned, so did Moderna’s earnings.

In response, Moderna increased vaccine prices.

However, the Big Pharma company also embarked on a marketing campaign to maintain its relevance in the public health sphere.

The company’s surveillance arm was led by Nikki Rutman, a former FBI analyst.

The operation monitors a vast array of mainstream and alternative media outlets.

Utilizing advanced technology like Talkwalker’s “BlueSilk” AI, the team tracks vaccine-related conversations across millions of websites globally.

High-risk alerts are raised for narratives that could potentially harm Moderna’s interests or bolster anti-vaccine sentiments.

This proactive approach to monitoring and influencing vaccine discourse extends to scrutinizing public figures like Elon Musk, Tucker Carlson, and Russell Brand.

Moderna’s reporting on public figures’ comments on vaccines does not necessarily dispute their claims but flags them as “misinformation” if they are perceived to encourage vaccine hesitancy.

The partnership between Moderna and PGP, however, is particularly interesting.

UnHerd claims to have obtained documents revealing that the companies initially collaborated on a program called “Stronger” in 2021-22.

The program seeks to identify “misinformation” and shape content decisions on social media.

However, the relationship has grown between the pharmaceutical firm and the NGO.

PGP, with its extensive access to Twitter data and influence in formulating pandemic-related speech policies, has been pivotal in guiding Moderna’s strategy.

According to documents, PGP works closely with social media platforms, government agencies, and news websites to confront the “root cause of vaccine hesitancy” by rapidly identifying and “shutting down misinformation.”

Moderna’s disinformation arm is perpetuating the public discourse wars that have been raging since early in the pandemic.

This effort was aimed at shutting down anything that might undermine COVID-19-related policies, including lockdowns and efforts to encourage mass vaccinations.

These documents provide a new window into the process that has roiled speech debates over the last three years.

As part of the effort, Moderna plowed huge sums of cash into “independent fact-checkers” on social media.

These so-called “fact-checkers” moved to shut down any wrongthink on social media.

“What often flies under the banner of combating disinformation is, in this case, nothing but corporate public relations, trying to spin public narratives in directions favorable to the corporation’s interests,” said Aaron Kheriaty, a bioethicist, and fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

“Does anyone really want to live under a regime where their social media feed is essentially curated by government or by multinational corporate interests that stand to profit, influencing opinion on these issues?”

But despite the growing backlash against social media censorship, the network of fact-checking “nonprofits” has grown at an industrial pace.

The industry is providing opaque opportunities for private and public interests to take subtle control over the public discourse.

Such sophistication in blending public health messaging and corporate advertising should concern anyone with an interest in how the government controls free speech.

“This is an interesting peek behind the disinformation industry, what it actually does,” said Kheriaty.

“It’s about controlling a narrative, controlling the flow of information, controlling how people think about public policy, like the vaccine mandate, and how people think about a particular product that a corporation is profiting from,” he added.

“It’s deeply disturbing.”

 

Source: https://slaynews.com/news/moderna-ran-covert-operation-shut-down-online-vaccine-critics-report-reveals/

No, it isn't a psyop!

 


Dawn Lester
December 9th  

It seems that the virus/no virus debate has been re-ignited recently. Or I should say rather, that the flames have been fanned to an even higher level of heat, largely due to posts by Chris Sky, the latest person to insist that the ‘no virus’ position is a ‘psyop’!

This is a ridiculous claim, which is putting it mildly, but it seems that many people nevertheless consider it to be valid. It therefore needs to be addressed - yet again.

The fundamental point for everyone to acknowledge is that the burden of proof lies with those who propose a theory, not with those who point out that the proposed theory lacks proof.

As Dr Tom Cowan has said in his recent article, Unlocking the power of wonder

"We do not have to understand what is true to know something isn't true.”

We know, or at least many of us know, that there is no evidence, and there never has been any, to support the idea that the particles referred to as ‘viruses’ cause disease. The ‘germ theory’, which in truth should be referred to as the ‘germ hypothesis’, was never based on experiments that conform to the Scientific Method.

I explain this, and more, in my recent presentation for the Crazz Files podcast that Adam has kindly produced as a video that is available to watch on Bitchute from the link below.

Crazz Files podcast

In this podcast episode, I cite a number of sections from chapters 2 and 3 of What Really Makes You Ill and particularly the sections that cover the history of the ‘germ theory’ and that of vaccinations. I also refer to some of the eminent physicians and scientists who were critical of these ideas at the time and came to the conclusion from their own research that these theories were unproven!

For those people who say that this was a long time ago and no longer relevant to the 21st century, I would refer to the fact that the theories these people are criticising are still held by the medical establishment to be valid. They are the very theories on which most of ‘modern medicine’ is based, so it is entirely valid to cite 19th and early 20th century critics of 19th century theories!

The reason this debate is important and cannot be allowed to be dismissed as a ‘psyop’, is because it is the basis for most of the tyranny that we currently face! If people do not recognise that the ‘germ theory’ is an unproven idea, they will not be able to resist any new stories about so-called ‘deadly infectious diseases’!

Problems can only be solved by understanding and addressing their root causes.

 

Source: https://dawnlester.substack.com/p/no-it-isnt-a-psyop?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=974130&post_id=139643230&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=wm70y&utm_medium=email

The Blue Dot: against Agenda 2030

 


Morféo de Gea
14 November, 2023

In the summer of 2022, "The Big Reset" documentary was released in Spain. In its runtime of just over two hours, it exposed a conspiracy against Humanity driven by the Covid-19 plandemic. The documentary's objective - as stated on its website—was to “help regain control of our lives and all the rights that have been violated. And the only way to achieve this is to help citizens understand what is really happening". The film was a resounding success, filling theaters in the 20 Spanish cinemas where it was screened, and it was also translated into the most relevant languages.

Directed by W—the pseudonym of an unknown
filmmaker—and necessarily financed by crowdfunding, the documentary was censored on all globalist social networks, but it still took the dissident platforms by storm.

After laying out the main points of the Covidian plandemic, the documentary concludes by stating that the plan's ultimate objective was to accelerate implementation of the “Great Reset”, a gigantic globalist operation looking to establish a totalitarian New World Order that will end most of our freedoms and rights.

It is a New Order made explicit with Agenda 2030, and the “The Blue Dot” project, which constitutes the second part of “The Big Reset Movie”, aims to expose this sinister plan against humanity.

The name of the documentary comes from astronomer Carl Sagan, who in 1990 thought it would be interesting for the Voyager 1 spacecraft, after completing its mission to Saturn, to turn around and take a photo of the Earth. Seen from across that enormous distance, our planet looks inconsequential, or as Carl Sagan said, “a speck of dust suspended in a ray of sunlight.” But it is a blue speck; hence the photograph's
famous name: "A pale blue dot."

As stated here on https://thebluedotmovie.com, "The Blue Dot" will try to address all of the challenges that threaten the future of humanity. Pandemics, wars, climate change, economic destruction, implementation of a universal basic income, worldwide digitalisation, and control of people via microchips are merely stepping stones to achieve greater objectives: total control of the planet's resources, as well as the minds and bodies of human beings.

Lying behind pretty slogans like “ending poverty” or “Zero Hunger”, and adorned with colourful tones, is an agenda that seeks to transform every aspect of our free societies in favour of a few private conglomerates.

This New World Order has several names: the Great Reset, Agenda 2030, Environmentalism, Globalism, Transhumanism... but they all respond to the same programme aimed at implementing a new model of society under the control of globalist elites.

With the plandemic already worn out, the new jewel in globalism's crown is climate change: «The story of global warming generated by CO2 from human activity has become a dogma resisting any debate, despite the fact that countless physicists, climatologists, Nobel Prize winners, and leading experts on the subject worldwide affirm the opposite. Dressed up as science, it comes to us now as a new religion, a new 21st century, ecological totalitarianism.

For this reason, “The Blue Dot” gives great relevance to the despotic and dystopian “Green Agenda”: “Again with the WEF at the helm, the “My carbon” policy signals an unimaginable number of restrictions that threaten free societies. In the documentary we will show the scenarios that have been drafted
: coercive mobility restrictions, digital identity, prohibition of cash, programmable currencies, and the Net Zero carbon tax policy will all convert our daily lives into an Orwellian nightmare.

Logically, a project like ours cannot count on any type of institutional aid, quite the opposite. This is why in order to carry it out, it will once again be absolutely necessary to resort to crowdfunding, in order to cover the high expenses involved in the preparation of a project of this magnitude. Because many prominent dissident figures will be interviewed, which entails expenses for the team to
travel to various cities in Spain and abroad.

It was the collaboration, generosity and support of many people that made the success of The Big Reset possible, and it is this same spirit of solidarity that the makers of the new documentary are asking for. Taking advantage of the wave of awareness that the first film provoked, it aspires to deepen that awakening, and give the necessary continuity to a project that would be in danger without it, since, following the plandemic, new threats to our rights & freedoms have arisen, along with new threats to human dignity and prosperity. Bringing these new provocations into the light in order to understand and combat them is the foundation of The Blue Dot.

The satanic mafia that wants to throw us into the dustbin of history represents only 1% of the human population, which means that if we united, if there was authentic collaboration and a commitment to solidarity, the battle would be won in a very short time. For this reason, the sinister elite that conspires against humanity wants to divide us at all costs. It does this by dividing the dissidents into beach bars, little cliques and groups that, despite having a common objective, not infrequently experience Goyesque-style beatings. What about the spike-protein gang? What about the graphenists? What about the atheists? What about the Catholics? What about the Right? What about the Left? In this context, projects like "The Blue Dot" are a magnificent opportunity to unite efforts, to generate solidarity and to overcome sectarianism.

It will need all our help for "The Big Dot" documentary to go ahead, We're aiming to help those who are awake have a better understanding of this total apocalypse on its way, and to stir an awakening in those still asleep, as happened with the first documentary. We really want to turn the “The Black Dot” of Agenda 2030 into a bright and happy “Blue Dot”.

"Making a donation is the ultimate sign of solidarity. Actions speak louder than words." (Ibrahim Hooper)

"A lot of small people, in small places, doing small things, can change the world." (Eduardo Galeano)

"There is nothing stronger in the world than the heart of a volunteer." (Colonel James H. Doolittle)

To collaborate with "The Blue Dot": https://thebluedotmovie.com/como-ayudar

To watch the documentary “The Big Reset”, click here

 

 Fernando López Mirones on Agenda 2030 (Blue Dot movie)  

Source: https://www.eldiestro.es/2023/11/el-punto-azul-desafiando-la-agenda-2030/