Word Games: Thought Police Label Speech as Crime

June 2, 2023

Word Games: Thought Police Label Speech as Crime

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and their ilk have concocted a growing list of declared “hate issues.”

If you’ve made it this far into this post, then you’re probably an English-speaker. So let’s define the word “hate” and carefully consider whether such a concept should be some type of crime, let alone a bad attribute.

Hate is, by definition, intense dislike. Synonyms would include loathing, detestation, dislike, distaste, abhorrence, abomination, resentment, aversion, hostility, ill will and bad feeling. These are all standard human emotions.

A better term in the English language is contempt- a completely natural and essential protective sentiment that allows for not falling into the hyper-tolerance pajama person trap. Contempt is defined as: “a strong feeling of disliking and having no respect for someone or something.”

Hate itself as a concept has been looked at by wise men throughout the ages, and they often got the context and even merit of it. Perhaps some insights can be gleaned.

“They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate.” — Edmund Burke

“We do urge hate: If you love something, that love requires you to hate anything that threatens its survival.” — Matthew Hale

“Achilles glared at him and answered, ‘Fool, prate not to me about covenants. There can be no covenants between men and lions, wolves and lambs can never be of one mind, but hate each other out and out an through. Therefore, there can be no understanding between you and me, nor may there be any covenants between us, till one or other shall fall.” — Homer, The Iliad

“Feeding milk and bananas to a serpent only makes its venom more potent.” — Chanakya Pandita, Raja niti sastra, expeller of Alexander the Great

“A time to tear apart and a time to sew together; a time to be silent and a time to speak. A time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace.” — Ecclesiastes 7

So if a person committed a crime against another person, more often than not it might involve one or more of those synonyms. On its face, a crime is a crime, and any ill feeling adjective used is secondary.

Of course, the poison of cultural Marxism is designed to link and infer that dislike of other races or even individuals with a crime, even if no actual physical crime was committed. It has gone so far that the dislike might not even be intense, but more of a preference, a contempt, or an opinion. In the Brave New World, that also is labelled hate and also racist.

But this is where it gets more tricky, as crime is defined as “a transgression of law.” One would assume that very few would call loathing, contempt, bad feelings or intense dislike a crime. You would be wrong. The poison has entered the system so much so that Americans are about split on criminalizing hate speech. Notice that I emphasized speech — exhibiting intense dislike or even just dislike — not violence.

Speech is defined as “the expression of or the ability to express thoughts and feelings by articulate sounds.”

So if one were to simply utter something that hurt the feelings of someone of another ethnic group, race or even age, sexual preference or gender, those mere words constitute a harm in the world of cultural-Marxist, Social Justice Warrior, Pervert Justice Warrior shadow language.

The dictionary and law, at least up to now, has defined harm as “physical injury, especially that which is deliberately inflicted.”

The term “derogatory” is useful to this discussion. We hear it a lot. To my ears, it’s commonly directed at broadly defined “white people.” But, to be fair, it flies about everywhere in our society. It means showing a critical or disrespectful attitude. So being disrespectful and critical is called “hateful” by snowflakes. If directed at the wrong often special privileged party, it might constitute hate speech and, by extension, be a crime.

How ironic that cultural Marxism is also know as “critical theory.” However, this form of criticism is not even-handed. That’s because postmodernists don’t truly believe everything is subjective, or “not real” (aka Cartoon or Clown World). After “disproving” existing reality, they choose a very specific new reality. They use subjectivism as a strategy to destabilize established thinking and tear down the pillars of western establishment so that they may recreate society with their own Illuminist vision.

The very word “postmodernism” is Orwellian double-think gibberish. I am forced by necessity to use it but a better word is counter-enlightenment. That vision is a socially-engineered “utopia” of anti-meritocracy, tyranny of the minority, Orwellian double-think and control over speech and behavior.

Read “The Postmodernist Cargo Cult Creates Carte Blanche for the Kakistocracy”

The same is true of the word “hostility,” which is defined as unfriendliness or opposition.

The word “antisemitism” is defined as hostility (opposition) toward Judaics. Indeed, Congress is considering passing a resolution calling the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions opposition movement against Israel “antisemitic.”

There is increasing anti-Americanism in the world and the question begs how is that any different than anti-Jew or anti-Israel? And if I, as an American, openly express a degree of critical hostility towards Americanism apparently that makes me a “self hating American.” The wizardry is endless on this general track.

This is the basis for the massive censorship we are witnessing on social media. Not only can you not be hostile toward privileged and protected groups, you really can’t even criticize them. These terms are so abused and overused so as to lose all meaning. You can’t even question what you are seeing with your own eyes.

Read “More than Merely Dubious: How I Was Permanently Banned at Reddit”

But that didn’t stop Red Queen Trump, who has now promised (good link) to “forcibly condemn antisemites,” or those people unfriendly or in opposition to Jews. The word “condemn” is a slippery slope, as it has two meanings in English: first, to express complete disapproval of, censure; second, to “sentence (someone) to a particular punishment.” There is a big difference between disapproval and punishment.

In today’s climate — and especially since Trump used the word “forcibly” alongside “condemn” — this could be seen as a veiled threat given all the talk about “hate crimes” and white-supremacist boogeymen. Trump played a major role in laying the foundation of Biden’s emerging neo-Stasi.

Neo-Stasi Operatives are Rapidly Taking Control of America

The dictionary defines “forcibly” as “using force or violence.” For English speakers not using shadow language, this could be construed as a criminal threat or a form of star chamber justice. Whoever wrote this script for marionette Trump knows exactly what they are doing here.

This weaponized use of terms like “hate” and “antisemitism” has gotten so over the top that thinking people should start completely tuning out those who use it. The use of the word “harm” is, however, legitimate and proper language use.

As far as real unlawful harm goes, if individuals and/or their property are physically harmed by “unfriendly” or hostile types, there is existing rule of law in place going back millenniums to deal with it. There is a whole body of existing law to deal with intimidation and verbal threats of harm as well.

Here is a prime example of just how far this hate crime scam has gone. A transgender, one Ebony Belcher, age 32, was using the women’s bathroom at a supermarket when a female security guard swung open the door and ordered her to get out.

“She opened the door and came in and started calling me derogatory names,” Ms. Belcher claimed. Ms. Belcher said the guard told her, “You guys cannot keep coming in here and using our women’s restroom. They did not pass the law yet.” She said the guard grabbed her by the arm and removed her out of the store.
Belcher then proceeded to file a complaint with D.C. police. Instead of shrugging off the incident as a matter of private property, police arrested the guard pursuant of “hate crime” charges.

Here we have a whole slippery slope of what is being defined as a crime, and what is a transgression of a crime: being called a derogatory name resulting in hurt feelings or perceived slight, whether real or imagined.

June 2, 2023

Dore Destroys Krystal Ball’s Interview With RFK Jr.

April 19, 2023, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. formally announced his 2024 Democratic presidential campaign. Early polls show he’s got nearly 20% of the Democratic vote
Democratic Party officials are doing everything they can to avoid public debates, and their media allies are not giving Kennedy the opportunity to share his views either
May 17, 2023, Krystal Ball, cohost of the online show “Breaking Point,” interviewed Kennedy. According to Ball, Kennedy’s “vaccine skepticism” and “antivaccine advocacy” is a “red line” that disqualifies him from holding the highest office
She repeatedly interrupted Kennedy with Big Pharma talking points — putting her own ignorance on public display — and didn’t allow him to answer her questions. Kennedy asked her to show him where he got things wrong many times, and she deflected with broad generalities
Several journalists and political commentators, including Jimmy Dore, Viva Frei, Kim Iversen and Glenn Greenwald have critiqued Ball’s attempted smear. In the end, the only one who looked bad was Ball herself

Visit Mercola Market — **Advertisement**

April 19, 2023, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. formally announced his 2024 Democratic presidential campaign.

Early polls show he’s got nearly 20% of the Democratic vote. Unfortunately, Democrat Party officials are doing everything they can to avoid public debates, and their media allies seem hellbent on not giving Kennedy the opportunity to share his views either.

May 17, 2023, Krystal Ball, cohost of the online show “Breaking Point,” interviewed Kennedy,

or perhaps more accurately, debated him herself. Ball told Kennedy she disagrees with his views on vaccines, and claimed Democratic voters by and large share her opposition. According to Ball, Kennedy’s “vaccine skepticism” and “antivaccine advocacy” is a “red line” that disqualifies him from holding the highest office.

In the video playlist above, comedian Jimmy Dore of “The Jimmy Dore Show” dissects Ball’s hatchet job of an interview, pointing out Ball’s “poor journalism, rudeness and irresponsible, antiscientific shilling for corporate interests.”

She repeatedly interrupted Kennedy with Big Pharma talking points — putting her own ignorance on public display — and didn’t allow him to answer her questions. Kennedy asked her to show him where he got things wrong many times, and she deflected with broad generalities.

When Kennedy pointed out that countries with the lowest COVID jab rates had far lower COVID cases and mortality, Ball insisted that there were “many other factors” that played into that, such as the high rate of obesity in America, and the fact that we don’t spend as much time outside in the sun as people in Africa.

Never mind the fact that obesity and sun exposure recommendations were never part of the COVID response. Not only did U.S. health authorities not offer any guidance on reducing obesity, but they closed parks and beaches and told everyone to spend as little time outdoors as possible.

The only solution they provided was the “vaccine.” If it worked, we ought to have far better outcomes than countries like Africa that didn’t follow our COVID response guidelines, like staying indoors and getting jabbed multiple times. But we didn’t.

Basically, Ball is admitting — seemingly without realizing it — that factors such as obesity and sun exposure were more important than the jab, because places with lower obesity rates and greater sun exposure fared better even with low jab rates.

Perhaps most shocking of all, when Kennedy points out that we now have data

showing that the effectiveness of the COVID shots rapidly wanes and becomes negative after six or seven months, so that you’re then MORE likely to get COVID, she says she “hasn’t seen that!”

How could she possibly have missed it? That by itself tells you she doesn’t know anything beyond what the Big Pharma PR departments have told her.

One consolation here is that the original “Breaking Points” video

on YouTube only has 288,768 views as of this writing, whereas Dore’s critique of her smear job, posted the following day, has over 524,000 YouTube views.

“Breaking Points” also lost about 4,000 subscribers in the days following this seriously botched interview.

Interestingly, many of “Breaking Points”’ own subscribers were also sorely critical of her performance. In fact, one day after the video aired, 79% of viewers had given it a thumbs-down. So, perhaps her pro-vaccine, pro-pharma stance isn’t as popular as she thinks.

Dore also points out that Ball has an interesting conflict of interest that makes this attempted smear job look all the worse. It turns out she’s very close to another Democratic candidate running for president, Marianne Williamson. In fact, Williamson officiated Ball’s wedding.

Did Ball focus on the vaccine issue rather than allowing Kennedy to present a broader view of his platform in the hopes that voters will be attracted to Williamson instead? Would Ball challenge — and dismiss — Williamson in the same way, even though Williamson has very similar concerns about Big Pharma and vaccines as Kennedy does?

What’s more, as noted by Kim Iversen in the video below, Ball supported lockdowns during the pandemic and never informed her viewers that she was making money from long-distance education.

To her credit, Ball did list two vaccine studies in defense of her position below her interview with Kennedy, as well as one study provided by Kennedy’s team, saying people could read them and make up their own mind. Well, Kim Iversen, a former host of “Rising” who now has her own online show, did just that.

In the video above, Iversen reviews the evidence presented by both parties. The first piece of evidence Ball would like you to review is a mathematical modeling study

of the global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination. According to this mathematical model, the mass injection campaign prevented 14.4 million deaths across 185 countries between December 2020 and December 2021.

Three of the funding sources for this paper were directly from Bill Gates through his foundations, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI and the World Health Organization for whom he is also the primary funder. On top of that, Gates also has significant influence over the National Institutes of Health,

which is another funder of this paper.

The second paper Ball thought was crucial was a Stanford paper

published in June 2022 that found getting the COVID jab after having the infection provided additional protection. Here, one of the researchers has received grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Regeneron and Serimmune, and five are employees of an institution that manufactures the COVID-19 vaccine.

Kennedy provided a Cleveland Clinic paper

published April 19, 2023, which found that vaccine effectiveness varied from a low of 4% to a high of 29% depending on the dominant variant in circulation, and that the risk of contracting COVID increased with time since the last shot and rose with the number of doses received. The funding for this research? None. Hence no conflicts of interest. The Cleveland Clinic simply compiled and analyzed its own employee data.

While “Breaking Points” is advertised as anti-establishment news, Ball’s interview with Kennedy is but one of the latest examples of why that’s not true. As noted in the Viva Frei video above (Canadian lawyer David Freiheit posts YouTube interviews under the pseudonym Viva Frei), every time “the rubber hits the road,” every time the stakes are high, “Breaking Points” stands with the corporate establishment and parrots the official narrative.

So, the “anti-establishment” façade is just that. A façade. And in her interview with Kennedy, that became really apparent. Not everyone will agree with Viva Frei on this point though.

Independent investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald (see video below), while disagreeing with Ball’s handling of the interview, stresses that he respects her journalism. Yet Greenwald also makes the case that Ball’s “red line” argument is one that is only employed by establishment figures against those who are anti-establishment.

So, he basically makes a similar point as Viva Frei. He just gives Ball the benefit of the doubt and assumes she’s been unwittingly and sort of unconsciously influenced by establishment propaganda, as opposed to being part of it.

In his May 18, 2023, System Update episode (above), Greenwald commented:

“I’ve long been interested in, and I’ve often written about, the idea that once a politician adopts a view that is so disagreeable that it renders them completely off limits from consideration for support, they almost get put into this camp of being crazy or a conspiracy theorist, or people just too unhinged to even consider supporting, no matter how much agreement one might have with them.
I first observed this dynamic in the 2012 election … Why was Ron Paul’s pro-life position a ‘red line’ but Obama’s support for the drug war or his view that he had the right to assassinate American citizens using drones — all with no due process … the embodiment of extremism and radicalism — why was that not a ‘red line’? How was that determined? …
Given that the same argument has arisen in the context of RFK Jr’s challenge to Biden, to argue that RFK is off limits but Joe Biden, chief advocate of the war in Iraq, chief architect of the U.S. prison state, an ardent supporter of the drug war, that he, Joe Biden … has not crossed any red lines, I think is really worth exploring.
How are certain politicians declared disqualified, and whose interests are served by this framework, and specifically, who gets called crazy in our political discourse and why? [C]alling them crazy or declaring them too strange, too unhinged and too bizarre is … only wielded by the establishment against critics of the establishment.
In other words, establishment figures have all the space in the world to endorse the most deranged, the most unhinged, the craziest policies but as long as you’re in alignment with establishment orthodoxy, you will never be declared crazy, no matter how crazy those ideas are.
This is a tactic reserved only for those who question prevailing establishment orthodoxy … It’s a very potent and pervasive form of propaganda that requires our constant vigilance.
If we let our guard down at all, we’re all susceptible to being influenced by that … I think analyzing how this tactic is wielded, and how it manifested here, is of the utmost importance.”

Like Dore, Greenwald goes on to review several clips from Ball’s interview with Kennedy, followed by his own take on the exchanges. Here are select parts of Greenwald’s commentary in which I think he makes some valuable points:

“First of all, you can see that Krystal is explicitly acknowledging that she doesn’t have the same level of information and knowledge, she hasn’t devoted anywhere near the amount of time to this question as RFK, Jr. and for that reason, she’s explicitly saying, ‘I don’t want to actually engage with you on the merits.’
She keeps trying to switch the question to a political or punditry question of, well, look, right or wrong, there are a lot of Democratic voters out there who share my views, who think you’re wrong on vaccines. How do you intend to persuade them?
But he wants, rightly so, after having been accused of being wrong … to hear what the basis is for her view that he’s wrong, He wants to engage the substantive debate — that’s part of why he’s running.
And he goes on to say, after listening to her try and make the case, that she’s parroting establishment outlets, that she’s parroting what the health establishment and what health policy officials have just repeated over and over, to the point that I think even well-intentioned people like Krystal start absorbing it to be true. And this is what I think is such an important point.
In order to have a public platform where you opine strongly on vital issues, like whether the benefits of vaccines have been oversold, whether their harms and risks have been minimized and concealed, I really think you have an obligation to have that opinion be steeped in some very in-depth knowledge …
And so, if you’re going to come and tell Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to his face that he’s not only wrong when it comes to vaccine skepticism, but is so wrong that it’s crossed over this red line, then I think you have the obligation to be prepared to engage on the merits and to construct an argument …
He spent years working on this. Remember, RFK, Jr. was for 20 years or so a very widely regarded environmental activist working on issues of harmful waste by corporations and toxic dumping. He’s a very serious person. He is not some extremist or marginalized figure who just emerged out of the blue and started … talking about vaccines.
This is a very deeply developed view, which does not mean I agree with it. I don’t have the knowledge to agree with it or not. But what I know is this: health officials in the United States and in the West were proven to be not just wrong, but dishonest, repeatedly, throughout the COVID [pandemic] …
We also know that all kinds of claims about the Pfizer vaccine and other vaccines were false to the point of being just deceitful. There are famous clips of people they send to propagandize the public, Rachel Maddow and others, even Dr. Fauci himself, saying that the vaccine prevents transmission … something that turned out to be a complete lie …
So, whether I’m persuaded or not by what RFK, Jr. has to say about vaccines … I know for sure we benefit from having these questions debated. That’s the reason the DNC wants to pretend RFK, Jr. doesn’t exist.
They’re petrified of him for reminding Americans not only of how much we were deceived on almost every aspect of the COVID pandemic, including the vaccines, but how much damage it has done from all the policies that we enacted based on these false claims …
So, at the very least, I think that if you have a public platform, you have a responsibility to encourage and … foster debate on these most critical questions, especially when it comes from highly informed people who are challenging and dissenting from establishment orthodoxy, especially on debates where they have been proven over and over to lie and to be proven wrong.
So, Krystal Ball has every right to insist that she disagrees with RFK’s skepticism on vaccines, but … it’s a big jump to say I’m going to use the privilege and the responsibility I have with my public platform to opine on issues that I really haven’t done the work necessary to have a reliable opinion on.
I think the only default position there — if you’re going to comment on those issues without the sufficient knowledge — is to encourage skepticism. To say, I want to hear these debates. We need more transparency and [the] right to have these questions raised, rather than telling somebody that they’re not only wrong but so wrong that they’ve crossed a ‘red line.’
Which is completely in alignment with what the DNC is trying to do — to say that both Marianne Williamson and RFK, Jr. don’t even deserve to be heard, they don’t even deserve to be considered primary opponents to Joe Biden.
If you ask a DNC official, they’ll say it’s already done. Biden has no primary challenger; he’s our nominee, without a single vote being cast, without any debate being held, precisely because their strategy is to encourage people to believe that RFK, Jr. is … so wrong that no matter how much else you might like him on other issues … he shouldn’t be someone that you’re willing to get near; he crossed a red line.
This is the establishment tactic that I think Krystal Ball, in this case … [has] propagated … [H]ours of work on a question this complex is nowhere near enough to opine that emphatically, and to tell someone they’re off limits, that they’ve crossed a red line. So … I think it’s … illustrative of how this propaganda tactic functions, often implicitly.”

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

June 2, 2023

It’s Been Three Years. Can You Hear Me Now?

By: Tessa Lena

In the past three years, we have been through hell, and the most maddening part has been seeing our loved ones succumb to the “COVID spell”
In our circles, it is very common to ask, “How do we get through to them?”
There is no magical formula but there is a way, and it’s rooted in self-confidence, patience, humility, and love
Language matters, and we gain more by genuinely respecting their souls, praying for guidance, and trusting the universe to make things right
It is a very long journey, we are not the first generation to deal with this — and in the end, there is light

This story is about how to get through to the ones who are still under the “COVID spell.” I would also like to poke the most inconvenient elephant in the room, and I would like to do so with love.

In the past three years we have been on a very dramatic roller coaster ride. It is fair to say that we’ve been through hell. And the most traumatizing and maddening part has been seeing our loved ones succumb to the spell of the “COVID response” and behave like their souls have been stolen off.

For that reason, in our circles, it is very common to ask, “How do we get through to the ones who have acted out of character and who are still under the COVID spell?” First, I am going to answer this question in earnest — and then, I am going to go to into the ideological “permafrost” and poke the giant elephant (or a wooly mammoth, rather) hiding there.

There are no magical formulas. We in America are somewhat used to magical formulas, psychological “systems,” and impressive consultants riding in on a white horse with a solution and an invoice.

But perhaps, the past three years showed up to strip us of that delusion and to demonstrate to us in the most visceral way that here we are, human beings between the earth and the sky, with a deep longing in our hearts and a clumsy prayer on our lips. And perhaps, that longing in our heart and that imperfect prayer on our lips are all we have — and it’s a start.

Getting through to ideological addicts is a time-consuming and difficult feat, and we get through by being patient, by not despairing, and by respecting their free will — which I think can only be done if there is a total and massive self-love in us, a massive love for them, and a total spiritual confidence in good things.

It is also important to make honest assessments in real time as to when to talk to them and when to let them be, perhaps for a while. Also, prayer helps, and it doesn’t have to be an institutional prayer. Prayer is prayer. The Creator is intelligent enough to understand our hearts.

Personally, I believe with passion that the lesson of the past three years is not about how to be better at marketing and arm-twisting than the ones on the dark side. In fact, I think it’s not possible to compete in the dark art of bending free will and arm twisting with the ones on the dark side without joining their team.

That’s the end of that story, really. If one does not have one’s eyes and one’s heart on honest healing and free will, and if one is not prepared to do the work but also relax and trust the universe (God, higher powers, however we think about those things) to make things right, one is just merely torturing himself or herself over what he or she cannot very quickly change.

And, if we are on the good side, we really cannot change the disposition of others by applying “just the right psychological trick.” It takes more.

Yes, it is very painful that they are broken and their hearts are closed. It could be the most painful thing that has happened to us, short of actual torture. (And even the alphabets seem to think that psychological disorientation is more effective than physical pain in breaking one’s spine.) However, each of us is just one person, and the bigger picture is called “the bigger picture” for a reason.

It is bigger than us! And if we can convince just one person whom we love, and each of us does at least that, can you imagine the impact on the world? “Local, local, local” is where our success lives, I think.

And it is by remembering that we are a part of the bigger picture that we stay grounded in timeless, confident love — and from that place, we get through to them by trusting our gut, being patient, keeping our faith in the good things even when our loved ones don’t hear, taking our “communication campaign” day by day, genuinely respecting the sovereignty of their soul, and leaving the timing in the hands of the universe.

It is not a big secret that in our polarized world, many words mean very different things in different “camps.” What is an innocent and self-evident statement in one echo chamber, in another echo chamber is an insult. And it is not a super revolutionary discovery that if you want the other person to hear you, it is better to talk in a way that does not scare him off or put him in a defensive spot.

That means choosing a starting point he can subscribe to, skipping the words that are “clear signs of the enemy” in his world, and so on.

For example — and I am being a little theatrical here for a reason — if you go to a very mainstream-minded person and tell him that “he’s been duped, and Fauci is a crook, oh and by the way, there is no virus, there has been no pandemic, his long COVID is vaccine injury, and the entire thing is to commit a genocide,” you are not engaging in a “communication campaign,” you are airing your frustrations — to which you are fully entitled to under the circumstance but it’s a different “genre” of talking, a genre that has zero chance of changing his mind. So it is important for us to do things in full honestly about what we are actually trying to achieve.

And by the way, the people with not so good intentions are fully aware of this psychological dynamic — and so they deliberately “milk” our very real trauma and plant hard-to-ignore reminders of unbearable pain into our thinking so as to dampen our ability to grow our souls or our desire to see the souls in the ones who’ve erred. And often, they get paid to do that.

Forgiveness and accountability are a very heated area of ongoing debate that deserves its own conversation. If you are curious, I’ve written about it here, here, and here.

Here is another trap, the “internet” trap. We can be very subtle in our private conversations but when it comes to public talking, we are half-screwed. Go one step too far in one direction, and you’ve scared away the ones whose ears you want to perk up.

Go one step too far in the other — and the folks in “our camp” who have married their pain (as well as the people with not so good intentions pretending to be “our peeps” in that state) will complain about you being too soft or something along those lines.

But human beings are not supposed to talk to “everyone” at all times, the way it is on the internet today. We are supposed to talk in context, to a specific person, face to face, and use the words that the person we are talking to will understand. The entire genre of “internet speech” has been rigged from day one — on purpose, perhaps.

That is the overarching circumstance we cannot change if we want to stay in the public sphere all. Which is why, there are no universal formulas here either, but the good news is that we are not algorithmic meat bags with linear brains. Human beings are capable — or, let me make the correction, should be capable — of nuance.

And the more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that our subjective agency, i.e. our individual choice to act wisely and to use our full sensory ability to navigate the terrain (vs. relying on the communication manual titled, “How to Get Righteously Triggered by Wrong Talking Points”) is where it’s at.

Which is why, it is very important to hold on to our love and our truth on the inside and choose words wisely, with healing in mind. And in my own life, before saying something, I always imagine the impact of my words on others and whether what I say is likely to contribute to healing or to a dead-end argument about “who is right” on the talking point du jour — and I always try to limit my expression for the former kind. Easy? No. Rewarding? Yes.

I’ve made this observation consistently over the years, and I think it’s an important one. Whenever somebody tries to make people focus on their trauma, defend their trauma, marry their trauma, and hold on to their trauma by identifying with it, they are one of two things.

They are either sincerely broken people who are being ridden by their trauma and who then have no business being in positions of leadership until take control of their souls — or they are straight out metaphorical vampires who find people’s suffering yummy and who want it to never end, and so they try to deliberately prolong the pain. On, and they often do so because it’s in their job description to do just that.

Now, this is obviously not to be confused with promoting situational awareness. Having situational awareness is critical. It can save one’s life. However, I believe that when somebody is whole and loves you, they talk about dangers in way that is distinctly different from the tricky way.

Here is a way to talk about situational awareness that I find helpful: “Be aware of this danger. Hone your senses, up your skills, be strong even in the darkness, be grounded in your soul, and do what’s right. There is no fear. Trust in the higher powers. You are not alone.”

And here is the tricky way: “See those people over there? They have hurt you, haven’t they? Oh how they have hurt you. I know, I know. I am on your side against those monsters who are subhuman anyway. I sense that you want to harm them for hurting you, don’t you? What a good, righteous thought,” etc.

On my end, whenever I encounter trauma milking — which is sadly often — I just shake my head and tune them off.

Speaking of situational awareness, yes, it is very important to have it. I have written about it in the past in the story called, “The Synthetic Age: Welcome to the Genocide“:

“Yes, there are times and places with many tanks and cannons and nuclear mushrooms and monsters — and there are also green pastures with blue skies and normal clouds. And the humbling and trivial conclusion is that situational awareness is about being as aware as possible of, uhm, the actual situation — and, depending on the actual situation, making good choices.
There is time for carefree sunbathing, and there is time for battle. Both are real and valid. The wise and most practical path is about keeping a cool head and good balance and orienting yourself in each moment, based on what’s around.
And what’s around? The bodies are piling up to the happy soundtrack of confidently misleading media chatter — and I want to emphasize that the body count is owed to many things, including but not limited to COVID injections.
I feel very sad about the carnage. I feel so, so sad about the carnage. I never thought I would living though a time of carnage, and it’s bizarre to even say that yes, the world I was taught to believe as a kid was fiction. All the bright future, being the special generation … all in the trash but instead, I am living through carnage!”

Let us zoom in on the topic of fiction. Oftentimes, when we look down on others and assume that, unlike them, we got everything figured out, we are oblivious to the fact that we live in our own version of fiction.

History consists of layers and layers of actual “misinformation.” It is so because the official history is always written by the biggest bully. And truly, how do we know that the stories we’ve imbibed with our mother’s milk were factual stories? How do we know that our own parents and their parents had not been lied to?

How do we know that the history we’ve been taught at school wasn’t propaganda? Easy for me to say, I am an expat from the USSR, and I know the answer to this one since the history I’ve been taught as a kid was clearly propaganda — but I think this tragic condition is universal.

I have found that oftentimes, it takes very rare and special courage to be so in love with intellectual integrity, knowledge of the world, and the truth, that one would be willing to let go of any dogma, however ingrained, and chase that knowledge. And when that happens, love shows up in an unstoppable way. Love and courage go hand in hand.

There is something else that happens when we tackle the tricky “ideological addition” monster within ourselves as eagerly as we go after it in others. It creates a mysterious “chemical reaction” in the world. Our honesty with ourselves grows our wings, and it ultimately makes easier for us to get through to the ones we love.

That is not to say that we’ll always see the results right away. That is also not to say that we are going to receive immediate thanks (lol) or that we should aspire to shove our truth down other people’s throats. It is something more subtle and mysterious that happens when we stop clinging to fiction in our own lives.

It is a very long journey, we are not the first people in this world to deal with this — and in the end, there is light and redemption of all our love. I would like to end the story with a very interesting conversation that I had with Igor Chudov, in which we talk about the fictional reality vs. the “real reality,” and all it entails.

The Battle for Your Brain: A Conversation with Igor Chudov

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

June 2, 2023

Ketogenic Keys to Good Fats, Bad Fats and Great Health

Download Interview Transcript | Download my FREE Podcast | Video Link

Expert Review By: James DiNicolantonio, Pharm.D

Just over 100 years ago, we began consuming industrial vegetable oils that never existed before. These oils are primarily damaged omega-6 linoleic acid. As a result, our omega-6 intake nearly tripled, while our intake of plant- and marine-based omega-3 fat decreased tenfold
Damaged omega-6 fat is integrated into your cell membranes, including the mitochondrial membrane, and once these membranes become dysfunctional, complications follow
The fluidity of the cell membrane is extremely important as it houses hormone transporters. When you don’t get enough marine-based omega-3 fats, especially docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), the membranes become very rigid
You only need around 1 to 2 grams of omega-6 linoleic acid per day, ideally from plant seeds and tree nuts, whereas optimal levels of marine omega-3 fats are around 3 to 4 grams per day, which can be obtained from small fatty fish such as anchovies, sardines, herring, wild-caught salmon or krill oil
Saturating your cells with DHA makes their membranes very fluid, thereby raising your basal metabolic rate by 15 percent, and increasing your fat burning capacity during exercise by 30 percent. Even at rest, your fat burning goes up by 20 percent

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published November 11, 2018.

I’ve previously interviewed James DiNicolantonio, Pharm.D., about his book, “The Salt Fix: Why the Experts Got It All Wrong and How Eating More Might Save Your Life,” where he exposes why we got it wrong about salt and promotes eating healthy real salt.

“The Salt Fix” is a fascinating book and I encourage you to go pick up a copy and read it. Here, we will focus on our new book, “Superfuel: Ketogenic Keys to Unlock the Secrets of Good Fats, Bad Fats, and Great Health,” which covers the importance of dietary fats, and how to discriminate between healthy and harmful fats.

DiNicolantonio compiled most of the research for this book and invited me to contribute to it, which I was happy to do. Healthy fats are the foundation of my last book, “Fat for Fuel,” and I thought it would be useful to expand on the topic with this book.

“‘Superfuel’ is the ketogenic diet 2.0,” DiNicolantonio says. “Everyone’s doing keto diets now, where their diets are mostly 70 to 80 percent fat. But, ‘How do we enhance that diet? What are the healthy fats? What type of fat should people be eating since it’s making up the majority of their calories?’
I think a lot of people doing the ketogenic diet are doing some things right, but they’re doing a lot of things wrong … That really was the motivation for this book.”

In a nutshell, “Superfuel” guides you back to a diet closer to what was eaten during Paleolithic times. Just over 100 years ago, Procter & Gamble introduced Crisco as an alternative to butter and lard in 1911, and we began consuming industrial vegetable oils or seed oils that never existed before.

These oils are primarily omega-6 linoleic acid, and damaged omega-6 at that, due to the processing involved. As a result, our omega-6 intake nearly tripled, while our intake of plant- and marine-based omega-3 fat DECREASED tenfold, causing a severe imbalance in our omega-3 to omega-6 ratio, which ideally should be between 1-to-1 and 1-to-5. DiNicolantonio says:

“We’ve had these dramatic changes in our fat intake. They actually changed us from the inside out. Omega-6 isn’t bad as it is an essential fat. It’s only when you isolate it and adulterate and consume it in excessive quantities that it becomes pernicious. We have these bottles of omega-6 now that are … exposed to light, and then we cook with them. That oxidizes the oil further.
Then we consume these isolated oils. They don’t have the natural vitamins and minerals and antioxidants in the coatings around seeds and nuts that gives us omega-6 to protect them from oxidizing in our body.
When you consume these isolated oils, even if it’s a cold-pressed omega-6, the acid in your stomach will oxidize those oils and create lipid hydroperoxides and aldehydes. We absorb these and they cause a ton of damage.”

Indeed, one of the most significant dangers from consuming processed vegetable oils is that the damaged fats are integrated into your cell membranes, including the mitochondrial membrane, and once these membranes become dysfunctional, complications are sure to follow.

Even if you do not cook with canola oil or some other vegetable oil, there are many other stealth or hidden sources of damaged omega-6s. If you frequent restaurants on a regular basis, for example, you’re virtually guaranteed to be eating a high-omega-6 diet, as most restaurants use vegetable oils in their cooking and baking.

“Canola oil is one of the worst oils you can cook with,” DiNicolantonio says. “It causes a ton of oxidation products, because they’re so susceptible to heat due to the double bonds. They put these omega-6 seed oils in bread and in condiments, cereals, pastries and desserts. It’s really everywhere … [and] it’s literally transforming you from the inside-out, because these long-chain omegas get integrated in the cell membrane.
The oxidation products oxidize those fatty acid tails. When you damage those tails in the lipid bilayer, they start to curl upwards. That actually creates a more permeable membrane. You get more things that aren’t supposed to get into the cell and damage the mitochondria, damage the DNA. The fluidity of the cell membrane also goes down.
The fluidity of the cell membrane is extremely important, because you have all these hormone transporters that sit in the cell membrane. When you don’t get enough omega-3s, especially docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), the membranes become very rigid …
Instead of being able to come in and out very easily, because the membrane isn’t fluid, it starts … affecting how things flow into and out of the cell. Your metabolic rate goes down, and you have damage in the cell. It’s a huge issue.”

With regards to your mitochondria, these organelles have an inner membrane. Cardiolipin is an important component of this membrane and it needs to be saturated in DHA, which happens to be very susceptible to oxidation. Cardiolipin can be likened to a cellular alarm system that triggers apoptosis (cell death) by signaling caspase-3 when something goes wrong with the cell.

However, if the cardiolipin is not saturated with DHA, it cannot signal caspase-3, and hence apoptosis does not occur. As a result, dysfunctional cells are allowed to continue to grow, which can turn into a cancerous cell. Similarly, in your brain, DHA is used as a signal to stimulate NRF2, heme oxygenase 1 and to upregulate antioxidant enzymes.

“Omega-3s oxidizing in the body is bad, but our bodies kind of know what to do with that signal, whereas omega-6, not so much, because we didn’t have as much during Paleolithic times,” DiNicolantonio says.

Lowering your omega-6 intake is also important for the removal of senescent cells, i.e., aged, damaged or crippled cells that have lost the ability to reproduce. If senescent cells are not removed, they start gunking up the machinery. Fasting is another method that will clear out senescent cells.

When it comes to omega-6, you really only need 1 to 2 grams of linoleic acid per day. I like my primary sources of omega-6 to be whole foods such as nuts and seeds. With the exception of flax seeds, chia seeds and hemp seeds, most other plant seeds have high amounts of omega-6

Meanwhile, the American Heart Association (AHA) recommends you to consume 5 to 10 percent of your calories as omega-6 from vegetable oils or olive oil. DiNicolantonio explains:

“Instead of recommending whole foods, they recommend oils, which makes absolutely no sense. The Lyon Diet Heart Study
lowered linoleic acid from over 5 percent to about 3.5 percent [and found] a 70 percent reduction in cardiovascular [problems] and mortality.
There’s actually no evidence to support the AHA or the United States dietary guidelines, [which] recommends consuming high amounts of omega-6s from vegetable oils …
The problem with these industrial seed oils is the processing that occurs to get [the oil] out of the seed. They have to use hexane and deodorize the oil, because it’s so toxic. By the time it makes it to the shelf, you’ve got all these oxidation products, and then you consume it and your body oxidizes it with the acid in your stomach.
These oxidation products are about a fiftyfold higher than the eicosanoids made in your body. They are dramatically more harmful than any of the most harmful eicosanoids, like thromboxane a2 … because they form aldehydes. These aldehydes, like 4-hydroxynonenal … is what actually causes oxidized low-density lipoprotein (LDL).
It binds to the apolipoprotein B (apoB) [and] all apoB-containing lipoproteins. Now, these lipoproteins aren’t recognized by the LDL receptors. They hang out in the blood. It’s really the linoleic acid that gets integrated into high-density lipoprotein (HDL), LDL and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL), [which then] oxidizes and causes atherosclerosis.
Linoleic acid itself also damages the endothelium and causes an increase in penetration of LDL and VLDL particles into the subendothelium … And then when you get these oxidation products, it’s dramatically more harmful.
This is what’s causing neurodegenerative diseases. Aldehydes can actually crosslink tau protein and create neurofibrillary tangles. It has been shown in animal studies that these aldehydes can literally create neurofibrillary tangles that you see in Alzheimer’s disease.
This is what’s called advanced lipoxidation end-products (ALEs). Most people know about advanced glycation end-products (AGEs), but these ALEs, by far, are much more harmful, and it’s caused by consumption of oxidized omega-6 seed oils.”

It may come as a surprise to learn that all omega-3 sources are not healthy either. Not only is the ratio between omega-3 and omega-6 a primary concern, but industrially processed omega-3 products can also cause problems similar to those caused by too much, and damaged, omega-6. This is a topic we delve deeper into in the book.

For example, about half of all fish oils have problems with oxidation. So, when buying a fish oil supplement, you really need to look for a product that tests the hydro peroxide levels. The lower the level the better, but I would not accept anything over 5 percent.

Many fish oils are also not sourced from wild fish, and that’s another consideration. Ideally, you really want a fish oil obtained from wild-caught fish and not farmed. Also avoid farmed fish such as farmed salmon if you’re using that as a direct omega-3 source.

Many times, farmed salmon are raised on an unnatural diet that raises their fat content to abnormal levels and skews their omega-3 to omega-6 ratio in favor of the latter. They’re also chockfull of toxins. Along with wild-caught salmon, other healthy sources of omega-3 are sardines, anchovies and herring.

In addition to that, there’s the issue of sustainability, where both wild-caught and farmed fish fall short. That’s one of the reasons I like krill oil, because it is the largest biomass in the world, and harvesting is tightly regulated. If you’re a vegan and refuse to eat any animal food at all, your choices become very limited. Perhaps one of the best sources of EPA and DHA for vegans is algal oil.

“Krill is great, because it is very sustainable and has so many advantages compared to just regular fish oil, because the omega-3s are bound to phospholipids,” DiNicolantonio says. “Back in Paleolithic times … we were scavengers. Sites have been discovered from over 2 million years ago with dozens of animal skulls cracked open around them.
The brain is higher in DHA than salmon — up to 30 percent more concentrated. So, our ancient ancestors were able to access and scavenge skulls in the African savanna and get tremendous amounts of DHA. To give you an example, 4 ounces of brain can give you up to 1.5 grams of DHA.
It’s extremely saturated in cholesterol as well. This was a phospholipid-bound DHA that we were getting. And your brain doesn’t absorb DHA without it being bound to phosphatidylcholine … When you’re consuming fish oil, you’ve got to esterify it. You’ve got to attach it to choline, and then you absorb it.
But with krill oil, being bound to the phospholipids, you get twice the absorption of DHA … And then, also, our consumption of ALA was 10 times what it was today. How we used to get omega-3s if we weren’t getting brain or seafood is we were consuming a tremendous amount of plant material.
We were getting 10 to 15 grams of alpha-linolenic acid (ALA). That’s the parent omega-3 in plants. We only get about 2 grams nowadays. If you look at a female of childbearing age, they could convert over 20 percent of their ALA to EPA …
[A woman of childbearing age] can convert almost 10 percent of that ALA to DHA, which is a long-chain marine omega-3. They were getting 1 to 1.5 grams of DHA just from the conversion.”

Bear in mind that these conversion rates are not typical. The average, nonpregnant adult typically converts only 5 percent ALA to EPA and 0.5 percent ALA to DHA.

What’s more, when you go from 15 grams of omega-6 linoleic acid to 30 grams, which we’re consuming nowadays, that reduces your conversion rate of ALA to EPA and DHA by another 40 to 50 percent. Certain nutrients, including magnesium and gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), are also required, so certain nutritional deficiencies play a role in your ability to convert ALA to EPA and DHA as well.

In regard to the ketogenic diet, most people don’t understand how important omega-3s are to building muscle, improving fitness and burning fat. To give you an example, if you replaced just 6 grams of visible fat in your diet (such as steak) with 6 grams of high-quality fish oil, research shows that in just three weeks you may lose 2 pounds of fat and gain half a pound of muscle. The reason for this is because omega-3 fat, particularly DHA, is the pacemaker of the cell.

“The reason why hummingbirds can beat their wings 80 times a second is because they can saturate their wings with DHA,” DiNicolantonio says. “DHA makes the cell membrane so fluid that molecules, like amino acids, glucose, sodium, potassium, they fly in and out of the cell.
The same thing happens in humans. When you consume a high amount of omega-3s, about 3 to 4 grams, you create a cell membrane that is super saturated DHA, very fluid. Now, your basal metabolic rate goes up 15 percent. Your beta-oxidation in the liver during exercise, your fat burning during exercise goes up by 30 percent. Even at rest, your beta-oxidation goes up by 20 percent.
Long-chain omega-3s are important for ketogenic diets, because you become a better fat-burning machine. It’s affecting the machinery, the beta-oxidation in the liver. It’s improving that by activating genes. And then the other omega-3, the plant omega-3, ALA, is a ketogenic substrate, so it doesn’t get stored like the marine omega-3s. It can be converted into ketones …
Medium-chain triglycerides (MCT) oil is great too for fat loss. Meta-analyses or randomized studies show that MCT oil, compared to long-chain saturated fats — we’re talking about heavy cream and butter —significantly reduces waist circumference and visceral adiposity, because it doesn’t get stored. It gets burned for ketones.
The reason why [marine-based] omega-3s are good for fuel is because it suppresses inflammation in the brain. What happens in a cognitive-declining brain is you’re not able to utilize glucose well, because of the inflammation. DHA helps squelch the inflammation.
Your brain is able to utilize glucose better when you’re consuming more omega-3s. You’re actually able to produce more ketone bodies when you’re consuming both parent omega-3 and the long-chain EPA and DHA. You become a better ketogenic machine when you’re consuming high amounts of omega-3s.”

The mechanism behind these effects is an upregulation of genes that activate beta-oxidation in your liver, allowing you to burn fat more efficiently when you have enough omega-3s in your system. Overall, your basal metabolic rate goes up, because your cell membranes are so fluid, which allows amino acids and glucose to flow into and out of the cells better.

Your inflammation also goes down, and all of this helps optimize your ability to burn fat for fuel. On top of that, omega-3s help synthesize protein, so muscle protein synthesis dramatically increases when you consume 3 to 4 grams of animal-based omega-3 per day — again, because amino acids are able to circulate through the cell very easily when its saturated with DHA.

“Studies have shown in middle-aged adults, as well as in the elderly, consuming 3 grams of DHA [per day] increases muscle strength, increases your maximum amount that you’re able to rep. Your grip strength is improved. This is an important fat to help prevent sarcopenia.
This is a very big issue, where elderly people are not even able to carry a milk carton. Really, the omega-3s are what’s going to hopefully help prevent a lot of the muscle loss during aging.”

After taping this interview, the drug company Amarin issued a press release

about a new study with fish oil that was just recently completed. They used a new proprietary prescription formulation of fish oil called Vascepa. This is a highly-processed form of EPA.

The drug trial was called REDUCE-IT and it was done for five years. The really unusual result of this trial is that they used high doses — 4 grams per day — which is two to four times as much EPA as is typically done in these types of studies.

What did they find? They found a 25 percent reduction in cardiovascular risks, which far exceeded their expectations and results that are seen with statins. The study only looked at cardiovascular disease but my guess is other degenerative diseases, like Alzheimer’s, diabetes and arthritis, also likely improved. We won’t be able to review the study until it is presented at the American Heart Association’s annual meeting on November 10, 2018.

This study confirmed what we wrote and predicted in our book that will be published on November 13. BUT here is the real kicker, the drug costs $2,500 per year or over $200 per month. Krill and clean fish are far less expensive but you need to approach the 4 grams per day dose to achieve these results, which is the key.

In closing, this has been but a small sampling of what is covered in greater depth in “Superfuel: Ketogenic Keys to Unlock the Secrets of Good Fats, Bad Fats, and Great Health,” which can be preordered from Amazon or Barnes & Noble. It’s a great complement to “Fat for Fuel,” and will help you clearly understand the benefits of these vitally important fats.

Follow Dr. James DiNicolantonio on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram for more information. Pick up a copy of his book, “The Salt Fix: Why the Experts Got It All Wrong and How Eating More Might Save Your Life.”

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

June 2, 2023

ELON UNMASKED: Tesla bigwig Elon Musk reaches out to CCP officials during short visit in China

(Natural News) Technology bigwig Elon Musk has landed in China for his first trip to the country in three years. He has also reportedly reached out to officials of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

According to a CNBC report, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO landed in the Chinese capital Beijing. The report cited a witness who told Reuters that Musk’s private plane was spotted at Beijing Capital International Airport on May 30. Flight aggregation website ADS-B Exchange stated that the jet, a 2015 Gulfstream G650ER, was shown leaving Alaska on the same day before crossing over Japan and South Korea.

Musk lauded the communist country’s space program, which aims to land a crew on the moon before 2030, while in route to China. He tweeted: “The Chinese space program is far more advanced than most people realize.”

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs welcomed Musk’s visit. The ministry also stated that aside from the Tesla and SpaceX CEO, China welcomes other entrepreneurs who seek to advance “mutually beneficial cooperation.”

The trip came amid increased competition in the market for electric vehicles (EVs) and rumors about Tesla’s future ambitions in the nation. The company’s expansion goals are focused on the Shanghai plant, which serves as its primary production facility in Asia. It also highlights the significance of Tesla’s position in China, the company’s second-largest market after the United States.

Aside from this, Chinese researchers have had their eyes fixed on both SpaceX and its Starlink satellite network. Research reviewed by Reuters has disclosed that experts from the People’s Liberation Army have studied Starlink as a potentially threatening technology.

Musk meets CCP officials, visits Tesla factory in Shanghai

A separate report by CNBC elaborated on what transpired during Musk’s short visit to China. It noted that he left China on June 1.

He first met with Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang, where they discussed the electric vehicle market’s “broad prospects for development.” A statement from the MFA said Tesla opposes “decoupling” and is willing to continue to expand its business with China. (Related: Biden says US WON’T DECOUPLE from China during G7 meeting in Japan.)

Musk also met with Chinese Industry and Information Technology Minister Jin Zhuanglong. Both discussed “the development of new energy vehicles and intelligent networked vehicles.

The Tesla CEO also met with Chinese First Vice Premier Ding Xuexiang, known for his loyalty to Chinese paramount leader Xi Jinping. However, any issues discussed by both remain unclear.

Before his departure, Musk met with Chen Jining, the CCP secretary for Shanghai where the Tesla factory is located. He also met with Zeng Yuqun, chairman of CATL – a major supplier of EV batteries for the company. CATL is the world’s largest EV battery maker.

Musk capped off his visit to China by stopping at the Tesla Gigafactory there. The billionaire delivered a speech to staff members, lauding them for their efforts.

“It’s been incredibly impressive how you have been able to overcome so many difficulties and so many challenges,” he said. “I tell people throughout the world, the cars we produce here are not just the most efficient production, but also the highest quality.”

Visit ElonMuskWatch.com for more stories about Elon Musk.

Watch this segment of the “Wayne Dupree Podcast” about the CCP having full control of all enterprises in China, including Tesla.

This video is from the Chinese taking down EVIL CCP channel on Brighteon.com.

Globalist UN favors same-sex relationships and transgenderism, objects to Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023

(Natural News) The United Nations has voiced out its objections toward Uganda’s newly-signed Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023, which imposes capital punishment on “aggravated homosexuality.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres pointed out that the law signed by Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni on May 29 “conflicts with key international treaties and violates the rights of Ugandan citizens.” The UN’s Human Rights Office (HRO) previously called for an “urgent” judicial review of the law. It also described the newly-signed act as a “recipe for systemic violations of the rights” of Ugandans.

Stephane Dujarric, spokesman for the UN secretary general, said on May 30 that Guterres was “very concerned” about the new law. He reiterated that the top UN official “again calls on all countries to decriminalize consensual same-sex relationships and transgender people everywhere. To put it clearly, no one should be penalized, jailed, criminalized for whom they love.”

“The secretary-general has been very clear and continues to call on all member states to uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular the adherence to the fundamental rights and principles of non-discrimination and respect for personal privacy,” said Dujarric.

The Joint United Nations Program on HIV and AIDS, the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria have also released a joint statement condemning the new law.

The three organizations expressed deep concern over the “harmful impact” of the newly-signed law on public health and the HIV response, adding that “stigma and discrimination associated with the passage of the Act have already led to reduced access to prevention as well as treatment services” for Ugandan LGBT.

“Uganda’s progress on its HIV response is now in grave jeopardy,” it noted. “The Anti-Homosexuality Act [of] 2023 will obstruct health education and the outreach that can help end AIDS as a public health threat.”

The Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023 stipulates the death penalty for “aggravated homosexuality” – which includes engaging in sexual intercourse with another member of the family, committing sexual crimes against children and having sex while HIV-positive. A suspect convicted of “attempted aggravated homosexuality” can face jail time of up to 14 years. Meanwhile, anyone found “promoting” homosexuality could be put behind bars for 20 years.

Ugandan lawmaker: Washington has no right to meddle in Kampala’s affairs

U.S. President Joe Biden blasted the new law in a May 29 statement. He described the new law as “a tragic violation of universal human rights – one that is not worthy of the Ugandan people and one that jeopardizes the prospects of critical economic growth for the entire country.”

“I join with people around the world, including many in Uganda, in calling for its immediate repeal,” he said. “No one should have to live in constant fear for their life or being subjected to violence and discrimination. It is wrong.”

Washington had previously warned of “repercussions” the East African nation could suffer – including possible visa restrictions, cuts to aid budgets and even economic sanctions. However, a lawmaker from Uganda blasted the U.S. for its selective imposition of sanctions due to Kampala’s approval of the Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023.

Asuman Basalirwa, a member of the unicameral Parliament of Uganda of the Bugiri Municipality, told RT on May 29 that decisions on internal affairs should be left to each country.

“I have no problem with the way a country manages their affairs,” he said. “My only problem with these people is single-picking. This law here was signed by the president of the Republic of Uganda.” (Related: Ugandan President Museveni signs anti-LGBT legislation that stipulates DEATH PENALTY for “aggravated homosexuality.”)

Basalirwa even escalated things to a higher notch by issuing a challenge: “May I invite America, Canada, Britain and the entire Europe to cancel the visa of [Ugandan President Yoweri] Museveni?”

Visit CultureWars.news for more stories like this.

Watch Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni expressing his dislike toward homosexuals in an interview.

This video is from the Puretrauma357 channel on Brighteon.com.

Day: June 2, 2023