Article Video – The China Fraud and Parasite Host Game – Saturday, April 29, 2023 By Anna Von Reitz

Watch and comment on Rumble:

Help support the work of Anna and the Living Law Firm here or if you have Cash.App, send to $AnnaReize.

Link to original article
Download and print

These article videos are made using Speechify ( and recorded with ScreenPal (

Video Platforms
Anna Article Video Channel on
Anna Webinar Snippet Channel on

Detaching From “Scientific Consensus” Propaganda: “Science” Can't Really Be Trusted Anymore


Set Your Pulse: Take a breath. Release the tension in your body. Place attention on your physical heart. Breathe slowly into the area for 60 seconds, focusing on feeling a sense of ease. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

“Scientific consensus” surrounds us everywhere. We saw it with all things COVID despite the fact that, to me at least, it seemed that doctors, scientists, and other experts in the field who were questioning government health policies during this time, like lockdowns, vaccine mandates, vaccine safety/efficacy and mask mandates were actually in the majority. Or at least a very large minority.

We were presented with a “clear consensus” type of narrative via mainstream media and government health authorities, but this clearly wasn’t the case.

In a recent interview, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson was asked about his scientific views about COVID-19 and he said “I’m only interested in consensus.” So, agreeing with the “consensus” is quite prevalent today even though it may not even be the consensus.

I’ve said it before many times and I’ll say it again, the mainstream can make the majority seem like the minority and the minority seem like the majority.

“I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled…Consensus is the business of politics….The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.

Michael Crichton – physician, producer, and writer

We’ve also seen consensus propaganda in other areas like climate science. The public is often told that approximately 97 percent of scientists agree with the catastrophe narrative, but this isn’t true when we really explore where this claim came from.

As Aaron Kheriaty, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, recently said:

“Science is an ongoing search for truth & such truth has little to do with consensus. Every major scientific advance involves challenges to a consensus. Those who defend scientific consensus rather than specific experimental findings are not defending science but partisanship.”

It reminds me of “Groupthink.” It’s a phenomenon that occurs when a group of individuals reaches a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation. It’s based on a common desire not to upset the balance of a group of people, or the “herd.”

What we were being presented with regarding all things COVID was opposed by so many experts in the field that a massive censorship machine had to step in and uphold the status quo of “consensus.”

New emails released during litigation against the Biden administration reveal incredible efforts to silence the concerns of many scientists, doctors, journalists, and other experts in the field. They actively censored content they knew contained, as White House officials Andy Slavitt and Rob Flaherty called it, “true content” to protect political policy.

Throughout the pandemic fact-checkers have not really been fact-checking, but rather narrative checking. Social media has been one of the many long arms of the government to enforce its narrative control tactics.

The origin of COVID is a classic example. Twenty-seven scientists published a letter in The Lancet condemning “conspiracy theories” that suggested the virus did not have a natural origin. Dissenting views were censored on social media and labelled “misinformation.” But now, the US Department of Energy and the FBI say the virus was likely the result of a lab leak in Wuhan. Even though their confidence level in the evidence is low, it still remains a strong possibility that wasn’t allowed to be openly discussed before. Why?

The recent release of the ‘Twitter Files’ revealed how government agencies, Big Tech, media, and academia colluded in an effort to police online content, and censor dissenting voices to create a false perception of consensus.

I go more in-depth on this massive censorship machine and the relationship between Big tech, media and several federal agencies that have orchestrated it in the article below for those who are interested.

The shaming started right from the start of the pandemic. On Twitter, #covidiot started to trend on the evening of March 22, 2020, and by the time the night was over thousands of tweets had co-opted the hashtag to denounce poor public health practices.

Words like selfish dumbfucks, village idiots, flat earther, inbred trash, negative IQ, and more became quite common. It was sad to see. People encouraged hospitals to not provide care for anybody who opposed what we were being told by the government.

That is how quickly the masses can be made to believe something, especially when massive amounts of fear and propaganda are used to paint a misleading picture that’s far from the truth.

It’s discouraging to see how quickly we can turn on our fellow citizens.

A piece written by Gabrielle Bauer, titled “Those Who Chose Shaming Over Science” explains,

“From the earliest days of the pandemic, something deep inside me – in my soul, if you will – recoiled from the political and public response to the virus. Nothing about it felt right or strong or true. This was not just an epidemiological crisis, but a societal one, so why were we listening exclusively to some select epidemiologists? Where were the mental health experts? The child development specialists? The historians? The economists? And why were our political leaders encouraging fear rather than calm?

The questions that troubled me the most had less to do with epidemiology than with ethics: Was it fair to require the greatest sacrifice from the youngest members of society, who stood to suffer the most from the restrictions? Should civil liberties simply disappear during a pandemic, or did we need to balance public safety with human rights? Unschooled in the ways of online warriors, I assumed the Internet would allow me to engage in “productive discussions” about these issues. So I hopped online, and the rest was hysteria.”

When I talk about shame and ridicule, I like to point to a paper I’ve cited in many of my articles from several researchers from academic institutions in the United Kingdom, United States and Canada.

“Public and political discourse quickly normalized stigma against people who remain unvaccinated, often woven into the tone and framing of media articles; for example, a popular news outlet compiled a list of “notable anti-vaxxers who have died from COVID-19” (Savulescu and Giubilini, 2021). Political leaders have singled out the unvaccinated, blaming them for: the continuation of the pandemic; stress on hospital capacity; the emergence of new variants; driving transmission to vaccinated individuals; and the necessity of ongoing lockdowns, masks, school closures and other restrictive measures.

Political rhetoric has descended into moralizing, scapegoating, blaming and condescending language using pejorative terms and actively promoting stigma and discrimination as tools to increase vaccination.

This has become socially acceptable among many vaccinated individuals and pro-vaccine groups as well as the public at large. The effect is to further polarize society – physically and psychologically – with limited discussion as to the reasons why people remain unvaccinated.

So, the next time you hear the words “scientific consensus.” Remember this article.

We’re coming for you!

We, the Humans….

We’re coming for you!

When the Powers That Be, that is, the Deep State [DS], aka [Khazarian Mafia] set out to attack We, the People of the Western Liberal Republics, they did so with psychological warfare.

It is War. By the [DS]’s own reckoning, they killed 7 million humans with their Covid psyop of a ‘pandemic’, which was yet another form of weaponized Munchhausen by Proxy let loose on the populace propelled by heavy and continuous propaganda that they had planned on being so dominating that over 400 millions were to have perished by design.

It didn’t happen the way the [DS][KM] planned.

Big Oops!

Well, now onto the other plans for genocide. This includes their ‘next step’, which they have just taken, which is the ‘weaponization of Law’. So they are indicting Trump….and, very likely, this, also, won’t quite work out as planned.

Asimov’s famous quote from the Foundation Trilogy goes to the point that ‘it is a poor weapon that does not point both ways’.

So the [DS][KM] weaponized language to start their War against We, the People.

We respond, recognizing that they have attempted to alter the underlying meanings, we return fire by altering the meaning of their definitions. We attack not only the phony justifications for their ‘climate emergency’, but also throw all their history of lies back at them. Slowly, but surely, and with final certainty, minds are being won over and ‘climate crisis’ is dying as a motivating wedge against We, the Humans.

We, the populace, is taking back our language. Non-compliance with redefinition works. Insistence on meaning, works. Slowly, the propaganda is being beaten back.

The [DS][KM] attacked us with disease. A disease more of the collective, social, mind than the body, but still a complex plot to induce illness into global Humanity.

It failed. Now, it is our turn. We can attack them back by calling out their disease, that of ‘weaponized MBP’ as regards their society destabilizing tactic of ‘trans’, and ‘trans kids’ which is the weaponized appeal to ‘compassion’. Look to the words they use! All tragic, all encompassing distortions such as ‘genocide’.

But they have given us the weapon to use, that of ‘disease’. We can repel the ‘trans attack’ by way of the weaponized medical system as we turn it around, making them the pariah of the ‘ill person’. We can insist that they ARE MENTALLY ILL, and that no civil or LEGAL discourse should happen with them UNTIL such a time that they are pronounced as ‘free’ of the weaponized MBP. Let them try and dispute our insistence on ‘weaponized MBP’ being a ‘thing’, just as we had to dispute their ‘covid’ as being a ‘thing’. Let them run into their own weaponized medical system as we insist that they are indeed mentally ill, and desperately need treatment.

If they can insist that Covid is real, that masks work, then we can insist that weaponized MBP is real (it has actual history going back to 1965), and that psychological exams work.

The [DS] [KM] has now escalated the tactics by weaponizing the DOJ and Law against We, the People here in the USA by targeting the emblem that is Trump. This attack will proceed as it must, but note that this also provides us with another ‘atom blaster’.

If the [DS] can charge Trump with bogus crimes, We, the People, can charge [DS][KM] players with real crimes. We can invoke, and charge them with crimes against humanity. It matters not that the judges are bought, and owned by the [KM]. Yes, the compromised judges will dismiss the cases, BUT the trials are only one goal with the tactic.

The [KM][DS] MUST maintain the illusion of a functioning justice system if only to pump up the other illusion that their assault on the emblem of We, the People, Trump, is ‘legitimate’. This means that they MUST do everything it takes to sustain the idea that the DOJ, and the judges are NOT compromised, are NOT bought off critters of the [KM].

So this means that they must honor Procedure, if not Fact, and Intent, in Law. Thus we have them by the balls. We can squeeze as hard as we want, and they have to stand there, and grin and bear it. Just to maintain the illusion. They are trapped.

Just as with their language changes, and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, or millions of people fighting back, insisting on real definitions and facts, acting as a crushing daily weight on that effort to trap us all in ‘climate crisis’, or ‘trans kids’ (leading to weaponized compassion for the ‘trans human kids’ they intend to bring out ), we can also CRUSH the [KM][DS] weaponization of Law.

We can do this by exploiting their weapon. Get the design pattern that is showing here? The [DS][KM] pick up a club to attack us, and we take it from them to beat them around the head with it!

Yes. Their prosecutors (paid for by Soros, the Evil Rat) will reject our claims, but they will HAVE to do so within procedure, so, if prepared without error, even if the argument is rejected, we will cost them time, energy, and effort to respond. Further, with each and every such suit pressed against their tools (the people using the system against us), we both wear them down by resource depletion, but also we wake more people up to the #5GUW.

And we highlight the enemy. Further, the enemy can be degraded by affecting their minions with Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

FUD is a very good tactic that they used against us. We can return it. If we press legal criminal charges against the propagandists, such as the main faces on CNN, MSNBC, and FOX for complicity in murder by weaponized medicine during Covid, OR any other charges for their censorship, and other illegal tactics, then how may the people doing that work now react? Yes, they will denigrate the charges, and dismiss it as ‘right wing conspiracy nutters being nutters’, BUT at that point, the Worm of doubt has entered their minds! As it would the minds of all the lower level minions at your local propaganda station! Will then they be as effective? Will they not think, “hmmm…maybe some of these words will get me sued…or arrested?”

And yes, perhaps thousands of such cases brought would be discarded. But there is a cost to process it legally to that point of dismissal. This is not a cheap cost. Multiplied by mere thousands, and entire court systems can be brought to a halt, drowning in paperwork. Plus there is a chance that Universe would Favor, and one or more charges would stick. And We, the People, can share our work, and put the AI into the grunt labor of producing the legal language for the documents.

And we can do this repeatedly. No penalty, other than umbrage, to filing one case right after another.

Perhaps we will see a Real Legal Shit Fight soon.

Once you start politicizing, thus weaponizing, the fundamentals of the social order, they are just laying there, for anyone, and everyone, to pick up and use; like atom blasters just scattered across the road. Bend down, pick one up.

They point both ways.