How The Corporate Media Lied About The Jerusalem Settlement Shooting

Last Friday night a Palestinian man in his twenties entered an illegal Israeli settlement in East Jerusalem, opening fire on Israeli settlers after they exited a synagogue and were walking on a nearby road, managing to kill at least 7 and injuring another 10. After ignoring the murder of 11 Palestinians the day before, Western media went into a frenzy to cover what they called a “synagogue shooting”, a disingenuous framing of what truly transpired, in addition to missing all key context while building a completely fabricated narrative around the event.

In order to understand any story of this nature, we first must receive context, learn where the story took place, what actually happened, and ultimately who was involved. This is an extremely basic breakdown of some key components that go into reporting on any story and although some details may not be available as a story breaks, a journalist has to do their due diligence. So what happened in Jerusalem?

To begin with, we’ll start with ‘the where’. According to the BBC’s account, the incident took place “in a synagogue in the city’s [Jerusalem’s] Neve Yaakov neighbourhood and [Israeli’s] were leaving when the gunmen opened fire”, which, unless the BBC used a journalist who lacked the critical ability to read a wikipedia page summary of the area where the attack happened, is an outright lie. Neve Yaakov is an illegal settlement, located in East Jerusalem. East Jerusalem is an occupied territory; according to International Law and the opinion of nearly every single country on earth, other than Israel itself. The construction of that illegal settlement was a war crime according to the fourth Geneva convention, as was the act of the Israeli government transferring Israeli citizens to live in the settlement, which is built on Palestinian land and is where Palestinians are now prohibited from living.

The headlines in Western media all state that the attack was a “synagogue shooting”, which is also a distortion of the facts. The reason the coverage is specifically attempting to frame this as a “synagogue shooting” is to make this seem as if a Palestinian had attacked a place of worship and connect the incident to horrific “white-supremacist mass shootings” in the United States and elsewhere that have no relevance as a comparison in this instance. This was a calculated propaganda move to garner public support for Israel and to demonize Palestinians, hence why rocket fire the night prior is mentioned in almost all reports on the issue, whilst the massacre of 10 Palestinians, followed by the murder of an unarmed Palestinian protester, who were all shot the day before by Israeli forces, is never brought up. Even if the gruesome massacre of Palestinians in Jenin is brought up (including an old woman who was shot twice in the throat and once in the chest) the Western media frame it as simply part of the ongoing “escalation”, when the massacre in Jenin was “the escalation”. In a CNN live report, the event in Jenin is glossed over as a “raid” that was carried out to target armed militants and not factored into the event, which the reporter claimed took place in “North Jerusalem“.

The Associated Press (AP), ostensibly one of the most trusted news sources in the world, never once described Neve Yaakov as an ‘illegal settlement’ and in its article on the attack used the rocket fire from Gaza — which triggered a disproportionate Israeli response in the form of large airstrikes that damaged homes in the Al-Maghazi refugee camp, otherwise known as the war crime of collective punishment — as appropriate framing for the attack in the illegal settlement. Later in the article the AP does note the murder of 9 Palestinians [now 10 as another died of their wounds], yet do not connect this at all to the rocket fire from Gaza — which caused no damage or injuries — that was a response to the massacre in Jenin. 33 Palestinians have now been killed this year, amongst them 8 children [5 from West Bank, 2 from East Jerusalem and 1 from Gaza], yet the much higher Palestinian death toll is never mentioned. It is very clear that the 21-year-old Palestinian who carried out the attack was acting alone and it was interpreted widely as a response to the horrific massacre of Palestinians in Jenin and the killing of a Palestinian teen in Shuafat refugee camp earlier in the week.

Many Western media outlets noted that Palestinians in Jenin, and elsewhere, celebrated the attack in Jerusalem. In fact, the AP article mentioned above does just that and mentions the celebrations much earlier in the article, before later adding a small segment which talks about the much higher Palestinian death toll. This is again very calculated and is written in such a way as to paint Israel as a victim and the Palestinians as rabid beasts. US President Joe Biden commented on the attack, condemning it and casually using the racist terminology of calling it “an attack against the civilized world”, which is actually quoted in the AP article right before mention is given to Palestinians rejoicing at the news of the attack. Why did Palestinians actually celebrate? Is it because they are bloodthirsty un-civilised terrorists? Or is it because illegal settlers living on stolen land were killed as revenge for the Jenin massacre and because they are subjected to Apartheid conditions and have not seen such a revenge attack against Israelis since the early 2000’s? Since the second Intifada around 10,000 Palestinians have been killed and Israel has not payed a significant price for any of its various massacres against Palestinians. So, when this happened, Palestinians felt as if they finally got some revenge. You may not agree with this way of thinking, but this is the real framing of the issue. On the other hand, Western media refuse to show frequent examples of Israelis celebrating the deaths of Palestinians, including in some cases the celebration of the murder of children.

The only outlet that got the issue correct in a short news piece that was released, was Reuters, to their credit, who described the Neve Yaakov by stating that it is “considered by Israelis as a neighbourhood within Jerusalem, while Palestinians and most of the international community consider it occupied land illegally annexed after a 1967 Middle East war.” Despite this, the Reuters article does not seem to challenge the claim that the shooting happened “in a synagogue”, which they do rightfully say was claimed by the Israeli police. The shooting did not take place in or on the grounds of the synagogue, it happened on a nearby road. The connection to the synagogue is that the settlers were walking on the street after exiting a synagogue. Many corporate Western broadcast media outlets reported at the time that it happened in the synagogue, without checking to see whether this was accurate.

Next we have the question of who was involved. On the one hand we have illegal Israeli settlers, living in an illegal settlement, participating in a war crime. These individual settlers had nothing directly to do with the Israeli military’s massacre in Jenin or killings during the days before, but were targeted as revenge. Then we have the shooter, Khairi Alkam, a 21-year-old Palestinian from the Shuafat refugee camp in East Jerusalem. Khairi was named after his grandfather, who was stabbed to death in 1998 by an illegal Israeli settler. The extremist Israeli settler was named Haim Pearlman, who killed 2 Palestinians and attempted to kill three others, Pearlman was released after being arrested in 2010 and now walks free. At the time of the attack he belonged to the terrorist Kach movement, which Israel’s security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir was also once a part of.

According to Khairi Alkam’s uncle, Sharhabil, the 21-year-old was motivated to avenge the death of 16-year-old Mohammed Ali, who was killed earlier that week by Israeli forces inside Shuafat refugee camp. The teenage Palestinian was shot in the back whilst running away from Israeli occupation forces that had stormed the refugee camp. Israeli forces stated that they had shot him because he had appeared to have been holding a gun, it was later found out to be a toy gun. Despite this, Israel’s national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, handed a medal of appreciation to the soldier that killed the Palestinian teen, calling the soldier a “hero” for killing a “terrorist”. Others have stated that Khairi was motivated by the killings in Jenin and that this drove him to want to respond, however, we have no official statement which shares any of this in his own words. None of what you are reading here appeared anywhere in Western corporate news when the topic was covered, instead they decided to talk about Holocaust remembrance day and manage to note this in most articles on the issue, despite this having no relevance other than added emotional impact for Israelis.

Then we have a second attack, carried out a day later against illegal settlers in the Silwan area of East Jerusalem, which resulted in the death of the Palestinian teen responsible and seriously injured two settlers. Again, this was described as a “terrorist attack” in Western media, despite the fact that the 13-year-old Palestinian who carried out the attack was shooting at a group of settlers who were armed with automatic weapons, one of the settlers he injured was a high ranking officer in the Israeli military’s para-troopers division. This was in no way described in the biased Western media coverage. This was an act of resistance against armed illegal settlers, some still serving in the Israeli military, who are participating in stealing the homes and lands of Palestinians in the area, where hundreds face being forced out of their homes.

Then we have the Israeli reaction to this all. Something that is also missed by Western media. Israel concluded a cabinet meeting on Saturday, during which they discussed the steps that had to be taken to “respond” to the attacks. Keep in mind that both of the lone shooters were killed and there is no indication that anyone else was involved. Firstly we had the immediate reaction, which was a large-scale arrest campaign, targeted at collectively punishing Palestinians for the actions of the attackers. Then we have the coming demolition of the family homes of the attackers (these homes have already been welded shut) meaning that the families have already been made homeless. These acts are clearly violations of international law. Furthermore, given the fact that Israel clearly targets and punishes Palestinians collectively for the actions of individuals, who did not carry out action against Israeli settlers or soldiers, is it not understandable why Palestinians who routinely suffer in this way might also see Israeli settlers and soldiers as fair game for retaliation? Israel has used collective punishment in the occupied territories since 1967, which is why many Palestinians might feel justified to respond in kind. This is key context that is almost always omitted by corporate media.

Now, we have the Israeli push to use bills currently being adopted in the Knesset (Israeli parliament) to strip the citizenship from Palestinian citizens of Israel, as well as Jerusalem ID holders, if they harm any Israeli soldier or settler, regardless of context. On Monday, the Israeli Knesset voted through a bill that would strip the residency and then deport any Palestinian involved in a “violent” act against an Israeli. The bill would include deporting Palestinians to the West Bank and Gaza, on which Likud party MK, Ofir Katz, commented the following:

“Damn terrorists will not be here, their place is in Gaza.”

Denial of residency and deportation must be approved by the Israeli ministry of interior within two weeks, or alternatively the ministry of justice within seven days. This is a bill that will perform the act of ethnic cleansing, it is clear racial discrimination. Where is the so-called “civilized world” when dealing with this? Imagine during the civil rights struggle in the US, that only black people — and not the other way round — who acted in violence against any white person, civilian or not, regardless of context, were stripped of their citizenships and deported, would the world have any problem identifying what that is? Absolutely not. So why then do we see complete silence from the international media and Western governments on the introduction of supremacist laws like these?

Another potential bill that may be introduced and passed by the Israeli Knesset would fulfill the agenda of the Religious Zionism party, which vowed to pursue laws whereby Palestinians would be given a death sentence for attacking Israelis. Then we have the possible military escalation that Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated may be in the works and the massive death and destruction such an action could bring. These are just some of the responses of the Israeli government to the attacks, not including punitive measures carried out in response on the ground. On top of this, Israeli settlers have been carrying out attacks against Palestinians and their properties in the West Bank; which has included burning down countless vehicles, destroying farm land and olive trees, the slaughter of animals, arson attacks against family homes, and shooting attacks which have injured a number of civilians. No Israelis have been charged or arrested by the Israeli occupation forces for such acts and provocative “death to Arabs” marches were launched all over the West Bank, guarded by Israeli occupation forces. The other “solution” proposed by the Israeli government has been the relaxation of already lax gun laws so that every settler can be armed. The Israeli regime has urged all its settlers to carry a gun. Keep in mind that a large percentage of these settlers are either actively part of the Israeli military or used to be, meaning that if there is a future attack on armed settlers, according to international law, they are armed combatants. However, Western media won’t describe them as such.

All of this context to the attacks, in addition to the racist responses of the Israeli regime and their illegal settlers, has been actively ignored. A mythological narrative has been constructed to distort the reality on the ground, in order to make Israel look like a victim and to justify its war crimes. This is why it is so important to address the propaganda surrounding the two attacks, because those who are reporting it in a way that leaves out all the key facts are actively participating in covering up for crimes against humanity. They are not journalists, they are paid propagandists and this is yet again another example of gutter journalism at play.

 

Source: https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com

Too Wet? Too Dry? Just Blame It On Climate Change

BY BRIAN C. JOONDEPH, M.D.

Climate change, as defined by the United Nations, “Refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. These shifts may be natural, such as through variations in the solar cycle.” That’s actually a good definition.

But not willing to leave well enough alone, the UN goes further, spoiling a simple and straightforward definition with, “But since the 1800s, human activities have been the main driver of climate change, primarily due to burning fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas.” [emphasis, links added]

It is amazing that before humans burned fossil fuels two centuries ago, it was only natural cycles that changed the climate, not backyard barbecues, gas stoves, and SUVs.

Yet the UN does not explain how previous ice ages developed due to global cooling, followed by melting of mile-thick ice over the upper Midwest due to global warming, multiple times over the Earth’s history, long before there was any significant human activity.

It seems that a changing climate was a thing long before Al Gore, Greta Thunberg, and the UN thought they figured it all out.

Not only does climate change, based on both short- and long-term cycles, but much of it is also unpredictable.

According to the Intragovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”

Climate change had other names over the years. In the 1970s, it was “global cooling” with predictions of a coming ice age. NPR, the guardians of all proper knowledge and thought, first used the term “global warming” in 1989.

It doesn’t make sense, at least to most logical people, that the planet can be both warming and cooling on a global scale, outside of normal seasonal variations, so the term “climate change” was popularized to encompass all weather events.

“Climate change” was first mentioned in 1975, but this was a time when climate scientists could not decide if temperatures were rising or falling, attributing sinister causes rather than natural and cyclic warming and cooling trends that have long preceded humans and their activities.

Since then, climate change has engulfed more than temperature, adding weather events such as hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards, droughts, and flooding.

It seems that any deviation from a sunny day with temperatures in the mid-70s with a light breeze is evidence of climate change and Republicans scheming to destroy the planet.

Democrats, the left, and the media have an uncanny ability to balance two contradictory propositions in their minds, believing both can occur simultaneously due to the same cause.

It would be like Goldilocks finding all three beds or bowls of porridge just perfect, regardless of whether they were too hot or too cold, too hard or too soft.

The New York Times ran an opinion piece in 2014 titled, “The end of snow?” predicting the demise of winter sports and the Winter Olympics due to global warming.

Eight years later in 2022, the New York Times told us, “How climate change can supercharge snowstorms.”

Or also in 2022 how, “The deadly freeze that swept the United States was extraordinary, but while scientists know that global warming can intensify extreme weather, the effects on winter storms are tricky to untangle.”

Tricky indeed. Climate change causes both not enough and too much snow. How does that work?  But it’s not only snow but water, both not enough and too much, all due to omnipotent climate change.

Let’s look at droughts in California.

According to the California Department of Water Resources,

California is no stranger to drought; it is a recurring feature of our climate. We recently experienced the 5-year event of 2012-2016, and other notable historical droughts included 2007-09, 1987-92, 1976-77, and off-and-on dry conditions spanning more than a decade in the 1920s and 1930s.

Paleoclimate records going back more than 1,000 years show many more significant dry periods. The dry conditions of the 1920s-30s, however, were on a par with the largest 10-year droughts in the much longer paleoclimate record.

Unfortunately, the scientific skill to predict when droughts will occur – which involves being able to forecast precipitation weeks to months ahead – is currently lacking. Improving long-range weather modeling capabilities is an area of much-needed research.

In a nutshell, droughts are nothing new in California, have been far worse in the past, before anyone talked about global warming or climate change, and they are impossible to predict, as the IPCC noted above.

Floods are much the same. The same California agency notes,

California is prone to potentially devastating impacts of periodic floods. All 58 counties have experienced at least 1 significant flood event in the past 25 years, resulting in loss of life and billions of dollars in damages.

Floods are naturally occurring phenomena in California.

Again, floods are normal and expected. They are nothing new. Here are some photos of floods going back 150 years. [Example photo below]

The Great California Flood of 1861-1862 was a series of four floods from December 9, 1861, Dec. 23-28, January 9-12, 1862, and January 15-17. The winter rains started early in November and continued nearly interrupted for four months. Marysville and Sacramento suffered the worst damage in the Northern California valley. This scene shows the floodwaters along K Street looking west from 4th Street in Sacramento, Calif. Photo was taken January 1862.
Courtesy photo California State Library

But look at media headlines claiming droughts and floods are new and due to climate change rather than a natural phenomenon.

From National Geographic last month, “Climate change and California’s drought.” A local ABC News affiliate explained, “California Drought: New research ties specific extreme weather events to climate change.” They went further, “California Drought: How will climate change affect California’s ski industry?”

Drought is due to climate change. Yet at the same time so is flooding.

Last week Vox claimed, “California’s floods reveal a likely climate change symptom: Quick shifts between opposing weather conditions.”

Climate pseudo-scientist Ellen DeGeneres unsuccessfully weighed in, “Ellen DeGeneres mocked for video blaming California flooding on climate change.” USA Today at least asked a question, “Are California’s storms normal, or is climate change making them worse?”

It seems all manner of weather is due to climate change, ignoring past and far more extreme weather when the world’s population and activity were much less than today.

Perhaps a historical perspective is necessary. After all, history didn’t begin when Greta Thunberg or writers at Vox or the New York Times came of age.

The climate has been changing for millennia, since the Earth was formed, and will continue to do so in the future. Most change is due to earth and solar cycles some of which we understand, none of which we can alter or control.

Market Watch reports: “Climate change has cost the government $350 billion” as of 2018 and that number is rising. Yet it’s still snowing in Colorado and both dry and wet in California.

We are pissing away money we don’t have, ignoring far more important and fixable problems at home, and attempting to fix the unfixable. Government at its finest.

Is this really about “saving the planet” or is the climate movement about money and control, similar to the COVID pandemic, the new homes of communism and tyranny?

Source: American Thinker

Humanity Must Move Beyond Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt

From brownstone.org:

January 2023 marks the third year of global Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD). FUD is a propaganda tactic, used in sales, marketing, politics, and cults, appealing to fear to influence perception. In marketing it is used to spread doubt about the quality of a competitor’s product (see e.g., The rhetoric of dread: Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) in information technology marketing). Often, negative and false information is spread in order to increase market share. An example is Microsoft, using this tactic to push out competitors such as Linux.

FUD first brought about by a crisis in health, cascaded into loss of faith in government, in the people around us and sometimes in ourselves. Three years is too long a time for FUD to be considered a crisis, but when a crisis is not resolved, loss of hope is the outcome. Many people have lost work, friends, health and even their lives as a result.

I wrote two reviews outlining the damage done by the non-pharmaceutical interventions. These articles dealt with the devastating ripple effects in terms of the doubling of hunger since the beginning of the crisis, hundreds of millions losing their jobs, postponed operations, and rising inequalities. At the same time, I did not only want to point out what was going wrong, but also use my knowledge as a behavioral scientist on how to go from a downward to an upward spiral.

An important question thus became: How can we move forward now that Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt have the potential of becoming endemic? At first the battle was fought over medical and statistical science. Over the virus, tests and vaccines. And though it showed us who was willing to engage in a scientific debate and who was not, it also divided us to the point where we choose sides and think later.

My name is Michaéla Schippers, I’m a professor in behavioural science and performance management in the Netherlands. I came up with several social initiatives; in 2020 and the great citizens movement in 2021, in response to the downward spiral I see and feel. In 2022 I started a third initiative; in which I discuss the psychological underpinnings of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. I engage in conversations with scientists from all over the world who are following their own ikigai (i.e. purpose in life, discussed below), and I think it is good if we use their knowledge to find a constructive way forward. Join us finding your own purpose in life; we move together.

My experiences and journey during the crisis

With the lockdowns starting in The Netherlands in March 2020, for me personally, not much changed in my work at first, except that the lectures I gave were no longer in the hall, but took place online. But I was shocked and I found myself in a kind of survival mode in those first few weeks. As soon as I realized that, I asked myself what was really going on. Why was a lockdown decided and for how would it proceed?

I was alarmed because as a single mother with a four-year-old son in elementary school, I was thrown back on myself. I read a story from a nurse in New York who apparently died of SARS-CoV-2. She was single and her five-year-old child had been with her for two days before he was discovered. It occurred to me that if something happened to me, I couldn’t let my son Mike go to the neighbors because he might infect them. I taught Mike to call the alarm number. Fortunately, he liked it and liked to play along.

After two weeks living in fear I thought: I don’t want this, I can’t live like this. I couldn’t think logically anymore and I was looking for ways to get out of this. My sister Esther called me and said she had a very strong feeling that something was not right. I told her that I couldn’t think about it rationally and that I needed some time to figure out exactly what was going on.

As a result, the scientist in me woke up again and I started looking for more scientific information. I called a colleague at Erasmus University, to talk about the situation, as he wrote blogs about the effects the closures had on elderly people. He told me he did not understand the widespread fear and anxiety either, as he did not see his hospital as overrun.

I decided to write an urgent letter to the Dutch Prime Minister and published an overview article ‘For the Greater Good? The Devastating Ripple Effects of the Covid-19 Crisis.’  Because I was increasingly worried about the future for my son and myself, I decided to speak publicly about my concerns regarding the consequences of the corona policy in a well-known podcast in The Netherlands (with English subtitles).

The original broadcast received widespread acclaim. I then gave two follow-up interviews and in October that year I appeared on national television. For the first time in my life I was present at a demonstration, as a speaker. In consultation with the department chair of my faculty, I indicated that this was in a personal capacity. But many colleagues could not understand me. They found my story rather bizarre, while for me it was a psychological interpretation, so just from my field of expertise.

I wrote about the role of groupthink, agnotology (i.e., the ways ignorance or doubt about certain topics is created by means of withholding or presenting information in a certain way), social influence, superstition and stress and coping. I sought to explain the social and behavioral aspects of human behavior in times of crises. I investigated the psychological and other consequences of global corona policy and my conclusion was, in short, that the cure (i.e. the nonpharmaceutical interventions) would be many times worse than the disease, both for The Netherlands and for poor countries.

The question was even whether the “cure” would work at all, because I couldn’t find any evidence for that. From my field of expertise, it does not really make a difference in terms of psychological processes and outcomes, whether such a disastrous policy was deliberately chosen, for example because of a perverse reward system, or whether this is the result of an extreme form of groupthink.

It can also be a combination of these factors; psychologically speaking, people are fairly easy to influence to make decisions that “hurt” themselves and even loved ones, as long as they think their suffering is for the greater good. Which of these motivations play a role, I leave to other experts to find out.

From a downward to an upward spiral

What I find even more important is to find ways to turn the situation around for the better, to ease the worst of the suffering and to see how I could get people to think for themselves again. What I eventually succeeded in, to shed the fear and see through the propaganda and psychological warfare techniques unleashed on an unexpecting population, many people could not.

Only a relatively small percentage of people recovered quickly from what fellow psychologist and professor Mattias Desmet called mass psychosis, or did not fall for it to begin with. Most people went along with the policies, despite the fact that many of them had their doubts. What you often see in such a crisis situation is that a large part of the population rallies around the leader (“rally around the flag effect”), which gives them a sense of (false) security. The more measures are taken, the more confidence this gives this population group, even if these measures have no effect, or have a clear negative effect such as a lockdown and school closures.

The compliant population group can even turn against those who are critical of the measures, because they see the latter group as a threat to their familiar world and perception of safety. This is also beautifully expressed in Plato’s allegory of the cave. Colleague Mattias Desmet from the University of Ghent told me that, inspired by my story in the alternative media in The Netherlands, he started doing further research into this phenomenon, also referred to as Mass Formation, and has published a book about it that has received widespread attention and is now available in multiple languages (The Psychology of Authoritarianism). I also wrote about this phenomenon in a publication with John Ioannidis.

Recently, I had a talk with Jordan Peterson on the downward path society is in, a death spiral. I also started to closely monitor the work of many scientists who experienced public scrutiny and backlash because they published and spoke about scientific findings that were counter-narrative, such as Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, Martin Kulldorff and many others. The huge risks that those scientists were taking in going against the tide only made me listen more closely to what they had to say.

The future if we do not make any changes

The next few years are going to be tough. If we don’t turn the tide, I fear we may be heading for a global police state under the guise of health care.

At the beginning of 2022, I published an article about this together with John Ioannidis, from which an excerpt is quoted below:

“Since early 2020, the world has witnessed a marked expansion of governmental decision-making regarding health. Lockdowns and curfews were instated in many countries, and many freedoms were taken away under the justification of a major health threat. Health authorities and politicians alluding to or exploiting health authorities acquired extraordinary power to regulate society at large, including the application of mandates. A Freedom House report found that democracy grew weaker in 80 countries during COVID-19, and that in 2020 the number of free countries reached the lowest level in 15 years. Countries that regressed included ones you’d expect like China and Belarus, but also democratic bulwarks like the United States, France, Denmark, and the Netherlands. The United States was listed as one of the 25 countries that witnessed the steepest declines in freedom. Even if the pandemic enters a less threatening endemic phase (as may already be the case in several countries), the legacy of authoritarian measures and mandates may leave behind a more enduring threat to democracy.”

Basically there are two (let’s say quite extreme) possibilities:

1. We are entering the dead-end tunnel of a technocratic society, complete with, for example, control by drones, in which we have entirely lost our freedom;
2. We choose the path of freedom; a life of healthy living in which we do not go along with the harmful measures that are imposed on us (see also the picture above).

The longer we wait, the harder it will get. Because so many people have lost their ability to look critically at the current situation, I foresee a long period of global unrest, a kind of “Sturm und Drang” period, in which people will starve to death, in which medical operations will be postponed and the farmers are being made increasingly difficult to practice their much-needed trade.

In very cynical moments, which I sometimes have, I sometimes think: if everyone dies, the problems will also disappear, and the virus will no longer bother us. But when I approach it positively, I say that we have the knowledge to implement solutions that are good for humanity and the earth. If we manage to get rid of perverse incentives, and make it a logical step to go for such solutions, I am sure humanity can thrive and prosper.

Importantly, for all those solutions, however, money should not be the guiding factor and many simple interventions are possible, such as psychological ones from my field, to determine your ideal future for yourself. It occurred to me that it is important that people start thinking for themselves again about how they want their future and that of the world to look like.

From shattered goals, hopes and dreams to meaning in life

Ikigai is a Japanese word that means purpose in life. A behavioural scientist might tell you; the key to building resilience to FUD is to find and feel your own purpose in life. So ask yourself; what is your purpose in life? And if you haven’t a clue, how may you find it? If you are ready for the challenge, we’ve written it down; “Humanity can do better. Discover your inner strength.” Rather than being alone, affright and divided, as we’ve all done over the last three years, could we – having found our personal ikigai purpose in life – move forward in a different direction?

Once we manage to move out of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt, we move. There’d be movement. A great citizens movement. Make no mistake, this is as much a scientific approach, as is the science behind the medical and statistical battles fought. This time, it’s behavioural science and we’re not fighting, we’re moving in a different direction. Go check out the citizens movement website. The great citizens declaration may be a nice place to start. If you like it, sign it. And start your own challenge in which you tell your fictional future self about where you are today, what you would change, if there were no limitations as you feel them imposed by FUD.

The idea is to teach people to discover and trust their own inner strength in these difficult times. The goal is to get people into an upward spiral and empower them. Through short-term and powerful positive psychology interventions, such as gratitude letters or describing the ideal future self, or other interventions.

Through these scientifically substantiated interventions and Practice Based Evidence interventions, people can get (renewed) energy and zest for life. And who knows, even make the world a better place. So let’s use the next few years for personal growth, accompanied with a lot of humor and fun. And above all, let’s not be afraid for our common sense and for a healthy life.

My dream

As inspiration, I would like to share my dream for my ideal future for the world, that I wrote in my letter to the future, here.

In the ideal world I have in mind, there is no needless suffering. Systems are in place to serve people, we are not there to serve the systems, or to make an effort to fit into the system. Kids are brought up with the idea in mind that they can become their best possible selves. Societal values are freedom, humanness, and wisdom. With these values as a basis, a process of co-creation can be used to make this world a better place. Hierarchical systems are abandoned and systems of radical direct democracy are implemented and embraced worldwide. In my ideal world, we do this, using evidence-based and effective methods to create a better world that is good for people, planet and all inhabitants of the earth. All people will get the chance to shine, and be their best possible version of themselves. 

You can start by signing the Great Citizens Declaration (GCD) here. And write your own letter to the future here. I hope many of you will join in. As hopeless as it may seem at times, it is my conviction (as a hopeless optimist maybe) that one day we’ll wake up and realize we have co-created a better world together.

Note: This article is written on a personal note. It is in part and loosely based on my book chapter in the book “Dodging or Waking Up” (Ontwijken of ontwaken), an edited book by Milo Scheeren, Käthie Schene and Peter Toonen. I would like to thank Rico Brouwer for his helpful comments on an earlier version of this essay and his help in updating it.

God Forbid We Ever Question the Libtard Dogma of Universal Mass Education

by Chris Black

The Department of Education didn’t exist until 1980(!), not that long ago at all. What has the DOE’s existence actually done to improve education in this country?

How does it justify its existence, other than platitudes about how “are childrun R da future!!1”

Maybe some people’s kids are, but you know what? Some kids are harder working than others.

Some kids are better suited to becoming skilled professionals than others. And some kids are smarter than others.

This stupid conversation about “school choice” and “charter schools” and “vouchers” has been going on for as long as I can remember. The elephant in the room is that there’s a not-insignificant chunk of the student population who are simply dumber than the other kids and are always going to underperform no matter how you try to “educate them.” 

There is no policy or amount of money you can throw at them that will make them stop being dumb.

See also  Project Veritas Video Exposes Education Specialist Bragging About Violating Georgia’s Ban on Critical Race Theory Propaganda in Schools.

Many great civil societies and empires were totally fine with this for thousands of years until one day, some smug shitlib idiot in a sweatervest decided that they must have been wrong and we need to spend infinity gorillion dollars trying to massage dumb kids into performing as well as smart kids do.

Republicans are more than complicit in this.

They love to play one-upsmanship with “education spending.”

And conservative voters are stupid enough to keep falling for it.

Say it with me:

Conservatives are worse than leftists.

Conservatives aid and abet leftists at every turn.

Conservatives stand in the way of dealing with leftists properly.

Conservatives must be smashed before leftism and liberalism can be smashed.

All of these are downstream from perverting the currency.

The Pentagon’s sole purpose is to secure Rothschild banking world hegemony.

The American Revolution started because Pennsylvania was denied the ability to use silver certificates. Everything else came after the fact. It’s the money.

See also  Ron DeSantis Lays Out the TRUTH About The Woke “History” Class He Banned:
‘We Want Education, Not Indoctrination

Always the money. The money first, then the education system.

Always and forever in that order.

 

Source: https://www.investmentwatchblog.com

Pfizer Rakes in Biggest Profits in Company’s History Thanks to Billions from Covid Vaccine Sales

by Nick R. Hamilton,

Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has just recorded the highest revenue in the company’s history thanks to the billions of dollars in profit it’s raking in from COVID-19 vaccines.

Covid products account for a large chunk of the vaccine maker’s sales and secured Pfizer’s record revenues for 2022.

The record profits are being reported as the company faces backlash for claiming to “mutate” viruses to sell more vaccines, as Slay News reported.

A growing number of doctors are also turning away from Pfizer’s boosters.

According to the earnings release by Pfizer on January  31, full-year revenues for 2022 came in at $100.3 billion, which is an “all-time high” for the multinational corporation.

This is the first time the company has seen annual sales in excess of $100 billion, with revenues reflecting 30 percent operational growth.

Excluding contributions from COVID-19 products, Comirnaty vaccine, and Paxlovid antiviral, revenues only grew by 2 percent operationally.

The two products combined generated over $56 billion in sales for the company.

The year “2022 was a record-breaking year for Pfizer, not only in terms of revenue and earnings per share, which were the highest in our long history,” said Dr. Albert Bourla, chairman and CEO of Pfizer.

“As we turn to 2023, we expect to once again set records, with potentially the largest number of new product and indication launches that we’ve ever had in such a short period of time.”

Sales of Comirnaty and Paxlovid are expected to hit their lowest levels in 2023 before getting back to growth next year “due to significant government supply on hand” at the beginning of this year, the company said.

Pfizer calculates Comirnaty sales to decline by 64 percent, to $13.5 billion this year, and Paxlovid sales to drop 58 percent, to $8 billion.

Pfizer’s results come as the company is under scrutiny following an investigative report which revealed that the firm is considering mutating the COVID-19 virus for developing new vaccines against it.

“One of the things we’re exploring is like, why don’t we just mutate it ourselves so we could create—preemptively develop new vaccines, right?” Dr. Jordon Walker, a director of research and development at Pfizer, told an undercover reporter for Project Veritas.

“If we’re going to do that, though, there’s a risk of like, as you could imagine—no one wants to be having a pharmaceutical company mutating [expletive] viruses.”

Walker insisted that Covid is going to be “a cash cow for us for a while going forward.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) has called on Congress to investigate the Covid vaccine approval process.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has also sent a letter to Bourla asking for more information about Pfizer’s efforts to mutate the virus.

Meanwhile, Pfizer is expected to start selling the Comirnaty Covid vaccine through commercial channels in the United States from the second half of this year.

It’s part of the company’s plan to move away from its earlier practice of selling to the government.

The firm intends to raise the price of the vaccine by around four times sometime in 2023.

While Pfizer is pushing for greater use of COVID-19 vaccines, a growing number of doctors are deciding against getting the booster jabs owing to a lack of clinical trial evidence.

“I have taken my last COVID vaccine without RCT level evidence,” Dr. Todd Lee, an infectious disease expert at McGill University, recently wrote on Twitter.

He was pointing to a lack of randomized clinical trials (RCT) for the booster vaccines.

“Pay close attention to note this isn’t anti-vaccine sentiment,” Lee, who has received three vaccine doses, stated.

“This is ‘provide [hard] evidence of benefit to justify ongoing use’ which is very different.

“It is only fair for a $30 billion a year product given to hundreds of millions.”

Meanwhile, Pfizer officials are facing a potential ban from the European Parliament due to the company’s lack of transparency regarding Covid vaccine purchase agreements during the pandemic.

On January 11, the European Parliament’s committee on Covid approved the ban proposal.

All political groups voted for the ban except for two parties.

 

Source: https://slaynews.com/econom

Celebrities Call for ‘Total Hollywood Strike’ Until Every Last Person Gets Jabbed

A group of liberal Hollywood celebrities are threatening a “massive, all-round Hollywood strike” until every last one of us is vaccinated. Describing Hollywood as “the base of the entire modern American culture”, the group also claims to be speaking on behalf of “humanity’s better nature.”

Rosie O’Donnell, Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth Paltrow and Gene Simmons are among the dozens of artists, entertainers, and activists who have attached their names to an effort calling for a month-long strike to encourage people they are calling “vaccine dodgers” to succumb to the jab.