By Anna Von Reitz
By Anna Von Reitz
Trans-humanist dystopia may not be that far away. In the future, humans are going to be artificially intelligent (AI). Google Director of Engineering Ray Kurzweil said, “We’ll also be able to fully back up our […]
The post Transhuman Artificial Intelligence Coming to a Hive Mind Near You first appeared on Winter Watch.
A growing interest in health and heath food has helped drive consumer demand for fish to an all-time high. A diet rich in fish has grown so popular that global fish consumption jumped 122% from 1990 to 2018, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).1
Fish is often viewed as a healthier alternative to meat2 due to the so-called “benefits” on human health and the environment. But is it really healthier for you and the planet? That all depends on what kind of fish you’re eating and where it’s sourced from.
An increasing amount of fish on the market — in restaurants and grocery stores — is sourced from large-scale industrial fish farms. These farms rely on a toxic cocktail of pharmaceutical drugs, pesticides and even genetically engineered crops such as soy.3
Industrial ocean fish farms or factory fish farms, where fish are raised numbering in the hundreds of thousands or millions, often in net pens in the open ocean, pollute the environment with massive amounts of fish waste and threaten already vulnerable wild fish with disease.
Fish raised in crowded and unsanitary conditions are, unfortunately, on the rise. The number of fish produced on fish farms skyrocketed 527% from 1990 to 2018, according to FAO. There are a couple of reasons for this spike, one being the world’s appetite for fish is growing. Another reason is that, by 2016, 90% of the world’s wild fish stocks had already been depleted due to overfishing.4
The result is more people are eating farm-raised fish produced on land in massive tanks or in open ocean net pens. In fact, the world now produces more farmed fish than it does beef.5 And, 50% of the fish eaten worldwide is now farm-raised.6
Salmon is one of the most widely sold types of factory farm fish, and salmon farms are now the fastest-growing type of food production system in the world.7 A fan favorite among fish eaters, salmon is often a go-to for health-conscious consumers. Loaded with vitamins, antioxidants and omega-3 fatty acids, salmon has all the characteristics associated with healthy food.
But salmon is only healthy if it is wild-caught, meaning it was fished from its natural habitat, where it fed on natural organisms. Salmon is not healthy for you if it is farm-raised. Farmed salmon actually has more in common with junk food than health food.
Farmed fish are raised on a diet of processed, high-fat, high-protein feed that can include everything from genetically engineered soybeans and pesticides, to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dioxins, to antibiotics.8 The dry pellet feed given to farmed salmon is what makes it so toxic to you when you eat it.
The toxins in farmed salmon feed accumulate in salmon fat. One study,9 which tested 700 salmon samples collected from around the world, found PCB concentrations in farmed salmon are, on average, eight times higher than in wild salmon.10
Farmed salmon in general contain higher levels of contaminants than wild salmon, in part because of their elevated fat content. So even when raised in similarly contaminated conditions, farmed salmon will absorb more toxins than wild fish.
Farmed salmon also does not have the nutritional profile of wild salmon, containing far higher amounts of omega-6, which can have deleterious health ramifications, seeing how most people are deficient in omega-3 while getting far more omega-6 than they need.
With all the farmed salmon floating around, you might be surprised to learn that the U.S. captures nearly one-third of the world’s wild salmon. But more than half of it is sent overseas, where it’s deboned and processed using cheap labor.
There was a time when our wild-caught salmon would be shipped back to us after processing but, today, the majority of it stays in Asia as a result of Japan’s shrinking fish supply and China’s improved economic status, which allows its citizens the luxury to purchase it.
The result is more farm-raised salmon for Americans. Two-thirds of the salmon we eat here in the U.S. is imported, mostly from industrial fish farms in Chile, Canada, Norway and processing factories in China.11
Similar to industrial animal agriculture, farming salmon (and fish in general) on a large scale results in a massive amount of animal waste or, in this case, fish waste. According to The Guardian:12
“A pen with 200,000 fish produces an enormous amount of waste. In nature, animal waste is not harmful; in fact it is often beneficial. But large concentrations of it can be destructive. The waste of wild fish swimming around is not harmful, but the waste of hundreds of thousands staying in the same spot is.”
From an outward perspective, the environmental impact of large fish farms can easily be obscured. Similar to factory farms on land, which house large numbers of cows, pigs and chickens yet are often kept out of public view, ocean fish farms are hidden from the public eye. The fish pens are placed up to 164 feet beneath the surface of the water.
These seemingly invisible underwater pens can hold up to 200,000 fish each. In Norway — which has a huge farmed salmon industry — some fish farms have eight to 10 pens. That means factory fish farms can house up to 2 million fish, which is more fish than the wild Atlantic salmon population of the entire world, The Guardian reports.13
Fish farms of this scale require a lot of capital, which is why most salmon farms are owned by large multinational companies.
Another major problem with open ocean fish farms is fish that escape. Whenever Atlantic salmon are farmed near wild Atlantic salmon, mixing occurs. When males escape, they usually die off because they aren’t tough enough to compete with wild males during the spawning process.
But when females escape, they lay eggs that are fertilized by wild males. This is problematic because the genes of farmed fish are not equipped to survive in the wild. Farmed fish also lack the basic survival skills that wild fish have. According to The Guardian:14
“Farmed salmon are not greatly different from one pen to another. They have been selected for fast growth, and growing fast seems to be their major skill. They do not have all the special survival skills of the wild stock. Although fast-growing, they only grow for a short time and never achieve the size of the more slow-growing wild salmon.
This is one of the reasons that they do not reproduce at the same rate as the larger wild fish. A salmon living in the wild that has a farmed parent or even grandparent is much less likely to survive at sea, and, in fact, sea survival has declined in places with farming.”
Farmed salmon that escape from ocean net pens are so common that more than one-third of “wild-caught” salmon from the Faroe Islands, tucked between Iceland and Norway in the North Atlantic Ocean (and politically part of Denmark), are actually escaped farmed fish.15
Fear of farmed fish escaping into the wild and threatening wild fish is why fish farming is now banned — and will be phased out by 2025 — in Washington state.16 In 2017, a fish-farm spill occurred off Cypress Island when a net pen holding 263,000 salmon gave way.
The farm’s owner, Cooke Aquaculture Pacific, tried to downplay the seriousness of the spill and initially said only around 160,000 Atlantic salmon had escaped. But it was later confirmed that the number was as high as 263,000.
Cooke blamed the damaged pens on a solar eclipse that brought “exceptionally high tides and currents.”17 But an investigation by the state of Washington found that Cooke was negligent because the company failed to properly clean the nets on the pens. This led to an excessive buildup of mussels and other sea life on the nets, The Seattle Times reported.18
The spill threatened native wild salmon including the endangered Chinook. The concern was the farmed Atlantic salmon would crossbreed with the wild Pacific salmon and expose the wild fish to disease and pests such as sea lice.
Sea lice are a major problem for farmed salmon, and thanks to industrial ocean fish farms, it’s now a problem for wild salmon, too. Sea lice that run rampant in fish farms can attack wild salmon swimming nearby. Fisherman on the west coast have reported seeing wild salmon swimming near fish farms infected with sea lice. The Guardian reports:19
“Before there were fish farms they [sea lice] did not pose a significant problem. They roamed the ocean looking for salmon, which make up a tiny minority of the fish population. One or two might attach themselves to a salmon, and the fish would live with the parasites until it returned to the river. Sea lice cannot live long in fresh water, so they fall off and die in the river.
Until farming, sea lice survived but never found huge schools of salmon on which to feed. Now they find salmon farms with hundreds of thousands of salmon trapped in one spot.
The lice eat the salmon’s skin. It is difficult to penetrate the scales so they attack the head and neck. They will completely skin a fish’s head and then it will die of exposure. Farmers find the dead fish with raw skinned heads at the bottom of the pens. It is not unusual to lose a quarter of a pen. Sea lice are a huge financial loss for fish farmers.”
Another problem with fish farming is that the companies that raise farmed fish aren’t exactly truthful about their practices. Mowi USA, the world’s largest producer of Atlantic salmon products, is accused of misleading consumers with false marketing claims.
Organic Consumers Association (OCA) filed a lawsuit in August 2020 against Mowi and Mowi Ducktrap for deceptive marketing and advertising of smoked Atlantic salmon products sold under the Ducktrap River of Maine brand.20
Many popular smoked Atlantic salmon brands lure in consumers with misleading claims such as “all natural,” “healthy and nutritious” or “sustainably sourced.” But the truth is that all smoked Atlantic salmon products are made from salmon raised on massive industrial fish farms that, in some cases, are nowhere near the Atlantic Ocean. As Katherine Paul of OCA writes:21
“Commercial fishing of Atlantic salmon — a species once abundant in the wild but now nearly extinct — is prohibited in the U.S. In the Gulf of Maine, they are even protected under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Similarly, in Canada, wild Atlantic salmon in the Bay of Fundy (located in the Gulf of Maine) are protected under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk.
That means all Atlantic salmon sold to consumers in food stores and restaurants — whether fresh, frozen, or smoked — comes from industrial salmon farms.”
To take action on this issue, please sign the petition telling Ducktrap of Maine to stop falsely claiming its smoked Atlantic salmon is “all natural.”
From the toxic drugs and chemicals used in fish farming, to its environmental impact on wild fish and the false and misleading marketing claims used by multinational fish farm companies, there are plenty of reasons to avoid farmed fish.
Instead, I only recommend eating safer seafood choices such as wild-caught Alaskan salmon, sardines, anchovies, mackerel and herring. All of these are at low risk of contamination yet are high in healthy omega-3 fats, without the problems posed by fish farming. You’ll want to opt for sustainably harvested wild-caught fish as well.
One of the best options toward this end is to look for the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) logo, which features the letters MSC and a blue check mark in the shape of a fish. The MSC logo ensures the seafood came from a responsible fishery that uses sustainable fishing practices to minimize environmental impacts.22
The Internet Archive, commonly known as Archive.org and IA, is intended to act as a historical archive. In addition to digitally hosting more than 1.4 million books and other documents, Archive.org acts as a historical vault for the internet, preserving cached versions of websites that are no longer accessible to the public.1
Billing itself as a “nonprofit library of millions of free books, movies, software, music, websites and more,”2 Archive.org’s Wayback machine contains records of more than 20 years of web history, including more than 486 billion web pages.
“We began in 1996,” their website states, “by archiving the internet itself, a medium that was just beginning to grow in use. Like newspapers, the content published on the web was ephemeral — but unlike newspapers, no one was saving it.”3 The whole purpose and value of Archive.org lies in its ability to preserve information that has been removed or deleted, whether intentionally or for other reasons.
With the use of IA, you can look at things that are no longer in existence via its valuable, really priceless, historical archive. Now, however, Archive.org has jumped on the fact-checking bandwagon, raising concerns that the integrity of its archive could be at risk.
Censorship continues to run rampant in the U.S. and elsewhere, particularly when it comes to information regarding public health. It was for this reason, along with their unscrupulous data mining efforts, that I left Facebook in 2019.
Not only is mainstream media being bought off by organizations including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but social media and the internet are being attacked by an army of “fact-checkers.” October 30, 2020, Archive.org announced in a blog post:4
“Fact checking organizations and origin websites sometimes have information about pages archived in the Wayback Machine. The Internet Archive has started to surface some of these annotations for Wayback Machine users.
We are attempting to preserve our digital history but recognize the issues around providing access to false and misleading information coming from different sources. By providing convenient links to contextual information we hope that our patrons will better understand what they are reading in the Wayback Machine.”
The problem with labeling something as “false and misleading information” is the damage that occurs if said information is not actually false or misleading. When a banner pops up on social media, for instance, warning readers that the content is false, most people will not click through.
In fact, according to The Poynter Institute, one of Facebook’s fact-checking partners, which bills itself as a “global leader in journalism” that believes that a free press is essential,5 once a Facebook post is flagged as false by a fact-checker, its reach is decreased by an average of 80%.6
Now, archived content that presents an accurate record of history is being flagged by fact-checking organizations while in the historical vault. It’s like burning the library, in a sense, because valuable information may only get further buried out of the public’s reach. One example is an article that was published on Medium in April 2020, which was removed for violating the site’s Covid-19 Content Policy.7
The article, which discusses the need to establish a new treatment protocol for COVID-19 “so we stop treating patients for the wrong disease,” is archived on IA, but now has a yellow banner at the top, which reads:8
“This is an archived web page that Medium.com determined violated their Content Policy. Here is a link to it on the Live Web. In most instances, the archiving of a page is an automated process. The inclusion of a page in the Wayback Machine should not be seen as an endorsement of its content in any way.”
Archive.org states that the fact-checkers “provide context” for the archived web pages, but really the notices add another layer of potential bias to what should be an impartial historical archive, essentially just spreading the reach of censorship further.
Ironically, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has stated publically that it’s not the job of social media to be an arbiter of truth,9 but it’s partnered with Poynter’s International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) to be just that. All of Facebook’s third-party fact-checkers are certified by IFCN, and Archive.org has also partnered with a Poynter affiliate, Politifact, for fact-checking, among others.
The Poynter Institute states it has a mission “to fortify journalism’s role in a free society [by championing] freedom of expression, civil dialogue and compelling journalism,”10 but it actively enables the silencing of free speech, in part via its partnership with Google11 and its widespread fact-checking efforts.
In 2019, for instance, Poynter compiled a list12 of 515 “unreliable” websites, including 29 conservative media outlets, based on “fake news” databases created by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, Merrimack College, PolitiFact and Snopes, among others. Poynter also called on advertisers to blacklist the named sites, as advertising dollars are what keep them going.
After significant backlash,13 Poynter issued a retraction,14 but it appears the blacklisting is still occurring, through the joint efforts of IFCN and its partners, including Facebook. It’s important to understand that the vast majority of fact-checkers do not have a traditional journalism background, nor are a majority of fact-checking sites run by established media.
Increasingly, then, news — and the fact-checking that used to be part of a journalist’s job description — is being outsourced to individuals who aren’t journalists and aren’t trained to think and act like one.
Even under the best scenarios, Stephen J. Ceci, a professor of development psychology at Cornell University, writes in Scientific American:
“Research underscores that fact-checkers’ personal biases influence both their choice of which statements to analyze and their determination of accuracy … Journalists and fact-checkers are human beings subject to the same psychological biases as everyone else—and their analyses of what constitute ‘facts’ is affected by their own political and ideological values, resulting in what psychologists term selective perception.”15
So-called “independent” fact-checkers are subject not only to their own inherent biases but also to those placed upon them by funders. The Poynter Institute, for instance, is among a number of journalistic organizations that have received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Writing in Columbia Journalism Review, Tim Schwab examined the recipients of nearly 20,000 Gates Foundation grants, finding more than $250 million had been given to major media companies, including BBC, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, National Journal, The Guardian and the Center for Investigative Reporting.16
Ironically, “The foundation even helped fund a 2016 report17 from the American Press Institute that was used to develop guidelines18 on how newsrooms can maintain editorial independence from philanthropic funders,” Schwab writes, adding, “Gates’s generosity appears to have helped foster an increasingly friendly media environment for the world’s most visible charity:”19
“When Gates gives money to newsrooms, it restricts how the money is used — often for topics, like global health and education, on which the foundation works — which can help elevate its agenda in the news media.
For example, in 2015 Gates gave $383,000 to the Poynter Institute, a widely-cited authority on journalism ethics … earmarking the funds ‘to improve the accuracy in worldwide media of claims related to global health and development.’ Poynter senior vice president Kelly McBride said Gates’s money was passed on to media fact-checking sites …”
Fast Company’s Alex Pasternack is among those who claim that Facebook’s fact-checking policies are also influenced by its own political and business agendas, citing “more than half a dozen instances in which Facebook managers have interfered with fact checks in ways that appear at odds with the program’s spirit of independence and nonpartisanship.” Still, Pasternack notes:20
“A post-2016 innovation, the labels aren’t placed by Facebook but by harried subcontractors, fact-checkers and journalists, and scientists who are fed a never-ending feed of potential misinformation.
They can flag extreme misinformation for total removal — think dangerous coronavirus hoaxes — but mostly they place ‘false’ or ‘partly false’ labels on content, which gray out posts with a warning message and a link to an article explaining the fact-checkers’ reasoning.
Fact-checks bring internal penalties too, like limits on content distribution or on a page’s ability to microtarget ads. In some cases, Facebook says repeat offenders can be deleted entirely.”
Children’s Health Defense (CHD), founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sued Facebook, its CEO Mark Zuckerberg and three of its fact-checking partners — Science Feedback, Poynter Institute and PolitiFact21 — for censoring their truthful public health posts and fraudulently misrepresenting and defaming CHD.
On CHD’s Facebook page, the social media giant added a label stating, “This page posts about vaccines,” along with a link to the CDC for “reliable, up to date information.”22
They also deactivated the page’s donate button — stopping fundraising efforts — and prohibited CHD from buying online advertisements while adding a warning in gray overlay stating that their independent fact-checkers found false information, which, according to CHD, “has the intended effect of reducing both click-throughs to the underlying content and shares. The net effect is to drastically reduce by 95% the traffic to Children’s Health Defense website.”23
By deactivating CHD’s donate button and using deceptive forms of technology like shadow banning, which essentially renders posts invisible to the public without the user knowing, Facebook attempted to silence CHD’s criticism of government policies and pharmaceutical products. According to CHD:24
“In short, Facebook and the government colluded to silence CHD and its followers. Such tactics are fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment, which guarantees the American public the benefits to democracy from free flow of information in the marketplace of ideas.
It forbids the government from censoring private speech — particularly speech that criticizes government policies or officials.”
Taken together, the deceptive “fact checks,” misleading warning labels and disabling of the nonprofit’s donate button may violate the First and Fifth Amendments, the Lanham Act, which protects against misleading advertising and labeling,25 and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), which seeks to eradicate organized crime.
“Those statutes protect CHD against online wire-fraud, false disparagement, and knowingly false statements,” CHD noted, adding, “CHD asks the Court to declare Facebook’s actions unconstitutional and fraudulent, and award injunctive relief and damages.”26
With Archive.org’s announcement that they’re now allowing fact-checkers to essentially rewrite history by adding various warning labels to archived pages, even more power is being placed with fact-checking organizations that are spreading the falsity that they’re responsible for fact-checking everyone else and telling you what to think about what you read.
It’s one more step toward centralized control of the web, when maintaining a decentralized web is the only way to protect it. Activist Post added:27
“Implementing a fact-checking solution that is a centralized mechanism powered by journalists they could easily control is certainly the CIA’s … dream, as a CIA director was once quoted stating that once the public’s perception is confused about what is real and what is propaganda then their mission would be complete.
Now you might think the CIA owning journalists is conspiratorial, but it happened with MKultra’s Operation Mockingbird … The other issue that is less conspiratorial, and one that needs to be highly considered is, what if the human doing the fact-checking lacks the proper skills to dig up information online, as not everyone is … skilled … when it comes to finding documents and data.”
Efforts to shut down public discussions about health information are in full force. So what can you do? Knowledge truly is power, so look beyond fact-checkers’ labels, and the corporations behind them, in your search for truth.
“The most important thing about the story, and something that doesn’t seem to bother a lot of people, is that we have outsourced decisions like this to corporations,” Andrew Dessler, professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University, told Fast Company. “This is a truly terrible situation to be in.”28
[Kp update: added one more video with Juan O’Savin.]
Okay, I’ve seen quite a few videos today. I’m going to list them off in order of viewing. I’ll highlight the ones I’ve felt were “highly resonant” with my “Higher Inner Guide”. Here we go:
MACRON GETS RED PILLED as He Gives French Muslims ULTIMATUM!!! (Dr. Steve Hurley)
Ep. 2333b – Dominion Execs Running, Message Sent In The Past, Received In The Present (x22Report)
Ep. 2334b – Once The [News Unlocks] Can The Puzzle [Full Picture] Be Put Together, Panic In DC (x22Report)
Special Forces Operators are activated directly to the Secretary of Defense. Bye Bye Deep State (Michael Jaco) (Kp note: great intel here, and a short 5 minute Crystal Bowl meditation (to end the lockdowns) is at the end of this; I feel it will be helpful to participate)
Janine & Ania do Tarot Card Readings with Charlie Ward (The Gesara Club) (Kp note: very fascinating readings done with Janine; also Charlie receive intel at about 22 minutes which indicates a major operation is about to take place via General Flynn. I’ve felt this was important enough to download as an MP4 (157 MB).)
MP4 download (157 MB)
Juan O’Savin, “The Hammer Falls, Here Comes The Pain!!!” (Rogue News) (Kp note: points out how vote count in a “small district” in Nevada is drawing major legal groups to try to prevent investigation of the vote computers.)
Patriot Susan Knox springs into action with her camera phone to get this breaking report.
Susan Knox is a courageous American Patriot.
There are millions more like Susan.
Looks to me like they may be destroying election documents in Cobb County, GA.
What do you think?
#FightBack Against Election Crimes
Susan Knox is a warrior for TRUTH.
Cobb County, GA Patriots, check with Sheriff & Police Departments & demand full investigation of possible obstruction of justice & evidence destruction today.
Election evidence about to be destroyed in Cobb County, GA?
DEMAND answers, Cobb County, GA Patriots!!!
You are probably familiar with Edward Snowden, the NSA whistleblower who blew the whistle and shared evidence showing that the U.S. Government not only illegally collects massive amounts of data via a variety of surveillance techniques on its own citizens, but also citizens of many other countries around the world. On July 27th, 2019, Snowden […]