I keep coming back to this irresistible idea that simply won’t go away. It has draped its paranoid pall all over the entire world. Perhaps it is the smell of a rotting corpse of a species that has failed to believe in itself.
The people who took the poison jab and insanely ordered everyone else to get them too have the same kind of personality as those residents of Salem, Massachusetts back in the 1600s nervously sweating with feverish excitement as they watched innocent women convicted of witchcraft dangling from the gallows after being found guilty by panic-stricken public hysteria.
This is the foul odor that has been hanging in the air ever since Bill Gates and his crooked cronies invented this modern plague called COVID-19 at a bureaucratic buffet known as Event 201 and foisted it on the world as the most dangerous plague of our times.
They didn’t quite get it right as what they created was the most dangerous cure of all time.
Really, I’ve had enough of you Jews and all your criminal acolytes, sycophants and useful idiots. Let me give it to you straight right now; Israel is the visible spear point of the Invisible “Nazi” Empire. No not our Nazi’s but the Nazi’s of IG Farben, Count Kalergi, the Rothschilds and you fucking Free Masons. Yea the same ones who betrayed Hitler and the SS on the Russian steppes as documented in our Bormann Faction. The same morons who underestimated Stalin who was only stopped from capitalizing on their stupidity and over running all of Europe by the men of the SS, a multinational force of Pagans, Christians and Muslims who would rather die on those Russian steppes than see the Bolsheviks take one more step forward. These were the greatest heroes Europe, and the Middle East has ever known, super soldiers led by super men like Léon Degrelle. If anyone thinks I will ever be a party to further soiling the memory of these magnificent men, and for those of you eavesdropping Hollywood seems too, then you have insulted me beyond my point of tolerance…
Yea that’s right, the war reparations for a phony “Holocaust,” Israel itself and its United Nations, Argentina, Patagonia and even the Dolphin Class submarines, all that was already decided before they threw the war at Stalingrad, almost losing Europe in the bargain too if it wasn’t for the SS. And you Roman Catholics you make me sick to my stomach to even look at you, groveling on your knees to an Argentinian pedophile pope, while the great men of the church like Bishop Richard Williamson are excommunicated. If it was up to me, each and every one of you will be strung up by your own Rosary Beads. You think the war is over, no think again and you better find out just who Miguel Serrano was… – Jack Heart
The writers who have dared to penetrate the secret of the Jewish Question have in one way or another been liquidated, sometimes physically like the recent assassination of François Duprat in France, the poet Robert Brasillach at the end of the ultimate Great War, or else in silence and forgotten like the greatest such as Knut Hamsun, Nobel Prize for Literature; Luigi Pirandello, a partisan of Fascism today absent from the stages of the world, and Ezra Pound.
Who remembers a novelist of marvels named Knut Hamsun, Pagan singer of the Northern forests of Norway? Who has dared to give Ezra Pound the seat of honour that befits him? Who has yet written his true biography? It was I who dedicated the only monument raised to him until now anywhere in the world, in the very ancient Spanish village of Medinaceli. Moreover I don’t know if it is still there when those who contributed to its erection hardly knew who Ezra Pound was.
And Louis Ferdinand Céline? And Francis Parker Yockey1 who died in prison in the United States? The procedure is nothing new. A fatal destiny that falls on those few foolish writers who have dared to delve into the abyssal mystery of the international conspiracy of Judaism. This has all been known since Classical times. How many fundamental works have disappeared, how many lives have been cut short!
So many profound truths we shall never know! There, in the Library of Alexandria, where the essential texts disappeared. Then later with the forty thousand volumes of the SS Castle of Wewelsburg . . . .
The first thing an academic tells you when you mention the mystical side of the Afghanistan story is that you shouldn’t talk about that. The study of foreign policy cannot be seen as having been motivated by anything other than rational and objective reasons and measured by the metrics of quantitative analysis.
How then to explain ‘Wild Bill’ Donovan, the first director of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and the father of today’s CIA calling his agents Knights Templars? How then to explain the American military’s fascination with medieval knighthoods? How then to explain the use of New Testament biblical passages engraved on the gunsights of American and British troops in Afghanistan? How then to explain American exceptionalism whereby the United States gets to do anything it pleases because America is right no matter what it does or how it does it?
People have heard about the holy warriors of the Muslim world, but what most Americans are unaware of is the mystical component of the warriors who fight for America and how that component has been setting the agenda for American politics from behind the scenes with no public scrutiny.
In Maine they use the expression “You can’t get there from here,” to explain this sort of disconnect. It’s being used to make the point that you can’t get exoteric Afghanistan unless you understand the esoteric and you can’t understand the esoteric without accepting your own personal motivations.
In researching for our books, we discovered a trove of esoteric history surrounding the West’s attraction to Afghanistan starting with the British. It revolves around Mystical Imperialism, a term first used to describe 19th-century British imperial efforts to colonize the non-Christian world by applying Judeo Christian ethics and philosophies.
Simply put, mystical imperialism rationalizes the expansion of a nation’s authority by conquest over other nations by infusing a sense of the divine into the raw politics of empire building. Today’s practitioners of American mystical imperialism are a hardened core of ideological defense intellectuals and military officers who combine their own esoteric and religious beliefs with Washington policy making.
These individuals can trace their philosophical DNA back to 19th-century European secret esoteric societies who were known to be heavily involved in espionage on both British and Russian sides. Reflected in the fictional quasi-Masonic exploits of Rudyard Kipling’s two soldiers in The Man Who Would be King, the “hidden” or occult game for control of Afghanistan and Central Asia was a factor in the foreign policy of the 19th century for the British and the Russians, and continues to this day through the United States.
As the ancient home of Zoroaster and the Avesta, the foundation document for the Judeo/Christian war of light against dark, of good versus evil, 19th-century Afghanistan and its surroundings provided a mystical underpinning to what today is dryly regarded as geopolitics.
Described as the “World-Island” by early 20th-century British geo-strategist Halford Mackinder, Russia’s geographic position at the center of the Eurasian land mass rivaled Britain’s as an island fortress. Mackinder foresaw Russia expanding with ferocity beyond its borders. From the outset – a Russian dominance of Central Asia spawned nightmares for the British of an apocalyptic horde sweeping from the Russian steppe across Europe, which had to be stopped at any cost.
Henry Wallace, Franklin Roosevelt’s vice president, supported an expedition in 1934 with the intention of establishing a spiritual settlement in the Himalayas. Wallace expressed his enthusiasm for the plan known as the Shambhala Project, stating that, “the political situation in this part of the world is always rendered especially intriguing by the effect on it, of ancient prophecies, traditions and the like.” Wallace anticipated that those prophecies were at last coming due.
Hidden to human eyes, Shambhala was said, by Tibetan Buddhists, to lie somewhere near Tibet and would finally be revealed at the end of time. Others believed it was hidden in the valleys of the Pamir mountain range in Northeastern Afghanistan. This was the Shambhala that concealed the lost wisdom, the secrets of immortality and the beginnings of the human race. Adolph Hitler sent an expedition to Tibet and Afghanistan in 1939 in the hopes of uncovering proof of Aryan links to modern German society in the soil of Central Asia.
From Halford Mackinder at the beginning of the 20th century to the American Cold Warrior James Burnham, the godfather of neo-conservatism, to Zbigniew Brzezinski, the Grand Master of Geostrategic American foreign policy, Eurasia represented the central basis for American global primacy, in a world defined by Manichean opposites.
In a 1945 Partisan Review article titled “Lenin’s Heir” Burnham, while still at the OSS, infused his apocalyptic political views with mystical allusions to the Eurasian heartland as “the magnetic core” of Soviet power, comparing it to the mystical “reality of the One-of-Neo-Platonism,” whose inexorable and unstoppable “progression… descends through the stages of Mind, Soul, and Matter… towards its ultimate destination beyond the Eurasian boundaries and through…Appeasement and Infiltration England and the United States.”
As an “anti-Communist ideology” Burnham’s apocalyptic warnings about the inevitability of Soviet expansion from Eurasia’s magnetic core ring like a medieval theologian’s incantation throughout Winston Churchill’s 1946 “Iron Curtain” speech, which set the terms of the Cold War.
Twenty-six years later, Senator William Fulbright would realize that only because of the disastrous outcome of Vietnam was there any willingness to reexamine the basic assumptions of the Cold War. The 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, known as SALT, would spring from this rational re-assessment, as would the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and eventually SALT II.
President Jimmy Carter and Soviet General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev sign the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT II) treaty, June 18, 1979, in Vienna.
(Image by Original Uploaded by Thames to EN) DetailsDMCA
But because of National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski’s unyielding hostility toward any compromise with the Soviet Union over Afghanistan, President Carter would ask the Senate to delay consideration of the treaty on the Senate floor. That treaty would never be passed and the United States would begin a long slow march into what Burnham described as the magnetic core of the World Island.
Our initiation into the realm of Mystical Imperialism began six months before the December 27, 1979, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan while we were producing Arms Race and the Economy: A Delicate Balance, a documentary for televangelist Pat Robertson‘s Christian Broadcast Network (CBN).
The station had been airing the American Security Council‘s The Salt Syndrome, a propaganda film railing against the passage of SALT II (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks) that would limit defense spending. As host of CBN’s public affairs show, our documentary was to be the rebuttal to The Salt Syndrome as required by the Fairness Doctrine. We were aware that Robertson’s proselytizing on his flagship 700 Club program was already engaged in a religious crusade to change America.
While working on the documentary our eyes were opened to a merging of powerful pro war political, business, and religious interests that were using their combined influence to push America into a Holy War against the Soviet Union.
As we continued to work on the production, experts from the opposite side of the political spectrum, such as economist John Kenneth Galbraith, informed us about the damage thata massive diversion of tax dollars would represent to the civilian economy. Galbraith insisted that accelerated defense spending following the end of the Vietnam War–as the military-industrial complex was demanding–would destroy the civilian economy.
He was convinced that the Cold War had already made America more like the Soviet Union, ideologically rigid, increasingly orthodox and ruled by a military-industrial-academic establishment suspended from reality.
By the time our program aired, the argument was no longer whether our government should call a halt to the nuclear arms race and reinvest in the civilian economy. According to President Carter the December 27, 1979, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was the greatest threat to peace since the Second World War.
That statement instantly rolled back the narrative to 1947, the Truman Doctrine and the psychological warfare campaign necessary to bring it back to life. We realized that the powerful pro-war political, business, and religious interests calling for Holy War in The SALT Syndrome had just won the brass ring.
The point man for that campaign was Zbigniew Brzezinski. As an acolyte of geo-strategist Halford Mackinder, Brzezinski believed the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan and its pursuit of global dominance was foreordained and not subject to rational empirical observations.
Beginning in 1978, Brzezinski had been dialoguing with the Chinese and the Pakistanis over Soviet influence in Afghanistan and how to respond to it. In the summer of 1979, six months before the Soviet invasion, Brzezinski had President Carter sign a finding enabling propaganda support to the insurgency that would help draw the Soviets into what Brzezinski referred to as “the Afghan trap.”
When the Kabul government expelled the Western media one month after the Soviet invasion, we jumped at the chance to get behind the propaganda and break the news blackout. Once we had secured the visas in the spring of 1981, a friend in local TV news connected us to CBS Foreign News Editor Peter Larkin. Larkin was an intense man–Saigon bureau chief during the Vietnam War–and wanted the story immediately.
What we saw in Kabul was indeed in stark contrast to the picture playing on evening news. After struggling with our footage for a month CBS finally aired a segment about the Soviet troops that we didn’t see. Our involvement with CBS News was the beginning of an education in the MSM’s fact-free restructuring of the Afghan narrative that continues to hold sway today.
Following the distribution of Afghanistan Between Three Worlds, a PBS documentary we produced in 1982, we got a call from Major Karen McKay of the Committee for a Free Afghanistan. She complained that we didn’t mention anything about the Soviets’ use of chemical weapons in the documentary.
We explained those charges hadn’t been proved. But the Major countered that since the New York Times and the Washington Post had accepted her evidence why wouldn’t we.
Because, we explained, the claims we’d reviewed came from second- or third-hand sources or were based on hearsay evidence. Then we politely suggested what seemed like common sense, that the Major could make a better case if she had some hard evidence. Major McKay’s answer was revelatory as she snapped, “When it comes to the Russians we don’t need proof. We know they’re guilty.”
Once again, it was made very clear to us that when it came to the MSM narrative, facts REALLY didn’t matter.
When the third opportunity to challenge the MSM’s narrative arrived, we still had hope and again jumped at the chance. In the spring of 1983 we returned to Kabul with Harvard Negotiation Project Director Roger Fisher for ABC’s Nightline.
Our aim was to establish the credibility of the American claims that the Soviets had no intention of withdrawing from Afghanistan. We had a number of credible sources stating that the Kremlin wanted desperately to abandon the war, but the Reagan administration was dragging its feet.
From the moment they entered the White House the new administration had demanded that the Soviets withdraw their forces, while at the same time keeping them pinned down through covert action so they couldn’t leave. Though lacking in factual backup, this hypocritical campaign was embraced by the entire American political spectrum and our effort with Roger Fisher to further the negotiation process remained willfully unexamined by America’s mainstream media.
By 1987 we were so frustrated with getting nowhere at changing the official narrative with the facts on the ground we had to question all our assumptions about journalism. If facts did not matter, what did?
That’s when we looked at our story from a personal perspective and wondered what had called us to the Afghan story in the first place. We started writing screenplays out of our accumulated materials and research and by the end of the 1980s had completed four. But we had yet to find the right path to tell our story.
Then in September of 1991, our ten-year-old daughter Alissa told us about a dream she had with Paul’s deceased father whom she had never met. He was accompanied by a man wearing a Scottish plaid suit with bell-bottom trousers and a matching hat. The man told Alissa he was 800 years old. We already knew the Fitzgerald family had come to Ireland as mercenaries for King Henry II 800 years before and decided to consider Alissa’s dream as a mystical encouragement to dig deeper into the past for answers.
Three months later we saw Oliver Stone’s film, JFK, and found the inspiration we had been looking for. Stone’s decision to include the involvement of an esoteric secret society with deeper motives resonated with us.
In our research into the Norman invasion of Ireland in 1170, an enterprise largely run by the Fitzgerald family, we had discovered historical reasons why members of some secret societies might have been motivated to eliminate JFK in the modern era as retribution for past “crimes.” We then developed The Voice research paper with the hope that Stone would become interested in this esoteric perspective too, but he wanted our Afghanistan story instead.
Once we began to work on the script, the mythic implications of the Afghan story began to emerge when many of the documents preceding the crisis were declassified. As we trailed the clues, we found pseudo-religious references in Washington’s official policy to the Manichean war of the light against the dark-whose origins began in the region now known as Afghanistan.
We then discovered a synchronistic connection that we could not have imagined. One of the books we had purchased was written by an ex-CIA agent about British efforts in the 19th century. In the book were many photos of prominent Brits and Afghans and of the battles they fought. But also included were photos of two Americans. One of these men was dressed wearing a Scottish plaid suit with bell-bottomed trousers and a matching turban. The photo was of Alexander Gardner, a mercenary who’d found his way to Afghanistan in the 1820s. He’d discovered the religion of Zoroaster settled in the mountains and married an Afghan Princess. He not only lived the real life of Rudyard Kipling’s Man Who Would Be King; it has been said Gardner provided Kipling with essential information for his novel.
Alissa confirmed that day when she came home from school that the soldier in the photo wearing a clan uniform of his own design, was the man from her dream. Alissa had somehow tapped a synchronicity about our Afghan adventure that gave it a deeper meaning.
As we continued to develop The Voice as a novel, over time Stone became intrigued and asked us to connect its esoteric background with the fact-based Afghanistan script. Now titled Three Nights of Desmond, we found ourselves merging the past, present, and future into a very different kind of story.
In writing the script, the antagonist (modeled after CBS Foreign News Editor Peter Larkin) emerged as a tragic archetype: an angry, wounded veteran who was determined to twist the Afghanistan story to get back at the Soviets for what he believed they had done to him in Vietnam. In The Voice, published in 2001, the character had matured as a victim of his own propaganda. Through that narrative the character of Alissa, as Paul’s daughter, resolved the conflict between the “Larkin” character and Paul.
Even though Alissa had no involvement in our work, over the decades many of our Afghan contacts, that she had never met, continued to cross into her life as if by magic. The most powerful synchronicity occurred when she came to meet the real Peter Larkin through her friendship with his daughter Brett. We had known nothing about this friendship until December 23, 2011, when Peter and Brett arrived at our home for a holiday party at 7:00 pm as guests of Alissa.
Having the man who launched us into our Afghan saga join with us for our holiday party was beyond surreal. It was as if a dream hadmaterialized before our eyes. The novelized encounter between Paul and Peter through Alissa (which had been foreshadowed in The Voice) had been delivered to us through our front door. The reality of the script we struggled to write for Stone had finally written itself. It was a revelatory moment produced by our daughters that completed a journey begun 30 years before between two competing storytellers.
CONCLUSION
Back in 1979 when we first encountered the MSM’s propaganda Afghan narrative we could not have imagined that narrative would still be presented as fact in 2021. The science is very clear; a narrative built with no facts is still more powerful at changing minds than facts alone. This MSNBC report is a stark reminder of that fact. From the ancient oral to the modern written tradition humans have always been drawn to stories. The power of narratives to transform people’s views is well documented. Like a recipe being offered as food, presenting even solid facts without framing it in a narrative is not enough to motivate most people to action. Our big breakthrough came when we realized that the power to win hearts and minds was not by trying to change the MSM’s empty narrative; it was in creating a new narrative with our own facts. When you create a good story out of solid facts that is truly food for thought!
We’ve often wondered what would have changed in the American dialogue on the JFK assassination if Oliver Stone had created a film based on the concept we gave him in 1992; going back to the origin of the Fitzgerald family and their dicey relationship with London. What Stone did do for us was put us back on the Afghan course we had walked away from; and in that process crossed us over into the mystical telling of our own story. We came to seethat the weaving back and forth of the screenplay and the novel had become a way of understanding the multi-dimensional nature of narrative creation. Although our three years of work with Stone did produce the Three Nights of Desmond script concept, it was never fulfilled. Thirty years in the making, we finally brought the script concept created for Stone to fruition as the heart and soul of, The Valediction Three Nights of Desmond and The Valediction Resurrection that will be available next spring.
Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould are the authors of Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story and Crossing Zero The AfPak War at the Turning Point of American Empire and The Voice,a novel.
Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould, a husband and wife team began working together in 1979 co-producing a documentary for Paul’s television show, Watchworks. Called, The Arms Race and the Economy, A Delicate Balance, they found themselves in the midst of a controversy that was to boil over a few months later with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Their acquisition of the first visas to enter Afghanistan granted to an American TV crew in 1981, brought them into the most heated Cold War controversy since Vietnam. But the people inside Soviet-occupied Afghanistan told a very different story from the one being broadcast on the evening news.
Following their news story for the CBS Evening News, they produced a documentary (Afghanistan Between Three Worlds) for PBS and in 1983 they returned to Kabul for ABC Nightline with Harvard Negotiation project director Roger Fisher. Arriving in Kabul that spring they were told that the Russians wanted to go home and negotiate their way out. But the story that President Carter called, “the greatest threat to peace since the second World War” had already been written by America’s pundits was not about to change the script.
As the first American journalists to get behind the official propaganda on the war, they not only got a view of an unseen Afghan life, but a revelatory look at how the US defined itself under the veil of superpower confrontation. But as they pursued the reasons behind the propaganda, they were drawn into a story that was growing into mythic dimensions.
It was at the time of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 when they were working on the film version of their experience under contract to Oliver Stone, that they began to piece together the mythic implications of the story. During the research for the screenplay crucial documents were declassified. Over the next decade they trailed a labyrinth of clues to find a likeness in Washington’s official policy towards Afghanistan – in the ancient Zoroastrian war of the light against the dark – whose origins began in the region now known as Afghanistan. It was a likeness that grows more visible as America’s involvement deepens.
By 1998, as the horrors of the Taliban regime began to grab headlines, they started collaborating with Afghan human rights expert Sima Wali. They contributed to the Women for Afghan Women: Shattering Myths and Claiming the Future book project. In 2002 they filmed Wali’s first return to Kabul since her exile in 1978. The film they produced about Wali’s journey home, The Woman in Exile Returns, gave audiences the chance to discover the message of one of Afghanistan’s most articulate voices and her hopes for her people.
In the years since 9/11 much has happened to bring their story into sharp focus. Their experience at combining personal diplomacy with activist journalism could become a model for restoring a healthy and vibrant dialogue to American democracy. Ultimately, Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story lays bare why it was inevitable that the Soviet Union and the U.S. should end up in Afghanistan and what that means to the future of the American emp
At the end of the Vietnam War the United States faced a crossroads; either continue along the bloody road to empire or reinvent its democracy. The focus of that struggle centered around the 1976 presidential campaign. With the election of Jimmy Carter it was assumed that the administration would reassess the U.S. role on the world stage and reinvest its energies in re building a war-weary nation. But with the selection of Zbigniew Brzezinski as his national security advisor, President Carter guaranteed that would never be.
Plotting to overthrow the old rules before even gaining access to the Oval office Brzezinski would play a pivotal role in the rise of the neoconservative agenda and their politicization of American foreign policy. And by stage-managing perceptions of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, he would permanently shift the management of the national security state from the pragmatic to the ideological. As journalists we followed this transformation for over 40 years as the Brzezinski agenda to weaponize extremist Islam on behalf of American empire spread across the globe while documenting the course of a deep-state movement that led to 9/11 and endless war.
In the end Brzezinski honored his duty to the elites by warning them in 2010 that for the first time in history a totally new reality had taken hold. Mankind was now politically awake and aware of their economic inequalities and politically active for the first time in human history.
Brzezinski was already concerned about the public’s growing dissatisfaction following the 2008 financial catastrophe. He warned the elites that bailing out failed banks while ignoring human suffering would not end well. But his 2010 lecture revealed that something even more profound was underway and that despite their mastery of the world’s economy, the global elitists he’d spent his career advancing were facing something beyond their control.
Ironically it was Brzezinski who guaranteed this tragic ending by merging the political objectives of the global elites to extremist Islam and in so doing, undid the very empire he thought he was advancing. But beyond the impacts of 9/11 and the so called “war on terror,” Brzezinski’s involvement helped us uncover hints of a deeper agenda and as we traced its roots we discovered that it led to the ancient past.
We are posting articles we have researched, written and published at different stages of our understanding. These articles not only form the basis of our discoveries, but have become more relevant than when they were originally published. In a unique way, each article plays a part that is revealed in The Valediction, Three Nights of Desmond.
I stood upon the raw desert plain, waiting, in silence, beneath the brilliant blue sky. In the deepest distance a disturbance appeared, a tiny point of darkness in the perfect blue. I knew that it perceived my presence, and in that awareness it turned towards me. The black ripple sped towards me with incredible speed, growing in size to blot out the majority of the sky. It hovered there, in a form exactly as described so long ago, a twisted grey abortion. My eyes followed its contorted form, and within it was an evocation of every corruption manifested by mankind, every dark desire, every underhanded plan. Its form evoked jealousy, mindless greed, extreme selfishness. Its presence was pain, and as it shape shifted into those desperate actions of mankind, vanishing within their darkest dreams and agendas, I realized that few would ever be aware of this entity, and fewer would ever know that the Archon exists.
Implicit here is the discovery that the entities of the lower order both shape and embody the motives and instincts that drive behavior in this physical reality.
Archon is understood to have an operative definition of “ruler”, not in the sense of a King, or Queen, but in the sense of a petty administrator, one who might be seen today as a corporate-government bureaucrat. Archons are of many orders, and of many states, and the fabrication of this cosmos by the demiurge is both fashioned and maintained through the activity of Archons. This activity includes the fashioning of the human form. This is the reason why modern scientism teased mankind with stories of being “stardust”.
This, however, is not the full story of mankind. Mankind carries the divine spark. The descent of Sophia to the abyss brought that flicker of her light into all of matter. In the song of the Voluspa, it was the tripartite divinity which bestowed that motive force to Ash and Elm. Thus, in mankind lies a realizable potential, an assumption of true humanity within the Archontic structure of the form of mankind.
This then, sets into motion an essential duality, a divided state that can only be realized to be truly known. It also means that the primary driver of this reality is the Archontic.
Archontic then, is the existence of the state whereby that spark from divinity remains unrealized. Over the years, archon has become a pseudonym for evil, but what it really is, is a term for the dead end mechanical universe of matter, and the thinking that accompanies it. All five of our senses, our nervous and circulatory systems, our methods of belief and our single minded focus, all have their origin in the organization of the cosmos, and mankind. In keeping with the lower order of creation that we inhabit, our primary drives are primitive, instinctual, and unconscious. The urge to control, to exercise power, to dominate, and to artificially usurp the divine is all there in the Archontic blueprint.
Archons are real. They exist, and their nature is to realize their order through the activity of mankind.
Enter the circus of Covid, and the relentless, illogical, and seemingly insane plan to inject the world with dubious pharmaceuticals, a plan which can only be enabled and actualized by way of unprecedented censorship, coercion in the extreme, coupled with persistent, blatant, outright lies. If this agenda is taken at face value, as a medical crisis, which is exactly what most do, the shaky ground upon which the entire narrative is built causes it to fall apart. For example, it is impossible to paint the injection campaign as an effort to end a pandemic, when cheap and effective early intervention treatments are-often illegally suppressed. This disconnect has been variously explained away as everything from incompetence to graft and greed. Yet in the case of such “rational” explanations, too much is swept under the rug, and ignored.
Some years ago, during nascent discussions involving robots and intelligence, i.e.; spying, it was concluded that the perfect form for this application had already been realized. If one truly wished to infiltrate, to invade, and to occupy, the ideal form was the insect. In the ancient shamanic cultures, the insect can be a source of protection, a sort of spiritual armor, but it is also a projectile, a weapon launched in order to cause harm. Whilst there are higher orders to the insect kingdom, most notably the Bee, the greater bulk of insectoids, forms bearing resemblance to insects, carry with them the features of imbalance, pathology, and excess.
From the point of view of one wishing to dominate, an insect would be a very useful slave, and the ability to reduce mankind to the kind of collective ordering seen in ants, for example, would be very desirable. Such goals, in fact, were clear in the writing of Bertram Russell. In Science on Society, he clearly stated his goals in education were to create subjects which were completely controlled by the elite. Further, he saw this process as a continuing one, where he used the metaphor of calling snow black, stating clearly that cognitive devastation was a long term goal. Russell is of course, portrayed as a giant in education.
Aldous Huxley and others became enamored with the idea of creating schizophrenic breaks in consciousness, breaks that in their theories would create the need to reassemble the mind. Much of the LSD experimentation of the 1960s was an attempt to put this theory to the test, with the idea that reassembly could be advanced with greater outside control. The failure of these experiments to produce the desired results didn’t dissuade the wannabe puppet masters; it just convinced them they needed to further develop their manipulations of psychology and biology, and the myth of the machine.
This development included an expansion into deep psychology, especially into understanding the emotional complex of fear. Psychologists like James Hillman used this knowledge of fear in developing methods to introduce concepts and ideas beyond the filter of the conscious mind. Advertising has long entered into psychological warfare against the psyche of mankind. Subliminal images, coded flashing lights, and renditions of skulls, skeletal objects, and other memes of fear and death have long been deployed by advertisers to sell products to an unwitting public. It just so happens that the insect, in some of its forms, is capable of evoking similar primal reactions.
Further, the exploration by depth psychology has proven the existence of a spiritual nature to consciousness. From the perspective of dominance, allowing a spiritual life, especially one that cannot be enveloped and smothered by an official religion, is useless. Spiritual competency tends to bring a cessation of full enlistment into the affairs of the dominant society. It creates a condition whereby the happiness and peace that is enjoyed is not dependent upon the whims and crimes of the ruling classes. Ultimately, such perspectives have the potential to transform the society itself, a fact that is anathema to those who rule by lower impulses.
The lesson learned thus transformed the raw bombardment by LSD, to the more subtle approach of pharmaceuticals as the driving force for cognitive paralysis, coupled with an agenda of media manipulation partially orchestrated by various intelligence services, as well as corporate control programs. The sophistication of the petroleum based pharmaceutical assault began soon after the Rockefeller led destruction of Naturopathy, completed by the mid 20th century, with the introduction of the polio “vaccine”.
Naturopathy had been the dominant form of medicine in America for generations before the Rockefeller offensive. It followed a completely different model from the Louis Pasteur method of blaming illness on invisible pathogenic particles. Naturopathy was strongly herb based, focused upon detoxification of environment and body. It employed thousands of years of knowledge of herb and plant based medicine, and its record of keeping people well was untarnished.
Yet the Archontic energetic never rests. The destruction of Naturopathy employed a strategy that used crime, intimidation, and payed-for-cowards in high places to advance their new version of medicine that included massive reliance upon invasive surgeries. Soon the governing bodies of universities were flooded with lackeys for invasive medicine, leaving the condition today that it is impossible to practice Naturopathy, except as an adjunct to other, more accepted medical disciplines. Petroleum based pharmaceuticals never looked back from their media based lift off courtesy of polio. Their use has never declined, never retreated. Modern medicine has used their oil based drugs to create unprecedented global dependency and addiction. Even before the orchestration that is the “pandemic”, the medical industry was far and wide the leading cause of death in the USA. The current manipulations only further solidify that lead.
This dependency has allowed massive inroads by globalists like Bill Gates, to advance entire agendas of the development and deployment of so called vaccines, which a drug addled world eagerly accepts. Never mind that the Covid” vaccines” were patented before the outbreak of the pandemic, in what the one and only Klaus Schwab might describe as “prescient”. The media, business, and government are barely conscious treadmills of noise that mindlessly ignore the significant; that the inevitable merge of oil based medicine and transhumanism has now occurred.
A thinking person might ask why the WEF, World Economic Forum, is leading and coordinating the so called global response to the ostensible medical emergency of the pandemic, instead of say-a medical organization. The answer is that in order for your injections to feature the transhuman agenda, they have to be coordinated by transhumanists. The recent meme circulating around social media is actually quite telling. Without fully repeating the ode to stupidity, it essentially states that not knowing what is in the injection is no reason to avoid injection. The reason why no one knows what is in their injections is because there has never been a release of ingredients. They could literally be injecting trusting recipients with graphene, graphene oxide, aluminum, nanotechnology, dead DNA, biological sensors, and insectoid matrixes, without those who proudly proclaim their ignorance having the slightest idea that they are guinea pigs. There is no transparent coordinating body that reports to the public, any public, on what is in the various batches of “vaccines”.
Mankind has been relentlessly attacked by an endless barrage of psychological and biological repurposing for decades, and it has brought us here to this stage of devolution, where the highest orders of society have nothing better to do than work towards their mythic singularity through the most devious, deceptive, and destructive agenda they can manifest.
How could this happen? How could this come to be? Who let their guard down? Who is to blame? Who should we go out and wreak vengeance upon?
Yourself
The Demiurge organized the Cosmos with great deficiency. The deficiency without is the deficiency within, and we can all run headlong into this deficiency with a very simple thought experiment; Silence the mind. The silence of the mind is that threshold into pure awareness. It is the moment of the Now stretched into eternity. Few can actually perform this experiment; very few can find the space which lies in between their internal noise. For the majority, their internal chatter is not only their constant companion; it is their very definition of self. Thus, the vast majority of mankind never has any experience of true awareness; instead they believe the raucous promise of the buisy Archontic mind.
Here lies the first step, and the first explanation for why things are as they are. Mankind is duped into believing that the tool for functioning in this reality is the reality itself. This error is the sleep of the archons, and it is fatal. When the ancient Gnostic sages wrote that their battle was not with men, but with the error, this is what they referred to, The silence of the mind opens the way to true self, but the endless noise; the emotion, the response, the thinking and the imagining, the conclusions and the ambitions, the secret plans and the hateful recompense, all belong to the Archontic, and they always rise to challenge the divine spark, which can only be realized through silence.
We have touched on the condition earlier that it is the realm of the Archontic to manifest hate, greed, separation, and what we describe as evil in mankind. This occurs through the raging Archontic mind that mankind erroneously believes they control, and the errant Archontic heart, which is a topic for a different time.
Transhumanists are convinced that their singularity will enable their scheming selves to attain an electronic fountain of youth. They do not know the true self, and their determination to enshrine the lower will inevitably bring destruction upon their heads. They like to think that they are the masters of the time, that they and only they decide and declare their agenda for the credulous. They are the laughing stock, for their deceit and their dark ambitions were never their own. Their emotions rule them. Their thoughts think them. Their outrage controls them, and their insect revolution is at its heart, fragile and weak.
Some seem to believe that the cure for the insect infestation received via the injections is to oxygenate the body. They believe that for those who have surrendered their birthright, a magic vitamin, a simple pill, can return to them what they gave away. Yet we know from chemists, who understand the bonds, that no vitamin is going to break up the replicant structure of graphene, and no amount of added oxygen is going to solve the attack of the inorganic bugs in the blood.
The choice to accept genetic modification, as outlined in APerfection of Error,is not something that is easily undone, like the tying and untying of laces on a shoe. The choice to be genetically modified by those who hate you extends into the future for your race, and your energy. There really is such a thing as race. Race is the expression of DNA and history. Genetic modification interferes with this history, and especially interferes with the template provided by DNA for that specific experience. Those who so cavalierly choose to reject this responsibility will find themselves at sea without a sail, as they have rejected the gift from their ancestors.
Yes, it is true that the disinformation campaign from “education” has sought to deny the reality of race. As with the current effort to cognitively damage mankind by claiming that gender is elective, race is seen as reducible to common whim. Taken to its current excessive level, these efforts, and those like them, seek to nullify that which cannot be nullified. The errant belief that biology is subject to wish fulfillment phantasie creates a great deal of dissociative stress, which is a technical term for certifiably crazy, and provides opportunity for mass insanity movements such as the so called pandemic, where the cure only offers inextricable immersion into a deeply dysfunctional and self destructive narrative.
Once subject to this agenda, there is very little that can be done. Most effective is to fight this on a spiritual level, via the silence, and together with natural bolsters for the blood and spirit. Yet the most effective effort will be to work towards the protection and integrity of the future generations, to prevent the innocent from falling victim to the mad injection campaign.
Beyond the personal, the effective route through this mass insanity event is found via the recovery of the deep purpose of mankind, which is unique to each race, as each race has its own vector. Broadly speaking however, all of mankind is the pioneering species, a life form that actualizes concepts, beliefs, and manifestations that were not part of the original cosmic design, bringing them into existence within it. This expands the scope of the cosmic design, while altering the very experience of reality. Thus the genius and tenacity of mankind are true contributions, true advances, when correctly realized and acted upon.
This flies in the face of the purpose behind this latest mass insanity movement, and its hidden ally, the inorganic insect. The graphene in the injections, suitably decorated, acts as a magnet for DNA and RNA. The self replicating nature of nanotechnology thus creates long chains of reactive nanoparticles, which attach and grow upon a central hub, or “head”, usually comprised of a heavy metal irreducible via the natural bodily systems, such as aluminum. Together, such form into inorganic structures that take on insectoid appearances, and interfere with the proper functioning of the blood and body. This is the insect revolution of the mass injection protocols, and as structures capable of providing their own magnetism via electronic fields, they are directly designed, despite their weakness, to introduce lower vibratory auras, and thus cut off the link discovered by deep psychology, and known by the masters since the beginning, to the divine.
The aim behind such is a great regression in functioning, especially cognitive, for the purpose of creating dim witted, obedient slaves. We recognize this objective in previous programs, from MK Ultra, to the Fabian Society, and beyond. The fact that it greatly shortens life expectancy, shatters the reproductive organs, and outright kills is hardly an impediment. Bill Gates’ polio vaccine permanently injured tens of thousands of Indian children, which apparently was a warm up for its distribution into Africa, where it is blamed for introducing an even more virulent form of the illness, on the eve of the WHO claiming polio was eradicated there. Few seem to recall Gates chortling some years ago, about vaccines bringing new possibilities to population control.
The transhuman agenda purports to hold the keys of life within its bristling computer networks, but just like its phantasie biology, it is an abrogation of the deep purpose, a perversion of the template of DNA. The agenda purports no knowledge of the divine spark, no comprehension of the true self, only an endless corrupt advance via deception, deceit, and lies.
What then of the Archons, ruling human nature through the counterfeit identity, blinding with ignorance, capturing through raging emotions, enslaving through fear? Few will ever know of their existence, or even understand their role. This one is up to mankind to become human. It is to find the reality beyond the nightmare of dissolution. The forces against this are mighty, yet we never had any choice, except to join the fray.
I have an extensive network of sources of the highest caliber from China to America, paralleling the readership of this blog. Recently I received an email from one of my most trusted ones which included an excerpt from God only knows where outlining the true intention of the “vaccine.” This sounds about right:
.…”The entire premise of the mRNA “vaccine” protocol, as it has been promoted, is in error. There needs to be some other alterations in the chemical mixture injected that will mitigate the bad or more worrisome effects. This mRNA injection is not a vaccine. It is an injection that is designed to alter the population / society control by the governments that use this methodology. The concept is that this injection will require as-needed boosters to act as a shield to all manner of foreign substances, germs and viruses. This is not only attractive from that point of view, but that it will also become a predominant revenue stream to the producers of that injection formula.
The governments that promote and use this injection scheme do so with no intention of vaccinating anyone. What they want is a platform to easily control, and defend the population with, when they create dangerous viral weapons to launch against the rest of the world. The nations favor this methodology as they can include other chemicals and substances at will that would be useful for them to maintaining crowd control, and to manipulate the population. Already there has been developed systems that resonate with the injected mRNA resultant mutations that create harmonics that allow the government to change the actions and thoughts of the injected populations. They can thus calm, anger, upset, or create any kind of emotional reactions in the population that they control simply by having the population so injected, and then pulsing frequencies at them through social media. This system is fraught with difficulties, and none of these were addressed during the rollout phase. And today some of the side effects are being noticed. This includes the biggest culprit with is known as the “spike protein”, but others that alter the cell structures in a negative vector downward trend. The enthalpic result is early organ failures, particularly of the critical priority organs such as liver, heart, kidneys and lungs. The damage is being noticed with alarm throughout the nations using this type of injection. However, they have mandated that there shouldn’t be any reporting of the danger, and the damages and deaths that have resulted so far.
At the end of the Vietnam War the United States faced a crossroads; either continue along the bloody road to empire or reinvent its democracy. The focus of that struggle centered around the 1976 presidential campaign. With the election of Jimmy Carter it was assumed that the administration would reassess the U.S. role on the world stage and reinvest its energies in re building a war-weary nation. But with the selection of Zbigniew Brzezinski as his national security advisor, President Carter guaranteed that would never be.
Plotting to overthrow the old rules before even gaining access to the Oval office Brzezinski would play a pivotal role in the rise of the neoconservative agenda and their politicization of American foreign policy. And by stage-managing perceptions of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, he would permanently shift the management of the national security state from the pragmatic to the ideological. As journalists we followed this transformation for over 40 years as the Brzezinski agenda to weaponize extremist Islam on behalf of American empire spread across the globe while documenting the course of a deep-state movement that led to 9/11 and endless war.
In the end Brzezinski honored his duty to the elites by warning them in 2010 that for the first time in history a totally new reality had taken hold. Mankind was now politically awake and aware of their economic inequalities and politically active for the first time in human history.
Brzezinski was already concerned about the public’s growing dissatisfaction following the 2008 financial catastrophe. He warned the elites that bailing out failed banks while ignoring human suffering would not end well. But his 2010 lecture revealed that something even more profound was underway and that despite their mastery of the world’s economy, the global elitists he’d spent his career advancing were facing something beyond their control.
Ironically it was Brzezinski who guaranteed this tragic ending by merging the political objectives of the global elites to extremist Islam and in so doing, undid the very empire he thought he was advancing. But beyond the impacts of 9/11 and the so called “war on terror,” Brzezinski’s involvement helped us uncover hints of a deeper agenda and as we traced its roots we discovered that it led to the ancient past.
We are posting articles we have researched, written and published at different stages of our understanding. These articles not only form the basis of our discoveries, but have become more relevant than when they were originally published. In a unique way, each article plays a part that is revealed in The Valediction, Three Nights of Desmond.
By Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould, World BEYOND War, October 6, 2020
Conor Tobin’s January 9, 2020 Diplomatic History[1]article titled: The Myth of the ‘Afghan Trap’: Zbigniew Brzezinski and Afghanistan[2] attempts to “dismantle the notion that President Jimmy Carter, at the urging of National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, aided the Afghan Mujahedin intentionally to lure the Soviet Union into invading Afghanistan in 1979.” As Todd Greentree acknowledges in his July17, 2020 review of Tobin’s article, the stakes are high because the “the notion” calls into question not just President Carter’s legacy, but the conduct, the reputation and the “strategic behavior of the United States during the Cold War and beyond.”[3]
Central to the issue of what Tobin refers to as “the Afghan Trap thesis,” is French journalist Vincent Jauvert’s infamous January 1998 Nouvel Observateur interview with Brzezinski in which he brags about a secret program launched by him and President Carter six months before the Soviet invasion “that had the effect of drawing the Russians into the afghan trap…” “According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise.” Brzezinski is on record as saying. “Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.”[4]
Despite the fact that the secret program had already been revealed by the CIA’s former chief of the directorate of Operations for the Near East and South Asia Dr. Charles Cogan and former CIA Director Robert Gates and was largely ignored, Brzezinski’s admission brings attention to a glaring misconception about Soviet intentions in Afghanistan that many historians would rather leave unexplained. From the moment Brzezinski’s interview appeared in 1998 there has been a fanatical effort on both the left and the right to deny its validity as an idle boast, a misinterpretation of what he meant, or a bad translation from French to English. Brzezinski’s admission is so sensitive amongst the CIA’s insiders, Charles Cogan felt it necessary to come out for a Cambridge Forum discussion of our book on Afghanistan (Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story)[5] in 2009 to claim that even though our view that the Soviets were reluctant to invade was authentic, Brzezinski’s Nouvel Observateur interview had to be wrong.
Tobin expands on this complaint by lamenting that the French interview has so corrupted the historiography as to have become the almost sole basis to prove the existence of a plot to lure Moscow into the “Afghan Trap.” He then goes on to write that since Brzezinski asserts the interview was technically not an interview but excerpts from an interview and was never approved in the form it appeared and that since Brzezinski has subsequently repeatedly denied it on numerous occasions—“the ‘trap’ thesis has little basis in fact.”[6] Tobin then proceeds to cite official documents to prove “Brzezinski’s actions through 1979 exhibited a meaningful effort to dissuade [emphasis added] Moscow from intervening… In sum, a Soviet military intervention was neither sought nor desired by the Carter administration and the covert program initiated in the summer of 1979 is insufficient to charge Carter and Brzezinski with actively attempting to ensnare Moscow in the ‘Afghan trap.’”
So what does this reveal about a secret U.S. government operation taken six months prior to the Soviet invasion of December 1979 and not bragged about by Brzezinski until January of 1998?
To summarize Tobin’s complaint; Brzezinski’s alleged boast of luring the Soviets into an “Afghan trap” has little basis in fact. Brzezinski did say something but what—is not clear, but whatever he said, there is no historical record of it and anyway it wasn’t enough to lure the Soviets into Afghanistan because he and Carter didn’t want the Soviets to invade anyway because it would jeopardize détente and the SALT II negotiations. So what’s all the fuss about?
Tobin’s assumption that the President of the United States and his CIA would never intentionally set out to exacerbate the Cold War in the middle of such a hostile environment, may reveal more about Conor Tobin’s bias than his understanding of what Brzezinski’s strategy of confrontation was all about. To read his article is to step through the looking glass into an alternative universe where (to paraphrase T.E. Lawrence) facts are replaced by daydreams and the dreamers act-out with their eyes wide open. From our experience with Afghanistan and the people who made it happen, Tobin’s “valuable service of traditional diplomatic history” (as quoted from Todd Greentree’s review) does no service to history at all.
Looking back at what Brzezinski admitted to in 1998 doesn’t require a top secret clearance to verify. The Great Game-like motivations behind the Afghan trap thesis were well known at the time of the invasion to anyone with an understanding of the history of the region’s strategic value.
M.S. Agwani of the Jawaharlal Nehru School of International Studies stated as much in the October-December 1980 issue of the Schools Quarterly Journal citing a number of complicating factors that support the Afghan trap thesis: “Our own conclusion from the foregoing is twofold. First, the Soviet Union had in all probability walked into a trap laid by its adversaries. For its military action did not give it any advantage in terms of Soviet security which it did not enjoy under the previous regimes. On the contrary, it can and does affect its dealings with the Third World in general and the Muslim countries in particular. Secondly, the strong American reaction to Soviet intervention cannot be taken as proof of Washington’s genuine concern about the fate of Afghanistan. It is indeed possible to argue that its vital interests in the Gulf would be better served by an extended Soviet embroilment with Afghanistan inasmuch as the latter could be taken advantage to ostracize the Soviets from that region. The happenings in Afghanistan also seem to have come in handy for the United States to increase its military presence in and around the Gulf substantially without evoking any serious protest from the littoral states.”[7]
Whenever questioned over the nearly two decades after the Nouvel Observateur article appeared until his death in 2017, Brzezinski’s responses to the accuracy of the translation often varied from acceptance to rejection to somewhere in between which should raise questions about relying too heavily on the veracity of his reflections. Yet Conor Tobin chose to cite only a 2010 interview with Paul Jay of the Real News Network [8] in which Brzezinski denied it, to make his case. In this 2006 interview with filmmaker Samira Goetschel[9] he states that it’s a “very free translation,” but fundamentally admits the secret program “probably convinced the Soviets even more to do what they were planning to do.” Brzezinski defaults to his long held ideological justification (shared with neoconservatives) that since the Soviets were in the process of expanding into Afghanistan anyway as part of a master plan for achieving hegemony in Southwest Asia and the Gulf oil-producing states, [10] (a position rejected by Secretary of State Cyrus Vance) the fact that he might have been provoking an invasion was of little significance.
Having dispensed with the implications of Brzezinski’s exact words, Tobin then blames the growth and acceptance of the Afghan trap thesis largely on an over-reliance on Brzezinski’s “reputation” which he then proceeds to dismiss by citing Brzezinski’s “post-invasion memos [which] reveal concern, not opportunity, which belies the claim that inducing an invasion was his objective.”[11] But to dismiss Brzezinski’s well known ideological motivation to undermine U.S./Soviet relations at every turn is to miss the raison d’être of Brzezinski’s career prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Accepting his denials at face value ignores his role in bringing the post-Vietnam neoconservative agenda (known as Team B) into the White House not to mention the opportunity to permanently shift American foreign policy into his anti-Russian ideological world view by provoking the Soviets at every step.
Anne Hessing Cahn, currently Scholar in Residence at American University who served as Chief of the Social Impact Staff at the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from 1977–81 and Special Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense 1980–81, had this to say about Brzezinski’s reputation in her 1998 book, Killing Détente: “When President Carter named Zbigniew Brzezinski as his national security advisor, it was foreordained that détente with the Soviet Union was in for rough times. First came the March 1977 ill-fated arms control proposal, which departed from the Vladivostok Agreement[12] and was leaked to the press before it was presented to the Soviets. By April Carter was pressing NATO allies to rearm, demanding a firm commitment from all NATO members to start increasing their defense budgets by 3 percent per year. In the summer of 1977 Carter’s Presidential Review Memorandum-10[13]called for an ‘ability to prevail’ if war should come, wording that smacked of the Team B view.” [14]
Within a year of taking office Carter had already signaled the Soviets multiple times that he was turning the administration away from cooperation to confrontation and the Soviets were listening. In an address drafted by Brzezinski and delivered at Wake Forest University on March 17, 1978, “Carter reaffirmed American support for SALT and arms control, [but] the tone was markedly different from a year earlier. Now he included all the qualifiers beloved by Senator Jackson and the JCS… As for détente—a word never actually mentioned in the address—cooperation with the Soviet Union was possible to meet common goals. ‘But if they fail to demonstrate restraint in missile programs and other force levels or in the projection of Soviet or proxy forces into other lands and continents then popular support in the United States for such cooperation with the Soviets will certainly erode.’”
The Soviets got the message from Carter’s address and immediately responded in a TAAS News Agency editorial that: “‘Soviet goals abroad’ had been distorted as an excuse to escalate the arms race.’” [15]
At a Nobel conference on the Cold War in the fall of 1995, Harvard/MIT Senior Security Studies Advisor, Dr. Carol Saivetz addressed the tendency to neglect the importance of Brzezinski’s ideology in the Cold War decision-making process and why that led to such a fundamental misunderstanding of each side’s intentions. “What I learned over the last couple of days was that ideology—a factor which we in the West who were writing about Soviet foreign policy tended to dismiss as pure rationalization… To some extent, an ideological perspective—an ideological world view, let us call it—played an important role… Whether or not Zbig was from Poland or from someplace else, he had a world view, and he tended to interpret events as they unfolded in the light of it. To some extent, his fears became self-fulfilling prophecies. He was looking for certain kinds of behaviors, and he saw them—rightly or wrongly.”[16]
To understand how Brzezinski’s “fears” became self-fulfilling prophecies is to understand how his hard line against the Soviets in Afghanistan provoked the results he wanted and became adopted as American foreign policy in line with Team B’s neoconservative objectives; “to destroy détente and to steer U.S. foreign policy back to a more militant stance viz-à-viz the Soviet Union.”[17]
Although not generally considered a neoconservative and opposed to linking Israel’s objectives in Palestine with American objectives, Brzezinski’s method for creating self-fulfilling prophecies and the neoconservative movement’s geopolitical aims of moving the U.S. into a hardline stance against the Soviet Union found a common objective in Afghanistan. Their shared method as Cold warriors came together to attack détente and SALT II wherever possible while destroying the foundations of any working relationship with the Soviets. In a 1993 interview we conducted with SALT II negotiator Paul Warnke, he affirmed his belief that the Soviets would never have invaded Afghanistan in the first place had President Carter not fallen victim to Brzezinski and Team B’s hostile attitude toward détente and their undermining of Soviet confidence that SALT II would be ratified.[18] Brzezinski saw the Soviet invasion as a great vindication of his claim that the U.S. had encouraged Soviet aggression through a foreign policy of weakness which therefore justified his hardline position inside the Carter administration. But how could he claim vindication for Soviet actions when he had played such a crucial role in provoking the circumstances to which they reacted?[19]
President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s science advisor George B. Kistiakowsky and former deputy director of the CIA, Herbert Scoville answered that question in a Boston Globe Op-ed barely two months after the event. “In reality, it was actions by the President designed to appease his hardline political opponents at home that destroyed the fragile balance in the Soviet bureaucracy… The arguments that stilled the voices of the Kremlin moderates grew out of the approaching demise of the SALT II treaty and the sharply anti-Soviet drift of Carter’s policies. His increasing propensity for accepting the views of National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski led to the anticipation of dominance in the United States by the hawks for many years to come…”[20]
In an April 1981 article in the British journal The Round Table, author Dev Murarka reveals that the Soviets had refused to intervene militarily on thirteen separate occasions after being asked by the Afghan government of Nur Mohammed Taraki and Hafizullah Amin—knowing a military intervention would provide their enemies with exactly what they had been seeking. Only on the fourteenth request did the Soviets comply “when information was received in Moscow that Amin had made a deal with one of the dissident groups.” Murarka observes that “A close scrutiny of the circumstances of the Soviet decision to intervene underlines two things. One, that the decision was not taken in haste without proper consideration. Two, that an intervention was not a predetermined inevitable consequence of growing Soviet involvement in Afghanistan. In different circumstances it could have been avoided.”[21]
But instead of being avoided, the circumstances for a Soviet invasion were fostered by covert action taken by Carter, Brzezinski and the CIA directly and through proxies in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt ensuring that Soviet intervention was not avoided but encouraged.
Additionally absent from the Tobin analysis is the fact that anybody who tried to work with Brzezinski at the Carter White House—as testified to by SALT II negotiator Paul Warnke and Carter CIA Director Stansfield Turner—knew him as a Polish nationalist and a driven ideologue.[22] And even if the Nouvel Observateur interview did not exist it wouldn’t alter the weight of evidence that without Brzezinski and Carter’s covert and overt provocations, the Soviets would never have felt the need to cross the border and invade Afghanistan.
In a January 8, 1972 article in the New Yorker Magazine, titled Reflections: In Thrall To Fear,[23] Senator J. William Fulbright described the neoconservative system for creating endless war that was keeping the U.S. bogged down in Vietnam. “The truly remarkable thing about this Cold War psychology is the totally illogical transfer of the burden of proof from those who make charges to those who question them… The Cold Warriors, instead of having to say how they knew that Vietnam was part of a plan for the Communization of the world, so manipulated the terms of the public discussion as to be able to demand that the skeptics prove that it was not. If the skeptics could not then the war must go on—to end it would be recklessly risking the national security.”
Fulbright realized that Washington’s neoconservative Cold Warriors had turned the logic for making war inside out by concluding, “We come to the ultimate illogic: war is the course of prudence and sobriety until the case for peace is proved under impossible rules of evidence–or until the enemy surrenders. Rational men cannot deal with each other on this basis.”
But these “men” and their system were ideological; not rational and their drive to further their mandate to defeat Soviet Communism only intensified with the official loss of the Vietnam War in 1975. Because of Brzezinski, U.S. policy formation surrounding the Carter administration on Afghanistan, SALT, détente and the Soviet Union lived outside the realm of what had passed for traditional diplomatic policy-making in the Nixon and Ford administrations while succumbing to the toxic neoconservative influence of Team B that was gaining control at the time.
Tobin ignores this glaring historical conjunction of likeminded ideologists. He insists on relying on the official record to come to his conclusions but then ignores how that record was framed by Brzezinski and influenced by Washington’s cult of neoconservatives to deliver on their ideological self-fulfilling prophecy. He then cherry-picks facts that support his anti-Afghan trap thesis while ignoring the wealth of evidence from those who opposed Brzezinski’s efforts to control the narrative and exclude opposing points of view.
According to numerous studies Brzezinski transformed the role of national security advisor far beyond its intended function. In a planning session with President Carter on St. Simon Island before even entering the White House he took control of policy creation by narrowing access to the president down to two committees (the Policy Review Committee PRC, and the Special Coordinating Committee SCC). He then had Carter transfer power over the CIA to the SCC which he chaired. At the first cabinet meeting after taking office Carter announced that he was elevating the national security advisor to cabinet level and Brzezinski’s lock on covert action was complete. According to political scientist and author David J. Rothkopf, “It was a bureaucratic first strike of the first order. The system essentially gave responsibility for the most important and sensitive issues to Brzezinski.” [24]
According to one academic study,[25] over the course of four years Brzezinski often took actions without the knowledge or approval of the president; intercepted communications sent to the White House from around the world and carefully selected only those communications for the president to see that conformed to his ideology. His Special Coordinating Committee, the SCC was a stovepipe operation which acted solely in his interest and denied information and access to those who might oppose him, including Secretary of State Cyrus Vance and CIA Director Stansfield Turner. As a cabinet member he occupied a White House office diagonally across the lobby from the Oval Office and met so often with the President, the in-house record-keepers stopped keeping track of the meetings.[26] By agreement with President Carter, he would then type up three page memos of these and any meetings and deliver them to the president in person.[27] He used this unique authority to single himself out as the primary spokesman for the administration and a barrier between the White House and the president’s other advisors and went so far as to create a press secretary to convey his policy decisions directly to the Mainstream Media.
He was also on the record as singlehandedly establishing a rapprochement with China in May of 1978 on an anti-Soviet basis which ran counter to U.S. policy at the time while renowned for misleading the president on critical issues to falsely justify his positions.[28]
So how did this work in Afghanistan?
Tobin rejects the very idea that Brzezinski would ever advise Carter to actively endorse a policy that would risk SALT and détente, jeopardize his election campaign and threaten Iran, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf to future Soviet infiltration—because to Tobin “it is largely inconceivable.”[29]
As proof of his support for Brzezinski’s belief in the Soviet’s long term ambitions to invade the Middle East through Afghanistan, Tobin cites how Brzezinski “reminded Carter of ‘Russia’s traditional push to the south, and briefed him specifically on Molotov’s proposal to Hitler in late 1940 that the Nazis recognize the Soviet claims of pre-eminence in the region south of Batum and Baku.’” But Tobin fails to mention that what Brzezinski presented to the president as proof of Soviet aims in Afghanistan was a well-known misinterpretation[30] of what Hitler and Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentropp had proposed to Molotov—and which Molotov rejected. In other words, the very opposite of what Brzezinski presented to Carter—yet Tobin ignores this fact.
From the moment Afghanistan declared its independence from Britain in 1919 until the “Marxist coup” of 1978 the main goal of Soviet foreign policy had been to maintain friendly but cautious relations with Afghanistan, while preserving Soviet interests.[31] U.S. involvement was always minimal with the U.S. represented by allies Pakistan and Iran in the region. By the 1970s the U.S. considered the country to already be within the Soviet sphere of influence having defacto signed on to that arrangement at the start of the Cold War. [32] As two long term American experts on Afghanistan explained quite simply in 1981, “The Soviet influence was predominant but not intimidating until 1978.”[33] Contrary to Brzezinski’s claim of a Soviet grand design, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance saw no evidence of Moscow’s hand in the 78’overthrow of the previous government but much evidence to prove the coup had caught them by surprise.[34] In fact it appears the coup leader Hafizullah Amin feared the Soviets would have stopped him had they discovered the plot. Selig Harrison writes, “The overall impression left by the available evidence is one of an improvised ad hoc Soviet response to an unexpected situation… Later, the KGB ‘learned that the Amin’s instructions about the uprising included a severe ban on letting the Russians know about the planned actions.’”[35]
Moscow considered Hafizullah Amin to be aligned with the CIA and labelled him “‘a commonplace petty bourgeois and extreme Pashtu nationalist… with boundless political ambitions and a craving for power,’ which he would ‘stoop to anything and commit any crimes to fulfill.’”[36] As early as May 1978 the Soviets were engineering a plan to remove and replace him and by the summer of 1979 contacting former non-communist members of the King and Mohammed Daoud’s government to build a “non-communist, or coalition, government to succeed the Taraki-Amin regime,” all the while keeping U.S. embassy charge d’affaires Bruce Amstutz fully informed.[37]
To others who had a personal experience in the events surrounding the Soviet invasion, there is little doubt that Brzezinski wanted to raise the stakes for the Soviets in Afghanistan and had been doing it at least since April of 1978 with the help of the Chinese. During Brzezinski’s historic mission to China only weeks after the Marxist takeover in Afghanistan, he raised the issue of Chinese support for countering the recent Marxist coup. [38]
In support of his theory that Brzezinski was not provoking a Soviet invasion, Tobin cites a memo from NSC director for South Asian Affairs, Thomas Thornton on May 3, 1978 reporting that “the CIA was unwilling to consider covert action”[39] at the time and warned on July 14, that “no official encouragement” be given to “coup plotters.”[40] The actual incident to which Thornton refers regards a contact by the second highest Afghan military official who probed the U.S. embassy chargé d’Affaires Bruce Amstutz on whether the U.S. would support overthrowing the newly installed “Marxist regime” of Nur Mohammed Taraki and Hafizullah Amin.
Tobin then cites Thornton’s warning to Brzezinski that the result of “giving a helping hand… would likely be an invitation for massive Soviet involvement,” and adds that Brzezinski wrote “yes” in the margins.
Tobin assumes the warning from Thornton is further evidence that Brzezinski was discouraging provocative action by signaling a “yes” to his warning. But what Brzezinski meant by writing in the margin is anybody’s guess, especially given his bitter policy conflict over the issue of destabilizing the regime with the incoming U.S. ambassador Adolph Dubs who arrived that July as well.
“I can only tell you that Brzezinski really had a struggle for American policy toward Afghanistan in 1978 and 79 between Brzezinski and Dubs” journalist and scholar Selig Harrison told us in an interview we conducted in 1993. “Dubs was a Soviet specialist… with a very sophisticated conception of what he was going to do politically; which was to try to make Amin into a Tito – or the closest thing to a Tito – detach him. And Brzezinski of course thought that was all nonsense… Dubs represented a policy of not wanting the U.S. to get involved with aiding antagonistic groups because he was trying to deal with the Afghan Communist leadership and give it off-setting and economic help and other things that would enable it to be less dependent on the Soviet Union… Now Brzezinski represented a different approach, which is to say was all part of a self-anointed prophecy. It was all very useful to the people who, like Brzezinski had a certain conception of the overall relationship with the Soviet Union.”[41]
In his book with Diego Cordovez Out of Afghanistan, Harrison recalls his visit with Dubs in August of 1978 and how over the next six months his conflict with Brzezinski made life extremely difficult and dangerous for him to implement the State Department’s policy. “Brzezinski and Dubs were working at cross purposes during late 1978 and early 1979.” Harrison writes. “This control over covert operations enabled Brzezinski to take the first steps toward a more aggressive anti-Soviet Afghan policy without the State Department’s knowing much about it.”[42]
According to the State Department’s 1978 “Post Profile” for the ambassador’s job, Afghanistan was considered a difficult assignment subject “to unpredictable – possibly violent – political developments affecting the stability of the region… As Chief of mission, with eight different agencies, almost 150 official Americans, in a remote and unhealthful environment,” the ambassador’s job was dangerous enough. But with Ambassador Dubs directly opposed to Brzezinski’s secret internal policy of destabilization it was becoming deadly. Dubs was clearly aware from the outset that the ongoing program of destabilization might cause the Soviets to invade and explained his strategy to Selig Harrison. “The trick for the United States, he [Dubs] explained would be to sustain cautious increases in aid and other links without provoking Soviet counter pressures on Amin and possibly military intervention.”[43]
According to former CIA analyst Henry Bradsher, Dubs attempted to warn the State Department that destabilization would result in a Soviet invasion. Before leaving for Kabul he recommended that the Carter administration do contingency planning for a Soviet military response and within a few months of arriving repeated the recommendation. But the State Department was so out of Brzezinski’s loop, Dubs’ request was never taken seriously.[44]
By early 1979 the fear and confusion over whether Hafizullah Amin was secretly working for the CIA, had so destabilized the U.S. embassy, Ambassador Dubs confronted his own station chief and demanded answers, only to be told Amin had never worked for the CIA.[45] But rumors that Amin had contacts with Pakistan’s Intelligence Directorate the ISI and the Afghan Islamists backed by them, especially Gulbuddin Hekmatyar are most likely true.[46] Despite the obstacles Dubs persisted in advancing his plans with Hafizullah Amin against the obvious pressure coming from Brzezinski and his NSC. Harrison writes. “Dubs meanwhile was arguing vigorously for keeping American options open, pleading that destabilization of the regime could provoke direct Soviet intervention.”[47]
Harrison goes on to say; “Brzezinski emphasized in an interview after he left the White House that he had remained strictly within the confines of the President’s policy at that stage not to provide direct aid to the Afghan insurgency [which has since been revealed as not true]. Since there was no taboo on indirect support, however, the CIA had encouraged the newly entrenched Zia Ul-Haq to launch its own program of military support for the insurgents. The CIA and the Pakistani Interservices Intelligence Directorate (ISI) he said, worked together closely on planning training programs for the insurgents and on coordinating the Chinese, Saudi Arabian, Egyptian and Kuwaiti aid that was beginning to trickle in. By early February 1979, this collaboration became an open secret when the Washington Post published [February 2] an eyewitness report that at least two thousand Afghans were being trained at former Pakistani Army bases guarded by Pakistani patrols.”[48]
David Newsom, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs who’d met the new Afghan government in the summer of 1978 told Harrison, “From the beginning, Zbig had a much more confrontational view of the situation than Vance and most of us at State. He thought we should be doing something covertly to frustrate Soviet ambitions in that part of the world. On some occasions I was not alone in raising questions about the wisdom and feasibility of what he wanted to do.” ‘CIA Director Stansfield Turner, for example,’ “was more cautious than Zbig, often arguing that something wouldn’t work. Zbig wasn’t worried about provoking the Russians, as some of us were…”[49]
Although noting Ambassador Dubs’ subsequent murder on February 14 at the hands of the Afghan police as a major turning point for Brzezinski to shift Afghan policy further against the Soviets, Tobin entirely avoids the drama that led up to the Dubs’ assassination, his conflict with Brzezinski and his overtly expressed fear that provoking the Soviets through destabilization would result in an invasion.[50]
By the early spring of 1979 the “Russia’s Vietnam” meme was circulating widely in the international press as evidence of Chinese support for the Afghan insurgency began to filter out. An April article in the Canadian MacLean’s Magazine reported the presence of Chinese army officers and instructors in Pakistan training and equipping “right-wing Afghan Moslem guerillas for their ‘holy war’ against the Moscow-back Kabul regime of Noor Mohammed Taraki.”[51] A May 5 article in the Washington Post titled “Afghanistan: Moscow’s Vietnam?” went right to the point saying, “the Soviets’ option to pull out entirely is no longer available. They are stuck.”[52]
But despite his claim of responsibility in the Nouvelle Observateur article, the decision to keep the Russians stuck in Afghanistan may already have become a fait accompli that Brzezinski simply took advantage of. In his 1996 From the Shadows, former CIA director Robert Gates and Brzezinski aid at the NSC confirms that the CIA was on the case long before the Soviets felt any need to invade. “The Carter administration began looking at the possibility of covert assistance to the insurgents opposing the pro-Soviet, Marxist government of President Taraki at the beginning of 1979. On March 9, 1979, CIA sent several covert action options relating to Afghanistan to the SCC… The DO informed DDCI Carlucci late in March that the government of Pakistan might be more forthcoming in terms of helping the insurgents than previously believed, citing an approach by a senior Pakistani official to an Agency officer.”[53]
Aside from the purely geopolitical objectives associated with Brzezinski’s ideology, Gates’ statement reveals an additional motive behind the Afghan trap thesis: The long term objectives of drug kingpins in the opium trade and the personal ambitions of the Pakistani General credited with making the Afghan trap a reality.
In 1989 Pakistan’s Lieutenant General Fazle Haq identified himself as the senior Pakistani official who’d influenced Brzezinski into backing the ISI’s clients and to get the operation to fund the insurgents underway. “I told Brzezinski you screwed up in Vietnam and Korea; you’d better get it right this time” he told British journalist Christina Lamb in an interview for her book, Waiting for Allah.[54]
Far from absolving Brzezinski of any responsibility for luring the Soviets into an Afghan trap, Haq’s 1989 admission combined with the Gates 1996 revelation confirm a premeditated willingness to use destabilization to provoke the Soviets into a military response and then use that response to trigger the massive military upgrade that was referred to in the Soviet reaction to Carter’s Wake Forest address in March of 1978. It also links Fazle Haq’s motives to President Carter and Brzezinski and in so doing, makes both witting accessories to the spread of illicit drugs at the expense of Carter’s own “Federal strategy for prevention of drug abuse and drug trafficking.”
In late 1977 Dr. David Musto, a Yale psychiatrist had accepted Carter’s appointment to the White House Strategy Council on Drug Abuse. “Over the next two years, Musto found that the CIA and other intelligence agencies denied the council—whose members included the secretary of state and the attorney general—access to all classified information on drugs, even when it was necessary for framing new policy.”
When Musto informed the White House about the CIA’s lying about their involvement he got no response. But when Carter began openly funding the mujahideen guerrillas following the Soviet invasion Musto told the council. “‘[T]hat we were going into Afghanistan to support opium growers in their rebellion against the Soviets. Shouldn’t we try to avoid what we had done in Laos? Shouldn’t we try to pay the growers if they eradicate their opium production? There was silence.’ As heroin from Afghanistan and Pakistan poured into America throughout 1979, Musto noted that the number of drug-related deaths in New York City rose by 77 percent.”[55]
Golden Triangle heroin had provided a secret source of funding for the CIA’s anti-communist operations during the Vietnam War. “By 1971, 34 percent of all US soldiers in South Vietnam were heroin addicts – all supplied from laboratories operated by CIA assets.”[56] Thanks to Dr. David Musto, Haq’s use of the Tribal heroin trade to secretly fund Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s rebel forces was already exposed, but because of Fazle Haq, Zbigniew Brzezinski and a man named Agha Hassan Abedi and his Bank of Commerce and Credit International, the rules of the game would be turned inside out. [57]
By 1981, Haq had made the Afghan/Pakistan border the world’s top heroin supplier with 60 percent of U.S. heroin coming through his program[58]and by 1982 Interpol was listing Brzezinski’s strategic ally Fazle Haq as an international narcotics trafficker.[59]
In the aftermath of Vietnam, Haq was positioned to take advantage of an historic shift in the illicit drug trade from Southeast Asia and the Golden Triangle to South Central Asia and the Golden Crescent, where it came to be protected by Pakistani intelligence and the CIA and where it thrives today.[60]
Haq and Abedi together revolutionized the drug trade under the cover of President Carter’s anti-Soviet Afghan war making it safe for all the world’s intelligence agencies to privatize what had up to then been secret government-run programs. And it is Abedi who then brought in a retired President Carter as his front man to legitimize the face of his bank’s illicit activities as it continued to finance Islamic terrorism’s spread around the world.
There are many who prefer to believe that President Carter’s involvement with Agha Hassan Abedi was the result of ignorance or naiveté and that in his heart President Carter was just trying to be a good man. But even a cursory examination of BCCI reveals deep connections to Carter’s Democratic Party circle that cannot be explained away by ignorance.[61] It can however be explained by a calculated pattern of deception and to a president that to this day refuses to answer any questions about it.
To some members of the Carter White House who interacted with Brzezinski during his four years at the wheel from 1977 to 1981 his intention to provoke the Russians into doing something in Afghanistan was always clear. According to John Helmer a White House staffer who was tasked with investigating two of Brzezinski’s policy recommendations to Carter, Brzezinski would risk anything to undermine the Soviets and his operations in Afghanistan were well known.
“Brzezinski was an obsessive Russia-hater to the end. That led to the monumental failures of Carter’s term in office; the hatreds Brzezinski released had an impact which continues to be catastrophic for the rest of the world.” Helmer wrote in 2017, “To Brzezinski goes the credit for starting most of the ills – the organization, financing, and armament of the mujahideen the Islamic fundamentalists who have metastasized – with US money and arms still – into Islamic terrorist armies operating far from Afghanistan and Pakistan, where Brzezinski started them off.”[62]
Helmer insists that Brzezinski exercised an almost hypnotic power over Carter that bent him towards Brzezinski’s ideological agenda while blinding him to the consequences from the outset of his presidency. “From the start… in the first six months of 1977, Carter was also warned explicitly by his own staff, inside the White House… not to allow Brzezinski to dominate his policy-making to the exclusion of all other advice, and the erasure of the evidence on which the advice was based.” Yet the warning fell on Carter’s deaf ears while the responsibility for Brzezinski’s actions falls on his shoulders. According to Carter’s CIA Director Stansfield Turner; “The ultimate responsibility is totally Jimmy Carter’s. It’s got to be the President who sifts out these different strains of advice.” [63] But to this day Carter refuses to address his role in creating the disaster that Afghanistan has become.
In 2015 we began work on a documentary to finally clear the air on some of the unresolved questions surrounding America’s role in Afghanistan and reconnected with Dr. Charles Cogan for an interview. Soon after the camera rolled, Cogan interrupted to tell us he had talked to Brzezinski in the spring of 2009 about the 1998 Nouvel Observateur interview and been disturbed to learn that the “Afghan trap thesis” as stated by Brzezinski was indeed legitimate.[64]
“I had an exchange with him. This was a ceremony for Samuel Huntington. Brzezinski was there. I’d never met him before and I went up to him and introduced myself and I said I agree with everything you’re doing and saying except for one thing. You gave an interview with the Nouvel Observateur some years back saying that we sucked the Soviets into Afghanistan. I said I’ve never heard or accepted that idea and he said to me, ‘You may have had your perspective from the Agency but we had our different perspective from the White House,’ and he insisted that this was correct. And I still… that was obviously the way he felt about it. But I didn’t get any whiff of that when I was Chief Near East South Asia at the time of the Afghan war against the Soviets.
In the end it seems that Brzezinski had lured the Soviets into their own Vietnam with intent and wanted his colleague—as one of the highest level CIA officials to participate in the largest American intelligence operations since WWII—to know it. Brzezinski had worked the system to serve his ideological objectives and managed to keep it secret and out of the official record. He had lured the Soviets into the Afghan trap and they had fallen for the bait.
For Brzezinski, getting the Soviets to invade Afghanistan was an opportunity to shift the Washington consensus toward an unrelenting hard line against the Soviet Union. Without any oversight for his use of covert action as chair of the SCC, he’d created the conditions needed to provoke a Soviet defensive response which he’d then used as evidence of unrelenting Soviet expansion and used the media, which he controlled, to affirm it, thereby creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. However, once his Russophobic system of exaggerations and lies about his covert operation became accepted, they found a home in America’s institutions and continue to haunt those institutions to this day. US policy since that time has operated in a Russophobic haze of triumphalism that both provokes international incidents and then capitalizes on the chaos. And to Brzezinski’s dismay he discovered he couldn’t turn the process off.
In 2016, the year before his death Brzezinski delivered a profound revelation in an article titled “Toward a Global Realignment” warning that “the United States is still the world’s politically, economically, and militarily most powerful entity, but given complex geopolitical shifts in regional balances, it is no longer the globally imperial power.” But after years of witnessing American missteps regarding its use of imperial power, he realized his dream of an American-led transformation to a new world order would never be. Though unapologetic at using his imperial hubris to lure the Soviets into Afghanistan, he did not expect his beloved American Empire to fall into the same trap and ultimately lived long enough to understand that he had won only a Pyrrhic victory.
Why would Conor Tobin eradicate critical evidence regarding the US role in the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan NOW?
In light of what’s been done to the historical record through Conor Tobin’s effort to debunk “the Afghan Trap thesis” and clear Zbigniew Brzezinski and President Carter’s reputations the facts of the matter remain clear. Discrediting Brzezinski’s Nouvel Observateur interview is insufficient to his task in view of our 2015 interview with former CIA chief Charles Cogan and the overwhelming body of evidence that totally disproves his anti “Afghan Trap” thesis.
Were Tobin a “lone scholar” with an obsession to clean up Brzezinski’s reputation for posterity on a school project his effort would be one thing. But to position his narrow thesis in a mainstream authoritative journal of international studies as a definitive rethinking of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan beggars the imagination. But then, the circumstances surrounding the Soviet invasion, President Carter’s premeditated actions beforehand, his overtly duplicitous response to it and his post-presidency participation with the CIA’s covert funder Agha Hassan Abedi, leave little to the imagination.
Of all the evidence disproving Tobin’s anti-Afghan Trap thesis, the most accessible and problematic for the managers of the ‘official narrative’ regarding the U.S. role in the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan remains journalist Vincent Jauvert’s 1998 Nouvel Observateur interview. Whether this effort to wipe the record clean is the motive behind Conor Tobin’s essay remains to be determined. It is likely that the distance between now and Brzezinski’s death signaled that the time was right for redefining his public statements for the official record.
It was fortunate that we were able to discover Conor Tobin’s effort and correct it as best we could. But Afghanistan is only one instance of where Americans have been misled. We all must become far more aware of how our narrative-creation process has been coopted by the powers-that-be from the start. It is critical that we learn how to take it back.
Bertolt Brecht, The Resistible Rise of Arturo Ui
“If we could learn to look instead of gawking, We’d see the horror in the heart of farce, If only we could act instead of talking, We wouldn’t always end up on our arse. This was the thing that nearly had us mastered; Don’t yet rejoice in his defeat, you men! Although the world stood up and stopped the bastard, The bitch that bore him is in heat again.”
[1]Diplomatic History is the official journal of Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR). The journal appeals to readers from a wide variety of disciplines, including American studies, international economics, American history, national security studies, and Latin-American, Asian, African, European, and Middle Eastern studies.
[4] Vincent Jauvert, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur (France), Jan 15-21, 1998, p.76 *(There are at least two editions of this magazine; with the perhaps sole exception of the Library of Congress, the version sent to the United States is shorter than the French version, and the Brzezinski interview was not included in the shorter version).
[5] Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould, Invisible History: Afghanistan’s Untold Story, (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 2009).
[6] Conor Tobin, The Myth of the ‘Afghan Trap’: Zbigniew Brzezinski and Afghanistan, 1978—1979 Diplomatic History, Volume 44, Issue 2, April 2020. p. 239
[7] M.S. Agwani, Review Editor, “The Saur Revolution and After,” QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF THE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY (New Delhi, India) Volume 19, Number 4 (October-December 1980) p. 571
[8] Paul Jay interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, Brzezinski’s Afghan War and the Grand Chessboard (2/3) 2010 – https://therealnews.com/stories/zbrzezinski1218gpt2
[10] Diego Cordovez, Selig S. Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), p.34.
[11] Tobin “The Myth of the ‘Afghan Trap’: Zbigniew Brzezinski and Afghanistan,” p. 240
[12] Vladivostok Agreement, November 23-24, 1974, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU L. I. Brezhnev and President of the USA Gerald R. Ford discussed in detail the question of further limitations of strategic offensive arms. https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/treaties/vladivostok.html
[14] Anne Hessing Cahn, Killing Détente: The Right Attacks the CIA (Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998), p.187.
[15] Raymond L. Garthoff, Detente and Confrontation (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1994 Revised Edition), p. 657
[16] Dr. Carol Saivetz, Harvard University, “The Intervention in Afghanistan and the Fall of Détente” conference, Lysebu, Norway, September 17-20, 1995 p. 252-253.
[17] Cahn, Killing Détente: The Right Attacks the CIA, p. 15.
[18] Interview, Washington D.C. , February 17, 1993.
[20] G.B. Kistiakowsky, Herbert Scoville, “The Kremlin’s lost voices,” The Boston Globe , February 28, 1980, p. 13.
[21] Dev Murarka, “AFGHANISTAN: THE RUSSIAN INTERVENTION: A MOSCOW ANALYSIS,” THE ROUND TABLE (London, England), No. 282 (APRIL 1981), p. 127.
[22] Interview with Paul Warnke, Washington, D.C., February 17, 1993. Admiral Stansfield Turner, Former Director of Central Intelligence, “The Intervention in Afghanistan and the Fall of Détente” conference, Lysebu, Norway September 17-20 p. 216.
[23] J. William Fulbright, “Reflections in Thrall To Fear,” The New Yorker, January 1, 1972 ( New York, USA), January 8, 1972 Issue p. 44-45
[24] David J. RothKopf – Charles Gati Editor, ZBIG: The Strategy and Statecraft of Zbigniew Brzezinski (Johns Hopkins University Press 2013), p. 68.
[25] Erika McLean, Beyond the Cabinet: Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Expansion of the National Security Advisor Position, Thesis Prepared for the Degree of Master of the Arts, University of North Texas, August 2011. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc84249/
[27] Betty Glad, An Outsider in the White House: Jimmy Carter, His Advisors, and the Making of American Foreign Policy (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University, 2009), p. 84.
[28] Raymond L. Garthoff, Detente and Confrontation (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1994 Revised Edition), p 770.
[29] Tobin “The Myth of the ‘Afghan Trap’: Zbigniew Brzezinski and Afghanistan,” p. 253
[30] Raymond L. Garthoff, Detente and Confrontation, (Revised Edition), p. 1050. Note 202. Garthoff later describes the incident as Brzezinski’s “misbegotten history lesson on the Molotov-Hitler talks in 1940.” (Which Carter made the mistake of accepting at face value) p. 1057.
[31] Rodric Braithwaite, Afgantsy: The Russians in Afghanistan 1979-89, (Oxford University Press, New York 2011), p. 29-36.
[32] Dr. Gary Sick, Former NSC staff member, Iran and Middle East expert, “The Intervention in Afghanistan and the Fall of Détente” conference, Lysebu, p. 38.
[33] Nancy Peabody Newell and Richard S. Newell, The Struggle for Afghanistan, (Cornell University Press 1981), p. 110-111
[35] Diego Cordovez, Selig S. Harrison, Out of Afghanistan, p. 27 Citing Alexander Morozov, “Our Man in Kabul,” New Times (Moscow), September 24, 1991, p. 38.
[36] John K. Cooley, Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism, (Pluto Press, London 1999) p. 12 citing Kremlin senior diplomat Vasily Safronchuk, Afghanistan in the Taraki Period, International Affairs, Moscow January 1991, pp. 86-87.
[37] Raymond L. Garthoff, Detente and Confrontation, (1994 Revised Edition), p 1003.
[38] Raymond L. Garthoff, Detente and Confrontation, p. 773.
[39] Tobin “The Myth of the ‘Afghan Trap’: Zbigniew Brzezinski and Afghanistan,” p. 240.
[41] Interview with Selig Harrison, Washington, D.C., February 18, 1993.
[42] Diego Cordovez – Selig Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal (New York, Oxford: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1995), p. 33.
[44] Henry S. Bradsher, Afghanistan and the Soviet Union, New and Expanded Edition, (Durham: Duke University Press, 1985), p. 85-86.
[45] Steve Coll, Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 (Penguin Books, 2005) p. 47-48.
[46] Authors’ conversation with Malawi Abdulaziz Sadiq, (a close friend and ally to Hafizullah Amin) June 25, 2006.
[47] Diego Cordovez – Selig Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal, p. 34.
[48] Cordovez – Harrison, Out of Afghanistan p. 34 Citing Peter Nieswand, “Guerillas Train in Pakistan to oust Afghan Government,” Washington Post, February 2, 1979, p. A 23.
[51] Peter Nieswand, “Peking’s finest fuel a holy war,” MacLean’s, (Toronto, Canada) April 30, 1979 p. 24
[52] Jonathan C. Randal, Washington Post, May 5, 1979 p. A – 33.
[53] Robert M. Gates, From the Shadows: The Ultimate Insider’s Story of five Presidents And How They Won the Cold War (New York, TOUCHSTONE, 1996), p.144
[54] Christina Lamb, Waiting for Allah: Pakistan’s Struggle for Democracy (Viking, 1991), p. 222
[55] Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, (Harper & Row, New York – Revised and Expanded Edition, 1991), pp. 436-437 Citing New York Times, May 22, 1980.
[56] Alfred W. McCoy, “Casualties of the CIA’s war against communism,” Boston Globe, November 14, 1996, p. A-27
[57] Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade, (Expanded Edition), pp. 452-454
[59] Alfred W. McCoy and Alan A. Block (ed.) War on Drugs: Studies in the Failure of U.S. Narcotics Policy, (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1992), p. 342
[60] Catherine Lamour and Michel R. Lamberti, The International Connection: Opium from Growers to Pushers, (Penguin Books, 1974, English Translation) pp. 177-198.
I got a real good one here from Kaminski, but it’s important for you to remember we are the band on the Titanic just trying to entertain you as your ship goes down into the dark icy depths. It’s not like I endorse any of this, just because Sympathy for the Devil is my favorite song it does not mean I endorse Lucifer. You needn’t worry anyway Elon Musk will be moving you all into space shortly, to make room for the New Atlantis his masters will be building here on earth. As Musk gleefully explains very few will be allowed to stay here on earth. You should trust Elon Musk, you should trust Klaus Schwab, you should trust Bill Gates and above all else you must trust Dr. Fauci. – Jack
We are no longer citizens. We are prisoners of the state, commanded to accept fatal torture. We don’t need protection from a phantom disease that so many experts have proven does not exist. We need protection from the state.
Nightmare medicine. Bribed government maniacs flushed and excited by their own demonic declarations, so certain of their unchallengeable power, sneer with a lurid leer, “Take this shot that might kill you if you want to stay alive.” And they always forget to say: “We’re not sure if it will actually work.” Ordinary knaves by the millions, trusting in their own conceited leaders, fall down and die.
Doctors all over the world deceive their patients by telling them to get the jab. These doctors should be charged with murder.
Like a decaying cow skull at a poisoned waterhole, people dying who once bragged that only cowards refused to get jabbed serve as a ghoulish reminder to those who resist the government’s cynical death prescription.
GURDJIEFF & STALIN / STALIN & GURDJIEFF? by John Robert Colombo
Below is an English transliteration of a Russian documentary Orage dug up that will give you some idea of just how historically important Gurdjieff is. – Jack
GURDJIEFF & STALIN / STALIN & GURDJIEFF?
Here JR Colombo reviews an astonishing Russian television program which spins many tales about Gurdjieff, with links to Stalin who features strongly, see photo, and others, some may give a lead to future research, others valuable for collectors of growing myths about Gurdjieff …
In the past there were times when I wished that I could speak the Russian language, and among them were the two state-sponsored trips that I took there. Yet guides and interpreters were plentiful and knowledgeable, so there was really no need to speak the language. Besides, many things may be known without the use of words. For instance, it has been said that each country in the world possesses two identities, its official identity and its secret identity. England is “John Bull,” but it is also King Arthur. France is “Marianne,” but it is also “the Spirit of Enlightenment and of Civilized Values.” Russia’s official identity has much to do with “the Russian Bear,” Alexander Nevsky, the Last Tsar, and perhaps Lermontov’s “living relic,” but its secret identity is, I believe, not a single personification or one person but two cities. Simply put, scratch a Russian and you will find someone who longs for the former glory of St. Petersburg and yearns for Moscow to be recognized as “the Third Rome.” Russians still feel that the capital of their country is the inheritor of a spiritual message to share with the rest of the world, in the same way that French citizens still feel that their country has a “civilizing” mission, the rayonnement of French culture.
One does not have to speak or read the Russian language to appreciate such yearnings. These concepts animate Russian theosophical texts and its imaginative literature. Remember that Soloviev, Berdyaev, and Blavatsky were Russians, and so was Ouspensky. Hence Moscow and St. Petersburg may be remembered as the “pressure-cookers” of occult and artistic thought at the turn of the 20th century, except that these capital cities are better regarded as “autoclaves” rather than pressure-cookers, so intense and concentrated have been the pressures that they have brought to bear on their citizenry.
An artist who fits this pattern (even to the extent that he lived most of his life abroad) was the artist and explorer Nicholas Roerich. Three museums (in New York City, Kerala, and Moscow) are dedicated to displaying his inspirational, semi-abstract paintings. On trips to New York, I visited that Slav-style Museum on a number of occasions, as well as the one in Moscow following its inauguration by President Mikhail Gorbachev at the time that he was awarded the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize. For some reason or other, those Russian scholars and writers whom I respect regard Roerich as “a reactionary”; I find him and his work to be progressive and prospective (when not a little portentous).
You might ask how Gurdjieff fits into all of this. Students of the Caucasian Greek are familiar with his Russian connections, so well described by Ouspensky and then by the two Jameses (Webb and Moore), so I am not going to connect the dots, a task I will leave to cultural historians who speak the language. Instead, I will add to the fund of general knowledge by offering a lopsided review of an hour-long documentary television program produced and telecast by the Russian state network earlier this year. If I am short on details (the names of producer and director, the date of the broadcast, etc.) it is because I am on the receiving end of two artifacts: a DVD of “Gurdjieff,” the telecast of the Russian-language program, with its credits in Cyrillic script; a dozen-page transcript and translation of the statements that were made by interviewees during the course of the forty-seven-minute documentary. The script was prepared by students of the Work in Toronto, a number of whom years ago had a hand in typesetting and publishing the Russian-text version of Beelzebub’s Tales. Given these limitations, I will be sympathetic should the reader of this review decide to read no further. But if the reader persists, here is what emerges: a jot of rumour and a tittle of speculation. As for facts, these are few and far between.
The style of the documentary is the “production house style” that will be familiar to television watchers in Britain and North America. (If I read the Cyrillic correctly, the production house is “RTR Planeta.” The rest of the credits were scrolled too fast to be transcribed.) Everything is slickly packaged, as if by a group of smart producers who had streamlined their bits and pieces of research. Yet a happy feature of their work is the fact that the interviewees are permitted to express their views at some length, without being subjected to needless interruptions. Striking images flash by: the cosmos appears, then the enneagram, then behind it the full face of the Moon, then behind it the moon-face photograph of Gurdjieff. At relevant points, there are still photographs and sequences from “home movies” (some in faded colour, perhaps colorized) of Gurdjieff, Madame de Saltzmann, disciples, workers at the Priory, sequences of movements, whirling dervishes, etc. The stills and clips show a heavy, well-dressed, moustachioed, elder sage, usually smoking. Some of these clips are new to me, others not. There is also news footage of wars and revolutions, as well as a number of dramatic enactments of the casting of death-masks. The musical score sets the mood of menace and occasionally echoes the piano music of the movements. In terms of mainstream television, these effects are well handled and fit the overall tone of the production: moody and mysterious; at times, ominous, with a sense of close-to-cosmic foreboding. The producers court the notion that the theory and practice of the Work are the kith and kin of totalitarianism, rather than its antithesis.
The subject of the documentary is inevitably the Russian connection of George Gurdjieff: mostly the man, but mainly the myth. There is an off-camera narrator and there are eight, on-camera “talking heads.” The narrator is given to making statements like this one: “He has been compared to Count Cagliostro and to Grigori Rasputin, and even with Madame Blavatsky herself.” (Each name is illustrated with a familiar portrait.) Well …. All the “talking heads” are those of men (no women are among them) and their ages range from (I would say) mid-forties to early eighties. Not one of them is identified as a disciple, but all of them appear well informed about the man and the message.
Alexander Pyatigorsky, philosopher; almost-bald, energetic man with a fund of knowledge, quite intense and expressive, the wearer of a blue sweater.
Vladimir Mikushevich, writer; a white-bearded man, bright red cheeks, wearing a bright red sweater, sitting in the midst of a personal library of books.
Medik Sarkisyan, historian; the wearer of a white shirt, a sensitive-looking man, a professional scholar.
Arshak Manukyan, director, Merkurov Museum, Gumri; thoughtful man casually dressed, at the museum of which he seems to be curator.
Arkady Rovner, specialist in gnosticism; scholarly, careful; white hair, red sweater.
Sergei Moskalev, researcher; doleful, stolid, dressed all in black.
Andrei Suhomlinov, police colonel; heavy-set, rather porcine, direct in manner.
Collectively they establish the following timeline and storyline: Gurdjieff is a perplexing figure of a man who may or may not have possessed paranormal powers. He appeared out of the Caucasus, may have personally known the young Joseph Stalin, travelled in the East, taught what he had learned to pupils in Moscow and St. Petersburg, left Russia during the war, may have engaged in espionage with Beria, turned up in Constantinople, opened an institute in Fontainebleau, and died in Paris. He and his teaching seem to have unexpected connections with Stalin and Adolf Hitler and their totalitarian regimes. The truth will never, ever be known.
Each interviewee offers a fact or a fiction, an opinion or an option.
Here, for each contributor, is a collation of such remarks, probably duplicating the order in which each was questioned by the unseen interrogator.
Pyatigorsky: “He was a man from another plane of consciousness.” He had “spiritual intutition.” “The only other person I would put on this level is Krishnamurti. Perhaps no one else.” All his life “he mixed with God knows who,” that is, people of all classes, races, religions, politics, etc. References to “Sarmoung” are references to “a place of sacred knowledge and we can call it a symbolic reality.” What did Gurdjieff use or take? What did he originate? “He took something from Buddhism, something from Gnostic Christianity, but most of all he took from the personal philosophy of Georgi Ivanovitch. Ninety percent is from Gurdjieff himself.” Pyatigorsky goes on to say that during his stay in Germany, Gurdjieff had students, and “among them were future members of the SS. Gurdjieff generally did not discriminate among men.” One of his students it seems was Karl-Heinrich von Stulpnagel, in later years a German general.
Mikushevich: “We are saying Gurdjieff, but we have Stalin in mind “or vice-versa.” “Gurdjieff was able to influence politicians because he was outside politics.” Gurdjieff and Stalin and even Hitler have features in common. “Stalin began his career as a poet, and Hitler as a painter. They took from Gurdjieff a method that appeared to be irresistible and flawless: the way to build a New Man.” The name “Sarmoung” comes from ancient Iranian and refers to “the king of the birds worshiped in ancient Iran as a superior being.” The original word was “simurg” and it means either “one bird” or “thirty birds” associated with the mountain of Kaf, “where he acquired secret knowledge in one of the dervish retreats to “a monastery hidden in the mountains.” Telepathy, hypnosis, and clairvoyance are some of the “mighty powers of this world.” Mikushevich refers to the early life of Stalin who studied at the same seminary as Gurdjieff. “He was expelled for participation in some kind of esoteric secret, maybe a kind of sect of Yezidis. The idea was the same as Gurdjieff’s. Stalin came to his main aim in life under the influence of Gurdjieff. The main idea was that in the world everything is predetermined and evil is overcome by evil.” Mikushevich equates the Institute for the Harmonious Development of Man with “the features of the Sarmoung brotherhood” and refers to Gurdjieff in terms of “the staretz tradition” in Orthodox Christianity. At the Priory, Gurdjieff recreated the traditions he knew: “Gurdjieff forces people to spy on other people and to tell on each other. Essentially he creates the birth-place, the model, of the totalitarian state which flourished in the Twentieth Century.” He added, “The main doctrine of Stalin emerged either under the influence of or in interaction with Gurdjieff. This is the famous idea of ‘multiple personalities and ‘man is a machine.” Mikushevich says, with respect to Gurdjieff’s views on the role of the Moon in human affairs, “There are rumours that Hitler was acquainted with this doctrine of Gurdjieff. Essentially this idea of a man as a machine is the foundation of any totalitarian regime. Gurdjieff is the inspiration of totalitarianism. He is a guru of totalitarianism, despite the fact that he himself was not interested in politics.” Mikushevich talks about Karl Haushofer and his geopolitical views because “he was acquainted with the experiences of Gurdjieff in Tibet. They tried to discover the true Aryan race in Tibet, and in the faces of Tibetans to find features of Nordic people.” Mikushevich refers to Haushofer, who was a member of the Thule Society, as “a student of Gurdjieff.”
Sarkisyan:
He relates the story that in “the ancient Armenian capital, Ani, Gurdjieff found an ancient manuscript in which there was mention of a mysterious brotherhood of Sarmoung residing far to the East.”
Sarkisyan tells a peculiar story about “a train with money … it entered a tunnel but did not come out “it is said that Gurdjieff caused to appear some kind of mirage.” He then refers to Gurdjieff’s cousin, the sculptor Sergei Merkurov, whose specialty was the preparation of death-masks. Sarkisyan says that what Gurdjieff offered was “harmonic philosophical thinking” and “the understanding of life.” “Why are we here. Who are we? This is a cosmic understanding of the world.” Sarkisyan goes on to discuss the relationship between Gurdjieff and Stalin. “In Tbilisi, they studied in the same seminary, and lived in the same house that belonged to an uncle of Gurdjieff. Later on, Stalin quit the seminary and skipped out without paying the rent. The relationship between them is a fact.”
Manukyan: Merkurov was academically trained, was received in Russian Orthodox circles, was commissioned by wealthy Russians, including the Communist Party, and was able to move with ease in Masonry. Among the Masons was Prince Bebutov, founder of the Astreya Lodge, whose house on Rozhdestvenskyy Boulevard, replete with symbols hidden in its ornamented facade, was familiar to Gurdjieff. Merkurov equates members of Bebutov’s circle with the “Seekers of Truth.” “Bebutov practised magic and spiritualistic séances. Politics and mysticism were to him two branches of the same tree. Maybe because of this, the returning traveller from Asia, Gurdjieff, evoked his sympathy. He made another trip to the East with Bebutov. This time to Istanbul.” There, about 1908, he apparently met with Turkish Masons who had overthrown the Turkish Sultan. “Among the European guests of the Turkish revolutionaries was a German, Rudolf von Sebottendorf.” He was a dervish and Gurdjieff studied with him. Ten years later, in Germany, Sebottendorf created the Thule Society, about which much is written, especially its influence on future founders of the Nazi Party. One of its symbols was the swastika. “Maybe this is where the legend originates that Georgi Ivanovich showed the Nazi founders this very important symbol of the future tyranny. However, the origin of this symbol has more to do with Helena Blavatsky she put the swastika on the emblem of the Theosophical Society which she founded. Later on it was copied on the standards of the Nazis.” [It is apparent that Manukyan has never heard about the Canadian connection with the Nazi symbol: It came from the mining community of Swastika, Ontario, now part of Kirkland Lake, and was conveyed to Hitler personally by the Unity Mitford “email the reviewer for further particulars.] Manukyan, an authority on death-masks, describes the story of Merkurov’s mask of Lenin and also his proposal for a 150-metre-high statue of Lenin. He adds, “Soon thereafter, some of Gurdjieff’s colleagues from the United Work Friendship founded another secret society, United Work Brotherhood. Its members included highly placed agents of OGPU/NKVD and in particular the omnipotent and omniscient head of this organization, Gleb Bokiy, member of the Central Committee and employee of the Ministry of Foreign Relations. Perhaps they wanted the guru to return to the USSR. When Gregori Ivanovich was on a lecture tour around the United States, he was offered the chance to visit the Soviet Union and to start working on studies of longevity in the All-Union Institute of Experimental Medicine. At the last moment Gurdjieff changed his mind. The visit was cancelled. The correspondence with his cousin suddenly ended.” It seems there is some evidence for this assertion and it is to be found in documents about the United Work Brotherhood in the archives of the Central Committee in which Alexander Barchenko, “professor of experimental medicine, parapsychologist,” wrote: “Gurdjieff, like myself, studied ancient science.” Apparently Barchenko tried to arrange an expedition with the help of the OGPU to “the secret country of Shambhala. He counted on discovering their ancient knowledge on telepathy and parapsychology. The expedition never took place. [Much scholarship has been expended on the German expeditions that really did take place.] All the members of United Work Brotherhood were executed.” Manukyan waxes eloquent about the role in mans life played by the present Moon “there being three previous lunar bodies “according to the theories of Hanns Harbiger, accepted or at least countenanced to some extent by the SS and the Nazi Party.
Rovner: This interviewee is knowledgeable about the enneagram. “This is a totally new figure, a symbol revealed or brought from an unknown source by Gurdjieff.” Rovner is also knowledgeable about Karl-Heinrich von Stulpnagel, future German general, who is said to be a student of Gurdjieff in Germany. Later, apparently, he headed the German occupation of Paris, and still later he took part in Staufenbergs attempted assassination of Hitler. In a remarkable incident, if it took place, Rovner describes Gurdjieff, “a short fat bald man,”
standing outside the SS building “on Felishate” in Paris. Rovner and Pyatigorsky jointly set the scene and tell the tale:
Gurdjieff kicks Stulpnagel, who is emerging from the SS building with his phalanx of bodyguards, and yells, “Remember! Remember!”
Stulpnagel cries in a wild voice: “Teacher! Teacher!”
They hug and kiss. “Teacher! How wonderful! I am delighted! We will talk, day and night!”
Pyatigorsky refers to this as “a well-known yogic technique: immediate self-remembrance.” Pyatigorsky concludes, “Gurdjieff considered this the basis of his system.” [Reassuringly, the Russian word heard for “remember” is “recollection,” an interesting instance of universal expression!]
Rovner is bothered by Gurdjieff’s automobile accident of 1948, but Pyatigorsky is not for the reason that Gurdjieff was known to the French police as a “speeder,” and concluded, “I am an ordinary man. He was absolutely extraordinary.”
Bastenaire: Dervish schools are mentioned. “These are people who have always lived isolated from the historical process. This is how they preserved methods that have ancient historical roots, by my estimation five or six thousand years old. They are peaceful people, people who dance, people who perform heroic deeds. A heroic deed is something that can be accomplished by a person who goes ‘beyond himself.’”
Bastenaire concludes, “The Gurdjieff teaching can be useful in the contemporary world because Gurdjieff could be a mediator between Islamic and Christian worlds, which at present cannot understand each other. Gurdjieff is a bridge.”
Moskalev: In formulating his system, Gurdjieff took some components from mysticism (including notions about the nature of the divine, about harmony, about psychology, about the physical body) but he focused his attention on psychology. “How are you able to be with yourself, and be with others? This was very much needed. So he started his work here.” Moskalev is surprisingly specific: “He developed certain instruments with which a man can deal with his own psychology. Simple things like not expressing negative emotions so that they do not take root, observing one’s own internal state, self-remembering was what it was called. These instruments turned out to be very effective.”
Suhomlinov: The police officer discusses the political and military situations in Baku in early 1918. “It is quite a complicated question who seized power.” It seems that Stalin was preoccupied with the situation in Azerbaijan and the Caucasus generally, and so was intelligence agent Laventri Beria.
So much for the “talking heads.” The voice of the faceless narrator supplies the continuity and adds a few inflections of his own. Here, accumulatively, is what the narrator has to say, presumably courtesy of the unidentified scriptwriter:
“People have maintained that Gurdjieff held a secret power over the leaders of political dictatorships. Some have said that he helped Hitler in selecting the swastika as a symbol for the Nazi Party. Gurdjieff left behind a trial of unexpected tales connected to Stalin and Beria.” [This is statement, conjecture, and speculation for which there exists no evidence that would satisfy a jury.] “Georgi Ivanovich Gurdjieff was not an ordinary person.” One instance of this is the fact, as stated, that his cousin Sergei Merkurov was led to create Gurdjieff’s death-mask despite the fact that “Merkurov had no idea that at this time Gurdjieff had been in an accident that nearly cost him his life.” The narrator describes the subjects ancestry but states that “Gurdjieff did not mention that his familys roots dated back to the Byzantine Emperor Palaeologus (Manuel II Palaeologus).” He refers to formative influences with a “garnak,” as an “evil spirit” is known in Azerbaijan. He went on his search for knowledge and when he returned “he wanted to become head of some movement which he regarded as originating in Afghanistan …. In this period of his life, Gurdjieff hinted that he was a student of dervishes, Muslim mystics who have developed tremendous will and power of body and spirit.” Gurdjieff was a remarkable teacher, but a few points are made that sound silly: “Impressions of meeting Gurdjieff were so powerful that many students, even just after a few lessons, considered themselves to be in continuous telepathic contact with the teacher. This was a hypnosis of tremendous force and tremendous personal power.” [Perhaps the root of this generalization is Ouspensky’s experience recorded in In Search.] An attempt is made to focus on a passage in Laventi Berias history of the Bolsheviks in the Trans-Caucasus concerning Stalins false passport made out in the name of “Prince Gaioz Nizharadze,” a name mentioned in Meetings with Remarkable Men. “Gurdjieff and Stalin began together in the Tiflis seminary. Both would-be priests were enamoured with one aim: revolution.” According to the narrator, “Gurdjieff in dervish clothes escorted Stalin in crossing through Armenian villages from Azerbaijan into Georgia. There was an operation under way that required the participation of Stalin and Gurdjieff. The dervish and the future leader tried to thwart these plans. Among the people ensuring the success of the mission was an agent of counterintelligence … Lavrenti Beria.” Much is made of the Azerbaijan party Musavat, subsequently deemed counter-revolutionary, and Gurdjieff’s damaging knowledge of Beria’s involvement with it. The narrator states that Gurdjieff formed the United World Friendship Party in the Caucasus and then left for Constantinople and ultimately for France. “His followers included not just Russian emigres but numerous Englishmen who sought in his occult teaching their own spiritual way in a world shattered by the war and social upheavals.”
Apparently, Gurdjieff continued to correspond with Merkurov, despite his favoured status as a Soviet sculptor, until 1935. “Gurdjieff persistently refused to name those who together with him founded the Society of Seekers of Truth. However, one of his associates is known. He is Karl Haushofer. He is the founder of Geopolitics and one of the prominent ideologues of the Third Reich. There were articles in the press about his trips with Gurdjieff to Tibet in 1903-08.” Gurdjieff was as mysterious in Paris as he was everywhere else. The narrator says, “The liberation of Paris and the end of the war did not bring peace to Gurdjieff. Students who surrounded him still noticed strange things in his manners and behaviour. He still hid something and did not tell the whole truth. It is a general opinion that he did not disclose everything to his students.” There were reasons for this.
“Unfortunately he inherited a very troublesome and gigantic household. The work of Gurdjieff was not a secret to Stalin. Intelligence agents informed Stalin of the publication of the book All and Everything.” What follows is the most remarkable incident described during the course of the documentary:
“One of the personages in that book was the allegorical Lentrohamsanin, the chief cause of the destruction of the most sacred works. Stalin read in the book that the soul of Lentrohamsanin is now residing on the planet of Eternal Retribution, where the main torture is suffering remorse of conscience, accompanied by understanding that it will never end. Stalin quickly deciphered the first part of the word Lentrohamsanin. Lenin-Trotsky … but who is Hamsanin? The master of the Kremlin quickly lifted the telephone receiver. Find Georgi Gurdjieff! The invisible signals and orders flew ahead. A telephone rang in Stalin’s office. A familiar voice slavishly said, Be at ease, Koba. Gurdjieff died last year in France in the American Hospital in Neuilly. Did he say anything before he died? asked Stalin grimly. Yes. He said, “I leave you in a difficult situation.”
The narrator concluded, enigmatically: “On his death bed he convinced his students that he will always be with them, that he will never leave them. They wanted to believe in the immortality of the sage, but the physical flesh obeyed the laws of nature …. So finally, who was Georgi Gurdjieff? A chosen one, member of the esoteric circle of secret rules of the world? A teacher of dances? A hypnotist? Or an inventor of a technology for the remarking of man, which in the hands of despots and tyrants became an instrument to control the mass consciousness. Maybe only Gurdjieff himself understood the true aim and purpose of his work. For us, Gurdjieff will remain a mystery which we will not be able to solve, ever.”
It is true that the mystery, enigma, or puzzle will long remain one that will continue to haunt those men and women who are concerned with “the psychology of man’s possible evolution.” The documentary does, uniquely, suggest that members of the Society of Seekers of Truth may be known and identified, for they are historical figures. It suggests that a number of them distinguished themselves as Monarchists, Fascists, Communists, and Traditionalists.
The thesis of the documentary “to the extent that it has a consistent one “is that Gurdjieff was something of an agent-provocateur whose life and work, if understandable at all, may be viewed in light of the political philosophies, the psychological theories, and the intrigues of his day in the context of Eastern Europe.
John Robert Colombo is known as the Master Gatherer in Canada for his innumerable anthologies of lore and literature. He has published three book-length studies of the life and work of the metaphysical writer Denis Saurat. Earlier this year, he hosted a six-part, thirty-minute, television series titled Unexplained Canada which is currently in reruns on the Space Channel.
Audio: Meetings With Remarkable Men
Lamenting the stupidfication of western man in Thus Spake Zarathustra Nietzsche said “they vomit up their bile and call it newspapers.” Here; Gurdjieff, the devils (Stalin) own guru, tells you all the harm “journalism” has done to the human race… Meetings With Remarkable Men 1 Introduction
The Stalinists you are up against, and stop saying Bolsheviks Stalin dispatched of Trotsky with a hammer, don’t believe in a soul. However they do believe in an immortal substance accrued during the course of a lifetime. Gurdjieff explains: Meetings With Remarkable Men 2 My Father
Gurdjieff, explaining education, and mind you both him and Stalin lived together when they attended the same seminary school in Tbilisi, and what it means to be a man and a woman: Meetings With Remarkable Men 3 My First Tutor
Was Captain Pogossian actually Rudolf Freiherr von Sebottendorff, alias of Adam Alfred Rudolf Glauer. Orage thinks so, we can put them together as guests of the Young Turks in 1908 in revolutionary Istanbul but remember we write fiction now… Meetings With Remarkable Men 5 Mr X or Captain Pogossian
These guys were reading the same books on which CG Jung based his career in their original languages in Tbilisi, Gurdjieff was fluent in eighteen languages yet in his own words he was a novice compared to Abram Yelov:Meetings With Remarkable Men 6 Abram Yelov
The Sarmoung brotherhood, stray dogs, stray drunks and stray princes. Russian historian Vladimir Mikushevich says “Gurdjieff is the inspiration of totalitarianism. He is a guru of totalitarianism…” Meetings With Remarkable Men 7 Prince Yuri Lubovedsky
Jeder, der dies liest und meine Arbeit in meinem Buch, in Veterans Today, im Nexus Magazine oder einfach auf unserem Blog gelesen hat – der inzwischen fast eine Million Mal aufgerufen wurde – weiß, dass ich Schriftsteller und kein Journalist bin. Ich schreibe diesen Newsletter nur, weil es offensichtlich die gleiche alte Geschichte ist: niemand sonst kann es. Journalismus ist ein Beruf, keine Kunst. Die Aufgabe des Journalisten ist es, die Fakten zu liefern. Schriftsteller, echte Schriftsteller, lehren die Fakten zu verstehen. Sie bringen bei, wie man sieht, und sie sind nie so grob, für den Leser die Schlussfolgerungen ziehen. Wenn dieser mit der Lektüre fertig ist, sollte er selbst in der Lage sein sich einen Reim zu machen.
Ich muss also gleich zu Beginn gestehen, dass ich mich davor scheue, diesen Job zu tun. Es ist ein bisschen so, wie Michelangelo sich fühlte, striche er ein Haus an, oder Axel Rose, sänge er in einem Chor. Ich beginne mit dem, was auf der Hand liegt: mit meinen persönlichen Beobachtungen. Ich bin gerade von einer Reise nach New York zurückgekehrt und habe den Verdacht, dass ich mich bei einem Klempner auf der Baustelle meines Cousins mit COVID infiziert habe. Der Klempner war vollständig geimpft, wurde aber am Tag nach meinem Baustellenbesuch mit COVID ins Krankenhaus eingeliefert. Zwei Wochen später befindet er sich immer noch in Quarantäne. Ich habe noch nie flachgelegen; tatsächlich bin ich gerade achthundert Meilen zurück nach Tennessee gefahren (Am 9. September, drei Wochen nach der Infektion, meldet mein Cousin, dass der Klempner, Gretar Liefsson von Gretar’s Plumbing, immer noch todkrank ist. Mir hingegen geht es gut …).
Nach dem Kontakt mit Gretar zeigte der Sohn meines Cousins Symptome, noch bevor mein Cousin erfuhr, dass Gretar im Krankenhaus lag. Ein paar Tage später fühlte ich mich sehr müde und hatte ständige Kopf- und Bauchschmerzen, ebenso wie mein Cousin. Der und sein Sohn haben die Krankheit sofort abgeschüttelt, seine Frau und seine Tochter haben sich nie angesteckt, obwohl sie sich in unserer unmittelbaren Nähe befanden.
Die gesamte Familie meines Cousins ist nie geimpft worden und alle hatten bereits COVID, zumindest diejenigen, die letztes Jahr an einem Thanksgiving-Dinner in einem beheizten Zelt teilnahmen, vor allem der Teil, der von Anfang an Maskenträger war. Sie bestanden darauf, dieses Essen, das normalerweise in dem weitläufigen Haus meines Cousins stattfindet, in dem Zelt abzuhalten. Ich glaube, es waren dreißig von zweiunddreißig, die sich am Ende COVID einfingen, darunter mein Cousin, seine Frau, sein Sohn und seine Tochter. Als Gründungsmitglieder von Anthony Faucis Masketieren ließen sich in ihrer Familie natürlich alle impfen, sobald Impfstoffe verfügbar waren. Als ich New York verließ, war mindestens ein halbes Dutzend von ihnen erneut an schweren Fällen von COVID erkrankt.
Israel, mit der höchsten Impfquote der Welt – das Land rühmt sich mit 78 % – hat jetzt eine der höchsten Infektionsraten des Planeten, wobei weit mehr als die Hälfte der schwerkranken Patienten vollständig geimpft sind. Israel hat vor kurzem eine neue Studie veröffentlicht, die noch nicht von Fachleuten geprüft wurde – als ob das etwas bedeutete: Die meisten ihrer Fachkollegen sind nachweislich schwachsinnig. “Diese Studie hat gezeigt, dass die natürliche Immunität einen länger anhaltenden und stärkeren Schutz vor Infektionen, symptomatischen Erkrankungen und Krankenhausaufenthalten bietet, die durch die Delta-Variante von SARS-CoV-2 verursacht werden, verglichen mit der durch die Zweidosis-Impfung BNT162b2 induzierten Immunität.” (1)
Die Lancet-Studie, die viel zu früh durchgeführt wurde, um die Wirksamkeit des Impfstoffs gegen den Delta-Stamm zu berücksichtigen, wird von COVID-Eiferern häufig als Beweis für die Wirksamkeit des Impfstoffs angeführt, weil sie von Fachleuten geprüft wurde. Ganz abgesehen davon, dass das Lancet eine Einrichtung der britischen Regierung ist, einer Regierung, die gerne messerschwingende muslimische Fanatiker importiert um ihre Bürger auf der Straße zu jagen, ist diese Lancet-Studie nichts anderes als ein Sammelsurium von Doppeldeutigkeiten.
Sie hätten in der Lage sein müssen, die gegenseitige Abschottung ihrer Wissenschaftszweige zu überwinden und The Blood of Christoder etwas Ähnliches zu schreiben, um die Welt zu warnen, wofür ihre Wissenschaft verwendet wurde. Stattdessen musste ich einen sechsmonatigen Crashkurs in Mikrobiologie absolvieren, um die Paint it Blue-Artikel zu schreiben, das endgültige Wort über MK Ultra. Ersteres wurde von Millionen gelesen und in mehrere Sprachen übersetzt, hauptsächlich durch den ziemlich heldenhaften Duncan Roads und sein kultiges Nexus Magazine. The Blood of Christ wurde hinterrücks auf Eis gelegt, und jetzt kann jedes empfindungsfähige Wesen auf diesem Planeten erkennen, warum.
Die Lancet-Studie ist nutzlos, weil längst Geschichte. Die Delta-Variante ist ein ganz anderes Spiel, und meine eigenen Beobachtungen, gepaart mit gesundem Menschenverstand, sagen mir, dass der Impfstoff gegen sie wertlos ist. Ich habe in New York viele andere Geschichten über COVID-Erkrankungen bei Geimpften gehört, aber die kann ich nicht verifizieren. Die berühmte Rockgruppe Kiss musste Ende August mindestens vier Konzerte absagen, als zwei der vollständig geimpften Bandmitglieder, Paul Stanley und Gene Simmons, an COVID erkrankten.
Der ikonische Trainer der New England Patriots, Bill Belichick, hat gerade öffentlich erklärt, dass “eine ziemlich große Anzahl von Spielern in der gesamten Liga das Virus hatte und geimpft wurde”. Belichick bewertete die Behauptungen der Medien, dass die Impfung eine Lösung sei, als “widerlegt durch das, was in diesem Jahr in den Football-Trainingslagern passiert.” (2)
Belichick ist nicht der einzige große Football-Trainer der feststellt, dass die Medien lügen und der Impfstoff nicht wirkt. Während Georgia am Samstag sein erstes Heimspiel gegen UAB im Sanford Stadium austrägt, sagte Trainer Kirby Smart [Head Coach der Georgia Bulldogs], dass drei oder vier seiner Spieler mit COVID-19 außer Gefecht gesetzt sind. Smart lehnte es während einer Telefonkonferenz mit Reportern am Montag ab, die Namen der Spieler zu nennen. Es ist nicht bekannt, ob sie für das Match gegen die Blazers am Samstag zur Verfügung stehen werden.
“Ich will ehrlich sein, ich bin so besorgt wie noch nie, denn wir haben drei oder vier Spieler, die COVID mit sich rumtragen, und wir haben ein paar Mitarbeiter, die kürzlich mit COVID unterwegs waren”, sagte Smart. “Wir befinden uns auf dem höchsten Punkt der Kurve. Und wir reden hier über Geimpfte, das sind Leute, die geimpft sind.” (3)
Aber die gekauften Medien tun ihr bösartig Bestes, um die Unwirksamkeit der Impfungen zu verschleiern, und Anekdoten werden, wann immer möglich, eliminiert. Dies gilt anscheinend auch für Staatsoberhäupter. Als der Präsident von Tansania die PCR-Kits und die PCR-Maschine der WHO erhielt, sagte er den WHO-Mitarbeitern: “Also gut, her mit den Abstrichstäbchen.” Er ging hin und nahm Abstriche von einer Frucht, einer Papaya. Er nahm Abstriche von einem Vogel namens African Kware. Er nahm Abstriche von verschiedenen Lebensformen, keine davon ein Mensch, sogar von Autoöl. Er gab den Proben Vor- und Nachnamen, einige stammten von einer dreißigjährigen Frau, andere waren auf den Namen eines fünfundvierzigjährigen Mannes ausgestellt. Er brachte die Abstriche zu den WHO-Mitarbeitern und teilte ihnen mit, sie seien für die Analyse bereit.
Sie ließen die Proben durch die Maschine laufen, und sie kamen positiv raus. Er wies sie darauf hin, wie merkwürdig ihre Ergebnisse seien, und forderte sie auf, das Land zu verlassen und ihre PCR-Kits mitzunehmen. Nachdem er die WHO des Landes verwiesen hatte, veröffentlichte er ein Video, das sich in der ganzen Welt verbreitete. Das war letztes Jahr, einige Monate nach Ausbruch der Pandemie. Nun ist der Präsident von Tansania auf sehr seltsame Weise gestorben, und wir wissen immer noch nicht genau wie. Wir wissen nur, dass es nicht Walt Disney war.
Zwei weitere Präsidenten aus Afrika, die sich nicht an die Anweisungen der WHO halten wollten, starben ebenfalls. Außerdem wurde der Präsident von Haiti vor einem Monat ermordet, weil er nicht wollte, dass Haitianer geimpft werden. Der Präsident von Madagaskar sagte vor zwanzig Tagen öffentlich, dass die WHO ihm siebzig Millionen Dollar für die Impfung von Madagaskar angeboten habe. Zehn Tage später wurde ein Anschlag auf ihn verübt, der ihm fast das Leben kostete. Der Präsident von Weißrussland, ein weiterer Staatschef, der der WHO gegenüber misstrauisch ist, wurde ebenfalls angegriffen und beinahe getötet. (4)
Am Donnerstag dem 26. August gab das japanische Gesundheitsministerium bekannt: “dass in einigen unbenutzten Dosen des Impfstoffs COVID-19 von Moderna Inc. Verunreinigungen gefunden wurden und die Verwendung von rund 1,63 Millionen Dosen aus derselben Produktionslinie zur Vorsicht ausgesetzt wurde.
Mindestens 180.000 potenziell kontaminierte Impfungen wurden bereits in 19 der 47 Präfekturen des Landes, darunter Tokio und Osaka, verabreicht, wie Kyodo News auf der Grundlage von Berichten der örtlichen Behörden berichtet.” (5)
“Die Fremdstoffe wurden seit dem 16. August an acht Impfstellen in fünf Präfekturen – Ibaraki, Saitama, Tokio, Gifu und Aichi – nachgewiesen. Sie wurden in insgesamt 39 Fläschchen gefunden.
Takeda [die Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. ist für den Verkauf und Vertrieb des Impfstoffs in Japan zuständig] meldete sie am Mittwoch dem Ministerium.
Die Zusammensetzung der nur wenige Millimeter großen Fremdkörper ist noch nicht geklärt.
Bei den “kleinen schwarzen Materialien”, die dem Ministerium gemeldet wurden, könnte es sich um metallische Fragmente handeln, sagte einer der leitenden Beamten des Ministeriums.
Takeda hat eine Dringlichkeitsuntersuchung durch Moderna beantragt und fordert gleichzeitig medizinische Einrichtungen und andere Stellen auf, “keine Impfstoffe zu verabreichen, die Anomalien aufweisen, auch nicht solche, die nicht von der Aussetzung betroffen sind.” (6)
Nur vier Tage später: “Zwei japanische Präfekturen setzten am Sonntag vorübergehend die Verabreichung des Moderna Covid-19-Impfstoffs aus, nachdem in mehreren Chargen “fremde Substanzen” entdeckt worden waren.” (7)
“In einer früheren Version dieses Artikels wurde ein Reuters-Bericht zitiert, wonach die japanischen Behörden eine weitere Million Dosen des Moderna-Impfstoffs ausgesetzt haben. In einer korrigierten Version des Artikels heißt es jedoch, nur zwei Regionen hätten beschlossen, ihre Impfungen vorübergehend auszusetzen.” (8)
Unerklärlicherweise kündigte der japanische Premierminister Yoshihide Suga am Freitag, dem 3. September, nach nur einem Jahr im Amt seinen Rücktritt an, nur wenige Wochen vor Japans wichtigen Parlamentswahlen. Es kommt noch besser. “Der Impfstoff-Zar Taro Kono – ein 58-jähriger ehemaliger Außenminister – plant, sich um die LDP-Präsidentschaft zu bewerben …” (9) Die Liberaldemokratische Partei ist Japans vorherrschende politische Gruppierung, und ihr Kandidat wird als Favorit für das Amt des Premierministers gehandelt.
Viele ignorante Amerikaner können wohl über was aus Tansania und Haiti kommt, einfach mit den Schultern wegzucken, aber Japan und Israel sind zwei der wissenschaftlich am weitesten entwickelten Nationen der Welt. Westliche Journalisten, die die jüngsten Ereignisse in diesen Ländern, die Fragen zu dem besagten Impfstoff aufwerfen, ignorieren oder sogar vertuschen, während sie zugleich dafür plädieren, dass zwölfjährige Kinder geimpft werden, sind nicht nur eklatant pflichtverletzend, sondern beteiligen sich wissentlich an einer tödlichen weltweiten Verschwörung.
Ja, ich habe es gesagt, eine Verschwörung, eine Verschwörung, die bereits eine Million Todesopfer gefordert hat, Tendenz steigend. Ich kann mir nicht einmal eine Strafe vorstellen, die geeignet wäre, diesen Verbrechern gerecht zu werden. Diejenigen, die ihnen Glauben schenken, beteiligen sich aus Unwissenheit an deiner Ermordung und der deiner Kinder, sowie an derjenigen ihres eigenen Nachwuchses. Sie sind es, die in Lager gesteckt gehören, zu ihrem eigenen Wohl und zum Wohl der menschlichen Art.
Als ich in New York war, hörte ich eine Geschichte nach der anderen über die Nebenwirkungen dieses Impfstoffs, alles Erfahrungen aus erster Hand von Menschen, die mir seit Jahren bekannt sind. Einer der Söhne meines Cousins, den ich kenne, seit er fünf Jahre alt ist, musste sich für das College impfen lassen. Er erzählte mir, dass er drei Stunden nach der Injektion Krampfanfälle bekam. Er musste sofort ins Krankenhaus gebracht werden und fühlte sich eine Woche später immer noch nervös und aufgekratzt.
Eine Erklärung für die Schäden, die der Impfstoff bei seinen Opfern anrichtet, erscheint besonders plausibel. Seine Wirkung beruht darauf, dass er über das Lymphsystem im Körper verteilt wird. Die winzigen Kapillaren, aus denen dieses System besteht, werden durch die Spike-Proteine, die der Impfstoff erzeugen soll, geschädigt, und aus den daraus resultierenden Mini-Blutgerinnseln bilden sich Blockaden, wenn das Immunsystem versucht, diese zu reparieren. Um das zu beweisen, muss innerhalb von vier bis sieben Tagen nach der Impfung des Opfers ein spezieller Dimer-Test durchgeführt werden, der nur kürzlich gebildete Blutgerinnsel nachweist. Dr. Charles Hoffe aus British Columbia stellte bei der Durchführung des D-Dimer-Tests fest, dass “62 % seiner eigenen Patienten, denen eine mRNA-Spritze verabreicht wurde, positiv sind.” (10)
Er ist schonungslos: “Die Blutgerinnsel, von denen wir hören und von denen die Medien behaupten sie seien sehr selten, sind die großen Blutgerinnsel, welche Schlaganfälle verursachen und auf CT-Scans, MRTs usw. zu sehen sind. Die Gerinnsel, von denen ich spreche, sind von mikroskopischer Größe und zu klein, um auf einem Scan gefunden zu werden. Sie können daher nur mit dem D-Dimer-Test nachgewiesen werden. “Das Besorgniserregende daran ist, dass es einige Körperteile wie Gehirn, Rückenmark, Herz und Lunge gibt, die sich nicht regenerieren können. Wenn diese Gewebe durch Blutgerinnsel beschädigt werden, sind sie dauerhaft geschädigt.”
Das Ergebnis, so Dr. Hoffe, ist, dass diese Patienten eine so genannte reduzierte Anstrengungstoleranz (RET) haben, was bedeutet, dass sie viel leichter außer Atem kommen als früher (Man sehe diesbezüglich auch die Berichte von Marathonläufen aus der jüngsten Zeit (Anm. d. Übersetzers)). Der Grund dafür ist, dass die Blutgefäße in der Lunge nun verstopft sind. Dies wiederum führt dazu, dass das Herz mehr arbeiten muss, um das Blut gegen einen viel größeren Widerstand durch die Lunge zu befördern.
Dies wird als pulmonale arterielle Hypertonie bezeichnet – hoher Blutdruck in der Lunge, weil das Blut einfach nicht mehr richtig durchkommt. Menschen mit dieser Erkrankung sterben in der Regel innerhalb weniger Jahre an Herzversagen.
Dr. Hoffe warnt traurig: “Diese Spritzen verursachen enorme Schäden, und das Schlimmste steht uns noch bevor.” (11) Von Tucker Carlson und Glen Greeenwald einmal abgesehen, sollten die Talking Heads in den Mainstream-Medien von ihren Kanzeln gezerrt und zu Tode geknüppelt werden, wie die Norweger es mit Robbenbabys zu tun pflegten. Es macht keinen Sinn, Kugeln an den Mördern zu verschwenden, die ihren höchsten Herren ergeben sind. Mit Ausnahme von Duncan Roads und dem Nexus Magazine ist ein Gutteil der großen alternativen Medien ebenfalls auf Linie gebracht worden. Diejenigen, die nicht einschwenkten, sind allzu oft entweder inkompetent, undiszipliniert oder beides. Einige wenige wurden sogar eingeschleust, um den Widerstand zu verwirren. Ich denke dabei an Stew Peters. Wie ein sehr scharfsinniger französischer Gönner von mir bemerkte: “Sprich seinen Namen ein paar Mal aus und du wirst Stu-pid, dümmer …”
Wie ein anderer Gönner sagte: “Jeder, dem die Kontrolleure ein landesweites Publikum erlauben, ist verdächtig.” Da ich mit Leib und Seele für Veterans Today zu schrieb, einem “limited hangout”, wie ihn Chefredakteur Gordon Duff beschrieb, maße ich mir an ebenso viel über die absichtliche Verbreitung von Desinformationen, sogenannte Psy-Ops, zu wissen, wie sonst irgendwer auf der Welt. Eine gute Psy-op beinhaltet so viel Wahrheit, wie der Urheber für zumutbar hält. Das ist eine Kunstform. Ein guter Fischer kann ein Dorf ernähren, ein guter Propagandist eine ganze Nation verführen.
Stupider (zu Deutsch Dümmer, Wortspiel abgeleitet aus Stew Peters, Anm. d. Übersetzers) legte den Köder bereits Ende Juli mit dieser Schlagzeile: EXKLUSIV! Karen Kingston, eine ehemalige Pfizer-Mitarbeiterin und derzeitige Analystin der Pharma- und Medizinprodukteindustrie, hat unwiderlegbare Dokumente vorgelegt, die der GANZEN WELT zugänglich gemacht werden sollten! (12)
Kingstons Dokumentation beweist angeblich eindeutig, dass Graphenoxid in dem Impfstoff enthalten ist – denn wir benötigen Graphen in diesem Impfstoff, um ihn mit dem Arzt Charles Lieber und seinen injizierbaren neuronalen Netzen in Verbindung zu bringen. Dessen Verhaftung Ende Januar 2020, wegen der Leitung des Wuhan-Labors – während er auf der Gehaltsliste des US-Verteidigungsministeriums stand – war der Beginn der COVID-Ära: Da Graphen oder ein Äquivalent vonnöten war, um diese COVID-Ära mit dem Aufkommen von 5G in Verbindung zu bringen, glaubte auch das Jack-Heart-Team einen Tag lang daran. Einer meiner niederländischen Forscher, der seit Anfang 2020 unermüdlich mit einem Team niederländischer Wissenschaftler daran arbeitet, der COVID-Ära ein Ende zu setzen, hat Frau Kingstons Geschichte derart löchrig gemacht, dass dies eigentlich Kingston und dazu noch Stupider hätte töten sollen.
Leider war dies nicht der Fall, und vor kurzem hat Stupider Dr. Paul E. Alexander in den schwelenden COVID-Streit eingeführt. Alexander ist ein kanadischer Gesundheitsforscher und ein ehemaliger Beamter der Trump-Regierung im US-Gesundheitsministerium während des COVID-Fiaskos. Alexander ist sich sicher, dass sein ehemaliger Herr Donald Trump von seiner eigenen “Task Force” in die Irre geführt wurde. Alexander, der als Apologet für Trump auftritt und wie Gunga Din aussieht, klingt wie Dr. Charles Hoffe, der erklärt, dass die Kinder, die geimpft werden, aufgrund von Myokarditis nicht älter als zwanzig bis fünfundzwanzig Jahre werden dürften. Er fährt fort: “Die Impfstoffe sind ein Problem; sie sind ein großes, großes Problem, und wir sehen es an den unerwünschten Nebenwirkungen, die jetzt auftreten…” (13)
“Das Spike-Protein, dessen Aufgabe es eigentlich ist, dem Virus den Garaus zu machen, ist das, was den Schaden in Ihnen verursacht. Und es ist in der Tat eine Gefäßerkrankung, es schädigt die Gefäße des arteriellen Systems. Dieses Spike-Protein ist das, was wir in Sie injizieren. Wir injizieren genetisches Material, umhüllt von diesen Lipid-Nanopartikeln, das Sie auffordert, dieses Spike-Protein zu bilden, auf das Ihr Immunsystem nun reagieren und eine Immunität entwickeln wird. Wir injizieren Ihnen das eigentliche Kernstück des Virus, das die Krankheit verursacht. Und jetzt sehen wir, dass die Impfstoffe versagt haben. Das zeigt sich bei der Delta-Variante, das zeigt sich in Israel, wo fast alle doppelt geimpften Menschen jetzt infiziert sind, das zeigt sich in Großbritannien, das zeigt sich jetzt in den Vereinigten Staaten. Die Impfstoffe funktionieren also nicht, und eine Boosterimfpung vorzuschlagen, wenn man nicht einmal die zweite Impfung in den Griff bekommt und wir all diese Durchbruchsinfektionen haben, ist ein katastrophales Versagen. Und die FDA hat der Öffentlichkeit einen Bärendienst erwiesen, denn sie hat soeben eine Zulassung für einen Impfstoff erteilt, der nicht verfügbar ist, aber die Notfallverwendung für einen verfügbaren, nicht zugelassenen Impfstoff verlängert. Das ist die verdrehteste Sache, die man sich vorstellen kann. Ich glaube, die FDA hat hier versucht, die amerikanische Öffentlichkeit auszutricksen…” (14)
Stupider stellt Alexander dann eine seiner vielgelobten, von ihm selbst als aufschlussreich empfundenen Fragen: “Der Impfstoff, der zur Verfügung steht, für den die Notfallgenehmigung oder die Anwendungsgenehmigung verlängert wurde, ist dieser Impfstoff nicht von der FDA zugelassen? Die FDA-Zulassung gilt für einen Impfstoff, der noch nicht verfügbar ist?” Alexanders Antwort ist eindeutig: “Richtig, es ist also ein Trick, damit CNN und die Medien rund um die Uhr berichten können, dass der Impfstoff jetzt von der FDA zugelassen ist. Das ist gelogen!” (15)
Stupider verpasst während seines Interviews mit Trumps Top-Mann im Gesundheitsministerium keinen seiner Einsätze. Und er entschuldigt sich auch nicht im Geringsten bei seinem scheinbar aus dem Nichts entstandenen landesweiten Publikum. Zwei Tage zuvor hatte er erneut die professionelle Desinformationsvermittlerin von Pfizer, Karen Kingston, ins Spiel gebracht. Dies, nachdem wir und sogar Zuckerbergs chinesische “Faktenchecker” vom Wuhan Lab sie letzten Monat als Lügnerin entlarvt hatten. Diesmal war Kingston darauf aus, die FDA-Zulassung für ihren nunmehr verdeckten Arbeitgeber zu bejubeln: Impfstoff-Pfizer. “Unmissverständlich” sagte sie, der Impfstoff von Pfizer sei jetzt zugelassen, und legte ihre üblichen gefälschten Unterlagen vor. Aber Stupider und seine nicht ganz so leichtgläubigen Zuhörer hatten auch Grund zur Freude. Laut Kingston würde die Entscheidung der FDA Pfizer vor Gericht für ihre Giftpille haftbar machen. Es sei “Schachmatt für Big Pharma”. (16)
Ähnlich wie die illegitime Biden-Administration ist auch dies völliger Blödsinn. Die FDA hat das amerikanische Volk verraten und für ihren wahren Sponsor, Pfizer, eine Mogelpackung präsentiert. Die biopharmazeutische Industrie stellt fünfundsiebzig Prozent der FDA-Finanzierung. Nach der FDA-Entscheidung “hat Pfizer absolut keine Haftung!” Das Zitat stammt von meinem anderen Cousin, dem bekannten Aktivisten in den Alternativen Medien Sage of Quay, der Kingston gleich am nächsten Tag nach Dr. Alexander demontierte. Sage geht dabei tief ins Detail. Bitte hört und seht euch sein Video an:
Die FDA, lange Zeit der Fluch der Kräuterkundler und einer über Jahrhunderte sich bewährten traditionellen Medizin, hat nun die Grenze überschritten und Hochverrat begangen. Jedes Mitglied dieser Organisation hat sich selbst und die Gewalt, die ihm vom amerikanischen Volk gewährt wurde, zu einem Instrument des globalen Völkermords gemacht. Sie hatten gerade hier ihren Prozess und jeder einzelne von ihnen wartet nun auf seine Hinrichtung. Wenn Amerika Mabeline hinrichten kann, weil sie zu viel Methamphetamin geraucht und unwissentlich ihre Oma erschossen hat, dann sollte es das auch bei diesen abscheulichen Kreaturen so halten.
Diese Verbrecher haben die feste Absicht, eure Kinder zu ermorden, und wie in den biblischen Tagen von einst werdet ihr, ihre Eltern, sie Moloch opfern, wenn ihr sie zur “Impfung” bringt. Einige der Klügeren sind bereits auf der Flucht: “Marion Gruber, Direktorin des Office of Vaccines Research & Review der FDA und 32 Jahre Veteranin der Behörde, wird Ende Oktober gehen, und der stellvertretende Direktor des OVRR, Phil Krause, der seit mehr als einem Jahrzehnt bei der FDA tätig ist, wird im November ausscheiden. Die Nachricht, über die BioCentury zuerst berichtete, ist ein schwerer Schlag für das Vertrauen in die Fähigkeit der Behörde, Impfstoffe zu regulieren.
Die wie eine Bombe einschlagende Ankündigung kommt zu einem besonders kritischen Zeitpunkt, da die Aufsichtsbehörde über Boosterimpfungen und Kinderimpfungen berät. Die Abgänge kommen auch deshalb, weil die Verwaltung vor kurzem die Überprüfung der Boosterimpfungen durch die FDA überstürzt hat und ankündigte, sie könnten in der Woche des 20. September verfügbar sein …”(17)
Jedes fühlende Wesen weiß, dass Impfstoffe Menschen töten und verstümmeln. Die Geschichten, auf die sie ihre Schlussfolgerung stützen, stammen nicht aus dem Internet, sondern sind Informationen aus erster Hand, genau wie meine eigenen Erfahrungsberichte. Auch Dr. Alexander ist nicht aus dem Internet. Er ist einer der führenden Köpfe zum Thema COVID im Dienst des rechtmäßigen Bewohners des Weißen Hauses: Donald Trump.
Dass das Militär tatenlos zusieht und zulässt, dass dieser Usurpator einfach diktatorische Befugnisse übernimmt, ist der größte Verrat an einem Volk durch die eigene Armee in der gesamten aufgezeichneten Geschichte. Jetzt will der senile Bösewicht – der, wenn es ihm passt, auf Knien vor anderen Staatsoberhäuptern kriecht, bei Zeremonien für die Familien von Marinesoldaten, die bei der Ausführung seiner Befehle gestorben sind, ungeduldig auf die Uhr schaut, und wenn er redet die Hälfte der Zeit vergisst, was er sagt – Kindern ein Mittel injizieren, das sie letztendlich töten wird. Und trotzdem haben sie nichts unternommen?
Obwohl es zahlreiche Beweise dafür gibt, hat noch niemand abschließend Graphenoxid in diesem Impfstoff nachgewiesen. Rasterelektronenmikroskope haben fremdes Material aufgespürt, ebenso wie die Japaner, aber zweifellos wird es ein Labor wie das in Los Alamos brauchen, um dieses eindeutig zu identifizieren. Es sind keine Amateure, die diesen Angriff auf die menschliche Art gestartet haben. Sie haben sich vorher vergewissert, dass alles in Position war, bevor sie es taten. Sie haben alle intriganten Schurken in der Regierung und in den Medien gekauft, die sie finden konnten, und dazu noch eine Medizinergilde, der schon immer weit mehr Respekt entgegengebracht wurde, als sie verdiente. Ehrlich gesagt, war die Menschheit ohne sie gesünder.
“Dieses Foto zeigt einen Trypanosoma-Parasiten von etwa 50 Mikrometern Länge, der in dem sogenannten Pfizer-“Impfstoff” gefunden wurde. Er besteht aus Kohlenstoff, Sauerstoff, Chrom, Schwefel, Aluminium, Chlorid und Stickstoff.” (18)
Im Impfstoff von Pfizer ist somit ein Parasit nachgewiesen worden. Und Parasiten sind der neueste Stand der Gedankenkontrolle:
Es ist bekannt, dass Krankheitserreger den Körper ihres Wirts durch die molekulare Manipulation von Chemikalien übernehmen können. Im extremsten Fall verwandelt der Pilz Ophiocordyceps unilateralis, der manchmal auch als Zombiepilz bezeichnet wird, seinen Wirt, eine Ameise, in einen Zombie, der nur noch lebt, um dem Lebenszyklus seines Parasiten zu dienen. Die Ameise lässt ihr Leben mit ihrer Kolonie im Baum zurück, um an den feuchten, dunklen Orten des Regenwaldbodens zu leben, als wäre sie ein Pilz. Schließlich krabbelt sie auf einen Ast, krallt sich mit ihren Kieferzangen an einem Blatt fest und stirbt, während der Pilz ihren Kopf durchbricht und aussport. Die parasitischen Würmer Spinochordodes tellinii und Paragordius tricuspidatus zwingen ihren Wirt, die Grille oder Heuschrecke, in ein Gewässer zu springen und zu ertrinken. Der Wurm verlässt dann den an der Wasseroberfläche treibenden Leichnam des Insekts, um wegzuschwimmen und sich einen Partner zu suchen. Untersuchungen von P. tricuspidatus haben gezeigt, dass er Effektormoleküle produziert, die das zentrale Nervensystem der Grille manipulieren. S. tellinii reproduziert Proteine, die in den Signalwegen des Insekts verwendet werden. Diese chemischen Signale, mit denen der Parasit den Körper seines Wirts kapert, werden als mimetische Moleküle bezeichnet. (68) Wissenschaftliche Studien haben gezeigt, dass Stechmücken, die Plasmodium falciparum in sich tragen, ein parasitäres Protozoa das Malaria verursacht, nicht nur über einen geschärften Räuberinstinkt verfügen – sondern auch mit dreifacher Wahrscheinlichkeit von menschlichen Gerüchen angezogen werden. (69) Toxoplasma gondii ist das parasitäre Protozoa, das Toxoplasmose verursacht, eine Krankheit, die überall auf der Welt vorkommt. Schätzungen gehen davon aus, dass über 30 % der menschlichen Bevölkerung weltweit infiziert sind. Erwiesenermaßen verändert T. gondii das Verhalten seines Zwischenwirts, eines infizierten Nagers den es als Vektor nutzt, um dessen Chancen zu erhöhen, von einer Katze gefressen zu werden; seinem Zielwirt und dem einzigen Tier, in dem er sich sexuell fortpflanzen kann. Infizierte Nagetiere verlieren jegliche Angst vor Katzen, ihrem größten natürlichen Feind.
Beim Menschen wird die Infektion mit T. gondii durch das Immunsystem in Schach gehalten, und die Toxoplasmose verläuft in der Regel asymptomatisch. Studien haben jedoch einen starken Zusammenhang zwischen Schizophrenie und dieser Krankheit nachgewiesen. Einige Studien haben gezeigt, dass Frauen, die an Toxoplasmose erkrankt sind, eher dazu neigen, ihre Ehemänner zu betrügen, während Männer leichter aggressiv sind und beide Geschlechter weisen zudem eine langsamere Reaktionszeit auf. (70)
Die Bakterien können ihren Wirt sogar noch subtiler manipulieren. Das lateinische Wort “subtilis” bedeutet “fein gesponnen”, “genau”, “gründlich”, “streng” und “präzise”. Bakteriologen vermuten nun, dass die Mikrobiota im Magen des Menschen tatsächlich Verhaltensmuster in ihren menschlichen Wirten diktieren könnte, die eher dazu führen, dass die Bakterien ihre benötigten Nährstoffe erhalten. (71)
Those Who Would Arouse Leviathan is available from Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
Irgendetwas läuft beim Menschen furchtbar schief, vor allem hier in den USA, wo man unbekümmert davon spricht, die Ungeimpften in Konzentrationslager zu sperren und ihnen Nahrung und Lebensgrundlage zu entziehen. Sie sind schlimmer als Hollywood-Nazis, und niemand erhebt seine Stimme. Institutionen, die eigens gegründet wurden, um gegen diese Art von autoritärem Alptraum zu schützen, unterstützen sie jetzt sogar. Ikonische Journalisten wie Glen Greenwaldsind fassungslos:
In einem Meinungsartikel in der New York Times von dieser Woche hat die Gruppe ihre Ansichten völlig revidiert und argumentiert nun, dass Impfstoffmandate den Bürgerrechten zugute kämen und die körperliche Autonomie “nicht absolut ist”.
Protest für medizinische Freiheit und Wahlfreiheit in Minnesota, Stop the mandates, Minnesota citizens demand informed consent and transparency in matters of health choice and medical freedom without coercion.(Foto: Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
Die American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hat in dieser Woche selbst viele ihrer schärfsten Kritiker überrascht, als sie im Namen der COVID-Bekämpfung Zwangsprogramme und andere staatliche Mandate nachdrücklich verteidigte. “Weit davon entfernt, sie zu gefährden, fördern Impfzwänge sogar die Bürgerrechte”, verkündete die ACLUauf ihrem Twitter-Account und fügte hinzu, dass “Impfzwänge auch diejenigen schützen, die bei ihrer Arbeit regelmäßig mit der Öffentlichkeit zu tun haben.”
Wenn es Sie überrascht hat, dass die ACLU verkündete,“Impfzwängen” und “Impfmaßnahmen” dienten dem Wohl der Bürgerrechte – wobei die Regierung Erwachsene dazu zwingt, sich Medikamente in den Körper zu injizieren, die sie nicht wollen – der von zwei ihrer leitenden Anwälte verfasste und von der Gruppe beworbene Meinungsartikelin der New York Timeswar noch extremer. Der Artikel beginnt mit der rhetorischen Frage: “Verletzen Impfvorschriften die Bürgerrechte?” Die ACLU-Anwälte stellen fest, dass “einige, die die Impfung verweigert haben, dies behaupten” und erklären dann: “Wir sind anderer Meinung.” In der Stellungnahme werden dann verschiedene Einwände aus der Perspektive der Bürgerrechtsvertreter gegen Pflichten und staatlichen Zwang untersucht – Kleinigkeiten halt wie körperliche Unversehrtheit und Freier Wille – wobei die ACLU-Vertreter sich auf ein autoritäres Klischee nach dem anderen berufen (“diese Rechte sind nicht absolut”), um Bedenken bezüglich der Bürgerrechte beiseite zu fegen:
[W]enn es um Covid-19 geht, weisen alle Überlegungen in dieselbe Richtung … In der Tat sind Impfzwänge weit davon entfernt, die Bürgerrechte zu beeinträchtigen, sie fördern sie sogar …
[Viele behaupten], Impfstoffe seien ein gerechtfertigter Eingriff in die Autonomie und körperliche Unversehrtheit. Das mag bedrohlich klingen, denn wir alle haben das Grundrecht auf körperliche Unversehrtheit und das Recht, über unsere Gesundheitsversorgung selbst zu entscheiden. Aber diese Rechte sind nicht absolut. Sie beinhalten nicht das Recht, anderen Schaden zuzufügen … Zwar sind Impfzwänge nicht immer zulässig, doch verstoßen sie selten gegen die Bürgerrechte, wenn es sich um hoch ansteckende und verheerende Krankheiten wie Covid-19 handelt …
Auch wenn begrenzt Ausnahmen notwendig sind, kann von den meisten Menschen verlangt werden, dass sie sich impfen lassen … In Fällen jedoch, in denen ein Impfstoff medizinisch nicht kontraindiziert ist, überwiegt in der Regel die Vermeidung einer tödlichen Bedrohung für die öffentliche Gesundheit, die persönliche Autonomie und die individuelle Freiheit.
Der Meinungsartikel klingt, als hätte ihn ein NSA-Beamter geschrieben, um die Notwendigkeit der Massenüberwachung zu rechtfertigen (ja, schon, Ihre Privatsphäre ist wichtig, aber sie ist nicht absolut; Ihre Rechte auf Privatsphäre werden durch die öffentliche Sicherheit aufgewogen; wir spionieren Sie zu Ihrem eigenen Wohl aus). Und die Stellungnahme endet passenderweise mit dieser perfekten Orwellschen Ausschmückung: “Uns liegen die bürgerlichen Freiheiten und die Bürgerrechte für alle am Herzen – und genau deshalb unterstützen wir die Impfpflicht”.
Was die Position der ACLU so bemerkenswert macht – abgesehen von der inhärenten Schockwirkung einer Bürgerrechtsorganisation,die sich für staatliche Mandate einsetzt, die sich über die individuelle Entscheidung hinwegsetzen –ist, dass dieselbe Gruppe noch vor kurzem vor den schwerwiegenden Gefahren genau dieser Denkweise gewarnt hat, die sie jetzt promotet. Im Jahr 2008 veröffentlichte die ACLU einen umfassenden Berichtüber Pandemien, der vor allem eines zum Ziel hatte: die gefährlichen und unnötigen Versuche des Staates anzuprangern, im Namen des Schutzes der Öffentlichkeit vor Pandemien Vorschriften zu machen, zu zwingen und zu kontrollieren.
Der Titel des ACLU-Berichts, der von David Shane aufgegriffen wurde, verrät, worum es in erster Linie geht: “Pandemic Preparedness: The Need for a Public Health – Not a Law Enforcement/National Security – Approach”. Wenn man diesen Bericht liest, hat man das Gefühl, die Anti-ACLU zu lesen – oder zumindest die ACLU vor ihrer Transformation in der Trump-Ära. Von Anfang bis Ende liest er sich wie eine Warnung vor den Gefahren genau der Denkweise, die die heutige ACLU plötzlich für COVID vertritt.
Im Jahr 2008 erklärte die Gruppe ihren Zweck folgendermaßen: “Der folgende Bericht untersucht die Beziehung zwischen bürgerlichen Freiheiten und öffentlicher Gesundheit in der gegenwärtigen Pandemieplanung in den USA und gibt eine Reihe von Empfehlungen für die Entwicklung eines effektiveren, bürgerrechtsfreundlichen Ansatzes. Seine wichtigste Warnung: “Nicht alle Maßnahmen jedoch im Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit waren gutartig oder nützlich. Allzu oft haben die durch Krankheiten und Epidemien geschürten Ängste den Missbrauch staatlicher Macht begünstigt. Große und kleine Gräueltaten wurden im Namen des Schutzes der öffentlichen Gesundheit begangen.”
Report der ACLU von 2008
Es gab zwei unmittelbare Anlässe für den Bericht der ACLU aus dem Jahr 2008: 1) das Auftreten der Vogelgrippe-Pandemie im Jahr 2008, die weltweit für höchst alarmierende und letztlich falsche Schlagzeilen über den Tod von Millionen von Menschen sorgte, und 2) neue Gesetze und Vorschriften zur Pandemiebekämpfung, die nach dem 11. September 2001 erlassen wurden und die, wie die ACLU es ausdrückte, davon ausgingen, “dass jeder Krankheitsausbruch der Beginn einer schrecklichen Epidemie sein könnte, die die Aufhebung der bürgerlichen Freiheiten erfordere”.
Die ACLU warnte in ihrem Bericht aus dem Jahr 2008 davor, dass die schlechteste Art und Weise, auf eine tödliche Pandemie zu reagieren, in Zwang und Vorschriften besteht. Stattdessen argumentierte die Gruppe – wie man es von einer Bürgerrechtsorganisation erwarten würde –, dass Überzeugungsarbeit und freiwillige Einhaltung der Vorschriften sowohl effektiver als auch weniger dazu führen würden, grundlegende Freiheiten zu untergraben. Wie sie es ausdrücken:
Die Lehren aus der Geschichte sollten wir uns immer dann vor Augen führen, wenn uns von Regierungsvertretern gesagt wird, dass “harte”, die Freiheit einschränkende Maßnahmen erforderlich seien, um uns vor gefährlichen Krankheiten zu schützen. Genauer gesagt: Zwang und rohe Gewalt sind selten notwendig. Tatsächlich sind sie in der Regel kontraproduktiv – sie schüren unnötigerweise das Misstrauen der Öffentlichkeit und ermutigen die Menschen, die am dringendsten eine Behandlung benötigen, sich von den Gesundheitsbehörden fernzuhalten. Andererseits funktionieren wirksame, präventive Strategien, die auf freiwilliger Beteiligung beruhen, durchaus.
Die ACLU betonte in ihrem Bericht von 2008 vor allem den Unterschied zwischen konstruktiver und überzeugender Kommunikation im Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit und dem Einsatz von Strafverfolgung und Zwangsmandate. Angefangen beim Titel des Berichts (“The Need for a Public Health – Not a Law Enforcement/National Security – Approach”) bis hin zu jedem Abschnitt drängt die ACLU darauf, dass Mandate und Zwang zugunsten von freiwilliger Befolgung und aufklärerischen Botschaften aufgegeben werden:
Staatliche Stellen spielen eine wichtige Rolle bei der Verhütung und Eindämmung von Epidemien. Leider hat unsere Regierung in den letzten Jahren bei der Vorbereitung der Nation auf eine mögliche Grippepandemie einen sehr falschen Ansatz gewählt. Allzu oft greifen die politischen Entscheidungsträger auf Strafverfolgungs- und nationale Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zurück, die nicht nur die Rechte des Einzelnen unnötig einschränken, sondern sich auch als unwirksam erwiesen haben, wenn es darum geht, die Ausbreitung von Krankheiten zu stoppen und Leben zu retten … .
Diese Strategie der Strafverfolgung und der nationalen Sicherheit verlagert den Schwerpunkt der Vorsorge von der Verhütung und Milderung eines Notfalls auf die Bestrafung von Menschen, die sich nicht an die Anweisungen halten und gesund bleiben.
Ein großer Teil des Berichts widmet sich der Untersuchung, wie die US-Regierung in der Vergangenheit mit Pandemien umgegangen ist. Bei der Untersuchung jeder einzelnen Pandemie – einschließlich der schrecklich tödlichen wie der Pest und der Pocken – kommt die ACLU immer wieder zu dem Schluss, dass die amerikanischen Gesundheitsbehörden übermäßig auf Zwang statt auf Aufklärung und Überzeugung setzten, angeheizt durch mediengestützte Angstmache und alarmistische Erzählungen:
Lehren aus der Geschichte: Die amerikanische Geschichte erinnert uns eindringlich daran, dass die Übertragung von Normen der Strafverfolgung und der nationalen Sicherheit auf den Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit sowohl unwirksam als auch gefährlich ist. Allzu oft haben Ängste, die durch Krankheiten und Epidemien geschürt wurden, den Missbrauch staatlicher Macht gerechtfertigt. Stark diskriminierende und gewaltsame Impf- und Quarantänemaßnahmen, die als Reaktion auf Pest- und Pockenausbrüche im vergangenen Jahrhundert ergriffen wurden, haben die Ausbreitung von Krankheiten eher beschleunigt als verlangsamt und gleichzeitig das Misstrauen der Öffentlichkeit und in einigen Fällen sogar Aufstände geschürt.
Erstaunlicherweise ist das Modell, das die ACLU als das zu vermeidende identifiziert, genau jenes von ihr jetzt für COVID vorgeschlagene. Man Vergleiche zum Beispiel die Verteidigung der ACLU von Zwangsverordnungen in ihrem Meinungsartikel in der New York Times diese Woche (Impfstoffverordnungen “verstoßen selten gegen die bürgerlichen Freiheiten”) mit ihrer eindringlichen Befürwortung der Notwendigkeit in ihrem Bericht von 2008, die Wahlfreiheit zu bewahren:
Dieses Modell geht davon aus, dass wir “Freiheit gegen Sicherheit eintauschen” müssen. Infolgedessen konzentriert sich die heutige Pandemieprävention auf aggressive Zwangsmaßnahmen gegen die Erkrankten, anstatt Einzelpersonen und Gemeinschaften durch Aufklärung und Gesundheitsversorgung zu helfen. Nicht die Krankheit, sondern der Mensch wird zum Feind.
Was die ACLU 2008 am meisten beunruhigte, war die Tatsache, dass die autoritäre Macht, die in den Händen der Gesundheitsbehörden in Form von Mandaten und Zwang liegt, zum Dauerzustand wird, da wir immer mit solchen Bedrohungen und endlosen Pandemien leben werden. Deshalb, so drängte die ACLU, müssen wir uns für einen Ansatz entscheiden, der auf Aufklärungsprogramme und freiwillige Einhaltung der Vorschriften setzt, statt auf staatliche Mandate.
“Der Ansatz der Strafverfolgung im Bereich der öffentlichen Gesundheit bietet eine Begründung für die endlose Aussetzung der bürgerlichen Freiheiten”, erklärten sie. In Anlehnung an die Ausweitung der staatlichen Macht nach dem 11. September 2001 erklärte die Gruppe: “Der Globale Krieg gegen den Terror mag noch eine Generation weitergehen, aber der Krieg gegen Krankheiten wird bis zum Ende der Menschheit andauern. Es wird immer eine neue Krankheit geben, immer die Bedrohung durch eine neue Pandemie. Wenn diese Angst die Aufhebung der Freiheitsrechte und die Einrichtung eines Notstands rechtfertigt, dann werden Freiheit und Rechtsstaatlichkeit dauerhaft außer Kraft gesetzt.” Die ACLU betonte diese Woche in einem Kommentar in der New York Times wiederholt, dass Zwangsmaßnahmen immer dann gerechtfertigt seien, wenn “die Krankheit hochgradig übertragbar, ernst und tödlich ist”. In ihrem Bericht von 2008 wird jedoch genau das Gegenteil behauptet. Der Bericht kritisierte Zwangsimpfungen und andere Vorschriften bei früheren Pockenausbrüchen – zweifellos eine hoch ansteckende und tödliche Krankheit – argumentierte dann aber, dass die Stadt New York beim Wiederauftreten der Krankheit in den späten 1940er Jahren viel besser damit umgehen konnte, indem sie freiwillige Impfungen und Aufklärungsprogramme anstelle von Zwangsmaßnahmen anbot:
Im Gegensatz dazu verfolgte New York City 1947 einen anderen Ansatz, bei dem die Öffentlichkeit als Kunde und nicht als Feind der öffentlichen Gesundheit betrachtet wurde. Als die Pocken nach langer Abwesenheit wieder in der Stadt auftauchten, klärte die Stadt die Öffentlichkeit über das Problem auf und führte eine massive freiwillige Impfkampagne durch. Es überrascht nicht, dass kein Zwang nötig war. Mit Informationen über die Notwendigkeit und die Vorteile der Impfung und der Gewissheit, dass die Stadt ihnen hilft und sie nicht angreift, beteiligten sich die New Yorker Bürger massenhaft an einer der größten freiwilligen Impfkampagnen der Welt. Die Kampagne war erfolgreich, und die Epidemie wurde zurückgedrängt, bevor sie sich in der Stadt oder darüber hinaus ausbreiten konnte.
Im Schema der repressiven Maßnahmen, die die ACLU 2008 beunruhigten, gehören “Zwangsisolierung und Quarantäne zu den zwanghaftesten nicht-pharmazeutischen Maßnahmen, die während einer Pandemie eingesetzt werden können”. Sie nahmen kein Blatt vor den Mund, wenn es um solche Maßnahmen ging: “Bürgerliche Freiheitsrechte sind in Gefahr, wenn diese Maßnahmen per Gesetz auferlegt werden”.
Die ACLU warnte nicht nur mit Worten vor den Gefahren übermäßiger Zwangsmaßnahmen bei einer Pandemie. Sie vertrat auch rechtlich mindestens einen Klienten, den sie als Opfer der öffentlichen Gesundheitshysterie und Tyrannei ansah. Im Jahr 2006 wurde “ein 27-jähriger Tuberkulosepatient namens Robert Daniels in Phoenix, Arizona, gegen seinen Willen unter Quarantäne gestellt, weil er eine Anordnung der Gesundheitsbehörden von Maricopa County, in der Öffentlichkeit stets eine Gesichtsmaske zu tragen, missachtet hatte”. Selbst als Daniels freigelassen wurde und sich herausstellte, dass er weniger schwer an TBC erkrankt war als ursprünglich angenommen, “drohte ihm Sheriff Joe Arpaio öffentlich mit einer Strafverfolgung wegen der Vorfälle vor der Quarantäne.”
Die Lektion der ACLU aus diesem und ähnlichen von ihr bearbeiteten Fällen war klar: Dies “sind abschreckende Beispiele, welche die kontraproduktive Natur eines strafenden, strafverfolgenden Ansatzes zur Verhinderung der Ausbreitung von Krankheiten illustrieren.” Vor allem aber, so die Bürgerrechtsgruppe, gefährden Zwangsmaßnahmen – wie Mandate und Quarantänen – nicht nur die bürgerlichen Freiheiten, sondern sind auch weniger wirksam bei der Verbesserung der öffentlichen Gesundheit, weil sie die Öffentlichkeit von kooperativen Verbündeten in Feinde verwandeln, die kontrolliert und bestraft werden müssen:
Diese Bemühungen setzen voraus, dass man mit den Gemeinschaften kooperiert, anstatt gegen sie vorzugehen, und dass man ihnen eine möglichst gesunde Umwelt, bei Bedarf eine Gesundheitsversorgung, und die Mittel zur Selbsthilfe und zur Hilfe für ihre Nachbarn bietet. Am wichtigsten ist, dass die Gesundheitspolitik zum Schutz der öffentlichen Gesundheit darauf abzielen muss, der Öffentlichkeit zu helfen, anstatt sie zu unterdrücken.
Ein anderer Bericht der ACLU aus dem Jahr 2015, der während der Ebola-Epidemie veröffentlicht wurde, enthielt eine ähnliche Botschaft. Er warnte “vor politisch motivierten und wissenschaftlich nicht gerechtfertigten Quarantänen, die dem Bericht zufolge die Rechte des Einzelnen verletzten und die Bemühungen zur Beendigung des Ausbruchs behinderten.” Die Hysterie über Ebola wurde so groß, dass die ACLU feststellte, “dass Menschen ihr Recht auf ein ordnungsgemäßes Verfahren gemäß dem 14. Zusatzartikel der Verfassung illegal vorenthalten wurde, da die Quarantänen und Bewegungseinschränkungen nicht wissenschaftlich gerechtfertigt waren.”
In beiden Berichten wird zwar eingeräumt, dass restriktivere Maßnahmen unter extremen Umständen gerechtfertigt sein können, doch die Kernaussage beider Berichte lautet, dass die freiwillige Einhaltung von Vorschriften besser ist als Zwang, dass staatliche Anordnungen in der Regel scheitern und dass die weitaus größere Gefahr darin besteht, dem Staat zu viel Macht zu übertragen, die er angesichts der Permanenz von Pandemien niemals aufgeben wird.
Wie die ACLU von diesen traditionellen und wichtigen Positionen zu den bürgerlichen Freiheiten dazu kam, diese Woche in der New York Times darauf zu drängen, dass “Impfmandate die bürgerlichen Freiheiten nicht beeinträchtigen, sondern sie sogar fördern“, kann man nur vermuten. Was jedoch außer Zweifel steht, ist, dass dies in der Tat ein tiefer Fall ist. Und besonders erschütternd ist es zu hören, wie sich die ACLU auf die Standardargumentation der Autoritären beruft –wir alle haben das Grundrecht auf körperliche Unversehrtheit und das Recht, unsere eigenen Gesundheitsentscheidungen zu treffen, aber diese Rechte sind nicht absolut“.
Glen mag perplex sein, ich bin es nicht. Diese Leute wurden infiziert und sind krank, gehorchen Sie ihnen auf eigene Gefahr! Sie sind die Zombies der Hollywood-Filme, und sie fügen Ihnen und allen anderen, die keine Zombies sind, den größtmöglichen Schaden zu. Du wirst einer von ihnen werden, eine Kreatur ohne Seele, ohne Empathie, ohne Gott, oder du wirst sterben. So sehen sie die Dinge, in Schwarz und Weiß, es gibt keine Grauzonen. Nichts, was du sagst, wird sie aufhalten, und die einzige Lösung ist die sprichwörtliche Schuss im Kopf, wie in Hollywood. Auch ich sehe die Dinge so: Schwarz und weiß, da gibt es kein Grau.
Ich habe bereits gehört, wie meine eigene Cousine zu ihrer einst geliebten Nichte sagte: “Ich hoffe, sie sperren euch alle ein, die ihr gegen Impfungen seid.” Diese Dinger sind nicht mehr eure Freunde und eure Familie. Mit jeder Minute, in der man sie existieren lässt, werden sie stärker und stecken andere an. Die unaussprechliche Wahrheit wird mir jeden Tag klarer und klarer. Sie müssen ausgerottet werden, von dem Planeten, den sie nicht in Frieden existieren lassen wollen, mit einem globalen Bürgerkrieg, der die Mutter aller Bürgerkriege sein wird …
Dr. Michael McDowell ist vielleicht der klügste Mann in diesem ganzen COVID-Krieg – ich kann nur hoffen, dass nicht ich es bin. Abgesehen von Veterans Today ist er der Einzige, von dem ich weiß, dass er diese biologische Waffe mit dem Labor in North Carolina auf dem Chapel Hill in Verbindung gebracht hat, aus dem sie stammt. Außer mir ist er der Einzige, der die Verhaftung von Dr. Charles Lieber, welche die ganze COVID-“Pandemie” überhaupt erst ermöglicht hat, als das Heimtückischste an der ganzen Sache bezeichnet. Lieber ist der Vater der Nanotechnologie, der höchstrangige experimentelle Wissenschaftler, der je geboren wurde. Er ist derjenige, der herausgefunden hat, wie man mikroskopisch kleine Maschinen in einer kostengünstigen Lösung züchten kann, wodurch die Nanotechnologie überhaupt erst machbar wurde. Er arbeitete an injizierbaren neuronalen Netzen, als er Ende Januar 2020 verhaftet wurde, weil er das Wuhan-Labor leitete, während er für das Verteidigungsministerium arbeitete.
Dr. McDowell ist ein guter Christ. Seiner enzyklopädischen medizinischen Meinung nach: “Wenn man ein Virus durch ein Massenimpfungsprogramm unter Druck setzt, werden die durch den Impfstoff induzierten Antikörper gegen das COVID 19-Virus loslegen und es bekämpfen, so dass das Virus auf der Flucht ist. Wenn ein Virus auf der Flucht ist, denken Sie daran, dass es sich um ein Virus handelt, das die Eigenschaft hat, sich zu vermehren, es fühlt sich unter Druck, es verändert sich, es mutiert. Es ändert seine Tarnung, sein Aussehen. Es wird zu einer Variante. Die Variante kann von den durch den Impfstoff induzierten Antikörpern nicht aufgehalten werden. Wobei impfstoffinduzierte Antikörper gleichzeitig das angeborene Immunsystem ausschalten.”
Er fährt fort und unterstreicht seine Ausführungen mit andächtigen Amens. “Rekombination bedeutet, dass der Geimpfte mit mehr als einer Variante gleichzeitig infiziert werden kann. Und die Delta-Variante ist in Trinadad [McDowell stammt aus Trinadad]. Dr. Peter McCullough sagt, dass das griechische Alphabet nicht genug Buchstaben hat, um alle Varianten zu benennen. In der Tat gibt es bereits über hundert Varianten, die auf der ganzen Welt verbreitet sind. Manche schätzen die Zahl auf hundertfünfundachtzig. Wenn ein geimpfter Wirt mit mehr als einer Variante gleichzeitig infiziert wird, vermischen sich in seinem Inneren die Varianten und verändern ihre DNA, es findet eine rekombinante DNA-Technologie statt, und es entsteht eine Supervariante. Sobald die Supervarianten produziert sind, kann sie nichts mehr aufhalten, und es wird bereits gesagt, dass die neueste Variante, die herausgekommen ist, impfstoffresistent ist. Das ist aber erst der Anfang. Geert Vanden Bossche warnt: “Wenn wir die Massenimpfkampagnen in der ganzen Welt nicht sofort stoppen, wird die Welt eine internationale Katastrophe mit Massensterben erleben.” Das habe ich nicht behauptet. Die Geimpften sind eine Bedrohung für uns alle. Aber, Amen, wir müssen die Geimpften freundlich behandeln, Amen, mit großem Einfühlungsvermögen, mit Gebet, Amen, und mit Menschlichkeit und Liebe. Keine Diskriminierung von Geimpften… (20)
Wie könnte ich diesen Mann nicht lieben? Wenn es eine neue Weltordnung geben muss, dann hat er meine Stimme, um sie anzuführen. Aber in diesem Punkt bin ich ganz anderer Meinung als er. Ich habe mein Bestes getan, um zu warnen, dass wir es mit biologischen Maschinen zu tun haben, mit Automaten. Sie werden nicht aufhören, bis sie die gesamte menschliche Rasse zu ihresgleichen gemacht haben oder bis sie selbst vernichtet worden sind.
Dieses Gesetz wurde kürzlich in New York erneut vorgeschlagen. Es ist ein Anachronismus aus der Zeit der Ebola-Angst, von der Dr. McDowell und das Jack-Heart-Team genau wissen, dass diese von den kranken Wichsern geschürt und produziert wurde, die COVID aus Fort Detrick und Porton Down zu euch brachten. Ebola war ein Probelauf für die Einführung von Gesetzen wie diesem, das kürzlich in New York eingebracht wurde:
DER STAAT NEW YORK
________________________________________________________________________
416
2021-2022 Reguläre Sitzung
IN VERSAMMLUNG
(im Voraus eingebracht)
6. January 2021
___________
Vorgelegt von M. of A. PERRY — gelesen und an das Gesundheitskommitee weitergereicht
EIN GESETZ zu Erweiterung des öffentlichen Gesundheitsgesetzes in Bezug auf die Entfernung von Fällen, Kontaktpersonen und Trägern von übertragbaren Krankheiten die potentiell gefährlich sind für die öffentliche Gesundheit der Bürger des Staates New York, repräsentiert durch Senat und Versammlung, beinhaltet Folgendes:
Paragraph 1. des Öffentlichen Gesundheitsgesetzes wird durch Einfügung des neuen Paragraphen 2120-a mit folgendem Wortlaut geändert:
§ 2120-a. Entfernung und Inhaftierung von Fällen, Kontaktpersonen und Trägern, die eine Gefahr für die öffentliche Gesundheit sind oder sein können; sowie Anordnungen.
1. Die Bestimmungen dieses Paragraphen kommen zur Anwendung, wenn der Gouverneur aufgrund einer Epidemie oder einer ansteckenden Krankheit den Gesundheitsnotstand ausruft.
2. Wenn durch eindeutige und überzeugende Beweise festgestellt wird, dass die Gesundheit anderer Personen durch einen Fall, Kontakt oder Überträger oder einen Verdachtsfall, Kontakt oder Überträger einer ansteckenden Krankheit gefährdet ist oder werden kann, die nach Meinung des Gouverneurs, nach Rücksprache mit dem Kommissar, eine unmittelbare und erhebliche Bedrohung für die öffentliche Gesundheit darstellen kann, welche zu schwerer Morbidität oder hoher Mortalität führt, kann der Gouverneur oder sein Stellvertreter, einschließlich, aber nicht beschränkt auf den Kommissar oder die Leiter der örtlichen Gesundheitsämter, die Abschiebung und/oder Inhaftierung einer solchen Person oder einer Gruppe solcher Personen anordnen, indem er eine einzige Anordnung erlässt, in der er diese Personen entweder namentlich oder durch eine hinreichend genaue Beschreibung der inhaftierten Personen oder Gruppe identifiziert.
Solche Person oder Personengruppe wird in einer medizinischen Einrichtung oder einer anderen geeigneten Einrichtung oder in Räumlichkeiten festgehalten, die vom Gouverneur oder seinem Bevollmächtigten bestimmt werden und den Bestimmungen des fünften Unterabschnitts dieses Paragraphen entsprechen.
3. Eine Person oder Gruppe, die auf Anordnung des Gouverneurs oder seines Beauftragten gemäß Unterabteilung zwei abgeschoben oder festgehalten wird,
ERLÄUTERUNG: Kursiv gedrucktes (unterstrichenes) Material ist neu; in Klammern gedrucktes [ ] ist altes Recht, das weggelassen werden soll.
ist für die Dauer und auf die Art und Weise festzuhalten, die das Ministerium in Übereinstimmung mit diesem Abschnitt 2 anordnet.
4. Ungeachtet aller widersprüchlichen Bestimmungen dieses Abschnitts: (a) Ein bestätigter Fall oder ein Überträger, der gemäß des Unterabschnitts dieses Paragraphen in Gewahrsam genommen wird, darf nicht weiter in Gewahrsam genommen werden, nachdem die Abteilung festgestellt hat, dass die betreffende Person nicht mehr ansteckend ist.
(b) Ein Verdachtsfall oder ein mutmaßlicher Überträger, der aufgrund Unterabschnitt zwei dieses Abschnitts festgenommen wird, darf nicht weiter in Gewahrsam genommen werden, nachdem die Abteilung mit der gebotenen Sorgfalt festgestellt hat, dass die Person nicht mit einer solchen Krankheit infiziert ist oder ihr nicht ausgesetzt war, oder, falls sie mit einer solchen Krankheit infiziert oder ihr ausgesetzt ist, nicht mehr ansteckend ist oder ansteckend werden wird.
(c) Eine Person, die gemäß Unterabteilung zwei dieses Paragraphen als Kontaktperson eines bestätigten Falls oder eines Überträgers festgehalten wird, darf nicht weiter festgehalten werden, nachdem die Abteilung festgestellt hat, dass die Person nicht mit der Krankheit infiziert ist oder dass ein solcher Kontakt keine potenzielle Gefahr für die Gesundheit anderer darstellt.
(d) Eine Person, die gemäß Unterabteilung zwei dieses Paragraphen als Kontaktperson eines Verdachtsfalls in Gewahrsam genommen wird, darf nicht weiter in Gewahrsam genommen werden:
(i) nachdem die Abteilung mit gebührender Sorgfalt festgestellt hat, dass der Verdachtsfall nicht mit einer solchen Krankheit infiziert oder nicht ansteckend war, als die Kontaktperson einer solchen Person ausgesetzt war; oder
(ii) nachdem die Abteilung festgestellt hat, dass die Kontaktperson keine potenzielle Gefahr für die Gesundheit anderer mehr darstellt.
(5) Eine Person, die gemäß Unterabteilung zwei dieses Paragraphen in Gewahrsam genommen wird, muss, soweit es die Umstände erfordern,
(a) ihr medizinischer Zustand und ihre Bedürfnisse, regelmäßig beurteilt und behandelt werden und
(b) in einer Weise festgehalten werden, die mit anerkannten Isolations- und Infektionskontrollgrundsätzen übereinstimmt, um die Wahrscheinlichkeit der Übertragung von Infektionen auf diese Person und auf andere zu minimieren.
(6) Wird die Inhaftierung einer Person oder einer Gruppe gemäß Absatz 2 für einen Zeitraum von höchstens drei Arbeitstagen angeordnet, so ist der Person oder dem Mitglied der Gruppe auf Antrag Gelegenheit zur Anhörung zu geben. Wird eine Person oder Gruppe, gemäß Unterabteilung zwei dieses Paragraphen länger als drei Werktage festgehalten, so ist ihr eine zusätzliche Anordnung gemäß der Unterabschnitte zwei und acht dieses Abschnitts zu erteilen.
7. Wird die Inhaftierung einer Person oder einer Gruppe unter Teil zwei dieses Paragraphen für einen Zeitraum von mehr als drei Werktagen angeordnet und beantragt die Person oder das Mitglied der Gruppe die Freilassung, so stellt der Gouverneur oder sein Bevollmächtigter innerhalb von drei Werktagen nach dem Antrag, bis zum Ende des ersten Werktags nach einem Samstag, Sonntag oder gesetzlichen Feiertag einen Antrag auf eine gerichtliche Anordnung zur Genehmigung der Inhaftierung, der einen Antrag auf eine ausführliche Anhörung enthält. Nach einem solchen Antrag auf Freilassung darf die Inhaftierung nicht länger als fünf Werktage andauern, wenn keine gerichtliche Anordnung vorliegt, die die Inhaftierung genehmigt. Ungeachtet der vorstehenden Bestimmungen darf eine Person in keinem Fall länger als sechzig Tage inhaftiert werden, ohne dass eine gerichtliche Anordnung vorliegt, die eine solche Inhaftierung genehmigt. Der Gouverneur oder sein Bevollmächtigter muss innerhalb von neunzig Tagen nach der ersten gerichtlichen Anordnung, mit der die Inhaftierung genehmigt wurde, und danach innerhalb von neunzig Tagen nach jeder weiteren gerichtlichen Überprüfung, eine weitere gerichtliche Überprüfung der Inhaftierung beantragen. In jedem gerichtlichen Verfahren zur Durchsetzung einer Anordnung des Gouverneurs oder seines Bevollmächtigten zur Abschiebung oder Ingewahrsamnahme einer Person oder Gruppe, die gemäß diesem Unterabschnitt 2 erlassen wurde oder zur Überprüfung der fortgesetzten Ingewahrsamnahme einer Person oder Gruppe muss der Gouverneur oder sein Bevollmächtigter die besonderen Umstände, die die Notwendigkeit einer solchen Ingewahrsamnahme begründen, eindeutig und überzeugend nachweisen.
(8) (a) Eine Kopie jeder Gewahrsamsanordnung des Gouverneurs oder seines Bevollmächtigten, die gemäß Unterabteilung zwei dieses Abschnitts erlassen wurde, ist jeder inhaftierten Person auszuhändigen; gilt die Anordnung jedoch für eine Gruppe von Personen und ist es nicht praktikabel, einzelne Kopien auszuhändigen, so kann sie an einer gut sichtbaren Stelle in dem Verwahrungsgebäude ausgehängt werden. Jede Gewahrsamsanordnung des Beauftragten, die gemäß Unterabschnitt zwei dieses Abschnitts erlassen wird, muss Folgendes enthalten:
(i) den Zweck des Gewahrsams und die rechtliche Befugnis, aufgrund derer die Anordnung erlassen wird, einschließlich der einzelnen Abschnitte dieses Artikels oder anderer Gesetze oder Vorschriften;
(ii) eine Beschreibung der Umstände und/oder des Verhaltens der in Gewahrsam genommenen Person oder Gruppe, die die Grundlage für den Erlass der Anordnung bilden;
(iii) die weniger restriktiven Alternativen, die versucht wurden und erfolglos waren und/oder die weniger restriktiven Alternativen, die in Erwägung gezogen und abgelehnt wurden, sowie die Gründe für die Ablehnung dieser Alternativen;
(iv) eine Mitteilung, in der die inhaftierte Person oder Gruppe darauf hingewiesen wird, dass sie das Recht hat, die Entlassung aus der Haft zu beantragen, einschließlich Anweisungen, wie ein solcher Antrag gestellt werden soll;
(v) eine Mitteilung, in der die in Gewahrsam genommene Person oder Gruppe darauf hingewiesen wird, dass sie das Recht hat, sich durch einen Rechtsbeistand vertreten zu lassen, und dass auf Antrag dieser Person oder Gruppe der Zugang zu einem Rechtsbeistand unter den gegebenen Umständen erleichtert möglich ist; und
(vi) eine Mitteilung, in der die festgenommene Person oder Gruppe darauf hingewiesen wird, dass sie die Adressen und/oder Telefonnummern von Freunden und/oder Verwandten angeben kann, die über die Festnahme der Person benachrichtigt werden sollen, und dass die Behörde auf Ersuchen der festgenommenen Person und falls machbar, einer angemessenen Anzahl dieser Personen mitteilen wird, dass die Person sich in Gewahrsam befindet.
(b) Darüber hinaus muss eine gemäß den Unterabschnitten zwei und sieben dieses Paragraphen erlassene Anordnung die Inhaftierung einer Person oder Gruppe für einen Zeitraum von mehr als drei Arbeitstagen vorschreibt:
(i) die in Gewahrsam genommene Person oder Gruppe darauf hinweisen, dass das Gewahrsam nicht länger als fünf Werktage andauern darf, nachdem ein Antrag auf Freilassung gestellt wurde, sofern keine gerichtliche Anordnung vorliegt, die dieses Gewahrsam genehmigt;
(ii) die in Gewahrsam genommene Person oder Gruppe darauf hinweisen, dass der Gouverneur oder sein Bevollmächtigter, unabhängig davon, ob sie die Freilassung aus dem Gewahrsam beantragen oder nicht, innerhalb von sechzig Tagen nach Beginn des Gewahrsams gerichtlich die Anordnung zur Genehmigung des Gewahrsams erwirken muss und danach innerhalb von neunzig Tagen nach einer solchen gerichtlichen Anordnung und innerhalb von neunzig Tagen nach jeder weiteren gerichtlichen Überprüfung, die weitere gerichtliche Überprüfung des Gewahrsams anordnen muss; und
(iii) die festgenommene Person oder Gruppe darauf hinweisen muss, dass sie das Recht hat, einen Rechtsbeistand zu beantragen, dass auf einen solchen Antrag hin Rechtsbeistand zur Verfügung gestellt wird, wenn und soweit dies unter den Umständen möglich ist, und dass, wenn ein solcher Rechtsbeistand zur Verfügung gestellt wird, dieser davon in Kenntnis gesetzt wird, dass die Person oder Gruppe einen Rechtsbeistand beantragt hat.
9. Eine Person, die in einer medizinischen Einrichtung oder einer anderen geeigneten Einrichtung oder Räumlichkeit festgehalten wird, darf sich nicht ordnungswidrig verhalten und darf die Einrichtung oder Räumlichkeit nicht verlassen oder versuchen, sie zu verlassen, bis sie gemäß dieses Abschnitts entlassen wird.
(3) Soweit erforderlich, und unter den gegebenen Umständen durchführbar, Dolmetscher und Personen, die in der Kommunikation mit seh- und hörbehinderten Personen geschult sind zu Verfügung zu stellen.
11. Die Bestimmungen dieses Abschnitts gelten nicht für die Ausstellung von Anordnungen gemäß § 11.21 des New York City Health Code.
12. Zusätzlich zu den in Unterabschnitt zwei dieses Paragraphen genannten Abschiebungs- oder Festhalteanordnungen und ohne Beeinträchtigung oder Einschränkung anderer Befugnisse, die der Beauftragte ansonsten hat, kann der Gouverneur oder sein Bevollmächtigter nach seinem Ermessen alle anderen Anordnungen erlassen und durchsetzen, die er für notwendig oder angemessen hält, um die Verbreitung oder Übertragung ansteckender Krankheiten oder anderer Krankheiten, die eine Bedrohung für die öffentliche Gesundheit darstellen können zu verhindern, einschließlich, aber nicht beschränkt darauf, Anordnungen, die den Ausschluss einer oder mehrerer Personen verlangen, die sich nicht im Gewahrsam des Ministeriums befinden; und deren Isolierung oder Quarantäne zu Hause oder an einem Ort ihrer Wahl, der für die Behörde akzeptabel ist, unter solchen Bedingungen und für einen solchen Zeitraum erfolgt, dass eine Übertragung der ansteckenden Krankheit oder einer anderen Krankheit verhindert wird; sowie Tests oder ärztliche Untersuchungen von Personen zu verlangen, die möglicherweise einer ansteckenden Krankheit ausgesetzt oder damit infiziert waren oder die möglicherweise gefährlichen Mengen radioaktiver Materialien oder giftiger Chemikalien ausgesetzt oder damit kontaminiert waren; von einer Person, die einer ansteckenden Krankheit ausgesetzt oder damit infiziert war, zu verlangen, dass sie eine angemessene, vorgeschriebene Behandlung, vorbeugende Medikation oder Impfung, einschließlich einer direkt beobachteten Therapie zur Behandlung der Krankheit absolviert und die Bestimmungen zur Infektionskontrolle für die Krankheit befolgt; oder von einer Person, die mit gefährlichen Mengen radioaktiver Stoffe oder giftiger Chemikalien kontaminiert ist, so dass sie eine Gefahr für andere darstellen kann zu verlangen, dass sie sich Dekontaminationsverfahren unterzieht, die von der Behörde für notwendig erachtet werden. Dieser Person oder diesen Personen ist auf Antrag Gelegenheit zur Anhörung zu geben, jedoch finden die Bestimmungen der Unterabteilungen zwei bis elf dieses Abschnitts ansonsten keine Anwendung.
13. Die Bestimmungen dieses Abschnitts dürfen nicht so ausgelegt werden, dass sie die gewaltsame Verabreichung von Medikamenten ohne vorherige gerichtliche Anordnung erlauben oder vorschreiben.
§ 2. Dieses Gesetzes wird am dreißigsten Tag nach seinem Inkrafttreten wirksam. Mit sofortiger Wirkung werden die Hinzufügung, Änderung und/oder Aufhebung von Vorschriften oder Verordnungen, die für die Umsetzung dieses Gesetzes zu seinem Inkrafttreten erforderlich sind, ermächtigt, an oder vor diesem Datum vorgenommen und abgeschlossen zu werden.
Dieses Gesetz ist noch nicht verabschiedet worden – wird es aber mit Sicherheit. Der Artikel der ACLU in der New York Times ist ein Teil der Vorbereitungen, die dafür getroffen wurden. Jeder Mann mit einem funktionierenden Penis hat darauf keine andere Antwort als Krieg bis zum Tod gegen alles und jeden, der auch nur im Entferntesten den Anschein erweckt, es zu akzeptieren oder zu befürworten. Möge Gott, welchen auch immer Ihr verehrt, mit Euch sein. Ich weiß, dass ich es sein werde …
Die gute Nachricht für die Amerikaner ist, dass sie endlich wirklich John Wayne sein können. Amerika jagt ihnen buchstäblich eine Höllenangst ein. Die Amerikaner waren noch nie entwaffnet, und nach dem zu urteilen, was ich in Richmond, Virginia, sah, am Martin-Luthur-King-Tag im Jahr 2020, werden sie es auch nie sein.
Ich möchte Euch diesen kurzen Beitrag des berüchtigten Dissidenten und praktizierenden Antisemiten John Kaminski nicht vorenthalten. Lasst das Gemetzel beginnen, oder ihr werdet alle sterben wie in einer Ecke kauernde urinierende Hunde, ausgelöscht von einer Armee lebender Toter …
“Unachtsame Australier ins Gefängnis getrickst
DAS PASSIERT, WENN DU DEINE WAFFEN ABGIBST”
Es gab einmal eine Zeit, in der wohlmeinende Australier ihre Waffen abgaben, und man schaue sich an, was jetzt mit ihnen passiert.
Die Australier wurden von geistesgestörten Staatsdienern in die Enge getrieben und sitzen heute im Gefängnis, sind wehrlos und werden von der weltweiten Big-Pharma-Tyrannei schwer missbraucht. Diese Tyrannei ist das Werk pathologischer Machtmilliardäre, die zehn Jahre lang darauf gewartet haben, wehrlosen Menschen eine Tyrannei aufzuzwingen, die sich gefälschter Tests und einer vorgetäuschten Krankheit bedient, sowie illegaler Inhaftierungen, die – mit dem Ziel über hilflose Menschen zu herrschen – von gewissenlosen, machtbesoffenen, bestechlichen und autoritätshörigen Dummköpfen durchgesetzt werden, welche nie die Konsequenzen ihrer sadistischen Grausamkeiten tragen müssen, weil sie das Gesetz auf ihrer Seite haben, ein Gesetz, das den Reichen immer alles und den Armen weniger als nichts gegeben hat.
Ein paar sehr reiche Männer haben herausgefunden, dass dies ein narrensicherer Weg ist, die Welt zu erobern. Erste Voraussetzung? Vergessen Sie, dass es echte Menschen sind, deren Leben Sie ruinieren, und behandeln Sie sie wie das leichtgläubige Vieh, als das sie sich erweisen.
Das ist eine gängige Technik, die in der Weltgeschichte schon oft angewandt wurde, nämlich die Bevölkerung unter einem Vorwand in die Sklaverei zu treiben, der sich bei späteren historischen Analysen immer als unser Verderben herausstellt. Und es ist auch eine übliche Taktik der einzigen satanischen Gruppe, deren Perfidie tief in die Spinnweben der Geschichte zurückreicht, wie man erkennt, wenn wir die lange Liste der Nationen betrachten, die von geschmeidig redenden Schwindlern zerstört wurden, denen jene wohlmeinenden und ein relativ unschuldiges Leben führenden Farmer und Viehzüchter niemals hätten vertrauen dürfen.
Sie tun es immer wieder, weil es scheinbar jedes Mal funktioniert, wenn sie es versuchen.
Und das ist es, was in Australien passiert ist, seit die progressiven Köpfe an das Gewissen der anständigen Menschen appellierten, obwohl sich herausstellte, dass die Leute, die an sie appellierten, selbst kein Gewissen hatten, sondern nur ein schlimmes Flughafensicherheitssyndrom und den versteckten Wunsch, die Taschen aller Menschen in ihrer Reichweite zu leeren.
Das geht zurück bis ins Jahr 1500 v. Chr. in einem afrikanischen Wüstenkönigreich, als diese beiden Gauner Abraham und Joseph auftauchten und schnell einen Weg fanden, gottesfürchtige Ägypter um alles zu bringen, was sie besaßen, und es reicht bis in die Gegenwart, wo die betuchten Söhne der Rothschilds – Schwab, Gates und Fauci, um nur einige zu nennen – zusammen mit ihren gierigen Kriechern alles Geld der Welt zusammenklaubten und dann ein paar gewissenlose Ärzte anheuerten, um allen Menschen auf der Welt zu erzählen, sie seien krank, und nur besagte clevere Ärzte hätten die Medizin, um diese schreckliche Krankheit zu heilen.
Dann fügten sie den neuen Vorbehalt hinzu, dass man diese Medizin für immer und ewig einnehmen und jedes Mal tief in die Tasche greifen müsse.
Ach, diese Lektionen des Unternehmenskapitalismus im Griff des Kumpaneikommunismus. Was für eine wunderbare Entwicklung der Menschheit: eine kleine Gruppe von Menschen lernt das ultimative Hütchenspiel und schläfert den Rest der Bevölkerung für immer ein, während sie die Sparschweine derjenigen plündern, die sie ruhiggestellt haben. Ja, man kann die Medien dafür verantwortlich machen.
Aber eines sollte man nicht vergessen.
Im Interesse eines dauerhaften Friedens wurden die Aussies davon überzeugt, ihre Waffen aufzugeben, so wie der Pharao seine Schäfchen überredete, ihren Besitz aufzugeben, um etwas zu essen zu bekommen, da sie am Verhungern waren, weil Abe und Joey die Lebensmittelvorräte geplündert und eine Hungersnot verursacht hatten, die die ahnungslose Bevölkerung bedrohte. Jede Ähnlichkeit mit der heutigen Situation, in der Landwirte dafür bezahlt werden, KEINE Lebensmittel anzubauen, Versorgungsketten absichtlich durch schlechtes Wetter unterbrochen und Ernten vergiftet werden, um die Wachsamkeit der erkrankten Verbraucher zu verringern, ist definitiv kein Zufall. Es handelt sich um eine ebenso alte, bewährte Tradition wie ein Kartentrick an einem Sommernachmittag im Zirkus.
Dies ist sowohl der älteste Trick im Buch als auch der neueste Trend in der gerade angesagten Bevölkerungsreduzierung, bei dem die heutigen medizinischen Heilmittel in suizidale Systeme der Selbstaufopferung verwandelt wurden, indem man sich ein tödliches Gift injiziert, um sich von einer tödlichen Krankheit zu heilen, welche man angeblich hat, die aber nicht wirklich existiert. Das nenne ich ein wirklich ausgeklügeltes Verkaufskonzept, und die Tatsache, dass es auch vom Rest der Welt geglaubt wurde, zeigt zwei Dinge:
Die Soziopathen würden alles tun, um das Geld der anderen zu stehlen, selbst wenn sie ihnen dafür das Leben nehmen müssten, und dass die Menschen alles glauben, sobald sie sich entschließen, jemandem zu vertrauen, der es nicht wert ist, dass man ihm vertraut. Und zu letzterer Kategorie gehören heute vor allem unsere Politiker und unsere Ärzte.
Leider wären das im Falle Australiens angemessene Gegenmittel die Waffen gewesen, die sie vor einigen Jahren beschlossen, abzugeben.
Was die restlichen Länder der Welt betrifft, so bedeutet die Lektion aus dem Missgeschick welches den Australiern die Freiheit kostete, diesen Fehler auf gar keinen Fall zu wiederholen, wie sehr die schleimigen Sprecher der schrillen Sendungen der heutigen High-Tech-Medien auch versuchen, sie von ihrer Vertrauenswürdigkeit zu überzeugen.
In der heutigen verkehrten Welt sind Waffen nicht so sehr ein Schutz gegen diejenigen, die einem schaden wollen, sondern vielmehr ein Schutz gegen die Widerlinge, die behaupten, sie wollten einem schützen. Und jeder weiß, wen ich meine: diejenigen, die behaupten, sie würden euch eure Freiheit nehmen, um euch vor einer Bedrohung zu schützen, die es in Wirklichkeit gar nicht gibt, außer in ihren eigenen kranken, sadistischen Köpfen.
Habt keine Angst sie zu töten wenn sie zu aufdringlich werden, denn sie bringen uns bereits aus geringeren Gründen um als wir benötigten, um sie in legitimer Notwehr zu töten. Offen gesagt, haben sie diesen Punkt schon vor langer Zeit überschritten. Man vergleiche nur die relativ geringe Zahl von Menschen, die an dieser Krankheit, deren Existenz sie nicht einmal beweisen können, verschieden sind, mit der sprunghaft ansteigenden Zahl von denjenigen, die an einem sogenannten Impfstoff starben, den absolut niemand jemals zu nehmen brauchte.
John Kaminski ist ein Schriftsteller, der an der Golfküste Floridas lebt und ständig versucht herauszufinden, warum wir uns selbst zerstören, und der ein korruptes Glaubenssystem als Motor unseres Untergangs ausgemacht hat. Da er ausschließlich auf Spenden von Lesern angewiesen ist, bitten wir Sie, seine Arbeit per Post zu unterstützen: 6871 Willow Creek Circle #103, North Port FL 34287 USA.
Please, watch this video. It shows who and where the blue masks are coming from.
You that are wearing blue masks to protect yourself from microbes!! Good Luck!!
Bei Gefallen bitten wir darum, diesen Newsletter zu teilen, damit auch andere davon profitieren können. Wenn dieser Newsletter durch Weiterleiten erhalten wurde, hier klicken,um sich für zukünftige Veröffentlichungen anzumelden.
This newsletter is an information product for subscribers who have signed up through subscription at the Jack Heart website.
This video is a must see.
Anybody reading this that has read my work in my book, in Veterans Today, in Nexus Magazine or just on our blog, which is now closing in on a million views, knows I am a writer not a journalist. I’m only doing this newsletter because apparently, it’s the same old story, no one else can. Journalism is a job not an art, the journalist’s job is to give you the facts. Writers, real ones, teach you to know what the facts are. They teach you how to see and they are never so crass as to actually draw conclusions for you. When they are done you should be able to arrive at a conclusion yourself.
So I have to admit to you all right now from the start I am at loath to do this. It’s kind of like Michelangelo would feel about painting a house, or Axel Rose singing in a choir. I will begin with what comes natural, my own personal observations. I’ve just returned from a trip to New York. I suspect I’ve been infected with COVID by a plumber on my cousin’s construction site. The plumber was fully vaccinated, yet he was hospitalized with COVID the day after I visited the site. Two weeks later he’s still in quarantine. I’ve never been off my feet; in fact I just drove eight hundred miles back to Tennessee.
(As of September 9, three weeks after infection, my cousin reports the plumber; Gretar Liefsson of Gretar’s Plumbing to be still deathly ill. I’m fine…)
After exposure to Gretar my cousin’s son exhibited symptoms even before my cousin found out Gretar was in the hospital. I started feeling really tired with a constant headache and stomach ache a few days later as did my cousin. My cousin and his son shook it right off, his wife and daughter never caught anything even though they were in close proximity to us.
My cousin’s whole family have never been vaccinated and have already all had COVID, at least all of them that attended a Thanksgiving dinner under a heated tent last year, particularly her side, all masketeers since the very beginning. They insisted on holding this dinner, usually held in my cousin’s sprawling house, in the tent. I think it was thirty out of thirty-two of them that ended up catching COVID including my cousin, his wife, son, and daughter. Of course as charter members of Anthony Fauci’s Masketeers her family all had themselves duly vaccinated as soon as vaccinations were made available. As I left New York at least a half dozen of them had again come down with serious cases of COVID.
Israel with the highest vaccination rate in the world, which they were boasting was 78%, now has one of the highest infection rates in the world with well over half of their critically ill patients fully vaccinated. Israel recently came out with a new study, not yet peer reviewed as if that means anything. Most of their peers are proven imbeciles. “This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.” (1) The Lancet study, done far too early to take into account the vaccines effectiveness on the Delta strain, is frequently cited by COVIDIAN zealots as proof of the vaccines effectiveness because it has been peer reviewed. Not even taking into account that the Lancet is an institution of the British government, a government that delights in importing knife wielding Muslim fanatics to chase its people down the street, this Lancet paper is nothing but a hodgepodge of doublespeak.
They should have been able to see through the compartmentalization of their science and write TheBlood of Christ, or something like it warning the world what their science was being used for. Instead I had to take a six-month crash course in microbiology to write the Paint it Blue pieces, the definitive word on MK Ultra. The former of which was read by millions and translated into multiple languages, mostly through the somewhat heroic Duncan Roads and his iconic Nexus Magazine. TheBlood of Christ was sandboxed, and now every sentient being on this planet can see why…
The Lancet study is useless ancient history. The Delta variant is a whole new ballgame and my own observations coupled with common sense tell me the vaccine is worthless against it. I heard a lot of other stories in New York about the vaccinated coming down with COVID, but those I cannot verify. The famed rock group Kiss had to cancel at least four concerts at the end of August when two of the fully vaccinated members of the band; Paul Stanley and Gene Simmons, came down with it.
Iconic New England Patriot coach Bill Belichick has just publicly stated that “quite a high number of players throughout the league have had the virus and been vaccinated.” Belichick went on to assess the media claims that vaccination is a solution as “unsubstantiated by what is occurring in football training camps this year.” (2)
Belichick is not the only big-time football coach to notice that the media is lying, and the vaccine does not work. “With Georgia set to host its first home game against UAB at Sanford Stadium on Saturday, coach Kirby Smart [Head Coach of the Georgia Bulldogs] said three or four of his players are sidelined with COVID-19. Smart declined to identify the players during a teleconference with reporters on Monday. It is unknown whether they will be available to play against the Blazers on Saturday (3:30 p.m. ET, ESPN2).
“I’ll be honest with you, I’m as concerned as I’ve ever been, because we have three or four guys out with COVID and we have a couple staff members that have been out with COVID here recently,” Smart said. “For us, we’re at our highest spike. And people are talking about vaccinations, well these are people that are vaccinated.” (3)
But the bought off media are doing their maleficent best to obfuscate the vaccines ineffectiveness and anecdotes whenever possible are eliminated. Apparently that goes for heads of states too. “When the president of Tanzania received the WHO PCR kits and their PCR machine, because of his background, he was a chemist and knew a lot about biology, he told the WHO staff “well okay give me some swabs.” He went and swabbed a fruit, a papaya. He swabbed a bird called the African Kware. He swabbed various life forms that aren’t human beings, even automobile oil. He gave the samples first and last names, some from a thirty-year-old female, some were under the name of a forty-five-year-old male. He took those swabs to the WHO staff, telling them they were ready for analysis.
They ran the samples through the machine and they came back positive. Remarking to them about how weird their results were he told them to please leave the country and take the PCR kits with them. After expelling the WHO he posted a video which went viral all over the world. This was last year a few months into the pandemic. Well the president of Tanzania died very strangely and we still don’t know how he died. All we know is it wasn’t Walt Disney, no.
Two more presidents from Africa that did not want to comply with the WHO also died. The president of Haiti was killed a month ago because he didn’t want Haitians vaccinated. The president of Madagascar said publicly twenty days ago that the WHO had offered him seventy million dollars to vaccinate Madagascar. An attack was made on him ten days later that nearly cost him his life. The president of Belarus, another head of state weary of the WHO, was also attacked and almost killed.” (4)
On Thursday August 26 Japan’s Health ministry announced: “that contaminants were found in some unused doses of Moderna Inc.’s COVID-19 vaccine and the use of around 1.63 million doses from the same production line has been suspended as a precaution.
At least 180,000 potentially contaminated shots have already been administered in 19 of the country’s 47 prefectures including Tokyo and Osaka, according to a Kyodo News tally based on local government reports.” (5)
“The foreign substances have been confirmed since Aug. 16 at eight vaccination sites in five prefectures — Ibaraki, Saitama, Tokyo, Gifu and Aichi. They were found in a total of 39 vials.
Takeda [Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. is in charge of the sale and distribution of the vaccine in Japan] reported them to the ministry on Wednesday.
The composition of the foreign matter, a few millimeters in size, has not been determined.
The “small black materials” reported to the ministry could be metallic fragments, one of its senior officials said.
Takeda has requested an emergency probe by Moderna, while urging medical institutions and other entities not to administer any vaccine showing abnormalities, even doses not subject to the suspension.” (6)
Just four days later: “Two Japanese prefectures temporarily suspended their rollouts of the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine on Sunday after “foreign substances” were discovered in more batches” (7)
“An earlier version of this story cited a Reuters report which suggested that Japanese authorities have suspended an additional 1 million doses of the Moderna vaccine. But a corrected version of the article noted that only two regions decided to put a temporary hold on their shots.” (8)
Inexplicably on Friday September 3 after just one year in office “Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga announced plans to resign” only weeks before Japan’s critical general election. It gets even better. “Vaccine czar Taro Kono — a 58-year-old former foreign minister — plans to seek the LDP presidency…” (9) The Liberal Democratic Party is Japan’s dominant party and their candidate will be the odds on favorite to become the new Prime Minister.
Many ignorant Americans can simply shrug off what’s coming out of Tanzania and Haiti, but Japan and Israel are two of the most scientifically developed nations in the world. Western journalists who ignore and even cover up recent events occurring in these country’s raising questions about this so said vaccine, while clamoring for twelve-year-old children to get it, are not only blatantly derelict of duty but knowingly participating in a deadly worldwide conspiracy.
Yes I said it, conspiracy, a conspiracy that has killed a million and counting. I cannot even think of a penalty suitable enough to compensate their crimes. Those that pay them any credence are unwittingly participating in the murder of you and your children as well as their own. It is they that need to be put into camps, for their own good and for the good of the human race.
I heard story after story about adverse reactions from that vaccine while I was in New York, all firsthand experiences from people I’ve known for years. One of my cousin’s sons friends, who I’ve known since he was five had to get one for college. He told me he started convulsing three hours after they injected him. He had to be rushed to the hospital and was still feeling jittery a week later.
One explanation for the damage the vaccine is doing to its victims stands out as particularly plausible. The vaccine works by being spread through the body by the lymphatic system. The tiny capillaries that comprise the system are damaged by the spiked proteins the vaccine is designed to induce and blockages are formed from the resulting miniature blood clots when the immune system attempts to repair them. In order to prove this a D Dimer test specific to detecting only recently formed blood clots must be performed within four to seven days after the victim is assaulted with the vaccine. Upon his administration of the D Dimer test Dr Charles Hoffe of British Columbia found that “62% of his own patients injected with an mRNA shot are positive.” (10)
He is adamant: “The blood clots we hear about which the media claim are very rare are the big blood clots which are the ones that cause strokes and show up on CT scans, MRI, etc. The clots I’m talking about are microscopic and too small to find on any scan. They can thus only be detected using the D-dimer test…
“The most alarming part of this is that there are some parts of the body like the brain, spinal cord, heart and lungs which cannot re-generate. When those tissues are damaged by blood clots they are permanently damaged.”
The result, says Dr Hoffe, is that these patients have what is termed Reduced Effort Tolerance (RET) which means they get out of breath much easily than they used to. It is because the blood vessels in their lungs are now blocked up. In turn, this causes the heart to need to work harder to try to keep up against a much greater resistance trying to get the blood through your lungs.
This is called pulmonary artery hypertension – high blood pressure in the lungs because the blood simply cannot get through effectively. People with this condition usually die of heart failure within a few short years.
Dr Hoffe warns sadly, “These shots are causing huge damage and the worst is yet to come.” (11)
Tucker Carlson and Glen Greeenwald aside, the talking heads in the main stream media need to be dragged from their pulpits and clubbed to death like the Norwegians used to do baby seals. No sense wasting bullets meant for the assassins who serve their overlords. With the exception of Duncan Roads and Nexus Magazine much of the bigtime alternative media has also been co-opted. Those that have not been; too often are either incompetent, undisciplined or both. A few have even been inserted to sew confusion into the resistance. Stew Peters comes to mind. As a very astute French patron of mine pointed out; “say his name a few times and you get Stupider…”
As another patron said; “Anyone the controllers let have a national audience is suspect.” Having cut my teeth writing for Veterans Today, a “limited hangout” as described by its senior editor Gordon Duff, I think I know as much about the deliberate spread of disinformation, what the professionals call a psy-op, as anyone in the world. A good psy-op contains as much truth as is deemed safe by the progenitor. It’s an artform. It’s just like baiting a hook, a good fisherman can feed a village, a good propagandist a nation.
Stupider set the hook back at the end of July with this headline: EXCLUSIVE! Karen Kingston, a former Pfizer employee and current analyst for the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, came forward with indisputable documentation that should be shared with the ENTIRE WORLD! (12)
Kingston’s documentation supposedly proved unequivocally that there is Graphene oxide in the vaccine. Because we need graphene to be in that vaccine to link it to doctor Charles Lieber and his injectable neural networks, whose arrest for running the Wuhan Lab back in late January of 2020 while he was on the payroll of the DoD started the COVID era, because we need graphene or an equivalent to link the COVID era to the rise of 5G, the Jack Heart team bought into it, for a day. One of my Dutch researchers, who has been working tirelessly since early 2020 with a team of Dutch scientists to put an end to the COVID era, shot Ms. Kingston’s story so full of holes, that it should have not only killed Kingston but Stupider too.
Unfortunately it didn’t and most recently Stupider introduced Dr. Paul E. Alexander into the simmering COVID fray. Alexander is a Canadian health researcher and a former Trump Administration official at the United States Department of Health and Human Services during the COVID fiasco. Alexander is certain that his former master Donald Trump was misled by his own “task force.” Acting as an apologist for Trump and looking much like Gunga Din, Alexander sounds just like Dr Charles Hoffe explaining that due to Myocarditis the children getting the vaccines should not expect to live more than twenty to twenty-five years. He goes on to say: “the vaccines are a problem; they are a big, big problem and we are seeing it with the adverse events now occurring…” (13)
“The spike protein that is actually the business end of the virus that causes the damage in you. And it is really a vascular illness, it damages the vascularity of the arterial system. That spike is what we inject into you. We are injecting genetic material in this lipid nano particle asking yourself to build this spiked protein that your immune system will now respond to and develop an immunity. We are injecting you with the actual business end of the virus that causes the pathology. And now we are seeing that the vaccines have failed. You are seeing that in the Delta variant, you are seeing it in Israel where almost all double vaccinated people are now infected, you are seeing it in Britain, you are seeing it now in the United States. So the vaccines are not working and to even propose a booster shot when you can’t even get the second shot sorted out and we have all these breakthrough infections is a catastrophic failure. And the FDA did a disservice to the public because they have just issued an approval for a vaccine that is unavailable but extended emergency use for an available unapproved vaccine. This is the most wrong sided upside-down thing. I think the FDA tried a trick on the American public here…” (14)
Stupider then asks Alexander one of his much lauded, by him, probing and insightful questions: “the vaccine that’s available, the emergency authorization, or use authorization was extended, that vaccine is not FDA approved? The FDA approval is for a vaccine that is not yet available?” Alexander’s answer is definitive: “Right, so it’s a trick, it was so CNN, and the media could 24/7 broadcast the vaccine is now approved by the FDA. That was a lie!” (15)
Stupider never even misses a beat during his interview with Trumps top gun at the Department of Health and Human Services. Nor does he come close to apologizing to his seemingly instant national audience. Two days before he had again rolled out Pfizer’s professional disinformation dispenser Karen Kingston. This after we and even Zuckerberg’s Chinese “fact checkers” from Wuhan Lab, showed her to be a lair last month. This time Kingston was out to okey-dokey the FDA’s approval of her for now covert employer; Pfizer’s vaccine. “Unequivocally,” she said Pfizer’s vaccine was now approved, producing her usual bogus documentation. But on a happier note Stupider and his less than credulous audience had reason to rejoice. According to Kingston the FDA’s ruling would make Pfizer liable in a court of law for their poison poke. It’s “checkmate for big Pharma.” (16)
Much like the illegitimate Biden Administration this is complete Malarkey. The FDA has betrayed the American people and pulled a bait and switch for their true sponsor; Pfizer. The biopharmaceutical industry provides seventy five percent of the FDA’s funding. Under the FDA ruling “Pfizer has absolutely zero liability!” The quote is from my other cousin; well-known alternative media activist the Sage of Quay who demolished Kingston the very next day after Dr. Alexander did. The Sage goes into great detail. Please listen to his commentary as you watch the video at:
Long the bane of herbalists and traditional medicine that has proven its value over centuries, the FDA has now crossed the line and committed high treason. Every member of that organization has now made themselves, and the authority vested in them by the American people, an instrument of global genocide. They’ve just had their trial right here and summary execution awaits each and every one of them. If America can execute Mabeline for smoking to much methamphetamine and unwittingly shooting granny dead it sure as hell better execute these vilest of creatures.
These fiends fully intend on murdering your children and like the biblical days of yore, you their parents will commend them to Moloch when you bring them in to get “vaccinated.” Some of the smarter ones are already bailing out: “Marion Gruber, director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research & Review and 32-year veteran of the agency, will leave at the end of October, and OVRR deputy director Phil Krause, who’s been at FDA for more than a decade, will leave in November. The news, first reported by BioCentury, is a massive blow to confidence in the agency’s ability to regulate vaccines.
The bombshell announcement comes at a particularly crucial moment, as boosters and children’s shots are being weighed by the regulator. The departures also come as the administration has recently jumped ahead of the FDA’s reviews of booster shots, announcing that they might be available by the week of Sept. 20…” (17)
Every sentient being knows that vaccine is killing and maiming people, the stories on which they base their conclusion are not from the internet, they are first-hand information, just like my own anecdotes. Dr. Alexander is not from the internet either. He is one of the top guns on the subject of COVID for the rightful occupant of the White House; Donald Trump.
For the military to stand idly by and let this usurper just assume dictatorial powers is the greatest betrayal of a people by their own army in all of recorded history. Now the senile malignancy that crawls on his knees to other heads of state when it suits him, looks at his watch at ceremonies for the families of marines who died carrying out his orders and forgets what he’s saying half the time when he’s talking wants to inject children with a concoction that will eventually kill them. Still they have done nothing?
Although there is a preponderance of evidence that there is no one has yet proven definitively that there is Graphene oxide in that vaccine. Scanning electron microscopes have picked up foreign material, as have the Japanese but no doubt it will take a lab like the one they got in Los Alamos to positively identify it. These are not amateurs that have launched this attack against the human race. They have made sure all their ducks were aligned before they did. They bought up all the scheming scoundrels in government and every media outlet they could, along with a medical community that has always been given far more respect than they deserve. Truth be told, the human race was healthier without them.
“This photo shows a Trypanosoma Parasite approximately 50 microns in length found in the so-called Pfizer “vaccine”. It is composed of carbon, oxygen chromium, sulfur, aluminum, chloride, and nitrogen.” (18)
There has been a parasite positively identified in Pfizer’s vaccine. Parasites are the cutting edge of mind control:
‘Pathogens have been known to hijack their host’s body through the molecular manipulation of chemicals. In a most extreme case the fungus Ophiocordyceps unilateralis sometimes referred to as the Zombie fungus turns its host, an ant, into a zombie that lives only to serve the life cycle of its parasite. The ant leaves its life with its colony in the tree to live in the dank dark places of the rainforest floor as if it were a fungus. Finally it crawls up and out on a branch, clasps its mandibles to a leaf and dies as the fungus bursts through its head and spores.
In the case of the parasitic worms Spinochordodes tellinii and Paragordius tricuspidatus, they force their cricket or grasshopper host to leap into a body of water and drown. The worm then emerges from the insects floating corpse to swim away and find a mate. Studies of P. tricuspidatus have shown that it produces effector molecules that manipulate the cricket’s central nervous system. S. tellinii reproduces proteins used in the insects signaling pathways. These chemical signals by which the parasite hijacks the body of its host are called mimetic molecules. (68)
Scientific studies have shown mosquitoes carrying Plasmodium falciparum, the parasitic protozoa that causes malaria, not only exhibit heightened predatory senses, but are three times as likely to be attracted to human odors. (69)
Toxoplasma gondii is the parasitic protozoon that causes toxoplasmosis; a disease found all over the world. Estimates suggest that over 30% of the world’s human population is infected. T gondii has been shown to alter behavior in infected rodents, its intermediate host which it uses as a vector, in order to increase the rodents’ chances of being eaten by a cat, its target host and the only animal in which it can sexually reproduce. Infected rodents lose all fear of cats, their greatest natural predator.
In humans, infection by T gondii is held in check by the immune system and Toxoplasmosis is usually asymptomatic. But studies have shown a strong correlation between schizophrenia and the disease. Some studies have shown that women with toxoplasmosis are more likely to cheat on their husbands, men more likely to be aggressive, with slower reaction times for both sexes. (70)
Bacteria may be even more subtle in the manipulation of its host. Subtilis in Latin means to be finely spun, to be exact; to be minutely thorough, strict and precise. Bacteriologists now suspect that the microbiota in people’s stomachs may actually dictate behavior patterns in their human hosts that will more likely result in the bacteria getting their required nutrients. (71)
Those Who Would Arouse Leviathan is available from Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
Something has gone horribly wrong with people, particularly here in America where they cavalierly speak of locking the unvaccinated in concentration camps and depriving them of food, and a means of making a living. They are worse than Hollywood Nazis and nobody says a thing about it. In fact institutions that were founded particularly to guard against this type of authoritarian nightmare now throw their support behind it. Iconic journalists like Glen Greenwald are perplexed:
In a New York Times op-ed this week, the group completely reversed its views, arguing vaccine mandates help civil liberties and bodily autonomy “is not absolute.”
Protest for medical freedom and health choice in Minnesota, Stop the mandates, Minnesota citizens demand informed consent and transparency in matters of health choice and medical freedom without coercion. (Photo by: Michael Siluk/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) surprised even many of its harshest critics this week when they strongly defended coercive programs and other mandates from the state in the name of fighting COVID. “Far from compromising them, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties,” its Twitter account announced, adding that “vaccine requirements also safeguard those whose work involves regular exposure to the public.”
If you were surprised to see the ACLU heralding the civil liberties imperatives of “vaccine mandates” and “vaccine requirements” — whereby the government coerces adults to inject medicine into their own bodies that they do not want — the New York Times op-ed which the group promoted, written by two of its senior lawyers, was even more extreme. The article begins with this rhetorical question: “Do vaccine mandates violate civil liberties?” Noting that “some who have refused vaccination claim as much,” the ACLU lawyers say: “we disagree.” The op-ed then examines various civil liberties objections to mandates and state coercion — little things like, you know, bodily autonomy and freedom to choose — and the ACLU officials then invoke one authoritarian cliché after the next (“these rights are not absolute”) to sweep aside such civil liberties concerns:
[W]hen it comes to Covid-19, all considerations point in the same direction. . . . In fact, far from compromising civil liberties, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties. . . . .
[Many claim that] vaccines are a justifiable intrusion on autonomy and bodily integrity. That may sound ominous, because we all have the fundamental right to bodily integrity and to make our own health care decisions. But these rights are not absolute. They do not include the right to inflict harm on others. . . . While vaccine mandates are not always permissible, they rarely run afoul of civil liberties when they involve highly infectious and devastating diseases like Covid-19. . . .
While limited exceptions are necessary, most people can be required to be vaccinated. . . . . Where a vaccine is not medically contraindicated, however, avoiding a deadly threat to the public health typically outweighs personal autonomy and individual freedom.
The op-ed sounds like it was written by an NSA official justifying the need for mass surveillance (yes, fine, your privacy is important but it is not absolute; your privacy rights are outweighed by public safety; we are spying on you for your own good). And the op-ed appropriately ends with this perfect Orwellian flourish: “We care deeply about civil liberties and civil rights for all — which is precisely why we support vaccine mandates.”
What makes the ACLU’s position so remarkable — besides the inherent shock of a civil liberties organization championing state mandates overriding individual choice — is that, very recently, the same group warned of the grave dangers of the very mindset it is now pushing. In 2008, the ACLU published a comprehensive report on pandemics which had one primary purpose: to denounce as dangerous and unnecessary attempts by the state to mandate, coerce, and control in the name of protecting the public from pandemics.
The title of the ACLU report, resurfaced by David Shane, reveals its primary point: “Pandemic Preparedness: The Need for a Public Health – Not a Law Enforcement/National Security – Approach.” To read this report is to feel that one is reading the anti-ACLU — or at least the actual ACLU prior to its Trump-era transformation. From start to finish, it reads as a warning of the perils of precisely the mindset which today’s ACLU is now advocating for COVID.
In 2008, the group explained its purpose this way: “the following report examines the relationship between civil liberties and public health in contemporary U.S. pandemic planning and makes a series of recommendations for developing a more effective, civil liberties-friendly approach. Its key warning: “Not all public health interventions have been benign or beneficial, however. Too often, fears aroused by disease and epidemics have encouraged abuses of state power. Atrocities, large and small, have been committed in the name of protecting the public’s health.”
2008 report of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
The immediate impetus for the ACLU’s 2008 report was two-fold: 1) the 2008 emergence of the avian bird flu pandemic, which produced highly alarmist and ultimately false headlines around the world about millions dying; and 2) new pandemic legislation and regulatory frameworks, enacted in the wake of 9/11, premised on the view, as the ACLU put it, “that every outbreak of disease could be the beginning of some horrific epidemic, requiring the suspension of civil liberties.”
The ACLU issued its 2008 report to warn that the worst possible way to respond to a deadly pandemic was through coercion and mandates. Instead, the group argued — as one would expect from a civil liberties organization — persuasion and voluntary compliance were both more effective and less likely to erode core liberties. As they put it:
The lessons from history should be kept in mind whenever we are told by government officials that “tough,” liberty-limiting actions are needed to protect us from dangerous diseases. Specifically: coercion and brute force are rarely necessary. In fact they are generally counterproductive—they gratuitously breed public distrust and encourage the people who are most in need of care to evade public health authorities. On the other hand, effective, preventive strategies that rely on voluntary participation do work.
The key dichotomy emphasized by the 2008 version of the ACLU was the difference between constructive and persuasive messaging regarding public health versus the use of law enforcement and forced mandates. Starting with the report’s title (“The Need for a Public Health – Not a Law Enforcement/National Security – Approach”) through every section, the ACLU urges that mandates and coercion be dispensed with in favor of voluntary compliance and educational messages:
Government agencies have an essential role to play in helping to prevent and mitigate epidemics. Unfortunately, in recent years, our government’s approach to preparing the nation for a possible influenza pandemic has been highly misguided. Too often, policymakers are resorting to law enforcement and national security-oriented measures that not only suppress individual rights unnecessarily, but have proven to be ineffective in stopping the spread of disease and saving lives . . . .
This law enforcement/national security strategy shifts the focus of preparedness from preventing and mitigating an emergency to punishing people who fail to follow orders and stay healthy.
Much of the report is devoted to an examination of how the U.S. government has historically treated pandemics. As it reviews each pandemic — including horrifically lethal ones such as the plague and smallpox — the ACLU concludes over and over that American health authorities excessively relied on coercion rather than education and persuasion, fueled by media-aided fear porn and alarmist narratives:
Lessons from History: American history contains vivid reminders that grafting the values of law enforcement and national security onto public health is both ineffective and dangerous. Too often, fears aroused by disease and epidemics have justified abuses of state power. Highly discriminatory and forcible vaccination and quarantine measures adopted in response to outbreaks of the plague and smallpox over the past century have consistently accelerated rather than slowed the spread of disease, while fomenting public distrust and, in some cases, riots.
Amazingly, the model that the ACLU identifies as the one that must be avoided is precisely the one that it is now urging be used for COVID. Compare, for instance, the ACLU’s defense of coercive mandates in its New York Times op-ed this week (vaccine mandates “rarely run afoul of civil liberties”) with this ringing endorsement of the need to preserve freedom of choice in its 2008 report:
This model assumes that we must “trade liberty for security.” As a result, instead of helping individuals and communities through education and provision of health care, today’s pandemic prevention focuses on taking aggressive, coercive actions against those who are sick. People, rather than the disease, become the enemy.
What most worried the 2008 version of the ACLU was that authoritarian power vested in the hands of public health officials in the form of mandates and coercion will become permanent given that we will always live with such threats and endless pandemics. That was why, urged that iteration of the ACLU, we must opt for an approach that relies on education programs and voluntary compliance rather than state mandates.
“The law enforcement approach to public health offers a rationale for the endless suspension of civil liberties,” they explained. Using post-9/11 expansions of state power as its framework, the group explained that “the ‘Global War on Terror may go on for a generation, but the war on disease will continue until the end of the human race. There will always be a new disease, always the threat of a new pandemic. If that fear justifies the suspension of liberties and the institution of an emergency state, then freedom and the rule of law will be permanently suspended.”
The ACLU’s New York Times op-ed this week repeatedly stressed that coercive mandates are justified whenever “the disease is highly transmissible, serious and lethal.” But its 2008 report argued exactly the opposite. The report was critical of forced vaccinations and other mandates in prior outbreaks of smallpox — certainly a highly contagious and lethal disease — but then argued that when the disease reappeared in the late 1940s, New York City handled it much better by offering voluntary vaccines and education programs rather than coercive measures:
In contrast, New York City relied on a different approach in 1947, one that viewed the public as the client rather than the enemy of public health. When smallpox reappeared in the city after a long absence, the city educated the public about the problem and instituted a massive voluntary vaccination campaign. Not surprisingly, no coercion was needed. Provided with information about the need for and benefits of vaccination, and reassurance that the city was helping rather than attacking them, the citizens of the New York turned out en masse for one of the world’s largest voluntary vaccination campaigns. The campaign was successful, and the epidemic was quashed before it had a chance to spread broadly in the city or beyond.
In the scheme of repressive measures that worried the 2008 ACLU, “compulsory isolation and quarantine are among the most coercive non-pharmaceutical interventions that may be employed during a pandemic.” They minced no words about such policies: “civil liberties concerns arise when these interventions are imposed by law.”
The ACLU did not merely warn with words of the dangers of excessive pandemic coercion. They also legally represented at least one client who they viewed as the victim of public health hysteria and tyranny. In 2006, “a 27-year-old tuberculosis patient named Robert Daniels was involuntarily quarantined in Phoenix, Arizona for disobeying an order by Maricopa County health officials to wear a face mask in public at all times.” Even once Daniels was released and it turned out he had a less severe case of TB than originally assumed, “Sheriff Joe Arpaio publicly threatened him with prosecution for the pre-quarantine events.”
The ACLU’s lesson from that case, and similar ones it had handled, was clear: these cases “are cautionary tales that illustrate the counterproductive nature of a punitive, law enforcement approach to preventing the spread of disease.” Most important of all, said the civil liberties group, coercive steps — such as mandates and quarantines — not only endanger civil liberties but are less effective in improving the public health, because they convert the public from cooperative allies into enemies that must be controlled and punished:
These efforts require working with rather than against communities, providing communities with as healthy an environment as possible, health care if they need it, and the means to help themselves and their neighbors. Most importantly, to protect public health, public health policies must aim to help, rather than to suppress, the public.
A separate ACLU report from 2015, issued during the ebola epidemic, contained a similar message. It warned “against politically motivated and scientifically unwarranted quarantines, which the report found violated individuals’ rights and hampered efforts to end the outbreak.” Hysteria over ebola became so intense that the ACLU “found that people were illegally deprived of their right to due process under the 14th Amendment because the quarantines and movement restrictions were not scientifically justified.”
While both reports acknowledge that more restrictive measures can be justified under extreme circumstances, the crux of each is that voluntary compliance is better than coercion, that state mandates typically fail, and that the far greater danger is vesting too much power in the hands of the state, which it will never relinquish given the permanence of pandemics.
How the ACLU fell from those traditional and vital civil liberties positions to urging this week in The New York Times that “far from compromising civil liberties, vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties,” is anyone’s guess. But what is beyond doubt is that it is a far fall indeed. And most of all, hearing the ACLU invoke the standard rationale of authoritarians — we all have the fundamental right to bodily integrity and to make our own health care decisions, but these rights are not absolute — is nothing short of jarring.”
