The beginning of the end for the USA

I’m reading Martin van Creveld’s The Rise and Decline of the State and came across this passage regarding government centralizing services:

By that time even the United States, traditionally the stronghold of rugged individualism and low taxes (to make the House of Lords vote money for his plans, Lloyd George had threatened to create the necessary number of new peers), was feeling the need to do something for its working population.  A modest first step had been taken in 1912 when the Commonwealth of Massachusetts passed a law requiring the payment of minimum wages.  However, it only lasted a few years; in 1923 a Supreme Court decision declared a State of Oregon minimum-wage law for women unconstitutional.  Other measures to extend government control and limit private enterprise were equally unsuccessful.  For example, the number of persons who benefited from a government vocational education scheme instituted in 1917 was so small that statistics about it simply ceased to be published.  In 1920 a law calling for the abolition of child labor failed to make it through Congress.  Five years later, a Kansas law for the compulsory arbitration of industrial disputes was similarly thrown out of the High Court.  In 1929, the last year of prosperity, all American federal welfare expenditure combined only amounted to $0.25 per head of population, which constituted perhaps one percent of its British equivalent.

In the event it took the Great Depression and 12 million unemployed to shake the United States out of the world of laissez faire and into the one in which, whatever the names attached to the various schemes, welfare came to be financed out of taxation.  The foundations were laid in 1933 when President Roosevelt, ignoring howls of Republican opposition, set up the Federal Emergency Relief Agency (FERA).  Its first director was a social worker, Harry Hopkins; armed with a war chest of $500,000,000, it provided work for at least some of those who needed it.  Over the next six years this and numerous other programs led to the spending of some $13 billion over and the construction of 122,000 public buildings, 77,000 bridges, and 64,000 miles of roads inter alia – all, however, without making a real dent in the Depression which only ended in September 1939 when, following the outbreak of war in Europe, the stock exchange went through the roof.

Administratively speaking, the annus mirabilis of the New Deal proved to be 1935.  That year saw the introduction of social security including old-age insurance and assistance, unemployment compensation, aid to dependent children, and aid to the blind.  In 1939 survivors’ and disability insurance, already a standard feature in the most advanced European countries, were added to the list.  By that time every American citizen had been issued with his or her social security card and the Department of Health and Human Services had been created to oversee the system’s operation.  Even the Supreme Court was prepared to cooperate, though not before Roosevelt, having fought a battle royal with Congress, packed it with his own supporters.  In 1937 a Washington State minimum wage law was declared constitutional.  Another ruling did the same for social security itself; the age of big government had truly begun.

If only we could go back to the days where the Supreme Court actually respected the Constitution and “rugged individualism” was the law of the land.  Instead we let the socialists take over and burden us with the albatrosses of welfare and social security, and a bit later open borders.

Self-responsibility is a powerful motivator.  Yes, some people suffered by some of those Supreme Court decisions and yes, some people would have suffered if some of those social service programs weren’t in place (note that these social service programs did not end the Depression).  But you know what?  Having the onus on you and you alone to survive and fulfill your destiny is a powerful motivator.  When there is no guaranteed safety net most people will be motivated to work, or else that’s it.  With that also comes a greater sense of satisfaction.  And it is better for EVERYONE in the long run.  Sometimes we need to let things fail.  Some short-term pain saves a lot worse long-term suffering.  These decisions made decades ago have shackled us and our children and future generations.  They have destroyed far more lives than the few individuals who would have suffered at the time.

Adding these disastrous programs, in combination with the 1965 Immigration Act, which opened the floodgates for people who had no allegiance to the founding of the country and do not have the will (or often the capacity) to possibly live up to the original American ideal, and you have a bonafide disaster on your hands.  The demographic alteration that took place because of that cannot be emphasized enough.  The country, as it was before these social services programs and opening the borders, fundamentally changed forever.  And for the worse.

DACA extension for wall offer

Well, it looks like the Axios report regarding the offer President Trump was going to make at his presser today was correct.  Essentially he offered a three year DACA extension for the $5.7 billion.  Whatever happened to negotiating for $25 billion?  Or building a wall across the entire border, not just certain areas?  Why are we negotiating at all for people who are here illegally anyways?  Are we really so stupid to think that rewarding lawlessness will lead to anything other than encouragement of more lawlessness?

President Trump deserves the benefit of the doubt, for now.  This all could be part of a bigger play.  He may know they won’t take it and he will then have the upper hand over more people in the court of public opinion.  God I hope this is the play.

The more one hears though the more one thinks the country is probably already doomed.  Yes, stopping illegal immigration is a top priority.  But even legal immigration needs a complete makeover.  If we continue to allow any and all people in even legally the demographic complexion of the country will change to something unrecognizable.  We’re already going that way.  I have nothing against Hispanics, or Africans, or anyone else, but I also don’t want to live in a country that’s predominantly Hispanic.  I just don’t.  But that’s the trajectory we are on.  Birth rates and legal and illegal immigration trends point that way.  Do you want to live in a new version of Mexico?  Is it really so racist to bring this up?  To want to live in a country going forward with the same demographic makeup as we had when we were younger?  Would we shame an African for saying he didn’t want to live amongst white people if his country were all of a sudden majority white in his homeland?

It’s probably already too late.  President Trump, for all the good he has done, hasn’t gone far enough and won’t go far enough.  He’s a civic nationalist.  And his ideas, while idealistic, are a bit naive.  Unless legal immigration is brought to a trickle or halted altogether America as we know it will have exactly zero shot of surviving in its current form.  And the result of increased diversity and multiculturalism will inevitably lead to war.  It always does.

A Friendly Reminder

Could you imagine how big a story it would be if it was discovered that a Republican Congressman had a Chinese spy working on his staff for 20 years?  That’s a question posed, surprisingly, by The Washington Post in an article from August of 2018 with regards to the revelation that Diane Feinstein had just that.  It is now six months later and this story has been completely forgotten.  From that article:

Feinstein acknowledged the infiltration but played down its significance. “Five years ago the FBI informed me it had concerns that an administrative member of my California staff was potentially being sought out by the Chinese government to provide information,” Feinstein said in a statement — which means the breach took place while Feinstein was heading the Intelligence Committee. But, Feinstein insisted, “he never had access to classified or sensitive information or legislative matters” and was immediately fired. In other words: junior staffer, no policy role, no access to secrets, quickly fired — no big deal.

But it is a big deal. I asked several former senior intelligence and law enforcement officials how serious this breach might have been. “It’s plenty serious,” one former top Justice Department official told me. “Focusing on his driver function alone, in Mafia families, the boss’s driver was among the most trusted men in the crew, because among other things he heard everything that was discussed in the car.”

A former top CIA clandestine officer explained to me what the agency would do if it had recruited the driver of a senior official such as Feinstein. “We would have the driver record on his phone all conversations that Feinstein would have with passengers and phone calls in her car. If she left her phone, iPad or laptop in the car while she went to meetings, social events, dinners, etc., we would have the driver download all her devices. If the driver drove for her for 20 years, he would probably would have had access to her office and homes. We would have had the source put down an audio device in her office or homes if the opportunity presented itself. Depending on the take from all of what the source reported, we would use the info to target others that were close to her and exhibited some type of vulnerability.”

“In short,” this officer said, “we would have had a field day.”

This would be nonstop coverage from the mainstream media if it were indeed a Republican Congressman.  Don Lemon would be crying and demanding justice on a nightly basis.  Dig a little deeper and you notice that they certainly try to obfuscate this fact and cover it up.  Snopes.com, whom we are to believe is the bastion of truth, says this claim is unproven.  Because any company that does the fact-checking for Facebook should be blindly believed, right?  But we are a society with an ever decreasing attention span, so once a story leaves the news cycle I guess that means the issue is settled, huh?

If the story doesn’t fit the narrative…bury it

CNN requested a local perspective in San Diego regarding the border.  Of course, when the reporter reported that the barrier actually has been working…they no longer wanted the report:

We believe CNN declined a report from KUSI because we informed them that most Border Patrol Agents we have spoken to told us the barrier does in fact work.

We have continuously been told by Border Patrol Agents that the barrier along the Southern border helps prevent illegal entries, drugs, and weapons from entering the United States, and the numbers prove it.

Meanwhile, California has spent $5 billion on a bullet train that isn’t anywhere near completed.  I wonder what one could buy with roughly $5 billion right about now…

#priorities

A Race to the Bottom

As the Government shutdown continues to drag on one thing seems apparent: those opposing the wall are hoping their constituents aren’t paying attention or just don’t care.  Consider a few of the facts presented by President Trump in a letter President Trump sent to Congress earlier this month:

  • In fiscal year (FY) 2018, 17,000 adults at the border with existing criminal records were arrested by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and border agents.
  • In FY2017 and FY2018, ICE officers arrested approximately 235,000 aliens on various criminal charges or convictions within the interior of the United States—including roughly 100,000 for assault, 30,000 for sex crimes, and 4,000 for homicides.
  • We are now averaging 60,000 illegal and inadmissible aliens a month on our Southern Border.
  • Last month alone, more than 20,000 minors were smuggled into the United States.
  • The immigration court backlog is nearly 800,000 cases.
  • There has been a 2,000 percent increase in asylum claims over the last five years, with the largest growth coming from Central America—while around 9 in 10 claims from Central American migrants are ultimately rejected by the immigration courts, the applicant has long since been released into the interior of the United States.
  • In FY2017, roughly 135,000 illegal and inadmissible family units arrived from Central America. Of those, less than 2 percent have been successfully removed from the country due to a shortage of resources and glaring loopholes in our federal laws.
  • So far in FY2019, we have seen a 280 percent increase in family units from FY2018.
  • 300 Americans are killed every week from heroin—90 percent of which floods across our Southern Border.
  • Illegal immigration is a humanitarian crisis: 1 in 3 migrant women is sexually assaulted on the journey northward to the U.S. border; 50 illegal migrants a day are referred for emergency medical care; and CBP rescues 4,300 people a year who are in danger and distress.

That is an airtight case that there is a problem at the border and that a wall is one of many things that needs to be done to help curb the problem.  Then consider that through restructuring NAFTA we are saving billions of dollars (Mexico indirectly paying), or consider the staggering amounts of wasteful government spending that occurs on a daily basis.  Or how about the amount of money we spend on foreign wars that we shouldn’t even be a part of?  Or this; Rand Paul recently tweeted that we give foreign aid to China and borrow money from them to pay them back…

screen shot 2019-01-12 at 8.54.58 am

The point being that we waste so much money on so much crap that even if the wall was a complete waste of money, $5.7 billion dollars is less than a drop in the bucket compared to the amount we spend each year and why not give it a shot to see if it does anything?

It gets even worse.  Chuck and Nancy, the two-headed monster that is the mouthpiece of the opposition party, voted for fencing several times, as did then Senators Obama and Clinton.  We even had the money earmarked for it and the fence was simply never built.  So we’re supposed to take Chuck and Nancy on their word that it’s immoral and just bad for *reasons* while they previously voted for it in the past?  And for the cherry on top, why is it okay that we fund a wall in Jordan but cannot do the same for ourselves?  Why is it okay for Israel to have a wall but not for ourselves?  Did you know Chuck Schumer, as well as many other members of Congress have dual citizenship and are Israeli citizens as well?  Why is it okay for them to defend their borders, Chuck, but we aren’t?

It is clear they do not care about Americans and in fact think so little of us that they think we’re stupid enough to listen to them deride the wall without noticing their past track record or their current stances in general.  It is downright insulting and shows the absolute disdain with which they view the American public.

Which leads to the thrust of the idea.  I really believe these people are hoping that they can dumb down the American public faster than they think we can catch onto their lies.  Watch a news broadcast from even 15 years ago compared to today.  You may once in a while actually find a spirited debate where opposing views are actually debated at the same time and both viewpoints being heard.  Take a look at this video of Jared Taylor talking with Donahue about race in America.  This conversation would NEVER occur today.  They would NEVER want you to hear the facts or hear the viewpoint that Jared brings to the table.  No.  Now segments are one-sided and they are so short nothing of substance is ever said before another commercial break or topic change takes place.  The “opponent” in today’s segments are usually controlled opposition (read: approved).  Sometimes someone like Tucker will get someone on where there is genuine pushback but the segments are so short that neither side can really have the time to get their point across and it often ends in a screaming match that Tucker needs to end because they aren’t getting anywhere.

This isn’t a coincidence.  The mainstream media is dumbing down the American public.  They are removing the critical thinking skills that we all once had in much greater abundance.  Couple that with distracting smart phones, shorter video clips, more commercials, and less people reading, and you get a genuinely dumbed down public.  IQ scores are falling worldwide.  Mainstream media will want you to believe that is due to climate change…but it is more likely due to the reasons stated in the Unz article.  Either way, the fact is they really are falling.  People really are getting dumber.  You are not just imagining it.  And Americans are reading less and less every year which cannot help critical thinking skills or holding attention spans.

All of this adds up to people like Chuck and Nancy thinking they can somehow justify their current position on the wall and not think anyone will notice how patently absurd it is.  Or worse, maybe they do know and just don’t think anyone will care.  Entertainment has been the opiate of the masses.  So long as people are comfortable and distracted many simply will not care about a wall or the hypocrisies of these people.  I fear a majority of the population will be in for a rude awakening when civilization as we know it begins to break down because we never addressed these problems and let them fester and metastasize to the point that they become uncontrollable.  Perhaps we have already passed the point of no return.  The trend certainly seems to be pointing that way.  But maybe it has not.  And I’m thankful we have a President who is standing his ground and genuinely fighting to reverse this trend.

Am I going crazy or are they pushing this vaccine stuff hard

Perhaps it’s just coincidental given the amount of vaccination stories coming out as of late, but it really does seem like they’re pushing this vaccine stuff HARD.  At the Golden Globes the other night they had doctors administer “flu shots”.  Of course, whoever the host was had to add this dig:

If you’re an anti-vaxxer, just put a napkin over your head and we’ll skip you.

BAHAHAHA!  So funny dude!

Curious tweet from Vanity Fair on the whole thing too:

Screen Shot 2019-01-08 at 8.57.01 PM.png

Why would that make you worry if they’re so safe?  Hmmmmm.  This whole thing is creepy and unsettling.  It’s clearly an effort to sway public opinion on the issue.  The mind control is real, folks.  You’re not imagining it.

Meanwhile, there may indeed be a link between vaccines and autism after all.  I still need to research this more before I have a firm opinion one way or another but it’s certainly raising more and more red flags…

The truth and free speech censorship

We discuss the importance of free speech a lot here.  There is a reason it was the first amendment ratified.  There has been a renewed effort to police, patrol, and prohibit free speech on the internet especially within the past few years.  It is something most people take for granted, as if there was no possible way that it could be taken away.

It should give one pause when specific topics or people are verboten to public discourse.  It is often said that “hate speech”, or the speech one disagrees with the most, needs to be vigorously protected the most in these battles.  And that is largely true.  Everyone should be open to the idea of seeing alternative viewpoints and hearing arguments s/he may have never considered before.  Those that think they are doing some greater good (or those using these idealistic people as puppets to further their nefarious agendas) by censoring speech cannot possibly know what is “good” for someone or what should or should not be read.  One’s opinions and ideas should speak for themselves and be subject to scrutiny.  If the idea is founded on truth it should stand up to the weight of critique.

There can be a variety of reasons why one may want to censor particular topics or speech outright.  The type of free speech censorship I want to talk about does not include obvious restrictions that should be put on children.  There are many topics that children should only learn about once they are of appropriate age.

Your “spidey-sense” should go off when certain topics are restricted or punishable by law if they are discussed.  It should raise one’s eyebrows when certain individuals or news outlets are banned or deplatformed en masse by the powers that be.

Ask yourself this: why would a specific topic or event be against the law if spoken out against?  The most obvious example of this is Holocaust denial, which is against the law in 17 countries.  You can literally go to jail if you deny the Holocaust.  Why?  The truth never needs to be covered up.  It can speak for itself.  YouTube has been particularly stringent on banning videos that question the exact details of the Holocaust as of late.  The Greatest Story Never Told used to be available on YouTube in its full form as well as partitioned out.  This is a movie about the life of Adolf Hitler and questions some of the events and the subsequent narrative of World War II and the Holocaust.  Nearly all of those videos have been removed.  Why?  Again, whether you agree or disagree with any of these topics we should all realize they should still be allowed to be shared and viewed.  Stupid ideas, ideas that are patently false, should be available for scrutiny.  They will make themselves look like jackasses if what they are saying is patently false.  That movie in particular does raise some very interesting questions and presents some compelling evidence that the official narrative may not be as true as we’re told (if at all).  It is not the responsibility of YouTube or the government to decide what is and is not the truth or what is best for us.  This level of censorship is on par with totalitarian regimes.  Do we really want to go down this road?

I did a cursory search this past week of many conspiracy theories that one hears about.  You used to be able to find countless videos on all of these topics.  Videos about Holocaust denial, Sandy Hook, Vegas, and the Parkland shooting conspiracy theories are nearly impossible to find now on YouTube.  Videos questioning the age of the pyramids and chem trails have been greatly reduced as well.  Many of these theories are patently ridiculous (looking at you, flat-earthers).  But you know what?  They should still be put up.  I’d be interested to hear their point of view and consider what they’re putting out there.  If it’s absurd they subject themselves to ridicule.  But maybe they’ll present different viewpoints or evidence not considered before.  And again, it’s not YouTube’s place to decide what is and is not acceptable for our viewing consumption.  The videos that were left on those topics were from YouTube approved sources like mainstream news outlets; hardly the institutions that will ever truly question the narrative.  Somewhat surprisingly, you can still find a decent amount of moon landing hoax conspiracy theory videos on YouTube…for now.  Not surprisingly, users exposing the pedophelia epidemic in DC and Hollywood like David Seaman and Jamie Dlux are banned outright or given strikes (and likely soon to be banned).

It gets worse.  This isn’t restricted just to historical or current events.  Questioning the validity of some scientific claims is now punishable too.  In Australia, you can now be thrown in jail for up to 10 years for speaking about the dangers of vaccines.  Why?  Isn’t that mildly suspicious?  If vaccines are so safe for us why should it be against the law to question their validity?  Especially in light of the fact that more than 50% of scientific studies cannot be reproduced by their peers.  We should be questioning scientific data and results more than ever now.  How long will it be before it’s against the law to question our contribution to climate change?

Whatever dark forces are conspiring to keep these topics off limits are doing themselves a disservice in that they are showing their hand and creating smoke in areas they wanted to be ignored altogether.  I, like most people, never really questioned the details of the Holocaust too much before hearing about those laws.  Similarly, in my recent posts about vaccine skepticism it was more of a curiosity for me.  Laws like this only make me more skeptical.

The truth does not need laws to protect it.  It can speak for itself.  Let people question the Holocaust or vaccines all they want.  If the evidence is ironclad that the events went down as said, or that a particular vaccine is safe for public consumption, then they do not need laws to prohibit speaking against them.  Prohibition only raises more questions.

Do not be afraid to pursue the truth.  It will never lead you astray.  Do not be afraid of what you will find.  Often times it is very ugly or depressing.  Often times the coverup is worse than the truth itself.  It is when we willingly turn away or hide it completely that we end up lying to ourselves, and when you can lie to yourself you open the door to darker evils.

China lands a probe on the far side of the Moon

Via space.com:

Humanity just planted its flag on the far side of the moon.

China’s robotic Chang’e 4 mission touched down on the floor of the 115-mile-wide (186 kilometers) Von Kármán Crater Wednesday night (Jan. 2), pulling off the first-ever soft landing on the mysterious lunar far side.

Chang’e 4 will perform a variety of science work over the coming months, potentially helping scientists better understand the structure, formation and evolution of Earth’s natural satellite. But the symbolic pull of the mission will resonate more with the masses: The list of unexplored locales in our solar system just got a little shorter. [Watch: China’s Historic Landing on the Moon’s Far Side!]

Congrats to China.  Hopefully this lights a fire under us to do the same.  Though it seems like we’re more focused on manned flight to the Moon with private partnerships.  Via nasa.gov:

Dec. 13, 2018

NASA Seeks US Partners to Develop Reusable Systems to Land Astronauts on Moon

As the next major step to return astronauts to the Moon under Space Policy Directive-1, NASA announced plans on Dec. 13 to work with American companies to design and develop new reusable systems for astronauts to land on the lunar surface. The agency is planning to test new human-class landers on the Moon beginning in 2024, with the goal of sending crew to the surface in 2028.

Through upcoming multi-phased lunar exploration partnerships, NASA will ask American companies to study the best approach to landing astronauts on the Moon and start the development as quickly as possible with current and future anticipated technologies.

“Building on our model in low-Earth orbit, we’ll expand our partnerships with industry and other nations to explore the Moon and advance our missions to farther destinations such as Mars, with America leading the way,” said NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine. “When we send astronauts to the surface of the Moon in the next decade, it will be in a sustainable fashion.”

You’d think it would take us less than 10 years to develop the technology to land on the Moon if we had been there 50 years ago, right?  Why are we “building on our model in low-Earth orbit” if we should already have a model of actually having gone to the Moon?  The chief problem to getting a crew there and back still seems to be the Van Allen radiation belt, which we allegedly went through 50 years ago.  Did you know that NASA’s official position is that we had the technology, but we destroyed it, and it’s too difficult to build it back up again?  Seriously.

I’ll be making a much more comprehensive post on this in the near future, but assuming we went already this whole timeline seems unfortunately long.  The notion that there was no point in going back to the Moon after the initial Moon landings is pure silliness.

Italian Group finds some vaccines don’t contain the active ingredients the vaccine claims it has

Interesting story from the science journal Nature:

Italian scientists protest funding for vaccine-safety investigation

The National Order of Biologists made a €10,000 donation to a group that questions the safety of vaccines.
Some scientists in Italy are up in arms over a donation from the organization that oversees the nation’s professional biology qualification to an advocacy group that opposes the country’s policy of mandatory childhood vaccination.

The news comes as Italian politicians debate whether to continue with the mandatory vaccination policy, which was introduced in 2017 and requires parents to provide proof of ten routine vaccinations when enrolling their children in nurseries and preschools.

The group, Corvelva, announced that it had received €10,000 (US$11,350) from the Italian National Order of Biologists (ONB) on 26 October and says that it plans to use the money for research that investigates the safety and efficacy of commonly used vaccines.

Corvelva says that the research it proposes is necessary because previous studies it has funded, which have not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal, indicate that some vaccines contain impurities, or lack the active ingredients they claim to contain.

ONB president Vincenzo D’Anna told Nature in an e-mail interview that there is a need for truly independent vaccine research because, in his opinion, work conducted in public laboratories and at universities is usually influenced or funded by companies that produce vaccines.

This is an interesting article for two reasons.  One highlights one of the many problems in the science community these days, and the other a worrying piece of information hidden in there, lost in the gobbledegook.

If you’re experiencing cognitive dissonance when reading that article title you are not alone.  Scientists are protesting funding for an investigation into the safety of vaccines.  That should give one pause.  And it’s fascinating that the article is focused on this bit of information, the fact that some scientists are outraged that this group, which is against mandatory vaccination, would be receiving funds to investigate the safety of vaccines.  A lot of people picture scientists as these puritanical beings striving only for the truth, constantly modifying their hypotheses as new information becomes available and scrapping ideas and methods that are disproven.  In reality, many are egotistical and have so much pride that they may “juke” the numbers or knowingly omit information that may hurt their research.  And this makes sense when you consider many scientists are funded by large corporations or governments hoping for specific end results or have put in years or decades into a specific topic.  Sometimes if they don’t reach those conclusions the funding dries up…and with it jobs and resources.  Of course, this shouldn’t be the way things are done.

So it should make one wonder what the true motivation of these scientists are when they are adamantly against a group receiving funding to investigate the safety of vaccines.  Is it possible big pharma has a LOT of money to be made with these vaccinations?  For sure.  Is there something more sinister going on?  That’s yet to be found out.  But the fact that these scientists are against this kind of research is very telling.  You’d hope that scientists would be all for vigorously testing and retesting data and hypotheses.  Especially when it comes to the health of the general public.  All too frequently this “the science is settled” crap, whether it’s vaccines, or climate change, or whatever, is BS.  It is not as nearly settled as one thinks.  And even if the facts are well established, it doesn’t mean that every single vaccine is safe and works for every single situation out there.

Which brings us to the second point, really the one that should be more worrying.  So they’ve tested some vaccines that have contained impurities or don’t even contain the active ingredients they purport to contain?  If they don’t contain the active ingredients (I’m assuming the antigen but I’m using their wording) then what exactly does it contain?  What exactly is its purpose?

I really don’t want to become one of those anti-vaccination people.  I really don’t.  But if we’ve learned anything from the past few years it’s to question EVERYTHING that the government or big corporations say and put out.  The narrative is very rarely, if ever, the full truth (or may not contain any truth at all).  I posted this and this last year, where institutions have pushed vaccinations without permission and some test results and side effects from the HPV vaccine.  I used to write off the stuff about vaccines causing autism or other effects but we really can’t do that anymore.  We cannot take any of it for granted.  There are dark forces at work at the highest levels of a lot of these institutions that have objectives other than your general safety in mind when they peddle these vaccines to us.  Mandatory vaccines sure would be a good way to spread something to a large amount of people if one really wanted to, no?

Stay tuned with follow ups on this story as more information comes out.

Looking ahead into 2019

There was a lot to be learned in 2018 if one was paying attention.  Here’s a few observations that we can learn from to use in 2019.

The Programming Runs Deep

People really can be programmed.  The more someone listens to the mainstream media news, or talk shows, or Netflix, or a variety of other narrative-approved sources, the stronger the connection.  Scott Adams likens it to two movies on the same screen.  Essentially people’s opinions and thoughts can be altered by the information they allow to feed into their brains.  This sounds obvious on the surface.  But the level of control and the amount of control is scary.  Social engineering.  This has been known for a long time.  Check out Edward Bernays and the Art of Public Manipulation.

It starts small.  Maybe it’s an innocuous image or two of a multi-racial family in a print ad or TV commercial.  Innocent in and of itself until you realize what they’re trying to do.  Or maybe it’s a slight change of lettering or wording.  The Berenstain Bears instead of the Berenstein Bears.  Or inventing terms like Judeo-Christian.  Or how about using Google vs Bing for your search results.  If you can accept that maybe there is a deeper, darker, more sinister objective to these types of seemingly innocent things you can begin to see what is going on.

IMG_2749.JPG

This has gone on for years.  It is not a new phenomena.  But it has hit a tipping point with many people.  Changes are happening faster over a shorter time period now.  Heck, look at Democratic talking points from 2018 vs 2008.  A 2008 Democrat was very anti-war.  Now they are mad President Trump is pulling out of an illegal war in Syria.  Once they were for the “little guy”.  Now they are all about big corporation funding.  A fence/wall, which they were all for in 2006 and 2013, is all of a sudden now the hill they’re willing to die on.  Most Democrats weren’t for gay marriage until about 10 years ago either.  Nor were they for illegal immigration.

All this is to say to be careful about what you watch and what you allow your loved ones to watch.  They do not report the news in an unbiased manner.  They have an agenda.  Look up who owns the NY Times or the Washington Post.  Do you really think these billionaires don’t have an ulterior motive other than presenting the news and facts as they are?  Of course not.  It’ll only get worse.  And the inversion of our values will only get worse.

For better or worse, it’s made me question a lot of the things I once took for granted.  We’ll get into this more later this year but even things like the moon landing are now questionable events that I once took for undisputed truth.  You will never go wrong by pursuing the truth.  You may get led down dark paths and discover things you never wanted to know, but this is ALWAYS preferable to lying to yourself.  Once you lie to yourself you can rationalize all sorts of evil and undesirable behavior and actions.

Evil is Real

This ties in a bit with the first point.  True evil does exist out there.  We’ve spoken about the rampant pedophelia problem in DC and Hollywood.  One of the ways the Cabal controls people is through blackmail.  Subscribe to Owen Benjamin if you want a rational, down to Earth view of the dark, sinister shit that goes on in these circles.  He was in these circles but couldn’t give in to the evil that necessarily seems to go along with making it “big” in Hollywood or DC.

Evil is real.  Sometimes it’s easier to spot evil than it is to spot good.  For me, I began to really notice and take seriously true evil around the time of Pizzagate.  That link is a pretty good starting point.  Check out neonrevolt.com and crazydaysandnights.net to go down that rabbit hole a little bit more.  It is not for the faint of heart.  If you can accept that evil is a real thing then you are on the path to truth.  It has rejuvenated my interest in Christianity, something I took for granted but now realize how much it has shaped our civilization and we’ve all gotten a glimpse of what a post-Christian Western civilization world looks like without it.  It is not pretty.  If you can accept that true evil exists then that is a good starting point to seeing that truth and true good also exists.  This is the path to Christ.

Protect Yourselves

2018 saw an unprecedented amount of censorship and deplatforming.  Dissident personalities like Alex Jones were rigorously ostracized and attacked for having views that did not fit with the accepted narrative.  Alternative news sources and individuals were demonetized and deplatformed on Twitter and YouTube like never before.  This is not an accident.  They are trying to silence the voices of those who speak truth and offer alternative viewpoints to the thoughts and opinions they want you to think.  “They” being the Master of the Universe aka Silicon Valley and their Deep State backers.  The cat is out of the bag.  This isn’t some tinfoil hat conspiracy theory anymore.

It’s a dangerous time to be a conservative in America.  You can easily be doxxed and have your life ruined for sharing your opinions.  I debated using a pseudonym or not when starting this site.  It’s certainly a risk to use one’s real name these days.  Be careful with what you post.  Consider what is at stake and what you’re willing to risk to share your opinions.  One should always post and profess the truth.  Just be careful with whom and how you share the truth.  It is not an even playing field out there.

2019 is going to be a good year.  The pieces are in place to have the hammer drop on the swamp creatures in DC and Hollywood.  Let’s learn from what happened in 2018 and continue to grow and adapt.  The attacks that come at us will only make us stronger.  Our arguments and positions are sharpened from all the criticism and vitriol.  We are antifragile.