While Americans around the country argue among themselves over just about everything, a trial that (if properly executed) could have worldwide implications is off to a questionable start. United States District Judge Alison Nathan is presiding over the Ghislaine Maxwell trial and has granted Maxwell’s request that evidence in this trial be redacted to hide “sensational and impure information”.
The six week trial of British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell begins today in New York City with opening arguments in the long-anticipated case expected this afternoon, following a slight delay due to “issues” with the two members of the jury. Maxwell, 59, faces charges related to her alleged involvement in financier Jeffery Epstein’s sex and trafficking crimes. Maxwell, who spent decades brushing shoulders with British Royals and US Presidents, is accused of recruiting and grooming underage girls for the late financier to sexually abused by Epstein himself as well as his powerful friends between 1994 and 2004.
The question that seems to be on the minds of those who are following this trial is whether or not the redacted information is being suppressed for the good of the general public or to protect a ruling class.
Upon being sworn in, US District Judge Alison Nathan made it a point to remind her hand selected jury that they must decide the verdict of the case solely on the evidence provided in the courtroom.
The corporate media, who scavenged every divisive morsel from the dead horse that was the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, seem to be uncharacteristically silent on what is quite possibly the trial of the century. This behavior is leading many to wonder if any information gleaned throughout this trial will see the light of day. Thus far, with a fresh and new Biden appointed Judge on the case, the outlook is bleak.
According to Reuters, the Biden appointee Alison Nathan will be required to question more than 200 prospective jurors. Nathan is married to a New York University Law School professor, Meg Satterthwaite. Establishment Senator Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., recommended Nathan for the nomination.
Alison Nathan was appointed to the federal bench by former President Barack Obama in 2011. Prior to serving as a federal judge, she clerked for the late Supreme Court Justice Paul Stevens, worked as counsel for the attorney general of New York, and was an associate White House counsel and special assistant for Obama, which has her two degrees of separation (if that) from those who are implicated by Epstein’s little black book.
Sarah Ransom – one of several women to have accused Epstein and Maxwell of abuse – was seen arriving at the courthouse this morning, and was quoted as saying “I thought this day would never come”.
The difference between the communist system and the capitalist one is that both kick you in the ass, but in the communist one they kick you and you have to applaud, while in the capitalist one they kick you and you can scream. I came here to scream.
It’s easy to understand why people are emotionally drawn to the ideals of Communism, Socialism, or what we perceive as the intentions of “the left” because they at least seem to draw their fundamental motivational source from a place of compassion. Today, well-meaning young Americans see socialism as a chic new system, promising equality and fairness. These are admirable things to want for the world. The unfortunate truth is that this game is not new, it’s more than 100 years old, and whether it’s the rigid, murderous version of socialism put in place by the Soviet Union, or today’s nightmare scenarios in Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Zimbabwe and North Korea, it’s an idea that has never delivered equality, more opportunity, or better lives.
To me, there’s nothing wrong with wanting everything provided for everyone, though obviously, some conservatives would disagree. The real reason we can’t have nice things isn’t because these economic systems don’t allow for it, it’s because some of the 3-5% of the population who exhibit sociopathic tendencies have long exploited the compassion that is present in most human beings. In short, all the good intentions in the world will equate to nothing when there are maniacs at the wheel.
Another glaring problem with this everlasting argument is that young people, myself included, tend to know very little about American history, in particular, the history of the radical left. How would we know? It feels eerily by design that we were never really taught about it, so why would we be concerned? It’s not mind-boggling that some would yearn for something besides an economic system in which businesses thrive not as a result of free enterprise (as originally intended), but rather as a return on money amassed through collusion between the business class and the political class. What I just described is called “crony capitalism” and it can certainly be seen as a negatively polarized usage of the free market system.
Communism and Socialism, however, despite the utopian light they are painted in, have historically been the source of untold death and suffering. The trauma that ALL of these systems have inflicted globally still haunts large portions of the human family. Here in the first world, we cry about crony capitalism (which has caused great suffering in more subtle ways) but we are at least still free to denounce a system that, for the time being, allows us the freedom to have a dissenting opinion.
Like many, I’ve wondered about potential socialist utopias; ways it could go right assuming you somehow had pure altruists controlling the state. But it’s hard to envision positive socialist futures when all we have to draw from in the past are the nightmares of Nazi Germany, Mao’s China, the Marxism-Leninism of the Soviet Union, and Maduro’s Venezuela. We can, however, learn much about modern socialism/communism, so long as we are willing, from the nearby island nation of Cuba.
Cuba’s history has always been deeply intertwined with America’s. It was one of the last of the Spanish colonies in the Americas to declare independence, not actually becoming a Republic until 1902. Cuba enjoyed real freedom for roughly half a century, many consider this time period to be Cuba’s golden age. By and large, Cuba enjoyed a high standard of living for a long time, so much so that people were actually immigrating from Spain to Cuba. The 1950s saw Cuba’s first dictatorship by a man named Fulgencio Batista (who is rumored to have been backed by members of our own military-industrial complex).
Cuba eventually underwent a “revolution” and was labeled a soviet satellite state in the late 1950s and early 1960s. What was propped up as a revolution, was simply a new brand of dictatorship devouring the old. Around this time the appearance of Cubans escaping in boats became a common sight off the coast of Florida.
Fidel Castro ruled uncontested for decades and was eventually replaced by the kinder face of Raul Castro, whose reign lasted until Donald Trump was approximately halfway through his time in office. Some had hoped that once the Castro regime ended, everything would revert back to the glory days of half a century prior. This hope was unfortunately a naive fairy tale.
The Cuban State is a monolithic system, and it did not just go away once the seat of power was vacated. Now that Cuba has one Miguel Diaz Canal at the wheel, who rose through the communist party ranks and assumed the position as the Cuban Head of State, business continues as usual.
Let’s dive into the reality of what has been touted as a “very successful socialist experiment”.
Very little exists outside of the state in Cuba, especially in the business sector. There’s a little bit of free enterprise here and there; some sole proprietors and Air Bnb’s, but aside from that everything else is run by the state, forcing Cubans to make their money abroad. Cubans do not have their own private checking accounts and most of the business has been nationalized. In the words of a Cuban immigrant:
“The Image you have of North Korea is not far off from the State of Cuba.”
A young Cuban-American girl recently took to TikTok and shared her truth on the state of Cuba. She claimed that there are no coffins, that when somebody dies in Cuba they wrap them in a sheet then leave the body to whomever they can find to claim it. In some cases, bodies would simply be tossed into backyards and left to decompose naturally in the Caribbean heat. She claims that electricity and water are cut as soon as the sun goes down each night and that if you dare to speak ill of the Communist party you run the risk of becoming a desaparecido (missing person by way of political suppression). Despite all that looming danger, the people have finally reached a boiling point and are actively protesting against their failed government.
How did these protests start?
According to Cuban American Author and entrepreneur Antonio Garcia-Martinez, the whole thing began when a bunch of disgruntled citizens decided to start yelling at a Communist Party headquarters. The protestors were apparently chanting pro-freedom sentiments and criticizing the State while waving American flags. According to actual Cuban citizens, there are a multitude of reasons for the current public uprising, but the mainstream media would have us believe the unrest is solely due to the people’s desire for better access to COVID pokes. Cuba has had a pretty rough economic situation for a long time, but the human rights violations were what pushed the general public over the edge. Despite their often praised healthcare system, poor access to medical treatment has been a symptom of the root problem, for the Cuban Government.
The people of Cuba are starting to mobilize for the first time in decades, the last time there were coordinated major demonstrations like this was nearly 30 years ago in 1994. When videos of the original protest began surfacing across the internet others were inspired to take action. It must have dawned on the State that allowing the citizens to continue having access to the internet was going to be a problem, so they did what any single party dictatorship worth their salt would do. They cut the internet, creating what in military jargon is called a communications blackout.
Sounds shocking, right? Consider this, it wasn’t actually until about 2008 that Cubans were even allowed to own cell phones, in fact, you could go to jail just for having one in your possession. Eventually, smartphones were permitted, but the internet works a little differently in Cuba. The kind of connection we enjoy here in America doesn’t really exist in Cuba; there are no private internet providers, the State has the monopoly. To access the internet you can either go to these public access areas (which tend to be expensive and the quality of the connection is quite poor) or you can buy the popular but illegal el Paquete, which is the equivalent of putting a weeks worth of news, music, videos, etc on USB drives and selling them. In essence, it’s like viewing a tiny curated portion of the internet without actually being online. This will cost you 5 CUC (Cuban convertible peso) which in Cuba’s economy takes up a big chunk of the average citizen’s weekly earnings.
Back to the protests, which seemed to pop up, get heated, and then disappear just as suddenly as they came… at least from our first-world perspective. The truth is that the protests are still ongoing, our Media has simply stopped reporting on them. Another factor that had a major damping effect was the State starting to really crackdown on the protestors, making arrests and even firing people from their jobs. Is any of this starting to sound familiar? On top of all that, the regime has the ability to just shut off the internet, one of the benefits of having everything centralized and controlled by the State.
Then you have BLM; one of several Marxist proxy armies, unironically blasting the United States for what’s happening in Cuba while completely ignoring the failed communist state they seem to love so much. Lest there be any doubt remaining that the Black Lives Matter crew has nothing to do with actual racial justice in America, look no further than their reaction to Cuba’s protests. The group put out a statement, not to condemn the authoritarian regime in Cuba for violently suppressing its people, but to berate the United States for its long-existing sanctions on the Communist state.
“Black Lives Matter condemns the U.S. federal government’s inhumane treatment of Cubans, and urges it to immediately lift the economic embargo,”
“This cruel and inhumane policy, instituted with the explicit intention of destabilizing the country and undermining Cubans’ right to choose their own government, is at the heart of Cuba’s current crisis.”
The statement is, of course, exactly backward. The US sanctions Cuba precisely because its Communist dictators prevent the Cuban people from “the right to choose their own government.”
Reporter/commentator Nicole Hannah-Jones, who authored the 1619 project and is a staff writer at the New York Times, claims that equality in Cuba is because of socialism. Cuban American Antonio Garcia-Martinez laughs at this statement and quips, “Sure, if you make everyone poor then indeed inequality would be lower”. But even the Washington Post recently ran an article about the plight of Blacks in Cuba. Nicole Hannah-Jones and BLM are by far not the only ones singing the praises of the Cuban government for their own personal benefits. In addition, the likes of Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson-Lee have previously praised the Castro regime.
The usual pop-culture politicians like Bernie Sanders and AOC hail Cuba as a highly successful example of the “socialist experiment”, citing their amazing healthcare system and literacy program. Apparently, the healthcare system isn’t as great as touted since that is one of the many things the protestors are criticizing, and as far as the literacy program being a great socialist achievement, Antonio Garcia-Martinez claims that Cuba has had a higher literacy rate since well before the revolution.
The rhetoric coming from BLM and the left is that Trump’s trade embargo is the sole cause for all of the troubles in Cuba, this is actually just simple propaganda, but let’s go there for a moment. According to Antonio Garcia-Martinez, virtually none of the protesters on the ground have mentioned nor seem to care about the embargo. Cuba can trade freely with the rest of the world and avoiding trade with the US isn’t considered some new catastrophic thing, but for a short period during the Obama era, this has been standard Cuban/US relations.
Of course, you see the shameless partisan hacks in DC virtue signaling and “standing in solidarity” with the Cuban people by acting to remove the embargo, an embargo that was placed specifically to hinder the very same communist party the Cuban people are now actively protesting against. If you wanted to actually “Stand in Solidarity” and not just stand on the backs of a silenced and oppressed people, then you would try to bring more awareness to the human rights violations instead of warping a tragedy to fit your agenda. While Cuban Americans may claim that changing the Embargo isn’t going to do very much for the people, it would, however, greatly benefit the State.
How long can these first-world pundits use Cuba as a shining example of a socialist experiment when you can now see (for the moment) videos of Cubans being beaten and arrested in the streets for dissenting? Hundreds of Cubans are facing charges of inciting unrest, their families are worried about trials being held without due process, and a lot of these protestors (mostly young people) cannot get independent defense lawyers. The Communist party has released Rapid Reaction Brigades to police and squash all dissent, and while these brigades are carrying out actual government-sanctioned police brutality, BLM doesn’t bat an eye because it’s such a “successful Socialist experiment”.
Suffice to say that the Cuban government is not the biggest advocate for open communication. In a nation where the government limits internet access to control the flow of information, there is no telling how much deeper the abuses run. Cuban dictator Miguel Díaz-Canel openly called for violence when instructing his followers that “the order to combat has been given. Revolutionaries need to be on the streets.” Should the pro-freedom protesters escape a beatdown by unruly communists, they certainly cannot expect fair treatment, competent media exposure, and a trial by a jury once they have been arrested. Yet, they do what they can to make their voices heard just the same.
Many Americans believe the pro-freedom uprising in Cuba is a microcosm of everything we see happening in America today. As politicians and bureaucrats seek to tighten their grip on power, the everyday joe schmoes are stepping up to make their voices heard. Pockets of concerned citizens are fighting back against the onslaught of socialism as it covertly wraps its slimy tendrils around what’s left of the foundations of our constitutional Republic.
What can we do to help, both short term and long term, outside of self-aggrandizing social media posts?
There are documents circulating on the internet that list the names and details surrounding the growing number of Desaparecidos, keeping the data centralized and alive. Continuing to share this sort of content keeps the reality fresh in the minds of those who care and is another example of how internet access has shaken things up in Cuba. Ron Desantis, the Governor of Florida, has written an open letter to the Biden Administration saying that the federal government should help restore internet access to the people of Cuba. FCC commissioner Brenden Carr echoed this sentiment and explained how we have the technology to easily override this. The internet, open communication, and freedom of speech are the most disruptful things that exist in a single-party dictatorship, so I believe enabling those three things is key.
Loon LLC, which exists under Sergey Brin’s big-tech umbrella company Alphabet, once used balloons to get WIFI to Puerto Rico when they were going through Hurricane Maria. It sounds wacky but a lot of different private companies have R&D teams working on new ways to transmit WIFI long distances. Facebook was working on a way to use satellites to beam the internet all across the planet, but these supposedly “woke” tech companies would have to actually choose to do this, which will hopefully happen as soon as it benefits them to do so. These are all things that will help but will require compliance of big business and big tech. We can, at the very least, continue to apply pressure and keep the fight alive by writing letters and joining demonstrations here on US soil to raise awareness.
Why Should Americans even care?
What is happening in Cuba is a symptom of a many decades-long push for a global centralized government. If Americans care about freedom and democracy at home and abroad then they should care about the 10 million people living under the yolk of Communism just 90 miles away from US territory. There’s a huge Cuban exile community in Florida who take voting far more seriously than your average young American, and from a strictly political standpoint, people in power should want to help for that reason alone. The real big one though, the crown reason for wanting to help the Cuban people, is simply because it is the right thing to do. I personally cannot imagine an argument where anyone could successfully defend why the Cuban people shouldn’t have free access to the internet and the freedom of open communication with the rest of the world.
The perfectly timed flood of immigrants across the southern border into blue states and federally funded sanctuary cities, creating an easily launderable multi-billion dollar racket is all fine and good, yet the DHS director under Joe Biden recently decided that he didn’t want Cubans coming over. It’s as if they’re saying “Oh, we only want these immigrants over here that benefit us, not those immigrants”.
Despite the poor treatment from the current administration, the Cuban people still wave the American flag and call for freedom. Regardless of whoever is in office at the time, our flag stands for what America could and should be. To those who have been conditioned to hate the country they live in and are the stewards of, I invite you to try living in Cuba for a while.
A lot of westerners don’t realize that Britain controlled Hong Kong for over a hundred and fifty years, besides a brief Japanese occupation during the second world war, and did not fully return to Chinese rule until 1997. It was ceded to Britain after the First Opium War, becoming a British colony or territory. It wasn’t until the 1970s and 1980s that conversations even began between the Chinese and the British over the future of Hong Kong.
The agreement made in 1997 was that Hong Kong would be allowed to maintain the high degree of autonomy it had enjoyed while under British rule, with all the freedom and basic rights that people in mainland China could only dream of, though Hong Kong would once again belong to China. The agreement stated that for 50 years things would remain unchanged in Hong Kong, this was ratified by the UN and supported by the US. Fifty years of democratic life, 50 years of autonomy. The relevant slogan was “One country, two systems.” Hong Kong would be the little exception in vast, Communist-ruled China. Today, however, the Joint Declaration, which was meant to protect the freedoms and autonomy of Hong Kong, has been eroded, broken, and is worth less than the paper it was printed on.
To be fair, a lot of folks were skeptical from the beginning that a single country could maintain two separate systems, especially when one system is communist and the other is to be pseudo-democratic, free-market capitalist. Actually, Hong Kong was never fully democratic. From 1982 to 1997, Hong Kong went from having no form of elected government to having a fully elected Legislative Council (though not entirely by geographical constituencies). Under Chinese sovereignty after the 1st of July 1997, Hong Kong had regressed to its pre-democracy days as a result of establishing appointed provisional bodies in place of the elected ones.
There was still freedom of the Press, freedom of speech, freedom to a fair trial, and the freedom of assembly… all of which ran quite contrary to mainland China. These factors, which largely lead to Hong Kong becoming a prime financial hub for international business, are nonexistent today. Hong Kong is actually an unprecedented situation, never before have we seen a city or state (of 7 million+ people) have their rights stripped away in such a remarkably short period of time. Hong Kong was promised 50 years of autonomy and received less than half of that.
Vivian Wang and Alexandra Stevenson of the New York Times filed a dispatch from Hong Kong in June of 2021. The subheading for their dispatch read, “Neighbors are urged to report on one another. Children are taught to look for traitors. Officials are pressed to pledge their loyalty.” Here was one detail, among many — not the most horrifying by a long shot, but striking all the same:
“Police officers have been trained to goose-step in the Chinese military fashion, replacing decades of British-style marching.”
If you are unfamiliar with the goose step, take a quick detour to IMG search in your preferred search engines to really get the full ambiance of the picture they’re trying to paint.
The pro-democracy movement is a political camp in Hong Kong that supports increased democracy, namely the universal suffrage of the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council as given by the Hong Kong Basic Law under the “One Country, Two Systems” framework. The movement has been around since before the 1997 handover and typically receives about 55-60% of the vote in each election. The pro-democracy activists emerged from the youth movements in the 1970s and began to take part in electoral politics as the colonial government introduced representative democracy in the mid-1980s. Samuel Chu, Managing Director of the Hong Kong Democracy Council, has been a part of the movement for years and has seen firsthand how China has crippled the movement.
“The pro-democracy movement has been so central and vital for the 30+ years in Hong Kong, (it is) a movement that my father was a leader in, a movement that I have participated in for years, and now, today, all of those leaders of the pro-democracy movement are either in jail, under house arrest, living in exile, or just stripped of their rights to speak out.”
So how did this happen? China was supposed to give Hong Kong 50 years of autonomy but little by little the CCP began seizing more and more control. There wasn’t much that the people could do about it, when China wants to control something it’s going to control it, and the country is historically unapologetic about its’ strong-arm tactics.
Within the aforementioned 50 year deal, it was promised that steps would be taken to ensure universal voting rights to its citizens by 2010. There was an unease among people in the movement as to whether or not even the status quo would remain intact for very long, let alone if China would allow all of Hong Kong’s citizens the right to elect their own Chief Executive and Legislative Council. Instead, by 2010 China had actually reversed its stand, deciding not to go through with the promised democratization. This reversal spurred what was known as the Umbrella Movement and the Hong Kong Democracy Protests of 2014. These protests would prove to be the largest act of civil disobedience in Hong Kong’s history up to that point.
Hong Kong Protests
In the fall of 2014, hundreds of thousands of Hong Kongers took to the streets. For 79 days they took over the financial district and made their discontent known, claiming China had broken its promise to the people. China responded by explaining that to them the agreement was no more than a historic document and was worth nothing. Many members of the Pro-Democracy movement were prosecuted for the peaceful protest in 2014, by the time they were sentenced in 2018 China had proposed a new law giving the CCP the ability to extradite Hong Kong citizens to the mainland to be tried in what is thought of as a highly corrupt and unfair Judicial System.
This is what led to the rise of the Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement and their subsequent protests in 2019. Two million Hong Kongers once again took to the streets to voice their distrust toward the CCP and to state as loudly as possible that they did not want their citizens extradited. Samuel Chu, whose father was tried in Hong Kong for organizing the peaceful protests in 2014, claims that the two-year sentence he received from the Hong Kong courts would have been for life if he had been tried on the mainland.
Since that time, in response to the protests on the ground and overseas efforts, China implemented what is called the “National Security Law”. Within this law is article 38, which clearly states that anyone, anywhere, whether or not they be a Hong Kong or Chinese citizen, can be charged under the National Security law for saying or doing anything deemed threatening to the CCP Samuel Chu is no stranger to article 38. Even though he has been an American citizen since 1996 and is really only guilty of advocating for Basic Law in Hong Kong, he has still found himself on a list of fugitives wanted by the CCP.
Some may recall the arrest of free-press advocate Jimmy Lai, which proved that even the head of a multi-million dollar company could not stand against the Chinese Communist Party. Jimmy Lai had been overtly vocal about the CCP’s dealings worldwide, slamming the Catholic Church for signing a treaty or “Provisional Agreement” with the CCP to further the party’s control over religious freedoms, and slammed Joe Biden prior to the election for kowtowing to party leader Xi Jinping. It didn’t take long for the CCP to completely annihilate Lai’s free press.
Apple Daily was Hong Kong’s largest independent paper for over twenty years and was arguably one of the biggest critics of the CCP still in print, that is until the aforementioned National Security law was used to destroy the entire company. Apple Daily was raided twice by Hong Kong police, once on August 10, 2020, and again on June 17, 2021. These raids and subsequent freeze of capital forced the 26-year-old newspaper to close its doors in June 2021. As for Jimmy Lai, he has been in jail since last December without any substantial convictions, and will likely remain there indefinitely.
Despite all the slant and spin coming from Fortune 500 news outlets, this story is relevant as we see the behavior from the American mainstream media and Big-Tech platforms beginning to eerily mirror what has been commonplace in both Hong Kong and Cuba. It doesn’t bode well that we have a President who by all accounts appears to be at least in bed if not subservient to the Chinese Communist Party, and has completely neglected the plight of the Cuban people. If the systemic throttling of the free flow of information is allowed to continue unchallenged in America, chances are this type of crackdown could spread worldwide.
Should the US and the UK be more active in trying to help Hong Kong?
Xi Jinping is presiding over what has been called the nastiest and most oppressive period in China’s history since Mao’s cultural revolution. Samuel Chu believes that the US and the UK, who were instrumental in working with China to draw up the foundation for Hong Kong’s short-lived autonomy, should come back to the table and help uphold the promises made to Hong Kong. In many cases concerning the average American citizen, there seems to be a bipartisan desire to stand with the people of Hong Kong, but when it comes to elected officials or to those with the means to do something, the buck has been passed.
As Human Rights Watch noted in a recent report, the Chinese government is now pressing residents to pledge public loyalty to the government in Beijing. It is turning the police and courts into “tools of Chinese state control rather than independent and impartial enforcers of the rule of law.” Candidates considered insufficiently loyal to China have been barred from running for Hong Kong’s electoral council. Academic freedom is under attack. Websites have been blocked, museums harassed, films canceled, political slogans banned, and school curriculum rewritten. Sound familiar? Rather than helping Hong Kong stop the death of democracy at the hands of a totalitarian regime, it’s starting to look as though we are copying their playbook instead.
Despite American intervention potentially being a conflict of interest for our current administration, the debate continues as to whether or not the US should do anything. Richard Haass, the former director of policy planning for the U.S. State Department under George W. Bush, has voiced the stance of the western elite:
“We don’t have the luxury of building a foreign policy that is centered on promoting the rule of democracy and human rights, so our influence is limited… We can vent, but we should have no illusions that it’ll change the situation on the ground in Hong Kong. That may seem cruel, but it’s a fact of life.”
Many have interpreted this to mean that what is occurring in Hong Kong is desirable for the international foreign policy elite. Remember, this statement is coming from a man who is now president of the Council on Foreign Relations, a globalist hotbed and arguably the most influential think-tank on the planet.
In contrast to Richard Haas’ pessimism or complete disinterest towards the United States helping the people of Hong Kong, Samuel Chu’s argument sounds a little more optimistic. Chu claims there is actually a lot that could be done: helping fight censorship and circumvent the coming internet firewall, helping activists get out of the country when China comes after them, working to strengthen the civil society groups, and pressuring businesses in Hong Kong not to go along with the repression are just a few examples. Despite Chu’s optimism, the Biden administration doesn’t seem interested in upholding the right to free speech in its own country let alone in a far-off city.
It is hard to say what’s in store for America, as it stands now the general population seems to be going for each other’s throats in a tribalist partisan pissing contest, one in which neither side would care much about a totalitarian regime in the United States, as long as their team wins. So with the figurative caution signs sounding off all around us, we can now see that the warnings from Cuba and Hong Kong are falling on deaf ears. Perhaps even worse, they are being intentionally ignored.
Native American Day: Learning The Way of Earth explains that Dr. Zach Bush warns we are in the Sixth Great Extinction and human survival depends on the urgent restoration of our soils (earth). So, the world — led by the West — is in very grave trouble now. However, we are facing not “just’ an ecological crisis. America is facing constitutional, political, and economic crises so severe there are growing predictions of a second Civil War. How did we get this far off course? Is there a principle that can unite us?
If so, where and how can we find it? Perhaps it’s with the guidance from Native American nations that our Founding Fathers sought to follow — but failed to go deep enough.
Capitalism ignores that endless growth is not possible on a finite planet. Where will we find the inspiration to change our relationship to the Earth on which we depend for survival?
Philip P. Arnold, a member of Neighbors of the Onondaga Nation (NOON) and associate professor of indigenous religions at Syracuse University, says: “How we in the larger society regard indigenous peoples — who have an ongoing relationship with the living earth — will determine our ability to survive.” The Library of Congress, National Archives and Records Administration, National Endowment for the Humanities, National Gallery of Art, National Park Service, Smithsonian Institution and United States Holocaust Memorial Museum join in paying tribute to the rich ancestry of Native Americans.
Iroquois Chief Canassatego Advised US Founding Fathers
“There was nothing inevitable about 13 separate colonies becoming a single, united nation. In fact, one generation before Thomas Jefferson put his pen to paper to declare independence from Great Britain in 1776, the idea of such a union was all but unthinkable. For decades before the American Revolution and for at least 13 years thereafter, the colonies squabbled with one another, in some ways just as they had with the British Crown.”
How the Iroquois Great Law of Peace Shaped U.S. Democracy explains that Canassatego (c. 1684–1750) was a leader of the Onondaga nation, one of the then five nations in the Iroquois Confederacy. He was a prominent diplomat and spokesman of the Confederacy in the 1740s. Chief Canassatego is now best known for a speech he gave at the 1744 Treaty of Lancaster, where he recommended that the British colonies emulate the Iroquois by forming a confederacy.
Chief Canassatego addressing Continental Congress members including Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock and Patrick Henry in Philadelphia on June 11, 1776, promoting peace and friendship as advocated hundreds of years earlier by Hiawatha and Deganawida.
“Canassatego became a prominent diplomat and spokesman of the Iroquois Confederacy in the 1740s. He served as the speaker for Onondagas at another conference in 1742.
Near the end of the conference, Canassatego gave the colonists some advice: ‘We have one thing further to say, and that is We heartily recommend Union and a Good Agreement between you our Brethren. Never disagree, but preserve a strict Friendship for one another, and thereby you as well as we will become the Stronger. Our wise Forefathers established Union and Amity between the Five Nations; this has made us formidable, this has given us great weight and Authority with our Neighboring Nations. We are a powerful confederacy, and, by your observing the same Methods our wise Forefathers have taken, you will acquire fresh Strength and Power; therefore, whatever befalls you, never fall out with one another.’”
Bill Moyers interviewed Chief Lyons on the Haudenosaunee land in 1991. Chief Lyons explains that despite 500 years of opposition, the Haudenosaunee and their traditions are still intact. The Haudenosaunee are a sovereign a nation and travel on their own passport.
Chief Lyons tells the story of the founding of the Iroquois Confederacy. He explains how over a thousand years ago, the Peacemaker taught the five warring tribes how to cooperate for survival. These are lessons America needs to hear now as we are so divided that there are growing predictions of a second Civil War. Will we be wise enough now to listen and learn again from our Native American neighbors?
The US Founding Fathers studied with Native Americans for 30 years. It was only enough time to scratch the surface of these profound cultures. We must integrate this study into our curriculums at every level now to understand and adopt the values of Native America. Nations that have survived thousands of years have much to teach us — if we will only listen now.
Values Change For Survival
Values Change For Survival shows that Chief Lyons said in his report to the United Nations the West must shift our values now to survive. Reconciliation can guide us in adopting those values. Chief Lyons warned, “You’re either going to change your values or you’re not going to survive!”
“We were told we would see America come and go — and in a sense, America is dying from within because they forgot the instructions of how to live on Earth.” – Floyd Red Crow Westerman.
November is Native American Heritage Month, an opportunity to learn from the many rich traditions of Native Americans. There are 500 Native Nations in this hemisphere — many of which have been here tens of thousands of years. Can these ancient wisdom keepers guide us now? Many Americans seem to think so as they flock to the Amazon to drink ayahuasca with shamans. However, although many of our states, cities, and rivers carry Native names, most Americans ignore Native America and know little about these cultures. We were told that Europe had a “Manifest Destiny” to take over this hemisphere because it brought a civilization vastly superior and Native American cultures were “primitive”.
Mikki Willis is the creator of Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind COVID-19 and Plandemic: Indoctornation that when viral in 2020. He said that Plandemic 3 which is coming out this year will recommend that we adopt the Native American system of counsels. However, without a shift in values, that would lead us to repeat the mistake the US Founding Fathers made — copying just a part of the form of the Native American systems. We must now understand the spirit of these cultures.
Reconciliation With Native America Is Key To Our Own Survival
We need to learn the truth of our history now to ensure our own survival.
Truth and Reconciliation is a form of restorative justice, which differs from adversarial or retributive justice. Retributive justice aims to find fault and punish the guilty. Restorative justice aims to heal relationships between offenders and victims. Those involved in Reconciliation seek to uncover important facts to establish the truth. The process allows for acknowledgment, public mourning, forgiveness, change, and healing for all. These are steps to end 500+ years of colonialism.
Several countries have implemented Reconciliation:
Two Rivers Film: Inspiring Reconciliation In Washington State
Two Rivers is an award-winning film about an American couple in Washington state who initiated reconciliation with the Native Americans who had been pushed off the land there. Within five years, many more people had joined, and together they launched social and political reconciliation initiatives that changed their community and race relations across the Northwest. See the trailer.
The Story explains that Glen Schmekel was taking a walk on his property in Washington State in 1999.
“I felt like I heard a word in my heart that was asking two questions,” recalls the school district executive. “The first question was, ‘Have you considered my host people?’ And the second question was, ‘Have you been planting any seeds that would grow up to a harvest?’”
Schmekel was living with his wife Carolyn, an interior designer, in the small, upscale, predominantly White town of Twisp, located at the confluence of the Twisp and Methow rivers in Washington. Schmekel knew the first question referred to the original inhabitants of the valley — The Methow Indians, a Plateau Indian tribe which had been decimated by historical White policies and practices. The few Methows who had survived had been shut out of their valley for decades, shunted onto the nearby Colville reservation and forbidden to fish, hunt, or harvest their sacred food and medicinal plants.
Glen thought the second question referred to a feeling he and Carolyn had that something was missing in their community. The idea of initiating something that might expand and enrich community life in Twisp was exciting to the Schmekels. Through a series of coincidences, the couple met Spencer Martin, a spiritual leader of Methow, Squaxin, and Colville Indian descent. As they came together and drew in other Native and White Americans from the Methow Valley, a remarkable journey unfolded. Two Rivers, a 60-minute documentary, traces this moving journey of discovery, connection, reconciliation, and lasting social change.
By 2003, the two groups felt it was time to take their private reconciliation process to the larger community — and the community was excited to receive it. The first Two Rivers Powwow, held that August at the confluence of the Twisp and Methow rivers, was a public reconciliation ceremony acknowledging the changes that had occurred between the local Native and White Americans. A ripple effect begins as other White townspeople and reservation Natives are drawn to the ceremony.
After the first annual “Heart of the Methow” Powwow in 2003, local ranchers and farmers ceded 300 acres so Indians could harvest their sacred medicine plants and foods, Methow teachings were integrated into the school curriculum, and 2.5 acres were donated for the Methow Valley Interpretive Center for a permanent place to honor the Methow people.
The Shamanic Odyssey: Homer, Tolkien, and the Visionary Experience by Robert Tindall explains that the West faces a choice between two paths. The one we are on leads to death. The other is reconciliation with our own indigenous roots which leads to transformation of consciousness and a new Garden of Eden. Time is very short now to make this choice. Reconciliation leads to a communion with ourselves, all peoples, all species – and Spirit.
Spencer Martin: In this universe, all things are connected: “The Whites from the Methow Valley….[their] ancestors back in Europe were once indigenous—and they were exterminated, just as we were exterminated. How much of the genocide that was inflicted on us was the result of the nature-worshiping religions of Europe being destroyed before us?
If Europeans couldn’t keep their indigenous ways, how were they going to allow us to keep ours? Without dealing with their own anger, they keep projecting it onto other people….Most of the people who settled this country weren’t all that popular in the countries they left.…They were persecuted, abused, they weren’t treated with respect. Most of them don’t remember why they’re angry; they’re just angry.”
National Day of Transformation
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed individuals can change the world. In fact, it’s the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Meade
“Decolonization Starts Inside of You”: Colonization is about creating separation—separation among people and separation from spirit and our connection to the Earth. Humans have been taking more than we need, and we haven’t been giving enough back.
Why We Must Be Honest This Thanksgiving shows that Thanksgiving is a Day of Mourning for many Native Americans. Just as “Columbus Day” has become “Native American Day” in a number of cities and states, Thanksgiving may become a “National Day of Transformation” that allows Americans to reconcile with Native Americans and create a more enlightened world.
The WHO has accounced a new COVID variant of interest called ‘Omicron.’
Israel is now on the verge of a state of emergency as a result.
Two weeks ago, Israel ran a war games exercise preparing for this exact type of announcement, with their new strain being called ‘Omega.’
Is it not responsible to watch, explore, and wait to see if this new strain is more severe before sending the world into a state of panic?
Many other strains of interest turned out to be ‘nothing,’ what if this does also?
Israel’s Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, announced on Friday November 26, 2021 that the country is on the verge of a state of emergency after three people tested positive for the new ‘Omicron’ variant of the coronavirus.
This announcement comes just two weeks after Israel held the world’s first war games exercise preparing for the possible emergence of a deadly variant of the COVID virus named “Omega” in the practice game.
The new real life B1.1.529 variant recently named Omicron by the World Health Organization (WHO) is currently found in South Africa, Botswana, Hong Kong, Israel, and Belgium, where there is only one confirmed case.
South African Health Minister Joe Phaahla is calling this mass panic a “kind of knee-jerk reaction, [that] really doesn’t make sense.” He stated that this was a variant to be watched, not to jump to conclusions and panic over.
According to a report put out by the UK Health Security Agency on November 26, 2021 this new variant is under investigation and presents a large number of mutations.
“It has a large number of mutations which are likely to be biologically significant, and which may change the behaviour of the virus with regards to immune escape, transmissibility, and susceptibility to some treatments.”
SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England
It is still unknown how contagious and severe this variant is at this time.
Besides announcing a travel ban to and from African countries, it is unclear what further measures will be taken by Israel if it does go into a state of emergency.
During the “Omega” drill war-game exercise led by Prime Minister Bennett, that took place just a couple weeks ago, they explored the following:
Restricting gathering, events, curfews and tourism.
How to roll out mass testing and booster vaccines.
Enforcement of quarantine.
Responding to disclosure on the internet.
“Now we see a variant that spreads faster and requires us to respond faster. We’ve been working together with other world leaders and now’s the time to act fast, early, hard and strong.”
Prime Minister Bennett
Great levels of fear were used in the past when discussing COVID-19 and new variants. The overall infection mortality rates of previous strains still remains low. With variants such as Zeta and Theta being completely de-escalated by the WHO and longer under monitoring.
Perhaps the messaging of fear could be reduced for this variant until we know if it presents more severe disease than previous strains.
A myriad of dubious chemicals has been introduced into our food supply in the last 120 years. This is a difficult truth that many can’t seem to reconcile, as most of us have been consuming ultra-processed foods since birth.
Even everyday household products and cosmetic items that are inhaled, applied to the skin, or absorbed through the scalp, can contain a bevy of harmful chemicals. The sum total of the overwhelming presence of these chemicals has been linked to nearly every modern chronic affliction and disease, particularly various forms of cancer and neurodegenerative disorders. Two recent examples of everyday products which were finally admitted to being carcinogenic are Monsanto’s pesticide Round-Up (Glyphosate) and Johnson and Johnson’s baby talc powder (asbestos).
There are many off-ramps on the highway to truth. When faced with an inconvenient truth, most people will search for confirmation of their preferred reality, and the AMA, the FDA, the chemical/ pharmaceutical companies in conjunction with the colleges and media outlets they fund are all too willing to provide that comfortable numbing to the truth. The most notable example that comes to mind is an extremely neurotoxic chemical called fluoride which has been added to the public water supply in most municipal areas. Fluoride is known to interrupt the basic function of nerve cells in the brain, causing more docile and submissive behavior as well as IQ devastation. Fluoride has never been proven to prevent tooth decay, according to Dr. Robert Carton, a former scientist for the EPA, “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not all time.”
But fluoride isn’t the only harmful additive that exists in our food and water, not by a long shot. Let’s take a look at 10 lesser-known additives that also have a negative effect on our wellbeing:
There are at least 5 artificial sweeteners that have been outed as neurotoxic, carcinogenic, and/or allergenic; Aspartame being the most prevalent and possibly the most damaging of them all. When searching for information on aspartame, depending on which search engine you’re using, you will find (as with most controversial topics) two separate realities: the reality where huge corporations, the medical institutes, and media outlets that they fund dismiss all negative claims directed at aspartame or the reality where current and former MD’s around the world as well as former EPA scientists are trying to raise awareness about the dangers of said sweetener.
You’ll find testimonials by all manner of “experts” and important-sounding people endorsing aspartame while denouncing those “aspartame alarmists” as lunatics, citing studies conducted by the same pharma funded institutes giving the illusion of unbiased science; but you will also find scientific papers the world over showing the exact opposite. Since only one of these realities can be objectively true you have to ask yourself, who is more incentivized to lie? The corporations profiting from hazardous products or the folks who are putting their careers on the line to raise awareness?
Aspartame is an excitotoxin, a substance that overexcites cells to the point of damage or death, and is commonly found in diet/zero sugar sodas, jello, sugar-free gum, drink mixes, sugar-free sports drinks, baking goods, tabletop sweeteners like Nutrasweet, kool-aid, ice tea, chewable vitamins, breath mints, toothpaste, and mouthwash. It was listed as a potential biochemical weapon by the Pentagon. In the peer-reviewed journal, Aspartame: Methanol and the Public Health, Dr. Woodrow Monte wrote: “When diet sodas and soft drinks, sweetened with aspartame, are used to replace fluid loss during exercise and physical exertion in hot climates, the intake of methanol can exceed 250 mg/day or 32 times the Environmental Protection Agency’s recommended limit of consumption for this cumulative poison.” The effects of aspartame are documented by the FDA’s own data. In 1995 the agency was forced, under the Freedom of Information Act, to release a list of aspartame symptoms reported by thousands of victims. From 10,000 consumer complaints, the FDA compiled a list of 92 symptoms, including death.
A report of a 1980 FDA Board of Inquiry, comprised of three independent scientists, confirmed that aspartame “might induce brain tumors.” The FDA had previously banned aspartame based on this finding, that is until establishment Republican and American Businessman Donald Rumsfeld, while president of G.D. Searle (the company that originally held the aspartame patent) vowed that he’d “call in his markers,” to get it approved. Eventually, Monsanto bought out Searle and was untroubled by aspartame’s clouded history. You can read more about Rumsfeld here.
This information barely attempts to scratch the surface when it comes to the dangers and shady history associated with aspartame.
High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)
High Fructose Corn Syrup is a highly-refined artificial sweetener which has become the number one source of calories in America. HFCS is found in just about all processed foods, packs on pounds faster than any other ingredient, increases your LDL Cholesterol levels, contributes greatly to the development of diabetes and tissue damage, promotes cancer, stimulates fat accumulation in the liver, increases the risk of heart disease, and increased mercury intake. Here are some statistics as of September 2016:
Americans consume an average of 50 grams of HFCS every day.
HFCS now represents more than 40 percent of caloric sweeteners added to foods and beverages and is the sole caloric sweetener in soft drinks in the U.S.
HFCS has been shown to increase the risk of developing high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease.
Consumption of HFCS increased more than 1,000 percent between 1970 and 1990, far exceeding the intake changes of any other food or food group, and is a main factor in our current obesity epidemic.
HFCS can cause leaky gut syndrome.
HFCS contains up to 570 micrograms of health-hazardous mercury per gram.
HFCS has been shown to promote cancer.
The average 20-ounce soda contains 15 teaspoons of sugar, all of it high fructose corn syrup.
To create HFCS, caustic soda is used to shuck the corn kernel from its starch, and corn syrup is then created. Enzymes (commonly GMO) are introduced to convert the corn syrup’s sugars to super-sweet fructose. HFCS contains no enzymes, vitamins, or minerals; only sugar and calories. Since HFCS is produced from corn, a natural vegetable, some people try to say that it’s a natural sugar; but there is so much processing that goes on to produce and chemically alter corn to make it into HFCS that it’s so far from natural. On top of that, so much of the corn today isn’t natural because it’s being genetically modified by growers for bigger crop yields and more money.
The fiscal incentives for companies to include trans fat in their products are numerous. It’s used to greatly extend the shelf life of processed foods and is among the most dangerous substances you can consume. Found in deep-fried fast foods as well as processed foods that have been made with margarine or vegetable oils. Numerous studies show that trans fat increases LDL (bad) cholesterol while decreasing HDL or “good” cholesterol; it has also been shown to increase the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, stroke, and inflammation. Oils and fats are now forbidden in the Danish market if they are found to contain trans fatty acids in excess of 2 percent. Besides fast food, trans fat is also found in margarine, chips, crackers, and most commercial baked goods.
The link between trans fat and cardiovascular disease shouldn’t be ignored. Multiple studies on Pacific Island populations who get 30-60% of their total caloric intake from fully saturated coconut oil have all shown nearly nonexistent rates of cardiovascular disease. The truth is that not all saturated fats are created equal, the operative word here being “created” because some saturated fats do occur naturally, while others are artificially manipulated into a saturated state through a man-made process called hydrogenation. Hydrogenation alters vegetable and seed oils by adding hydrogen atoms while heating the oil, producing a rancid substance that really only benefits shelf life and profits. Just about all experts finally agree that hydrogenation does nothing good for your health and actually causes harm.
Monosodium Glutamate (MSG/E621)
MSG is a slow poison that hides behind numerous titles like: “natural flavoring”, “yeast extract”, “textured protein”, “disodium guanylate”, “disodium inosinate”, or “hydrolyzed pea protein”. Currently, labeling standards don’t require MSG to be listed by name, meaning it can hide behind all kinds of disarming verbiage. MSG is an amino acid used as a flavor enhancer in soups, dressings, frozen foods, seasonings, cookies, lunch meats, and many restaurants. MSG, like aspartame, is an excitotoxin. Studies show that regular consumption may result in adverse effects such as depression, disorientation, impaired vision, fatigue, headaches, and obesity.
MSG affects neurological pathways in the brain and disengages the “I’m full” response which explains the rapid weight gain. The part of MSG that negatively affects the human body is the “glutamate”, the glutamic acid in corn, molasses, or wheat is broken down by processes like hydrogenation or by fermenting with strong chemicals, bacteria, and enzymes. It has been well-established that MSG has some laudable gustatory and psychological effects as well as positive effects with regard to hypertension and iron deficiency. However, at the same time, there are abundant reports of harmful effects such as oxidative stress, DNA damage, protein modification, and lysis of stromal cells.
5. Common Food Dyes
The dangers of food coloring have been known for decades, and for decades scientists were bankrolled by the food industry to produce results that showed the contrary, tweaking details in the abstract to elicit the desired result. The food colorings that are still on the market today are linked to cancer and neurological issues. Blue 1 and 2 is found in beverages, candy, baked goods, and pet food; and has been linked to rapid cancer growth in mice. Red 3, used to dye cocktail cherries, grenadine, candy, and baked goods; has been shown to cause thyroid tumors.
Green 3, most commonly found in candy and beverages, has been linked to bladder cancer. The widely used yellow 6, added to beverages, sausages, gelatine, baking ingredients, and candy has been linked to tumors of the adrenal gland and kidneys. Multiple studies have shown that artificial colorings may contribute to behavioral problems in children and a significant reduction in IQ. Blue #1 & #2 are banned in Norway and Sweden.
6. Sodium Sulfite (E221) and Sodium Chloride
I know you might be scratching your head at the mention of sodium chloride on this list, common table salt exists in an overwhelming majority of diets the world over, but most diet-conscious individuals are aware that sodium chloride has almost nothing in common with traditional rock or sea salt. Even the mainstream media will admit that you should stay away from sodium chloride.
Sodium Sulfite, a preservative used in wine-making and other processed foods, is even more dubious. According to the FDA, approximately one in every 100 people is sensitive to sulfites in food, but some believe that this ratio is optimistic. Some medical experts have suggested a possible link between sulfites and asthma. Sulfite-sensitive individuals may experience headaches, breathing problems, and rashes. In severe cases, sulfites can actually cause death by closing up the airways altogether, leading to cardiac arrest. Sulfites are also commonly found in some brands of dried fruits as well.
7. Potassium Sorbate, Sodium Sorbate, Sodium Benzoate, and Potassium Bromate
Potassium Sorbate is one of the most prolific preservatives used in the food industry, it’s nearly impossible to find any packaged candy or ice cream without it The food industry and its “scientists” will parrot endless assurances that potassium sorbate isn’t a health threat, but conflicting data suggests otherwise. The combination of sodium benzoate or potassium benzoate with ascorbic acid in soft drinks may result in the production of benzene, a carcinogen. Potassium Bromate is used to increase volume in white flour and is found mostly in bread and rolls. Potassium Bromate is known to cause cancer and even small amounts in bread can create problems for humans.
Sodium Sorbate is known to be genotoxic (DNA damaging), As per a 2012 study:
“Results of the study revealed that SS, which is commonly used in the food industry, has genotoxic and clastogenic effects in human peripheral lymphocytes. Madle et al. (1993) reported that using human lymphocytes could provide the best results for human mutagenicity studies. According to these data, it can be concluded that SS may also cause cancer because of its mutagenic and genotoxic effects.”
8. Sodium Nitrate (Sodium Nitrite)
Sodium nitrate is used as a (drumroll) preservative, food coloring, and “flavor enhancer” in bacon, ham, fish, hotdogs, lunch meats, corned beef, and other processed foods. This ingredient, which sounds harmless, is actually highly carcinogenic once it enters the human digestive system. Once ingested, it forms a variety of nitrosamine compounds that enter the bloodstream and wreak havoc on a number of internal organs: the liver and pancreas in particular. Sodium nitrite is widely regarded as a toxic ingredient and the USDA actually tried to ban this additive in the 1970s but was vetoed by influential food manufacturers who complained that had “no alternative” for preserving packaged meat products.
Why does the industry still use this additive? Simple, this chemical (sodium nitrite) just happens to turn packaged meats bright red. It’s a “color fixer”, and it makes old, dead meats appear fresh and vibrant for an unnaturally long time. Like its nitrate counterpart, it can be found in hotdogs, bacon, ham, lunch meat, cured meat, corned beef, smoked fish, and other forms of processed meat.
9. Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT)
BHA and BHT (E320) are used to preserve common household foods and are known to be toxic. Any processed food item that has a particularly long shelf life is often filled with BHA. These preservatives are found in things like cereal, chewing gum, potato chips, and vegetable oils. BHA and BHT keep foods from changing color, changing flavor, or becoming rancid. They are also oxidants, which form potentially cancer-causing reactive compounds in your body and can affect the neurological system of the brain and alter behavior.
These additives are typically found in potato chips, chewing gum, cereals, frozen sausages, enriched rice, lard, shortening, cake, candy, and jello. Propyl Gallate is another preservative often used in conjunction with BHA and BHT. It is sometimes found in meat products, chicken soup base, and chewing gums. Animal studies have suggested that it too could be linked to cancer growth, though other studies claim it can induce cell death to cancer cells. Propyl Gallate can also cause stomach and skin irritation, liver damage, kidney damage.
10. Sulfur Dioxide (E220)
A lot of these additives can be downplayed by clever manipulation of wording and how the more biased “studies” alter the parameters to end up with a more desired result, but Sulfur additives are undeniably toxic. In the United States, the FDA has actually completely prohibited their use in fruit and vegetables. Adverse reactions include bronchial problems, particularly in those prone to asthma, hypotension (low blood pressure), flushing, tingling sensations, or anaphylactic shock. Sulfur additives also destroy vitamins B1 and E, which can be particularly damaging to developing children.
The International Labour Organization of the UN says to avoid E220 if you suffer from conjunctivitis, bronchitis, emphysema, bronchial asthma, or cardiovascular disease. It is found in beer, soft drinks, dried fruits, juices, cordials, wines, vinegar, and potato products.
Author's Note:I hope that while you read these texts you do your own cross-referencing and learn firsthand just how split the medical and scientific communities really are on most topics. I would ask that you put your problem-solving and critical thinking skills to use and consider who has more to lose on either side of these arguments, and what could possibly cause a respected MD or scientist to commit career suicide.
If you still prefer to use Google for these fact-finding ventures, you will likely be provided a surplus of damage control articles and “testimonies”, if you use duckduckgo it will be closer to an even mix, and if you use Qwant you will see things you’d never find otherwise. You will no doubt come across a media outlet called “Healthline” which provides assurances that all of these claims are false despite scientific evidence to the contrary (provided below in the sources section). I’d also like to point you towards the primary funders of Healthline, a who’s who of big-money investment firms containing many dozens of corporations each. Lawsuits against these funders include everything from security fraud to violating the Clean Water Act, so consider this before placing blind trust in the words of a well-financed propaganda mouthpiece.
Cardinal George Pell, who became the highest-ranking Vatican official to ever be convicted of child sexual abuse, has now been freed from jail after Australia’s highest court overturned his conviction.
The 78-year-old senior Catholic figure was facing a six-year jail sentence after a jury found he was guilty of sexually abusing two boys in Melbourne in the 1990s. Seven judges ruled unanimously in Pell’s favor, stating that the jury who found him guilty had “not properly considered all the evidence presented at the trial.”
Throughout the entire time, Pell maintained his innocence from the moment he was charged in June of 2017, and despite what’s happened since, regardless of whether he’s actually innocent or not, his case has brought even more attention to the on-going problem of pedophilia within the Vatican and Catholic church.
Although the conviction against Pell has been dropped, people will forever ponder if this man is actually guilty of what he was accused of, and perhaps much more. Unfortunately, sexual abuse within the Catholic Church and other places of power has been an issue for quite some time. It begs the question, how is this type of activity able to persist and sustain itself with nothing stopping it?
It can be disturbing to contemplate the idea that Cardinal George Pell is or would be involved in such things as he himself established The Diocesan Commission Into Sexual Abuse in 1996.
It’s no secret that sexual abuse scandals have plagued the Catholic Church for decades, and it seems almost every single year. For example, prior to the accusations against Pell, in 2015 a lawyer by the name of Ulrich Weber uncovered that for the thirty year reign of boys choir run by Benedict’s XVI’s elder brother, approximately 600 boys with a “high degree of plausibility” were victims of sexual and physical abuse, or both. The report identified 500 cases of physical abuse, and 67 cases of sexual abuse committed by a total of 49 people in a position of power within the church.
Furthermore, it was only a few months ago when Carlo Maria Vigano, former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States and Secretary-General of the Governor of Vatican City, implicated multiple church officials, including Pope Francis, in sexual abuse.
Reverend Gabriele Amorth is another example. He was an Italian Roman CatholicPriest and an exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, which is an administrative branch of the Catholic Church of Rome. He claimed to have performed tens of thousands of exorcisms over his half a dozen plus decades as a Catholic Priest, and has mentioned a number of times how Satanism is practiced within the Vatican. He has also claimed that girls are commonly kidnapped by a gang of Vatican police and foreign diplomats. He claimed that these girls are recruited for Vatican parties, and crimes with a sexual motive.
Malachi Martin, an Irish Catholic priest and writer on the Catholic Church published many books exposing the practice of Satanism within the Vatican. He was originally ordained as a Jesuit priest and eventually became Professor of Palaeography at the Vatican’s Pontifical Biblical Institute.
“Most frighteningly for [Pope] John Paul [II], he had come up against the irremovable presence of a malign strength in his own Vatican and in certain bishops’ chanceries. It was what knowledgeable Churchmen called the ‘superforce.’ Rumors, always difficult to verify, tied its installation to the beginning of Pope Paul VI’s reign in 1963. Indeed Paul had alluded somberly to ‘the smoke of Satan which has entered the Sanctuary’. . . an oblique reference to an enthronement ceremony by Satanists in the Vatican. Besides, the incidence of Satanic pedophilia – rites and practices – was already documented among certain bishops and priests as widely dispersed as Turin, in Italy, and South Carolina, in the United States. The cultic acts of Satanic pedophilia are considered by professionals to be the culmination of the Fallen Archangel’s rites.”
AP News calls them “far-right,” but tens of thousands of freedom-loving people marched against new tyrannical public health measures, such as partial and full lockdowns and health passports and mandatory vaccinations, across Europe.
Demonstrations against new virus restrictions were observed in Austria, Croatia, Italy, Northern Ireland, the UK, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. Outside of Europe, protesters were seen in several cities across Canada, Australia, Japan, and even the US. Some marked Saturday as part of a “Worldwide Freedom” rally to protest COVID-19 restrictions and vaccine mandates.
Some of the most intense rallies, which turned into riots, were in the port city of Rotterdam. Clashes between protesters and police began Friday and continued through Saturday night.
About 30 minutes away, protests transformed into riots in Hague.
Protesters across many European cities shared commonalities as they marched to preserve their lives and liberty. Governments are attempting to plunder that via increased COVID restrictions, mandatory health passports, and forced vaccinations.
The worst of restrictions, or rather the government’s plundering of liberties, was in Austria, where full lockdowns begin Monday. Nationwide lockdowns are expected for at least ten days but can be extended to more than two weeks. Then by Feb. 1, the government will make vaccinations mandatory (only 66% of Austria’s 8.9 million people are fully vaccinated). Good luck with that one.
Saturday’s march in Vienna’s massive Heldenplatz square had many chanting “My Body, My Choice,” “We’re Standing Up for Our Kids!,” and “Resistance!”
One of the biggest protests might have been in Zagreb, Croatia’s northwestern capital, where Citizen Free Press reports as many as 100,000 flooded streets to protest the government’s health passports and new COVID measures.
In Rome, thousands of demonstrators gathered in the capital’s Circus Maximus to protest against “Green Pass” certificates required at workplaces, restaurants, cinemas, theaters, sports venues, and gyms, as well as for public transportation.
“People like us never give up,” read a protester’s sign.
The pushback against totalitarianism is spreading across Europe. Usually, “Europeans generally are more compliant than Americans when it comes to government orders. But even there, citizens are protesting governments seizing power in the name of public health,” said American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson.
People of the world are awakening to government tyranny plundering their life and liberties as the Davos Man, the world’s elites, and their political puppet officials are becoming more unfavorable than ever. The increasing discontent among citizens and their respective governments is dangerous – this is how revolutions begin.
Was the government of Australia aware of the US Central Intelligence Agency plot to assassinate Julian Assange, an Australian citizen and journalist arrested and now imprisoned under unrelentingly bleak, harsh conditions in the UK?
Why have the country’s elected leaders refused to publicly advocate for one of its citizens, who has been held on dubious charges and subjected to torture by a foreign power, according to UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer? What does Canberra know about Julian’s fate and when did it know it?
The Grayzone has obtained documents revealing that the Australian government has since day one been well-aware of Julian’s cruel treatment inside London’s maximum security Belmarsh Prison, and has done little to nothing about it. It has, in fact, turned a cold shoulder to the jailed journalist despite hearing his testimony of conditions “so bad that his mind was shutting down.”
Not only has Canberra failed to effectively challenge the US and UK governments overseeing Assange’s imprisonment and prosecution; as these documents expose in stark detail, it appears to have colluded with them in the flagrant violation of an Australian citizen’s human rights, while doing its best to obscure the reality of his situation from the public.
On knowledge of CIA plot against Assange, Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs issues snide non-denial denial
In the wake of Yahoo News’ startling September revelations of CIA plans to surveil, kidnap, and even kill WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, which confirmed and built upon a May 2020 exposé by The Grayzone’s Max Blumenthal, officials in the NATO-oriented ‘Five Eyes’ global spying network struggled to get their stories straight.
William Evanina, Washington’s top counterintelligence officer until his retirement in early 2021, told Yahoo the Five Eyes alliance was “critical” to Langley’s dastardly plot, and “we were very confident” that Julian’s potential escape from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London could be prevented, by hook or by crook.
When asked whether the US had ever briefed or consulted the government of Julian’s native Australia on the operation, however, Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) dodged the question. For his part, Malcolm Turnbull, the Australian Prime Minister at the time of these deadly deliberations, claimed, “the first I heard about this was in today’s media.”
It is certainly possible that elected officials in Canberra were kept in the dark about the CIA’s proposals. Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam was unaware of the very existence of Five Eyes until 1973, 17 years after his country became a signatory to the network’s underpinning UKUSA agreement, following police raids on the offices of domestic spying agency the Australian Security Intelligence Organization, due to its withholding of information from the government.
Whether or not Turnbull was aware of the operation, DFAT’s response when a member of Julian’s family contacted the Department demanding Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne ask the Biden administration to drop the charges against him, and seeking comment on the Yahoo article, was disturbingly flippant.
“Just because it’s written in a newspaper doesn’t mean it’s true…the CIA has been accused of a lot of things, including faking the Moon landing,” a DFAT official quipped in a classic non-denial denial.
These crude remarks were recorded in a letter sent to Payne by John Shipton, Julian’s father. The missive is just one of many documents provided exclusively to Grayzone by Kellie Tranter, Julian’s legal authority in Australia.
For years, Tranter has filed freedom of information requests with the Australian government in a campaign to uncover its true position on Julian, and to what extent its intimate alliance with Washington has limited its ability or willingness to push for his freedom.
The documents acquired by Tranter expose Canberra as anything but an advocate for Assange, the Australian citizen. Instead, throughout Julian’s time in the Ecuadorian Embassy, and imprisonment at Her Majesty’s Pleasure in Belmarsh high security prison – “Britain’s Gitmo” – the Australian government has been determinedly committed to seeing, hearing, and speaking no evil in his regard, despite possessing clear evidence of his dramatically waning physical and mental health, and the torturous conditions of his confinement.
Assange informs Canberra of US violations of his rights: ‘This action was illegal’
The records of a brief visit by Australian consulate officers to Belmarsh on May 17th 2019, one month after Assange’s dramatic expulsion from the Embassy, are especially illustrative of Canberra’s attitude. Over the course of that meeting, Assange spoke in detail about prison conditions and his 23-hour-a-day solitary confinement.
“He remains in his cell most of the day, with 40 minutes allocated each day for ‘associations’,” the Australian consular officials noted. “He is allowed outside for 30 minutes each day, although he said at times this does not happen,” for reasons unstated. Unable to eat at all “for a long period,” he was now ingesting “small amounts”, collecting meals from the kitchen and returning to his cell.
Permitted just two personal visits each month, plus legal consultations, Assange mentioned his recent meeting with Nils Melzer and two medical experts specialized in examining potential victims of torture and other ill-treatment, and that he had so far been unable to speak to his family.
The WikiLeaks co-founder eschewed work programs “which would afford him the opportunity to get out of his cell more often,” according to the diplomats, on the grounds that he refused to engage in “slave labour” and needed time to prepare his legal case. Prisoners in British jails earn an average of $13 per week for hard, thankless toil on behalf of big business, which in turn profits immensely from their rank exploitation.
While mercifully prescribed antibiotics and codeine by prison doctors for an infected root canal, which can be life-threatening in the event the infection spreads, Assange was still waiting on reading glasses and had yet to see an optometrist. The jailed journalist went on to describe how one senior officer “has it in for me,” showing his visitors a charge sheet indicating that a search of his cell uncovered a razor blade, and he’d failed to tidy it after an inspection.
A third infraction of any sort “would result in exercise privileges being withdrawn,” the document states. Possibly fearing reprisal, Assange asked that officials not raise these matters with prison authorities. Evidently, what might typically be considered an unambiguous indication of suicidal intentions was instead logged as a simple disciplinary matter.
Adding to his psychological toll, Assange reported that he had undergone blood tests, and been advised he was HIV-positive, a shocking diagnosis. However, subsequent examinations confirmed the test result to be a false positive, forcing Assange to wonder if the misdiagnosis was a mere error, or “something else.” It could well have been a grotesquely sick mind game, perhaps alluding to the bogus sexual assault allegations he had faced in Sweden, and intended to drive him toward madness.
Assange also presented the Australian consular officials with a recently-published UK Home Office deportation notice, informing him then-Secretary of State Sajid Javid had determined under the 1971 UK Immigration Act that his presence in the UK “was not conducive to the public interest, and he would be removed from the UK without delay,” with no chance of appealing the decision.
“Mr. Assange expressed concern about surviving the current process and fears he would die if taken to the US. He claimed the US was going through his possessions that had remained at the Ecuadorian Embassy. He said that this action was illegal,” the officers wrote. “He stated that his possessions included two valuable artworks he planned to sell to raise funds for his legal defence, the manuscripts of two books, and legal papers. He expressed concern his legal material would be used against him by the US.”
Assange was correct that sensitive documents were stolen by US authorities. Immediately following his arrest, his attorney Gareth Peirce contacted the Ecuadorian Embassy regarding this privileged material, demanding it be handed over as a matter of urgency. When at last his property was collected, all legal papers were missing save for two volumes of Supreme Court files “and a number of pages of loose correspondence,” making his extradition defense an even greater challenge than it already was.
Over the course of Julian’s initial extradition hearings in early 2020, assistant US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Gordon Kromberg implausibly pledged a “taint team” would excise material from these files so it would not be used in any resultant trial. Similarly feeble “assurances” of this ilk were offered during the recent appeal proceedings.
Conversely, there has so far been no unconvincing public guarantee against the abuse of any information illicitly obtained by UC Global, a CIA contractor, from its extensive surveillance of the Embassy. The Spanish private security firm went as far as bugging the building’s female bathroom, where the WikiLeaks founder conducted discussions with his lawyers, away from prying ears and eyes – or so he hoped.
Despite his situation, Julian somehow retained a vague shred of optimism about the future in discussions with consular officials, suggesting that the result of Australia’s federal election, which was held the very next day, “may present a window for a new government to do something supportive for his case,” asking that Marise Payne be briefed on developments.
As it was, Scott Morrison’s Liberal National Coalition retained its grip on power – and no alarm was publicly raised about anything learned over the course of the consular visit. Indeed, remaining tight-lipped on Julian’s suffering, no matter how horrendous, was to be a matter of dedicated policy.
Australia’s DFAT denies any role in “progressively severe abuse” of Assange
On May 30th that year, WikiLeaks’ made the shock announcement that Julian had been moved to Belmarsh’s medical ward, expressing “grave concerns” about the state of his health. Almost immediately, DFAT’s Global Watch Office fired off an internal email drawing attention to the post.
The following day, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Nils Melzer proclaimed “the collective persecution of Julian Assange must end here and now!” The international legal veteran added that, “in 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution,” he had “never seen a group of democratic states ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonize and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law.”
Next, Melzer fulminated against a “relentless and unrestrained campaign of public mobbing, intimidation and defamation” by the US, UK, Sweden and Ecuador, which had subjected him to “persistent, progressively severe abuse ranging from systematic judicial persecution and arbitrary confinement in the Ecuadorian embassy, to his oppressive isolation, harassment and surveillance inside the embassy.”
In response, Australia’s DFAT issued a statement rejecting any suggestion Canberra was “complicit in psychological torture or has shown a lack of consular support” in Assange’s regard, claiming to be “a staunch defender of human rights and strong advocate for humane treatment in the course of judicial processes,” and expressing confidence that he was “being treated appropriately.”
Due to “privacy considerations” allegedly extended to all consular clients, the Department declined to divulge any further details related to his physical or mental state.
It added that the Australian High Commission in London “previously raised any health concerns identified with Belmarsh prison authorities and these have been addressed,” with further inquiries made following Julian’s move to the health ward.
The documents provided to The Grayzone indicate Canberra did indeed make repeated enquiries to Belmarsh by phone and mail in the wake of Wikileaks’ announcement, all of which went unanswered for six straight days. So why did Australia’s High Commissioner not intervene, and demand immediate clarity on an issue of literal life-and-death urgency?
Whatever the reason for the Australian government’s foot-dragging, a consular file dated August 8th that year records how Shipton wrote to advise that Julian had been readmitted to Belmarsh’s sick bay, and a lawyer was drafting a letter to Marise Payne, requesting DFAT “use its diplomatic sources to seek an independent medical assessment (ie outside the prison).”
Then, 11 days later, Shipton mentioned that Julian’s brother, Gabriel, had recently visited the prison and was distressed by Assange’s “deteriorating condition,” leading him to write letters to both Australian Governor General David Hurley and Morrison raising his fears.
On October 21st, Assange appeared in court for a pre-trial hearing in his extradition case. As was widely reported in the mainstream media, he appeared frail and discombobulated, struggling to recall his own name and date of birth when asked by the judge. When the presiding justice enquired whether he even knew what was happening, Assange responded, “not exactly,” indicating conditions in Belmarsh left him unable to “think properly.”
“I don’t understand how this is equitable,” the imprisoned journalist stated. “I can’t research anything, I can’t access any of my writing. It’s very difficult where I am.”
Assange’s attorney, Mark Summers, argued that his initial extradition hearing, scheduled for February 2020, should be delayed by three months due to the complexity of the case – “the evidence…would test the limits of most lawyers,” he said, and discussed the immense difficulty of communicating with his client in the jail, given he lacked access to a computer.
The judge denied the request. As a result, Julian would be deprived of “the most basic of access to the bare minimum needs for proper representation” until just weeks prior to the hearing.
Assange attorney warns Australia’s DFAT of “impending crisis”
Three days later, Assange attorney Gareth Peirce wrote to the High Commission, asserting that if consular representatives had attended court, “they will have undoubtedly noted what was clear for everyone present in court to observe” – that her client was “in shockingly poor condition…struggling not only to cope but to articulate what he wishes to articulate.”
Unbelievably, a DFAT report on the proceedings unearthed by Tranter made no mention whatsoever of Julian’s disheveled appearance, or his clearly frayed mental state.
Peirce went on to argue that under the circumstances, it was unsurprising Julian had not authorized prison officials to provide the Australian government with information regarding his medical treatment, which had been “been grossly and unlawfully compromised over some time, including, disturbingly, even whilst he has been in Belmarsh prison, false information on at least one occasion having been provided to the press by very obviously internal sources.”
“We hope that what we are able to say…will be accepted by you as having been based on close observation, including by independent professional clinicians..Every professional warning provided to the prison, including by at least one independent doctor called in by Belmarsh, has been ignored,” she wrote. “We would be pleased to meet with you at any stage if by intervention in what is now an impending crisis [emphasis added], you can contribute to its amelioration and avoidance.”
And so it was that consular officials visited Belmarsh November 1st. In their exchange, Assange criticized false statements made to the media by DFAT which suggested he had rejected offers of their support.
Next, he revealed that a prison doctor was “concerned” about his condition. In fact, Assange said his psychological state was “so bad that his mind was shutting down,” with his near-permanent isolation making it impossible for him “to think or to prepare his defence.”
He did not even have a pen with which to write, was unable to do any research, could not receive documents during legal visits, and all his mail was read by prison officials before it was given to him.
The next month, Professor Michael Kopelman, emeritus professor of neuropsychiatry at King’s College London, prepared a report on Julian’s psychiatric state based on meetings throughout his first six months in Belmarsh, conversations with his parents, friends, colleagues and Stella Morris, his partner and mother of his two children.
As was revealed in Judge Vanessa Baraitser’s January ruling on the US extradition request, Kopelman diagnosed Julian with a severe recurrent depressive disorder, which was occasionally accompanied by psychotic features such as hallucinations, and frequent suicidal thoughts.
His symptoms furthermore included loss of sleep and weight, impaired concentration, a persistent feeling of being on the verge of tears, and state of acute agitation in which he paced his cell until exhausted, punching his head or banging it against the wall.
Assange commented to Kopelman that he believed his life was not worth living, he thought about suicide “hundreds of times a day,” and had a “constant desire” to self-harm or commit suicide, describing plans to kill himself that the professor considered “highly plausible.”
Calls to The Samaritans, a UK charity helpline providing emotional support to those in emotional distress, struggling to cope, or at risk of suicide, were “virtually” a nightly occurrence, and on occasions when he had not been able to reach them, Assange had slashed his thigh and abdomen to distract from his sense of isolation.
Kopelman concluded that, if Assange was held in solitary confinement in the US for a prolonged period, his mental health would “deteriorate substantially resulting in persistently severe clinical depression and the severe exacerbation of his anxiety disorder, PTSD and suicidal ideas,” not least because various “protective factors” available to him in the UK would be absent Stateside.
“For example, he speaks to his partner by telephone nearly every day and, before lockdown, was visited by her and his children, various friends, his father, and other relatives…[Kopelman] considered there to be an abundance of known risk factors indicating a very high risk of suicide,” Baraitser recorded. “He stated, ‘I am as confident as a psychiatrist ever can be that, if extradition to the US were to become imminent, Mr. Assange will find a way of suiciding.’”
The professor’s reports were fundamental to the extradition order’s rejection – a surprising outcome, given Baraitser previously approved extradition in 96% of cases upon which she has ruled.
Nonetheless, she accepted every other argument and charge put forward by the Department of Justice, in effect criminalizing a great many entirely legitimate journalistic activities, and setting the chilling precedent that citizens of any country can be extradited to the US for alleged breaches of its national laws, therefore implying Washington’s legal jurisdiction is global in scale.
Files on Australia’s DFAT discussions with US Secretary of State redacted in full
In response to the ruling, Australia’s Shadow Attorney General Mark Dreyfus issued a forceful statement, declaring the opposition Labor party believed “this has dragged on for long enough,” particularly given Julian’s “ill-health,” and demanding the Morrison administration “do what it can to draw a line under this matter and encourage the US government to bring this matter to a close.”
Conversely, DFAT published a characteristically laconic, soulless note, stating merely that Australia was “not a party to the case and will continue to respect the ongoing legal process,” and rehashing previous false claims that Julian had rejected multiple offers of consular assistance.
Canberra was simply silent when in June, the Icelandic publication Stundin revealed in detail how a “superseding indictment” levelled against Assange in September 2020, which charged that he and others at WikiLeaks “recruited and agreed with hackers to commit computer intrusions,” was based largely on the admittedly false testimony of fraudster, diagnosed sociopath and convicted pedophile Siggi Thordarson, who had previously embezzled vast sums from WikiLeaks and been recruited by the FBI to undermine its founder from within.
There is good reason to believe the Australian government knew the indictment was coming. In July that year, Foreign Minister Payne met with CIA director Mike Pompeo at an Australia–US Ministerial Consultations convention, “the principal forum for bilateral consultations” between the country and the US.
Tranter submitted freedom of information requests for details of that rendezvous, but the documents she received in return were fully redacted. As were files released to her relating to the Foreign Minister’s summit with Secretary of State Antony Blinken in May 2021.
It was almost certain that Assange was a subject of these meetings. DFAT claims Payne “raised the situation” when she met Blinken again in September, and the minister herself alleges she specifically discussed Australia’s “expectations” regarding Assange’s treatment with UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab when he visited Canberra in February 2020. Tranter requested records related to this meeting too, but was told none existed.
Upon Julian’s arrest, Prime Minister Morrison alleged he would receive “the same treatment that any other Australian would get.”
“When Australians travel overseas and then find themselves in difficulties with the law, they face the judicial systems of those countries,” Morrison said. “It doesn’t matter what particular crime it is that they’re alleged to have committed, that’s the way the system works.”
However, an internal email dated April 5th 2019 secured by Tranter from the Australian Attorney General’s office was shot through with contempt for the Wikileaks co-founder. The note asserted, “FYI – Assange might be evicted. Not sure if his lawyers will make any (not very convincing) [emphasis added] arguments about Australia’s responsibilities to him but thought it was worth flagging.”
As usual, Australian officials said nothing in public about Assange’s imminent abduction.
Assange’s treatment, and the total lack of outrage over his incarceration, prison conditions, blatant procedural abuses engaged in by Washington in their relentless pursuit of him, and CIA plans to kidnap and/or murder the WikiLeaks founder, diverges starkly from Australia’s approach to Kylie Moore-Gilbert, an Australian-British academic jailed in Iran for 10 years on questionable charges of espionage in September 2018.
Behind the scenes, Australian diplomats struggled for almost two years to secure her release, eventually brokering a prisoner swap, under which she was traded for three Iranian inmates in Thailand – two of whom were convicted in connection with a 2012 bombing plot in Bangkok. In a statement, Foreign Minister Payne expressed relief that Moore-Gilbert was finally free as a result of “professional and determined work,” noting Canberra had “consistently rejected” the grounds on which she was detained.
Meanwhile, the Australian government has consistently reinforced Washington’s position on Assange. In fact, officials have on occasion gone even further than their US counterparts in publicly condemning him and his actions.
In December 2010, then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard declared WikiLeaks’ release of US diplomatic cables meant Assange was “guilty of illegality,” and that Federal Police were investigating, to offer “advice about potential criminal conduct of the individual involved.” To be fair to Canberra though, elected representatives there may effectively have no choice in the matter.
According to investigative journalist Duncan Campbell, each Five Eyes member theoretically has the right to veto a request for signals intelligence collected on an individual, group or organization collected by another. However, Campbells explained, “when you’re a junior ally like Australia or New Zealand, you never refuse,” even in situations when there are concerns about what ostensible allies may do with that sensitive information.
The documents obtained by Tranter and provided to The Grayzone provide an unobstructed view of the Australian junior ally’s betrayal of one of its citizens to the imperial power that has hunted him for years. As Julian Assange’s rights were violated at every turn, Canberra appears to have been complicit.
Vero Beach, FL — Last Friday, the internet and streets erupted in both anger and joy after a jury of his peers found Kyle Rittenhouse ‘not guilty’ on all charges. The jury determined that Rittenhouse acted in self-defense and therefore was justified in killing two people and injuring another.
To those who watched that trial, this was the logical conclusion yet people are still hell-bent on calling him a hero or a villain, when in reality, he is neither. Acting in self-defense is a natural choice. It is acting in defense of others that is heroic.
While the corporate media vultures picked the Rittenhouse trial clean of every single divisive fleck they could to keep society at each other’s throats, they conveniently ignored another trial in which that man actually did act in a heroic manner. Andrew Coffee IV attempted to save he and his girlfriend’s lives by firing at multiple home invaders who crashed into his bedroom window in the middle of the night.
Unfortunately, Coffee was unsuccessful at saving his girlfriend, Alteria Woods, and the home invaders shot her ten times. The details of this case, on the surface, were cut and dry, and Coffee should have never gone to trial. However, because those armed invaders who killed his girlfriend wore badges, Coffee went to jail and was charged with Woods’ murder. He was also charged with the attempted murder of the three officers who smashed in his window that night and killed his girlfriend
This horrific incident unfolded in 2017, yet unlike Rittenhouse, it took Coffee four years to get his trial and on the same day Rittenhouse was found not guilty of murder, so was Coffee.
As the media obsessed over Rittenhouse, jurors found Coffee not guilty on charges of felony murder and attempted murder of a law enforcement officer, on Friday. They determined he acted in self-defense when firing at deputies during that SWAT raid in 2017.
There were no protests, no riots, and no fights outside the courthouse while the verdict was read inside. Instead, Coffee hugged his family and the media remained mum.
According to police, they were at Coffee’s home that night to arrest his father, Andrew Coffee III. He was suspected dealing in substances deemed illegal by the state. According to police, they arrested Coffee III outside of his front door that night, without incident.
It was what happened after they got their suspect that helped Coffee IV win his case. Despite arresting Coffee III without incident, SWAT members still thought it was necessary to smash the windows in the bedroom Coffee IV was asleep in with his girlfriend.
Because he was asleep, Coffee IV had no idea his dad had been arrested or who it was that was smashing through his windows in the middle of the night. So, he grabbed his firearm and began shooting. So did the cops.
Woods would be shot 10 times by police. Coffee IV would tell police he didn’t know they were cops because he never heard them announce themselves as he was asleep.
“He said, ‘I’m not saying that they didn’t announce [themselves], I’m saying I didn’t hear it,” Coffee’s attorney Adam Chrzam told CBS 12 News in an interview. “He believed he was under assault, whatever assault that was.”
“Clearly the defense was that he didn’t realize that this was law enforcement,” said Ian Goldstein, a West Palm Beach defense attorney who serves as a legal analyst for CBS 12 News. “If that’s what he thought, than he has the right to use self-defense.”
On Friday, a jury agreed and cleared Coffee IV of the murder charges, much to the chagrin of the police department who wanted him behind bars for the woman they killed.
“It’s disappointing that this jury did not see that the tragic death of Alteria Woods occurred as a direct result of the actions of Andrew Coffee IV,” a spokesperson for the Indian River County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement to CBS 12 News. “Our deputies were there as a result of drug complaints and sales and took fire from Coffee upon which they had no choice but to protect themselves and others. Our hearts go out to the Woods family as they still suffer from the loss of their daughter, but we stand by our statement that she would still be here had Coffee simply complied with law enforcement.”
Despite the empty excuses from police, the family knew they had no reason to smash in the windows that night. They also knew that Woods would still be alive that night had SWAT team members not senselessly broken into their bedroom after they already arrested the person for whom they were looking.
“The Woods family never blamed Andrew “AJ” Coffee IV for the death of their daughter, Alteria Woods. They are happy with the jury’s verdict and that justice prevailed today,” the family’s attorney Mary Sherris told CBS 12 News.
Sadly because he had a record, Coffee IV was not allowed to own a gun and the jury found him guilty of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. As prosecutors are highly disappointed with the murder acquittal, they are seeking the maximum sentence for the firearms charge which is 30 years.
Unlike Rittenhouse, whose judge found a loophole in the law to justify his questionable possession of the rifle, Coffee was not given the same support.
Where were the protests for Coffee, where were the riots, the 24/7 news coverage, and the constant hate being channeled through all forms of media? As Coffee doesn’t fit the divisive nature of what the media needs to keep you angry, his case was ignored. How are these people still relevant?
According to a 2021 Rasmussen phone poll of 1000 likely US voters, about 58% of the American voting public views the media as the “enemy of the people.” Rasmussen Reports has this to say:
A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports finds that 58% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat agree that the media are “truly the enemy of the people,” including 34% who Strongly Agree. Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t agree, including 23% who Strongly Disagree.
Three questions were asked of poll participants:
Do you trust the political news you are getting?
How serious of a problem is “fake news” in the media?
Do you agree or disagree with this statement: The media are “truly the enemy of the people”?
The wording of the third question echoed Trump’s 2019 tweet in which he said “Fake News is truly the ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!”
Here’s how the entirety of the poll results broke down, as Newsmax reports:
76% of Republicans agree with the “enemy of the people” phrase in describing the media.
37% of Democrats agree with the phrase.
61% of independents agree with the phrase.
83% of voters believe “fake news” is a serious problem in the media, compared to 14% who disagree.
92% of Republicans believe “fake news” is a serious problem, compared to 74% of Democrats. 82% of independents believe it to be a serious problem.
37% say they trust the political news they’re getting, compared to 43% who don’t trust it. 20% are not sure.
54% believe that most reporters who write or talk about President Joe Biden are attempting to help him pass his agenda.
Supermajorities of Republicans and Independents agree with the “enemy of the people phrase.” A significant minority of Democrats agree. A huge chunk of the population, >80%, views fake news as a problem. Many view the political news as untrustworthy and think reporters are trying to help Biden rather than report on the news.
Though the poll was conducted in July of 2021, it’s unlikely the news for the news has gotten much better, as the trend has been toward a more and more negative view of the media.
For example, a 2020 Knight and Gallup poll found that “only 20% of Democrats have an unfavorable view [of the media], and 66% say that attacks are not justified.” That number had gone up by at least 17% by the time of the Rasmussen poll, where 37% of Democrats agreed with the “enemy of the people” phrase, showing a strong trend toward distrust of the media.
This is nothing new for the mainstream media. In fact, they’ve been trying to tell us what they want us to hear and not the truth for quite some time now. And people have finally started to wake up in America and say, ‘Wait a minute, I don’t think I’ve been getting the facts from these quote-unquote journalists out there,’ because that’s not what they are at all. A lot of these people consider themselves to be political activists, and they disguise themselves as journalists. But I think it’s why you see the distrust in the media at an all-time high in our country right now because you haven’t been able to get the facts about a lot of things. They’ve been pushing a certain narrative for so long.
Noting the trend, Rasmussen reported on November 12th that a full 53% of the American populace now doesn’t trust the political news they’re getting. That’s up 10% from the July survey, a massive increase in the space of a few months. So, Americans’ view of the media is getting worse and worse as its narratives are proven false.
“As far as I'm concerned, it's a damned shame that a field as potentially dynamic and vital as journalism should be overrun with dullards, bums, and hacks, hag-ridden with myopia, apathy, and complacence, and generally stuck in a bog of stagnant mediocrity.” -Hunter Thompson