Vaccination as a Form of Mithridatism

Mithridatism is the practice of ingesting small amounts of poison in order to develop immunity, or at least tolerance, to the substance. The practice is named after King Mithridates VI, who ruled over the ancient Kingdom of Pontus in Anatolia from 120 to 63 BC and began the eponymous practice after his father had been assassinated by poisoning. Mithridatism can work in two ways: either by producing antibodies that neutralize toxins, or for the same reason that alcoholics and drug addicts develop a tolerance: the body begins producing more enzymes to catalyze the metabolic pathways responsible for detoxifying the substances being ingested. The same process may be reversed when the addict ceases to consume the substance – the body will downregulate the enzymes necessary for the now unused pathways. This fact often kills heroin addicts who relapse and take the same dose that they had been taking when they had a high tolerance for the substance.

Mithridatism works with a small variety of compounds, mostly complex biological molecules that can be handled by the immune system, or specific compounds that the body has metabolic pathways to detoxify. Examples of the former are animal venoms, and examples of the latter are toxins like alcohol and cyanide. Mithridatism generally does not work on heavy metals, most of which are toxic, as they tend to bioaccumulate, though resistance to arsenic has developed over evolutionary time spans in areas with heavy arsenic exposure^[1]. Even acquiring immunity to cyanide is relatively ineffective, since the ability of the body to detoxify cyanide is not limited by the enzyme, rhodanese, but by the body’s stores of thiosulfate, which donates a sulfur atom in the detoxification process. So, while increased levels of the rhodanese enzyme may aid survival, it is ultimately the level of internal thiosulfate which will be the determining factor (indeed intravenous thiosulfate is sometimes used to treat cyanide poisoning)^[2].

Because of the limitations it suffers from, mithridatism is rarely ever a practical endeavour, but it has been applied historically. According to the historian Appian, King Mithridates had failed to commit suicide by poison after his defeat by Pompey and the Romans, and thus had to ask his bodyguard to kill him with his sword. American herpetologist Bill Haast (1910 – 2011) furnishes a more recent example. Haast was a venomous snake handler who operated the Miami Serpentarium and would perform live demonstrations of himself collecting venom from his snakes^[3]. He practised mithridatism throughout his life, which allowed him to survive the more than 172 bites from venomous snakes he received over his career, including by a king cobra. The antibodies within his blood were used to treat over 20 patients who had been bitten by snakes. In fact, this is how anti-venoms are produced commercially, though the antibodies are harvested from the blood of mammals like rabbits and horses, rather than humans.

Vaccination proceeds from the same logical foundation of deliberate poisoning to achieve immunity, but with the target being pathogenic microorganisms rather than poisons or venoms. This is easy to see if we look at Edward Jenner’s attempts to vaccinate against smallpox by infecting his subjects with cowpox. Clearly inoculating subjects with cowpox could not but be deleterious to their health – the only possible justification being that if some small harm now may avert the possibility of larger harm later then it may be justified by some lines of reasoning. Though modern vaccination is more technologically advanced, it still proceeds by the same method of poisoning to evoke an immune response.

Most modern vaccines include adjuvants that increase the immunogenicity (ability to provoke an immune response) of the vaccines. Some of the most common adjuvants in use today are aluminum salts, like aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate, which were discovered to increase immune response in the 1930s. Since aluminum is a toxic metal that is not required for any part of human metabolism, any vaccine that contains it is therefore toxic. Aluminum adjuvants have been shown to induce immunological disorders and neurological pathology, and may also be carried across the blood-brain barrier by macrophages^[4,5]. Adjuvants other than aluminum salts, such as squalene and mineral oil, have been associated with the development of autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA)^[6]. Another review remarks that “[t]he inflammatory or danger-signal model of adjuvant action implies that increased vaccine reactogenicity is the inevitable price for improved immunogenicity,” meaning that the vaccines that are most effective at producing an immune response must also have the highest rates of adverse reactions^[7]. Although not all vaccines contain adjuvants, they all necessarily function by polluting the body with foreign substances in order to trigger an immune response.

Given these facts, which are just a small subset of those proving vaccine toxicity, it is not unreasonable to say that the practice of vaccination inherently involves poisoning the individual. US law would agree that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe, as per the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-22) which lists, under heading (b) Unavoidable adverse side effects; warnings that

(1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1,1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.^[8,9] [emphasis mine]

Such side effects may include allergic reactions, Guillain–Barré syndrome or other neurological disorders, and death. Vaccine manufacturers are not held liable for any of the possible side effects, and vaccine injuries in the US are adjudicated by a special “vaccine court” established by the act^[10].

Separate from the risks inherent to vaccination is the fact that some¹ vaccines may not actually function in their stated objective of reducing mortality and morbidity from disease. The most immediate goal of vaccination is to induce the production of antibodies in the inoculated person. The effectiveness with which it will do this depends on a large variety of factors, including the person’s age, sex, health, etc., though it is generally the case that being poisoned will induce the body to produce antibodies that are protective against the poison. But, while antibodies may be produced, it is not at all certain that they will have a beneficial effect on the person, and there are many ways in which vaccination can produce a more serious disease state, even apart from the initial poisoning.

One way in which vaccines can increase disease severity is through antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) whereby antibodies allow non-neutralized virus particles to enter into (be phagocytosed by) immune cells, which then allows the virus to replicate. This happened with Sanofi-Pasteur’s 2016 Dengvaxia vaccine for Dengue fever, which was responsible for killing at least 14 children through ADE when they were subsequently exposed to wild virus after vaccination^[11]. Another mechanism through which vaccines can have the opposite of the desired protective effect is through original antigenic sin, whereby previous exposure to one set of antigens in a vaccine may result in the body subsequently fighting similar but not identical antigens with the originally learned antibodies, which are now mistargeted^[12]. Since the antibodies were developed in response to similar but not identical antigens, the body may use the original antibodies – which do not properly neutralize the new antigen – rather than produce new ones which are better suited to the new infection. Of course, it is not possible to reliably predict the direction of antigenic drift in viruses, which makes original antigenic sin a practically insoluble problem, especially in viruses that mutate quickly.

Beyond vaccines producing paradoxical reactions, they may also disrupt selection pressures in virus-host co-evolution. One classical example of this is the viral Marek’s disease in chickens. Marek’s disease was first described in 1907 by an eponymous Hungarian veterinarian, and, though mortality was low, the disease was costly for the poultry industry. This led to the development of a vaccine, which was introduced in 1970. The vaccine, while preventing symptoms, did not prevent birds from becoming infected with the virus or spreading it – also known as a leaky vaccine. This modified the selection pressures on the virus, which was no longer selected for low mortality when transmitting among vaccinated populations (transmission being difficult if the host has died)^[13]. The result is that after several decades of these selection pressures being active, modern viral strains approach 100% mortality in unvaccinated birds. This is a negative outcome from vaccination that affects those outside the inoculated group, while being rewarding for pharmaceutical companies due to continued demand for their products.

Humans also coexist and have co-evolved with viruses. There are several viral diseases of childhood like measles and chicken pox which effectively comprise a part of the human life cycle. If vaccines are to reduce the occurrence of these diseases during childhood², this will have ramifications at the level of the group. Adults who previously had chicken pox as children would have been likely to come into contact with young children in their families who would be sick and shedding the virus. This exposure (exogenous boosting) would serve to periodically “remind” the immune system about the pathogen, and hence strengthen cell-mediated immunity. Far from improving community health, surveillance data indicates that since the introduction of widespread varicella vaccination in US children, cases of shingles have increased in older populations^[14]. Given that shingles is more expensive to treat that chicken pox, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation in the UK concluded that “[c]ost-effectiveness modelling indicates that a two-dose childhood vaccination programme […] could be cost effective but only after 80-100+ years of vaccination […] for the first 30-50 years [the] programme would have a high probability of being cost ineffective.”^[15] That is, cost-ineffective for the taxpayers funding vaccination programs, not for the pharmaceutical companies producing the vaccines.

Even apart from group-level effects and paradoxical reactions, vaccines may simply fail to work at all, rendering the point moot and the price paid in vain. According to vaccine trials, anywhere from 2-10% of healthy vaccinees do not mount a sufficient immune response to vaccination^[16]. This rate is higher for elderly or immunosuppressed individuals. This is in addition to the fact that many kinds of vaccines are not capable of effectively inducing cell-mediated immunity, which is a crucial half of the immune system^[17]. Immunity also wanes over time, apparently lasting only six months in the case of COVID vaccinations. Of course, even if the vaccines do result in the production of long-lasting antibodies, that fact may ultimately have no relation to the more relevant outcomes of sickness and death. In a 2006 review, Tom Jefferson noted that “[e]vidence from systematic reviews shows that inactivated [influenza] vaccines have little or no effect on the effects measured”^[18]. A 2010 Cochrane Library systematic review of 50 studies, primarily randomized controlled trials, found that “Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local harms and an estimated 1.6 additional cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome per million vaccinations.”^[19] Given that more flu vaccines are given each year than any other (until COVID vaccination campaigns), and that great effort goes into increasing flu vaccination rates, the fact that their effectiveness is limited to non-existent is important yet largely ignored^[20].

Vaccination, then, like mithridatism, can be compared to a form of insurance. It is gambling with your health, under the assumption that certain poisoning now will be worthwhile to potentially avoid the possibility of illness of uncertain severity in the future. If vaccination were presented this way, with a full disclosure of risks and no pressure applied to refusers (as is required under Western bioethics) then vaccination would surely be a much less contentious issue. The fact that adverse events of clinical significance are relatively rare allows vaccines to be promoted as “safe and effective”, but it is far from true that the gamble pays off for everyone, as all those who have been killed or maimed by vaccination would attest to (if they were able).

Given the certain cost and uncertain benefits, vaccination, as with insurance, must be left to the personal choice of the individual. To require everyone to follow the same course would be to nullify one of the most important psychological characteristics that differentiates people: risk assessment and risk preference. It is well known that some people prefer feeling safe to having the freedom to make risky choices. This preference is expressed in all domains of life, from choice of recreation, to investment, to health decisions^[21]. Clearly many moderns believe that the risk of disease far outweighs the risk of vaccination, which is their prerogative, but others may decide differently. Any society that holds liberty in high esteem must allow people to freely make these choices, and will subsequently benefit from the entrepreneurship and innovation of people who choose to step off the beaten path. To do otherwise is to force society into the mould of Nietzsche’s last man, who takes no risks and seeks only comfort and security, while preempting the emergence of those who would aspire to accomplish great deeds or produce great works.

To mandate vaccination of any kind is to pathologize the essence of being human. Those who might otherwise be considered a hale and hearty individuals are in fact dangerous disease vectors, who must be preemptively fixed. It is an Original Sin that can only be purged through the products of modern pharmaceutical companies, as in Catholicism where Original Sin can only be erased through baptism. To recast humanity as fundamentally flawed in this way has long been used as a motivator for political goals, notably by the Club of Rome: “In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. […] The real enemy then is humanity itself.”^[22] Substitute disease outbreak for global warming and you have the perfect pretext for the biosecurity state.

Of course, carrying the idea of treating humanity as a disease carrier to its logical conclusion implies a host of other reforms beyond mandatory vaccinations. Obese people are more susceptible to infectious disease from a variety of pathogens, and are therefore more likely to transmit those pathogens to others^[23]. The same goes for immunocompromised individuals, or those with low levels of vitamin D, who are more susceptible to respiratory disease^[24]. At the level of sex, women mount stronger adaptive and innate immune responses than men, something that is not unique to humans but is evolutionarily conserved among creatures across the spectrum of complexity, from lizards and birds to higher mammals^[25]. This affects not only disease response generally but vaccination specifically: for instance, women’s antibody responses to seasonal influenza vaccines are at least twice as strong as those of men.

To maintain internal consistency the biosecurity state should, ostensibly, privilege young, fit women with no pre-existing conditions, due to their robust immune systems, while forcing everyone else to the periphery in some strange form of immunological Darwinism. However, that is not what is playing out. Under the pretext of “protecting the vulnerable” the state is forcing everyone to receive vaccinations, insouciant of the individual’s immunological state before or even after the injection, or whether the vulnerable actually desire to be protected or not. The apparent disconnect between the stated intentions and the resulting actions belies those intentions: vaccine mandates are not about safety, but about removing the right to bodily autonomy, if not in law then in practice and the public consciousness. The libertarian tradition argues that all rights are grounded in property rights: murder is a crime because it violates ones rights to ownership of their physical body; slander is a crime because it defaces ones reputation, which may be considered to be a form of self-property; theft is a crime that violates property rights in a self-evident way. If one no longer has the right to bodily autonomy, then they can no longer be considered to have ownership of their own body – their body is now owned by the state.

The reason that governments worldwide are now making steps to abolish bodily autonomy is because technology now exists to track humans that must be installed on or in the body. As the World Economic Forum puts it, “We’re entering the era of the “Internet of Bodies”: collecting our physical data via a range of devices that can be implanted, swallowed or worn,” and they make sure to mention that this data could “prove crucial in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.”^[26] Of course, many people would find the idea creepy and intrusive, and refuse it, making arguments that they are solely responsible for what they wear or have implanted in their bodies. That is, until the precedent is set that purported public health concerns trump bodily autonomy. It will be at least several years before the technical challenges behind the Internet of Bodies can be solved, but when and if the Internet of Bodies achieves widespread adoption, there may no longer be any culturally acceptable arguments for refusing a wearable continuous blood solute & hormone monitor^[27]. After all, it’s for public health.

---

1. I have seen this issue hit from several angles: vaccines work and you should get all of them; vaccines work but some are unnecessary; some vaccines work and some don’t; vaccines don’t work they are just poison; and viruses aren’t real so vaccines are just poisoning for profit. I take the position that viruses exist and can in some circumstances cause disease, and that vaccines can be successful in stimulating the production of antibodies, though they inherently involve poisoning and generate massive profits for pharmaceutical companies. Whether specific viruses are or are not real, or are capable of causing disease is outside the scope of this paper, and tangential to the question of vaccination in general.
2. I do accept that the chicken pox vaccine provides resistance to the chicken pox virus. I have known several people who received the vaccine and subsequently did not contract chicken pox in childhood (though one suffers from weakened immune function and did come down with shingles as an adult). One individual was vaccinated while his two younger sisters were not, and while his sisters both came down with chicken pox he never became sick despite repeated exposure. I personally was not vaccinated, contracted chicken pox as a child, and recovered with no complications.

References

[1] Carina M. Schlebusch, Lucie M. Gattepaille, Karin Engström, Marie Vahter, Mattias Jakobsson, Karin Broberg, Human Adaptation to Arsenic-Rich Environments, Molecular Biology and Evolution, Volume 32, Issue 6, June 2015, Pages 1544–1555, https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msv046
[2] Hall AH, Dart R, Bogdan G. Sodium thiosulfate or hydroxocobalamin for the empiric treatment of cyanide poisoning? Ann Emerg Med. 2007 Jun; 49(6):806-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.09.021. Epub 2006 Nov 13. PMID: 17098327.
[3] Bill Haast extracts venom from a king cobra live on the Mike Douglas Show, 1965 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoByplZraSY
[4] Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA. Aluminum vaccine adjuvants: are they safe? Curr Med Chem. 2011;18(17):2630-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.2174/092986711795933740. PMID: 21568886.
[5] Vaccine Aluminum Travels Into The Brain http://vaccinepapers.org/vaccine-aluminum-travels-to-the-brain/
[6] Vera-Lastra O, Medina G, Cruz-Dominguez Mdel P, Jara LJ, Shoenfeld Y. Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (Shoenfeld’s syndrome): clinical and immunological spectrum. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2013 Apr;9(4):361-73. doi: https://doi.org/10.1586/eci.13.2. PMID: 23557271.
[7] Petrovsky N. (2015). Comparative Safety of Vaccine Adjuvants: A Summary of Current Evidence and Future Needs. Drug safety, 38(11), 1059–1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-015-0350-4
[8] The Supreme Court did not deem vaccines “unavoidably unsafe,” Congress did https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/health-healing/the-supreme-court-did-not-deem-vaccines-unavoidably-unsafe-congress-did/
[9] National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986 (42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to 300aa-34) https://www.hrsa.gov/sites/default/files/hrsa/vaccine-compensation/about/title-xxi-phs-vaccines-1517.pdf
[10] National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Injury_Compensation_Program
[11] Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE) and Vaccines https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/antibody-dependent-enhancement-and-vaccines
[12] Vatti, A., Monsalve, D. M., Pacheco, Y., Chang, C., Anaya, J. M., & Gershwin, M. E. (2017). Original antigenic sin: A comprehensive review. Journal of autoimmunity, 83, 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2017.04.008
[13] Read, A. F., Baigent, S. J., Powers, C., Kgosana, L. B., Blackwell, L., Smith, L. P., Kennedy, D. A., Walkden-Brown, S. W., & Nair, V. K. (2015). Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens. PLoS biology, 13(7), e1002198. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002198
[14] Goldman, G. S., & King, P. G. (2014). Vaccination to prevent varicella: Goldman and King’s response to Myers’ interpretation of Varicella Active Surveillance Project data. Human & experimental toxicology, 33(8), 886–893. https://doi.org/10.1177/0960327113512340
[15] Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation Statement on varicella and herpes zoster vaccines (2009) https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107105354/http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@ab/documents/digitalasset/dh_114908.pdf
[16] Wiedermann, U., Garner-Spitzer, E., & Wagner, A. (2016). Primary vaccine failure to routine vaccines: Why and what to do?. Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 12(1), 239–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2015.1093263
[17] Bodewes, R., Fraaij, P. L., Geelhoed-Mieras, M. M., van Baalen, C. A., Tiddens, H. A., van Rossum, A. M., van der Klis, F. R., Fouchier, R. A., Osterhaus, A. D., & Rimmelzwaan, G. F. (2011). Annual vaccination against influenza virus hampers development of virus-specific CD8⁺ T cell immunity in children. Journal of virology, 85(22), 11995–12000. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.05213-11
[18] Jefferson T. (2006). Influenza vaccination: policy versus evidence. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 333(7574), 912–915. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38995.531701.80
[19] Jefferson T, Di Pietrantonj C, Rivetti A, Bawazeer GA, Al‐Ansary LA, Ferroni E. Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 7. Art. No.: CD001269. DOI: https://doi.org//10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub4. Accessed 06 December 2021.
[20] Kristine Sheedy, PhD (2011) Communication Strategies for Increasing National Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Usage https://www.who.int/influenza_vaccines_plan/resources/sheedy.pdf
[21] Frey, R., Pedroni, A., Mata, R., Rieskamp, J. & Hertwig, R. Risk preference shares the psychometric structure of major psychological traits. Science Advances 3, (2017). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1701381
[22] Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider. The First Global Revolution (The Club of Rome), 1993. p. 115
[23] Karlsson, E. A., & Beck, M. A. (2010). The burden of obesity on infectious disease. Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.), 235(12), 1412–1424. https://doi.org/10.1258/ebm.2010.010227
[24] Hughes, D. A., & Norton, R. (2009). Vitamin D and respiratory health. Clinical and experimental immunology, 158(1), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2249.2009.04001.x
[25] Klein, S., Flanagan, K. Sex differences in immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol 16, 626–638 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nri.2016.90
[26] Tracking how our bodies work could change our lives https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/internet-of-bodies-covid19-recovery-governance-health-data/
[27] What to Know About Continuous Glucose Monitoring https://www.verywellhealth.com/continuous-glucose-monitoring-the-arrival-of-dexcom-5-3289566

Steps to Unconcealed Totalitarianism

Israelis protest vaccine passports, February 24, 2021

1. Tell the nation that it is under attack, and that anyone who downplays or disputes the threat is putting everyone at risk. According to Hermann Göring, from Gustave Gilbert’s The Nuremberg Diary “the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

2. Scapegoat a minority of the population for all the country’s problems.

Left – Russian: “Jews, like rats, devour the wealth of your people”
Center – German: “Who is to blame for the war?”

3. Vilify that minority, calling them dirty, and say they are corrupting the “pure body” of the people and hence need to be removed.

Left – Polish: “Jews are lice; they cause typhus”
Center and right – those not taking government-approved precautions are called rat-lickers and CovIdiots. Unvaccinated people are likened to plague rats.

4. Start banning the minority from cafes, bars, gyms, concerts, theatres, etc.

Left – a 1942 law from Vichy France bans Jews from public establishments and events
Right – The government of Québec mandates vaccine passports to access public establishments and events

5. Give everyone else little cards proving that they are not from the minority.

Left – A card from Vichy France certifying that the holder is not Jewish
Right – A European digital COVID passport certifying that the holder is vaccinated

6. Public antipathy increases towards the minority, possibly resulting in violence or the confiscation of property.

7. The minority is physically removed from society, whether by deportation, incarceration, or lethal force.

Some have said that the comparison of vaccine passport initiatives to fascism during the Second World War is not apt. They would be hard pressed, then, to explain the striking similarity both in the kind of propaganda employed, and the chronological progression thereof. Nazi Germany is characterized in the contemporary imagination by the presence of concentration camps holding many persecuted groups, including Jews, Slavs, and homosexuals. The fact that unvaccinated individuals have not yet been forcibly incarcerated does not mean that the comparison is invalidated, as there was a lengthy historical progression preceding the establishment of the concentration camps. During WWII the Nazi regime progressed all the way to step 7. As of late August, 2021, France has progressed to step 5, with other places like Quebec, British Columbia, and New York set to follow suit. While it is true that the appellation “fascist” has been greatly overused in the past decade, this should not deter justified comparisons.

Vaccine passports are a kind of social credit system that allows only those who are obedient to the government to participate in society. Unlike China’s Sesame Credit system they are binary, 0 or 1: either you have followed government diktats and are allowed to participate in the economy, or you are not. They do, however, normalize compliance-based exclusion from society, and could be expanded on later to involve degrees and gradations of access to locations and services. Perhaps in the future those who have received two vaccine doses but no boosters will be barred from certain “high risk” locales and employments but not others.

Mandatory vaccination to be able to sustain employment or access facilities deemed “non-essential” (which are, in reality, completely essential to living a complete and fulfilling life) is coercion and a violation of bodily autonomy. Dissenters are given two pernicious options: either sacrifice your bodily autonomy and submit to arbitrary recurring injections, or lose access to all cultural, social, and vocational institutions. Either your body is effectively owned by the government, or you lose the ability to put food on the table. It is not a choice, it is coercion, and it is evil.

This type of coercion is only possible once a majority of the population has been vaccinated – that is, those who remain unvaccinated constitute a minority. In France, the Pass Sanitaire was mandated for cultural and leisure venues starting July 21; when the announcement was made on July 12, 53.7% of Frenchmen had been vaccinated. In New York City, the city will be enforcing vaccine passports starting on September 13; when the announcement was made on August 3, 63.4% of the population had received at least one vaccination. In British Columbia vaccine passports will also be required starting September 13; when the announcement was made on August 23, 75% of BC residents had received one vaccination.

It is hoped by those pushing the vaccines that by gradually increasing the pressure on the unvaccinated, all those who are not committed to outright refusing the vaccine will eventually get it. By exploiting the foot-in-the-door technique, those who have received vaccinations already can be more easily convinced to receive additional booster shots. This will leave a core of people who unconditionally refuse the vaccine, and the overlap between this group and those who are aware of or would be opposed to the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset initiative is likely to be quite high. The result will be a split in society between two groups of people: those who can be convinced to receive mandated yearly (or more frequent) vaccinations, and those who refuse, and are no longer permitted to participate in society. In this way the largest roadblock to the implementation of the 4^th industrial revolution – those citizens who would not go along with the wholescale remodeling of society – are effectively neutralized.

In this case it is doubtful that vaccine refusers will ever be rounded up en masse and sent to FEMA camps, as has been theorized. Instead they will be incrementally marginalized and forced into criminality in order to survive, due to the dwindling number of legal opportunities, at which point they can be incarcerated and removed from society. That is how social credit systems work, and no gulags are required.

(1) https://www.gouvernement.fr/pass-sanitaire-toutes-les-reponses-a-vos-questions
(2) https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2021HLTH0053-001659

Speech on Blockchain and Social Impact Investing

The following is an approximate transcript (I adjusted some sentences) of a speech I gave at the worldwide protest in Toronto on July 24. I have included additional content that I was not able to fit into my speech given time constraints:

When you’re in a crisis, it’s easy to get caught in the events of the here-and-now, with everything happening. But it’s also important with an engineered crisis like COVID to take a step back and look a few steps into the future to see what’s coming. The truth is that COVID is a distraction. And it’s a distraction from many things – the curtailing of rights, the shutting down of small businesses – but mostly it’s a distraction and it’s an excuse to implement the Great Reset or the 4^th Industrial Revolution, which I’m sure you’ve heard of. And there are many moving pieces there, but two of the main ones are transhumanism and the biosecurity state. Transhumanism, to put it in a sentence, is just the merging of man with technology, virtually or digitally, and the biosecurity state is the replacement of the threat of terrorism with the idea that at any time, unbeknownst to them, anyone could be harbouring deadly pathogens, for which they must be constantly surveilled.

The near term goal is a health passport, as we’ve seen with Israel’s Green Pass and France’s Pass Sanitaire. But it’s not sufficient for individual countries to implement that, it needs to be a global interoperable system, and that’s where the blockchain comes in, where it will be integrated into an Electronic Health Record. Blockchain is just a distributed ledger or database where things can be added but not removed – what they call immutable. So this is beneficial for cryptocurrency in that all transactions are visible in perpetuity. Beneficial for who? Well, not for us, usually. People have been lured into the crypto space with the idea that they can make a lot of money there because the central banks are printing trillions of dollars inflating the dollar, serving to draw people into a system that is not being inflated. But ultimately it is a global Ponzi scheme, but the idea is that if the elites get their way it’s going to be a Ponzi scheme that everybody is forced into. It’s what Charles Hoskinson, who develops the Cardano cryptocurrency calls “the future financial operating system of the world.”

But it’s not just for cryptocurrency, because anything can be stored on the blockchain. And that’s how they’re going to implement social impact investing or human capital finance. So, what is that? Social impact investing is when you make an investment not just for a financial return, but to make a socially beneficial investment. As an example, if the government notices that people who don’t graduate from high school are statistically more likely to be addicted to drugs, or incarcerated, and that costs money for the government, then Goldman Sachs can come along and say hey, I have an intervention that will increase the rate of high school graduation, and then the government will pay them money if it turns out that their intervention results in the change that they advertised.

As a real example, there is in Brazil what is called the Boa Vista Digital Identity Pilot. How this works is they take poor families and they give them a digital identity on the Ethereum blockchain and they send a home visitor to their house with an iPad that used machine vision to track their kids. And if the AI behind the machine vision detects measurable behavioural change on behalf of the kids – that is, in the direction that the social impact investors want – then the payments are given out to Goldman Sachs or Vanguard or whatever investment bank is behind the investment.

The Boa Vista program is tied to the Bolsa Familia program which is already giving conditional cash transfers to these poor families. It is conditional on their kids attending school, and their kids being fully vaccinated. So it’s tying behavioural compliance to receiving money from the government, and it’s gamifying that compliance in the way that it’s being tracked. And this is the future of UBI, universal basic income. It’s going to be on the blockchain, it’s going to be tied to a digital ID, and it’s going to be based on whether you comply with what the government wants you to do.

And as I said, you can put anything on the blockchain, you can ‘tokenize’ anything. The South African company Bankymoon is putting blockchain on Smart Meters to track all of your energy usage. When you track everything like this it enables hedge funds to bet through futures markets on where certain trackable metrics are going to be going in the future. For instance hedge funds are already betting on water futures in California, they are betting on whether water will be plentiful or scarce. In 2008 they bet that millions of Americans would lose their homes. And you can be sure that once social impact investing has been enabled by the blockchain they’re going to be betting on whether little African children are receiving their vaccinations or not.

You can see this in Cardano Africa, where five million Ethiopian schoolchildren are going to be put on the blockchain and have all of their academic records tracked: their attendance, their test scores, everything. And the minister of Ethiopia that implemented this program explicitly said that they need this to compete in the 4^th industrial revolution.

So this is the digitally planned future that the elites want to implement. It’s not going to be a mass depopulation event, they don’t need that, birth rates are already low. It’s going to be a digital panopticon, which is a system where you are always observed at all times but you don’t know when and if you being observed at that moment. They want full-spectrum dominance, they want to control and surveil all economic activity on Earth, and what we need is full-spectrum refusal. Do not go along with any of this. And it’s difficult because the entire economy is built around implementing this future, whether you work in medicine or you work in technology or you work in education. All of these sectors are being controlled to manoeuver towards this end. But everyone knows in their heart whether they are doing all that they can to resist – whether they are making their best effort in a difficult situation. So that’s what we need: refuse fast food, refuse the media, refuse pornography, refuse all these systems that control you.

Thank you.

[This speech was inspired by the work of Alison McDowell. You can find her blog here: wrenchinthegears.com. Her best presentation on her research can be found here: Level Up Life in a Post Pandemic Video Game]

I was limited to about 5 minutes to give this speech, which was supposed to be at least 10. Consequently I left out some important things, which I will mention here. The Boa Vista Digital Identity Pilot is being run by two corporations: Shanzhai City and the iO2 Foundation, both of which are run by Tat Lam (Lam is the CEO of Shanzhai City and the Chief Impact Strategist at iO2). Shanzhai City works to implement the UN’s sustainable development goals, and the iO2 Foundation provides AI and blockchain technology for use in social impact investing. The partnership of these two companies is indicative of the true nature of the UN’s sustainable development goals, specifically goal #1, to end poverty. It isn’t about ending poverty, it’s about managing poverty for profit.

To see a fuller picture of the future that is being imagined by the technocrats, the following passage is enlightening:

“While I’m brushing my teeth, Jamie, my personal AI, asks if I’d like a delivery drone to come pick up my daughter’s baby tooth, which fell out two days ago. The epigenetic markers in children’s teeth have to be analysed and catalogued on our family genetic blockchain in order to qualify for the open health rebate, so I need that done today.”

That paragraph comes from Good Morning, Biodigital, a short work of speculative science fiction that was included in a paper on Exploring Biodigital Convergence that was published by Policy Horizons Canada, a branch of the Canadian government, on February 11, 2020 It is worth reading the whole story, but I picked this paragraph in particular because it is the creepiest, and also ties into social impact investing. Not only are they planning on cataloguing everyone’s genome and storing it on a blockchain, they will be offering “health rebates” to those who make their data accessible in this way. This is because they will use the genetic data to identify “genetic predispositions to disease” that can be ‘fixed’ through some social impact scheme that pays out handsomely for the investor.

“I take my smart supplement, which just popped out of my bioprinter. The supplement adjusts the additional nutrients and microbes I need, and sends data about my body back to my bioprinter to adjust tomorrow’s supplement. The feedback loop between me and my bioprinter also cloud-stores daily data for future preventive health metrics. The real-time monitoring of my triglycerides is important, given my genetic markers.”

It’s all about technocratically managing the health of the population, where health can be defined as whatever equilibrium state that is most profitable to the controllers – it does not mean keeping the population in optimal health, free of poisons and unnecessary environmental stressors. Jim West notes, citing the Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology by Hayes and Laws, that small doses of toxic substances can increase biological metabolism and increase productive yield of farm animals (egg laying, meat production) at the cost of increased morbidity and mortality. The situation is the same with humans and human production. One recalls the legions of software developers in Silicon Valley and on Wall Street taking Adderall, Modafinil, or microdosing LSD. So while it may reduce productivity overall if an individual has diabetes (there are already social impact bonds for it), a chronically poisoned population may actually be more productive. Impact investing creates another means of profiting from an ailing population, by preemptively ‘curing’ people and profiting by doing so. And of course, the underlying cause of the poisoning can never be addressed, because it would destroy the billion-dollar impact markets altogether.

(1) https://www.frbsf.org/community-development/files/human-capital-performance-bonds.pdf
(2) https://medium.com/shanzhai-city/boa-vista-municipality-brazil-announces-blockchain-pilot-with-szc-to-deploy-did-serving-1e0d3fa8324e
(3) https://www.smart-energy.com/regional-news/africa-middle-east/bankymoon-launches-bitcoin-to-simplify-utility-revenue-collection/
(4) https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/equity-index/us-index/nasdaq-veles-california-water-futures.html
(5) https://africa.cardano.org/
(6) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_KFt_C1Izs
(7) https://horizons.gc.ca/en/2020/02/11/exploring-biodigital-convergence/
(8) http://harvoa.org/polio/toxcredo.htm
(9) https://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/modafinil-2013-4/
(10) https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2015/11/27/lsd-microdosing-the-new-job-enhancer-in-silicon-valley-and-beyond/?sh=1dae40fe188a
(11) https://www.reuters.com/article/israel-diabetes-bonds-idUSL5N16L061

Controlled Opposition at the Toronto Covid Protests

I have posted a video of myself delivering a speech on history on November 29, 2020 in Mississauga, Ontario. Having posted that speech, I feel that there is an important point I need to address, and that is controlled opposition attending, speaking at, and leading the protests in the GTA in 2020 and 2021.

First, some background information is necessary to contextualize the situation. Protests against Covid restrictions began on April 25^th, 2020, and were held every Saturday at Queen’s Park in front of the Ontario legislative assembly. Very quickly, several ostensible leaders and groups emerged. The groups were Hugs Over Masks, started by Vlad Sobolev, Fearless Ontario, organized by Michael Snape, a staffer for independent Ontario MPP Randy Hillier, and The Line, publicly led by Lamont Daigle. Chris Sky was also present, promoting a Back to Work initiative, as was Kelly Anne Wolfe, who helped organize and emcee the protests. As the protests continued over the summer, they showed all the signs of being infiltrated by controlled opposition, with rifts and squabbles between groups, protest venues being changed at the last minute without communication, and publicly identifiable members of the protest deliberately going viral with antics that would discredit the movement.

Remember that the organizing principle behind controlling the opposition is that if one is trying to change society, some people will oppose that change. To succeed in implementing the change, one must ensure that the group of resisters is rendered ineffective at opposing it. This means that one should ensure that the opposition is not able to convince people sitting on the sidelines to join their cause, and that the core group of resisters is steered in a direction that is not damaging to the agenda. To prevent the opposition group from growing, it would be made to look as stupid, crazy, obnoxious, and unlikable as possible. To prevent the group from having any significant impact, it could be misdirected with false or incomplete narratives, or have its energies occupied with well-meaning but ultimately futile endeavours. There are many different ways to achieve these two objectives, either from outside a movement or from the inside, but the most effective strategy is to preemptively seed a movement with people one controls to ensure that it crystallizes around a core of leaders that can be directed. As Vladimir Lenin said, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”

With that context, there are two comments I will make about the environment in which I gave the speech, which will lead to a discussion of evidence that Kelly Anne Wolfe and Chris Sky are operatives controlling the opposition.

The first thing I will address are the protesters carrying flags that can be seen waving behind me in the second half of the video. The flags represent The Line Canada (as depicted by a red line through a black circle on a white background). I am not, and have never been, affiliated with The Line, and have written about how they are a controlled opposition group intended to splinter and discredit the opposition in my paper on Trump. As the links I provided there indicate, The Line was created by a man who goes by fake aliases, most likely an undercover cop. As such I do not endorse The Line, and I would encourage others who are affiliated with them to distance themselves from the organization. However, as a matter of practicality it is difficult to prevent certain groups from attending public protests (unless it is a group against which there is a general animus and feeling of moral superiority, e.g. people waving a Nazi flag) and so it comes down to the individual protesters to do their due diligence and spurn the associations and paraphernalia of controlled groups. Unfortunately, based on my experience during the lockdowns, many dissidents attending Covid protests are seeking group identity and charismatic leaders, and are thus easily led by controlled operatives who they resist being skeptical of (Trump supporters come to mind).

The second item to address is Kelly Anne Wolfe, who invited me to give the speech. Kelly is also controlled opposition, as I will demonstrate. In fact, she was formerly executive director of The Line. However, she has always been kind and supportive of me, and has facilitated me giving speeches at protests on several occasions. So, why out her, and why now? The first reason is that I have known that she is controlled opposition since summer of 2020 and discussed that with friends and fellow protesters, and have finally gotten around to writing about it now. The second reason is that I don’t like controlled opposition, and I see it as the responsibility of truthers to blow the cover of operatives who are seeking to control dissident movements. The third reason is that I don’t want to be tied to her, or any narrative that she is promoting. The reason I accepted her invitation to give a speech is because I wanted to discuss a topic I didn’t see anyone else in the local protest movement talking about. I wanted to disseminate this information, and I used a platform that was offered to me to do it. Kelly had no input on what I was talking about (indeed she didn’t know any of the contents of my speech).

But if she was friendly and supportive, why turn on her? Because one role played by controlled operatives is to form alliances with real grassroots dissidents to draw them into organizations where their attentions can be misdirected and their actions manipulated. For instance, the last time I spoke with Kelly she was going to be making a tour of Canada with Chris Sky and Rob Carbone (both also controlled opposition, as we will see later). She was seeking to make demographic surveys of the towns she was speaking at, in order to target her message more effectively. She asked me if I could produce a short video that would explain to any skeptical respondents why certain questions on the survey were necessary. I wanted no part in it, and so did not agree, but it serves as an instructive example of how operatives ingratiate themselves with activists in order to further their own plans.

But why do I think she is controlling the opposition? That is often not a conclusion that can be drawn on the basis of direct evidence or confession – in fact whenever I have confronted operatives directly and accused them of being controlled, they dismissed the idea as preposterous. Unless someone admits to being CIA it is difficult to acquire direct evidence, and any competent agent would make it impossible to do so. I do not have any direct evidence, and so we must proceed on the basis of circumstantial evidence:

“Circumstantial evidence – and that includes fingerprints and forensic evidence presented by expert witnesses – allows for more than one explanation. When different strands of such evidence are drawn together and each corroborates the conclusions drawn from the others, we have every reason to [take] serious notice. For hundreds of years attorneys have talked about the ‘cable’ of circumstantial evidence. A cable is made up of many strands which individually are not particularly strong, but the more strands which are applied to the cable the stronger it becomes. In many, if not indeed the majority of legal cases, it is this cable of circumstantial evidence which solidly links an accused to the crime.” [1]

The first major piece of evidence is her behaviour during a protest on July 7^th, 2020, in response to the TTC (Toronto public transportation) making masks mandatory for riders. During the protest, she is caught on video saying many ridiculous things, like that she has an IQ of 195, is a member of Mensa, has 13 degrees in psychology, and is a very popular musician. She also stated that people who obey the government and wear masks are “the same kind of people who walked the Jews right into the gas tanks”, and that her brother is a cop (this will be relevant later). This episode, filmed by cyclist Brian Tao, received wide attention, being covered by Newsweek and appearing on the front page of Reddit’s popular /r/PublicFreakout subforum.

Both Kelly and Brian later appeared on the September 16^th airing of the Doctor Phil show, where Kelly claims that she “said the most absolutely ridiculous things a person could possibly say, and it worked [to go viral].” She doesn’t acquit herself particularly well in the interview, and many of the things that were written on the card that was handed out during the protest were not scientifically defensible (I later worked to ensure that the card was changed, and that all scientific claims were supported by citations.) Kelly’s behaviour is problematic both in the impression it gives to the general public, and to other dissidents. The general public would see her well-publicized antics as proof that anyone who challenges the narrative is a raving lunatic, and use that belief as an excuse to dismiss other activists with more reasoned messages. Dissidents would see her antics as a reason not to get involved with the protests at all. Though I personally attended this protest, I did not see the incident at the time. After seeing it on the front page of Reddit, I was rather embarrassed to be associated with it, and resolved to distance myself from any association with the various groups that had sprung up around the weekly Saturday rallies.

Kelly is not only controlled opposition, she appears to be a compulsive liar. During that same protest, Kelly misrepresented herself as a virologist to bystanders, and justified it by saying that they would never know when I called her out on it. She also told me that her brother is in Anonymous, the hacker group – recall that she also said that her brother was a cop to Brian Tao during this same protest. In a Telegram chat named ‘Project freedom’, started by Kelly, she admits that her brother works in Canadian intelligence, and that she has received counter-terrorism training. In a later conversation with me (the same one where she asked for help with her survey), I asked her if people were right to be suspicious of her due to her brother’s role in intelligence. She told me that her brother works for CSIS handling war crimes, and is also a part of Joint Task Force 2 (an elite special operations division of the Canadian army, analogous to Seal Team Six). Clearly Kelly’s brother wears many hats, if she is to be believed. She has also lied about many other things of small import, such as saying in the Brian Tao video that virologists would be attending the Saturday protests (this never happened), claiming that Andrew Kaufman would attend a protest in Toronto in the winter of 2020 (this never happened), claiming that 100,000 people would attend a protest to hear Rocco Galati speak (it was at most 10,000), etc.

One last point to mention is that Kelly goes under an assumed name. Her real last name is Farkas, which is Hungarian for wolf (she claims to speak Hungarian on her LinkedIn profile). This came to light on January 16^th, when she and Lamont Daigle of The Line were arrested during a protest (two different protests at different locations, actually) and both charged with common nuisance. The arrests were clearly planned beforehand, since a group of about 50 officers in yellow jackets can be seen marching into Yonge-Dundas square in a line formation. The only question is whether Kelly and Lamont were in on what was going to happen. Although I can’t provide any evidence, I suspect this is the case, and the arrests were intended to intimidate protesters. Many protesters were fined or threatened with arrest that day, including myself, though I came after the arrests had happened. I also wouldn’t be surprised if the episode with Brian Tao had been planned beforehand in order to achieve the desired publicity.

You might say that my argument that Kelly is controlled opposition is not compelling, that she could conceivably be a run-of-the-mill pathological liar who happened to get involved in the Toronto protest scene early and assume a leadership position. But if that is the case, it is beyond unlikely that she would be able to co-host a round table interview with David Icke (controlled opposition) and Rocco Galati (controlled opposition), not to mention Lamont Daigle and Chris Sky.

There are many other small things I could mention here, but already I see no other plausible explanation than that Kelly Anne Wolfe (Farkas) is an intelligence asset who was deployed early to organize and corral the protest movement in Toronto. Why would a civilian, even one with 13 degrees in psychology, be given counter-terrorism training? Counter-terrorism involves strategies used by military, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies to combat terrorism, or, really, since terrorism is manufactured by intelligence agencies as a form of social control, counter-terrorism is mostly a means of surveilling civilians and justifying foreign military intervention.

In July, Kelly and Chris Sky and others held a “Road to Freedom Motorcade”, making appearances in Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. Kelly told me when she requested my help for her survey that she and Chris would be flying in Rob Carbone’s private jet. That doesn’t seem to have transpired, probably due to the absurd falling out between Chris and Carbone. However, it is important to understand who Rob Carbone is, and what role he is playing in the controlled opposition, especially because of his relationship with Chris Sky.

Carbone is the leader of the Republican Party of Canada, which is explicitly piggybacking on the brand image of the US Republican Party, yet has not actually registered with Elections Canada. What are the policies of Carbone’s fake party? Although clicking on his policies on his official website gives a “Content is protected !!” error, we can still see what they are. Here’s how he wants to “Protect Canadians Through Strength”: strengthen CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service – our CIA), enlarge all three branches of military, and strengthen airport security with police and military personnel. So he’s resisting the biosecurity state by retrogressing to the previous national security state paradigm. Of course, we don’t need any kind of security state, and would probably benefit from slashing CSIS and airport security budgets to a tenth of what they are now, but Carbone’s positions give him away as yet another shill for the military-industrial complex. I also asked him, during a protest that he attended on October 17^th, 2020, why he was proposing to increase CSIS budgets when CSIS is involved in the psychological warfare behind the Covid scam. He gave me mealy-mouthed politician’s answers and implied that I didn’t know what I was talking about. I never again saw him attend a protest in Toronto.

Carbone also claims to be a “a seasoned businessman with access to trillions in assets.” His investment group, London Burke, is for “billionaires only”, allegedly offering private lending for anywhere from $100 million to $2 billion. His website is currently wiped of all content, but you can look at the few archived versions that exist. It looks like it was thrown together by an intern who was asked to create a website for a fake investment group to be briefly shown on screen in an episode of 24. The main website, londonburke.com was archived a total of 20 times between 2010 and 2021, compared to Vanguard’s main page, which has been archived 3,584 times since 2012. Or you can compare it to a random firm I found on the Wikipedia list of asset management firms, Neuberger Berman, which has been archived 126 times since 2019. Clearly London Burke is some kind of sham or front (another researcher found that Carbone has never had office space at the address listed on the website), but regardless anyone associating themselves with investment banking and the billionaire class in this manner should not be trusted.

So Carbone’s party is fake, and his investment group is fake. Why then would Chris be promoting him? During a Saturday protest at Yonge-Dundas in October of 2020, Chris publicly endorsed Rob Carbone: ““Donald Trump is going to win the election, and once he wins he’s going to endorse Mr. Carbone of the Republican Party of Canada. Repeat after me: ‘Trump and Carbone.’” Although I cannot find video evidence of the rally, I was in attendance and I can confirm that Chris said this, promoting Carbone as Canada’s saviour, in the same vein as Trump was being promoted as America’s savior by segments of the alt media. He started a cheer, which I was disturbed to see most of the crowd participated in. All this, after Chris had previously vowed to “NEVER align politically” because political entities “all have their OWN interests”.

This was not the last time that Chris endorsed Carbone. In October of 2020, I attended a large Thanksgiving party for people affiliated with the protest movement, and Chris showed up as a ‘special guest’ halfway through. I took the chance to ask him about Carbone, playing the role of someone who wasn’t already convinced he was controlled opposition, and he told me a series of ridiculous stories. According to Chris, who said he had been staying at Carbone’s house and eating his cooking, Carbone is a trillionaire who has the Rothschilds on speed dial (but doesn’t like them), he has been making more money than his parents since he was six years old, he has a button that allows him to unilaterally delete people’s Facebook accounts, and, tragically, his son had previously passed away after being hit by a Mack truck in right front of Carbone, who had held him in his arms while he died. When another guest asked about Carbone later that night, Chris told them and a crowd of others watching that he was a rich and powerful man who was going to save Canada from the globalist agenda, again presenting him as a saviour.

Clearly Chris was lying, but he said one other thing that may be telling. Chris was supposed to be in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia over Thanksgiving weekend, giving speeches at rallies. However, he had been detained at the airport and placed under arrest by the RCMP. He described to me how instead of calling his lawyer, he had someone inform Carbone, and a little over an hour later an order came down to the arresting officers to free Chris. He described the officers as being shocked and subsequently much more polite in their interactions with him as they returned him to the airport to fly back to Toronto. I have no evidence besides Chris’ dubious say-so that this is in fact what happened, but what I infer from the evidence is that Carbone is likely Chris’ handler and an intelligence asset himself. Carbone’s websites provide superficial evidence to justify his backstory, which is often all that is needed for an intelligence project, since most people only look at superficial evidence. It is the same with Kelly Anne Wolfe, who claims to be a popular musician but has only 106 followers on her Soundcloud page.

But who is Chris Sky? His real name is Christopher Saccoccia – notice the penchant for fake last names among this group – son of wealthy real estate developer Art Saccoccia who runs Sky Homes, which designs and builds multi-million dollar McMansions (and is, as far as I can tell, a real business, unlike others we have seen). Chris calls himself “the world’s most prolific human rights advocate”, and is the most recognizable figure in the Canadian anti-Covid restriction movement, both among dissidents and the general public. He has appeared on Alex Jones, who is also controlling the opposition through Infowars. Despite starting locally in Toronto, Chris has grown his audience and given speeches across Canada, and also in Ireland.

To understand the role that Chris plays in controlling the opposition, it is useful to take an outside view. Chris has a Jersey Shore aesthetic, sporting neck tattoos, dental veneers, bleached blond hair, and frequently wearing tank tops to display his steroid-acquired physique. He is also a hothead, and repeatedly shouted over the interviewer when interviewed on the mainstream media outlet CP24 on October 7^th, 2020. We can see more indication of that with him storming out of a July 13, 2021 interview with alt-media (and yet again, controlled opposition) outlet Rebel Media. In short, Chris is the very last person I would nominate to be the public face of the liberty movement in Canada. To the broader public, he and Kelly together constitute an image of “this is what anti-maskers are like”, and it’s an image that forestalls those with reservations about the way things are going from even considering speaking out or protesting.

The same thing goes for Chris’ many arrests and fines. Chris has been fined for refusing to quarantine after returning to Canada from Europe and for leading a crowd of people into grocery stores. Chris’ position is that the fines are illegal and won’t hold up in court, which is true enough, and therefore he earns bona fides with dissidents, who see him as courageously standing up to the system and demonstrating to everyone that the illegal government orders have no teeth. ‘United non-compliance’ has been Chris’ message from the beginning, and he often posts content demonstrating his non-compliance with government mandates (by not wearing a mask, not quarantining, etc.) in an effort to persuade others to do the same. While the message itself is completely correct, and it is important to demonstrate to others that you can in fact stand up for yourself, what the mainstream public sees is that if you are caught breaking the rules there will be consequences and you will be fined. For people already too timid to remove their masks in stores, the risk of getting a fine is enough to ensure compliance. The result is that Chris’ actions, while inspiring to some in the dissident camp, serve to reinforce the image of government power to the public.

Another example of the polarizing impact of Chris’ actions is his Chris Sky vs. Longos video. Chris is filmed shopping for maple syrup at a Longo’s grocery store. While there, he is followed by staff who tell him he needs to leave; he is served a trespass notice, which he does not accept; he is told that the police are on their way; and the cashier refuses to check him out, forcing him to leave a twenty dollar bill on the counter as payment. One employee even tries to snatch the maple syrup out of his hands. While this might appear to be a victory to some who are fed up with mask mandates – “Wow, they tried all that but still couldn’t prevent him from doing his shopping!” – any mainstream viewer will a) think Chris is being an obnoxious asshole and b) never even consider shopping without a mask, for fear of encountering the same reception from employees. How many people are capable of getting their shopping done while weathering the condemnation of all the employees in the store? If people were that impervious to social disapprobation then we simply wouldn’t have arrived at the present state. It is worth mentioning that I have never worn a mask to do my shopping, and I have only encountered treatment like Chris received a handful of times. Most of the time either no one says anything, or one person asks me to put on a mask, I say I’m exempt, and that’s it.

What about Chris’ actions outside of giving speeches and interviews? Let’s examine Chris’ resumé as the world’s most prolific human rights advocate. When the Saturday protests first began in the spring of 2020, he was promoting his Back to Work initiative, and started a gofundme for it on May 29. As of the time of writing, the gofundme has received $13,433 in donations, the last of which was two months ago. At least $4,350 of the money was donated by Chris himself, which still leaves over nine thousand dollars donated by other protesters. What do we have to show for it? Although it is still advertised prominently on his personal website, it is not linked to, which makes sense considering the URL, https://backtowork.bz, is now a dead link. The site can be seen on the Wayback Machine, where it is a bare-bones site, with a mission statement, a link to join and another to donate, and three news posts, one of which is a message from Chris. Based on the archives on the Wayback Machine, the last time the website was accessible was some time in January of 2021, where it looks the same as it did in July of 2020.

So where did the nine thousand dollars go? Keep in mind gofundme will disburse payments to the fund organizer regardless of whether the goal is met or not. When the site went down, Toronto and the rest of Canada were still locked down and people were out of work. Did the need to get people back to work suddenly disappear? In the message from Chris that can be viewed in the archive, he mentions that his initiative helped businesses to “renegotiate their leases” and provided “personally tailored adaptive business models to generate revenue” during lockdowns. Somehow I doubt that he did nine thousand dollars worth of work. On a personal note, when I first heard of the initiative, and before I was certain that Chris was untrustworthy, I considered sending the link to some businesses that I patronized. After looking at the site, I decided not to do that, both because of the look of the site, and because I couldn’t imagine a small business owner trusting a man on steroids with a neck tattoo, who sounds like he’s narrating an infomercial, to save their business. Oh, and I looked at the facebook group, #BACKTOWORK: the last post is by Chris 9 months ago, promoting Rob Carbone as a man of honour and integrity.

The other group that Chris has started is MAD, Mothers Against Distancing. The website for this group is actually still operational, though devoid of any real content. The last news post is labeled as being from January 4, 2020, which was before there was any global furor over Covid, but appears to have actually been posted around June 17, 2020. Again featured prominently are buttons allowing you to donate – this time to help fund mask-free private schools – although this fundraiser doesn’t appear to have any donors at all. Chris first announced that he would be starting private schools in August of 2020, about a month before public schools opened again. I was at the protest when he made the announcement, and I talked to one mother who was eagerly awaiting the opportunity to send her daughter to Chris’ school instead of public school for the coming school year. Since the schools never materialized, the timing of Chris’ announcement would have made it difficult for parents to find an alternative form of schooling when his plan failed to result in any real action.

When Chris made the announcement I sent an email offering to teach to his privateschool@protonmail.com address, not because I trusted him, but because I wanted to see what was going to happen. I received one email asking for my location in the city, and nothing following that. Kelly was also involved in the plan, and when I asked her what was happening several weeks later she told me they were soliciting money from banks to fund the venture. I asked her why she thought banks were trustworthy but she dodged the question. I later spoke with a woman who said she was helping Chris set up the schools, and she told me that they had purchased a Montessori curriculum, but were having difficulty with government regulations and with finding spaces to hold classes. That was the last I heard about the project.

Both of Chris’ humanitarian projects – to get people back to work, and to spare kids from psychological warfare at school – have ended up with hype and donations, but no actual results. In fact it seems that no more than a perfunctory effort intended to generate donations was ever attempted. One wonders why Chris feels comfortable listing both of these failed ventures prominently on his website. I’d say it’s either because he’s not that smart, or he doesn’t think his audience is.

As with Kelly, there is much more that I could say about Chris, such as the time that he claimed that Rob Carbone controlled the Canadian Infrastructure Bank by copyrighting the name of the legislative act that established it, but I have already made my point. The last person I want to discuss is Vlad Sobolev, who started Hugs Over Masks, and is featured in the image promoting the Road to Freedom Motorcade. As one of the visible leaders that emerged in April of 2020, Vlad has been working and associating with Chris and Kelly from the beginning. That said, I did not include him prominently in this piece because I cannot build a strong enough argument that he is controlled opposition to convince myself. He has associated with many people who I’m convinced are agents, which is certainly a red flag, but I have not seen him tell obvious lies, get himself arrested for puerile stunts, or do other things that would suggest he is trying to derail the movement. Therefore, with the evidence available to me, I cannot conclude that he is controlled opposition based solely on his connections. As I mentioned previously, one of the roles of controlled operatives is to ensnare authentic people in their schemes so as to prevent them from getting things done by striking off on their own. I suspect that this is the case with Vlad, whom I have had several people tell me is the only seemingly-genuine leadership figure in the protest movement. If additional evidence comes to light, I will update this paper. [Some people have told me that Vlad knew Kelly before 2020 and the plandemic. If anyone can send me proof of that, I will update the paper with a section on Vlad.]

If you are in the truth/liberty movement, and you have not trained yourself to be able to recognize controlled opposition and when you are being misdirected and spun, it is essential that you develop that skill. This paper may help you out. But more than reading, it requires applying the same skepticism to alt-media figures and conspiracy narratives that you apply to the mainstream media, because the last thing you want is to refuse swindle #1 and immediately fall for swindle #2. That doesn’t mean you have to be a paranoid loner, afraid that everyone is out to get you – I have met plenty of real people, and made friends by attending protests over the past year and a half. You just have to pay attention and do your due diligence by looking into the people and organizations that you are affiliating yourself with.

Speech on History

The following is a transcript of the speech on History I delivered on November 29, 2020, in Mississauga, Ontario:

When I speak, I like to talk about things that other speakers have not been covering in the previous weeks. So I’m sure that everybody here, by now, knows that the PCR tests are unreliable, and that all-cause mortality is within the normal range of variation. We know that. I want to talk about historical epistemology – that is, how we know what we know about history. Because we know that the present that is being sold to us by the media is a lie. It’s full of inconsistencies, and unbelievable events that don’t fit together and don’t make sense. But history is no better. And just like the present, we can lean all of the lies against each other, until they all contradict each other, and force them to collapse, leaving only the truth standing.

I want to talk about history because the same families that are ruling over us now, that think they can impose tyranny on us, are the same families that have ruled for thousands of years. And once you can recognize a psyop, a psychological operation from 200 years ago, you won’t fall for the same thing when they use the same script today. Because the methods they use have remained more-or-less unchanged for a very long time. The one thing that has changed is the technology they have access to to set their schemes in motion. I am not going to make any sweeping claims, such as that the historical chronology has been completely fabricated, and I’m not going to rely on any appeals to supernatural figures – demons, Nephilim, what have you, gods – in order to make my narrative make sense. I would say that history is a palimpsest: that’s a word that means something that has been overwritten but still retains traces of what originally there. As Voltaire said, “History is the lie that is commonly agreed upon.”

To set my narrative, I am going to go back to 1200 BC, so that’s the Bronze Age, and the dominant merchant sailing empire that was active at that time was the Phoenician empire. They had formed an international trade network all throughout the Mediterranean and even out across the Iberian peninsula and into Britain. Their main cities were Sidon, Byblos, and Tyre, which are still extant cities where Lebanon is today. But they also had trading posts all across the Mediterranean where they could sell their wares. They mostly dealt in luxury goods, especially what you may know as royal purple dye, which is made from the Murex snail – the secretions of this snail – that was local to the region. In fact that is where the name Phoenicia comes from: it comes from the Greek word for purple, for the Tyrian purple dye – named after the city of Tyre – that they sold. They used Lebanese cedar – and the cedar trees in Lebanon are enormous – they used these trees to build their ships. Around 1150 BC, the Mediterranean suffered the Late Bronze Age collapse, a sudden violent upheaval that destroyed empires all throughout the region. Mainstream historians give credit for this to mysterious Sea Peoples, whom they don’t identify, but the only seafaring empire that was dominant at this time was the Phoenicians.

You can trace the Phoenicians because they founded Carthage in around 800 BC, and they founded Thebes in Greece as well. You can trace their influence through Cyrus the Great, who founded the Achaemenid Persian empire, through the Peloponnesian Wars of ancient Greece, through the conquests of Alexander the Great, who destroyed the Achaemenid Persian empire, through to the Punic Wars between the Roman Republic and Carthage – again, founded by the Phoenicians – up through to the present day. Historians would have us believe that there have been countless empires that have risen and fallen throughout history, but for the past 3,000 years it has mainly been the Phoenician empire that has conquered and reconquered itself countless times, rising like the phoenix from its ashes. In fact, their symbol is the phoenix, and it is often depicted as a two-headed eagle, which can be seen in the heraldry of empire worldwide. If you look up the coat of arms of the Holy Roman Empire you’ll see a double-headed eagle.

Some people will say that it’s the Vatican, or it’s the Knights Templar, or it’s the Jesuits, or the Freemasons, or the Illuminati that secretly run the world. It’s none of them. All of these organizations were either created or later infiltrated by these Phoenician families, the Merchant Princes you could call them, who run these trade networks. How did they come to rule? Through trade, through banking, through conquest, and most importantly through intermarriage with other ruling families throughout the world that they traded with. To elaborate on the Knights Templar: they ran a large commercial infrastructure – again, commerce – throughout Christendom, and in fact they developed an early form of banking. The real name of the Knights Templar, the full name, is the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon. If you have read the Bible, you will know that the Temple of Solomon was built with the aide of King Hiram of Tyre, a Phoenician. King Hiram provided cedar and teams of masons and architects to construct Solomon’s temple. The role of the Knights Templar would later be taken over by the East India Company, the Hanseatic League, and other proto-capitalist organizations.

I’m going to jump ahead to the Vatican. The Medicis were an Italian banking family in the 15^th century – that’s the 1400’s – and they basically bankrolled the Renaissance. Which is one of the few good things these families have actually done throughout history. If only they would support real art now, instead of putting slashed canvases in museums, and having us live in concrete boxes. In 1513 Lorenzo de’ Medici bought the papacy for his son, Giovanni. Giovanni became Pope Leo X. The Medicis put four popes in the Vatican this way, and they did everything they could to defile and despoil the Vatican, and be as corrupt as possible. The Borgias, another Italian banking family centered in Rome, whereas the Medicis were in Florence, did the same thing a few decades earlier when they held orgies in the Vatican after buying the papacy for one of their sons. The reason they did this is because religion gets in the way of trade. Religions posits a morality that says you can’t take advantage of people and that you can’t commit usury, which is the charging of interest. Obviously that gets in the way if you want to have an international trade network and defraud people, as is happening today.

The reaction to all of this obvious corruption in the Catholic church was the Protestant Reformation. But the leading players in the Protestant Reformation were the cousins of the southern Phoenicians that were defiling the church to begin with. John Knox, who founded Presbyterianism in Scotland was the cousin of the ruling Stewart dynasty of Britain. John Calvin, who founded Calvinism was instrumental in changing the contemporary definition of usury charging of interest – interest, period – to the charging of excessive interest. Thus allowing interest to continue to be charged within Christianity. The common people were rightly fed up with the Catholic church, but their anger was redirected by the northern Phoenician cousins in order to mount a coup on the southern ones. So as with everything else, it is the elites fighting for dominance among their own families, and what we see, not being members of these families, is what happens afterwards. We see the aftereffects, we don’t see what’s really happening. All we see are the shadows on the wall of the conflict that’s happening behind closed doors.

As the industrial revolution in the 18^th century progressed, it began to displace the strategy of landed aristocracy in favour of the strategy of industrialism. By 1848 there were revolutions all over Europe promoting republicanism – that is, the governmental structure of a republic, not the Republican party of the US. Karl Marx published his communist manifesto in 1848. This is not a coincidence. Marx was promoting a dictatorship of the proletariat, and a class struggle against the bourgeoisie. He was funded by Engels, who was himself an industrialist from a family producing textiles. But what is not commonly known is that Marx was independently wealthy. His uncle was a Philips, of the same Philips family that owns Philips Electronics. His wife, Jenny von Westphalen, was also a wealthy noblewoman. So why, then, were these wealthy industrialists promoting communism? That doesn’t seem to be in their interests. Because they were controlling and misdirecting the opposition. Rather than republican ideas, which may have been successful, they were promoting communism. They were setting the middle and lower classes against each other, and promoting a dictatorship of the proletariat, which no one with any sense would actually want. That was set up as the ideal. We can see that Marx later took over the First International, which was a workers organization, and he neutered it, and it later fell apart. That is what he was doing: he was infiltrating and making sure that these workers revolutions were not successful. And this is why he is still lionized by the establishment today. He is still promoting the same misdirection 150 years later.

With the rise of industry, we brought about technocracy. Technocracy – the rule through technology by so-called experts who know better than the public and can act on behalf of the public, telling them what to do, because the public is not trusted to know better. In the words of Aldous Huxley, “Under a scientific dictatorship, education will really work with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.” That is the end goal of these ruling families. I have shown you how their strategy has evolved throughout history. That is their end goal, and we are in the final stages of this now. The only reason these lockdowns have worked is because people are contented with their bread and circuses, because they have Netflix at home and because they can order in food on Uber Eats. The only reason we have over 90% compliance with these mask mandates is because people are glued 24 hours a day to the media which tells them over and over again to wear their masks and to be afraid. But do not be led astray by false idols, who speak out from one side of their mouths against Covid, but with all of their efforts push forward this agenda in their actions. Elon Musk has spoken out against Covid, but at the same time he is promoting Neuralink, which seeks to create microchip brain implants for anybody who wants it. This is the essence of transhumanism – combining with machines. And if we allow the transhumanist agenda to come to fruition, it will be the end of freedom and humanity as we know it.

And I haven’t talked about the East in this yet. I am more familiar with the European history. But don’t be lead astray thinking that China is its own power, seeking its own ends. It is a fully-owned subsidiary of the Phoenician empire. You can trace this back to the Opium Wars in the mid 19^th century when the British used their naval power – gunboat diplomacy, as it’s called – to force China to accept their opium imports and demoralize and drug the population. Later on at the end of the 19^th century the Rockefellers came in with the intention of displacing traditional Chinese medicine in favour of their own allopathic medicine. Which, I think we can all agree, has been a great success on their part. Xi Jinping’s handler is Robert Lawrence Kuhn, you can look him up, he’s from the Kuhn banking family. He has written many books on China and where China will go in the future, and has been instrumental in bringing bread and circuses to China.

The first president of South Korea, Syngman Rhee, was educated at Harvard, and met Theodore Roosevelt. So he was also being controlled by the same Western powers as Mao was. Mao was funded by international banking interests, and Mao had his troops trained by OSS, the Office of Strategic Services, that was the precursor to the CIA. Later Kissinger, under Nixon, came in and opened up more trade with China. China was rapidly industrialized under Mao’s reign with horrible effects on the actual population, and you can see the same pattern of industrializing countries in this way. In fact Japan suffered the same fate, when in 1854 it was opened up, again with gunboat diplomacy, by admiral Matthew Perry, who opened it up for trade with the West. The Meiji restoration that followed, which was a period of rapid industrialization in Japan when Japanese society came to be controlled in large part by family owned monopolies called zaibatsu, which were basically [vertically integrated holding companies] that were owned by one family¹.

So the elites have a vision for what they want to bring about in the world. It’s a vision of Mordor, as seen through the eye of Sauron, but it is there and it is coming. Do we have a vision? We cannot afford to simply react to their plans. We need to be proactive in bringing about a future that we would all want to live in. And that doesn’t mean a return to the old normal, which was not normal in any sense of the word. It means we need a vision for something positive that we can try to bring about, something for our kids. We need to gather with likeminded people, whom we would be proud to call fellow citizens. The people walking down the street in their masks are too far gone to help us. You cannot save people who do not want to be saved. We need to voluntarily separate from them before they drag us off a cliff, running blindly like lemmings in their ignorance. To do that, we need to pool our resources. We cannot afford to be scattered everywhere, where we can be singled out and taken out one by one. It is too easy to break up a small group. The reason that people in certain places in the US have been able to resist this agenda as much as they have is because they as a community have the same values, and their sheriffs are not willing to execute the undemocratic, illegal orders that their governors are pushing forth.

You can do this in various ways. You can start living more closely with other people. You can start only shopping as businesses that share your ideas. Because as we have seen with Adamson Barbeque, people who are normies are not even going to go to him anymore. His actions have destroyed their trust in his business. But they’ve not destroyed our trust. So see if you can begin living more closely – live together, buy property, and not in a communist sense, but live more closely together where you can defend yourselves. We need to be able to defend ourselves, and to bring the cops on our side we need to offer them an incentive to actually join with us. What incentive to join with us is there, if they’re going to lose their jobs, and ultimately we could possibly lose. I’m not going to sugarcoat things and say that we’re going to win because god is on our side. That’s naive. We need to actually fight. And we need to fight in a way that’s going to actually work. We need to offer them incentives to join with us. If we can offer them a paycheque, if we can offer them that they could be police in our communities and not have to do immoral things and commit immoral acts, and bow to overloads whom they don’t respect, then they might actually do it. Ultimately it comes down to strength in numbers. If we are scattered, we can be broken up easily. If we unite, like this, we are much stronger.

Thank you.

1. One of the four major zaibatsus of this period was the Yasuda zaibatsu, which was founded by Yasuda Zenjirō. I will quote from A Frog in a Well Knows Nothing of the Ocean: A History of Corporate Ownership in Japan by Randall Morck and Masao Nakamura :

“The Yasuda zaibatsu began at the end of the Tokogawa era, when Zenjiro Yasuda (1838- 1922), the son of a poor samurai in Toyama, moved to Edo and obtained work in a money changing house. In 1863 he began providing tax-farming services to the Shogunate, overseeing the collection and transport of silver and gold. After the Restoration, he provided the same services to the Meiji. Yasuda profited from the delay between the collection of taxes and their forwarding to the government. He greatly magnified his wealth by buying up depreciated Meiji paper money that the government subsequently exchanged for gold.”

We see the same Phoenician themes of money changing and tax collecting. It is not explained in the source why the Meiji government would exchange gold for a depreciated currency, but it was likely a form of state-sanctioned theft, similar to US Executive Order 6102 that in 1933 made it a criminal offense for US citizens to own or trade gold, and was shortly followed by the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 and FDR unilaterally raising the statutory price of gold from $20 to $35 per ounce. It also claims without providing a genealogy that Zenjirō was the son of a poor samurai, but as with other rags-to-extraordinary-riches stories I hesitate to believe it.

After greatly magnifying his wealth Zenjirō went on to co-found the Third National Bank in 1876 and found his own Yasuda Bank in 1880. By 1912, the Yasuda zaibatsu contained 17 banks and 16 other businesses, including multiple insurance companies. The economic reordering that took place in Japan in the aftermath of WWII is beyond the scope of this footnote, but through name changes and mergers the Yasuda Bank has evolved into the contemporary Mizuho Financial Group, which is the 15^th largest banking institution in the world by total assets, which are in excess of $1.8 trillion US dollars. Yasuda’s insurance companies followed a similar trajectory, with the Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company being one of the largest insurers in modern-day Japan.

The Yasuda zaibatsu also serves to exemplify the intermarriage of foreign elite families, as Yoko Ono is Zenjirō’s great grand-daughter. Yoko Ono was married to and had one child with John Lennon. Miles’ research has shown that Lennon very likely descends from the Stanleys, Earls of Derby and Kings of Mann, who had a deciding influence in the Battle of Bosworth Field, and by extension the English War of the Roses.

[Much of the content here is based on original research done by Miles Mathis, along with a guest author by the name of Gerry. I present a synthesis and my own take on several years of research.]

[I also have an article with some context behind this speech, Controlled Opposition at the Toronto Covid Protests]

The Trump Psyop

I want to start by saying that my prediction in August was that Trump would win the election. In August I gave it an eighty percent probability. I did not predict this by looking at any polling numbers or reading political analysis, I predicted it because I know all American elections are fake, and I thought another four years of Trump was in the script. Trump is, after all, an actor. A reality TV star to be exact – now filling the role of puppet president of the United States.

Anyone with their eyes open can see that the 2020 elections were a fraud. And I don’t mean that Biden was involved in a nefarious plot to steal the election from Trump, with the aid of Russia or Italy or any other party. I mean that the way things turned out was scripted beforehand, possibly years – but at least months – beforehand, with the knowledge and consent of Trump. This is not only true this year, but in 2016, 2012, and every election year before that.

Like any effective psyop, Trump serves multiple agendas. The most obvious is to radically increase political polarization. As US president, he would be expected to manipulate both the Left and the Right. For the Left, he is the quintessential bogeyman: a boorish, crass, rich white male. Hardly capable of stringing together a coherent sentence, his gaucheries and malapropisms were at the forefront of mainstream media coverage for days and weeks at a time, crowding out any real news. The emotional response Trump triggers in some Leftists (Trump Derangement Syndrome) precludes any rational analysis of the actions carried out in his name. The Left is quite susceptible to emotional manipulation, and messaging playing on their primary moral foundations of care/harm and fairness has been extremely effective at engaging them in the mainstream narrative.

For the Right, Trump has come to represent a messianic figure, rescuing America from the depravity and decline wrought by the Left. This is further intensified by the Q psyop, averring that not only are the democrats corrupt puppets of the ruling elite, but they are a cabal of pedophilic child sacrificing Satanists. Trump, then, the 4-D chess master, is going to arrest them (any day now!) and drain the swamp, for the glory of God, and capitalism, and Uncle Sam, etc., etc. Trump appeals to the Right’s moral foundations of in-group loyalty and purity. Even after Trump has failed to achieve many of the things set out in his campaign (for instance, prosecuting the Clintons), many conservatives continue to promote Trump, and appear unable to admit that they have been duped.

Trump is not going to drain the swamp: he is simply another swamp creature, with an entourage of ghouls from Goldman Sachs and the CFR. Trump’s commerce secretary is Wilbur Ross, who previously managed bankruptcy restructuring at N M Rothschild & Sons in New York. In 1990 Ross helped Trump renegotiate his debts tied to the Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City. Trump’s treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, is an investment banker and second generation Goldman Sachs alumnus. Trump’s erstwhile National Security Advisor was John Bolton, former diector of the neocon (fascist) PNAC think tank. Several close Trump associates were or are members of the globalist Council on Foreign relations, including Elaine Chow, Trump’s Secretary of Transportation and wife of Mitch McConnell, and Neil Gorsuch, Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. This is hardly and exhaustive list of Trump’s globalist connections, which would take many more paragraphs to list, but suffice it to say that anyone who has been bailed out by Rothschild bankers is not a saviour come to deliver America from the clutches of globalism.

Another objective of the Trump presidency was to preside over the economic unravelling of the US. In terms of raw numbers, since Trump took office the US national debt has risen 40%, from $20 trillion in January of 2017 to $28 trillion now. The Federal Reserve’s balance sheet has followed a similar trajectory, rocketing up $3 trillion in the span of three months from March to May of 2020. It now stands at $7.3 trillion. All this while the US billionaire class increased their wealth by over $1 trillion (up 36%) and household wealth plunged over $6.5 trillion. Employment numbers are also dismal, with real unemployment, as measured by ShadowStats up about three percent from ~23% in 2016 to ~26% today. It may be argued that these calamitous economic conditions are due to COVID response, and not Trump, but as the ostensible leader of the country, Trump is accountable for government response. We simply see Trump playing the controlled opposition, bolstering the pandemic farce by claiming credit for the “best [COVID] testing in the world” and touting the vaccines as a “medical miracle” for which his administration directly responsible. I do not need to get into economic minutae, as the numbers speak for themselves – and it is not a good track record for a nominally populist president.

Probably the most devious agenda served by Trump’s presidency is the co-opting of the liberty movement. I have seen with my own eyes protestors waving Trump flags at anti-lockdown demonstrations in Toronto. Attaching the brand of liberty to such an unsuitable figurehead allows it to be tarnished by association with Trump’s ridiculous actions. Even his commendable decisions, such as defunding the WHO, only serve to draw insufficiently skeptical dissidents back into an ersatz-establishment fold. If dissenters wrongly perceive that something is being done on their behalf, they are less likely to take action themselves. Besides which, liberty will not be won by following a leader, though sources of inspiration are necessary. It will only be won through a grassroots movement not dependent on any leader, but organized through the self-directed virtuous behaviour of supporters. If morale can only be maintained through engagement with duplicitous leaders like Trump and QAnon, the movement is guaranteed to fail.

Part of Trump’s role as charlatan leader of the opposition is to trick dissidents into supporting actions counter to their ideals – into supporting greater levels of government control. This was one of the goals of the manufactured riots over the summer. If conservatives could be convinced that martial law was an appropriate solution to the problem, it would open the door to even greater levels of fascism. The agenda is the same with the calls for Trump to impose martial law to overturn the election. Yes, the election was fake, but it was faked with the help of Trump. It is simply another narrative to convince the people to accept ever greater levels of control.

With any misleading narrative it is important to recognize the source, in this case US three-star generals Michael Flynn and Thomas McInerney. Merely their rank in the American armed forces should be enough to place them under highest suspicion, as no one reaches that level without being owned by, and in many cases part of, the ruling families. Michael Flynn was Director of the Defence Intelligence Agency from 2012 to 2014, making him a top-ranking spook. He was Trump’s National Security Advisor for only 24 days, and was succeeded by H. R. McMaster, another member of the CFR. Flynn’s short tenure was due to being fired by Trump for lying to Vice President Pence and the FBI about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador, a charge to which he plead guilty. This, along with Flynn’s other connections to Russia, such as giving a speech at Russian military intelligence (GRU) headquarters, are structured so as to lend credence to the Russian collusion, though that was simply another fictional narrative intended to distract the Left.

In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Flynn has recommended that Trump suspend the costitution and hold a new election under martial law. Since the US constitution has, for all intents and purposes, already been shredded, I’m not sure what different it would make, other that to bring the fascism out into the open for all to see. Flynn has also recently been paying homage to Q, releasing a video on Twitter in July swearing an oath to support and defend the constitution, and finishing off with the QAnon “Where We Go One, We Go All” catchphrase. Interesting that he now wants to suspend the constitution.

General McInerney spent 34 years in the Air Force, before retiring in 1994. After leaving the military, he went into private enterprise as a board member of several military contractors. From 2002 to 2018, he also served as a senior military analyst for Fox News. In this role, he was revealed as a shill for the Pentagon, faithfully presenting the talking points that he had been given. In his role as public mouthpiece for the military-industrial complex, McInerney advocated for the Iraq war, as well as regime change through military action in Iran and North Korea. He also claimed that Saddam Hussein had moved WMDs to Lebanon and Syria, and wrote opinion pieces defending Donald Rumsfeld at the behest of the Pentagon.

This goes to show that McInerney is a paid liar who is willing to say anything his military handlers tell him to. Lately he has been advocating for Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807, suspend habeas corpus, and declare martial law. In other words, become a dictator outright. As part of his story he claims that Russia, China, and Iran were involved in cyber warfare to rig the election. This is simply a repeat of the Russian collusion narrative from 2016, and it is just as fake now as it was then. The US elites have no need of foreign powers to rig their own elections. The question is simply why one faction, the military, appears to be upset with how the faked elections turned out this year.

[For my readers in Ontario, you should know that George Roche, co-founder of the protest group The Line, promoted Flynn and McInerney and this psy op during a protest march in December. This adds to the already abundant evidence that The Line is controlled opposition, including the fact that the founder is a member of a biker gang and goes by a fake name, and that starting in January 2021 The Line made the decision to split with other protest groups and hold their protest at a different location with all unrelated signage prohibited. Do not fall for it, or invest your time or money in their initiatives.]

Although Trump never declared martial law or invoked the Insurrection Act, the theatre continued with the U.S. Capitol riots on January 6^th. Although there were doubtless many authentic Trump supporters in attendance at the Capitol, there is much evidence that it was planned beforehand and allowed to occur. Trump invited his rally attendees to walk down to the Capitol, and in the last two minutes of his speech said “We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” Security was very light at the Capitol despite adequate foreknowledge of the event, and there are multiple videos of police allowing rioters to enter the capitol grounds or the building itself. Several of the most recognized rioters also throw up red flags, being either actors, long time military, or the children of prominent families.

Apart from its impact as a psychological operation, there is no reason for the Capitol riots to have happened. They accomplished nothing, and nothing could have been expected to come of them. The most disruptive possible outcome would have been if members of congress were murdered, but as members of congress are simply pawns executing the decisions of men behind the scenes, nothing substantial would have been accomplished. The outcome, then, is that the Right loses any possible moral high ground that it may have had after the events of the summer. The media completes its total blackwashing of the Right, and cements the image of Trump as a Hitlerian figure – a cautionary tale of what can go wrong when conservative ideals are allowed to take root in government. Basically, Trump was put in to give naive truthers hope, he did little that will have any lasting positive impact, and now if he loses power it will be a demoralizing blow to many in the liberty movement.

A revolution will only succeed if the revolutionaries are focused on the right targets. That means they need to recognize the controlled opposition and repudiate it just as strongly as they do the mainstream. From my experience attending covid protests and speaking with other truthers, at best (if I’m being generous) 20% of them are aware of the controlled opposition theatre led by Trump, and even among those almost all still cling to various figures or ideas I know to be false or otherwise controlled.

I’m not sure what will happen on the 20^th, and whether Biden’s inauguration will proceed as planned. After the Capitol riots I figured that the kabuki theatre was over, but the presence of over 20,000 troops in Washington DC suggests that things will not go forward in the ‘standard’ manner. Remember that such a troop movement must have been planned months in advance, and that Trump is still the Commander-in-Chief of the US military – that means that troops are present on his authority. Whatever happens, we can be sure that it is not Trump and Biden duking it out for the presidency – it is the occulted power brokers behind each of them jockeying for power. Their actions are only visible to the masses as shadows on the wall; any speculation about what is happening behind the scenes must be inferred from the exoteric stage play. My intuition is that COVID and the events of this election cycle are an attempted coup from newer elite players, like big tech, trying to usurp power from older players, like the military and oil companies. This can be seen from the increased reliance on technology during COVID, from Zoom calls, to remote work, to Amazon deliveries, together with diminished consumption of travel and physical goods (US oil prices briefly turned negative in April of 2020). In any case, if I never have to hear about Trump again, it will be too soon.

Read more about Trump from Miles or Alt-Market.

My Journey

[This was previosly posted on Cutting Through the Fog as a response to the Share Your Story thread.]

For me, becoming a truther wasn’t the product of a single transparent psyop or moment of epiphany. It basically came down to realizing over time that more and more of what I had been taught in my life was a lie, until I accepted that most of what I had been told was deliberately inverted. I’m pretty young, so it becomes a story of my life viewed through the lens of exposing one lie at a time.

I was always skeptical from childhood – I stopped believing in Santa at four because I found it scientifically implausible that one man could fly around the whole world in one night and deliver presents to every child on Earth. I was also very cynical (although I know now I wasn’t nearly cynical enough…) I remember being upset when as a teenager the news of the Forex scandal broke, and being slightly aghast when no one in my family seemed to care that trillions were being stolen.

In university I discovered The Red Pill and the Manosphere, which I approached with caution because of its reputation for being misogynistic and downright evil. Ultimately most of the ideas made sense, and appreciated that there was a community that was attempting to systematize knowledge of gender relations. I took what I thought was valuable (which did indeed help significantly with the opposite sex) while leaving anything I considered manipulative and unethical. That was the first time that I realized that a large chunk of my worldview had been composed of deliberate lies intent on warping the heterosexual relationship and turning men into mere provisioners of overpriced ‘romantic’ commodities.

Two years after that Jordan Peterson became famous practically over night, and I was quite drawn to his philosophy. Although I now realize he is an agent (something I figured out before finding Miles’ work) in terms of real impacts on my life I only have positive things to say. Starting from childhood I have seen many therapists for recurrent depression (I no longer do), but I found Peterson was the only one who was helpful in any significant way, simply through video lectures. He also got me into reading classics and philosophy, whereas before my main fare had been fantasy series like the Wheel of Time. I admired that he was ostensibly struggling against the obvious sophistry of modern Leftism, and I recall thinking that he was the first person whom I had ever idolized (again, I no longer do).

Eventually, through a chain of YouTube recommendations following from Peterson, I found the alt-right ecosystem through J.F. Gariepy. That was basically my introduction to the alt-media, and I quickly discovered Austrian economics, race differences, the Jewish Question, and 9/11 truth. I watched Ryan Dawson’s 9/11 documentary War by Deception, and once I realized that something like that could be a false flag I knew that nothing I had learned about history, or anything else, was trustworthy. All I knew about 9/11 truth beforehand was the meme “jet fuel can’t melt steel beams”, sometimes suffixed by “, man”, but all it would have taken was an intelligent account of the events of the day including the collapse of Building 7, and Jane Standley’s fatal gaffe.

This was two and a half years ago, and I was finishing my undergraduate degree in summer school, so naturally I did the bare minimum in my (easy, psychology,) courses and spent upwards of 8 hours a day reading and watching documentaries and interviews. I read the Culture of Critique and learned about the drug trade, oil politics, and the Holocaust. After only about two months I found Miles’ work through a google search on connections between Elon Musk and the CIA. It was reprinted on another site which I can no longer locate, but I knew to always go to the original source. Upon reading the list of best articles I was astounded by all of the claims, but I could tell that he was a genius and I figured if only half of them were true it would still be worth reading.

The claims I found most difficult to reconcile were the non-existence of nuclear weapons and serial killers. That required the most reorganization of my previous understanding (how can I explain Hiroshima & Nagasaki, North Korea, the Rosenbergs, Pollard, Vanunu, etc?) It took a while for the evidence to accrue before I could accept that. I still don’t understand how the bombing of Dresden could have been faked [after: it was likely exaggerated and given a falsified mythology].

Miles was the first person I had read to suggest that vaccines or fluoride were bad, so as I was catching up on his vast corpus I looked into those topics as well. I found I still had many holes in my understanding of specific topics so I spent several more months wading through controlled opposition sources to find what I needed to know about various things. There were a number of shocks, but the last one, before I was entirely desensitized, was that dinosaurs are likely a fabrication. I still find that difficult, given I don’t have a theory to replace it with, other than to say paleontology is constructing a fantasy universe on top of very little real data.

So that’s how I came around intellectually. There is still the question of what you do after such an apocalypse, but that is a different post entirely. I tried telling my family, of course, with the result that they don’t really take me seriously, and refuse to speak with me about anything of substance. I had hoped that the obvious contradictions in the coronahoax would wake them up, but so far no dice. Becoming a truther has shown me how fragile, and in some cases transient, human relationships are.

__________

One commentor replied to me suggesting that the Acámbaro figures were evidence that dinosaurs are in fact real, and were contemporaneous with humans. I replied, explaining my perspective on dinosaurs:

In a world of so many hoaxes, what strong evidence do we have that the Acambaro figures are authentic? Even if they were from the time period that is alleged, there are many figures that do not match any known dinosaur morphology, as well as dinosaurs that did not exist in the geographic range where the figures were found. Why are the figures considered strong enough evidence to posit the coexistence of dinosaurs and humans when a simpler explanation is that they are evidence of an active imagination in whoever molded them? It’s like claiming a Hieronymus Bosch painting is evidence that humans live contemporaneously with anthropomorphic birds.

Since fossil findings labeled as dinosaurs are mostly partial skeletons, dated using radiometric or stratigraphic dating, I think the most likely explanation is that paleontologists found a few bone fragments, perhaps correctly dated and perhaps not, and came up with the most sensational story possible to explain them. Piltdown man would be an example of this, Nebraska man another. Perhaps there were reptilian megafauna 100 million years ago, perhaps not. Without a complete reexamination of the evidence by independent parties, I doubt it is possible to know.

Note that I am not an evolution denier, neither macro nor micro. I think there is sufficient evidence beyond the fossil record to make evolution the most parsimonious and predictive explanation. However, looking at the history of dinosaur research, I find much of it was likely fabricated to bolster the nascent theory of evolution. This would have been done both as an attack on the Church, and as a means of acquiring fame and fortune. Dinosaurs were unknown before 1800 and were first classified by Richard Owen (who was disliked by his contemporaries and called “a most deceitful and odious man” by historians) in the 1840’s. Then, in the much-publicized Bone Wars from 1872 to 1892 two competing paleontologists allegedly discovered 136 new species of dinosaur, including many of the most famous, like stegosaurus and triceratops. The ‘scientists’ had the usual provenance, Othniel Charles Marsh being the nephew of banker George Peabody, and Edward Drinker Cope being a wealthy Quaker who married his cousin.

It is difficult to know where the fakery ends. I am relatively sure that mastodons, smilodons (sabre-tooth cats), and basilosaurids (ancient whales) are real. I am also relatively sure that triceratops and stegosaurus are fake. I am not sure about pterodons, plesiosaurs and mosasaurs. If anyone knows of any work addressing this kind of fraud from a secular, scientific perspective, I would be interested to read it.

Thoughts on Cryptocurrencies

[Previously posted as a comment at Cutting Through the Fog]

The actions of the central banks in inflating the US dollar (and other currencies) incentivizes moving to Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies as a store of value. The average person is losing more faith in fiat, and while gold was historically used as a hedge against economic uncertainty, cryptocurrencies are gaining a lot more traction, especially with the younger generation. Both have problems, in that they are deflationary and already owned in large part by the elite. Since the elites would like to move to a digital currency, anything that normalizes that or speeds adoption plays into their hands. Money in your bank account will be stolen through inflation; money you put into property will be stolen through property taxes (not to mention all the other ways the elites can cause land to be devalued), etc. Bitcoin’s price is based entirely on FOMO, and the bet that cryptos will someday have wider adoption. What difference does it make if money is stolen through cryptocurrency, really? What is the best way to store capital earned over a lifetime? Obviously investing in experiential, intellectual, or social capital is imperative, and will pay excellent returns, but financial/material capital is also necessary.

Bitcoin has the highest market cap because it was first, not because it will persist longest. It was the proof of concept for a digital currency, but since it was launched in 2009, millions of man-hours of programming and mathematical research time have been devoted to improving cryptocurrency protocols to increase usability and number of use cases. Bitcoin itself is too slow and inflexible to be of any lasting value. The second generation of cryptocurrencies (e.g. Ethereum) introduced smart contracts that allow for various transactions to take place without the support of a trusted third party (for instance, Kickstarter’s functionality could be implemented with a smart contract). Third generation cryptocurrencies are attempting to solve problems of scalability (transactions per second, storing the blockchain as it reaches terabyte size and above, obviating the incredibly expensive proof of work consensus mechanism, etc.) and other issues. There is still a lot of work to be done before digital currencies could be feasibly deployed as a global currency – though I believe it will be done through the dominant blockchain model. Cardano, a digital currency founded by Charles Hoskinson, one of the co-founders of Ethereum, is being developed through collaboration with cryptographers in top universities worldwide. Wolfram Research, founded by spook Stephen Wolfram, is now working closely with Cardano. The families are investing a great deal in getting their blockchain currencies off the ground.

I believe that the elite are funding Cardano to develop the necessary technology and mathematics to make a global digital currency a reality, and not as a pump-and-dump scam. However, it is true that Intelligence can secure funding for black ops by developing a garbage cryptocurrency and selling it to feckless speculators.

In terms of legislation, the US Treasury Department under Mnuchin is seeking to add rules requiring that cryptocurrency exchanges identify owners of private (unhosted by an exchange) wallets when making large asset transfers. The vast majority of cryptocurrency trading is already done through exchanges, which defeats the purpose of a decentralized currency, but this kind of legislation would further imperil the potential psuedonymity currently offered by cryptos. I would expect to see more of this kind of thing in the future, until cryptocurrencies are as completely controlled as fiat dollars are today.

To read more about cryptocurrencies, check out this guest paper on Miles’ site, or these reviews on RealCurrencies.

Masks, Seatbelts, and Stop Signs

Humanity’s descent into the abyss continues unabated in Quebec, where premier François Legault has ordered that everyone must wear a mask in indoor spaces, starting July 18^th, without any actual legislation to that effect. The province has decided to force compliance by leaning on business owners to enforce the premier’s executive order, and has hired 100 inspectors to go around the province, issuing fines of $400 to $6000 to recalcitrant businesses. Since there is no law passed by a legislature, this is simply an overreach by the executive branch, and a bluff. Unfortunately, the facts on the ground are that many businesses are allowing themselves to be controlled by unconstitutional orders, and many are also unaware of the exemptions that exist for those that cannot wear the mask.

By putting the onus on businesses, the government expedites the cultural change by intensifying social pressure to wear the mask. To most business owners, the mask mandate becomes not only a question of their feeling of safety, but of putting themselves at financial risk by allowing the maskless into their stores. Even those businesses that don’t see the necessity of masks will be incentivized to enforce mask wearing if their livelihood comes under threat.

Since media sensationalism and misrepresented science have manufactured consent for obligatory mask wearing, some regions in Ontario are now requiring masks on the basis of public polling. Other polling in the US, France, Germany, the UK, and Sweden indicates that the average citizen believes that two orders of magnitude more people have died from COVID than the official numbers show. As of July 27^th, the average American polled believes that a full 9% of the US population has already died from COVID. So not only are policies being implemented based on consent being manufactured by the media, those who support these policies, on average, don’t have the slightest clue what’s going on, even by official standards. The massive push to normalize mask wearing is the result of the most prolonged and widespread propaganda campaign in history. As Dr. Matthew Oughton, infection disease specialist at McGill University and a physician at Montreal’s Jewish General Hospital puts it, “it boils down to trying to change someone’s habits and a society’s culture, which isn’t always easy.” Perhaps that’s why millions of man-hours of propaganda and marketing have been devoted to cementing this cultural change?

Make no mistake, the ubiquitous COVID scaremongering campaign by the media is a deliberate attempt at forcing contrived and pernicious changes to cultures worldwide. It is a direct assault on the normative commons – the system of values and cultural norms that everyone is ensconced by while existing in a society. It is a common property, since as inhabitants of a culture we defend our cultural norms against outside forces, and adhere to them at a cost to ourselves. The damage to our normative commons should be prosecuted in a court of law (though that won’t happen) and reparations should be sought from those responsible. Monetary indemnities will not do anything to repair the cultural damage, but at a minimum those pushing this narrative from positions of influence in media and government should be banished from the society and removed of any means to influence the society in the future.

Now that masks have entered the culture as an everyday garment, it demonstrates a visible compliance to social norms. This is unlike some other moral frameworks, like honour systems, where action in accordance with norms is not always visible. No more can those who oppose masks “think as they like, but behave like others” without compromising their ideals. Also notable is the different psychological effect the mask has on those who promote mask wearing and those who resist it. For those who condone masks, a mask is calming – an essential talisman ensuring their safety. For those who oppose, it is a muzzle – a degrading symbol of their lack of bodily autonomy.

A typical narrative justification

Since the wearing of masks has become a moral issue, people have begun inventing narrative justifications for masks. Wearing a mask is compared to wearing a seatbelt, or not smoking indoors, or stopping at a stop sign. However, the comparison is specious, since a mask is not like any of those things. Firstly, it is not like a seatbelt, since a seatbelt is intended to protect the individual, whereas the mainstream refrain recommending masks is that they are needed to protect others. Even so, I think people should not be required to wear a seatbelt, as long as they assume responsibility for any avoidable injuries that result. In general, the state should not require or prohibit any actions as long as the consequences are not externalized to the public. That is, if the taxpayer is not on the hook to pay for injuries that result from reckless behaviour, and that behaviour does not cause collateral damage, it should not be criminalized. Individuals must be allowed to take risks and learn from the positive and negative consequences of their actions. To that end, I would gladly waive my right to free medical treatment, if I ever were to get COVID, if I could ignore any and all orders pertaining to the response. No social distancing, no masks, no lines outside stores, no booking a time slot at the gym. Things as they were in what rags like The Atlantic are nauseatingly calling “The Before Time”.

Secondly, the comparison between masks and smoking is not apt, since smoking is taking a voluntary action that pollutes the area around you, and imposes externalities on anyone in that area. This is different with masks, as it is not any particular action that necessitates the mask, but merely existing as a human in a space. Since the mask isn’t tied to any particular activity (say, coughing) for which it is required, it pathologizes the mere fact of being human. The fact that asymptomatic transmission of COVID is, as admitted by the WHO, extraordinarily rare, makes this even more egregious. The myth of asymptomatic transmission is what the mainstream uses to justify masks for all, ignoring that we have a behavioural immune system that has evolved for millions of years to protect us from harmful pathogens. Wearing a strip of fabric over your face is a risible intervention when compared with systems evolved over millennia. Or when compared with literally anything else.

Thirdly, masks are not comparable to obeying traffic signs. When you are driving a car, you are not the same as a human operating on evolved systems and cultural programming. Driving a car exchanges the human ecosystem for the traffic ecosystem, where you are one agent on the road out of hundreds, and missteps can lead to immediate injury or death. Humans have no specific adaptations to facilitate car driving, and the road network requires a high degree of predictability and legibility to function safely. Since driving is an elective action, that humans have no predisposition to, using potentially lethal technology in a distributed setting, it is reasonable and necessary to require drivers to stop at street lights. The argument can always be made that certain traffic protocols are unnecessary or dangerous, and I believe many stop signs could be removed with no loss of safety, but the general case that certain behaviours are required while driving is entirely reasonable. The argument does not, however, apply to masks.

Now that the public in Canada is largely on board with masks, the question is how long they will remain commonplace. I would say… indefinitely¹ (or until popular revolt). The elites are experts in the creation of markets, wherein they can use their control of the media to create demand for a product, and then use their control of industry to fill that demand, generating profits orders of magnitude greater than the initial outlay for marketing. Hats have declined as a fashion object in the modern day, so the elites have provided a new, quasi-mandatory facial garment. As a woman said to me recently, “masks are the new lipstick”. Masks also serve to reinforce that ‘something is happening’, when for the vast majority of people the coronavirus (should it exist) has been felt only indirectly, in media reports and in the restriction of freedoms. It also allows the elites to look out on their beaten-down proletariat to observe how many of the serfs are demonstrating compliance that day. Since they apparently gratify themselves by subjugating a populace they view as little better than cattle, it probably makes them feel all warm and fuzzy.

¹ Some might say that during the Spanish Flu, masks were required in some locations, but that this ended after the pandemic. Why would it be different this time? The biggest relevant change since the 1910’s is the level of media saturation. In 1918, the television had not yet been invented, much less the internet. Radio was still being broadcast in Morse code. The success of the mandatory mask program is in large part due to the fact that almost every single person is plugged into the media at all waking hours, where they receive a constant stream of COVID propaganda.

Then there is the position in the historical chronology. The Spanish Flu began towards the end of World War I, when worldwide chaos had already peaked with the war, and would decline for several years thereafter. The peoples of the world had been thoroughly brutalized, and it would be another two decades before the ruling class could orchestrate another war. Compare that to the present moment, when chaos has been building continuously over years, and economic depressions, foot shortages, and wars, civil and otherwise, are on our doorstep. The coronavirus will not be the denouement. When the commercial incentive is included in the analysis, with outrageously expensive designer masks satisfying the ‘need’ for ultra-conspicuous consumption, I find it unlikely that masks are going anywhere anytime soon.

Added 30/08/2020:
Further support for my thesis can be found by looking at the history of mask wearing in Korea. Prior to 2008, masks were only worn by sick people when out in public, and only occasionally. In 2008, a member of Korea’s most popular boy band posted a series of selfies while wearing a mask from the Sakun streatwear brand. The trend was picked up by social media influencers, and quickly created a fashion trend among teenagers. Having achieved mainstream acceptance, the 2009 swine flu and 2015 MERS events allowed the medical industry to reinforce and solidify the cultural change. Today in Korea, mask wearing for protection from pollution or viruses, or other reasons, is a cultural mainstay. So, we can see media and pop culture being used to create a market where none existed before, and medical propaganda used to reify and expand that market. Today with the coronavirus psyop, Gyeonggi, the most populous province of Korea with over 13 million inhabitants, has issued an ‘administrative order’ requiring masks to be worn at all times in public, even when outside. Clearly the earlier initiation of the cultural shift has allowed for more consent to the manufactured among Koreans for mandatory mask wearing. It remains to be seen whether cultures that did not have a decade-long evolution of mask wearing customs will adopt the change as zealously as Korea, where 19% of the population reported wearing masks prior to COVID, and 89% wear them today.

Why I believe Rocco Galati is controlling the opposition

This piece is a work in progress, although I have collated enough information to be confident in the conclusions I am presenting. I am posting it now because Galati is scheduled to be speaking at the next Saturday protest at Queen’s Park in Toronto. I will be updating it as I compile more research. It follows the method and research of Miles Mathis – if you are not familiar with his work and you find yourself confused by my logic, you may wish to start by reading his exposé on the OJ Simpson trial, showing it was a psy op from beginning to end.

Rocco Galati is a Canadian constitutional lawyer who on July 9^th filed a 191-page suit containing 183 criminal and constitutional charges against various individuals and organizations, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Chief Doctor of Canada Theresa Tam, and the CBC, on behalf of Vaccine Choice Canada. In the past Galati has defended several suspects of terrorism, throwing up immediate red flags. He has also been involved in challenging the appointment of Marc Nadon to the Supreme Court of Canada, and bringing a case against the Canadian government to restore the Bank of Canada as a lender to the government. Wikipedia lists Galati as Jewish. This is relevant since the billionaire and trillionaire families who own the world are predominantly Jewish. That is to say, not all Jews are elite, but almost all of the elites are Jewish or have significant Jewish ancestry.

After being called to the bar in 1989, Galati worked for the federal Department of Justice for one year, before striking out on his own and exclusively taking cases against the government. In 2001, he, along with Paul Slansky, defended Delmart Vreeland at trial. Vreeland claimed to be an officer for the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), the oldest branch of the US intelligence community. Vreeland had, according to the story, produced a note predicting the 9/11 attacks. According to Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael Ruppert, Chapter 11, “Neither [Galati nor Slansky] had the slightest doubt that Vreeland had worked for the Office of Naval Intelligence or in some similar capacity, possibly for the CIA.” Ruppert reports that the two lawyers spent months in well-documented efforts to prevent the 9/11 attacks, given the foreknowledge provided by Vreeland.

Vreeland had been arrested in Toronto on December 6^th, 2000, on fraud charges. He was immediately put in solitary confinement, and remained there until January 15^th. This illegal treatment was apparently administered because Toronto police had difficulty ascertaining his identity. In May, the US requested Vreeland’s extradition for credit card fraud. What happened in the five intervening months? At this point, he hired Slansky and Galati. In June, he informed his counsel that he had information relevant to the national security of Canada and the US. Over the next few months Slansky and Galati made several requests to various intelligence agencies that they interview their client, without success. In August, the note predicting 9/11 was produced, although it was allegedly sealed and not opened until September 14^th. After Vreeland was released from prison in 2002, Alex Jones, who competes with David Icke for world’s most obvious intel plant, interviewed him on air.

This is all incredibly suspicious, and reads like yet another show trial staged by intelligence. It includes such theatre as Galati having a dead cat hung on his porch as a threat. Why was Galati defending what was apparently, at the time, a small-time fraudster? Throughout the story, Vreeland is constantly trying to contact CSIS, the RCMP, and every other spook agency he could name. The book by Ruppert is also selling the narrative that US intelligence was warned of the impending 9/11 attacks but chose to do nothing. This is misdirection, since we now know that no planes hit the towers on 9/11. To wrap it up, in 2008 Vreeland was sentenced to 336 years in prison for sexual exploitation of children and distribution of cocaine.

Next, Galati served as a lawyer for Abdurahman Khadr of the Khadr family of spooks. Abdurahman’s father, Ahmed Khadr, was a known financier for Al-Qaeda. At one point in 1998, the Khadr family was living with Osama bin Laden in a compound outside Jalalabad, Afghanistan. Later, Abduraman claimed to be an informant for the CIA. So having Galati represent him in 2002 is quite telling.

In 2006, he represented Ahmad Mustafa Ghany, who was a suspect in the 2006 Ontario terrorism plot. On June second, 2006, raids around the GTA resulted in the arrest of 18 suspected terrorists, dubbed the ‘Toronto 18’. Here we have immediate numerology, since 18, also called Chai in Hebrew, or aces & eights, is a common numerological marker in hoax events. The numbers 33 (the highest rank in freemasonry) and 47 are used similarly. Although the suspects were allegedly planning a series of bombings, armed invasions of government buildings, and even to behead the Prime Minister, nothing was carried out. The group had been under surveillance by CSIS (Canadian Security Intelligence Service) since 2004. On November 27, 2005, intelligence agent Mubin Shaikh began to infiltrate the group. Mubin has worked as an expert witness for the UN security council, NATO, and the Department of Homeland security, and given many interviews on terrorism for CBC, CNN and other mainstream propaganda outlets. So the group was infiltrated not by just any intelligence operative, but by a major spook with international connections.

In 2011, Galati represented the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform (COMER) in a case against the government of Canada. In it, they argued to restore the Bank of Canada as a lender to the government, and that it is mandated to provide debt-free financing to public works undertaken by the government. COMER was founded by William Krehm and John Hotson in the 1980’s. Krehm was a Russian Jew who grew up in Toronto. In 1932, 2 years after graduating high school, he became a Trotskyist after being recruited by a fellow Russian Jew, Albert Glotzer. Krehm joined the Canadian branch of the Communist League of America (CLA), which is given nine different names on Wikipedia, including the League for Socialist Action, the Revolutionary Worker’s Party, and The Club. One wonders why they needed so many different aliases. We know that Communism was a Jewish movement (remember, Trotsky’s real name was Lev Bronstein) invented to misdirect dissidents around the time of the 1848 republican revolutions in Europe, and to see the Trotskyist movement in Canada undergoing so many splits and rebrandings during the 1930’s indicates it was still accomplishing the same objective. Workers could be diverted from any meaningful action by following the cavalcade of socialist organizations and debating which one was best representing their interests. The same thing still happens now in contemporary politics, without workers realizing that NONE of the political parties represent their interests.

Krehm’s Trotskyist faction was opposed to that of Maurice Spector, Jewish, who was one the of the founding members of the CLA. Krehm’s affiliation with the organization was sporadic, and he eventually moved to Montreal to lead the party branch there. Interesting that someone who was dropping in an out of the organization was able to later acquire a leadership position. In 1934 he split from the CLA permanently, and with the American B. J. Field (born Max Gould; Gould is a common Jewish name) founded a new worker’s party, this time with a 5-letter acronym, which later morphed into a different 4-letter acronym. I don’t consider the names important, seeing as they seemed to change on a monthly basis, but they were known as the Fieldites, after the assumed name of Gould. Krehm became the leader of the Canadian Fieldites, and edited their Worker’s Choice newspaper.

In 1936 he was off to Europe, representing the Fieldites as a delegate at a conference held by the International Revolutionary Marxist Center in Brussels that year. He bounced back and forth between Belgium and Spain, before going to Paris and then London. While in London he spent Christmas with prominent Irish communist Charles Donnelly. He then returned to Spain, where he joined the Partido Obrero de Unificación Marxista (POUM, in English the Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification) as a propagandist and translator during the Spanish Civil War. It’s not clear how Krehm was able to afford his travels across Europe, seeing as professional revolutionary is not a well paid job. Wikipedia isn’t even sure if he graduated from the University of Toronto, or if he dropped out after two years for lack of funds. This is a common theme with the biographies of children of the elite families, who pretend to be working class, but are somehow able to journey all over Europe, holding audiences with prominent people. For one example, see Mark Twain.

While in Barcelona Krehm met spook George Orwell and would converse with him in cafes. Orwell later related his experiences in Spain in Homage to Catalonia. For more on Orwell, see here, page 16. POUM was outlawed by the Spanish government in June 1937, and Krehm’s house was raided by the secret police. He was detained on suspicion of being a spy, and allegedly held for 3 months, before being hospitalized following a hunger strike and subsequently being released. Whether or not that actually happened, we can be sure he was a spy. He was released on the French border, and returned to Canada, where he began giving speeches about his experiences in Spain.

Krehm has a long list of spook bona fides, and finding him founding COMER should give us grave doubts about the sincerity of their mission. COMER circulates a newsletter where they republish articles from limited hangouts like the Center for Research on Globalization (globalresearch.ca). Just so you know, the CRG was founded by Michel Chossudovsky, Jewish. The Jewish Tribune, a newspaper founded by B’nai Brith Canada (now out of publication) described CRG as “rife with anti-Jewish conspiracy theory and Holocaust denial.” So to find CRG being founded by a Jew and being reprinted by the Jewish-run COMER makes no sense under a conventional interpretation. In fact, it is another example of Jews creating their own opposition, in the tradition of Karl Marx, Ezra Pound, and Hitler.

It is clear that Galati has made a career out of representing intelligence assets and spook economic institutions. He has been set up as a white hat, first trying to prevent 9/11, then trying to restore interest-free lending for government projects. But notice, was he successful in either of those endeavours? The question then remains, why would Galati file this suit if he is controlling the opposition? The answer is that it gives false hope to those who are opposed to medical fascism that there are authentic and intelligent voices representing their interests. If even one person who was planning on filing suit decides to not do so in light of Galati’s lawsuit, the project will have been successful. Besides reducing the perceived urgency for others to sue for violations of civil liberties, having the upcoming legal battle managed from both sides allows the elites to script the trial in any way they want. Any outcome can be manufactured, and entered into case law, based on the actions taken and arguments raised by the lawyers and judges. If Galati is unsuccessful in his suit, and I predict that that is the plan, then that will be a blow to anyone else pursuing similar cases. The solution is to not wait for Rocco Galati to ride in on a white stallion to save us, but to file our own lawsuits en masse and force the government to answer for its unconstitutional actions.

[In the future I will be updating this article with more research on the Khadr family, including Omar Khadr, the Toronto 18, and the Canadian Infrastructure Bank, which was created in response to the COMER lawsuit]