In a March 28, 2021, interview with Fox News’ Steve Hilton, former Clinton adviser and author Naomi Wolf warned that mandatory COVID-19 passports will spell the “end of human liberty in the West”:1,2
“‘Vaccine passport’ sounds like a fine thing if you don’t understand what those platforms can do,” she said. “I’m [the] CEO of a tech company, I understand what these platforms can do. It is not about the vaccine, it’s not about the virus, it’s about your data.
Once this rolls out, you don’t have a choice about being part of the system. What people have to understand is that any other functionality can be loaded onto that platform with no problem at all. It can be merged with your Paypal account, with your digital currency.
Microsoft is already talking about merging it with payment plans. Your network can be sucked up. It geolocates you everywhere you go. Your credit history can be included. All of your medical and health history can be included.
This has already happened in Israel, and six months later, we’re hearing from activists that it’s a two-tiered society and that basically, activists are ostracized and surveilled continually. It is the end of civil society, and they are trying to roll it out around the world.
It is absolutely so much more than a vaccine pass … I cannot stress enough that it has the power to turn off your life, or to turn on your life, to let you engage in society or be marginalized.”
The Forgotten History of IBM
Wolf also points out the horrific history of IBM,3 whose Digital Health Pass will tie our biometric IDs to our health data through its smartphone app. This “health pass” will then grant or deny us access to public spaces and events, based on our vaccination status.
This is essentially the modern-day version of the punch card system — the forerunner to digital entry on computers — that IBM developed for the Nazi regime, which allowed them to create a census of Jews and other undesirables, who could then be identified, tracked and sorted into groups slated for incarceration or extermination.
In no uncertain terms, IBM’s technology facilitated the Third Reich’s genocide of the Jewish nation, and IBM leadership aided and abetted the Nazi’s reign of terror with full knowledge of what it was doing.
While it’s hard to understand how a company playing such an integral role in genocide was allowed to survive past the end of the war, it’s even harder to fathom why it would be entrusted to create the same kind of system decades later.
You don’t need a tinfoil hat to wonder whether IBM might have been purposely chosen for the task of creating a “health pass” system, for the simple reason that the purpose of the system itself is near-identical to that deployed in Nazi Germany. IBM also has a relationship with the CIA,4 which has a history of mind control abuses and assassination programs.5
The AGs of all border states need to use Biden and his entire administration for failing to support current US immigration laws and causing human atrocities against those being trafficked at the border! 🤬
Globalist forces are being mobilised to win a last battle in the ‘long-war’ – looking to break-through everywhere.
In The Revolt of the Public, Martin Gurri, a former CIA analyst, contends that western élites are experiencing a collapse of authority deriving from a failure to distinguish between legitimate criticism and – what he terms – illegitimate rebellion. Once control over the justifying myth of America was lost, the mask was off. And the disparity between the myth and public experience of it became only too evident.
Writing in 2014, Gurri foresaw that the Establishment would respond by denouncing all evidence of public discontent, as lies and disinformation. The Establishment would, in Gurri’s telling, be so constrained within their ‘bubble’ that they would be unable to assimilate their loss of monopoly over their own confected ‘reality’. This Establishment denial would be made manifest, he argued, in a delusional, ham-fisted authoritarian manner. His predictions have been vindicated with Trumpist dissidence denounced as a threat to ‘our democracy’ – amidst a media and social platform crackdown. Such a response would only confirm the suspicions of the public, thus setting off a vicious circle of yet more “distrust and loss of legitimacy”, Gurri concluded.
This was Gurri’s main thrust. The book’s striking feature however, was how it seemed so completely to nail the coming Trump and Brexit era – and the ‘anti-system’ impulse behind them. In America, this impulse found Trump – not the other way around. The point here essentially being that America no longer saw Red and Blue as the two extended wings belonging to the bird of liberal democracy. For something around half of America, the ‘system’ was rigged towards a profiteering 0.1%, and against them.
The key point here surely is whether the élites’ Great Re-set – to reinvent themselves as leaders of the ‘re-vamped’ values of liberalism, overlayered by a newly up-dated, AI and robot-led, post-modernity – is destined to succeed, or not.
Continued ‘westification’ of the globe – the principal component to ‘old’ liberal globalism – though tarnished and largely discredited, remains mandatory, as made clear in the cogent reasoning recently advanced by Robert Kagan: Absent the justifying myth of ‘seeding democracy across the world’ around which to organise the empire, the moral logic of the entire enterprise begins to fall apart, Kagan argued (with surprising frankness). He thus asserts that the U.S. empire abroad is required – precisely in order to preserve the myth of ‘democracy’ at home. An America that retreats from global hegemony, he argues, would no longer possess the cohesive binding to preserve America as liberal democracy, at home either.
Gurri is ambivalent on the élite’s ability to stick fast. He both asserts that “the centre cannot hold”, but then adds that the periphery had “no clue what to do about it”. The public revolts would likely arrive unattached to coherent plans, pushing society into interminable cycles of zero-sum clashes between myopic authorities, and their increasingly furious subjects. He called this a “paralysis of distrust”, where outsiders can “neutralize, but not replace the centre” and “networks can protest and overthrow, but never govern”.
Dave Zed of the Generation Zed Podcast joins THC to talk about his ongoing coverage of deep state projects, secret operations, & his journalistic attempts to corroborate the wildest claims of the various whistleblowers we’ve seen emerge from these places over the years.
See where they are going with this? I tried to tell y’all…
And so it begins.
Those of us who have been exposing the corruption in Big Pharma, and especially in the vaccine industry, for more than a decade now, knew this day was coming.
It’s been coming for a long time now, but the COVID Plandemic has shifted medical tyranny into high gear, primarily because this time around the masses have complied with the medical tyrants and, so far, voluntarily surrendered their rights all in the name of “public safety.”
Very soon now, the supply of experimental COVID vaccines will exceed the demand for those who have been lining up and begging to be injected with who-knows-what to fight the unseen enemy, the dreaded Coronavirus, and then it will be time to deal with the “vaccine resistant” who are perceived as a threat to public health.
Domestic Terrorists. That’s the new label for those who dare to question the new experimental COVID injections.
And who else should Big Pharma and their media anoint to start this new campaign, but California Senator Dr. Richard Pan?
Richard Pan is a pediatrician-turned-politician who has spearheaded California’s descent into medical tyranny, since 2015, when he wrote bill SB277 to remove all religious exemptions to childhood vaccines in the State of California, despite widespread public opposition by parents, doctors, lawyers, and educators.
(This is amazingly still up on YouTube, but if it disappears after the publication of this article, let us know and we will replace it on another platform. Note: one of the people who speaks in opposition in this video is former Merck representative Brandy Vaughan, who has since died under suspicious circumstances.)
Dr. Pan has a long history of lying to his constituents and selling them out to Big Pharma.
Always wondered if Bitcoin is a CIA plot?
Follow the money…
Story at a glance
- A new petition asks the Supreme Court to revisit a 1981 ruling that excluded women from the U.S. military draft.
- Women have been officially allowed to serve in combat since 2013.
A new petition issued from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has made it to the Supreme Court and aims to declare the historic male-only military draft to be unconstitutional.
Noting that the U.S. Department of Defense lifted the ban on women serving in combat in 2013, the petition specifies that the obligation for men to register upon turning 18 years old has yet to be applied to women.
“Thousands of women have since served with distinction in combat positions across all branches of the military,” the formal petition reads. “The registration requirement has no legitimate purpose and cannot withstand the exacting scrutiny sex-based laws require.”
Rooted in this argument is the 1981 case Rostker v. Goldberg, which argued that because American men are required to register under U.S. law and women are not, the male-only draft is discriminatory and unconstitutional.
The act gives U.S. presidents the power to require mandatory conscription of eligible adult males into the U.S. Army, but excludes women. Ultimately, the court held that the act does not violate equal protection clauses under the Fifth Amendment, and that the government is allowed to develop an army in times of national emergency.
Now, the petition asks the Supreme Court to overrule Rostker v. Goldberg since women are formally allowed to register for military service and in combat roles.
“It is time to overrule Rostker. The registration requirement has no legitimate purpose and cannot withstand the exacting scrutiny sex-based laws require,” the petition states, citing that military departments acknowledge that requiring both men and women to register would “’promote fairness and equity’ and further the goal of military readiness.”
The Department of Defense has made strides in including women in combat roles, authoring a report in 2015 that called its own previous standards excluding women from military work “outdated.”
In 2017, a committee was established to review the draft policy within the Military Selective Service Act to evaluate if the draft should be expanded to incorporate women recruits. Despite a commission analysis that recommended the inclusion, Congress has yet to make the requirement for women official.
The Washington Post further notes that last week, a group of veterans who held military leadership roles asked the Supreme Court to take the case and rule the male-only draft requirement a violation of the equal protection clause.
“The vast majority of men . . . have no advantage in readiness over women, who the current statutory scheme forbid from registering,” the brief, filed by former National Security Agency (NSA) director Michael Hayden, reportedly said.
Debate over whether or not the draft requirement for men is constitutional has ensued in multiple lower courts, but these revitalized petitions ask the Supreme Court to overturn their original 1981 ruling.
The petition’s authors also note that by excluding women from draft registration requirements, it undermines their own equality as U.S. citizens.
“Like many laws that have purported to privilege women over men, the men-only registration requirement burdens women too by perpetuating the notion that women are unworthy of ‘full citizenship stature,’” the report concludes, citing another Supreme Court case regarding the treatment of women in the military. “Excluding women from a duty characterized as a ‘fundamental civic obligation’ conveys ‘not only that they are not vital to the defense of the country but also that they are not expected to participate in defending it.‘”
The Supreme Court could reportedly take months before deciding to revisit Rostker v. Goldberg.
Published on Feb 19, 2021
I can’t wait to see how this pans out.
To be sure, the human brain is wired for negativity bias, so mass hysteria can occur without government manipulation. Bagus explains:
“There can certainly be mass hysteria without the state in a private law society or within the context of a minimal state. This possibility exists due to the negativity bias of the human brain which makes people vulnerable to delusions. Due to biological evolution, we focus on bad news as it may represent a possible threat. Focusing on negative news and feeling a loss of control may cause psychological stress that can develop into a hysteria and propagate to a larger group.”
Anxiety and fear can spread through a social process of conformity:
“Once anxiety has spread and the majority of a group behaves in a certain way, there is the phenomenon of conformity, i.e., social pressure makes individuals behave in the same way as other members of the group. In the end, there may be a phenomenon that has been called emergent norms: when a group establishes a norm, everyone ends up following that norm. For example, if a group decides to wear masks, everyone agrees to that norm. Emergent norms may explain the later stages of contagion. Contagion by fear can lead people to overreact strongly in a situation, even in a minimal state.”
How Private Property Reduces Hysteria
Crucially Bagus points out that without a strong government reaction, “there exist certain self-corrective mechanisms and limits that make it less likely for a mass hysteria to run out of control.”
When even a minority exercise their property rights and ignore collective panic, hysteria is undermined:
“While anyone in a hysteria related to public health may voluntarily close their own business, wear a mask, or stay at home, in a minimal state, no one can use coercion to force others who are healthy and do not succumb to the hysteria to close their businesses, wear masks, or quarantine. A minority can just ignore the collective panic and continue to live their normal lives, because they are free to do so. Such a minority can be an example and a wake-up call to those that do succumb to the collective hysteria or are close to doing so. This minority may be especially attractive to borderline cases.”
Bagus explains how the example of others limits hysteria: “Suppose that a small group of people during a collective health hysteria continues to go shopping, to work, to socialize, and breathe freely and does not fall ill (massively and fatally). Having this example, the anxiety of observers may fall. Observers may follow the example, and the group of hysterics shrinks.”
Bagus catalogs the ways governments increased hysteria and inflicted harm.
…To fast-track President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion pandemic aid plan will trigger billions of dollars in cuts to critical programs…
“This is not a concern,” said a senior Democratic aide. “This is not something we’re concerned about…”
There ya go folks. Biden has killed energy jobs, caused fuel prices to rise, raised the cost of medication, opened our borders to illegals, given the green light for staffers to assault women, and NOW is stealing from Medicare funds to pay the stimulus.
I can’t think of a bigger FUCK YOU from an administration. This is criminal.
MEGHAN MARKLE is following a “well-worn path” into US politics, a political strategist has claimed, which has prompted fury from a royal insider who says the Duchess’ “ego knows no bounds”
.By EMILY FERGUSONPUBLISHED: 09:05, Sat, Feb 13, 2021 | UPDATED: 09:43, Sat, Feb 13, 2021
Meghan Markle is following in the footsteps of US celebrities who have decided to embark on a political career, such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, a prominent Democratic strategist has claimed. Mike Trujillo said the Duchess is “definitely putting her toe in the water” and predicted it won’t be long until she decided to fully enter the political arena
He told the Times: “She’s doing everything that’s appropriate and allowed given her new position but she’s definitely putting her toe in the water.
“And once your toe is in the water your whole foot is in and next thing you know you are knee-deep and then you are fully in.”
Mr Trujillo believed Meghan and Harry’s foundation, which they are yet to officially launch, is also a stepping stone into politics.
But one source believed Meghan was not concerned with entering politics at the moment, and was instead focusing on “making money”.
They told the newspaper: “I don’t really think she has political ambitions now. But her ego knows no bounds, so maybe she is keeping the door open.
The antipathy that most of the UK and US public feels towards her also knows no bounds. They’d sooner vote for Gruesome again than for this clueless tart. Feeding her delusions is about the stupidest thing you can do 🙄…
Are they going to ban scarves too? Those look pretty “phallic”, this is getting ridiculous…