wakingtimes--2020-09-17--A Global Uprising is Underway

A Global Uprising is Underway

Get the latest Waking Times articles delivered to your inbox .
Sign up here .
After six months of intermittent or in some cases near-continuous lockdowns , many have reached their limit and uprisings are finally emerging around the world .
The last week of August 2020 saw gatherings of tens of thousands of individuals in Berlin,1 London2 and Dublin,3 protesting stay-at-home orders , business closures , mask and vaccine mandates and Bill Gates ’ dictatorial grip on public health matters .
In the U.S. , a protest took place August 30 , 2020 , in Boston , Massachusetts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and in Virginia , protesters gathered September 2 in opposition of unconstitutional COVID-19 mandates.5 These are just a few of the many demonstrations that have taken place in recent weeks around the world , as people are starting to realize their human rights are being stripped away over a virus with a lethality on par with that of seasonal influenza and other pandemic viruses , none of which was responded to with a global shutdown of economies and forced quarantining of healthy individuals .
In recent weeks and months , more and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know about the roles of Big Tech , Big Pharma and global health organizations such as the World Health Organization in the creation of a new technocratic world order .
If you missed my interview with financial analyst Patrick Wood , in which he details the technocratic take-over plan , which has been in play for decades , be sure to review it now .
Other articles shedding light on what ’ s happening behind the scenes include “ Harvard Professor Exposes Google and Facebook , ” featuring a documentary with professor Shoshana @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” When you start to put all the puzzle pieces together , it seems clear this pandemic is being used as a cover story for both a global wealth redistribution scheme , and for the implementation of a technocratic system of totalitarian rule by unelected leaders .
The WHO seems to be part and parcel of this global network .
While the U.S. has severed ties with the organization , Big Tech is still promoting the WHO as a final arbiter of which views are acceptable and which are not — medical expertise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported by Reclaim the Net,6 the WHO eavesdrops on everything you do online , from reviewing your social media interactions to analyzing your emotions .
To counteract “ spread of misleading information ” about the pandemic — which was a key area of focus during Event 201 — the WHO has partnered with an analytics company that uses machine learning analysis to scan more than 1.6 million social media posts per week .
The aim of this “ social listening approach ” — a nicer term than good old-fashioned spying — is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the WHO ’ s current narrative on illnesses , treatments , interventions and causes of disease .
Aiding them in this dystopian censoring process is the United Nations , which has launched an army of 10,000 digital volunteers who troll the internet for “ false ” information and opposing views .
On top of that , most social media platforms have their own highly biased “ fact-checkers ” who censor for all they ’ re worth .
Back in April 2020 , YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki , wife of Google product director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and remove any video from the platform that contradicts the WHO.7 Countless examples of wanton censorship of perfectly valid medical and scientific information across all social media platforms and Google can be found at this point .
Just How Deadly Is COVID-19 ?
According to groundbreaking data8 recently released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , only 6 % of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate .
Six percent of 169,044 ( the total death toll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19 , on average , there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death , ” the CDC states .
As reported by Rochester First,9 the top underlying medical conditions included influenza , pneumonia , respiratory failure , high blood pressure , diabetes , dementia , heart problems and renal failure .
However , the list also includes 5,424 intentional and unintentional injury and poisoning deaths , so basically , accidents and suicides in which the individual just happened to test positive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for SARS-CoV-2 ) are also included in the grand total .
The fact that only 6 % of COVID-19-related deaths are directly attributable to SARS-CoV-2 is bad news when you ’ re trying to keep a doomsday narrative going .
In what appears to be a blatant attempt to minimize exposure of these data , social media platforms have censored many trying to share it.11 As noted by independent news commentator Tim Pool in the video below , fact-checkers are digging into nitpicky semantics in their effort to censor the CDC data , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re really stretching the “ false ” claim ultrathin .
Similar data have emerged from Palm Beach County , Florida , where an investigation by CBS 1212 I-Team revealed only 86 of the reported 658 COVID-19 deaths had “ COVID-19 pneumonia ” listed as the sole cause of death .
All others had multiple comorbidities , including diabetes , cardiovascular diseases and dementia .
As noted by CBS 12 , “ Most Palm Beach County COVID deaths can not be attributed to COVID alone.
” While Dr. Terry Adirim , senior associate dean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Medicine , told the I-Team that “ it makes sense to count them [ people with comorbid conditions ] toward COVID deaths because the virus may have made an otherwise nonfatal illness like a heart condition deadly , ” the converse argument can also be made .
Had it not been for them having one or more serious comorbidities , the risk of the virus to these individuals would have been minuscule , and if they got sick at all , they ’ d probably have survived .
So , ultimately , should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blame ?
Infection Fatality Rate on Par With the Flu Keeping the “ killer virus ” narrative going much longer is probably going to become even more difficult in light of a September 2 , 2020 article13 in Annals of Internal Medicine , which points out that : The estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza listed in this paper is 0.8 % .
So , the only people for whom SARS-CoV-2 infection is more dangerous than influenza is those over the age of 60 .
All others have a lower risk of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dying from the flu .
Put another way , if you ’ re under the age of 60 , your chances of dying from the flu is greater than your chance of dying from COVID-19 .
White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx also confirmed this far lower than typically reported mortality rate when she , in mid-August 2020 , stated that it “ becomes more and more difficult ” to get people to comply with mask rules “ when people start to realize that 99 % of us are going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates being as low as they are for everyone under the age of 60 , it really weakens the rationale for vaccinating the entire world , including newborns , the risk to whom the virus poses is virtually nil .
The vaccine looking increasingly unnecessary is likely a reason for why the U.S. government is planning to launch an “ overwhelming ” COVID-19 vaccine campaign this fall , using carefully researched messages .
As detailed in “ Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century , ” Yale University has conducted a trial16 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maximize acceptance and uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine .
Messaging slants evaluated in the investigation included:17 The study , which was completed July 8 , 2020 , also sought to determine : • Participant ’ s confidence in the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine after hearing the message in question • Participant ’ s willingness to persuade others to get vaccinated • Their fear of those who have not been vaccinated • The social judgment of those who choose not to vaccinate Harvard Business School in collaboration with the Sloan School of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have also published a working paper18 comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors .
Considering the messages we ’ ve been bombarded with over the past few months — calling people who don ’ t wear masks “ grandma killers ” and so on — it seems clear that results from these kinds of investigations have been capitalized on .
In that paper , “ Don ’ t Get It or Don ’ t Spread It ?
” the authors review studies in which various types of messages were compared — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ versus the threat you might pose to others .
Overall , prosocial messages , i.e.
, messages that stress the importance of complying with prevention behaviors in order to protect others fared the best .
According to the authors:19 A powerful essay20 in the American Institute for Economic Research asks the question : Is the lockdown the best way to minimize casualties in this pandemic ?
Using historical examples beginning with Voltaire ’ s words , “ those who can make you believe absurdities , can make you commit atrocities , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to save the world from COVID-19 , if for no other reason than whenever lockdowns are eased , infections naturally start to creep back up .
However , the vast majority of these “ infections ” or “ cases ” are asymptomatic .
A rising “ case ” load does not mean people are actually getting sick and dying .
The misuse of the medical term “ case ” is an egregious one , as historically , a “ case ” is defined as someone who has symptoms of a particular disease — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in medical history has a “ case ” meant someone who is perfectly healthy and requires testing to determine whether they are infected with a particular pathogen .
Would you get tested for the common cold or influenza if you had no symptoms ?
If the test happened to come back positive , would you with a straight face say you “ have ” a cold or the flu ?
There are other myths , mostly scare tactics , that people are willingly believing that need to be stopped now , too , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s time to start questioning what is credulous and what is not .
I encourage you to read that essay in its totality .
Another article21 well worth reading is Mark Petrakis ’ “ The Fatal Attraction of Techno-Fascism.
” This one also starts off with an excellent quote by Cato the Elder : “ Those who are serious in ridiculous matters will be ridiculous in serious matters.
” One of the first points he makes is that fascism is attractive because : Petrakis goes on to discuss why propaganda and disinformation is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fascist regime , and how truth is a liability that must be disallowed and penalized .
In the end , the price we pay for this kind of intellectual laziness is “ soul-crushing denial and disconnection.
” No one who has been paying attention this past year in particular can have missed that propaganda is in full swing , 24/7 , and that both truthful facts and personal opinions that run counter to the established propaganda narrative are being censored and penalized in equal measure .
When it comes to COVID-19 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it has actually shattered what Petrakis refers to as “ the grandest illusion of all ” that “ must be maintained at all costs , ” namely the appearance that the propaganda messages are randomly generated .
“ It must always appear that the media ’ s coverage and the comments of experts are entirely free from any preconceived manipulation , ” he says .
Today , there is little doubt that the narrative we see is anything but free from bias .
There ’ s little doubt that what we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to quote Petrakis yet again .
Ultimately , the economic system known as technocracy is tailor-made for the transhumanist revolution — which I touch upon in “ Will New COVID Vaccine Make You Transhuman ?
” — where man is merged with technology and AI .
As always , the lure will be greater convenience , self-improvement and “ a better world for all.
” What ’ s never mentioned is the ultimate price .
The price for all of it is complete subjugation to faceless leaders who profit from your every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of them .
I ’ ll end this with some observations by British Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption , who in a March 30 , 2020 , interview22 with The Post warned that COVID-19 rules are paving the way for despotism — the exercise of absolute power in a cruel and oppressive manner .
It is time to ask ourselves some very pressing questions .
Is it reasonable to expect government to eliminate ALL infection and ALL death ?
They ’ ve proven they can not , yet we keep relinquishing more and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing so will keep everyone safer .
It ’ s an enticing lie , but a lie nonetheless .
Remember , they sold us on the business shutdowns and home quarantining by saying we just need to flatten the curve of infection to avoid hospital overcrowding .
Now the curve is in a visible nosedive and hospitals are far from overcrowded with COVID-19 patients , yet lockdowns remain in many areas and some — Australia being a prime example — have reached astonishing new heights .
Sooner or later everyone must decide which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ false security ?
Circling back to where I started , the good news is that many are in fact starting to see the writing on the wall ; they ’ re starting to see we ’ ve been “ had , ” and are starting to choose liberty over brutal totalitarianism in the name of public health .

A Global Uprising is Underway
Dr. Mercola, Guest
Waking Times
After six months of intermittent or in some cases near-continuous lockdowns, many have reached their limit and uprisings are finally emerging around the world. The last week of August 2020 saw gatherings of tens of thousands of individuals in Berlin,1 London2 and Dublin,3 protesting stay-at-home orders, business closures, mask and vaccine mandates and Bill Gates’ dictatorial grip on public health matters.
In the U.S., a protest took place August 30, 2020, in Boston, Massachusetts, against a new student flu vaccination mandate,4 and in Virginia, protesters gathered September 2 in opposition of unconstitutional COVID-19 mandates.5
These are just a few of the many demonstrations that have taken place in recent weeks around the world, as people are starting to realize their human rights are being stripped away over a virus with a lethality on par with that of seasonal influenza and other pandemic viruses, none of which was responded to with a global shutdown of economies and forced quarantining of healthy individuals.
COVID-19 — A Massive Brainwashing Scheme?
In recent weeks and months, more and more experts have come out sharing what they know about the roles of Big Tech, Big Pharma and global health organizations such as the World Health Organization in the creation of a new technocratic world order.
If you missed my interview with financial analyst Patrick Wood, in which he details the technocratic take-over plan, which has been in play for decades, be sure to review it now. Other articles shedding light on what’s happening behind the scenes include “Harvard Professor Exposes Google and Facebook,” featuring a documentary with professor Shoshana Zuboff, and “Plandemic Part 2.”
When you start to put all the puzzle pieces together, it seems clear this pandemic is being used as a cover story for both a global wealth redistribution scheme, and for the implementation of a technocratic system of totalitarian rule by unelected leaders.
The WHO seems to be part and parcel of this global network. While the U.S. has severed ties with the organization, Big Tech is still promoting the WHO as a final arbiter of which views are acceptable and which are not — medical expertise and scientific achievements be damned.
As reported by Reclaim the Net,6 the WHO eavesdrops on everything you do online, from reviewing your social media interactions to analyzing your emotions. To counteract “spread of misleading information” about the pandemic — which was a key area of focus during Event 201 — the WHO has partnered with an analytics company that uses machine learning analysis to scan more than 1.6 million social media posts per week.
The aim of this “social listening approach”— a nicer term than good old-fashioned spying — is to counteract anything that doesn’t align with the WHO’s current narrative on illnesses, treatments, interventions and causes of disease.
Aiding them in this dystopian censoring process is the United Nations, which has launched an army of 10,000 digital volunteers who troll the internet for “false” information and opposing views.
On top of that, most social media platforms have their own highly biased “fact-checkers” who censor for all they’re worth. Back in April 2020, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, wife of Google product director Dennis Troper, announced they would ban and remove any video from the platform that contradicts the WHO.7
Countless examples of wanton censorship of perfectly valid medical and scientific information across all social media platforms and Google can be found at this point.
Just How Deadly Is COVID-19?
According to groundbreaking data8 recently released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, only 6% of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate.
Six percent of 169,044 (the total death toll as of September 2) is 10,143. “For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death,” the CDC states. As reported by Rochester First,9 the top underlying medical conditions included influenza, pneumonia, respiratory failure, high blood pressure, diabetes, dementia, heart problems and renal failure.
However, the list also includes 5,424 intentional and unintentional injury and poisoning deaths, so basically, accidents and suicides in which the individual just happened to test positive (or was suspected of being positive for SARS-CoV-2) are also included in the grand total.
(Please note, these data were accurate as of this writing. The CDC does not notate when data is altered as new death certificates come in, so the numbers may therefore be different from what is reported here, depending on when you’re looking at it. For the most up-to-date figures, see the CDC’s website.10)
The fact that only 6% of COVID-19-related deaths are directly attributable to SARS-CoV-2 is bad news when you’re trying to keep a doomsday narrative going. In what appears to be a blatant attempt to minimize exposure of these data, social media platforms have censored many trying to share it.11
As noted by independent news commentator Tim Pool in the video below, fact-checkers are digging into nitpicky semantics in their effort to censor the CDC data, and in so doing, they’re really stretching the “false” claim ultrathin.
Similar data have emerged from Palm Beach County, Florida, where an investigation by CBS 1212 I-Team revealed only 86 of the reported 658 COVID-19 deaths had “COVID-19 pneumonia” listed as the sole cause of death.
All others had multiple comorbidities, including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and dementia. As noted by CBS 12, “Most Palm Beach County COVID deaths cannot be attributed to COVID alone.”
While Dr. Terry Adirim, senior associate dean at the Florida Atlantic University College of Medicine, told the I-Team that “it makes sense to count them [people with comorbid conditions] toward COVID deaths because the virus may have made an otherwise nonfatal illness like a heart condition deadly,” the converse argument can also be made.
Had it not been for them having one or more serious comorbidities, the risk of the virus to these individuals would have been minuscule, and if they got sick at all, they’d probably have survived. So, ultimately, should the virus bear the brunt of the blame?
Infection Fatality Rate on Par With the Flu
Keeping the “killer virus” narrative going much longer is probably going to become even more difficult in light of a September 2, 2020 article13 in Annals of Internal Medicine, which points out that:
“Because many cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are asymptomatic, generalizable data on the true number of persons infected are lacking, and that when calculating mortality rates from confirmed cases, you end up overestimating the infection fatality ratio (IFR).”
The paper reads, in part:14
“To calculate a true infection fatality ratio, population prevalence data are needed from large geographic areas where reliable death data also exist … We combined prevalence estimates from a statewide random sample with Indiana vital statistics data of confirmed COVID-19 deaths.
In brief, our stratified random sample consisted of state residents aged 12 years and older. Known decedents and incarcerated persons were excluded. Because nursing homes were limiting residents’ ability to leave and re-enter the facilities, their participation was unlikely.
Participants were tested from 25 April to 29 April 2020 for active viral infection and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, which would indicate prior infection … We calculated the IFR by age, race, sex, and ethnicity on the basis of the cumulative number of confirmed COVID-19 deaths as of 29 April 2020, divided by the number of infections.
Although nursing home residents were not tested, they represented 54.9% of Indiana’s deaths. Thus, we excluded nursing home residents from all calculations (that is, deaths and infections).
To account for all infections, we added the number of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the testing period and noninstitutionalized COVID-19 deaths into the denominator …
Our random-sample study estimated 187 802 cumulative infections, to which 180 hospitalizations were added. The average age among all COVID-19 decedents was 76.9 years.
The overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio was 0.26% … Persons younger than 40 years had an infection fatality ratio of 0.01%; those aged 60 or older had an infection fatality ratio of 1.71%. Whites had an infection fatality ratio of 0.18%; non-Whites had an infection fatality ratio of 0.59%.”
The estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza listed in this paper is 0.8%. So, the only people for whom SARS-CoV-2 infection is more dangerous than influenza is those over the age of 60.
All others have a lower risk of dying from COVID-19 than they have of dying from the flu. Put another way, if you’re under the age of 60, your chances of dying from the flu is greater than your chance of dying from COVID-19.
White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx also confirmed this far lower than typically reported mortality rate when she, in mid-August 2020, stated that it “becomes more and more difficult” to get people to comply with mask rules “when people start to realize that 99% of us are going to be fine.”15
Expect Massive Propaganda Campaign to Boost Vaccine Uptake
With death rates being as low as they are for everyone under the age of 60, it really weakens the rationale for vaccinating the entire world, including newborns, the risk to whom the virus poses is virtually nil.
The vaccine looking increasingly unnecessary is likely a reason for why the U.S. government is planning to launch an “overwhelming” COVID-19 vaccine campaign this fall, using carefully researched messages. As detailed in “Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century,” Yale University has conducted a trial16 to determine the type of message that will maximize acceptance and uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Messaging slants evaluated in the investigation included:17
Personal freedom message — A message about how COVID-19 is limiting people’s personal freedom and how working together to get enough people vaccinated can preserve society’s personal freedoms. Economic freedom message — A message about how COVID-19 is limiting people’s economic freedom and how, by working together to get enough people vaccinated, society can preserve its economic freedom. Self-interest message — A message that COVID-19 presents a real danger to one’s health, even if one is young and healthy, with the idea being that getting vaccinated against COVID-19 is the best way to prevent oneself from getting sick. Community interest message — A message about the dangers of COVID-19 to the health of loved ones. The idea to promote is that the more people who get vaccinated against COVID-19, the lower the risk that one’s loved ones will get sick. The idea: Society must work together and all get vaccinated. Economic benefit message — A message about how COVID-19 is wreaking havoc on the economy and the only way to strengthen the economy is to work together to get enough people vaccinated. Guilt message — This message is about the danger that COVID-19 presents to the health of one’s family and community, with the idea that the best way to protect them is by getting vaccinated, and that society must work together to get enough people vaccinated. Then it asks the participant to imagine the guilt they will feel if they don’t get vaccinated and spread the disease. Embarrassment message — This message is about the danger that COVID-19 presents to the health of one’s family and community. The idea to promote is that the best way to protect them is by getting vaccinated and by working together to make sure enough people get vaccinated. Then it asks the participant to imagine the embarrassment they will feel if they don’t get vaccinated and subsequently spread the disease. Anger message — This message is about the danger that COVID-19 presents to the health of one’s family and community. The sales idea is that the best way to protect them is by getting vaccinated and by working together to make sure that enough people get vaccinated. It then asks the participant to imagine the anger they will feel if they don’t get vaccinated and spread the disease. Trust in science message — A message about how getting vaccinated against COVID-19 is the most effective way of protecting one’s community. It promotes the idea that vaccination is backed by science, and that anyone who doesn’t get vaccinated doesn’t understand how infections are spread or who ignores science. Not bravery message — A message which describes how firefighters, doctors and front line medical workers are brave, and infers that those who choose not to get vaccinated against COVID-19 are not brave.
The study, which was completed July 8, 2020, also sought to determine:
Participant’s confidence in the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine after hearing the message in question
Participant’s willingness to persuade others to get vaccinated
Their fear of those who have not been vaccinated
The social judgment of those who choose not to vaccinate
Prosocial Pressure Tactics Work Best
Harvard Business School in collaboration with the Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, have also published a working paper18 comparing self-interested versus prosocial motivations for COVID-19 prevention behaviors.
Considering the messages we’ve been bombarded with over the past few months — calling people who don’t wear masks “grandma killers” and so on — it seems clear that results from these kinds of investigations have been capitalized on.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~ Voltaire
In that paper, “Don’t Get It or Don’t Spread It?” the authors review studies in which various types of messages were compared — messages highlighting the threat to self, versus the threat you might pose to others.
Overall, prosocial messages, i.e., messages that stress the importance of complying with prevention behaviors in order to protect others fared the best. According to the authors:19
“These results reveal that prosocial framing was more effective than self-interested framing, suggesting a potential primacy of prosocial motivations in supporting prevention intentions …
First, prosocial framing may have been relatively more effective not because prosocial motivations do more to drive prevention intentions, but rather because people believe that COVID-19 poses a greater threat to society than to themselves.
Indeed, subjects in Studies 1-2 did on average report that coronavirus posed a larger public than personal threat.
However, we find that the advantage of the Public treatment (relative to the Personal treatment) was not significantly moderated by ‘threat difference scores’ (i.e., differences between the reported personal vs. public threat of coronavirus), or significantly smaller among subjects who reported the personal threat of coronavirus to be as large or larger than the public threat …
Thus, we find evidence that the relative effectiveness of the Public treatment was not unique to subjects who saw COVID-19 as more threatening to society than to themselves.
A second possibility is that prosocial framing (which encourages people to avoid spreading coronavirus) was more effective than self-interested framing (which encourages people to avoid getting coronavirus) because people feel relatively more empowered to avoid spreading the virus.”
Stop Believing in the Lockdown
A powerful essay20 in the American Institute for Economic Research asks the question: Is the lockdown the best way to minimize casualties in this pandemic?
Using historical examples beginning with Voltaire’s words, “those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities,” the author reasons that lockdowns are not going to save the world from COVID-19, if for no other reason than whenever lockdowns are eased, infections naturally start to creep back up.
However, the vast majority of these “infections” or “cases” are asymptomatic. A rising “case” load does not mean people are actually getting sick and dying. The misuse of the medical term “case” is an egregious one, as historically, a “case” is defined as someone who has symptoms of a particular disease — someone who is actually sick.
Never in medical history has a “case” meant someone who is perfectly healthy and requires testing to determine whether they are infected with a particular pathogen. Would you get tested for the common cold or influenza if you had no symptoms? If the test happened to come back positive, would you with a straight face say you “have” a cold or the flu?
There are other myths, mostly scare tactics, that people are willingly believing that need to be stopped now, too, the author asserts — and it’s time to start questioning what is credulous and what is not. I encourage you to read that essay in its totality.
The Fatal Attraction of Techno-Fascism
Another article21 well worth reading is Mark Petrakis’ “The Fatal Attraction of Techno-Fascism.” This one also starts off with an excellent quote by Cato the Elder: “Those who are serious in ridiculous matters will be ridiculous in serious matters.” One of the first points he makes is that fascism is attractive because:
“… it requires so little from us, so little independent thought; just our basic belief and adherence to a limited set of popularly-shared directives and narratives that once fully accepted, relieve us of the need to address stubborn questions or to fret over subtle differences of opinion and feeling.
Propaganda reassures us that we are complete, that we know all there is to know, that we are rational, pragmatic and pure, that the science has been settled and that we are a part of something special.”
Petrakis goes on to discuss why propaganda and disinformation is required in order to maintain control in a fascist regime, and how truth is a liability that must be disallowed and penalized. In the end, the price we pay for this kind of intellectual laziness is “soul-crushing denial and disconnection.”
No one who has been paying attention this past year in particular can have missed that propaganda is in full swing, 24/7, and that both truthful facts and personal opinions that run counter to the established propaganda narrative are being censored and penalized in equal measure.
When it comes to COVID-19, the propaganda is so pervasive and widespread that it has actually shattered what Petrakis refers to as “the grandest illusion of all” that “must be maintained at all costs,” namely the appearance that the propaganda messages are randomly generated.
“It must always appear that the media’s coverage and the comments of experts are entirely free from any preconceived manipulation,” he says. Today, there is little doubt that the narrative we see is anything but free from bias. There’s little doubt that what we’re told is “weaponized storytelling,” to quote Petrakis yet again.
“Looking at our world, we can see that the reach and authority of the transnational global capitalists who run the world’s nation-sized casinos has been cemented. All systems are now in place, up and running LIVE on that criminal syndicate’s vast web of networks. Each one of us has by now been targeted by them for some form of surveillance and financialization …
The ‘A.I. control grids’ are all active and expanding. The technocratic agendas are now fully ready for prime-time.
We have been gradually ‘shepherded’ by propaganda and psychological torture techniques … under the ‘persistent’ control of A.I., which will guide the process of transmuting us into commodities, into plunderable assets, into digitally-regulated and genetically modified ‘livestock.’ Sadly, this is where decades of constant acquiescence to propaganda and institutional hypnosis has brought us …”
Ultimately, the economic system known as technocracy is tailor-made for the transhumanist revolution — which I touch upon in “Will New COVID Vaccine Make You Transhuman?” — where man is merged with technology and AI. As always, the lure will be greater convenience, self-improvement and “a better world for all.”
What’s never mentioned is the ultimate price. The price for all of it is complete subjugation to faceless leaders who profit from your every move, and therefore will dictate all of them.
COVID-19 Rules Mark ‘Hysterical Slide Into Police State’
I’ll end this with some observations by British Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption, who in a March 30, 2020, interview22 with The Post warned that COVID-19 rules are paving the way for despotism — the exercise of absolute power in a cruel and oppressive manner.
“The real problem is that when human societies lose their freedom, it’s not usually because tyrants have taken it away. It’s usually because people willingly surrender their freedom in return for protection against some external threat. And the threat is usually a real threat but usually exaggerated.
That’s what I fear we are seeing now. The pressure on politicians has come from the public. They want action. They don’t pause to ask whether the action will work. They don’t ask themselves whether the cost will be worth paying. They want action anyway. And anyone who has studied history will recognize here the classic symptoms of collective hysteria.
Hysteria is infectious. We are working ourselves up into a lather in which we exaggerate the threat and stop asking ourselves whether the cure may be worse than the disease.”
It is time to ask ourselves some very pressing questions. Is it reasonable to expect government to eliminate ALL infection and ALL death? They’ve proven they cannot, yet we keep relinquishing more and more freedoms and liberties because they claim doing so will keep everyone safer. It’s an enticing lie, but a lie nonetheless.
Remember, they sold us on the business shutdowns and home quarantining by saying we just need to flatten the curve of infection to avoid hospital overcrowding. Now the curve is in a visible nosedive and hospitals are far from overcrowded with COVID-19 patients, yet lockdowns remain in many areas and some — Australia being a prime example — have reached astonishing new heights.
Sooner or later everyone must decide which is more important: Personal liberty or false security? Circling back to where I started, the good news is that many are in fact starting to see the writing on the wall; they’re starting to see we’ve been “had,” and are starting to choose liberty over brutal totalitarianism in the name of public health.


wakingtimes--2020-09-15--California County Votes to End Covid State of Emergency

Get the latest Waking Times articles delivered to your inbox .
Sign up here .
The Placer County , California Board of Supervisors recently declared that they no longer consider the Covid-19 pandemic to be a ‘ state of emergency ’ requiring the most restrictive government-mandated lockdowns .
Placer county , located in the Sacramento area , has acquired a running tally of 3,325 Covid-19 cases since February , with a total of exactly 39 deaths .
The United States Census Bureau counted the Placer population at 398,329 as of July 1 , 2019 , placing the overall infection rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Placer County ’ s perceived risk level from ‘ Widespread ’ to ‘ Substantial ’ , allowing restaurants to open indoor dining at 25 % capacity and schools to re-open for all grades as they choose .
The World Health Organization believes that it is safe to reopen in areas with a testing positivity rate of less than 5 % , positioning Placer county just under the mark at 4.5 % as of August 29th .
However , the move to end the most restrictive lockdown orders spurred public health officer Dr. Aimee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Covid-19 have caused an outbreak of drug abuse , suicide , and domestic violence across the country .
By forcing millions of people who were already battling depression , addiction , and abuse out of a job and isolating them in their homes , state governments have precipitated irreversible damage in the lives of many Americans across the entire country .
Masks come with their own problems too as dentists have noticed an alarming rate of gingivitis since mask-wearing mandates began , including among patients who have never had dental problems before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this phenomenon “ Mask Mouth ” .
When the pandemic began , we were told the lockdowns would last ’ 15 days to slow the spread , ’ specifically to prevent hospitals from becoming overfilled .
However , now that those issues have long passed it seems that globalist bureaucrats and state governors are only interested in keeping America shut down until a lucrative coronavirus vaccine is widely available , which could take years .
We know that lockdowns are not necessary in every area , particularly in those with a low rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sweden declined to lock down their country from the start of the pandemic and are faring quite well in regard to immunity .
Perhaps it is time we discuss reopening with or without a vaccine , rather than continuing to lock down America for what may be years to come .
About the Author Phillip Schneider is a staff writer and assistant editor for Waking Times .
For more of his work , you can visit his Website , Facebook Page , or follow him on the free speech social network Minds .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ End Covid State of Emergency ) originally appeared at PhillipSchneider.com and may be re-posted freely with proper attribution , author credit , and this copyright statement .

California County Votes to End Covid State of Emergency
Phillip Schneider, Staff Writer
Waking Times
The Placer County, California Board of Supervisors recently declared that they no longer consider the Covid-19 pandemic to be a ‘state of emergency’ requiring the most restrictive government-mandated lockdowns.
“Our case numbers are so low, it doesn’t warrant a shutdown,” said Placer County Board chairwoman Bonnie Gore.
Placer county, located in the Sacramento area, has acquired a running tally of 3,325 Covid-19 cases since February, with a total of exactly 39 deaths. The United States Census Bureau counted the Placer population at 398,329 as of July 1, 2019, placing the overall infection rate around 0.008%.
“We will continue to encourage our residents and businesses to take precautions, but our businesses and community will continue to suffer if we cannot allow them to reopen as much as possible,” said Gore.
This move downgrades Placer County’s perceived risk level from ‘Widespread’ to ‘Substantial’, allowing restaurants to open indoor dining at 25% capacity and schools to re-open for all grades as they choose.
“We have reiterated from the beginning that there would not be a ‘one size fits all solution,’” said Placer County Office of Education Spokeswoman Michelle Eklund. “Each school district has unique challenges, student needs and capacity… Our goal is to support districts in safely reopening – and staying open.”
The World Health Organization believes that it is safe to reopen in areas with a testing positivity rate of less than 5%, positioning Placer county just under the mark at 4.5% as of August 29th. However, the move to end the most restrictive lockdown orders spurred public health officer Dr. Aimee Sisson to resign in protest.
“Today’s action by the Placer County Board of Supervisors made it clear that I can no longer effectively serve in my role as Placer County Health Officer and Public Health Director. – Dr. Aimee Sisson
Lockdowns from Covid-19 have caused an outbreak of drug abuse, suicide, and domestic violence across the country. By forcing millions of people who were already battling depression, addiction, and abuse out of a job and isolating them in their homes, state governments have precipitated irreversible damage in the lives of many Americans across the entire country.
Masks come with their own problems too as dentists have noticed an alarming rate of gingivitis since mask-wearing mandates began, including among patients who have never had dental problems before. In response, they began calling this phenomenon “Mask Mouth”.
“The difference is, she and the governor and the state have been very focused on COVID health and I have looked at this as a public health issue [beyond] COVID, how it is affecting our mental health and our emotional health of our residents.” – Bonnie Gore
When the pandemic began, we were told the lockdowns would last ’15 days to slow the spread,’ specifically to prevent hospitals from becoming overfilled. However, now that those issues have long passed it seems that globalist bureaucrats and state governors are only interested in keeping America shut down until a lucrative coronavirus vaccine is widely available, which could take years.
“I think looking in the rear view mirror, we can see that emergency never materialized and we’re fully justified in calling the end of the state of emergency, and in fact I believe we have an obligation to call an end to the local state of emergency,” said Kirk Uhler, a Supervisor who represents the areas of north Roseville and Granite Bay.
We know that lockdowns are not necessary in every area, particularly in those with a low rate of Covid-19 infection. For example, Sweden declined to lock down their country from the start of the pandemic and are faring quite well in regard to immunity. Perhaps it is time we discuss reopening with or without a vaccine, rather than continuing to lock down America for what may be years to come.
About the Author
Phillip Schneider is a staff writer and assistant editor for Waking Times. For more of his work, you can visit his Website, Facebook Page, or follow him on the free speech social network Minds.
This article (California County Votes to End Covid State of Emergency) originally appeared at PhillipSchneider.com and may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author credit, and this copyright statement.


wakingtimes--2020-09-15--America’s 1984: Welcome To The Hate

America’s 1984: Welcome To The Hate

America ’ s 1984 : Welcome To The Hate Get the latest Waking Times articles delivered to your inbox .
Sign up here .
Is it time for The Hate ?
It ’ s a question that we , like the protagonist of George Orwell ’ s dystopian 1984 , may be asking ourselves now as we tune into a news program or click on our favorite website .
For Orwell ’ s Winston Smith , the Two Minutes Hate occurs at 11:00 a.m. as coworkers assemble in front of a telescreen .
Together they watch as Emmanuel Goldstein , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedom of speech and an end to war .
And together they scream , kick their chairs , and hurl books at Goldstein ’ s image .
The scene reveals the devastating effects of sustained hatred .
After thirty seconds , half of the spectators are enraged .
By the second minute , they are in a frenzy .
As Smith reflects , It ’ s Oceania ’ s 1984 .
But it ’ s becoming America ’ s , too , as any news program or social media feed will confirm .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ could start a fire we may never extinguish .
But how are we to stop it ?
Start with language .
In 1984 , one editor of the dictionary of Newspeak rhapsodizes about the destruction of words .
By eliminating phrases , the Party destroys the ability of people not only to express ideas but to think them : “ In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible , because there will be no words in which to express it.
” What words have ceased to exist in this dystopia ?
Honor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name a few .
One can not demand something one can not express .
Today we might build our own list , starting with civility .
It is elitist , we are told , to insist on treating other individuals with dignity and courtesy .
To use it in some contexts , particularly at universities , is to incite a frenzy akin to The Hate .
To be safe , one must use sanctioned slogans , such as those in 1984 : “ War is Peace , ” “ Freedom is Slavery , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now we are on the verge of creating new slogans , such as “ Riots are Peaceful Protests , ” “ Unequal Treatment is Equity , ” “ Looting is Justice.
” After all , looting is “ a political mode of action ” that “ attacks the idea of property ” and the way in which it ’ s “ unjust.
” Perhaps people really believe these mantras .
Or perhaps they know that today ’ s Big Brothers are watching , ready to cancel them as quickly as the Party vaporizes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resist , because as our language shrinks and twists , so does our ability to think .
This is one of the two aims of the Party in 1984 : to conquer the earth and “ to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought.
” In fact , the individual hardly matters in such a world .
We are only members of a tribe , pieces of a body .
“ Can you not understand , ” a Party member tells Winston , “ that the individual is only a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflect or judge .
This is why the Hate escalates .
And because our culture , like Orwell ’ s 1984 , is bent on rewriting or canceling history , we are losing the sources that would enable us to fight this trend morally as well as politically .
Consider Adam Smith ’ s warning in The Theory of Moral Sentiments that in a nation distracted by faction , a “ spirit of system ” takes hold , inflaming the public “ to the madness of fanaticism.
” “ Intoxicated ” by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advocates fall for their own sophistry .
Only a few individuals “ preserve their judgment untainted by the general contagion.
” And so our ability to consult our conscience , our impartial spectator , the demi-god within , diminishes .
We turn instead to the mob .
“ We can have things for free ” Today , politicians and activists inflame mobs with lies that confirm the orthodoxy , which in 1984 means “ not thinking—not needing to think .
Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.
” And the most popular lies concern property .
Consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ It also attacks the very way in which food and things are distributed .
It attacks the idea of property , and it attacks the idea that in order for someone to have a roof over their head or have a meal ticket , they have to work for a boss , in order to buy things that people just like them somewhere else in the world had to make under the same conditions .
It points to the way in which that ’ s unjust .
And the reason that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obviously , is for the profit of the people who own the stores and the factories .
So you get to the heart of that property relation , and demonstrate that without police and without state oppression , we can have things for free.
” Never mind the process of exchange .
Never mind the individual innovation that creates the products that are exchanged .
Simply take away the police and “ state oppression ” and businessmen , and we can all have things for free .
Why didn ’ t Adam Smith @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no great shakes at economics , she ’ s brilliant at Hate .
Looting , she enthuses , “ provides people with an imaginative sense of freedom and pleasure and helps them imagine a world that could be.
” She adds , “ riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.
” With the promise of such delights , no wonder activists have a following .
In fact , they seem to have taken Orwell ’ s depiction of Hate Week in 1984 as a guide .
Certainly we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ savagery along with Orwellian phrasing : CHAZ was merely a block party , a “ summer of love.
” It ’ s time to interrupt the current of Hate , time to name both its causes and the long-term effects on individualism and prosperity .
Contra 1984 , Freedom is not Slavery .
By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge Like Waking Times on Facebook .
Follow Waking Times on Twitter .

America’s 1984: Welcome To The Hate
Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge
Waking Times
Is it time for The Hate?
It’s a question that we, like the protagonist of George Orwell’s dystopian 1984, may be asking ourselves now as we tune into a news program or click on our favorite website.
For Orwell’s Winston Smith, the Two Minutes Hate occurs at 11:00 a.m. as coworkers assemble in front of a telescreen. Together they watch as Emmanuel Goldstein, designated enemy of the Party, demands freedom of speech and an end to war. And together they scream, kick their chairs, and hurl books at Goldstein’s image.
The scene reveals the devastating effects of sustained hatred. After thirty seconds, half of the spectators are enraged. By the second minute, they are in a frenzy. As Smith reflects,
“The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Within thirty seconds any pretense was always unnecessary. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness… seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic.”
It’s Oceania’s 1984. But it’s becoming America’s, too, as any news program or social media feed will confirm.
Left uninterrupted, the current of hate could start a fire we may never extinguish. But how are we to stop it?
“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words”
Start with language. In 1984, one editor of the dictionary of Newspeak rhapsodizes about the destruction of words. By eliminating phrases, the Party destroys the ability of people not only to express ideas but to think them: “In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.”
What words have ceased to exist in this dystopia? Honor, justice, and morality, to name a few. One cannot demand something one cannot express.
Today we might build our own list, starting with civility. It is elitist, we are told, to insist on treating other individuals with dignity and courtesy. To use it in some contexts, particularly at universities, is to incite a frenzy akin to The Hate.
To be safe, one must use sanctioned slogans, such as those in 1984: “War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” “Ignorance is Strength.”
And now we are on the verge of creating new slogans, such as “Riots are Peaceful Protests,” “Unequal Treatment is Equity,” “Looting is Justice.” After all, looting is “a political mode of action” that “attacks the idea of property” and the way in which it’s “unjust.”
Perhaps people really believe these mantras. Or perhaps they know that today’s Big Brothers are watching, ready to cancel them as quickly as the Party vaporizes its opponents.
“To extinguish . . . the possibility of independent thought”
But we have to resist, because as our language shrinks and twists, so does our ability to think. This is one of the two aims of the Party in 1984: to conquer the earth and “to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought.”
In fact, the individual hardly matters in such a world. We are only members of a tribe, pieces of a body. “Can you not understand,” a Party member tells Winston, “that the individual is only a cell?”
A cell does not reflect or judge. This is why the Hate escalates. And because our culture, like Orwell’s 1984, is bent on rewriting or canceling history, we are losing the sources that would enable us to fight this trend morally as well as politically.
Consider Adam Smith’s warning in The Theory of Moral Sentiments that in a nation distracted by faction, a “spirit of system” takes hold, inflaming the public “to the madness of fanaticism.” “Intoxicated” by the beauty of a new system, its advocates fall for their own sophistry. Only a few individuals “preserve their judgment untainted by the general contagion.”
And so our ability to consult our conscience, our impartial spectator, the demi-god within, diminishes. We turn instead to the mob.
“We can have things for free”
Today, politicians and activists inflame mobs with lies that confirm the orthodoxy, which in 1984 means “not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
And the most popular lies concern property. Consider Vicky Osterweil’s justification for looting:
“It also attacks the very way in which food and things are distributed. It attacks the idea of property, and it attacks the idea that in order for someone to have a roof over their head or have a meal ticket, they have to work for a boss, in order to buy things that people just like them somewhere else in the world had to make under the same conditions. It points to the way in which that’s unjust. And the reason that the world is organized that way, obviously, is for the profit of the people who own the stores and the factories. So you get to the heart of that property relation, and demonstrate that without police and without state oppression, we can have things for free.”
Never mind the process of exchange. Never mind the individual innovation that creates the products that are exchanged. Simply take away the police and “state oppression” and businessmen, and we can all have things for free.
Why didn’t Adam Smith think of that?
But if Osterweil is no great shakes at economics, she’s brilliant at Hate. Looting, she enthuses, “provides people with an imaginative sense of freedom and pleasure and helps them imagine a world that could be.” She adds, “riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.”
With the promise of such delights, no wonder activists have a following. In fact, they seem to have taken Orwell’s depiction of Hate Week in 1984 as a guide. Certainly we have seen recent examples of delirium and savagery along with Orwellian phrasing: CHAZ was merely a block party, a “summer of love.”
It’s time to interrupt the current of Hate, time to name both its causes and the long-term effects on individualism and prosperity. Contra 1984, Freedom is not Slavery.
By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge
Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.


wakingtimes--2020-09-18--The Little-Known Sordid History Of Psychiatry

Get the latest Waking Times articles delivered to your inbox .
Sign up here .
Dr. Peter Breggin , a psychiatrist , has written more than a dozen bestselling books on psychiatry and the drug industry .
He ’ s frequently referred to as “ the conscience of psychiatry ” because he ’ s been able to successfully reform the psychiatric profession , abolishing one of the most harmful practices , namely lobotomies and other experimental psychosurgeries .
He was the first to take a public stand against lobotomies as a young man , and was able to change the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s featured in Aaron and Melissa Dykes ’ excellent documentary , “ The Minds of Men.
” 1 Now 83 years old , Breggin has seen a lot , and in this interview , he shares his own evolution and experiences as a psychiatrist .
His interest in psychiatry began at the age of 18 , when he became a volunteer at a local state mental hospital .
Breggin eventually became the leader of that volunteer program .
He and 200 other students painted the walls and took patients for walks .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per volunteer aid , to build real relationships .
The superintendent balked at the idea , but eventually gave in .
Breggin tells this story in his book , “ Toxic Psychiatry.
” 2 All of this is what motivated Breggin to go into psychiatry , in order to help reform the profession from the inside .
Interestingly , as early as 1963 , Jerry Klerman , who later became the highest-ranking psychiatrist in the federal government and a professor at Harvard , told Breggin there was no future in helping people strengthen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Klerman told him , was in drugs , and using computers to decide which drugs to use .
After his first year at Harvard medical school , Breggin left and went back to the Upstate Medical Center ( University ) in New York , where he had already done internship .
Breggin focused on helping people without medication .
“ I learned very quickly that the most disturbed people would calm down and relate when somebody cared about them , wasn ’ t afraid of them , was interested in them and made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he says .
Drugs , he explains , were simply stifling the patients .
While they might ease some of the suffering , that relief came at the expense of brain damage .
Breggin goes on to tell the story of how he prevented the return of lobotomies and psychosurgeries — strategies in which the brain is purposely damaged through electric shocks , radium chip implants or puncturing the prefrontal area of the brain with an ice pick inserted next to the eyeball , for example .
Breggin refers to lobotomies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the permanent mutilation of an individual ’ s selfhood , as damage to one area of the brain will harm the integration of the whole brain .
As noted by Breggin , you can not “ plop out aggression ” like a pit out of an olive .
The brain doesn ’ t work like that .
It ’ s an integrated organ and mental processes arise from integrated processes involving many different areas of the brain .
He decided somebody had to stop the madness .
And , while he received no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ professor , and came under vehement attack by the establishment , including threats of physical violence against himself and his family that at times necessitated the use of bodyguards .
Breggin eventually succeeded .
It ’ s a fascinating story , so I highly recommend listening to the whole interview .
When asked why he took on this formidable fight , he says : The end of lobotomies was brought about by a lawsuit filed by a young lawyer named Gabe Kaimowitz on behalf of a chronically hospitalized patient who had been promised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ underwent experimental psychosurgery .
Breggin tells the story : It ’ s important to realize just how important this was , to put a stop to the return of lobotomies and experimental psychosurgeries .
It was widely accepted as a practical solution for all sorts of problems , including race riots and behavioral problems among young children .
The beginning of the end of psychosurgery was the early 1970s .
At that time , Breggin , who for most of his career struggled to get support , got the support of the Congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social consequences of psychosurgery being used on black children , as well as certain conservative Senators who thought it was immoral .
The Dangers of Speaking Out Against Prozac Breggin also had a hand in getting the word out about the dangers of Prozac .
In his 1991 book , “ Toxic Psychiatry , ” he briefly mentioned Prozac is likely to do a lot of harm , and that there were already reports of the drug causing violent aggression .
He was later asked to be the sole scientific expert to put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Eli Lilly , in which patients or their families claimed the drug had caused violent episodes , suicide , homicide , mania or psychosis .
The drama and intrigue surrounding this trial rivals any good spy novel , so for more details , listen to the interview .
As just one example , at the time of his deposition against Eli Lilly , he , his wife and daughter all developed severe illness .
By chance , a plumber they ’ d called in to fix a problem in the basement discovered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been disconnected and was laying out of sight , as if purposely hidden , pumping gas into the house .
Before that , the family had received death threats , and Breggin had called the FBI .
Agents claiming to be FBI had visited his family , but something obviously wasn ’ t right .
In broad strokes , the Eli Lilly trial turned out to be fixed in Eli Lilly ’ s favor and Breggin was set up to fail in his investigation .
The plaintiffs lost the case and Eli Lilly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ however , evidence emerged showing Eli Lilly lawyers had bribed some of the plaintiffs and arranged for a secret settlement provided they lost the case .
A Supreme Court judge in Kentucky declared the trial a fraud and changed the verdict to “ a secret settlement with prejudice.
” When the judge decided to disclose the amount of the secret settlement , he was removed and replaced with another judge who decided the settlement amount was not to be disclosed as it might hurt Eli Lilly .
The full details of this remarkable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s book , “ Medication Madness.
” 3 One psychiatric treatment Breggin has not been able to eliminate is electroshock treatment ( ECT ) , which is actually starting to be used more and more .
Breggin says : Breggin also discusses the hazards of transcranial direct current stimulation and Neuralink , a transcranial implant designed by the Elon Musk Company .
Elon is probably doing this because he ’ s concerned about the integration of artificial intelligence , which is coming .
He fears the human race could become subservient to artificial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preservation strategies is to allow us to sort of keep pace with these advances .
Breggin comments :

The Little-Known Sordid History Of Psychiatry
Dr. Mercola, Guest
Waking Times
Dr. Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist, has written more than a dozen bestselling books on psychiatry and the drug industry. He’s frequently referred to as “the conscience of psychiatry” because he’s been able to successfully reform the psychiatric profession, abolishing one of the most harmful practices, namely lobotomies and other experimental psychosurgeries.
He was the first to take a public stand against lobotomies as a young man, and was able to change the field as a result. He’s featured in Aaron and Melissa Dykes’ excellent documentary, “The Minds of Men.”1
Now 83 years old, Breggin has seen a lot, and in this interview, he shares his own evolution and experiences as a psychiatrist. His interest in psychiatry began at the age of 18, when he became a volunteer at a local state mental hospital.
“It was a nightmare,” he says. “It was like my uncle Dutch’s descriptions of liberating a Nazi concentration camp. The place stank. People were sitting in these bare, barren concrete corridors.
They had a TV set that wasn’t working … and bolted down tables and chairs so the people couldn’t throw them at each other. No attention being given to them at all. Often just sitting there; some hallucinating, and somebody told me that the girl in the corner coiled up in a ball on the floor by a radiator had been a Radcliffe student …
The doctors were callous, the aids were callous, there was just no love in the place at all. I could tell, even though I didn’t really have much experience growing up with love, I could feel that what was missing was love, care, nurturing. It was so clear.”
Toxic Psychiatry
Breggin eventually became the leader of that volunteer program. He and 200 other students painted the walls and took patients for walks. He asked the superintendent to assign one patient per volunteer aid, to build real relationships. The superintendent balked at the idea, but eventually gave in. Breggin tells this story in his book, “Toxic Psychiatry.”2
“We ended up getting almost every patient out of that hospital,” he says. “We got them placed in different places that were much better. We got some back with their families. It was so clear to me that this was the way to go …
I watched electroshock and insulin coma shock where people would come in and they’d give them overdoses of insulin to send them into coma. They’d be frothing at the mouth, unconscious, having seizures and getting ready to die, literally. Then they would give them orange juice or sugar water and they would become alert again.
It was so clear to me what was going on. People would come in full of energy — angry, depressed, anxious and often resistant … They’d get this injection of insulin to knock them out, killing them, basically, but when they came awake they were like puppies. They were grateful, they said ‘Thank you, I feel like you saved me.’ They’d be docile … There’s no fooling about what this was. I knew exactly what it was.
I knew what shock treatment was … I’ve been fighting this, but we’re still doing it … It’s when they put electrodes on the forehead of the brain … You get a shock of a voltage … 10 times what you need to give convulsions … and it makes docility. It makes people out of touch with themselves. It makes people unable to complain … [Elevated mood] is the artificial euphoria [caused by] brain damage. This is very brain damaging.”
All of this is what motivated Breggin to go into psychiatry, in order to help reform the profession from the inside. Interestingly, as early as 1963, Jerry Klerman, who later became the highest-ranking psychiatrist in the federal government and a professor at Harvard, told Breggin there was no future in helping people strengthen their mental resilience.
The future, Klerman told him, was in drugs, and using computers to decide which drugs to use. After his first year at Harvard medical school, Breggin left and went back to the Upstate Medical Center (University) in New York, where he had already done internship.
“Then I went on to the National Institute of Mental Health … for two years. There I saw clearly what was happening. Psychiatry was leaving the psychosocial model behind.
My volunteer program had already been described by the last big Federal Commission on Mental Health. It’s mentioned two or three times and described as one of the solutions to the vast mental hospital problems … Nothing about drugs, drugging and shocking people in it.
It was much more real, much more about what was really going on with human beings and human sufferings, spiritual, psychological. I could just see this writing on the wall and I was not sure what to do. I was invited to stay at the National Institute of Mental Health.
I accepted briefly, in the child division. I was very interested in helping children. Then I thought, I can’t do this. I gave them warning without even having a job that I was leaving. I didn’t know what else to do, so I went into private practice.”
Breggin Spearheaded Drug-Free Psychiatry
Breggin focused on helping people without medication. “I learned very quickly that the most disturbed people would calm down and relate when somebody cared about them, wasn’t afraid of them, was interested in them and made no pretense of being superior to them,” he says. Drugs, he explains, were simply stifling the patients. While they might ease some of the suffering, that relief came at the expense of brain damage.
Breggin goes on to tell the story of how he prevented the return of lobotomies and psychosurgeries — strategies in which the brain is purposely damaged through electric shocks, radium chip implants or puncturing the prefrontal area of the brain with an ice pick inserted next to the eyeball, for example.
Breggin refers to lobotomies as a rape of the soul, the permanent mutilation of an individual’s selfhood, as damage to one area of the brain will harm the integration of the whole brain. As noted by Breggin, you cannot “plop out aggression” like a pit out of an olive. The brain doesn’t work like that. It’s an integrated organ and mental processes arise from integrated processes involving many different areas of the brain.
So many people now know that drugs are dangerous and shock treatment is horrible. But, the power of psychiatry grows and the drug companies grow … and more and more people are being recruited by all the ads and all the fake science.
He decided somebody had to stop the madness. And, while he received no support from any other well-known psychiatrist or professor, and came under vehement attack by the establishment, including threats of physical violence against himself and his family that at times necessitated the use of bodyguards.
Breggin eventually succeeded. It’s a fascinating story, so I highly recommend listening to the whole interview. When asked why he took on this formidable fight, he says:
“When I saw what was being done to people, I said ‘Somebody has to do this. I have no choice about this.’ I had no idea what I was up against. I had no idea that everywhere there would be enemies; that I’d be threatened with violence.
When I was invited to speak by Harvard Medical students, that people would rip down all the signs about the meeting; that there’d be blowback on the students and stuff like that. I had no idea what I was walking into.”
The Lawsuit That Ended Lobotomies
The end of lobotomies was brought about by a lawsuit filed by a young lawyer named Gabe Kaimowitz on behalf of a chronically hospitalized patient who had been promised release from the mental hospital if he underwent experimental psychosurgery. Breggin tells the story:
“[Kaimowitz] found out they were going to do a psychosurgery experimentation in the state hospital with a local university, Wayne’s State. It was all set up to go. He intervened. In fact, the case is called by his name, which is unusual … Kaimowitz v. The Department of Mental Health Wayne State University.
A three-judge panel met about the case. This [patient] had been interviewed by the Commissioner of Mental Health. He had been chronically hospitalized and then allegedly had sexually assaulted a nurse or something, but there was no record of it and certainly no adjudication about it; no meetings about it. He was a lifetime patient.
The Commissioner told him he could get out if he underwent the psychosurgery. Well, the judges looked over his case and decided that, first, he was going to be discharged because he was being held illegally. They discharged John Doe. Then the state said, ‘Well, the case is over.’ They said ‘No. You guys have set up this whole thing. We’re going to look at it.’
Well, I was the go-to person as … [Kaimowitz] brought me in. I couldn’t testify the first day because they were filibustering me. They wanted to force me to stay overnight so that … they’d have the whole weekend to review the case with the surgeons. Follow me?
Of course, they’re forcing me into testifying in the afternoon, filibustering in the morning. Gabe said, ‘This is really too bad because now they’re going to have the whole weekend to talk about your testimony with the surgeons.’ I said, ‘No, no, no. We’ll filibuster back. I’ll testify on something else for the afternoon.’ He said, ‘How are you going to do that?’
I said, ‘Well, I’ll talk about the history of psychiatry. I’m going to tie it into the extermination camps, which were very much modeled on state mental hospitals. Show the comparison and hopefully the judges will invoke the Nuremberg Code, which says that, of course, that man couldn’t volunteer in a state mental hospital because he’s in a total institution, just like the Nuremberg Code was applied to.
He said, ‘OK.’ I gave him a few questions and we went that afternoon and did that. Then on the following Monday, I started to talk about psychosurgery. They were so unprepared that all they could do was go through this 100-page paper that I had written …
We won the trial and it stopped, on the spot, all psychosurgery in the state hospitals in the federal programs. NIH stopped; VA stopped and all the state hospitals stopped. This was 1972-1973.”
It’s important to realize just how important this was, to put a stop to the return of lobotomies and experimental psychosurgeries. It was widely accepted as a practical solution for all sorts of problems, including race riots and behavioral problems among young children.
The beginning of the end of psychosurgery was the early 1970s. At that time, Breggin, who for most of his career struggled to get support, got the support of the Congressional Black Caucus, who could see the social consequences of psychosurgery being used on black children, as well as certain conservative Senators who thought it was immoral.
“I was the first person to criticize lobotomies in public, let alone the first psychiatrist. It was crazy. I still don’t understand human beings. I work hard about it, but I keep falling short. I couldn’t believe that I was so alone doing this,” he says.
The Dangers of Speaking Out Against Prozac
Breggin also had a hand in getting the word out about the dangers of Prozac. In his 1991 book, “Toxic Psychiatry,” he briefly mentioned Prozac is likely to do a lot of harm, and that there were already reports of the drug causing violent aggression.
He was later asked to be the sole scientific expert to put together the science for several dozen lawsuits against Eli Lilly, in which patients or their families claimed the drug had caused violent episodes, suicide, homicide, mania or psychosis. The drama and intrigue surrounding this trial rivals any good spy novel, so for more details, listen to the interview.
As just one example, at the time of his deposition against Eli Lilly, he, his wife and daughter all developed severe illness. By chance, a plumber they’d called in to fix a problem in the basement discovered the stovepipe for the gas heater had been disconnected and was laying out of sight, as if purposely hidden, pumping gas into the house.
Before that, the family had received death threats, and Breggin had called the FBI. Agents claiming to be FBI had visited his family, but something obviously wasn’t right.
“When I called the FBI back, they said they had no record of coming to see me,” Breggin says. “It got very weird … We were in this strange world. People would get angry at me in the audiences. By the way, that never happens, anymore … I want people to know, the environment has changed completely.
So many people now know that drugs are dangerous and shock treatment is horrible. But, the power of psychiatry grows and the drug companies grow … and more and more people are being recruited by all the ads and all the fake science. It is all fake science. You can look at any of my books. If you want it quicker, look up my YouTube channel.”
In broad strokes, the Eli Lilly trial turned out to be fixed in Eli Lilly’s favor and Breggin was set up to fail in his investigation. The plaintiffs lost the case and Eli Lilly was cleared of charges. Eventually, however, evidence emerged showing Eli Lilly lawyers had bribed some of the plaintiffs and arranged for a secret settlement provided they lost the case.
A Supreme Court judge in Kentucky declared the trial a fraud and changed the verdict to “a secret settlement with prejudice.” When the judge decided to disclose the amount of the secret settlement, he was removed and replaced with another judge who decided the settlement amount was not to be disclosed as it might hurt Eli Lilly. The full details of this remarkable case can be found in Breggin’s book, “Medication Madness.”3
Electroshock Treatment — A Real-World Conspiracy
One psychiatric treatment Breggin has not been able to eliminate is electroshock treatment (ECT), which is actually starting to be used more and more. Breggin says:
“I’ve worked on denting shock treatment. Then finally, a class action suit was brought against the manufacturers. They lost against the first manufacturer. There are only two [manufacturers] in North America, and I wasn’t involved. Then they called me in. Of course, they expected, again, to just get it thrown out of court.
I did a scientific brief for the judge on brain damage from ECT. The judge decided that there was sufficient evidence for brain damage to make it a jury question. This was huge. The judge focused on the single most important thing he could.
The drug company, within days, settled and put out a statement to the FDA that ECT can cause brain damage and severe memory loss. All that’s up on my website, and I’ve written blogs about it … to show you the nature of what is definitely a conspiracy of people working together toward the same aim and being evil about it.
Within days, the FDA approved ECT for the first time for treatment-resistant depression, which means nothing. It’s used more and more. It’s not less. I don’t think we slowed it down with this, but we made a big gain. We now have a record of a drug company admitting to the FDA it causes brain damage and so on.
Then the FDA with all its power comes right back and then approves ECT for the first time. They had never approved it. They tried to and there was so much opposition they didn’t do it. Then when the drug companies got hurt, it was within days that they approved it. Wow.”
On Neuralink and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Breggin also discusses the hazards of transcranial direct current stimulation and Neuralink, a transcranial implant designed by the Elon Musk Company. Elon is probably doing this because he’s concerned about the integration of artificial intelligence, which is coming.
He fears the human race could become subservient to artificial intelligence. He thinks one of the preservation strategies is to allow us to sort of keep pace with these advances. Breggin comments:
“This is the new cutting edge that I’m trying to get across to people. I have a new show. If you go to my YouTube channel and look at [my interview with] the Dykes … I did a show about this saying that this is worse than the psychiatry we have now. I’m focusing on all the electronics.
The FDA has approved electrodes on the heads of children to leave them on all night long to give them low voltage stimulation, which is going to go through the skin, back up the nerves, all the way to the frontal lobes in an entirely disruptive hammer-like, crushing way. It’s going to blunt the kids. It’s horrible. They studied it for four weeks and approved it, if you can imagine that.
It’s low voltage, but we know it disrupts brain waves. It’s bizarre that they approved this. I started to take this on and then, or actually through Aaron and Melissa, I found out about what was being done by Elon Musk. What’s interesting to me is that while Musk is so brilliant, he’s stupid about the brain. That’s probably because the neurosurgeons and psychiatrists he consults are stupid about the brain.
I mean they’re just stupid. He wants to put in multiple threadlike electrodes into the brain, into webs of neurons, and put in low voltage stimulation. This is insane. The brain can’t tolerate this. He hopes to [be able to] communicate but there’s not going to be any communication.
The brain isn’t going to talk to these electrodes. That’s not how the brain works. The brain talks to itself. It’s not going to talk to Elon Musk [or anyone else] and he’s going to disrupt the brain talking to itself. It’s a terrible thing to do.
I wish somebody who knows Elon Musk would say, ‘You ought to talk to Peter Breggin. He says your consultants are stupid.’ He’s already planning to try to get FDA approval for some neurological disorders and that’ll be the beginning of the onslaught.
Here’s the really deadly part — a part to really think about and close with — and that is that the defense department, DARPA, is funding Musk.


wakingtimes--2020-09-18--Australia Pushes New Measure To Detain COVID ‘Conspiracy Theorists’

Get the latest Waking Times articles delivered to your inbox .
Sign up here .
Weekend demonstrations have flared up in Australia over the last month , as Aussies have vented their frustrations and attempted to take back control of their communities after a surge in virus cases prompted the government to re-implement some of the world ’ s most draconian social-distancing measures .
And if there is one thing that terrifies increasingly tyrannical governments , it ’ s a loss of control of the narrative , which is why the Australian government is getting a jump start on curbing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to spread information that questions the fear-mongering being used to keep Aussie citizens under lock and key .
A new bill is expected to be debated by the Victorian government in the State Parliament this week .
It gives local authorities the power to detain “ conspiracy theorists ” and people who refuse to self-isolate , reported Caldron Pool .
If passed , the COVID-19 Omnibus ( Emergency Measures ) allows the government to detain anyone labeled as a “ high risk ” or likely to spread COVID-19 negligently .
A state government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be applied to “ conspiracy theorists who refuse to self-isolate or severely drug-affected or mentally impaired people who do not have the capacity to quarantine.
” Those arrested under the new rule will be housed in quarantine facilities .
Attorney-General Jill Hennessy said the new bill would “ allow us to continue responding to the challenges the pandemic presents , so we can keep protecting Victorians and delivering the services they rely on.
” So far , many of the anti-lockdown demonstrations have been held on the weekends .
At least 200 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a protest in Melbourne on Sunday .
If the bill is passed , some protesters would be rounded up and arrested , and could spend time in a quarantine facility .
Clearly , the government ’ s intent to extend powers and detain conspiracy theorists and those who pose a risk of spreading the virus should be alarming to readers .
In a glimpse of what is ahead , authorities have already arrested a Melbourne woman for allegedly writing pro-anti lockdown posts on social media.Notably , after widespread social media account deletions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of followers in Australia , so what comes next ?
‘ Re-education centers ’ for QAnons ?
By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge Like Waking Times on Facebook .
Follow Waking Times on Twitter .

Australia Pushes New Measure To Detain COVID ‘Conspiracy Theorists’
Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge
Waking Times
Weekend demonstrations have flared up in Australia over the last month, as Aussies have vented their frustrations and attempted to take back control of their communities after a surge in virus cases prompted the government to re-implement some of the world’s most draconian social-distancing measures.
And if there is one thing that terrifies increasingly tyrannical governments, it’s a loss of control of the narrative, which is why the Australian government is getting a jump start on curbing any so-called “conspiracy theorists” daring to spread information that questions the fear-mongering being used to keep Aussie citizens under lock and key.
A new bill is expected to be debated by the Victorian government in the State Parliament this week. It gives local authorities the power to detain “conspiracy theorists” and people who refuse to self-isolate, reported Caldron Pool.
If passed, the COVID-19 Omnibus (Emergency Measures) allows the government to detain anyone labeled as a “high risk” or likely to spread COVID-19 negligently.
A state government spokesman told The Age that the rule could be applied to “conspiracy theorists who refuse to self-isolate or severely drug-affected or mentally impaired people who do not have the capacity to quarantine.” Those arrested under the new rule will be housed in quarantine facilities. Attorney-General Jill Hennessy said the new bill would “allow us to continue responding to the challenges the pandemic presents, so we can keep protecting Victorians and delivering the services they rely on.”
So far, many of the anti-lockdown demonstrations have been held on the weekends. At least 200 people were fined and 74 arrested at a protest in Melbourne on Sunday. If the bill is passed, some protesters would be rounded up and arrested, and could spend time in a quarantine facility.
Clearly, the government’s intent to extend powers and detain conspiracy theorists and those who pose a risk of spreading the virus should be alarming to readers.
In a glimpse of what is ahead, authorities have already arrested a Melbourne woman for allegedly writing pro-anti lockdown posts on social media.Notably, after widespread social media account deletions, TheConversation notes that QAnon has attracted a lot of followers in Australia, so what comes next? ‘Re-education centers’ for QAnons?
By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge
Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.