How does Assange's arrest and Mandatory Vaccine Mandates relate? [Archive]

View Full Version : How does Assange's arrest and Mandatory Vaccine Mandates relate?

Maggie

14th April 2019, 18:12

Powder kegs and dangerous forces are evident ready to dis-assemble a very obvious need in our society. This is the need to provide checks and balances to protect us. Real journalism uncovers the truth. This enables us to access informed consent. This empowers us to cooperate for the purpose of standing up to corporatocracy which has manifested itself as a megawar machine....

The arrest of Assange has shown that the media for the most part does NOT act in the interest of truth. The "news" has been vilifying Julian Assange. This shows that the news is NOT synonomous with journalsim. The "news" is simply a mouth piece for the corporatocracy.

tw8yf6Luwo4

There is a war being waged against health. The corporatocracy does not want health. It wants managed disease. It is spear headed by the pharmacy industry which has a massive cash cow in mandatory vaccination.

UIm8fHxqUAM

There is a totally hysterical response evident now concerning measles. Many of us know the truth. The "news" has been demonizing vaccine skeptics. The imbalance of the power of the corporatocracy is also shown in the treatment of the subject of communicable disease in the media.
We are on the verge of being forced to accept mandatory vaccination. This is from 2018 and is coming to pass now.

_R0URP_IwGI

There is absolutely no time IMO for petty divisions because we are all the fuel for the maw of the machine.

They came for Dr Andrew Wakefield because he dared to ask questions about vaccines , and I did not speak out because I preferred the cosy pretence that vaccines were completely safe and effective.

Then they came for the vaccine hesitant , and I did not speak out , because I did not know about vaccine injury and deaths and just believed what the papers said about “crazy anti vaxxers”

Then they mandated vaccines on everyone , and I did not speak out because I thought personal choice and informed consent was less important than public health agendas.

Now I am vaccine injured myself because I did not read the label or do my own research and naively. (quote form the comments to the video below)

4sEXWjTyAbA

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 18:18

Assange's arrest reflects TWO things in my estimation.

The tendency for MSM to become involved in things they don't really understand but usually stand in favor of ostensible decency.

AND

The fact that Assange is a criminal rabble rouser at heart.

That has long been my belief. Assange might be looking for truth but has no interest in justice.

Fred Steeves

14th April 2019, 18:31

Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.

George Orwell

Watching "journalists" heralding the arrest of Assange is chilling. It's to be expected with our typical self absorbed and spineless politicians, but by the one's whose very job description is to hold the powers of government accountable for their actions is unconscionable. True journalism is all but dead, except in parts of the new and ever rising independent media. That's the lifeline.

It's also fascinating to observe who cheers the machine, and who jeers it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt-udg9zQSE

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 19:15

Ellsberg is full of poopoo...

He spent no time in prison AND he was an American Citizen.

Assange was releasing information regarding secret info about the USA while not a citizen...That's called espionage?

What is wrong with these people.

He has to be making money from this...

Maggie

14th April 2019, 19:57

(Ellsberg) spent no time in prison AND he was an American Citizen.

Assange was releasing information regarding secret info about the USA while not a citizen...That's called espionage?

I guess your stand on the 1st amendment is that you don't like it when people talk bad about who and what you like? Yeah, it is inconvenient for people to insist on spreading inconvenient evidence so that a myth cannot just be maintained and we will all be quietly respectful of authority... I wonder who Assange is an inconvenience to in your mind? Is it that you had a dog in that war after 9/11? What is your personal purpose in these many discussions?

Constitution of United States of America 1789 (rev. 1992)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

“Throughout American history, our government has excessively restricted public discourse in the name of national security,” University of Chicago Law Professor Geoffrey Stone told Congress at a hearing in December. Stone said that prosecuting journalists under the Espionage Act would violate the First Amendment. “Over time, we have come to understand that these episodes from our past were grievous errors in judgment in which we allowed fear and anxiety to override our good judgment and our essential commitment to individual liberty and democratic self-governance.”

Journalists have never been successfully prosecuted
As it is currently written, the Espionage Act of 1917 makes it a crime to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country by collecting or communicating information that would harm the national defense. It is also a crime to enter an installation or obtain a document connected to the national defense in order to hurt the United States or benefit a foreign country. Knowingly receiving classified information that has been obtained illegally, as well as passing it on, also runs afoul of the Espionage Act.

“The Espionage Act is so vague and poorly defined in its terms, that it’s hard to say exactly what it does and does not cover,” said Steven Aftergood, who directs the Project on Government Secrecy for the Federation of American Scientists.

The U.S. government has never successfully prosecuted anyone other than a government employee for disseminating unlawfully leaked classified information, Stone said in his testimony. Thus, the Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of such a prosecution.

The closest the Court has come to examining the issue is the famous Pentagon Papers case, New York Times v. United States, when the Court rejected the government’s attempt to prevent The New York Times and The Washington Post from publishing a leaked copy of a top secret study of the Vietnam War.

The Court’s short, unsigned opinion simply said the government had not met its heavy burden of justifying a prior restraint on publication. Concurring opinions went into more detail, reflecting the justices’ different views on the government’s ability to respond to the leaking of classified information.https://www.rcfp.org/journals/wikileaks-and-espionage-act-1917/

Ellsberg was charged with conspiracy and violating the Espionage Act of 1917. He faced a total maximum sentence of 115 years in prison; Russo faced 35. In a trial in Los Angeles that began on January 3, 1973, Ellsberg’s attorneys claimed that the documents were illegally classified, to keep them not from an enemy but rather from the American public. The judge deemed the argument “irrelevant.” Ellsberg later recalled that his “lawyer, exasperated, said he ‘had never heard of a case where a defendant was not permitted to tell the jury why he did what he did.’ The judge responded: well, you’re hearing one now. And so it has been with every subsequent whistleblower under indictment.”

But Ellsberg was saved from almost certain prison time when it came out that a secret Nixon White House team dubbed “the plumbers” burglarized the office of Ellsberg’s psychiatrist in September 1971. The FBI had also recorded numerous conversations between Ellsberg and former National Security Council member Morton Halperin without a court order. And, further, Ehrlichman had offered the judge the directorship of the FBI in a move that he interpreted as a bribe.

Citing gross governmental misconduct and illegal evidence gathering, the judge dismissed all charges against Ellsberg and Russo on May 11, 1973. In his decision, Byrne said, “The bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this case.”

Ellsberg was in the clear.https://timeline.com/pentagon-papers-famous-leak-prison-9772ec594f73

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 20:20

lol...I didn't care...I thought Hussein sucked and I think any blind condemnation of an entire 'culture' based on the action of a few sucks...That was my stake...

The 1st amendment...I'm not stuck on it...I am stuck on justice, truth, and basic human decency. I don't need laws to guide my conscience.

Maggie

14th April 2019, 20:52

The corporate control of social experience is strongly evident in the US in the 21st century. It is not JUST the military industrial complex (MIC) that now has a hold on each of us but the model is most pronounced in the corporations that manufacture weapons and the establishment of the perpetual outlets which the MIC must create to continue its profitable business.

Ike's Warning Of Military Expansion, 50 Years Later

January 17, 2011
On Jan. 17, 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower gave the nation a dire warning about what he described as a threat to democratic government. He called it the military-industrial complex, a formidable union of defense contractors and the armed forces.

Eisenhower, a retired five-star Army general, the man who led the allies on D-Day, made the remarks in his farewell speech from the White House. continue herehttps://www.npr.org/2011/01/17/132942244/ikes-warning-of-military-expansion-50-years-later

OyBNmecVtdU

Another parallel rise in corporate control of social experience is the growth and development of the Pharmaceutical industry's hold on "health care". One of the most egregious examples IMO is the vaccine industry which is neither settled science nor public health obligatory (when one reads the science and evidence of alternative methods of handling communicable disease).

Mandatory vaccination of children has been countered only by some medical and in some states religious exemption. The pharmaceutical companies are protected by the US government form legal repsonsibility in the case of injury. The CDC actually makes money itself from the production and distribution of vaccines.

Strangely a quote from ‎Martin Niemöller that I was thinking about shows up in this video also.

xEcYQydhY9E

I do think it may be a profound rallying point of view that corporate control has overwhelmed the power structure and may actually be the one issue that we can all gather to face in soldidarity? All of us will face the same kind of thumb screws when we get in the way. If we get over our petty fears and delusions that from someone and somewhere else lies the "problem", maybe we can see it is simply the benefits to living beings needing paramount emphasis. Corporations breathe no air and have no heart but they do eat money and they excrete toxic waste.

Free Speech and Shutting Down Vaccine Debate
Written by Dr. Joseph Mercola

April 06, 2019

The U.S. Constitution protects the civil liberties of all Americans, including freedom of thought, speech, conscience, religious belief and the right to dissent and petition the government.1,2,3 Yet, in recent years we've seen a frightening erosion of these civil liberties under the guise of "protecting public health."

I'm talking about the ongoing effort to shut down all public discussion about vaccine safety, of course — an effort that is now reaching a fever-pitch as online communication platforms have started actively censoring information that questions the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

The featured video, "Free Speech and Shutting Down the Vaccine Debate" by Truthstream Media, addresses this disturbing turn of events. As noted in the video, all vaccine-related videos on YouTube now carry a "Vaccine controversies" information panel, warning viewers that:

"Vaccine hesitancy is a reluctance or refusal to be vaccinated or have one's children vaccinated. Identified by the World Health Organization as one of the top 10 global health threats of 2019,4 it contradicts overwhelming scientific consensus about the safety and efficacy of vaccines."

What's Driving Growing 'Vaccine Hesitancy'?
The information panel includes a link to the "vaccine hesitancy" page on Wikipedia, which further states that "Hesitancy results from public debates around the medical, ethical and legal issues related to vaccines," and that "Despite overwhelming scientific consensus that vaccines are safe and effective, unsubstantiated scares regarding their safety still occur, resulting in outbreaks and deaths from vaccine-preventable diseases." This is propaganda at its most obnoxious, as:

a. Scientific consensus that vaccines are safe and effective does not in fact exist. On the contrary, in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that government licensed and recommended childhood vaccines mandated by states are "unavoidably unsafe."5

b. Outbreaks of infectious disease often occur in highly-vaccinated populations6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14

c. Vaccine hesitancy does NOT actually result from exposure to information about vaccine safety (or lack thereof). It's spreading because most people now know someone who was healthy, got vaccinated and became permanently unwell or disabled (or died).15,16

Widespread personal experience is the real cause behind growing "vaccine hesitancy," and this is why the vaccine industry is pushing so hard to shut down all public conversation about vaccination and eliminate all vaccine exemptions. If they succeed, then the harms can continue to be swept under the rug and their extraordinary profit center can continue to grow unimpeded.

As noted by Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) in "Taking No Prisoners in the Vaccine Culture War":

"No public health official, professor or legislator in America can explain why millions and millions of children and more than half of all adults are chronically ill or disabled.17

This is the real public health emergency that mothers and fathers want to talk about, but Congress and medical trade groups do not want to discuss. This is the elephant in the room at every public hearing on bills proposing to take away or expand vaccine informed consent rights being held in state legislatures today."

Summary of How Free Speech Is Being Dismantled in the US
The featured video, as well as several of my recent articles, discusses the growing effort to vilify (if not outright criminalize) those who express concerns about vaccine safety and to shut down free speech in the U.S. — but only speech relating to vaccine harms, not the benefits of vaccines. Here's a summary of some of the most prominent examples:

The World Health Organization lists "vaccine hesitancy" as one of the top 10 global public health threats for 2019.18

In a January interview with CBS News,19 Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) lied when he flat-out denied the fact that vaccines can cause injury or death. The fact is, the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) created under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 has paid out $4 billion in awards for vaccine damages and deaths, and that's just 31 percent of all the injury petitions filed.20,21

February 27, 2019, Fauci also lied to the U.S. House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations at its "Confronting a Growing Public Health Threat: Measles Outbreaks in the U.S." hearing.22 In his testimony, he claimed childhood vaccines like the MMR are completely safe and do not cause serious reactions, such as encephalitis (brain inflammation).23 The facts are:

a. The MMR vaccine package insert24 published by Merck states that "Encephalitis and encephalopathy have been reported approximately once for every 3 million doses of M-M-R II or measles-mumps- and rubella-containing vaccine."

b. The vaccine information statement (VIS), which doctors by federal law (under the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act) are required to give parents before their children receive a CDC recommended vaccine, states that "severe" adverse effects of the MMR25 and MMRV26 vaccines include "deafness; long-term seizures; coma; lowered consciousness; and brain damage."

One of the "moderate" adverse events listed as associated with the MMRV vaccine is encephalitis.

c. Studies have shown the MMR vaccine can cause encephalitis and encephalopathy (acute or chronic brain dysfunction).27

d. As noted in a 2015 paper in the journal Vaccine,28 "We summarize epidemiologic data on deaths following vaccination, including examples where reasonable scientific evidence exists to support that vaccination caused or contributed to deaths.

Rare cases where a known or plausible theoretical risk of death following vaccination exists include anaphylaxis, vaccine-strain systemic infection after administration of live vaccines to severely immunocompromised persons, intussusception after rotavirus vaccine, Guillain-Barré syndrome after inactivated influenza vaccine, fall-related injuries associated with syncope after vaccination, yellow fever vaccine-associated viscerotropic disease or associated neurologic disease, serious complications from smallpox vaccine including eczema vaccinatum, progressive vaccinia, postvaccinal encephalitis, myocarditis, dilated cardiomyopathy and vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis from oral poliovirus vaccine."

Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, also misinformed Congress when she stated, "There are rare instances in children with certain very specific underlying problems with their immune system in whom the vaccine is contraindicated."

She lied when she said the MMR vaccine "does not cause brain swelling and encephalitis" in healthy children, and that parents would know if their child was at risk beforehand, because their child's doctor would tell them if this were the case.29

In February, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb threatened state legislators with federal government intervention if they do not eliminate vaccine exemptions.30,31,32

California state Sen. Dr. Richard Pan, D-Sacramento, is urging the U.S. Surgeon General to push mandatory vaccinations to the top of the federal public health agenda.33,34 According to Pan, mandating vaccines, as was done for smallpox during the Revolutionary War, would "protect our right as Americans to be free of preventable diseases."

A bill has been introduced in Washington, D.C., allowing minor children of any age to get vaccines in the city without a parent's knowledge or consent after a doctor says the child is "mature" enough to make the decision.35

In recent weeks, the media have been flooded with reports of how tech platforms and social media are fueling "anti-vax" fears and spreading misinformation, and doing nothing to prevent sharing of vaccine safety-related material between users.36

Art Caplan, a bioethics professor and head of the division of medical ethics at New York University School of Medicine, has stated that "companies cannot allow themselves to be 'vehicles for misinformation contagion,'" and must take steps to censor information that might lead people to avoid vaccination.37

In response, YouTube has demonetized "anti-vaccine" channels, barring them from advertising on the platform.38

Facebook is "hiding" vaccine critical content and barring "ads that contain misinformation about vaccines."39

Pinterest is blocking search terms related to vaccines, as well as "memes and pins from sites promoting anti-vaccine propaganda"40

Amazon has removed films critical of vaccine safety from its Prime Video streaming service,41,42 as well as books discussing vaccine risks and failures and/or biomedical and holistic health treatments for autism.43

Google is burying content and videos relating to vaccine safety issues.44

The Case of Dr. Peter Hotez
The video spends quite some time dissecting the influence of Dr. Peter Hotez, and for good reason. Over the past two years, Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, has called for violent suppression of vaccine safety information, bullying parents of vaccine-injured children45 — calling them "anti-vaxxers" even though these parents are discussing their children's injuries that occurred as a result of vaccination, not because they didn't vaccinate them — classifying vaccine safety and pro-informed consent advocacy groups such as the NVIC as "hate groups" that "hate children,"46 and saying we must "snuff out" (a term typically reserved for gangster style murder) the "anti-vaccine" movement.47 He's also stated that vaccination "is not a choice; it's a responsibility."48

"Free Speech and Shutting Down the Vaccine Debate" details some of Hotez's professional history, revealing just how strong his ties to the vaccine industry are. He even published a paper last year on how to develop your "personal brand" as a scientist,49 saying he got the idea in 2012, and has been developing his brand as a "vaccinologist and autism dad" ever since, for the express purpose of combating "a well-organized and well-funded pseudoscience anti-vaccine lobby."

It's not so surprising then that Hotez is calling for nothing short of a scientific dictatorship that will control what can and cannot be said about medical and scientific topics.

On at least two occasions, including during a recent appearance on the Joe Rogan show, Hotez has suggested Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Reddit, Instagram and other online platforms should hire chief scientific officers to manage, filter and regulate content50,51 — a truly ludicrous proposition by any definition of freedom of speech.

Are Parents 'Inundated' With Anti-Vaccine Information?
According to Hotez,52,53 parents are so inundated with anti-vaccine propaganda that they don't have the opportunity to get to the truth. "The anti-vaccine lobby owns the internet right now," he told Rogan, adding there are about 500 anti-vaccine websites, and whenever you do an online search for vaccine information, all you end up with is their misinformation.

"Free Speech and Shutting Down the Vaccine Debate" demonstrates just how ridiculous that idea is, and you can test it for yourself, using whatever search engine you prefer. Simply type in any vaccine-related search term, and see what kind of results you get, and just how far you have to scroll to actually find any accurate information detailing not just the complications of infectious diseases, but also the complications of vaccines that can cause brain and immune system damage and chronic poor health.

There are about 200 million active websites today, so clearly, what Hotez labels as the "anti-vaccine lobby," even at 500 websites does not "own" or even dominate the internet by any stretch of the imagination. It's actually less than a fraction of a percent, 0.00025 percent to be exact.

Citing information from an SEO expert, the video reports that "The average web user won't go past the first five listings on a search engine results page (SERP) … [M]ore than 67 percent of all clicks on SERPs go to the top five listings … Research shows that websites on the first SERP receive almost 95 percent of web traffic, leaving only 5 percent for remaining SERPs."

What that means for vaccines is that pro-mandatory vaccination sites, mostly government- and industry-funded and operated, receive 95 percent of the web traffic from web searches. Yet vaccine hesitancy continues to grow. It should be obvious that the reason for this is not because people are inundated with "anti-vaccine" information.

Vaccine "hesitancy" continues to grow because many more people have learned they cannot trust one-sided information about vaccine benefits that basically denies vaccine side effects.

The public has good reason to have legitimate concerns about vaccine side effects and, now, the forced vaccination lobby is trying to eliminate the ability of people to access and share vaccine information or even discuss it among themselves. This kind of censorship is bound to raise red flags and set off warning bells in most people.

The headline of Hotez's most recent article even pronounces "Vaccines cannot and do not cause autism — there's no debate."54 Indeed, avoiding debate is a Hotez hallmark. So far, he's refused every invitation to debate other experts on these issues.

Again, this kind of behavior is what causes "vaccine hesitancy," because if those wanting to shut down the debate have valid science to back their claims, there's no reason to avoid open debate. The refusal to debate the issue means they lack the information required to win.

The websites of vaccine safety and pro-informed consent organizations like the NVIC, on the other hand, are loaded with referenced scientific studies and government data showing there is rational cause for concern and urgent need to reform public health laws that mandate vaccine use.

How Many Are Actually Injured by Vaccines?
According to the most recent vaccine injury compensation data from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA),55 the total compensation paid out since the VICP began operating in 1988 is approximately $4 billion. Since then, more than 20,428 petitions for compensation for vaccine injuries have been filed with the VICP.

Of those, 17,718 petitions have been adjudicated, meaning a formal decision was pronounced; 6,430 received compensation and 11,288 were dismissed. Interestingly, 4,250 of the petitions that have received compensations were filed between 2006 and 2017, suggesting there's been a significant rise in vaccine-related injury petitions to the VICP in the past decade, although two out of three claims continue to be denied.

Sadly, today the majority of federal vaccine injury awards go to adults, not children, even thought the 1986 Act was established by Congress specifically to compensate children injured by federally recommended and state mandated vaccines.56

The Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Justice have gutted the VICP through rulemaking authority and fight to deny compensation for the majority of claims filed by parents on behalf of their vaccine-injured children, so fewer and fewer attorneys are filing for claims for children because the deck is stacked against them.57

Clearly, federal agencies responsible for developing, licensing, recommending and promoting vaccines do not want to acknowledge just how many children are being harmed by vaccines mandated by states for children to get a school education.

Here's another interesting tidbit. According to the HRSA report, based on the number of doses administered between 2006 and 2017 and the number of petitions that received compensation in that time, the HRSA calculates that "for every 1 million doses of vaccine that were distributed, one individual was compensated."

I find it curious that this is the exact same ratio given for vaccine injury. You've probably heard that vaccine injuries occur about once per 1 million doses.58 Could this be a coincidence? Or are they flat-out misrepresenting vaccine injury compensation as a vaccine injury probability statistic? The two are clearly not the same.

What Does the Science Say About the Potential for Vaccine Injury?
In the U.S., the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that children receive 69 doses of 16 vaccines by the time they're 18 years old, with 50 doses of 14 vaccines given before the age of 6.59 How does this affect their health?

A study60 published in 2017 reported a disturbing discovery. The researchers examined health outcomes among infants 3 to 5 months old following the introduction of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) and oral polio vaccine in Guinea-Bissau, which took place in the early 1980s.

(In the U.S., the whole cell pertussis vaccine in DPT was replaced in 1996 with a less reactive acellular pertussis vaccine in DTaP). This population offered the rare opportunity to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children due to the way the vaccines were rolled out in the West African country.

Shockingly, researchers discovered "DTP was associated with fivefold higher mortality than being unvaccinated." According to the authors, "All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis."

In other words, the researchers concluded that DTP vaccine weakened the children's immune systems, rendering them vulnerable to a whole host of other often deadly diseases and serious health problems.

Other clinical trials in West Africa revealed that a high titer measles vaccine interacted with the DTP vaccine, resulting in a 33 percent increase in infant mortality.61 In this case, the finding led to the withdrawal of that experimental measles vaccine targeting very young infants, but what would have happened had those studies never been done? Clearly, we need many more like them.

Eye-Opening Statistics Reveal Dose-Dependent Relationship Between Vaccines and Injuries
In his book, "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies," Neil Z. Miller also provides eye-opening information about the potential for vaccine injury. He downloaded the entire vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) database and created a program to extract all reports involving infants. In all, the reports of 38,000 infants who experienced an adverse reaction following the receipt of one or more vaccines were extracted.

Another program was then created that was able to determine the number of vaccines each infant had received before suffering an adverse reaction. Next, reports were stratified by the number of vaccines (anywhere from one to eight) the infants had received simultaneously before the reaction took place. They specifically homed in on serious adverse reactions requiring hospitalization or that led to death. Here's what he found:

Infants who received three vaccines simultaneously were statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die after receiving their vaccines than children who received two vaccines at the same time
Infants who received four vaccines simultaneously were statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who received three or two vaccines, and so on all the way up to eight vaccines
Children who received eight vaccines simultaneously were "off-the-charts" statistically in that they were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die after receiving those vaccines
Children who received vaccines at an earlier age were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who receive those vaccines at a later age
Endgame: Forced Use of All Vaccines by All People
As noted by Fisher in "Taking No Prisoners in the Vaccine Culture War":62

"The win that industry is looking for is a complete shutdown of the public conversation about health and vaccination followed by a mandate by every government to force every child and adult to use every vaccine that drug companies develop and sell …

WHO is encouraging drug companies to fast track more than a dozen new "priority" vaccines to market for children, pregnant women and adults — and you can be sure industry will lobby governments to mandate all of them — respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), Streptococcus A and B, HIV, herpes simplex virus, gonorrhea, E-coli, Shigella, Salmonella, tuberculosis, malaria and more.63

The pharmaceutical industry, which was handed a partial liability shield from vaccine injury lawsuits by the U.S. Congress in 1986,64 which was turned into a total liability shield by the Supreme Court in 2011,65,66,67 is fighting to keep an economic stranglehold on a crumbling U.S. health care system.68,69,70,71

With the government having paid vaccine victims more than $4 billion in federal vaccine injury compensation since 1988 under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act,72,73 pharmaceutical corporations do not want to give up the no-risk, stable income stream they get from selling mandated vaccines.74

'No exception' vaccine laws guarantee that good vaccine science will never be done so vaccine casualties can continue to be swept under the rug by denying they exist,75,76,77,78,79 and nobody has to care about the crippled and dead bodies lying on the ground except the mothers and fathers grieving endlessly for what could have been.80"

If you're like most, you probably know someone who has been injured by a vaccine, and the vaccine industry doesn't want you to share that experience with anyone, not even your closest friends or family on social media. People like Hotez claim the debate is over, yet in truth the debate has been going on for a long, long time and it is not going to stop no matter who tries to shut it down. continue here (https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/04/06/shutting-down-the-vaccine-debate.aspx)

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 20:59

I agree...I despise the corporat...whatever, I don't know how to spell it. The thing is that 'vaccination' is a red herring. Industry doesn't need vaccines to own the world...all they need is the new and improved mobile phone. Vaccines are emblematic of good being done as a byproduct of corporate greed. And therein lies the need for 'decent' members of our government to compromise with the evil dead.

Maggie

14th April 2019, 21:12

I wonder what is factual in this statement. Convince me...

Vaccines are emblematic of good being done as a byproduct of corporate greed.

I always watch Del Bigtree's Thursday program. In this one, he uses Joe Rogan's interview to counter some ridiculous evidence of the bankruptcy of the vaccine expert Hotez. This physician has a book that proclaims his daughter (sadly dealing with autism) did not develop it with a vaccine injury. I hope she did not. He received something like 56 million from the pharmaceutical industry for his lab but thinks he has never benefitted form that industry? I gather from his interview here that he is not very sharp so he may not understand how that is a benefit.

Unfortunately because autism was so relatively unknown until vaccines were stepped up in the 1980's one wonders, how do we explain the dramatic and unprecedentaed rise of this behavioral condition which is also accompanied by a dramatic gastrointestinal disorder in children suspiciously following vaccination?

Fred is right that we can still go to noncommercial sources for information and despite the trend, we can still watch programs like this one. The truth is laying out and not when one takes the time to listen and to read IMO.

3GAmHscgtEs

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 21:19

Maggie

14th April 2019, 22:02

my first thought would be...well, two things.

all professions...even the medical one, jump on the latest and greatest fad...it is pretty silly but it is human nature to want to make things better with the new and improved. 2nd, diagnostic tools and even more ready access to those that can't afford it, who coincidentally are genetically more likely to be subject to such maladies.

I do appreciate your willingness to engage with this thread. It is certainly true that the medical establiishment has itself agreed to accomodate the pharmaceutical industry. When people present with symptoms, there is a desire to treat these symptoms. There is a significant relationship now in the way illness is defined by way of medication treatment.

The Pharmaceutical Industry's Role in Defining Illness
Elizabeth A. Kitsis, MD, MBE

The pharmaceutical industry develops, manufactures, and sells drugs. Defining illness is not its mission. Generally, the medications produced by drug companies target diseases that have been defined previously by the medical profession. However, there are several indirect ways in which the industry contributes to the definition of illness. Are these contributions beneficial to society and ethically sound, or are they solely aimed at maximizing corporate profit? To address these questions, I analyze some examples of how the pharmaceutical industry has played a role in defining illness.

No sharp line divides health from disease. Defining an illness is a complex process, and definitions typically evolve over time, facilitated by advances in science and validated by societal recognition. Thus, it is expected that the definition of what constitutes disease will change with time, with additions (e.g., Lyme disease), subtractions (e.g., homosexuality), and modifications (e.g., autoimmune disorders). While some of these modifications are universally accepted, others—particularly those regarding conditions that lack objective signs or laboratory abnormalities—are controversial. The term “medicalization” was introduced in the 1970s by Illich and others [1] to challenge the characterization of normal variation among humans as disease. However, defining illness can be the first step toward reducing human suffering. Thus, medicalization can alternatively be defined as “a process by which human problems come to be defined and treated as medical problems” [2].

A case in point is fibromyalgia, a chronic pain condition associated with tender points on certain parts of the body. Physicians began to see patients with this constellation of symptoms in the 1980s and cautiously and provisionally defined a new syndrome. As with many syndromes, elucidating its pathogenesis was not so easy and has lagged behind the description of the disorder. It is not uncommon, however, for clinicians and drug companies to search empirically for new treatments even without a precise understanding of pathogenesis. Several medications—including pregabalin (approved in 2007), duloxetine (approved in 2008), and milnacipran (approved in 2009)—were found to alleviate the symptoms of fibromyalgia and were the first medications to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treating it.

What are the implications of these new drugs for fibromyalgia? Most importantly, they may provide relief to patients with a potentially debilitating condition. However, there may also be other, important downstream effects. First, the very fact that drugs have been approved provides some validation that fibromyalgia is, in fact, an illness. Receiving treatment for fibromyalgia may legitimize a patient’s chronic pain symptoms that might otherwise be dismissed by family, friends, or employers as hypochondriasis. Indeed, some fibromyalgia patients report improved health after diagnosis [3]. Second, if the treatment is truly effective, one would anticipate that it would reduce the use and cost of health care for sufferers, perhaps benefiting patients as well as society. Some investigators have reported these outcomes [4, 5]. Third, in a reversal of the usual direction of translational medicine, knowing the mechanisms by which effective drugs act may provide important insights into pathogenesis.

On the other hand, are there potential risks to medicalizing the symptoms of fibromyalgia? Some rheumatologists still dispute the existence of this condition. If they are correct, its medicalization could encourage inappropriate sick-role behavior. It could also expose otherwise healthy patients to medications with potential side effects and unnecessarily increase the costs of medical care. Some data indicate that pharmacy and health care costs go up among patients who have been treated with pregabalin and duloxetine [6].

In either case, it is clear that the pharmaceutical industry has played a role in the medicalization of fibromyalgia. While this process is usually driven by physician experts, the decision to develop and seek approval for new drugs can strongly influence the medicalization process—especially when those drugs are efficacious. One might question the motivations of drug companies—are they after profit, patient welfare, or both? Regardless, in the case of fibromyalgia, several new medications have been added to the treatment armamentarium.

In contrast to fibromyalgia, there are other examples in which pharmaceutical companies have played a less positive role in the definition of disease. For example, some allege that GlaxoSmithKline developed a business plan to promote paroxetine as a treatment for social phobia by depicting the disease as a severe medical problem [7]. Although the prevalence of social phobia was noted as “rare” in the 1980 DSM-III, it was noted to be “extremely common” by 1994. GlaxoSmithKline’s extensive media campaign included posters displayed prominently across the country that showed a dejected man playing with a teacup and proclaimed “Imagine being allergic to people.” Labeling people who may simply be shy as severely ill may be stigmatizing. Encouraging them to take a medication with potential side effects raises a concern about whether patient welfare is the key objective. Expanding the boundaries of a treatable illness simply to enlarge the market for a drug has been termed “disease mongering” continue here (https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/pharmaceutical-industrys-role-defining-illness/2011-12).

The thing about all pharmaceuticals is the massive issue of "Side Effects" The vaccines inserts themselves describe potential and possible serious side effects. Yes, the hope would be to identify people at risk before being challenged by a mandated substance like vaccination. More important is the "informed consent" component where parents and children can refuse.

ALSO, the MOST IMPORTANT of all is that MAYBE vaccination is not the "new and improved" approach to communicable disease at all. When you look deeply into the claims that vaccines are safe and effective, one finds an unbelieveable fact. These claims are not based on scientific study at all.

BUT back to the suppression of information. These facts are discovered only through the efforts of people who have challenged the "system". One is NOT given even the basic vaccine insert information unless they challenge the physicians prescribing them. When the demand is made to decide based on informed consent, one is possibly labeled "difficult" and possibly a rabble rowser if making a loud noise in public?

If one refuses vaccination based on the notion of informed consent and freedom to refuse if not in consent, when it is mandated legally such as in Williamsburg today with the adult MMR, one is now a CRIMINAL rabble rowser. In many ways, lack of power is obvious when on literally cannot afford to protest. One who can home school, who can afford to fight with legal representation, can afford a fine, affiord to leave a job........

Otherwise, obey to keep the status quo of social benefits. In an EMERGENCY EVERYONE MUST CONFORM or face jail and fines. In the interest of the public good of course. Yes, the arrest of Assange too is in the public good too because obviously like measles he is DANGEROUS to every good citizen.

dzpReTgPTus

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 22:06

I'm definitely with you on the side effects...After watching some of those TV drug commercials I figure it is better to just shoot yourself in the head than take the drugs

Fred Steeves

14th April 2019, 22:15

The 1st amendment...I'm not stuck on it...

That's unfortunate, as well as unsurprising, but I still fully support your right to stick your neck out and boldly proclaim such a repressive idea.

It's important everyone knows where each other stands. That's, what the 1ST Amendment was all about after all. The freedom to speak one's mind no matter how repugnant it may appear to another.

Emil El Zapato

14th April 2019, 22:40

Maggie

14th April 2019, 23:14

Maggie

14th April 2019, 23:23

repulsive to you, of course...

From my perspective since 1776 more than a few of the sacred amendments have been used to bash the unfavored. Because you are stuck in the 'Law and Order' paradigm you missed the most important part of my statement. I let my conscience drive my humanity and sense of right and wrong. I don't need written favoritism or an attorney to give me the right to speak my mind nor does it limit my ability to respect others right to speak theirs. Have you ever been in a court of law when you were told to 'shut the fuck up!'. I have.

So far so good said the man who jumped from a high building as he passed the half way mark. Just a matter of time until you see the bottom IMO and I'll wonder how you feel then. I say that from my POV which has much to do with what we stand for and my own OPINION that the first amendment is a real innovation in human social mind. It's not all there is but IMO it's about the first to be lost.

Maggie

15th April 2019, 00:38

The whole subject of Assange is so complex!

Richard Dolan is right IMO about how much wikileaks accomplished.

Julian Assange is one of the most important journalists in history. The information that has been revealed via Wikileaks has become part of humanity's shared heritage of freedom of information. His organization's track record of accuracy has been impeccable, far more accurate than the dishonest legacy/corporate/mainstream/establishment media has ever been. For this reason, Assange has been in the crosshairs of the American national security state for a long time. Now it appears they have him. This is one more battle in the long war to roll back the freedom of information people have won since the creation of the Internet.

#RichardDolan

ugaA-PKygAw

I came across a Richard C. Hall investigation into what is known about his history.

Richard Hall says he is "an intelligence created tool being used to front one of the biggest psy-ops currently in operation on this planet".

In conspiracy circles Wikileaks generates much excitement. But not at Richplanet. Whenever you hear the words "Assange" or "Wikileaks" in relation to some new "leak", there are the questions you ought to be asking yourself : What is the ulterior motive for this leak and am I being taken for a ride here? In this film, for the first time anywhere Richard D Hall reveals just how much of a handled entity Julian Assange is. Assange is not an independent activist, but is chauffeured around by establishment handlers. He is not a wanted criminal, he is not being given asylum, he is not a whistleblower, he is not an advocate of freedom of information. He is an intelligence created tool being used to front one of the biggest psy-ops currently in operation on this planet. Wikileaks is funded and supported by globalists who are using it for a number of agendas.
Please visit www.richplanet.net

Snyc6DbaYk8

Maggie

15th April 2019, 05:45

“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.” George Orwell

Ray McGovern, worked as a CIA analyst for 27 years from 1963 to 1990. He chaired National Intelligence Estimates and prepared the President’s Daily Brief. He received the Intelligence Commendation Medal at his retirement but returned it in 2006, to protest the CIA’s involvement in torture. In 2003 Ray co-founded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

xnwgQhBSEqI

The lawyer representing Julian Assange says her client wasn't hiding from justice when he took refuge in London.

wpwyMu3PsUg

Chris Hedges is a Truthdig columnist, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, a New York Times best-selling author, a professor in the college degree program offered to New Jersey state prisoners by Rutgers University, and an ordained Presbyterian minister.

UT7n0WY_6Ww

Maggie

15th April 2019, 06:25

https://defend.wikileaks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/War-on-journalists-768x768.jpg

Jailed for journalism: WikiLeaks editor Hrafnsson on Assange case

Six years, nine months, three weeks, two days after taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy, the impasse was broken when WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was dragged out of the building by British police in response to an extradition request from the United States.

When it comes to media personalities and stories about journalism, there are few that come to mind that are bigger than Assange and WikiLeaks.

Assange stands charged with "a conspiracy to commit computer intrusion" and his extradition could have wider implications for journalists in the digital age, in the US and beyond.

The Listening Post's Richard Gizbert speaks with WikiLeaks editor Kristinn Hrafnsson on the charges and the timing of Julian Assange's arrest.

Al Jazeera: Let's start with the context and the question, why now? Given that Ecuador took Julian Assange in seven years ago, does the decision to expel him from the embassy and probably place him at the mercy of the US justice system simply come down to the fact that the president who initially gave him asylum, Rafael Correa, is no longer in power, having been replaced by the new President, Lenin Moreno?

Kristinn Hrafnsson: That's exactly what happened. I mean, the only change that was in the scenario was that the fact that there was a regime change in Ecuador and the president that came in there was willing to bow to the pressure or willing to curry favours with the Trump administration.

There had been reports in the New York Times in December that he was willing to hand Julian Assange over to the Trump administration in exchange for debt relief or favours from the IMF. So it didn't come as a surprise. And therefore there has been increased pressure inside the Ecuadorian embassy in trying to force him out, and it ended in this manner this week.

Al Jazeera: Edward Snowden was among the people who tweeted on this right away, and he said, "Images of Ecuador's ambassador inviting the UK's secret police into the embassy to drag a publisher of - like it or not - award-winning journalism out of the building are going to end up in the history books. Assange's critics may cheer, but this is a dark moment for press freedom."

How do you see this precedent?

Hrafnsson: I totally agree with Snowden on this, it is a very dark day and it sets a precedent that is totally … actually very dangerous for journalists, editors, publishers all around the world. If you can extradite a journalist to a third country, the United States, for publishing the truth, no journalist can be secure. So this must be stopped. This must be resisted in all manner. It has to unify journalists around this cause, whatever they may think about Julian Assange.

.......................

Al Jazeera: The charges in the US carry maximum jail time of five years. First of all, do you take the US Justice Department at its word on that?

Hrafnsson: No, I mean there are two things to consider here. First, this is … this is a reference to hacking here, it's being reported in media as a conspiracy of hacking, which is a very strange depiction of this.

But secondly, this is only the tip of the iceberg. We are absolutely certain that this is only one of the charges that will be brought on Julian Assange, and they will be added on more charges when he arrives - if he arrives in the United States in chains.

It's specifically presented in this manner, in our opinion, to increase the likelihood that he will be extradited because people will say, "well, it's only five years".

gEwgUefRAxw

Paul Craig Roberts, secretary to the treasury with Ronald Reagan, about the brutal arrest of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange at the Equadorian Embassy today, we also discuss the suppression of freedom of speech, the Washington coup in Venezuela, and the Brexit facade.

j1nOsq3KDl4

Dreamtimer

15th April 2019, 06:46

I've heard several journalists from a variety of perspectives decry the arrest of Julian Assange and the direct relation it has to journalism and speech.

There's definitely not some monolithic response going on.

I didn't have to go looking. Lots of folks in the media are expressing concern.

Aragorn

15th April 2019, 09:13

Some say there is no such thing as an autism epidemic. Epidemics are associated with contaigen and so yes, technically there is no epidemic. It is not "catching" but it is dramatically increasing. I met a mother of sons 18 and 22 (born 2001 and 1997). She came for a massage. She never can anywhere or do anything without arranging care for wheelchair bound adults (issues including autistim). This is a permanent child hood of near infancy.

IF vaccines are part of this increase, we owe it to all the families who have children unaffected so far to STOP the process. Is it vaccine related, glyphosate related, related to EMF, what is the issue?

Okay, I have been biting my lip again since I've seen this thread appear in the listings, but I am now going to open up my mouth, and then I'm going to mentally ignore this thread. :wry:

First of all, Maggie, I respect you and I like you, but you do have a chip on your shoulder regarding the "autism and vaccines" issue, and so I find it utterly bizarre that you link the arrest of Julian Assange ─ who, mind you, is not quite the saint that this so-called alternative community would like to portray him as, but who has so far been doing the world a big favor by publishing things that The Powers That Be™ would have preferred to remain hidden, even if Assange would actually be serving the agenda of some yet unidentified entity ─ to the subject of vaccines.

Secondly, it has already long been proven that an autism spectrum neurology is a purely genetically originated condition and that no extraneous factors are involved with that. Most of the genes responsible have already been identified. In addition to that, there are scientists who believe that an autism spectrum neurology may actually be an evolutionary thing.

Furthermore, a more than ten-year-long investigation into the link between vaccines and autism has recently ─ i.e. in 2018 ─ come to its final conclusion, and this investigation finds that there is no causal link between an autism spectrum neurology and vaccines. Furthermore, the mercury-based conservation agent known as Thiomersal has already no longer been used in any MMR vaccines in over 30 years.

Thirdly, you keep championing Andrew Wakefield, who has repeatedly been found guilty of unethical conduct, fraud and misappropriation of subsidies, and who was proven to have a completely unprofessional and unethical agenda, selling his services and "expertise" to a law firm ─ which is how this whole thing got started in the first place ─ and treating his patients with a complete lack of empathy. The man is a cold-blooded criminal and he was barred from practising medicine ever again for very good reason.

Just because the "vaccines cause autism" myth is very popular within this so-called alternative community doesn't make it legitimate yet, and especially not when it has already become abundantly clear over the many years that this so-called alternative community mainly thrives on knee-jerk dismissals of things people do not understand because they lack the scientific education and the discernment to do so.

Lastly, it has also come to light quite recently ─ I think it was in January 2019 ─ that one of the most rabid anti-vaxxers exclusively got her "scientific evidence" from an anti-vaxxer group on Facebook. This was discovered by her own autistic daughter, whom she sought to "cure" of her autism. And of course ─ it almost goes without saying ─ this woman once again turns out to be a US American.

I have been on Facebook for a few years, and I was very active there in the autism acceptance movement. I am very familiar with the anti-vaxxers and their groups on Facebook, and it was in part ─ not entirely, but to a large extent ─ why I chose to leave Facebook in 2010. I have had to deal with lots of bullies in my life, but I can tell you from the heart that hell hath no fury like an anti-vaxxer "autism mom". They bully you, they stalk you, and they are among the most arrogant and vicious creatures I've ever encountered in my life. Some of them will even speak to you in such a manner that you start contemplating appealing for an exorcist from the Vatican.

Anyway and to bring this post to a conclusion, like I said, it takes quite a stretch of anybody's imagination to link the arrest of Julian Assange to mandatory vaccinations, and it is therefore quite easy for me to see that this is some personal crusade of yours, but the science has been explained into detail ad nauseam ─ by myself here at the forum, as well as by others elsewhere ─ and so I'm not going to get into that yet another time, because I lack both the energy and the will to do so.

The One Truth will not censor your freedom of speech, but as a forum, we cannot and will not support this crusade, nor the glorification of Andrew Wakefield and his fraudulent, ego-driven and unethical agenda. As an individual on the autism spectrum, I experience autism with both its challenges and its merits ─ it's not perfect, but at the same time it gives me abilities that normies don't have, such as an incredible attention to detail and a virtually inexhaustible memory capacity. And I didn't get any of it through any vaccinations either ─ I am too old to have been subjected to any mandatory MMR vaccinations, and I have had the measles, the mumps and rubella as a young boy, and I've recovered from them, as did all children of my generation.

I have said what I needed to say, and most importantly, an official disclaimer from The One Truth on account of this thread was warranted. I will now do as I said I would and I will leave this thread for what it is, but depending on the direction this thread evolves in, I may eventually decide to park it under the misinformation category. :hmm:

:getcoat:

Maggie

15th April 2019, 15:38

you do have a chip on your shoulder regarding the "autism and vaccines" issue, and so I find it utterly bizarre that you link the arrest of Julian Assange

I respect your ability to create a solid personal POV and have stated my own. I also have included different observations of the systematic stifling of information (which may be true and if true would challenge a major insititution revered and trusted) so as to shut down any further investigation. That includes the role of journalism and the private world of humans who are forced to receive treatments they may not want and which may injure and which MAY not be necessary at all. There is my link.

If something is true, it is true..... that will always be so. Unfortunately authoritarian gaslighting can actually be an effective way to shut MANY people's mouths. Someone hears a "quack" and wonders... is that a duck? the response form authority is "NO! How dare you suggest that?" If one continues to question and if one is dangerous to a certain faction, there will be severe repercussions. Others say in the depths of their minds.... that DID sound like a duck but I won't go there.

Andrew Wakefield (a gastrointestinal specialist who had a sterling reputation BEFORE) is one person who in MY RESEARCH has been shown to have made the big mistake of trying to report the sound of quacking. It linked a sudden neurological failure to a severe gastrointestinal disorder in multiple patients and their Mom's said..."It all started with a vaccination...."

The experiences that are happening to people (including Assange) because they are thwarting the system's goals feel like a heart break. Assange was in that room for 7 years and now will be subject to the worst kind of pay back possibly. Information was leaked and it was important. He has been called a diificult person and he may have been a tool?

It is not necessary to me to add any many more bits here. Everyone here can look up info if they still have questions.

I will now do as I said I would and I will leave this thread for what it is, but depending on the direction this thread evolves in, I may eventually decide to park it under the misinformation category.

That statement leaves me with such a strange feeling.

Maggie

15th April 2019, 16:13

I have said what I needed to say, and most importantly, an official disclaimer from The One Truth on account of this thread was warranted. I will now do as I said I would and I will leave this thread for what it is, but depending on the direction this thread evolves in, I may eventually decide to park it under the misinformation category. :hmm:

:getcoat:

I felt something like an electric sensation when reading this statement.
My response is that this forum has some really bizarre standards of determining mis-information. Honestly it is just like I said. The powers that control decide what is true.
I have decided to withdraw my energy from this forum as it has already evidenced just the kind of concern I think I am addressing.

If you tow the (whatever) standards, you can say whatever (they) like. Very very eerie.
Good Bye all. See ya in the Funny Papers. Maggie

Maggie

15th April 2019, 19:11

I requested a retirement and Aragorn responded that he would not go back on his words about relegating the thread to misinformation (as he suspected of me also... that I would not retract my position).

The vaccine issue despite what you state is NOT settled science. The threat to journalistic investigation includes silencing of those who want to seek scientific investigation of public health mandates.

I am adding this to my thread as I was reflecting on what does it mean to "have a chip on my shoulder" VERSUS a concern crafted from experience and knowledge? Most people were not trained as as an RN (1978) or a Family Nurse Practitioner (1988). Not every one has seen changes in the health care approach in person. In my experience as an FNP in a clinic which served many people without insurance, I was made aware that my job was to use what is essentially a "cook book" of treatment.

There were several incidents that created cognitive dissonance. In that same time period, I was first made aware through my friends' experience of a PERFECTLY normal boy who suspiciously contiguous to his vaccinations regressed developmentally. He was later diagnosed with autism. His mother became an activist in the school system as there were no special eduaction programs in Union County addressing autism. She became a special ed teacher so she could help him and others.

Through intervention, he was able to graduate from High school and he found his calling in growing plants and he has a greenhouse at their property. Now he is in his 30's. He lives at home but because his mother is who she is (devoting herself to him), the situation they are in is quite good.

I did wonder about the coincidence and yes, the faith I felt in the system began to erode.

The decison I made was to remain a hospital RN. I thought that I could use my skills to bring comfort to people and not feel conflicted over being the one to decide on treatment. I respected that people could make their choices with their physician. I always 100% supported the relationship and emphasized always that people can recover.

I know I have a trigger about being forced to receive treatment I do not think is good. It has partly to do with the concept of the placebo and nocebo effect. In 2009, Emory hospital was one of the first institutions in the US to require a flu shot of ALL employees. It was so they could reach a percentage that would conform to a "quality indicator" of "excellence" resulting in greater reimbursement form Medicare.

I was able to see that hardly anyone felt this as an existential insult. I did use religious exemption along with at least one other person as concerned as I. Then luckily I was able to retire because we also were asked to vaccinate all patients who were not up to date (against my principles because I don't think vaccination is good when ill).

This did create a dark night of my professional life. I had to wrestle with my principles because I was not reirement age (though technically I could use my retirement account and was officially retired after being there over 22 years plus age of 55-= at least 75).

In my recollection, I have always known what is right for my body. I did get a flu shot once (despite some reservation) and weirdly had something like narcolepsy for 6 months. I have always gravitaed to holistic modalities and have quite a bit of knowledge about alternative treatments.

During my dark night of floundering about for what I would do as a living, I tried various jobs. Then I found out that massage therapy which I had studied was a wonderful career. I meet lots of people. Most have some ailment. I don't really think one treatment fits all. But what I see is that we are always funneled by "insurance" into a very narrow band of acceptable response to issues. ON TOP OF THAT, when I share my various explorations into things I have learned have worked for people, many just are not interested unless a DOCTOR says this would work.

I have been true to my own beliefs and feel so physically well these days. I threw out all activities and substances that feel wrong. Oddly that is not synonomous with the "proscriptions of health experts" but what seems right to me. I am working on strengthening my power of INTENTION.

I have a deep desire that all be happy and all be free. I feel hatred for systems that actively seek to perpetuate themselves and their agendas gainst our will. IMO promulgating constant fear of what we have to do to live stifles the mind of humans. These systems seek only their own proliferation. These are what Vadim Zeland call PENDULMS. Humans and human agency keep these pendulums swinging. HOW? By our own dedication and belief and fearful aquiescence.

IMO the vaccine and journalistic debate are correlaries because each have elements that show what they seek: subjugation of the human to the will of the pendulums. It seems to me that if people listened to the stuff I post, it would encourage some question marks in the mind. My question at the moment. Are we facing the critical and insufferable asault on rational social freedom of expression and sharing of information?

Vaccines don't injure everyone but has anyone been wondering about the additive burden that vaccines have a part in and the prevalence now of chronic disease that increases exponentially? Maybe in some way, I have linked these changes with being forced to have shots of unnatural substances.

To me after many years, the whole nexus of power is the mind. Yes, if I had no concern at all about vaccines, I could probably take in gallons. My mind is that powerful. But I DON"T have that knowing about vaccines. I met someone at a Joe Dispenza workshop who does apparently have complete control over her reality. She told me a funny story of how she makes her family practioner feel better by taking the flu shot. My intention is to use all the tools I know to develop mastery of the matrix presentaion of "me". Vaccines are not acceptable now but maybe IF I had to do it, I could change my mind?

In the mean time, I don't do things that seem dicey. AND YES< I am pissed that we are told we have to conform> Yeah, I do feel a bit pissed that here of all places you can threaten a kind of thought policing. I am sad that you Aragorn think you ABSOLUTELY know what is what enough to say I am sharing mis-information on this thread. WEIRD.

Best of luck is sincerely desired in for all who read this post. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a grand goal. I see myself at this time as PRO CHOICE and PRO FREEDOM and PRO INDIVIDUAL with a big helping of rejection of dictator ship.

Aragorn

15th April 2019, 20:36

I said I wasn't going to participate in this thread anymore, but if you keep on quoting me and even addressing me without quoting me, then you're not leaving me much choice, Maggie. So here it is, for whatever it's worth.

I requested a retirement and Aragorn responded that he would not go back on his words about relegating the thread to misinformation [...

That is not what I said. I said I would not go back on my words, period. I meant that I was not going to go back on anything from the content of my post higher up the thread, and I consider the part where I spoke of possibly moving this thread as just a minor detail from my post. The rest of my post was (and still is) much more important to consider.

...] (as he suspected of me also... that I would not retract my position).

I know you too well, Maggie.

The vaccine issue despite what you state is NOT settled science.

When it comes to vaccines and autism, then I'm afraid it is very much a settled science, and has been for years. When it comes to Andrew Wakefield, there are two members here ─ they're not online right now ─ who happen to be able to describe in much greater detail what exactly he's done. And there's also a very interesting Wikipedia article about him, from which I've already quoted a few paragraphs in reply to another member here who was defending Wakefield tooth and nail without daring to look at the evidence.

I'm a scientist, Maggie. I look at the evidence ─ I'm not into knee-jerk reactions.

The threat to journalistic investigation includes silencing of those who want to seek scientific investigation of public health mandates.

Oh but I'll accept that. It just doesn't have anything to do with Julian Assange. The connection you make between Assange and the issue of vaccines is an artificial one, as an excuse to carry on with your crusade, in spite of all the evidence that you're wrong.

I am adding this to my thread as I was reflecting on what does it mean to "have a chip on my shoulder" VERSUS a concern crafted from experience and knowledge?

Well, that one is easy, isn't it? Julian Assange's arrest has nothing whatsoever to do with vaccines ─ let alone with autism ─ but you chose to artificially create this link so as to be able to bring up the subject of how vaccines supposedly cause autism (when it has been proven time and time again that autism is a purely genetic condition), and to once again defend Andrew Wakefield.

If that's not a chip on your shoulder, then I don't know what is.

Most people were not trained as as an RN (1978) or a Family Nurse Practitioner (1988).

Surprise surprise, I was. And I was trained as much more too.

[...] In the mean time, I don't do things that seem dicey. AND YES< I am pissed that we are told we have to conform> Yeah, I do feel a bit pissed that here of all places you can threaten a kind of thought policing. I am sad that you Aragorn think you ABSOLUTELY know what is what enough to say I am sharing mis-information on this thread. WEIRD.

It's not thought policing. This forum is all about seeking the truth, and history knows that The One Truth has seen more than its fair share of misinformation, disinformation and hoaxes. But that is in the past now. If you're looking for the truth, then you also have to be willing to accept the truth if it turns out to be something you don't want to hear. And regarding autism, the truth is that it has been proven time and time again to not have anything to do with vaccines ─ or at least not in any causal way.

By the same token you could go and claim that jumping up and down on a trampoline in your backyard is what causes rain to fall down from the sky, because on both occasions that you were jumping up and down on your trampoline, it started raining. And then you conveniently deny the fact that it was also raining on the days that you weren't jumping up and down on that trampoline, but that you were indoors reading a book that you were so immersed in that you didn't even notice that it was raining outside.

Knee-jerks and denial do more harm than good. Like I said, Thiomersal has already no longer been part of any vaccines since the 1980s. And I am autistic without ever having been injected with anything containing Thiomersal.

I am opposed to mandatory anything, including mandatory vaccinations. I am also fully aware of how Big Pharma is a psychopathic industry that doesn't have the best of intentions in mind, any more than the military-industrial complex does. But vaccines do save human lives. And they do not cause autism. Furthermore, your crusade shows that you do not properly understand what autism is, what it does, or what it feels like to be autistic. I do. I live it every day, and I also understand the neurology, the psychology and the psychiatry. Because instead of jerking my knees and being a yes-man, I've studied all that stuff.

Lastly, whether this thread is to be moved to the disinformation category has nothing to do with you personally, but with the statement this thread is making (or about to make) with regard to something that has been disproven time and time again in scientifically verifiable manners and with all results of the research unfalsifiably published in reputed and reliable scientific publications.

There are still people who claim that Earth would be flat, there are still people who believe that the Nazis were the good guys, there are still people who believe that QAnon would be a genuine US military insider in collusion with El Donaldo the Banana Republican™ against the Deep State™, and there are still people who claim that the convicted murderer Mark Richards would be a genuine whistleblower and hero from a secret space program, or that Corey Goode would be some sort of chosen emissary from the alleged Blue Avians.

Their delusional thought processes don't make it so yet, and if anyone posts that stuff here, then they are free to do so, but it'll all get parked in the Proven Hoaxes & Misinformation forum. Because it has been proven to be misinformation. Not my personal opinion, not some ego-driven arbitration that you and others here would attribute to myself, but stuff that was proven to be one thing or the other. It's as simple as that. But I guess that rules me out as a tyrant or a dictator, and that in itself could also be an unsettling truth to accept for certain individuals here.

How much evidence does one need before reality breaks through those bubbles of knee-jerking denial that have this so-called alternative community in their clutches, Maggie?

Maggie

15th April 2019, 21:10

an official disclaimer from The One Truth on account of this thread was warranted. I will now do as I said I would and I will leave this thread for what it is, but depending on the direction this thread evolves in, I may eventually decide to park it under the misinformation category.

An OFFICIAL disclaimer is the exact point. Maybe you are the one on a crusade here and using your position to STOP discussion. What I am not claiming is that ALL cases of symptoms that have been defined as autism are vaccine injuries. You may have symptoms (but obviously mild ones) of a neurologic pattern defined in the Autism spectrum without the trigger of environmental toxic overload?

I may be mistaken about a meta connection? I see correlation between wikileaks representive Julian Assange's arrest for sharing sensitive information and sharing information around the contentious issue of vaccine heisitancy. I do think that they share the same mode of operation of chilling the flow of important information.

Credible scientists have demonstrated through analysis of mainstream research that vaccine safety is an UNSETTLED question. The role of vaccines in permanent and catastrophic injury is not about just "autism" but neurotoxic damage and immune system failure caused by a combination of ingredients, the route, the sheer amount and the timing of substances FORCED on vulnerable organisms.

Moreover, the science around the role of hygeine and resistance to disease shows a clear relationship between changes in availability of clean water, proper nutrition, sanitation and population density with manifestation of communicable disease. There are so many variables to explain the presence and absence of infection and yet, the vaccine industry would like us to accept the "unavoidable danger" of injecting foriegn substances into the body.

There is also the misnomer of herd immunity that is so well proclaimed by the "Emergency" need to force vaccinations on infants as young as 6 months and adults in NYC NOW. The MMR does not provide life time immunity. Having measles, mumps and rubella does. Having the diseases is not dnagerous unless immune compromised and there is a BIG question about why one becomes immune compromised (think hygeine and iatrogenic and environemntal toxins).

There is the issue of the slippery slope in forced vaccination: the assault on religious freedom, the assault on philosophical disagreement that is thrown out entirely when government proclaims states of emergency. Then we find how much election funding comes form the industries of "health care" to politicians and the conflicts of interest that make one suspect this is not public health at all that drives laws.

Moreover, there is the issue of who takes care of all those who are unavoidably harmed by the vaccination and sequelae? It is NOT about autism per se but about freedom and responsibility and who gets to mandate in the face of no social net support or necessity to deal with unintended consequences?

Like I said before... I am drawing meta connections and what I see is that when dissent is denied, the only losers are those who were forced into compliance.

People who are active in the process of seeking scientific safety and efficacy studies have included whistle blowers who reported the manipulation of evidence. I think it is a case where the pharmaceutical industry has overtaken governmental bodies. The evidence is available but all the social media machines are for some reason agreeing to label all dissent Anti-vax crazies and others not yet affected will parrot that line.

To silence all debate about the issue IS analogous to demanding that journalists not pass on information deemed sensitive and therefore potentially disruptive to society.

Identifying yourself, Aragorn as having a condition, wanting to explain your perception of the causes and consequences (both positive and negative) of symptoms identified with the condition and feeling you are offended by others who might suspect this is an un-natural iatrogenic induced condition... NO PROBLEM.

Coming from the admin power of demanding my thread be deemed mis-information is just really similar IMO to all the other ways we are being mentally herded into the state of powerless agreement. Enough said and enough explained.

Aragorn

15th April 2019, 21:32

An OFFICIAL disclaimer is the exact point. Maybe you are the one on a crusade here and using your position to STOP discussion.

I have already stated in clear English that I am not trying to stop the discussion, Maggie, but by all means, keep trying to suggest that I do indeed intend to do so and that I would be abusing my position as the administrator here to police the thoughts of our members.

If you repeat the lie long enough, somebody's going to believe it eventually, and I can already think of one particular member who will now be sending you a PM to let you know that they sympathize with you, and that I am such a horrible tyrant who suppresses discussion. :rolleyes:

I've said what I needed to say. I am not responsible for anybody's interpretation of my words in ways that would be convenient for their hostile-to-myself mindset, even if they would be utterly wrong with their interpretation. To the best of my knowledge, I have neither deleted, nor closed, nor moved this thread yet. If I wanted to shut you up, then I guess I could have already used that dreaded admin power by now, no?

Maggie

15th April 2019, 21:42

I have already stated in clear English that I am not trying to stop the discussion, Maggie, but by all means, keep trying to suggest that I do indeed intend to do so and that I would be abusing my position as the administrator here to police the thoughts of our members.

An OFFICIAL disclaimer is the exact point. I have never been hostile to you personally. To suggest that is strangely missing the mark.

Emil El Zapato

15th April 2019, 21:50

Just a suggestion:

A better approach to maintaining a controversial position is to supply hard evidence supporting the position. But all info has to be stirred about by multiple sources...credible sources. Bias will always creep in but reputable and 'the best of the best' scientists are by nature very open minded to new viable information or counter-information.

To sustain an idea with true conviction the evidence should be very very solid else a caveat is in order.

Just my opinion. Maggie, I know you are very bright and have strong opinions and as Aragorn stated he is a scientist...and that is his approach towards what he feels is unsubstantiated claims...cautious and conservative and in this case personal. I would be looking for peer reviewed medical research that is inline with your position.

Maggie

15th April 2019, 21:52

Emil El Zapato

15th April 2019, 21:54

Don't let your feelings get in the way of your interaction here...you bring very valuable info...some of it controversial... :) but that's why we are here.

Maggie

15th April 2019, 22:12

Don't let your feelings get in the way of your interaction here...you bring very valuable info...some of it controversial... :) but that's why we are here.

It is the matter of where we place our energy. I am not sure that feelings are getting in the way unless it is the feeling of CRAZY when one's own information gets conflated with hoaxes, flat earth memes and Corey Goode. Do I doubt myself now that Aragorn has spoken? Nah.

OH well. I am done here. Best

Emil El Zapato

15th April 2019, 22:22

I get it...but, still an overreaction really...

Aianawa

16th April 2019, 00:42

Happening again Aragorn.

It is okay to be wrong, to hold n express ones own truth, to follow your gut, even if someone else believes it is a hoax.

Fred Steeves

16th April 2019, 02:23

Hmmm, so we're to the point where peer reviews and such are the only way to verify reality?

I guess the science is settled on most matters as of 2019, nothing more to see here folks move along...

Aianawa

16th April 2019, 04:20

Imo the energy pot worldwide is moving big time, micro n macro, as changing beLIEfs is hugely diffiCULTish.

Emil El Zapato

16th April 2019, 11:35

I lost my post...

How else would one substantiate a scientific claim...statement of opinions are less rigorous, of course. and then There's Trump Truth...also known as fantasy.

Aragorn

16th April 2019, 11:54

Happening again Aragorn.

It is okay to be wrong, to hold n express ones own truth, to follow your gut, even if someone else believes it is a hoax.

Even if only for once, try seeing things through a more holistic lens than the "I have my own truth", Vern.

And for that matter, what about my truth? Did I give up the right to have my own truth when I was appointed the administrator of this forum? No, don't even go there, because I have no personal truth that would be different from the truth.

I look at the greater picture instead ─ as is required by the responsibility of running a forum of (alleged) truth-seekers. How the hell do you expect anyone from outside of this forum to take anyone or anything here seriously if we're going to go by "Oh, I have my truth, and you have your truth, and there is no such thing as the truth" ?

We are all grownups here. So it's time for everyone to start behaving as such.

Chris

16th April 2019, 14:19

Emil El Zapato

16th April 2019, 14:30

ignorance versus 'feeling' is a hard thing to gauge. I'm as guilty of 'bias' as anyone...but i'm confident with it... :)

I think it was William James that said...one should be familiar with the facts before letting one's emotion run away with it... Actually, it was me that said that...but citing William James is cool

Fred Steeves

16th April 2019, 16:43

Even if only for once, try seeing things through a more holistic lens than the "I have my own truth", Vern.

And for that matter, what about my truth? Did I give up the right to have my own truth when I was appointed the administrator of this forum? No, don't even go there, because I have no personal truth that would be different from the truth.

I look at the greater picture instead ─ as is required by the responsibility of running a forum of (alleged) truth-seekers. How the hell do you expect anyone from outside of this forum to take anyone or anything here seriously if we're going to go by "Oh, I have my truth, and you have your truth, and there is no such thing as the truth" ?

We are all grownups here. So it's time for everyone to start behaving as such.

I think it's important to have minimum standards of Truthfulness and empirical verifiability on any forum. If it's just about people stating their opinions and beliefs, with nothing to back it up, it devalues the whole discussion and any information that is in fact backed up by verifiable facts.

I experience this on other forums that have no such standards and people just throw their often completely uninformed opinions around with no filter, which means that any serious discussion is nigh-on impossible. If I put serious time and effort into researching a topic, my efforts become futile as soon as someone who knows next to nothing about said topic throws some ignorant opinion in there as if it were fact. I would say that the ratio of ignoramuses vs actually knowledgeable people on most forums is about 10:1 and that's probably generous. The democratisation of opinion, which has been enabled by the internet, becomes a hindrance to serious discussion and stifles the ability for people to think and to come to a consensus on reality. This is why we have so many wild, unsubstantiated theories circling around the internet, most of which refuse to die, even though they've been disproven over and over again.

I agree with Aragorn, that the alternative community is seriously devalued by this and there does not appear to be anything we can do about it.

This is getting ridiculous IMO. And it all started because a valued member DARED voice an opinion about vaccines contrary to "established science" and our resident vaccine expert?

Guess what? I happen to think fluoride is not good for me, therefore I don't drink public utility water. Does this make me a kook because established science and peer reviewed publications insist it's perfectly harmless, in any given quantity, and plus, is excellent for my teeth to boot?

I also happen to think there was an ancient war in this solar system that blew one planet to bits, and ripped the atmosphere off of another, but established science and peer reviewed papers from NASA would dictate that I need to go have my damn head examined. Maybe seek professional help and initiate some needed medications to stop the delusions. I may as well be Corey fucking Goode, right?

So then, if this is the road we're going down then let's go there full swing, shall we? Let's do this:

Aragorn, I want to see some established science demonstrating to me that you descended here as an angel, for one solo incarnation, and that Bill Ryan has indeed turned the corner and is no longer dealing cards from the bottom of the alt media deck of cards just like his good buds Rick Doty and such.

Chris, I want some empirical evidence demonstrating your personal relationship with an ancient Sumerian goddess.

And just for shits and giggles: NAP, show me some empirical evidence demonstrating that most ills in this country are due *solely* to the ugly, devil incarnate republicans/conservatives.

I'm not from Missouri, but show me anyway. Otherwise, it would seem we have nothing to talk about any more.

Show me...

Emil El Zapato

16th April 2019, 17:31

temper, temper, Mr. Fred.

peer reviewed material means literally that...peer reviewed...if one has 20,000 peers and only one says vaccines and fluoride cause problems then there is a credibility gap.

that is a good question though...

Empirical evidence...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S69qpXChJrY

Noam Chomsky credentials follow and he is far from alone among the intelligentsia:

Chomsky is voted world's top public intellectual
He is in his 70s and first became known for his theory of transformational grammar - and now he is top of the thinkers' hit parade. Noam Chomsky, the linguistics professor who has become one of the most outspoken critics of US foreign policy, has won a poll that names him as the world's top public intellectual.
Chomsky, who was underwhelmed by the honour, beat off challenges from Umberto Eco, Richard Dawkins, Vaclav Havel and Christopher Hitchens to win the Prospect/Foreign Policy poll.

NOAM CHOMSKY – ‘I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS’

Noam Chomsky – linguistic, anarchist, and Professor Emeritus at MIT – was never much of a student.

Chomsky is the subject of Michel Gondry’s new documentary “Is The Man Who is Tall Happy?” The film animates Chomsky’s life and work. In a post-premiere discussion of the film, Chomsky recounts his constant absenteeism in college and his disdain for high school.

“I don’t want to be corrupting the youth,” Chomsky begins before elaborating why he feels his success was a “series of accidents.”

“The truth is I have absolutely no professional credentials, literally, which is why I’m teaching at MIT,” Chomsky notes to laughter. “It’s a science-based university, they didn’t care if you have a guild card and something or other”

He continues to recount his distaste for high school. In 1945, Chomsky went to “the academic high school” with other college-bound students. As a result, Chomsky felt the teachers “didn’t work hard” because the students would pass their exams regardless.
But Chomsky eagerly awaited college, browsing the University of Pennsylvania’s class catalogs. But it wasn’t all that it was cracked up to be.

After my first year of college, each course I took in every field was so boring that I didn’t even go to the classes. I was quite interested in chemistry, but the way I passed the chemistry course was because I had a friend, a young woman about my age, who took extremely meticulous notes…she lent me her notes so I didn’t have to go to class and I could pass the exams.”

As a result, Chomsky declares that he “never really had an undergraduate degree.”

So how does a slacker become a Professor Emeritus at MIT?

I started taking mainly a scattering of graduate courses without much background, I then was lucky enough to get a 4-year graduate fellowship…did my own work, essentially I never had much of a formal education.

…And then I was very lucky, to get to M.I.T., which was a research institution, they didn’t care about credentials. You could work on what you wanted to, and it turned out very well. It’s just a series of accidents I think. Very few people are lucky enough to have an experience like that.

Aragorn

16th April 2019, 18:21

This is getting ridiculous IMO. And it all started because a valued member DARED voice an opinion about vaccines contrary to "established science" and our resident vaccine expert?

There is a distinct difference between voicing an opinion and repeatedly pushing an opinion with a voice of authority, and especially so if it's an opinion that has time and again already been proven false. And if you understand the science behind it, then you will also know why that opinion is false.

Furthermore ─ and I believe I've already used the exact same wording before on this thread ─ I think it's quite a stretch of anybody's imagination to link the arrest of Julian Assange to the issue of mandatory vaccinations. But then again, Maggie is also a member at Project Avalon, where an older thread regarding vaccines and how they allegedly cause autism just happens to have been revived in the last two days, with even members of the Project Avalon staff joining the anti-vaxx vantage.

So please, Fred, don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that I am trying to censor a member for "daring to voice an opinion" that happens to go against "my" opinion. Because the innuendo in that wording would be a grotesque lie. Furthermore, like I said already, it is not my opinion that I was expounding. It was scientific fact. There's a huge difference.

So then, if this is the road we're going down then let's go there full swing, shall we? Let's do this:

Aragorn, I want to see some established science demonstrating to me that you descended here as an angel, for one solo incarnation, and that Bill Ryan has indeed turned the corner and is no longer dealing cards from the bottom of the alt media deck of cards just like his good buds Rick Doty and such.

Fine, you want to be silly? Let's be silly. You're asking for evidence on two separate and unrelated things, neither of which I have evidence of, nor did I ever claim to have evidence of them, nor did I ever speak of those things with a tone of authority.

On account of the first issue, my allegedly being an incarnated angel, it is not something I generally talk about in public anymore, even though I have in the past. I only mentioned that to you in a private message because it was somehow relevant to the discussion we were having.

But I have never claimed with a voice of authority that I would indeed be an incarnated angel. That idea came to me a very long time ago, through a series of weird experiences, and it was also corroborated by psychics. But I was also still a Catholic when that notion came to me, and it has taken me many, many years to shake off my Catholic indoctrination. In fact, I'm not sure whether I've managed to completely eradicate that programming from my psyche, because there are times that I still catch myself surreptitiously thinking along the logic of Catholicism.

When I first heard Dolores Cannon talk about the Three Waves of Volunteers ─ her original version, because her definition of the Three Wavers changed a lot over the years as the result of the information she was receiving from the people whom she put under regression hypnosis ─ it felt like I finally had the answer as to where I came from and what I was doing here on this rock. Do I still care about it? Not all that much anymore, because it doesn't really matter. All I know is that I am trying to be the best human being I can be, and that I care about truth and justice.

On account of the second issue, I have also never said with authority that Bill Ryan had turned a corner. What I may have said is that I have turned a corner on account of my vantage toward the man, and that I am now beyond the knee-jerking phase where we were all dissing on el ingles en Ecuador. It was immature and it had to end. The fact that I found myself communicating with Bill woke me up to that.

Bill Ryan is a man with flaws, just like we all have our own flaws. And only he can work on his flaws. But ─ and this I have said ─ I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, and I have also said that time will eventually tell. That's good enough for me. Nothing said with a voice of authority there, although I have slapped a few people upside the head for continuing to feed into the childish Bill-bashing.

When The One Truth was founded, it was primarily a kind of venue for Project Avalon refugees, and so the Bill-bashing was strong here at the time. I know because I've been part of it myself. Guilty as charged. But it wasn't just Bill-bashing. It was knee-jerk everything-mainstream-bashing. I even got chastised here once by Marcus (DNA) over having drunk tap water one day when I was out of beverages and too ill to go out the door. Seriously, I had been drinking tap water instead of suffering thirst, for one or two days in a row, and so now the sky was going to fall. :rolleyes:

Well, those days are over now. The One Truth has evolved into what it was supposed to have been from the start, but which it couldn't become because of the knee-jerking egos that had come over from Project Avalon. Unsubstantiated conspiracy theories, championing kooks like Alfred Lambremont Webre and tabloid stories about baby-eating satanic pedophiles from questionable websites and opinionated YouTube talking heads. No wonder the mainstream media wouldn't take any of this conspiracy or UFO talk seriously. Those who were talking about conspiracies were all immature kooks with an attitude problem, a lack of a proper education, no sense of discernment whatsoever, and an unhealthy dose of paranoia.

The One Truth wants to be a forum for truth-seekers, and seeking the truth is seeking "the truth, wherever it takes you" ─ paraphrasing the lovely Christine Anderson from the Earth Empaths forum. And the truth is the truth. It isn't somebody's truth.

But I've already said higher up that it's not about me being the arbiter of truth. Maggie ─ the deadline of the 24-hour grace time has expired now, so I am now going to do as she requested and retire her account, hence why I'm now typing her name in slate grey ─ was pushing her already proven-false opinion with a voice of authority, and she already had quite a history of doing this, about the exact same subject. And she was even trying to disguise it as something that supposedly had to do with Julian Assange's arrest.

But wait, I'm not done yet. Because as you may have noticed, this thread has not been closed. We're still talking here. Maggie was not censored. And the thread has also not been moved to Proven Hoaxes & Misinformation yet. So much for having censored our members, stifled discussion and having abused my admin powers. I must be a real tyrant.

No, I'll tell you what I am, Fred. I am a mirror. I confront people with themselves, and I don't even have to instigate this myself. That's why many people don't like me. They are all too happy pointing out the splinter in somebody else's eye, and they don't want to be reminded of the beam in their own. And then there's the Dunning-Kruger effect, of course.

Fred Steeves

16th April 2019, 19:42

Well just for the record here Aragorn, I wasn't at all implying Maggie was being censored. She wasn't. I just didn't like seeing you guys going after her like that and I still think it was uncalled for.

Now also just for the record, you being the big bad admin here is irrelevant, except that when you go after someone it has that extra thud of authority behind it. But no, I'm just talking to you man to man, as equals, just like the other guys. I don't have that authority figure complex many seem to have, but I DO like to see those in authority use the utmost restraint when forced to exercise that authority. Cops would be a good example of that.

Also just to be crystal clear, if it hadn't have already been out there publicly anyway, I would never have brought up the angel thing because I respect the privacy of pm's. I don't think I was being silly with my questions, but we can agree to disagree on that.

Chris

17th April 2019, 07:20

Chris, I want some empirical evidence demonstrating your personal relationship with an ancient Sumerian goddess.

Show me...

That is certainly something that crossed my mind, believe you me…

But let’s be real here, proving the existence of a spiritual being, one that has no physical form, is entirely different than proving the effectiveness, side-effects, or lack thereof, of well-established medicinal substances. The latter has been done, repeatedly and in the case of most vaccines (I’ll put a question mark over flu vaccines, because I think they’re not nearly as effective or side-effect free as claimed), conclusively. I am not aware of anyone being able to present conclusive, empirically verifiable evidence for the existence of deities or spirits. Yet, billions of people not only believe in their existence, but make serious and repeated efforts to communicate with them and claim to accrue tangible benefits from their interactions with them. Are all those people (the majority of the human population) simply insane or delusional? Leading atheists seem to think so anyway, but I would not be so hasty when making a judgement.

In any case, the point is that the two are in no way comparable when seeking empirical proof, because the Spirit world doesn’t even exist, as far as science and medicine is concerned, therefore how could it possibly study something it claims isn’t even real?

Going back to the issue of deities, I have interacted with a number of them, but would it be even possible to prove empirically that any of them are real? If it were, somebody would have done it already, so I suspect this will remain outside the scope of empirical science for quite some time. It is important to note though the empirical science is a very narrow discipline and as discussed on this forum beforehand, once you expand your field of view to include theoretical science and philosophy (of which Science is just one branch) the existence of deities and spirits becomes at least a Theoretical possibility.

Dreamtimer

19th April 2019, 02:57

Aianawa

19th April 2019, 06:48

Horse has bolted

Chris

19th April 2019, 10:51

If Chris could share an experience, like a shared dream experience, that could be personal proof for someone because they would be a direct witness.

But that kind of witnessing doesn't come with empirical proof.

Personal proof is possible, because our perceptions are subjective and personal. However, it would not be empirical proof or reproducible in any way. This is a problem with psychic phenomena in general, they happen and are real, but they tend to be random and people have no control over when or how they occur.

In my own case, I have seen enough to know that psychic phenomena and spirits/deities are real, but this will only satisfy myself, personally. I could not provide any sort of proof that would conclusively satisfy the general public, let alone the scientific community. If I was really lucky, maybe I could find one open-minded scientist (Michio Kaku would be top of my list), to conduct a little experiment. If I could get a higher-dimensional being to visit and interact with him, he would probably be convinced of the reality of such beings (I think he already is, based on what he wrote about them, which I quoted on another thread a few months ago), but then again, it would not reproducible, so we still wouldn't have any concrete proof.

Even getting a higher-dimensional being to visit someone is a tall order, generally they're not interested and extremely busy as it is. They will do so when the situation warrants it, such as a medical or spiritual emergency and only when the person in question is open to them visiting and gives express permission. It is very rare indeed and I have only been able to convince higher beings to visit someone on a couple of occasions, where there was a real and immediate need for it. In general they do whatever the hell they want and are not the least moved by our little materialistic concerns, such as the need for empirical proof.

Elen

19th April 2019, 11:44

Empirical proof doesn't exist to someone without empathy. It's very much like...being stabbed by someone and when the person stabbing you asks you if it hurts. You would say yes, but the stabber will then say...prove it! Empathy is key to this problem...feelings which is another form of intelligence. :swing:

Emil El Zapato

19th April 2019, 13:07

Chris

19th April 2019, 14:36

That's a cool thought Elen,

Chris, I've had different types of experiences than you, but my psychic experiences are what brought me to alternative forums. Truly, I was looking for validation and a serious need for a sanity check. :)
What I ran into was a mass of right wing bigots...Talk about culture shock.

We don't have to have experiences in a vacuum of validation. There are many serious scientists examing the phenomena today.

Giovonni suggested a foundational level book in "The End to Upside Down Thinking". As DT said 'empirical' evidence is hard to provide on an individual basis...though I have done it...with a :) and a Nyuk, Nyuk, Nyuk...but you are not going to convince a random sceptic easily... That book is excellent though.

Sounds an awful lot like Rupert Sheldrake's work, which I greatly enjoy. No, matter doesn't create consciousness, it is the other way round and this becomes quite obvious once you start having psychic or spiritual experiences. One of the big realisations that science has yet to make is that most life is non-material, it exists purely as energy, vibration and spirit, in forms that are currently inaccessible to the five senses and thus, science, which is really just and extension of that, through material instruments. Higher-dimensional beings are so much more advanced than we are that it boggles the mind and we better start waking up to that reality.

Just to mention one here, the Sun God, he is just one single consciousness that controls the entire Sun. In fact our star is a manifestation of his consciousness. That is how powerful, ancient and cosmic some of these beings are.

Emil El Zapato

19th April 2019, 15:19

Sheldrake is one of the names cited in the book...The referenced scientists are not lightweights by any stretch of the imagination.

Orbs

21st April 2019, 02:12

Did anyone mention the compartmentalization of vaccines with other programs?

Dreamtimer

30th April 2019, 14:10

Here is a statement about evidence and proof which is centered on the subject of magic. The same principles apply.

WHAT IS EVIDENCE TO YOU?
7 MONTHS AGO • 6 COMMENTS • MAGIC
An unusual few days.

Firstly, I was without internet for about twenty hours which would have made me throw the hissiest of fits had it not also happened to my new favourite Huon Valley denizen, Avalon Cameron, who also had videos waiting to upload. Misery may love company. Mild technological frustrations similarly enjoy being experienced together.

So I was simultaneously behind (can't do actual internet stuff) and ahead (guess I'll get started on future internet stuff) when I got up on Wednesday morning. To see there's a Paul Weston interview to watch. Everything else can wait because -as regular listeners to the podcast know- there is always time for Story Time with Paul.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpH4KjMp1Pg

(Fun fact for when Paul reads this: Video is 33:33. I presume that was deliberate.)

Over the course of several decades, Glastonbury's unofficial mayor has built a Paul-specific system of what we might as well go ahead and call 'time magic' based on encounters and experiences in his own life. Now, if we do that thing where we compare praxes from such a height that we lose a lot of essential detail but also surface truths that are less evident from closer to the ground, we can say that

Talismanic magic
Use of planetary days and lunar days
Acknowledgement of governing spirits of the hours
Are all examples of 'time magic' that -for whatever after the fact reason you care to speculate- rely on 'matching' to previous instances of the time of your operation.

We can ascend to even greater heights and invite cross-cultural comparison at this point, by noting that this is one of the very few forms of ritual praxis that are conserved in literally every culture on earth, whether they map it to indigenous calendars such as in Central America, spirits of the days such as in some forms of Chinese magic, or the annual return of certain asterisms to (more or less) the same corner of the sky, such as found absolutely everywhere.

What about 'folkloric' accounts of ghosts and entities that return to a particular place on earth (or in its skies) on the same night of the year. What do they look like from these dizzying, comparative heights? Up here in the nosebleed seats we can say with confidence that our 'normal' experience of time is in some sense 'wrong'. But, in almost all cases, any attempt to correct it from up here tips very quickly into the New Age habit of weaponising a cursory understanding of twentieth century science and becomes goo.

And I'm being very deliberate in saying 'twentieth century science' (and cursory) because even 'science itself' will sporadically admit that we don't have time right. Hopefully in our lifetimes in this Dominant of Wider Inclusions an improved synthesis will emerge. Even if it doesn't, we are still presented with an urgent metaphysical challenge the Premium Members are very familiar with: empiricism as a necessary but woefully insufficient epistemology. Put another way: Why would you use 'science' as a form of 'truth justification' for something that extends so far beyond the foundational premises (typically mistaken for 'reality') it needs to function in the first place? Defences of materialism rely solely on forms of evidence that presuppose the validity of the claim. This is viciously circular, truly idiotic, and is the sort of behaviour that leads to one junior high school losing to another in inter-school debates.

After watching Paul's video, I see on the twitters that Hunt For The Skinwalker is available to buy or rent on Vimeo. The weather was crap, I was/had convinced myself I was a little ahead in my work, the couch was comfy and... well, maybe I could review it on the blog? That counts as work, right?

My tl;dr review is that it is probably too long, which is pretty common for productions/love labours like these. But it's good and you should watch it if you like that kind of thing. While this post was still in draft mode, I see Josh Cutchin was toiling in the same vineyard, which prompted me to finish it.

As I was watching the documentary, immediately after the interview with Paul, it occurs to me that we not only have time 'wrong' when it comes to 'magic', we also have 'place' 'wrong'... with the inevitable implication that we have 'spacetime' 'wrong', yeah? Then came the line in the film that is also the title of this post: What is evidence to you?

Well, exactly.

And it's not just evidence. It is when you marshal it, how you respond to it. The following day, I headed up to the northern part of my funny little island to Tasmania's second city, Launceston, for the Tamar Valley Writers Festival. A sensation that is probably familiar to many of you -even after so long on the path- is 'intuitively' knowing that something is wrong or you shouldn't do it, but nevertheless justifying it away because it is a work-related, or you are just being silly or whatever. Because I was dreading it the whole week, briefly considered cancelling, etc, etc... and still went because I'm new to this place and definitely need new creative friends and all that.

It's not just that Launceston is crap, although it is, as you can see in this for-once-actually-hilarious satirical travel video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32eKGFeoQeo

And it wasn't just Launceston. While it might be unfair to call the writers festival disappointing -the attendees all seemed to be very local and were clearly enjoying themselves- my cynical dread at having been to events like these in college was more or less confirmed: the delegates are largely retired boomers who have spent the last ten years tinkering on a biography of their aunt or something, because she was in the radar room in Darwin during the infamous Japanese bombing raid of WWII or whatever.

It was instead an aggregate sensation of unease that built as I drove up the island, arrived in town, found the apartment, and so on. In the current Magical Geography course, the Premium Members are performing whole body sensing of Place and it was in this capacity that Launceston made me feel weird.

On the Friday, having nothing to do until the welcome cocktail party in the evening, I took myself for a drive up and down the Tamar Valley. While searching for the farm, once we'd zeroed in on Tasmania, we were looking at both of the state's two 'wine valleys': the Tamar and the Huon, for pretty much the same configuration of reasons to do with setting up an eventual accommodation business, but I actually hadn't ever been to the Tamar before. And let me tell you, I picked the better valley/the better valley picked me.

The Huon is a steep-sided, hidden valley ("Imladris") where Gondwana-era trees tumble down between apple orchards and creepy, rundown, nineteenth century sheds to a glasslike river that mirror-reflects the snow-capped peaks which keep her perpetually fed. It is fantastical and eerie -duelling banjos in Middle Earth. The Tamar -at least near the coast- is wider and flatter and a lot of the housing stock downriver from Launceston looked like 1980s semi-suburbia, although it is also clear that it is a much wealthier area than the Huon. In amongst my lack of enjoyment was a sense of relief that this wasn't to be 'my landscape'. And it didn't even feel like it could be a possibility, the way Bristol always did whenever I'd go back for a visit from London. (In a dimension near this one, I still live in Bristol.)

So the idea to potentially cut short the trip grew as Friday night rolled into Saturday morning, just as the sense of unease grew. I'd already paid for the accommodation and tickets though, so literally against my literal better judgement, I went along to the first panel and it was appalling. I don't want to be arrogant about this because I'm not at all -I was genuinely there because I have so much to learn- but nevertheless I have published three books. Some ABC journalist who had just published his first thriller novel is maybe not the person who has useful experience for my context. But I do think that was felt in the entire room of retired boomers. One of the other panellists said how great it was to be at "events like this" where she gets to "meet the readers" and the audience bristled. Readers? Lady, one of us is at the wrong event.

Turns out it was me. As the interminable hour dragged on, there was a weird sense of upwelling freedom that accompanied my realisation that I really was going to cut short this trip by two whole nights, that I really was going to abandon all those tickets I'd bought and -because Tasmania is delightfully tiny- I'm less than three hours from the farm and I'm on the complete other side of the island. I'd be home by mid-afternoon!

I all but push past the other delegates as we make for the door, drive back up the valley to check out of the apartment ("Can I get a refund for these two remaining nights? Something's come up. Nope? Actually, I don't care.") and hit the road. The further south I drove, the more the feelings of dread evaporated off me like tarmac steam after summer rain. Getting clear of it and having a few hours of driving through a bracing gale allowed me time to process the sensation. What was it familiar to? In all honesty, the closest previous sensation -which was admittedly much, much stronger- was when I was forced to do a decompression stop on my own due to equipment failure in the mouth of a murky river known for bull sharks in Fiji. That particular spidey sense was so loud it almost gave me a headache, though. I similarly heeded it and swam over to the reef and made the boat pick me up from there. But it really did get me wondering if maybe I'd have been physically attacked or something had I stayed in Launceston. It's one of the eternal challenges with what constitutes evidence -evidence again!- for successful acts of divination... if you forecast something and avoid it, you'll actually never know if you were correct.

It also occurred to me that I should probably try a little Paul Weston magic when I got back to the farm and see what was happening on these same days, at least last year. So I did. And this time last year I was in another AirBnb apartment that made me (and James) decidedly uncomfortable. That time in Melbourne, which we'd travelled to in order to spend some time with the kiwi in-laws and whiled away an evening talking about Auckland -a 'home' I was no longer in. But the secondary purpose of the trip was to 'feel out' Melbourne as a potential -albeit temporary- place we might live while continuing the quest for an appropriate rural property as the Hawkesbury was becoming essentially unliveable for me. Home, discomfort, weird apartment, a sense of disappoint at the prospect of 'settling' for a temporary place that wasn't right. Check, check, check.

More than that, though. As the Cyprian Days roll around again, I am aware that I am approaching the one-year anniversary of when I first clapped eyes on the farm. Mother and I flew down exactly a year ago minus one week. So this very point in time in 2017 was probably the peak of the unease/discomfort/anxiety that many of you would be familiar with while looking for a new home to buy or rent... you simply don't know how long it will take because you can't know until you find the place. The 'pull' to the farm was probably at its strongest this week in 2017, and in 2018 all I could think of was getting back to it -a process that started with Paul talking his weird time magic and immediately followed by an extended examination of the spirit specificity of place. (Skinwalker Ranch.)

What is this evidence of? What even am evidence? Let's go back a few more years.

2016: Podcast episode with Dr John Reid came out. A kiwi anthropologist and our first discussion of the personhood of place, custodianship, wider notions of 'home'.
2015: Having ruined the two rooms we were renting in London writing several books simultaneously, I rearranged the entire library and we moved rooms/beds as best we could in a share house.
2014: Actually in New Zealand, a place I used to live, experiencing again the pangs of what even am home? London? New Zealand? Australia?
Well, shit.

Get out of my head, Paul.