April 27, 2023

JAMES CORBETT: “The ICC Wants to Start Arresting Politicians! I Think That’s A GREAT Idea! Let’s Just Go Ahead and Arrest Them All!”

“As long-time followers of The Corbett Report will know by now, the International Criminal Court is that ridiculous, UN-spawned kangaroo court in The Hague that dispenses victor’s justice at the behest of its Western backers, spending its time exclusively prosecuting Africans and asking the hard questions about Gaddafi and Viagra while studiously ignoring US and UK and Israeli war crimes. So why don’t we just cut to the chase. Perhaps instead of making a list of all the politicians we should arrest, it would be easier to make a list of all the politicians we shouldn’t arrest. OK, let me think about it. . . . Uhhh . . . . . . Give me a minute here . . . Ahhh, this is too difficult. Let’s just go ahead and arrest them all! Of course, I suppose that would mean that we’d have to face the prospect of a world without politicians. I mean, can you imagine a world without politicians? You know what? I’m willing to give it a try if you are.”

~James Corbett

As long-time followers of The Corbett Report will know by now, the International Criminal Court is that ridiculous, UN-spawned kangaroo court in The Hague that dispenses victor’s justice at the behest of its Western backers, spending its time exclusively prosecuting Africans and asking the hard questions about Gaddafi and Viagra while studiously ignoring US and UK and Israeli war crimes.

Well, guess what? Embracing the “diversity, equity and inclusion” mantra that’s all the rage in Western institutions these days, the ICC has finally gone out and issued an arrest warrant for a major European leader!

. . . If you count Russia as a European nation, that is.

That’s right. In case you haven’t heard by now, the illustrious international court of criminals has issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, accusing him of being “allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children)” and of facilitating the “unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.”

Now, while your average news consumer is busy trying to figure out why the ICC can’t stop bracketing the word “children,” I, for one, am too busy applauding to ponder such peculiarities of punctuation.

Yes! Arrest the politicians! What a brilliant idea!

But now that we’re taking the ICC’s idea and running with it, we’re faced with a new dilemma: who should we arrest?

So today, let’s put on our thinking caps, don our Saturnalian robes of justice and slip into our international law pants and come up with a list of politicians who should be rounded up and locked away forever for their crimes against humanity. Are you ready?

VLADIMIR PUTIN

Yes, ICC prosecuters, I agree! By all means, let’s arrest Putin!

. . . But not for the trumped-up, phoney-baloney charges that the ICC has listed in its transparently political and obviously fraudulent “won’t someone think of the (children)!?” arrest warrant.

In reality, of course, the ICC’s warrant for Putin was based on a US State Department-funded report that debunked itself, and it was issued by a prosecutor who claimed political neutralitywhile speaking at Ukraine government-organized events and yukking it up with NATO member officials at a donor conference in London.

In fact, it’s so obvious the ICC is in the business of selling “justice” to the highest bidder that even The Guardian admitted the timing of the Putin warrant was calculated to maximize donations to the court. (For the record, the incredibly cynical move worked: the ICC ended up raising nearly $5 million from NATO countries to continue its work “holding Russia to account” for its war crimes in Ukraine.)

So, no, let’s not arrest Putin for those ridiculous charges. Instead, let’s bring some charges of our own.

For starters, we could bring him in to answer some questions about the Russian apartment bombings in September 1999. Then-Prime Minister Putin blamed the wave of bombings—which killed more than 300 people over 10 days in five separate events—on “Chechen terrorists,” using them as a pretext to launch the air bombing of Grozny that began the Second Chechen War.

Unsurprisingly to students of the history of false flag terror, however, it wasn’t long before agents of the Russian security service, the FSB, were caught red-handed planting bombs in an apartment complex in Ryazan. Naturally, the Kremlin claimed that the FSB agents’ foiled bombing attempt was part of a “security exercise” and the event was promptly covered up. Putin, meanwhile, proceeded to milk the trauma this false flag inflicted on the Russian population for all it was worth. His poll numbers skyrocketed from 2% before the bombings to 55% afterwards and by the end of the year he was installed as the new President of Russia.

Or why not arrest Putin for his whole-hearted, full-throated participation in the erection of the Russian biosecurity grid?

He has, after all, actively promoted the Sputnik V clot shot vaccination agenda, claiming time and time again that “we need to do everything we can to overcome this pandemic, and the best tool we have in this fight is vaccination.” He has repeatedly bemoaned the “insufficient” uptake of the clot shots by Russians, and his press secretary has declared that “any measures that can push more people to vaccinate are good” and “only vaccination saves from death.” Putin even went out of his way to remind Russia’s regional governors that they have the authority to coerce citizens into getting jabbed.

He has made biosecurity a key talking point of the Russia/China alliance that—we are constantly assured by certain sectors of the “alternative” media—forms the backbone of the new power bloc intended to “oppose” the NATO bloc tyranny. Putin has vowed that “particular emphasis will be placed on the fight against the novel coronavirus infection pandemic,” because this “ongoing pandemic” poses “a serious challenge to the fulfilment of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” He has even signed agreements with Chinese President Xi Jinping to ensure “the deepening of information exchange on the subject of the COVID-19 pandemic and the strengthening of coordination when interacting at such platforms as WHO.”

And he has not only endorsed the erection of a digital ID system in Russia, but he actually urged the government to fast track the development of such a system (“the faster, the better”), warning that “such services are highly in demand, and you just need to accelerate their implementation.”

Need I go on?

Oh, OK.

Putin signed into law a biometrics bill that was illegally rushed through the State Duma. Under the guise of “banning” forced collection of biometrics, the bill in fact greatly expands the (World Bank-endorsed) “Unified Biometric System” introduced by Rostelcom in 2018 for collecting fingerprint, facial image, voice, iris, and palm vein pattern information on Russian citizens and places control of that biometric data in the hands of a private entity. As even pro-Putin Russian alt media warns, the bill is “deeply unconstitutional and creates the basis for building a ‘digital concentration camp’ in Russia.”

Plus, Putin has collaborated with his old pal (and “former” WEF Board of Trustees member) Herman “Sberbank” Gref in the rollout of the country’s biometric control grid. In 2021, Putin delivered the keynote address at Sber’s artificial intelligence conference—”one of the main global venues for discussing artificial intelligence,” Putin assures us—where he praised Sber’s efforts to use AI technologies to transform “healthcare and education, environmental protection and agriculture, industry and transport” and encouraged his globalist amigo to “accelerate the digital transformation across the board and as soon as possible move from isolated experiments and pilot initiatives to end-to-end projects with AI applications.” And, in case we didn’t get the point, Putin delivered the keynote address again at the 2022 conference, informing us that his “next goal on the horizon of the current decade is to ensure broader introduction of artificial intelligence.”

So, in short: yes, arrest Putin!

But why stop there? Since we’re already pissing off the 5D-chess-playing, MAGA-supporting, hopium addicts in the crowd, why don’t we just go the whole hog and arrest . . .

DONALD TRUMP

Now, before the red caps in the crowd start hyperventilating (“I always KNEW you were a shill, James!”): relax! Of course I don’t think The Orange Man should be put into an orange jumpsuit over some Stormy Daniels-related “campaign finance violation” horsetwaddle.

And if you think I’m talking about Russiagate then you haven’t seen my typically entertaining and hilarious (if I do say so myself) debunking of Russiagate.

No, that’s all left/right, Coke/Pepsi partisan political distraction nonsense. Instead, let’s arrest Trump for something of consequence.

Like what? Well, how about his work against American interests in the service of a foreign power?

No, I’m not talking about Russiagate, silly. As I observed back in 2017: “Forget Russiagate, The REAL Scandal Is Israelgate.”

Oh, you don’t remember Israelgate? That’s not surprising, since Russiagate was hyped endlessly by the same truthtelling truthsayers at the bastions of truthiness like CNN and MSNBC, and Israelgate was never mentioned once by those controlled corporate (fake) news networks.

For those not in the know, the ouster of Michael Flynn from his role as Trump’s national security advisor came when he “pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the FBI about his back-channel negotiations with the Russian ambassador.” But what was he “negotiating” with the Russians about?

Hmmm. Let me check my notes. . . .

Oh, that’s right! He was “negotiating” with the Russians about their vote on United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334. You know, the resolution that sought to condemn Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians? And what was he on the horn with his Russian counterpart about, exactly? Oh yeah, he was trying to twist the Russians’ arm to vote “no” on the resolution.

And who put him up to that task? Why, none other than the Son-in-Law-in-Chief, Jared Kushner, the wheeling and dealing Wunderkind whose family is so connected to Israel’s zionist likudniks that he once let Benjamin Netanyahu sleep in his bed (yes, literally) and who failed to disclose that he led a foundation that actually funded an illegal Israeli settlement (yes, really).

Oh, wait. Silly me! It seems Israelgate is all about Trump’s son-in-law and has nothing at all to do with Trump himself. I mean, it’s not like Donald J. Trump would ever sell out America in the interests of Israel, would he?

OK, I guess he did move the US embassy to Jerusalem, unilaterally altering longstanding US foreign policy in the region to implicitly endorse Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. And Donald “Make Israel Great Again” Trump didbrag at every opportunity how he was a “true friend of Israel” who may be a “newcomer to politics but not to backing the Jewish state” and did gloat about how Israelis believe him to be “the King of Israel” and love him like “the second coming of God.” And he did make campaign endorsement videos for his best pal Benjamin Netanyahu (another unconvicted criminal who, come to think of it, should definitely be arrested!).

But he’d never sell out American interests in favour of Israel. Heaven forfend! I guess Kushner must’ve put Flynn up to that phone call all by himself.

So, what else can we arrest Trump for?

Well, how about his international war crimes in Syria? You know, the country that—like Obama (who should be arrested) and Bush (who should be arrested) before him—Trump continued to bombard for years in a completely illegal attempt at regime change? Or has the international community already forgotten about the Syria Strikes?

Remember the Syria Strikes? Convinced by the pictures provided to him by the Academy Award-winning White Helmets that Assad had indeed gassed the “beautiful babies” of Douma and apparently unconvinced by every shred of available evidence that this was, in fact, yet another false flag perpetrated by the anti-Assad terrorists, Trump lobbed 59 Tomahawk land attack missiles at the country in 2017 (adding $5 billion to the bottom line of his buddies at Raytheon in the process).

Or remember when Trump bragged about the “highly successful” (and highly illegal) raids he ordered as part of the years-long US-sponsored war crime in Yemen that he likewise inherited from Obama and gleefully expanded during his time in office?

These are undoubtedly offences of the highest order. But if we really want to arrest Trump for his crimes against humanity, why don’t we convict him for the very thing he’s proudest of: his role in the scamdemic?

Trump’s loudest defenders always conveniently forget that their orange hero came to office on the back of his willingness to discuss the vaccine/autism link and his promise to appoint RFK Jr. to chair a commission on vaccine safety but that under his watch vaccines became the greatest thing since sliced bread and an RFK Jr. vaccine safety commission was off the table because Bill Gates told him it was a bad idea.

They forget that it was Trump who ordered Operation Warp Speed and who called the MAGA jabs his “greatest achievement.”

They forget it was Trump who followed Fauci’s every dictate throughout the course of the scamdemic and allowed the shutdown of the country at the behest of the “health” tyrants.

They forget it was Trump who pulled off the ultimate vaccine bait and switch by removing funding from the WHO . . . in order to give it to Gates’ GAVI, the vaccine alliance.

Yes, if any world leader needs to answer for the crimes against humanity committed during the scamdemic, it’s Trump. Can you imagine if Trump actually were the hero that the QAnoners believed him to be? Can you imagine him calling out the scamdemic for the transparent sham that it was, instead of actively helping facilitate the deep state’s crimes? Neither can I.

But before the intellectually challenged dupes of the left/right political farce go and accuse me of being some damn commie-loving pinko for putting Putin and Trump on the arrest list, let me go ahead and call for the arrest of . . .

JOE BIDEN

When it comes to Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., 45th President of the United States of America, there is once again no shortage of charges to place on the arrest warrant.

It would be tempting to arrest him for his incessant lying—from the Big, Consequential Lies (like the safe and effective injection lie and the pandemic of the unvaccinated lie and the economy is doing great lie) to the Small, Bizarre Lies. Remember when he randomly invented the story of playing college football for no particular reason? Or when he made up a story about being recruited by Golda Meir to help in the Six Day War? (Don’t worry, though; it turns out Corn Pop was totally real.)

But, on sober reflection, lying is (generally) not a crime, and we don’t want to set a precedent that would allow for Biden’s ilk to start arresting people for their speech, do we?

Perhaps, then, it would be more productive to arrest Biden for his crimes in Ukraine.

Now, I’m not just talking about his war crimes in Ukraine, or even the Ukrainian war crimes in the Donbas that the Biden administration is now actively supporting. I’m also talking about Biden’s pre-war crimes in Ukraine, from his son’s wheelings and dealings on the board of Burisma Holdings on behalf of “the big guy” to Biden’s own incredible on-camera admissionthat he threatened to withhold a billion-dollar loan guarantee to the Ukrainian government unless they fired the attorney general . . . who, as it turns out, was trying to prosecute Burismafor its corrupt practices.

But that is a long and complicated story that would no doubt tie up the courts for years, generating lots of boring testimony that the TikTok-addicted, fluoride-addled public would surely tire of before Biden’s inevitable conviction.

So why not arrest him for something far more immediately understandable (and immediately revolting), like his long and documented pattern of sexual assault and molestation?

Sadly, in this case I’m not simply referring to Tara Read, a staff member in Biden’s Senate office in the 1990s who accused him of inappropriate touching and of a specific act of sexual assault (and who was then subjected to intense scrutiny by the same types of people who tell us to “believe all women” . . . as long as those women are democrats).

And I’m not just talking about the photographs and videos of Joe Biden caressing grown women and making them visibly uncomfortableat various official functions throughout his career.

No, I’m talking about the multiple underage girls who have been inappropriately groped, fondled, caressed and even kissed in full view of the camera.

It’s important to understand that Biden’s sexual molestation of women and girls is not some fringe conspiracy theory, either. Entire websiteshave been set up to document these abuses. Heck, even his own daughter questioned whether she had been molested by the current resident of the Oval Office in a journal entryreflecting on the inappropriate showers Biden took with her at a young age.

Naturally, the establishment lackey media has (to the surprise of no one) run to Biden’s defense at every opportunity, with the consensus among the trendy, progressive, #MeToo-supporting Democrats being that “Uncle Joe” is just a bit hands-y and doesn’t realize he’s being inappropriate.

And besides, Biden teamed up with Lady Gagato create trauma centres for victims of physical and emotional abuse, so he must be a good guy, right? After all, a credibly accused rapist in need of a PR pick-me-up would never engage in a cynical ploy to pollute the “Biden sexual assault” search results with feelgood stories about Uncle Joe’s trauma recovery centers, would they?

Yet, for the partisan political hacks, sexual assault is AOK when the man doing it is on their political team. Just ask Bill Clinton’s victims. I don’t run in those rarefied, elitist circles, so perhaps I just don’t understand such double standards. All I know is that—as the father of a young girl—if any man were touching my daughter like that he would have his face rearranged in short order.

So, yes: let’s get the ICC to issue one of those arrest warrant thingies for Biden, too, please.

But how can we talk about criminal presidents in need of arrest without talking about . . .

GEORGE W. BUSH

OK, OK, this one is a gimme, but really, are you gonna make a list of politicians to arrest WITHOUT including W? Of course you aren’t, and neither am I.

To be fair, I’m not exactly the first person to ever think of arresting Bush 43 for his crimes against humanity. There were those who lobbied for Bush’s arrest when he came to speak in Calgary in 2009, including Splitting The Sky (R.I.P.). As you’ll recall, Splitting The Sky even attempted a citizen’s arrest of the fiendish Bush fils . . . but alas, the criminal slipped away.

Then there was the time that Bush was forced to cancel a trip to Switzerland to speak at a fundraiser for the United Israel Appeal after it was revealed that a number of human rights groups were planning to prosecute Bush for his war crimes, including his contravention of the Convention Against Torture to which the United States is a signatory.

The Canadians were back on the case in 2011 when the Canadian Centre for International Justice—citing the evidence in a 2006 UN report, a 2007 Council of Europe report, and a 2008 US Senate Armed Services Committee report, as well as the testimony of UN Special Rapporteurs Nowak and Scheinin and a 2009 admission by Cheney and Bush’s own 2010 memoirs—attempted to prosecute the 9/11-Criminal-in-Chief . . . but apparently “The Mounties always get their man” only applies when said man is not the psychopathic progeny of a famed international crime family. The prosecution was blocked by the B.C. government, and the election thief evaded justice once again.

Bush finally received his judgment in 2012, when the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission found George W. Bush guilty of war crimes in the illegal invasion of Iraq. Strangely enough, though, that hasn’t resulted in any country actually arresting him . . . yet.

But hey, Bush didn’t let Iraq’s complete lack of WMDs stop him from spilling the blood of millions of innocent Iraqis, so are we really going to stop trying to nab one of the prime war criminals of the 21st century just because it didn’t work the first few times? Of course not!

I suppose I should make it clear that this isn’t a partisan thing. Let’s arrest every living US president for their part in committing crimes against humanity and for their expansion of the American empire on the back of countless dead women and children!

And, while we’re at it, let’s nab their friends, too. Friends like . . .

TONY BLAIR

If Bush deserves jail (and he certainly does), then surely Tony Blair deserves to be right there beside him as the war crimes tribunal begins.

After all, when Bush and Cheney and Rice and the gaggle of neocons in Washington were selling totally made-up “mushroom cloud” bullplop to the trusting American rubes, there was Blair, selling his sexed-up dossier and peddling his 45-minute fantasy and murdering David Kelly.

And when Bush was planning to stage a false flag event in order to justify war in Iraq, who was he conspiring with? That’s right: Tony “Aztec Rebirther” Blair.

And when it came time to sell the public on the Osama-did-9/11 myth, who did Bush recruit? You guessed it.

Then there was Blair’s own 7/7 false flag that was used to perpetuate the terror myth and his call to “crack down on future problem children before they are even born” and his repeated calls for digital IDs and vaccine passports.

Yes, there is no shortage of reasons why we might want to add Tony Blair to the list of dangerous political criminals who need to be thrown behind bars.

But hold on a second. Looking at this list, I notice something is missing: namely, estrogen!

JACINDA ARDERN

Pardon me! I forgot this is <CURRENT YEAR> and that any list that does not include a woman (however that’s defined!) just wouldn’t pass muster with the equity and inclusion crowd, so let’s make sure we get a female politician in shackles, too, shall we?

Now, there is no shortage of lady criminals to choose from. We should definitely have an orange jumpsuit ready for our apprehension of Angela “Minsk Fraudster” Merkel, of course. And we shouldn’t forget about Sanna “I Definitely Wasn’t On Drugs!” Marin just because she’s been replaced as Finland’s chief pathocrat.

But if we’re going to go after recently departed female prime ministers, let’s start with Jacinda Ardern.

As with all of the others on our roster, there is no shortage of reasons to issue a warrant for the former Prime Minister of New Zealand, including her attempts to crack down on the free speech rights of citizens at home and abroad with a global censorship system.

And who could forget the New Zealand government’s participation in the crimes against humanity perpetrated during the scamdemic, like rampant discrimination against the unvaccinated and the institution of medical martial law at military-run quarantine facilities? After all, even New Zealand’s own courts ruled that Ardern’s government had acted “unlawfully, unreasonably and in breach of the Bill of Rights” in its enactment of an absolutely bonkers quarantine lottery system and that its vaccine mandate for Police and Defence Force staff was similarly a breach of fundamental rights and thus illegal.

But of all of the many crimes that Ardern presided over during her time as Prime Minster, one of the most egregious has to be the arrestof activist and Paster Billy Te Kahika and alternative media host Vinny Eastwood for the “crime” of protesting New Zealand’s draconian lockdown legislation. Not only were they arrested and held in custody for “offences against the Covid 19 Response Act,” but, as my readers may have seen by now, Billy and Vinny just received prison sentences of 4 months and 3 months, respectively, for their participation in peaceful protests.

In fact, as the change.org petition calling for their freedom notes, Billy “has been persecuted by the New Zealand Government for almost twenty months and vilified endlessly by Government funded mainstream media in New Zealand,” and his prison sentence “is the harshest sentence of its kind given in the western world to date.”

Keep in mind that this prison-worthy protest took place just months before New Zealand relaxed its lockdown restrictions and Ardern confirmed that orgies of up to 25 people were once again legal! (Unless the orgy participants were discussing their opposition to lockdowns, presumably.)

But at least it all turned out well for Jacinda. After shedding crocodile tears during a speech announcing her retirement as Prime Minister in which she claimed she had no plans for the future other than “spending time with her family,” she promptly went back on her word and took up a new post as a . . .

. . . wait for it . . .

. . . internet authoritarian!

That’s right, apparently “spending time with her family” is globalese for “becoming a special envoy for the Christchurch Call,” the New Zealand-led global censorship body that aims to “eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online” by labeling all of their political opponents as terrorists and scrubbing their material from the internet.

So, sadly, no, Ardern is not retiring from public life as promised. But it’s good to know that she got to squeeze in one last lie to the New Zealand public on her way out the door!

ARREST THEM ALL!

You know, compiling this list is a lot harder than I expected. Not because there aren’t enough politicians to arrest but because there are too many.

I mean, we have Biden and Trump and Bush 43 on the list already, so we might as well throw every other American president on there, too. (Yes, every one of them.)

And I don’t want to be accused of any pro-Canadian bias, so I’m more than happy to throw Trudeau in there for his crimes against the Canadian people.

And I haven’t even gotten to President-for-Life Xi Jinping yet.

. . . Hmmm. Come to think of it, this list is getting too long already and I’m just getting started! I mean, we haven’t even considered what would happen if we took seriously the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalize War and its proposal to make warfare itself a crime. How many more politicians would that add to the arrest warrant list?

So why don’t we just cut to the chase. Perhaps instead of making a list of all the politicians we should arrest, it would be easier to make a list of all the politicians we shouldn’t arrest.

OK, let me think about it.

. . . Uhhh . . .

. . . Give me a minute here . . .

Ahhh, this is too difficult.

Let’s just go ahead and arrest them all!

Of course, I suppose that would mean that we’d have to face the prospect of a world without politicians. I mean, can you imagine a world without politicians?

You know what? I’m willing to give it a try if you are.

~via The Corbett Report

May 11, 2019

JON RAPPOPORT: “The Lure Of A Stimulus-Response World — Shrinking Freedom Is A Spiritual Covert Op”

“What do you think AI is all about? Stimulus-response. AI is engineered to provide widespread and varied stimuli — in order to extract desired responses. The future would be a locked down world, disguised as ‘helpful machine companions’.”

~Jon Rappoport

Most people never even think about the individual spirit. That’s strange, because a person IS an individual spirit.

He’s not a brain or a physical form or a machine.

The individual spirit wants freedom. His energy is directed toward using that freedom to create in an open future.

An open present-and-future equals freedom.

There is internal freedom, and external freedom (open unrestricted space) in the world.

The individual spirit can be trained to expect and even favor less freedom. It happens. Often, the rationale given is: we need more rules to protect everyone. Protection, protection, protection — vastly overcooked.

Major powers behind the scenes will covertly finance and organize conflict, crime, violence, war, and violation of basic freedoms, in order to “prove” that everyone needs to be protected.

When an individual has freedom and feels it, his view of life and the world CHANGES IMMEDIATELY. He looks around, astonished. His muzzle has fallen away. He feels his voice, his body, and he feels open space. He suddenly has tons of energy, and he’s ready to use that energy.

Therefore, “operators” decide they must turn down the flame and pour water on it. “Can’t have lots of free people walking around. It spells trouble.”

Or you’ll get something like this. Sitting with his fellow planners in a secure boardroom, a heavy hitter says, “You know, in XXX Country, there is a remote lake in the mountains. Thirty families have been living there in a community for perhaps a thousand years. They still use the same large dugout canoes. They fish. They embroider and sew. They make colorful pots. They have freedom, and they know what to do with it. We leave them alone. They’re quiet. They have no interest in exporting their way of life. They’re rather quaint. All over the world, there are small groups like this. We don’t care about them. We’re focused on nations and their populations. These are the people we want to control. We want to ‘prove’ they need less freedom in order to be protected. They need more rules and intrusive laws and mandates. And many, many bureaucrats…”

Part of the control covert op involves convincing people they’re stimulus-response organisms and nothing else. SPIRIT doesn’t exist. It’s just a fiction. Instead, fit yourself into a slot where you’re obeying more and more rules — ALL the rules. Spend your life adapting to the rules. THE RULES ARE THE STIMULUS. OBEYING THE RULES IS THE RESPONSE.

As part and parcel of that process, DON’T FIND YOUR VOICE. DON’T CREATE A FREE AND STRONG VOICE. Because, if you do, you become aware of many new things. You become aware of the fact that you have a lot more power than you assumed. You have energy in that voice. You can express all sorts of ideas; you can affect others — through contagion, they begin to tap into their own voices.

On top of that, using your own voice brings you to a better state of health.

You’re inventing your own freedom.

What do you think AI is all about? Stimulus-response. AI is engineered to provide widespread and varied stimuli — in order to extract desired responses. The future would be a locked down world, disguised as “helpful machine companions.”

The lure is: “It’s easy. AI devices will help you navigate an increasing complex society. You’ll be much happier fitting into an AI civilization. You’ll bypass the need to figure out things for yourself. AI will give you simple answers and instructions. You’ll respond by following those instructions…”

How long will it take to put freedom on the back burner? Not very.

But someone who knows he has freedom and feels it — he’s different. He doesn’t care about responding to stimuli. His experience of life tells him his freedom is beyond these lunacies.

He needs to invent his future as he wants it to be.

That process is high, wide, and deep.

~via DavidIcke.com

March 12, 2019

CAITLIN JOHNSTONE: “The Revolution Has No Hollywood Ending”

“People are hoping that Donald Trump gets arrested for conspiring with Russia and dragged off in chains and everything goes back to normal. People are hoping that President Trump drains the swamp, locks up Hillary Clinton, arrests most of Capitol Hill for child molestation, and destroys the Deep State. People are hoping there’s a violent revolution which restores individual sovereignty to the citizenry. People are hoping there’s a peaceful people’s revolution which ousts the ruling class and replaces the status quo with whatever their personal favored strain of leftism is. Everyone’s subconsciously looking for some big, momentous climax where the Good Guys are vindicated and the Bad Guys are brought to justice.

And it just isn’t going to go down like that.”

~Caitlin Johnstone

After struggling against our own self-destructive tendencies throughout the entirety of recorded history, humanity is now at a point where that struggle is probably going to be resolved, one way or another, within the lifetime of most people reading this.

The movie about this struggle has been written with one of two possible endings. In the first, we are unable to overcome our self-destructive tendencies, and the last of our species dies by radiation poisoning or choking on the dust of an uninhabitable planet. In the second, we evolve beyond our self-destructive tendencies and move into a healthy relationship with our minds, our ecosystem, and each other.

Neither of these two endings would work in a Hollywood blockbuster. In the first, humanity dies off not with a bang but with a whimper as a result of nuclear fallout or climate collapse. In the second, conflict and drama as we know it will cease to exist as we pull up and away from the self-destructive patterns which brought us to this point. We’ll either keep along this same destructive trajectory and meet its inevitable end very soon, or we’ll deviate from that trajectory into something wildly different. In either case, there is no kissing the girl while the credits roll, no coolly striding away from the explosion, and no spin-kicking the bad guy off a cliff into lava after uttering a short, memorable line.

I say this because it seems like a lot of people are kind of hoping for a Hollywood ending in some way. People are hoping that Donald Trump gets arrested for conspiring with Russia and dragged off in chains and everything goes back to normal. People are hoping that President Trump drains the swamp, locks up Hillary Clinton, arrests most of Capitol Hill for child molestation, and destroys the Deep State. People are hoping there’s a violent revolution which restores individual sovereignty to the citizenry. People are hoping there’s a peaceful people’s revolution which ousts the ruling class and replaces the status quo with whatever their personal favored strain of leftism is. Everyone’s subconsciously looking for some big, momentous climax where the Good Guys are vindicated and the Bad Guys are brought to justice.

And it just isn’t going to go down like that.

If you’ve paid much attention to human behavior throughout your life, you know that we reliably repeat the same patterns until there’s inner healing and personal growth. If you’ve experienced inner healing and personal growth, you know that the actual experience of it is generally anti-climactic. True healing is always a game of subtraction, and it moves in the exact opposite direction of the egoically satisfying mental narratives which Hollywood has grown so skilled at providing us. When true inner healing takes place, it doesn’t usually make for a good story, and its effects often go unnoticed for some time, because they are evidenced not in the addition of something new but in the subtraction of something old. You look at your memories of your old unwholesome behavior patterns and think “Hmm, how strange that I used to do that sort of thing!”

If humanity transcends its unwholesome patterns at the end of this movie, it’s going to happen in much the same way. Not in an egoically gratifying way where we see our most hated political figures punished and our own ideological preferences uplifted, but in the simple falling away of old patterns. If human consciousness evolves to the point where we can avert our own destruction, then it will necessarily have dropped the egoic patterns of fear, greed and negativity which kept us bound to our old destructive behaviors. Were that to happen, we’d probably struggle to even remember what we used to stress and rage about when looking at the state of our world.

Nothing else will do the trick. If we do come to some dramatic, egoically satisfying climax, like where all the oligarchs and warmongers are guillotined and their wealth distributed among the needy or whatever, then it isn’t the end of the movie. We have not arrived at a point where we’ve transcended our old patterns, we’ve just seen those old patterns manifest in a way which happens to be egoically pleasing to us in this particular instance. And we will soon see them manifest in ways which we find far from pleasing again.

We will not arrive at our happy ending unless we collectively heal away those old egoic addictions to drama and conflict. Even if we did somehow manage to create a utopia without healing away those old egoic addictions, it would be quickly destroyed and the countdown to doomsday restarted by the gnashing, looping patterns which brought us to the brink of extinction in the first place.

Because guess what? From the perspective of our current state of drama-addicted and conflict-addicted collective consciousness, a world without drama and conflict is dull and worthless. Those addictions will keep leading us toward our destruction until we shed them, if for no other reason than our psychological inability to live in a peaceful, harmonious world.

Are you able to live in a peaceful, harmonious world? A world that is boring to the ego and unsuitable for Hollywood scripts? When I look at the behavior of a lot of activists on social media, it seems like a lot of them fear an end to drama and conflict more than they fear the end of the world. It sounds funny to say, but I think this is legitimately the case for many people. Our addiction to drama and conflict is so strong and our ability to just be at peace in the here and now so weak that keeping things from becoming harmonious can feel like an existential life-and-death need. And we all know people who are strongly predisposed toward stirring up drama to feed that illusory need.

To be able to live in a peaceful world where we collaborate harmoniously with our ecosystem and our fellow humans, we’ll have to transcend our inability to simply be. To have a world where all human ingenuity is pointed at making the world a better place instead of inventing new ways to create landfill for mass consumption and new ways to kill and exploit each other, we’re going to have to have minds that are able to survive in an environment with a lot less conflict, and, once our ingenuity really gets going, a lot less work as well. Minds that can rest comfortably without frenetic busyness or drama. Such minds are currently rare among our species.

The reason there are so many Hollywood movies about dystopian futures and hardly any about utopian futures is because there is no drama and conflict in utopia. Hollywood movies bring in the big bucks by being egoically pleasing to watch; it’s ego candy to watch heroes kicking villains off cliffs, because we can place ourselves in the role of the protagonist and imagine ourselves emerging triumphantly from the drama and conflicts displayed on the screen.

This is why I refer to myself as a “utopia prepper”. In order to have a peaceful, harmonious world, we’re going to have to have minds that are receptive to such a thing. I consider cultivating such a mind to be the most important thing I do in paving the way for paradise on earth, abandoning all attachments to our old ways of operating and opening a path within myself for something new. This will necessarily happen among us all if we’re to see the happy ending of this movie, and if we do it won’t be spectacular. It won’t be egoically gratifying. We’ll simply cease engaging in unwholesome patterns in a very anti-climactic way, begin channeling our ingenuity into making the world a better place, and perhaps once in a while look back on history and think, “Hmm, how strange that we used to do that sort of thing!”

~via WakingTimes.com

December 8, 2018

RICHARD ENOS: “Why It’s A Shame George H. W. Bush Wasn’t Interrogated Before He Died”

Ascension Avatar note: Or was he? Will we ever know? Just bringing these things into the light… For the record, Benjamin Fulford claims that “Clone Number 34” of the “Nazi Fourth Reich Fuhrer George H.W. Scherff (Bush)” has been dead since June, and that the original G. H. W. B. died on January 8, 1992 after choking on sushi, and being given the final ‘off’ from Barbara Bush’s “poisoned cloth”… Stranger than fiction? Read the full report here with a link to the incident on video: https://sananda.website/benjamin-fulford-complete-report-december-3d-2018/

. . .

In Brief

The Facts:
With the passing of George H. W. Bush, yet another bloodline family member moves on without having to account to the public for his crimes against humanity.

Reflect On:
What is the value of coming to a full understanding of the dark and horrific crimes perpetrated by ruling bloodline family members like George H. W. Bush? What role do they play in our collective evolution?

In the wake of the passing of former President George H. W. Bush, and the reverence and solemnity that pervaded his state funeral, I was struck with a particularly paradoxical emotion. On one hand, I fully endorse the tradition of reliving the highest points of achievement of someone who had just passed away, and imbuing the totality of their life with grand purpose and meaning, as I myself was happy to do in writing my own father’s eulogy. On the other hand, I cannot fully escape the regret I feel that another bloodline family member who has perpetrated great and horrific crimes against humanity has moved on without having to make himself accountable to the world, and in the process reveal the means and motives of the bloodline family rule of the planet to enable humanity to fully liberate itself from it.

Certainly, when I enter into my ‘higher self’ perspective, I understand that acceptance and forgiveness of all past misdeeds is essential for healing and moving forward. But healing and moving forward also require knowing the truth and having it acknowledged, so we know exactly what it is we are forgiving. Otherwise the anger and despair are likely to simply be buried. The incongruity between the lavish honor and praise ubiquitously delivered through mainstream media and the harrowing accounts I’ve heard and read about George H. W. Bush’s cruel Satanic practices drew me to this video interview clip with David Icke, where he explains that there are a number of reasons why we need to look at and expose the practices of the man he calls ‘Father Bush’.

Father Bush High Up The Ladder

David Icke puts George H. W. Bush, who died at age 94, in a category with others high up in the ranks of the ruling bloodline families, aligned with their darkest practices, such as drinking the adrenalized blood of tortured children to lengthen their own lives:

“These people always seem to live long lives, don’t they, the Kissingers, and the Father Bushes, and the David Rockefellers, and the Queen Mother in England, who lived to a hundred and two, and the Queen of England, now, is well of age, because they’re not given the same treatment, health treatment, the rest of us get, one of the bloody reasons, and also the other things that they do which is very dark, satanic, and to do with the energy of children.”

More on the treatment of children later. But important to note that George H. W. Bush’s testimony would have been invaluable because he was higher up the bloodline rank than most other high profile public servants who belong to this group, like Barack Obama or his son George W. Bush. In fact, David Wilcock recounts a story he heard from multiple sources that when Barack Obama had been sworn into office, he had a meeting with all the past presidents, and then a private 30 minute sit-down with Father Bush, who called him a ‘nigger’ and warned him that he was to follow what the ruling elite told him to do or else his wife and daughters would be brutally raped and killed.

George H. W. Bush seemed to be a kingpin in the Deep State and publicly made great strides in advancing the New World Order agenda, actually being the one who popularized the phrase, while privately pulling important strings to advance the Deep State agenda, like helping to align the CIA with the globalist plan during his time as CIA Director and having a hand early on in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. David Icke says he would have liked to interrogate Bush not only for his political role in trying to enslave humanity as a whole, but perhaps more importantly for his dark, hidden practices as well:

“Father George Bush is such a classic purveyor of this madness, this insanity that they want to impose on the world, and as presidents go, he’s a bit higher up the ladder, than say his son, or some of the others, and I would want to confront him with, not just questions about his role through the years in so many things, because coming from a bloodline family, he would have been brought, from birth, he would be developed to be in the positions that he was in, head of the CIA, and vice-president, president and all these other things that he was involved in.”

But there’s another area of Father George Bush, which is something that a lot of conspiracy research doesn’t cover, but really needs to, and that is pedophilia. It’s a deep rabbit hole, but when you connect the dots, you can explain why the ratio of pedophiles to positions of power, especially in the higher levels, is fantastic compared with the ratio of paedophiles in the general population.

The Torture Of Children

In the video interview David Icke does not go too much into the evidence regarding the crimes of Bush Sr., which he says is discussed in much greater detail in his books and full lectures, though he does point out that he has had firsthand witness testimony of what Bush Sr. has done:

“This man, Father George Bush, has not just been responsible for the most unspeakable, grotesque, unimaginable sexual abuse and torture of children, using various electromagnetic technologies and such that cause enormous pain for the kids who are tortured, this guy’s been responsible for the deaths of goodness knows how many children. And I’ve met some of the adults that he abused as children and survived, and they are absolutely scrambled mentally, emotionally, and physically, because of the horrors that this man put them through.”

Now there’s a number of reasons, Luke, why we need to look at this, and expose this, first of all to stop the kids having this done to them, but also to let people to see into the minds and the mentality of those who are behind this global conspiracy.”

Lack of Empathy

Icke goes on to discuss how the reason one would want to interrogate Bush is to come to understand why members of the elite ruling bloodline families behave the way they do. And the key point is to understand their complete lack of empathy. Icke says ‘there is something about their genetics which has deleted empathy. It’s deleted the ability to feel the consequences, for others, of your actions.’

Because our own empathy is so central to our understanding of human life, it is not surprising that many good, kind, well-adjusted people simply cannot fathom that there are people in high places putting children through excruciating torture through sexual abuse as well as ritual sacrifice. And because so many cannot fathom it, and might not be willing to even consider it, exposing it has been a slow, piecemeal process while these practices continue to happen in our world.

If we can imagine that from birth, members of these bloodline families are themselves put through ritual abuse and mind-control processes from when they are very young to completely sever their empathy for other human beings, and essentially live in a state of dissociative fear where their only satisfaction is personal power, wealth, and control over others, then it becomes possible to come to grips with what is really going on at the highest levels of power in the world.

While George H. W. Bush is no longer around to reveal the tale of his transgressions, there is still a multitude of opportunities for us to uncover not only the extent of his crimes, but the big picture they help to reveal about bloodline family rule on our planet.

The Takeaway

Difficult as it is to go through, the truth about how the ruling elite controls and manipulates humanity through its deception and dark practices is an essential step in our awakening. It’s important for us to break through our own fear and loathing and come to understand the nature of having been ruled by non-empathetic psychopaths who have been programmed to look and seem ‘normal’ on the outside. We need to stop projecting our own humanity onto them because all vestiges of humanity has been drummed out of them.

Condemning them and getting angry may very well be a stage many of us need to go through, but eventually we will need to recognize them as victims themselves and forgive them. While they might not be aware of it during their lives, they are still a part of the human family and ultimately they chose to play these dark roles in service to human evolution.

~via Collective-Evolution.com

October 17, 2018

JOHN W. WHITEHEAD: “You Want to Make America Great Again? Start by Making America Free Again”

“If the freedom of speech be taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

—George Washington

Living in a representative republic means that each person has the right to take a stand for what they think is right, whether that means marching outside the halls of government, wearing clothing with provocative statements, or simply holding up a sign.

That’s what the First Amendment is supposed to be about.

Yet through a series of carefully crafted legislative steps and politically expedient court rulings, government officials have managed to disembowel this fundamental freedom, rendering it with little more meaning than the right to file a lawsuit against government officials.

In the process, government officials have succeeded in insulating themselves from their constituents, making it increasingly difficult for average Americans to make themselves seen or heard by those who most need to hear what “we the people” have to say.

Indeed, President Trump—always keen to exercise his free speech rights to sound off freely on any topic that strikes his fancy—has not been as eager to protect the First Amendment rights of his fellow citizens to speak freely, assemble, protest and petition one’s government officials for a redress of grievances.

Not that long ago, in fact, Trump suggested that the act of protesting should be illegal.

The president has also suggested demonstrators should lose their jobs or be met with violence for speaking out.

Mind you, this is the man who took an oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Perhaps someone should have made sure Trump had actually read the Constitution first.

Most recently, the Trump Administration proposed rules that would crack down on protests in front of the White House and on the National Mall.

Imagine if the hundreds of thousands of participants in the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, which culminated with Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial, had been forced into free speech zones or required to pay for the “privilege” of protest.

There likely would not have been a 1964 Civil Rights Act.

What is going on here?

Clearly, the government has no interest in hearing what “we the people” have to say.

It’s the message that is feared, especially if that message challenges the status quo.

That’s why so many hurdles are being placed in the path of those attempting to voice sentiments that may be construed as unpopular, offensive, conspiratorial, violent, threatening or anti-government.

Yet the right of political free speech is the basis of all liberty.

It’s the citizen’s right to confront the government and demand that it alter its policies. But first, citizens have to be seen and heard, and only under extraordinary circumstances should free speech ever be restricted.

No government that claims to value freedom would adopt such draconian measures to clamp down on lawful First Amendment activities. These tactics of censorship, suppression and oppression go hand-in-hand with fascism.

Efforts to confine and control dissenters are really efforts to confine and control the effect of their messages, whatever those might be.

That’s the point, isn’t it?

The powers-that-be don’t want us to be seen and heard.

Haven’t you noticed that interactions with elected representatives have become increasingly manufactured and distant over the past 50 years? Press conferences, ticketed luncheons, televised speeches and one-sided town hall meetings held over the phone now largely take the place of face-to-face interaction with constituents.

Additionally, there has been an increased use of so-called “free speech zones,” designated areas for expressive activity used to corral and block protestors at political events from interacting with public officials. Both the Democratic and Republican parties have used these “free speech zones,” some located within chain-link cages, at various conventions to mute any and all criticism of their policies.

This push to insulate government officials from those exercising their First Amendment rights stems from an elitist mindset which views them as different, set apart somehow, from the people they have been appointed to serve and represent.

We have litigated and legislated our way into a new governmental framework where the dictates of petty bureaucrats carry greater weight than the inalienable rights of the citizenry.

With every passing day, we’re being moved further down the road towards a totalitarian society characterized by government censorship, violence, corruption, hypocrisy and intolerance, all packaged for our supposed benefit in the Orwellian doublespeak of national security, tolerance and so-called “government speech.”

Indeed, while lobbyists mill in and out of the homes and offices of Congressmen, the American people are kept at a distance through free speech zones, electronic town hall meetings, and security barriers. And those who dare to breach the gap—even through silent forms of protest—are arrested for making their voices heard.

On paper, we are free to speak.

In reality, however, we are only as free to speak as a government official may allow.

Free speech zones, bubble zones, trespass zones, anti-bullying legislation, zero tolerance policies, hate crime laws and a host of other legalistic maladies dreamed up by politicians and prosecutors have conspired to corrode our core freedoms.

Indeed, the Supreme Court has had the effrontery to suggest that the government can discriminate freely against First Amendment activity that takes place within a government forum, justifying such discrimination as “government speech.”

If it were just the courts suppressing free speech, that would be one thing to worry about, but First Amendment activities are being pummeled, punched, kicked, choked, chained and generally gagged all across the country.

Protest laws are not about protecting the economy or private property or public sidewalks. Rather, they are intended to keep us corralled, muzzle discontent and discourage anyone from challenging government authority.

The reasons for such censorship vary widely, but the end result remains the same: the complete eradication of what Benjamin Franklin referred to as the “principal pillar of a free government.”

If Americans are not able to peacefully assemble for expressive activity outside of the halls of government or on public roads on which government officials must pass, the First Amendment has lost all meaning.

If we cannot stand silently outside of the Supreme Court or the Capitol or the White House, our ability to hold the government accountable for its actions is threatened, and so are the rights and liberties which we cherish as Americans.

Free speech can certainly not be considered “free” when expressive activities across the nation are being increasingly limited, restricted to so-called free speech zones, or altogether blocked.

If citizens cannot stand out in the open on a public sidewalk and voice their disapproval of their government, its representatives and its policies, without fearing prosecution, then the First Amendment with all its robust protections for free speech, assembly and the right to petition one’s government for a redress of grievances is little more than window-dressing on a store window: pretty to look at but serving little real purpose.

What most people fail to understand is that the First Amendment is not only about the citizenry’s right to freely express themselves. Rather, the First Amendment speaks to the citizenry’s right to express their concerns about their government to their government, in a time, place and manner best suited to ensuring that those concerns are heard.

The First Amendment gives every American the right to “petition his government for a redress of grievances.”

This amounts to so much more than filing a lawsuit against the government. It works hand in hand with free speech to ensure, as Adam Newton and Ronald K.L. Collins report for the Five Freedoms Project, “that our leaders hear, even if they don’t listen to, the electorate. Though public officials may be indifferent, contrary, or silent participants in democratic discourse, at least the First Amendment commands their audience.”

As Newton and Collins elaborate:

“Petitioning” has come to signify any nonviolent, legal means of encouraging or disapproving government action, whether directed to the judicial, executive or legislative branch. Lobbying, letter-writing, e-mail campaigns, testifying before tribunals, filing lawsuits, supporting referenda, collecting signatures for ballot initiatives, peaceful protests and picketing: all public articulation of issues, complaints and interests designed to spur government action qualifies under the petition clause, even if the activities partake of other First Amendment freedoms.

There’s more.

Even more critical than the right to speak freely, or pray freely, or assemble freely, or petition the government for a redress of grievances, or have a free press is the unspoken freedom enshrined in the First Amendment that assures us of the right to think freely and openly debate issues without being muzzled or treated like a criminal.

Just as surveillance has been shown to “stifle and smother dissent, keeping a populace cowed by fear,” government censorship gives rise to self-censorship, breeds compliance and makes independent thought all but impossible.

In the end, censorship and political correctness not only produce people that cannot speak for themselves but also people who cannot think for themselves. And a citizenry that can’t think for itself is a citizenry that will neither rebel against the government’s dictates nor revolt against the government’s tyranny.

The end result: a nation of sheep who willingly line up for the slaughterhouse.

Still, as Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas advised in his dissent in Colten v. Kentucky, “we need not stay docile and quiet” in the face of authority.

The Constitution does not require Americans to be servile or even civil to government officials.

Neither does the Constitution require obedience (although it does insist on nonviolence).

If we just cower before government agents and meekly obey, we may find ourselves following in the footsteps of those nations that eventually fell to tyranny.

The alternative involves standing up and speaking truth to power.

Jesus Christ walked that road.

So did Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and countless other freedom fighters whose actions changed the course of history.

Indeed, had Christ merely complied with the Roman police state, there would have been no crucifixion and no Christian religion.*

Had Gandhi meekly fallen in line with the British Empire’s dictates, the Indian people would never have won their independence.

Had Martin Luther King Jr. obeyed the laws of his day, there would have been no civil rights movement.

And if the founding fathers had marched in lockstep with royal decrees, there would have been no American Revolution.

In other words, if freedom means anything, it means that those exercising their right to protest are showing the greatest respect for the principles on which this nation was founded: the right to free speech and the right to dissent.

Clearly, the First Amendment to the Constitution assures Americans of the right to speak freely, assemble freely and protest (petition the government for a redress of grievances).

Whether those First Amendment activities take place in a courtroom or a classroom, on a football field or in front of the White House is not the issue. What matters is that Americans have a right—according to the spirit, if not always the letter, of the law—to voice their concerns without being penalized for it.

Frankly, the First Amendment does more than give us a right to criticize our country: it makes it a civic duty.

Let’s not confuse patriotism (love for or devotion to one’s country) with blind obedience to the government’s dictates. That is the first step towards creating an authoritarian regime.

One can be patriotic and love one’s country while at the same time disagreeing with the government or protesting government misconduct. As journalist Barbara Ehrenreich recognizes, “Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.”

Indeed, I would venture to say that if you’re not speaking out or taking a stand against government wrongdoing—if you’re marching in lockstep with everything the government and its agents dole out—and if you’re prioritizing partisan politics over the principles enshrined in the Constitution, then you’re not a true patriot.

Real patriots care enough to take a stand, speak out, protest and challenge the government whenever it steps out of line. There is nothing patriotic about the lengths to which Americans have allowed the government to go in its efforts to dismantle our constitutional republic and shift the country into a police state.

It’s not anti-American to be anti-war or anti-police misconduct or anti-racial discrimination, but it is anti-American to be anti-freedom.

Listen: I served in the Army.

I lived through the Civil Rights era.

I came of age during the Sixties, when activists took to the streets to protest war and economic and racial injustice.

As a constitutional lawyer, I defend people daily whose civil liberties are being violated, including high school students prohibited from wearing American flag t-shirts to school, allegedly out of a fear that it might be disruptive.

I understand the price that must be paid for freedom.

Responsible citizenship means being outraged at the loss of others’ freedoms, even when our own are not directly threatened.

The Framers of the Constitution knew very well that whenever and wherever democratic governments had failed, it was because the people had abdicated their responsibility as guardians of freedom. They also knew that whenever in history the people denied this responsibility, an authoritarian regime arose which eventually denied the people the right to govern themselves.

Citizens must be willing to stand and fight to protect their freedoms. And if need be, it will entail publicly criticizing the government.

This is true patriotism in action.

Never in American history has there been a more pressing need to maintain the barriers in the Constitution erected by our Founders to check governmental power and abuse.

Not only do we no longer have dominion over our bodies, our families, our property and our lives, but the government continues to chip away at what few rights we still have to speak freely and think for ourselves.

If the government can control speech, it can control thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.

My friends, let us not be played for fools.

The government’s ongoing attempts to suppress lawful protest activities are intended to send a strong message that in the American police state, you’re either a patriot who marches in lockstep with the government’s dictates or you’re a pariah, a suspect, a criminal, a troublemaker, a terrorist, a radical, a revolutionary.

Yet by muzzling the citizenry, by removing the constitutional steam valves that allow people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world, the government is deliberately stirring the pot, creating a climate in which violence becomes inevitable.

When there is no steam valve—when there is no one to hear what the people have to say, because government representatives have removed themselves so far from their constituents—then frustration builds, anger grows and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

Then again, perhaps that was the government’s plan all along.

As John F. Kennedy warned in March 1962, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

The government is making violent revolution inevitable.

How do you lock down a nation?

You sow discontent and fear among the populace.

You teach them to be non-thinkers who passively accept whatever is told them, whether it’s delivered by way of the corporate media or a government handler.

You brainwash them into believing that everything the government does is for their good and anyone who opposes the government is an enemy.

You acclimate them to a state of martial law, carried out by soldiers disguised as police officers but bearing the weapons of war.

You polarize them so that they can never unite and stand united against the government.

You create a climate in which silence is golden and those who speak up are shouted down.

You spread propaganda and lies.

You package the police state in the rhetoric of politicians.

And then, when and if the people finally wake up to the fact that the government is not and has never been their friend, when it’s too late for peaceful protests and violence is all that remains to them as a recourse against tyranny, you use all of the tools you’ve been so carefully amassing—the militarized police, the criminal databases and surveillance and identification systems and private prisons and protest laws—and you shut them down for good.

Divide and conquer.

It’s one of the oldest military strategies in the books, and it’s proven to be the police state’s most effective weapon for maintaining the status quo.

How do you conquer a nation?

Distract the populace with screen devices, with sports, entertainment spectacles, political circuses and materialism.

Keep them focused on their differences—economic, religious, environmental, political, racial—so they can never agree on anything.

And then, when they’re so divided that they are incapable of joining forces against a common threat, start picking them off one by one.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, what we’re witnessing is just the latest incarnation of the government’s battle plan for stamping out any sparks of resistance and keeping the populace under control: censorship, surveillance, battlefield tactics, military weaponry, and a complete suspension of the Constitution.

About the Author

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute, where this article (You Want to Make America Great Again? Start by Making America Free Again) was originally published. He is the author of A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State and The Change Manifesto.

~via WakingTimes.com

*Ascension Avatar note: Read anything by Lisa Renee regarding the false crucifixion of Yeshua Christ, who ascended naturally.