Connect with us

Alternative News

From Lockdowns To ‘The Great Reset’

Published

on

Photo Credit: TMU

Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge

The lockdowns in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the implementation of long-held plans to establish a so-called new world order. Under the auspices of the World Economic Forum (WEF), global policymakers are advocating for a “Great Reset” with the intent of creating a global technocracy. It is not by coincidence that on October 18, 2019, in New York City the WEF participated in “Event 201” at the “high-level” pandemic exercise organized by the John Hopkins Center for Health Security.

This coming technocracy involves close cooperation between the heads of the digital industry and of governments. With programs such as guaranteed minimum income and healthcare for all, the new kind of governance combines strict societal control with the promise of comprehensive social justice.

The truth, however, is that this new world order of digital tyranny comes with a comprehensive social credit system. The People’s Republic of China is the pioneer of this method of surveillance and control of individuals, corporations, and socio-political entities.

For the individual, one’s identity is reduced to an app or chip that registers almost any personal activity. In order to gain a few individual rights, and be it only to travel to a certain place, a person must balance such apparent privileges with his submission to a web of regulations that define in detail what is “good behavior” and deemed as beneficial to humankind and the environment. For example, during a pandemic, this sort of control would extend from the obligation of wearing a mask and practicing social distancing to having specific vaccinations in order to apply for a job or to travel.

It is, in short, a type of social engineering which is the opposite of a spontaneous order or of development. Like the mechanical engineer with a machine, the social engineer—or technocrat—treats society as an object. Different from the brutal suppressions by the totalitarianism of earlier times, the modern social engineer will try to make the social machine work on its own according to the design. For this purpose, the social engineer must apply the laws of society the way the mechanical engineer follows the laws of nature. Behavioural theory has reached a stage of knowledge that makes the dreams of social engineering possible. The machinations of social engineering operate not through brute force, but subtly by nudge.

Under the order envisioned by the Great Reset, the advancement of technology is not meant to serve the improvement of the conditions of the people but to submit the individual to the tyranny of a technocratic state. “The experts know better” is the justification.

READ: Globalists Reveal That The “Great Economic Reset” Is Coming In 2021

The Agenda

The plan for an overhaul of the world is the brainchild of an elite group of businessmen, politicians, and their intellectual entourage that used to meet in Davos, Switzerland, in January each year. Brought into existence in 1971, the World Economic Forum has become a mega-global event since then. More than three thousand leaders from all over the world attended the meeting in 2020.

Under the guidance of the WEF, the agenda of the Great Reset says that the completion of the current industrial transformation requires a thorough overhaul of the economy, politics, and society. Such a comprehensive transformation requires the alteration of human behavior, and thus “transhumanism” is part of the program.

The Great Reset will be the theme of the fifty-first meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2021. Its agenda is the commitment to move the world economy toward “a more fair, sustainable and resilient future.” The program calls for “a new social contract” that is cantered on racial equality, social justice, and the protection of the nature. Climate change requires us “to decarbonize the economy” and to bring human thinking and behavior “into harmony with nature.” The aim is to build “more equal, inclusive and sustainable economies.” This new world order must be “urgently” implemented, the promotors of the WEF claim, and they point out that the pandemic “has laid bare the unsustainability of our system,” which lacks “social cohesion.

The WEF’s great reset project is social engineering at the highest level. Advocates of the reset contend that the UN failed to establish order in the world and could not advance forcefully its agenda of sustainable development—known as Agenda 2030—because of its bureaucratic, slow, and contradictory way of working. In contrast, the actions of the organizational committee of the World Economic Forum are swift and smart. When a consensus has been formed, it can be implemented by the global elite all over the world.

Social Engineering

The ideology of the World Economic Forum is neither left nor right, nor progressive or conservative, it is also not fascist or communist, but outright technocratic. As such, it includes many elements of earlier collectivist ideologies.

In recent decades, the consensus has emerged at the annual Davos meetings that the world needs a revolution, and that reforms have taken too long. The members of the WEF envision a profound upheaval at short notice. The time span should be so brief that most people will hardly realize that a revolution is going on. The change must be so swift and dramatic that those who recognize that a revolution is happening do not have the time to mobilize against it.

The basic idea of the Great Reset is the same principle that guided the radical transformations from the French to the Russian and Chinese Revolutions. It is the idea of constructivist rationalism incorporated in the state. But projects like the Great Reset leave unanswered the question of who rules the state. The state itself does not rule. It is an instrument of power. It is not the abstract state that decides, but the leaders of specific political parties and of certain social groups.

Earlier totalitarian regimes needed mass executions and concentration camps to maintain their power. Now, with the help of new technologies, it is believed, dissenters can easily be identified and marginalized. The nonconformists will be silenced by disqualifying divergent opinions as morally despicable.

The 2020 lockdowns possibly offer a preview of how this system works. The lockdown worked as if it had been orchestrated—and perhaps it was. As if following a single command, the leaders of big and small nations—and of different stages of economic development—implemented almost identical measures. Not only did many governments act in unison, they also applied these measures with little regard for the horrific consequences of a global lockdown.

Months of economic still-stand have destroyed the economic basis of millions of families. Together with social distancing, the lockdown has produced a mass of people unable to care for themselves. First, governments destroyed the livelihood, and then the politicians showed up as the saviour. The demand for social assistance is no longer limited to specific groups, but has become a need of the masses.

Once, war was the health of the state. Now it is fear of disease. What lies ahead is not the apparent coziness of a benevolent comprehensive welfare state with a guaranteed minimum income and healthcare and education for all. The lockdown and its consequences have brought a foretaste what is to come: a permanent state of fear, strict behavioural control, massive loss of jobs, and growing dependence on the state.

With the measures taken in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, a big step to reset the global economy has been made. Without popular resistance, the end of the pandemic will not mean the end of the lockdown and social distancing. At the moment, however, the opponents of the new world order of digital tyranny still have access to the media and platforms to dissent. Yet the time is running out. The perpetrators of the new world order have smelled blood. Declaring the coronavirus a pandemic has come in handy to promote the agenda of their Great Reset. Only massive opposition can slow down and finally stop the extension of the power grip of the tyrannical technocracy that is on the rise.

On a Personal Note

If you have not read the 1984 Novel by George Orwell I strongly advice buying it, as it’s an eye opener and a book that should be in your library. You can click HERE if you want to head over to Amazon and get a copy of it.

By Tyler Durden / Republished with permission / Zero Hedge

Please SHARE this article with your family and friends.

Alternative News

Israel Mandates “Vaccine Passes” For Gyms, Malls, Hotels & More – Some Using Facial Recognition

Published

on

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Photo Credit: Collective Evolution

What Happened: Israel has recently implemented a new measure that requires citizens who would like to enter into gyms, shopping malls, theatres, swimming pools and hotels to be vaccinated. Once they are vaccinated they receive a “vaccine pass.” You get a “green pass” if you have had two doses of the vaccine or if you’ve had COVID-19 and are presumed to be immune. Some of these places are also using facial recognition technology to confirm the identity of people.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tweeted, “We are the first country in the world that is reviving itself thanks to the millions of vaccines we brought in….Vaccinated? Get the Green Pass and get back to life.”

Social-distancing and mask wearing mandates are still in place even for those who have been vaccinated. Israel has administered at least one dose of the vaccine to nearly 50% of their population. That’s almost 4.5 million people, and they are claiming that the risk of illness from COVID-19 has dropped 95.8% among people who have received both shots.

According to Reuters:

Israel has logged more than 740,000 cases and 5,500 deaths from COVID-19, drawing criticism of Netanyahu’s sometimes patchy enforcement of three national lockdowns. The government has pledged that there will not be a fourth. But Nachman Ash, a physician in charge of the country’s pandemic response, told Army Radio that another lockdown “is still possible … Half of the population is still not immune.”

It’s unclear whether or not controversy has surrounded the death count in Israel. For example Ontario (Canada) public health clearly states that deaths will be marked as COVID deaths whether or not it’s clear if COVID was the cause or contributed to the death. This means that those who did not die as a result of COVID are included in the death count. You can find the source for that and read more about it here.

Dr. Ngozi Ezike, Director of the Illinois Department of Public Health stated the following during the first wave of the pandemic,

If you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live and then you were also found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death, despite if you died of a clear alternative cause it’s still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone who is listed as a COVID death that doesn’t mean that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of death.

These are a few of many examples.

Why This Is Important: Many mainstream media sources, as expected, have picked up on this story. There are quotes from citizens who have been interviewed who support these mandatory vaccine measures, with many expressing that it makes them feel safe and protected. This is obviously understandable, a large portion of people do feel this way, and do feel that vaccines help to protect people and stop the spread of COVID-19. But these are the people that seem to be given a voice within mainstream media. All other opinions, especially if they call into question the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine seem to be instantaneously shut down. Facebook, Twitter and Instagram for example, have been quite open about the fact that they do and will ban any accounts who bring to light information that paint vaccines in a negative light.

Despite no attention from mainstream media, many in the “alternative” media community are well aware of the growing vaccine hesitancy that exists within multiple countries. 

Riverside County, California has a population of approximately 2.4 million, and about 50% of healthcare workers in the county are refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine despite the fact that they have top priority and access to it. At Providence Holy Cross Medical Center in Mission Hills, one in five frontline nurses and doctors have declined the shot. Roughly 20% to 40% of L.A. County’s frontline workers who were offered the vaccine did the same, according to county public health officials. According to the L.A. Times, “The vaccine doubts swirling among healthcare workers across the country come as a surprise to researchers, who assumed hospital staff would be among those most in tune with the scientific data backing the vaccines”

The “scientific data” as the L.A. Times puts it has also come into question by academicians, scientists and doctors. For example, Dr. Peter Doshi, an associate editor at the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a piece in the journal issuing a word of caution about the supposed 95% Effective” COVID vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.” In it he outlines how there is no proof showing that the vaccine can and will prevent infection and/or transmission of the virus.

 A study recently published in Global Advances In Health & Medicine titled “Ascorbate as Prophylaxis and Therapy for COVID-19 – Update From Shanghai and U.S points out,

A recent consensus statement from a group of renowned infectious disease clinicians observed that vaccine programs have proven ill-suited to the fast-changing viruses underlying these illnesses, with efficacy ranging from 19% to 54% in the past few years.

But according to Facebook fact-checker Health Feedback,

In the case of both COVID-19 vaccines, the FDA concluded that they met the necessary criteria for safety and efficacy. Preliminary data from clinical trials indicate that both vaccines have more than 94% efficacy in protecting vaccinated individuals from the disease. Clinical trials are still underway, so estimates of each vaccine’s efficacy may change.

A few other papers have raised concerns as well, for example. A study published in October of 2020 in the International Journal of Clinical Practice states:

 COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.

In a new research article published in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, veteran immunologist J. Bart Classen expresses similar concerns and writes that “RNA-based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.”

I’m not going to go into detail here. If you want to read more about growing vaccine hesitancy among, not only people, but doctors and scientists as well and  the reasons as to why so many people are hesitant, you can do so in articles I’ve previously published that go more in depth herehere, and here.

The reason why Israel has implemented these measures, and why many other places in many other countries will most likely follow is based on the theory that if you are vaccinated, you are ultimately protecting others. This is referred to as “herd immunity.” In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors claim that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” This is one of multiple reasons why so many suggest voluntary choice as opposed to vaccine mandates.

It’s obviously quite a controversial issue these days.

The point I am making is that freedom of choice, in my opinion, should always remain and if not I feel that is quite immoral and unethical. At the end of the day, mandatory measures are being done in a clever way, because you still do have the freedom of choice in Israel, you just can’t enter certain places of business.

The Takeaway

At the end of the day, what seems to be happening is that the mainstream does not do a proper job at addressing controversial issues? When it comes to vaccines specifically, it’s not uncommon to hear terms like “anti-vax conspiracy theorist” being used without actually addressing the concerns that are being raised.

I often point to a conference held at the end of 2019 put on by the World Health Organization (WHO). At the conference, Dr. Heidi Larson a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project Emphasized this point, that this kind of terminology does not help and needs to be done away with. She also stated,

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen…still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider.

When it comes to vaccines specifically, a quote from a paper published in the International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy by professor Paddy Rawlinson, from Western Sydney University, provides some good insight into what I am referring to.

Critical criminology repeatedly has drawn attention to the state-corporate nexus as a site of corruption and other forms of criminality, a scenario exacerbated by the intensification of neoliberalism in areas such as health. The state-big pharma relationship, which increasingly influences health policy, is no exception. That is especially so when big pharma products such as vaccines, a burgeoning sector of the industry, are mandated in direct violation of the principle of informed consent. Such policies have provoked suspicion and dissent as critics question the integrity of the state-pharma alliance and its impact on vaccine safety. However, rather than encouraging open debate, draconian modes of governance have been implemented to repress and silence any form of criticism, thereby protecting the activities of the state and big pharma industry from independent scrutiny. The article examines this relationship in the context of recent legislation in Australia to intensify its mandatory regime around vaccines. It argues that attempts to undermine freedom of speech, and to systematically excoriate those who criticise or dissent from mandatory vaccine programs, function as a corrupting process and, by extension, serve to provoke the notion that corruption does indeed exist within the state-pharma alliance.

Censorship does not solve any problems. If there’s misinformation out there the solution to that, in my opinion, is more discussion and more free speech. Conversations and healthy debates should be occurring more in these times, instead what we are seeing is the shutdown of any opinion, information and evidence that seems to go against the grain.

Many of us are feeling the loss of freedoms, and even with new measures like that which is presented in this article, we are now seeing how our reality may become limited should we choose not to participate in certain measures we don’t agree with. The trouble we seem to be having is determining how to communicate about COVID, the fears we have around it, and how to come together as a community to ‘draw a line’ as to where we may be taking things too far.

Have we given ‘authority’ figures too much power to the point where they can limit our rights and freedoms if we do not comply? The issue of vaccines is not a black and white one. There are many concerns and issues and as a result of this, freedom of choice, I believe, should always remain. Many people see mandatory vaccine measures as completely unethical, others see them as necessary and justified. At the end of the day, if we keep listening and obeying we continue to place more power in the hands of people and institutions that may not have the best interests of humanity at heart and are more focused on profit, power and control. If there’s one thing that’s constant throughout history, it’s that global issues like COVID, climate change, and terrorism, for example, have all been used for powerful people to capitalize off of in more ways than one.

Do you truly believe that when the first wave, this second wave, the 16th wave of the coronavirus is a long-forgotten memory, that these capabilities will not be kept? That these datasets will not be kept? – Edward Snowden

It’s fine if you believe this vaccine is safe, effective and that everybody should take it. It’s also fine if you believe the opposite, why can’t we all just get along without one side forcing the other in order to access certain rights and freedoms?

This article (Israel Mandates “Vaccine Passes” For Gyms, Malls, Hotels & More – Some Using Facial Recognition) was originally created for Collective Evolution and is published here under Creative Commons.

Please SHARE this article with your family and friends.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

University Of Alaska Study ‘Definitively’ Concludes Fire Did Not Cause Building 7 Collapse On 9/11

Published

on

9/11,
Photo Credit: Mint Press News

Phillip SchneiderGuest Writer

On September 3rd, the University of Alaska Fairbanks released a study on their analysis of the infamous Twin Towers collapse. In it, they found that the third tower’s collapse was, “caused not by fire but rather by the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

On September 11th, 2001, World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed in on itself at free fall speed, falling over 100 feet in less than 10 seconds. After the event, the New York City government cleaned up the debris before a full forensic investigation could be done.

This information and more has prompted many family members of victims, architects, engineers, and everyday people to be sceptical of the official narrative surrounding 9/11, that three buildings fell that day based solely on the impact of Al-Qaeda’s hijacked planes.

The report, led by Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey and funded by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, is currently in draft form until its public comment period ends. The final report is expected to be released before the end of the year.

“The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse.” – Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey

University Study Concludes: Fire Did Not Bring Down Building 7 on 9/11

The conclusions of this four-year study, funded by the not-for-profit group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, runs in complete contrast to the findings of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the government-funded agency responsible for the official conclusion that fire caused by jet fuel was responsible for the collapse of each World Trade Center building, including Building 7, which was not hit by a plane.

In the recent study, computer models were created to simulate each collapse scenario, including both the conclusions of Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, as well as those of the NIST.

After analysing each scenario, the study authors concluded that, “the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of all columns in the building and not a progressive collapse involving the sequential failure of columns throughout the building.”

“We discovered that NIST over-estimated the rigidity of the outside frame by not modelling its connections… overall thermal movements at the A2001 base plate support near Column 79 were not sufficient to displace girder A2001.” – Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is an organization which represents over 3,000 certified architects and engineers who question the official story put out by NIST and the White House. The nonprofit has produced other studies as well, including “15 Years Later: One the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses”, published in the European Scientific Journal in 2016.

Footage of Building 7 collapsing on 9/11
Compiled Footage of Building 7’s Collapse

As time moves on, people seem to be more open-minded about the idea that the World Trade Center may not have fallen due to fire, as the official story suggests. Even Donald Trump suggested at one point that the buildings had probably been destroyed by explosives.

“How could a plane, even a 767 or a 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through the steel? I happen to think they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously because I just can’t imagine anything being able to go through that wall…. I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel.” – Donald Trump, 2001

The tragic events that occurred on 9/11 have led to many global changes including the war on terror, the TSA, the Patriot Act, and more, which were all introduced after the attacks. No matter what the cause of the collapse, people deserve to know the truth about this event that killed thousands and changed our government forever.

According to this analysis, the question is still very much up in the air.

“Despite simulating a number of hypothetical scenarios, we were unable to identify any progressive sequence of failures that could have taken place on September 11, 2001, and caused a total collapse of the building, let alone the observed straight-down collapse with approximately 2.5 seconds of free fall and minimal differential movement of the exterior.” – Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey

About the Author

Phillip Schneider is a student as well as a staff writer and assistant editor for Waking Times. If you would like to see more of his work, you can visit his website, or follow him on the free speech social network Minds.

Please SHARE this article with your family and friends.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Germany Starts Universal Basic Income Trial Giving Some Citizens $1400 A Month For 3 Years

Published

on

Germany Starts Universal Basic Income
Photo Credit: Collective Evolution

What Happened: Germany is starting a universal basic income trial where volunteers will get a $1400 dollar payment every single month as part of a study that will compare the experiences of 120 volunteers who receive it to 1,380 people who won’t. A total of 140,000 people have come together to help fund the study after the idea of a universal basic income continues to gain popularity. Germany is not the only country who has begun such initiatives, Finland also did something similar a few years ago, and proponents of the initiative believe it would improve peoples’ lives and reduce inequality, among other things. Opposition arguments to this type of initiative suggest that it would simply be unaffordable, too expensive and also discourage work.

Jürgen Schupp, who is leading the study, told the German newspaper Der Spiegel that it would improve the debate about universal basic income by producing new scientific evidence.

“The debate about the basic income has so far been like a philosophical salon in good moments and a war of faith in bad times,” he told the newspaper.

Universal basic income is not really supported by any of the major political parties across the globe, especially in Germany.

Why This Is Important: A quote often attributed to Henry Ford reads as follows, “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Isn’t it odd that the financial elite can simply print money at will? How come when we do it it’s called counter-fitting, but when they do it it’s called increasing the money supply? These people can literally create money out of thin air, and the more I understand the concept of fractional reserve banking, the more I realize that money is simply a tool to in-slave and control the human race while benefiting a select few. This becomes easier to see when you follow the money.

Do we not have the potential to create something better on our planet? Is money really needed, or could we all come together, cooperate and find a better way? If we are going to use this creation of ours, could it not be used in a better and more efficient way?

“As I followed the money I’ve learned that everything I once believed about money is simply not true.” – Foster Gamble

If you want to learn more about the system, you can refer to this article that goes into more detail: The Real Purpose of the Federal Reserve Banking System.

I believe these questions are important, as many of us have been made to believe that our financial system is for the greater good, and that it’s efficient and the only possible way to operate here on our planet. When it comes to the world of finance, our minds are stuck inside of a box.

When it comes to universal basic income, is it really too expensive? For those who believe it is not feasible, did you know that Mark Skidmore, a Michigan State University economist teamed up with multiple researchers, including Catherine Austin Fitts, former assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and  found trillions of unaccounted for dollars missing from housing & D.O.D?  Did you know that trillions of dollars are going into “black budget” programs that the president, for example, has no idea about? Did you know that there is no branch or agency of government that can overrule actions that the Federal Reserve takes? It’s simple, if you control the money supply, if you are the printer and the maker of money, you control the population and can create the experience you want humans to live inside.

The researchers found documents indicating a total of $20 trillion of undocumented adjustments had been made, from 1998 to 2015. The original government documents and a report describing the issue can be found here where updates are continually provided.

Imagine if this $21 trillion was allocated to a universal income package? Big financial institutions seem to have no issue with constantly printing money when they need it, but when it comes to concepts of universal income, there are always excuses. Ask yourself, is it really too expensive when this type of misallocation of money is happening?

The problem doesn’t really seem that we don’t have enough money, the issue is that the monetary system is used for control and money is allocated, both legally and illegally, to projects that don’t have the best interests of humanity at hand. The system would work better of the world of finance was not dominated by global elitist agendas seeking control and power. Perhaps it would work better if these people were actually making decisions based on what’s best for humanity.

It’s a complicated topic, a deep one that I would have to go in depth into the fraud, corruption and intentions behind our modern day banking system.

I believe humanity is more than capable of creating a human experience that doesn’t require money. We are extremely advanced, and we already have the means to create an experience where everybody’s basic needs can be met without the requirement for work. This can come as a result of various technological advancements, cooperation not competition, and more.

This is why shifting human consciousness is so paramount.

I believe that solutions exist, yet any type of solution that threatens to uproot our economy and how it currently operates never sees the light of day, and some of these developments are kept from public eye due to ‘national security’ concerns. Today, national security has become an umbrella term to classify technology and information that threatens corporate interests. This is why Julian Assange is in jail.

For example, most countries have an Invention Secrecy Act. Are certain technologies that threaten our current economic system that’s based on the idea that resources are scarce, a threat to scarcity? Is technology that could provide abundance to all hidden from the public simply because they threaten those with large amounts of power? What type of technology is under restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act? We don’t really know, but a previous list from 1971 was obtained by researcher Michael Ravnitzky. Most of the technology listed seems to be related to various military applications. You can view that list HERE.

As Steven Aftergood from the Federation of American Scientists reports:

“The 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies in “excess of 70-80%.” (source)

You can read more about the Invention Secrecy Act here.

There have been even more efficient developments.

There is significant evidence that scientists since Tesla have known about this energy, but that its existence and potential use has been discouraged and indeed suppressed over the past half century or more.  – Dr. Theodor C. Loder, III (source)

What if I told you all of our homes could be powered by nature, without the need to be reliant on the corporation, without the need for gas, coal, oil, fossil fuels etc…These are a few of many examples that would be included in a world that would operate without the need to pay for your life, or services that should be everybody’s birth right.

“Much to my surprise, these concepts have been proven in hundreds of laboratories throughout world and yet they have not really seen the light of day.” – Former NASA astronaut and Princeton physics professor. (source)

There are many examples of this, Paramahamsa Tewari, a physicist and inventor, who won early commendation by Nobel Laureates in physics for his revolutionary Space Vortex Theory, published a paper in Physics Essays (2018) explaining his theory, from which he built an electrical generator capable of achieving over-unity efficiency. You can watch a video of him and his machine here. Why isn’t humanity exploring these concepts that could lift our dependence on big energy corporations and eliminate scarcity of resources, openly, freely and transparently? 

Again, energy generation is one of many examples, there are many solutions to all of our issues from food, to environmental degradation and more.

It seems that when it comes to solutions that can help ‘free’ the human race, even just a little bit with the idea of universal basic income, it is sharply opposed by all major political parties, just like it is in Germany.

Any type of bartering system, or monetary system that is controlled by the citizenry, like Bitcoin for example, also always faces harsh opposition, or an attempt to gain control over it ensues. There are people out there who desire power and control above anything else, and the money supply represents the center of that control.

The truth is, a thriving society will be one that’s devoid of any reliance on governments/federal regulatory agencies. Our various systems are put in place and structured in a way to make it easy for us to be controlled, and for the “1%” to thrive. Right now, we are their worker bees and we choose to uphold the system and are taught, through education, to justify it and see it as necessary without ever using our imagination to ponder how it could be different.

We have so much potential, and we can do much better than we are currently doing.

Bitcoin image
5D Shift: Essential Evidence Of A Widespread Awakening Underway. Click here to read the article.
The Takeaway

I often think about how absurd it is to live on a planet where you can die if you are unable to pay for your life. Having worked in this field for a number of years now, and as stated above, solutions exist to change our world and kick our dependence on corrupt governments and organizations. We could be in the stars by now. Life doesn’t have to be this way, if we continue operating from our current level of consciousness our planet will continue to be destroyed. There are better ways to do things here, and providing all citizens with a basic income, whether they are currently earning or not, is a fantastic place to start as it is clearly possible given all of the money that’s spend on measures that don’t really make sense.

This article (Germany Starts Universal Basic Income Trial Giving Some Citizens $1400 A Month For 3 Years) was originally created for Collective Evolution and is published here under Creative Commons.

Please SHARE this article with your family and friends.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Catholic Church Ignores Pedophilia, But Bishop Warns Reiki & Energy Healing Are Satanic

Published

on

Bishop Alphonsus Cullinan
Photo Credit: Collective Evolution

 Richard Enos, Guest Writer

It is wisely said that, ‘you should clean up your own backyard first before you come running over to fix mine.’ Obviously, this wisdom continues to be lost on the clergy of the Catholic Church.

According to this Irish News article, Catholic Bishop Alphonsus Cullinan has said he is establishing a “delivery ministry” of people who will attempt to rid others of the devil and warned that using reiki or other new-age healing methods could open one up to the possibility of encountering malevolent spirits. He said he had received “several requests” from people to help deal with evil forces.

On the strength of what spellbinding evidence and research does the bishop rest his indictment against reiki healing treatments on? He said he was told by the brother of a reiki master that the man was “working on somebody one day when he actually says he saw a vision of Satan” and was “scared out of his wits, dropped the reiki and went back to the Church”.

Gosh. Did Bishop Cullinan even go so far as to interview the reiki master himself, to verify the authenticity of the report, and perhaps inform himself just a touch more about the philosophy and practice of reiki, before giving it such firm identification with the dark side?

“This is something that has to be done in secret because you don’t let these people’s names out, and they are going to houses where people maybe have been involved in some kind of new-age thing or some kind of séance or that kind of thing, and unfortunately, they’ve opened up a door to an evil force, Satan.” – Bishop Alphonsus Cullinan

Absolving Personal Responsibility

Let’s be clear on what the good bishop is saying here: he is worried about people getting influenced by Satan while engaging in ‘new-age’ healing practices. (In fact, he misidentifies reiki as a ‘new age’ practice when in fact it was developed in the early 1900’s in Japan by Mikao Usui, who realized that healing energy can be transmitted between human beings via the hands and directed intention and visualization.) Does he say what the consequences might be if people fall deeply enough under Satan’s spell under these conditions? Will they suddenly be tempted to steal an apple from the grocery store? Say a crossword to a neighbour? He doesn’t know. And doesn’t say. And probably hasn’t even thought that far.

No, what it really looks like is that the good bishop would like to stop people who are taking personal responsibility for their own healing, and play the devil card to encourage such people to run back to the Catholic Church where members don’t actually have to take responsibility for their own actions–they can simply believe the devil made them do it. This is a scenario in which the good bishop can feel useful in an advisory capacity because he has the God-given power to absolve participants of their sins with the recitation of a few ‘Hail Mary’s.

Why Not Address In-House Pedophilia?

You would think, if indeed you believe Cullinan is being sincere, that he would not be sticking his nose into something he knows little about, and instead bring his Satan-fighting attention to the actions of his Catholic brethren who are already known to be torturing children. You would think it would be of the highest order to turn his exorcising powers to work on these contemporaries of his, if for nothing else than to try to resurrect the reputation of the Catholic Church which has fallen to unprecedented depths.

But you get the feeling that his attitude falls in line with the Church on the matter of pedophilia in the church. Their inaction seems to indicate that they feel not much can be done about it. It is not a question of personal responsibility; it is a question of demonic possession. In the past, Cullinan said he “absolutely” agreed with Pope Francis’s view that child abuse is caused by Satan. This means offenders themselves are not to be ‘blamed’ for their actions. The church’s propensity to take offenders of these violent crimes and simply move them away from one outraged community to continue their criminal activity in another one is a clear sign of this.

Popes audience hall
Multiple Catholic Priests Expose the Practice of “Satanism” within the Vatican. Click here to read the article.
The Takeaway

This bishop certainly has gall to act concerned about potential demonic influence coming from modern energy healing practices he knows nothing about. The good news is, the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church continues to reveal itself in these feeble attempts to retain power over people, and they could serve as a catalyst for more people who still give themselves over to these institutions to take their power back.

The views in this article may not reflect editorial policy of Collective Spark.

About the Author

My Master’s thesis on “The Anatomy of Self-Overcoming in Nietzsche” was only the beginning of my journey of exploration into consciousness. I have since lived and taught in Korea, studied yoga in India, written a book entitled “Parables for the New Conversation”, built a film and theatre production company (pandorasboxoffice.ca), and started a family.

Please SHARE this article with your family and friends.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending Now