THE USE OF KNOWLEDGE IS POWER

In A Time Of Universal Deceit, Telling The Truth Becomes A Revolutionary Act. (Orwell)

ALL TRUTH PASSES THROUGH THREE STAGES; FIRST, IT IS RIDICULED, SECOND, IT IS VIOLENTLY OPPOSED, THIRD, IT IS ACCEPTED AS BEING SELF-EVIDENT. (Arthur Schopenhauer)

I WILL TELL YOU ONE THING FOR SURE. ONCE YOU GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU ARE ACTUALLY DOING THINGS FOR TRUTH'S SAKE, THEN NOBODY CAN EVER TOUCH YOU AGAIN BECAUSE YOU ARE HARMONIZING WITH A GREATER POWER. (George Harrison)

THE WORLD ALWAYS INVISIBLY AND DANGEROUSLY REVOLVES AROUND PHILOSOPHERS. (Nietzsche)

Search This Blog

Blog Archive

Showing posts with label WEAPONS OF MASS PRESCRIPTION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WEAPONS OF MASS PRESCRIPTION. Show all posts

Saturday, August 22, 2026

TRUTH IS OUT THERE


"Ignorance... brought about anguish and terror. And the anguish grew solid like a fog and no one was able to see." The Gospel of Truth, 17:10 Nag Hammadi Texts

 "Humanity is asleep, concerned only with what is useless, living in a wrong world… Do not prattle before the People of the Path, rather consume yourself. You have an inverted knowledge and religion if you are upside down in relation to Reality. Man is wrapping his net around himself. A lion (the man of the Way) bursts his cage asunder." The Sufi Master Sanai, teacher of Rumi, 'The Walled Garden of Truth' (1131 C.E.)

  • What role does conspiracy and cover-up play in the multifarious facets of life in the closing years of this twentieth century?

  • Are powerful groups manipulating events as part of a long-range strategy to bring about a totally controlled global society?

  • Does recognition of conspiracies lead to paranoia and delusion?

  • Or does it actually explain events and thereby empower people?

It is not the purpose of this short article to examine the range of crimes, cabals and secret plots broadly covered by the word 'conspiracy.'

Nor do we intend to prove the existence of some international conspiracy at work in the crisis torn world of the 90s.

  • What we want to touch on is the implications of conspiracy theories for personal transformation.

  • What we want to explore here is a different way of seeing the world.

First let us define the meaning of that seemingly disturbing word: "conspiracy".

Webster's International dictionary gives, as one connotation,

"a combination of men for an evil purpose; a plot".

The Oxford Dictionary of English agrees, defining 'conspiracy' as,

"a combination of persons for an evil or unlawful purpose; an agreement between two or more to do something criminal, illegal or reprehensible; a plot".

If, as a significant number of researchers claim, it can be shown that influential - largely hidden - elites have knowingly combined their efforts in a plot(s) to manipulate and control people and events, then on the basis of the standard definition just cited, a conspiracy does indeed exist.

Readers who are accustomed (or is it conditioned?) to automatically regard any mention of conspiracy as irrational paranoia, will find this very subject a 'problem'.

Jonathon Vankin, the author of two excellent books exploring a host of conspiracy theories, observes that,

"The word 'conspiracy' may be a 'problem' for some, but only because it represents the unknown, mystery, and risk.

Those are the things that grip the human mind and bring it to life. These ideas can only be a problem for those who wish to keep our minds under control."

Last century the British politician, Benjamin Disraeli, a man of wide political experience, declared that,

"the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."

This century U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt has been quoted as saying:

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, it was planned that way."

"Ruling elites will use conspiracy," states political scientist and activist Dr. Michael Parenti.

"They will finance elections, publicity campaigns, publishing houses, wire services, and academic studies. They will use surveillance, mobsters, terrorists, assassins and death squads."

Conspiracy researchers 'look behind the dark curtain' that shrouds history and the sacrosanct assumptions reinforcing contemporary society.

There really are, as investigative author Jim Hougan says, two kinds of history,

"the safe, sanitized 'Disney version,' so widely available as to be unavoidable... and a second one that remains secret, buried, and unnamed."

This "second" version of history, Jonathon Vankin and John Whalen argue, does indeed have a name:

"conspiracy theory."

According to the co-authors of The Fifty Greatest Conspiracies of All Time the official, safe "Disney" version of history,

"could just as easily be called the 'New York Times version' or the 'TV news version' or the 'college textbook version.'

The main resistance to conspiracy theories comes not from people on the street, but from the media, academia, and government - people who manage the national and global economy of information."

The structure of the modern world demands mass adherence to faith in the institutions that maintain the existing order and make it run.

These institutions are innumerable: government, business, science, education, politics... and their survival is dependent on people's faith in authority.

"We have to believe the institutions are functioning in our best interests," wrote Vankin in his 1991 ground-breaking book Conspiracies, Cover-Ups and Crimes.

"We have to believe what the people within those institutions assure us to be true."

This is why 'conspiracy theories' are universally anathema to the Establishment.

They directly challenge the status quo, undermining the blind faith of the 'brainwashed' masses in society's machiavellian 'leaders'!

Vankin quotes anthropologist Jules Henry as saying that,

"our civilization is a tissue of contradictions and lies."

Henry used the term "sham" for the everyday deceptions that reinforce this malignant society.

"Sham gives rise to coalitions because usually sham cannot be maintained without confederates."

In other words, to keep the system afloat requires a conspiracy.

"In sham," Henry continues, "the deceiver enters into an inner conspiracy against himself."

Acknowledging the conspiracies and cover-ups behind history and contemporary events means we can no longer lie to ourselves, like Colin Wilson's "Outsider" who,

"cannot live in the comfortable insulated world of the bourgeois, accepting what he sees and touches as reality."

Modern civilization is a conspiracy against Reality.

R.D. Laing explains in The Politics of Experience how people are 'conditioned' and 'brainwashed' by modern society.

Beginning with the children, Laing says,

"It is imperative to catch them in time. Without the most thorough and rapid brainwashing their dirty minds would see through our dirty tricks. Children are not yet fools, but we shall turn them into imbeciles like ourselves, with high IQs if possible.

"From the moment of birth, when the Stone Age baby confronts the Twentieth century mother, the baby is subjected to these forces of violence, called love, as its mother and father, and their parents and their parents before them, have been.

These forces are mainly concerned with destroying most of its potentialities, and on the whole this enterprise is successful.

By the time the new human being is fifteen or so, we are left with a being like ourselves, a half-crazed creature more or less adjusted to a mad world.

This is normality in our present age."

In our conditioned environment we accept what we are told, largely without question. Society, or more precisely the ruling elites, define reality.

Central to every conspiracy is the suppression of specific information or the deliberate avoidance of certain key facts.

Control of information is a mechanism of social control.

If information is used by the ruling elites to program and mentally enslave people, then information can be used to deprogram and liberate them. Knowledge is the key to freedom.

According to the Sufis, the potential for clear, direct perception in man in his everyday life is largely frustrated by a distorting complex of socio-psychological conditioning factors.

Often these appear in the seemingly innocuous forms of unfounded assumptions and expectations. Consequently man is ready mental putty in the hands of powerful manipulators. Conspiracies are detected only by the exercise of unfettered perception and thinking. Thus, conspirators must propagate a necessary level of confusion in those whom they seek to deceive and control.

The mere realization of the existence and activities of various 'conspiracies' orchestrated by powerful ruling elites, has a largely liberating effect on a thinking individual, disclosing to him as it does the vast magnitude of the lies and deception incorporated in the various layers of official culture.

The whole social structure, educational structure, economic and political structures are directly challenged.

Once a person realizes that there is a 'hidden history' behind our so-called history, they invariably start to want to break away from the futile human pattern of

seeing reality as it is not and thereby living a lie.

They want to abandon the anesthetic of ignorance and suppression within which man cocoons himself and to embrace the intensity of reality - as it is.

Conspiracies and cover-ups do exist.

However, their underlying root cause is our own irresponsibility, ignorance and inactivity. The world tells us what we want to hear, giving us justifications for different states of irresponsibility. Civilization may well be destroying itself, but individuals don't have to destroy themselves with it.

The modern world with its phobias, neurosis, contradictions and conflicts, is what we must overcome. We must break our links, sever our ties; plumb the depths of our unconsciousness, and cut the bonds with which we've bound ourselves.

Confronted by the intrigue of conspiracy and cover-up, we don't react to the sham by constructing an equally dogmatic, paranoid worldview. Nor do we become down-cast, depressed or consumed with red-hot anger. There is no point in hiding away or running wildly in the street.

Just be AWARE.

From the inner certainty, clarity and calm of AWARENESS proceeds right and constructive action.

Channel your anger, your fear, your hopes and dreams into TOTAL AWARENESS. By discerning society's true condition you are free from the bonds of ignorance and no longer a pawn in the game.

Awakening from the sleep of conditioned existence we can appreciate the words of the Sufi teacher Al Ghazzali:

"The higher one ascends a mountain, the farther one sees."

Some radical students of the Bible identify the existing social, political and economic order as "Babylon".

A name synonymous with a system of total oppression and exploitation, taken from the Book of Revelation. The government, the bureaucracy, indeed all worldly authorities are mere instruments of Babylon.

Babylon, built on falsehood and sustained by ignorance, will one day come crashing down because of fundamental untruths. Awakened to the actual nature of this world, one's life is that of exile. A stranger in a strange land.

Conspiracy and cover-up is what we first encounter when we begin to perceive real life in Babylon.

"It may be that mankind has been invited to participate in a bizarre kind of contest with some undeclared cosmic opponents," says Brad Steiger, a writer on the paranormal.

"Man may have been challenged to play the Reality Game; and if he can once apprehend the true significance of the preposterous clues, if he can but master the proper moves, he may obtain a clearer picture of his true role in the cosmic scheme of things."

by M. Sabeheddin
August 21, 1995
from NewDawnMagazine Website

Friday, April 24, 2026

BREAKING SPECIAL REPORT: For the First Time Ever, the COVID Jabs Are Called “Bioweapons” in Court! WHAT WAS CALLED “CONSPIRACY” IS NOW EVIDENCE IN COURT!


Historic Dutch court case labels COVID-19 mRNA shots as military bioweapons. Dr. Francis Boyle’s final testimony shakes the global narrative.

THE CASE THEY NEVER WANTED TO HAPPEN

For the first time, a European court is hearing arguments that the COVID-19 mRNA injections may qualify as military-grade biological weapons. This unprecedented legal battle is now unfolding in the Netherlands, as attorney Peter Stassen takes on the so-called “Architects of the Great Reset” in a lawsuit on behalf of citizens allegedly harmed by the COVID injections.

Stassen cited testimony by the late Dr. Francis Boyle, a globally recognized expert in biological weapons law. Boyle died unexpectedly after agreeing to testify under oath in this case. Before his death, Boyle described the COVID mRNA injection as:

“…a bioweapon… conceived by the Pentagon.”

These words are no longer part of online speculation or alternative media — they are now part of legal proceedings in an open court.

THE LEGAL ARGUMENT: ILLEGAL GENE RESEARCH, MILITARY FUNDING

Dr. Boyle, author of the U.S. Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, argued that the mRNA technology in the COVID injections is directly tied to unlawful gain-of-function research funded by the Pentagon and DARPA.

According to testimony, the vaccine platform includes:

  • A synthetic spike protein payload, developed to infect human cells.
  • A nanolipid particle (NLP) delivery system, designed to insert mRNA into the body.

Together, these form what Boyle termed a “military biological weapon system.”

NOTE: In legal terms, this means the technology may fall under international prohibitions on bioweapons, regardless of its framing as “public health.”

EVIDENCE FROM SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE

As part of the legal argument, a 2015 Nature Medicine study is central. The article, titled “A Cluster of Circulating Coronaviruses in Bats, Similar to SARS Shows Potential for Human Infection,” describes scientists creating a synthetic, infectious SARS-like virus.

The study stated:

“We have synthetically created an infectious SHC014 recombinant virus… with robust viral replication in vitro and in vivo.”

This research involved scientists from UNC Chapel Hill and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Boyle argued that this constitutes gain-of-function research — banned under U.S. and international law.

NOTE: This suggests the pathogenic component of the COVID injection wasn’t discovered — it was built.

DELIVERY PLATFORM: MORE THAN “FAT GLOBULES”

One key point of contention is how the mRNA is delivered. The term “fat globules” has been used to downplay the role of nanolipid particles (NLPs), but Boyle insisted this is misleading.

He described NLPs as a nanotechnology-enhanced weapons platform, designed by DARPA and the Pentagon to deliver biological payloads.

NOTE: The NLP platform wasn’t a “side feature” — it was allegedly part of a military-grade design to ensure intracellular delivery of genetic material.

WHO IS ON TRIAL — AND WHO IS WATCHING?

The case features a panel of expert witnesses, including:

  • Dr. Joseph Sansone, medical researcher (who released the court video on March 14, 2026)
  • Sasha Latypova, retired pharmaceutical R&D executive
  • Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of HUD

These individuals argue the COVID program was coordinated between private corporations and government agencies. They name figures such as Bill Gates and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla as potentially culpable under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

NOTE: These claims have not yet been proven in court but form the foundation of this legal challenge.

THE DEATH OF DR. FRANCIS BOYLE

Dr. Boyle’s death occurred shortly after he confirmed his willingness to testify under oath. He was reportedly in good health prior to his passing.

“He knew, like no other, that the COVID-19 mRNA injection is a bioweapon.”

His signed statement remains a key piece of evidence in the case, and his passing has raised questions among supporters.

NOTE: The court has not ruled on the cause or timing of his death in relation to the case.

CONCLUSION: COURTROOM, NOT CONSPIRACY

This lawsuit marks the first known instance of a legal court considering the COVID injection as a potential bioweapon. Whether or not it succeeds, the case introduces evidence and arguments previously confined to alternative media — now under legal review.

The claim:

“The mRNA injection is a bioweapon. And we now have the receipts.”

This case may set a precedent. At minimum, it opens the door to broader legal examination of the COVID program’s development, funding, and global rollout.

NOTE: No verdict has been reached. The defendants have not yet responded in full, and the court proceedings are ongoing.

https://rumble.com/v77722e-they-said-it-was-a-conspiracy.-now-its-evidence-in-court-covid-bioweapon.html 

🔥🇺🇸 BOOOM! RFK JR. DROPS THE HEALTHCARE TRUTHBOMB — All Hospitals, Insurers, and Doctors Must Now Publish Their Prices | March 15, 2026 [VIDEO]

🔥🇺🇸 BOOM: HHS Secretary RFK Jr. just flipped the healthcare system — all hospitals, insurers, and doctors must now show you prices upfront. No more secrets. No more scams. Transparency begins now.

🔥🇺🇸 INSURANCE COMPANIES FORCED TO EXPOSE THEIR DEALS — GAME OVER FOR PRICE MANIPULATION

👉 FULL STORY HERE:  

https://amg-news.com/booom-rfk-jr-drops-the-healthcare-truthbomb-all-hospitals-insurers-and-doctors-must-now-publish-their-prices-march-15-2026-video/

RELATED: MEDICAL BOMBSHELL: Dr. William Makis Exposes How IVERMECTIN CREAM Destroys Skin Cancer — What Big Pharma Doesn’t Want You to Know [VIDEO]  

https://amg-news.com/medical-bombshell-dr-william-makis-exposes-how-ivermectin-cream-destroys-skin-cancer-what-big-pharma-doesnt-want-you-to-know-video/

https://rumble.com/v776zks-rfk-jr.-destroys-medical-secrecy-all-prices-must-now-be-public-must-watch.html

READ MORE

FEDERAL RESET: Trump Moves Marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III — “I Promised Common Sense. That’s Exactly What I’m Doing.” [VIDEO]

https://amg-news.com/

Sunday, April 12, 2026

The behind-the-scenes footage of the Artemis II Mission was Leaked


Global Warming - An Official Pseudoscience

On January 8, 2014, at New York University in Brooklyn, there occurred a unique event in the annals of global warming: nearly eight hours of structured debate between three climate scientists supporting the consensus on manmade global warming and three climate scientists who dispute it, moderated by a team of six leading physicists from the American Physical Society (APS) led by Dr. Steven Koonin, a theoretical physicist at New York University.

The debate, hosted by the APS, revealed consensus-supporting climate scientists harboring doubts and uncertainties and admitting to holes in climate science - in marked contrast to the emphatic messaging of bodies such as Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

At one point, Koonin read an extract from the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report released the previous year. 

Computer model-simulated responses to forcings - the term used by climate scientists for changes of energy flows into and out of the climate system, such as changes in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions, and changes in the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, "can be scaled up or down."

This scaling included greenhouse gas forcings.

Some forcings in some computer models had to be scaled down to match computer simulations to actual climate observations. But when it came to making centennial projections on which governments rely and drive climate policy, the scaling factors were removed, probably resulting in a 25 to 30 percent over-prediction of the 2100 warming.

The ensuing dialogue between Koonin and Dr. William Collins of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory - a lead author of the climate model evaluation chapter in the Fifth Assessment Report - revealed something more troubling and deliberate than holes in scientific knowledge: 

Dr. Koonin: But if the model tells you that you got the response to the forcing wrong by 30 percent, you should use that same 30 percent factor when you project out a century. 

Dr. Collins: Yes. And one of the reasons we are not doing that is we are not using the models as [a] statistical projection tool. 

Dr. Koonin: What are you using them as?

Dr. Collins: Well, we took exactly the same models that got the forcing wrong and which got sort of the projections wrong up to 2100.

Dr. Koonin: So, why do we even show centennial-scale projections?

Dr. Collins: Well, I mean, it is part of the [IPCC] assessment process.

Koonin was uncommonly well-suited to lead the APS climate workshop.

He has a deep understanding of computer models, which have become the workhorses of climate science. As a young man, Koonin wrote a paper on computer modeling of nuclear reaction in stars and taught a course on computational physics at Caltech.

In the early 1990s, he was involved in a program using satellites to measure the Earth's albedo - that is, the reflection of incoming solar radiation back into space.

As a student at Caltech in the late 1960s, he was taught by Nobel physicist Richard Feynman and absorbed what Koonin calls Feynman's "absolute intellectual honesty."

On becoming BP's chief scientist in 2004, Koonin became part of the wider climate change milieu.

Assignments included, explaining the physics of man-made global warming to Prince Philip at a dinner in Buckingham Palace.

In 2009, Koonin was appointed an under-secretary at the Department of Energy in the Obama administration.

The APS climate debate was the turning point in Koonin's thinking about climate change and consensus climate science ("The Science").

"I began by believing that we were in a race to save the planet from climate catastrophe," Koonin writes in his new book, 'Unsettled - What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters.'

"I came away from the APS workshop not only surprised, but shaken by the realization that climate science was far less mature than I had supposed."

"Unsettled" is an authoritative primer on the science of climate change that lifts the lid on The Science and finds plenty that isn't as it should be.

"As a scientist," writes Koonin, "I felt the scientific community was letting the public down by not telling the whole truth plainly."

Koonin's aim is to right that wrong.

Koonin's indictment of The Science starts with its reliance on unreliable computer models.

Usefully describing the earth's climate, writes Koonin, is, "one of the most challenging scientific simulation problems."

Models divide the atmosphere into pancake-shaped boxes of around 100km wide and one kilometer deep.

But the upward flow of energy from tropical thunder clouds, which is more than thirty times larger than that from human influences, occurs over smaller scales than the programmed boxes. 

This forces climate modellers to make assumptions about what happens inside those boxes.

As one modeller confesses, "it's a real challenge to model what we don't understand."

Inevitably, this leaves considerable scope for modelers' subjective views and preferences. 

A key question climate models are meant to solve is estimating the equilibrium climate sensitivity of carbon dioxide (ECS), which aims to tell us by how much temperatures rise from a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Yet in 2020, climate modelers from Germany's Max Planck Institute admitted to tuning their model by targeting an ECS of about 3° Centigrade.

"Talk about cooking the books," Koonin comments.

The proof of the pudding, as they say, is in the eating.

Self-evidently, computer projections can't be tested against a future that's yet to happen, but they can be tested against climates present and past.

Climate models can't even agree on what the current global average temperature is.

"One particularly jarring feature is that the simulated average global surface temperature," Koonin notes, "varies among models by about 3°C, three times greater than the observed value of the twentieth century warming they're purporting to describe and explain."

Another embarrassing feature of climate models concerns the earlier of the two twentieth-century warmings from 1910 to 1940, when human influences were much smaller. 

On average, models give a warming rate of about half of what was actually observed.

The failure of the latest models to warm fast enough in those decades suggest that it's possible, even likely, that internal climate variability is a significant contributor to the warming of recent decades, Koonin suggests. 

"That the models can't reproduce the past is a big red flag - it erodes confidence in their projections of future climates."

Neither is it reassuring that for the years after 1960, the latest generation of climate models show a larger spread and greater uncertainty than earlier ones - implying that, far from advancing, The Science has been going backwards. 

That is not how science is meant to work.

The second part of Koonin's indictment concerns the distortion, misrepresentation, and mischaracterization of climate data to support a narrative of climate catastrophism based on increasing frequency of extreme weather events. 

As an example, Koonin takes a "shockingly misleading" claim and associated graph in the United States government's 2017 Climate Science Special Report that the number of high-temperature records set in the past two decades far exceeds the number of low-temperature records across the 48 contiguous states.

Koonin demonstrates that the sharp uptick in highs over the last two decades is an artifact of a methodology chosen to mislead.

After re-running the data, record highs show a clear peak in the 1930s, but there is no significant trend over the 120 years of observations starting in 1895, or even since 1980, when human influences on the climate grew strongly.

In contrast, the number of record cold temperatures has declined over more than a century, with the trend accelerating after 1985.

Notes Koonin, "temperature extremes in the contiguous U.S. have become less common and somewhat milder since the late nineteenth century."

Similarly, a key message in the 2014 National Climate Assessment of an upward trend in hurricane frequency and intensity, repeated in the 2017 assessment, is contradicted 728 pages later by a statement buried in an appendix stating that there has been no significant trend in the global number of tropical cyclones, "nor has any trend been identified in the number of U.S. land-falling hurricanes."

That might surprise many politicians.

"Over the past thirty years, the incidence of natural disasters has dramatically increased," Treasury secretary Janet Yellen falsely asserted last month in a pitch supporting the Biden administration's infrastructure package.

"We are now in a situation where climate change is an existential risk to our future economy and way of life," she claimed.

The sacrifice of scientific truth in the form of objective empirical data for the sake of a catastrophist climate narrative is plain to see.

As Koonin summarizes the case: "Even as human influences have increased fivefold since 1950 and the globe has warmed modestly, most severe weather phenomena remain within past variability.

Projections of future climate and weather events rely on models demonstrably unfit for the purpose."

Koonin also has sharp words for the policy side of the climate change consensus, which asserts that although climate change is an existential threat, solving it by totally decarbonizing society is straightforward and relatively painless. 

"Two decades ago, when I was in the private sector," Koonin writes, "I learned to say that the goal of stabilizing human influences on the climate was 'a challenge,' while in government it was talked about as 'an opportunity.' 

Now back in academia, I can forthrightly call it 'a practical impossibility'."

Unlike many scientists and most politicians, Koonin displays a sure grasp of the split between developed and developing nations, for whom decarbonization is a luxury good that they can't afford.

The fissure dates back to the earliest days of the U.N. climate process at the end of the 1980s.

Indeed, it's why developing nations insisted on the U.N. route as opposed to an intergovernmental one that produced the 1987 Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances. 

"The economic betterment of most of humanity in the coming decades will drive energy demand even more strongly than population growth," Koonin says.

"Who will pay the developing world not to emit? I have been posing that simple question to many people for more than fifteen years and have yet to hear a convincing answer."

The most unsettling part of "Unsettled" concerns science and the role of scientists. 

"Science is one of the very few human activities - perhaps the only one - in which errors are systematically criticized and fairly often, in time, corrected," Karl Popper wrote nearly six decades ago.

That condition does not pertain in climate science, where errors are embedded in a political narrative and criticism is suppressed. 

In a recent essay, the philosopher Matthew B. Crawford observes that the pride of science as a way of generating knowledge - unlike religion - is to be falsifiable.

That changes when science is pressed into duty as authority in order to absolve politicians of responsibility for justifying their policy choices ("the science says," we're repeatedly told). 

"Yet what sort of authority would it be that insists its own grasp of reality is merely provisional?" asks Crawford. 

"For authority to be really authoritative, it must claim an epistemic monopoly of some kind, whether of priestly or scientific knowledge."

At the outset of "Unsettled," Feynman's axiom of absolute intellectual honesty is contrasted with climate scientist Stephen Schneider's "double ethical bind."

On the one hand, scientists are ethically bound by the scientific method to tell the truth. On the other, they are human beings who want to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change.

"Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest," Schneider said.

"Being effective" helps explain the pressure on climate scientists to conform to The Science and the emergence of a climate science knowledge monopoly. 

Its function is, as Crawford puts it, the manufacture of a product - political legitimacy - which, in turn, requires that competing views be delegitimized and driven out of public discourse through enforcement of a, "moratorium on the asking of questions."

This sees climate scientist gatekeepers deciding who can and cannot opine on climate science. 

"Please, save us from retired physicists who think they're smarter and wiser than everyone in climate science," tweeted Gavin Schmidt, NASA acting senior climate advisor, about Koonin and his book.

"I agree with pretty much everything you wrote," a chair of a university earth sciences department tells Koonin, "but I don't dare say that in public."

Another scientist criticizes Koonin for giving ammunition to "the deniers," and a third writes an op-ed urging New York University to reconsider Koonin's position there. 

It goes wider than scientists... 

Facebook has suppressed a "Wall Street Journal" review of "Unsettled."

Likewise, "Unsettled" remains unreviewed by the "New York Times," the "Washington Post" (though it carried an op-ed by Marc Thiessen based on an interview with Koonin) and other dailies, which would prefer to treat Koonin's reasoned climate dissent as though it doesn't exist.

The moratorium on the asking of questions represents the death of science as understood and described by Popper, a victim of the conflicting requirements of political utility and scientific integrity.

Many scientists take this lying down. Koonin won't...

For his forensic skill and making his findings accessible to non-specialists, Koonin has written the most important book on climate science in decades... 

By Steven E. Koonin, Reviewed by Rupert Darwall
May 20, 2021
From RealClearEnergy Website


Unsettled: Climate Change's Real Story - 2026

Video Clip

READ MORE

Global Warming - An Official Pseudoscience...

Saturday, April 11, 2026

Prison Planet - If we want to Escape, we need to overcome the Slave Mentality that Society constantly imposes on us

There are people who refer to others as their "masters", their "guides", their "teachers", or say they need someone to "guide" them. 

There's this constant tendency to look up to something external for direction, like they cant trust themselves to figure things out on their own.

Think about what that actually leads to.

If someone goes through their entire life like this, always looking for authority and needing guidance what do you think happens when they die

Because if you've been conditioned your whole life to look for a "higher being", a "guide", a "teacher", something "loving" that tells you what to do, then the moment you cross over you're very likely going to do the exact same thing.

We are taught to refer to some people and things as, 

"teachers", "guides", "experts", "source",

...all of that already puts you in a lower position. 

It frames things in a way where you're beneath something, like you're supposed to listen and follow.

And then you have religions, which are probably the strongest example of this programming. 

There is nothing more effective at training people into obedience and a slave-like mentality than religion.

It does not matter where you are from or which religion is dominant in your country, there is always something placed above you, and your role is to follow it and obey it.

That kind of submissive mindset makes people much easier to control. 

Someone who sees themselves as, 

their own authority is far harder to manipulate...

So if you spend your whole life looking for a "master", a "guide", a "teacher", what do you think you'll do when you end up in a completely unfamiliar state after death?

You'll follow the first thing that presents itself as one. 

When you are young, you have teachers. 

Then you grow up and you have a boss. 

And even as an adult, other types of "teachers", "leaders", and authority figures show up in different areas of life.

So from the very beginning, you are conditioned to believe that you need to be guided, that you need someone above you to tell you what to do, like a sheep following a shepherd.


If that mindset is deeply ingrained in you, you are not suddenly going to become independent in the astral afterlife.

You are going to look for the same thing you have always looked for, a shepard to follow.

So if you are then presented with "God", "Jesus", "angels", or "guides", you are far more likely to trust them, submit, and do as you are told. 

And if what many NDEs suggest is true, and you are encouraged or told to "go back", then you will likely agree to it without questioning it.

And that is how the cycle (of reincarnations) continues...!

Even as little children, we are bombarded with cartoons about, 

Superman, Batman, Spiderman, you name it.. not to mention all the movies about Thor, Captain America, Iron man...

The list is endless, there are so many examples. 

From a very young age but also during adulthood, we are being conditioned to look for salvation outside of ourselves, to believe that someone else will come and save the day.

It is presented as harmless entertainment, but the pattern it reinforces is always the same which is that the solution is never you, it is always something or someone above you.

Once you see it, you cannot unseen it. 

Society programs people from every angle, every religion, the New Age, cartoons, movies, all pushing the same underlying message: 

be obedient, look outside yourself, wait to be "saved"...

So even if you avoid one trap, it doesn't make much of a difference because there are other traps everywhere, all waiting for you to fall right back into the same pattern. 

You know what i mean? 

If you do not fall for religion and wait for God to save you, you fall for the New Age and wait for spirit guides, and if not that, there is always something else ready to take its place, same pattern, different label.

"They" want us to be obedient slaves, so if we want to get out of here we need to be the exact opposite... 

Be sovereign...! 

by Razerer92
March 24, 2026
from EscapingPrisonPlanet Website


Return Home

Return to Matrix

Return to Consciousness and Human Energy - Death - A Transition

Return to The Divine and Manipulative Extraterrestrials - The Harvest

Wednesday, April 8, 2026

Planned Chaos – Institutional Capture

How Hybrid Warfare Took the Battlefield Inside the Buildings We Trusted Most

“You provide the prose poems, I’ll provide the war.” — Charles Foster Kane

In the masterwork film Citizen Kane, Kane – based on William Randolph Hearst’s famous line allegedly told to artist Frederic Remington, “You supply the pictures, I’ll supply the war,” – frames the power of the press’s ability to create reality through perception. The fact that a hundred years later it still circulates as the most concise description of how media manufactures reality — tells you everything you need to know about how power and perception have always operated together.

The quote is fiction. The mechanism it describes is not.

This is Article 19 in the Planned Chaos series. In the previous eighteen articles, I have documented the manufactured crises — the media capture, the financial engineering, the racial division tactics, the pandemic response machinery, the election infrastructure, the Great Reset, AI and the technocracy agendas. In the post I rereleased on Sunday, Why They Do This, I show how prescient the knowledge of end times and what it means to the Iran/Israel war is now, compared to when the article first posted in 2023. What I have not yet examined in full is the meta-strategy underneath all of it: the strategic doctrine of institutional capture.

Because Planned Chaos is not just a collection of events. It is a military strategy. And to understand the strategy, you have to understand how wars are now fought — and where the battlefield actually is.

I. The New Battlefield

When the intelligence officers I interviewed during my years at Prepare for Change used the phrase “captured institution” — men like Robert David Steele, John DeSouza, and others from the community of former operatives who had gone public — they were not speaking metaphorically. They were using the precise language of a military doctrine.

In classical warfare, to capture something means to take it intact and turn it against the enemy. You do not destroy the bridge — you cross it. You do not burn the radio tower — you broadcast from it. The asset becomes your weapon.

In the film, “Saving Private Ryan,” the climatic scene is of the troops willing to sacrifice everything to hold the bridge, which would keep supply lines open – against allowing passage for the enemy if not there to defend it.

Hybrid warfare — the dominant strategic framework of the last fifty years — applies this same principle to the battlefield of narrative. The territory being contested is not geography. It is perception. And the fortifications are not trenches and walls. They are institutions.

The Senate. The judiciary. The Pentagon. The CIA. The university. The newsroom. The medical establishment. The technology platform. These are the high ground of the information war. Whoever controls them controls the authorized version of reality — which experts are credible, which science is settled, which history is taught, which questions are permitted.

The battlefield took shape not on foreign soil but in the places most Americans thought were permanently on their side.

II. The Methodology — How Institutions Get Taken

John DeSouza — a former FBI special agent who specialized in paranormal cases and later in counterintelligence — described the methodology with clinical precision when I spoke with him. You do not need to be an ideologue yourself to execute institutional capture. You need only to understand incentive structures.

The playbook has five moves, and they are not secret. They are documented in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, in the academic literature on organizational theory, and — most usefully — in John Perkins’ confessional memoir, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, which describes the export of this methodology to foreign governments. What Perkins documented in the developing world, his contemporaries were doing domestically. And more importantly, recently in America.

Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign “aid” organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet’s natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization. I should know; I was an EHM.

– John Perkins, 2004

Move 1: Identify the Institution’s Dependencies

Every institution has pressure points — the funding it cannot do without, the accreditations it requires to function, the political relationships that protect it from scrutiny. Map those dependencies and you have the map of the takeover.

Move 2: Control the Incentive Structure

Fellowships. Grants. Peer review committees. Publishing boards. Promotion criteria. Award panels. These are not neutral mechanisms — they are the valves that determine who rises and who stagnates within an institution. Control who gives the fellowships and the grants, and you control which ideas get developed, which researchers get platforms, and which conclusions get amplified.

Move 3: Staff the Gatekeeping Roles

The department chair. The editor. The committee chairman. The bureau chief. The grant officer. These are not the most visible positions, but they are the most consequential ones. The captured institution is staffed not by visible ideologues at the top — that would be too obvious — but by reliable gatekeepers in the middle. The top can say anything it likes, but the gatekeepers decide what actually moves through the system.

The below graphic, though years old, shows a glimpse of how incestuous the relations between administration officials and the media are. Think of this for a moment, when an administration had come to power, it had made thousands of promises to thousands of people regarding their compensation when they would come to power. Either straight up bribes, or kickbacks, or funneled money, or positions are given out as incentives. The result are compromised representatives at all levels of governments and institutions.

Move 4: Elevate the Compliant, Isolate the Independent

Independent thinkers are not fired in the early stages of institutional capture — that would create martyrs and attract scrutiny. They are passed over. Their grant applications are denied. Their papers are rejected for peer review. Their speaking invitations dry up. Over time, without drama, without scandal, the institution becomes a monoculture — not because dissent was suppressed but because it was simply not rewarded. The compliant rise. The curious plateau. The independent leave.

Move 5: Normalize the Capture

The final move is generational. Once the institution has been staffed with products of its own captured environment, the original ideology no longer needs to be enforced. It is simply the air that everyone breathes. The new faculty were trained by the captured faculty. The new editors were mentored by the captured editors. The new grant officers attended the captured universities. The takeover becomes self-perpetuating without any further external pressure. At this point — and this is the chilling part — even the people inside it cannot see it. They simply call it normal.

III. The Consolidation Evidence — Following the Pattern

It would be reassuring to believe this is abstract theory. The evidence is frustratingly concrete. In the US, it was determined that the public would see and react to a socialist state decades ago, so the calculation was to create the PPP or public private partnerships.

Public companies and installed actors play out the roles of what used to be the State. It’s why there are so many grifters in the highest valued companies. Of course, this began years ago with the defense industry contractors, but it’s moved to all parts of the ecosystem – banking, technology, financial, education, etc. Those top performers are never short of compensation.

Media

In the 1980s, approximately 50 corporations controlled the majority of American media. After the Telecommunications Act of 1996 — which I documented in the Planned Chaos Media episode — that number collapsed to six. Six corporations now control what roughly 330 million Americans read, watch, and hear as news. Each of those corporations has board members and shareholders with direct ties to the financial and political structures they are supposed to cover. That is not a free press. That is a captured institution posing as one.

Banking

The Federal Reserve is not federal. It has no reserves in the traditional sense. It is a private consortium of member banks — established by legislation written by the bankers themselves at the Jekyll Island meeting of 1910, passed during a congressional session deliberately held during the Christmas recess of 1913. The central bank captures monetary sovereignty from elected government and lodges it in a private institution answerable to its shareholders. That is the oldest and most consequential institutional capture in American history.

Technology

The consolidation of the technology sector into a handful of platforms — Google, Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft — represents the most recent iteration of the same pattern. These platforms do not merely carry the conversation; they shape it through algorithmic curation, content moderation, and the de-platforming of voices that challenge the consensus. When a single company controls what information 4 billion people can access and share, it has captured the global nervous system of public discourse. These are by design.

The recent announcement of a technology advisory board organized by the Trump administration — bringing the same consolidated tech players into direct coordination with executive policy — should be examined carefully, regardless of one’s political alignment. Centralized coordination between government and monopolized tech infrastructure is the capture mechanism, not the solution to it. Again, the so-called public sphere is doing the bidding of the State, because they ARE the State. The ideology of the person assembling the board does not change the architecture.

IV. The Chaos Agents — Who Carries the Strategy Forward

Planned Chaos does not require a single orchestrating body with a whiteboard and a master plan — although the evidence for coordinated strategic intent is stronger than most people are willing to examine. What it requires is a class of actors I call chaos agents: operatives, true believers, and unwitting participants who carry the strategy forward without necessarily knowing its full scope.

The chaos agent is not always a villain. In many cases they are exactly what they appear to be: a committed ideologue who genuinely believes in the transformation they are advancing. The DEI administrator. The activist academic. The foundation program officer. The corporate diversity consultant. These individuals are not, for the most part, consciously serving a hidden agenda. They are products of a pipeline — the indoctrination pipeline examined in the next article — who have been trained, incentivized, and promoted to advance a framework they experience as their own.

This is what makes the strategy so durable. It does not depend on conspirators who could be exposed and prosecuted. It depends on true believers who cannot be argued out of their beliefs because those beliefs constitute their professional identity, their social world, and their understanding of moral purpose. You do not defeat a captured institution by arguing with the people inside it. You defeat it by understanding the architecture that produced them.

The chaos agent is not always the enemy. Sometimes the chaos agent is the person who attended the captured university, worked for the captured institution, and never had access to a different map.

V. The Quickening — Why This Is the Moment

Something has shifted in the velocity of events. Those of us who have been tracking these patterns for years have a name for it: the compression window, also called the quickening. The timelines are collapsing. The perceptions are moving at global speed. What would have taken years to percolate through the public consciousness a decade ago now completes its cycle in weeks.

Consider: AI-generated propaganda videos out of Iran, targeted at Western audiences around the Trump-Netanyahu alliance, now circulate within hours of production. They are crude by professional standards. They are effective by political ones — not because they convince the informed, but because they seed doubt in the undecided and harden the committed. The technology of perception management has been democratized, which means the battle for narrative has become simultaneous, global, and unceasing.

This is why understanding institutional capture matters right now, in this moment, rather than at some more convenient future date. The institutions that shape perception are under more pressure than they have been at any point in living memory. The captured media is losing audience at historic rates. The captured universities are facing enrollment crises and legislative scrutiny. The captured central bank is confronting the first serious challenge to dollar hegemony in half a century. The captured technology platforms are under antitrust pressure from multiple governments simultaneously.

The pressure does not guarantee liberation. Institutions under pressure can consolidate further, restrict harder, and capture more effectively. But the window of visibility — the moment when the public can actually see the mechanism — is open. And open windows do not stay open.

VI. What Comes After Capture — The Integration Task

Understanding institutional capture is not a counsel of despair. It is a map. And maps are most useful when you are trying to find your way through unfamiliar territory.

The integration task — the work this platform exists to support — is not to capture the institutions back. That is the wrong target and the wrong strategy. The answer to institutional capture is not counter-capture. It is the construction of parallel institutions: media organizations that are structurally independent, educational models that prioritize critical thinking over ideological formation, financial systems that are not controlled by a private central authority, technology platforms that are genuinely decentralized.

Those parallel structures are being built. They are fragile, underfunded, and embattled. But they exist — and they are growing exactly because the captured institutions have overreached far enough that large numbers of people have lost faith in them simultaneously.

The naradigm shift is, at its core, a crisis of institutional legitimacy. The old institutions are failing to perform their stated functions. New structures are forming to replace them. The question — the only question that matters in this compression window — is what values and what architecture those new structures are built on.

That is the conversation this platform is here to advance.

The Indoctrination Pipeline

Academic Capture – The Indoctrination Pipeline examines how the methodology described above was applied to one specific institution: academia. From billion-dollar university endowments to picture books for four-year-olds, from the peer review apparatus to the school board meeting in Montgomery County, Maryland — the pipeline is documented, sourced, and named.

Gerry Gomez

Tuesday, March 10, 2026

Are ALL our Spiritual Leaders now CORRUPTED?

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

Exposing Spiritual ‘Gurus’: 

From Dalai Lama to Deepak Chopra – The Truth Behind the Facades 

In this provocative video, we delve into the shocking connections and controversies surrounding renowned spiritual figures like the Dalai Lama, Deepak Chopra, Jay Shetty, Sadhguru, Mooji, Teal Swan, and Wim Hof.

The script uncovers unsettling details from Jeffrey Epstein-linked documents, allegations of misconduct, misleading credentials, and even tragic consequences. 

Beyond exposing these figures, the video aims to encourage viewers to critically evaluate spiritual leaders and seek genuine, heart-based guidance on their spiritual journeys.

00:00 Shocking Mentions: Dalai Lama and Deepak Chopra in Epstein Documents

02:02 Dalai Lama’s Controversial Moments and CIA Connections

04:52 Deepak Chopra’s Dubious Friendship with Epstein

07:46 Sadguru: Allegations and Controversies

09:42 Moji: Accusations of Misconduct and Financial Exploitation

11:17 Teal Swan: Controversial Teachings and Tragic Outcomes

15:18 Wim Hof: The Iceman’s Dangerous Techniques

17:09 Jay Shetty: Questionable Credentials and Exaggerated Claims

19:34 Final Thoughts: Navigating the Spiritual Landscape