Bulletin Board

Home >> News


A 40-year-old law that’s been key to the growth of renewable energy in the U.S. may be due for an overhaul.

The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. There is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. – JFK

If you suggested to someone a decade ago that secrecy dominates our world, and that transparency on a larger scale really doesn’t exist at all, not many would take you seriously. We, the public, have been kept inside a bubble, and outside that bubble exists a “breakaway civilization,” a term coined by author and historian Richard Dolan to describe the vast amount of knowledge in the form of science, technology, history, etc that’s been amassed by the military industrial complex.

Everything in this area is simply deemed “classified,” receiving absolutely no oversight from Congress. They’re referred to as deep black projects that in 2008 ex-Canadian Defence Minister Paul Hellyer described as projects that the “Commander in Chief has no idea about.”

This information is now coming to light, and it received even more attention when last year, a Michigan State University economist, working with one former government official and multiple graduate students discovered that $21 trillion of “unauthorized” spending had occurred within the Department of Defense and Housing and Urban Development. This is only for the years 1998-2015

For their research, the team used several government websites and made inquiries to multiple U.S. agencies. Much of the time they received no response and the Office of the Inspector General even disabled links to all key documents that revealed unsupported spending, according to the team.

Unfortunately for them, the researchers downloaded and stored the documents, and thus they made their way into the public domain. Regardless, many people still haven’t heard about it.

The name of the Economist from Michigan State is Mark Skidmore. He was sparked to do something when Catherine Austin Fitts, former assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development (where all the missing money is from, including the D.O.D)  referred to a report that indicated the Army had $6.5 trillion in unsupported adjustments and spending, in the 2015 fiscal year.

Given the Army’s $122 billion budget, that meant unsupported adjustments were 54 times spending authorized by Congress. Typically, such adjustments in public budgets are only a small fraction of authorized spending….Skidmore thought Fitts had made a mistake. “Maybe she meant $6.5 billion and not $6.5 trillion,” he said. “So I found the report myself and sure enough it was $6.5 trillion.” (source)

Fitts was one of the people involved with Skidmore’s research, they worked together, and found documents indicating a total of $20 trillion of undocumented adjustments had been made, from 1998 t0 2015, as mentioned above. The original government documents and a report describing the issue can be found here.)

They also recently provided an update, as when this information went public, the Pentagon claimed that they were going to do an internal audit.

Update As of September 2018

Several months after beginning the audit, recommendations of the Federal Accounting Standards Board were accepted by the government which stopped the process. https://fas.org/sgp/news/2018/07/fasab-review.pdf (see page 3 for a summary).

Fitts explains how “the statement allows government officials to misstate and move funds around to hide expenditures if it is deemed necessary for national security purposes, and the rule applies to all agencies, not just the black budget.” She then shares an excerpt from the report:

This Statement permits modifications that do not affect the net results of operations or net position. In addition, this Statement allows a component reporting entity to be excluded from one reporting entity and consolidated into another reporting entity, and the effect of the modification may change the net results of operations and/or net position.

Fitts then makes another point that needs to be emphasized, one that I’ve been writing about for years, and it’s the fact that only a few people with high-level security clearances have the authority to determine what exactly a national security issue is. These days, there is so much secrecy in our world that ‘national security’ has simply become a term used to justify extreme and unethical secrecy. This secrecy ultimately benefits a select powerful few, and keeps the dollars rolling into their pockets.

No one but these few people would ever know that expenditures on activity A are hiding in a completely different area of government. What good is an independent audit if authorities are allowed to move expenditures around with no transparency? How can one conduct an evaluation of any portion of the federal budget under such an arrangement? How is this policy in compliance with financial reporting laws or Constitutional requirements for reporting on government spending to the citizens of the United States? -Fitts explains.

In a December. 8th 2017 Forbes column, MSUs Skidmore co-authored with Laurence Kotlikoff, Skidmore said the “gargantuan nature” of the undocumented federal spending “should be a great concern to all taxpayers.”

Taken together these reports point to a failure to comply with basic constitutional and legislative requirements for spending and disclosure,” the column concludes. “We urge the House and Senate Budget Committee to initiate immediate investigations of unaccounted federal expenditures as well as the source of their payment.

Our tax dollars and the level to which we are taxed are going towards black budget programs, that cost far more than our roads and services. If this information was made transparent and open for discovery and use, it leaps all of humanity into the stars and beyond into new discovery and exploration. The implications are huge.


There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself. – Senator Daniel Inouye (source)

Fitts has been outspoken on where this money has been going and has stated multiple times that during the investigations and through her work experience within the U.S. Housing and Urban Development sector, ‘Space’ issues were always involved when it came to finding out where this money was going.

It wasn’t long ago when the Pentagon publicly disclosed a ‘UFO ariel threat program’ it had been running, one that cost $22 million. Hal Puthoff, a member of To The Stars Academy, that was involved with this public disclosure from the Pentagon, has stated that it could be one of the multiple programs. You can read more about that here.

This information that was not aggressively disseminated by mainstream media, too much public attention on $21 trillion missing dollars starts to bring up questions about where this money is going.

Having been an avid researcher into the UFO phenomenon for more than a decade, I can tell you that a lot of it is going towards activities in space and other activities that are deemed classified for ‘national security’ purposes. One example I’ve written about before has been the reality of deep underground military bases, and deep under ocean military bases.

Fitts is one of many who has claimed that these black budget operations are being used to build a space economy, and that there is currently a war going on up there. A fight for economic domination between nations of Earth. This doesn’t sound too outlandish when you consider she is one of the multiple credible sources giving this type of interpretation. Sometimes, information like this can be too much for us to handle, at other times it is purposely subjected to ridicule and official smears campaigns to bring less credibility to the topic.

Corporations are currently dominating space. Let’s not forget about Garry Mckinnon, who performed the largest ever military computer hack in human history. This made global headlines, it was too big to conceal, and he gave a telling interview before he was arrested claiming that he found multiple pictures of UFO’s and lists of “off world officers” and “fleet to fleet” transfers. You can see a clip of his interview with Project Camelot’s Kerry Cassidy, here. This interview was conducted before it became public knowledge and before he was arrested for his hack. He hacked into Department of Defence and NASA systems, among others.

The evidence for a clandestine secret space program that is costing tax-payers trillions of dollars is backed up by undeniable evidence, yet it’s shrouded in secrecy, despite the fact that it hides in plain sight.

According to Fitts, we are not alone, this is known, and we too have an ever-growing presence in space. In an interview, she recently did with Dark Journalistshe talks about the Secret Space Program from a historical perspective. She explains how enormous amounts of resources were handed over to covert operations to develop a security system of finance. This then created the CIA and a select group of people who were in charge of UFO technology. “By the time JFK came into office ready to challenge this shadow government and make space program the centrepiece of his administration, the civil war between the Deep State and the public state was in full force.”

Robert Bigelow, CEO of Bigelow Aerospace revealed knowledge of an extraterrestrial earlier this year.

The important thing to remember here is that the UFO phenomenon and extraterrestrial hypothesis have, in my opinion, enormous amounts of credibility and evidence behind them. We’ve been writing about the topic since CE was founded in 2009, you can visit the disclosure section of our website to sift through those articles for more information.

Below is one of the last interviews she did:

A Little More On The Black Budget

Did we really need this leak in order to believe that black budget programs operate in secrecy? No, many people will tell you that the existence of black budget programs was obvious and that we didn’t need any official documentation to prove it, but this still helps. The United States has a history of government agencies existing in secret for years. The National Security Agency (NSA) was founded in 1952, its existence was hidden until the mid-1960’s. Even more secretive is the National Reconnaissance Office, which was founded in 1960 but remained completely secret for 30 years.

We are talking about Special Access Programs (SAP). From these, we have unacknowledged and waived SAPs. These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as ‘deep black programs.’ A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.” (source).

The Washington Post revealed that the “black budget” documents report a staggering 52.6 billion dollars that were set aside for operations in the fiscal year 2013. Although it’s great to have this type of documentation in the public domain proving the existence of these black budget programs, the numbers seem to be off according to some statements made by some very prominent people who have been involved in the defence sector for years. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that these programs are not using billions of dollars, but trillions of dollars that are unaccounted for. Here is a statement was given by Canada’s former Minister of National Defence, Paul Hellyer in 2008:

It is ironic that the U.S. would begin a devastating war, allegedly in search of weapons of mass destruction when the most worrisome developments in this field are occurring in your own backyard.  It is ironic that the U.S. should be fighting monstrously expensive wars  allegedly to bring democracy to those countries, when it itself can no longer claim to be called a democracy when trillions, and I mean thousands of billions of dollars have been spent on projects which both congress and the commander in chief no nothing about(source)

Rumsfeld also admitted that 2.8 trillion could not be accounted for. On July 16, 2001, in front of the house appropriations committee, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld stated:

The financial systems of the department of defence are so snarled up that we can’t account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that’s believable (source)

It turns out he lied, and it was a heck of a lot more, and probably even far greater than $21 trillion dollars…

Yes there have been crashed craft, and bodies recovered.

The Takeaway

The takeaway here is to realize that our world is plagued with secrecy, but at the same time, with so many whistleblowers, leaks and investigations, that secrecy is going away. It’s all there for one to see, it’s not really “secret” as it is simply, unacknowledged. That being said, there is clearly a lot we don’t know including just how far this world of secrecy has advanced. One thing is for certain, it has gone off the planet. We may not know who entirely is involved, but if you follow the money, that’s probably your best bet.

At the end of the day, the lid is being blown off, and secrecy cannot last. New discoveries await the human race, and information that is naturally our birthright to discover has been kept from us in the hands of those who clearly do not have the best interests of humanity at heart. The tides are turning.

The strength to face the challenges in our life always rewards us with a refinement and evolution of our soul regardless if we win or lose the battle.

We all strive to live our soul’s purpose, but sometimes our mind conflicts with our feelings and causes confusion. The Bhagavad Gita is an ancient Hindu text that has an important teaching for those of us who experience this internal struggle. In this story, Arjuna the peaceful warrior is faced with a choice to act or not act in what he feels is a no-win situation for himself. If you have ever felt confusion or inner conflict holding you back, then the timeless wisdom in this story can bring clarity and relief.

Ahimsa is the principle of non-violence, which is a fundamental tenet of Hinduism. It is rooted in the belief that all lives, both human and non-human, are sacred. This is why on the eve of a great war, the choice between duty and non-violence leaves Arjuna in a state of inner conflict in this story. Being a peaceful warrior requires you to stand firmly in your spiritual path, dharma, but sometimes we don’t have the clarity to know what the best choice is. This requires an active fearlessness and non-attachment, which is embodied in the famous parable of Arjuna and Krishna’s discussion on the battlefield.

The story begins with a young prince, Arjuna, who realizes that the enemies he’ll be fighting in an upcoming battle are his own relatives, beloved friends, and revered teachers. He turns to his charioteer confessing his conflicting emotions and his fears. His charioteer is actually the eternally wise Krishna. Here Arjuna talks to Krishna about his confusion:

…it is not proper for us to kill our own kinsmen, the sons of Dhritarashtra. For how, Krishna, shall we be happy after killing our own relatives? If the sons of Dhritarashtra, weapon in hand, should kill me in battle, me weaponless and not defending myself, that would be better for me. – Bhagavad Gita

As he contemplates no action at all and allowing his enemies to kill him, he hopes to stay true to his dedication to non-violence (ahimsa), but Krishna recognizes this as a cop-out. Compassion is said to come in the form of a lamb and a lion. We must accept that we are not perfect. This humility allows each of us to evolve forward from the place that we stand, rather than jump to absolute ideals.

Though Arjuna has mentally justified that he is being fearless and selfless to let his enemies kill him unarmed, he is actually avoiding his own dharma and here Krishna reminds him of this:

One’s own duty, though defective, is better than another’s duty well performed. – Bhagavad Gita

This is a call to hone one’s own inner voice and stay true to it; trusting that there are no wrong choices, only lessons to be learned. Duty is usually associated with something we don’t want to do, but it can feel quite empowering once we accept our role in a situation. When I was in my 20s, I was passionate about the environment and saving the world, but I was broke. I had gone past being able to be picky about a job that would help me pay the bills or feed myself, so I begrudgingly took a job as a landscaper.

Swinging a pick-axe in the hot sun, I was given the task of putting irrigation lines in to grow plants and grass that should not have been planted in the arid climate of Arizona. Non-native, drought-tolerant plants waste precious water in the desert landscape. I was miserable while I worked and felt a bit self-righteous about my sustainability ideals. Angry at the universe that I should have to do such a lowly chore, I put my nose to the grindstone and woke up early every day to make ends meet.

If you have ever felt conflicted about your life path then you will understand this feeling. In acceptance of the task at hand comes a certain humility, self-compassion, a sense of service, mental liberation, and even empowerment. This is central to karma yoga, which teaches us not to be attached to the outcome of our work, but to do it as a form of devotion to our own inner evolution.

Your business is with action alone; not by any means with the fruit of action. Let not the fruit of action be your motive to action. Let not your attachment be fixed on inaction.Therefore, always perform action, which must be performed, without attachment. For a man, performing action without attachment attains the Supreme. – Krishna to Arjuna

Even the most mundane actions in our day-to-day life are the result of choices we have made. The parable of Arjuna’s indecision on the battlefield is an extreme expression of this common circumstance and that is why it holds such value for us today. With clarity of mind, or mindfulness, along with personal accountability and non-attachment to outcome, we can have the courage to face any battle. A situation can be terrifying and feel like life or death even if it is not. The strength to face the challenges in our life always rewards us with a refinement and evolution of our soul, regardless if we win or lose the battle.

To one that is born, death is certain; and to one that dies, birth is certain. Therefore, you should not grieve about things that are unavoidable. – Krishna to Arjuna

Sometimes it is the fear itself that dies (or an ego death) on this journey. Each one of us is here at this time for something greater than we can know or understand. The world is filled with terrifying possibilities, and mistakes are easy to come by. Sometimes the fear of making the wrong choice is scarier than the choices themselves, yet we are all here to fail as much as we are here to succeed.

Anyone with great success can also boast many failures. In this process, we learn to be more compassionate to ourselves and to those who have wronged us with their own poor behavior. The journey of soul evolution continues regardless. We must always put one foot in front of the other, and the path will appear with each step.

In this path to final emancipation, nothing that is commenced becomes wasted effort; no obstacles exist; and even a little of this form of sacred duty protects one from great danger. – Krishna to Arjuna

Knowing that we are in line with our dharma, and on the path (not the right path or the wrong path, just on the path), we begin to liberate and empower ourselves. These ancient parables, like the one told in the Bhagavad Gita, are meant to remind us of the eternal challenges that humans face and how to conquer our demons, even if we’d rather do nothing. Arjuna contemplates not taking up arms in battle, but after speaking with Krishna he follows his dharma and fights.

Being a peaceful warrior does not mean that you should be without your sword, as you never know when you might be called to unsheathe it. You can stand fearlessly in whatever circumstance you may face, knowing that you are not alone on the journey to personal evolution.

If you haven’t been following the drama coming out of Florida’s Broward and Palm Beach Counties since the Midterm Election polls closed on Tuesday night, I would like to alert you to the fact that it is an event worth paying attention to. Not necessarily because it is a prime example of election fraud, which it certainly is. But more profoundly, because it may become the signature public event that reveals the long-hidden Deep State influence over American politics to Americans at large on both sides of the political divide.

The fact that election laws have clearly been broken is certainly not a first; what is noteworthy is that we have finally reached the time in history in which it is no longer possible for the Deep State to hide their blatant crimes from public scrutiny. And the transparent agenda that is being revealed here reeks of last-chance desperation on the part of the Deep State. Let’s first give some context before getting into details.

Context: Midterm Election Results

By Wednesday morning, it had become clear that Democrats had gained control of the House and Republicans had retained control of the Senate. While for many Democrats this initially seemed like a moment for celebration, President Donald Trump lauded the results as a victory for his side. Post #2448 from Q-Anon the next day explains why the election results were exactly what the Alliance was looking for in their quest to take down the Deep State:

We are at war.
Think logically.
Why was winning the House majority the primary goal for them?
To this point, what chamber is currently directing the DOJ/FBI investigations?
To this point, what chamber do they feel most threatened by?
While the focus was on the House for them (due to above), our underlying focus was adding PRO_POTUS members to the Senate and safely securing a PRO_MAJORITY.
While we had a senate majority on paper, in reality, we never did, nor could we count on bringing investigations to that body until it was safely in our full control.
Moves & countermoves.

The message here is very clearly stated. In order to begin mass arrests of the Deep State, the Alliance has to remove powerful Deep State assets from the Department of Justice and the FBI. The DOJ/FBI investigations were being conducted by Trey Gowdy and Bob Goodlatte through the House of Representatives, and so the Deep State figured that if the Democrats took control of the House, those investigations could be stopped. What they didn’t account for is that after the election, Gowdy and Goodlatte would close the House investigations and DOJ/FBI investigations would be re-opened in the Senate, which actually has more power than the House investigations to actually get the job done. And so while Democrats had their attention on the House races, the Alliance wanted to ensure a pro-Trump majority in the Senate.

Q states, ‘While we had a senate majority on paper, in reality, we never did, nor could we count on bringing investigations to that body until it was safely in our full control.’ The results of the midterm elections actually added a few ‘PRO_POTUS’ Senators (Alliance allies) to the Senate such that there would be unfettered majority support for the DOJ/FBI investigations. Retiring Senator Jeff Flake, who was a Trump critic, is one example of a senator whose vote could not be counted upon.

Before the election, Republicans held (on paper) a 51-49 majority. Here are the post-election Senate numbers as they currently stand: Republicans 51, Democrats 46 (Republicans lead in Florida, Mississippi; Democrats lead in Arizona). The way things stand here, The Republicans are likely to have a 53-47 majority in the Senate. Now that the Deep State realizes that a PRO-POTUS majority in the Senate means unfettered DOJ/FBI investigations from the Senate, which signifies the beginning of the end for the Deep State, it is not surprising that they are desperately doing everything they can to overturn the three remaining races. And the first order of business is to lean on their old (and well-paid) friends in Broward and Palm Beach Counties. Here is what has happened there.

Criminal Activity In Florida

To say that illegal activity has gone on in Democratic strongholds Broward and Palm Beach Counties is not speculation. It is fact that not even the most ardent Democrat could deny. Clear state election laws have been broken, and this has become public knowledge. Let’s put this on a timeline:

Broward County: Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes is required by Florida state law to provide a count of all the absentee and early votes that had come in within thirty minutes of the polls closing. She did not do that. Then, she did not give updates on the vote count every 45 minutes once the polls had closed, which is also required by law. Over the course of the next few days, she continued to stay silent on the total vote count, while operating with her staff clandestinely until Republican nominee Rick Scott won a lawsuit insisting that observers be present to the process. But by then the operation to overturn the election result was in full gear. According to this AP article,

The vote total in Broward County, which is no stranger to dubious voting procedures, stood at 634,000 votes on election night, according to the Scott campaign. That figure swelled to 695,700 votes by 1 a.m. Thursday and then to 707,223 votes by 2:30 p.m.

“And we just learned, that the number has increased to 712,840 ballots cast on election day,” the Scott campaign said at 8 p.m. EST Thursday. And all of this has unfolded against a backdrop of silence from county officials about where the thousands of votes had been or how many more they may claim to need counting.

Scott, who had been deemed the winner on Tuesday night by a margin of 60,000 votes, has seen his margin dwindle to 15,000 since all these additional votes have magically materialized, and the elections officials had still not announced a vote total for the county almost 4 full days after the election.

To add to the notion that these irregularities are an all-out attempt to circumvent the rule of law, as the Deep State has so often done with impunity, is the descent of lawyer Marc Elias into the fray:

Marc Elias, a lawyer with the Democratic-connected firm Perkins Coie, held a conference call with reporters Thursday morning at which he brashly predicted Mr. Nelson would eventually be declared the victor in the race and boasted of his track record in flipping the results of elections that allowed Democratic candidates who initially looked like losers to claim victory in the end. Mr. Scott and his “billions of dollars” wouldn’t be able to stop it, Mr. Elias said.

Palm Beach County: In the video below, Ronna McDaniel, the RNC chairwoman, explains how Susan Bucher, the Palm Beach County clerk, defied the law by not providing a vote total by a court-ordered deadline of 7pm on Friday. Palm Beach County have themselves already come up with more than 15, 000 additional votes in the interim which contributed to the dwindling of Rick Scott’s lead over Democratic senator Bill Nelson.

This Time It’s Different

In the past, as with the ‘Hanging Chads’ election victory of George Bush over Al Gore in 2000, voting fraud was more easily and readily swept under the rug, for a number of reasons. But one reason, in particular, that the illusion of democracy and rule of law was easier to maintain was that, at the end of the day, the Deep State had control over both parties. Oh, competing factions within the Deep State might have more affinity to one party than the other, say for simplicity’s sake that the Rockefeller faction benefited more from a Republican in office while the Rothschild faction favored a Democratic president, but all in all things were well under control, so not much of a fuss needed to be made.

In this election, we are dealing with one party who is receiving the full brunt of support from the Deep State, while the other party is working as the vehicle with which to take down the Deep State. Which is not to say that there are not Republicans who are Deep state players, not at all. In fact, Q confirmed in post #2468 today that ‘[SWAMP] contains RED & BLUE.’ Having said that, it appears that the strength of the Alliance has been enough to convert a few of those Senators away from the dark side: Lindsey Graham is a prominent example, as he has obviously done an about-face to become a staunch Trump supporter. So now Q can boast of a ‘true’ majority in the Senate (meaning having at least 50 people supporting the takedown of the Deep State) which is something that absolutely terrifies the Deep State.

There is a sense that the Alliance has enough power now that they can prevent attempts at election-stealing from happening, and it is playing out right in front of our eyes more than it ever has. Never has the rule of law been so blatantly and clumsily flaunted in the public arena, and true to form the Mainstream Media shows itself once again to be Deep State puppets. The headlines are not about abuses of power and illegal activities, they are about confusion, legal challenges, potential for recounts, and overall try to characterize the matters as ‘complicated,’ while just saying enough about complaints from Republicans such as Rick Scott to try to maintain a veneer of objectivity. Still, they take the opportunity to frame the mainstream narrative:

Scott presented no evidence that the votes being added to the total in Broward are illegitimate. Despite multiple investigations into purported voting fraud, no widespread fraud has been detected in U.S. elections in recent years.–Washington Post

The Takeaway

Let’s be clear that this battle has little to do with the struggle between Democratic and Republican ideologies, but rather is a battle between those who would participate in support of truth and liberty and those who are agents of enslavement and suppression. The desperation and blatant disregard for the law seen in Florida could be a sign that the Deep State have truly lost control, and a breathtaking revealing of truth and transparency could soon be upon us. Let’s savor the way the sun of our collective awareness is starting to shine upon Deep State darkness, and as Q says, ‘Enjoy the Show!’

Discussing vaccines and autism isn’t an explosive topic, it’s thermonuclear. Both sides of the argument feel, with great passion, that the health and welfare of children is at stake. Much of that passion is the product of several lies told repeatedly. These lies form a foundation for self-interested parties to deny, obscure, and misdirect the truth about what’s happening to millions of children. They pit well-meaning parents against well-meaning parents. Remove the lies and you’re left with a deeply disturbing explanation for why so many children seemingly have autism out of the blue.  JB Handley – Author of How To End The Autism Epidemic 

How To End the Autism Epidemic – with many people saying is the best book on the link between vaccines and autism – is already an Amazon best seller (it hit the list even before it was released) and has recently been sent to all of the senators in Washington.

Author, JB Handley, whose own son Jamieson, showed warning signs that very night after receiving his 6 vaccines given at his ‘well baby’ appointment at two months of age.  Handley shares that something was clearly very wrong after that visit to the trusted family paediatrician, and his once perfectly healthy baby quickly morphed into a very sickly child.

Jamieson quickly regressed into autism and was often in constant pain with severe gut issues, his future now ruined.  This tragedy, that has also become millions of other parent’s far too eerily similar nightmare, propelled Handley on a journey that has become his life’s mission and purpose. Nothing fuels a parents fire to do something, more than that of their own child’s suffering.  It also is the reason why parents of other injured children won’t go away, until something is done about this crippling crisis.

JB, who studied at the prestigious Stanford University, has a very sharp grasp and innate ability to interpret and convey science, which is truly impressive. The research gone into this book is meticulous.

The book is written in a way that is concise and incredibly compelling, but most importantly, it is easy to understand.  This is a very important factor when discussing vaccine topics, simply because much of the ‘vaccine science’  in the last few decades has been manipulated, and you usually need a very sharp mind to see how this has happened.

The way studies are written actually go over most people’s heads, and this is why most don’t look at the studies themselves in detail, for they simply do not understand what things mean, or how to question the data presented, let alone to see how the statistics were manipulated.

The book enables the reader to clearly see inside popular studies which are repeatedly shared in the public to shut down further discussion on issues surrounding vaccine safety and efficacy.

Whilst JB writes only briefly on his own families experience with autism, the book relies mostly on information from science, emails from FOIA requests, court transcripts, and expert testimonials and shares some truly shocking things.  I won’t go into all of them here of course, but there is one testimony from a court case with a leading ‘vaccine expert’ Dr. Stanley Plotkin, that you should be aware of – so that it encourages you to question the ethics of the entire industry – and to purchase the book to find out what other bombshells it contains.

Whilst denying it at first, when questioned by Lawyer Mr. Siri, Dr. Plotkin admitted that he had conducted experimental vaccine tests on mentally disabled subjects (both adults and children), as well as babies born to mothers in jail.  Testing on the most vulnerable of people means that you can conduct studies where the results can easily be manipulated (for example, you won’t have to say in the study that vaccines cause mental illness if a test subject already is mentally ill).

This is highly disturbing to say the very least, but these sorts of ethics are not at all rare in the vaccine industry.

The book also exposes financial interests that many of the well-known vaccine proponents such as Dr. Paul Offit, Dr. Peter Hotez, Dr. Eric Fombonne and Dr. Paul Shattuck have.  Combined it’s many tens of millions.  It’s easy to see why they are used publicly (and so often)  to provide ‘expert commentary’ that vaccines are safe and effective.

For decades, the concern regarding vaccine ingredients was mainly around the neuro-toxic thimerosal, in recent years, there has been a switch to focus on aluminum, an adjuvant found in many of today’s vaccines at alarmingly high amounts. JB has written extensively about this in articles and information is also found in his book.

One expert who has been studying aluminum for decades is that of Professor Chris Exley who had this to say about JB’s book

I have been thinking about the toxicity of aluminum for thirty-five years. It is my life’s work. Before we completed our recent research on aluminum in brain tissue in autism, I could not see a direct link between human exposure to aluminum and autism. I certainly saw no immediate role for aluminum adjuvants in vaccines in autism. The missing link was a mechanism whereby the brain would be subjected to an acute exposure to aluminum, for example, as occurs in aluminum-induced dialysis encephalopathy. Pro-inflammatory cells, some originating from blood and lymph, heavily loaded with a cargo of aluminum in brain tissue in autism provided that missing link. We all tolerate the toxicity of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. Unfortunately, some of us are predisposed to suffer, as opposed to tolerate, the toxicity of aluminum adjuvants, and this may cause autism.

Autism is a disease, and it is not inevitable. J.B. Handley’s elegant synthesis of what we know and what we need to know argues that autism could and should be preventable. I agree with him.―Professor Christopher Exley, PhD, fellow, Royal Society of Biology; professor of bioinorganic chemistry, Keele University

Like it or not, the subject of whether or not ‘vaccines cause autism’ is one that won’t go away, and if anything, becomes talked about more each day, simply because so many parents are sharing that they too, saw something happen to their own children that they can only put down to recent vaccines.

The Implications of Truth

Despite what we are told by the mainstream media and medical industry when it comes to vaccines causing autism, the science here isn’t anywhere near settled.  Some of you might perhaps realize this ‘parroted’ term is perhaps repeated on purpose, it’s used to ‘shut down’ further discussions.  And this should make you question why?  Why are we not able to ask important questions, regarding safety, ingredients and studies?  What other drugs, that you know of, are we not allowed to question?  Could it be down to money?

Imagine if it did come out that vaccines triggered autism in children.  Wouldn’t there be a tidal wave of court cases with hundreds of thousands of claimants wanting compensation?  I wonder how much money this would amount to? The US Government has already paid out close to US 4 Billion (with taxpayers money) and that is for vaccine injury, not for Autism claims.

It is already estimated that for the cost for caring for people with autism will surpass $1 trillion in 2025, and this figure is nothing to do with compensation.  It is a frightening future that we have and one that is headed our way very soon.

The Science is Not Settled…

Science is never settled because it is a field that should always be encouraging further research and critical questioning.  Science has become so corrupted over the last few decades that it is actually an area that should now perhaps raise suspicion, especially where big profits are involved, and especially if the companies who produce the products aren’t held responsible financially if something goes wrong.

Vaccines, unlike drugs, are protected by a 1986 law that gives protection to all vaccine manufacturers. They cannot be sued.  This is disturbing to most people when they discover this, and with very good reason.  Without liability, why would a company bother to change how something is made, to improve it, if no one is going to come knocking on your door demanding change and making you pay anyone that sues you for damage? It’s called the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

It is particularly intriguing to see that vaccine research is an area that vaccine manufacturers and those that speak for them, staunchly seem to not want this to be looked into further – especially around the issue of vaccine safety, and it’s connection to autism.

Vaccines have not been tested adequately in relation to them increasing the rates of autism, you might be shocked to know that only one, the MMR  (and also only one ingredient, Thimerosal) has been studied by the CDC – with questionable results at that.  They never mention these other studies on Thimerosal toxicity or acknowledge the comments made by their longtime scientist Dr. William Thomspon, who blew the whistle on the MMR vaccine.

Thompson bravely told the world that it was “the lowest point” in his career that he “went along with that paper.” He said that the authors “didn’t report significant findings” and that he is “completely ashamed” of what he did, that he was “complicit and went along with this, and that he regrets that he has “been part of the problem.” (source)(source)(source)

Vaccines contain so many different ingredients and to have just studied one, seems beyond incredulous. With over 20 different types of vaccines (some which have multiple diseases in them) this is terrible ‘evidence’ that vaccines don’t cause autism.  The CDC (which, unbeknownst to the average person, actually owns 20 vaccine patents) cannot state that is true, because they have simply, not studied them all.

So the science here is most certainly not at all ‘settled.’

What does the US vaccine court say about vaccines causing autism?

Inside JB’s book is a chapter titled ‘The clear legal basis that vaccine’s cause autism’ is dedicated to how the vaccine court operates, and where it was admitted that a child’s injury, and subsequent diagnosis of autism, was because of a vaccine.  One case, which was leaked to the public, regarding Hannah Polling, whose family was given $20 million in compensation, under the condition they never speak out about the finding.  For those that want to deny there is a connection between vaccines and autism, this is a chapter they will have real trouble refuting.

Autism is predicted to affect a whopping 1 in 2 children by the year 2025. Yet nothing seems to be being done by the medical industry about the ’cause’, and certainly nothing effective for its treatment.  Many families are suffering in silence and are becoming impoverished looking after their sick children.

For those in countries like Australia and the UK, where people rely on the socialized ‘free’ health care system, many children are not being given the testing and the treatments that they need. Whilst genes are typically blamed for autism, yet there is no definitive gene for autism.  The money being put into autism research is just not going into the right areas, that would make a huge positive difference.  If it was, the autism rates would be going down.

I feel this is important to note, that the book is not about making the author money to line his pockets. 100% of the profits from How To End The Autism Epidemic are all being donated to several organizations, to help families dealing with autism.

We could do something about autism, and we could do it quickly if our Governments paid attention. The answers are found in this book.

If you are concerned about this issue, want solid science and to want to know the truth about how the vaccine industry operates, this book is for you.

To purchase the book in either paper back of kindle, please click here Remember, the proceeds go to helping other families dealing with autism.

Below is an interview with the author JB Handley


Vaccine Court has paid 3.7 billion in damages to families

The more time you spend on the forums, pages, commenting sections and events that touch the ET and UFO community, the more you realize it is like anything else: there are deep differences and deep divides.

You’ve heard it, the lashing out on stage or online from various figureheads, calling out others in the space as not having their facts straight or being infiltrated by intelligence communities etc. This then goes online in an even bigger way, spreading through comments, forums and everything else, creating more confusion amongst people. In essence, it’s a giant distraction.

I found out how intense this really was when first became a lot more involved within the community 5 years ago. So I decided to make it a personal mission to begin mending relationships in the space. Further to that, we committed to producing our content the way we do at CE, in our view, has encouraged both ‘leaders’ and the ‘viewers’ in the space to begin thinking differently about how we create hate, divides and focus on differences. To us, this is truly ‘walking the talk’ when it comes to the unity message of the movement.

This space, like any other thing in our world, requires us to look within ourselves individually to find out why we are creating the experiences we are. Stop blaming others and pointing fingers, and instead make this about truly doing the conscious work to create unity.

Thus far, I have seen shifts and changes happen amongst our audience, people uniting more, being more empathetic towards all presenting a message. And when they disagree with something they simply move on. I feel it’s more important that we come together as a community and support bringing this message out in a big way than it is to become divided and distracted like we often can be.

My Two Rules

For me, I have carried two rules into this ET and UFO space as I have met and worked with many of the prominent figures within it. They are:

1. If I hear something that is hearsay from someone else, usually trash talking or something of that nature, I go directly to the person it’s about and talk to them about the info. I don’t care to name names, more so just talk about the facts. Most of the time, you find out the trash talking was BS or misconstrued. You also often find that people have never actually taken the time to speak to their colleagues about the issue at hand.

2. I remember that like me, and everyone else on the planet, we are all souls on a journey. We each have our everyday challenges we are working through. With this level of empathy towards others, we are much more open to discerning information.

These rules have helped to bridge gaps between people, repair relationships and ultimately work towards creating a more solid and united disclosure movement grounded in the practice of living through the heart. An important and sometimes missing aspect of this space.

In a recent interview, I decided to ask David Wilcock about this very subject to see what he had to say with his many years in the space.

A new film called Above Majestic has come out and it features David Wilcock, Corey Goode, John Desouza, William Tompkins, David Adair, Laura Eisenhower, Niara Isley, and Jordan Sather.

Above Majestic is a shocking and provocative look at what it would take to hide a multi-trillion-dollar Secret Space Program (a clandestine group of elite military and corporate figureheads charged with reverse-engineering extraterrestrial technology also known as “Majestic 12”) from the public and the implications this would have for humanity. Viewers will be guided through taking a deep dive into the origins, technologies, history, cover-ups, conspiracies, testimony and research that goes beyond and Above Majestic.

You can watch the film here.

Digital solutions could revolutionize energy trading if they were adopted more widely across the market.

Digital solutions could revolutionize energy trading if they were adopted more widely across the market.

Gary Z McGee, Staff Writer
Waking Times

“I must create a system or be enslaved by another Man’s.” ~William Blake

Becoming free is creating your own virtuous system despite being outflanked by unvirtuous systems controlled by unvirtuous men. It is cultivating a healthy way of living despite the unhealthy ways of unhealthy men. It’s becoming so “absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion” (Albert Camus). Then it’s building “a new model that makes the existing model obsolete” (Buckminster Fuller).

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

But first, we must ask ourselves what we are freeing ourselves for before asking ourselves what we are freeing ourselves from. The answer to that question, what are we freeing ourselves for, will be the foundation of our freedom, the cornerstone of our virtue, the building blocks of a healthier way of being human in the world.

Understand: we must be critical and highly skeptical of any “answer” that should arise from asking this most vital of questions. For if our “answer” is deemed invalid/unhealthy by the dictates of universal law (what’s healthy and what’s not), then it should be discarded as invalid/unhealthy for any humans who are attempting to be virtuous and healthy. Also, every “answer” should remain flexible and adaptable lest it become stagnant, rigid, dogmatic, tyrannical, or stuck in its ways.

A virtuous system follows the Golden Rule and the Nonaggression Principle:

“Beware of the good and the just! They like to crucify those who invent their own virtue for themselves.” ~Nietzsche

As human beings there is no way around the fact that we are social creatures. We need each other to survive in a hostile (entropic) universe. Therefore, the golden rule is paramount.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

It is imperative that whatever we are freeing ourselves for does not overreach or impede the health and welfare of others. A truly virtuous systemnever forces its virtue onto others. The moment a so-called virtuous system forces its virtue or values onto others, it ceases to be virtuous. There’s no way around this absolute fact. Any attempt to “get around it” is a violation of the golden rule and therefore unvirtuous.

Likewise, it is vital that whatever we are freeing ourselves for does not violate the nonaggression principle (See caveat). A truly virtuous system is never directly violent. It is only ever violent in self-defense. The moment a so-called virtuous system becomes directly violent it ceases to be virtuous. The only moral exception to this fact is when violence is necessary to defend against direct violence –and, even then, only as a last resort. Any attempt to use violence to force others into compliance is a violation of the nonaggression principle and therefore unvirtuous.

Caveat: Being social animals in an environment with finite resources is highly complicated. To the extent that our virtuous system indirectly pollutes the environment it gets a pass for somewhat violating the nonaggression principle. The tragedy of the commons is a very real and sometimes unavoidable paradox. But, and here’s the rub, to the extent that our virtuous system directly pollutes the environment it is in direct violation of the nonaggression principle and therefore can no longer be considered virtuous.

A healthy system is sustainable, moral, and eco-conscious:

“A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” ~ Aldo Leopold

How do we know the current system (society) is unsustainable, immoral and even ecocidal, and thus unfit for healthy and virtuous people? It’s self-evident…

1.) Our society pollutes the air it needs to breathe.

2.) Our society pollutes the water it needs to drink.

3.) Our society pollutes the food it needs to eat.

4.) Our society creates unhealthy individuals it needs to evolve with.

Any system that forces its people to breathe polluted air, drink polluted water, eat polluted food and then continues to do all the things that causes that pollution is a profoundly sick society. Krishnamurti’s quote is a powerful reminder of this vital fact: “It’s no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

The solution is to create a system that is sustainable, moral, and eco-conscious; to create a healthy system that makes the unhealthy system obsolete.

The problem is that the unhealthy system overreaches. It overreaches with its pollution and it overreaches with its power. So almost any attempt at creating a healthier system will have to be covert and strategically defensive. Both in its attempt to create a healthy system and in its attempt to thwart the encroaching unhealthy system. It will have to be clandestine and stealthy on the one hand, and creative and daring on the other hand.

This will probably result in pockets of horizontal democracy on the group level: sustainable communes, ecovillages, and various types of anarchist groups. While on the individual level it will probably result in plenty of free-range humans, ninjaneers, eco-warriors, and various types of sustainable hermits.

The bottom line: Discovering a healthy and virtuous answer to the question ‘what are we freeing ourselves for?’ is no easy feat. It’s not for the faint of heart. It will take counterintuitive reasoning. It will require you to think outside of whatever box you’ve been conditioned to think inside of for most of your life. It will force you to unwash the brainwash. It will involve reprogramming your programming. It will demand that you question the profoundly sick society you were born into.

Most of all, it will require audacious courage in the face of comfortable cowardice. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said:

“A man is to carry himself in the presence of all opposition…I ought to go upright and vital and speak the rude truth in all ways…Your goodness must have some edge to it — else it is none.”

But, in the end, it will have been worth it. For you will have discovered moral virtue. You will have discovered provident health. You will have discovered authentic freedom. And your conscience will have finally been cleared.

Read more articles by Gary ‘Z’ McGee.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Gary ‘Z’ McGeea former Navy Intelligence Specialist turned philosopher, is the author of Birthday Suit of God and The Looking Glass Man. His works are inspired by the great philosophers of the ages and his wide awake view of the modern world.

This article (On Becoming Free – What Are We Really Freeing Ourselves For?) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Gary ‘Z’ McGee and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter. On Becoming Free – What Are We Really Freeing Ourselves For? was last modified: November 9th, 2018 by WakingTimes

The CDC claims that its recommendation that everyone aged six months and up should get an annual flu shot is firmly grounded in science. The mainstream media reinforce this characterization by misinforming the public about what the science says.

New York Times article from earlier this year, for example, in order to persuade readers to follow the CDC’s recommendation, cited scientific literature reviews of the prestigious Cochrane Collaboration to support its characterization of the influenza vaccine as both effective and safe. The Times claimed that the science showed that the vaccine represented “a big payoff in public health” and that harms from the vaccine were “almost nonexistent”.

What the Cochrane researchers actually concluded, however, was that their findings “seem to discourage the utilization of vaccination against influenza in healthy adults as a routine public health measure” (emphasis added). Furthermore, given the known serious harms associated with specific flu vaccines and the CDC’s recommendation that infants as young as six months get a flu shot despite an alarming lack of safety studies for children under two, “large-scale studies assessing important outcomes, and directly comparing vaccine types are urgently required.”

The CDC also recommends the vaccine for pregnant women despite the total absence of randomized controlled trials assessing the safety of this practice for both expectant mother and unborn child. (This is all the more concerning given that multi-dose vials of the inactivated influenza vaccine contain mercury, a known neurotoxin that can cross both the placental and blood-brain barriers and accumulate in the brain.)

The Cochrane researchers also found “no evidence” to support the CDC’s assumptions that the vaccine reduces transmission of the virus or the risk of potentially deadly complications—the two primary justifications claimed by the CDC to support its recommendation.

The CDC nevertheless pushes the influenza vaccine by claiming that it prevents large numbers of hospitalizations and deaths from flu. To reinforce its message that everyone should get an annual flu shot, the CDC claims that hundreds of thousands of people are hospitalized and tens of thousands die each year from influenza. These numbers are generally relayed by the mainstream media as though representative of known cases of flu. The aforementioned New York Times article, for example, stated matter-of-factly that, of the 9 million to 36 million people whom the CDC estimates get the flu each year, “Somewhere between 140,000 and 710,000 of them require hospitalization, and 12,000 to 56,000 die each year.”

…the average number of deaths each year for which the cause is actually attributed on death certificates to the influenza virus is little more than 1000.

On September 27, the CDC issued the claim at a press conference that 80,000 people died from the flu during the 2017 – 2018 flu season, and the media parroted this number as though fact.

What is not being communicated to the public is that the CDC’s numbers do not represent known cases of influenza. They do not come directly from surveillance data, but are rather controversial estimates based on controversial mathematical models that may greatly overestimate the numbers.

To put the matter into perspective, the average number of deaths each year for which the cause is actually attributed on death certificates to the influenza virus is little more than 1,000.

The consequence of the media parroting the CDC’s numbers as though uncontroversial is that the public is routinely misinformed about the impact of influenza on society and the ostensible benefits of the vaccine. Evidently, that’s just the way the CDC wants it, since the agency has also outlined a public relations strategy of using fear marketing to increase demand for flu shots.

In other words, the CDC considers it to be a problem that people are increasingly doing their own research and becoming more adept at educating themselves about health-related issues.

The CDC’s “Problem” of “Growing Health Literacy”

Before looking at some of the problems with the CDC’s estimates, it’s useful to examine the mindset at the agency with respect to how CDC officials view their role in society. An instructive snapshot of this mindset was provided in a presentation by the CDC’s director of media relations on June 17, 2004, at a workshop for the Institute of Medicine (IOM).

In its presentation, the CDC outlined a “‘Recipe’ for Fostering Public Interest and High Vaccine Demand”. It called for encouraging medical experts and public health authorities to “state concern and alarm” about “and predict dire outcomes” from the flu season. To inspire the necessary fear, the CDC encouraged describing each season as “very severe”, “more severe than last or past years”, and “deadly”.

One problem for the CDC is the accurate view among healthy adults that they are not at high risk of serious complications from the flu. As the presentation noted, “achieving consensus by ‘fiat’ is difficult”—meaning that just because the CDC makes the recommendation doesn’t mean that people will actually follow it. Therefore it was necessary to cause “concern, anxiety, and worry” among young, healthy adults who regard the flu as an inconvenience rather than something to be terribly afraid of.

The larger conundrum for the CDC is the proliferation of information available to the public on the internet. As the CDC bluntly stated it, “Health literacy is a growing problem”.

In other words, the CDC considers it to be a problem that people are increasingly doing their own research and becoming more adept at educating themselves about health-related issues. And, as we have already seen, the CDC has very good reason to be concerned about people doing their own research into what the science actually tells us about vaccines.

One prominent way the CDC inspires the necessary fear, of course, is with its estimates of the numbers of people who are hospitalized or die each year from the flu.

…many if not most people diagnosed with ‘the flu’ may not have actually been infected with the influenza virus at all, given the large number of other viruses that cause the same symptoms and the general lack of lab confirmation.

The Problems with the CDC’s Estimates of Annual Flu Deaths

Among the relevant facts that are routinely not relayed to the public by the media when the CDC’s numbers are cited is that only about 7% to 15% of what are called “influenza-like illnesses” are actually caused by influenza viruses. In fact, there are over 200 known viruses that cause influenza-like illnesses, and to determine whether an illness was actually caused by the influenza virus requires laboratory testing—which isn’t usually done.

Furthermore, as the authors of a 2010 Cochrane review stated, “At best, vaccines may only be effective against influenza A and B, which represent about 10% of all circulating viruses” that are known to cause influenza-like symptoms. (That’s the same review, by the way, that the Times mischaracterized as having found the vaccine to be “a big payoff in public health”.)

While the CDC now uses a range of numbers to describe annual deaths attributed to influenza, it used to claim that on average “about 36,000 people per year in the United States die from influenza”. The CDC switched to using a range in response to criticism that the average was misleading because there is great variability from year to year and decade to decade. And while switching to the range did address that criticism, other serious problems remain.

One major problem with “the much publicized figure of 36,000”, as Peter Doshi observed in a 2005 BMJ article, was that it “is not an estimate of yearly flu deaths, as widely reported in both the lay and scientific press, but an estimate—generated by a model—of flu-associated death.”

Of course, as the media routinely remind us when it comes to the subject of vaccines and autism (but seem to forget when it comes to the CDC’s flu numbers), temporal association does not necessarily mean causation. Just because someone dies after an influenza infection does not mean that it was the flu that killed him. And, furthermore, many if not most people diagnosed with “the flu” may not have actually been infected with the influenza virus at all, given the large number of other viruses that cause the same symptoms and the general lack of lab confirmation.

The “36,000” number came from a 2003 CDC study published in JAMA that acknowledged the difficulty of estimating deaths attributable to influenza, given that most cases are not lab-confirmed. Yet, rather than acknowledging the likelihood that a substantial percentage of reported cases actually had nothing to do with the influenza virus, the CDC researchers treated it as though it only meant that flu-related deaths must be significantly higher than the reported numbers.

The study authors pointed out that seasonal influenza is “associated with increased hospitalizations and mortality for many diagnoses”, including pneumonia, and they assumed that many cases attributed to other illnesses were actually caused by influenza. They therefore developed a mathematical model to estimate the number by instead using as their starting point all “respiratory and circulatory” deaths, which include all “pneumonia and influenza” deaths.

In his aforementioned BMJ article, Peter Doshi reasonably asked, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?”

Of course, not all respiratory and circulatory deaths are caused by the influenza virus. Yet the CDC treats this number as “an upper bound”—as though it was possible that 100% of all respiratory and circulatory deaths occurring in a given flu season were caused by influenza. The CDC also treats the total number of pneumonia and influenza deaths as “a lower bound for deaths associated with influenza”. The CDC states on its website that reported pneumonia and influenza deaths “represent only a fraction of the total number of deaths from influenza”—as though all pneumonia deaths were caused by influenza!

The CDC certainly knows better. In fact, at the same time, the CDC contradictorily acknowledges that not all pneumonia and influenza deaths are flu-related; it has estimatedthat in an average year 2.1% of all respiratory and circulatory deaths and 8.5% of all pneumonia and influenza deaths are influenza-associated.

So how can the CDC maintain both (a) that 8.5% of pneumonia and influenza deaths are flu-related, and (b) that the combined total of all pneumonia and influenza deaths represents only a fraction of flu-caused deaths? How can both be true?

The answer is that the CDC simply assumes that influenza-associated deaths are so greatly underreported within the broader category of deaths coded under “respiratory and circulatory” that they dwarf all those coded under “pneumonia and influenza”.

In his aforementioned BMJ article, Peter Doshi reasonably asked, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” As he put it, “US data on influenza deaths are a mess.” The CDC “acknowledges a difference between flu death and flu associated death yet uses the terms interchangeably. Additionally, there are significant statistical incompatibilities between official estimates and national vital statistics data. Compounding these problems is a marketing of fear—a CDC communications strategy in which medical experts ‘predict dire outcomes’ during flu seasons.”

Setting aside pneumonia and looking just at influenza-associated deaths from 1979 to 2002, the annual average according to the NCHS data was only 1,348.

Illustrating the problem, Doshi observed that for the year 2001, the total number of reported pneumonia and influenza deaths was 62,034. Yet, of those, less than one half of one percent were attributed to influenza. Furthermore, of the mere 257 cases blamed on the flu, only 7% were laboratory confirmed. That’s only 18 cases of lab confirmed influenza out of 62,034 pneumonia and influenza deaths—or just 0.03%, according to the CDC’s own National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).

Setting aside pneumonia and looking just at influenza-associated deaths from 1979 to 2002, the annual average according to the NCHS data was only 1,348.

The CDC’s mortality estimates would be compatible with the NCHS data, Doshi argued, “if about half of the deaths classed by the NCHS as pneumonia were actually flu initiated secondary pneumonias.” But the NCHS criteria itself strongly indicated otherwise, stating that “Cause-of-death statistics are based solely on the underlying cause of death … defined by WHO as ‘the disease or injury which initiated the train of events leading directly to death.’”

The CDC researchers who authored the 2003 study acknowledged that underlying cause-of-death coding “represents the disease or injury that initiated the chain of morbid events that led directly to the death”—yet they fallaciously coupled pneumonia deaths with influenza deaths in their model anyway.

At the time Doshi was writing, the CDC was publicly claiming that each year “about 36,000 [Americans] die from flu”, and as seen with the example from the New York Times, the range of numbers is likewise presented as though representative of known cases of flu-caused deaths. Yet the lead author of that very CDC study, William Thompson of the CDC’s National Immunization Program, acknowledged that the number rather represented “a statistical association” that does not necessarily mean causation. In Thompson’s own words, “Based on modelling, we think it’s associated. I don’t know that we would say that it’s the underlying cause of death.” (Emphasis added.)

Of course, the CDC does say it’s the underlying cause of death in its disingenuous public relations messaging. As Doshi noted, Thompson’s acknowledgment is “incompatible” with the CDC’s “misrepresentation” of its flu deaths estimates. The CDC, Doshi further observed, was “working in manufacturers’ interest by conducting campaigns to increase flu vaccination” based on estimates that are “statistically biased”, including by “arbitrarily linking flu with pneumonia”.

…there are otherwise significant limitations of the CDC’s models that potentially result in spurious attribution of deaths to influenza.

More “Limitations” of the CDC’s Models

While the media present the CDC’s numbers as though uncontroversial, there is in fact “substantial controversy” surrounding flu death estimates, as a 2005 study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology noted. One problem is that the CDC’s models use virus surveillance data that “have not been made available in the public domain”, which means that its results or not reproducible. (As the journal Cell reminds, “the reproducibility of science” is “a lynch pin of credibility”.) And there are otherwise “significant limitations” of the CDC’s models that potentially result in “spurious attribution of deaths to influenza.”

To illustrate, when Peter Doshi requested access to virus circulation data, the CDC refused to allow it unless he granted the CDC co-authorship of the study he was undertaking—which Doshi appropriately refused.

While the number of confirmed H1N1-related child deaths was 371, the CDC’s claimed number was 1,271 or more.

In the New York Review of Books, Helen Epstein has pointed out how the CDC’s dire warnings about the 2009 H1N1 “swine flu” never came to pass, as well as how “some experts maintain that the CDC’s estimates studies overestimate influenza mortality, particularly among children.” While the number of confirmed H1N1-related child deaths was 371, the CDC’s claimed number was 1,271 or more. To arrive at its number, the CDC used a multiplier based on certain assumptions. One assumption is that some cases are missed either because lab confirmation wasn’t sought or because the children weren’t in a hospital when they died and so weren’t tested. Another is that a certain percentage of test results will be false negatives.

However, Epstein pointed out, “according to CDC guidelines at the time”, any child hospitalized with severe influenza symptoms should have been tested for H1N1. Furthermore, “deaths in children from infectious diseases are rare in the US, and even those who didn’t die in hospitals would almost certainly have been autopsied (and tested for H1N1)…. Also, the test is accurate and would have missed few cases. Because it’s unlikely that large numbers of actual cases of US child deaths from H1N1 were missed, the lab-confirmed count (371) is probably much closer to the modeled numbers … which are in any case impossible to verify.”

As already indicated, another assumption the CDC makes is that excess mortality in winter is mostly attributable to influenza. A 2009 Slate article described this as among a number of “potential glitches” that make the CDC’s reported flu deaths the “‘least bad’ estimate”. Referring to earlier methods that associated flu deaths with wintertime deaths from all causes, the article observed that this risked blaming influenza for deaths from car accidents caused by icy roads. And while the updated method presented in the 2003 CDC study excluded such causes of death implausibly linked to flu, related problems remain.

As the aforementioned American Journal of Epidemiology study noted, the updated method “reduces, but does not eliminate, the potential for spurious correlation and spurious attribution of deaths to influenza.” Furthermore, “Methods based on seasonal pattern begin from the assumption that influenza is the major source of excess winter death.” The CDC’s models therefore still “are in danger of being confounded by other seasonal factors.” The authors also stated that they could not conclude from their own study “that influenza is a more important cause of winter mortality on an annual timescale than is cold weather.”

Once the CDC has its estimated hospitalization rate, it then multiplies that number by the ratio of deaths to hospitalizations to arrive at its estimated mortality rate. Thus, any overestimation of the hospitalization rate is also compounded into its estimated death rate.

As a 2002 BMJ study stated, “Cold weather alone causes striking short term increases in mortality, mainly from thrombotic and respiratory disease. Non-thermal seasonal factors such as diet may also affect mortality.” (Emphasis added.) The study estimated that of annual excess winter deaths, only “2.4% were due to influenza either directly or indirectly.” It concluded that, “With influenza causing such a small proportion of excess winter deaths, measures to reduce cold stress offer the greatest opportunities to reduce current levels of winter mortality.”

CDC researchers themselves acknowledge that their models are “subject to some limitations.” In a 2009 study published in the American Journal of Public Health, CDC researchers admitted that “simply counting deaths for which influenza has been coded as the underlying cause on death certificates can lead to both over- and underestimates of the magnitude of influenza-associated mortality.” (Emphasis added.) Yet they offered no comment on how, then, their models account for the likelihood that many reported cases of “flu” had nothing whatsoever to do with the influenza virus. Evidently, this is because they don’t, as indicated by the CDC’s treatment of all influenza deaths plus pneumonia deaths as a “lower bound”.

For another illustration, since it takes two or three years before the data is available to be able to estimate flu hospitalizations and deaths by the usual means, the CDC has also developed a method to make preliminary estimates for a given year by “adjusting” the numbers of reported lab-confirmed cases from selected surveillance areas around the country. The “80,000” figure claimed for last season’s flu deaths is just such an estimate. The way the CDC “adjusts” the numbers is by multiplying the number of lab-confirmed cases by a certain amount, ostensibly “to correct for underreporting”. To determine the multiplier, the CDC makes a number of assumptions to estimate (a) the likelihood that a person hospitalized for any respiratory illnesswould be tested for influenza and (b) the likelihood that a person with influenza would test positive.

Caveats such as that, however, are not communicated to the general public by the CDC in its press releases or by the mainstream media so that people can make a truly informed choice about whether it’s worth the risk to get a flu shot.

Once the CDC has its estimated hospitalization rate, it then multiplies that number by the ratio of deaths to hospitalizations to arrive at its estimated mortality rate. Thus, any overestimation of the hospitalization rate is also compounded into its estimated death rate.

One obvious problem with this is the underlying assumption that the percentage of people who (a) are hospitalized for respiratory illness and have the flu is the same as (b) the percentage of those who are hospitalized for respiratory illness, are actually tested, and test positive. This implies that doctors are not more likely to seek lab confirmation for people who actually have influenza than they are for people whose respiratory symptoms are due to some other cause.

Assuming that doctors can do better than a pair of rolled dice at picking out patients with influenza, it further implies that doctors are no more likely to order a lab test for patients whom they suspect of having the flu than they are to order a lab test for patients whose respiratory symptoms they think are caused by something else.

The CDC’s assumption thus introduces a selection bias into its model that further calls into question the plausibility of its conclusions, as it is bound to result in overestimation. In a 2015 study published in PLoS One that detailed this method, CDC researchers acknowledged that, “If physicians were more likely to recognize influenza patients clinically and select those patients for testing, we may have over-estimated the magnitude of under-detection.” And that, of course, would result in an overestimation of both hospitalizations and deaths associated with influenza.

Caveats such as that, however, are not communicated to the general public by the CDC in its press releases or by the mainstream media so that people can make a truly informed choice about whether it’s worth the risk to get a flu shot.


In summary, to avoid underestimating influenza-associated hospitalizations and deaths, the CDC relies on models that instead appear to greatly overestimate the numbers due to the fallacious assumptions built into them. These numbers are then mispresented to the public by both public health officials and the mainstream media as though uncontroversial and representative of known cases of influenza-caused illnesses and deaths from surveillance data. Consequently, the public is grossly misinformed about the societal disease burden from influenza and the ostensible benefit of the vaccine.

It is clear that the CDC does not see its mission as being to educate the public in order to be able to make an informed choice about vaccination. After all, that would be incompatible with its view that growing health literacy is a threat to its mission and an obstacle to be overcome. On the other hand, misinformed populace aligns perfectly with the CDC’s stated goal of using fear marketing to generate more demand for the pharmaceutical industry’s influenza vaccine products.

This article is an adapted and expanded excerpt from part two of the author’s multi-part exposé on the influenza vaccine. Sign up for Jeremy’s newsletter to stay updated with his work on vaccines and receive his free downloadable report, “5 Horrifying Facts about the FDA Vaccine Approval Process”.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

11 years. The amount of time I have been observing the truth about what is going on in our world.

10 years. The amount of time I have been meditating while also learning about what is going on in our world.

Point blank: the benefits of meditation for health, lifestyle, wellness, and being able to see more clearly what’s going on in our world are undeniable.

I’ve said this for a very long time, there is no separation between what you can learn via independent media about what’s truly happening in our world and spirituality. Sure, this is a more specific statement when you are accessing conscious media, like what we do here at Collective Evolution, but in general, the world around us IS a reflection of our individual and collective consciousness. For us to properly understand our world and move past what we don’t favor, we must understand the nature of why certain things are happening in the first place. And no, it’s not because of political policies.

This is why it’s inspiring to see that more and more people are becoming friends with meditation. Trying it is half the battle!

The good news is that in the last 5 years, the number of American adults and children who practice meditation has significantly increased. This is known through the results of a questionnaire administered by the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) every 5 years. Thousands of Americans respond to questions about their health, wellness, and illness-related experiences.

Results indicate that about 14 percent of adults practiced yoga and meditation in 2017. That’s up from about 9.5 percent and 4 percent respectively compared to a similar survey fielded five years ago.

“The survey data suggest that more people are turning to mind and body approaches than ever before,” NCCIH acting director David Shurtleff said in a press release.


Yoga and meditation have grown in a big way since 2012 in the US according to a national survey from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics.

Kids & Teens Are Meditating More Too

Children between the ages 4 to 17 are also practicing yoga more often. Those numbers jumped from 3.1 percent in 2012 to 8.4 percent in 2017. Meditation rose by around 5% as well amongst younger people, jumping from 0.6 percent in 2012 to 5.4 percent in 2017.

What is the cause of this increase? It’s tough to say. Personally, I point to what we have pointed to over the last 10 years in reporting about news, consciousness and more here at CE: there is a shift taking place within our individual and collective consciousness. At a foundational level, we are moving from the mind to the heart a hell of a lot more often because we, as a collective, feel the old ways simply aren’t working anymore and it’s time for something different.

When there is an innate evolution of consciousness like this taking place across the planet, trends begin, increase and we eventually see what sticks. Meditation is an age-old practice and its benefits were always widely discussed. Now that people are realizing the corporate influence over science and general health care, they are turning to different methods for certain daily challenges and illnesses. Maybe not virally yet, but it’s growing.

As I have always said, if you feel our world around us is chaotic with all that is going on, there is no better reason to begin meditation. I work in media every day, combing through the different stories, drama and crazy reactions people are having to our world events. You would think it’s exhausting, negative or taxing, but it isn’t. The reason for this is I have developed a deep meditative practice over the years that has helped me see the truth about myself, the world and us all as humans. Drama, negativity and polarity are things of the ego. The less you exist in that state, the more you see things for what they are and remain in peace. It’s powerful. Once again, this is why CE is built the way it is. neutral, conscious media that explores the deep truth behind our daily events.

We believe this form of media is truly what the world needs in a time where things are so divided, bias, misleading and emotional. This is why we created our conscious media movement campaign as well.

Here are some further details from the report regarding adults:

– Yoga was the most commonly used complementary health approach among U.S. adults in 2012 (9.5 percent) and 2017 (14.3 percent). The use of meditation increased more than threefold from 4.1 percent in 2012 to 14.2 percent in 2017.
– The use of chiropractors increased from 9.1 percent in 2012 to 10.3 percent in 2017.
– In 2017, women were more likely to use yoga, meditation and chiropractors in the past 12 months than men.
– Non-Hispanic white adults were more likely to use yoga, meditation and chiropractors than Hispanic and non-Hispanic black adults.

And here are some for children:

– The percentage of children aged 4-17 years who used yoga in the past 12 months increased significantly from 3.1 percent in 2012 to 8.4 percent in 2017.
– Meditation increased significantly from 0.6 percent in 2012 to 5.4 percent in 2017.
– There was no statistically significant difference in the use of a chiropractor between 2012 and 2017 (3.5 percent and 3.4 percent, respectively).
– In 2017, girls were more likely to have used yoga during the past 12 months than boys.
– In 2017, older children (aged 12-17 years) were more likely to have used meditation and a chiropractor in the past 12 months than younger children (aged 4-11 years).
– Non-Hispanic white children were more likely to have used yoga and a chiropractor in the past 12 months than non-Hispanic black children or Hispanic children.

The Takeaway

When it comes to daily life, or when you dive into understanding what is happening in our world, there are serious benefits to including meditation into this practice. I go into this in deep detail when I discuss the link between ‘conspiracies’ and spirituality in an episode of the CE podcast.

Meditation is an excellent practice to be using regularly as it not only helps in exploring our consciousness, changing our lives, making an impact on our world but also helps us to find ease and peace within what we see happening around us. From there, from the state of peace, we actually see VERY CLEARLY the actions to take in order to help make change. You will notice they never come from an aggressive, emotional place – like much of what we see happening today.

Not sure where to get started with meditation? Grab this meditation I have used for the last 10 years that I built from a number of different techniques. It’s simple, quick and effective.

Duke is focused on emissions reduction by retiring coal-fired plants, increasing nuclear generation capacity and has add close to 650 MW of built or purchased solar energy.

Duke is focused on emissions reduction by retiring coal-fired plants, increasing nuclear generation capacity and has add close to 650 MW of built or purchased solar energy.

There are clearly, undoubtedly, multiple concerns that arise from the genetic engineering of our food. We are past the second decade since their approval and for a long time, the ‘corporatocracy‘ used its stranglehold on media, education (CIA relationship with media/academia document, read more about it here & here) and overall human consciousness to persuade the human population, health professionals and many within academia that GMO food was completely safe.

They went further by claiming that GMOs could be a great solution to world hunger, climate change, and other factors that are made out to be a threat to global security. It’s the same way the elite use terrorism to impose even more restrictions and security measures on humanity like mass surveillance. Many of these issues don’t exist as we are made to believe they do. They are simply manufactured so the same entity can then propose their solution, all in the guise of the savior while really having ulterior motives.

After observing this, the question then became: How could a human in good conscience do something that they know will be harming many other people?  People of high stature are now coming forward, and have been coming forward for years saying this is actually what has been happening. This is all part of the shift in consciousness on the planet right now. The only problem is, GMOs are still taught and viewed as a good thing within schools, especially in post-secondary education. This type of brainwashing that’s been targeted towards academia will change as we keep discussing these things and more people become aware.

This is why the CIA has always kept a close relationship with mainstream media & academia: to manipulate the population, their thoughts and beliefs towards certain things. We are living in an age of mass propaganda and brainwashing, and admittedly, it is done in a very clever way.

Just Look At The Science

Even if we put whistle-blowers on pause and just look at all of the science, that’s enough. There is a reason why GMO products and the pesticides that go with them are completely banned in several countries. It’s simple: human and environmental concerns should be paramount. No product should receive approval before all doubts are put to rest. No debate should exist. In North America, the corporations control politics and control the policy behind this, as well as the ‘science’ that deems these products safe. It’s all company-sponsored science, which greatly contrasts the science published independently around the world.

The GMO-Cancer rat study is a great example.  This article is one that correlates them with more than 22 diseases. It’s not hard to see, too often we put our minds in the hands of others, and unfortunately many times it’s an academic institution that is completely controlled by ‘the powers that be.’ We just saw a massive conflict of interest disclosed with regards to cancer care and a major medical figure, you can read more about that hereA lawsuit even forced the FDA to divulge secret files it had pertaining to GMOs, and how the science used to approve them was completely fraudulent, manipulated and changed. Scientists were even brainwashed.

There are also WikiLeaks documents pertaining to GMOs showing just how politicized these matters are; the US even threatened to cause ‘economic war’ to countries who refused their product.

The US Department of State is selling seeds instead of democracy. This report provides a chilling snapshot of how a handful of giant biotechnology companies are unduly influencing US foreign policy and undermining our diplomatic efforts to promote security, international development and transparency worldwide. This report is a call to action for Americans because public policy should not be for sale to the highest bidder.” – Wenonah Hauter, Food & Water Watch Executive (source)

The problem goes far beyond the marketing of GMOs as a solution to world hunger and climate change. We really have to turn off Bill Nye the science guy and all the other mainstream brainwashing and get really get serious here.

The Whistleblower

Ken Roseboro is editor and publisher of The Organic & Non-GMO Report, a monthly news magazine that focuses on threats posed by GM foods and the growing non-GMO food trend. He sat down with Caius Rommens, who was Director of Research at Simplot Plant Sciences from 2000 to 2013 where he led the development of the company’s genetically engineered Innate potato. Over time, Rommens started to have serious doubts about his work and worried about potential health risks from eating the GMO potatoes, which are now sold in 4,000 supermarkets in the United States. Prior to this he worked at Monsanto as a team leader.  At Simplot, he designed a genetically modified potato that he believed “was resistant to bruise and late blight, and that could be used to produce French fries that were less colored and less carcinogenic than normal fries.

The following came from this interview with Rommens:

Interviewer: The main genetic engineering of the Simplot GMO potatoes…was silencing genes called RNAi. What are some of the possible negative consequences of silencing genes?

Rommens: Silencing is not gene-specific. Any gene with a similar structure to the silencing construct may be silenced as well. It is even possible that the silencing that takes place inside the GM potatoes affects the genes of animals eating these GM potatoes. I am most concerned about bees that don’t eat GM potatoes but may use GM potato pollen to feed their larvae. Based on my assessment of the literature, it appears that the silencing constructs are active in pollen.

He is telling us that silencing the PRO (polyphenol oxidase, a gene responsible for browning in potatoes) gene increases toxins that accumulate within the GMO potatoes.

Interviewer: Why are these toxins are produced and what effects they could have on human health?

Rommens: Ex-colleagues of mine had shown that PPO-silencing increases the levels of alpha-aminoadipate by about six-fold. Alpha-aminoadipate is a neurotoxin, it can also react with sugars to produce advanced glycoxidation prouducts implicated in a variety of diseases.

This is obviously concerning, and makes one wonder how these ‘things’ were approved for human consumption. In 2009, an application for the approval of a Monsanto GM corn variety, LY038, was denied in Europe after regulators there found it to have high concentrations of alpha-aminoadipate.

Rommens: Similarly, ex-colleagues had shown that the damaged and bruised tissues of potatoes may accumulate high levels of tyramine, another toxin. Such damaged tissues are normally identified and trimmed, but they are concealed, or partially concealed, and much of it is not trimmed in GM potatoes. Therefore, it seems important that Simplot should determine the full spectrum of possible tyramine levels in their GM potatoes. Another potential toxin is chaconine-malonyl. There is little known about this compound, but ex-colleagues had shown that it is increased by almost 200 percent upon PPO-silencing. This should probably be investigated.

They key factor here is the impact of GMO technology on the proliferation of a variety of diseases.

Rommens Retracts His Own Paper

A paper published by Rommens and colleague J.R. Simplot, also a former Monsanto employee, entitled Crop Improvement through Modification of the Plant’s Own Genome, was later retracted by the authors themselves after they admitted to fraud. According to the abstract,

Plant genetic engineering has, until now, relied on the incorporation of foreign DNA into plant genomes. Public concern about the extent to which transgenic crops differ from their traditionally bred counterparts has resulted in molecular strategies and gene choices that limit, but do not eliminate, the introduction of foreign DNA. Here, we demonstrate that a plant-derived P-DNA fragment can be used to replace the universally employed Agrobacterium transfer T-DNA. Marker-free P-DNAs are transferred to plant cell nuclei together with conventional T-DNAs carrying a selectable marker gene. By subsequently linking a positive selection for temporary marker gene expression to a negative selection against marker gene integration, 29% of derived regeneration events contain P-DNA insertions but lack any copies of the T-DNA. Further refinements are accomplished by employing Ω-mutated virD2 and isopentenyl transferase cytokinin genes to impair T-DNA integration and select against backbone integration, respectively. The presented methods are used to produce hundreds of marker-free and backbone-free potato (Solanum tuberosum) plants displaying reduced expression of a tuber-specific polyphenol oxidase gene in potato. The modified plants represent the first example of genetically engineered plants that only contain native DNA.

Except, that wasn’t true. As the retraction notice suggests, Rommens appears to be an expert in the properties of ring fries, but in fact he just made stuff up:

This article has been retracted at the request of the authors. Retraction is based on three inaccurate statements of facts that are associated with a plant-derived transfer DNA. Two of the inaccuracies were described on p. 422 (first paragraph of the “Results” section): the plant-derived transfer DNA was not isolated from pooled wild potato (Solanum tuberosum) DNA but, instead, from DNA of the commercial potato var Ranger Russet, and its sequence was not confirmed by inverse PCR. Furthermore, the sequences of the left and right border-like regions shown in Figure 1B reflect transfer DNA-like primer sequences and are not present in the Ranger Russet genome. The corresponding author, Caius M. Rommens, takes responsibility for the inaccuracies and sincerely apologizes to the readers, reviewers, and editors of Plant Physiology.

One Massive Genetic Experiment

A clear picture is coming into view that these companies developing and producing GMOs have absolutely no regard for science, truth, or humanity itself. Jane Goodall explains what happens with regards to the process of approval, in the foreword of the book Altered Genes & Twisted Truth:

“As part of the process, they portrayed the various concerns as merely the ignorant opinions of misinformed individuals – and derided them as not only unscientific, but anti-science. They then set to work to convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that GMOs were safe.” (source)

The manipulation of science by GMO proponents in order to get them approved, and become filthy rich at the expense of the environment and human health is clearly a dangerous problem. Biologist and author David Suzuki were right when he said that humanity has become one massive genetic experiment. The genetic modification which has and does occur in nature is far different from what these biotechnology companies are doing. I go into much more detail about that in a previous article. Thankfully, we have courageous scientists with integrity like Caius Rommens who are willing to abandon their lucrative careers in favor of human safety and the truth. For further reading, please refer to the articles linked below.

How Monsanto Genetically Modifies Our Food Compares To What Happens Naturally In Nature

Hundreds of Scientists Tell The World That The GMO & Cancer Link Is Real 

The GMO Agenda Trakes A Menacing Leap Forward with EPA’s Silent Approval of Monsanto/Dow’s RNAi Corn 

Federal Lawsuit Forces US Government To Share Disturbing Facts on Genetically Engineered Foods

Why Bill Nye is not a Science Guy – What He Gets Wrong About GMOs.

The Takeaway

GMOs are a topic like vaccines, where it’s difficult to publicly question without being ridiculed. Ridicule is one of the main strategies of those who back these products. When you step away from your television, mainstream academia, and corporate science, and simply do your own research without someone telling you how things are, the picture becomes quite clear. For anybody who has done any type of in-depth research and looked at both sides of this coin, it’s hard to fathom how any human being could not come to the same conclusions.

At the end of the day, it’s one of many great examples of seeing how the corporations control government policy in North America, and the lengths they will go to in order to have their products approved, by-passing and completely controlling regulatory agencies while completely ignoring human health. But we are awakening to all this at an accelerating pace, and we are gaining confidence that we have the choice and the power to say NO to GMO.

If you follow mainstream media, the answer to the question of why election voting machines break down so much is ‘complicated.’ Much too complicated, in fact, for us to come up with any kind of permanent solution. An article like Wired’s ‘Voting Machine Meltdowns Are Normal—That’s The Problem,’ will fill us with the nitty-gritty details: paper ballot scanner malfunctions, machines actually ‘flipping votes’ because of some kind of ‘bug’, machines running with ‘outdated’ Windows operating systems, about which the article states, “it stands to reason these antiquated systems would break down under pressure.” But far and above all this was the detailed explanation that the rain may have had something to do with votes not getting processed properly:

Simply replacing old machines with new ones wouldn’t guarantee an incident-free election, though. Take the claim that the rain messed with people’s ballots—it isn’t just an excuse. Kings County in New York and Madison County in Alabama both use an optical scanner machine called the DS-200. According to its operating manual, Stewart says, it’s designed to operate in 10 to 15 percent humidity. In both Kings County and Madison County on Tuesday, the humidity was more like 98 percent. The irony there, Stewart says, is the DS-200 isn’t one of the old machines we always hear about becoming obsolete. It came out at the end of 2015. “It’s a more persnickety piece of equipment, giving you greater security,” Stewart says. But that sophistication clearly comes with unforeseen consequences.

More on this later. But even as budgetary issues, late delivery of funds or new machines or other bureaucratic matters are also pointed out as having an impact on the problem, the articles concludes that even these problems of neglect, incompetence, and disorganization, as with the voting machine issues, have to be accepted as the “new normal.”

Bull Cookies, as M*A*S*H*’s Colonel Sherman Potter used to say.

True Source Of The Problem

The true source of the problem is so simple. The people that have long held the power in the United States don’t want us living in a true democracy. They certainly want us to believe we live in a democracy, and think we have true freedom and representation; the fact is that in all realms of society, we have long been living in an oligarchy controlled by a wealthy elite who is more than happy to keep the ‘democracy’ charade going for as long as it suits them.

A thorough background check on who gets to make the voting machines and the kinds of profits they get for the sale of these pathetic contraptions, and who approves the purchase and implementation of these machines and on what basis they are approved as anchor points of the democratic process reveals of litany of self-service, conflict of interest, fraud, greed, intimidation, and corruption of the highest kind.

Then there are the machines themselves and the ridiculous extent to which they are not secure from hacking and external manipulation. As this New York Times article points out,

In the 15 years since electronic voting machines were first adopted by many states, numerous reports by computer scientists have shown nearly every make and model to be vulnerable to hacking. The systems were not initially designed with robust security in mind, and even where security features were included, experts have found them to be poorly implemented with glaring holes.

Let me get this straight: systems that were built to be at the heart of American Democracy ‘were not initially designed with robust security in mind’? Have you ever heard of anything so ridiculous in your life? And we are supposed to believe that this was some kind of ‘oversight’ and not part of the hidden agenda of the powers that be in America to manipulate voting results?

The fact of the matter is, it is not only obvious that airtight security should be one of the prime characteristics of voting machines even before they get off the drawing board, and would be if true patriots were in the positions of power in the country; it also needs to be stated that creating a secure voting machine that works 100% of the time for decades would be one of the simplest-to-make machines known to man, an unchallenging two-week homework project for a first-year mechanical engineering student.

If We Had A True Democracy

I am sure many people have devised a voting system while waiting for a bus or getting a haircut that would be a vast improvement over the one currently in place. Please indulge me as I explain how easy it would be–if, indeed, the powerful forces in our country actually valued democracy over their own personal agendas.

  1. There would be one system country-wide that would be agreed on at the Federal level in cooperation with state representatives that proved to be the best, most secure, most reliable, and easiest to operate and use. While I am a strong advocate of decentralization of power and the rights of local and state governments over the Federal government, I still believe an independent Federal election agency would be the best thing for implementation of this system (Of course, this is contingent on it being an honest, uncorruptable agency)
  2. Funding matters we hear about are all hogwash. Not only would overall funding be significantly reduced through the mass production of a single model of voting machine of the highest quality that would be readily available as needed, the cost would further be slashed tremendously if there were no special interests and middle-men gaining huge amounts of money in these transactions. With an honest Federal agency getting the best price for the American people, the cost would be an absolute pittance, a drop in the bucket, and would likely be touted as one of the most important and worthwhile expenditures in the federal budget.
  3. The machine itself simply needs to help the user fill in a simple online form. Each machine would be linked to a State database (that could be off the internet, if this was a security concern) which would contain one read-only database file with the ballot information (candidate, party, referendum questions, etc) and one read/write file to record the voter’s identification and their votes on candidates and proposed laws.
  4. Each voter would work with a touch-screen to make their choices, laid out clearly, one-by-one on the screen. When they had finished, they would be able see all their votes on the screen and ‘CONFIRM’. Then they would get a paper copy of all their votes under their vote id (consisting of, for example, a combination of State code, District code, Polling Station, Machine number, and timestamp), and would again be able to check if their paper copy exactly matched the screen, before pressing ‘END’.
  5. Each machine would record transactions on their own hard drive as well as sending them to the state database. Vote-counting would be instantaneous for each state, complied by secure programs accessing the state database. This information could then be securely uploaded to the internet on a federal government website. All citizens would be able to see their own vote as part of a detailed list of vote count by state, by district, by polling station, even by machine, based on their vote id.

I’m sure there are better systems out there, which is fine. This is really just off the top of my head. My personal preference would be a system through which voters names were made public on the internet, and verification of fraud would become much simpler, but that is a matter for a later discussion. Suffice it to say that, solely based on my 8 years as a computer programmer/analyst in earlier days, making secure software for reliable machines grounded in a reliable system seems like a simple project to me, let alone for the technological wizards in the country who could be brought into such a project, if only the sole motivation was the proper functioning of this aspect of the democratic process.

The Takeaway

If you’ve read some of my previous articles, you will recall that I have said there is no good reason to waste your time voting under the current circumstances, because indeed, I don’t believe we are currently living in a representative democracy, but rather a thinly-veiled, poorly disguised mockery of it. But I wrote this article in order to bring forth the idea that our democracy is not failing due to the haphazard incompetence, laziness, or even greed of our elected officials, vendors, technicians, and bureaucrats. Our democracy is failing because many of the citizens of this country have stayed asleep while the powerful elite has continued to push its agenda of control and domination right under our collective noses.

I believe the Founding Fathers had great wisdom and the best of intentions setting up the Republic in the way they did through the Constitution; they were very well aware of the dangers posed to our liberty by the powers that are afforded to centralized governments and the undue external influence that is brought to bear upon them. If we are to honor the Founding Fathers and be part of the process of reclaiming our liberty, we will do so by awakening collectively to the veil of illusion that we live under now, and creating the conditions through which such deception is no longer possible.

Fall is in full swing meaning lots of planning, lots of stressing, and lots of intermingling with friends and family as the holidays approach. It is always this time of year when cold and flu germs...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]
Clean energy is usually never a central focus of the ballot but was a high priority for voters this election. Here's a recap of the most critical results affecting renewable energy.
Clean energy is usually never a central focus of the ballot but was a high priority for voters this election. Here's a recap of the most critical results affecting renewable energy.
Clean energy is usually never a central focus of the ballot but was a high priority for voters this election. Here's a recap of the most critical results affecting renewable energy.

SINN Power is gathering the necessary data to evaluate the renewable energy potential in Conakry, Guinea, considering wave, wind and solar resources.


Connect with us

Subscribe to our rss and social networks accounts...

On the Subject of US

Ætherna Guild is a free will, clean energy & sustainable living community resource website. More


Browse Ætherna's resourceful info!

Ætherna Guild

Energetic Balance Frequencies

Ætherna Guild's Mission

Awaken mankind's universal consciousness to find equitable solutions for a real, honest, best and prosperous Guild, based on unity and sharing, peace, respect and love, in harmony with nature and our environment to foster the achievement of collective goals leading to a higher intelligence and collective consciousness.

A Sovereign Space for One Hearth Guild ॐ