Suddenly Fear Of Social Unrest Is Everywhere

News & Current Events Public News & Current Events
,
161

The primary underlying difference between the two camps is MSM-believers vs. those who look at sources beyond that utterly criminal (and now very terroristic) formerly-mainstream corporate media – sources censored by the former to the maximum degree they’re able to. Every month that passes, the difference between the soul-crushed mind-controlled NPC army of the MSM becomes visibly and audibly greater and greater.
That is the information war being waged.
For those of you who fall into the 1st camp (and I couldn’t stress enough how unbelievably clueless you have foolishly allowed yourself to become), watch this video that the MSM would never, ever, ever, show you, of Orange Man Bad’s own words:

^ Yes, that’s what he ACTUALLY says, vs. what they tell you he says and does (i.e. the false narrative that has you believing the most absurd lies such as the idea that he’s clearly a racist, sexist, a Russian agent, blah blah blah)… while they hide Biden’s senility and child predator proclivities (and credible rape accusations etc):

@Sparky1 (Side note: tbp & Co., Congrats on your exquisite timing and targeted efforts for a job well done! PP is well on its way to becoming Peak Natural News. Of course, this change was not solely the result of your very sophisticated and persistent shilling, but you certainly display great skill in profiling and ingratiating yourself with key PP senior members, mastering the "right" themes and language to trigger hot buttons designed to foment conflict and catalyze further the transformation and decline of PP.)
What a joke. We deal with facts, figures, ample sources of information, truth, discussion, debate, dialogue, ... You deal with false narratives, identical "Woke" PC thought (that's why the label NPC is so accurate and appropriate), making you virtue-signalling safe-space-seeking riots-and-looting-supporting Overton-window-reducing victimhood-mentality-imbued weaklings calling for censorship of opposing views... all of it coming from A SINGLE SOURCE (although presented as many sources): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R9oJZswV6Y We want you to WAKE UP and see on whose side you really belong. You are not our natural enemies. Those whom you are ALLOWING to control your mind, beliefs, actions, ultimately life itself, are. The only reason you think we are your enemy and not the TV, is because you have been extremely uncareful in choosing who it is you allow to influence you with (dis)information and narratives built on such. Hell, I'm not even a right-winger (as you no doubt assume I am), I'm a volutaryist/libertarian/[classical-]liberal. Also a non-dualist, but I recognize the 3rd density dramas for the entertaining and necessary show that they are. This is about evil vs. good, immorality vs. decency, terrorist lies-based narratives vs. truth, censorship vs. free speech (primary pillar of Western civilization), mind-control vs. thinking for oneself, neomarxist indoctrination vs. diversity of thought, officialdom vs. "conspiracy theories", enslavement agendas vs. freedom, transhumanism vs. ascension, NAA vs. GSF beings. We've reached Peak Corruption, but many haven't noticed yet because a primary goal of corruption is hiding itself.
162

This is what Peak Prosperity became. What a shame.

163

^ Nice arguments bro. What are you trying to say, that Chris has attracted “conspiracy theorists” with his conspiracy theorizing such as claiming that HCQ is being suppressed and that the virus most likely came from a lab?

164

No. My arguments are offered at #104, #118, and #120. I have no explanation of why Peak Prosperity ended up attracting conspiracy theorists, but can only point out that among those who understand that our society is failing, many will seek to generate or believe explanations that are not backed by facts. I don’t know if it’s a form of self-soothing, or what, but it is a highly destructive phenomenon.
I will add this: although I admire Chris Martenson’s reporting on the pandemic, it would have given him more credibility with me if he had gone back and corrected misinformation he has spread (the Italian rheumatologists’ survey, for example). I do understand that he has limited time and that his listeners will have limited attention. He is at his best, I think, when he is pointing out shoddy science, but he puts himself in an awkward position when he himself does not correct misinformation he has spread, while accusing respected people of, well, I’m not sure what, exactly. But I don’t think Dr. Fauci, for example, is a sellout to big pharma.

165

mjtrac, It’s been made perfectly clear by yourself and others that you don’t like this content. While I don’t necessarily agree with tbp on all issues, topics, or data, I do agree with him that we live in a sea of propaganda and that the mainstream media lies incessantly. To me the ethos of this site is crowd sourcing the truth, whether the topic is the environment, the money system, etc. tbp, myself, and many others here see what amounts to an existential threat to our ability to operate as free humans in the current political environment. My posts may not wake you up, but they very well may help wake somebody else up.
The answer to your question to Chris is already under your nose if you choose to acknowledge it - do me a favor please and go back to post 132 from one of our senior members. Read it. Then scan the identities of those who gave it a thumbs up check mark.
Now curb your emotions and respond to the underlying issues rather than making emotional appeals requesting censorship. Please.

166

I don’t believe you can crowd source truth, or vote on it.

167

Hopefully you did look at #132 so we can stop the appeals to Chris to censor content.
I was just thinking last about how the debunking of the faked Lancet HCQ study, something I lived through and participated in in real time, was a stellar example of how the light of truth can be shone through the networked efforts of many smart, passionate, truth seeking individuals. Did you follow this at all mjtrac?
I will give you a capsule summary from my perspective - as you may know I have been deeply interested, as a practicing chemist, in the potential of various therapeutics against Covid-19. So have various MD’s and ND’s who post here like Sandpuppy, as well as PhD Chemical Engineer Bruce Dale. Along with Chris and others here… I can’t name them all but Island girl comes to mind… we have some real cumulative technical chops on board.
So here appeared the Lancet study which purported to extract data from an immense database of over 90K hospital patients, and pulled a propensity-matched subset of about 10K of these in for statistical analysis. The main conclusion of the study was that those patients receiving hydroxychloroquine had a 10% chance of dying from cardio complications - terrible if true. As you may remember, within 2 days of publication, the WHO used this paper as predicate to suspend ALL HCQ trials under its control, effectively knee capping them all.
At the same time, within just a few days, questions were being asked all over the twitter verse and interwebs. Dr Roult in France was looking at the data and saying it was impossibly homogeneous - and he was also saying that after treating almost 4000 patients in hospital with hydroxychoroquine, NONE had died from cardio complications. Other medical researchers on twitter started to point out that the huge database purportedly collected by a shady company called Surgisphere would have been literally impossible to assemble because of the complications involved in getting individual hospitals to share closely guarded patient data - the implication was that this data, which purported to represent nearly every patient treated with HCQ in hospitals WW, was faked. Some hospital systems, including a large one in Australia, started to point out that they had in fact NOT shared data in this way. Surgisphere had to start changing their story almost immediately.
I even participated in a small way in this debunking - I watched the few youtube videos that were available at the time meant as Surgisphere PR - their lead S. Desai was mouthing platitudes about using ML (machine learning) and AI (artificial intelligence) to tease meaning out of large databases… and indeed this is what these technologies do… but Desai also suggested through a graphic representation that he was using the AI to literally fill in gaps in the patient data. You can’t use AI to fill in gaps in patient data… that is complete BS, and I called it out. To me, Desai was essentially admitting that they made up data, though not on the scale that was ultimately proven to be the case.
In the end, the paper was proven to be a complete fake, and it was retracted. The mainstream media did not do this mj… we did… people just like us. People with different backgrounds and different types of expertise worked together, sharing their views, to reach the truth: This paper was a lie.
Doesn’t this make you mad? Doesn’t this make you want to fight against the powers that brought this lie to life? Do you think this was just an accident? A coincidence?
 
 

168

I’m afraid I did not find #132 very convincing, sorry. I don’t own pearls, for starters.
But I think the work done by you and others to debunk shoddy science was excellent, and I thank you for it. I’m not sure how anyone can jump from that to accusations against Dr. Fauci, or assertions like this one in #160, which was the message to which I replied: “…while they hide Biden’s senility and child predator proclivities (and credible rape accusations etc)…”
It is completely possible that some complaints are real while others are the product of an overactive imagination, and treating them all in the same way seems to me to delegitimize the legitimate complaints. But that’s just me.
 

169

mjtrac said,

But I don't think Dr. Fauci, for example, is a sellout to big pharma.
mj, I don't think anyone who has been engaged technically in the developments relating to therapeutics would agree with you on this.. in fact calling him a sell out to big pharma is the most mild of criticism one could level against him. Remdesivir, which Fauci called a, "game changer" is mildly effective. HCQ given early as a cocktail is much, much more effective since it stops the disease early in the vast majority of patients such that they never need to be hospitalized. Did you know that the intended endpoints for the Remdesivir study were changed midstream because it had become clear that no statistically significant mortality benefit could be proven? The only thing that could be proven was that Remdesivir had the potential to shorten hospital stays. Weak. To those of us who have been following the technical details, Fauci is a demon of the first order. To those who consume only mass media, he is still our beloved health advisor. This is the contrast to which tbp, myself, and others want to bring attention to. We are not going to stop doing so regardless of your protestations. https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2020/04/what-the-public-didnt-hear-about-the-nih-remdesivir-trial/
Finally, though, many on social media – but noticeably few in mainstream news media – have pointed to the fact that primary endpoints or outcomes were shifted by the researchers in the NIH trial just within the past two weeks. Fauci didn’t acknowledge that in his upbeat pronouncement at the White House. He said that the study’s primary endpoint was time to recovery. Yes, that has been the primary endpoint for the last two weeks. But not before that.The trial started February 21.
Zelenko knows....
1480×741 22.5 KB
170

Would you care to reply to the accusation in #160 that Vice President Biden is a child predator, or has such tendencies? Or the assertions that what we hear in the press about the current President are false?
As for Fauci, it will take a lot of evidence to convince me that he is, in your word, a demon. His reputation from AIDS gives him, in my opinion, a lot to stand upon, and it doesn’t make logical sense to me that an elder statesman of science as well as bureaucratic politics would somehow endanger lives in order to add to profits of some companies.

171

Fauci knew chloroquine was effective against SARS-CoV-1. Now he denies any use for HCQ. That by itself means he’s a sellout to Big Pharma (actually not a sellout, he IS big pharma and has been for a very long time). Can you counter this argument, mjtrac?
Do you honestly believe Biden isn’t senile, isn’t experiencing dementia, mjtrac?
Do you honestly not see anything strange or problematic in how he touches children? Did you watch the video?
 

172

mjtrac-
Here’s an article on Fauci funding the Wuhan lab research that - more likely than not - resulted in this virus. We don’t hear much about this, do we?
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
And another article - pre COVID - that talks about Fauci tanking a generic drug that would have saved thousands of lives had NIH approved it - or even conducted a study on it. This, back in 1987, when he was the “elder statesman” of the AIDS crisis. Note that the on-patent drug AZT was definitely the preferred treatment approach.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/whitewashing-aids-history_b_4762295
I say we defund Fauci and his entire organization. We’d have fewer deaths, and better treatments. Unless you can tell me what the official “blessed” treatment is for non-hospitalized outpatients here in the US? [In other nations: HCQ+AZI+zinc, or Ivermectin - both of which are proven to be effective]
Turns out, if a treatment that works is available (such as either HCQ+AZI, or Ivermectin), then a vaccine - which Fauci is extremely enthusiastic about, and wants literally everyone to be vaccinated, even though we can never reach “vaccinated herd immunity” because fat people and old people (more than 50% of the population) do not respond well to vaccines, and this vaccine (he tells us) won’t actually prevent infection, it will simply reduce symptoms, cannot be made mandatory.
But vaccinated we must be. All of us. Because no treatment is available.
Except of course in reality, there are two treatments, and they work really well. Did he fund a rapid trial on these treatments? Just like back in the AIDS days - the answer of course is “no”.

173
we live in a sea of propaganda
How can it be that the media continually fabricates stories or invents a new twist to slander their opponents? Karl Rove used to send out talking points every morning to his media outlets. Why? Because if you listened to one source and were skeptical and checked another source, they would agree making it more believable. Both sides have talking points now. Why does the mainstream push outlandish stories now? Because it takes months to cleanse or wash out a person's existing natural biases. And they think its working.
174

Mjtrac

"His reputation from AIDS gives him, in my opinion, a lot to stand upon, and it doesn't make logical sense to me that an elder statesman of science as well as bureaucratic politics would somehow endanger lives in order to add to profits of some companies."
Here is a excerpt of an alternate take on his Aids record from an article by William Engdahl that paints a compelling picture of Fauci of institutionalized regulatory capture and science, corrupted and blinded by conflict of interest spanning his entire career that did indeed have life endangering consequences, your faith in DC elder statesman scientist bureaucrats not withstanding. Really? you think that Big Pharma and the politicians they own have our best interests at heart and not their bottom line? mm

By F. William Engdahl
https://fort-russ.com/amp/2020/04/shedding-light-on-the-dishonorable-record-of-dr-fauci-a-real-mengele/
America’s AIDS Czar Tony Fauci has held the top post at the NIAID in Washington for an astonishing 36 years. Today he is well past retirement age at 79, and holds the funds to determine which drug companies or university researchers will get precious government funds or not from NIAID’s annual $5 billion budget.
robert gallo aids coronavirus fauci
Dr Robert Gallo
Let’s go back to 1984 when Fauci was named head of NIAID during the Reagan era. That year an AIDS researcher, Robert Gallo, working under Fauci, held a press conference to announce that he had “discovered” the AIDS virus. He said it was HIV- human immunodeficiency virus. The shocking announcement which went around the world, was in complete disregard of scientific procedures of prior peer-reviewed published scientific evidence, including the required electron microscope analyses. It was a case of “science by press conference” as a critical scientist, Prof. Peter H. Duesberg described it. Duesberg was an award-winning researcher at Berkeley who isolated the first cancer gene through his work on retroviruses in 1970, and mapped the genetic structure of these viruses. For Gallo and Fauci, that was unimportant as millions in research funds flowed into NIAID to research the new virus, HIV. Fauci and Gallo claimed that AIDS was highly contagious, also by sexual transmission, especially among homosexual men. Notably, before the Gallo claim to have found the HIV AIDS virus, NIAID had been doing research on the role of drugs, poppers or nitrites, proven immune-suppressants, in the deaths of the earliest AIDS patients. That was quickly dropped in favor of researching a “cure” for AIDS. Media was told that AIDS was the “public health threat of the Century.” Gallo went on to make millions on his patented blood test for HIV, despite the fact that the test was often giving false positives and did not test directly for the alleged virus but for active antibodies, something immunology practice said was not valid, as antibodies merely suggested a past infection response and not necessarily presence of AHIV. At this time in the 1980’S Fauci was responsible for AIDS research at NIAID, a post he still holds. False Tests? The issue of HIV/AIDS tests is central. While a frightened world was clamoring for a test, Gallo and Fauci promoted their deeply flawed tests of antibodies. In 2006 Gallo claimed, “HIV tests were highly accurate from the time they were developed in 1984 and have become much more accurate over time…” Highly accurate in 1984 but more accurate than highly over time? Gallo added in response to criticism, “A PCR test for the presence of the virus itself can accurately determine a child’s HIV status.” In a sharp rebuttal of the Gallo claims, claims endorsed by Fauci and the NIAID as well as CDC, Roberto A. Giraldo, MD and Etienne de Harven, MD, the scientist who produced the first electron micrograph of a retrovirus, pointed out that both the ELISA and Western blot, and a genetic test, the PCR or ‘Viral Load’ test,” the two major tests used to determine if one has AIDS, are invalid. “None of these tests detect the HIV virus itself, nor do they detect HIV particles.” They add that there are “more than 70 different documented conditions that can cause the antibody tests to react positive without an HIV infection.” Among the false positive cases are influenza, the common cold, leprosy or the existence of pregnancy. The same tests are used today to determine SARS-CoV-2-positive. They concluded,
“The fact that after 25 years of intense research HIV has been neither isolated nor purified in terms of classical virology indicates to us that the infectious view of AIDS as a contagious viral disease is based on an apparently non-existent microbe!”
Giraldo and de Harven declared, “The alleged existence of HIV was asserted from the study of proteins, reverse transcriptase activity (RT), and RNA fragments that were found in culture supernatants, not from the direct analysis of purified viral particles.” The CDC requires a positive antibody test for HIV to determine AIDS in the USA. Yet in Africa since 1985 the WHO requires no HIV test or any other laboratory test. Merely the patient’s symptoms that can include weight loss, chronic diarrhea, prolonged fever, persistent cough and such, symptoms endemic to chronic poverty, malnutrition and lack of sanitation. Yet this fraud has shaped the career of Tony Fauci for more than 35 years. Fauci as head of NIAID has taken millions from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as well as the Clinton Foundation along with tens of billions from US taxpayers for this bogus research. Suspiciously, the 2006 article by Giraldo and de Harven was suddenly retracted by the journal in 2019 just before the coronavirus Wuhan outbreak. Despite the fact that he knew the established rules of virology, Fauci, as head of NIAID, recommended the Burroughs Wellcome chemotherapy drug, AZT as a “preventive drug” for HIV diagnosed patients even without symptoms! Burroughs Wellcome gave NIAID the study that was deliberately biased for AZT. Fauci even backed AZT for pregnant women despite the grave risk to the fetus. One mark of pregnancy in all women is a higher level of antigens as the natural immune system fights any infection to protect the fetus. AZT or Retrovir, a failed leukemia drug, has been proven to be a highly toxic drug. It was approved for AIDS testing in a record 5 days by Fauci and the US Government in 1987. Today despite more than thirty years funded research and billions of dollars, no effective vaccine for HIV/AIDS exists. Fauci and Gilead According to people who have studied the role of Tony Fauci as head of NIAID, his focus has been what is called scientific reductivism, described as “a 19 Century-style, single-germ theory for a complex web of factors that collapsed the immune systems of a subset of gay men in the early 1980s.” He has refused to explore the documentation that a variety of lethal drugs and other toxins such as nitrites could play a role. As a result he has wasted tens of billions of taxpayer dollars since 1984 on dead end experiments. One of his most nefarious was his collaboration with Gilead Sciences. Not satisfied with having developed a false positive test for AIDS and having gained FDA fast-track approval for AZT to treat HIV-positive patients with serious illness symptoms, Fauci decided to collaborate with Gilead (as in the Biblical “balm of Gilead”) on what came to be called PrEP experiments.
azt gilead science fauci truvada
© AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File Fauci promoted Truvada (AZT) as a prophylactic to the AIDS virus
Fauci in 2007 began to finance clinical trials of the AZT drugs in HIV “negatives,” on the theory the chemotherapy would “protect” them from becoming “positive.” That is, testing toxic HIV drugs on otherwise healthy persons to “insure” they never got AIDS. If it sounds mad, it was. Gilead supplied the drug, Truvada, to NIAID between 2007-2012 for Phase III human tests on HIV negative subjects. Four tests of at least 2,000 and up to 5,000 test subjects each, were done. The project was called “pre-exposure prophylaxis” or “PrEP.” Healthy subjects were given doses of chemotherapy drug Truvada on the thesis it could prevent them from one day getting HIV-positive. CDC, in its May 2014 recommendation urged physicians to prescribe Truvada for negatives in the so-called “risk groups,” an official government imprimatur for an extremely profitable drug. The FDA ignored two of the four Truvada tests that had failed and been halted. Despite that and owing to data manipulation by Fauci’s NIAID and Gilead, the FDA approved the dangerous Truvada for PrEP. Today Gilead lists the side effects of Truvada: Kidney problems, including kidney failure; worsening Hepatitis B; too much lactic acid in your blood (lactic acidosis), which can lead to death; severe liver problems, which can lead to death; bone problems. They state that Truvada “can help reduce the risk of getting HIV-1 through sex, when taken every day and used together with safer sex practices.” The Fauci-Gilead scam of promoting Truvada for healthy people to “reduce risk” of HIV is a marker for the level of medical malpractice and in some cases evident criminal abuse of human health that the current White House coronavirus guru, A. Fauci, represents.
175

Can I counter that argument? My assumption is that Fauci was waiting on controlled trial results. (The concern that HCQ was hazardous never made sense to me, for all the reasons presented in Chris Martenson’s videos, and still doesn’t. I’m prepared for a less malicious explanation to emerge than that Fauci is a sellout. I am perfectly willing to believe that media science reporting is heavily dependent on what is said to lazy, overworked, or uneducated/uncaring reporters by lobbyists from pharma, and I believe that explains the favorable reporting on Remdesivir.)
No, I honestly do not believe that Joe Biden is suffering from dementia. No, I honestly don’t see anything strange or concerning about how he touches children. I do have concerns about the behavior, from long before his election right up through yesterday, of the current President.
I wonder if hosting this conversation fills Chris Martenson with pride. It shouldn’t, IMO. If that’s what you mean by my encouraging censorship, guilty as charged.

176

“No, I honestly do not believe that Joe Biden is suffering from dementia. No, I honestly don’t see anything strange or concerning about how he touches children.”
mjtrac, ask any medical professional who has worked with patients with dementia. If one does not see any evidence of early dementia in Joe Biden, I don’t know what can be said or shown that would convince them otherwise. Let me ask you this, do you see any evidence of significant cognitive decline or do you think his cognition is completely normal and appropriate for becoming POTUS?
In terms of how he touches females, especially younger females, am I correct in assuming you find his behavior perfectly acceptable? You would be OK with him touching your wife or daughter in this way? And the females who pull away from him, obviously uncomfortable with the inappropriate touching, are all just being overly sensitive and there is nothing wrong with what he is doing? Do you truly believe that?
 

177

I can’t for the life of me see why you’re still here. Most of us are irretrievably deplorable and uneducable, and your noble efforts have been in vain. It looks like we’ll never “get it.” Thanks for trying though.

178

“You would be OK with him touching your wife or daughter in this way?”
Oh, you mean as opposed to the way the p*ssy grabber-in-chief treats women? Why isn’t that serial sex predator ever discussed here?

179

You’re welcome.

180

AO,
My assumption here is that mjtrac is not seeing the numerous compilations and examples of Biden’s cognitive decline or the numerous examples of inappropriate touching because given his disdain for all things tbp, I highly doubt he watched the video provided that shows the inappropriate groping and child sniffing.
You can’t see something you refuse to watch, and it’s pretty obvious that mjtrac has CNN party line blinders on. No coverage of these issues in the mainstream media other than to ridicule and shut down discussion of these issues as conspiracy, but never, you’ll notice with the accompanying video evidence provided as context.
This is not a binary equation. It’s OK to detest Trump and recognize his manifest flaws, that doesn’t mean that Biden isn’t corrupt, senile with strong evidence of dementia and highly inappropriate with women and children. Including credible allegations of rape which are conveniently memory holed.
The cognitive dissonance is off the charts!
mm