WW3 Is A War On Your Consciousness. If A Part Of You Is Calling For Bloodshed, You Are Imprisoned.
CNN Retracts Hamas Beheading Babies Claim and Apologizes. Sara Sidner Says It Came From The Israeli PM's Office And Was Originally "Confirmed," But Later Disintegrated Into "Cannot Confirm"
below…
Is Putin in cahoots with the globalists?
Here’s an easy way to find out. Is he a prominent politician in charge of a big region? Well then, duh…he’s one of them:
What’s that sign, you ask?
Cique Du Slave
most of us are slaves and don’t even know it…Wouldn’t it be better to know it and not comply?
below…
💉 The world got a little less funny this week, after New Zealand comedian and TV host Cal Wilson, 52, died suddenly “after a short illness.”
On Thursday, Token Artists confirmed that Wilson died of an unidentified “rare and aggressive form of cancer.” It’s a mystery. She got great medical care, having been treated in hospital for four weeks before she died, but to no avail.
Or maybe she died because she was in the hospital for four week. Just saying.
Anyway, the good news is she was jabbed, or it could have been so much worse:
Safe travels, Cal. We’ll see you on the other side.
Cirque Du Slave
Watch ←
Wikipedia now apart of the Intelligence Community Propaganda system
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Wikipedia is the most biased encyclopedia in history, having been hijacked by U.S. intelligence, industry and the political establishment years ago
According to Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger, U.S. intelligence has been manipulating the online encyclopedia since at least 2008, if not longer
Sanger noticed a bias creeping in around 2006, particularly in areas of science and medicine. Around 2010, he noticed that articles about Eastern Medicine were being changed to reflect blatantly biased positions, using “dismissive epithets” to paint this ancient tradition as quackery
Over-the-top kind of establishment bias includes Wikipedia’s assertion that the Ukraine-Biden scandal is a conspiracy theory designed to undermine Biden, even though evidence of Biden’s corruption has been made public
One explanation for why ideological bias has taken over Wikipedia is that it’s intentionally being used as a propaganda tool by intelligence agencies and the globalist establishment that is seeking to establish a One World Government. To succeed, they can’t allow a multitude of dissenting viewpoints to proliferate, and intelligence agencies are working together to disseminate and uphold the Deep State’s narratives worldwide
I, *anonymous*, tried three times to edit a Robert Kennedy Jr page to insert "unsafe" between "anti" and "vaccines" and ALL THREE times it was changed back to "anti vaccines".
Intelligence agencies have a long history of using propaganda as a tool of war, and the effectiveness of information warfare radically improved with the emergence of the internet, to say nothing of artificial intelligence and social media.
If you’re over 50, you can probably remember a time when your family had a row of encyclopedias on the bookshelf — usually obtained at considerable cost — which were perused whenever you needed to learn more about a particular topic.
Today, you can’t even give a complete set of encyclopedias away because, well, we have Wikipedia. However, Wikipedia has also become a favored propaganda tool, so to call it unreliable would be an understatement.
According to Wikipedia cofounder Larry Sanger — who left Wikipedia in 2002, the year after its inception — U.S. intelligence has been manipulating the online encyclopedia since at least 2008, if not longer. Sanger recently sat down to speak with independent journalist Glenn Greenwald (video above) about the subversion of the site he helped create.1
The Blatant Bias of Wikipedia
Sanger says he noticed a bias creeping in around 2006, particularly in areas of science and medicine. Around 2010, he started noticing that articles about Eastern Medicine were being changed to reflect blatantly biased positions, using "dismissive epithets" to paint this ancient tradition as quackery.
In 2012, evidence also emerged revealing a Wikipedia trustee and "Wikipedian in Residence" were being paid to edit pages on behalf of their clients and secure their placement on Wikipedia’s front page in the "Did You Know" section,2 which publicizes new or expanded articles3 — a clear violation of Wikipedia rules.
"It really got over the top ... between 2013 and 2018," Sanger says, "and by by at the time Trump became president, it was almost as bad as it is now. It’s amazing, you know, no encyclopedia, to my knowledge, has ever been as biased as Wikipedia has been ...
I remember being mad about Encyclopedia Britannica and The World Book not mentioning my favorite topics, [and] presenting only certain points of view in a way that establishment sources generally do. But this is something else. This is entirely different. It's over the top."
Greenwald agrees, highlighting some recent examples of the "over the top" kind of establishment bias, such as Wikipedia simply declaring that the Ukraine-Biden scandal is a conspiracy theory designed to undermine Biden:
"The very first sentence reads: ‘The Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory is a series of false allegations that Joe Biden, while he was Vice President of the United States, engaged in corrupt activities relating to his son, Hunter Biden, who was on the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma.’
‘As part of efforts by Donald Trump and his campaign in the Trump–Ukraine scandal, which led to Trump’s first impeachment, these falsehoods were spread in an attempt to damage Joe Biden’s reputation and chances during the 2020 presidential campaign,’ the Wikipedia entry still reads.
So, notice: The Biden-Ukraine scandal is — according to Wikipedia — the ‘Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory’ but the Trump controversy involving Ukraine is ‘the Trump–Ukraine scandal’. Everything is written to comport with the liberal world view and the Democratic Party talking points."
Wikipedia’s treatment of all things COVID-related is equally skewed. It presents only the establishment’s "truth" across the board, no matter how much evidence there is to refute it.
‘Truth’ Has Been Married to Ideology
"Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia devoted to truth," Greenwald says. The problem is that "The premise seems to be that you don't have truth anymore independent of ideological outlook."
We know that a great part of intelligence and information warfare is conducted online, and where, if not on websites like Wikipedia? ~ Larry Sanger
Indeed, Sanger points out that Wikipedia’s official policy even declares that 80% of Right-wing media is unreliable, and "that really, really colors the articles and what the editors allow the articles to say," he says. Just how did we get to a point where "truth" is tied to a particular ideology? Common sense tells you it simply cannot be so.
One explanation for why this ideological bias has taken over Wikipedia is that it’s intentionally being used as a propaganda tool by intelligence agencies and the globalist establishment that is seeking to implement a new global governance, a New World Order/One World Government.
To succeed in that Herculean effort, they can’t allow a multitude of dissenting viewpoints to proliferate, and intelligence agencies are working together to disseminate and uphold the Deep State’s narratives worldwide. Sanger puts it this way:
"I think that the Left ... very, very deliberately seeks out to take control. Except it isn't just the Left. We're learning that now, aren't we? No, it’s the establishment, and they have their own agenda.
I'm not going to try to offer any opinions — because it's not something that I study — as to how they bring that about. But it's clear that between 2005 and 2015 ... Wikipedia moved onto the establishment's radar, and we ... have evidence that ... even as early as ... 2008 ... CIA and FBI computers were used to edit Wikipedia. Think they stopped doing that? No.
And not just them. We know that a great part of intelligence and information warfare is conducted online, and where, if not on websites like Wikipedia?
They pay off the most influential people to push their agendas, which they're already mostly in line with, or they just develop their own talent within the [intelligence] community. [They] learn the Wikipedia game and then push what they want to say with their own people. So, that's my take on that."
Google and Social Media Are Controlled Too
As noted by Greenwald, Google has played a significant role in Wikipedia’s growth and success by algorithmically placing Wikipedia answers at the top of most searches, and, of course — while they don’t discuss this in the interview — Google also has deep and longstanding ties to the military-intelligence-industrial complex and the globalist Deep State.
The same can be said for social media companies like Twitter and Facebook. As reported by Jimmy Dore in the video above, in early 2023, Elon Musk released documents showing Twitter’s former executives censored content at the request of the FBI and assisted the U.S. military’s online propaganda campaigns.
Twitter also censored anti-Ukraine narratives on behalf of several U.S. intelligence agencies. Similarly, Facebook censored accurate information that was damaging to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign at the direct request of the FBI. There’s simply no doubt that intelligence agencies are directly involved in controlling and directing public information flow, and Wikipedia is invaluable in that respect.
Anonymous Writers Have No Credibility
Now, I’d be remiss if I didn’t stress a key feature of Wikipedia that makes it unreliable, no matter what, and that is the fact that contributing authors and editors are all anonymous.
Clearly, the credibility of an author, regardless of the media format, is of importance when trying to determine the veracity of a given topic, keeping in mind that even experts in the same field will often reach different (and perhaps opposing) conclusions.
Not every expert will have read and evaluated the exact same evidence, for example, leading to differences in interpretation of data. This is normal and unlikely to change, as it is human nature to draw conclusions based on our own breadth of experience and knowledge.
It’s then up to the reader to make up their mind about which of the two or more experts they believe is most correct — a choice that in turn is dependent on the reader’s own prejudices and knowledge base. That said, it should be obvious that no one individual, or even group of individuals, can be the final arbiter of which expert opinion is "the truth."
However, that’s exactly the position that Wikipedia has inserted itself into. They now decide who they think is right and which position is the correct one, and they simply censor opposing views.
Google Must Have Known They Were Promoting Unreliable Info
Considering that one of the primary factors that come into play when determining the credibility of an author is his or her credentials, affiliations and previous writings,4 how is it that Google promotes Wikipedia as an authority for every possible type of information by listing them at the top of its search results?
And how can Google use Wikipedia as a primary tool for its quality raters to establish credibility of other online material?5,6 It doesn’t make sense, unless you realize that neither Google nor Wikipedia are about giving people accurate and unbiased information. Their function is to facilitate the programming of people with a certain set of narratives and viewpoints.
As early as 2011, the fact that Wikipedia editors were being paid by corporations to remove and suppress unwanted information was well known and had been declared scandalous.7 Yet nothing changed. At least not for the better.
A 2014 paper8 titled, "Do Experts or Collective Intelligence Write with More Bias? Evidence from Encyclopedia Britannica and Wikipedia" by Shane Greenstein and Feng Zhu, compared 4,000 articles that appear in both encyclopedias and found 73% of Wikipedia’s articles contained political buzz words, compared to 34% in Britannica, and in nearly all cases, Wikipedia was more left-leaning than the Britannica.
Wikipedia Used to Smear and Defame Truthtellers
A key take-home from all this is that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. It’s a propaganda tool, and relying on it will frequently leave you wearing the dunce hat. Articles on science and medicine are definitely corrupted and biased in favor of establishment views and should never be used to make medical decisions.
According to a 2014 study,9,10 which assessed the veracity of medical claims made on Wikipedia by cross-checking them with the latest peer-reviewed research, reported finding "many errors" in articles concerning the 10 costliest medical conditions. In fact, 9 out of 10 entries — 90%! — contained assertions that were contradicted by published research.
"Health care professionals, trainees, and patients should use caution when using Wikipedia to answer questions regarding patient care," the authors warned.
That said, articles about historical events, current geopolitical issues and the biographies of public figures are not much better. Greenwald himself has seen his personal page transform from a neutral listing of his work history and accomplishments to an "ideological war" description that paints him in a bad light.
Many excellent scientists and doctors who veered from the establishment narrative on COVID have also been shamefully smeared and defamed by Wikipedia, and anyone who tries to clarify or clear up inaccuracies on the site is simply blocked.
Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, for example, has repeatedly tried to "correct provably false facts" about her background on Wikipedia, only to be told she’s "not a reliable source" and having her edits overridden by anonymous editors that guard her page, making sure her award-winning work is kept hushed and her character portrait tarnished.11 Other examples of "sanitizing" certain pages and tarnishing others can be found in a June 28, 2015, article12 in The Epoch Times.
Ditch Wikipedia and Use Other Online Encyclopedias
If you’re interested in learning more about Wikipedia, its history and inner workings, pick up a copy of Andrew Lih’s book, "The Wikipedia Revolution: How a Bunch of Nobodies Created the World's Greatest Encyclopedia."13 In it, Lih asks, "If Wikipedia is a minefield of inaccuracies, should one even be tiptoeing through this information garden?" It’s a fair question, for sure.
Similarly, in a 2005 blog post critiquing Wikipedia, Nicholas Carr, author of "What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains," noted:14
"[A]n encyclopedia can’t just have a small percentage of good entries and be considered a success. I would argue, in fact, that the overall quality of an encyclopedia is best judged by its weakest entries rather than its best. What’s the worth of an unreliable reference work?"
The good news is there are dozens of other online encyclopedias, many of which do not suffer from this entrenched ideological bias. Two great resources are encyclosearch.org and encycloreader.org, which allow you to search for answers across dozens of encyclopedias, including Wikipedia, at once. This way, you can compare a multitude of sources.
Examples of more specialized encyclopedias include Ballotpedia (an explicitly neutral encyclopedia of American politics), Scholarpedia, EduTechWiki, MedlinePlus (a medical encyclopedia), Encyclopedia Mythica (religion, folklore and mythology) and HandWiki (computing, science, technology and general).
Sanger is involved in the creation of encyclosearch.org, which he describes as an effort to "strike a blow against censorship and control of information by simply making it easier to find the all the other encyclopedias that are out there."
Truth be told, Wikipedia is dependent on your lack of knowledge about how they really operate. Taking advantage of your desire for quick information, their goal is to shuttle your thoughts, opinions and knowledge into a silo that doesn’t allow anything in except what they put in there. And what they’re putting on their site is some of the most biased information you’ll find anywhere in media today.
Sources and References
9 Journal of the American Osteopathic Association 2014 May;114(5):368-73
10 Journal of the American Osteopathic Association 2014 May;114(5):368-73 (Archived copy)
Is Putin in cahoots with the globalists?
I’ve been busy feeding goats and engaging in manure removal, but I promise that the Q&A (my elegant and extremely beguiling and handsome paid subs asked so many amazing questions) will be published no later than Monday. There are also exclusive Russian Village reports coming very soon.
Thank you again to Mike and the Unz Review. Have a very nice Friday.
— Riley
Question 1— In many parts of the world, Vladimir Putin is admired for his outspoken defense of national sovereignty. But on the domestic front, many of Putin’s policies seem to align with those of the Western globalists. As you note in a recent post at Substack Putin just “signed a decree on the creation of a ‘digital’ domestic passport,” which many people think will pave the way to technocratic tyranny. Am I exaggerating the risks of digital ID here, or is this development pose a serious threat to personal freedom?
Riley Waggaman— Imagine if the United States started issuing digital driver’s licenses that could be used as an official form of ID. What would the reaction be? I suspect a lot of Americans would feel “worried”, for lack of a better term. And not without good reason.
The digital passport system being implemented in Russia is deserving of the same skepticism.
First some context: Russia has a “domestic passport” that basically functions as a national ID. You use your domestic passport to open up a bank account, when you have to interact with the local bureaucracy, etc. etc. It’s an important document that you need to do ordinary, everyday things.
The digital passport has been billed as an electronic copy of the domestic passport, accessible via smartphone (via the State Services portal, Gosuslugi). The government is still deciding in what situations/scenarios the digital passport will be accepted as a valid form of ID.
Proponents of this digital document say it’s more convenient than a paper ID, and perhaps they’re right. The problem of course is that modern conveniences can lead to all sorts of unpleasantness, and with time these unpleasant things can even become “normal”.
The fact that this ID will be linked to the State Services portal (Gosuslugi) is certainly cause for concern and it’s easy to imagine how digital passports could be used (and abused) by the Russian government—or any government, for that matter. All in the name of convenience.
Of course, the authorities promise that digital IDs will never be made mandatory. Well, I’m old enough to remember when the Russian government promised that Covid vaccination would be 100% voluntary…
Question 2— Russia appears to be spearheading the transition to Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) with its creation of the “digital ruble”. In your opinion, what are the potential pitfalls of such a plan?
Riley Waggaman— Excluding the possibility of imposing a full-spectrum digital gulag, the digital ruble has no obvious benefits. I would say the same of all CBDCs, of course.
Some claim that the digital ruble is a very necessary, prudent, and brilliant way to bypass Western sanctions. This is untrue. The Bank of Russia has a fully functional Financial Messaging System (SPFS) that operates independently from SWIFT. Here are a few RT.com headlines for your consideration:
March 2017: “Russia’s banking system has SWIFT alternative ready”
February 2018: “Russian banks ready to switch off SWIFT – official”
October 2019: Russia, China & India to set up alternative to SWIFT payment system to connect 3 billion people”
All of these articles are about SPFS and were published long before the Bank of Russia announced its intention to develop the digital ruble in October 2020.
I’m puzzled as to why so many westerners who claim to understand the dangers of CBDCs think the digital ruble is somehow “different”. The Bank of Russia’s CBDC has been almost unanimously condemned by the country’s most prominent commentators in the alternative/conservative media space. Even mainstream outlets like Tsargrad have published scathing take-downs of the digital ruble.
Meanwhile, in English-language “alternative media”, we are blessed with the profound postulations of deep thinkers like Simplicius who write nipple-hardening purple prose about how amazing and anti-globalist the Bank of Russia is, and why the digital ruble is super hip and cool.
I just don’t understand why English-language commentary (all non-Russian commentary, actually) is so far removed from what patriotic Russians living in Russia are saying about their own country, in Russian.
By the way: The Bank of Russia has already reneged on its promise that it will never, ever “color” digital rubles so that they can only be used to purchase certain items. The central bank’s deputy chairman recently said that placing restrictions on how digital rubles can be spent is a real possibility—and one that will be explored in the future. (link) The digital ruble hasn’t even entered circulation yet, and the Bank of Russia is already open to “exploring” how this fun new tool of total control—endorsed by Davos, the IMF, the G20, etc. etc.–can be used to curb-stomp basic human dignity.
Question 3— Is Russia moving closer to mandatory vaccinations?
(Note: Here’s a quote from one of your recent posts:
Russia’s Ministry of Health wants to amend the National Preventive Immunization Calendar so that COVID vaccination could be mandatory for “vulnerable categories of citizens” whenever the country’s benevolent health authorities believe the “epidemiological” situation warrants another round of coercive injections…..
Of course, any new mandatory vaccination decrees would also apply to state employees, including teachers, doctors, military personnel, etc. Edward Slavsquat, Substack
Riley Waggaman— If Russia’s enterprising health ministry—which works tirelessly to safeguard public health—decides that “Covid” is “spreading” at an unacceptable rate, various categories of citizens will have to choose between getting vaxxed or losing their jobs. This is of course still voluntary vaccination because Russians get to choose whether they want to be employed or inject themselves with an unproven genetic goo developed in cooperation with AstraZeneca.
There are many highly intelligent intellectuals—like Aussie Cossack —who continue to pretend that Russia never had mandatory Covid vaccination, which is very brave considering that as of January 2023, there were still hundreds of Russians who were barred from working because they refused to be injected.
The Gamaleya Center continues to “update” its Covid vaccine, and the Russian government continues to shill this dangerous and barely tested trash to children. Whether Covid vaccination will become as ubiquitous and “normal” as the annual flu shot (which is even shoved into the little arms of Russian children every year; I know because I had to sign a document forbidding the kindergarten nurse from injecting my 6-year-old son) is an open question. But you have to be impressively credulous to believe that the Russian government wants to keep Covid vaccination a purely voluntary affair. Russia’s health bureaucracy has a very poor track record when it comes to calling out Big Pharma/WHO scams. Did you know that you have to get an HIV test (an old school 80s Fauci scam) to get a work visa in Russia? Well, now you know.
Question 4— Here’s an excerpt from one of your recent posts that will surprise many readers who think that President Putin actually opposes the Davos crowd and their globalist agenda:
“To defeat globalism, Moscow is reluctantly but responsibly adopting the globalist agenda….
There is no way to stop the technological “progress” promoted by Davos, the G20, the IMF, the World Bank, the UN, and the WHO, which is why Moscow must closely collaborate with all of these globalist organizations in order to maintain globalist parity with the Collective West—otherwise Russia won’t be able to protect herself from the globalists.”
And, here’s more from another post:
“…almost every joint declaration Moscow signs (whether it be a G20 Declaration, a BRICS Declaration, or just some word salad authored with the help of Beijing) includes a passage praising the vital roles of the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organization, and the International Monetary Fund? This seems like relevant information.
The Russian government has repeatedly said it has no intention of withdrawing from the WHO, the WTO, or even the IMF. It would be nice if Cerise could update his article to reflect this undeniable reality. Edward Slavsquat, Substack
You appear to be saying that—even though Russia is fighting the western oligarchy in Ukraine—it is still marching in lockstep with the globalists on matters of social policy. Can you expand on this a bit? And how does Putin fit in with all of this? Is he an unwitting accomplice or an eager participant?
Riley Waggaman— Is Moscow fighting the western oligarchy in Ukraine? Gazprom has been pumping gas across Ukraine since Day 1 of the SMO. And that’s not the only natural resource that Russian “entrepreneurs” are desperately transiting through Ukrainian territory.
I have yet to read about a western-backed Ukrainian oligarch having his home vaporized by a Russian missile. Actually, it’s doubtful that a single western oligarch, anywhere, has been inconvenienced by the SMO. On the contrary, it has been a wonderful money-making opportunity—for Russian oligarchs as well.
But to address the second part of your question: Anyone who follows Russian-language media knows that Moscow is in near-total lockstep with the West when it comes to soul-crushing technocracy and other forms “safe and convenient” societal progress. Actually, an objective observer would recognize that Russia is far ahead of the West in implementing “digitalization” shilled by Davos and other celebrated anti-globalist organizations.
Putin has done nothing meaningful to slow this process down. Actually, by allowing glorious patriots like Herman Gref to spearhead AI, biometrics, QR-coded cattle-tagging, facial recognition systems, “sustainable development”, and other trendy tech-development in Russia, Putin is an unapologetic accomplice in all the unsavory madness pestering Russia and every other country.
Seriously, just look at how the Russian government treats schoolchildren (like diseased, suspicious cattle), and you will begin to understand where this country is headed. Children are the future, after all!
Question 5— Can you summarize your views on the Covid-19 vaccine?
It’s bad.
Question 6— You say that “Russians are not too keen on Russia’s Central Bank chief Elvira Nabiullina”. According to you: “The socialists, the monarchists, the neo-soviets, the conservatives, the military hardliners—with few exceptions,… all despise Elvira and her digital rubles.”
Later in your article you say: “(Elvira) Nabiullina is a symbol of pursuing an economic policy contrary to Russia’s interests.”
That’s pretty harsh criticism. Can you explain what’s going on? Why would Putin reappoint someone to such an important position who –many feel– is implementing a globalist agenda?
Riley Waggaman— The second quote is actually from Nakanune.ru, which is a left-leaning independent news outlet based in Yekaterinburg. Excluding state-funded media, every news outlet in Russia hates Elvira Nabiullina and thinks she’s a globalist stooge who is actively working to destroy Russia. The conservatives, the Orthodox hardliners, the Communists, the Neo-Bolshiviks, the nationalists—they all despite Nabiullina. This is a fact and why it is never conveyed to non-Russian “alternative news” consumers is a massive mystery.
I haven’t the slightest idea why Putin nominated this Yale World Fellow graduate for another term as the Bank of Russia’s governor, even though she is awful and nobody likes her. Probably this is part of Putin’s ingenious strategy to defeat the globalists with a programmable CBDC 100% controlled by an IMF-obedient central bank that operates independently from the Russian state.
Question 7— In our last interview, you delivered a stirring summary of our current epoch saying:
“I am often reminded of that unsettling line from Alexis de Tocqueville: “I go back from age to age up to the remotest antiquity; but I find no parallel to what is occurring before my eyes: as the past has ceased to throw its light upon the future, the mind of man wanders in obscurity.”
With each passing day it seems we are being forcibly severed from our own past. We are being “retrained” to accept a new civilizational model. It’s happening at the local, regional, national and global level. It is tearing apart families.
I do believe we are facing an evil that has no equal in human history.” Edward Slavsquat Substack
Judging from the response, I think there are a great number of people who feel the same as you do… My final question to you is this: Do you still feel as pessimistic as you did then?
Riley Waggaman— Mike, I would like to thank you (again) for that interview—it remains the most-read post on my blog. As you probably recall, the realities of Russia’s “public health” policies lacked “accuracy” (I’m trying to be charitable here) in 2021, and I think our internet exchange paved the way for a more fact-based, nuanced discussion about Russia’s “Covid response”.
Actually, I’m quite optimistic in the sense that I have accepted that there isn’t a 5-dimensional omnipotent white hat Twitter account that will save me from the Western Satanists, and I will have to save myself—which is actually relatively painless, easy, and even fun. I would even describe my current outlook as hopeful.
But I fully understand the pessimism of someone who is sick of the US government, or any western government; someone who looks longingly at the Russian government as an alternative. The problem with this curious way of thinking is that according to official data, around 30% of Russians live on less than $10 a day, Russia is facing a catastrophic demographic crisis (and it’s hard to think of a more basic metric for gauging the health of a nation), and the Russian government is a fanatical proponent of policies that are chipping away at the last vestiges of basic human dignity. It’s true that the Russian government isn’t on board with the tranny agenda; that’s a nice footnote to admire as Russia’s birthrate circles the drain.
But again, I am an optimist. I have been able to connect with like-minded individuals here in Russia, and all over the world, and my life has greatly improved as a result. I am able to live the life I want to live without having to make obscene excuses for the inexcusable.
We should all be guided by truth, friendship, and love, and why the so-called “alternative media” is so obsessed with carrying water for governments who offer the world nothing but more of the same (sadness) is truly amazing. Enough already. We have everything we need.
✈️ Politico ran a very encouraging story yesterday headlined, “DeSantis orders Florida to organize charter flights for Americans stranded in Israel.”
mRNA Injury Series - Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine blood clots in the heart - up to 40cm long clots - surviving a Pfizer clot shot heart attack - Pfizer's Eliquis is now world's 6th best selling drug!
Feb.2023 (above) - Sydney, NSW, Australia - 42 year old Darious works 5-7 days a week abseiling buildings in construction. He was bodybuilding and training 6 times a week. He had two Pfizer vaccines and barely survived a heart attack 2 weeks later - needed 5 stents put in.
Potential Role of Lutein from Olive Oil on Post-COVID and Vaccine Injury Syndromes
Understand that the olive oil we are talking about is extra-virgin, medicinal grade and should not be cooked or used with food. It is taken by tablespoons or capsules.