Epigraph Quotes Interviews and Comments:
Whitney Webb: “Wearables” aren’t the only thing they want to develop. They also have a single-session neural monitoring device that can define a treatment-predictive brain state. Basically you are taken to a super machine that can interrogate your human brain state directly and predict how your brain will respond to various interventions or treatments that will make you motivated at work or whatever they tell you….
Mr. Beaker: Its called Remote Neural Monitoring and Targeted Individuals know it for what it really is. Hell.
Whitney Webb: This is not something we can ignore. (Wellcome Trust) is arguably a foundation that is more powerful than the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation teaming up with the kings and queens of the public-private partnerships of this Orwellian surveillance technology from DARPA to Silicon Valley with the guy that dominates the entire gene-sequencing industry, all coming together to do this to the world. No thanks. Let’s pay attention to these guys. And they are targeting this directly at babies.
Engage: I saw somewhere that they need to do something to children under two to make them more susceptible to indoctrination, if they combine the surveillance with electromagnetic ELF interference it would be an ideal test bed for testing this. This is one of those things they do to targeted individuals, this might be what they are planning.
Engage: Absolutely mate, 8 years in. Let me guess- started off completely horrible people acting weird, electronic surveillance sabotage behind the scenes, people gaslighting you harassment then going live following you around anchoring (sensitizing you) and triggering. Then torture sleep deprivation, all kinds of electromagnetic beams fucking with you. Isolating you.
Psyops slander campaigns, character assassination. Getting whole groups to harass you. Trauma-based mind control or like they like to call it, “events”. Destruction of private property. Hacking phones and computers. Broadcasting your thoughts. Street theatre, psychotic narcissistic gangs stalking you. Threats, cohurstion, cover-ups, entrapment, lies, intimidation, v2k, dream manipulation, silent suggestions, forced speech, criticizing you 24/7 brainwashing, social sabotage, blackmail.
Creating problems then blaming you and pretending to fight those problems but leaving their involvement out of the picture, Driving a wedge between loved ones and you, being the in-between for all information streams, Arbitrary rules. Workplace mobbing, stripped away of all privacy and rights. Emotional and mental assault. Abuse of all kinds. Years and years. Never a day off. And so much more, you wouldn’t even know where to start? Something like that?
freemanontheland: this covid1984 vax could be the act/contract of a christening to/for the one world religion … transhumanist one god (satan) is (now) inside us all !!!
Free Bird: If we get rid of all alphabet companies, we might have a chance. Israel is behind it all, every lie in history leads to Israel.
I. Whitney Webb Interview Interview with Christian Ryan: Their “Wellcome Leap” Toward Transhumanism & Why You’re Now A “Terrorist”- Last American Vagabond;
II. Partial Transcription of Whitney Webb-Ryan Christian (Last American Vagabond) Interview, June 25, 2021:
Whitney Webb: You will see that Attorney General Merritt’s new strategy to go after “white supremacists” as the largest domestic terror threat actually defines anyone who is considered a threat to the status quo as these domestic terror threats. So they say that “white supremacy” is actually a global problem.
I think Israel and the Five Eyes (most of he English speaking world) are definitely involved in this crackdown on dissidents. This is basically an Operation Condor, but set up for the West. Operation Condor was a CIA domestic dissident elimination program in South America. Basically, it was coordination between multiple countries so that people couldn’t escape from Chile to Argentina, etc. Condor was based on the Phoenix Program which the CIA established in Vietnam. The people directly involved in these programs planned the pivot to Homeland Security before 9/11. 9/11 manufactured the consent for this to be pushed through.
Last year, DHS published its first domestic threat assessment. This has been years in the making. Trump and Bill Barr (AG) helped set this up. The dissidents are now Americans.
Iran-Contra included these people, including Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, and set up Continuity of Government- and this was also in response to Reagan’s illegal war in Nicaragua.
They drew up a huge enemy list during the 1980’s under President Reagan- it was much larger than the enemy’s list Nixon put together. They would either increase surveillance or detain the members of these lists. This included indefinite detention.
The NDAA under Obama has made it legal to detain people indefinitely. This data base, called Main Core, has existed for along time. Tim Shorrock wrote about this in 2008 and estimated then that there were 7-8 million people on this list.
And this particular Main Core list would have been used to at the White House to flag certain people after 9/11 for increased surveillance.
Main Core today has all the fruits of the surveillance state over the past several decades. Surveillance of your financial transactions, your social media. After 9/11, some aspects of the COG protocols were activated and the Main Core data base was activated. This has ties to the US military and Peter Thiel and his Palantir program. Social media was set up as a way to have you profile yourself for the government. And it is also used as a way to humanize artificial intelligence at the same time. The new war on domestic terror is drawn on pre-crime based on what people post on social media. So the best way to push back is stop using social media. Boycott it. Don’t feed the beast. Delete your accounts.
We are in a different category because we are trying to get information out.
Ryan: Don’t engage in a personal level with these platforms. Since 9/11, every part of this system has been turned on American citizens.
Their effort for machine learning kind of failed for them. What’s happening with the injections right now could have to do with this.
This is all about the pre-crime aspect. it all builds a case that your words lead to violence and terrorism. This is the hate speech dynamic.
Whitney: It’s also a push toward increasing censorship based on the idea that our work leads to violence. Which of course isn’t true.
This will be a matter of platform hopping in the near future- to try to keep information coming out.
Ryan: We’re bobbing and weaving.
Whitney: Mailing lists are a good way to get information out.
The pre-crime aspect of this is “people mobilizing toward violence” as per Bill Barr. So they are trying to prevent free speech based on these bullying tactics. They also define protests as violent whether or not they are. And they infiltrate protests- like what happened on Jan. 6. So they want to declare the Grandma’s as terrorists.
Ryan: I’m pretty sure at this point that Trump served an important purpose for the Deep State. He helped them set all this up.
Whitney: If it wasn’t for Trump, the “left” wouldn’t have become the new neocons. When it’s basically it’s a tribalist thing.
The main motive of this is “to restore faith in government” by either taking out the people that will never like the government- or launching a massive propaganda strategy put out by DHS.
I mean this is a dictatorship…. It’s pretty obvious.
Klaus Schwab gave a really important prophetic speech this year…. He said Covid 19 will morph into climate change. He also said that this is the year that we restore trust in our public private partnership institutions. Biden mentioned this as well.
They need some level of support from the population. Not everyone watches mainstream media any more. They don’t watch anything any more.
Ryan: Creating indifference…. The concept that you just batter people with opposite messages until they just say “whatever.”
Whitney: It’s really arrogant of Klaus Schwab and the US government to think they can restore faith in government given what they’ve been doing.
Meanwhile, the new domestic terrorists are being defined as anyone who violently opposes forms of capitalism or corporate globalization. They want to replace the present economic system with a more inclusive system. They could now go after any and all Bernie Sanders supporters because he was socialist.
Ryan: They will claim a climate emergency is immanent. So the people that argue that this isn’t real will be said to be putting people’s lives at risk. The same with the covid false flag. People who are resisting this “new world” / Great Reset will be designated as terrorists. And a totalitarian dictatorship is what we get.
Whitney: They are trying to claim that they are guardians of the collective, when in fact, they are going after the people that oppose the collective, and they are trying to enslave the collective. So they can create a neo-feudal society.
In fact, if you use your brain, you’ll see that this has been the largest wealth transfer in history. These people have already created neo-feudalism, they just need to keep people docile for a little bit longer until they can complete their technocratic takeover of humanity so that this small group of people can successfully micro-manage the actions of millions and billions of people. That’s where this is heading.
Ryan: Here’s an interesting tidbit regarding that. (Reading) Workers lost $3.7 trillion dollars during the pandemic and an additional 500 billionaires have emerged in that time and $5 trillion dollars has been transferred to the world’s billionaires.
Whitney: This is a much bigger wealth transfer than 2008. But where’s the Occupy Wall Street movement? This is perception management.
Ryan: Do you want to go over the pillars of this discussion?
Whitney: The first pillar is understanding and sharing domestic terrorism-related information with other governments and private tech companies. This will make new information sharing partnerships to share all the information they amass on you with foreign governments and Silicon Valley. will covertly with
Israel is going to be involved in this and we know this because of the extreme degree of involvement of the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) in this domestic war on terrorism setup. The ADL has been doing trainings for the FBI about this stuff for a really long time. They recently hired a top ex-FBI guy to be one of their Vice Presidents. They’ve basically created a ADL-FBI revolving door. That’s problematic. They are often the ones identifying the “terrorists” in the US.
The ADL for all intents and purposes functions as a lobby for Israel in the US. It has lots of ties law enforcement and to the MegaGroup, which is responsible for Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual blackmail operation, which goes all the way back to the national Crime Syndicate of the 1920’s and 30s. This shows you it’s not really about terrorism.
I think they have a ways to go and that concerns me… Just like several months before 9/11, they had already had set up DHS to come in. Now I’m concerned there will be some sort of other event that will break out the war on terrorism again. So something will be big and will be blamed on white supremacists.
Ryan: What isn’t a completely lied about narrative?
Whitney: The Club of Rome planned this out decades ago- specific regions as part of a larger global government. Stake-holder capitalism is a recipe for that because it’s basically making corporations the government. The Vatican is on board with this- the Biden government, the UK government.
Ryan: Seems like we already in this global government.
Whitney: There will be a huge emotional manipulation coming. It could be a big cyber attack. It could be all the utilities being knocked out. It could be a cyber pandemic. I think they’ll have one big event that will have decently high death toll. It could be poisoning the water supply, or a bio-terror attack conducted by white supremacists. The will probably try to weaponize the polarization surrounding Covid-19.
Ryan: It could be a bio-attack that would lead back to Iran which leads to white supremacists or it could an attack on vaccine infrastructure. It would have to de-humanize the anti-vaxxers as the terrorists, which this domestic agenda also includes.
Whitney: The first pillar is about information sharing. The second pillar I describe in the article is about preventing domestic terrorism recruitment and mobilization toward violence; it is largely about censorship. Disrupting and deterring domestic terror activity, is the third and involves increasing the number of federal prosecutors to a significant degree that would go after people for extremism. The last one is the nuttiest- confronting long-term contributors to domestic terrorism.
The Biden administration says: “This means eliminating racism in the U.S.”
Ryan: AG Garland is talking about sending people out to stop people before they do something…. this is pre-crime.
Whitney: I would say don’t give your guns to the Biden administration. There is a way to beat this. This is probably counter-economics. Don’t be dependent on the government or these private corporations that are dependent on all of this. This is also true of the vaccine passport.
Ryan: Vote with your financial power. If you vote with your money…. Imagine if every American stopped buying things. Barter. These are things that are easier to do.
Whitney: This is easier to do in small towns. We can opt out of these systems. Try to work toward leaving if you can. We obviously have a massive period of global instability coming.
We have to look at this a different way that doesn’t feed into their game.
Whitney: How do they want to do this? They use precision medicine: They want to go into your genome, your microbiome, the neural connectivity of your brain, how your brain processes rewards, how your genome is tied to how reward processing functions in your brain. They basically want to use wearables for this.
They want to develop new “wearables” that will quantify your mood, based on biometrics such as voice and facial expression, your sleep movement, reward system functioning, effort, motivation, and energy levels, social interaction, coloric intake, and HPA access output in real world situations.
I want to point out that Amazon’s new wearable, Halo, already quantifies your mood, your emotional state, your sleep and movement. So they really don’t have to go that far. They want a wearable that can detect your effort, motivation, and energy levels.
Imagine them producing this and in corporations of the future, mandating it for use: “Oh, worker X is not motivated enough. Time to send him for some brain stimulation.”
Ryan: Right. What does it sound like? This is social credit. That’s the wearable transition, in my opinion. This will become a one-stop shop thing. Or tie in the Facebook work, well, he’s thinking dissident thoughts right now.
Whitney: This is the digital dictatorship run by the corporations of stake-holder capitalism.
I want to bring up this guy that the people at World Economic Forum (WEF) and also Mark Zuckerberg love. His name is Yuval Noah Harari. I did a video with Johnny Vedmore on this guy, analyzing his keynote speech at the 2020 WEF Davos Conference.
And he basically said:
“As soon as wearables come out that can read your thoughts, we are in the digital dictatorships and there’s no going back from that.” And he’s telling this to the WEF people and basically saying: “You can make this future if you want. Gee whizz.”
One example he gives of a government doing this is: Imagine that everyone in the state where you live has to wear one of these things and everyone is listening to a speech by the great leader. And you are listening and outwardly smiling and clapping, but the wearable knows you are angry or thinking negative thoughts. And the next morning you’ll be in the gulag.
He’s saying this to the Davos conference where the people in the audience are actually building this stuff. So that’s what they think too.
Ryan: Or how about you just have someone knock on your door. And they say, hey, we noticed that you weren’t happy yesterday. Did you want to set up a genetic appointment? That’s where this will go. If they don’t do this, then it will lead to violence. This is scary stuff.
Whitney: Exactly This is so tied in with the war on domestic terror. I really want to stress this. Same deal.
I mentioned the HPA access, which is one of the things they want to monitor. This is the access between the adrenal glands, the pituitary glands, and the hypothalamus, that regulates not just how you react to stress but also your immune system and your fertility are impacted by this. So they can intervene and just from your brain and stimulating those parts of your brain affect how your immune system functions, how well it functions, and affect how fertile you are, in addition to supposedly treating depression.
Ryan: All this stuff can be weaponized. We can aim this over to a foreign nations. I’m sure the military has considered all things.
Whitney: They want to make things that are non-invasive that can directly interrogate the brain state. If they suspect you are thinking bad thoughts, they can take you in to one of these things and can know exactly what’s going on.
They say examples of these are a non-invasive spinal tap. And “single neural monitoring capabilities that define a treatment predictive brain state.”
Those are the programs in a nutshell. I conclude with some quotes from Wellcome Trust and Julian Huxley.
1994 Investigation Of The Welcome TRUST now SCRUBBED from the Sunday Times in the UK:
“Through Wellcome Trust grants and sponsorships, government agencies, universities, hospitals, and scientists are influenced all over the world. The Trust distributes more money to institutions than even the government’s research council. In offices on the building’s first floor, decisions are reached that affect lives and health on scales comparable with minor wars. In the conference room high above the street and in the meeting hall in the basement, rulings in biotechnology and genetics are handed down that will shape the human race.”
Ryan: There is the constant cross-over with the war analogy. The way you frame this is so spot on. Your body is now the battlefield. It’s all war. Even today. With the war on Covid-19. To shape the human race. This is the evolution, the nano-technology, the technocracy. Transhumanism.
Whitney: We can’t ignore this. This is arguably a foundation that just as if not more powerful than the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation teaming up with the kings and queens of the public-private partnerships of this Orwellian surveillance technology from DARPA to Silicon Valley with the guy that dominates the entire gene-sequencing industry, all coming together to do this to the world. No thanks. Let’s pay attention to these guys. And they are targeting this directly at babies, dude.
Ryan: There’s no better word than sinister. It doesn’t matter whether they think this is for some greater good. If you think that destroying half the population is going to benefit the other half, it doesn’t make it some noble agenda. It’s still murdering people. What they are doing is changing your world,without your acknowledgement, without your even knowing its happening. It’s just so crazy, by the way, the same thing happened with 9/11 and everything before it. That speaks to the ham-fisted, rushed nature to all this.
People are more attuned to it. People are seeing it.
Whitney: They are counting on people not seeing this stuff. And being distracted. Like a possibility of a lab origin, or early treatments being suppressed.
III. Article: Who is a Terrorist in Biden’s America? (June 18, 2021)
Who Is A “Terrorist” In Biden’s America? (Whitney Webb, June 18, 2021)
Posted on June 18, 2021 Author Whitney Webb
Far from being a war against “white supremacy,” the Biden administration’s new “domestic terror” strategy clearly targets primarily those who oppose US government overreach and those who oppose capitalism and/or globalization.
In the latest sign that the US government’s War on Domestic Terror is growing in scope and scale, the White House on Tuesday revealed the nation’s first ever government-wide strategy for confronting domestic terrorism. While cloaked in language about stemming racially motivated violence, the strategy places those deemed “anti-government” or “anti-authority” on a par with racist extremists and charts out policies that could easily be abused to silence or even criminalize online criticism of the government.
Even more disturbing is the call to essentially fuse intelligence agencies, law enforcement, Silicon Valley, and “community” and “faith-based” organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League, as well as unspecified foreign governments, as partners in this “war,” which the strategy makes clear will rely heavily on a pre-crime orientation focused largely on what is said on social media and encrypted platforms. Though the strategy claims that the government will “shield free speech and civil liberties” in implementing this policy, its contents reveal that it is poised to gut both.
Indeed, while framed publicly as chiefly targeting “right-wing white supremacists,” the strategy itself makes it clear that the government does not plan to focus on the Right but instead will pursue “domestic terrorists” in “an ideologically neutral, threat-driven manner,” as the law “makes no distinction based on political view—left, right or center.” It also states that a key goal of this strategic framework is to ensure “that there is simply no governmental tolerance . . . of violence as an acceptable mode of seeking political or social change,” regardless of a perpetrator’s political affiliation.
Considering that the main cheerleaders for the War on Domestic Terror exist mainly in establishment left circles, such individuals should rethink their support for this new policy given that the above statements could easily come to encompass Black Lives Matter–related protests, such as those that transpired last summer, depending on which political party is in power.
Once the new infrastructure is in place, it will remain there and will be open to the same abuses perpetrated by both political parties in the US during the lengthy War on Terror following September 11, 2001. The history of this new “domestic terror” policy, including its origins in the Trump administration, makes this clear.
It’s Never Been Easier to Be a “Terrorist”
In introducing the strategy, the Biden administration cites “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists” as a key reason for the new policy and a main justification for the War on Domestic Terror in general. This was most recently demonstrated Tuesday in Attorney General Merrick Garland’s statement announcing this new strategy. However, the document itself puts “anti-government” or “anti-authority” “extremists” in the same category as violent white supremacists in terms of being a threat to the homeland. The strategy’s characterization of such individuals is unsettling.
For instance, those who “violently oppose” “all forms of capitalism” or “corporate globalization” are listed under this less-discussed category of “domestic terrorist.” This highlights how people on the left, many of whom have called for capitalism to be dismantled or replaced in the US in recent years, could easily be targeted in this new “war” that many self-proclaimed leftists are currently supporting. Similarly, “environmentally-motivated extremists,” a category in which groups such as Extinction Rebellion could easily fall, are also included.
In addition, the phrasing indicates that it could easily include as “terrorists” those who oppose the World Economic Forum’s vision for global “stakeholder capitalism,” as that form of “capitalism” involves corporations and their main “stakeholders” creating a new global economic and governance system. The WEF’s stakeholder capitalism thus involves both “capitalism” and “corporate globalization.”
The strategy also includes those who “take steps to violently resist government authority . . . based on perceived overreach.” This, of course, creates a dangerous situation in which the government could, purposely or otherwise, implement a policy that is an obvious overreach and/or blatantly unconstitutional and then label those who resist it “domestic terrorists” and deal with them as such—well before the overreach can be challenged in court.
Another telling addition to this group of potential “terrorists” is “any other individual or group who engages in violence—or incites imminent violence—in opposition to legislative, regulatory or other actions taken by the government.” Thus, if the government implements a policy that a large swath of the population finds abhorrent, such as launching a new, unpopular war abroad, those deemed to be “inciting” resistance to the action online could be considered domestic terrorists.
Such scenarios are not unrealistic, given the loose way in which the government and the media have defined things like “incitement” and even “violence” (e. g., “hate speech” is a form of violence) in the recent past. The situation is ripe for manipulation and abuse. To think the federal government (including the Biden administration and subsequent administrations) would not abuse such power reflects an ignorance of US political history, particularly when the main forces behind most terrorist incidents in the nation are actually US government institutions like the FBI (more FBI examples here, here, here, and here).
Furthermore, the original plans for the detention of American dissidents in the event of a national emergency, drawn up during the Reagan era as part of its “continuity of government” contingency, cited popular nonviolent opposition to US intervention in Latin America as a potential “emergency” that could trigger the activation of those plans. Many of those “continuity of government” protocols remain on the books today and can be triggered, depending on the whims of those in power. It is unlikely that this new domestic terror framework will be any different regarding nonviolent protest and demonstrations.
Yet another passage in this section of the strategy states that “domestic terrorists” can, “in some instances, connect and intersect with conspiracy theories and other forms of disinformation and misinformation.” It adds that the proliferation of such “dangerous” information “on Internet-based communications platforms such as social media, file-upload sites and end-to-end encrypted platforms, all of these elements can combine and amplify threats to public safety.”
Thus, the presence of “conspiracy theories” and information deemed by the government to be “misinformation” online is itself framed as threatening public safety, a claim made more than once in this policy document. Given that a major “pillar” of the strategy involves eliminating online material that promotes “domestic terrorist” ideologies, it seems inevitable that such efforts will also “connect and intersect” with the censorship of “conspiracy theories” and narratives that the establishment finds inconvenient or threatening for any reason.
Pillars of Tyranny
The strategy notes in several places that this new domestic-terror policy will involve a variety of public-private partnerships in order to “build a community to address domestic terrorism that extends not only across the Federal Government but also to critical partners.” It adds, “That includes state, local, tribal and territorial governments, as well as foreign allies and partners, civil society, the technology sector, academic, and more.”
The mention of foreign allies and partners is important as it suggests a multinational approach to what is supposedly a US “domestic” issue and is yet another step toward a transnational security-state apparatus. A similar multinational approach was used to devastating effect during the CIA-developed Operation Condor, which was used to target and “disappear” domestic dissidents in South America in the 1970s and 1980s. The foreign allies mentioned in the Biden administration’s strategy are left unspecified, but it seems likely that such allies would include the rest of the Five Eyes alliance (the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand) and Israel, all of which already have well-established information-sharing agreements with the US for signals intelligence.
The new domestic-terror strategy has four main “pillars,” which can be summarized as (1) understanding and sharing domestic terrorism-related information, including with foreign governments and private tech companies; (2) preventing domestic terrorism recruitment and mobilization to violence; (3) disrupting and deterring domestic terrorism activity; and (4) confronting long-term contributors to domestic terrorism.
The first pillar involves the mass accumulation of data through new information-sharing partnerships and the deepening of existing ones. Much of this information sharing will involve increased data mining and analysis of statements made openly on the internet, particularly on social media, something already done by US intelligence contractors such as Palantir. While the gathering of such information has been ongoing for years, this policy allows even more to be shared and legally used to make cases against individuals deemed to have made threats or expressed “dangerous” opinions online.
Included in the first pillar is the need to increase engagement with financial institutions concerning the financing of “domestic terrorists.” US banks, such as Bank of America, have already gone quite far in this regard, leading to accusations that it has begun acting like an intelligence agency. Such claims were made after it was revealed that the BofA had passed to the government the private banking information of over two hundred people that the bank deemed as pointing to involvement in the events of January 6, 2021. It seems likely, given this passage in the strategy, that such behavior by banks will soon become the norm, rather than an outlier, in the United States.
The second pillar is ostensibly focused on preventing the online recruitment of domestic terrorists and online content that leads to the “mobilization of violence.” The strategy notes that this pillar “means reducing both supply and demand of recruitment materials by limiting widespread availability online and bolstering resilience to it by those who nonetheless encounter it.“ The strategy states that such government efforts in the past have a “mixed record,” but it goes on to claim that trampling on civil liberties will be avoided because the government is “consulting extensively” with unspecified “stakeholders” nationwide.
Regarding recruitment, the strategy states that “these activities are increasingly happening on Internet-based communications platforms, including social media, online gaming platforms, file-upload sites and end-to-end encrypted platforms, even as those products and services frequently offer other important benefits.” It adds that “the widespread availability of domestic terrorist recruitment material online is a national security threat whose front lines are overwhelmingly private-sector online platforms.”
The US government plans to provide “information to assist online platforms with their own initiatives to enforce their own terms of service that prohibits the use of their platforms for domestic terrorist activities” as well as to “facilitate more robust efforts outside the government to counter terrorists’ abuse of Internet-based communications platforms.”
Given the wider definition of “domestic terrorist” that now includes those who oppose capitalism and corporate globalization as well as those who resist government overreach, online content discussing these and other “anti-government” and “anti-authority” ideas could soon be treated in the same way as online Al Qaeda or ISIS propaganda. Efforts, however, are unlikely to remain focused on these topics. As Unlimited Hangout reported last November, both UK intelligence and the US national-security state were developing plans to treat critical reporting on the COVID-19 vaccines as “extremist” propaganda.
Another key part of this pillar is the need to “increase digital literacy” among the American public, while censoring “harmful content” disseminated by “terrorists” as well as by “hostile foreign powers seeking to undermine American democracy.” The latter is a clear reference to the claim that critical reporting of US government policy, particularly its military and intelligence activities abroad, was the product of “Russian disinformation,” a now discredited claim that was used to heavily censor independent media. This new government strategy appears to promise more of this sort of thing.
It also notes that “digital literacy” education for a domestic audience is being developed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Such a policy would have previously violated US law until the Obama administration worked with Congress to repeal the Smith-Mundt Act, thus lifting the ban on the government directing propaganda at domestic audiences.
The third pillar of the strategy seeks to increase the number of federal prosecutors investigating and trying domestic-terror cases. Their numbers are likely to jump as the definition of “domestic terrorist” is expanded. It also seeks to explore whether “legislative reforms could meaningfully and materially increase our ability to protect Americans from acts of domestic terrorism while simultaneously guarding against potential abuse of overreach.” In contrast to past public statements on police reform by those in the Biden administration, the strategy calls to “empower” state and local law enforcement to tackle domestic terrorism, including with increased access to “intelligence” on citizens deemed dangerous or subversive for any number of reasons.
To that effect, the strategy states the following (p. 24):
“The Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Department of Homeland Security, with support from the National Counterterrorism Center [part of the intelligence community], are incorporating an increased focus on domestic terrorism into current intelligence products and leveraging current mechanisms of information and intelligence sharing to improve the sharing of domestic terrorism-related content and indicators with non-Federal partners. These agencies are also improving the usability of their existing information-sharing platforms, including through the development of mobile applications designed to provide a broader reach to non-Federal law enforcement partners, while simultaneously refining that support based on partner feedback.”
Such an intelligence tool could easily be, for example, Palantir, which is already used by the intelligence agencies, the DHS, and several US police departments for “predictive policing,” that is, pre-crime actions. Notably, Palantir has long included a “subversive” label for individuals included on government and law enforcement databases, a parallel with the controversial and highly secretive Main Core database of US dissidents.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas made the “pre-crime” element of the new domestic terror strategy explicit on Tuesday when he said in a statement that DHS would continue “developing key partnerships with local stakeholders through the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3) to identify potential threats and prevent terrorism.” CP3, which replaced DHS’ Office for Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention this past May, officially “supports communities across the United States to prevent individuals from radicalizing to violence and intervene when individuals have already radicalized to violence.”
The fourth pillar of the strategy is by far the most opaque and cryptic, while also the most far-reaching. It aims to address the sources that cause “terrorists” to mobilize “towards violence.” This requires “tackling racism in America,” a lofty goal for an administration headed by the man who controversially eulogized Congress’ most ardent segregationist and who was a key architect of the 1994 crime bill. As well, it provides for “early intervention and appropriate care for those who pose a danger to themselves or others.”
In regard to the latter proposal, the Trump administration, in a bid to “stop mass shootings before they occur,” considered a proposal to create a “health DARPA” or “HARPA” that would monitor the online communications of everyday Americans for “neuropsychiatric” warning signs that someone might be “mobilizing towards violence.” While the Trump administration did not create HARPA or adopt this policy, the Biden administration has recently announced plans to do so.
Finally, the strategy indicates that this fourth pillar is part of a “broader priority”: “enhancing faith in government and addressing the extreme polarization, fueled by a crisis of disinformation and misinformation often channeled through social media platforms, which can tear Americans apart and lead some to violence.” In other words, fostering trust in government while simultaneously censoring “polarizing” voices who distrust or criticize the government is a key policy goal behind the Biden administration’s new domestic-terror strategy.
Calling Their Shots?
While this is a new strategy, its origins lie in the Trump administration. In October 2019, Trump’s attorney general William Barr formally announced in a memorandum that a new “national disruption and early engagement program” aimed at detecting those “mobilizing towards violence” before they commit any crime would launch in the coming months. That program, known as DEEP (Disruption and Early Engagement Program), is now active and has involved the Department of Justice, the FBI, and “private sector partners” since its creation.
Barr’s announcement of DEEP followed his unsettling
“prediction” in July 2019 that “a major incident may occur at any time that will galvanize public opinion on these issues.” Not long after that speech, a spate of mass shootings occurred, including the El Paso Walmart shooting, which killed twenty-three and about which many questions remain unanswered regarding the FBI’s apparent foreknowledge of the event. After these events took place in 2019, Trump called for the creation of a government backdoor into encryption and the very pre-crime system that Barr announced shortly thereafter in October 2019. The Biden administration, in publishing this strategy, is merely finishing what Barr started.
Indeed, a “prediction” like Barr’s in 2019 was offered by the DHS’ Elizabeth Neumann during a Congressional hearing in late February 2020. That hearing was largely ignored by the media as it coincided with an international rise of concern regarding COVID-19. At the hearing, Neumann, who previously coordinated the development of the government’s post-9/11 terrorism information sharing strategies and policies and worked closely with the intelligence community, gave the following warning about an imminent “domestic terror” event in the United States:
“And every counterterrorism professional I speak to in the federal government and overseas feels like we are at the doorstep of another 9/11, maybe not something that catastrophic in terms of the visual or the numbers, but that we can see it building and we don’t quite know how to stop it.”
This “another 9/11” emerged on January 6, 2021, as the events of that day in the Capitol were quickly labeled as such by both the media and prominent politicians, while also inspiring calls from the White House and the Democrats for a “9/11-style commission” to investigate the incident. This event, of course, figures prominently in the justification for the new domestic-terror strategy, despite the considerable video and other evidence that shows that Capitol law enforcement, and potentially the FBI, were directly involved in facilitating the breach of the Capitol. In addition, when one considers that the QAnon movement, which had a clear role in the events of January 6, was itself likely a government-orchestrated psyop, the government hand in creating this situation seems clear.
It goes without saying that the official reasons offered for these militaristic “domestic terror” policies, which the US has already implemented abroad—causing much more terror than it has prevented—does not justify the creation of a massive new national-security infrastructure that aims to criminalize and censor online speech. Yet the admission that this new strategy, as part of a broader effort to “enhance faith in government,” combines domestic propaganda campaigns with the censorship and pursuit of those who distrust government heralds the end of even the illusion of democracy in the United States.
IV. A “Leap” toward Humanity’s Destruction article by Whitney Webb, June 25, 2021 (Article)
A Leap Towards Humanity’s Destruction
The world’s richest medical research foundation, the Wellcome Trust, has teamed up with a pair of former DARPA directors who built Silicon Valley’s skunkworks to usher in an age of nightmarish surveillance, including for babies as young as three months old. Their agenda can only advance if we allow it.
A UK nonprofit with ties to global corruption throughout the COVID-19 crisis as well as historical and current ties to the UK eugenics movement launched a global health-focused DARPA equivalent last year. The move went largely unnoticed by both mainstream and independent media.
The Wellcome Trust, which has arguably been second only to Bill Gates in its ability to influence events during the COVID-19 crisis and vaccination campaign, launched its own global equivalent of the Pentagon’s secretive research agency last year, officially to combat the “most pressing health challenges of our time.” Though first conceived of in 2018, this particular Wellcome Trust initiative was spun off from the Trust last May with $300 million in initial funding. It quickly attracted two former DARPA executives, who had previously served in the upper echelons of Silicon Valley, to manage and plan its portfolio of projects.
This global health DARPA, known as Wellcome Leap, seeks to achieve “breakthrough scientific and technological solutions” by or before 2030, with a focus on “complex global health challenges.” The Wellcome Trust is open about how Wellcome Leap will apply the approaches of Silicon Valley and venture capital firms to the health and life science sector. Unsurprisingly, their three current programs are poised to develop incredibly invasive tech-focused, and in some cases overtly transhumanist, medical technologies, including a program exclusively focused on using artificial intelligence (AI), mobile sensors, and wearable brain-mapping tech for children three years old and younger.
This Unlimited Hangout investigation explores not only the four current programs of Wellcome Leap but also the people behind it. The resulting picture is of an incredibly sinister project that poses not only a great threat to current society but to the future of humanity itself. An upcoming Unlimited Hangout investigation will examine the history of the Wellcome Trust along with its role in recent and current events.
Leap’s Leadership: Merging Man and Machine for the Military and Silicon Valley
Regina Dugan’s Keynote at Facebook F8 2017. Source: YouTube
The ambitions of the Wellcome Leap are made clear by the woman chosen to lead it, former director of the Pentagon’s DARPA, Regina Dugan. Dugan began her career at DARPA in 1996; she led a counterterrorism task force in 1999 before leaving DARPA about a year later. After departing DARPA, she co-founded her own venture capital firm, Dugan Ventures, and then became special adviser to the US Army’s vice chief of staff from 2001 to 2003, which coincided with the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2005, she created a defense-focused tech firm called RedXDefense, which contracts with the military and specifically for DARPA.
In 2009, under the Obama administration, Dugan was appointed director of DARPA by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Much was made over her being the first female director of the agency, but she is best remembered at the agency for her so-called “Special Forces” approach to innovation. During her tenure, she created DARPA’s now defunct Transformational Convergence Technology Office, which focused on social networks, synthetic biology, and machine intelligence. Many of the themes previously managed by that office are now overseen by DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office, which was created in 2014 and focuses on everything “from programmable microbes to human-machine symbiosis.” The Biological Technologies Office, like Wellcome Leap, pursues a mix of “health-focused” biotechnology programs and transhumanist endeavors.
Right before leaving the top role at DARPA, Dugan greenlighted the agency’s initial investments in mRNA vaccine technology, which led to DARPA’s investments in Pfizer and Moderna shortly thereafter. The DARPA scientist who lobbied Dugan to back the program, Dan Wattendorf, now works as the director of Innovative Technology Solutions at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
While Dugan’s efforts at DARPA are remembered fondly by those in the national-security state, and also by those in Silicon Valley, Dugan was investigated for conflicts of interest during her time as DARPA’s director, as her firm RedXDefense acquired millions in Department of Defense contracts during her tenure. Though she had recused herself from any formal role at the company while leading DARPA, she continued to hold a significant financial stake in the company, and a military investigation later found she had violated ethics rules to a significant degree.
Instead of being held accountable in any way, Dugan went on to become a top executive at Google, where she was brought on to manage Google’s Advanced Technology and Products Group (ATAP), which it had spun out of Motorola Mobility after Google’s acquisition of that company in 2012. Google’s ATAP was modeled after DARPA and employed other ex-DARPA officials besides Dugan.
At Google, Dugan oversaw several projects, including what is now the basis of Google’s “augmented reality” business, then known as Project Tango, as well as “smart” clothing in which multitouch sensors were woven into textiles. Another project that Dugan led involved the use of a “digital tattoo” to unlock smartphones. Perhaps most controversially, Dugan was also behind the creation of a “digital authentication pill.” According to Dugan, when the pill is swallowed, “your entire body becomes your authentication token.” Dugan framed the pill and many of her other efforts at Google as working to fix “the mechanical mismatch between humans and electronics” by producing technology that merges the human body with machines to varying degrees. While serving in this capacity at Google, Dugan chaired a panel at the 2013 Clinton Global Initiative called “Game-Changers in Technology” and attended the 2015 Bilderberg meeting where AI was a main topic of discussion.
In 2016, Dugan left Google for Facebook where she was chosen to be the first head of Facebook’s own DARPA-equivalent research agency, then known as Building 8. DARPA’s ties to the origins of Facebook were discussed in a recent Unlimited Hangout report. Under Dugan, Building 8 invested heavily in brain-machine interface technology, which has since produced the company’s “neural wearable” wristbands that claim to be able to anticipate movements of the hand and fingers from brain signals alone. Facebook showcased prototypes of the project earlier this year.
Dugan left Facebook just eighteen months after joining Building 8, announcing her plans “to focus on building and leading a new endeavor,” which was apparently a reference to Wellcome Leap. Dugan later said it was as if she had been training for her role at Wellcome Leap ever since entering the workforce, framing it as the pinnacle of her career. When asked in an interview earlier this year who the clients of Wellcome Leap are, Dugan gave a long-winded answer but essentially responded that the project serves the biotech and pharmaceutical industries, international organizations such as the UN, and public-private partnerships.
In addition to her role at Wellcome, Dugan is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations-sponsored taskforce on US Technology and Innovation policy, which was formed in 2019. Other members include LinkedIn’s Reid Hoffman, McKinsey Institute Global Chairman James Manyika, former head of Google Eric Schmidt and President Biden’s controversial top science adviser Eric Lander.
The other executive at Wellcome Leap, chief operating officer Ken Gabriel, has a background closely tied to Dugan’s. Gabriel, like Dugan, is a former program manager at DARPA, where he led the agency’s microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) research from 1992 to 1996. He served as deputy director of DARPA from 1995 to 1996 and became director of the Electronics Technology Office from 1996 to 1997, where he was reportedly responsible for about half of all federal electronics-technology investments. At DARPA, Gabriel worked closely with the FBI and the CIA.
Ken Gabriel – COO of Wellcome Leap. Source: Wellcome Leap
Gabriel left DARPA for Carnegie Mellon University, where he was in charge of the Office for Security Technologies in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. That office was created after 9/11 specifically to help meet the national-security needs of the federal government, according to Carnegie Mellon’s announcement of the program. Around that same time, Gabriel became regarded as “the architect of the MEMS industry” due to his past work at DARPA and his founding of the MEMS-focused semiconductor company Akustica in 2002. He served as Akustica’s chairman and chief technology officer until 2009, at which time he returned to work at DARPA where he served as the agency’s deputy director, working directly under Regina Dugan.
In 2012, Gabriel followed Dugan to Google’s Advanced Technology and Products Group, which he was actually responsible for creating. According to Gabriel, Google cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin tasked Gabriel with creating “a private sector ground-up model of DARPA” out of Motorola Mobility. Regina Dugan was placed in charge, and Gabriel again served as her deputy. In 2013, Dugan and Gabriel co-wrote a piece for the Harvard Business Review about how DARPA’s “Special Forces” innovation approach could revolutionize both the public and private sectors if more widely applied. Gabriel left Google in 2014, well before Dugan, to serve as the president and CEO of Charles Stark Draper Laboratories, better known as Draper Labs, which develops “innovative technology solutions” for the national-security community, with a focus on biomedical systems, energy, and space technology. Gabriel held that position until he abruptly resigned in 2020 to co-lead Wellcome Leap with Dugan.
In addition to his role at Wellcome, Gabriel is also a World Economic Forum “technology pioneer” and on the board of directors of Galvani Bioelectronics, a joint venture of GlaxoSmithKline, which is intimately linked to the Wellcome Trust, and the Google subsidiary Verily. Galvani focuses on the development of “bioelectronic medicines” that involve “implant-based modulation of neural signals” in an overt push by the pharmaceutical industry and Silicon Valley to normalize transhumanist “medicines.” The longtime chairman of the board of Galvani, on which Gabriel serves, was Moncef Slaoui, who led the US COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution program Operation Warp Speed. Slaoui was relieved of his position at Galvani this past March over well-substantiated claims of sexual harassment.
Jeremy Farrar, Pandemic Narrative Manager
While Dugan and Gabriel ostensibly lead the outfit, Wellcome Leap is the brainchild of Jeremy Farrar and Mike Ferguson, who serve as its directors. Farrar is the director of the Wellcome Trust itself, and Ferguson is deputy chair of the Trust’s board of governors. Farrar has been director of the Wellcome Trust since 2013 and has been actively involved in critical decision making at the highest level globally since the beginning of the COVID crisis. He is also an agenda contributor to the World Economic Forum and cochaired the WEF’s Africa meeting in 2019.
Farrar’s Wellcome Trust is also a WEF strategic partner and cofounded the COVID Action Platform with the WEF. Farrar was more recently behind the creation of Wellcome’s COVID-Zero initiative, which is also tied to the WEF. Farrar has framed that initiative as “an opportunity for companies to advance the science which will eventually reduce business disruption.” Thus far it has convinced titans of finance, including Mastercard and Citadel, to invest millions in research and development at organizations favored by the Wellcome Trust.
Wellcome Trust Director Jeremy Farrar with NTI Co-Chairman Sam Nunn, who led the 2001 Dark Winter exercise.
Some of Wellcome’s controversial medical-research projects in Africa, as well as its ties to the UK eugenics movement, were explored in a December article published at Unlimited Hangout. That report also explores the intimate connections of Wellcome to the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, the use of which has now been restricted or banned in several countries. As mentioned in the introduction, the Wellcome Trust itself is the subject of an upcoming Unlimited Hangout investigation (Part 2).
Jeremy Farrar, who was born in Singapore in 1961, had previously been director of the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Ho Chi Minh City, beginning in 1998. During that time, he authored numerous epidemiological research papers. He claimed in a 2014 Financial Times article that his decision to move to Vietnam was due to his disdain for conference halls full of white men. Southeast Asia was obviously a much less regulated environment for someone in the medical-research industry wishing to indulge in groundbreaking research. Although based in Vietnam, Farrar was sent by Oxford to various locations around the globe to study epidemics happening in real time. In 2009, when swine flu was wreaking havoc in Mexico, Farrar jumped on a plane to dive right into the action, something he also did for subsequent global outbreaks of Ebola, MERS, and avian flu.
Over the past year, many questions have arisen regarding exactly how much power Farrar wields over global public health policy. Recently, the US president’s chief medical adviser, Anthony Fauci, was forced to release his emails and correspondence from March and April 2020 at the request of the Washington Post. The released emails reveal what appears to be a high-level conspiracy by some of the top medical authorities in the US to falsely claim that COVID-19 could only have been of zoonotic origin, despite indications to the contrary. The emails were heavily redacted as such emails usually are, supposedly to protect the information of the people involved, but the “(b)(6)” redactions also protect much of Jeremy Farrar’s input into these discussions. Chris Martenson, economic researcher and post-doctorate student of neurotoxicology and founder of Peak Prosperity, has had some insightful comments on the matter, including asking why such protection has been offered to Farrar given that he is the director of a “charitable trust.” Martenson went on to question why the Wellcome Trust was involved at all in these high-level discussions.
One Fauci email, dated February 25, 2020, and sent by Amelie Rioux of the WHO, stated that Jeremy Farrar’s official role at that time was “to act as the board’s focal point on the COVID-19 outbreak, to represent and advise the board on the science of the outbreak and the financing of the response.” Farrar had previously chaired the WHO’s Scientific Advisory Council. The emails also show the preparation, within a ten-day period, of the SARS-CoV-2 “‘origins” paper, which was entitled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” and was accepted for publication by Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020. The paper claimed that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could only have come from natural origins as opposed to gain-of-function research, a claim once held as gospel in the mainstream but which has come under considerable scrutiny in recent weeks.
Shaping the presentation of an origin story for a virus of global significance is something Farrar has been involved with before. In 2004–5, it was reported that Farrar and his Vietnamese colleague Tran Tinh Hien, the vice director at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, were the first to identify the re-emergence of the avian flu (H5N1) in humans. Farrar has recounted the origin story on many occasions, stating: “It was a little girl. She caught it from a pet duck that had died and she’d dug up and reburied. She survived.” According to Farrar, this experience prompted him to found a global network in conjunction with the World Health Organization to “improve local responses to disease outbreaks.”
An article published by Rockefeller University Press’s Journal of Experimental Medicine in 2009 is dramatically titled, “Jeremy Farrar: When Disaster Strikes.” Farrar, when referring to the H5N1 origin story stated: “The WHO people—and this is not a criticism—decided it was unlikely that the child had SARS or avian influenza. They left, but Professor Hien stayed behind to talk with the child and her mum. The girl admitted that she had been quite sad in the previous days with the death of her pet duck. The girl and her brother had fought over burying the duck and, because of this argument, she had gone back, dug up the duck, and reburied it—probably so her brother wouldn’t know where it was buried. With that history, Professor Hien phoned me at home and said he was worried about the child. He took some swabs from the child’s nose and throat and brought them back to the hospital. That night the laboratory ran tests on the samples, and they were positive for Influenza A.”
With Farrar now having been revealed as an instrumental part of the team that crafted the official story regarding the origins of SARS-CoV-2, his previous assertions about the origin of past epidemics should be scrutinized.
As the director of a “charitable trust,” Jeremy Farrar is almost completely unaccountable for his involvement in crafting controversial narratives related to the COVID crisis. He continues to be at the forefront of the global response to COVID, in part by launching the Wellcome Leap Fund for “unconventional projects, funded at scale” as an overt attempt to create a global and “charitable” version of DARPA. Indeed, Farrar, in conceiving Wellcome Leap, has positioned himself to be just as, if not more, instrumental in building the foundation for the post-COVID era as he was in building the foundation for the COVID crisis itself. This is significant as Wellcome Leap CEO Regina Dugan has labeled COVID-19 this generation’s “Sputnik moment” that will launch a new age of “health innovation,” much like the launching of Sputnik started a global technological “space age.” Wellcome Leap fully intends to lead the pack.
“Rulers” of the Gene-Sequencing Industry
In contrast to the overt DARPA, Silicon Valley, and Wellcome connections of the others, the chairman of the board of directors of Wellcome Leap, Jay Flatley, has a different background. Flatley is the long-time head of Illumina, a California-based gene-sequencing hardware and software giant that is believed to currently dominate the field of genomics. Though he stepped down from the board of Illumina in 2016, he has continued to serve as the executive chairman of its board of directors. Flatley was the first to be chosen for a leadership position at Wellcome Leap, and he was responsible for suggesting Regina Dugan for the organization’s chief executive officer, according to a recent interview given by Dugan.
Illumina Campus. Source: Glassdoor
As a profile on Illumina in the business magazine Fast Company notes, Illumina “operates behind the scenes, selling hardware and services to companies and research institutions,” among them 23andMe. 23andMe’s CEO, Anne Wojcicki, the sister of YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki and the wife of Google cofounder Sergey Brin, told Fast Company, “It’s crazy. Illumina is like the ruler of this whole universe and no one knows that.” The report notes that 23andMe, like most companies that offer DNA sequencing and analysis to consumers, uses machines produced by Illumina.
In 2016, Illumina launched an “aggressive” five-year plan to “bring genomics out of research labs and into doctors’ offices.” Given the current state of things, particularly the global push toward gene-focused vaccines and therapies, that plan, which concludes this year, could not have been any better timed. Illumina’s current CEO, Francis DeSouza, previously held key posts at Microsoft and Symantec. Also in 2016, Illumina’s executive teams forecast a future in which humans are gene tested from birth to grave for both health and commercial purposes.
Whereas most companies have struggled financially during the coronavirus pandemic, some have seen a massive increase in profits. Illumina has witnessed its share price double since the start of the COVID crisis. The company’s $1 billion plus in profits during the last tax year was obviously helped by the quick approval of the NovaSEQ 6000 machines, which can test a large number of COVID samples more quickly than other devices. An individual machine has a hefty price tag of almost $1 million, and thus they are mostly found at elite facilities, private labs, and top-tier universities.
Jay Flatley, Executive Chairman, Illumina, speaking at World Economic Forum in Davos 2018. Source: WEF
In addition to his long-standing leadership role at Illumina, Jay Flatley is also a “digital member” of the World Economic Forum as well as the lead independent director of Zymergen, a WEF “tech pioneer” company that is “rethinking biology and reimagining the world.” Flatley, who has also attended several Davos meetings, has addressed the WEF on the “promise of precision [i.e., gene-specific] medicine.” At another WEF panel meeting, Flatley, alongside UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock, promoted the idea of making genomic sequencing of babies at birth the norm, claiming it had “the potential to shift the healthcare system from reactive to preventative.” Some at the panel called for the genomic sequencing of infants to eventually become mandatory.
Aside from Flatley as an individual, Illumina as a company is a WEF partner and plays a key role in its platform regarding the future of health care. A top Illumina executive also serves on the WEF’s Global Future Council on Biotechnology.
A New HOPE
Wellcome Leap currently has four programs: Multi-Stage Psych, Delta Tissue, 1KD, and HOPE. HOPE was the first program to be announced by Wellcome Leap and stands for Human Organs, Physiology and Engineering. According to the full program description, HOPE aims “to leverage the power of bioengineering to advance stem cells, organoids, and whole organ systems and connections that recapitulate human physiology in vitro and restore vital functions in vivo.”
Source: Wellcome Leap, https://wellcomeleap.org/hope/
HOPE consists of two main program goals. First, it seeks to “bioengineer a multiorgan platform that recreates human immunological responses with sufficient fidelity to double the predictive value of a preclinical trial with respect to efficacy, toxicity and immunogenicity for therapeutic interventions.” In other words, this bioengineered platform mimicking human organs would be used to test the effects of pharmaceutical products, including vaccines, which could create a situation in which animal trials are replaced with trials on gene-edited and farmed organs. Though such an advance would certainly be helpful in the sense of reducing often unethical animal experimentation, trusting such a novel system to allow medical treatments to go straight to the human-testing phase would also require trusting the institutions developing that system and its funders.
As it stands now, the Wellcome Trust has too many ties to corrupt actors in the pharmaceutical industry, having originally begun as the “philanthropic” arm of UK drug giant GlaxoSmithKline, for anyone to trust what they are producing without actual independent confirmation, given the histories of some of their partners in fudging both animal and human clinical trial data for vaccines and other products.
The second goal of HOPE is to open up the use of machine-human hybrid organs for transplantation into human beings. That goal focuses on restoring “organ functions using cultivated organs or biological/synthetic hybrid systems” with the later goal of bioengineering a fully transplantable human organ after several years.
Later on in the program description, however, the interest in merging the synthetic and biological becomes clearer when it states: “The time is right to foster synergies between organoids, bioengineering and immunoengineering technologies, and advance the state-of-the-art of in vitro human biology . . . by building controllable, accessible and scalable systems.” The program description document also notes the interest of Wellcome in genetic-engineering approaches for the “enhancement of desired properties and insertion of traceable markers” and Wellcome’s ambition to reproduce the building blocks of the human immune system and human organ systems through technological means.
The second program to be pursued by Wellcome Leap is called “The First 1000 Days: Promoting Healthy Brain Networks,” which is abbreviated as 1KD by the organization. It is arguably the most unsettling program because it seeks to use young children, specifically infants from three months to three-year-old toddlers, as its test subjects. The program is being overseen by Holly Baines, who previously served as strategy development lead for the Wellcome Trust before joining Wellcome Leap as the 1KD program leader.
Source: Wellcome Leap, https://wellcomeleap.org/1kd/
1KD is focused on developing “objective, scalable ways to assess a child’s cognitive health” by monitoring the brain development and function of infants and toddlers, allowing practitioners to “risk-stratify children” and “predict responses to interventions” in developing brains.
The program description document notes that, up to this point in history, “our primary window into the developing brain has been neuroimaging techniques and animal models, which can help identify quantitative biomarkers of [neural] network health and characterise network differences underlying behaviours.” It then states that advances in technology “are opening additional possibilities in young infants.”
The program description goes on to say that artificial neural networks, a form of AI, “have demonstrated the viability of modelling network pruning process and the acquisition of complex behaviours in much the same way as a developing brain,” while improvements in machine learning, another subset of AI, can now be used to extract “meaningful signals” from the brains of infants and young children. These algorithms can then be used to develop “interventions” for young children deemed by other algorithms to be in danger of having underdeveloped brain function.
The document goes on to note the promise of “low-cost mobile sensors, wearables and home-based systems” in “providing a new opportunity to assess the influence and dependency of brain development on natural physical and social interactions.” In other words, this program seeks to use “continuous visual and audio recordings in the home” as well as wearable devices on children to collect millions upon millions of data points. Wellcome Leap describes these wearables as “relatively unobtrusive, scalable electronic badges that collect visual, auditory and motion data as well as interactive features (such as turn-taking, pacing and reaction times).” Elsewhere in the document there is a call to develop “wearable sensors that assess physiological measures predictive of brain health (e.g., electrodermal activity, respiratory rate, and heart rate) and wireless wearable EEG or eye-tracking technology” for use in infants and children three and under.
Like other Wellcome Leap programs, this technology is being developed with the intention of making it mainstream in medical science within the next five to ten years, meaning that this system—although framed as a way to monitor children’s brain functioning to improve cognitive outcomes—is a recipe for total surveillance of babies and very young children as well as a means for altering their brain functioning as algorithms and Leap’s programmers see fit.
1DK has two main program goals. The first is to “develop a fully integrated model and quantitive measurement tools of network development in the first 1000 days [of life], sufficient to predict EF [executive function] formation before a child’s first birthday.” Such a model, the description reads, “should predict contributions of nutrition, the microbiome and the genome” on brain formation as well as the effects of “sensimotor and social interactions [or lack thereof] on network pruning processes” and EF outcomes. The second goal makes it clear that widespread adoption of such neurological-monitoring technologies in young children and infants is the endgame for 1DK. It states that the program plans to “create scalable methods for optimising promotion, prevention, screening and therapeutic interventions to improve EF by at least 20% in 80% of children before age 3.”
True to the eugenicist ties of the Wellcome Trust (to be explored more in-depth in Part 2), Wellcome Leap’s 1DK notes that “of interest are improvements from underdeveloped EF to normative or from normative to well-developed EF across the population to deliver the broadest impact.” One of the goals of 1DK is thus not treating disease or addressing a “global health public challenge” but instead experimenting on the cognitive augmentation of children using means developed by AI algorithms and invasive surveillance-based technology.
Another unsettling aspect of the program is its plan to “develop an in vitro 3D brain assembloid that replicates the time formation” of a developing brain that is akin to the models developed by monitoring the brain development of infants and children. Later on, the program description calls this an “in-silico” model of a child’s brain, something of obvious interest to transhumanists who see such a development as a harbinger of the so-called singularity. Beyond that, it appears that this in-silico and thus synthetic model of the brain is planned to be used as the “model” to which infant and children brains are shaped by the “therapeutic interventions” mentioned elsewhere in the program description.
It should be clear how sinister it is that an organization that brings together the worst “mad scientist” impulses of both the NGO and military-research worlds is openly planning to conduct such experiments on the brains of babies and toddlers, viewing them as datasets and their brains as something to be “pruned” by machine “intelligence.” Allowing such a program to advance unimpeded without pushback from the public would mean permitting a dangerous agenda targeting society’s youngest and most vulnerable members to potentially advance to a point where it is difficult to stop.
A “Tissue Time Machine”
The third and second-most recent program to join the Wellcome Leap lineup is called Delta Tissue, abbreviated by the organization as ΔT. Delta Tissue aims to create a platform that monitors changes in human-tissue function and interactions in real time, ostensibly to “explain the status of a disease in each person and better predict how that disease would progress.” Referring to this platform as a “tissue time machine,” Wellcome Leap sees Delta Tissue as being able to predict the onset of disease before it occurs while also allowing for medical interventions that “are targeted to the individual.”
Source: Wellcome Leap, https://wellcomeleap.org/delta-tissue/
Well before the COVID era, precision medicine or medicine “targeted or tailored to the individual” has been a code phrase for treatments based on patients’ genetic data and/or for treatments that alter nucleic acid (e.g., DNA and RNA) function itself. For instance, the US government defines “precision medicine” as “an emerging approach for disease treatment and prevention that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle for each person.” Similarly, a 2018 paper published in Technology notes that, in oncology, “precision and personalized medicine . . . fosters the development of specialized treatments for each specific subtype of cancer, based on the measurement and manipulation of key patient genetic and omic data (transcriptomics, metabolomics, proteomics, etc.).”
Prior to COVID-19 and the vaccine roll outs, the mRNA vaccine technology used by the DARPA-funded companies Moderna and Pfizer were marketed as being precision medicine treatments and were largely referred to as “gene therapies” in media reports. They were also promoted heavily as a revolutionary method of treating cancer, making it unsurprising that the Delta Tissue program at Wellcome Leap would use a similar justification to develop a program that aims to offer tailored gene therapies to people before the onset of a disease.
This Delta Tissue platform works to combine “the latest cell and tissue profiling technologies with recent advances in machine learning,” that is, AI. Given Wellcome Leap’s connections to the US military, it is worth noting that the Pentagon and Google, both former employers of Wellcome Leap CEO Regina Dugan and COO Ken Gabriel, have been working together since last September on using AI to predict disease in humans, first focusing on cancer before expanding to COVID-19 and every disease in between. The Delta Tissue program appears to have related ambitions, as its program description makes clear that the program ultimately aims to use its platform for a host of cancers and infectious diseases.
The ultimate goal of this Wellcome Leap program is “to eradicate the stubbornly challenging diseases that cause so much suffering around the world.” It plans to do this through AI algorithms, however, which are never 100 percent accurate in their predictive ability, and with gene-editing treatments, nearly all of which are novel and have not been well tested. That latter point is important given that one of the main methods for gene-editing in humans, CRISPR, has been found in numerous studies to cause considerable damage to the DNA, damage that is largely irreparable (see here, here and here). It seems plausible that a person placed on such a hi-tech medical treatment path will continue to need a never-ending series of gene-editing treatments and perhaps other invasive hi-tech treatments to mitigate and manage the effects of clumsy gene splicing.
Total Surveillance to Treat “Depression”
Wellcome Leap’s most recent program, launched just this week, is called “Multi-Channel Psych: Revealing Mechanisms of Anhedonia” and is officially focused on creating “complex, biological” treatments for depression.
Source: Wellcome Leap, https://wellcomeleap.org/mcpsych/
Those behind Wellcome Leap frame the problem they aim to tackle with this program as follows:
“We understand that synaptic connections serve as the currency of neural communication, and that strengthening or weakening these connections can facilitate learning new behavioral strategies and ways of looking at the world. Through studies in both animal models and humans, we have discovered that emotional states are encoded in complex neural network activity patterns, and that directly changing these patterns via brain stimulation can shift mood. We also know that disruption of these delicately balanced networks can lead to neuropsychiatric illness.” (emphasis added)
They add that “biologically based treatments” for depression “are not being matched to the biology of the human beings they’re being used in,” and, thus, treatments for depression need to be tailored “to the specific biology” of individual patients. They clearly state that what needs to be addressed in order to make such personal modifications to treatment is to gain “easy access to the biological substrate of depression—i.e. the brain.”
Wellcome Leap’s program description notes that this effort will focus specifically on anhedonia, which it defines as “an impairment in the effort-based reward system” and as a “key symptom of depression and other neuropsychiatric illnesses.” Notably, in the fine print of the document, Wellcome Leap states:
“While there are many definitions of anhedonia, we are less interested in the investigation of reduced consummatory pleasure, the general experience of pleasure, or the inability to experience pleasure. Rather, as per the description above, we will prioritize investigations of anhedonia as it relates to impairments in the effort-based reward system—e.g. reduced motivation to complete tasks and decreased capacity to apply effort to achieve a goal.”
In other words, Wellcome Leap is only interested in treating aspects of depression that interfere with an individual’s ability to work, not in improving an individual’s quality or enjoyment of life.
Leap notes, in discussing its goals, that it seeks to develop models for how patients respond to treatments that include “novel or existing behavior modification, psychotherapy, medication, and neurostimulation options” while also capturing an individual’s “genome, phenome [the sum of an individual’s phenotypic traits], [neural] network connectivity, metabolome [the sum of an individual’s metabolic traits], microbiome, reward processing plasticity levels,” among others. It ultimately aims to predict the relationship between an individual’s genome to how “reward processing” functions in the brain. It implies that the data used to create this model should involve the use of wearables, stating that researchers “should seek to leverage high frequency patient-worn or in-home measurements in addition to those obtained in the clinic, hospital or laboratory.”
One of the main research areas included in the program looks to “develop new scalable measurement tools for reliable and high-density quantification of mood (both subjectively reported and objectively quantified via biometrics such as voice, facial expression, etc.), sleep, movement, reward system functioning, effort/motivation/energy levels, social interaction, caloric intake, and HPA axis output in real-world situations.” The HPA (hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal) axis is mentioned throughout the document, and this is significant as it is both a negative and positive feedback system regulating the mechanisms of stress reactions, immunity, and also fertility in the human body. The latter is especially important given the Wellcome Trust’s ties to the UK eugenics movement. It is also worth noting that some commercially available wearables, such as Amazon’s Halo, already quantify mood, sleep, and movement.
The program’s authors go even further than the above in terms of what they wish to monitor in real time, stating, “We specifically encourage the development of non-invasive technology to directly interrogate human brain state.” Examples include “a non-invasive spinal tap equivalent,” “behavioral or biomarker probes of neural plasticity,” and “single-session neural monitoring capabilities that define a treatment-predictive brain state.”
In other words, this Wellcome Leap program and its authors seek to develop “non-invasive” and, likely, wearable technology capable of monitoring an individual’s mood, facial expressions, social interactions, effort and motivation, and potentially even thoughts in order to “directly interrogate human brain state.” To think that such a device would stay only in the realm of research is naive, especially given that WEF luminaries have openly spoken at Davos meetings about how governments plan to use such technology widely on their populations as a means of pre-emptively targeting would-be dissent and ushering in an era of “digital dictatorships.”
The focus on treating only the aspects of depression that interfere with a person’s work further suggests that such technology, once developed, would be used to ensure “perfect worker” behavior in industries where human workers are rapidly being replaced with AI and machines, meaning the rulers can be more selective about which people continue to be employed and which do not. Like other Wellcome Leap programs, if completed, the fruits of the Multi-Channel Psych program will likely be used to ensure a population of docile automatons whose movements and thoughts are heavily surveilled and monitored.
The Last Leap for an Old Agenda
Wellcome Leap is no small endeavor, and its directors have the funding, influence, and connections to make their dreams reality. The organization’s leadership includes the key force behind Silicon Valley’s push to commercialize transhumanist tech (Regina Dugan), the “architect” of the MEMS industry (Ken Gabriel), and the “ruler” of the burgeoning genetic-sequencing industry (Jay Flatley). It also benefits from the funding of the world’s largest medical-research foundation, the Wellcome Trust, which is also one of the leading forces in shaping genetics and biotechnology research as well as health policy globally.
A 1994 Sunday Times investigation into the Trust noted that “through [Wellcome Trust] grants and sponsorships, government agencies, universities, hospitals and scientists are influenced all over the world. The trust distributes more money to institutions than even the British government’s Medical Research Council.”
It then notes:
“In offices on the building’s first floor, decisions are reached that affect lives and health on scales comparable with minor wars. In the conference room, high above the street, and in the meeting hall, in the basement, rulings in biotechnology and genetics are handed down that will help shape the human race.”
Little has changed regarding the Trust’s influence since that article was published. If anything, its influence on research paths and decisions that will “shape the human race” has only grown. Its ex-DARPA officials, who have spent their careers advancing transhumanist technology in both the public and private sectors, have overlapping goals with those off Wellcome Leap. Dugan’s and Gabriel’s commercial projects in Silicon Valley reveal that Leap is led by those who have long sought to advance the same technology for profit and for surveillance. This drastically weakens Wellcome Leap’s claim to now be pursuing such technologies to only improve “global health.”
Regina Dugan’s Keynote at Facebook F8 2017. Source: YouTube
Indeed, as this report has shown, most of these technologies would usher in a deeply disturbing era of mass surveillance over both the external and internal activities of human beings, including young children and infants, while also creating a new era of medicine based largely on gene-editing therapies, the risks of which are considerable and also consistently downplayed by its promoters.
When one understands the intimate bond that has long existed between eugenics and transhumanism, Wellcome Leap and its ambitions make perfect sense. In a recent article written by John Klyczek for Unlimited Hangout, it was noted that the first director general of UNESCO and former president of the UK Eugenics Society was Julian Huxley, who coined the term “transhumanism” in his 1957 book New Bottles for New Wine. As Klyczek wrote, Huxley argued that “the eugenic goals of biologically engineering human evolution should be refined through transhumanist technologies, which combine the eugenic methods of genetic engineering with neurotech that merges humans and machines into a new organism.”
Earlier, in 1946, Huxley noted in his vision for UNESCO that it was essential that “the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable,” an astounding statement to make so soon after the end of World War II. Thanks in large part to the Wellcome Trust and its influence on both policy and medical research over the course of several decades, Huxley’s dream of rehabilitating eugenics-infused science in the post–World War II era could soon become reality. Unsurprisingly, the Wellcome Trust hosts the archive of the formerly Huxley-led Eugenics Society and still boasts close ties to its successor organization, the Galton Institute.
The over-riding question is: Will we allow ourselves to continue to be manipulated into allowing transhumanism and eugenics to be openly pursued and normalized, including through initiatives like those of Wellcome Leap that seek to use babies and toddlers as test subjects to advance their nightmarish vision for humanity? If well-crafted advertising slogans and media campaigns painting visions of utopia such as “a world without disease” are all that is needed to convince us to give up our future and our children’s future to military operatives, corporate executives, and eugenicists, then there is little left of our humanity to surrender.
The First 1000 Days: Promoting Healthy Brain Networks
VI. Wellcome Leap’s “Selected Performers for Healthy Brain Networks”
(Selected Performers in Promoting Healthy Brain Network of Wellcome Leap
Mauro Costa-Matiiolli, Baylor College of Medicine
Kirsten Donald, University of Capetown, South Africa
Elena Geangu, University of York, England
Peter Gluckman, Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, and Singamore Institute of Clinical Sciences
Uri Hassen, Princeton University
Rebecca Lawson, Cambridge University, Cambridge, England
Victoria Leong, Nanyang Institute,
Sergiu Pasca, Stanford University
Guilherme Polanczyk, University of São Paulo
Dustin Scheinost, Yale University
Wellcome Leap Institutions
Centres have a Director, who drives and oversees the research vision.
Research groups in centres are led by senior leaders, who hold substantial research funding and are often a Wellcome Fellow or Investigator. There are also early-career group leaders and training programmes to nurture talented junior researchers.
Current centres: There are 15 Wellcome Centres.
Wellcome Centre for Anti-Infectives Research (opens in a new tab) (University of Dundee)
The centre is working to accelerate the discovery and investigation of new small-molecule candidates for treating neglected tropical diseases – initially focusing on visceral leishmaniasis and Chagas’ disease.
Wellcome / MRC Cambridge Stem Cell Institute (University of Cambridge)
The institute investigates the mechanisms regulating stem and progenitor cells, both normal and pathological, for the prevention and treatment of disease. It is funded in partnership with the Medical Research Council (MRC).
Wellcome Centre for Cell Biology (University of Edinburgh)
The centre aims to understand cellular epigenetic mechanisms by looking at nuclear organisation, genome packaging and transmission, chromatin states and RNA biology.
Wellcome Centre for Cell-Matrix Research (University of Manchester)
The centre investigates the principles that govern cell and matrix interactions. This will lead to a better understanding of how organisms develop and age, and will help to identify interventions for matrix disorders, such as fibrosis.
Wellcome Centre of Cultures and Environments of Health (University of Exeter)
The centre explores, creates and supports cultures and environments that promote health and wellbeing throughout people’s lives, drawing on expertise from the humanities, social and biomedical sciences.
Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities (University of Oxford)
The centre is rethinking bioethics to recognise the importance of data, genomics, neuroscience, and global interconnectivity. This will better equip bioethics to analyse the major moral problems in 21st century bioscience and healthcare.
Wellcome / CRUK Gurdon Institute (University of Cambridge)
The institute aims to understand the fundamental mechanisms of normal biological development, look for where these mechanisms fail in cancer and other diseases of ageing and, where possible, to develop new therapies. It is funded in partnership with Cancer Research UK (CRUK).
Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics (University of Oxford)
The centre investigates the genetic causes and functional consequences of human disease, drawing on human and pathogen genomics and structural biology.
Wellcome Centre for Infectious Diseases Research in Africa
The centre aims to combat infectious diseases related to poverty, with a particular focus on TB and HIV. It wants to determine the role of non-infectious diseases in infection, and overcome the challenges of large scale anti-retroviral therapy for HIV. The centre will provide training and opportunities to African scientists and clinicians.
Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging (University of Oxford)
The Centre is helping laboratory neuroscience to better benefit patients by making it easier to integrate neuroimaging across species and scales. It will generate new imaging markers for prediction, stratification and therapeutic monitoring, and make all data, analysis and related tools openly available.
Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Medical Engineering (King’s College London)
The centre is developing markers to allow early detection of disease so that its onset or progression can be prevented. It will focus on cardiovascular, oncological and neurological applications of medical imaging (primarily MRI and PET). It is jointly funded with the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and King’s College London.
Wellcome Centre for Mitochondrial Research (Newcastle University)
The centre carries out basic and clinical research on genetic and cell-biological mechanisms of mitochondrial disease, phenotypes patients, and develops new approaches to prevention and treatment.
Wellcome Centre for Integrative Parasitology (University of Glasgow)
The centre investigates molecular processes and pathways in parasites in order to develop new approaches to treatment. It uses techniques from genomics and molecular epidemiology to study parasites and their interactions with host immune systems.
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (University College London)
The centre is using neuroimaging to identify biomarkers that can inform prognosis and treatment in a variety of psychiatric and neurological conditions. It brings together expertise in human cognition, physics, biophysical modelling, computational neuroscience and clinical neuroscience.
Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (University College London)
The centre is advancing image-guided surgery by combining imaging, sensing and smart instruments. It helps clinicians to adopt these new technologies and methods and to interact with patients and the general public.
Africa and Asia Programmes
We run five programmes as part of our work to fund and support research in Africa and Asia.
The Francis Crick Institute is a partnership between Wellcome, the Medical Research Council, Cancer Research UK, University College London, Imperial College London and King’s College London. It is the largest biomedical research institute in Europe.
The Sainsbury Wellcome Centre – The Sainsbury Wellcome Centre is funded through a partnership between Wellcome and the Gatsby Foundation. The centre focuses on furthering our understanding of neural circuits in the brain.
The MSD-Wellcome Trust Hilleman Laboratories, funded through a partnership between Wellcome and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, is a not-for-profit vaccine research and development initiative based in India. Hilleman laboratories complete research into affordable vaccines to combat disease in low-income countries.
* VII. Comments From Bitchute Interview on
Share this video on AWI https://awakeningincubator.com/news-feed/
13 days ago
Time for a little scamdemic entertainment – Fat Albert Gets Out Of Prison:
13 days ago
People it’s TIME to see the truth, investigate-expose-fight !
DEEPSTATE PEDOS SATANIST NETWORKS EXPOSED !
NEVER BE AFRAID TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/tKHIyABwIzrv/
13 days ago
who did the war games? Democrats. WWll, Korea, Vietnam, and many others, leaving A republican dupe to take the fall. GW Bush was the only republican to use the progressive playbook of the past he was and is a leftist war monger in drag. I voted for him. I am guilty.
13 days ago
After living overseas most of my young life, I became aware America was doomed. Due to your collective false idea of the world as it is. Most of the world is racist bigoted and full of hate for any visitor to their country. If not for the Power of the USA and the military bases in the country they would [show more]
13 days ago
𝕄𝕣. 𝕋𝕣𝕦𝕞𝕡, 𝔽𝕒𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣 𝕠𝕗 𝕋𝕙𝕖 𝕍𝕒𝕔𝕔𝕚𝕟𝕖
Heads up Florida and New York residents – SB-2006 and Senate Assembly Bill A416 (mandatory detention, isolation, vaccination)
Government is lying to us. SARS-Cov-2 has not been isolated according to Koch’s postulates:
14 days ago
Well, whatever happens in the near and distant future because of whats going on, make sure Jesus is your savior. Trust with confidence and understanding that Jesus removed ALL of your sins when He died and rose. Simple! If you need some teaching on the matter, the bible teaching site, teachingfaith.Com [show more]
13 days ago
14 days ago
This is extremely Disturbing…
14 days ago
https://www.bitchute.com/video/gWw3bQtsCn2x/ the royals are satanists
14 days ago
John 3 : 16
June 25, 2021 at 2:49 pm
I posted this on Whitney’s blog so someone reads it, but I am getting censored so no idea this is going through. Beware
I posted this on Tom Luongo’s blog. My comments don’t go through.
This is about 3 things:
1) Training their AIs on our brains.
2) Keeping their secrets.
3) Stealing our information and ideas, which they can use to huge profit on the financial markets and anywhere else.
Beware anyone who tries to gaslight you for an extended time!
Hey Tom, sorry this is off-topic, we don’t see eye to eye on everything but you were so right about the value of information.
That’s why they wanted me isolated. Someone was fucking with me.
They weren’t trying to silence me alone, they were stealing my ideas. They gave me some ideas in return, thinking I was the one benefiting. It was hidden under the guise of initiation that never ends. I’ve been censored on your blog somehow, I don’t think it was you. It could be a technical glitch though since wordpress sucks.
I said it from the start, our efforts need to be an open-source process, because otherwise the people with tech and bad intentions will literally violate your computer and your mind, and use it for themselves. The technology is here for them to do this, we’re the ones who don’t have it. Beware. Do things openly or only the bad guys will get the information. They’ll develop products and place bets on the market with it.
This about defending the private property which is your very mind, and them trying to keep secrets buried, both.
That’s why you make a thousand new age religion blogs where people submit to the idea of joining hivemind and “communitarian” empires. All your thoughts belong to society, really.
It’s extremely hard to stay down to earth when you go down this rabbit hole, but this is it, they want your brainpower and their secrets.
Basic natural law libertarian socialist ethics are the only thing I believe in anymore. I ditched even spirituality since it was a gateway drug to superstition.
It’s all about information.
June 25, 2021 at 8:23 pm
hearing all this …The only giant red flag booming statement Ms. Webb said IDF Terrorist acting as police, on US soil???? SO WE HAVE THE ULTRA HATE GROUP, the ADL who is fomenting the race war minute by minute and influencing US laws, now they are going to have IDF soldiers on US soil??? We just put an IDF trained cop in jail and major cities are still burning over the floyd murder by an IDF trained cop…. WHAT! WHAT! THAT IS THE MOST DANGEROUS THING I HAVE HEARD ,YET. We will be Palestinians on US SOIL. HELL NO. So these terrorists will be shooting US children, as they do in Palestine ??? this is worst than an invasion of the Chinese army. let me guess, they will help shoot are US kids too. RESOURCE TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS????
June 25, 2021 at 11:21 pm
Excerpt from (Surviving) The Great American Novelty by JSP
“The infection was everywhere, in plain sight of everyone. But, depending on how your mind
interpreted the “code”, that determined the message you received. The same words were
interpreted in a variety of ways. Layers of dis-info, camouflaging, and redirections were
broadcast, amplified and repeated in a 24 hour cycle. A few very talented “agitants” capitalized
on their “cult of personality”. It was an efficient way to (dis)organize the masses.
These “agitating agents” posed as “anti-establishment outsiders” singing songs of “ending
corruption” but in reality they helped to herd and ultimately clear the path of troublesome “truth
activists” who had been growing since 911. At the time, they were called “conspiracy theorists”
and then conflated with “domestic terrorists” after 2020, when framed by media architect
Everyone from “Neo-Nazis” to the “vaccine hesitant” to “911-Truthers” were all bundled into the
same “ dangerous basket of deplorables”. It was no coincidence that those who would push
back against totalitarian solutions were the targets of this gambit, although both sides were fed
false truths… The Left blamed Russian interference and radicals from the Right… and the Right
blamed Chinese plots and radicals from the Left.
…Both were manipulated by their prejudices, but the Right wing was armed and more likely to
resist.And, so, they became the target of Qanon. Along with Evangelicals.
Evangelicals were “naturally hesitant” to the solutions due to omens of Apocalypse.
Luciferase is a chemical that glows under UV light and was used in the first micro-dot tattoos,
contributing to “hesitancy”. The number 666 was found in the House Bill for Covid Relief. The
same number, 666, was found in the patent number for the “cryptocurrency” promoted by
Winthorp Fence. Buying and selling or travel could not be conducted without what many
considered “the mark of the Beast”. The evangelicals didn’t know it, but they had been primed
since Roman times to expect such signs… Your “resistance” was part of the show.
Neither side looked to our closest allies and history’s patterns for the answers. This “ruse” had
been used since 1947… effectively. The real enemy (the seed of Global Fascism, The Serpent’s
Egg) was invited to nest and fester in the form of US intelligence agencies long ago, and took
that initial step towards the “lockstep” with the 1947 NDA.
That was the silent coup. The Wall Street Lawyer whose brother had an airport named after him,
was the “Gatekeeper” who allowed the defeated Nazi intelligence agents to retrench after The
Battle of the Bulge and go underground and become the US Intelligence network… and NASA.
The Fascist-Technocratic parasite had been attached to our nation’s brain by lawyer and master
spy, Allan Dulles.
June 29, 2021 at 5:50 am
I saw this,….. “6uild 6ack 6etter”, from another blogger and it just seemed appropriate to pass it on.
July 7, 2021 at 6:42 pm
Where can one find this book??
June 26, 2021 at 11:57 am
The problem with government and the problem with corporations are one and the same: The rights of people are granted to entities as if an organisation without a physical body is as alive as real people. Then real people use the cover of governments or corporations to shield their actions and get away with things they could not as simple individuals. Body-politic metaphors have corrupted the minds of many and yet their popular use remains unmitigated (catch-22; Purging purge metaphors does not work). Real people are treated as if they are the disease which society needs curing from, and it’s real people who perpetuate such myths, cloaked in patriotism and jingoism.
June 26, 2021 at 4:11 pm
Medicare is going to become eugenics. I can so see this happening.
Paul S Martin
June 26, 2021 at 5:30 pm
Klaus Schwab of the Davros W.E.F. has warned us twice that there will be a Cyber attack. I think he is saying is that they will pull down the entire internet and only allow their approved/controlled web services.
June 26, 2021 at 8:28 pm
Re: factions/cooperation between the elite, I see this through the lens of historical patterns of imperialism; starting from the premise that this represents a new wave of imperialism, all elites agree on plundering the new “frontier” (imperialism always takes place along a frontier). The frontier in this case is biology itself merged with digital technology. However, competition and “factions” or even arms races emerge when individual elites or groups of elites compete for power within that colonized space. We can compare to the European colonization of the Global South starting in the 1400s. The Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, English and others all agreed that they were going to colonize and enslave the frontier and mine resources. The outcome was the same throughout the frontier. However, there were skirmishes and arms races between competing imperial powers over which one was going to occupy which space. That is what I believe is happening now. There are genuine conflicts among the elite but they are mostly just competing with each other over who gets which space to colonize and mine. Imperialism always goes after resources and this time, the resources are not crops, oil, spices or metals, but our very minds.
June 28, 2021 at 11:08 am
White supremacists, evangelicals chosen for rapture ,Jewish the chosen people ,chinese middle Kingdom, Japanese empire , English rulers of Brittania ,Black power, wealthy elitists ,ivy League alumni. Techno transhumanists .All with ideas of supremacy.
Where do I belong???
June 28, 2021 at 12:12 pm
Excellent discussion. On point. I will be sending several because from iphone.
David Icke has been demonized for decades, being influenced I only watched him beginning 2018. There is a recent one where he reviews a UK Military Futures document. It is about AI, transhumanism, genetic engineering. It is titled The Human Hive Mind and the End of Human Individuality. Since it is a document of the military it sets the plan snd Frames it as the future.
June 28, 2021 at 12:26 pm
DARPA and Regina. I donn’t know if you know this. Regina has at least one computer implant in her forearm. Excellent noting how DARPA directors (4 year stint) move to other places, like Google and FB and SRI. Always emphasize DARPA IS NATIONAL SECURITY and secrecy. That means wherever they move to, they are working National Security. You are documenting how big Tech is a tool.
The director after Regina, Indian name can’t remember, gave an interview in 2015 where she said there is nothing more important for Nat Sec than “collective identity”, how it is created and controlled. What are the collective identities today?
June 28, 2021 at 12:45 pm
One area I am studying is social engineering. I look for it to make it more visible. On Mindmatters on SOTT, they had a review of The Fourth Turning. The book presents the theory that society runs in generational cycles of 90 years. Because this cycle ends in 2030 and there is Agenda 2030 made me question.
The coauthor is Neil Howe. He was s member of the think tank Center for Strategic snd International Studies, CSIS, founde in 1962 at Georgetown U. Other members Kissinger and Brzezinski. Georgetown ended the relationship because CSIS was focussed on media, not scholarly research. Al Gore praised the book and his Inconvenient Truth is social engineering.
What does it show? A globalist think tank is authoring books to provide “scientific” foundation for the agenda. Of course, America is falling apart in 2030 because of this natural cycle.
June 28, 2021 at 1:04 pm
Regarding social engineering, Peter Foster wrote a review of Mark Carney’s book Values: BUILDing a BETTER World for All., on SOTT called “it won’t be pleasant” – Mark Carney unveils dystopian…
it sounds like Build Back Better to me.
Climate emergency will keep us locked up longer so WE CAN SAVE THE WORLD, uh, for the power brokers.
Whitney may have already run across Mark’s history.
June 28, 2021 at 1:11 pm
There is a site UKcolumn.org. One of their investigative reporters, Brian Gerrish, gave testimony to Reiner Fulimich in Germany regarding the “pandemic” and manipulation of the people. One of the methods is neuro linguistic programming.
June 28, 2021 at 1:25 pm
Whitney talked about AI and creating a singularity. The question is computing power. This is where quantum computing would be necessary. They are probably not there yet.
Dark winter. Though covid was either fake or lethality overrated, don’t lose sight of the jab and “antibody dependent enhancement”. The jan primes the person for cytokine storm response to flu.
Anadonia(?) sounded like pavlov’s dogs to me. Once they get you engineered, Schwaub will be right, “you will own nothing and you will be happy.”
June 28, 2021 at 1:43 pm
Basically the power brokers see man as a machine that needs to be upgraded to the improved, uniform and compliant model. Also older versions(the useless class) are obsolete and expendable. In this world, values and morality and the human soul, are delusions that must be expungef. Then we have the Power Broket Utopis. ( In the show, written by someone in the know, John Cusack on several occasions asks his daughter, What have you done “useful” today.
June 30, 2021 at 7:08 am
One last thought. We need to keep in mind child trafficking and pedophilia and Epstein. Epstein’s connections to power brokers at MIT, Harvard in education and science, all branches of government, MSM, and social media is the weak link in their power structure. Where was the money used?
I respect and applaud your seeking, finding and expressing truth. Truth brings light to the darkness.
July 1, 2021 at 1:35 am
Stumbled across Whitney”s Dark Winter series during lockdown as part of my own journey into the light. This new video offers brilliant context and draws back the curtain exposing the sinister agenda being obfuscated from a misinformed public. Fighting for my grandchildrens’ future. So many people walking around in a coma.