I've purchased the DVD.  It's worthwhile in a variety of ways but...careful...  Corbett, who's research I highly respect and even monetarily support from time to time, recently produced this which is also a must-see in association with the  Russo interview material.

  https://youtu.be/MGyrxK0pXWM?t=7m50s

By happenstance Corbett also has some Bitcoin related stuff later in the QFC.  It makes some valuable suggestions about an aggravating issue which has me pulling my hair out just about every time I hear anyone talking about crypto in mainstream sheep-land.

You mean the same government which double-taps wedding parties?

Pertussis (aka, whooping cough) is a poster-child for this.  The wild strain can reside asymptomatically in vaccinated people which makes them carriers.

Now a pro-vaxxer could say "well, everyone should get vaccinated so they don't get sick from the vaccinated carriers."  The problem here is that the vaccine itself is increasingly failing (meaning they don't work for shit in more and more people) so even vaccinated are at risk.

The 'best solution' will, as always, be that everyone should go in for boosters regularly.  Other vaccinations (e.g., mumps) are also failing and you can see the more recent outbreaks happening in highly vaccinated populations.  Thus everyone should go in to the doctor multiple times per year to get their 'boosters'.

To make matters worse, the production of mutant strains of some kinds of organisms are enhanced by keeping highly vaccinated populations:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gS8BSBYYMk

---

A shrewd investor would do well to invest in corporations who make vaccines for U.S. 'markets' (so called).  These corporate entities have legal immunity specifically for whatever harm their vaccine products might cause, and it the trend with 'Obamacare' and it's 'single-payer' replacement is to force-march people into the clinics to get injected with whatever vaccinations the pharma lobbyists wish.

Oh ya...another great thing is that the safety studies that the regulatory bodies such as the CDC rely on are typically performed by the corporations who manufacture vaccines.  Better yet, the boards who make vaccine schedule recommendations are populated by people like Dr. Paul Offit who hold intelectual property rights and get royalties from the vaccines they recommend be added to the vaccine schedule!

I've used one of my guns several times in the last few days to dispatch a couple of rats who had invaded one of my buildings.  This was just my 22 cal rifle and I used shot-shells which work like a charm on rats.  It is nearly impossible to kill more than one rat by any other means that I've found.  They are smart creatures who quickly learn any kind of trap or poison.

One of the most common needs for a firearm is to put large animals out of their misery.  Fairly recently a local donkey got into trouble.  In that case we did have a vet come out and she killed the animal with an injection, but it cost $700 and she was able to come out fairly quickly.  I would have just shot the animal rather than have it suffer and slowly die over 48 hours.  And if I'd known that the creature would have to be put down, I'd have spent $1 on a shell rather than $700 on a visit from the vet.  I would _not_ have taped a knife to a stick and tried to stab the creature to death or whatever 'option' you urban morons might dream up.  Had I not the option of instantly killing it with a shot to the brain, the creature would have died a painful death over the course of a few days.

It is pretty common to see an animal who was hit by a car and is suffering in pain beside the road.  I've seen it on average of probably once per year.  A responsible person will put the animal out of it's misery.  I don't live in a 'rich' area where there is a lot of 'services' who will come out and deal with the problem (e.g., sheriff, animal control, etc.)  The resources just are not there.  I've not had to kill an injured animal on the roadside mostly because so many people carry guns in their cars in my area that someone else has always come along before I needed to perform this duty.  Thankfully.  I would not like to have to perform this duty, but I would rather do it than to think of an animal suffering for as long as it takes to die naturally, especially since scavenger animals usually start in before the animal is totally dead.

A normal healthy body can 'fight against microbes' just fine without vaccines in most cases.  Now if 'science' starts 'turbo-charging' and 'jacking with' certain elements of an immune system, which is what current adjuvated vaccines do, it is fairly obvious that it can fuck up the immune system as a whole.  Lots of times it gets totally confused and starts eating up the body itself.  The we see an epidemic of auto-immune related ailments.  Diabetes, MS, lupus, artheritis, etc, etc.  Also a lot of times when the immune system just does not work right and fall-out like 'hay fever.'

The 'good news' is that the vaccinated people are highly profitable throughout the rest of their lives to the pharma industry as they struggle with their various conditions.  Better yet, their lives are shortened so 'we' don't have to expend as much to support these 'useless eaters' and 'cannon fodder' as they age beyond their productive years.  In the U.S., this will extend the life-span of the social security ponzi scheme.  Other socialist countries gain a similar benefit for their brand of ponzi scheme.

Been there, done that.  One gets in a lot more trouble if one uses a firearm in the commission of a crime, and criminals know this.  It worked, and that is why problems spiked in the 1970s when the policy was undertaken and have been declining ever since.

What you get on 'the news' is not a random sample and is not a good basis for making policy decisions, and this is especially the case if you've not carefully monitored the news over many decades.  WRT firearms in the U.S., the news is a particularly poor resource since there is a campaign to demonize firearms and get our society such that the police, military, and paramilitaries forces have a monopoly in the use of force and the mainstream corporate media is a key player in this effort.  Success here will allow more flexibility in future social engineering operations.

Also, it is a directive from the United Nations for the U.S. to 'synchronize' with most of the rest of the world in this use-of-force monopolization so I understand.  As far as I'm concerned, the lack of self-defense capability on the part of a citizenry is often a key element of national disaster.  No thanks.

The U.S.'s 2nd amendment recognized just this phenomenon and attempted to deal with the problem by giving society the tools to fight back if it became necessary.  An armed population makes it more tactically difficult to perform certain governing operations such as genocides and population displacements/replacements.

The downside is that in response, those who 'thirst for power' have shifted to more subtle methods than, say, old uncle Joe Stalin.  Don't forget to get your flu shot.

Sadly, brieghtbart.com is among the most credible information outlets here in 2017.  Most of the mainstream outlets were stupid/desperate enough to 'burn the books' (to use a stockbrocker's term) in a failed attempt to get Hillary in as POTUS.

The most sure-fire way to 'get a rise out of people' is to have an element of fundamental and undeniable truth to an idea.  Any troll who is worth his/her salt will testify to this reality.  This is because 'truth hurts', and pain is what gets a response.

In fact the blocks of a blockchain could be locked by anything.  It is interesting to me that Satoshi choose an energy backed POW method, and indeed it is probably the strongest of the relatively weak indications that Bitcoin was a project of bankster/CIA scum or whatever.

Again, the thing which really fascinated me about crypto early on is that, paradoxically, it's strength is that it CAN easily fail.  Failure is inevitable if it is abused in the real world.  In a capitalist system any solution will see the winners ending up with all the chips, but the chips in crypto-land can be turned into piles of shit at will by the losers.  This differentiates it from gold (where although possible, the failure mechanics are simply less practical.)

The hopeful outcome in a distributed crypto-currency environment is that the currency itself is a neutral force of nature free of manipulation.  This levels the play field to a degree.  The 'chips' in this case weigh to some other form (land, resources, intellectual property, etc.)

A troll, but a good one.  (Snoops is actually a useful resource in some corner-case instances.)  It would be great if such a stupid idea really did go, and maybe it will induce some idiot to create a real effort along these lines;  a guy could make some money setting up a web-cam pointing at a neighbor's house and catching a 'real crime in progress' on vid.

Being able to induce drug addled losers to one's house at 2am could also foster a competition for the most gory shotgun-to-the-face pics.  It could help develop the most effective shotgun loads for meth-heads.  Kinda like they did back in the day to develop 'Rhodesian Jungle' loads and so forth.

I believe that this subject is startlingly on-target.

Many people know that debt-based monetary systems have a life expectancy dictated by fundamental mathematics.  They need a periodic re-set.  Many people feel that the USD system is near that point.

It looks to me like what is happening is a tussle between several fairly powerful groups:

  1) re-set with yet another debt-based monetary system.

  2) Try a resource-backed monetary system with the resource being energy.

The 2nd group is the driving force behind the climate scam, but they have to engineer a situation which aligns with their doctrine.  Specifically, they need energy to be a scarce and valuable thing (and they need centralized control of it.)  Basically they need to make "Hubbert's Peak" fit since it is what their plans are built on, but the problem is that newer technology keeps popping up and there is plenty of the old stuff (coal, solar, hydro, etc) still around.  This energy-based monetary system was the key element of the 'Technocracy' movement from the 1930's.

Worth note is that #1 works best in a capitalist or free-market environment.  #2 requires a totalitarian environment such as socialism/communism.

---
There is a 3rd and most important group:

  3)  Just finance both sides.  This is a winning strategy is well proven and effective.  We've seen it in most notably in wars were a certain group finances both sides.  This is so effective and so lucrative that this group pretty much dominates large segments of the human condition at this point.

---
There is also a nearly non-existent 4th group:

  4)  the so-called 'sound money' crowd.  This would be finite-source-backed monetary solution.  Gold and crypto-currency are in this category.  Although it is very possible to 'sweep the table' by controlling gold in a gold-backed system, gaming more flexible systems makes it easier and more durable to keep the game going.  

Crypto, on the other hand, is a nasty beast.  When one player accumulates all the crypto, the rest of the players just make a new one and start playing again.

I've been following Tomljenovic's and Shaw's research since I got interested in the subject of vaccines several years ago.  It's very compelling, and I'm glad to see this published.  I would expect that within a week the publisher retracts the study and these two scientists be widely condemned as frauds all over the mainstream jnews.  That's the way these things go time and time again.  These two people, and the other authors, are brave souls indeed.  I hope for a day when they are given the highest honors.  Not Nobel prizes which have become a sick joke.

Shaw and Tomljenovic's work on the brain tissue of girls who died from the HPV vaccine was very interesting (and shocking.)  At this point I've high confidence that vaccine regimes are first and foremost a eugenics program.  I know it sounds harsh and 'crazy', but there is just so much evidence out there to indicate it.

I guess it wasn't posted on this thread, but here's a high-powered doctor who say that since it's mostly 'white people' who refuse to have their kids shot up will all of the vaccines, the solution is to get rid of white people.

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

Of course she was joking in a certain way, but the idea is clearly in her mind and she is not alone.  That's the kind of people who sit on such panels making decisions about the average citizen's health.  When you get a bunch of people like those on this panel talking about 'for the future of our kids', it should not be taken on faith that the 'our kids' she is talking about are the same ones which are getting the shots.  I've heard numerous times that doctors scratch one-another's backs to make it so their kids get certified without actually taking the shots.  Of course that doesn't make it automatically true, but usually when I hear the same thing over and over again it turns out to have a basis in reality.  It's a certainty that if I had kids, I would seek out some sleezebag doctor and pay him/her off to empty the syringe into the sink and I'll bet I'm not the only one.

Also, it is worth note that Google is playing games with vids of this awful 'Baker' creature.  One (of many) clips of her rant usually show up in a Youtube search of the string 'carol baker', but if one sorts by date, nothing.  This in spite of the string being in the title of the vid.  When Google hand tunes results like this (and I've seen it on various occasions) you know the subject is important to the social engineers.  This is actually a fairly valuable marker.

Decent discussion of the panel here:  https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2017/09/17/baylor-u-professor-m-d-carol-baker-lets-just-get-rid-of-all-the-whites-in-the-united-states/#comments

I'd be surprise if 5% of the 'Syrians' were actually born and raised in that country.  The actual Syrians are likely for the most part trying to save their country and are likely fully behind Assad at this point even if they were not always.

95% of these so-called 'Syrians' are likely CIA paid and trained mercenaries from all over the Middle East and N. Africa who are getting their asses kicked by Assad, the Russians, and the Iranians.

There probably are a fair chunk of Kurds who may be nominally 'Syrian' insofar as when their usefulness to Turkey in the Armenian genocide was over, the Turks chased their fathers across the border to Syria.

But anyway, your point is well taken.  The Obama administration was more than happy to take whoever the UNHCR, who was responsible for allocations to Western countries, sends our way.  The U.S. was probably allocated the most smart and dangerous of the failed 'ISIS' gaggle because we are the biggest roadblock to their one-world government and our population is one of the best self-protected.  Second only to Switzerland would be my guess.

Guns are stolen all the time in my area.  Probably the most targeted item.  All that hassle and and abuse of John/Jane Q. Citizen who just wants some protection for his/her family is for naught when they go on vacation and their home is broken into and their guns, tools, 4-wheelers, etc, are grabbed by some meth-head.

Your run-of-the-mill tweeker has no ability to pass a background check here in the U.S., and won't go to a gun store for their weapons.

All the policy of extreme harrassement does is bother the very people who should have guns.  It does nothing but possibly instill a false sense of confidence in the drooling idiots who get their thoughts from mainstream jnews, and makes it more likely that people who wish to have a gun to use appropriately are less likely to have the ability.  But the U.N. has mandated that no citizens in any country should have guns or the ability to provide for their own defense so the mainstream jnews and modern 'progressives' will keep hammering on the issue...to their political detriment here in the U.S...

Countless people every day could kill others by applying a few centimeters of movement to a steering wheel.  And many do in fact.

At the end of the day one has no choice but to put some confidence in one's fellow citizen.  Or be some sort of an isolated hermit because there is only so much that Big Brother can realistically do.  As technology improves BB can probably do more (like chipping and continuous AI monitoring) but most semi-normal humans will definable not like the ultimate results.  Fortunately confidence in one's fellow citizens is usually not terribly misplaced.

The ironic thing is that most areas in the U.S. (by surface area) are much safer for all people because of an armed population of civilians.  In most areas criminals don't have to much to worry about from the police who, even if they are competent and honest, are a long way from the scene of a potential crime.  Potential criminals are very aware of this.  They do have to worry about a home-owner blowing their head off which a shotgun, and that worried a lot of them quite a bit.

From what I'm reading, Israel was an invention of the political Zionists, and for at least a segment of them the project is just a stepping stone to a larger end-goal.  Development of an Israeli  'Samson Option' (aka, a 'doomsday device') is a component.  Now they have it.  Logic indicates that most of Israel's 100's of nuclear weapons are targeting Western nations.  When Israel undergoes a controlled demolition these nukes will detonate on their targets and control of the planet will be passed to those who are prepared for the event and subsequent consolidation.

Although startlingly on-target in some ways, I don't see anything which indicates any super-natural force in the various religious teachings about the 'end times.'  Mostly it seems to me a matter of self-fulfilling prophesy.  For one thing, most of our leadership actually does not have a lot of creativity.  For another, it is handy in engineering (or Judo) to use existing organic momentum to one's own advantage.  So, if 50% of the people already believe that there will be a plague of locusts (drone swarms) and fire+brimstone (nukes), etc, and have some expectation of what to expect there-after, it makes for a more controllable environment to arrange just this.

Israelis would do well to consider how much more care the political Zionists have for them than they have for the rest of us goy.  Ya, most Israelis may be part of 'the tribe', but at the end of the day their being sacrificed may be outweighed by the 'greater good' and 'ends justify the means.'  These philosophical underpinnings are well represented in various sources of information, and in observation.

As for America, I think it fair to suspect that at this point in time (2017), what our political leaders do is a nearly exact match for what the political Zionists desire, although it is not the case that the political Zionists have a complete lock on this control, and even if they do, the movement has it's own internal opinions.  They joust with certain other groups who don't totally share their vision...or at least not their road-map and timings.

And it's not like the 'army' of any country has ever abused their power or anything like that.  That would be unthinkable.

Just trying (and failing) to enforce gun confiscation laws would cost vastly more than that.  Add to that the fact that Joe Citizen protects himself and his property for very little cost to society by having a defensive capability.  Trying to arrange something remotely approaching is level of protection through para-militaries would be vastly more expensive and come with it's own very severe risks of failure.


We've got a lot of problems.  Giving private citizens to tools to protect themselves is probably the only reason things work as well as they do here.

Also, I would not really classify the U.S. as an 'industrialized nation' at this point.  The globalist social engineers are working hard to 'de-industrialize' the U.S., and succeeding, so I think it fair to label ourselves a 'de-industrializing nation.'  From a social engineering standpoint there is a huge difference.


The BLM and Muslim population movement operations may well be working as well here as they are in Sweden if we law abiding citizens didn't have protection.  Indeed, the driving force behind gun restrictions seem to be the same people who seek to engineer such problems so it is entirely unsurprising that they are every bit as desperate to remove this 2nd amendment stumbling block as they seem.

As best I can tell, the anti-gun people who have powers of reason at all figure that after a couple hundred years of mayhem where only criminals have guns, the supply will eventually dry up and we'll have the promised violence-free utopia.

Of course in reality the policy is driven by people who don't wish law abiding citizens to have guns.  Criminals having guns and terrorizing normal citizens is very much in their interest.  In fact, anything terrorizing normal citizens is in their interest since the (usually false) promise of arranging protection is how they justify their power.  I'd bet money that in a 'gun free' America, if the supply of guns did actually start drying to the point where criminals couldn't get them, the powers that be would resolve the problem by making guns available to criminals.  Maybe through operations such as 'fast and furious'.  Maybe simply be fostering corruption of law enforcement.  Probably both.

Not sure what country you are in, but here in the U.S. it is not a problem:



10/100,000 is hardly what I would consider a crisis.  If the number of cancer cases were plotted on the same graph it would be up in the 30,000/100,000 range.  That seems to me a much bigger issue.  Same with autism which is, for some reason, skyrocketing over my lifetime.  Like from 1/10,000 to 1/60-ish.  Me thinks that people who are all worried about gun violence are brainwashed into barking up the wrong tree and wasting their worry budget on a non-issue.

I would also count out suicide since people who are serious about it have a multitude of options.  Doing so reduces the 10/100,000 non-issue to 5/100,000.



(2010 figures apparently...it was just the first thing I pulled up to make the point.)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2879650/Study-shows-annual-gun-deaths-United-States-catching-killed-car-crashes.html