
They divide us and conquer us…




The fake New York Times continues its efforts at disinformation and trying to overthrow the elected government of the USA: Last week Soros-backed „reporter“ Eric Schmitt tried to spark hostility with Russia over alleged “Bounties“ for US soldiers in Afghanistan.
Both the Russians and the Taliban have denied the crackpot claims. On June 29, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the story “a lie” and “absolute BS.” Speaking on Russia24 television channel, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called the story “a Hollywood blockbuster“ that reminded her of the movie “Wag the Dog“, TASS reported. The Taliban are outlawed as a terrorist organization in Russia.
The Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid also rejected the claims by The New York Times: “We strongly reject this allegation. Neither is the Islamic Emirate in need of anyone’s help in determining its objectives,” said Mujahid. “These rumors are being circulated to create hurdles for the departure of American troops, to weaken and confuse advocates of peace in America and to attribute the great heroism and achievements of the Afghans to foreigner circles,” Mujahid said, according to Turkish Anadolu News Agency.
The New York Times story, which did not cite any actual examples of a “Russian bounty” being paid for the deaths of U.S. soldiers and offered little in the way of evidence besides unnamed “officials” and “sources”, was principally written by Eric Schmitt, who has been an employee of George-Soros sponsored Democrat Think Tank „Center for a New American Security“ (CNAS) since 2015. The New York Times did not reveal this affiliation in Schmitt‘s articles. It was not clear how working for a partisan Think Tank complies with NYT journalistic ethics.
CNAS was run by Obama-era Ukraine ambassador Victoria Nuland until 2019, a frequent guest at the Soros-funded Ukraine Media Crisis Center, ground zero for the Russiagate conspiracy. Nuland was closely involved with the Biden crime family’s Ukraine Burisma racket, George Soros’ manipulations in Ukraine and the plunged $5 billion taxpayer dollars into Ukraine as part of the “color revolution” 2014.
CNAS was also one of the prime sources for the hit job on Gen. Mike Flynn 2017. Eric Schmitt had already begun writing about Mike Flynn’s threat to the deep state in Dec. 3, 2016, warning of Flynn’s “desire to usurp what he viewed as Washington’s incompetent and corrupt elite.” Closely coordinating with Rep. Adam Schiff, Schmitt became one of the first reporters to begin the takedown of Gen. Mike Flynn on Feb. 12 with an article headed “Turmoil at the National Security Council, From the Top Down” and Feb. 14 with an article claiming “Trump Was Informed 17 Days Ago That Flynn Had Not Been Truthful on Russia”. Amazingly, Schmitt is still on staff at the “New York Times”.
On Thursday, more than six months after our initial reporting the mainstream media finally caught up with Gateway Pundit and admitted their original reporting was as fake as the Russia pee-pee tapes.


On April 8, 2020, President Biden addressed the public concerning new executive orders he is planning on putting through.
This will be on top of the forty-eight other executive orders that have already come from the man who just last October was saying, “I have this strange notion—we are a democracy … [there are] things you can’t do by executive order unless you are a dictator. We’re a democracy, we need consensus.” He’s already surpassed both Trump and Obama in executive orders issued during the first four months of their respective presidencies.
It looks like the next EOs Biden aims at mandating are related to the topic of gun control: “Gun violence in this country is an epidemic. Let me say it again. Gun violence in this country is an epidemic.” This is ironic coming from the former vice president of the Obama administration, which started regime change wars in countries like Yemen, Libya, and Syria which in large part included supplying certain “moderate” rebel groups like al-Nusra and ISIS with weapons, cash, and intelligence support that was ultimately used to slaughter innocent men, women, and children.
The U.S. House Judiciary Committee approved a bill Wednesday that would create a commission to study reparations for black Americans for slavery. The vote was along party lines, 25 Democrats voting yes and 17 Republicans voting against.
The bill has been designated as H.R. 40, in reference to the “40 acres and a mule” once promised to freed slaves in the South.
The bill would create a 15-member “Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans,” which would recommend “appropriate remedies.” The text of the bill argues that slavery resulted in “systemic” discrimination against black Americans whose effects endure: “[A] preponderance of scholarly, legal, community evidentiary documentation and popular culture markers constitute the basis for inquiry into the on-going effects of the institution of slavery and its legacy of persistent systemic structures of discrimination on living African Americans and society in the United States.”
It is not clear who would pay reparations to whom. Moreover, as the Washington Post noted, one Democrat’s comments highlight another potential problem with the idea: namely, that once reparations for “systemic” problems in the past begin, it is unclear where they should end.

The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.
You must be logged in to post a comment.