police state – Page 240 – Hellbound and Down

How America Gave Up Press Freedom and Nobody Noticed

Did you notice that we’ve lost the press freedom that is essential in our democracy? If you’re like many people, probably not.

Do you believe that a free press is a Constitutional guarantee? Most people likely think it is indeed guaranteed. Actually, it is not.

Here’s the real story as I see it:

“Freedom of the press is an implicit and essential right of the people. It is not just freedom of speech for journalists. If a democracy is going to work, citizens have got to make informed political choices. The media are the people’s primary means for keeping informed. Many believe that press freedom exists if the media are free of governmental control and that pluralism prevails. That view misses the main point. A good share of the media has got to be free to serve the people.”

Those were my opening comments when the World Association of Newspapers invited me deliver the Keynote Address at the Press Freedom Forum of its 2006 World Congress.

Separately, a published report from the US Agency for International Development tells us of another vital point. It is that the press “serves a ‘checking function’ by ensuring that elected representatives uphold their oaths of office and carry out the wishes of those who elected them.” Often this is called being a “watchdog.”

Now, here in 2024, much of our news coverage is devoid of those fundamental principles. Tune in to CNN or MSNBC and you’ll hear people serving their audiences with bias and persuasion, forthrightly favoring their preferred political candidates. Switch to Fox News and you’ll hear the same thing, but with an opposite political twist.

These biased or dishonest news services are not violating any law. They are free to do what they’re doing. But in those cases voters are not being served consistently honest, unbiased information on which to base reasonable choices of leaders or to detect failures in existing leadership. Real news seeks to report, not persuade.

Network news has bias too. But it is not as consistent as cable news, and not as intense. Nonetheless it is still not a consistently reliable source for honest news.

As to a constitutionally guaranteed free press? Many believe we have that guarantee. For example, a free speech center at an American university states flatly, “Freedom of the press is a Constitutional guarantee contained in the First Amendment, which in turn is part of the Bill of Rights.” That might be a good fundraising line for the university. But it’s not true.

Keep reading

How the Regime Captured Wikipedia

In 2019, a scandal ripped through the Wikipedia community when a Wikipedia admin who goes by the handle Fram was handed a year-long ban from the site. While known to few outside the tight-knit but feverishly active collective of Wikipedia contributors, the affair was part of a far-reaching, partisan shift at the open encyclopedia with widespread implications for the future of media, technology, and politics around the world.

Although contributor bans are not uncommon on Wikipedia, this case was different. Instead of coming from the English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee (Arbcom), the panel of editors empowered to make such decisions, the ban was handed down directly by Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), the NGO that owns the site.

Little more than 12 hours after the ban’s announcement, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales publicly intervened to help quell the storm by publicly assuring the community he was reviewing the situation, and later saying he’d “raised the issue with WMF.” A week later, two Wikipedia bureaucrats — high-ranking editors who can assign admin rights — and 18 admins — editors with enhanced rights — resigned in protest. Arbcom released a searing statement saying the top-down ban was “fundamentally misaligned with the Wikimedia movement’s principles of openness, consensus, and self-governance.”

At its lowest resolution, the controversy was born from the tension between the decentralized Wikipedia site and the highly centralized Wikimedia Foundation. In reality, the ban and subsequent backlash were tied to a massive culture shift at Wikipedia, precipitated by the rise of a new social-justice-minded power structure at Wikimedia Foundation.

Keep reading

What’s going to be the ‘thing’ that the globalists and bankers use to try to impose ‘lockdowns’ next?

It seems clear that the globalists and bankers (from hereon to be referred to as non-elites) will soon be imposing their “pandemic preparedness” schemes on the public again. Having pushed that ‘virus epidemic’ “pandemic” envelope a little too far the last time around, what would they possibly be able to dangle like that proverbial carrot in front of our faces that would be effective as a tool to convince us that we need to be locked up again?

Think: war and more precisely, civil wars. It seems very clear from the chaos and madness happening in the UK and Ireland right now that the illegal immigrant male youths ‘residing’ all over the cities and countryside are very much meant to be there for a planned retaliation against culture. Sorry, I see what I see. Prove me wrong.

All they need is a signal. This could comprise many things: fooling the people into burning actual refugee refuges, incitement from a public figure, or a few children potentially being ear-marked for rape or murder.

Keep reading

FBI To Resume Meetings With Social Media Companies, Ignoring Censorship Concerns

Here we go again – another US election is coming up, and there’s another push to find ways to censor “disfavored” voices, and one of those ways is the focus on the foreign malign influence (FMI) boogeyman.

Americans (and the world) have seen this play out already before and after the contested 2020 vote.

The infamous case of the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop news story came after the FBI issued a warning to social media companies about an incoming FMI “disinformation dump” – from Russia.

We know how that went and was eventually debunked, the laptop being authentic, rather than a figment of some “disinformation” peddling operation’s imagination. But here is the FBI again, more than just emboldened by the recent Supreme Court’s ruling in the Murthy v. Missouri case.

That decision lifted an injunction that banned the US government from colluding with Big Tech in order to promote censorship. Now the case is back in the lower courts, and in the meanwhile, mere months before the election, the legal hurdle to resume suspected collusion has been cleared.

And so the FBI will now “resume regular meetings” with social media companies, the pretext being finding ways to combat “potential” FMI threats. The Hunter Biden laptop scandal illustrates very well how the supposed hunt for FMI can go astray, straight into the political censorship territory.

But none of that seems to matter now, as the current White House presses on with the old practices. On July 12 this year, just after the Supreme Court’s decision, Department of Justice (DOJ) Associate Deputy Attorney General George D. Turner penned a memo that shows the collusion never really stopped – even after last October’s court injunction restricting this type of “collaboration.”

We obtained a copy of the memo for you here.

Keep reading

Here’s What’s Really Behind the Global Reset and Sustainable Development Agenda 2030

The title of this article projects an ominous future where the masses are controlled by a few. Over the years I have written several articles covering the elite gathering in Davos. The global elites see the World Economic Forum (WEF) as an opportunity to promote their views and various causes. These people often fail to see that many of us have come to view Davos, as a notorious rendezvous for the world’s elite that grant us the honor of paying for their schemes in some way or form.

Such gatherings are not for our sake but more for the benefit of plutocrats like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The Global Reset they are pushing often reeks of their desire to “break the world” with their ruthless corporate agendas that continue to move political power into the hands of the globalist elite. To counter this attitude reassuring words are cast out over the airwaves to us, the minions of the world, to encourage faith in their wisdom. Oh, what a tangled web those in charge of our fate have woven for us as they rush to sell and bargain away our freedom for power and wealth.

When the WEF revealed its Davos 2021 Agenda, it confirmed the event of that year would be digital and herald the public unveiling of its Great Reset Initiative. Angel Gurría and Klaus Schwab have outlined how governments and businesses can shape a new labor market that supports workers to thrive in the future. This underlines how the covid-19 pandemic has accelerated systemic changes that were apparent before its inception.

The Covid-19 pandemic has been used as confirmation that no institution or individual alone can address the economic, environmental, social, and technological challenges of our complex, interdependent world. It is also being touted as a reason to support the “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” One hundred and ninety-three UN member states adopted this 15-year global framework and its ambitious set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in September 2015.

Keep reading

What the Australian excess deaths inquiry refused to publish

A committee investigating potential causes of Australia’s record excess deaths has refused to publish a comprehensive interdisciplinary submission by the Australian Medical Professionals Society (AMPS), of which I am a contributor.

Since 2021, Australia has experienced excess mortality at rates not seen outside of wartime. Not all of it is due to Covid. Therefore, the Australian Parliament established the world’s first excess deaths inquiry to get to the bottom of what’s causing so many more Australians to die than would normally be expected.

The AMPS submission includes :

Evidence of an uptick in all-cause mortality (ACM) with the introduction of Covid vaccines to a zero Covid community,
An estimate of the true contribution of Covid to excess deaths (29% at most),
An estimate of the true number of Australian cumulative excess deaths throughout 2021-2023 in the ballpark of 40,000 as opposed to the official Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) estimate of 29,601,
Discussion of how the ABS drastically reduced its excess deaths estimate overnight by changing its baseline modelling,
Evidence that Covid vaccine injuries and deaths are under-reported in official record keeping,
A review of the Australian Government’s unscientific response to the Covid pandemic and its detrimental impact on health outcomes, likely contributing to excess deaths,
And evidence that deaths in the vaccine arm of the Pfizer trial were concealed prior to the US Emergency Use Approval (EUA) data cut-off date, plus evidence of a 3.7-fold increase in cardiac events in vaccinated vs. placebo arm subjects.

After AMPS made its submission to the inquiry earlier this year, the organisation was invited to testify at a public hearing. This resulted in some rather explosive content going in the public record, including Dr Jeyanthi Kunadhasan asking the committee,

“If the clinical sponsor can hide deaths and autopsy results, ignore a sudden adult death and cardiac event signal in the clinical trial, with the regulator waving this along, what else can they hide?”

Keep reading

No Means No: The Child in Vermont Said No, So What Good is the Vermont Supreme Court Ruling?

During the height of the COVID19 pandemic debacle, suggestive reasoning in advocating for Federal vaccine mandates was used to nudge the unthinkable. This observation is directed at a 2022 article by Fraser and Neuss in the journal Chest. At a time when it was already known that the vaccines failed to prevent transmission, the authors nevertheless attempted to nudge subtly toward a nationalized approach to vaccine mandates without explicitly stating this position. Their approach is easily criticized for its passive-aggressive tone, lack of clarity, and failure to fully engage with counterarguments.

I will argue that via a detailed analysis of the principle of informed consent. I will argue that solicited, explicit, and voluntary agreement before administering medical procedures, particularly vaccinations, without pretext, coercion or presumption, is a basic human right. The Vermont Supreme Court’s recent ruling, interpreted by some as allowing schools to vaccinate children without explicit parental consent, is highlighted as an anomalous but significant threat to informed consent and parental rights. In particular, in addition to rights to choose (accept or decline) proferred medical options, this ruling potentially enables the state to enroll children in long-term vaccine safety studies without parental knowledge or consent, contravening ethical standards outlined in 45 CFR 46, the Common Rule, and other federal regulations designed to protect vulnerable populations.

Case examples, such as Murthy v. Missouri (2024) and Medical Professionals for Informed Consent v. Bassett (2023), are used to illustrate the importance of maintaining individual rights and informed consent in public health policies. These cases underscore the necessity for clear legislative frameworks and robust protections to prevent overreach and maintain public trust.

I call for more direct and transparent discussions on vaccine mandates, urging a balanced approach that respects individual autonomy and informed consent while addressing public health needs. The current trend of suggestive reasoning and ambiguous policy advocacy undermines ethical principles and fails to provide a solid foundation for public health strategies.

Keep reading

British Government Advisor Calls for Lockdowns To Tackle Unrest

An advisor to Britain’s Labour government has suggested using COVID-style lockdowns to tackle growing unrest, as protestors clash with police and counter-protestors across the UK after the murder of three young girls at a dance class.

John Woodcock, Baron Walney, a former MP and the UK government’s advisor on political violence and disruption, told Times Radio that the government should be prepared to implement lockdown measures to tackle unrest.

He said the British public will back measures they “feel are necessary to get this situation under control.”

“I think the government and new ministers will understand the British public will back them in whatever measures they feel is necessary to get this situation under control.

“Hopefully we can see this petering out now over the next few days and the extra effort which is being put on forces being able to have effect.

“But if that isn’t the case, I think the British public will back further action from ministers in this emergency to get things under control.

“Back in Covid, they were prepared to back measures that were needed in that situation and I think they would take a similar approach to keeping rioters off the streets now given the scale of damage that has been done to communities.”

Tensions across the UK remain extremely high after the murder of three schoolgirls by Axel Muganwa Rudakubana, the son of a Rwandan immigrant, at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport.

Keep reading

	Bigus Macus on The Business Of Homelessn…
	Connecticut Governor… on Connecticut Governor’s Signatu…
	Bigus Macus on NATO Propagandists Again Procl…
	freemattpodcast on This Is The Deep State On Para…
	Pentagon puts buildi… on The evidence for a planned cov…

Every person alive right now PAY ATTENTION

Section 71A

states that a member of the police may do anything reasonably necessary (including the use of force) to help a medical officer of health or any person authorised by the medical officer of health in the exercise or performance of powers or functions under sections 70 or 71.

section 70(1)(f)

section 70(1)(h)