Whom Do You Trust?

Often today we face a tough situation. Issues come up that involve technical subjects. Is the world threatened by “global warming” or is this a hoax? Are the so-called Covid-vaccines good for you or bad for you?  Different “experts” weigh in on different sides. How do we decide which ones to believe?

One of the most important ways to answer this question is to look at the hidden agenda of the people who push a particular program. For example, the “experts” who preach global warming want to dismantle our economy, which is based on fossil fuels. They say we have to do this because if we don’t, the world will heat up and this will have bad effects. What they don’t tell you is that they want to get rid of people. They are radical environmentalists, who think that the world is “over-populated.” In some cases, they want to get rid of human beings completely.

Brandon Smith has exposed what they have in store for us: “In the late 1960’s into the 1970’s there was a resurgence of population control rhetoric coming out of globalist circles. Under the supervision of the UN and some related scientific groups, the Club Of Rome was formed. A prominent part of the Club of Rome’s agenda was population reduction. In 1972 the group of ‘scientists’ under the UN’s direction published a paper called ‘The Limits Of Growth’, which called for greatly reduced human population in the name of ‘saving the environment’. This effort was directly linked to another agenda – the institution of a global government that could handle and enforce population controls on a wide scale.

The elites had found a new scientific front for their eugenics obsession: Climate science. In the early 1990’s the Club Of Rome published a book called ‘The First Global Revolution’. In it they state:

‘In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes. and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.’

The statement comes from Chapter 5 – The Vacuum, which covers their position on the need for global government. The quote is relatively clear; a common enemy must be conjured in order to trick humanity into uniting under a single banner, and the elites see environmental catastrophe, caused by mankind itself, as the best possible motivator. It also outlines the perfect rationale for population control – Mankind is the enemy, therefore, mankind as a species must be kept under strict supervision and his proliferation must be restricted.

The Club of Rome and the UN agenda have always been intimately connected. In the 1990’s at the same time ‘The First Global Revolution’ was being published, UN assistant secretary general Robert Muller was publishing his manifesto which is now collected on a website called ‘Good Morning World’. Muller argues that global governance must be achieved using the idea of ‘protecting the Earth’ and environmentalism as the key components. Through fear of environmental Apocalypse, the public could be convinced to accept global government as a necessary nanny state to keep society from destroying itself.

In a paper titled ‘Proper Earth Government: A Framework And Ways To Create It’ Robert Muller outlines how climate change could be used to convince the masses of the need for global government. Integral to his plan were the introduction of a new ‘global religion’, and population controls.

It should come as no surprise that the UN established the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) and that this panel and its offshoots are now at the forefront of the argument for population reduction. As we close in on the end date for the UN’s Agenda 2030, which calls for a radical shift of human production from oil and other large scale energy sources into small scale ‘renewable energies’, there is only 10 years left for the globalists to achieve their goals if they hope to meet their announced deadline. This would require a violent change in human society and most of all industrialized nations.

The human population would have to be reduced dramatically in order to survive on the meager energy output of renewables alone. A disaster of epic proportions would have to take place soon so that the globalists could then spend the next decade using the resulting fear to convince the surviving population that global governance is needed. Without aggressive crisis and change most people would never go along with the UN’s agenda, out of simple desire for self preservation. Even many leftists, once exposed to the true nature of carbon controls and population reduction, might have second thoughts when they realize they could be affected.

The key to understanding people who cheer for population control or population reduction is that these people always assume that THEY will be the survivors and inheritors of the Earth after the culling.  They never assume that they will be the one’s put on the chopping block.

In 2019, the population agenda is being ramped into high gear and the public is being carefully conditioned over time to accept the idea that man-made climate change is real and population is the source of the problem.  Recently, a group of scientists partially funded by something called the;’Worthy Garden Club’ claimed 11,000 signatures on a statement for the need for population reduction in the name of saving the Earth from global warming.

The statement cites all the same long debunked IPCC and UN climate change propaganda as the reasons why the Earth is on the verge of annihilation. The fact of the matter is, climate scientists have been consistently caught red handed manipulating their own data to show the intended outcome of global warming. They have even been caught trying to adjust their own data from 20 years ago in order to match it more closely to the rigged data they publish today.

The Worthy Garden Club is a strangely sterile group and there doesn’t seem to be any list of their patrons and who funds them. However, the mainstream media was quick to pick up on the statement from the ‘11,000 scientists’ and tie it to statements made by the UN’s IPCC.

Population control has also been brought up consistently as an issue in the 2020 Presidential Election race. Bernie Sanders argued for birth control measures in poor countries. Elizabeth Warren promoted abortion by saying it was as safe as ‘getting your tonsils removed’. She has consistently promoted the carbon control agenda of the UN and was, interestingly, a member of the University Of Texas Population research Center in the 1980s. And, Green New Deal politicians are throwing their support behind the statements from the Worthy Garden Club on population reduction.

This is the first time I have seen the argument for population reduction used so blatantly and widespread in the mainstream media, and it suggests to me that a trend is forming. For years I have warned my readers that they will know when the globalists are about to pull the plug on the current system when they start talking about their criminality openly. When they admit to their agenda in a free way, this means they are close to a global reset and do not care anymore who knows about it. The openness of the plan to cut world population is becoming apparent.

Strangely, there has been little mention of the fact that the world population, in the west most of all, is actually in decline. Far from exploding beyond the Earth’s capacity, people are barely having enough children to keep the current population stable. It would appear that the globalist agenda is already in motion. Through engineered economic disintegration, the population is being slowly reduced.  However, this slow decline may not be enough to satisfy the

How many people would the globalists like to kill off to achieve their utopian aspirations?  Well, globalist Ted Turner in a moment of honesty said when confronted by We Are Change that the population should be reduced to 2 billion down from 7 billion.

The primary issue here beyond the moral horror show of eugenics is, who gets cut? And furthermore, who gets to decide who gets cut? Who gets to decide if you can have children or not? Who gets to decide if you are allowed to access resources to produce and make a living or not? Who gets to decide if the global economy will sustain the population or not? Who pulls the trigger on the culling of the population?

As history has shown us, it is always the elites that end up in the position of deciding the fates of millions or billions. From the Rockefeller Foundation sterilization programs in the US in the early 1900’s to the UN today, the globalists, a veritable death cult, are desperate to conjure a rationalization as to why they should be the ones to allow or deny human life based on lies like man-made climate change.  They don’t believe in the climate change threat, THEY were the people that fabricated it.  So, what is the core reason behind all of this?

A reduced population completely dependent on limited energy sources might be easier to dominate.  But I have another theory – they are psychopaths looking for a socially justifiable way to kill as many people as possible. Why? because they enjoy it.”

Another sure-fire way to pick the right “experts” is to ask. Do the people who want to interfere with our freedom have a personal stake in what they want us to do? For the most infamous of the “vaccine” advocates, the notorious “Dr.” Fauci, the answer is a clear “yes.” As the great Tom DiLorenzo says, “I just got my copy of RFK Jr.’s The Real Anthony Fauci.  Flipping through the first couple of chapters, one thing really stood out — that Fauci dispenses some $7 billion in research grants to ‘public health’ researchers all over the world.  He has held that position for 30 years.  This means that for thirty years there has been one-man monopoly control over virtually all public health-related ‘peer review.’  This proves in spades what a clownish, lying, incompetent, corrupt stooge Fauci is when he responds to criticism with statements like ‘everyone I know agrees with me on this.’  Yeah, everyone who works for him and is paid by him, or wishes to work for him and be paid by him (with taxpayers’ money).  This means that “public health” peer review is a joke and a fraud.  No other profession in the world would be taken seriously if one single government bureaucrat was effectively in charge of all the professional publications in the entire field.

And what Fauci doesn’t control through government funding, other government bureaucrats at NIH and elsewhere do.  They are Fauci wannabes in this corrupt, stinking, fraudulent field of ‘public’ health.  No wonder Dr. Scott Atlas, a real doctor and medical researcher, was so shocked at the immense incompetence he was exposed to while serving on President Trump’s COVID task force and sitting through meetings with dopey Fauci and that goofy scarf woman.  He told Tucker Carlson that the two of them seemed 100% detached from and unaware of the relevant science and did nothing but repeat leftist lockdown/masking/you-must-obey/jab-every-child/shut-down-all-the-schools-and-churches talking points without even discussing any scientific basis for any of it.”

One final bit of advice. If the expert shares our values, we have good reason to think that what he says is in our interest. Let’s take the best example. The great Dr. Ron Paul is the foremost champion of freedom on the political scene today. He is a medical doctor, so we can trust his advice about Covid-“vaccines.” Here is what he says:” If the vaccine provided a high level of immunity from the virus that did not wane over time, encouraging people to take the shot – which uses experimental technology – might make some sense, though mandating it would still be immoral and illegal.

But Biden’s own senior health officials such as CDC Director Wallensky have been telling us since August that the shot does not prevent against infection from the virus and does not prevent transmission of the virus. So it is not a ‘vaccine’ by any definition of the term. That’s why the CDC itself in September changed its official definition of the term ‘vaccine’ to exclude the term ‘immunity.’ The deception is so transparent.

They say you must take the shot because it may prevent serious illness from the virus. But we know there are plenty of other things that may prevent serious illness from the virus. Media personality Joe Rogan was widely ridiculed for using ivermectin and other drugs and procedures to treat his bout of Covid-19. But it seems to have worked. Likewise, Green Bay Packers legendary quarterback Aaron Rodgers successfully treated his Covid with ivermectin and other procedures. Even though he now has natural immunity to the virus, he has been attacked by the mainstream media for not following Fauci’s demands. Success means nothing. Only obedience matters.

A new study of the effectiveness of the Covid shots is not good news for the Biden Administration. Published November 4th in the scientific journal Nature, researchers followed 800,000 US veterans for six months after receiving the shot. Between March and November, Moderna effectiveness fell from 85 percent to 58 percent – just a little better than a coin flip. The Pfizer/BioNTech two-dose fell in effectiveness from 87 percent to 45 percent, and the Johnson & Johnson fell in effectiveness from 86 percent to 13 percent!

As the Washington Times wrote about the important new Nature study, “Factor in natural immunity and a case could be made these vaccines are nearly worthless.”

Let’s do everything we can to support the real experts, like Dr. Ron Paul, and to out the phonies.