Klaus Schwab wants to control humanity

 

Klaus Schwab shares who are the ‘stakeholders’ for the WEF (World Economic forum) in 2007
•Business
•Politics
•Governments
•Media
•NGO’s
•Trade Unions
•Experts & Scientists
•Religious Leaders
Klaus Schwab – World Economic Forum Headquarters Full [2007]
‘Founder and Executive Chairman, presents the World Economic Forum from its headquarters in Geneva. Klaus Schwab talks about the Annual Meeting in Davos and its different stakeholders.’
Klaus Schwab opens World Economic Forum’s virtual “Davos Agenda” by introducing China’s Xi Jinping.
“It is my distinct honor and great privilege to introduce his excellency…”

Gates Gives Over 319 million to media outlets; Catholic Church Holds Funeral with Nazi Salutes & Swastika Flag Draped Coffin and the most dangerous man in Americamd

According to new documents, it was revealed that Bill Gates, as well as his foundation, has given over $319 million to hundreds of Media Outlets, including CNN, NBC, NPR, PBS, and The Atlantic  Facts Matter (Jan. 12):

Documents Show Bill Gates Gave $319 Million to Media Outlets, Promotion of Global Agenda Video

Revealed: Documents Show Bill Gates Has Given $319 Million to Media Outlets

Sifting through over 30,000 grants in the company’s database, MintPress can reveal that the Gates Foundation has bankrolled hundreds of media outlets and ventures, to the tune of at least $319 million.


Vax propaganda on Sweden

Catholic Church Holds Funeral with Nazi Salutes & Swastika Flag Draped Coffin

St. Lucia in Rome has become the epicenter of a religious scandal. Footage from a funeral service showed the casket covered in a Nazi flag, while attendees did fascist salutes shouting, “Presente!”

The Catholic Church has tried to distance itself from the event publicized by the Italian online news portal Open. The Vicariate of Rome described the proceedings as ”ideological and violent exploitation … unacceptable for the church community of Rome,” adding that the Third Reich’s flag is “a horrendous symbol irreconcilable with Christianity.”

Local media identified the deceased as a 44-year-old woman, former member of the extreme right-wing, neo-fascist Forza Nuova group

The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers (2009)

Fauci Was Told Privately by Key Scientists That COVID-19 Natural Origin Was ‘Highly Unlikely,’ Newly Unredacted Emails Confirm

Fauci Was Told Privately by Key Scientists That COVID-19 Natural Origin Was ‘Highly Unlikely,’ Newly Unredacted Emails Confirm

“I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature”
January 11, 2022 Updated: January 11, 2022

 

News Analysis

Top U.S. health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, scrambled in early 2020 to respond to public reporting of a potential connection between COVID-19 and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

This response, which included a secret Feb. 1, 2020, teleconference, was loosely detailed in previously released and heavily redacted emails. Those emails strongly suggested that Fauci and a small group of top scientists sought to promote the natural origin theory, despite having evidence and internal expert opinions that pointed to the possibility of a leak from the Wuhan lab.

Unredacted versions of some of the emails made public by lawmakers on Jan. 11 further confirm this.

The newly unredacted emails, released by House Oversight Committee Republicans, confirm and illustrate a pattern of lies and coverup. From the emails, it appears the effort was spearheaded by Fauci himself but also involved his boss, recently retired National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Francis Collins, as well as Jeremy Farrar, the head of the British Wellcome Trust.

It was previously revealed that at least two scientists, both of whom had received funding from the NIH, had told Fauci during the teleconference that they were 60 to 80 percent sure that COVID had come out of a lab.

The most significant new revelations in the unredacted emails come from two of these scientists, Robert Garry and Mike Farzan, who both noted the difficulties presented by the presence of a furin cleavage site in the COVID-19 virus—a feature that would later be cited as the defining characteristic of the virus.

‘Bothered by the Furin Site’

Farzan, an immunologist who in 2005 discovered the receptor of the original severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) virus, sent his post-teleconference notes to Farrar, who then shared them with Collins, Fauci, and Lawrence Tabak—top officials at the NIH. In those notes, Farzan wrote that he was “bothered by the furin site” and had difficulty explaining it “as an event outside the lab.” Farzan noted that it was theoretically possible the virus’s furin cleavage site could have arisen in nature but that it was “highly unlikely.”

The furin cleavage site is the defining feature that gives COVID-19 the ability to easily infect humans and has long been puzzled over by scientists, since no such site has ever been observed in naturally occurring SARS-related coronaviruses.

Farzan, like scientist Kristian Andersen, who has received funding from Fauci’s NIAID, works at the Scripps laboratory. As was already known from previously released emails, Andersen had privately told Fauci on Jan. 31, 2020 that the virus looked engineered. Andersen would later spearhead Fauci’s efforts to promote a natural origin narrative.

Epoch Times Photo
Then-NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins listens during a Senate Appropriations Labor, Health and Human Services Subcommittee hearing looking into the budget estimates for National Institute of Health (NIH) and state of medical research on Capitol Hill in Washington on May 26, 2021. (Sarah Silbiger-Pool/Getty Images)

Farzan told the senior members of Fauci’s teleconference group that “a likely explanation could be something as simple as passage SARS-live CoVs in tissue culture on human cell lines” for an “extended period of time,” which could lead to the accidental creation of “a virus that would be primed for rapid transmission between humans.” This mutated virus would likely have specific “adaptation to human ACE2 receptor via repeated passage.”

recent study in the science journal Nature noted that the COVID-19 virus was uniquely adapted to infect humans, as it “exhibited the highest binding to human (h)ACE2 of all the species tested.”

In layman’s terms, Farzan concluded that the pandemic likely originated from a lab in which live coronaviruses were passed through human-like tissue over and over, accelerating virus mutations with the end result being that one of the mutated viruses may have leaked from the lab. Farzan placed the likelihood of a leak from a Wuhan lab at 60 to 70 percent likely.

The emails indicate that Farzan was cognizant that the Wuhan lab conducted these types of dangerous experiments in Level 2 labs, which have a very low biosecurity standard. This fact was later admitted by the Wuhan lab’s director, Shi Zhengli, in July 2020. Notably, since the start of the pandemic, Farzan has received grants totaling almost $20 million from Collins’s NIH and Fauci’s NIAID.

‘Can’t Figure Out How This Gets Accomplished in Nature’

Further revelations in the newly unredacted emails came from Garry, another scientist funded by Fauci’s NIAID, who told the senior members of the teleconference group in no uncertain terms that “I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus” to COVID-19.

Garry cited the remarkable sequences that would have to occur naturally, telling the group that “I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. Do the alignment of the spikes at the amino acid level – it’s stunning.” He noted that a lab-created virus would readily explain the data he was seeing, telling Fauci’s group that “Of course, in the lab, it would be easy to generate the perfect 12 base insert that you wanted.”

Epoch Times Photo
The P4 laboratory on the campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on May 13, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

Along the same lines of what Farzan had said, Garry was telling Fauci’s group that it was extremely unlikely that the furin cleavage site could have evolved naturally, whereas creating it in a lab was easy.

The primary difference between Farzan’s and Garry’s view lies in whether the lab created the furin cleavage site through serial passage in human-like tissue or through direct insertion of the site. In either case, both scientists thought it was likely that the virus came out of the Wuhan lab rather than having originated in nature.

Scientist’s Private Views Conflicted With Public Statements

Garry’s privately stated view is even more remarkable because only a day earlier, on Feb. 1, 2020, Garry had helped to complete the first draft of the Proximal Origin paper that promoted the idea that the virus had originated in nature. That paper became the media’s and the public health establishment’s go-to evidence for a natural origin for the COVID virus.

It was published online on Feb. 16, 2020, and firmly excluded the possibility of a lab leak.

One of Garry’s co-authors for the Proximal Origin paper, Andrew Rambaut, also is cited in the newly redacted emails. In congruence with the other two scientists, Rambaut told Fauci’s teleconference group that he also was bothered by the unusual furin cleavage site. But unlike Garry or Farzan, he speculated that the virus might have arisen in another animal, a so-called intermediate host.

Epoch Times Photo
Peter Daszak, right, the president of the EcoHealth Alliance, is seen in Wuhan, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

Two years later, no such host has been identified. In the case of the original SARS virus as well as the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) virus, the intermediate host was found within a few months. Rambaut also recognized immediately the peculiar fact that the furin cleavage site “insertion has resulted in an extremely fit virus in humans—we can also deduce that it is not optimal for transmission in bat species.”

Rambaut lamented the lack of data being shared by Wuhan scientists and concluded that only the Wuhan Institute of Virology knew what had happened.

Fauci’s Group Misleads National Academy of Sciences

The day after these three scientists shared their views with the senior members of the group, on Feb. 3, 2020, Fauci attended a meeting at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). That meeting had been urgently convened at the behest of White House Director of Science and Technology Kelvin Droegmeier, who wrote that he was seeking answers about the origins of COVID-19.

Epoch Times Photo
Dr. Anthony Fauci, White House chief medical advisor and director of the NIAID, shows a screengrab of a campaign website for Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) while answering questions at a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on Jan. 11, 2022. (Greg Nash-Pool/Getty Images)

The meeting, which included a presentation by Fauci, was also attended by Peter Daszak–the person through whom Fauci had funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology–and Kristian Andersen. Fauci and his group promoted the natural origin theory to the Academy, despite having just been told on the teleconference and in subsequent emails that a lab leak provided the most likely explanation for the virus.

While they were pushing their natural origin narrative to NASEM, and by extension to the White House, Fauci and his group made no mention of their private discussions—which were taking place at the same time—that the virus most likely originated in a Wuhan lab.

NIH Hiding Behind Unjustifiable Redactions

The new emails fill some of the gaps left by previous redactions, but still only cover a small portion of the many emails that remain redacted. A close examination of the newly unredacted emails reveals that none of the usual justifications for redactions, such as private information about people or threats to sources and methods, apply. Instead, it appears that all of the redactions were made solely on the basis of shielding the NIH from scrutiny over its coverup of the virus’s origins.

These efforts at obfuscation tie in with the fact that we only found out about these new emails after a months-long battle between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the parent organization of Fauci’s NIH and NIAID, and House Republicans.

Epoch Times Photo
The Capitol building in Washington in a file photo. (Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times)

In order to obtain this information, House Republicans were forced to avail themselves of a rarely used law from 1928, the so-called Seven Member Rule. Under this law, an executive agency, such as HHS, is required to provide requested information when requested by seven members of the House Committee on Government Operations (now called the Committee on Oversight and Reform).

It isn’t known why Republicans haven’t used this law earlier or with greater frequency.

Eventually, HHS allowed the House Republicans’ congressional staffers to view the unredacted emails in person. The staffers then transcribed what they saw, which is how we came to know about these new revelations.

NIH Silences Dissenting Views

These new emails are crucial in that they confirm that by Feb. 2, 2020, Fauci’s teleconference group had identified evidence pointing to a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These scientists knew that the virus’s unique furin cleavage site was very likely the result of experiments conducted at the Wuhan lab. Notably, they also knew that these experiments were being conducted in minimum biosecurity Level 2 labs.

These facts presented a major problem for the heads of the NIH, who had funded the experiments.

Dr. Martin Kulldorff
Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital, in Connecticut on Aug. 7, 2021. (York Du/The Epoch Times)

As the new emails confirm, their response was to cover up the lab leak evidence and push a natural origin narrative.

Then-NIH Director Collins, who would later call for the public “takedown” of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, asked his group for a “swift convening of experts” in order to prevent the “voices of conspiracy” from doing “great potential harm to science and international harmony…” through public discussion of a lab leak theory.

Collins’s view was mirrored by another participant in Fauci’s teleconference, Dutch virologist Ron Fouchier, who told the group that “Further debate about such accusations would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular.”

Jeff Carlson

Jeff Carlson co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He is a CFA-registered Charterholder and worked for 20 years as an analyst and portfolio manager in the high-yield bond market. He also runs the website TheMarketsWork.com and can be followed on Twitter @themarketswork.

Hans Mahncke

Hans Mahncke co-hosts the show Truth Over News on Epoch TV. He holds LL.B., LL.M. and Ph.D. degrees in law. He is the author of numerous law books and his research has been published in a range of international journals. Hans can be followed on Twitter @hansmahncke

 

‘Think Twice Before You Vaccinate Your Kids,’ Dr. Robert Malone Warns Parents on COVID-19 Shots

‘Think Twice Before You Vaccinate Your Kids,’ Dr. Robert Malone Warns Parents on COVID-19 Shots

By Mimi Nguyen Ly and Jan Jekielek
January 9, 2022 Updated: January 10, 2022

Dr. Robert Malone, a virologist and immunologist who has contributed significantly to the technology of mRNA vaccines, issued a strong caution for those who seek to have their children vaccinated against COVID-19.

“Think twice before you vaccinate your kids. Because if something bad happens, you can’t go back and say, ‘whoops, I want a do-over,’” Malone told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program in an interview, Part 1 of which premiered on Sunday.

He also said, “It is clear that parents should think twice about vaccinating their child,” adding that serious adverse events can occur and can be “so severe that it puts your child in the hospital.”

 

Malone noted that with regard to myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart, “there’s a good chance that if your child takes the vaccine, they won’t be damaged, they won’t show clinical symptoms—[but] they may have subclinical damage.”

“But the question is, do you want to take that chance with your child? Because if you draw the short straw and your child was damaged, most of these things, if not all of them, are irreversible. There is no way to fix it,” he said. “And I get these emails all the time: ‘Doctor, doctor, what can we do? This has happened.’ And that once it’s happened, there’s … you can’t go back you can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.”

He pointed to information compiled on his website, which includes a list of peer-reviewed studies related to COVID-19 vaccine adverse events in children, the main one being myocarditis. The website also includes a collection of adverse events reports as well as death reports in the pediatric community, submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

“They’re there as links to the VAERS database, and if you click on them, you can see the actual VAERS report that was filed by a physician saying this is what happened,” Malone said. “And you can make your own decision about whether or not you think that that’s vaccine-related. So all of those data are there.”

Epoch Times Photo
A 5-year-old girl looks at her arm after getting a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in New York City on Nov. 8, 2021. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

One page on Malone’s website points to a paper published in the Toxicology Reports journal in which authors noted, using data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), that normalized data on COVID-19 deaths per capita are “negligible in children,” while deaths after COVID-19 vaccination are “small, but not negligible, in children.”

“For children the chances of death from COVID-19 are negligible, but the chances of serious damage over their lifetime from the toxic inoculations are not negligible,” the authors wrote in the paper, titled “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?”

 

Malone’s latest warning comes after he issued a prepared statement in mid-December 2021 aimed at parents, in which he said that with regard to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, “a viral gene will be injected into your children’s cells” that “forces your child’s body to make toxic spike proteins.”

“These proteins often cause permanent damage in children’s critical organs, including their brain and nervous system, their heart and blood vessels, including blood clots, their reproductive system, and this vaccine can trigger fundamental changes to their immune system.”

Malone is strongly opposed to COVID-19 vaccine mandates for children. He is the chief science officer and regulatory officer for The Unity Project, a movement seeking to resist COVID-19 vaccine mandates for K–12 children.

“The Unity Project’s position is one based on the logic of informed consent versus forced vaccination—that mandates should not happen,” Malone told EpochTV. “The state should not be forcing itself into the family. The decisions belong at the level of parents not at the level of the state or the school board. School boards and schools and teachers have no right to understand and seek out medical information about their students‚ that’s illegal. And yet, it’s being done all the time. And students are being bullied if they haven’t taken vaccine.”

Malone is also the president of the International Alliance of Physicians and Medical Scientists—a group of 16,000 professionals who have signed a declaration that says healthy children “shall not be subject to forced vaccination.”

“Mandates are illegal based on the Nuremberg Code, Helsinki Accord, the Belmont Report,” Malone said. “These continued to be unlicensed products, they’re only available through emergency use authorization … These are not licensed products, and they’re being forced on your children, and they have risks. And the media—through its censorship—and Big Tech, is blocking your ability to even learn what those risks are so you can make an informed decision for your children yourself. That is a huge crime in my mind.”

Epoch Times Photo
Municipal workers hold placards and shout slogans as they march across Brooklyn Bridge during a protest against the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, in New York on Oct. 25, 2021. (Ed Jones/AFP via Getty Images)

Malone said that people can join a “Defeat the Mandates” rally and march in Washington, D.C., scheduled for Jan. 23, to unite against mandatory vaccinations.

Two mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are currently available in the United States under emergency use authorization (EUA)—one from Pfizer-BioNTech and the other from Moderna.

The only COVID-19 vaccine that has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for people 16 and older is Pfizer and BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine, which is marketed as Comirnaty. Doses are to be produced in the future, according to FDA documents.

A separate, existing supply of COVID-19 vaccines under Pfizer-BioNTech continue to be available under an updated EUA for those over 16. The FDA has also granted an EUA for Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine for those aged 12–15 in May 2021, and for children aged 5–11 in October 2021.

California in October 2021 became the first state to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for children, followed by Louisiana in December 2021. Both states said they will only enforce the mandate if the FDA fully authorizes the vaccines for children.

 

The Pfizer vaccine remains the only jab against COVID-19 available for people aged under 18 in the United States. The FDA in October 2021 delayed a decision on whether to grant Moderna an EUA for its COVID-19 vaccine for those aged 12 to 17, saying it needs more time to further review the vaccine’s risk for myocarditis in this population.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Pfizer-BioNTech and the FDA for comment.

Editor’s note: This article has been adjusted to clarify that the FDA has only approved future COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech—marketed as Comirnaty.

Gene Therapy is happening, alternating our DNA with the Jab

Bayer in Gene Therapy Collaboration With Mammoth Biosciences

By Reuters
January 10, 2022 Updated: January 10, 2022

FRANKFURT—Bayer on Monday struck a partnership deal with Mammoth Biosciences to develop therapeutic tools based on CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing as the German drug maker seeks to widen its cell and gene therapy development efforts.

Unlisted U.S. biotech firm Mammoth will initially receive $40 million from Bayer plus potential milestone payments of more than $1 billion contingent on scientific and commercial achievements.

The initial focus of the collaboration will be liver-based diseases, the companies said in a joint statement on Monday.

Mammoth, headquartered in the San Francisco Bay area, was co-founded by Nobel laureate Jennifer Doudna. She shared the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Emmanuelle Charpentier for developing the CRISPR/CAS9 gene editing tool.

Among previous steps to build a cell and gene therapy business, Bayer acquired BlueRock Therapeutics and Asklepios Biopharmaceutical in 2019 and 2020, respectively.

In late 2020, it agreed on an alliance on anti-tumour immune cell therapies with Atara Biotherapeutics.

By Ludwig Burger and Patricia Weiss



 

 

Self Over Situation

As we realize the  world was and is not as it seems and our  physical and metaphysical  worlds  are inseparable, there is this age our yearning of who are we.   More than ever it is important to look within ourselves and discover are true selves. This can only be accomplished by YOU.  You are more powerful than you know.

 

Sadhvi Bhagawati Saraswatiji and Bruce H. Lipton, PhD speak on the power of the mind, thoughts and beliefs to impact and change every aspect of our situation- the Self over Situation. Bruce and Sadhvi ji discusses how to live lives of joy, peace and health-A bridge of science and spirituality.

Unprecedented: Deaths in Indiana for ages 18-64 are up 40%

Unprecedented: Deaths in Indiana for ages 18-64 are up 40%

(The Center Square) – The head of Indianapolis-based insurance company OneAmerica said the death rate is up a stunning 40% from pre-pandemic levels among working-age people.

“We are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business – not just at OneAmerica,” the company’s CEO Scott Davison said during an online news conference this week. “The data is consistent across every player in that business.”

Vaccines Kill

OneAmerica is a $100 billion insurance company that has had its headquarters in Indianapolis since 1877. The company has approximately 2,400 employees and sells life insurance, including group life insurance to employers in the state.

Davison said the increase in deaths represents “huge, huge numbers,” and that’s it’s not elderly people who are dying, but “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica.

“And what we saw just in third quarter, we’re seeing it continue into fourth quarter, is that death rates are up 40% over what they were pre-pandemic,” he said.

“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.”

Davison was one of several business leaders who spoke during the virtual news conference on Dec. 30 that was organized by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.

Most of the claims for deaths being filed are not classified as COVID-19 deaths, Davison said.

“What the data is showing to us is that the deaths that are being reported as COVID deaths greatly understate the actual death losses among working-age people from the pandemic. It may not all be COVID on their death certificate, but deaths are up just huge, huge numbers.”

He said at the same time, the company is seeing an “uptick” in disability claims, saying at first it was short-term disability claims, and now the increase is in long-term disability claims.

“For OneAmerica, we expect the costs of this are going to be well over $100 million, and this is our smallest business. So it’s having a huge impact on that,” he said.

He said the costs will be passed on to employers purchasing group life insurance policies, who will have to pay higher premiums.

The CDC weekly death counts, which reflect the information on death certificates and so have a lag of up to eight weeks or longer, show that for the week ending Nov. 6, there were far fewer deaths from COVID-19 in Indiana compared to a year ago – 195 verses 336 – but more deaths from other causes – 1,350 versus 1,319.

These deaths were for people of all ages, however, while the information referenced by Davison was for working-age people who are employees of businesses with group life insurance policies.

At the same news conference where Davison spoke, Brian Tabor, the president of the Indiana Hospital Association, said that hospitals across the state are being flooded with patients “with many different conditions,” saying “unfortunately, the average Hoosiers’ health has declined during the pandemic.”

In a follow-up call, he said he did not have a breakdown showing why so many people in the state are being hospitalized – for what conditions or ailments. But he said the extraordinarily high death rate quoted by Davison matched what hospitals in the state are seeing.

“What it confirmed for me is it bore out what we’re seeing on the front end,…” he said.

The number of hospitalizations in the state is now higher than before the COVID-19 vaccine was introduced a year ago, and in fact is higher than it’s been in the past five years, Dr. Lindsay Weaver, Indiana’s chief medical officer, said at a news conference with Gov. Eric Holcomb on Wednesday.

Just 8.9% of ICU beds are available at hospitals in the state, a low for the year, and lower than at any time during the pandemic. But the majority of ICU beds are not taken up by COVID-19 patients – just 37% are, while 54% of the ICU beds are being occupied by people with other illnesses or conditions.

The state’s online dashboard shows that the moving average of daily deaths from COVID-19 is less than half of what it was a year ago. At the pandemic’s peak a year ago, 125 people died on one day – on Dec. 29, 2020. In the last three months, the highest number of deaths in one day was 58, on Dec. 13.

Unprecedented: Deaths in Indiana for ages 18-64 are up 40%


1.5.21: W@rs, P@ndemics, Coverups as WE the PEOPLE work TOGETHER and WAKE UP! INDICTMENTS! Pray!

Bill Gates Ruthless Vaccine Billionaire Documentary; The Uncomfortable Truth and The Cabal

 

 

“They Are Not Being Honest” | The Uncomfortable Truth

Bill Gates Ruthless Vaccine Billionaire Documentary


THE SEQUEL TO THE FALL OF THE CABAL – PART 20

Part 3 of multiple episodes about the biggest medical scam of all times.
About Face Masks, Social Distancing, and much more…

 

Theory of Stupidity: Addictive ‘Brain Hijacking’ Methods of Social Media Platforms Harmful to Users

Theory of Stupidity 

Dietrich Bonhoeffer argued that stupid people are more dangerous than evil ones. This is because while we can protest against or fight evil people, against stupid ones we are defenseless — reasons fall on death ears. Bonhoeffer’s famous text, which we slightly edited for this video, serves any free society as a warning of what can happen when certain people gain too much power.

 Dr. Bruce Lipton explains  we have been programmed since birth and it has continued through Operation Mockingbird.  Our education, media, political and religious systems play an integral part of who we have become.  We have been guided daily through a world wide messaging system and are now learning they are using addictive “Brain Hijacking” to control us.

Addictive ‘Brain Hijacking’ Methods of Social Media Platforms Harmful to Users, Especially Children: Insider

December 21, 2021 Updated: December 21, 2021

Addictive “brain hijacking” methods used by social media giants to keep users on their platforms have harmful effects, particularly on children, according to industry insider Rex Lee, who says the companies may be violating child protection laws and consumer protection laws by employing such techniques. See the source image

Lee, who has over 35 years of experience in the tech and telecom industry, recently testified before Congress, speaking to members about some of the deceptive practices used by social media networks—in particular, “brain hijacking.”

“The first time I’d ever heard of brain hijacking, I thought it was something from a science fiction movie,” he recently told EpochTV’s Crossroads program.

He said that social media apps, including those developed by Google, Meta, and Bytedance, are intentionally developed to be addictive.

Part of what makes these platforms addictive is associated with brain hijacking technologies, which involve suggestive and manipulative advertising, he explained.

Lee, who works in the tech industry for an enterprise app and platform developer, said that he was shocked after coming across an admission in a 2017 Axios interview by Sean Parker, who served as the first president of Facebook.

In the interview, Parker said that Facebook was intentionally developed using addictive technologies associated with something he described as a “social validation feedback loop.”

“That in itself is what is at the heart of brain hijacking,” Lee said. “And what that does is that reassures the end user that what they’re posting on the platform is being accepted by a lot of people. In other words, a social validation feedback loop would be associated with a thumbs up, or confetti or emojis, and that sort of thing after they do a post.”

Lee said these are addictive qualities that developers put into their app and platform designs, which ultimately end up harming the user.

“Sean Parker actually admitted this during the Axios interview when he said, ‘God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains,’” Lee said. “But it’s not only the brains of children, it’s the brains of the end user, whether it’s an adult, teen, child, or business and user.See the source image

“This is why people are checking their smartphones up to 150 times a day.”

Lee added that Parker expressly told Axios that the feedback loop was “exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting vulnerability in human psychology.”

Lee has been providing to congressional committees, as well as senators and House members, insider information on how these platforms are developed.

The cybersecurity and privacy adviser also highlighted the harmful effects these social media platforms have on young teenagers, describing the platforms as “no different than tobacco companies making bubblegum-flavored cigarettes to sell to children.”

“These social validation feedback loops are what’s at heart, and why young teen girls as well as boys who utilize this technology can be harmed by it—they get addicted to it, they never can find fulfillment in it,” Lee said.

“And then, they end up depressed and they end up always constantly having to look for that validation, not only from the technology, but from the other end users on the platform.”

“This also is dangerous because it contributes to cyber bullying,” said Lee, explaining that cyberbullies themselves may become addicted to bullying others online.

“They [cyberbullies] get a few thumbs up from that post where they’re bullying somebody and then more thumbs up comes. And then that person, the bully, becomes addicted to actually  harming people, as well as the recipient starts getting harmed,” he explained. “And we all know what that leads to anxiety, self harm, as well as suicides. And all of those are up among teen and young adult adult users, especially young girls who utilize the platform.”

“Kids are being exploited,” he alleged, noting that social media giants may be violating a child online protection law—the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) enacted in 1998.

“It’s actually illegal for a child under 13 to use any type of technology that’s supported by predatory apps that are developed to exploit the user for financial gain through methods such as data mining and surveillance,” Lee said of the law.Mass Media -Media is a KEY LINKAGE INSTITUTION between the people and polic...

Lee said he analyzed the legal language on a Samsung Galaxy Note smartphone that was pre-installed with over 175 apps created or developed by 18 companies, including Chinese tech company Baidu. 

He explained that what’s often hidden from the user within the devices themselves is “the most important part of your terms of use.”

This includes the application permission statements and application product warnings “which describe in great detail how much surveillance and data mining that the tech companies can conduct on you.” 

“But they don’t want that online. They hide that within the devices, and some of those application permission statements actually contain product warnings,” Lee said.

“So again, another cigarette analogy would be, it would be like the warning for cigarettes being printed on the inside of the package,” he explained. “So that after you consume the product, you understand then that it commit that it can cause cancer, it’s the same thing.”

He added, “They’re hiding the product warnings within the application permission statements, which can only be accessed from within the device and not online.”

Lee said the FTC should be taking action to investigate these companies for related harm reported by their consumers, and enforce existing customer laws, particularly since former senior executives, such as Parker, have admitted that they developed these technologies to be addictive, “even at the expense of the end user safety.”

“We not only had these platforms weaponized against the end user to exploit them for financial gain through harmful technology, such as addictive apps, but now they’re using them to oppress people and spread misinformation, censorship, crush freedom of the press, and in other things,” Lee added. “It’s unbelievable.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Meta, ByteDance, and Google for comment.

Isabel van Brugen

Isabel van Brugen is an award-winning journalist and currently a news reporter at The Epoch Times. She holds a master’s in newspaper journalism from City, University of London.


 

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: