WHO ARE THE DIRECTORS OF THE SHOW?

The world seems be lost in a never ending state of chaos and confusion. Division is becoming the end goal. Usually that nonsense calms down after presidential elections but it hasn’t. It has been snowballing since Trump ran for office! I knew politicians weren’t going to agree with him necessarily but for Pete’s sake! ENOUGH is enough.

The ongoing demand for control has to stem from something much deeper or someone that is directing the show from behind the red velvet curtain. Things are so out of hand, that they have forgotten who they are. FREE PEOPLE! FREE AMERICANS! FREEDOM US WHAT THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON! WE ARE NOT A SOCIALIST COUNTY? So what is going on?

The Great Reset

Let’s look at The Great Reset that we all keep hearing about. Here’s a little bit of information on this new agenda that is not actually very new at all come to find out.

The Great Reset is the name of the 50th annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF), held in June 2020. It brought together high-profile business and political leaders, convened by Charles, Prince of Wales and the WEF, with the theme of rebuilding society and the economy following the COVID-19 pandemic.

WEF chief executive officer Klaus Schwab described three core components of the Great Reset:

International Monetary Fund director Kristalina Georgieva listed three key aspects of the sustainable response: green growth, smarter growth, and fairer growth.

1. the first involves creating conditions for a “stakeholder economy”;

2. the second component includes building in a more “resilient, equitable, and sustainable” way—based on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics which would incorporate more green public infrastructure projects;

3. the third component is to “harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution” for public good. In her keynote speech opening the dialogues,

The launch of The Great Reset

At the launch event for the Great Reset, Prince Charles listed key areas for action, similar to those listed in his Sustainable Markets Initiative, introduced in January 2020.

In June 2020, the theme of the January 2021 50th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting was announced as “The Great Reset”, connecting both in-person and online global leaders in Davos, Switzerland with a multi-stakeholder network in 400 cities around the world. The Great Reset was also to be the main theme of the WEF’s summit in Lucerne in May 2021, which was postponed to 2022.

The World Economic Forum generally suggests that a globalised world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of multinational corporations, governments and civil society organizations (CSOs). It sees periods of global instability – such as the financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic – as windows of opportunity to intensify its programmatic efforts. Some critics hence see the Great Reset as a continuation of the World Economic Forum’s strategy of focusing on connotated activist topics such as environmental protection and to disguise the organization’s true plutocratic goalssocial entrepreneurship

By mid-April 2020, against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic, the COVID-19 recession, the 2020 Russia–Saudi Arabia oil price war and the resulting “collapse in oil prices”, the former Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, described possible fundamental changes in an article in The Economist. Carney said that in a post-COVID world “stakeholder capitalism” will be tested as “companies will be judged by ‘what they did during the war,’ how they treated their employees, suppliers and customers, by who shared and who hoarded.” The “gulf between what markets value and what people value” will close.

In a post-COVID world, it is reasonable to expect that more people will want improvements in risk management, in social and medical safety nets, and will want more attention paid to scientific experts. This new hierarchy of values will call for a reset on the way we deal with climate change, which, like the pandemic, is a global phenomenon. No one can “self-isolate” from climate change so we all need to “act in advance and in solidarity”. In his 2020 BBC Reith Lectures, Carney developed his theme of value hierarchies as related to three crises—credit, COVID and climate.

According to a May 15, 2020 WEF article, COVID-19 offers an opportunity to “reset and reshape” the world in a way that is more aligned with the United Nations 2030

In June 2020, Klaus Schwab, who founded the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 1971 and is currently its CEO, described the three core components of the Great Reset.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), as climate change, inequality and poverty gained even greater urgency during the pandemic.

This includes resetting labour markets, as more people work remotely speeding up the process of the “future of work”. The reset will advance work already begun to prepare for the transition to the Fourth Industrial Revolution by upskilling and reskilling workers. Another post-COVID concern raised by the WEF is food security including the “risk of disruptions to food supply chains”, and the need forglobal policy coordination” to preventfood protectionism from becoming the post-pandemic new normal.”.

In her June 3, 2020 keynote address opening the Great Reset forum, a joint initiative of the WEC and the Prince of Wales, Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said that there has been a “massive injection of fiscal stimulus to help countries deal with this crisis” and that it was of “paramount importance that this growth should lead to a greener, smarter, fairer world in the future”.

Georgieva listed three aspects of the Great Reset; green growth, smarter growth and fairer growth. Government investments and government incentives for private investors could “support low-carbon and climate-resilient growth” such as “planting mangroves, land restoration, reforestation or insulating buildings.” With low oil prices, the timing was right to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies and introduce carbon pricing to incentivize future investments. READ THAT AGAIN… INCENTIVE FOR FUTURE INVESTMENTS.

Are you getting the picture yet?

The COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to shape an economic recovery and the future direction of global relations, economies and priorities.

In one of the Great Reset Dialogues, John Kerry and other members of a WEF dialogue discussed how to rebuild the “social contract” in a post-COVID world.

According to Prince Charles, the economic recovery must put the world on a path to sustainability, which would include carbon pricing. Prince Charles emphasized that the private sector would be the main drivers of the plan. The market should adapt to the current reality by aiming for fairer results, ensuring that investments are aimed at mutual progress including accelerating ecologically friendly investments, and to start a fourth industrial revolution, creating digital economic and public infrastructure. According to Klaus Schwab, they would not change the economic system, but rather improve it to what he considers to be “responsible capitalism”. HA!

Klaus SchwabGerman economist, founder of World Economic Forum

The Short Scoop on Klaus Martin Schwab

Schwab was born on 30 March 1938 and is a German engineer and economist best known as the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum.

During the earlier years of his career, he served on a number of company boards, such as The Swatch Group, The Daily Mail Group, and Vontobel Holding. He is a former member of the steering committee of the Bilderberg Group

The Swiss radio and television corporation SRF mentioned the salary level of Klaus in the context of ongoing public contributions to the WEF and the fact that the Forum does not pay any federal taxes. Moreover, the former Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung journalist Jürgen Dunsch made the criticism that the WEF’s financial reports were not very transparent since neither income nor expenditure were broken down. I’m certain there are very good reasons for concerns about how he maintained his wealth over the years but that’s another dig for another day.

The Bilderberg Group Meetings are secret and by invitation only

The Bilderberg meeting (also known as the Bilderberg Group) is an annual conference established in 1954 to foster dialogue between Europe and North America. The group’s agenda, originally to prevent another world war, is now defined as bolstering a consensus around free market Western capitalism and its interests around the globe.

The conference was initiated by several people, including Polish politician-in-exile Józef Retinger who, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting Atlanticismbetter understanding between the cultures of the United States and Western Europe to foster cooperation on political, economic, and defense issues.

Participants include political leaders, experts from industry, finance, academia, and the media, numbering between 120 and 150. Attendees are entitled to use information gained at meetings, but not attribute it to a named speaker. This is to encourage candid debate, while maintaining privacy – a provision that has fed conspiracy theories from both the left and right.

In 2002 in Them: Adventures with Extremists, author Jon Ronson wrote that the group has a small central office in Holland [sic] which each year decides what country will host the forthcoming meeting. The host country then has to book an entire hotel for four days, plus arrange catering, transport and security. To fund this, the host solicits donations from sympathetic corporations such as Barclays, Fiat Automobiles, GlaxoSmithKline, Heinz, Nokia and Xerox.

List of the Bilderberg Group Meetings Participants from the United States

Senators

Governors

Concerns about lobbying have arisen.

Ian Richardson sees Bilderberg as the transnational power elite, an integral, and to some extent critical, part of the existing system of global governance”, that is “not acting in the interests of the whole”. An article in The Guardian in June 2017 criticized the world view expressed in an agenda published by the Bilderberg group.

This should give you a general idea of what the Bilderberg Group is about but if you want to further your knowledge you can read more about the them, their meetings, goals and activities on their website at https://www.bilderbergmeetings.org

For a list of their FAQ’s go here

See also

WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM (WEF)

In the view of some critics, the WEF is exercising too much influence on global systems and institutions. The picture shows George Soros during a Davos session on redesigning the international monetary system.
George Soros speaking at the Word Economic Forum

In the view of some critics, the WEF is exercising too much influence on global systems and institutions. The picture shows George Soros during a Davos session on redesigning the international monetary system.

This brings me to the Plandemic

Since these “Globalist” seemed to be so concerned about the all of us normal folks and managed to sling trillions and trillions of money around like it grew on tree’s… Just who were the winners from lockdown nation?

And now that we have actual evidence of collateral damage from the lockdowns around the world why is almost the entire world protesting and demanding freedom? Why are we all in a bad way still and having such a difficult time getting back to normal? One would think that the current gas prices, food shortages in certain areas and the overall economic crisis would persuade even those on the far left who generally support the heavy hand of government to take a look around and question the people in power that are controlling the pathetic narrative. It would be apparent to a first grader they are all about complete control.

Big businesses scored a “$1.4 trillion payday” during the pandemic. Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft increased their profits by 45% last year. “Wow, bring back more pandemics!” they must be shouting around the boardroom table.

Shutting down the economy hurt the poor the most and vastly widened the chasm between rich and poor. Lockdowns squashed small startup businesses, hurt low-income workers whose jobs were first in line to be destroyed, and devastated educational advances of children in the worst school districts.

For example, we have learned that high-achieving children did fine with remote learning. However, those who scored below average in school performance or from low-income families without computer skills tended to tune out and shut down online lessons completely. We know from teachers that as many as one-third of children rarely, if ever, even turned on a computer during the lockdowns. The long-term educational setbacks for these children as they grow to adult age could be devastating.

It’s not rocket science to figure out that the wealthy got wealthier! So, Just who were the BIG winners from lockdown nation? Let’s start with the corporate titans: Walmart, Google, Amazon, Walgreens, Apple, McDonald’s, Pfizer, Goldman Sachs, etc. THEY’ were rewarded with the designation of “essential” by the politicians. Their doors stayed open. They raked in dollars by the millions.

You can find all the information you need to confirm these facts. For instance there was is a headline from MarketWatch earlier this month: “Big Tech’s pandemic year produces mind-boggling financial results.” There was also was this nugget from the front page of The New York Times: “Wealth inequality is the highest since World War II.” George Soros, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett won the lottery.

I’m usually not a Big Tech or Big Pharma basher and actually like to see the stock market rise. It means people are making money. If these corporations make great products or can sell valuable services that people need, I am all for it! Yay for capitalism. Everyone’s happy.

But within the case of of our current situation, we see the hypocrisy of the left in the media shining big and bright. The left denounces inequality, but it embraces the policies that allow the uneven playing field. The entire situation baffles me to the core.

History lessons keep repeating Thema. They are like a skip on a vinyl record. Why on earth would anyone want to relive these deliberately concocted scenerios ridden with fear and oppression? What happened to faith in personal judgment. Big government creates economic unfairness. It never solves it.. When will people turn off the TV and stop believing the propaganda and LIVE LIFE?

Big Tech Censored Dozens of Doctors, More Than 800 Accounts for COVID-19 ‘Misinformation,’ Study Finds

Resource : https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2022-02-08/merck-and-ridgeback-announce-that-3-1-million-courses-of-molnupiravir-an-investigational-oral-antiviral-covid-19-medicine-have

Big Tech Censored Dozens of Doctors, More Than 800 Accounts for COVID-19 ‘Misinformation,’ Study Finds

Ailan Evans / @AilanHEvans / February 09, 2022

Twitter, Google, Google+, Gmail, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat are among the platforms arrayed on the screen of an Apple iPhone. Many of them have used their largely unregulated power to censor information they don’t approve of as “misinformation.” (Photo: Chesnot/Getty Images)

Major technology companies and social media platforms have removed, suppressed or flagged the accounts of more than 800 prominent individuals and organizations, including medical doctors, for COVID-19 “misinformation,” according to a new study from the Media Research Center.

The study focused on acts of censorship on major social media platforms and online services, including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Ads, and TikTok.

dailycallerlogo

Instances of censorship included Facebook’s decision to flag the British Medical Journal with a “fact check” and “missing context” label, reducing the visibility of a post, for a study delving into data-integrity issues with a Pfizer vaccine clinical trial.

Facebook also deleted the page of the Great Barrington Declaration, an open letter led by dozens of medical professionals, including Dr. Jay Battacharya, a Stanford epidemiologist, and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a former employee of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which advocated for less restrictive measures to address the dangers of COVID-19.

“Big Tech set up a system where you can’t disagree with ‘the science’ even though that’s the foundation of the scientific method,” Dan Gainor, MRC vice president of Free Speech America, told the Daily Caller National Foundation. “If doctors and academic journals can’t debate publicly, then it’s not science at all. It’s ‘religion.’”

Big Tech also scrubbed podcast host Joe Rogan’s interviews with scientists Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Robert Malone, the latter of whom was instrumental in pioneering mRNA technology. Twitter banned Malone from its platform permanently in late December over the virologist’s tweets questioning the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine.

“We tallied 32 different doctors who were censored, including mRNA vaccine innovator Dr. Robert Malone,” Gainor said. “Censoring views of credentialed experts doesn’t ensure confidence in vaccines. It undermines faith in government COVID-19 strategies.“

In addition to medical doctors, the study examined instances in which members of Congress were censored by tech platforms.

These included an incident last August in which YouTube suspended Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for posting a video arguing that “cloth masks” are not effective against the coronavirus, a view later echoed by many prominent medical commentators. Twitter also flagged a tweet from Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., in which he wrote “studies show those with natural immunity from a prior infection are much less likely to contract and spread COVID than those who only have vaccine-induced immunity.”

The study also examined Big Tech censorship of prominent media personalities, such as Rogan, Tucker Carlson, and Dan Bongino.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders”

World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders”

Bill Gates and Justin Trudeau

By Jacob Nordangård

5 februari, 2022 Agenda 2030, Demokrati, ENGLISH, TeknokratiComments: 14

Through its Young Global Leaders program, the World Economic Forum has been instrumental in shaping a world order that undermines all democratic principles. For several decades, this program has nurtured compliant leaders acting as WEF agents in governments around the world. The consequences are far-reaching and may turn out to be devastating for humanity.

I have to say then I mention names like Mrs Merkel, even Vladimir Putin and so on… they all have been Young Global Leaders of The World Economic Forum. But what we are really proud of now with the young generation like Prime Minister Trudeau, President of Argentina and so on, is that we penetrate the cabinets… It is true in Argentina and it is true in France now…” (Klaus Schwab)

In 1992, Klaus Schwab and World Economic Forum launched a program initially called Global Leaders of Tomorrow. In 2004, this program was turned into the Forum for Young Global Leaders (which I cover in my book The Global Coup D’Etat) – a 5-year program of indoctrination into WEFs principles and goals. The aim was – and is – to find suitable future leaders for the emerging global society. The program has since its inception has included politicians, business leaders, royalty, journalists, performers and other cultural influencers who have excelled in their fields but have not yet turned 40 years of age (originally 43 in order to include Angela Merkel). It has since grown into an extensive global network of dedicated leaders with enormous resources and influence, all working to implement the technocratic plans of the World Economic Forum in their respective nations and fields.

The network creates a force for worldwide influence through the combination of the individual skills and resources of its members.

As Klaus Schwab says in the introductory quote, it has become very successful. Already in the first year, 1992, a number of highly influential candidates were elected.

Among 200 selected were global profiles such as:

  • Angela Merkel
  • Tony Blair
  • Nicolas Sarkozy
  • Bono
  • Richard Branson (Virgin)
  • Jorma Ollila (Shell Oil), and
  • José Manuel Barroso (President of the European Commission 2004–2014).[1]
  • Bill Gates (Global Leader of Tomorrow 1992)
  • Justin Trudeau (Young Global Leader, unknown class)

More examples of influential Young Global Leaders [2]:

  • Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden
  • Crown Prince Haakon of Norway
  • Crown Prince Fredrik of Denmark
  • Prince Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, Netherlands
  • Princess Reema Bint Bandar Al-Saud, Ambassador for Saudi-Arabia in USA
  • Jacinda Arden, Prime Minister, New Zeeland
  • Alexander De Croo, Prime Minister, Belgium
  • Emmanuel Macron, President, France
  • Sanna Marin, Prime Minister, Finland
  • Carlos Alvarado Quesada, President, Costa Rica
  • Faisal Alibrahim, Minister of Economy and Planning, Saudi Arabia
  • Shauna Aminath, Minister of Environment, Climate Change and Technology, Maldives
  • Ida Auken, MP, former Minister of Environment, Denmark (author to the infamous article “Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better”)
  • Annalena Baerbock, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Leader of Alliance 90/Die Grünen, Germany
  • Kamissa Camara, Minister of the Digital Economy and Planning, Mali
  • Ugyen Dorji, Minister of Domestic Affairs, Bhutan
  • Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Canada
  • Martín Guzmán, Minister of Finance, Argentina
  • Muhammad Hammad Azhar, Minister of Energy, Pakistan
  • Paula Ingabire, Minister of Information and communications technology and Innovation, Rwanda
  • Ronald Lamola, Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, South Africa
  • Birgitta Ohlson, Minister for European Union Affairs 2010–2014, Sweden
  • Mona Sahlin, Party Leader of the Social Democrats 2007–2011, Sweden
  • Stav Shaffir, Leader of the Green Party, Israel
  • Vera Daves de Sousa, Minister of Finance, Angola
  • Leonardo Di Caprio, actor and Climate Activist
  • Mattias Klum, photographer and Environmentalist
  • Jack Ma, Founder of Alibaba
  • Larry Page, Founder of Google
  • Ricken Patel, Founder of Avaaz
  • David de Rothschild, adventurer and Environmentalist
  • Jimmy Wale, Founder of Wikipedia
  • Jacob Wallenberg, Chairman of Investor
  • Niklas Zennström, Founder of Skype
  • Mark Zuckerberg, Founder of Facebook

The purpose from the beginning has been to “identify and advance a future-oriented global agenda, focusing on issues at the intersection of the public and private sectors.” Public–Private Partnerships is one of the cornerstones of the World Economic Forum philosophy. That is, a merger between state and large companies (also known as corporativism) with the aim of solving global problems of in a more “effective” way. The choice of leaders clearly reflects this aspiration.

The Young Global Leaders group was initially instructed to identify the major challenges of the 21st century. These included peace, the environment, education, technology and health areas which these upcoming leaders could exploit politically, economically, and culturally in the new millennium.

Partners for Global Leaders of Tomorrow in 2000 were large global companies such as:

  • The Coca Cola Company
  • Ernst & Young
  • Volkswagen, and
  • BP Amoco

These could contribute to the agenda by “playing an active role in developing and implementing the concept of the GLT project. The partners can therefore actively participate in the development of GLT programs; representatives of the partner companies as well as their guests are invited to GLT meetings ..

Since the Global Leaders of Tomorrow was turned into Young Global Leaders 2004, partners such as:

  • The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
  • Google
  • JPMorganChase (with alumni from the program) have also participated as sponsors.

The ultimate consequence of both public–private partnerships and these target areas is the creation of a largely fascist social contract in which the individual has become subordinated to these powerful interests. Noble goals of creating a better world have also been kidnapped. This is especially evident in the context of the partnership between the WEF and the UN and the implementation of the global goals (Agenda 2030) through the application of the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

This means that the democratic principles and division of power of the 20th century have largely been completely undermined and instead replaced by a new global class that shapes our common future based on their own interests. This has led to a de facto privatisation of both  national governments and international organisations, where lobbyists are no longer kept in the lobby but have moved into the seat of power, shaping policies directly affecting our lives. What this means has become particularly evident since the pandemic was declared in March 2020. In addition, leading multinational investment management corporations such as BlackRock, led by the World Economic Forum’s own Larry Fink, have constantly moved their positions forward.

German economist and journalist Ernst Wolff believes that many of the national leaders included in the Young Global Leader program have been selected for their willingness to carry out the tough agenda of lockdowns in recent years without asking any questions, and that their impending failure (as evidenced by in a growing dissatisfaction of the masses) will be used as an excuse to create a new form of Global Government where the old nation states become largely obsolete. A new global digital currency with Universal Basic Income (UBI) can then be gradually introduced to replace our doomed monetary system.[3] This conclusion partly coincides with my own. It is also supported by Paul Raskin‘s scenarios from The Great Transition Initiative on how  a totalitarian “New Earth Order” is established, to be replaced in the long run by a global democratic government (Earth Federation) with a World Constitution.[4]

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the catastrophic failure of an every-country-for-itself approach to public health, and national economic interests, rather than global needs, continue to dominate discussions of climate policy, paving the path toward climate chaos.

Under the tricameral World Parliament come the four main agencies of the Earth Federation government: the World Supreme Court system, the World Executive, the World Enforcement System, and the World Ombudsman.[5]Glen T. Martin, The Great Transition Requires the Earth Constitution

The vision is that a peaceful and harmonious world in balance is created through the establishment of a World Federation with a World Parliament, World Government and a World Court. These are ideas that have long circulated in Club of Rome and closely connected New Age circles. The question is how such a new global system of power would escape the fate of being kidnapped by the same interests that created our current corrupt and failing system? This is in view of those who support projects such as The Great Transition (initiated with start-up capital from Steven Rockefeller). What is happening is rather a method of taking us to their ultimate solution in the form of a global technocratic control system.

However, it is highly unlikely that this plan will succeed. Awareness is spreading like wildfire and the panic of the elite increases as their narrative crumbles and people become more and more immune to the propaganda. Hence all the inquisitors and “fact checkers” who diligently gatekeep the narrative and help steer public opinion in the “right” direction. They are surely to be trusted since, for example, David Roy Thomson, Chairman of the Thomson Reuters Corporation, is an alumni of Global Leaders of Tomorrow, class of 1993.

It is now time to take control of our own destinies and to avoid falling into new traps.

References

Thanks to investigative journalist Cory Morningstar for the clip that inspired this blog article. Follow her blog Wrong Kind of Green.

[1] World Economic Forum, GLT Class of 1993.pdf
[2] World Economic Forum, Young Global Leaders Community (searchable list over YGL alumni)
[3] Michael Lord, “Exposed: Klaus Schwab’s School For Covid Dictators, Plan for ‘Great Reset’“, RAIR Foundation, November 10, 2021
[4] Paul Raskin, Journey to Earthland: The Great Transition to Planetary Civilization.pdf, Tellus Institute, Boston, 2016
[5] Glen T. Martin, The Great Transition Requires the Earth Constitution“, Great Transition Initiative, November 2021

Unholy Grail: Adrenochrome, the “White Rabbit” Elixir Pursued by Blackhearted Elites

Op-Ed

By Paul Dowling

The author extends this courtesy warning to readers: The subject matter under discussion in this article is of a potentially disturbing nature.

 

“Enemies in our midst.  Enemies.  In.  Our.  Midst.  The enemies of innocence.  The crimes of ritual sexual abuse happened in schools, churches, youth groups, scout troops, orphanages, foster homes, sporting clubs, group homes, charities, and in family homes as well.” 

– Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, October of 2018, addressing the matter of child ritual abuse

“There’s evil in the world, all right.  Being aware of it makes you a realist, not a paranoid.”  

 Dean Koontz, in Your Heart Belongs to Me

 

From Dark to Light: Queries for “Adrenochrome” Explode, as Internet Censorship Ceases

The censorship of anyone who disagrees with the politically-correct sensibilities of Big Techhas been the norm that has been forced upon conservatives by corporatist tech giants for some time now.

But Google’s algorithm censoring the freedom of expression of so many Americans has recently been reversed.  It is also true that Facebook has allowed people who have been in “Facebook Jail” for years (this author included) suddenly to start sharing information again without being “shadow-banned” into obscurity.

YouTube – which has shadow-banned conservative content provided by everyone from PragerU to the SGT Report – has likewise suddenly been allowing searches for longed-for, but verboten, videos to succeed.

For years, Internet searches for “adrenochrome” have yielded limited information as to the true significance of that substance, let alone where it comes from, how it is obtained, and who uses it.

There has been a real conspiracy, of bowdlerizing tech companies, to quash not only free speech, but free inquiry as well.  If any information were to be found, such as the entry for “adrenochrome” in the Urban Dictionary, there would generally be guidance given for the reader, usually written by some naïve academic, suggesting that adrenochrome is pure fiction, for example: “Author Hunter S. Thompson mentions adrenochrome in his book Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. . . .  In the DVD commentary, director Terry Gilliam admits that his and Thompson’s portrayal is fictional.”  While technically true, that the movie portrayal is fiction, the basis for the portrayal is not.

Indeed, logical thinking on the subject at hand eventually brings up the following line of questioning: If there were nothing of substance to the lore surrounding adrenochrome, why not allow people to read about it and make up their own minds?  Is censorship of the terrible truth about adrenochrome vital to the continuing ability of the media to protect the powerful elites they serve?  And could it be that public knowledge of adrenochrome might pose a danger to establishment elites who participate in the death-dealing harvest of this life-giving elixir of youth, in hopes of making themselves into evergreen immortals?

Search engines, from Google to Bing, have barred discovery of almost any useful information with respect to issues that seekers of truth and justice care about, especially when it comes to adrenochrome and other such serious matters, until just recently.  (One notable exception to the censorship regime has been IBM Watson’s new Yippy browser.)

Before freedom of inquiry was renewed, most of the information available would deride any reference to adrenochrome as “conspiracy theory” or “urban legend.”  But this has all changed overnight, as the CEOs of major companies – from Alphabet to Microsoft – have stepped down.

Even Twitter seems to have undergone a reversal in its censorship algorithms.  It is as if suddenly the perfect storm had moved into the power vacuum created by the leaving of so many notables in the tech world.  Suddenly, a query in search of “adrenochrome” yields many different kinds of information on the substance, shedding light upon a dark subject that has been hidden from view for some time.

What Is Adrenochrome, and Why Do Many Strive to Censor Information Regarding the Substance?

One of the most clearly articulated descriptions of adrenochrome can be found in an article entitled “Adrenochrome Vampirism,” which states the following: “Adrenochrome is a chemical compound (C9H9NO3created by oxidizing adrenaline with Silver Oxide.

From a pure ‘scientific’ viewpoint of it being studied and published in mainstream forums the only side effects reported were that it may induce schizophrenic episodes, de-realization, and euphoria.

The truth behind the use of adrenochrome is much more sinister than it may initially appear.”  Actually, the visual representation of the chemical adrenochrome belies the fact of its malign nature, since, turned on its side, it creates the innocuous impression of a commonplace white rabbit:

Representation of Adrenochrome, the Chemical “White Rabbit”

Why Global Elites Wish to Make Articles Like This One Difficult to Discover

Adrenochrome is desired by many globalist elites – from Hollywood, California, to Wall Street, NYC, to Washington, DC, and around the world.  Whether its use is incentivized by the facts of pure science or the dictates of unholy ritual, the form of adrenochrome most in demand is that which has been taken from young children who have literally been scared witless.

The younger the children are, from whom the adrenochrome is extracted, the more highly prized is the chemical obtained.  To complete the harvesting of adrenochrome, children are tortured and terrorized to the utmost.

According to Edgar Morgan, “[t]hey are then killed and the adrenochrome is collected with a needle and syringe from the base of the back of their neck and spinal column.  (For someone who is up to the difficulty level and medical precision required, another, more brutal, way of extracting the substance directly from the pineal gland is reported in an article entitled “The Elites’ Super Drug: Adrenochrome”; but the mental picture created by describing this process is too disturbingly gruesome to paint here.)

Once collected, the chemical can be sold on the black market at exorbitant prices.”  There is even a crypto-currency, known as ADC-alt coin, used for the “exclusive purchase of adrenochrome.”  This is not a substance that can be afforded by many outside the establishment of jet-set elites.  In an age of Epstein flight manifests revealing that a former president flew to an “Orgy Island” in the Caribbean where Satanic rituals were likely being held, people are waking up to the horrible realities of such things as child sacrifice and adrenochrome harvesting.

This author used to believe that stories about adrenochrome were nothing more than bizarre fictional accounts created by the drug-addled minds of fiction writers like Hunter S. Thompson, but this all changed.

 

When It All Changed: Two Offbeat Anecdotes in the First Person

Anecdote the First: When I was attending the University of Texas, back in the 1980s, I met a young lady we shall call Angie.  She was attractive and kind – or so I thought – and I asked her if she might be interested in going out.  Her answer was that she was not the right person for me.

Of course, I had to ask her how she could be so sure this was true.  Her answer was both creepy and off-putting: “So, riddle me this, Batman,” she said, “are you a vampire – as am I?”  Not knowing what to make of this odd combination of weird inquiry and eccentric declaration, I fell silent.  Before I could think how to reply, Angie followed up by inquiring, “Okay, tell me this: Do you know what adrenochrome is?”  I struggled to recall where I had encountered the term, but my memory failed me in that moment.  “I thought not,” Angie said, accusingly, before storming off.

Days later, in the Perry-Castañeda Library, I suddenly remembered where I had first run across the word “adrenochrome,” as I spotted a book that was splayed open, spine up, on a tabletop; it was a copy of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.  But Thompson’s depiction of adrenochrome users as vampirelike was just made up, right?  Angie had to have been pulling my leg about her being an “adrenochrome vampire” – or was she perhaps a little touched in the head?

 

Anecdote the Second: So, I moved on with my life, put the weirdness behind me, and wound up teaching in L.A., where I would eventually find myself teaching high school.

One day, a student we shall call Luke lingered after class to invite me to worship services with his family.  I had met Luke’s folks recently at the school’s parent night, and apparently they had taken a shine to me.  I explained that I preferred to attend services in a synagogue but that I appreciated the invitation.  Luke bragged that his religion was better than Judaism, because his religion controlled the US government and was the most powerful religion in America.  “What is your religion?” I asked.  “Satanism,” was Luke’s reply, “which is why my parents look so young.”  Luke went on to explain that his parents were adrenochrome users and that someday he too would use it to stay young.

The conversation was interrupted when a colleague entered the room to warn me that I was going to be late to the faculty meeting.  At this point, Luke blushed, walked out of the room, and the next day his parents withdrew him from the school.

 

Adrenochrome in Popular Literature: The Gonzo Journalism of Hunter S. Thompson

Few cult classics have been as popular as Hunter S. Thompson’s 1972 novel, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, which featured an exciting new style of writing created by Thompson himself and branded as “gonzo journalism.”

Thompson got away with saying many of the things he did about drugs and the dark side of American popular culture, because most people believed his narrative to be a fictionalized critique on the supposed failure of the counterculture of the 1960s.  This author no longer believes that Thompson spun his yarn out of whole cloth.  Indeed, Thompson’s references in the book to adrenochrome tend to show that Thompson must have been genuinely knowledgeable on the subject.

 

In Chapter 5 of Thompson’s bizarre tale, entitled “A Terrible Experience with Extremely Dangerous Drugs,” Thompson has checked into a hotel with his attorney.  At one point, Thompson happens upon a “little brown bottle” in his attorney’s shaving kit and questions his attorney: “What is it?” he asks.  “Adrenochrome,” his attorney explains, elaborating that it “makes mescaline seem like ginger beer.  You’ll go completely crazy if you take too much. . . .  It’s absolutely pure.”

Hunter follows up: “What kind of monster client have you picked up this time?  There’s only one source for this stuff . . . the adrenaline glands from a living human body. . . .  It’s no good if you get it out of a corpse.”  His lawyer’s response is to admit that his client is “one of these Satanism freaks.

He offered me human blood – said it would make me higher than I’d ever been in my life. . . .”

The attorney also confesses that “[t]hey nailed this guy for child molesting, but he swears he didn’t do it. . . .  I didn’t dare turn the creep down.  He might have picked up a letter opener and gone after my pineal gland.”  Further along in the weird scene being played out, Thompson describes a news program on television, in a way that makes a veiled reference to the Satanic ritual killing of young children: “Nixon’s face filled the screen, but his speech was hopelessly garbled.  The only word I could make out was “sacrifice.”  Over and over again: “Sacrifice . . . sacrifice . . . sacrifice.”

 

In Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail ’72, Thompson again mentions the evil super-drug in the book’s footnotes: “It was sometime after midnight in a ratty hotel room and my memory of the conversation is hazy, due to a massive ingestion of booze, fatback, and forty cc’s of adrenochrome.”

For most readers, Thompson is simply making another one of his drug-related rants, but for those who know the truth about this diabolical substance, there is a high level of discomfort, given the true source from which adrenochrome derives.

It is this same strong discomfort which tends to induce denial that adrenochrome exists in the minds of many people, especially those who have been sheltered and, therefore, have a hard time accepting the existence of such diabolical wickedness.

The truth is that many blackhearted people in this world are more than willing to inflict overwhelming amounts of harm upon others, if there is a pay-off for them.

 

Fear and Loathing: Satanic Sacrifice

The chemical reaction that produces adrenochrome is described in a whitepaper written at California State University, Northridge, entitled “Assay for Superoxide Dismutase Activity Using the Enzyme Inhibition of the Oxidation of Epinephrine,” where it is written that “[a]s O2 builds in the solution, the formation of adrenochrome accelerates because O2 also reacts with epinephrine to form adrenochrome.  Toward the end of the reaction, when the epinephrine is consumed, the adrenochrome formation slows down.”

 

Corporal rejuvenation is the desired outcome for those who ingest this adrenochrome-laden blood.  So, it is the blood of child sacrifices that “allows the body to conduct cell mitosis closer to the level it does for minors, improves regeneration of muscle tissue, and . . . prevents chromosomes from being pulled apart during mitosis which strengthens them.

The more youthful the victim of adrenaline harvesting is, the stronger this effect is.  As well as sexual predation this is why the elites have such an obsession with kidnapping and trafficking children.”

Anyone who uses adrenochrome risks his own body’s cessation of making its own adrenaline, so it becomes necessary to take this elixir of youth on a regular basis, so as not to fall ill.  This culture of adrenochrome addiction does not bode well for children anywhere and everywhere.

Since time immemorial, wherever Satanists have been present, it has not gone well for children.  In a globalist paradigm, as long as Luciferians are at large, child trafficking will serve to ensure that there is no place on earth where children can be safe.

 

As Memorialized in Leviticus, Child Ritual Abuse Has Been Banned as an Abomination

In the Book of Leviticus – Leviticus 17:10-14 to be precise – the act of ingesting blood (and thus the adrenochrome borne by that blood) was prohibited scripturally: “And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that eats any manner of blood, I will set My face against that soul that eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people.  For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement by reason of the life.  Therefore I said unto the children of Israel: No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourns among you eat blood.  And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that takes in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust.  For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof; therefore I said unto the children of Israel: Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eats it shall be cut off.”

 

Leviticus 18:21 says this concerning child sacrifice in specific: “Do not permit any of your children to be offered as a sacrifice to Molech, for you must not bring shame on the name of your God.  I am the LORD.”  This ban on child sacrifice occurs in the section of the Levitical Priestly Code that deals with idolatrous sexual prohibitions, which intimates that ritual sex with children was involved before any sacrifice was made.  (This is the same section of Leviticuswhere male-on-male sex, having to do with idolatrous fertility rituals, is forbidden.)  Because the “life of the flesh is in the blood,” anyone who “eats any manner of blood” is stealing the life of another to extend one’s own span of years.  Indeed, the child sacrifice necessary to obtain this blood is harrowing.

https://www.biblehub.com/leviticus/18-21.htm

As a Result of Epstein’s Arrest, People Have Begun to Awaken

Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest has exposed the fact that pedophile rings really do exist and that the problem is larger than most people had ever thought to be the case.

The American people are beginning to learn that the “ritualistic Satanic abuse of children used for various ceremonies, sacrifices, and rituals” is involved.  Children are hurt and even killed, and many who carry out the heinous acts involved are from the upper echelons of political, corporate, and cultural power globally.

 

Taking Child Ritual Abuse Seriously

As recently as October of 2018, the Prime Minister of Australia gave a speech to his parliament, addressing the matter of child ritual abuse, wherein he spoke the following words: “Why was our system of justice blind to injustice?  Why has it taken so long to act?  Why were other things more important than this, the care of innocent children?  Why didn’t we believe?  Today we dare to ask these questions, and finally acknowledge and confront the lost screams of our children. . . .  Nothing we can do now will right the wrongs inflicted on our nation’s children.  Even after a comprehensive Royal Commission, which finally enabled the voices to be heard and the silence to be broken, we will all continue to struggle. . . .  We honour every survivor in this country, we love you, we hear you and we honour you. . . .  As one survivor recently said to me, ‘It wasn’t a foreign enemy who did this to us – this was done by Australians.’  To Australians.  Enemies in our midst.  Enemies.  In.  Our.  Midst.  The enemies of innocence.

The crimes of ritual sexual abuse happened in schools, churches, youth groups, scout troops, orphanages, foster homes, sporting clubs, group homes, charities, and in family homes as well. . . .  When a child spoke up, they weren’t believed and the crimes continued with impunity.  One survivor told me that when he told a teacher of his abuse, that teacher then became his next abuser. . . .  Power and position exploited for evil dark crimes.”

 

This speech was a sobering event in Australia, especially when considering that the existence of “survivors” so strongly implies that there were missing children who did not survive or who were never found.

The prime minister’s address was never brought to light by America’s mainstream media, whose goal is the direct opposite – keeping people in the dark about child ritual abuse, in order to protect their corporate employers and political protectors, while intimidating others not to report such abuse; Vox has put it this way: “Today, it’s a media-fueled scare over crazed clowns [perpetrating Satanic ritual abuse].  But as Satanic Panic shows us, that’s not the real fear.  The real fear is that, tomorrow, someone could decide the crazed clown is you.”

 

So, do journalists working for the mainstream media protect child sex-trafficking and Satanic ritual abuse, because their strings are being pulled by Hollywood, Wall Street, and Washington elites, ultimately to conceal the harvesting of adrenochrome?

Is this why so many in the media are desperate to maintain the open-borders agenda?  Are the media, in truth, so anti-Trump, because the president has been putting a stop to human trafficking?  Is the supply of sacrificial children dwindling, thereby forcing a Satanic cadre of politicians to enact laws – like the one passed recently in New York – to allow the veritable sacrifice of newborn infants, albeit under the auspices of a woman’s right to an abortion?  Is it really implausible to conjecture that a conspiracy of Satanic Ritual Abuse might exist in America’s political Swamp?  If the comments of the prime minister of Australia are to be taken at face value, then who can seriously rule out the possibility?

 

Epilogue

As corporatist CEOs step down, will the sudden transparency that is being enabled by an Internet free of their regime of censorship finally give rise to arrests of child and adrenochrome traffickers?  The prospects are now better than they ever have been.  It would appear that Justice is coming, although many, understandably, will not believe it until they see it.  As a praying man, this author has a different view: We shall see it when we believe it; so, please pray.

~~~

Paul Dowling

Paul Dowling has written about the Constitution, as well as articles for American Thinker, Independent Sentinel, Godfather Politics, Eagle Rising, and Conservative Notions.

www.independentsentinel.com/unholy-grail-adrenochrome-the-white-rabbit-elixir-pursued-by-blackhearted-elites/

Featured

This is By Far, Best, Most Thoughtful Explanation For Why So Many Americans Believe 2020 Was a “Sham” 

This explanation brilliantly vindicates and validates every single American who has questions and doubts about the 2020 election. Beautifully done.
So, without further ado, here’s the best explanation you’ll ever read on why so many Americans believe the 2020 election was a sham:
I think I’ve had discussions w/enough Boomer-tier Trump supporters who believe the 2020 election was fraudulent to extract a general theory about their perspective. It is also the perspective of most of the people at the Capitol on 1/6, and probably even Trump himself.
Most believe some or all of the theories involving midnight ballots, voting machines, etc, but what you find when you talk to them is that, while they’ll defend those positions w/info they got from Hannity or Breitbart or whatever, they’re not particularly attached to them.

Here are the facts – actual, confirmed facts – that shape their perspective:

The FBI/etc spied on the 2016 Trump campaign using evidence manufactured by the Clinton campaign. We now know that all involved knew it was fake from Day 1 (see: Brennan’s July 2016 memo, etc).
These are Tea Party people. The types who give their kids a pocket Constitution for their birthday and have Founding Fathers memes in their bios. The intel community spying on a presidential campaign using fake evidence including forged documents is a big deal to them.
Everyone involved lied about their involvement as long as they could. We only learned the DNC paid for the manufactured evidence because of a court order. Comey denied on TV knowing the DNC paid for it, when we have emails from a year earlier proving that he knew.
This was true with everyone, from CIA Dir Brennan & Adam Schiff – who were on TV saying they’d seen clear evidence of collusion w/Russia, while admitting under oath behind closed doors that they hadn’t – all the way down the line. In the end we learned that it was ALL fake.
At first, many Trump people were worried there must be some collusion, because every media & intel agency wouldn’t make it up out of nothing. When it was clear that they had made it up, people expected a reckoning, and shed many illusions about their gov’t when it didn’t happen.
We know as fact:
a) The Steele dossier was the sole evidence used to justify spying on the Trump campaign,
b) The FBI knew the Steele dossier was a DNC op,
c) Steele’s source told the FBI the info was unserious,
d) they did not inform the court of any of this and kept spying.
Trump supporters know the collusion case front and back. They went from worrying the collusion must be real, to suspecting it might be fake, to realizing it was a scam, then watched as every institution – agencies, the press, Congress, academia – gaslit them for another year.
Worse, collusion was used to scare people away from working in the administration. They knew their entire lives would be investigated. Many quit because they were being bankrupted by legal fees. The DoJ, press, & gov’t destroyed lives and actively subverted an elected admin.
This is where people whose political identity was largely defined by a naive belief in what they learned in Civics class began to see the outline of a Regime that crossed all institutional boundaries. Because it had stepped out of the shadows to unite against an interloper.
GOP propaganda still has many of them thinking in terms of partisan binaries, but A LOT of Trump supporters see that the Regime is not partisan. They all know that the same institutions would have taken opposite sides if it was a Tulsi Gabbard vs Jeb Bush election.
It’s hard to describe to people on the left (who are used to thinking of gov’t as a conspiracy… Watergate, COINTELPRO, WMD, etc) how shocking & disillusioning this was for people who encourage their sons to enlist in the Army, and hate people who don’t stand for the Anthem.
They could have managed the shock if it only involved the government. But the behavior of the corporate press is really what radicalized them. They hate journalists more than they hate any politician or gov’t official, because they feel most betrayed by them.
The idea that the press is driven by ratings/sensationalism became untenable. If that were true, they’d be all over the Epstein story. The corporate press is the propaganda arm of the Regime they now see in outline. Nothing anyone says will ever make them unsee that, period.
This is profoundly disorienting. Many of them don’t know for certain whether ballots were faked in November 2020, but they know for absolute certain that the press, the FBI, etc would lie to them if there was. They have every reason to believe that, and it’s probably true.
They watched the press behave like animals for four years. Tens of millions of people will always see Kavanaugh as a gang rapist, based on nothing, because of CNN. And CNN seems proud of that. They led a lynch mob against a high school kid. They cheered on a summer of riots.
They always claimed the media had liberal bias, fine, whatever. They still thought the press would admit truth if they were cornered. Now they don’t. It’s a different thing to watch them invent stories whole cloth in order to destroy regular lives and spark mass violence.
Time Mag told us that during the 2020 riots, there were weekly conference calls involving, among others, leaders of the protests, the local officials who refused to stop them, and media people who framed them for political effect. In Ukraine we call that a color revolution.
Throughout the summer, Democrat governors took advantage of COVID to change voting procedures. It wasn’t just the mail-ins (they lowered signature matching standards, etc). After the collusion scam, the fake impeachment, Trump people expected shenanigans by now.
Re: “fake impeachment”, we now know that Trump’s request for Ukraine to cooperate w/the DOJ regarding Biden’s $ activities in Ukraine was in support of an active investigation being pursued by the FBI and Ukraine AG at the time, and so a completely legitimate request.
Then you get the Hunter laptop scandal. Big Tech ran a full-on censorship campaign against a major newspaper to protect a political candidate. Period. Everyone knows it, all of the Tech companies now admit it was a “mistake” – but, ya know, the election’s over, so who cares?
Goes w/o saying, but: If the NY Times had Don Jr’s laptop, full of pics of him smoking crack and engaging in group sex, lots of lurid family drama, emails describing direct corruption and backed up by the CEO of the company they were using, the NYT wouldn’t have been banned.
Think back: Stories about Trump being pissed on by Russian prostitutes and blackmailed by Putin were promoted as fact, and the only evidence was a document paid for by his opposition and disavowed by its source. The NY Post was banned for reporting on true information.
The reaction of Trump people to all this was not, “no fair!” That’s how they felt about Romney’s “binders of women” in 2012. This is different. Now they see, correctly, that every institution is captured by people who will use any means to exclude them from the political process.
And yet they showed up in record numbers to vote. He got 13m more votes than in 2016, 10m more than Clinton got! As election night dragged on, they allowed themselves some hope. But when the four critical swing states (and only those states) went dark at midnight, they knew.
Over the ensuing weeks, they got shuffled around by grifters and media scam artists selling them conspiracy theories. They latched onto one, then another increasingly absurd theory as they tried to put a concrete name on something very real.
Media & Tech did everything to make things worse. Everything about the election was strange – the changes to procedure, unprecedented mail-in voting, the delays, etc – but rather than admit that and make everything transparent, they banned discussion of it (even in DMs!).
Everyone knows that, just as Don Jr’s laptop would’ve been the story of the century, if everything about the election dispute was the same, except the parties were reversed, suspicions about the outcome would’ve been taken very seriously. See 2016 for proof.
Even the courts’ refusal of the case gets nowhere w/them, because of how the opposition embraced mass political violence. They’ll say, w/good reason: What judge will stick his neck out for Trump knowing he’ll be destroyed in the media as a violent mob burns down his house?
It’s a fact, according to Time Magazine, that mass riots were planned in cities across the country if Trump won. Sure, they were “protests”, but they were planned by the same people as during the summer, and everyone knows what it would have meant. Judges have families, too.
Forget the ballot conspiracies. It’s a fact that governors used COVID to unconstitutionally alter election procedures (the Constitution states that only legislatures can do so) to help Biden to make up for a massive enthusiasm gap by gaming the mail-in ballot system.
They knew it was unconstitutional, it’s right there in plain English. But they knew the cases wouldn’t see court until after the election. And what judge will toss millions of ballots because a governor broke the rules? The threat of mass riots wasn’t implied, it was direct.
a) The entrenched bureaucracy & security state subverted Trump from Day 1,
b) The press is part of the operation,
c) Election rules were changed,
d) Big Tech censors opposition,
e) Political violence is legitimized & encouraged,
f) Trump is banned from social media.
They were led down some rabbit holes, but they are absolutely right that their gov’t is monopolized by a Regime that believes they are beneath representation, and will observe no limits to keep them getting it.
Trump fans should be happy he lost; it might’ve kept him alive
— Read on www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/07/this-is-by-far-best-most-thoughtful-explanation-for-why-so-many-americans-believe-2020-was-a-sham/

Doctor Google will see you now! Privacy fears as tech giant ‘strikes deal’ with hospital chain to use 32 MILLION patient records to create algorithms that will guide healthcare workers’ decisions

This is beyond invasion of privacy!Doctor Google will see you now! Privacy fears as tech giant ‘strikes deal’ with hospital chain to use 32 MILLION patient records to create algorithms that will guide healthcare workers’ decisions

278 comments

  • HCA Heathcare announced the partnership with Google Cloud on Wednesday
  • Company operates 186 hospitals and approximately 2,000 sites of care in the US
  • Will use Google technology to develop new healthcare algorithms for doctors
  • HCA says names will be removed from the records and deal follows privacy laws 

Google has struck a deal with a massive hospital chain to help analyze some 32 million patient records, and hopes to develop new healthcare algorithms that could guide doctors’ decisions.https://4fedf3f76e7b733bffe1f01cbe6214bb.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

HCA Healthcare, the hospital chain based in Nashville, Tennessee, on Wednesday announced the deal to consolidate and store data from its digital health records and medical devices with Google Cloud.

Using anonymized records stripped of personally identifying information, HCA plans to use Google’s AI technology to develop algorithms that could advise doctors on the best treatment options for patients. 

HCA, which owns and operates 186 hospitals and some 2,000 care sites including clinics, says it will utilize Google’s ‘planetary-scale database’ to analyze data from its 32 million annual records of patient visits.

‘Our contract prohibits Google Cloud from the use of patient identifiable information,’ an HCA spokesman told DailyMail.com in a statement. ‘Furthermore, access to any data is prohibited without HCA Healthcare’s permission.’ 

Many details of the deal remain unclear, including the financial side and whether the algorithms that HCA develops to improve treatment will be proprietary to the hospital system, or shared with Google. 

The partnership marks Google’s latest foray into the healthcare realm – and it is already raising privacy concerns.

Google is partnering with HCA Healthcare, which owns 186 hospitals across the country including Good Samaritan in San Jose, California, in a deal to analyze medical records
Google is partnering with HCA Healthcare, which owns 186 hospitals across the country including Good Samaritan in San Jose, California, in a deal to analyze medical records

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court today against Google LLC for deceptive and unfair practices used to obtain users’ location data, which Google then exploits for its lucrative advertising business.

PHOENIX – Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court today against Google LLC for deceptive and unfair practices used to obtain users’ location data, which Google then exploits for its lucrative advertising business. Arizona has brought forward this action under the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act to put a stop to Google’s deceptive collection of user data and obtain monetary relief up to and including forcing Google to disgorge gross receipts arising from its Arizona activities.

“While Google users are led to believe they can opt-out of location tracking, the company exploits other avenues to invade personal privacy,” said Attorney General Mark Brnovich. “It’s nearly impossible to stop Google from tracking your movements without your knowledge or consent. This is contrary to the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act and even the most innovative companies must operate within the law.”

Google derives the vast majority of its profit through selling advertisements and displaying them to users of Google’s products and services. In 2019, over 80% of Google’s revenues—$135 billion out of $161 billion total—were generated through advertising. Google collects detailed information about its users, including their physical locations, to target users for advertising in a specific geographic location. Google’s collection of location data also allows the tech giant to validate the effectiveness of ads by reporting to advertisers how often online ad clicks are converted into real-world store visits. As outlined in the lawsuit filed by Arizona, Google’s advertising revenues are largely driven by the company’s collection of detailed data about its users, including location information, often done without the users’ consent or knowledge.

The Arizona Attorney General’s Office began its consumer fraud investigation of Google in August 2018, following an Associated Press article entitled, “Google tracks your movements, like it or not”, which detailed how users are lulled into a false sense of security, believing Google provided users the ability to actually disable their Location History. Google told users that “with Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored.” But as the AP article revealed, this statement was blatantly false — even with Location History off, Google surreptitiously collects location information through other settings such as Web & App Activity and uses that information to sell ads. At the same time, Google’s disclosures regarding Web & App Activity misled users into believing that setting had nothing to do with tracking user location. Google’s account set-up disclosures made no mention of the fact that location information is collected though Web and App Activity, which is defaulted to “on,” until early-to mid-2018.

Arizona’s investigation has also revealed that Google uses deceptive and unfair practices to collect as much user information as possible and makes it exceedingly difficult for users to understand what’s being done with their data, let alone opt-out. Given the lucrative nature of Google’s advertising business, the company goes to great lengths to collect users’ location, including through presenting users with a misleading mess of settings, some of which seemingly have nothing to do with the collection of location information. According to Harvard Professor Shoshana Zuboff, “Google’s proprietary methods enable it to surveil, capture, expand, construct and claim behavioral” data “including data that users intentionally choose not to share.”

The almost 50-page complaint cites extensive testimony from Google employees given under oath and contains nearly 100 additional exhibits, including internal documents that were obtained from Google over the course of the nearly two-year investigation. The public version of the filing redacts certain information that Google has asserted is confidential; the State will be seeking to make more information public consistent with applicable court rules.

The State is being represented by Brunn W. Roysden III, Oramel H. Skinner, Joseph A. Kanefield, Michael S. Catlett, and Christopher Sloot of the Arizona Attorney General’s Office; and David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson of Cooper & Kirk, PLLC; Guy Ruttenberg and Michael Eshaghian of Ruttenberg IP Law, APC.

A copy of the lawsuit.

State v. Google – State’s Status Report

Letter from 27 Scholars, Practitioners, and Advocates re Unsealing Google Complaint

Letter from Congressman Biggs re Unsealing Google Complaint

State’s Response to Google’s Motion for Continuance

PRESS RELEASE ARCHIVE

202105 (8)

202104 (13)

202103 (18)

202102 (13)

202101 (6)

202012 (14)

202011 (7)

202010 (11)

202009 (17)

202008 (8)

202007 (11)

202006 (14)

Pagination

Next page››

PRESS CONTACT

Katie Conner

Director of Media Relations

2005 N Central Ave.

Phoenix, AZ 85004

(602) 542-8019

Katie.Conner@azag.gov