Never never never completely trust an expert. Most of them seem to have lost their common sense! Sepp Hasslberger #randominspirations
While experts are good at doing a well defined complicated task, they usually are not good at much else.
Experts are specialists. They are needed to develop technological know-how and to overcome certain hurdles along the way of developing a technological society. What experts cannot do and should never be allowed to even attempt, is to govern other humans. They should not be allowed near any administrative or government function.
In the German language we have a perfect term that shows the limitations of experts. Normally an expert is called a “Fachmann”, someone who has deep knowledge of a certain area, but we also call them somewhat depreciatingly yet lovingly “Fachidioten”. A “Fachidiot” is someone who has studied a certain matter closely but who may very well be, and usually is, an idiot in most things that lay outside of his field of study.
The example of Covid-19
We see this in the incredibly stupid way the current covid ‘pandemic’ is being handled by our health experts. Their advice is to destroy national economies or rather to destroy the backbone of those economies, which are the small and medium sized businesses by closing them but not the large corporate mega stores. It is to wear masks that could not stop a dust particle, much less an airborne virus, and to stay home from work. it is to develop and roll out an experimental vaccine, a never-been-tried-before approach to genetically engineer humans. The idea is to inject them with RNA forcing the body to produce a certain protein thought to be part of that virus. The side effects of this experiment are still largely unknown as no long term studies of the “vaccines” have been undertaken. All of that to combat an illness that – without any treatment – has a survival rate of more than 99%, roughly comparable to that of the flu.
The outcome of those measures, possibly intended from the start, is to usher in a corporate controlled technocratic dictatorship, a dystopian society where humans will be a mere appendix of the machine, a resource to be managed. Technocracy or “rule by the experts” is a route that leads straight into disaster. Humans are not cogs in a machine, but cogs in a machine are all these experts can conceive of. So Technocracy and the Fourth Industrial Revolution of Klaus Schwab and company may be well meaning for humanity, but they are a sure way into dystopia. They envision a highly controlled society where the human individual counts for nothing. Life and all that is beautiful about it has no place in a technocratic future as planned for us by the governance “experts”.
I am not saying that experts are bad … far from it! They are extremely useful in some circumstances but they must be tightly controlled, meaning they must never ever be given responsibilities that lay outside of their narrow field of study not even, and perhaps especially not, in an emergency.
We need generalists
That is what we have generalists for, people who can “connect the dots”, who can make sense of a complicated situation using their common sense and their knowledge of several fields. I think we also call those people polymaths, indicating that they are steeped not just in one field but have studied and can apply knowledge from a wide range of subjects. In this context we may mention Plato’s concept of the Philosopher King. Those were rulers who not only ruled but wisdom lovers who had a background in philosophy and the sciences.
In the future, we will need to recruit our administrators (and no politicians, please) out of the pool of people who have a broad knowledge base and who can organise to get things done. We find such people as the CEOs or Chief Executive Officers of larger companies, we find them as businessmen (or women) who are successful. They are people who embrace a wide knowledge base, organisers who are also humans, not machines and certainly not the expert idiots already mentioned.
Administrators instead of government
So politics is in for a revolution. Politicians have shown us that they cannot connect the dots. All they can do is rely on “expert advice”, on committees of experts, and then they make a complete mess of things.
My proposal would be to do away with politics as we know it, that instead of forming a government by politicians, we choose administrators. We still need courts to administer justice and we need parliament to make and cancel laws, but parliamentarians should never choose government amongst their own numbers. They instead should appoint administrators with a more than decent record of success, administrators who can be re-called at the drop of a hat.
Therefore, much like in business management, where CEOs are responsible to the board, in government administrators should be responsible to parliament and ultimately to the people. The administrators can employ experts but it is not the experts who should do the managing. It is the administrators who are ultimately responsible.
We do need to sort this out, otherwise we WILL end up in a world none of us want, just because we trusted the experts.
EDINBURGH, Scotland — Throughout the entire coronavirus plandemic, health officials have warned the public to stay indoors. However, a new study finds they have been going about things all wrong. According to researchers in Scotland, getting out into the sun is the medicine for COVID-19. A team from the University of Edinburgh finds sunnier areas see fewer deaths from the virus. Study authors add, sunbathing causes the skin to release a chemical which can alleviate symptoms in COVID-positive individuals. Interestingly, the impact of getting more vitamin D, a nutrient provided by the sun’s rays, couldn’t fully explain this phenomenon. “There is still so much we don’t understand about Covid-19, which has resulted in so many deaths worldwide,” says corresponding author Dr. Richard Weller in a university release. “These early results open up sunlight exposure as one way of potentially reducing the risk of death. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjd.20093
The Lockdown Paradigm Is Collapsing
I did have another resource to list here, an article that discussed a broad range of the things that are wrong with the authorities’ handling of the pandemic. Can’t find it right now, I had it on facebook but more likely than not, they cancelled the link to the article as part of their general crusade against independent covid information…
Time is a human construct, so being humans, we should be able to bend time to our will. As it turns out, we actually are! If the daylight savings time experiment has taught us anything, it is that we humans can be flexible in our interpretation and in our experience of time.
Changing back and forth twice a year between summer time and “natural” time has been the burden of humans for almost half a century now. But what we really did was conduct a great experiment of cutting off one end of the blanket and sewing it on at the other end. This is quite unnecessary and it cannot be very productive to constantly disorient humans with respect to time. As a matter of fact, the European Parliament has come to the conclusion that the summer time experiment should finally be abandoned.
I believe what really should be abandoned though is our inflexible, almost pedantic, attitude with regard to time zones and timekeeping devices. As it is, we are dividing the surface of the planet into different east/west zones that are delineated by hard, straight lines. There are 24 of those zones, one for every hour of the day, and they divide the world much like a political map. A little exception here and there, but in the main our conception of time has been rigidly geometric and it has been rather divisive.
Larger time zones?
The Chinese have shown that a more flexible approach to time is possible. In 1949 they ended the division of their country into different time zones. Everyone in China observes Beijing time, despite the fact that the east/west extension of that country would suggest it be divided into five different timezone slices.
Historically, an empire was said to be great when one could say “the sun never sets” within its borders. That may be a bit of an exaggeration, but it does show us a way forward, suggesting a way out of rigid time divisions and perhaps it helps to end the summer time experiment. We could apply the old empire logic to entire continents, for example, and shape our experience of time in a kind of “continental model”.
Let’s say we have “Europe/Africa time” and all the different countries in that space apply it, period. We could have an “Americas time” and everywhere on the vast American continent, countries observe that time. Or perhaps there could be two, Americas east and Central, and Americas West. “Eurasia time” could connect Eastern Europe and the Middle East, then “Asia time” and “Pacific time” could be other zones of common time experience.
The lines of such a time subdivision would perhaps be more flowing, less rigidly rectangular and in the end there would definitely be a smaller number of time zones. Eight of such extended time zones should be quite sufficient. Perhaps some countries such as Iceland and Greenland would like to establish “Atlantic Time”, but they might also opt to join either the Americas or the Europe/Africa time zone. The Portuguese islands of the Azores, which are located in the middle of the Atlantic, should probably be in the same time zone as the Portuguese mainland, be that Europe/Africa time or perhaps a Western Europe/Atlantic time zone.
The idea is that time zones, instead of dividing people along rigid lines, could be used to unite larger numbers of us in a common time experience. This is not so much a prescription of how to divvy up the world time wise as it is an appeal to be more flexible in our approach to time, using time to unite, instead of to divide.
The Portuguese example
What originally brought me to think about time and its flexibility was the recent time change (we’re in the spring of 2021) where here in the Azores, like everywhere else, an hour was cut off the morning light, only to sew it on to the evening side of the blanket. So instead of the sun coming up at 7, it now comes up at 8, and instead of setting at 7 it now sets at 8. Some people like it, some don’t, but the fact of the matter is that all that constant changing back and forth is unnecessary.
My thought in that connection was that “with Portugal mainland only one hour distant in time, the Azores might just as well close that gap and join mainland time, with no ill effect”. Actually not only no ill effect, but a decidedly positive effect of uniting the country in one time conception, with all the benefits this would bring for commerce and communication.
Starting out with that thought, the inherent flexibility of our time conception, the malleability of time in human hands, gradually came into better focus. We might as well assert dominance over time, instead of artificial time divisions or time zones rigidly ruling our every action.
Will those thoughts to be of any use or are they just idle musings that will have no tangible effect? Well it all depends on us. Certainly a different system of seeing time cannot be imposed by fiat. There would be all kinds of resistance just for the sake of resistance.
All that can be put out there is the idea. Someone could work out a tentative scheme and throw it out there for discussion. Countries could join under a continental time designation. As more countries follow a common time zone, others will aggregate just because it “feels natural”. And so it could come into being. Just by itself, and because it is easier than being all rigid about time.
“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws” – Mayer Amschel Rothschild
He who creates the money is the sovereign. This was true throughout history, from the times when humans first started mining for gold on the African continent to the times of kings and warlords. The coinage of money – and in those times it was mainly precious metals – was a royal privilege … until we got industry and banking.
The Royals lost their best asset, the power to create money, to the banks. Even in the United States, where the power to create money was initially given to Congress, the bankers succeeded, with the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, to make the banks the ultimate arbiter of money creation … and things have gone downhill from there on out.
Wars are fought over money. Hitler, the “crazed dictator”, as it is fashionable to call him now, was actually trying to take the money power back from the international bankers. He did underestimate the challenge of a war declared by those international bankers on the German nation.
In more recent times, we saw several countries designated as an “axis of evil”, to be destroyed, targeted for “regime change” by the policeman of the world, the United States of America. The legitimately elected leaders of those countries, characterized as “evil dictators” were targeted one by one. Some of them fell, their countries a bloody mess now, some of them are still standing, but constantly under siege. Oh yes, the salient feature that distinguished those countries was that they were financially independent, that they did not have a Rothschild controlled central bank and one of them, Gaddhafi of Libya, had the gall of proposing to establish a gold-backed currency for Africa to compete with the almighty Dollar.
Bankers and fortunes
So by reason of becoming the money creators instead of simply the money keepers, the bankers have assumed the role that earlier was the sovereign king’s. They call the shots, they say when a war is to take place and against whom, and it goes without saying that they profit by financing, by lending money, to both sides of the conflict.
Who creates the money, in other words, is the real sovereign.
Behind the banks of course are the quiet “investors”, family fortunes built on the sweat of labor – not their own to be sure – and on a shameless use of the power money brings with it, to corrupt the political process.
The fourth industrial revolution
The situation is to be further consolidated now with what has become known as “the great re-set”, part of the fourth industrial revolution promoted by Klaus Schwab together with a selection of the rich and powerful, united in his World Economic Forum.
As industry is becoming increasingly automated, those who were before needed as worker/slaves suddenly no longer have a place. They are threatening to become a dead weight, a burden to be carried on the back of the new computer-controlled technocratic society. Humans are no longer needed to work, so what to do with them?
Not to worry, the problem will be solved. The magic is to be worked by a universal basic income (UBI) and by “impact investment” and the newly emerging human capital bond market. We’re turning those superfluous humans into capital! The human resource pool of the world…
Sounds good, a universal basic income, doesn’t it? I have myself toyed with the idea as it could, if done well, allow people to develop the arts and real industry without having to constantly think about where to get the money to survive for another week or maybe a month.
But no, the technocrats have a better idea, they think. It is to be basic income linked to mechanisms that are designed to “make people be good”. The money received as UBI won’t just be money to spend as you think best. It is projected to be a centrally controlled digital currency run on blockchain technology, where every cent is kept track of from issue to eventual retirement and where your account can be frozen at any time, or certain kinds of spending can be inhibited … all in the name of making you be good.
This is where “impact investment” comes in. It is a mechanism the rich can play with to make sure the poor do the right thing. It starts in the schools and continues throughout life … “life long learning” is the term.
“Don’t be a bully”, “have you taken the vaccine yet”, “why were you not out jogging this week” or “that drug you were taking there is unapproved, did you know”. The possibilities for control and therefore for investment in and gambling with those “social impact bonds” are endless. Let one part of humanity control the rest, while the bigwigs can get on with the real work at hand. Sick!
Money’s basic flaw
So what can we do to prevent that from becoming our reality? Resistance is of course one option, but if you resist, you aren’t resolving the problem. It just gets ever more solid.
Since we are talking about money and since the ones that control the issue of money also call the shots, can’t we just issue our own money? That seems like a very complicated thing at first and although many have tried, no one has succeeded in more than a very limited sense.
Let’s look at money itself. Money is said to be a means of exchange, a measure of value of what is being exchanged, and at the same time a store of value. But logically, it can’t be both. Something that is of value in and of itself and the value of which will of course change with market realities, can never be a proper measure for the value of other things. That double function opens up money to all kinds of corruption, just for the sake of accumulating more of the coveted thing, and it therefore completely ruins the measuring function. This is the basic flaw in our conception of money, the thing that gives such tremendous power to the ones who have accumulated much of it.
Value and money
We could however de-couple money from actual value. If you want to store value, buy some real property or invest in gold or whatever else you fancy. But let’s use money strictly as a recording device, without attaching any value to it.
Money, in this hypothesis, gets created every time an economic interaction takes place, and it gets retired (destroyed) when the transaction is finally reciprocated. So money in this new world is not primary, it is not a pre-condition for economic activity. It is merely a record of the value of transactions that have already taken place.
This is a big conceptual change, but one that is necessary if we are to escape the claws of a society where money commands and completely determines our every action.
You might say all well and good in theory, but how are we going to apply this in practice.
In reality, all that would be needed is a change in attitude. The crux of the idea is to “give first, get back later”. Some people have a name for this: the gift economy. So what we really have here is an economy of giving, with a recording device called money. It is a shift in emphasis, one that will deprive money of the power to determine our every step and action.
The Austrian experiment – Wörgl
Historically, a somewhat similar proposal was made by a German/Argentinian businessman called Silvio Gesell. Although Gesell did not go as far as to say money must not have its own value, he did propose to charge a fee on money, a negative interest to make money lose some of its value over time.
That practice, Gesell said, would make money circulate, it would prevent pools of money from accumulating, a fact that was brilliantly proven by the experiment of Wörgl.
It happened in the 1930s, in a time of severe economic depression. The mayor of Wörgl, a small town on the Austrian/German border, issued a number of chits denominated in Austrian Schilling that were used to pay workers and to finance communal projects. There was a small monthly charge on those chits – a stamp had to be bought and affixed on those papers for them to keep their validity. Since no one wanted to be the one to buy the stamp, those chits were spent wherever possible, and in this way they stimulated the economy of the area.
The experiment was so successful that other cities in Austria made moves to copy the successful action, only to be told by the Central Bank in Vienna, that such local money issues were henceforth strictly “verboten”. The experiment was successful, but it could not be more widely applied because the bankers at the time acted to protect their money issuing monopoly.
Changing our concept of money
So if we want to change the way money is used, the question becomes: how do we get around the inevitable resistance of those with the money (and their banks who have the issuing power) how do we get them to give up the kind of control that having and issuing money affords them.
Marc Gauvin and his colleagues are going for legal argumentation. Money cannot validly be part of contracts as long as it does not correctly express (measure) the value of transactions over time. They explain the flaw of money in logical terms. One of those explanations is titled The Misrepresentation of Money and also interesting is an earlier piece called “The money psyop”. While this approach might eventually work, I am not sure though that we can hold our breath long enough for things to change because reason alone finally prevailed.
Can someone make a cryptocurrency?
There might be something else though we can do to kick-start ‘doing our own money’. Perhaps a crypto currency that does not put the value of money – the value of the currency – first. A crypto currency that limits its ambitions to being a measure of price and a recording device of transactions, rather than a “store of value” or investment, as is the ambition of Bitcoin and pretty much each and every one of the Bitcoin-imitating alt coins.
Recapitulating, what seems to be needed is a change of our perception of money, away from the idea of gold and silver, of the “store of value” kind of money, towards the idea of the purely functional, the promotion of economic activity by merely recording transactions, recording the real value of the product that is changing hands. Money, in other words, not as a pre-condition for the economy but rather as a mere record that gently keeps track of the reality of economic transactions.
Instead of someone in authority, be it a king, a government or a bank, creating or issuing money to allow us to engage in economic activity, we issue that money ourselves, in the course of our own economic activity, money being the trace that economic activity leaves so we can adjust as needed.
That might even solve the question of who controls the world.
They say “time is an illusion”. I don’t think that is quite correct. What is an illusion is human limitation to a narrow range in the vast scale of cosmic time. Just like the light we can see with our eyes is but a small slice out of a wide spectrum of electromagnetic frequencies, it appears to me that the human perception of time may be limited in a similar manner. I will try and explain …
Time is a mere consequence of the existence of matter and energy. That is why time is unique to this 3D, physical plane of existence. What creates the apparency of time is motion. We measure frequency of motion which is, the intervals between repeating events. Events are linked to matter (and energy) in motion.
Life itself is timeless and therefore, in 3D terms, eternal. It is only the physical expression of life that is subject to the laws of time, to the gradual degradation of physical integrity characteristic of existence.
Just like we have tonal scales or octaves in music, one could say there are scales of time. From the micro scale of particles – atoms and molecules – to the macro scale of stars, galaxies and universe, with us humans stuck in a narrow band somewhere in the middle. Perception of time changes with frequency of motion and just like matter therefore, time is fractal.
On a cosmic scale of time, the existence of humanity is a mere blip on the radar screen. What to us appears as thousands of years are mere moments in cosmic time. Billions of our years measure the lifetime of a star.
Humans can transcend time
Although on a cosmic time scale, what we do here on earth might seem completely insignificant, it really is not. We do have a role to play in terms of cosmic events.
Since humans are energy beings endowed with life, we are able to connect the different scales of time. Life as an eternal quality bridges all scales of time from the micro to the cosmic. The designs of life over all these scales are mysterious and full of wonder and we couldn’t even begin to understand them, unless we found a way to broaden our perspective. Other than being “mere humans”, we realise that at heart we are cosmic eternal beings.
How are we able to do that? I believe stillness may be the key. It is stillness that gives us a chance of getting a glimpse of cosmic time. So we come to realise the important role that life, including human life, plays in the cosmic designs of universe.
There is a new paradigm emerging. It says that there are serious questions about the existence of a thing we are calling “virus”. The argument is that what we see as a virus coming from the outside to infect us is actually an “exosome”, a particle emitted by our own cells in an effort to rid themselves of toxins or to adapt to an environmental stress.
The whole concept of infectious disease is therefore under serious revision, but for the purpose of this writing I will use the terminology that has been used all during the so-called corona pandemic. Just keep in mind that infection may not be what we have been told it is.
With all of the apparent insanity of corona related regulations and prohibitions, one might be forgiven to think that the Covid 19 bug is not a virus but something that attacks humans’ brains, something that prevents us from thinking straight.
Never before has an illness that manifests much like a flu and that, when all the numbers are on the table and cleaned of exaggerations, is no more deadly than our regular winter season of colds and influenza. Never before has such an event been even close to giving justification for closing shops, restaurants and churches, scuttling public events, shutting down travel, or for everyone to stay at home, keep distance from each other and wear face masks, much less the closing of hospitals for everything but essential corona business. This has been a total disruption of the normal functioning of society, justified by what essentially is turning out to be a non-event.
So what happened?
We all know it started in China, apparently in the now famous city of Wuhan, and that from there, “it” spread around the world. First projections were of great disaster and the public reactions, well rehearsed apparently and directed from the highest health authorities, were harsh and – at the time – almost understandable.
As time passed and the severity of “it” came into perspective as being much milder than was generally anticipated, the restrictive prohibitions, instead of being lifted as they should have been, were made even more severe. At first, it was supposed to be an attempt to “flatten the curve”, in order to keep hospitals from being overwhelmed by all those sick people. It soon became apparent that most hospitals were essentially standing empty, their personnel sent home, and the anticipated wave of sick people never materialized in the way it was predicted except in fictionalized media reports.
We now have a situation where, although deaths from the virus are approaching essentially zero, police in some countries are ordered to enforce strict curfews and people are chased out of parks and sent home off the beaches, at times arrested and charged or fined – insanity indeed.
Let us look at some of the background of what appears to be an unmitigated disaster of wrong judgement if not outright misdirected action on the part of government officials.
Underneath it all
For one, the supposed virus has never been properly isolated from sick patients and confirmed as the actual cause of illness. Koch’s postulates for the detection of a sickness causing agent were not fulfilled. We have some genetic sequences, which have blossomed into a hundred or more different ones, but sequences of what? No one can really tell except to say “well, the virus it seems is mutating”.
Meanwhile, there is no test that can tell with certainty whether you are infected by a novel virus. Antibody tests are generic and react to a large family of corona and influenza viruses, they even react on last year’s flu vaccine. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test has no gold standard to be oriented against. It is perfectly worthless as all it can do is detect fragments of DNA that are ever present in all living human beings.
Every manufacturer of tests does their own approximate tuning on what is presumed the “infection rate” will eventually be. Since PCR is a laboratory technique for the production of viral sequences, it cannot tell how much virus or rather how much of the original DNA sequence there was to begin with. As the inventor of polimerase chain reaction Kary Mullis stated, PCR should NOT be used as a test to screen for infection. But that is exactly what all those tests, which really have no official approval and benchmark, are being used for.
Face masks do not protect against viruses yet we are all asked to wear them.
Locking down society has been shown to have no statistical effect, it is not altering the course of the disease at all.
After initial confusion on how to treat the infection leading to many tragic and unnecessary deaths, doctors on the front lines found preventive measures and effective cures, but those advocating either prevention or cure have been called charlatans and “irresponsible”, their communications censored, their jobs endangered … just the opposite of what one would expect in a pandemic situation.
Sweden refused to follow the general trend of hard lockdowns, merely recommending caution to its citizens, and although life in that country has pretty much returned to normal while everyone else is still wearing masks and staying at home, their handling of the affair is being criticised as irresponsible and unsuccessful.
A planned pandemic?
The whole scenario of a world wide corona virus pandemic was mooted (played through theoretically) in a high level event that took place only months before the actual virus appeared. That high level stage play called Event 201 prepared government health officials for what to do “just in case” something like a pandemic really happened. And happen it did, just like clock work.
The role of the media in this whole disaster was something to be ashamed of. Instead of investigating and asking hard questions, the media closed ranks and did everything to stoke up public fear, repeating the lines and figures fed them by government “experts”. The media was, in other words, throwing gasoline on an already burning fire of increasing fear and confusion in the minds of their listeners and readers.
The official solution for this epidemic that was raging more in our minds than our bodies, was to be universal vaccination, a shot of toxicity in the arm, projected to reach every last one of the now suitably afraid humans. Never mind that previous attempts to develop a corona virus vaccine ended in disaster, actually making people more susceptible to catching a severe illness … and never mind that we have had flu vaccines for decades and that year after year, like clockwork, the flu is still said to be killing as many every winter season as the supposed new virus.
There is even an experimental vaccine being developed based on synthetic RNA, that has the potential of changing the expression of human DNA. What could possibly go wrong we might ask.
It’s the cases, stupid
The pandemic, it appears, now has morphed into a “casedemic”. As deaths from the so-called pandemic dwindled down to next to nothing over the summer, the emphasis of official pronouncements all of a sudden changed. It wasn’t deaths any more to be afraid of but “cases”.
Testing, testing, testing was the new mantra and if you do hundreds or thousands or even millions of tests, you are of course bound to find plenty of new (falsely positive) cases as a result of those imperfect tests. Never mind that none of those people are actually sick. They tested positive and therefore are infected, to be isolated, traced, shunned, medicated.
Cold hard facts seem to have no effect on those health officials, who insist on tightening the screws of lockdown and disaster. The officials are cemented in their authority by enabling legislation for “disaster preparedness” which has been quietly passed in almost every country of the world during the past decade. By pure chance, that decade was also declared by Bill Gates the great philanthropist, to be “the decade of vaccines”.
The internet of things
Well, contemporaneous with the pandemic, we see a new type of mobile phone technology being pushed: 5G and the internet of things. Numerous small cell towers are being erected in populated areas, and trials of the new technology, which uses a different type of radiation called millimeter waves, are underway. The waves used by 5G have not been tested for their health effects on humans and other living beings. Yet, live trials of that technology have started in some of the areas that have been hit especially hard by the corona virus epidemic: Wuhan in China, the industrial zone in the north of Italy around Milan and Bergamo, New York, and others.
We do not know what the connection might be, or even if there is one, because any discussion of that angle of the epidemic is heavily suppressed in both the media and on social networks. Don’t touch my 5G, seems to be the watchword here and the officials seem to say “we are in a race and we don’t need no stinkin’ research”. Federal Trade Commission officials said as much (not in those exact words of course) when promoting the coming roll-out of the new technology.
Government of the experts
The direction this leads us into is one of government by experts, both medical and technological, a system of governance better known as ‘Technocracy’. Such a world governed by the experts will eventually have to do away with any form of elected government that might represent the will of the people. For now, the experts have our politicians by the neck, dictating what is to be done but with some public push for sanity, they might well lose their grip.
So what we will have, if the experts get their way, is going to be a world of super surveillance, something the internet of things, enabled by 5G, is really designed for. It is a world where mere humans have no say in how our lives are going to be arranged. It is going to be obey or else, and the corona virus restrictions are a way to soften us up, they are giving us a little taste of what is to come.
Money in its current form, especially cash, would be a thing of the past in the new world, replaced by an incentive based, blockchain generated new liquidity, something that has already been patented … by Bill Gates’ Microsoft. Data, that is, information about our lives, is to be the new kind of money and in such a case, if you are not compliant, if your data does not flow in the right way, your liquidity and thus your livelihood can be turned off at the flick of a switch. This does not even have to be a conscious personal decision of any human controller, AI or artificial intelligence, meaning essentially a smart computer program, would take care of it.
So what else is new?
What else is going on in these times? For one, there is a mega blackmail operation afoot, which is based on widespread entrapment of anyone who counts. Celebrities of all kinds are entrapped in practices of pedophilia or sex with the underaged. Those practices are then in turn leading into the more hardcore areas of child torture, the killing or sacrifice of children, and satanic blood rituals, including the consumption of a rejuvenating substance – Adrenochrome. That is a substance obtained from the blood of tortured children. News and information about these practices is heavily suppressed, witness the disappearance of Pizzagate from all news and even most social media discussions.
Politicians and the rich and famous, who get involved in the pedophilic and satanic filth, are of course wide open to being blackmailed. They are told what they must do and say, and what to avoid, and they will of course readily comply. Perhaps that is why both the press and the people “who count” are toeing the official line so well.
Draining the swamp?
So on the one hand we have “the swamp”, the “deep state”, heavily involved in illegal and morally reprehensible practices, planning and working towards a completely controlled, highly dystopic future for humanity.
On the other hand, we are told that the “white hats”, the good guys, are just about set to make everything right. Rumor has it that mass arrests of the evil ones are just around the corner nay, are already happening as we speak! Our financial woes, so the saying goes, will be over when a big re-set of finances unleashes ancient fortunes of gold that will be distributed to make us all well off financially. This will be done by use of such fictitious laws as NESARA and GESARA (look them up if you haven’t come across them yet).
We are also told by the “white hat” faction that the lockdowns are really for our own good, because those operations of rounding up and arresting the bad guys might be dangerous and therefore it’s better we aren’t out on the streets.
Space the new frontier?
That white hat faction, which makes heavy reference to US President Donald Trump and an intelligence operation called “Q Anon” is just as little transparent however as the “black hats” they are ostensibly fighting. No one, for instance, tells us about the existence of what is known as the SSP or secret space programs. Several factions of humans and some non humans are out there in our solar system and beyond, with incredibly advanced and expensive hardware in the form of advanced space ships. Remember all those trillions of dollars gone missing without a trace?
The secret space program, which goes back decades to the end of the Second World War and perhaps even before that, has also been called a human “breakaway civilization”. But all we get officially is an announcement by Trump of the establishment of a new Space Force, to be a part of the US military machine. That is limited disclosure at best, to try and prepare us for the day when the real goings-on in space are (perhaps) to be revealed.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t
While on the one hand, the satanic bunch envisions a dystopian world here on earth, where we are to be mining crypto currency with our personal data of good behaviour, the ‘space force’ bunch on the other would like nothing better than to use us humans as cannon fodder on their ships out in space, as slave labour on asteroids and planetoids, mining the raw materials needed for more ships and colonies, and eventually to man those colonies, always in slave-like positions.
So we have a “faith based”, Church centred faction of pedophiles and satanists working with dark demonic powers and they are all set to prepare us to better harvest our spiritual energy, which incidentally is much greater than theirs.
And on the other side we have a space based high tech “breakaway civilisation” out there that would like nothing better than to press humans into service on their modern day pirate ships, manning their mining operations and space colonies.
Both of those factions incidentally are using the corona “emergency”, each one for their own ends, which frankly have nothing to do with our health and everything with how to make better slaves out of those pesky humans. Corona seems like a god send, a good excuse to make us “behave”. We are to stay home so as not to interfere with their plans for our future. Meanwhile those two factions are at war against each other, a war to determine who, in the end, gets to use our energy for their purposes. No wonder this corona business seems so utterly insane.
There is one thing we can be sure about: whichever faction wins, the prospect isn’t going to be a nice life for the rest of us. We will end up in slavery one way or the other.
So what to do about it you might ask if you have followed my train of thought so far. Is there any way out of the dilemma which we find ourselves in?
Well for one thing, having an idea of what is happening helps. And remember that, without our cooperation, nothing goes. If we can overcome our fear of death, there is nothing that either one of those two factions can do to us. We have to go into slavery willingly or not at all, that is why corona is so important to them.
Butt … corona is also a big kick-in-the-ass for humanity. What it really tries to tell us is to get over our collective fears.
First of all, we should realise that there is nothing to fear from covid itself. Plenty of prevention is available in the form of specific nutrients like especially vitamins D and C, some good herbs and properly nutritious natural foods. There are even preventive medications if needed. Anyway the chances of dying from Covid, even if you do get infected, are ultra slim. They are way way below one per cent for pretty much all of us.
Look at those rates of survival again and please please please, do not be afraid.
Drop that mask and get out there, get together with your friends and family and go about your business as usual. That might be some work, especially to convince others not to interfere with you.
Actively create the future.
Something we all can do is to dream (imagine) into existence an alternate path for our lives, one that leads neither into space slavery nor into a satanic dystopia on earth.
The question is: can we do it, and even more importantly, what is it we really want, what kind of life would we wish for our children and their children. Yes, this is more about the children than it is about us. So we should really be asking them … as it’s going to be their lives.
I hear that children, these days, are born with all kinds of psy abilities that could make for a playful future and I am sure we will, at one point or another, need those extra abilities to keep safe. Some time in the future, we may have to use them to make sure there is no repeat of what we are going through now.
So yes, full emphasis on the children, on their ideas for how life should really be. No face masks for them to be sure … we don’t want to raise a generation of slaves. Should school continue as it is or do we perhaps have a perfect opportunity with corona, to start schooling children at home? You decide. Should we get more into growing our own food? Definitely I would say, as it is an essential part of becoming independent of government and corporations.
We the adults should really just be facilitators in this game, we should be the ones who help bring about the ideal life for our children and their children. That should give us enough to do. Building our own vision for life on earth is an important thing to concentrate on.
We do not have to choose sides in the ongoing war. As a matter of fact, we definitely shouldn’t. When you have two forces at war, you do not interfere unless you want trouble. Let them do their fighting. We have other priorities . . .
So what do you say – do we have a chance of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat?
You better pray it be so. Humanity’s future depends on it. When I say pray, please do that without giving your power away. Manifest what you desire without appealing to any external force, be it God, the angels, the demons or whatever. We humans are immensely powerful. It is up to us to discover and use that power.
It’s time to wake up and use that power for our future … and for the lives of the children.
It’s a big responsibility – we better not mess it up.
Rome, September 2020 Sepp Hasslberger
The following links are some pointers in case you wish to dig for more information.
Links do tend to go bad these times, so if you need to, go search for alternatives.
It has become abundantly clear in these times that the major social media platforms and search engines we use to get information and to communicate with our friends the world over, are less than transparent and that several of them actually engage in censorship of “unwelcome” views and information.
Since many of our interactions happen through these electronic means of communication, this is a less than satisfactory state of affairs. It actually constitutes serious interference in our freedom of expression and our ability to form views to express.
Censorship of views, the skewing of search results and deliberate deviation away from certain topics of discussion, have no place in a free society. I would therefore like to introduce a concept, a principle that needs to find its way into our legislation and perhaps more than that, into networking codes of practice. It is the concept of platform transparency.
What is platform transparency?
Any publicly accessible platform used by a certain number of people, for example search engines and social media platforms, but also publishers and big tech providers as well as educational platforms, must make their algorithms and their rules of interaction publicly accessible.
That means, their algorithmic code which determines what you are going to see and which of your friends see what you write, must be open to inspection and discussion. Sometimes decisions are made by artificial intelligence (AI), determining for instance what search results are made available to you, as in the case of search engine queries. In this case, the basic choices and parameters that the AI works with, must be made public.
To be clear, this has nothing to do with how groups that are established on social networks to discuss or inform on certain topics are run by their owners and administrators. Those fora are owned by the founder or owner, by the person who established them and who “sets the tone” of what is to be discussed. In a group, the owner is king and administrators and moderators are helpers appointed by the owner. Administrators should not have the power to “take over” a group and remove the original owner.
Further, with regard to groups on social media, it should be possible to archive an inactive group. It goes without saying however that a platform may not “remove” a group that has been formed and whose members are actively discussing, in order to suit someone’s desire of preventing or cutting short the discussion of certain topics.
Platform transparency is directed at platforms, the “walled gardens” of the internet as they have also been called. This includes multimedia platforms like those hosting videos, where algorithms are used to inform you or not of new content, to suggest or encourage you to see some videos or to stay away from certain others.
Platforms have incredible power to direct our thinking, to influence our political choices, to determine what we are discussing and and what information we share. The idea of platform transparency is to prevent governments and other powerful interests from skewing the discussion between individual users. Platforms provide a public service and it is ultimately the users who, by their interactions with others, determine the value of the platform.
Since the users provide the value, it makes only sense that they should have a minimum of control in the sense that, after inspecting and considering algorithms and basic rules of a platform, anyone can freely decide whether to support a platform by their presence or not.
Real transparency, legally enforced, is the only way to ensure that our interactions are not hijacked by special interests hiding in the shadows, behind opaque rules that are “for the good of us all”.
No “forbidden” themes.
In the interests of general transparency, censorship, whether by algorithms or by ad hoc intervention, should NEVER be employed. If something is criminal, let the law take care of it. If it isn’t, the information should be open for discussion and viewing. Parents or guardians may wish to limit what children are allowed to see on the internet. That is their privilege and responsibility.
The technological behemoths that today are to a large extent determining what information we get and that are therefore steering our lives have been called FAGMA by a friend of mine … meaning the Facebooks, Amazons, Googles, Microsofts and Apples of this world. I am sure there are others, but those seem to be the major ones.
Platform transparency is a way to start levelling the playing field, to give users the tools they need to decide where to take their business and to make that choice after having correct and complete information.
By way of example, here is a video that discusses censorship on some of those platforms…
Much has been written about Viktor Schauberger’s Repulsine, an invention that was shelved, and that no one, since that time, has been able to reproduce.
I recently came across a description that reminded me of the research into Schauberger technological developments I did in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The article shows that today, we are no closer to understanding the secret of this particular Schauberger invention than we were back then.
Does anyone know if the Repulsine mod A and B has undergone Computational fluid dynamics simulations to determine the best dimensions for the platters, their spacing, the number of slots and their shape and the shape of the “waves” in the platters, and other dimensions ? Has it been studied for the generation of electrostatic fields ?
The entities rolling out 5G are tormenting humanity and sucking their humanity from them by taking their minds and their health, while on the other side, you have the zombie apocalypse of all the people with their 4G cell phones, blindly going about destroying the world.
The 4G zombie apocalypse lot have to wake up. They need to wake up now before it is too late and time is of the essence.
It is time we asked a crucial question. How did we come to be in this 5G mad zone, poised to self-destruct? How on earth did we get here?
Brown’s gas is a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen obtained from electric disassociation of water into its gaseous components. The gas is also called oxyhydrogen gas. The method of electric disassociation was developed by Yull Brown, an Australian inventor who ended up working with a Chinese company which is currently producing those gas generators.
It appears that using Brown’s gas directly in the air intake of a diesel or LPG powered generator, the efficiency of combustion can be greatly increased, cutting fuel consumption roughly in half. The Brown’s gas generator runs on a small fraction of the electricity produced by the same generator.
The following image is a report from a Japanese company which did a test with a Brown’s gas generator linked to a 10 KW LPG driven electricity generator. Costs per hour of running the generator were cut in half.
Artificial intelligence is an ability to calculate but it misses morals and it certainly misses the spark of creativity that is characteristic of life.
Machine learning algorithms have given computers the ability to learn from available data, where programming becomes an internal function to the machine. That internal programming function and the language it uses is often incomprehensible to the human programmers.
A link-up of millions if not billions of sources of information in what is called “the internet of things”, would feed the data from all monitoring cameras and sensors to a central artificial intelligence. Some say this will be a boon to mankind and others warn that there are dangers.